BST Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About mikez2

  • Rank
    1,000 Post Club!

Recent Profile Visitors

1,467 profile views
  1. I feel really bad for those grieving family members. That is what these hardcore surfers and boogyboarders should be thinking of. No one will be impressed with your rebellious bravado when they watch your mother cry on tv.
  2. It was different going back aways. Of the two I ever frequent, one has always been a rotation spot, probably before most of our times. When I did it late 80s early 90s, it was mostly older guys, regulars, some townies, some RV guys. It was like you describe. Respectful new guys were given a spot, even some tips. I luckily got introduced by a local so my learning curve was short. I never really saw people buck it. Seemed obvious that wouldn't fly. The other place I like didn t used to be so hardcore rotation spot. More the who ever got there first spot. That has changed and now on outgoing during peak times you got young guys doing the new version rotation with one guy casting and five guys watching like idiots. Makes no sense. Everyone could cast with a little cooperation. The other thing about the new guys, they come late, in groups and muscle their way to the tip and claim it in the name of the rotation. That never happened. The one difference between the two spots is on one, there's fewer options to avoid the rotation. The other one you can spread out. In the right conditions I can consistently catch without taking a spot in line but also stay out of their way. Not always, but enough.
  3. Here's some interesting research. I just found it. Only skimmed it, on my way to work. Looks like something a lot of us would like to know. They include speculation about white sharks. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/300370801_The_potential_role_of_spiny_dogfish_in_gray_and_harbor_seal_diets_in_the_Gulf_of_Maine
  4. There are interesting tourism numbers that can be tracked. I glanced at some stuff on google. No numbers for this year yet. Couple thing caught my eye; real estate occupancy rates have not changed. Rentals are as full as pre-shark, within a percent or less. Recorded visits to the national seashore are down. That might be shark related. I'm guessing casual swimmers look to the bay now. Really it's the post-fatality numbers that matter, and a few years to adjust to really know jow tourism is affected.
  5. Some good advice up there. Another lesson that comes out of this is how many smart and handy people have no idea of the how and why of natural gas. I knew a little from working utilities (water) but I learned a lot from this. Can only hope everyone has.
  6. The more I think about a rec hunt, the more I like it. In my opinion, regardless how the science shakes out, "Cull" is a dirty word that will cost too much bad press. Also a hard sell to wildlife management. For a cull you would need TOO MANY seals. That's hard to determine, might take years and millions and maybe makes them look bad. For a harvest you would only need just enough, not too many. Plus, generally speaking, wildlife management that produced surplus animals allowing a revenue generating recreation opportunity would look good. I'm sure it would be easier and quicker to sell the idea the herd can spare a few rather than the herd needs to be killed off. You'd have to drop the word cull, and somehow get the armchair biologists and idiot politicians to stop their shrill cries. And get the natives in on it somehow.
  7. I think you will find most of the respectable aquariums have moved away from keeping them. I don't know that for a fact but all the bad press on captive whales has the good aquariums scrambling to separate themselves from Sea world et al. They try and present themselves as more than wet zoos with miserable critters in tiny glass boxes. They all have an educational aspect and a conservation aspect that would preclude displaying doomed animals.
  8. I couldn't really follow that but there was something about me being anti-hunting I think. In fact my answer to the "problem" is a recreational hunt. I am a hunter myself. I also dabble in taxidermy and love fur. And no, if you actually read what I say that is not a contradiction. Now by answer I mean shut up the cull crowd, not change much on the water. Make people feel good. Let the haters see some dead seals. I know they would never ok a harvest big enough to reduce the herd much but one huge advantage is to teach seals to fear humans again. Just like coyotes, they are smart. They learn to steal from humans when they can get away with it but just as quickly learn to avoid humans once they've been hunted. I would only stipulate that there can be no waste. No shooting for fun. There would have to be some way to use the meat. I bet there would be more acceptance across the country and world if it was an indigenous peoples hunt. Frankly, I think that would be way cool. That is something I would travel to watch.
  9. All fair. They eat alot of fish. Some of them are stripers. They are super annoying to fish near, no question. Without them, there wouldn't likely be a shark fatality. All fair, all true. Nothing there to trigger an amendment to the MMPA but true all the same.
  10. How can you tell there weren't 50,000 back then? No modern commercial fishermen so presumably plenty of fish to eat. No modern human beach development means many more beaches to haul up and pup. Logically it would seem there should have been many more seals than there are now. I think you attributing way too much credit to the native Americans' ability to decimate such a prolific critter with stone tools and bark canoes. Further, I don't believe the evidence supports the claim. Yes, seal bones are in middens but it's huge and unreasonable leap to say they ate so many there were less in those days than today. FWIW, I'd be totally fine with some sort of hunting season like they have in Canada. They take a tiny fraction of the population, has no effect on the big picture. I'd eat seal and would be very happy to add a tanned seal to my pelt collection. Wouldn't change the shark danger or nuisance factor to surf casters but be a good feel good measure and provide opportunities to hunters.
  11. Nope. I'm coming, be there soon. Come on out and gimme some **** on the jetty.
  12. You can't reuse that one.
  13. Ok this is a tough slog of a read but everyone should at least carefully read the introduction and skip to the conclusion. THIS is where the 50,000 comes from that is quoted as gospel by pretty much all media and 100% amatuer seal haters. It was an experiment in a lab by computer geeks. It was meant to test the technology. It had never been done. The google snapshots cover just two data sets and the model used telemetry data from just 8 seals. The conclusion spells out the sketchiness and theoretical vs factual nature of the method. Yet it is utter fact in the eyes of both seal haters and tree huggers. If nothing else, honest people on both sides need to through away the argument that the seals went from 17000 to 50000 in 7 years. You have to pick a methodology you prefer. Obviously the "overabundance" camp will pick the bigger. And that may actually be the more accurate which is fine. But then you have to throw out that 17000. The supposed huge increase is a cornerstone of the cull philosophy. Without it, cull will be an even tougher battle. https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/67/8/760/3865418
  14. Good post except no one here is saying cull the sharks, this is all about seals. The seal hate is not about public safety. In fact I've seen it said right here "can't wait until someone gets killed" because they mistakenly believe there will be a seal cull. The seal hate has become a universal attitude among some Cape residents and summer people. "The seal problem" is talked about far from the water by people who've never even been there. The comments from seal haters under social media posts range from hilarious to deeply disturbed. Lots of armchair biologists talking about "systems out of balance", "overabundance", "decimated fish stocks" despite being clueless about what they are talking about. The ones trying to sound scientifical use the utterly irrelevant math equations. Some even claim to calculate the pounds of seal ****. The fact is, nobody knows how many seals there. All the haters that cling to 50,000 seals are the same guys that would flip out and scream "Fake Science" if the same squishy math was used to count stripers or groundfish. Nobody really knows how much of which fish the seals eat. In my opinion claims they ate all the fish on the Cape are bogus. The stocks have declined coastwide. Baitshops, coffee shops, breakfast joints etc are out of business from Maryland to Maine. There are less people fishing because the fishing hasn't been so easy anymore, anywhere. A lot of people are yelling cull on tv now. My guess is that will pressure the feds to dump big $$$$$$$$ into a study of the situation. It will be interesting to see what comes of it and how long it takes.
  15. So everyone keeps repeating those numbers as some sort of population explosion. Turns out the difference is from the use of a totally new sampling model. The old way, 17000 came from live humans counting live seals. The 50,000, supposedly the huge increase, comes from google earth snapshots and a computer model based on a sample size of 8. Eight individuals. They may or may not have increased since 2011 but you can't tell by the difference between those two numbers. Apples to oranges.