White Sharks vs Sevengills - Paper!

First image of Sevengills on this blog = as always, great pic by Peter! Source.

Just in case you've missed it.
Watch.

I must say that I really like it.

Obviously, correlation is not causation so we'll never know 100% - but as somebody who has been equally documenting long-term changes in abundance that are likely partially due to competitive exclusion, I can only applaud the authors for advancing an astute and I believe highly plausible hypothesis.

But go see for yourselves.

Paper here, synopses here and e.g. here.

Enjoy!

Stress in Cape Fur Seals - Paper!

Source.

Very nice - watch.



Paper here.
Well done!

Apex Predator Tourism - Paper!

Behold!

I say, not too bad = a big improvement over last time!

Yes it's once again one of those papers where the academic intelligentsia is meddling and wants to tell us what to do - but when put into context like they have done here, those recommendations do make much more sense. And it's obviously nice that they mention the SRMR, and they also do get extra points for mentioning Rick's SSD!

And the whole mumbo jumbo about the need for regulation?

When it comes to Shark diving, it remains highly irritating - but I'm really not gonna waste my time and try to reformulate what I've said here, so please go and read it there = far from being the rule, regulation all the way to bans (!) is only opportune at a very last resort, i.e. only once common sense, voluntary codes of conduct and self regulation have utterly failed!

And yes, Florida troglodytes, I'm totally looking at you!

Oh and.

Considering the current rampant biodiversity loss within all non-managed ecosystems, I personally find the reference to moral, ethical, and philosophical questions about the commodification of nature naive and highly disturbing - and I can certainly leave it at that!

The good news?

This fad appears to be petering out and from what I can discern, this is very likely one of the last papers on the subject - thankfully!

Anyway.

Judge for yourselves = enjoy the paper!

Scavenging by Tiger Sharks - Paper!

Click for detail!

Very nice!

Watch.

Paper here, press release here.

That's quite a handful of prominent authors - but in essence, this is a re-interpretation of some of the data collected by Richard, Adam and Ian whilst on the venerable Undersea Explorer that have already led to this paper from 2012 I posted about here.

Which is why the authors stress that much of the above is speculation.

The experimental design was aimed at deciphering long-term movements, and the present fine-scale analysis is very much based on inference rather than actual scientific evidence; but having said that, Richard and Adam have logged hundreds of man hours at Raine, and tell me that actual predation events on healthy Turtles are very rare and tend to be confined to the start of the breeding season when there are less Turtles and the Tigers are just arriving hungry. On a busy year, Raine will yield up to 2,000 dead Turtles, meaning that after a while, the Tigers are more than sated and really could not care less about chasing after healthy Turtles.

Like I said, very nice - but now things are changing.

BHP the mining giant is giving a lot of money to the Raine Island Green Turtle Recovery Project, and the island is being made more Turtle-friendly by eliminating features that could kill them and by protecting the nests against inundation. This means that less turtles will have accidents, and that any distressed Turtle will be aided by the turtle lovers and consequently, adult Turtle mortality has already been reduced by 50%.

And the Tigers?

What happens at Raine is part of a system - and if you tinker at one end, it stands to reason that there will be consequences at the other.

Will the Sharks predate more on healthy individuals whilst expending more energy in the process - and if predation increases, will that have an effect on the behavior of the Turtles? Or will the Tiger Sharks gradually stop coming? And what are the effects of this diminishing resource on their population?

Here's what I think - and yes I'm totally speculating.

Research in Hawaii has shown that those Tiger Sharks are able to regularly exploit determined ephemeral resources, and our own observations at Shark Reef indicate the same for our Bulls at Shark Reef. In essence, one of those Sharks will stumbles upon an opportunity, is able to memorize the experience and will henceforth come back to exploit it. This is learned individual behavior, not something that is genetically encoded or communicated by conspecifics or the like.

At the same time, our observations and those of the GWS people indicate that individual Sharks will favor determined strategies, e.g. individual GWS will attack the teaser bait consistently in one determined way; and on Shark Reef where we have a hand feeding and a bin feeding tribe of Bulls with very little overlap, those specialized hand feeding Bulls will gradually stop visiting when we temporarily suspend hand feeding,

Could it be the same for Raine Island?

Could there be always the same Tigers, and could those individuals be specialized scavengers that would not switch to outright predation but instead, would eventually stop coming once there are not anymore enough carcasses to feed on? 

Dunno - but that's certainly testable, or not?

And another thought.

If one believes Domeier -and I certainly do- what happens at Guadalupe is essentially a GWS feeding and mating aggregation. Could the food pulse during the pupping season of the Northern Elephant Seals maybe even trigger mating, and could it be important for the success of the ensuing pregnancies?

And could what happens at Raine Island be the same, meaning that if the Shark aggregation slowly disperses, finding mates would become more difficult and reproduction success would be lower?

Questions questions!

Ain't science a wonderful thing! :)

Tiger Beach - Paper!

Source.

Nice!

Have you seen this?

I cannot find it online - but somebody sent me the full text that says Open Access, so I assume it will appear shortly.

Anyway, here's the 

ABSTRACT: Advancing our knowledge of the reproductive biology and mating systems of freeranging sharks is inherently challenging. The large size and mobility of the specimens are just a few of the problems that make such studies complicated, and in some respects, impractical. The tiger shark Galeocerdo cuvier is a large, roving, apex predator found in many oceans throughout the world. Although their nomadic nature is primarily linked to large-scale migrations, these sharks can also display site fidelity. 

One site where this is known to occur is at Tiger Beach, Bahamas. 
Unique to the waters of this area is the consistent sighting of large females. While the sex-specific use of the area remains unknown, the shallow, warm environment could represent a critical habitat for reproductive events. To investigate the reproductive biology of tiger sharks at Tiger Beach, 65 individuals were opportunistically sampled between 2011 and 2014. Reproductive status of captured females (n = 59) was assessed with ultrasonography and by measuring circulating sex steroid hormones (progesterone, testosterone and estradiol). 

Our results indicate that Tiger Beach is a high-use site for female tiger sharks of mixed life stages.
The results also suggest that Tiger Beach may function as a refuge habitat, allowing females to reach maturity free from male mating harassment, as well as functioning as a gestation ground where gravid females can benefit from year-round calm warm waters, which may reduce the gestation period and accelerate embryo development.

I really like this, especially the collecting of multi-pronged evidence.

Local lore had it that the  Tiger Shark aggregation was correlated with the fact that Sea Turtles would shelter on Little Bahama Bank during rough weather - but I guess we now know this to be, if at all, of only secondary importance.
Press release here.

Anyway, bravo, well done!

PS - here's the full text!

Jimmy, Neil and Al Jazeera - great Shark Media!

Affectionate Sharks? Hmmmm...

And talking of bimbos and Sharks.

Watch this.

This is how you do it!

No drama and undue hype but instead, plenty of science and passion garnished with the right conservation messaging that is being delivered unobtrusively between the lines as opposed the usual tired old unappealing pathos. This is really excellent, highly entertaining and highly informative programming - love not loss, remember?

Kudos!

And bless Jimmy!

His love and passion for his Sharks is just infectious and really quite endearing.

Tho the Tigers and affection thingy, hmmm...

Tricky tricky. I've not been to TB and have never met those specific, highly conditioned individuals. And I totally respect Jimmy for arguably being the world's foremost authority on diving with them, and I also believe him when he states that there's something going on.
 

Still, from my own, granted much more limited experience, I do consider Tiger Sharks to be highly deceiving.
Yes they certainly appear mellow but the way I see it, they are actually always probing for opportunities and likely to pounce when not properly acknowledged and dominated = what I call a head on a swivel Shark that requires constant supervision and should never be underestimated!

Case in point.

To me, that is typical Tiger.

Yes the situation can usually be defused by reacting assertively, much like that dude did with the attacking Blue - but IMO this is never the less a highly dangerous Shark that should never be taken for granted! But who knows - maybe the TB sharks are somehow different? I say, possibly but not very likely. So, please, don't do that at home - and if you really must, then only with great circumspection and flanked with copious amounts of fishy bribes!

Anyway.

Love love love that feature and once again, big congratulations to everybody that has made it possible!

North Carolina Shark Attacks- Interview with Neil!

Good stuff!

But first, and I cite,

"Scientists believe that most shark bites are a case of mistaken identity. From below, a surfer in a black rubber wetsuit looks a great deal like a seal, for example," explains David Shiffman, a PhD candidate at the University of Miami's Abess Center for Ecosystem Science and Policy. 

Really - and if so, who exactly?

Last time I checked, "mistaken identity" was an -incidentally untested and untestable- hypothesis proposed by John McCosker when it came to explaining why GWS attack surfers on surfboards - not some generic statement about any Shark in any situation!

And assuming that David meant "by mistake": is that even plausible considering the Sharks' preternatural senses that we're usually so proud to illustrate? What scientists do believe is that most Shark bites are not predatory in nature - which is only logical considering that the very vast majority of Sharks (like e.g. Caribbean Reefies) pursue prey that is orders of magnitude smaller than people! But there are heaps of other possible reasons, read that first link, for why Sharks could bite people - and genuine mistakes are probably the very last of them! And guess what: in most cases, we'll never know why, exactly, they did strike - which is one thing the majority of scientists will certainly agree upon!

Would this be yet again one of those stupid attempts at rehabilitating Sharks by asserting that they have no bad intentions, or the like?

Which brings me over to this.

It's part of this thread, already mentioned here.

Christopher Neff There is no scientific evidence to support this - Gruber (1987) notes that shark bites are not feeding events

Gruber (1987) huh.

Doc has sent me Gruber (1988), published in Naval Research Review and entitled Why do Sharks attack Humans. Therein I find this - the only possible explanation for it being that Doc did radically change his mind one measly year later! :)

Click for detail!

Anyway.

Whilst the young padawans need to urgently stop making public pronouncements about topics they obviously got no clue about, Neil (and, mostly, Lawrence) shows us how to do it right - especially when you're a scientist!

Enjoy - and well done!

Shark Diving Tourism - Paper!

Absolutely agree! 

Finally!

I say, this is as good as it gets!

After years of frustration at the various stupidities about our industry that have been proffered by an motley array of researchers and other bloviators with little personal experience but obvious agendas, here comes a paper written by people who being Shark divers have been there and done it, and obviously understand what they are talking about.
And... nice to see the frankly surprising cooperation! :)

Required reading!

The global code of conduct and scoring system?

Absolutely agree! 

Developing a meaningful code that is not too generic will be a huge challenge in view of the highly diverging circumstances in terms of legal framework, location, species etc. - but on top of the general statements (= e.g. don't harass), one could envision sub-categories (e.g. provisioned or not) that could lead to the necessary specificity. Plus, there will have to be considerable industry buy-in - so guys, talk to us!

And when it comes to the rating which I strongly advocate, the challenge will be to avoid the obvious issues of liability for the rating agency - but again, it can, and should be done.

And guess what - people are already working on both issues! :)

So, does this paper make me 100% happy?

Of course not! :)

Precautionary approach?

Like I continue to state, we've been enduring decades of unsubstantiated slander despite of having built one of the safest tourism activities anywhere - and I am really sick an tired of that.

Our track record speaks for itself and with that in mind, I do not at all buy into the recommendation that we need to adopt a precautionary approach on all those assumed potential risks pending more in-depth analysis by the intelligentsia.
E.g. Ben and Cristina have been hand feeding those Reefies for what feels like time immemorial, and this with zero documented side effects and owing to their protective gear, zero incidents. With that in mind, it makes zero sense for them to discontinue anything only because somebody proffers some hypothetical caveat - but at the same time, should somebody come up with hard evidence, I am equally convinced that Cristina would be the first to implement the necessary changes!

So once again - stop speculating but show me the fucking evidence instead!

Or the bloody ban of flash photography!

This stupidity has been the "mainstay" of sustainable Whale Shark snorkeling procedures, see e.g. here. Methinks it was likely once developed by some tree hugging do-gooder and then simply copy/pasted uncritically, and it has been my pet hate ever since. 

I mean, seriously: eye trauma? How does the intensity of an electronic strobe compare to those gasquillions of bursts of UV-saturated sunlight that are hitting the eyes of a WS when it basks at the surface? 

And no - regulation is the very last resort!

But yes I'm digressing.

Not 100% happy - but 99.5% I am!

This is spot-on both in scope and content, and I cannot but applaud the authors for an exhaustive, thorough, unbiased and what is more important, accurate analysis of the issues at hand.

Bravo - job well done!

Tiger Beach - cool Research!

Nice!

I must say, I really like this.

It's about bloody time somebody took a long hard look at Tiger Beach - both to assess its biological importance and hopefully, one day, to finally evaluate the impact of those diverging diving protocols!

And since we're at it - could somebody please turn it into a full no-take MPA?

Anyway, bravo Neil for starting to tackle those obvious questions!

Ila vs David - big Kerfuffle!

Totally uncool - monster tournaments. Source.

Oh my.

Whilst I was away, the shit has hit the fan.

And yes, having been asked and after much deliberation, I'm gonna wade right in - and I may add, with much trepidation! :)

But first.

Please read David and Neil's paper about recreational Shark fishing in Florida. At the time, I did applaud it as the way I read it then, it aims at promoting catch-and-release as a more benign alternative to (lethal) trophy fishing.

After having re-read it, I stand by that judgment.

But of course, there is a big BUT - and here's where Ila comes in!

You must now read her op-ed - not this censored edited version but the original that includes the contentious assertions about the paper and its authors.

You can find it (after a toothy intro) right here.

The reaction was of course immediate.

David did post this and his interventions with Live Science did lead to the abovementioned editing - and totally unsurprisingly, things have since escalated. The usual tribalism is king and there is now a David camp vociferating against the Ila camp and vice versa, and what could have been an interesting discussion has long become irrational and personalized and is really benefiting no-one anymore.

My take?

From what I can discern, the question about whether Fish in general and Sharks in particular feel pain remains largely unresolved, with both camps being able to cite scientific literature in support of their viewpoint - but do those minutiae really matter in the present case?

Whether it is "pain" like we perceive it (from what I can observe, probably not) or another sense of acute discomfort, it is pretty much evident that being hooked is certainly a traumatic event that will always have negative consequences for the Sharks. Even if the animals are being released, some of the consequences will be transient and some will be more permanent and possibly debilitating - but a considerable percentage of the Sharks will die, and this depending on a whole array of variables ranging from the fishing technique to the length of the fight to the handling of the animal to the Sharks' species-specific resilience, etc etc. 

With that in mind, the topic of catch-and-release fishing for Sharks touches on animal welfare all the way to Shark conservation and on that, I'm 100% with Ila in stating that it is certainly never "good".

But here's where I differ - reluctantly!

I am a recreational fisherman. Although I strictly fish for food, and this only for non-threatened species, I'm not gonna try to deflect and obfuscate and state clearly that I certainly do so principally for the thrill and the challenge. I understand that this will disappoint some purists, but this is how it is. I could also add that for obvious reasons (= I love Sharks and yes, they are not Trout!) and because technically, Shark fishing sucks, I'm totally against targeting Sharks - but that's not the point.

The point is that there is thousands upon thousands of people like me. The point is that in this real world we live in as opposed to some idealistic but equally unrealistic utopia, they constitute an economically important, powerful and well organized force whereby if we really want to further the cause of Shark conservation among the recreational fishermen, we must learn to work with and not against them - re-read this.

Again: reluctantly - but that's the only viable strategy!

David and Neil know that.

I've now followed them for many a year and there has been considerable evolution - incidentally, like with yours truly, read these posts bottom-to-top! The net result of their efforts and those of many other equally evolving Shark conservation advocates has been, among others, the reforming of several kill tournaments, the establishment of the Shark Free Marinas Initiative (again, read bottom-to-top), the adoption of length- instead of weight records by the land-based Shark fishermen, etc - by no means perfect but still a notable step in the right direction. 

With that in mind and like their recent paper against weight records, the chastised article is not proof of their affiliation to nefarious fishing interests like asserted but rather, a testament to David and Neil's advocacy of positive, albeit (only) gradual and organic reform!

And one last thought if I may.

Whereas the Hammerschlag labs are simply brilliant in their outreach, they continue to fail quite miserably in handling critique, be it ever so benign. Guys, in the softest possible way: if you publicly circulate your research in the mass- and social media, you must a) develop a better strategy for dealing with the inevitable, equally public and possibly unsubstantiated criticism and b) develop a thicker skin - and I can certainly spare myself the examples as I'm sure you understand!

Or not? :)

End of wading!

Comments policy: read this! :)

PS - Martin here!
PPS - David's final comments here!
 

Tagging Controversy - Paper!

Howlymackerel!

You really got to read this!

Neil, Austin et al are wading right into the hornet's nest that is the whole bloody Shark tagging controversy -biofouling, harassing and all- and attempting to encourage dialogue to establish a set of possible rules that may satisfy all the diverging resource users from researchers to operators to fishermen to conservationists to aficionados.

Not gonna happen of course - but valiant try! :)

And I cite.

Some recommendations to help engage local stakeholders in the significance of tagging research include

• (1) use of informative posters or flyers; 

• (2) meetings with stake holders ahead of time; 

• (3) involving members of the public in the research (i.e. citizen science) or inviting them to observe the tagging activities; 

• (4) providing public talks (e.g. schools, clubs and museums); 

• (5) working closely with stakeholders (such as hiring guides or tourism operators to help with research)

• (6) use of traditional mass media (print, radio and television)

• (7) publishing tagging results in peer-reviewed journals in a timely fashion

• (8) use of online materials such as websites, short videos, teaching via social media and even online platforms that allow the public to follow the movements of the tagged animals; and

• (9) keeping the public updated on results.

Indeed - see Fischer's bloody communication breakdown in SA vs the much improved outreach when he moved operations to the US East Coast!

And I did like this.

While this discourse has mostly focused on stakeholder attitudes as well as user consideration and responsibilities, manufacturers have an important role to play in improving tag function and animal welfare.
While there is certainly considerable manufacturer effort to improve tag performance (battery life, transmission rate and size), there needs to be a greater focus on engineering instruments that eventually detach from animals, especially if a large proportion of tags inevitably become functionally impaired. The software does exist for some tags (mostly satellite tags) to determine their functionality (e.g. battery life/power level or light level that could determine biofouling) which could trigger release mechanisms of external tags. Tools could be further developed or studies designed in a way that tagged animals are recaptured at the end of a study.

Again, indeed!

Kinda reminds me of a rather lengthy (!!!) post somebody wrote a few years ago! :) 

Anyway, brave and interesting paper!

Like I said, you really got to read it, and I'm sure the authors will be happy to provide you with a copy should you ask them!

Recreational Shark Fishing in Florida - Paper!

Watch.

Nice.

I like research with immediate implications for conservation!:)

Good to see that most operators care and practice catch-and-release - now they only need to be educated to keep off those Hammers!

Paper here, synopsis here.

Catch-and-Release fishing for Sharks - Paper!

Nothing to be proud of - source.

Good stuff!

Remember those interminable debates - especially here?

Now that Austin has finally published his research, the verdict is unequivocal: targeting those Great Hammerheads is just simply wrong - especially in the case of land based fishing that requires subduing and wrestling in the Shark all the way to shore. Considering the documented post release mortality, there is no best practice here as even those Sharks that swim away seemingly unfazed are in grave danger of dying shortly thereafter.

Of course one cannot always chose what takes the bait - but the deliberate targeting of that species must stop immediately.

Or as Austin puts it,

This study may also suggest that relying on visual observations of post-release vitality could underestimate mortality and that these events could still occur in conservation zones that wholly restrict shark harvest (e.g. shark sanctuaries) and/or require release of threatened or protected species (e.g. regional/national prohibited species, endangered species list). 

For example, in January 2012, the state of Florida added 3 species of hammerhead sharks (great, scalloped [ Sphyrna lewini] , and smooth [ S. zygaena] ) to their prohibited species list, requiring individuals caught in state waters to be released. 
However, our results suggest that great hammerhead sharks are particularly vulnerable to fighting on a line with short fight times, even when sharks are observed swimming away vigorously post-release. Thus, potential conservation strategies to address these issues in great hammerhead sharks (in addition to restricting harvest) could include having fishers avoid peak or aggregation areas/times, use weak fishing line or hooks, or simply cut the line nearest the hook (without having to ‘fight’ the animal; Stokesbury et al. 2011).

Synopsis here, paper here.

And here's the usual nice video by Neil's lab.

Enjoy!

PS: follow-up Q/A on the Shark Defenders blog here.

Tagging Sharks - Article by Neil!

Source.

And I cite.

That said, at times it is necessary to keep some information “privy” (i.e., shared only with regulators) such as the location of a specific unknown aggregation site but such instances are uncommon.

Bingo.

Remember this, and the debate?

To my knowledge, this is the first time that a researcher has publicly addressed my only reservation against satellite telemetry in general and publishing those tracks in particular, i.e. that like in the case of those Fish spawning aggregations, publishing the location of particular hot spots may be unwise.

I say, bravo Neil.

His article in Nat Geo convincingly and comprehensively refutes the various allegations spouted by the loony fringe against especially those SPOT tags. Yes the process is by no means perfect - but in weighing the pros against the cons, it is crystal clear that the advantages prevail. Plus, this is obviously an evolution where all researchers continue to refine their methods to make them as little invasive as possible.

Required reading!

And here's a plug for the RJD Shark tagging program 

Enjoy!

Scavenging on Whales - new GWS Paper!

Source.

Nice!

I've been so busy with the Fischer fiasco and according complete vindication of Domeier that I've been remiss in not posting about this paper.

Check this out.

So there you have it.

Of course, ever since the Blue Water White Death team bought a Whale carcass off Durban in their search for GWS, we knew that they scavenge on Whales - but it's nice to see such an in-depth analysis of the phenomenon. Great also to see Neil concede the first authorship to Fallows - tho why such a staunch crusader against Fischer's SPOT tagging would align himself with a prolific SPOT tagger like Neil leaves me somewhat perplexed.

Obviously, with N=4, much remains conjecture.

Although the insight about selective feeding is not completely new (but now further confirmed), the other hypotheses are certainly plausible and warrant further investigation.. Personally, I was intrigued by two observations in particular

• The initial predilection of the calorically poor fluke and caudal peduncle.
  This reminds me of Gary's account (and video!) of how he got jumped by a GWS when outside of the cage many years ago in SA. The Shark went for his fins, prompting the speculation that they may be first targeting the locomotion, much like Makos are reported to do when attacking Billfishes.
  Maybe this is yet another clue verifying that hypothesis.

• The lack of intra-specific aggression, and the pecking order.
  I've always described our baited dives as an artificially induced communal scavenging event, and I can confirm that our observations fully match that pattern. Somewhere, I've read that Sharks are not known to bite conspecidfics when competing for food whereas they will certainly exclude and when necessary, even attack other species. I see that daily on our dive but have also heard the same from other foraging events on Whale carcasses, namely from a well documented event in New Caledonia where dozens of Tiger Sharks retreated from a Whale carcass upon the advent of two GWS.
  If my intuition is correct, those chummed and baited GWS dives may thus offer a great opportunity to further record such inter- and intra-specific interactions.
  From what we can discern here, when it comes to rank, size certainly plays a very high role - but in addition to it, there are definite individual character traits, foremost of which assertiveness/boldness that break the general pattern whereby particularly assertive Sharks (usually males) will barge in ahead of the rather placid large females. And one other factor may even be desperation, whereby some possibly particularly hungry and thus desperate subadults will try and dash in and steal a Tuna head, only to then abscond precipitously followed by a whole gaggle of competitors!

Anyway, just a hint.

All-in-all, a very charming little paper that will hopefully once lead to more and stronger insights.about GWS life history and their functions within their ecological niche.

Oh - and I've learned a new word!

Post-prandial torpor = food coma! Didn't know Sharks had that, too!

Nice!

Christine - stellar!

Apologies!

I obviously did not due my due diligence.

When I wrote that I frankly don't quite know what she is currently doing, I should have taken the time to go and check! Turns out that Christine Shepard is very much the person behind Neil's stellar media outreach - and more than that, she has even found the time to describe her work in this brilliant little video!

Once again, this is really as good as it gets.

Not only because of the great images and because it really motivates people to follow, and even participate in those research ventures; but above all, because I discern none of the ego, agendas and primadonna shenanigans I bemoan in so many others - and let there be no doubt that this is WAY more professional and WAY more appealing, too!

Anyway.

Enjoy!

One World One Ocean and Neil!

No bolts? Interesting tag attachment - Neil?

Great!

This would be two of my fave orgs working together!

Doesn't get much better that that!

Join the movement and view more stunning ocean content at One World one Ocean.

Check out how Dr. Neil Hammerschlag and his University Of Miami crew tag sharks in the Berry Islands, Bahamas to study their migration patterns and thus, better protect them. You can learn more about UM's shark conservation program and follow Berry The Tiger Shark here.
Special thanks to Summit Series, University Of Miami, Waitt Institute, The Nature Conservancy, Bamboo Sushi and citizen scientists for making this video possible. Learn more about Summit Series here.
Bamboo Sushi, the country's first sustainably certified sushi restaurant, and Summit Series raised and contributed more than $800,000 to help create the South Berry Island MPA.

Story here.

Enjoy!

And talking about brilliant Outreach!

Orange Crocs - need I say more!

I've been remiss in not posting about SharkTagging.com.

From an all-too-old press release.

We have created a visually driven online experience to hopefully engage new students and members of the public in our research, education and conservation efforts. 

The site features dozens of images from world-renowned underwater photographers, such as Daniel Botelho, Brian Skerry, and Chris Fallows. 

The site not only has a completely new look, but also has been augmented with extra content and reorganized for easier navigation. 
The home page features a newsreel with fresh takes on marine conservation hot topics, RJD shark tagging trip reports, and featured ocean heroes for each month. We would love your feedback, and greatly appreciate your support in spreading the word. As always, we are available to answer any questions you may have. 

Sincerely, Neil and the RJD Team 

I'm obviously a big fan of Neil and the team (and here!).

As I said in last year's infamous recap

This is how you do it.
This is simply brilliant outreach via blog, Facebook, video and undoubtedly many more outlets, showing that Shark research can be fascinating, fun, hip and young. I remain concerned by those SPOT tags and only time will tell whether the data will somehow justify the invasive methods – but all-in-all, I really do like the people and the energy and am impressed by the passion and also by the willingness to tackle some of the more controversial aspects of Shark research.
Well done!

And let's not forget the individual accolades for Christine Shepard and above all, for Shark conservation's only fashionista and fearless performer David DaSchiffman!

Which obviously begs the question, will they succeed in matching last year's spectacular success?

Ah aint telling - but keep watching this space! :)

And since we're at it.

What happened to the dance-off - don't tell me that somebody's chickened out?

But I'm digressing as usual.

Please do peruse Neil and Co's spectacular new website.

Enjoy!

Austin Gallagher - great Outreach!

Brilliant!

Currenly, Austin works as a research assistant with Neil.

A whole lotta Bull - Video!

As I said, big but not that big!
Great job by Dan Crowell and great to see Joe - and may we be witnessing the birth of yet another Shark Man here?
Oh and note Neil's Bistro Mario Batali Edition Crocs - always the fashionista! :)