Fix those bloody Tags!

About those SPOT tags.
This is gonna be quick&dirty - but I want to quickly follow up on yesterday's comments.

From Neil's paper about satellite tags.
Read it - it is thankfully open resource for which Neil has to be commended.

SPOT tags are usually mounted to shark fins using biocompatible materials.
The attachment process includes punching or drilling holes through the dorsal fin tissue, where after the tag is affixed using bolts or pins, and finally secured with nuts made of a corrodible material.

This design theoretically allows the tag to shed after battery exhaustion.
However, tissue degradation and infection due to a foreign body response may result. To our knowledge, there are no published reports of this condition on the dorsal fins of satellite tagged sharks, however this pattern of fin damage from tagging has been described in other predatory marine animals such as dolphins (Balmer et al., 2010).

Once deployed, the actual satellite tag becomes an extension to the shark's body.
The most obvious behavioral consequence of tagging is a change in swimming efficiency due to hydrodynamic drag incurred by the tag. Transmitters have been linked with abnormal swimming behavior and increased energetic demands in dolphins (e.g. Irvine et al., 1982) and marine birds (e.g. Wilson et al., 1986; Wilson and McMahon, 2006). Various studies have examined possible effects of electronic tags or data loggers on the swimming efficiency of sharks, but results have been variable (Holland et al., 1993; Heithaus et al., 2007; Gleiss et al., 2009).

Another factor rarely considered is satellite tag color and how this may impact shark behavior (Wilson and McMahon, 2006).
It is well documented that white sharks rely on stealth and ambush to successfully capture and subjugate seal prey (Martin et al., 2005; Hammerschlag et al., 2006). A vigilant seal may be cued into the presence of a white shark prior to an imminent attack by detecting a colored satellite tag, resulting in predator avoidance. We have been able to consistently distinguish colored electronic tags on approaching white sharks below the surface, before visualizing the actual shark (Authors, unpublished data).
Brightly colored tags should be avoided due to their potential to alter predator–prey relationships (Hawkins, 2004).

No I'm not gonna repeat myself.
Long story short: those tags suck! Long story: re-read this - and keep in mind that I wrote it before seeing yesterday's shocking pictures! Now that there ARE published reports of this condition on the dorsal fins of satellite tagged sharks, pretending that there isn't a problem will not fly anymore!

To Neil's credit, he is trying his best.
This post documents the extreme care he applies when mounting the tags, clearly in the attempt to minimize those negative effects. Plus, his Hammerhead paper elaborates as follows

To limit bio-fouling of the tag, the transmitter was coated with Propspeed, a non-toxic, nonmetallic, anti-fouling agent comprised of several different types of silicone resins that inhibit attachment of marine growth (Hammerschlag et al. 2010).

The coated SPOT tag was attached to the first dorsal fin of the shark (following Weng et al. 2005) using titanium bolts, neoprene washers, steel washers, and high carbon steel nuts following Hanson (2001).
The attachment metals were selected to ensure that the steel nuts would corrode, resulting not only in tag detachment (Hanson 2001), but also to prevent any metallic corrosion from touching the shark fin (Hammerschlag et al. 2010).

I say bravo, but this may not be good enough anymore!
Now there is new and plausible evidence that those tags may lead to deformities and until this is being dispelled, any further deployment ought to be halted. There are now plenty of Sharks out there lugging around SPOT tags and it is now incumbent on the researchers to make the effort to go and see how those Sharks are faring.
And if they are not faring well - suspend the research and FIX THE GIZMO!

Incidentally, how about this Shark from Lupe.
Apparently, he was equally tagged by Domeier. I already posted the picture here but did not catch on to it til now: does that first dorsal fin look normal to you?


Like lethal sampling, this has now become an ethical, not a technical debate.
David: hint hint!

And yes as announced: this sure aint a contender for a Pulitzer - apologies!

A whole lotta Bull!

Wow - that's one mighty big Bull Shark!

But ours are bigger! :)
With the exception of the enormous Nyami Nyami (but how, exactly was she measured - length-over-all by bending down the tail?), people in the know tell me that Fiji's Bulls are substantially bigger than anything they've seen anywhere else, especially in the Caribbean. Which of course begs the question, what will Mahmood reveal once he publishes his findings about the Bull Shark genome and the possibility, or not, of distinct populations?
Keep watching this space as I hear that the roll-out may be imminent!

As always, kudos to Neil for the brilliant outreach!
And, you may want to amuse yourself and read the comments, among which
Wow, trolling the internet must be a great way to spend your time in between, Matsurbating to naked pics of your mom while covering yourself in spray cheese.
Wow indeed! :)

But have you seen this?
Bull sharks "have the most testosterone of any animal on the planet, so that should tell you a little something," Hammerschlag said.

Indeed it does!
It tells us that even the most prominent researchers are not immune to parroting urban legends! :)
Regular readers may remember that this particular piece of pseudoscience has been thoroughly debunked by Christie Wilcox of then Observations of a Nerd (and now Science Sushi) - but if not, here is that post in all of its glorious analytical deconstruction!
Enjoy!

Stopped!

Remember Mr. Donlon's abomination?

Here's what I got five minutes ago.

Dear Friends

It was just announced a few moments ago that the Ft. Myers Beach Chamber of Commerce and its City Commissioners all voted unanimously to immediately change the upcoming "Are You Man Enough Shark Challenge" to a total Catch and Release tournament with chase boats and live streaming video beamed back to television monitors at the tournament headquarters!

There will be no "shark kill" tournament!

This came just days before a large organized shark conservation and education protest was scheduled this weekend in front of the tournament headquarters. It has been confirmed that the sponsoring business owners were virtually unanimous in their support as well and actually had decided to make the tournament "catch and release" just hours prior to the commission vote.

Margret Meade once said, "Never doubt that a group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world.......indeed it is the only thing that ever has!"
There are many heroes in this effort and hundreds of individuals behind the scenes who helped make this environmental victory possible. Those hundreds of you who took the time to write an e mail and voice your concern to the tournament organizers fueled the fire!

Penny Miller who networked and boldly wrote Governor Crist's office and the Ft Myers Beach Chamber of Commerce in Florida strongly voicing her anger at this throwback to an African Big Game Hunting mentality!
Mary O'Malley and Lupo who were relentless in their pursuit of information on the "toxic" shark meat that was ostensibly being given to the homeless in an effort to "spin" killing sharks into a "positive justification" by the tournament organizers. They uncovered the falsehood that the Salvation Army had not even been contacted at all this year by the tournament organizers as advertised on their web page and they did not even want the meat in the first place....toxic or not!
Lawrence Groth who is a tenacious truth seeker that never gave up and pursued sponsors, tournament organizers, wrote blogs and even went "undercover" to film the "secret" shark kill tournament in Sarasota last week and planned the protest event on the Ft Myers side.
Neil Hammerschlag whose academic candor roused the environmental spirit of young supporters and helped turn the Commissioners around and to ultimately get the vote in favor of the sharks passed in commission chambers!
The scientific intervention by Dr. Sonny Gruber of the Bimini Field Station/University of Miami fame and Dr. Bob Heuter, Director of Mote Marine Lab in Sarasota lent credibility and sound insight to this project's goal and gave the tournament organizers a viable alternative to still making a success of a Catch and Release tournament.
And of course....to all the bloggers around the world, Mike Neumann, Patric Douglas, Wolfgang Leander, Heidi Coluzzi and dozens of others on all continents, who raised their voices in protest and demanded environmental reason to prevail.....

Thank you one and all! The sharks won this one today....thanks to a unified effort by everyone. Now with this momentum let us not allow it to fade. Let us all continue to pick the battles and take every opportunity to make a difference for the shark globally. Our children are counting on it....and our planet can not survive without our collective conscience.

The former president of the Nature Conservancy, John Sawhill once said..."in the end, our society will be defined....not only for what we created....but for what we refused to destroy....!

Respectfully,

Gary and Brenda Adkison
Directors Shark Foundation,
USA 954 554 8918

(Sour grapes) story here.

One World One Ocean and Neil!

No bolts? Interesting tag attachment - Neil?

Great!

This would be two of my fave orgs working together!

Doesn't get much better that that!

Join the movement and view more stunning ocean content at One World one Ocean.

Check out how Dr. Neil Hammerschlag and his University Of Miami crew tag sharks in the Berry Islands, Bahamas to study their migration patterns and thus, better protect them. You can learn more about UM's shark conservation program and follow Berry The Tiger Shark here.
Special thanks to Summit Series, University Of Miami, Waitt Institute, The Nature Conservancy, Bamboo Sushi and citizen scientists for making this video possible. Learn more about Summit Series here.
Bamboo Sushi, the country's first sustainably certified sushi restaurant, and Summit Series raised and contributed more than $800,000 to help create the South Berry Island MPA.

Story here.

Enjoy!

Important Stuff by Neil!

One more post about Shark research!
The Dorsal Fin alerts me to this video featuring Dr. Neil Hammerschlag.



Story here.
Neil comes across as being an impressive guy doing impressive things.
He popped up on my radar when I reported about the senseless killing of pregnant Sharks in Florida and I have since followed his research blog and had a peek at his website. From what I can discern, he operates very much at the cutting edge of science and technology, is respectful of the animals and is passionate about conservation - exactly the way I believe modern researchers need to be!
Very well done indeed!

Bull Shark Dance!

Hammerhead! from the R.J. Dunlap Marine Conservation Program blog

What was I thinking!
Now that I see it, it was always clear that David would not engage in just any Shark dance but develop beautifully choreographed species-specific routines instead - and not only that, they are being subjected to instant peer review by none other than Dr. Hammerschlag himself, as it should be!
Now that I can see where this is leading, I can quite picture the routine for Hammerheads, see above, and maybe even that for Tigers - but I must confess that I can't wait to see the Thresher Shark dance!

I must say, I am deeply impressed!
Kudos for having had the vision of bonding exquisite artistic expression with research, conservation and outreach. This is smart, inclusive and eminently entertaining - and it works!
Awesome!

David in snazzy Floridian attire at 00:16.
Absolutely adore the flowery shorts - but where are the de rigueur orange Crocs?

Enjoy!

Neil: great Stuff - again!

Looks like Neil's research has yielded some spectacular results!

Range extension of the Endangered great hammerhead shark Sphyrna mokarran in the Northwest Atlantic: preliminary data and significance for conservation

Neil Hammerschlag, Austin J. Gallagher, Dominique M. Lazarre, Curt Slonim

ABSTRACT:

We provide pilot data from a satellite-tracked great hammerhead shark Sphyrna mokarran in the Atlantic, representing the first such data on this species in the literature.
The 250 cm shark was tagged off the coast of the middle-Florida Keys (USA) and transmitted for 62 d. During this time it migrated a minimum distance of ~1200 km northeast from the coast of Florida, into pelagic international waters of the Northwest Atlantic. When compared to the primary literature, this migration represented a northeasterly range extension for this species off the continental slope in the Atlantic. The significance of this range extension is discussed in terms of the vulnerability of S. mokarran to target and non-target fisheries.

This very much reminds me of those Tiger Shark migrations!
Which very obviously begs the question, what is there of interest in the middle of the Atlantic???
Stories here and here, and more once I get my hands on the paper.

My only grievance: this!
When will everybody finally choose to publish in open access journals - outreach & communication are as important as the research proper!

Shark Dances!

Bull Shark - by none other than the great Dr. Hammerschlag himself!

Great stuff!
For the countless fans of David's dazzling footwork, here's a longer clip of his beautifully choreographed Bull Shark dance, along with excerpts from several more species-specific routines that are quite obviously still in their early production stages - but certainly getting there!
Still eagerly awaiting a glimpse of the Thresher Shark dance tho!

Seriously, big kudos to Christine!
This instant follow up was seriously smart - and yes, kudos to Neil and to David, too! :)
I must say, this whole RDJ venture is simply stellar outreach and I invite everybody to go and explore the sheer scope and depth of that website. If ever there was a question about how to best communicate science and to fascinate and activate the public at large, let there be no doubt that this is how you do it!

And without further ado!

Killing for Conservation?

Excellent stuff from Florida - again!

ABSTRACT

Top oceanic predators, especially large predatory sharks (TOPS), appear to be experiencing varying degrees of population declines. Life history data (e.g. diet, reproductive status, age and growth, mortality) are critical for developing effective conservation strategies for TOPS. Presently, lethal sampling remains the most effective and accurate means of gathering these data. To meet such challenges, many scientists have utilized specimens obtained from recreational and commercial fisheries, but have needed to supplement those data with fishery-independent sampling.

However, there is growing public and scientific debate as to whether lethal sampling of TOPS is justified for obtaining conservation data.
Here we describe the development and use of non-lethal alternatives for collecting data on (1) trophodynamics; (2) maturity state and fecundity; and (3) growth and mortality rates necessary to enact conservation measures for threatened or even data-deficient TOPS.

CONCLUSION

In the case of TOPS which are highly protected, lethal sampling is not an option.
As such, scientists have generated innovative non-lethal alternatives for obtaining data on trophodynamics, age-growth, maturity, and reproductive status. This is best exemplified in the white shark Carcharodon carcharias, which is designated as Vulnerable to Extinction by The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN; Fergusson et al. 2005), listed on Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), and fully protected in South Africa, Namibia, the USA, Australia, Israel, Italy, and Malta (Fergusson et al. 2005).

For example, white shark diet and feeding habits have been determined from gut content analysis of specimens obtained from fisheries (Cliff et al. 1989, Bruce 1992, Cortés 1999, Hussey et al. in press, Smale & Cliff in press). Sulikowski et al. (in press) recently developed non-lethal techniques to assess the reproductive biology of white sharks. Moreover, electronic tagging (Domeier & Nasby-Lucas 2008, Weng et al. 2007, Jorgensen et al. 2010), mark-recapture (Anderson et al. 2011), photo identification (Domeier & Nasby-Lucas 2007, Chapple et al. 2011), and application of molecular genetics (Gubili et al. 2009, Jorgensen et al. 2010) have been used to determine population size and structure of white sharks in a variety of locations.

In his book ‘Why big fierce animals are rare: an ecologist’s perspective,’ Colinvaux (1978) elegantly described how the second law of thermodynamics restricts the abundance and size of apex predators. He wrote: …Great white sharks or killer whales in the sea, and lions and tigers on the land…are very thinly spread. One may swim many lifetimes in the world oceans without encountering a great white shark… (p. 27) Even nearly a century ago, long before overfishing, Elton (1927) pointed out that large carnivores were rare.

Given the threatened status of many TOPS, there is a growing need to develop feasible alternatives to lethal sampling.
We recognize that this will not happen overnight; but as scientists, we need to become creative, collaborate, and challenge ourselves to do so, because this is the direction we need to be moving in, if conservation is our goal.

Finally, a voice of reason!
The above is from Killing for conservation: the need for alternatives to lethal sampling of apex predatory sharks, by Neil Hammerschlag and James Sulikowski and you can thankfully read the whole (short and clear, so do not worry) paper here.

I remain generally dead set against lethal sampling and must commend the authors for having tackled a subject that is highly controversial and for having unequivocally spoken out in favor of the animals. May I also add that it cannot be a coincidence that the first two people that are being acknowledged are DaMary and Jimmy, a clear tribute to their excellent advocacy for Sharks.
Be it as it may, kudos to everybody involved.

This is clearly the way forward and once again, you have positioned yourself very much at the forefront of Shark research and Shark conservation.
Bravo!

Shark Strike in the Azores - Debate!

Oh for crying out loud!

Have you seen this?

Spare yourselves the 40 bucks - in essence, the article recounts how a Blue Shark bit the fin of a pal of the authors, and this thusly.

An Unprovoked Attack by a Blue Shark Prionace glauca (Chondrichthyes: Carcharhinidae) on a Spear Fisherman in Terceira Island, Azores, Northeast Atlantic

On July 24, 2013, near a shallow water rocky reef approximately 50 m from the coastline, a 48-year-old spear fisherman was surprised by a blue shark that bit his right flipper. The incident occurred on the South coast of Terceira Island, Azores, Portugal, Northeast Atlantic, where a shark attack or conflict is a very rare phenomenon, having only 3 minor incidents previously recorded...

Late afternoon the spear fisherman entered the water and swam away from the adjacent fishing port, now converted into a leisure summer area, toward the tip of the adjacent rocky reef. 
There, he saw a school of Atlantic Bonito, Sarda sarda (Bloch, 1793) and immediately dove to place himself in a position suitable to target one of the fish swimming in front of him. As he descended to a depth of approximately 10 m, he felt his right foot being pushed and turned his head to see an approximately 2.1 m total length blue shark biting his flipper...

At the same time, he reported that at least 5 more similar-size blue sharks were close by, and he was able to chase the first specimen away simply by touching it with his left leg. The sharks disappeared, and the victim continued to fish in that same area with no further sightings.

And then the authors have the audacity to attribute the incident to Shark feeding as follows.

These offshore, mainly pelagic species do have coastal habits when in close proximity to oceanic islands, as happens to be the Azores. Moreover, they are attracted by tourist operators with feeding stimuli and may be already in the process of associating these stimuli with humans, namely, divers. Contrary to well-known coastal sites where this practice is common and local sharks seem to have residential habits while becoming conditioned by specific diving sites, Azorean targeted species roam vast areas and far away from the open water zones where they are mainly attracted.

In spite of the fact that some of the most dangerous species are seldom seen in the Azores, we believe that this practice of proximity and feeding stimuli to open water nonresident sharks is potentially dangerous and may well lead to more, possibly very serious, accidents in Azorean waters in the future.
In our opinion, close proximity of large predatory vertebrates to humans may well lead to accidents that sometimes may even be lethal. Apex predators, when accustomed to being enticed with food by humans, either for tourist purposes or from simple curiosity, are known to increase attacks.
Changes in shark behavior due to touristic activities such as “shark diving” were also documented by Hammerschlag et al.

We do think that care and common sense must surely prevail in these cases, while dealing with situations than can easily get out of control and lead to serious risks and overwhelming panic situations, which, if nothing else, will inevitably affect tourist activities as a whole.

Not so fast, says Juerg.

Here is his reply, unabridged.

Shark Attacks and Shark Diving 

To the Editor:
It is with great astonishment and concern that I read the letter to the editor by Barreiros et al in which the authors report an attack by a blue shark on a spear fisherman in the Azores.
Whereas the first part of the article accurately details the circumstances of the accident, Barreiros et al, in the second part,devise a far-fetched and illegitimate connection with shark div ing, in particular with shark feeding.

Shark-induced human injuries are among those inter actions between humans and wildlife that arguably receive the most media and public attention.
The general arguments of shark feeding critics are that 1) luring or feeding sharks over a period of time has the potential to condition them and that this conditioning could lead to sharks associating the presence of humans with food; and by insinuation, 2) make them aggressive toward humans. This in turn could lead to 3) an increase in accidents (eg bites)at shark feeding sites when no food is provided. Concern also exists that 4) regular shark feeding at ecotourism sites may increase the risk of shark attacks on ocean users in surrounding areas.

The first argument is beyond scientific controversy.
There is ample empiric evidence that elasmobranchs can be conditioned and are capable of learning to associate, for example, specific locations with food rewards. Recent studies looking at long-term trends in shark abundance at such sites have found numbers,at least of certain species, increasing over time,which further supports the quite unsurprising conclusion that sharks can learn to associate specific locations with food. It is this very capability shark diving operators capitalize on to set up profitable and sustainable businesses. No empiric evidence exists that would support the other 3arguments.

If shark feeding critics implicitly deduce them from the first argument,one has no other choice than to assume that what critics mean is not sharks “associating” humans with food, but “regarding” them as a food source. This could be viewed as semantics, but they are the very arguments on which authorities have based the implementation of legislation on shark feeding bans.
For example, in 2 highly publicized cases in 2002, Florida and Hawaii banned the practice of shark feeding while diving or snorkeling in their respective state waters.

Barreiros et al use a certainly tragic but single shark accident to fire an unsubstantiated broadside at the nascent shark diving industry in the Azores.
If shark feeding critics are serious about their assertion that sharks regard humans as food, then it is time to come up with fact sand figures. In doing so, the results of the respective studies will add to the objectification of the public discourse about feeding sharks as a tourism attraction. If shark feeding critics continue to refuse to address the respective questions by applying the scientific method, then their arguments remain what they currently are: tendentious and uninformed.

Juerg Brunnschweiler, PhD ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

And this is the riposte by the authors.

In Reply to Shark Attacks and Shark Diving

To the Editor:
 In his letter, Dr Juerg Brunnschweiler expresses both astonishment and concern regarding our paper when stating that it “devises a far-fetched and illegitimate connection with shark diving, in particular with shark feeding.”

We do not agree with Dr Brunnschweiler’s comments, because 1) our paper is not a “criticism” of either shark diving nor shark feeding but yet a description of an attack that might have had some kind of connection with the growing industry of shark diving in the Azores; 2) we clearly expressed a legitimate concern that, contrary to shark species with residential habits, the blue shark that caused this attack has pelagic habits and roams coastal areas of oceanic islands, and is the only species targeted by the Azores commercial shark diving companies; 3) the possibility—although rare—of interactions with humans and eventual attacks are real and may cause collateral damage to man upstream and downstream areas of maritime tourism in the Azores; and 4) panic and disproportionate fear, something that is worldwide associated with sharks, are critical issues and may lead to other types of accidents.

We understand and respect the diving operators’ will to capitalize on this specific niche of tourism. 
However, we think that it is our duty and even a responsible obligation to describe well documented events and discuss them within the scientific community. Throughout the world, many accidents presenting several degrees of gravity do occur. However, it is known that many remain unreported, either because they occur in remote areas or because there are many types of political pressures to avoid their knowledge precisely not to harm some types of touristic initiatives. That is one of the reasons why Dr Brunnschweiler’s comment when asking for “facts and figures” is so difficult to achieve.

And yet,in his last paragraph, DrBrunnschweiler expresses a very inelegant affirmation when he doubts our ability to use the “scientific method.”
We are certain that he knows perfectly well that we did use it, but numbers do not appear—and probably that will remain as it is for a long time simply because (and may we add, fortunately) shark attacks are rare.

Our arguments are precautionary and cautious.
Enticing predators and especially apex predators with food will lead to conflicts between humans and wildlife, and these happen all the time and in many places. This is not the first time that the description of an attack with a discussion on possible causes is criticized, and we thank Dr Brunnschweiler for doing precisely that. Discussing these aspects, however, may well lead to more caution and common sense when dealing with these types of animals. That will certainly improve human-wildlife relations, reduce conflicts, and certainly diminish high degrees of intolerance toward wildlife—and that will ultimately be of great help in protecting precisely these animals, including sharks.

In conclusion,we would like to add that, apparently, Dr Brunnschweiler expressed his legitimate concern for the industry of shark diving. We express our deep concern on behalf of the welfare of both humans and sharks.

Deep concern huh.

My take?

• First, there is ONE scenario whereby the authors would be correct.
  That is, if some fool had been feeding Blue Sharks on that reef 50 meters away from the adjacent fishing port, now converted into a leisure summer area. I've said it before: location matters, and establishing a Shark feeding dive right in front of a tourist area would be utterly reckless and negligent, and the authors would be absolutely correct in asserting likely causality and being deeply concerned.
  But I don't think that's the case as every single picture of Blue Sharks from the Azores has been clearly taken in open ocean.

And if so, the assertion by the authors that they did use the scientific method is just plain ludicrous. Yes n=1 really does generally not allow for any deep insights, and Shark strikes are rare and thus elude science - and in fact, had they attributed the strike to the alignment of Mars and Jupiter, their finding would have had the exact same degree of veracity!

With that in mind, it would have been perfectly OK had they simply reported the incident - but once they started to speculate about the likely cause, then the scientific method would have mandated to examine all the possible scenarios and not simply jump to conclusions and blast what is obviously their pet hate, and this without a single shred of evidence.

So there.

• Blue Sharks are big, bold and potentially dangerous.
  Yes they do not figure prominently in the Shark attack statistics - but that is both a figment of those statistics and also due to the fact that they are epipelagic and that there are usually not a lot of people perambulating in the open ocean. But as those gruesome shipwreck tales from WWII amply illustrate, large epipelagic Sharks will certainly investigate and eat people and thus, the surprise of the authors that a Blue Shark would approach, investigate and nip their pal is rather naive.


• Incidentally, that's also not how a conditioned Shark would approach a person.
  As anybody that dives with fed Sharks can attest, they don't sneak in and then take a nip - that's typical of wild Sharks. Sharks that expect to be fed approach openly from the front and linger waiting for a handout.

• But what were those half-dozen Sharks doing there in the first place?
  As the authors assert, the species is known to frequent coastal areas of oceanic islands so that's hardly surprising. In this case, it appears plausible that they may have been following their prey = those Atlantic Bonito, an equally epipelagic species that may in turn have been coming to the coast to feed.

• Or maybe not.
  Maybe the cause for the presence of those Sharks was that the reef is frequently being used by spear fishermen. Or maybe it was the proximity to that fishing port. 
  Because let us never forget who feeds and conditions the Sharks: fishermen! 
  Spear fishermen produce fish blood and vibrations, attract Sharks and are frequently victims of Shark strikes. Fishermen feed Sharks with millions upon millions of baited hooks, clean their catch and discard bycatch, and specifically those Blues have been following fishing boats into port since time immemorial.  
  If there has to be talk of conditioning, that it is THAT the authors should have been focusing on, not a few people baiting with tiny scraps!

• And what about the assertions that apex predators, when accustomed to being enticed with food by humans, either for tourist purposes or from simple curiosity, are known to increase attacks and that enticing predators and especially apex predators with food will lead to conflicts between humans and wildlife, and these happen all the time and in many places.
  
  Welcome to the fucking old tired "don't feed the Bear" argument!
  Yes "they" happen - but so far, when it comes to those big Sharks, that is simply not the case! Whereas accidental bites on feeders do happen, strikes let alone fatal ones on participating tourists are exceedingly rare, and any correlation (let alone causality) between Shark feeding and Shark strikes on the public at large is completely speculative and not at all supported by the evidence.
  
  In fact, and yes I'm repeating myself, people who feed large Sharks are acutely aware that it is dangerous and are exerting tremendous caution and common sense - and as a consequence, the danger of those activities is significantly smaller than interactions with other marine life (including smaller Sharks) that are being viewed as more harmless; and it is orders of magnitude safer than "normal" diving! 


• In fact, if anybody had to be reprimanded, then it would have been the victim, for being totally reckless: for potentially attracting Sharks to a tourist area, for spearfishing at dusk when predators are known to feed and above all, for not immediately leaving the water but instead continuing to spear fish after having been nipped!


• And finally.
  That will certainly improve human-wildlife relations, reduce conflicts, and certainly diminish high degrees of intolerance toward wildlife—and that will ultimately be of great help in protecting precisely these animals, including sharks.
  
  What a load of sanctimonious horse shit!
  Fishermen target Sharks for money - not because they hate them for biting people! That argument is frankly so stupid to be embarrassing!
  Want to save those Blues? Take a boat to Vigo and tell those fishermen to stop targeting the Azorean Blue Shark nurseries - or at least stop wasting people's time and patience with BS, and work on making a stock assessment and on implementing a management plan for sustainable Blue Shark fishing in the Azores!
  That's how real scientists contribute to Shark conservation!


• And one very last remark: how the fuck did this manage to get a pass by the peer review?

Long story short?

It's exactly like Juerg states: this is not science but total bullshit, nothing more than a completely unsubstantiated broadside against the nascent Shark feeding industry in the Azores, and this clearly not based on the evidence but driven by one's uninformed prejudices.

And yes I can leave it at that.

Not impressed and once again, rather pissed off!

Neil - fabulous Stuff!

Quick-quick, just received.
Once again, I am impressed!

Enjoy!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Educational Shark Research Goes Virtual

Miami, FL – January 4, 2011 –

Experiencing the excitement and challenges of shark research is now only a click away, thanks to the R.J. Dunlap Marine Conservation Program at the University of Miami (RJD).
Interaction with the vibrant, multi-media interface provides students and marine enthusiasts with a hands-on shark conservation education from the comfort of their home or classroom.

Set atop a sea of turquoise waters and teeming tropical reefs, five segments featuring video, photo, and text create a sequential workflow to learn and experience what goes into the scientific research to protect shark populations. Although much of the content is catered toward a high-school level and above, the interactivity with photo and video can reach children as young as elementary school.

Nearly six months in the making, the Virtual Expedition is the newest addition to an ever expanding volume of resources in the online RJD “classroom.”
Many schools around the country already piously follow the GoogleEarth tracks of RJD’s satellite tagged Bull, Tiger and Hammerhead sharks. An interdisciplinary high-school curriculum available for download also offers nearly an entire semester of Marine Conservation education. The RJD website is fast becoming the premiere hub for marine conservation education in the world.

To collect your boarding pass for this action-packed adventure, visit http://rjd.miami.edu/learning-tools/virtual-expeditions/.

The R.J. Dunlap Marine Conservation Program is a joint program of the Rosenstiel School of Marine & Atmospheric Science and the Leonard and Jayne Abess Center for Ecosystem Science and Policy at the University of Miami.
The Rosenstiel School offers one of the largest, most comprehensive marine and atmospheric programs in the nation. Robust academics and in-depth scientific investigation are hallmarks of the School’s programs.
The Abess Center creates innovative interdisciplinary initiatives that bridge the gap between hard science and environmental policy.

Neil Hammerschlag, Ph.D.
Research Assistant Professor,

Rosenstiel School of Marine & Atmospheric Science (RSMAS) & Leonard & Jayne Abess Center for Ecosystem Science & Policy

Director, RJ Dunlap Marine Conservation Program

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!
 

Left to die

Got the following two e-mail messages today.

I am sad to report that on Tuesday evening a pregnant Bull Shark was killed in the keys from beach shark fishing activities.
The fishermen were using two 16/0 "J" hooks to catch the animal. The animal was caught in the gills with the J hook and left to die on the beach. As you can see from the pictures, there were 12 pups ready to be born (6 male, 6 female). Very sad and wasteful.
This is a nightly occurrence!


Sadly we have a very similar report from Delray Beach today.
A pregnant Great Hammerhead washed up on shore in Delray a little before 2pm.

The Shark was hooked in the mouth with a large J Hook.
I don't know the specifics about the hook, but we have the hook and the line that was attached. A friend happened to be at the beach when this happened and called me. She said that the shark looked pregnant. Somebody asked me to bring a knife so that we could try to save the pups if they were still alive. There were 35 pups -- 21 male and 14 female -- all fully developed and ready to be born.

Unfortunately they were all dead already.

The measurements of the mother were 13 feet total length; 10 feet 4.5 inches fork length and 9 feet 8 inches pre-caudal.
This is another example of why female Sharks need to be protected in Florida, especially in Spring and Summer when the females come close to shore to give birth.
Sorry to have to share this sad news.

Are you as angry as me?

This may surprise you but I'm actually an avid game fisherman.
Being a Shark conservationist, I obviously don't target Sharks - but even as a "sportsman", or whatever, I personally believe that Shark fishing really sucks: they are way too easy to attract and catch, with the exception of Makos they put up a very poor fight, many end up being gut hooked and perish even when released - with land based fishing for Sharks being even worse since the big ones need to be completely subdued in order to be landed, meaning that many are likely to die of exhaustion.

But that's just my personal opinion which is certainly not shared by many game fishermen.
I must also acknowledge that there is a movement from within aimed at reforming Shark fishing by promoting less invasive methods like e.g. catch & release and circle hooks.
Pragmatically speaking, it's unfortunately the only way forward, at least in the short term - but I still don't like it and have thus refrained from promoting any Shark fishing and specifically, the new format of Shark tournaments, forward looking as they may be. Thing is, I'm still not convinced that they are not merely the brain child of some clever businessmen who want to establish, market and exploit a new business niche by pandering to the eco movement, as opposed to the genuine desire to reform the existing kill tournaments.
I would however be convinced if the net result would be a) existing kill tournaments being reformed, b) no new Shark fishing tournaments being established and c) less people game fishing for Sharks. Anybody taking bets?
Yes I'm digressing and as always, we will see!

But wherever you're coming from - this cannot be tolerated anymore!
This has catapulted the reputation of land based Shark fishing back to the stone age and confirmed all of the anti-fishing stereotypes.
If those people ever want to rid themselves of the stigma of being nothing more than primitive murderous yahoos, their associations will have to do much, much better. Let us see the immediate and unequivocal public condemnation of these shameful events; let us see them issue regulations aimed at ensuring that despicable shit like this will never happen again, coupled with sanctions against any transgressors.

As to the targeting of pregnant Sharks - how can anybody possibly justify that?
Do I really need to spell out the ethical implications and the value of mature breeding females for endangered stocks?

And yet, by its very own regulations, the IGFA still promotes this abomination.
All-tackle record Sharks will always be pregnant females and as long as those shameful records are being certified, game fishermen will continue to specifically target those animals. Can you imagine the reaction of the public and even, the hunting community if similar "feats" had been perpetrated by hunters?

All very sad, really.
My only hope is that those 49 dead Sharks will serve as ambassadors, like other dead Sharks have done in the past: for credible reform among the fishermen and their associations and failing that, for better legislation aiming at protecting those valuable animals when they are most vulnerable.

PS: also posted by Neil Hammerschlag here - read the shocking testimony of a beach cleaner in the comments section and yes, Shark fishing is illegal in Delray Beach.

Sun Sentinel article here.

PS2: great blog post by Mary here.

PS3 toothy comments on SDI's new blog!

2011: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly - Part One!

Shark pic of the Year!

So there.
2011 is slowly petering out, the shop is closed so that the staff can enjoy a well deserved rest and I’ve got some spare time on my hand – so brace yourselves for a lengthy recap of 2011!
You have been warned!

This time, it’s not gonna be about BAD.
Thanks to our clients that have once again visited us in record numbers, we did very well indeed – and so did Shark Reef where biodiversity continues to increase and where once again, we recorded a record number of Bulls - and it ain’t over yet: from what we can already see now, we will very likely witness a further increase in 2012!
As of September 1st, we are also completely carbon neutral after having sponsored the planting of 330,000 mangroves, very likely a world first – and again, this is just an intermediate step as we’re currently planting more in order to offset the carbon footprint of our clients!
Finally, we’ve again met some wonderful new people, many of which researchers, and are involved in several ground-breaking projects that will hopefully come to fruition next year.
Keep watching this space!

But as I said, this post is not about us.
2011 has been an exceptional year for global Shark conservation and outreach. It has also seen the continuation of the usual shenanigans.

And without further ado – 2011 as seen by DaShark!

The Good

This is the easy part.

But lemme first tell you where I’m coming from here.
The way I see it, the only metrics for effective Shark conservation is that less Sharks are being killed, full stop. The rest is just fluff and we shall talk about it later.

Having now been involved in Shark conservation for close to a decade and having seen the varying success of various approaches, I remain firmly of the opinion that regardless of the anger at seeing the all-pervasive global slaughter of Sharks, the only winning strategy when advocating Shark conservation is to remain strictly fact-based, pragmatic and willing to compromise.
Successful conservation is always the result of negotiations where we are asking others to enact pro-Shark legislation - and whereas sometimes popular support (and thus petitions) may help, the arguments must never the less be rock solid. Never forget that legislation can as easily be repealed – and it will if the arguments supporting it are proven to have been fraudulent!

By the same token and very much like the science it is based upon, Shark conservation remains always in flux and is evolving rapidly based on the latest science but also on the success (and the failings) of the latest conservation initiatives.
As an example, legislation has evolved massively in 2011 as the forces of evil have shown considerable cunning in exploiting loopholes and otherwise circumventing the law, and as it has become painfully evident that the best legislation will always remain completely toothless unless it gets adequately enforced. The latter requires considerable resources for capacity building, monitoring and prosecution that must be an integral component of any such initiative in developing countries.

And one last thought.
As the global recession is far from over, 2011 has seen a further shrinking of the resources available to research and conservation. With that in mind and because the Shark fin industry is supply limited, we need to prioritize our resources and invest them where the Sharks are being killed - and yes, like an old broken record, I'm repeating myself - and will continue to do so, over and over again!

Anyway, here is the list.

• Most impressive Shark Conservation Org: The Pew Environment Group's Global Shark Campaign.
  
  I must confess that for once, I’m quite at a loss of positive attributes here. I was going to painstakingly try and enumerate the many achievements but thankfully, they have done so themselves. Far from the huge bureaucratic overhead of the established NGOs, this is but a tiny group: but its members are smart, dedicated and extremely hard working individuals who know how get the job done and who like in the real world, operate under a strict regime of deliverables, deadlines and accountability. And no, they don't achieve their success by throwing money at the problems as some of their pathetic detractors claim, but by being solution-oriented, strictly science-based, pragmatic and diplomatic - and thus widely accepted as valuable expert interlocutors by the powers that be.
  The strategy has been to concentrate on the supply side by successfully advocating changes in fisheries policies at national, regional and global levels.
  This is how you do it – which of course begs the question, what have all the other, bigger, more established and more vocal orgs been doing all these years!
  


• Most improved Shark Conservation Org: Shark Savers
  
  Shark Savers continues to evolve and I like where it is going, the more as I’m good friends with several of the people involved, some of which for a very long time indeed. 2011 has seen a long overdue consolidation at the top where the org is now being steered by intelligent, pragmatic and solution-oriented individuals, resulting in solid Shark conservation successes. Case in point: this year's Florida Shark protection measures where they have played a preeminent role, the stellar project Manta Ray of Hope, see below, and much along the lines of think global act local, this recent victory in the Midwest (bravo Penny!).
  


• Most promising new marine Conservation Org: One World One Ocean
  
  This is a brand new undertaking and there is thus no track record except for a stellar PSA.
  But I like the people, the pragmatic message and the mission and look forward to many successes in the years to come. The principal difference to other media-based initiatives: no personal self promotion but above all, a long term track record of getting the message across – meaning distribution distribution distribution!


• Most impressive individual Shark Advocate: Stefanie Brendl
  
  The victim of an appalling and by no means resolved witch hunt in Hawaii (check on the oldest posts), Stefanie has not given up but instead, completely re-invented herself and become one of the most respected global Shark advocates in the process. Following their ground breaking Shark fin ban in Hawaii, she and Senator Clayton Hee have successfully expanded the concept to several US territories and states. Their approach has been quiet, rational, pragmatic and science-based diplomacy instead of activist clamoring. Passionate, goal-oriented and doggedly determined, Stefanie gets the job done whilst operating in the background and leaving the limelight to others – deservedly and alas, very much not so, see Part Two.
  So here’s to Stefanie, heroine of Sharks!


• Most impressive Shark Conservation Achievement: Bahamas Shark Sanctuary
  
  Who would have thought!
  Having previously talked to literally scores of insiders about the need to protect the Sharks there, everybody was telling me that getting meaningful conservation enacted in the Bahamas was strictly mission impossible – and then Pew and the BNT (and yes: many others did help) managed to pull it off without any notable hiccups in a matter of mere months! This is a massive achievement and a testament to the quality and effectiveness of the approach by Pew and it cannot be applauded enough!


• Best new Elasmobranch Conservation Initiative: Manta Ray of Hope
  
  Although not directly an initiative by Shark Savers (or is it?), it is very much associated with them. Once again, kudos for a brilliant, important and timely project!


• Best Shark Conservation Resources: Reports by Pew
  
  Once the clear niche of Oceana of which I used to be a fan but where I am increasingly becoming critical, the reports authored by Pew are a meticulously researched treasure trove of hard facts, always up-to date science and pragmatic solutions – the latter very much setting them apart from the widespread whining and lamenting! A must-read for anybody wanting to stay abreast of modern, solution-oriented Shark conservation!


• Best Outreach in Shark Research: Neil Hammerschlag and the RJ Dunlap Marine Conservation Program
  
  This is how you do it.
  This is simply brilliant outreach via blog, Facebook, video and undoubtedly many more outlets, showing that Shark research can be fascinating, fun, hip and young. I remain concerned by those SPOT tags and only time will tell whether the data will somehow justify the invasive methods – but all-in-all, I really do like the people and the energy and am impressed by the passion and also by the willingness to tackle some of the more controversial aspects of Shark research.
  Well done!


• Best Shark Conservation print Media: Juliet Eilperin
  
  Juliet’s contribution to catapulting Shark conservation into the mainstream media has been invaluable. Extremely well informed and (frustratingly) balanced, she continues to crank out stellar pro-Shark pieces that directly counteract the appalling hype by the tabloids.
  


• Best Shark Conservation television programs: CNN
  
  Bravo and thank you CNN for having embraced the cause of Shark conservation with frequent, balanced and always interesting programming!


• Best Nature Programming: BBC
  
  Who else – the measure of all documentary work, the one and only, the best of the best, forever emulated and forever unrivaled and unmatched!
  Need I elaborate? I sure hope not!


• Best Shark Conservation Movie: Sanctuary: The Last Stand for Sharks
  
  So far, it appears that it has only been shown to select audiences in the Bahamas. Funded by Pew and (I believe) produced by Shawn, it combines great visuals with strict scientific data. I’ve seen it at DEMA and it is my hope that there will be a less Bahamas-centric director’s cut for viewing by a larger audience.
  Great job Shawn, I'm actually quite impressed!


• Best Shark Picture: this one, featured at the top!
  


• Best Shark Dance: David Shiffman
  
  Nobody and i mean Nobody! comes even close to David’s beautifully choreographed species-specific routines combining his dazzling footwork with exquisite artistic expression, period! Here’s to the Fred Astaire of Shark conservation - and frugal fashionista to boot!
  


• Most promising Shark Conservation Newcomers, ex aequo: Madi Pip Stewart, Christine Shepard, David Diley
  
  The common denominator: passion and a lot of talent.
  But as always, this is only the beginning. Having witnessed how other promising talents have quickly succumbed to the temptations of fame and money, or just simply lost interest, only time will tell whether these are mere blips or whether we are witnessing the start of careers that could be remarkable indeed.
  So far so great!
  


• Best Shark News Website: Shark Year Magazine
  
  It may well be an old hat but having only discovered it recently, it's new to me. Shark Year Magazine impresses by being exhaustive in covering all aspects of Shark news from fishing to strikes to the latest science.


• Best Shark Info Website: Elasmodiver
  
  Andy Murch’s Shark website is truly a treasure trove of information, often interspersed with personal and intelligent observations by the author who proves to be a true Shark expert – and this for once in a positive sense!


• Best Shark Blog: Underwater Thrills
  
  How could it be any different!
  His is the other watchdog blog and like this scribe, Patric does not shun to dabble in controversy of which there is plenty – especially if you got no patience for bullshit! The difference being, where I regularly get outraged and start firing broadsides, he retains his composure and dissects sarcastically, something which is both way more effective and also, way nastier! Whereas we sometimes disagree vehemently, we are united by the fact that we get called names by very much the same people, something I carry as a badge of honor – as I suspect does he!
  


• Best Marine Science Blog: Southern Fried Science
  
  In all honesty, this is likely the last year where I would assign the honors to them. I sense that the boyz are growing up and being kept increasingly busy pursuing their professional careers. Blogging is excruciatingly time consuming and requires staying on the ball, something very few can afford once they enter the daily treadmill. But for 2011, SFS has continued to be my very favorite marine blog, this largely to the epic posts mentioned below.


• Best Blog Posts on Shark-related Issue: WhySharksMatter on the Junior Controversy.
  
  I must say, David’s two posts here and here, and especially, the ensuing epic threads and moderation by both David and Andrew have been nothing short of stellar. This is a brilliant exercise in investigative journalism shining a cold spotlight on the Californian GW research scene - more in Part Two.


• Best Shark Facebook Pages, ex aequo: Shark Defenders and Shark Savers
  
  There is now a legion of Shark conservation Facebook pages and making a choice has been difficult. My personal criterion: whether or not they allow the Shark whacks to post their ramblings – and both these pages do thankfully not but instead, they are regularly updated and feature interesting news and causes worth pursuing.


• Most deserved Accolades: Doc becoming a featured Nat Geo Explorer
  
  Whereas it is quite impossible to overstate Doc’s contribution to Shark research and Shark conservation, I believe that his true legacy will be that he has found the time to educate and mentor a whole new generation of brilliant and equally passionate Shark researchers who are truly among the crème de la crème in their field.
  

So, have I already managed to piss somebody off like usual?
Wait til you see Part Two! :)