Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ps4fanboy 3880 days ago
"23kg (50lb) of sardines for bait, 700 hooks, miles of line"

"Without bait or fish hooks, Alvarenga invented a daring strategy to catch fish. "

I am confused these statements are contradictory, did I miss something.

3 comments

"shoved his arms into the water up to his shoulders. With his chest tightly pressed to the side of the boat, he kept his hands steady, a few inches apart. When a fish swam between his hands, he smashed them shut, digging his fingernails into the rough scales"

Can't imagine how long this took. In the middle of the ocean, most of the time you don't even see any fish at the surface. How long do you have to wait for one to swim right between your arms?

Dangling things attract fish. If he was wiggling his fingers, fish might well come to investigate.

Tickling trout is a well-established (though generally highly illegal) freshwater fishing method.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trout_tickling

Why would that be illegal? You'd think it's the taking that's illegal, not the method?
I think because it's a way of concealing poaching (no artifacts besides your bare hands) so it's extra harshly punished, but it's just my guess.
Possible that it's not considered "fair chase"? In North America, a lot of conservation ethics are hard-codified into law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_chase

As mentioned in the article, he tossed almost everything overboard to make the boat more stable in the waves.
Hooks and line have got to be the worst choices to throw overboard. I can't imagine it made much of a weight difference on a boat as long as two trucks. But then again he also smashed the engine when he got mad, so maybe it was just one in a series of poor choices.
The article doesn't make clear what sort of hooks and line these were. It's likely to have been a big, heavy, motorized rig from which the line and hooks couldn't be neatly separated, especially while frantically aligning the boat and bailing water in a freak storm.

We should also bear in mind that, at that moment, Alvarenga wasn't anticipating a year at sea. In fact, he was acting to prevent that fate. He believed that his first priority was the right the ship at any cost, because the alternative was capsizing or going adrift. From there, he'd planned to make it back to shore or be rescued in relatively short order.

It's too easy to critique his choices retrospectively. Some of them look bad on paper, out of context. But I've never been placed into that sort of context.

As a general rule, your first priority in any emergency at sea is to stay afloat. This directive overrules all others until you believe your vessel is stable and secure.

Yes the article was being specific though in the things they threw overboard, I guess you can just deduce what the author intended. Good story though.
During the storm, they threw everything they could overboard to make the boat lighter. They threw away their catch, as well as the hooks and line.