Feeding marine life
Walter Starck
life but one wonders how many have any real knowledge of the practice. As
justification the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission who
passed it states: "There is no known connection between their
marine-life-feeding dives and the high-profile cases of shark attacks and
bites on humans this year. Commissioners concluded any practice that
modifies natural feeding habits of marine species is unacceptable, and
practices that teach marine life to associate people with food is unhealthy
for marine life as well as humans."
Why modifying natural feeding habits is "unacceptable" or how associating
people with food is "unhealthy" is not explained. In the absence of any
apparent detriment simply labeling something unacceptable or unhealthy is
more like a declaration of political incorrectness than it is a reasoned
basis for law.
As many of the feeding sites in Florida are on the outer reefs over three
miles from land and thus in Federal waters outside state jurisdiction they
also made it illegal to transport people through state waters for the
purpose of observing feeding. In other words it's not only illegal but it's
illegal to go where it is isn't if that is your purpose in going there.
Obviously there is an agenda involved that goes beyond the purported
reasons.
At hundreds of locations all over the world on a daily basis thousand of
people enjoy close interaction with marine life through feeding it. In many
places this has been going on for several decades. The only apparent effect
on the abundance, diversity and condition of life in these locations has
been to increase it. The purported problems are simply unsupported
hypotheticals contrary to a vast amount of real world experience.
Feeding marine life has enabled millions of people to personally and
intimately interact with creatures that would otherwise only be seen at a
distance in passing. To arbitrarily prohibit such experience on the basis
of the unsupported opinions of a relative handful of people with
demonstrable bias is worse than simply a mistake and even beyond
counterproductive. It is simply not very intelligent.
A basic function of genuine democracy is to protect individual rights.
Governmental pandering to pressure groups or even widespread popular opinion
is not democracy but a step toward mob rule or dictatorship of the
proletariat. Whenever we restrict the rights of others we also threaten our
own. In some sense we are all members of minorities and all susceptible to
discrimination whenever freedom is allowed to be restricted without clear
benefit or necessity.
Applying emotive labels to attract mindless support is the mainstay of
demagoguery. If one doesn't wish to join the fools it is prudent to
consider very carefully before lending support where one doesn't have
personal experience or expertise.
Walter Starck
Editor/Publisher
Golden Dolphin Video CD Magazine
www.goldendolphin.com
mike gray
>
> Applying emotive labels to attract mindless support is the mainstay of
> demagoguery. If one doesn't wish to join the fools it is prudent to
> consider very carefully before lending support where one doesn't have
> personal experience or expertise.
...garnering ol'Walt the "Most Confused Two Consecutive Sentences of the
Month Award".
m
Ben Bradlee
"discrimination" and "freedom" all in the same paragraph, you have said a
mouthful!
"George" <ghmorrisr...@telocity.com> wrote in message
news:vsk7ut4fuslrp9df5...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 3 Nov 2001 19:13:37 +1000, "Walter Starck"
<wst...@dingoblue.com.au>
> shaped the electrons to say:
>
> --A basic function of genuine democracy is to protect individual rights.
> --Governmental pandering to pressure groups or even widespread popular
opinion
> --is not democracy but a step toward mob rule or dictatorship of the
> --proletariat. Whenever we restrict the rights of others we also threaten
our
> --own. In some sense we are all members of minorities and all susceptible
to
> --discrimination whenever freedom is allowed to be restricted without
clear
> --benefit or necessity.
>
> We've got another live one. I've always been deeply suspicious of anyone
who
> uses "proletariat". They usually have an agenda...
>
> George
John Francis
wrote:
You guys go on ahead. I'll catch up after I look up some more words.
http://www.geocities.com/johnofrancis/scuba.htm
and the rec.scubans I've met
http://www.orc.ca/~jfrancis/rogues.htm
cyklon300
> "Why modifying natural feeding habits is "unacceptable" or how associating
> people with food is "unhealthy" is not explained."
Walt, do you really need this explained to you? Perhaps you should
give your high school biology teacher a quick call and ask for a
refund.
Gregg
>
Walter Starck
marine science and 45 years diving experience all over the world. This has
included 10 year periods in both the Florida Keys and the Great Barrier Reef
where I have had the opportunity to observe long term effects of fish
feeding.
Walter Starck
Golden Dolphin Video CD Magazine
www.goldendolphin.com
"cyklon300" <gst...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1564ae6a.01110...@posting.google.com...
Lee Bell
> My opinion does not derive from high school biology but rather a PhD in
> marine science and 45 years diving experience all over the world. This
has
> included 10 year periods in both the Florida Keys and the Great Barrier
Reef
> where I have had the opportunity to observe long term effects of fish
> feeding.
You have not expressed an opinion, you made the statement ""Why modifying
natural feeding habits is "unacceptable" or how associating people with food
is "unhealthy" is not explained."
If you would like to express an opinion on this, go for it. Better yet,
give us an example, any example, of any time when modification of the
behavior of a wild animal, any wild animal, by a for profit commercial
operator has proven to be to the advantage of the wild animal, ever.
Lee
mike gray
Seems like getting a PhD is a bit of a waste if yer gonna end up as a
promoter of petting zoos.
m
HLAviation
>give us an example, any example, of any time when modification of the
>behavior of a wild animal, any wild animal, by a for profit commercial
>operator has proven to be to the advantage of the wild animal, ever.
>
Why would it need to be proven advantageous, and not just non detrimental? I
used to run a glass bottom boat in Avalon, and I had a Sea Lion show with any
number of a family of Sea Lions. I fed them off the boat (whole mackeral) and
the patriarch of the family, Duke, a very large male, I would even let little
kids feed because he was so gentle. Even after they made it illegal to feed
the Sea Lions (I can however shoot them or, if I request, get seal bombs which
ar 1/3 stick of dynamite from the state to blow thier freaking heads off) and
I moved over to the Shore Boats full time due to the decline in tips from the
lack of the Sea Lion show ($200-$300 a day down to $70), I could still call
them and they would come to the shore boat to be petted. The baby would even
ride around with me some times in the boring off season. They still came for
social interaction, they liked me.
http://hometown.aol.com/hlaviation/
Scott J. McFadden
> If one doesn't wish to join the fools it is prudent to
>consider very carefully before lending support where one doesn't have
>personal experience or expertise.
It sure hasn't stopped you.
--
SJM