Hunting Octo's? Is this for real?

[spatman]

Hey Spatman!! I think we need a new sticker...

"Mean Divers Suck."

give me some design ideas, and i'll see what i can come up with!

[Cold_H2O]

Dang it.. I missed all the links.

They have been removed by the author.
I wonder if Fish and Game got in touch with him.

I want a mean divers suck sticker. Let me know when they are ready.

I hate to share the location of Octo's or Wolfies unless I know the diver I am sharing with.

I have seen too many "divers" poke them with sticks and try and pull them out of their dens.

[Dmitchell]

4) I will draft a "no octos" harvest proposal for areas 7 through 13 and circulate it here for comments. I will need actual human signatures to give it some punch though. Should have ample time to collect those before the next rulemaking cycle begins.

Richard

Just being the devils advocate here, but what about the guy who legally fishes for Octopus because he enjoys eating it diving or not. Is it fair to him to attempt to institute a ban on fishing for octo's? Where does this lead? Ban crabbing and shrimping as well, I enjoy looking at them when I dive.

If they are as plentiful down there as they are here, the few that are in fact caught for sport are not going to damage the population. I soaked 3 shrimp pots on one string for 12 hours last year and 2 of them caught Octopus (which I released).

Besides, Do you really think making it illegal would stop the craigslist idiot? Selling them is illegal and he still made the offer.


Dave

[Sounder]

Hey - anyone who wants to argue against our no-octos proposal is welcome to show up and debate. I bet between dsteding, Diver C, and Mrs. Sounder, we can open a case of whoop- in just about ANY debate.

Just thinking of the three of them in the same corner... :naka:

Then you add in WSA (thinking tourism), dive businesses like charters and shops, and voices from divers like the rest of us lay bubble blowers... we might just be able to make something happen. All they can say is "no," right?

[Grateful Diver]

Besides, Do you really think making it illegal would stop the craigslist idiot? Selling them is illegal and he still made the offer.

Hey, ya know I was just reading an article in today's paper about how Ladies of the Night are selling their ... services ... on Craigslist. I mean ... that's illegal too. Mebbe the idiot took his cue from them ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[Joshua Smith]

4) I will draft a "no octos" harvest proposal for areas 7 through 13 and circulate it here for comments. I will need actual human signatures to give it some punch though. Should have ample time to collect those before the next rulemaking cycle begins.

Richard

Just being the devils advocate here, but what about the guy who legally fishes for Octopus because he enjoys eating it diving or not. Is it fair to him to attempt to institute a ban on fishing for octo's? Where does this lead? Ban crabbing and shrimping as well, I enjoy looking at them when I dive.

If they are as plentiful down there as they are here, the few that are in fact caught for sport are not going to damage the population. I soaked 3 shrimp pots on one string for 12 hours last year and 2 of them caught Octopus (which I released).

Besides, Do you really think making it illegal would stop the craigslist idiot? Selling them is illegal and he still made the offer.


Dave

I have no problem whatsoever with legal hunting and fishing.....but, if some of our members can make it illegal to harvest GPOs around here, I'll sign the petition, and buy the first round of beers after it passes. If those people who feel they should have a right to harvest GPOs manage to overturn the law, I'll try and fight it, in whatever (legal) way I can. I love the Octos. Of course, I love Ling Cod, too, and I have no problem eating them....

Maybe it's hypocritical of me to favor smarter creatures, but as far as I can tell, Octos are right up there with Dogs and Chimps, and I would have to be pretty damn hungry to eat one of them....kinda opens up a whole debate about meat, and what's OK to eat, but I have my own ideas about that. In any case, I think it should be illegal to kill the GPOs- and I'll be first in line to sign any innitiative to that effect.

[CaptnJack]

Just being the devils advocate here, but what about the guy who legally fishes for Octopus because he enjoys eating it diving or not. Is it fair to him to attempt to institute a ban on fishing for octo's? Where does this lead? Ban crabbing and shrimping as well, I enjoy looking at them when I dive.

Well the real problem is the in the 1950s the WA State Legislature had the boneheaded gaul to sell off state owned tidelands to the adjacent property owners. Many bought them for a pittance. So we have very few publically accessible shore diving sites. So when there's an octo at a popular shore site it can provide viewing enjoyment for 100s, or dinner for 1. Usually there are one or 2, you don't see a half dozen on a shore dive around here.

Now at boat sites its a bit more of a mixed bag. Some of the most octo prolific boat dives are MPAs. Which wouldn't stop Mr idiot anyway. But many (fishing allowed) boat sites also provide income and support charter operators. Those would be scuba charter operators, not fishing/spearfishing. (Fishing chareters are focusd on salmon, halibut, and lings mostly, definately not octos).

Overall I suspect that passive scuba recreation/photography generates more income and supports more jobs than octo fishing does. There's just alot of in and out of state appeal for viewing octos. While I don't know anyone who eats them (wild caught or in a restaurant). And, I work right in the heart of the Asian community and I don't even see it on their menus.

But overall I'm a believer in democracy. If the "don't eat them" people are mobilized and get their position passed, so be it. If the eaters are politically active and pursasive, well that's the way it works too. I have suggested limiting this to the more densely populated portions of Puget Sound with the highest concentrations of divers and charter operators for a reason.

So yes, I am willing to spend some energy and lobby for an octo harvest moratorium since I believe they have both instrinsic value and are far more appealing (and valuable) in life than on a plate.

[Pez7378]

What does it take to make the GREAT PACIFIC OCTOPUS a protected species? Is it strictly a numbers game? How about the fact that it bears the name of our region? It's Illegal to hunt the National bird, and the State bird isnt it? Although I don't know who would want to hunt a Goldfinch. And I better never catch anyone harming a Bald Eagle.....EVER!

[CaptnJack]

Its 99% a numbers game. The octopus probably doesn't deserve protected status. However other relatively stable+adequate fish/invert populations have no allowable harvest already. So in this case its a question of how can octos deliver the greatest societal good. In pictures and memories or on a plate.

[Cwest]

I think I would rather see an expansion of mpa's and enforcement of the laws protecting them. We have run more than one boat out of a protected enviroment more than once. All it takes is a mention in the fishing laws and the willingness to polietly remind the offending boat they are breaking the law. I have even been known to video someone who is poaching.

Of course if the science shows declining stocks all harvest should be stopped for whatever species shows a decline.

[CaptnJack]

I think I would rather see an expansion of mpa's and enforcement of the laws protecting them. We have run more than one boat out of a protected enviroment more than once. All it takes is a mention in the fishing laws and the willingness to polietly remind the offending boat they are breaking the law. I have even been known to video someone who is poaching.

A pretty hard issue for citizens to initate. I see few negatives to prohibitions on taking octos in areas 7 through 13. Other than those people who just don't like more rules.

I agree that we really do have skimpy MPA enforcement.

[spatman]

Maybe it's hypocritical of me to favor smarter creatures, but as far as I can tell, Octos are right up there with Dogs and Chimps, and I would have to be pretty damn hungry to eat one of them....kinda opens up a whole debate about meat, and what's OK to eat, but I have my own ideas about that.

not to instigate a heated discussion by any means, but just wondering:
how do you feel about pigs? they are just as intelligent as most dogs, and as far as i can tell, taste a lot better.

[Sounder]

not to instigate a heated discussion by any means, but just wondering:how do you feel about pigs? they are just as intelligent as most dogs, and as far as i can tell, taste a lot better.

That all depends on who you ask!

[kjc]

I see few negatives to prohibitions on taking octos in areas 7 through 13.

Other then its looking at a tree instead of the forest.

Octopus aren't a targeted species that indicate the health of a fisheries management plan, or for that matter the productivity of a particular habitat. Why would WDFW act on it?

You can't petition the WDFW realistically by saying on one hand they need to cut back on harvest quotas in particular regions and not simultaneously say on the other hand they don't need more habitat.

If you wanna cut back on the kill quota, which is the only thing WDFW is there to manage, then what is needed is more habitat!

It would be a more advantageous political strategy to take the insult of observing the fishery of a diver's emotionally preferred target species like octopus and turn it into a positive as an opportunity for the benefit of being allowed to build more habitat! Preferably, just for divers!

Divers have had a bad relationship with WDFW historically anyway. The bit about not using chemical irritants to catch octopus came as a result of divers who used them.

I'm sure I'm not the only diver who remembers Octopus Wrestling contests that were sponsored by dive stores years ago. Divers would use a squirt gun filled with Chlorox bleach to harrass the octopus out of its den. The biggest octo that was weighed in won the contest! They were released after that, but it was basically harrassment for fun!

I don't doubt for a minute that the Craig's List fellow heard some story from another older diver or dive store owner about the days of yore when octopus were wrestled and thought he might like to try it for himself for fun and profit. The guy who chastized him wrestled one himself!

[spatman]

how do you feel about pigs? they are just as intelligent as most dogs, and as far as i can tell, taste a lot better.

That all depends on who you ask!

a pig farmer showing off his 3-legged pig at a county fair is approaching by the panel of judges and asked to tell them a little bit about his hog.

the farmer launches into a long speech about how amazing this pig is: how when it was just a few months old, it raced into a burning barn and saved the farmer's daughter who was playing in the hay; how the pig jumped into a frozen lake to rescue the farmer's son who had fallen through the ice; how the pig had pulled a plow through the fields all season when the farmer's tractor broke down; and many more tales.

after this long-winded speech, the judges were all very impressed. but one judge was still a little confused, and asked the farmer "so why does this pig have only 3 legs?"

the farmer replied: "well, heck, you can't eat a pig like this all at once!"

[Grateful Diver]

Pigs are an honorable species.

When Bill Clinton was President he even had a couple as pets. One time, as he was herding them down the ramp off of Air Force One, he noticed one of the Marine Corps honor guards taking a particular interest in the pigs, so he explained ... "These here are genuine Arkansas razorbacks. I got one for Hillary and one for Chelsea."

The Marine looked impressed and replied, "Nice trade, Sir."

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[lamont]

I see few negatives to prohibitions on taking octos in areas 7 through 13.

Other then its looking at a tree instead of the forest.

Octopus aren't a targeted species that indicate the health of a fisheries management plan, or for that matter the productivity of a particular habitat. Why would WDFW act on it?

worst they'll realistically do is deny the petition.

[Joshua Smith]

Maybe it's hypocritical of me to favor smarter creatures, but as far as I can tell, Octos are right up there with Dogs and Chimps, and I would have to be pretty damn hungry to eat one of them....kinda opens up a whole debate about meat, and what's OK to eat, but I have my own ideas about that.

not to instigate a heated discussion by any means, but just wondering:
how do you feel about pigs? they are just as intelligent as most dogs, and as far as i can tell, taste a lot better.

I feel that pigs are pretty damn tasty and that it's wrong to eat dogs, of course! If pigs were really smart, they'd be loyal, charming, usefull companions, like dogs, and they'd stop being so delicious!

[kjc]

worst they'll realistically do is deny the petition.

Because it will be nothing more then a hope and a prayer divergent path distraction away from the reality of there being not enough habitat.

A better plan would be to grow the idea that we need to build habitat!

If you petition WDFW for kill quota restrictions and win, there still is not enough habitat.

If you petition and lose, there still is not enough habitat.

Petitioning a conservative political entity with prayer only builds more distraction and empowered pejorative conservative opinion.

That's not reality.

The reality is there is not enough habitat.

Why don't we revive the ole' conservative touchstone for Octopus Wrestling contests and film it! We could have a conservative bitch slapping contest with the octopus on the beach afterwards!

Best that could happen is the conservative would die and the worst that would happen is the octopus would get used to it.

[nwscubamom]

You never know. We might stand a chance. With all the invasive tunicate work that volunteer divers have been doing that helps WDFW, and working closely with them, as well as WSA's work on the Hood Canal Dissolved Oxygen project....well, we might have more of a leg to stand on now, since volunteer recreational divers are out there now DOING things to help.

It could be worth a try.

- Janna

[kjc]

What would be worth a try?

Change the kill quota or building habitat?

Octopus have a 4 year lifespan. They are prolific breaders with nests full of eggs. They live in dens.

What do you think would be more effective?

Changing the kill quota, or building just one den?

[nwscubamom]

Both.

[Grateful Diver]

They are prolific breaders with nests full of eggs.

... and an infant mortality rate of about 99.995% ...

I would love to see more habitat created, though ... not only would it help a lot of different species, but it makes dive sites more interesting. A buddy recently commented about TTN that if it weren't for all the junk people have put down there over the years, it'd be a damn boring place to dive ... imagine if it were done in a planned way, rather than people just dumping their old diswashers and ranges overboard ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[Cold_H2O]

The death rate of new born Octos is very high as Bob mentioned.

I know the Seattle Aquarium kept about 100 babies when its female laid eggs the other year.
Not 1 survived.

The other new hatchlings were released into Puget Sound so it is not known how many of those survived.

[kjc]

I would love to see more habitat created, though ...

YES!!!!

Thank you for agreeing with me Bob!

Not to derail the topic of the thread, which was about the taking of an octopus for hire by a Craig's List poster...

But yes, I do believe the solution is more habitat.

I think it would be better to ask the WDFW for an administrative change in their reporting requirements to include octopus on fisher's catch record cards rather then a rule change to ban fishing for octopus in certain areas.

I feel this would be a more prudent first request for several reasons;

First, the reported catch information would be useful census data that could be used to determine the health of the species in the targeted areas. WDFW may have chosen the daily limit for the octopus fisheries in part to contribute to the health of the crab fisheries, which already are a targeted species for fisheries management and subject to catch reporting requirements. Octopus prey on crab, so if the octopus fisheries were restricted, the crab population might deminish and that might be worse in the WDFW's eyes because crab are a more significant economic consumerable. They may deny the request to ban the octopus fisheries, but instead agree to study and monitor it by collecting data. Besides, there is fresh, locally caught octopus in the seafood department in Asian markets all the time. Go to Uwajimaya downtown! Somebody is catching octopus and eating it! Octopus are an economic consumerable too!

Second, the debate over habitat building is just now begining with the Ships to Reef proposals and the alternative concept of building carefully selected reefs out of naturally occuring material in specifically sited locations using designs that would actually be reefs. Please don't derail that idea with alternative ideas of regulated fisheries restrictions.

The sunken ships of the Ships to Reefs idea would have to be shared with fishers anyway, so fisheries restrictions might negate the perceived need to reef a ship. Sunken ships will forever be in bed politically with fishers in Washington so get used to promoting fishers rights too if you want to sink a ship.

Makes more sense to want a natural reef just for divers, doesn't it?

And third, the frustration expressed over some diver actually taking an octopus illegally is more an issue of personal empowerment. Obviously, that diver either doesn't know right from wrong, or doesn't care. Care not so much about the octopus, but about you!

Individual citizens ARE empowered!

Don't confront the diver under water. Let it go.

Observe the diver on shore and take their car license plate number. (If you want to confront on land, that's your call. At least no one will drown!)

Go to the Police station and explain what you observed and that you suspect it to be illegal poaching. Ask to have the individual identified by name and mailing address by tracing their license plate number. Vehicle license plates are public information! They are out there for all to see! The identity of the individual who it belongs to it is also public information. Police are officers of the court. They are obliged to respond to public information requests if the request is reasonable and prudent. Tell the Police officer that it is your intent to file a Harrassment Complaint against the person with the District Court.

Once you know his or her name, petition the WDFW for their Fishing License. It should be public record. If the WDFW won't give it up, then that is a little conversation public conservation minded divers collectively should have with the WDFW isn't it?

Go to the District Court in that jurisdiction and speak to the Clerk and ask to file a Harrassment Complaint. You will get a packet of information to fill out. There is a modest filing fee, $20-$30. The person will be served papers with a summonds to appear in court. You will be as well.

State your case!