The Bad and the Ugly!
Sorry for keeping you waiting!
So this is what y'all been waiting for - with bated breath no doubt!
This is when, to
paraphrase Vee and the nieder-Jupp, my vicious soul and inferiority complex compel me to insult and belittle others - this all in order to get attention, elevate myself at the expense of others, become famous and get the chance to finally travel with a retinue of shapely bimbettes, just like my secret hero ABC4!
But more seriously
This is when somebody will inevitably start shouting, how dare you attack fellow conservationists, and invoke global peace and harmony and-so-on and-so-forth.
So lemme state this loud and clear: I don’t hate anybody here.
Hell, I don't even really care about those people!
What I however DO hate is bullshit!
And in the spirit of qui tacet consentire videtur,
I will always reserve the right to criticize situations I don’t agree
with - and if they happen to be in the public domain, I will also feel
perfectly entitled to do so publicly, like it or not!
I also believe that like in
science, progress in conservation is achieved via dialogue but also, via
robust debate where opinions may get heated but where everybody who is
legit accepts that those are just the rules of the game – and where
those who do not are simply not scientists and conservationists but
posers and bullshitters!
In brief, where I’m coming
from is that whereas it is great that Shark conservation has become
sizzling hot and is uniting many passionate voices around a great common
cause, bullshit continues to be bullshit and shenanigans, shenanigans -
and the great common cause is in no way an excuse for any of that.
And like in real life, people are sometimes simply incompatible and thus mutually exclusive.
If you don’t agree, stop reading now - HNY and have a great life!
Seriously,
spare yourself the aggro because the following aint gonna be pretty –
but if you cannot resist and end up being outraged, spare me the lessons
in ethics and instead, debate the assertions!
Seriously!
If
the meteoric rise and the astounding successes of Pew teach us one
lesson, then it is that the correct way to save Sharks is to pursue
their protection by pragmatic and science-based advocacy and by hard work
and smart negotiations aimed at legislative changes.
The rest is just stupid fluff and hot air, and counter productive to boot. We are not
the ones who enact Shark protection - and rest assured that the people
who do have zero time, zero patience and zero respect for the vocal
clamoring of the Shark whacks!
Again, Shark conservation is
inextricably liked to political and economic considerations, and he who does not understand that is just a fool.
Shark fishermen don’t
hate Sharks, they want to make a buck – and the authorities don’t subscribe to conservation because they have
changed their perspective and suddenly
love Sharks, they do so because they have been convinced of the (eminently economic)
need for sustainability and in the case of Sharks, because they have learned about the importance of several (
not all!)
species in regulating the marine environment and thus, of their
economical value all the way to generating millions in income from
tourism.
Shark finning?
The finning bans
are archaic and ineffective and thus not anymore worth pursuing in
isolation. Yes finning is an ethical abomination and needs to be
abolished – but what is killing the Sharks is Shark
fishing
and if you care to open your eyes, you will quickly discern that many
of the major Shark fishing hubs are processing
the whole animals as the
meat is increasingly sought after by ever increasing populations
starving for protein, and other products like leather, squalene and
even the eggs are introduced into the wider economy.
The facts and numbers?
Thankfully, there are now plenty of resources where
anybody can consult the latest insights and data, meaning that those who
continue to operate with inflated statistics and outlandish assertions
lack any excuses and credibility whatsoever. The facts are plenty
horrible as it is – so let’s please stick to those and refrain from the
usual stupid inflated hyperbole!
The industry?
If there has been one trend at this year’s DEMA, then it has been Shark conservation - and everybody in the dive industry is now claiming that he has always been deeply and passionately involved.
Great – if only they all did walk the talk!
Instead, the usual shenanigans have continued unabated.
Don’t
get me wrong, I know that nothing is just black or white. Competition
is continuously leading many Shark diving operators to ever up the ante,
this also very much in order to satisfy the continuous requests for
ever more adrenaline by their clients. There is also an insatiable
demand for images featuring stunt work with Sharks.
I understand
that these are businesses and that those folks are merely trying to make
a buck – but I certainly do not subscribe to the notion that these
developments are
inevitable, the more since we at BAD are doing very
well indeed by promoting a totally different kind of experience, do not
enable Shark porn and have in fact continuously tightened
our protocols as a result of the stupendous increase in large Sharks visiting Shark Reef.
But you can’t have it both ways.
Stunt work with Sharks and promoting gratuitous adrenaline thrills got nothing to do with Shark conservation, period!
And the much-invoked Demystifying and Changing Perceptions about these Misunderstood animals?
Indeed
- respectable Shark diving operations do that daily, and this without
having to resort to those stupidities, and so do respectable Shark
media!
Think about how the same was achieved with the
terrestrial top predators: certainly not by showcasing scantily clad
death-defying bimbettes (
Bikini Shark Warrior? C'mon girl - you're better than that!) perambulating in the savannahs and the
Sundarbans and also not by turning alpha predators into pets by allowing
tourists to physically interact with them, let alone ride them!
E.g., what is this shit - and no it was
not with
Epic Diving!
Changing
perceptions by attempting to “prove” that we’re not on the menu of
Sharks actually perpetuates the myth by reducing the animals’
fascinating and complex life history to one element only, that of
shark-human interactions where
some of the large species actually
do
devour people – which makes them neither
Bad not
Good but merely illustrates that
they are the opportunistic predators they just happen to be!
Nobody
in his right mind asserts that Lions and Tigers are harmless – but most
of us have learned to respect and love them for what they are,
beautiful, charismatic and awe inspiring essential elements of their
natural habitats, and very much endangered.
Think BBC documentary: that’s how you do it – and yes, the rest is just moronic BS!
Ring a bell?
It better - because I've basically copy/pasted what I've written last year!
Yes, alas, nothing has changed much - and I'm frankly too lazy and also lack the profound motivation to try and re-formulate the exact same message in the hopes that choosing other words may change the outcome!
WARNING!
In keeping with what constitutes
REAL messaging in Shark conservation, the following will contain a liberal dosing of CAPS LOCK!
The Dolphinization of the Shark Conservation Movement
So, what's going on?
Why is it that after years of attempts at educating the public and of trying to weed out the most irritating myths, those people still continue to spout these inanities - and mind you, I'm talking about the people on OUR side, not the Shark haters?
Look no further than here!
Need I elaborate?
The question of course is, how do we proceed if we want to stop
preaching to the choir and instead broaden our base and activate the masses that by definition are
dumb (and I'm not even talking about the retards!) - the more as the most popular communication vehicles are demanding ever shorter messages, see Facebook, Twitter et al!
I've been discussing this with one of the science communication
senseis, the great
Randy Olson, and his answer is,
you got to tell a compelling story - one that appeals to the gut and the emotions rather than the brain!
But hear it from da man himself!!
Easier said than done - right?
The challenge of course is to be interesting, entertaining, informative and on top of that all, synthetic - this however without succumbing to the temptation to shorten and dumb down the message to the point where its veracity is being compromised!
And here is obviously where most Shark conservation messaging fails!
I really did like this comment on
David's post about the same issues.
Kirsten E
Popularizing science is a very difficult thing to achieve. It is
worth considering that misinformation becomes widespread because it
appeals to the general public’s sense of Right and Wrong, where
soundbites with some tenuous connection to a factual foundation fit
firmly into a black and white worldview. It is not surprising that
sympathetic individuals fall prey to exaggerated claims, because they
lack the background, ability, or dedication to look deeper.
I am guilty of being a bit of a loudmouth when discussing shark
conservation, but as it is my intended career path I am always looking
to further my knowledge. The difficulty is that most people’s
introduction to these issues is not from researchers, but from
organizations like Sea Shepherd or documentaries like Sharkwater, who
seek a reactionary, emotional impact to make a point. Once that
impression is made, it is very hard to scale it back to a more realistic
discussion, perhaps because it lacks the same shock factor that appeals
to people’s indignation in the first place.
It’s ironic that conservationists can be their own worst enemy.
AMEN!
Which brings me to the second issue here.
Once the scientists and conservation orgs broaden their outreach, the messaging is then picked up and multiplied by others - the bleeding hearts and idealists that consitute the movement I call Sharktivism.
And the result of those efforts?
Examples?
Here's
just two from a never-ending succession of wrong or distorted
"information" bombarding the public - and because these people are
certainly well-intentioned, I refrain from adding the links.
You know who you are!
We
need to get these extremely vulnerable and critically endagered
Porbeagles listed in CITES appendix I or we can put the few pictures
which exist of these magnificent animals in a museum!
But Porbeagles are only
critically endangered REGIONALLY!
And consequently, they ARE being protected
nationally and regionally and the advocates are proposing to have them protected by the relevant RFMOs (so far
successfully in one but
in vain in another) and to list them on CITES II and not I!
To make shark's fin soup, fishermen catch sharks and cut off their fins.
They
throw the rest of the shark back into the ocean because the meat of the
shark is considered less valuable and not worth keeping. The sharks
are often still alive and left to slowly drown because without their
fins they can no longer swim!
But the soup's recipe does not require finning - right?
Finning is perpetrated by OTHERS (very much including us supercilious westerners!), and this for reasons of convenience and greed! But granted, yes, it happens all-too-often - so is this compression of a long story legit?
Probably YES - but then, once the Chinese (!) whispers pick up and propagate the meme, it inevitably leads to
racist rants and to crap like
the practice of shark finning
results in an estimated 73 million sharks a year being killed for their
fins alone and that over one-third of all shark species are threatened
with extinction as a result of shark finning;
Oh yes that would be once again be the United Conservationists - see Part Three!
AND: finning is not the real issue - the real issue is
OVERFISHING! Are we advocating CONSERVATION or are we ANIMAL WELFARE activists?
So lemme repeat this -
again!
If we want to be credible Shark advocates, we got to do our homework and first of all, be informed about the animals we love!
Science is always in flux and today’s insights may quickly become tomorrow’s fallacies, meaning that we must keep abreast of the latest research results and not base our knowledge on old publications and approximate hearsay.
Most importantly, we the amateur naturalists should never make up things on the fly, nor should we idly re-interpret what is considered to be the accepted consensus.
This does not mean that we should not challenge the current status quo, as that is precisely the process by which knowledge is being advanced!
BUT: the only accepted technique for doing so is the
Scientific Method and as always, let me warn against the siren calls and intellectual shortcuts of the self promoters, quacks and charlatans!
Every single researcher I’ve ever met has always been eager to engage in informed discussions and to entertain different hypotheses, if adequately supported by according observations.
Those researchers are neither omniscient nor omnipresent and often, observations by common mortals like us have greatly contributed to the advancement of scientific insights - so even if you have no academic background, don’t be shy and speak up!
But do your home work first!
Can we maybe just be a little more humble and less righteous, the more since Conservation is so complicated - and maybe progress towards more facts and less truthiness?
Can we maybe just open our eyes and wonder at the magnificence of what IS instead of trying to make things up?
It is that very deluge of platitudes, pseudoscience and exaggerated doomsday scenarios in all those pedestrian wannabee Sharkwater clones, those zillions of activist Facebook pages and those idiotic petitions that is undermining the legitimaticy of Shark conservation by making us all look like total wingnuts!
We are the amateurs.
Can we please listen to what the professionals are telling us – the principal message being that extreme positions (on both sides!) are inhibiting conservation and appropriate management measures?
AND, here's another one I need to get off my chest!
The Shark Con
No not the ramblings of HE Sawyer!
That's just whackadoodle gibberish!
I'm talking about misleading conservation messaging that is coupled with an AGENDA.
Mostly, it is obviously about the money. Sometimes, it is about the money plus other motivations, e.g. narcissistic self promotion like in the case of Ms. Andersen, see Part Four.
In my book, it becomes a CON when the bullshitting is INTENTIONAL.
Examples?
That's a difficult one as in practice, it is often difficult to differentiate from the equally idiotic and misleading statements of people who are actually well-meaning but who think that resorting to hyperbole constitutes legitimate "marketing", or of people who simply
parrot the stupid statements of others - or of people who are simply stupid!
Case in point, once again from David's post.
David McGuire (@Seastewards)
........
Given the scanty data for the MSC “sustainable spiny dogfish fishery”
it remains to be seen whether there really can be such a thing.
Included in the definition should be negligible to no bycatch. It that
category the Southern California drift gill net fishery fails.
Thousands of blue sharks, other species of sharks including Great White
Sharks, marine mammals and sea turtles are all killed as bycatch in the
thresher shark fishery (and now Mako where the population is data
deficient).
David McGuire, Shark Stewards
To which a reader responded.
Jonathan Gonzalez
@Seastewards
I get worried when I see such comments from a shark conservation
organization leader like yourself that collects peoples donations. Folks
like you worry me because you are irresponsible and you mislead the
public.
“Included in the definition should be negligible to no bycatch. It
that category the Southern California drift gill net fishery fails.
Thousands of blue sharks, other species of sharks including Great White
Sharks, marine mammals and sea turtles are all killed as bycatch in the
thresher shark fishery (and now Mako where the population is data
deficient).”
Currently, over 90% of the total bycatch by numbers in the DGN
fishery comes from a single species, the common mola (sunfish). Although
there has not been a definitive study on the survivorship of common
mola released from DGN gear, observations by NMFS observers and
researchers suggest that a high percent (>90%) of them are released
alive.
Here is a link to info regarding shark bycatch in California’s drift gillnet fishery, you might learn something here:
As far as great white shark bycatch, the numbers are a non-issue as you can see here:
Pingers have lowered bycatch of cetaceans by 50% (Barlow and Cameron
2003) and the 6 fathom extenders (buoy lines) have drastically reduced
bycatch of California sea lions and CTS which are typically near the
surface at night when the nets are being dragged.
California’s drift gillnet fishery hasn’t killed a sea turtle in 13 years. Here is a link to prove it:
Do your homework Mr. David McGuire. You owe it to the folks that
donate to your organization and the sharks you claim to protect.
Bingo!
So is McGuire just an IDIOT who spouts unverified factoids, or is he a CHARLATAN who is amping up the rhetoric in order to be more successful when soliciting funding, or BOTH?
You be the judge of that - but he is certainly IRRITATING, and has been so for a very long time indeed! Not quite enough for a nomination - but he's certainly on the waiting list!
Solutions?
On the positive side, LET US TELL A GOOD STORY!
Don't know how to do that? Read
this - and if you're an org in the USA,
book a seminar with Randy!
Oh yes - and read
his blog - see the blog roll on the side!
(howz that for a shamelesss plug, buddy! :)
Example!
On the negative side, LET'S CALL OUT THE PERPETRATORS!
And NO I do NOT agree with Randy on
this one: - no
gravitas and
decorum
here mister, ever! I shall NOT watch my language, and I specifically
reserve the right to continue saying FUCK, and this in CAPITAL LETTERS,
whenever I please!
And what about the comments section?
Moderation is enabled and the WAILING OF HYENAS (love it!) will only be tolerated for entertainment and/or educational purposes!
To be continued!
PS: Check out Part
One, Part
Three and Part
Four!
