Bonaire by Cruise

"Chris Guynn" <chris.guynn@> 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

"Skeptic" wrote

> gauges, and octopi are needed items.

I dove for 29 years without gauges or an octopus. What makes you think
they're needed?

>> Maybe you can't. Lots of people do it every day.
>
> Incorrect. Recreational diving is done with fins.

Did you see the word recreational somewhere in my previous comments?

> I haven't.

Funny, I'm pretty sure everybody else believes you have.

> Well then Lee, now you know you don't need to fuss any longer - it's an
> island law so get over it or don't dive there.

No worry there. I'll take my money elsewhere.

Lee

"Scott" <pugetsounddiver@> wrote in message
news:6qmdnR26KLe-OB3ZnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d@wavecable.com...
> "Skeptic" <bcs002bm> wrote in message
> news:zr1gg.759963$084.515982@attbi_s22...
>
>> since you are selectively snipping like a punk.
>
> Punk?

yes, when you post a reply as you did, but remove the context to which it
was being stated, that's an adolescent usenet trick. You are a punk.

"Skeptic" wrote

>> I dove for 29 years without gauges or an octopus. What makes you think
>> they're needed?

> In common use, they're considered necessary items. A few months ago, in
> Aruba, they made me use one of their regulators even though I had my
> own... but no octopus. I'm happy that you, too, have dived in the golden
> age of diving with fewer restrictions, but gloves are far more optional.

Only in your opinion.

>> Funny, I'm pretty sure everybody else believes you have.
>
> since you are selectively snipping like a punk, here is what "I haven't"
> is in response to:

>> You have every right to your opinion and every right to chose not to wear
>> gloves. You don't have the right to decide for others.

Correct. That's also what I stated that others thing you have.

> Clearly you are opposed to it.

Only incidentally. I'm opposed to imposing limits of safety equipment
because some people misuse it rather than dealing with the people who are
responsible. I feel the same way about gun laws.

Lee

"Skeptic" <bcs002bm> wrote in message
news:3L1gg.1002476$xm3.653097@attbi_s21...

> I don't consider myself part of the problem. However, if you have any
> diving experience whatsoever, you know there are plenty of people who are
> "incompetent" or at least very green. These people, armed with gloves, do
> in fact use their hands to bounce from coral head to coral head.

So why not allow gloves for the non-green?

My own personal tragedy goes as follows: After a nice solo dive at Capt.
Don's house reef, I was heading back to the dock. Conditions were quite
surgey and as I approached the ladder under the dock, I was suddenly shoved
into a piling. My choices were clear: (a) ram the piling head on, or (b)
put up a hand to stop myself. I chose option (b) and bounced off the piling
with the side of my right hand. Immediately my ungloved hand lit up from
the contact with the encrusting fire coral around the piling. I was in
decent pain until I could get myself up the ladder and over to the shop for
a squirt of vinegar, and I had an itchy bumpy rash that lingered for most of
a month. Until that point, I had made physical contact with absolutely
nothing underwater even though I was taking pictures galore. Gloves would
have solved my problem, yet would have made no difference to the reef.

> Bad buoyancy and attitude control are the problem....
> The rule should be: ``Do not touch the reef at any time, for any reason.''

The funny thing is, it's not all that hard to stay off the reef. Some
people have the experience and skills to get quite close without touching.
Others don't. It's not all that much to ask those that don't to add a few
feet of buffer.

Lee

"Robert" <osiris@woden.com> wrote in message
news:til38217mlnaacv4ju30fh8ncbl4j7gqot@...

> Can we get this into perspective please

Good luck with that.

On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 20:28:11 GMT, "Skeptic" <bcs002bm> wrote:

>While your comments are interesting, the basic fact remains that by human
>nature, a diver (particularly a new one) will be more likely to
>handle/touch/push off of coral when wearing gloves because they are
>protective. Even that only accounted for 49% of the damage 20% of the time,
>that is entirely avoidable reef damage which can be drastically reduced with
>not using gloves.
>
<SNIPPED>

I wonder just how many inexperienced 'newbies' even OWN gloves, diving
over a lot of the Cribbean, Teneriffe, Turkey, Crete and the Maldive
Islands, I have seldom seen divers with gloves.

On night dives, and wrecks it is sensible, in fact correct me if I am
wrong, but do not P.A.D.I. advocate the use of gloves whilst wreck
diivng (externally as well as penetration)??

Alos when diving in freshwater sink holes etc, where the water is
normally a few degrees colder, gloves are also usefull to keep the
hands from numbing.

It is a fallacy to think just because you wear gloves you will touch,
and those that do often look very carefully where their finger goes.

Diving recently in the Dominican Republic (diving for 3 months), the
amount of trash that was on the reefs doing damage was far greater
than the human contact damage by orders of magnitude.

Can we get this into perspective please

Regards

Rob

Vulcan Bomber (101 Squadron)

On Sat, 03 Jun 2006 10:17:20 -0400, Reclining Buddha <> wrote:

<SNIPPED>
>>
>>No. Personal observation, experience, and the opinion of the
>>conservationists who created the policy in Bonaire.
>
>This is the same as the notices on all US gas pumps to not use cell
>phones while pumping because of the danger of sparks igniting the
>gasoline. Have you or anyone you personally know EVER been shocked by
>a cell phone? In case you are wondering, the answer is NO.
>
O.T. ....but....
Did you know that in a lot of the 'SHELL' vertical price 'thingies'
at the side of the pumps actually contain a cellphone relay station,
at around 5 to 10 times the power of your cellphone??
There is a website somewhere which tells which ones do.


>Sure, it SEEMED logical to the Bonairians to ban gloves, but a REALLY
>inexperienced diver will grab the coral just as much with his bare
>hands as with gloves. It is only AFTER he does it that he learns
>better!
>
>
>Reclining Buddha
>
>The Original Couch Potato!


Regards

Rob

Vulcan Bomber (101 Squadron)

Skeptic wrote:
> While your comments are interesting, the basic fact remains that by human
> nature, a diver (particularly a new one) will be more likely to
> handle/touch/push off of coral when wearing gloves because they are
> protective. Even that only accounted for 49% of the damage 20% of the time,
> that is entirely avoidable reef damage which can be drastically reduced with
> not using gloves.
>
So it is inexperience not gloves

can you cite your statistics 49% of the damage 20% of the time??????