Catch-and-Release fishing for Hammerheads - Reminder!

Source.

That last post has virtually exploded.

So as a reminder.

This was the post back then: in brief, once they've been dragged all the way to the shore, those Hammers will likely die.

And no there's really no room for interpretation here.

And here is the video.

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!
 

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.

Thanks Buddy!

Right - click for detail. Source.

Nice, way to go.

Caught and released this shark by swimming because the shark was so exhausted I needed to give it a kick start. 

The fish was released perfectly and the hook was removed! This is one of the larger bull sharks Ive caught at Charlies reef in swf. I caught him on a 6/0 Penn Senator with 80lb bull buster. 6' malin hardwire #19 with a Gamagatsu Big River 12/0 J hook.

Hammerhead Pups?

Oh for crying out loud.

What a load of crap.

Those are of course Remoras, Likely Sharksuckers, Echeneis naucrates - which in itself is interesting as I don't recall having  seen a Remora on a Scalloped Hammer, ever!
And anyway - that Shark got claspers!

You can read the whole nonsensical story here.

And here's the video.
Shark fishing off a swimming beach - great idea!

Hammers are protected in Florida, and this is not catch-and-release but instead, it is an appalling case of harassment, likely for taking the usual fucking pictures, that has likely resulted in the Shark's disorientation and ultimate death - so this should be ample evidence for taking those morons to task.

Florida Hammerhead - two!

Just a really short one.
Please do read David's post and especially, the epic comments thread where anglers, conservationists and researchers are engaged in a constructive debate about how to best handle those cases where prohibited Sharks are being caught and need to be released immediately, alive and unharmed.

Great stuff!
I must really applaud everybody who has remained polite despite of the emotions this has undoubtedly stirred up among the various factions represented.
Kudos!

Thank You Sean Paxton!

Underwater Thrills alerts me to this op ed by Sean Paxton.
Please, do read it.

I must say, once again, I am impressed.
Like Guy Harvey, Sean and (Shark) brother Brooks are prominent and well regarded representatives of the recreational fishing guild and having people like them speak out in favor of Shark conservation is highly gratifying indeed. All these gentlemen have a proven track record of advocating and above all, implementing pragmatic and consensus based solutions like the Shark Free Marina Initiative and the Guy Harvey Ultimate Shark Challenge and having them on our side is simply priceless.

I was particularly intrigued by the reference to IGFA.
Whereas they have been brilliant in advocating tag & release for Billfishes, they remain equally appalling when it comes to Sharks. Certifying all-tackle weigh records for Sharks means that the trophy hunters will continue to specifically target the heaviest, biggest individuals which in the case of Sharks will always be pregnant females. Can you imagine a hunter willfully shooting a pregnant animal? Unthinkable! It's high time the IGFA took a stand against this wasteful, antiquated and ethically reproachful practice by introducing length records and advocating catch&release - and yes I'm repeating myself!
Many species will give birth in specific coastal locations, meaning that informed trophy hunters know exactly where and when to target them. The Florida legislation will be a great step forward in preventing just that.

Anyway, Kudos and Thank You to Sean!

Florida - getting there!

It's a slow day in Paradise so I have time to catch up on developments.

It very much looks like the Florida legislation is well on its way.
It will not curtail the commercial Shark fishery that is principally happening in federal waters. But, it's a great step towards protecting those large pregnant females that come to the coast to give birth where they will continue to be targeted by the trophy hunters as long as the IGFA keeps certifying those disgraceful all-tackle weight records. And, it may well limit some of the slaughter perpetrated by the likes of Mark the Shark.

Incidentally, I was happy to see the above picture.
Those two big guys in the center are the Shark Brothers and it is vital to have well regarded recreational fishermen like them come and testify in favor of the Sharks, which they always do. Kudos and thank you!
I'm a game fisherman myself but personally, I do not like targeting Sharks as it is way too easy, and I particularly dislike land based Shark fishing (and am wary of shore fishing in general) where the animals need to be fought hard, exhausted and dragged all the way to the shore - this on top of other issues that are enumerated in this eloquent petition text. I fully concur!
But a lot of people do, and having the Shark Brothers trying to reform Shark fishing by advocating catch and release (and links!) certainly helps bring about real, tangible improvements. In that context, please read this post that I found excellent indeed.

So here's to a positive outcome of the legislative process!
This is not a done deal quite yet, so please do follow the recommendations by Shark Savers and if you live in Florida, do go to the final public hearing in November!
Thank you!

Shark Free Marinas PSAs!

Excellent stuff!
We've obviously been big fans of the SFMI since day one, and Fiji continues to be one of the initiative's principal supporters.

Ever since Guy Harvey and the Humane Society have decided to support the concept, Luke has been assisted by a growing number of Board members, Celebrities and yes, certainly not leastly, by the influx of much needed funds that are being spent on promotional and support materials but also, on excellent PSAs.

Here are two of the most recent ones.
The first contains the endorsements by actor Kelly Perine, singer/songwriter Aria Johnson , celebrity photographer Nigel Barker, actress Lisa Edelstein, guitar legend Slash, the Dr Guy Harvey, American football legend Steve Bartkowski and the SFMI's Director Luke Tipple.
The second features the unequaled Guy and specifically targets the marinas in Florida - and I sure hope that there will be more targeting the other coastal states where pro-Shark activities have so far been dismal!
And, let's not forget this one! :)

Enjoy!

Catch&Release fishing for Sharks?

Sorry for the prolonged silence.
Much to do, all of it real good, and not much Sharky happening out there.

Except for this timely post by David.
I'm not, and never will be a member, or whatever, of any of those Shark lists and once again, David's post amply illustrates why.
Really, what is there to discuss and get so incensed about?

Fishing for Sharks sucks, period.
As a Shark lover, I fervently wish that nobody would do that.
I also fervently wish that everybody could live in harmony and that there were no wars.
Did anybody say tough luck ?
Indeed!

And what about a global fishing ban for Sharks?
Read my lips: it ain't gonna happen - incidentally, as with all global fishing bans!
This is the real world where every day, millions of hooks are baited for Sharks in order to aliment the global Shark fin trade. As conservationists, we can continue to totally waste our energies trying to enact a total global ban - or we can pursue smarter strategies and advocate sustainability that will preserve those fishing jobs and revenues forever, or in the case of Shark fishing, fight for finning bans that eliminate a profoundly unethical harvesting technique and ensure that at least all the protein of those Sharks is being utilized.
And yes, as David correctly points out, Shark researchers can, and should take advantage of the existing commercial Shark fisheries to gather valuable data. Case in point, these fantastic insights into the life cycle of Porbeagles garnered by Steven Campana, for which he cooperated closely with the Canadian Shark fishermen - but I stand by this comment: like in the case of lethal sampling, actively advocating commercial fishing just for the sake of research, let alone publicly bemoan conservation successes is totally unacceptable!
Remember Mark Harding?

...the fact that a scientist supposedly promoting their conservation is damning that decision is somewhat concerning. Science provides valuable tools with which to carve out a conservation arguement, but, in some cases, science can go too far. Tag the last remaining specimen, harry it, disturb it, infiltrate its life so that it will not breed, so that it does become the last one on earth?
If there were ten dodos left alive, would we be better off studying them, watching them die, or putting a fence 30 miles around them and letting them get on with it, in the hope that they would breed?

And then, there's the game fishermen.
They number tens, if not hundreds of thousands and they are passionate, often financially well endowed and extremely well organized - trust me, not people we want to pick a fight with! I happen to be one of them but I just happen to believe that in terms of sportsmanship, fishing for Sharks sucks.

But others beg to differ as they want to catch large trophy fishes.
In the past, they would land the Shark, get the obligated trophy pictures and either cut out the jaws and throw away the carcass, or donate the contaminated meat to some food bank or the like, or have the Shark mounted. Now, they are being offered the alternative of catch & release and in a few particularly forward looking excellent tournaments, they are being invited to co-operate closely with reputable Shark researchers. That's exactly in line with what has previously happened with Billfishes where practically all game fishing is now catch, tag& release, and I cannot but strongly applaud and fully support these recent developments.

As to whether this harms the Sharks?
No, one does NOT need peer reviewed science to answer this: catch & release is certainly inferior to not fishing - or is anybody seriously disputing this? Many of our Bulls feature fishing hooks and a few now feature permanent disfigurements, like that Tiger in the above picture by Wolfgang, or even our iconic Scarface. Those disfigured Sharks will be at a disadvantage when catching prey - I know because those individuals are regularly incapable of properly grabbing the bait. Not nice by any stretch of the imagination and as a minimum, the fight those Sharks had to endure has unnecessarily expended energy, which is certainly reducing their fitness, at least temporarily - and as a maximum and depending on species, a few to many of the hooked Sharks will eventually die.

But again, this is about finding solutions in the real world, not about pursuing utopian visions.
I will never cease to repeat this: we must be ready to compromise. Catch & release is the pragmatic compromise between no fishing, and fishing to kill. As in every good compromise, both sides will not be perfectly happy - but like in all conservation initiatives, it is the only realistic way forward.

So, again, David thank you for your timely post.

Shark Tournaments - increasing Traction for Catch&Release Format!

Those game fishermen continue to kill Sharks.

But the tide is clearly turning.
Congratulatory reports like this one are thankfully disappearing.
Instead, the media are increasingly adopting a much more critical view by focusing on the ethical implications of those feats, or whatever and the plight of the animals that are being targeted.
This is specially apparent in the case of those horrible Shark kill tournaments.

Case in point, this article from Bermuda.
It bemoans the wanton killing of eleven Tiger Sharks (for Lobster bait?) and contains references to the Shark Free Marinas Initiative, the work of the Guy Harvey Ocean Foundation and the Ultimate Shark Challenge. All-in-all and despite of the appalling circumstances, this is excellent pro-Shark advocacy and kudos to James Whittaker for having listened to the right people!

And then, there is this post by the Consortium for Ocean Leadership.
Very unfortunately, it provides a platform for once again highly problematic statements by a Shark researcher, this time by one Lisa Natanson who appears to be a habitual groupie of the East Coast's kill tournaments.

Yes, taking samples from Sharks that have already been landed by fishermen is vastly preferable to lethal sampling.
But to then go as far as to become a vocal public apologist for the kill tournament format is totally unacceptable. Will those people ever learn to just keep a low profile, do their job and keep their mouth shut?
Thankfully, other more enlightened colleagues raise their voice in dissent

While acknowledging the scientific benefits that can accrue from tournaments, Dr. Robert Hueter of the Mote Marine Laboratory in Florida nevertheless believes that the pressures on sharks are too great for tournaments to continue.
“I’m not saying that we aren’t gaining useful data from this sort of sampling,” he says. “But scientists have been taking these sorts of samples at tournaments for nearly 50 years.
It’s questionable that the research benefits gained at this point justify the cost to shark conservation.”

Exactly!
How many more vertebrae does Ms. Natanson need to collect before waking up to the reality that Sharks are endangered and require protection and advocacy - especially by the people who research them? Will people like her ever overcome that apparent pervasive fatal disconnect between their research and the required ethical sensibility?
Yes, what may have been OK in the past is not OK anymore - how about some adaptive evolution!

Once again, kudos to Bob Heuter for having spoken up.
Having very much been part and parcel of the Guy Harvey Ultimate Shark Challenge, he knows what he's talking about and represents the future of Shark research, as do Neil and of course Juerg!
Well said!

Excellent!

Please read this press release by Mote.
It really looks like the Guy Harvey Ultimate Shark Challenge has been a total success.
Kudos!

From an e-mail by a friend.

On a positive note, I went to Sarasota this weekend to the Guy Harvey USC...

I was able to watch Bob Hueter SPOT tag a young female great hammerhead. She was about seven and a half feet, so not exactly a baby, but maybe not quite sexually mature yet (they mature at @ 92 inches). Anyway, the shark looked to be in good shape when she swam off. Overall I'm really, really happy that I went...

Anyway I guess you can see that I was impressed.
Hopefully I'm not being naive or overly optimistic, but I really do feel good about this. I'm glad I got to see the hammerhead release, because that is one of the biggest concerns. This was a relatively small one. I know they'd like to tag a big pregnant one, so they can find out where they go to pup, etc.
I am still nervous about that, but definitely less nervous than before.

What a remarkable change!
Like me, this particular gentleman was initially skeptical and to see him so totally converted is truly remarkable! Good on him for having conducted his personal due diligence, and for having kept an open mind about the issue!

Me, too, I'm really impressed - so far!
Due to my personal distaste of game fishing for Sharks, I shall never quite warm to the concept.
But having said this, my hope is that this will establish a trend and that the existing kill tournaments will gradually switch to the catch and release formula - hopefully, without any new Shark tournaments being established.
If on top of that, the IGFA could be convinced to stop certifying those disgraceful all-tackle records for Sharks, then this would really be huge progress over the current status quo!

Fingers crossed!

So Far so Good!

Guys, this ain't a circle hook - well spotted by Lawrence!

Some you win, some you loose!

Case in point: this recent post.
It contains a very oblique reference to the Guy Harvey Ultimate Shark Challenge - and now both sides are equally pissed off! The proponents believe that I'm criticizing it unfairly, the opponents criticize me for not having spoken out against it!
Guess it serves me right for not having been my usual abrasive self!

Thing is, I'm very much on the fence on this one.
In theory, I support it for being the better alternative to kill tournaments, at least in the short term; from the heart, I do not like it as I'm against trophy fishing for Sharks; and in this specific case, I still need to be convinced that this is genuine and not just some kind of business spin.
As always, time will tell!

But as the title implies, I'm rather impressed - so far!
You may first want to read the general outline here and then, the recap of the qualifying round here.

From what I can discern, this has been off to a great start!
This looks like a meticulously planned and flawlessly executed event and I must say: kudos to all those who came up with the initiative and invested what must have been a gargantuan amount of sweat equity into making this happen!
Technically speaking all I can say is job very well done!

And there's more good news.
Firstly, the apparent sidelining of real man Jack Donlon - and if so I say, good riddance!
Secondly, the re-appearance of Bucky Dennis among the catch-and-release anglers! If this indicates a genuine change of heart, it would be a truly spectacular confirmation of the effectiveness of the tournament's new format!

And ethically, as a conservationist?
Still not convinced!
This has now morphed into an event where fishermen catch and tag specimen for the research of Mote, something the Shark researchers do anyway.
That in itself is a good thing as it furthers our insights into the animals' life history and since the need to release them in good health has mandated the deployment of circle hooks and tail snares, along with very heavy tackle in order to get them to the boats in a minimum of time - not very game as in game fishing but probably the least invasive way to go.

Still, this is the principal mating and birthing season and this means that this is once again directly targeting pregnant females, some of which will certainly perish despite of all the precautions - especially some of the highly endangered Great Hammerheads who are particularly prone to dying of exhaustion as they are known to fight til the end.
Could next year's dates be moved to a less sensitive time frame?

Long story short - I'm still undecided but at the same time, looking forward to more news about the tournament proper!

The immediate question now being: who did I piss off this time!

PS: this is very cool - thanks Underwater Thrills for posting it!

Well, gee, Congrats!

From the Paxton Brothers' Fishing gone Wild website.

The original Abomination (hint: you may wanna change the URL...) has been re-branded into The Ultimate Shark Challenge and honored by the County's commissioners. The tournament is now 100% catch-and-release and that's certainly an improvement (tho far from being "good") and a notable achievement for the Shark Free Marinas Initiative.

I understand the need for this sort of harmonic mythology and mutual back-slapping - but let's not forget to honor the contribution of the people who got the ball rolling in the first place! And of these guys! And others!
Fair is fair - OK?

Yes, I know, others will disagree!

Win-Win

Remember?

Well, here's the ordinance (click for details).



Apparently, the fishermen are happy.
So are the residents of Delray Beach, as no one has seen them around.

Guess one could call that a win-win.

Answer to a Comment

The anglers are pissed off.

What was a short and noncommittal post mentioning Delray Beach has triggered a surprising response. At the same time, the usually irreproachable and intelligent Sharky has waded in knee-deep and is using the same unfortunate arguments.

Before I post my answer to that comment, here's where I stand on some of the issues raised.

I haven't met Jimmy Abernethy personally and am on record for being unconvinced by some of his apparent procedures (and never having dived with him, I'm also on record for reserving my final judgment on that) and for being disappointed that his signature dive site, Tiger Beach, is not being protected and is being thrashed by other operators.
These ad personam attacks are however totally uncalled for, especially the underhanded reference to the tragic accident of Markus Groh. Jimmy loves Sharks and together with Gary Adkison, he is without a doubt the one person that has single-handedly introduced the most people to Sharks and turned them into Shark lovers in the process. His fans and followers are legion and many of them have embarked on the path of Shark Conservation after having dived with him. This is his legacy - and not the accident, as an equally unfortunate comment has suggested.

Trophy hunting and trophy fishing have no possible justification, ethical or otherwise.
I'm all for hunting and fishing for food, as long as the species are not endangered and as long as the animals are dispatched humanely.
Yes I realize that some believe that the thrill of stalking a prey or of wrestling with a large Fish is "fun" - but this is the 21st century and we must all progress from our troglodyte origins towards being modern and civilized human beings with ethical imperatives. Killing (and also, torturing) animals for the thrill alone will never meet those prerequisites, ever. And I may be repeating myself - real men just don't do that!
This is an example of that kind of behavior - and yes, those were land-based anglers!

I believe that good conservation should be based on consensual and pragmatic solutions.
But not necessarily always. Sometimes, as in Ft. Myers, the anglers need to be shown the "stick" in order to agree to come to the negotiating table. Very rarely, the pro-Shark faction is just being dealt the better hand and if so, they should certainly play it. The good people of Delray Beach have every right to decide about what happens on their beach and if the decision is to ban Shark fishing, I can only applaud it. After all, my thing is Shark conservation, not diplomatic relations and universal peace and justice.

That said, over to my response.
It got longer and longer and finally, Blogger refused to accept it in the comments section - so there.

Thank you for your comment.

I however disagree with your standpoint in so many ways.

a. Catch & release is not a "good thing" - not to fish for Sharks is.
Yes, catch & release is certainly better than killing - but it is cruel and unneccessary nevertheless.

Look, I'm an angler myself and although I don't target them, I sometimes hook a Billfish.
Like any responsible catch & release angler, I will try and get the Fish to the boat in the shortest time possible and with the minimum of stress to the animal.
That involves maneuvering the boat in such a way that the Fish is not being muscled in during a protracted fight, to the point where it may even die of exhaustion. The release is then effected immediately whilst the animal is submerged and often, it involves "walking" the animal in order to aerate its gills until it can then swim away under its own power.

All evidence suggests that often, land-based Shark fishermen do not act that way, especially when they hook big animals.
The Sharks can only be landed once they are completely exhausted. Often, they get dragged onto the beach where considerable time is spent taking measurements and posing for pictures.
This is certainly extremely stressful for the animals and it is only fair to assume that some will not survive that treatment.
This is not cool.



If they want to gain any "credibility", the land-based anglers must be asked to review their procedures when catching and releasing Sharks.

b. Jim Abernethy (with an "e") is uniquely positioned to comment about the dangers of baiting for Sharks ("chumming" is something else - and I sure hope the Shark anglers don't do that!) precisely BECAUSE he operates baited Shark dives and thus knows intimately how the animals behave in those conditions.

Like us here in Fiji, he does it well away from any beaches and surface oriented aquatic recreationists. And like us, he does not allow any snorkelers, swimmers, nor even free divers on those trips.
And for good reason!
Once you bait for Sharks, they behave differently - even smaller piscivorous species like Blacktips and Carribean Reefs. Whereas divers can minimize risks by displaying adequate behavior, people at the surface become particularly vulnerable to the threat of attracting the Sharks' attention and being bitten as a consequence.

To cut to the chase, fishing (for Sharks but also for other Fishes) and surface-oriented beach activities like swimming and body surfing just don't go together.
Would you feel safe to go and have a dip right next to where some anglers deploy bait or drag in struggling Fish? Really? I for sure would not!

I've said it before: the chicken have come home to roost.
Jimmy and other Shark operators have been chased out of Florida by people claiming that his "chumming" (mind you - way offshore) was a public safety hazard - and now some of the very same groups are claiming that doing the precise same thing directly on the beach is unproblematic!
If there's an issue of credibility, it certainly does not reside with Jim.

c. I was not at the meeting (were you?) and don't know if and what pictures were presented, and how.
But one has only to surf the website of the South Florida Shark Club and view the many YouTube clips featuring land based fishing to see that the behavior displayed is sometimes problematic (and I'm being polite).
In that light, it is really of no importance where the pictures presented were taken - it's pretty obvious that there is no common code of conduct and that the allegations of rowdy behavior, littering, Shark kills, daytime fishing and chumming are certainly plausible.
In fact, I just happen to know somebody completely and utterly un-involved in this matter who lives there - and having asked, that person has confirmed some of the above grievances.

To sum it up, dragging in Fish and Sharks from a beach in a residential area is problematic.
There's a reason why hunters go hunting in the wilderness and not in city parks - and this is not much different.

If the land-based anglers want to pursue their activities in Delray Beach, they will have to assuage the reservations of the residents, the more since many of the anglers don't live there. It is for them, not the residents of Delray Beach, to do the convincing, to come up with viable solutions and compromises and to have their members stick to some acceptable code of conduct.
Barring that, they will need to go fishing somewhere else.

Hobo Catch & Release?

Story here.

Fiji: Pro-Shark!

Matava organises Fiji to be the first COUNTRY to fully participate in the Shark Free Marina Initiative Matava - Fiji's Premier Eco Adventure Resort and Bite Me Gamefishing Charters take the leading role in the world with a major shark conservation initiative in the gamefishing community KADAVU, FIJI ISLANDS - 14 July 2009 - Matava - Fiji's Premier Eco-Adventure Resort and Bite Me Gamefishing Charters are proud to take a world wide leading role in the the international Shark-Free Marina Initiative. The international Shark-Free Marina Initiative works with marinas, boaters and fishermen to develop policy designed to protect a vital component of the oceans health, our sharks. Matava Director Stuart Gow said "We have worked hard over the past few months in Fiji at certifying many marinas and charter fishing boats as 'Shark-Free Marinas' and so far have more than any other country worldwide." "Matava and Bite Me Gamefishing Charters was the first in Fiji to sign up and is actively promoting, coordinating and distributing information about the Initiative. We are working towards when Fiji can be the first country to be proud to announce itself as a 'Shark-Free Marinas' Country!" he continued. The majority of shark species caught by recreational and sport anglers are currently listed by the IUCN as 'Threatened' (or worse) and each year an average of a ½ Million of these sharks are killed in the United States alone. It is estimated that 70-100 million sharks are killed yearly world wide! Bite Me Gamefishing Charters actively avoids fishing for any species of shark and encourages this practice to be followed by all. By encouraging non-lethal 'catch-and-release' shark fishing fishermen and those sharks inevitably caught accidentally can enjoy their sport while ensuring that shark populations are not further diminished. By promoting sustainable practices of ocean management we hope that sharks will be around to keep our oceans healthy for generations to come. Many Fiji marinas and charter operations are already listed on the Shark-Free Marina website as well as having the right to use the SFMI logo and signs for their own publicity. We are now in the process of distributing the stickers, posters and metal dock signs to registered businesses, charter boats and marinas. The SFMI website also has an education centre that we hope everyone will find useful, it includes tips on how to catch and release shark, a list of Endangered and Threatened species plus information on how they can help protect the ocean. "At Matava, and Bite Me Gamefishing Charters we are of course both happy and proud to be spearheading this initiative in the South Pacific and indeed the World" said Matava Director and Bite Me Gamefishing Charter Captain, Captain Adrian Watt. "We also see this as a great step forward and opportunity for all gamefishing and sportfishing charter boats, both on Kadavu and in the Fiji Islands, to move forward in their standards to achieve truly world class levels of service and capabilities demonstrated by the 'catch and release' programs." Captain Watt finished by saying "We would like to thank all friends and clients of Matava and Bite Me Gamefishing Charters past and present who have contributed to the success of our ecotouirsm principles and the resort and we look forward to exciting times ahead." The Shark-Free Marina Initiative has a singular purpose, to reduce worldwide shark mortality. We encourage shark conservation at sport fishing and resort marinas by prohibiting the landing of any shark at the participating marina. The SFMI works with marinas, fishermen and like minded non-profit groups to form community conscious policy and increase awareness of the need to protect our sharks, our ocean and our legacy. Matava - Fiji's Premier Eco Adventure Resort, is an eco adventure getaway offering you a fun and unique blend of cultural experiences and adventure activities in the environmentally pristine and remote island of Kadavu in the Fiji Islands. Matava - Fiji Premier Eco Adventure Resort is a PADI Dive Resort as well as a Project AWARE GoEco Operator. With more than 12 years experience in the Fiji Islands, Matava is recognized as a leading educational dive centre. Matava offers accommodation for up to 22 guests in lush tropical surroundings in traditional thatched Fijian 'bures' with hardwood polished floors, louvre windows and private decks offering privacy, comfort and superb ocean views. Bite-Me Gamefishing Charters is our on-site IGFA game fishing specialists offering the best of superb record breaking blue water game fishing for tuna, wahoo, sailfish and marlin. As an active member of IGFA and The Billfish Association we advocate tag and release of all billfish and Trevally not deemed to be a National or World Record. www.Matava.com www.GamefishingFiji.com # # #

A Confession and a Demand

Yes this GW is smiling!

Would you believe this!

From the website of none other than the much-maligned South Florida Shark Club!

As many of you know me on here, my name is Shannon Bustamante , and i have a confession and a demand to share with anyone willing to listen.
In the past I was as stubborn, immature, and ruthless as every other idiot out there that kills every shark they come in to contact with!!!!! I would slaughter them in cold blood and sell them to pay for my fishing trips, and even save up money, because i would catch so many.

But all of a sudden a close friend of mines for years (William Fundora) started Harassing me every chance he got about how wrong it was for me to be killing every shark i caught. At first i was in denial and very hard headed, as i would brush him off every time he would start. But as time went by i started educating myself more and more about sharks and the whole echo system, and the more i learned the more i changed.

Today i can honestly and proudly say that me and everyone fishing with me release every shark that we catch, which is a huge milestone, however it is not quite enough!!!!!! Not at all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Full post -and comments- here !
Now is this cool, or what?

Bravo Shannon!

Shark-Free Beaches?

Back to the controversy.

I got quite a bit of flak for having posted my take on the land-based Shark fishing in Delray Beach.
The organizers of the anti-fishing movement are excellent and passionate people who love Sharks with a vengeance, and the post was seen as a stupid and unnecessary contribution that would ultimately weaken their case. If so, I hope they'll accept my sincere apologies.

Of course, it wasn't meant that way.
Where I'm coming from is that I believe that Conservation must be pragmatic, smart, whenever possible consensual and fact-based. The Shark-Free Marinas Initiative is an excellent example of how that can be achieved.

Surely, nobody is seriously contemplating to ban all land-based fishing (for Sharks and "regular" Fishes) in Florida.
Anglers are a passionate and powerful group and their hobby is just another -albeit for some disturbing- way of enjoying the outdoors. From a Conservation point of view, they are certainly entitled to pursue it as long as they don't kill endangered species.

Here's an example from Australia.



Once again, the way to go is to sit at one table and agree on a compromise, whereby the anglers are allowed to fish provided that they do so sustainably.
In the case of game fishing for Sharks, all of which are endangered to some degree, that really boils down to practicing catch and release, very much in line with what the IGFA is already doing with Billfish. I understand that some anglers do kill the Sharks and eat the contaminated meat - but from what I can discern, many don't, so it should not be mission impossible to convince the recalcitrant rest.



Incidentally, Sean Paxton & Brooks Paxton II are already working on certifying released Sharks as part of the Int'l Land-Based Shark Fishing Association. Not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, as they will also certify dead Sharks and also, because some of the Sharks on their list should be fully protected - but certainly a step in the right direction.
Also, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission is presently reviewing its Shark management rules and it very much looks like they are willing to take aboard the above reservations, along with measures aimed at protecting juveniles, pregnant females and banning Shark kill tournaments.

But what about the argument that land-based fishing is endangering the other aquatic recreationists by drawing in Sharks?

I've actually been totally sold on that one for quite a while - but maybe contrary to the proponents of a ban on Shark fishing, I intuitively believe that the worst perpetrators may well be the "regular" fishermen that use chum and then drag in struggling fish that send out distress signals which are irresistible to Sharks. Incidentally, that's what the Shark fishermen claim, too!
On top of that, many anglers will then clean their catch right on the shore and thus create a further Shark attractant. I've personally witnessed it in French Polynesia and the next blog post will mention a glaring example from Hawaii. And there's the famous case of Walker's Cay where the regular dumping of carcasses by a game fishing operation established a resident population of Bull Sharks.

If the above is true, the only solution would be to establish mutually exclusive zones: no fishing where people swim and no swimming where people fish.
Yes Delray Beach may resolve to chase away the anglers (but it should really be all of them, not only those who target Sharks) citing that the area is just to small to support both activities - but in the big scheme of things, anglers certainly deserve their own space where the other users agree to take a step back.

Bottom line: talk to each other!
It's really always the same: the best and most enduring Conservation is the result of negotiations - and yes, sometimes the parties will only agree to talk after having been shown the "stick", like in Ft. Myers. The result of those talks will likely be a compromise, meaning that some Sharks will be killed - but in exchange, we could have a say about what species, how many, where, when and how and be reasonably confident that the anglers will abide by those rules. And maybe export the concept to other states where land-based Shark fishing is equally popular.
To me, that would be quite an achievement!

Anyway, as I said, just a thought.

PS: I just found this poll on the Orlando Sentinel website - please cast your vote.