It seems these scuba vs free threads go on and on and no one ever changes his mind. Having said my piece early in this one, I really did resolve to stay out of it, but now you have sucked me back in.
I don't know why I'm dumb enough to think I could actually cause anyone to take a wider view, but here goes with an example I have used many times before.
In Southern California, our most sought-after species, white sea bass, are very sensitive to noise and movement. I have seen them bolt at the squeak of ears being equalized. We always remove our snorkels from our mouths as we start the dive so that we won't scare them with a stream of bubbles. Some people punch holes in the top of their hoods so as to make sure all the air gets out so that a stray bubble won't escape the suit and spook the fish. As you can imagine, the sound of a regulator and all those exhaust bubbles would be absolutely out of the question.
Our other most popular gamefish, the yellowtail, may not be quite as sensitive, but it is also very hard to approach using scuba.
So, if we really want to be "sporting" doesn't it follow that we should use scuba gear? If we hunt them while holding our breaths, aren't we taking advantage by sneaking up on them silently and not giving them proper warning?
That is really a rotten thing to do, and should be banned.
Hi Bill,
Beautiful part of the world you live in, and an interesting point of view though not really addressing the issue of those who shoot huge docile fish on scuba.
The 'my fish are more timid than your fish' arguement wears a little thin as you can still breath hold at depth, release air and move to another area. You are at a huge advantage...unfairly IMO, particulalry in the Med and Atlantic.
Rob