IGFA Weight Records - Rebuttal!

This stuff is just not cool - source.

The debate continues.

Remember David's paper, an the lame reply by the IGFA?
Here is his response, and I cite,

We are grateful for the productive discussion...

Hahahahahahaha!

PS - published version here!

 

IGFA - lame lame lame!

The IGFA keeps defending unethical trophy fishing - not cool!

Remember David's paper about trophy fishing?

As a reminder, here's a nice synopsis, and I cite

“To us, ‘don’t kill IUCN Red List Threatened species for fun’ should be a part of any ethical angling policy, and many IGFA member anglers that we’ve spoken to agree,” Shiffman said. “We can only hope that the IGFA leadership decides to take the simple step that we propose.” 

Well said - totally agree!

And here is the answer by the IGFA.

Well, nobody really expected that they would fully endorse the paper's recommendations - but this?

This is unprofessional demagoguery at its very worst, to the point that one really has to ask the question whether the Conservation Director (no less!) is just simply hopelessly out of his depth? Nobody disputes that the principal cause for those collapsing fish stocks is not the recreational anglers but commercial (and subsistence!) fishing, at least when it comes to the marine species - but this is in no way an excuse for continuing to promote policies that are ethically reprehensible and hopelessly antiquated!

No I'm not gonna dwell.

The proposed solutions are compelling and easy to implement, and they would instantly affirm the IGFA as a responsible and forward looking organization - AND help preserve the Fish stocks the IGFA relies upon for its existence.

Not gonna happen - and fuck the breathy mission statement.

Not impressed!

IGFA Records - great Paper!

Dead Goliath Groupers in 1957 - source.

Bravo!

Great to see a paper looking into this.

Those all-tackle weight records have been a personal gripe of mine for years (and here and here). In brief, the IGFA is sanctioning and certifying the deliberate targeting of the biggest individuals = inevitably, the oldest and possibly pregnant females that are the most prolific breeders and thus the most valuable individuals. This is especially true for Sharks where their life history compounds the problem - but in general terms, this generally applies to all Fishes.

Please read this paper.

Doesn't get much clearer than that - but should you still have any open questions, here are more answers by David.

Well done!

And the IGFA?

Why do they continue to hang on to those hopelessly archaic and unethical practices?

Hearsay has it that there was a movement from within the IGFA to gradually switch from weight- to length records that would not have automatically implied killing the Fish. Apparently, some Southern Hemisphere chapters threatened that if so, they would leave and thus break up the Association, at which the proposal was quietly shelved.

Dunno if 100% accurate - but certainly plausible.

And incidentally. 

I just realized that I never followed up on the trailer posted in one of the above links. This is the finished product - not 100% directly related but certainly worth watching.

Trophy fishing for Sharks?

Dumpster full of Blue Sharks after fishing tournament - Long Island, NY

Hmmm...
...these derbies provide significant socio-economic and educational value for the rural coastal communities? What possible educational value could come from killing and stringing up trophy Sharks?
Anyway, it'll be interesting to watch the finished product!

Here's the trailer.



I say, trophy tournaments are an abomination.
And I'm not only talking about Sharks! Targeting the biggest and oldest Fish that happen to also be the most prolific breeders, and this only in order to get immortalized, or whatever, in some record book is not only ethically reprehensible, it deprives the Fish stocks of their most valuable individuals.

The real culprits?
The IGFA and their record keeping which ultimately incites anglers to continue to target and kill mature pregnant females - and yes I'm very much repeating myself! Thankfully, some forward thinking anglers are starting to question that practice and more and more kill tournaments are being reformed - and there's even eco-shark- fishing businesses like this one!.



But in the end, it all depends on the IGFA.
If they want to remain current and relevant, they must finally do away with their weight records in favor of other non-lethal measurements - especially in the all-tackle category!
Guy?

H/T: Shark Year Magazine.

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!

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.

5,341 Bucks!

Yes this pic is from Destin! Great destin-ation marketing huh!

Pretty sweet!

That's what Team Tim's Tree Service bagged for catching and releasing a 7 1/2 feet Hammerhead at the Are You Man Enough Shark challenge this week in Fort Myers. And they could have earned themselves another ten grand by catching one of the previously tagged five Sharks.
To me, that should be plenty of incentive for keeping this format in the future - and hopefully, for getting rid of the horrible name in the process!

Compare that to the measly 250 bucks for landing the biggest of many dead Sharks in Destin, and it should be pretty obvious what they guys over there ought to do.

Yes, as WhySharksMatter said, the victory in Fort Myers has indeed been the result of clever and respectful Shark Conservation - but let there be no doubt that threatening to disrupt proceedings via a vocal Conservation rally played an important role as well!

That's also the message to Devin: evolve, and everybody will be happy to work with you in order to find attractive alternatives - or else!

Talking of which, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) has scheduled a series of public workshops this month to receive comments on the management of sharks, including possible changes to Shark bag and size limits, the prohibited Shark species list, and Shark landing requirements and gear rules.

Would be great if this could be turned into an ethical debate, as in stopping the despicable slaughter of pregnant females. No reason why the fishermen shouldn't follow the lead of the hunters - or is there?

Time for IGFA to show some leadership!

Shark Free Marinas!

Mark the Shark has just killed another Tiger Shark.

At 14 feet and 1200 pounds, she must once again have been a pregnant mother, like the other Tiger in the Bahamas and the two Hammerheads killed by Bucky Dennis. And then, there's the upcoming abomination of Mr. Donlon in Ft. Myers that is specifically targeting more record-sized and thus pregnant Sharks.
That's what "game" fishermen do for fun, the more as their Association has no ethical problems whatsoever to sanction those killings as legitimate records. In my book, that's being tacit instigators, accomplices and enablers. Even the hunting community doesn't do that anymore - and thankfully, there seems to be growing opposition to those gruesome trophies even among the fishermen themselves.

But the cold facts are that all of that is perfectly legal.
All of our vocal condemnation, petitioning and picketing are not likely to change much in the short term. Game fishing is big business and we're hopelessly outmanned and outgunned.
Yes, I'm repeating myself! Again!

Which brings me straight over to the Shark-Free Marina Initiative.
It's a great idea that started with this post by Shark Diver in September, 2008. Type "Shark Free Marinas" into the search box of Underwater Thrills and you will be able to follow its gradual inception by several enlightened marinas in the Bahamas.

Now, it's being rolled out on a global scale via its own org., website and blog

This is smart Conservation aimed at organic cooperation instead of confrontation, via a nifty feel-good campaign. Good for the marinas, good for the Sharks. And I'm sure that the ultimate thrust is to educate the fishermen in the process.

Smart, cheap, effective - Conservation bootstrapping at its best.
Kudos guys!

Ethics should not need to be regulated

Amen to that!

Sharky of The Chum Slick has written this great post about the recent killings of Sharks by sport fishermen. And let's not forget Mr. Donlon's abomination in Ft. Myers!

What is particularly riling is that in order to book themselves an IGFA record, they specifically target the largest individuals - and those are invariably pregnant females, i.e. the very breeding stock that would deserve special protection, and not persecution. To compound the problem, they are very easyly caught as they turn up at predictable times in the coastal Shark nurseries.

How does it feel to kill a pregnant mother and dozens of babies? Or to sit in a bikini on the corpse of a threatened animal?
So much for IGFA's "sportsmanship" and proclaimed conservation efforts - and I'll leave it at that.

Luckily, some are bucking the trend.
Very shortly, I'll be able to tell you about a great initiative that aims at protecting Sharks by working organically with the sport fishing community.
Keep watching this space!

Bingo!

Well, it was about bloody time!

Someone in Florida has finally discovered who chums the water and attracts Sharks to the beaches!

Guess what - we've said it before!
Go take your fight to the fishermen, not the divers!

Now, if only the Powers That Be could reconsider that stupid fateful decision...

Yes I know, I'm hallucinating!

Are You Man Enough?

That is the question!

A friend asked me to write a post about this abomination, so there.

Really, there's not much to say, is there.
Shark Monster Tournaments are for wankers - short, ugly, fat, beer-guzzling loudmouthed idiots who are not getting any. Oh, and did I mention the small dicks?

Real Men don't kill for wanton sport - especially when it's not even a challenge, as in Shark Fishing.
Wanna be Da Man? Try catching a big Marlin - and then release it!

So: are you Man enough?

Busted!!!

Say "See Ya Later" To Another Big Beautiful Shark (yes this is a link)

Well well...

A nip at New Smyrna Beach helps Volusia County break its own record by reporting its 23rd Shark bite for 2008.
And in Islamorada, a heroic owner rescues his dog from the maws of a Lemon Shark, thus un-busting one of Mythbusters' busts!

So what, I hear you say.

The "what" is that both locations are in the State of Florida.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that would be the very same State of Florida that decided to enact a Shark feeding ban in 2002, thus putting a grand total of three or so operators out of their unholy business - this of course for the benefit of the poor harassed wildlife and for the safety of the public (and pets!) at large - Right?
Yes, Florida, home to the people who gloated and felt "vindicated" when tragedy struck in the Bahamas!

And yet, it appears, the numbers aint dropping!
And how about Hawaii, the second State to pass such groundbreaking and "eco-friendly" laws?
Thought so...

So, what's going on?
Who are those people that continue to attract the Sharks to the beaches by throwing in bait and chumming the waters?

Might those be the very same guys who lobbied to have the Shark feeding ban enacted in the first place? And their trigger-happy brethren?

The same people whose "game" Association endorses the killing of Sharks for "sport, fun and relaxation", including a "Royal Slam" for the successful demise of nine species? And "Monster Tournaments" aimed at wiping out the last breeding stocks? The same people who fill websites with detailed instructions about how to mix up a batch of rubby dubby, or chum in order to motivate their prey to come inshore?

Yes, to lure them Inshore! As in "Shell bars, grassflats, jetties, inshore cuts and channels, mangrove and grassy points, docks and rocks, ledge dropoffs and similar fishy locations"!

So much for Myth versus Reality, eh?
Busted!!!