Great Whites - Great Paper!

GW picture by Chip Scarlett

Wow!
It should come as no surprise that after the Junior fiasco, I'm certainly not a great admirer of the GW researchers within the TOPP program, at least not when it comes to their ethical attributes.

But I must say, this is as good as it gets.
From the paper.

About what the Sharks may be doing in the White Shark Café.

Despite the likely reduction in foraging opportunities in the Subtropical Gyre, white sharks are offshore during a period of time when prey availability in this region may be relatively high.
It is logical that white sharks would time their offshore migrations to coincide with periods of increased prey availability. The reported spawning area of the neon flying squid (Ommastrephes bartrami) generally overlaps temporally and spatially with white sharks in offshore waters as does that of the purpleback flying squid (Sthenoteuthis oualaniensis), suggesting that spawning aggregations of Ommastrephid squid may be an important prey resource in offshore waters. Similar to the neon flying squid, Pacific pomfret (Brama japonica) also make seasonal migrations, foraging in the transition zone or subarctic waters during the summer then moving south to subtropical waters to spawn during winter and spring. Catches of pelagic fishes and sharks by the Japanese long line fishery can be substantial, though not necessarily at their peak, in this region during the time of year that white sharks are present. It has also been noted that the occurrence of white sharks in Hawaii coincides with birthing of humpback whales.
Therefore, it appears that white sharks may be using these offshore habitats when prey availability, though likely still lower than in coastal habitats, is relatively greater than at other times of the year.

Although these offshore habitats may not provide optimal foraging conditions at present, it is important to remember that historical conditions may have been very different.
It is possible that with the decline of large pelagic fishes, sharks and whales, the historical forage base of white sharks in these habitats has diminished. In addition, the decline of the Hawaiian monk seals, may have also removed an important prey item for white sharks. It seems likely that historically there was a more abundant prey field available for white sharks to exploit in pelagic habitats.
Therefore, to some extent white shark migrations may be vestigial and reflect historical conditions.

About why they may be traveling there

One of the fundamental questions regarding white sharks in the NEP is why they undertake these extensive and regular offshore migrations, leaving the highly productive California Current for oligotrophic waters of the central Pacific.
The two primary hypotheses are that these movements are related to foraging or reproduction. While our data are not able to directly address the reproductive hypothesis, they are useful for evaluating the foraging hypothesis. Our results indicate that 1) white sharks do forage in offshore habitats, though at a lower rate, and 2) white sharks may initiate these offshore migrations around the size of first maturity.
These results, in combination with the observation that white sharks returning to central California aggregation sites often are lean, suggest that although white sharks feed offshore, it appears foraging may not be the primary motivation for offshore migration.

If white sharks are not moving offshore to feed, an alternative explanation is that the offshore migrations have a reproductive purpose, possibly playing a role in gestation, parturition or mating.
The particular reproductive function that offshore habitats may play in white shark life history is unclear, but it is possible that use of these habitats is related to gestation and/or mating as parturition is believed to occur in the southern California Bight. It is possible that females use the warm waters of the Subtropical Gyre to aid in gestation, and indeed there is some evidence that females segregate from males in offshore habitats, especially when in the Hawaiian focal area. If female white sharks have an extended gestation period (12 to 18 months), extended use of warm offshore waters may explain the return of some large females to coastal aggregation sites every other year.

Very interesting!
Needless to say, I very much look forward to finding out how this dovetails with Michael Domeier's multi-year tracking results, and his own interpretation of the data!

But look for yourselves.
Thankfully, the paper is open access and you can read it in its entirety right here.

Enjoy!

Junior - final Chirp!

Junior with the tag, as posted on Domeier's website. See any damage to the jaw?

Did you understand this comment?

I'm not a native English speaker and did not. Apparently, it means no one is listening and by implication no one wants to hear it. It’s a sound gag used when a comedian tells a joke that falls flat and not a sound is to be heard from the audience.
Fair enough.

So there, let's put this baby to rest.
Three independent sources have told me the following.

• The video(s) were shot by two researchers sometime between September and the end of November, 2010. I know their names but have no proof that they are the authors of the smear campaign, so the names will remain unmentioned.
• They work for TOPP under the formidable Barbara Block. This has happened on her watch and it is her job to get to the bottom of what really went down within the organization she heads.
• There was a GFNMS observer
• The research has been paid for by, and the video(s) are the property of the Monterey Bay Aquarium and Stanford.
• A copy of the video(s) was given to the GFNMS.

What then obviously happened is this.
Somebody grabbed some stills off those videos. That person was then able to peruse archives with older images of Junior and produced the before-and-after pictures that were then leaked. That is not the spontaneous action of a Shark activist who stumbled upon the information - that takes a lot of time and effort and is something only an insider could have achieved.

And who is it that leaked the pictures?
From the e-mail I received.
I’m a shark enthusiast...
After inquiring with some students that study white sharks, I became aware that this same shark was re-sighted and identified with video almost a year after it was tagged. According to my friend some of the images were submitted to the sanctuary during the public comment period for the tagging permit renewal...
My concern is that other scientists or media hounds will try to do this again, heck, who knows how many of these sharks have already been severely impaired as a result of this same researcher’s made for TV science. Since the latest information suggests that there are less than 300 individuals in this area, I am very upset over the lack of oversight these researchers have when working with these magnificent creatures. If we can’t protect these sharks inside of a sanctuary, then we are no better than the commercial interests that we routinely blame for the shark decline.
I’ve included the images that I was sent, showing the shark before and after the horrible incident.
Genuine? My intuition tells me, it is.

Big picture?
This is a smear campaign against Michael Domeier.

Forget the opinion of the inevitable expert bloviators.
Half of what they assert is just speculative BS that has been completely debunked by several pictures that show that Junior had no abrasions, nor dislocated jaws whatsoever after having been hauled aboard. And what about the general bad condition of the animal: do you really believe that it is the consequence of the brutal treatment it suffered one year earlier (!), due to some obscure reduced caloric equation and the like? C’mon…
How about invoking the much abused Occam. Is it not much more plausible that a Shark with two big bites on his back and a further nasty bite on his mouth (just to keep with Domeier's explanation - there could be heaps of others) would be in bad shape, at least temporarily? Plus, keep in mind that the tracks indicate that Junior is still migrating normally, and this 18 months after the accident!

Also, Domeier’s research is by no means redundant as some are asserting.
Yes in their present configuration, those SPOT tags are way too invasive and I also think that the procedures are way too brutal. I commend Domeier for having exhaustively documented what led him to choose those specific protocols here, but I still strongly differ with his conclusions that the research ought to continue basically unchanged. I say, the gizmos need total re-engineering and the procedures need to drastically change before any further deployment.
Still, this does not disqualify the study per se, only the methods. It would be great if the researchers would dispose of precise multi-year tracks enabling them to shed light on the life history of those GWs, especially when it comes to their breeding cycle and mating and pupping grounds. Telemetry will obviously not answer all questions, but it would give valuable pointers about where to start investigating with other means.

I say, with the exception of the damage caused by the tag, there is not one single shred of proof here.
The only possible evidence is the video – and is it not revealing how it never surfaced, and how none of Domeier’s detractors are asking that it be produced?
Anyway, my call is that Domeier has nothing whatsoever to do with those injuries and that this is a well orchestrated ignominious campaign aimed at rubbishing him. I’ve said it before, despite of the techniques he has employed where I continue to be highly critical, he is a brilliant researcher and does not deserve this.

Which brings me straight back to the TOPP labs and the role they have played in this latest fiasco. All the leads converge there.
The videos were shot by them, in fact, those two guys saw the Shark and know whether it had other shark bites - which means that if Domeier's explanation is correct, the "evidence" is fabricated! Somebody was then given access to that video and even more telling, to archives of further images of GWs from the Farallones. The person who leaked the pictures speaks of students that study white sharks and of images that I was sent. What I find particularly disturbing is that those researchers have not only possibly fabricated the evidence and not posted the video that could exonerate Domeier, but that they continue to snipe from the safety of anonymity on top of it – or how are we to interpret A source close to the photographers who saw Junior last October!
I say, this is underhanded, unprofessional and cowardly, and in total breach of basic ethical tenets and collegiality. Disgusting.
Barbara Block as the person in charge sure has a lot to answer for.

This is happening on the money of the Monterey Bay Aquarium and Stanford and I must also say that I’m starting to be concerned about their oh so politically correct silence. Like it or not, they are parties to this - how long can this continue without an unmistakable statement from their side before they do become accomplices!

Sean Van Sommeran?
In a twisted way, I must say that I’m rather impressed by his passionate stance and his total lack of political correctness. Normally, donors don't like controversy and having been intrigued by how he could afford to speak up like he does, I went snooping for his sponsors: talk about an eclectic and anarchic combo with among others, Sea Shepherd - and a gun training outfit! If that doesn’t say it all - and being a combat shooter myself, I can confirm that we always shoot to kill! :)
Anyway, yes the ramblings, self promotion, innuendos and outright insults are at times terribly irritating - but he's sure got chops and his latest exchanges with Greg Barron on SFS (bottom of thread) and on Alastair Bland’s second article reveal the whole extent of the shenanigans, from heaps of history, infighting, food fights, territoriality and xenophobia to his utter frustration with the authorities who are seemingly totally failing to do their job.
Very interesting and very revealing indeed!

Indeed, the GFNMS role in this has been highly questionable to say the least.
Read the Barron/Sommeran exchanges and you can clearly discern the extent of the rot, from the anti-public and anti-industry agendas to the favoring of certain groups at the expense of others, and how in this specific case, they spectacularly failed to discern the basic fact that a fishing show and experimental and highly invasive research had simply no place in a marine sanctuary. Plus, what’s that about the excuse that images and video footage of the injured shark were received too late - what was the purpose of the observer if not observe and report?
This has happened on the watch of the current boss, Maria Brown. It is she who ultimately bears the responsibility for it.

There you have it.
I’m done with this, the more as I’ve noticed that Greg Barron, a local with plenty of insight who is obviously both principled and objective has decided to look into it – bottom of this thread. Much much better this way.
I sure wish him not to get some nasty infection by wading into this toxic quagmire!

Long story short?
I have been asked to post "evidence" that Domeier has caused permanent damage to Junior - meaning that the emaciated status and injury on the mouth were alleged to be the direct consequence of the brutal treatment the Shark had been subjected to one year earlier.
Having looked, I now believe that the evidence is fabricated, and that this is a smear campaign against Michael Domeier that has been orchestrated by circles associated with the TOPP labs - but as always, I shall be happy to be proven (!) wrong!

Over & out!

PS - excellent article here - kudos!

PPS - as of December, 2013, it has been revealed that the trolling Mr. van Sommeran is one of the perpetrators of this scam.

Junior - the Narrative is changing!

Another pic of Junior on the boat - see any evidence of a permanently dislocated jaw?

Well well.

I've given an interview and here is the article.
Once I told them about the interview, some people have warned me not to trust Alastair Bland and predicted that he might make me look like a crazy person. Well, he has not - or has he? :)
Just two minor corrections: we do not employ cages, and I said the specific procedures were brutal, not SPOT tagging in general. The tags are invasive and I shall post about that at a later stage.

This is a follow up to his first article in the Bohemian and I must commend Alastair for not having blindly accepted the prima facie evidence but continued to investigate instead.
This, I think, is much more balanced.

So, where is that video.
Anonymous posting to Vimeo (better quality than YouTube) with a few comments will suffice. Again, this is not gonna just simply go away - I still intend to post a final wrap-up and post mortem. What I will say then will largely depend on developments in the next couple of days.

PS you may also want to go and read Andrew the Southern Fried Scientist's comment on the spectacular thread there. It's towards the bottom, with a yellow background. Although I don't agree with all he says (yes individuals may not count for much, but how we treat them does), this is as good as it gets.
Kudos.

Junior - follow up!

The silence after my last post about Junior has been deafening.

But fear not.
I've been around for a long time and know alot of people.
I've started to do some digging and lemme tell you, the terrain has quickly become treacherous! I never intended to ever wade back into the arcane politics of GW research and conservation in California, the more as I don't understand (does anybody?) half of what's going on there - but I am persevering because I'm starting to get pissed off and am thus highly motivated.

Did I hear, what's the agenda?
To shed light on what increasingly appears to be a smear campaign against Michael Domeier.
Period. I don't personally know any of the actors and have no vested interests there whatsoever. But having been dragged into it and having publicly asked questions, I now want to get answers.

So there.
What I'm starting to discern, is a faint buzz of vague innuendos and speculation: but if one weeds out the most preposterous allegations (= this is viral marketing for Sharkmen2 instigated by MD and Nat Geo) and aggregates the most plausible bits and pieces, the picture that is starting to emerge is this.

I hear about nasty politics. I hear that the research community was once highly fractured and the scene of fierce internecine warfare. I hear that a big 500lb gorilla wielding a big schtick in the form of lavish research grants and with a determined (some say nasty) disposition managed to browbeat everybody into submission, pacified the various factions and created an uneasy alliance of researchers. I hear that for quite a while, there has been a small group of researchers, advisers and bureaucrats overseeing that place and making a living of it. A little incestuous it seems. A bit of conflict of interest too perhaps? I hear that for years, that group has been trying to get everyone else, and I do mean everyone including the general public, excluded from the islands, see the above link. I sense that as a consequence, everybody with any connection to that place is highly concerned about possible retribution and accordingly paranoiac about not wanting to get involved.
I hear that Domeier is an outsider who had the audacity to intrude. I hear that he was told to back off, or else. I hear that there is history, including anecdotes about tagged Guadalupe GWs traveling on the coastal highway all the way to Sta Cruz – hilarious, you really can’t make these things up. I get messages predicting that they will cannibalize him in an orgy of scientific frothiness that would put even the best 1930's piranha movie to shame. It's how academia rolls. If you thought internecine fighting between operators was bad, you ain't seen nuthin' until you have seen a knife fight between two scientists. Nice.
Get the gist?

Is this PROOF?
Hell, no! Much is anecdotal and circumstantial - it is merely a plausible backdrop that may however help frame the issue at hand.

Names?
Not quite yet - but I know about that research and having Googled Great White Sharks Philopatry, I've come up with a possible lineup of characters.
Interesting.

Open questions.

• There is a video: who has taken it, who owns it, who has copies
• Does the video clearly prove that the wound on Junior's head is a Shark bite. Release the video - regardless of whether it’s a yes or a no.
• Who did grab those stills and leak them, and why
• Did anybody sanction the leak
  

This ain't going away - and that's a promise.
At stake, the reputation of Michael Domeier.
But equally at stake, the reputation of some researchers, that of the people and institutions they work for and who fund their research, that of the GFNMS.

Whoever is behind this - it's time for some reflection and soul searching.

I shall be writing one more post in this matter after this.
After that, we can then hopefully concentrate on the real issue at hand, i.e. the tagging of Sharks.

About Great Whites

As usual, found by pure chance!

It is, I believe, a great piece about Great Whites, Shark research and Shark diving in the Farallone Islands - including some gruesome footage of finning, however totally without the usual unhelpful melodrama.
Very interesting to see McCosker explain his mistaken identity hypothesis - certainly plausible but not verifiable!

Enjoy!


QUEST on KQED Public Media.

Producer's notes here.

Disaster - as expected!

Domeier apparently thinks that showing off this meat hook is somehow cool - well, it aint!

Bingo!

I've just come back from an epic DEMA Show, only to find out that Domeier has managed to grieviously injure a Great White.
This is what has happened (transcript here).



It's all very very bad but having said it all before, there's no need for me to post any more opines on the matter. Others have taken up the issue, foremost of which Underwater Thrills, Sharky (welcome back buddy), Sea Stewards, RTSea and even the mainstream media like the ABC Blog and undoubtedly, many others.

Just this.

I'm particularly appalled by the reaction of the people involved, be it that woman who gave the permit, Domeier, NatGeo who remained silent and above all, that guy Fisher who chose to act as the spokesperson and greenwasher of the whole fiasco.
Their statements populate the comments sections of the various blogs and articles and are a glaring example of their arrogance, lack of ethical imperatives and pure and simple hubris. Where they should have been eating humble pie, admitted their error, apologized and stopped their stupid undertaking in view of developing better and more respectful procedures, they chose out to lash out against the critics and to point their finger at similar (and equally unethical) experiments by their peers.
Shame on them and shame on NatGeo for not having pulled them back and taken better control of what amounts to a substantial blunder and according tarnishing of their brand.

Secondly, this has come at no surprise.
I chose to chastise it in unequivocal and abrasive terms, partly because of, I hate to admit, my Germanic genes coupled with a sometimes poor understanding of the foreign language I write in - and partly because being literally in the thick of it, I vehemently and passionately oppose unethical and gratuitous science, a recurrent thread of this blog.
Turns out that on top of being unnecessarily brutal, the whole exercise was largely redundant as TOPP and others had already collected a vast sample of identical data. Yes the new tags stay on longer but that's no excuse whatsoever for harming the animals and yes, I'm repeating myself.

Thing is, it didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that this was wrong and that it did harbor an unacceptably high risk of harming the animals. If this comment is true, it appears that they hadn't even figured out the need for using proper circle hooks, something every game fisherman has known for years.
Anyway, what I wanted to say is that I had wished for a more unequivocal condemnation of the way things were being handled - and this from the outset and not only after disaster struck.

Guys, in so many ways, we are the gatekeepers.
So let's be a little less politically correct, a little less timid, a little less oblique, a little less calculating and let's say it as it is - and yes, I'll leave it at that, the more as I'm sure you understand.

Luckily, within the scientific community, many concur that this unethical shit must stop.
I had the honor and great personal pleasure of finally meeting one of the world's foremost authorities on Sharks. We had a fantastic dinner where we exchanged views and lined up some exciting stuff for the future. And I was touched when he said that he started by killing many Sharks, a fact he now regretted as he was seeing what was happening and wanted to devote his efforts to getting the animals protected. What a great thing to witness!

Hopefully, the many new scientists he coaches and mentors will take up this modern view of what science needs to be: committed to conservation and always respectful of the animals.
Hopefully, the likes of Domeier who apparently sold his soul to the gratuitous fame of a stupid reality show will be adequately reprimanded by their peers at the next meeting of the AES or whenever he will try to hawk the data he has gathered. Hopefully, in the future, we will never again enable nor condone this kind of attitude, irrespective of the media dollars and the scientific veneer and according brownie points it may come with.

And hopefully, the poor Shark will survive - and guess who now carries the onus of proving it!

Enough said.

PS The Dorsal Fin has weighed in on this one and if one follows the links, one ends up on Mr. Fisher's website. Pretty revealing huh? So, maybe, this was primarily about reeling in some monster Fish that would have otherwise been protected?
Honi soit qui mal y pense...

The proper Way

I've recently ranted about frivolous and heartless science and about Shark "experts" proffering ludicrous opinions instead of doing what is to be expected from proper scientists, and that is, to use the Scientific Method:

• ask Questions
• make Observations
• develop a Hypothesis (that is, a theoretical Explanation)
• make Predictions and then
• collect, analyze and interpret the necessary Data (that is, the Evidence, often via Experiments) in order to verify or falsify (that is, to test) that Hypothesis.
• only then, publish the results (as a Model or Theory) and have them re-tested, often by peers.

That is the only acceptable Technique to separate Truth from Belief, Science from Opinion, Superstition, Myth and Religion, fact from fiction, wheat from chaff. Worth keeping in mind when confronted with yet another piece of unproven conjecture.

Apart from "our" very own Juerg and his research on Shark Reef, here are some institutions and individuals who do serious research on the topics of the past rants:

Mexico: Dr Leonardo Castillo from Mexico's National Fisheries Institute has begun equipping thousands of Sharks with satellite, radio and plastic tags to better understand the cause for a recent spate of incidents on the Mexican Pacific Coast. I look forward to his explanations after the results have come in, as it should be. Much more tedious than taking a quick trip to Mexico in order to give a few interviews - but oh so much more credible!

Greenland Sharks: Canada's three Oceans are frequented by up to 41 species of Sharks.
GEERG, the Greenland Shark and Elasmobranch Education and Research Group is currently conducting Research on 3 of them, the Greenland, Basking and Blue , and planning research on the four Lamnids Great White, Shortfin Mako, Porbeagle and Salmon Shark. As far as I can discern, no frivolous killing involved.
The Canadian Shark Research Laboratory conducts research on some of the same Sharks, mostly by examining catches by local fishermen.
Both websites are a treasure trove of information, along with a nifty interactive Shark identification key.




And then, there's of course TOPP, the herculean effort of trying to tag, and thus record the movements of the Pacific Predators, be it cetaceans, fish, Sharks, birds or reptiles. It never ceases to intrigue and amaze me, be it by its sheer scope or by the wealth of information it regularly unveils.

Plenty to discover, plenty to learn.
Enjoy!

Mexico: Big Shark!

Two surfers have been killed and a third one injured in an recent spate of Shark incidents on Mexico's Pacific coast. The token Shark "expert" believes the reason may partially be "unusually cool sea-surface temperatures due to the La Nina phenomenon" bringing the Sharks closer to shore.

Well, yes: "may be".

Then again, "may be" not.
TOPP's fabulous real-time tracks sure point otherwise. And there have been plenty of "eventless" La Ninas between 2008 and the last recorded Mexican attacks in 1972-1973.
Aint "science" by experts just a wonderful thing.

In the aftermath, following a ceremonial shark massacre and community panic one expert described as "everything you saw with the movie 'Jaws,' only in Spanish," mania still flares.

Because as always, the locals know best: there's one helluva Big Shark lurking out there, chomping on Mexican flagged ships.
And on the token expert trying to flee the scene.