Bonaire by Cruise

"Dennis (Icarus)" <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote in message
news:ea7bb$447e5f81$18d64cf6$13836@KNOLOGY.NET...
> "Skeptic" <bcs002b@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:FFsfg.999651$xm3.138567@attbi_s21...
>>
>> "Alan Street" <agstreet@nonono_san.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:310520061929589180%agstreet@nonono_san.rr.com ...
>> > In article <SVrfg.999582$xm3.882937@attbi_s21>, Skeptic
>> > <bcs002b@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > ? > ?
>> > ? > ?
>> > ? > You really have no idea what you're talking about. Do you honestly
>> > ? > think gloves are the cause of reef damage?
>> > ?
>> > ? There are many causes. Gloves when diving is one of them. That is
> the
>> > ? entire basis for their being banned in Bonaire.
>> > ?
>> > ?
>> >
>> > Gloves have nothing to do with the problem. Start thinking about the
>> > root cause, not about the symptoms.
>> >
>> > The ban on Bonaire is based on ignorance, not logic. By your postings,
>> > you're part of the ignorance.
>>
>> Nice to see you insult an entire island's philosophy. If you don't think
>> recreational divers with neoprene gloves on cause reef damage, you
>> haven't
>> dived much. Inexperienced divers are like underwater wrecking balls.
>>
>>
>
> So if these inexperienced divers are ouching the reef without gloves on,
> its
> ok?

The lack of gloves forces divers to be more aware of their surroundings and
makes them less likely to use their hands as buoyancy devices bopping from
coral to coral.

> Or do you see the point that the common symptom is inexperienced divers?
>
> Grand Cayman also has a "no gloves" philosophy. Being a goo ddiver I
> planyed
> by their rules.
> When I'm diving other warm water areas, I still don't touch, even with
> gloves on.
>
> Dennis
>
>

"Greg Mossman" <mossman@qnet.com> wrote in message
news:127su12s9ffcm60@corp.supernews.com...

> "They"? Tell me who they are and I'll shoot them.
>
> I am the NRA.

Start with the Senate, and then finish up at the House.

But dont take it personal, they think we are all stupid.

"Dennis (Icarus)" <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote in message
news:6e2f0$447edc8f$18d64cf6$31544@KNOLOGY.NET...
> "-hh" <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote in message
> news:1149158499.762778.6930@c74g2000cwc.googlegrou ps.com...
> > Skeptic wrote:
> > > "Dennis (Icarus)" <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote:
> > > > So if these inexperienced divers are ouching the reef without gloves
> on,
> > > > its ok?
> > >
> > > The lack of gloves forces divers to be more aware of their
surroundings
> and
> > > makes them less likely to use their hands as buoyancy devices bopping
> from
> > > coral to coral.
> >
> > That's the theory, but unfortunately, its wrong.
> >
> > First, what does "forces divers to be more aware" really translate to?
> >
> > It translates to: "make an injury more likely AFTER a contact event".
> >
> > This means that the diver-induced incremental reef damage will have
> > happened regardless of if there were wearing gloves on or not. As
> > such, you're relying on the learning curve of someone getting hurt (or
> > at best, the psychological fear of injury) to work, to hopefully
> > slightly reduce the odds of the individual repeating that type of
> > action in the future. That's not particularly reliable.
> >
> >
> > Second, as you point out, for divers who are using their hands as
> > buoyancy aids, when they do get injured from a lack of gloves, what are
> > their learning options?
> >
> > a. Blame the event on something 'not their fault' and do not learn
> > b. Upgrade their lycra skin to a 2mm wetsuit (& bodycrash the reef)
> > c. Upgrade the wetsuit to one with rubber knee patches (& continue)
> > d. Realize they're not a victim & learn to improve bouyancy skills
> >
> > Since the majority of the problem are the stupid divers (and our
> > "victim" attitude to everything today), why do we always want to delude
> > ourselves into believing that option (d) is for some reason the most
> > likely?
> >
> >
> > Third, hands are only part of the diver's body. As per this study on
> > diver-caused reef damage,
> >
> > http://www.reef.crc.org.au/publicati.../TechRep4.html
> >
> > they concluded:
> >
> > a) 4% of the divers caused over 70% of the detected damage
> > b) Kicks by divers' fins were the major cause of coral injury.
> >
> > What this means is that even if we want to say that fins were 51% and
> > gloves 49% for damage, this report shows that gloves aren't a problem
> > over 80% of the time.
> >
> >
> >
> > Finally, here's the real source of diver-induced reef damage in
> > Bonaire. Please note that he is *not* wearing gloves:
> >
> > http://www.bonairetalk.com/newsgroup...s/626/1175.jpg
> >
> >
> > This is the nature of educational problem that needs to be overcome.
> >
> > And FWIW, I'm not blaming this on this diver having a camera. Its just
> > that this guy's buoyancy control skills are very obviously grossly
> > deficient, and this type of behavior is going to be very hard to break
> > him of, with or without optional toys.
> >
> >
> > And finally, where did this reef damage come from? Historically, this
> > "rubble" area used to be covered with staghorn coral, fire coral and
> > critters, but as can seen in the photo, its pretty barren, although
> > there are small coralheads trying to grow back.
> >
> > So was the reef damage seen here inflicted by the fin of man, attracted
> > by the webcam?
> >
> > No, it was not. Despite Yahoos like the above, it is known that 99%
> > of the damage here was caused by non-diver sources. In this specific
> > case, it was from Hurricane Lenny.
> >
> >
> > Finally, please don't get me wrong: I do agree that we should strive
> > to prevent reef damage while diving. My point is that that doesn't
> > mean that divers are to blame for most of it, with or without gloves.
> > The reality is that most reef damage comes from non-point sources such
> > as the flushing of toilets up on this arid island, and similar types of
> > human consumption activities. Not someone accidentally rubbing
> > something on a dive. When viewed in the context of all sources, reef
> > damage from direct scuba diver contact is actually a very small
> > minority. If we really want to help protect the reef, sure, avoid the
> > small stuff, but realize that our efforts will be much more productive
> > if we focus on those sources that we can influence that are a larger
> > percentage than the proverbial 4%. To concentrate just on gloves
> > violates the Pareto Principle.
>
> >
>
> Ok, here's what we can do:
> a) All divers will be gloveless & finless. They'll have minimal weighting
to
> insure that they're psotively bouyant. Professional divemasters can tow
the
> customers to within 20 ft of each reef.
> b) Adoption of a "no hurricane" policy to prevent further damage.
> c) Adoption of a "no toilet" policy - all port-a-potties, with the
contents
> shipped elsewhere.

N.I.M.B.Y.

Bjórrúnar skaltu "Scott" <pugetsounddiver@gmail.com> rista-

> "Greg Mossman" <mossman@qnet.com> wrote in message
>
>> "They"? Tell me who they are and I'll shoot them.
>>
>> I am the NRA.
>
> Start with the Senate, and then finish up at the House.
>
> But dont take it personal, they think we are all stupid.

You're advocating the murder of the entire Senate and Congress,
Scotty?

Tsk, tsk.

I hope your home is well-stocked in advance of the visit from the
FBI

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"-hh" <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote in message
news:1149158499.762778.6930@c74g2000cwc.googlegrou ps.com...

> Finally, here's the real source of diver-induced reef damage in
> Bonaire. Please note that he is *not* wearing gloves:
>
> http://www.bonairetalk.com/newsgroup...s/626/1175.jpg

How'd you get a picture of the guy who was on the boat with us in the Keys
on Sunday morning? The first time I've ever seen someone stand (and later
lie down) on the reef like that. I was impressed.

"Carl Nisarel" <nisarel@postmaster.uk.co> wrote in message
news:Xns97D55211AE8DDnisarelpostmastercou@66.150.1 05.47...

> You're advocating the murder of the entire Senate and Congress,
> Scotty?
>
> Tsk, tsk.
>
> I hope your home is well-stocked in advance of the visit from the
> FBI

Donuts?

"Chris Guynn" <chris.guynn@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ifCfg.115792$F_3.82256@newssvr29.news.prodigy .net...
>
<snip>
> >
> > Ok, here's what we can do:
> > a) All divers will be gloveless & finless. They'll have minimal
weighting
> to
> > insure that they're psotively bouyant. Professional divemasters can tow
> the
> > customers to within 20 ft of each reef.
> > b) Adoption of a "no hurricane" policy to prevent further damage.
> > c) Adoption of a "no toilet" policy - all port-a-potties, with the
> contents
> > shipped elsewhere.
>
> N.I.M.B.Y.
>
>

Illustrating absurdity by......

Dennis

"Carl Nisarel" <nisarel@postmaster.uk.co> wrote in message
news:Xns97D55211AE8DDnisarelpostmastercou@66.150.1 05.47...
<snip>
>
> You're advocating the murder of the entire Senate and Congress,
> Scotty?

Soo...you consider the Senate to be separate from Congress?

Dennis

Dennis (Icarus) wrote:
> "Carl Nisarel" <nisarel@postmaster.uk.co> wrote in message
> news:Xns97D55211AE8DDnisarelpostmastercou@66.150.1 05.47...
> <snip>
>> You're advocating the murder of the entire Senate and Congress,
>> Scotty?
>
> Soo...you consider the Senate to be separate from Congress?

can carLito the Loser say "bicameral"?


>
> Dennis
>
>

"Greg Mossman" <mossman@qnet.com> wrote in message
news:127u9eh99opob21@corp.supernews.com...

> Donuts?

Several of my buds are FBI, ATF, etc.

They share my disgust.