I will shoot, kill, eat lots of things. I can give a Coho a good slap with the ball bat when I land em...no much remorse for deer or elk.. But, there are few species, that will actively seek us out..and seem to want a contact, want to interact. So.. dolphins, whales, noooo... but the octopus... it's an ancient survivor..and it is too too smart for me to harvest. If it meets you in the sea.. and all is cool... he will want to know as much about you as you do it. It's a very, very intelligent animal to lay waste to. It's an arbitrary line to draw (I suppose some PETA folks were offended the first line). But a species that smart, so unlike us ..that will develop social rituals with us in their environment if they are not afraid or threatened. Something to consider.

I expect that I'm not going to convince my friend anonyme on this, but in this young man's defense, I'd like to cite the following tidbit from today's Seattle Times.

Please pay special attention to the second paragraph:

The Washington state Department of Fish & Wildlife announced Thursday that it will consider bans on octopus harvesting near popular Seattle beaches and possibly other areas in Puget Sound.

Dylan Mayer, the octopus hunter who sparked an outrage when he took one of the charismatic animals at Cove 2, a popular dive site in West Seattle, was the first voice for a ban on hunting in the cove at a public hearing before the state Fish and Wildlife Commission meeting in Olympia.

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2019640738_octopus09m.html

Now please consider that this young man, after having already taken considerable public criticism, came to a meeting where he knew he could expect even MORE criticism . . . and expressed remorse for his actions, while at the same time giving full support to a new law that would forever stand in condemnation of what he did.

To me that doesn't sound like an "angle." That sounds like a genuine change of heart. A change of heart of the kind we sadly don't see too much of anymore.

Dylan's made some serious errors, yes. But what he's done to atone for those errors is certainly more than some of our recent Presidents have done to atone for their considerably graver ones.

But then, perhaps we're holding this young man to a higher standard than the one to which we hold our leaders.

Think about that.

sunset (#74) . . . yes and no.

Yes, a 19-year-old is old enough to know better than to hurt animals. Hell, a 5-year-old should know better than that. But in the case in question, a young person actually made two mistakes, not one. And the age of accountability does not apply equally to both of them.

His first mistake was "harvesting" an octopus in a particular way. (Whether he regrets that now is a point under discussion here, but I'll address that in my next post.)

His second mistake was in boasting about what he did, threatening to go get another octopus, and so on. Looks bad when you think about the poor octopus, yeah. But really, those are typical behaviors for a 19-year-old. It's part of being a teenager to act recklessly, to boast, to contradict the advice of wiser heads.

Let me ask you something:

Were you ever a 19-year-old?

Didn't you ever make mistakes and then persist in them?

Ever tell your parents or the other adults to get lost?

If not, you'd be the rare exception. I know that I did all these things. And how!

Don't let the fact that a 19-year-old can join the Army* or vote fool you into thinking that he's a bonafide grown-up. There are lots of things a 19-year-old still can't do legally, and that would include things like drinking a beer, renting a car, getting an unsecured credit card.

Recent studies have suggested that young people don't reach full maturity in terms of their emotional and ethical development (to say nothing of judgment) until around age 26. If that's true, then our guy has several years to go.

On the other hand, he's gotten some particuarly hard lessons lately, so he might actually be ahead of the curve at this point.
 

*****************************************************************************************

*Ever wonder why the Army welcomes teenage boys into its ranks? Did you really think that was because of their maturity?

Here's a sample:
http://www.myspace.com/video/contributor/35840289/videos/all
http://www.break.com/user/bordguy1123/

I'd really like to know if anyone on the forum has seen the Facebook postings that caused such an uproar? If true (killing a porcupine for fun, blowing up a snake with a firecracker) these acts indicate a sadistic streak that is unlikely to be diverted by attendance at any meeting. Even for hunters, this is not normal behavior.

So, like Sunset, I'm a little skeptical about precisely what lesson Dylan has learned, and what he's done to make "amends", aside from becoming more secretive and careful about what he does and says in front of witnesses.

Someone old enough to vote, marry, and serve in the military is not a "kid." At the legal age when one is expected to have the maturity and judgment to do those three things, one is old enough to be expected not to hurt smaller creatures for amusement.

@sunset
“I don't want him to come back here because I see no reason to believe that he will stop that kind of behavior.”

And what makes you think that anybody really cares what YOU want?

Frankly, you are not in the position to pass judgment on this kid nor do you have the right to do so. It appears that the overwhelming consensus amongst his peers is that he has made his amends.
Your mind-set is part of the problem, not the solution.

That's great to hear!

After being blackballed from every dive shop in the Pacific Northwest, he did something that a dive shop owner asked him to do so that he'll be able to dive again. That doesn't show maturity; it just shows that he will do what he needs to do to get what he wants.
He seems to enjoy making creatures that are smaller than he is suffer. I don't want him to come back here because I see no reason to believe that he will stop that kind of behavior.

So often the negative media over powers the positive. In order to make sure that this story doesn't get lost I wanted to post this update:

A group of divers made a presentation today to the WDFW commisoners to ask for an emergency closure of the Seacrest Park to the harvesting of Octopi. While no decisions were made today the most importatn thing to note is that DYLAN MAYER showed up and spoke to the comission to support the iniative. DYLAN showed a lot of maturity today and should be commended by the community for doing the right thing under pressure. He deserves the positive attention today.

His picture is also making the rounds on facebook - several friends across the US have posted it over the last couple of days asking if anyone knows who he is. Anyone know whether he's been connected with a diving mentor yet? It'd be nice to see the guy who confronted him do it.

made NPR this weekend:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/11/04/164287403/man-who-killed-octopus-for-art-project-angers-divers?ft=1&f=1001

Libel may be a stretch, but here's something those directly involved may want to consider:

RCW 77.15.210
Obstructing the taking of fish, shellfish, or wildlife — Penalty.

(1) A person is guilty of obstructing the taking of fish[, shellfish,] or wildlife if the person:

(a) Harasses, drives, or disturbs fish, shellfish, or wildlife with the intent of disrupting lawful pursuit or taking thereof; or

(b) Harasses, intimidates, or interferes with an individual engaged in the lawful taking of fish, shellfish, or wildlife or lawful predator control with the intent of disrupting lawful pursuit or taking thereof.

(2) Obstructing the taking of fish, shellfish, or wildlife is a gross misdemeanor.

(3) It is an affirmative defense to a prosecution for obstructing the taking of fish, shellfish, or wildlife that the person charged was:

(a) Interfering with a person engaged in hunting outside the legally established hunting season; or

(b) Preventing or attempting to prevent unauthorized trespass on private property.

(4) The person raising a defense under subsection (3) of this section has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=77.15.210

Just like gun ownership...like it or not, sport harvesting is a right people have. So much so there is a specific WA law written to protect that right. Bob Bailey, and people looking to identify and confront Dylan (or ANYONE involved in legal sport harvesting), could be looking at a gross misdemeanor.

Thanks for the petition link - if I had eight arms, I'd sign it eight times!

I can hook you up with someone who creates a BEAUTIFUL piece of Octo Art, and she's here in West Seattle: Jennifer Cepeda. Maybe she'd be interested!

I think anonyme describes my view correctly. I also pointed out then (and reiterate now) that there is a difference between legal and right. And I hate what happened.

I neither hunt nor fish. I don't eat seafood. The modest amount of meat I do eat is all farm raised in, as best I am able to tell, a humane manner. But hunting and fishing ARE legal -- and for some low income families also their only real source of protein.

Cove 2 is not currently a protected area. It is legal to take one GPO per day with a shellfish license. He had a shellfish license. It is legal to take while on SCUBA. It appears to even be legal to take it had it been a female with eggs (it appears a male was likely taken). It does not appear that they used an illegal technique (spearing or using chemicals).

For reasons that I don't understand, the social norms around "hunting" are very different above and below the water. Can you imagine allowing catch and release hunting for deer using a hook baited with an apple -- that you then reel in? Or it being OK to use a "fish stick" on an elk?

In this instance, the diver said the octopus had a tentacle around his neck and was using another to try and dislodge his regulator. And that, while he was at the surface, his face was still in the water and the punches were to get the octopus to release the grip.

Thus why I think what he did was legal (but not right). These two guys are both around 20 and need to be educated on some things...I am hopeful that can be done in a civil manner.

montanapup - If you put "Octopi West Seattle," along with a cool octopus design, on a green, blue, black, or red t-shirt, please let me know where I can send my $30. :)

Montana, my thoughts exactly. Fund the cause.

@ anonyme - thanks! the WSB is a great resource. i love all the folks and the community. great group.

hmmmm, regarding t-shirts - didnt think of that! it would be a great way to bring attention and maybe fundraise? let me check to see what it would take!

Montanapup, Irukandji - hearts and thumbs up! "Octopi West Seattle"? Awesome. I'm in for a T-shirt!

BTW, Montanapup - welcome to the WSB. So far, I really like your style.

If the community here is too inhospitable for you, Dylan, I hear there's this fishing fleet in Taiji, Japan, that works the waters in your preferred style.

Sunset, don't misunderstand - I am fully as angry as you are. I was even a fully trained PETA soldier at one time. Not only that, one of my earlier posts was even deleted due to my blunt 'opinion' of the perp. But that's not the issue at hand.

I read the paragraph you refer to, and anotherthought is correct. What Dylan did was not right IMO, but unfortunately it was legal. I agree completely that punching an animal to death is horrible, but not very different from the standard method - which is clubbing - or the even more horrible death by "butchery" - slicing the octo up for super fresh sushi while it's alive. When it comes to non-mammalian sea life that is considered a food source, there are laws about how the creatures can be "harvested" - but none that I know of that regulate how or when they are actually killed.

Again, I AM NOT SUPPORTING ANY OF THIS. Only anotherthought can clarify this for sure, but I didn't read anything in the post that sounded pro-cruelty.

How about some levity!

OCTOPI WEST SEATTLE!

:)

anonyme, I suggest you re-read the first paragraph of post 48.

Sunset, I suggest you re-read the post by anotherthought. He/she was referring to a libel case - not animal cruelty.

casimir81, anotherthought, and others who say no laws were broken,
Since when is it legal to repeatedly punch animals that are not being aggressive? Which animals do you consider acceptable to punch?

Signed

WSB - This is yet another example of an instance where something's legality and its morality differ.

Petition signed.
http://www.divenewsnetwork.com/index.php/newsevents/divingnews/dnnonlineexclusive/167-nwonlineexclusive/1184-save-the-gpo

Signed the petition.

Mike

Good article on NW Sportsman:

http://www.nwsportsmanmag.com/2012/11/02/the-octopus-killer-kid-is-not-a-sportsman/

I'm also troubled by the narcissistic tone of the hunter's posts. The lying, combined with a strong sadistic bent, seem to indicate a personality devoid of either compassion or an awareness of consequences. This is indicated not simply by the act of bludgeoning the octopus in front of horrified onlookers, but the almost glib description of a cow writhing on the ground after "a friend" shot her in the head - as well as the firecracker and snake report. If any of this is true (most of it reported by the hunter himself) this paints a troubling picture.

I've lived on a farm where animals were butchered, and the farmer (my uncle, whose family had been farming for generations) always approached butchering with dread. There was no fascination with suffering, and a pall fell over the homestead for several days after a slaughter.

Anotherthought has it right: expressing a personal opinion and/or discussing a report made second-hand is not libel. If it were, there could be no evening news.

Casimir81 (posts 37 and 43):

I hope you don't plan to sit for the Washington bar exam anytime soon. Pulling a quote from wiki is not the same as understanding the case law in Washington for both libel and SLAPP.

I'll just leave it at that.

Dylan:

I am not in your shoes so I don't fully understand why you are reacting the way you are. Let me start by saying that I am sorry you or your family have been subject to threats of violence -- that is both wrong and uncalled for. And I am the first to agree that you acted in a perfectly legal manner.

But I don't think legal and right are always the same thing. For example, you say you checked to make sure it was a female with eggs. It actually appears to be legal to take a female with eggs -- yet you didn't want to do that. An example of the difference between legal and right.

I understand how you might not have understood in advance what a big deal it was -- and why it was the wrong place -- but it sounds like in post 41 you get it.

I was not there for the interaction on the beach so I have no idea how rude you were or how rudely you were treated. This might be hard to hear but some of your own comments have done yourself no favor.

If you truly are doing this for the food (and still have 50# in the freezer), why would you say you plan to go again the next day? If you truly believed it to be a male, why did you say "When he asked me what if it was protecting its eggs, I said well its not now sarcastically." If you truly take responsibility for your actions, why would you say you had nothing to do with snake and the firecracker -- all you did was take and post the photo (how is that nothing?)?

Free advice: This incident and the stuff on your websites has defined you in the minds of many. That isn't fair -- it is out of context and ignores the many good things you have likely done. But it is reality -- and litigation would not fix the problem. But accepting the olive branch offered by some, combined with a bit of contrition might go a long way....

Here is public information published elsewhere, a twitter picture posted the afternoon after the killing: http://twitter.com/DaniMayer1/status/264132484248240129

Dylan,
When you say in comment 41 that nothing was wasted, why is so much of the animal visible on the ground? How much of what is on the ground the day after the kill did you eat or otherwise use?

Dylan,

Thank you for your response. You know sometimes it's the questions that we don't even know to ask that jump up and bite us! I'm a young single dude in my 20's too (although a little later in my 20's than you) and damn the hardest lesson to learn is learning when to just admit that I just didn't know! I can be bull-headed sometimes and can probably relate to where you've been the last 48 hours.

That being said I still offer the hand that I extended in post 17 above that I will help you meet the right people if you are still interested in hunting in a manner that the community would find ethical.

I think in some regards man you can change the public perception 180 degrees if you sign the petition to protect Cove 2 (not end hunting, just hunting at cove 2) at the link below:

http://www.divenewsnetwork.com/index.php/newsevents/divingnews/dnnonlineexclusive/167-nwonlineexclusive/1184-save-the-gpo

You could become the spokesman for this effort and I could not imagine a more powerful voice for conservation than from someone who learned the hardway!

Additionally as a side note (and not being a hunter I'll admit I don't know how relevant this is) please be aware this area has been closed in regards to shellfishing for pollution....

http://ww4.doh.wa.gov/scripts/esrimap.dll?name=BIOVIEW&Left=1158736&Bottom=806482&Right=1188736&Top=847427&click.x=180&click.y=190&Step=3

Pretty much everything Lamont has said is spot on.

Dylan, whether you knew it or not at the time, you went to the most popular dive site in the region, pulled out a 9 foot, 70lb GPO, most likely a female, and beat her to death in front of several divers. Even if you didn't realize how much your actions offended and upset those people and everyone in the dive community who later heard about it, you do now.

You owe the community a sincere apology. Which I haven't heard from you yet. And at this point, you've lied several times to the media and in your stories on this board so it will be hard to believe you anyway. But give it a shot. The only thing that is going to make this stop is your acknowledgement that you made a huge mistake and you're really sorry and it won't happen again. Meaning, you will never hunt in Cove 2, let alone grab an octopus there and beat it to death in front of people. OK? Not too much to ask, I hope.

Maggie

Bob claimed that Dylan said that the octo was on eggs. It sounds like when he was confronted that Dylan decided to mouth off, and Bob reported that. And we still only have Dylan's statement that the octo wasn't on eggs. This gets into he-said-she-said territory which would immediately get thrown out by any judge in a defamation lawsuit.

And having known Bob for 8 years, I'm going to believe his account that Dylan said that. I don't know if Dylan was lying that the octo was on eggs just to get a rise out of Bob, or if Dylan is lying now that the octo wasn't on eggs and it actually was.

Given that I'd be willing to bet money that Dylan pulled the octo out of the diving area and has later lied about it, I'm not all that inclined to believe him. And I suspect that if you put Bob and Dylan before any judge, who is halfway competent at spotting a bullshit artist, I know which one is going to come out on top.

"And if he lost his job over this, then that's good and its a "teachable moment" for him and nobody can sue anyone over it. That is the consequences of his actions. His employer does not need to employ anyone who is getting bad press all over the news. The fact that its a free country applies to Bob and me, and the dive shops and the news media and his former employers."

You do have the freedom to speak what you like. But when lies are told (saying it was a female octopus which seems to have really made it look a lot worse) without credible research and with the intent to harm a person's reputation it is called libel and that is against the law and has been since before the American Revolution.

It does not matter what you, or I, or Bob Bailey, or even the whole dive community think of him. It is against the law to spread lies that inflict harm.

Kooth: GOOOD ONE!!!!

Hammerhead this is for you. yes i did eat the octopus (some of it) and i also gave much of it to my old high school teachers that i often still work with. i still have most of it in my freezer. i will also state that nothing was wasted

for the rest of you. i would like to state that i do regret fishing in the spot i did. but if you saw it the way i did (seeing other fishermen and dive shops not seeming to care when i said i was going to fish it) you wouldn't have thought there was a problem either. if someone would have just came and told me nicely instead of confronting me bluntly and rudely, i would have released it. however the community (not everyone) felt the actions they took were necessary.

Clearly if Dylan is getting death threats over this that's one thing.

But while this is legal to hunt these octos, its also perfectly legal to speak out against it. We all have the freedom of speech, particularly divers like Bob Bailey. Bob has the freedom to take the pictures, the freedom to post them. Dive shops in the area have the freedom to deny anyone they like to their shops and their compressors and deny anyone they like training.

This is what happens when you do something which is perfectly legal in the eyes of the law, but which which community standards judge you to be a asshole. And myself and Bob saying that Dylan is an asshole isn't defamatory, its our opinion, and that is protected first amendment speech.

And the Seattle dive community is surprisingly small and has long memories and he's going to be banned in a lot of dive shops, he's going to be banned by a lot of instructors and anyone he dives with is going to have these articles pointed out to him. But far from being a 'victim' when he was doing something 'perfectly legal' that means that he really should have thought this through a bit more before he did it, and particularly after there was outrage and he decided to announce that he'd come back and do it again.

Sure what he did was legal, but he's got most of the dive community around puget sound (and a lot of people around the world) who think he's an asshole who we don't want to deal with, and nobody can force us to think otherwise or accept him. Legally he doesn't have a case against us... Although if people are giving him death threats they should stop that crap, immediately.

And if he lost his job over this, then that's good and its a "teachable moment" for him and nobody can sue anyone over it. That is the consequences of his actions. His employer does not need to employ anyone who is getting bad press all over the news. The fact that its a free country applies to Bob and me, and the dive shops and the news media and his former employers.

Does any good karma get bestowed on this guy if he ends up being the catalyst that officially protects the coves?

Dude, you killed an animal in the equivalent of a petting zoo. Hell of a sportsman.

I just listened to this story on the Ron and Don show tonight. I think Bob Bailey and some people of the diving community should be worried about an upcoming lawsuit. It does not matter if they agree with what was done with the octopus or not it was completely legal. Dylan followed the Fish & Wildlife rules to the T.

"OCTOPUS
Must be caught with hands or instrument which does not penetrate the OCTOPUS, except that octopus taken while angling with hook and line may be retained.
ALL WATERS
except MARINE AREA 12 GIANT PACIFIC Year-round No min. size. Daily limit 1. NO CHEMICALS OR IRRITANTS ALLOWED.
MARINE AREA 12 ALL SPECIES CLOSED"

http://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/shellfish/statewide_rules.html

No laws were broken and he has been slandered received death threats, and suffered personal and financial loss due to one mans championing of his personal views at the expense of a fisherman that was following the law of Washington State.

There are several ways a person must go about proving that libel has taken place. For example, in the United States, first, the person must prove that the statement was false. Second, the person must prove that the statement caused harm. Third, the person must prove that the statement was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement

1. It has been stated that the Octopus was female when a) Bob Bailey was not down there and had no way of knowing the sex of the Octopus and b) a fish and wild life official had inspected the octopus and said no laws were broken. The female Octopus statements are lies.

2)Dylan has stated on the radio that he lost his job due to this. Financial harm

3) There could not have been much research put in by Bob Bailey or else he would have known that what Dylan did was completely legal and there was no call to defame him.

If I were a lawyer I would be very interested in this case.

Ok since you hunted this poor creature . True hunters eat their kill are you?

Hammerhead

I cannot understand why we allow so much hunting of octos anyway.News said one a day is legal?? Are there that many out there? Is that true that someone ,anyone,can hunt one per day if they have a license?

Responding to this:

"For one, i didnt harvest this octo in the dive site. i swam many yards off and just used the dive site as a way in and out of the water."

I've probably 200+ dives in cove 2 and have covered the ground roughly a mile north and south of there with scooters, from roughly 170' to the surface. Divers use those areas and see the critters there, so we still consider this to be spitting in our face to take an octo from the area.

For the non-divers in the crowd, this also simply strikes me as dylan flat-out lying. He was spotted taking an octo from Cove 2 which is the middle cove with Cove 1 and Cove 3 on either side. He would have had to have kicked hundreds of yards either direction, burning 20-30 minutes of air, to get to the edge of what is the divable area by starting in Cove 2. Plus once you get outside of the divable area the bottom becomes flat and muddy with little structure for octos. He would have then had to drag the octopus hundreds of yards back to Cove 2 to exit -- so he is almost certainly lying that he didn't take the octo out of one of the dens in the dive site which are commonly visited by divers.

I'm positive he took it from one of the dens that are nearly under where the water taxi is, or from the honey bear in between Cove 1 and Cove 2, and this statement that he didn't take it from the diving area is simply a lie.

brew and kitsapdiver,
How do you find such compassion in your hearts for someone who pulled an animal out from its home and repeatedly punched it?
People don't punch things to get food. People punch things to hurt them. Hunters kill things as humanely as they can. They don't punch animals.
The talk about some kind of legal protection for gpo's at site is interesting, but I am more concerned that someone chose our community as a place to do something gut-wrenchingly cruel, and he has said that he will do it again.

Dylan,
It’s not about backing down. It’s about compromise. Being defensive and arguing the point is not going to get you anywhere. It will only make things worse. Like I said before, sometimes you just need to swallow the pride and bury the ego to get the results that you want.

I know you didn’t do anything illegal and truly believe you don’t feel like what you did was wrong, nor expected this type of outcry. However, it is how you precede that will determine the outcome. This could, and probably will, have an effect on the rest of your life. It’s important to nip it before it gets even worse. The only way you are going to achieve this is discussing it with those that are reasonable and by being proactive vs. reactive.

There are 2 groups of people involved, those that will threaten and harass you regardless, and those that are trying to reach out and help resolve the situation. It’s my opinion that you need to latch on to those that are reaching out. Maybe offering to be the first to sign the petition to make popular dive sites a “No Take Area”.

@ anonyme
“But there's really no point in wasting another minute talking to, or about, this individual.”

You couldn’t be more wrong.

This may be someone posing, could be trying to get a reaction from people. Sign the petition, ignore those trying to distract from it.

my birthday is 11/23/92..... im days away from twenty..... im in college..... i have my diploma....