Silkies vs Whale Shark!

Source - click for detail!

Watch.
Yes it's very much belated - but still!
Story here - enjoy!

No more Galapusky - Paper!

Or is it, Duskapagos?

Anyway, check this out.

I was sent to me by the Saffron Pimpernel under the heading of mumbo jumbo - and for a genetic ignoramus like me, it sure very much is! 

But having double checked with my trusted geneticist, she confirms that Gavin and Will's putative lumping of the Dusky and the Galapagos is no more, meaning that the two species continue to be valid.

And this mystery Shark?

Likely not a Dusky (see the map at the top) but a Silky like first assumed!

Ain't taxonomy fun - and it's so easy, too!:)

 

Inverted Trophic Pyramids? Not so fast!

Bingo - watch.

Those inverted trophic pyramids are bullshit.

Stories here and here: all excellent stuff so no need for synopses and interpretations.

Paper here - read it, it's open access!

Well what can I say.

First and foremost, bless Darcy and Yannis et al, very well done!

But I must also say that for me, this was a given anyway.

I've been a traveling diver for more than 40 years, and some of my friends for decades longer than that; and having once again asked some of those friends, and with the obvious exception of the known aggregation spots: none of us remembers anything even remotely resembling Sala's hypothesized Shark Eden - and lemme tell 'ya, we all have been to some locations that back then were mighty remote and mighty pristine and certainly not overfished!

Don't get me wrong here.

Back then, those reefs were teeming with life, with amazing coral, heaps upon heaps of fishes including numerous large predators among which Sharks, see e.g. here, meaning that the postulated biodiversity loss and the shifting baselines are more than real and cause for great concern - but again, even those absolutely magic spots were nothing like what Sala et al would have us believe!

Long story short?

Prima vista, not to worry.

Re-examining and possibly, falsifying previous scientific findings is quite normal and in fact, dissent is often how science and our knowledge progress.

But this is now a pattern.

Starting with the bloody numbers where some quarters continue to recklessly disregard the latest peer reviewed science (and no you fucking morons, you did not fucking "find" 80 million "missing" Sharks - you know who you are!); to the bloody tourism numbers (and here!); to the bloody oxygen BS; to the bloody exploding Cownose Rays; to all the bloody pseudoscience surrounding e.g the thorny issue of Shark strikes, or those Shark repellents, or Shark feeding, etc; to those bloody petitions - and now those bloody inverted pyramids: all-too-often all that spurious garbage is being commissioned, or outright invented by so-called Shark conservation circles, this sometimes in the misguided opinion that it may constitute good marketing for the "cause".

It is not.

It is just spurious garbage - and like I never cease to repeat, it is bad conservation as the truth will eventually emerge, incidentally often at great expense of resources that could have otherwise been invested in better undertakings. Plus, the reality is already so dire that there's absolutely no need for all that hyperbole!

Can we please stop with this shit and tell it as it is?

Which brings me straight over to this op ed - read it!

I can certainly see where Shelley is coming from. 

Near Threatened (by the conservation-friendly IUCN no less!) equals NOT Threatened, and from a formal standpoint, this outcome was most certainly based on breathy marketing and not fact, and as such the wrong decision - and we can only hope that it doesn't eventually end up biting us all in the arse!

Again, we really need to stop those shenanigans!

But having said that, 

I must confess that given my advocacy for a change of paradigms (and here), I applaud any Appendix II listing because of the mandated NDFs; and I certainly fervently believe the precautionary principle to very much be one of the tools of public policy = e.g. specifically when declaring Shark sanctuaries as stop gap measures pending the implementation of proper Shark fisheries management, especially in lesser developed countries!

But all-in-all, fully agree, especially about the demise of expertise - so well said!

But I'm digressing as usual.

Great paper and great op-ed - and should you have some spare time, you may also want to consult this syllabus about bullshit! :)

Enjoy!

CITES - done!

Source.

Victory!

Congratulations to everybody involved.
But not to the POB in Jersey who don't even know what the FAO is, contributed nothing as always but still have the audacity to claim credit for the success!

I really got nothing else to say about the Sharks - but lemme say something about the Mobulas.

Because the proposal to list them came from Fiji.

The parties to CITES are not those NGOs but nation states, and it is only they who can make proposals and cast votes. In brief, had it not been for Fiji, there would have been zero pamphlets, PSAs, press releases, articles, posts and interviews and above all, zero lavish junkets essential trips and conferences, meetings and committees by all those terribly important conservation professionals (yes that's only the provisional list!) that are now busy clapping themselves on the back whilst making terribly profound statements in the media!

And did anybody thank let alone praise Fiji?

So here's to the Fijian Delegation.

• Here's to you Bati who together with Eleni from Environment obtained Government approval and ensured that the powers that be kept on signing all the relevant paperwork. As always, you rock!


• And here's to you Ian who greatly, and quietly assisted in keeping the ball rolling!


• And to you Art who I hear gave a rousing speech that did sway several delegates!

Vinaka vakalevu and very well done!

And since we're at it.

Here's to you DaMary - you know why, and so do they!

And the dreaded Mobula lovers?

I hear that having been led to their senses, they did in fact assist - so here's just a hint of a slow hand clap for those who will always believe that they know better! :)

ICCAT - some Progess!

Silkies in, I believe, Malpelo - awesome!

Not Success, as the Pew bemoans?
As always, that really depends on the the POV and having had no big expectations, I am quite pleasantly surprised!

The fact is that they are now protecting the Silkies which is great.
Yes many other species undoubtedly do need better protection (good report here!) but once again, conservation is very much a step-by-step process whereby one has to be willing to (grudgingly) accept compromises and also, to acknowledge the realities on the ground - including the ever-present political shenanigans!
But I agree, no progress on the issue of limiting bycatch despite of plenty of highly viable alternatives and also, the failure of tightening the finning regulations are indeed a disappointment.

Which brings me straight over to the Bluefins.
In the context of ICCAT, Sharks are really little more than a side distraction. The real issues at hand are the management of maybe the fisheries for Billfishes (including the non-endangered Swordfish) but above all, that of the endangered Northern Bluefin Tuna. More details about the status of those Fishes right here.
As anticipated, there has not been any revision to the TAC but instead, the attention has been focused on curtailing the widespread shenanigans which is a good thing and very much conducive to reducing the numbers of Tuna that are actually being landed.

So although not being happy, I am quite satisfied.
Yes much remains to be done but at least the direction continues to remain the correct one!

More details on the measures here.

November!

Graphic by Pew - click for detail.

It's that time of the year again!
ICCAT is meeting in Istanbul, the economy is still fucked, actually probably more than ever, and consequently, my hopes remain dim, at least when it comes to the Tuna (read this!).
The good people at Pew have produced an excellent report (do download and read the PdF!) that illustrates how widespread IUU in the Mediterranean (under- and non reporting, poaching, fraud and the illegal use of drift nets by the Italians, etc) has led to total catches of at least double the official quotas.

Not into reading?
Here's what I'm talking about - and remember this post?
Watch out for the puny tuna coming out of the hold - shocking!



And what about the Sharks?
In comparison to the Tuna, they are not really of any economic importance and consequently, I remain hopeful that ICCAT will decide something positive, be it only to distract from what I fear will be another fiasco for the Tuna - or do you really believe that in this economy and amid those political upheavals, Berlusconi is going to direct the police to go and arrest those poaching fishermen!

Take a look at the recommendations by Pew.
As always, they are totally well researched and make total sense - and as always, I fear, they will not be heeded. I however remain hopeful for Shark protection, tho fully protecting the Porbeagle that is a food fish is probably going to be ambitious. A moratorium and then, strictly monitored and enforced (I know I know...) science based quotas like suggested for the Mako would certainly be a good step in the right direction. And the fin removal ban clause would be really nice and does not look impossible at all.
There's of course much more to do - see the recommendations by the Shark Alliance!

And what about ending the overfishing of the Tuna and Billfishes?
Hmmmmmmmm - but hope, as they say, springs eternal.

Best of luck to Pew - I know they're gonna try their best!