Wildlife trips

[melads]

Haven't been up to seil for a while. Now spoilt for choice - pros & cons : porpoise II or seafari ?

[Seilant]

Boating or bouncing?

- Seilant

[MA1BOB]

I vote for Midgie hunting.

[wasseventhseil]

mmm hard chioce, but ideally if you want to do something positive for the local wildlife and enviroment dont go on either.........bit thirsty on the earths resources, what with the 500-900 horse power to take 12 passengers out to see some quite common animals.

[Seil Blubber]

TO suggest that wildlife watching trips are damaging our local friendly sea creatures is a bit much IMHO . . .

Trips like this encourage awareness and may lead to positive decisions being made. Well worth the extra carbon emissions by and large, and also of course of some value to the local economy.

Stop going for the soft targets. The villanous scum who deserve our wrath are the scallop dredgers, fish farmers and similar looters and pillagers of our marine environment.

[elephantseal]

I love how going and seeing some furry animals makes us all more 'aware'. Equally as rich calling fishermen and fish farmers

villanous scum

considering most are folk who have lived here all their lives and care as much for the area as anyone else.

I detect a little elitism as well (and ideas of 'ownership' ) when the phrases 'looters and pillagers' is used - getting a little overprotective are we? There's nothing like a good bit of hypocrisy, especially when it comes to environmentalists (who are full of it!)

[Pentlandpirate]

I agree that those who work the land normally have it's (their) best interests at heart. So although a farmer may send his animals for slaughter, the well being of each of his stock will be his prime concern. But at the same time he may consider the efficient breeding of cattle and sheep can only be achieved if he can eliminate rabbits, foxes, deer, badgers, etc from his farm. Fish farmers have similar priorities.

What big game would exist in Africa if it were not for the protection offered by wildlife reserves? It appears that the revenue from tourism has allowed them to invest in improving and extending the environment for the animals.

What matters is striking the right balance. Fish farmers and Sea-Life operators bring employment and revenue. Yes, the environmentalists bring a degree of interference. And such differences of priorities will have to work together if a Marine Park is to succeed. As for ownership, I thought we all owned the Earth. That should give us the freedom to do as we wish with our own little bit provided we act responsibly and tolerantly towards others. Normally compromise is the only peaceful solution.

As for boating or bouncing, I prefer bouncing, preferably on a sea sausage.

[wasseventhseil]

My point is the only difference between tour operators and fish farmers/scallopers (apart from the fact the latter provide year round employment for local people) is that you can see the damage the farmers/scallopers are doing,meanwhile tour operators are melting ice caps somewhere out of site......by all means attract more tourists, just dont dress it up as some sort of ecological favour.

as for enviromentalists being a soft target.....not really, they get all the air time and goverment backing they want as they of course have the "moral high ground" all be it a false .