Guadalupe?

Best picture, ever, from the Fiji Shark Dive - you just must click on it!

I truly am a sucker for punishment!

Yes, I’m posting one about Guadalupe - again!
And before you start screaming that I’m meddling, got no clue and should just shut the f up and mind my goddamn business and the like, lemme answer the question in this article: Shark diving in Guadalupe is the business of a) the Mexican government as the owner of the resource, b) the Shark diving operators drawing their sustenance from that site and, yes, c) every single Shark diving operator around the planet!
And that includes me!

To make the obvious example, Jimmy’s accident did reverberate across the entire industry and I can only commend him for having handled it as well as humanly possible, mainly by observing strict silence in public and talking only with the directly affected persons and authorities - and still, the backlash has been truly astounding.
Here in Fiji, apart from having had to face a barrage of questions, that accident prompted us to try and learn from the little that eventually transpired, re-visit our procedures and institute a regimen that is one of the strictest and most intransigent anywhere - especially for image hunters! Others alas seem to have learned nothing whatsoever - and I’m certainly gonna leave it at that.
For now!

Back to Guadalupe.
The X-Ray Mag article is basically a re-hash of this piece by Pete Thomas plus, on the side, a great interview with Wolfgang in his endearing incarnation as Shark-, and free diving nutter. He's being his usual wise man and I fully concur with his assessment: GW differ from other species in being ambush hunters (of mammals); and diving with them outside of cages is not for everyone.
Which begs the question, who, exactly, does qualify?

So for once, instead of clamoring about ethics, this or that technique, operators and egos, let’s try and look at this from a pure business perspective.

This is how it works.
New Shark diving sites start up by being discovered by a few individual adventurous divers or spearos, often acting upon the information of local fishermen. Correct me if I’m wrong, but in the case of Lupe, that would have been the San Diego Diving Locker gang, i.e. Howard, Marty, Jeremiah & al.

Later on, somebody -in this case, Lawrence Groth- will then try to set up a more organized venture, initially for his friends but eventually, for a few selected clients.
At this stage, the site is still something of a secret that is handed around among insiders and attracts the crème de la crème of the image hunters that start publishing a first batch of totally unique and spectacular images in the media.

This media exposure quickly attracts the first customers proper, generally speaking, other professionals plus the more adventurous elite amateurs.
If the site has not been secured by the original commercial pioneer, and it rarely is, other operators recognize the commercial potential and start moving in. This never happens organically and peacefully and this is why all multi-user Shark dives are marred by vicious infighting among the operators.
Correct so far?

As the number of operators expands, so does the customer base.
This expansion is characterized by a marked shift in demographics. In essence, the top people who have published the first images move on to new discoveries, the elite amateurs become scarcer whilst the bulk of the client base consists of generally less experienced and also, less ambitious Joe divers.

In Fiji, now a mature market, our client base can be characterized as follows.

5% are bona fide professionals and by that I mean people who derive 100% of their income from diving and/or publishing images. That means that we do not accept the notion that there’s such a thing as a semi-professional UW photographer and the like, exactly as we do not accept semi-professional lawyers or semi-professional surgeons - and neither should you!
In general terms, 90% of these people are a delight to work with. They are extremely experienced, know the industry inside out and above all, have learned that it is very much in their own interest to respect and to listen to the local experts. The others are, well, very different and will leave Fiji very disappointed indeed.
When it comes to these clients, we follow industry standard and allow for quite a bit of leeway. Always within what we consider our absolute limits, we will strive to let them capture spectacular images, like the one above by Douglas, by organizing special dives and positioning them in selected radical spots.

25% are elite amateurs, for lack of a better word: the Wetpixel gang.
I used to be one of them, albeit pre-digital, and thus can very well relate to their ambitions: they are generally highly passionate all the way to being fanatic, wealthier, better traveled, quite experienced and mostly excellent divers, tote expensive hi-end equipment and are brilliant photographers and videographers, and want to emulate the work they see published by the professionals.
They are also quite cumbersome to service as they are quite reckless all the way to being outright adrenaline junkies, request special treatment for their gear and special positioning in relation to the animals, often complain about not having been able to capture the ideal shot and generally try to convey the sense of being specially valuable and important whilst at the same time asking for special discounts.

Once again, approx 60% of them are a delight to work with .
That being the magical word: if they give us the respect and are willing to undergo a process of gradual crescendo, we will be happy to go the extra mile and they will end up capturing some truly fabulous images.
Case in point: Sasha who has been with us many times, totally listens to our advice, is increasingly well acquainted with the routine, knows the animals and is thus being allowed to get ever closer to the action – and gets to capture simply stunning images in the process!

Alas, the other 40% are, well, what they are.
They are never satisfied, are unpleasantly vociferous, bully the other divers, always want to push the envelope, know it all better and are generally a nightmare to handle.
Check out the last points in this recent post and you’ll understand that we’re simply not interested in their business.

Leaves 70% of our clients that are just ordinary Joe divers.
These are people who come to Fiji to just experience the Shark dive and explore our reefs and who are generally delighted by what we got to offer. Apart from being the bulk of our business, they are the easiest to service as they generally follow instructions, have no overbearing asocial ego and are totally happy to just observe and enjoy something which to them is new, safe, unique and exhilarating – and on top of that, they are happy to pay full price!

Now if you do the math, here’s what you come up with.
4.5% + 15% + 70% = 89.5% of our clients are a delight and 10.5% are just assholes - there, I said it!
Is Guadalupe really radically different?

And if it is not – what’s the fuss all about?
Ever since Rodney Fox pioneered diving with Great Whites, cages have been the 100% safe way to go - be it at the surface, submerged, cinema or self propelled, they are equally good! Rodney the pioneer has been using them successfully for the past 30+ years. Lawrence the pioneer is doing so successfully in Guadalupe.
So, why are you trying to fix something that is not broken?

Whatever the self serving rhetoric: taking clients outside of the cage adds an additional dimension of risk, period.
What is the benefit of doing so, the more as everybody seems to agree that if there should ever be a fatal accident, the Mexicans will sweep in and close down the site – for everybody, perpetrators and bystanders alike?
Are you maybe letting the inmates run the asylum?

If my premises are in any way correct, 90-odd percent of your clients are perfectly happy with the current product, the more as the pros are being accorded special privileges anyway. And keeping in mind that the bulk of your clients are inevitably going to be ever more Joe divers: should your procedures not become gradually more conservative rather than less so?

Leaves a measly 10% of volume who in all likelihood do not even represent 10% of cash flow!
They are the ones who are clamoring for ever more radical encounters, and this in a place where the animals are being brought to within a mere inches from their lenses and visibility is stellar anyway. Is it really credible that upping the ante would lead to better images - or is this just, as I believe, nothing more than the insatiable quest for ever more bravado and adrenaline?
And: how many of those people would you feel comfy in taking outside of the cage anyway?

Guys, will all due respect – and I got plenty of it!
The question really boils down to this: are you really willing to risk everything in order to satisfy less than 10% of your client base?
Amos can just move on – can you?
Ever heard of risk/reward?

I believe the choice is simple.

You can continue doing what you are doing now.
You can shut up and let the most aggressive and reckless among you run the show whilst you’re busy pursuing your pathetic feuds – and incidentally, I was saddened to see that even the stalwart Patric appears disheartened and is considering to bow to those stupid ideas. Sorry to see!
Even assuming that nothing terrible will happen: where will that leave the industry in, say, 2 years when the adrenaline junkies will again ask for more more more and somebody will be tempted to up the ante again? And in 2 years after that?
Is that in any way sustainable?

Or, you can finally close ranks and put an end to the shenanigans by presenting a unified front vis-à-vis the perpetrators and the Mexican authorities – and yes, that requires that you bury the hatchet, even if only temporarily and for this one cause only, talk to each other and do something for the common good!
And no, it’s not only Club Cantamar and Amos – I’m in the same industry as you and know it is not!

Once again, it’s all about the math.
Guadalupe is world renown for being the premier site in the world for seeing Great Whites in stellar visibility. And yet, in the big scheme of things, total capacity is comparatively tiny, probably not even 2,000 clients per season.
How about trying to expand your client base instead of bowing to the demands of a clamoring minority of less than 200 customers. How about starting to look beyond the US and Europe and their broken economies and aggressively market in Asia where I promise you, there are a lot of eager, increasingly wealthy and on top of that, extremely pleasant clients.
Hell, incredibile dictu – you could even join ranks and do a common marketing push for Lupe as a destination! Think Caymans!
Yeah I know I know, and pigs…

Just my two cents.
Yes I’m an outsider - but as your industry peer and precisely because I am an outsider and not emotionally invested, it breaks my heart to see what a great unique site you have and how you’re letting it go to shit by just sitting there and doing nothing,

Wanna think about it?
And by all means: always feel free to write me the usual nasty messages!

Shark Diver - the Movie

From Luke Tipple’s Producer’s notes.

I'd never thought to make a film like this.
For so long I've been stuck in the documentary and reality TV mind-set that the entire realm of dramatic programming was a completely foreign concept. Added to that, I've never thought of myself as an actor!

Well, he has done it and I must say that I really, really liked the result!
A long time ago, I used to run dive expeditions to remote locations and more recently, I spent 13 months on a continuous dive cruise across Micronesia and Melanesia. Being stuck on a boat like that was really like being in a prison, with the added risk of drowning as we used to quip. I can thus totally relate to Luke’s portrayal of the monotonous job of a dive guide taking clients Shark diving, the sense of frustration and loneliness that goes with it and the desire to break out and for once do something private, personally rewarding and useful – as the real Luke has done with this movie pilot!

Thing is, I really like the guy.
We’ve actually never met but we’ve interacted a lot in connection with the roll-out of the Shark Free Marinas Initiative, and I’ve found him to be highly professional and committed, and totally dependable – actually very much not like your usual diving jock, let alone your quintessential ozzie macho!
Must be the karmic influence of Patric’s chai coffee!

Case in point, this production.
From a stellar website to the great plot and the unusual filming technique, and yes, the acting, this is a testimony to the talent but above all, to the outright tenacity of the Tipple clan who have delivered a great product against all the odds of having had to go the fully independent and fully self funded route. Kudos to them and kudos to the sponsors and people like Richard and Scott Cassell who believed in the project and added their energy and time pro bono.

As to future episodes of what is meant to be a 6-part series, I’m keeping my fingers crossed.
Considering the continued economic slump, it’s not gonna be easy finding the funding – but then again, this really is top notch material!
Having asked Luke about where he stands, here’s what he wrote back.

If there's a message to be told it's that there's more to the ocean and sharks than the depths and jaws.
There's real people who daily make a bargain with themselves and the sea that today I dive with you and acccept that that's where I may stay. It's also about how we represent our idols and our fears. The constant negativity towards sharks as portrayed by the typical shark porn centric show is simply juvenile masturbation. It comes from no knowledge or respect for how the job is done and ends in an unsatisfying and lackluster climax.

What do I want from this?
The means to make the next episode. Whether from private or corporate investment I have story to be told and it will be said. As far as a conservation message there's enough beaters knocking on that door.
I just want to make a predator beautiful.

Lean back, relax and enjoy Mark and Luke’s film.
Oh and if you feel so inclined - you can help them as well!

Fiji - Humpback Volunteers?

Just got this from Helen.
We actually see a lot more Humpbacks in Beqa Channel than ever before and with that in mind, collecting baseline data is timely indeed.

Humpback whale research volunteers needed

Fiji Fisheries Department, WWF, Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society and USP are looking for volunteers to assist in humpback whale research in Makogai and Levuka from August 27th to September 18th.
Research will primarily be land-based yet boat surveys to record whale song, collect whale fluke images, confirm species identification and monitor behaviour will also be undertaken. Volunteers must be willing to work long hours and learn new research skills.

A training and awareness workshop will be run in preparation for the surveys from August 18th and 19th.
All are welcome.

For more information, please contact: Saras Sharma (saras.sharma0205@gmail.com), Cara Miller (cara.miller@wdcs.org) or Penina Solomona (psolomona@wwfpacific.org.fj).

BAD on Arte!

Denis and his RED One - from this post by Sasha.

Just got a message from Martin Blanchard.

BAD will be featured on Arte this Monday, Aug 16 at 19:50.
Titled Fidji, parfums d'îles this is an episode of Les nouveaux Paradis, a series by What's up Productions that focuses on ecotourism ventures around the globe. You can watch the episode directly, or you can watch it later online on Arte+7 where all shows are being showcased for 7 days after airing.
Arte is one of Europe's most prestigious TV networks and we are really very proud to add this feather in our cap.

This has been a rather challenging shoot.
Martin and sound guru Laurent came to Fiji in the middle of the Lagoon case and working around the temporary chaos did require some, hmmm, flexibility. Plus, the weather was iffy, the viz challenging (see the pic!) and the animals spooky. Luckily, UW cameraman Denis is a BAD veteran, good friend and consummate professional and eventually managed to get the stuff he required - after much frustration and even more perseverance!

I haven't seen anything yet so me too, I'm waiting with bated breath!
Enjoy - I hope!

Here's to the Aquarium!

And here's to Lori, Mike, Milo and Leni!

This is now the third Shark Free Marina in Tonga.
Forget the old and helplessly dated Mermaid - the Aquarium is clearly the place to be in Vava'u, and not only if you are a yachtie! The brainchild of Lisa and Ben who have moved on, it was taken over by Lori and Mike two years ago and is now bigger, hipper and more popular - and still as friendly as before!

Apart from being a favorite hang out of the decent locals, his remains the obligated port of call of every yachtie visiting the Port of Refuge.
There are moorings for hire, free wi-fi, excellent and cheap food and by far the very best coffee (!) - but above all, this is the place where everybody is happy to help you navigate the treacherous waters of getting things done in a place where time begins but then gets caught in a gelatinous warp of the spacetime continuum called Tonga Time. Don't ask, that's just the way it is, probably a third consequence of the Theory of Relativity!

But I'm digressing as usual.
Well done - and yes, still counting!

David on Shark Conservation

Not much going on in Sharksville.

Luckily, David aka WhySharksMatter has stepped in and once again written a brilliant post, this time about Shark conservation.
I actually agree with 99% of what he says - which is highly unusual! :)

But: some of those NGOs...

Managing Shark Stocks - a new Commission?

Shark stocks continue to be on the decline.

This is obviously just a part of the larger picture.
Despite of a plethora of orgs that try to monitor and manage Fish stocks, it appears that those efforts have so far fallen well short of attaining the aim of achieving the sustainable management of fisheries and the protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems.

This is where this new paper fits in.
It advocates the creation of a new international commission for the conservation and management of Sharks that would be comparable to the IWC but at the same time, avoid the various shortcomings of that organization.

Hmmm...
Whereas I instinctively cringe at the thought of yet another layer of bureaucracy, it is however evident that the problem is global and requires a coordinated global approach - however with ample scope for regional solutions that reflect the fact that there are huge differences between species, habitats and geographical locations.
Food for thought.

Abstract

The current rate of shark global exploitation and mortality is arguably so high under current management regimes that unless a renewed initiative is undertaken some species of shark will become effectively extinct.

Current efforts to sustainably manage shark mortality are driven primarily by domestic laws in a few countries, big international non-governmental organizations (BINGOs) promoting environmental laws in the countries or regions where they exist, a handful of regional fisheries management organizations (e.g., IATTC and ICCAT), and inter-governmental organizations such as CITES.

The absence of enforcement capability is often argued as the critical component in the failure to protect sharks from overexploitation.
The remedy advanced here goes far beyond the need for stepped up enforcement, and calls for the creation of an entirely new international management regime, the International Commission for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (ICCMS). Such an agency could learn from the experiences of management bodies tasked with conservation of species biologically similar to sharks, such as the International Whaling Commission (IWC), to improve its efficacy. Critics have identified many organizational flaws that reduced the IWC’s effectiveness during its earliest years. Some of those flaws are examined here and remedies are suggested that an ICCMS could use to create a more effective management regime. The life histories of elasmobranches and large whales are compared to illustrate their similarities as a biological foundation for the selection of the IWC as a model.

5. Conclusions and discussion

Now is the time to establish an effective international body dedicated to sustainably manage and conserve shark species.
Many shark populations continue to decline and the status of others is unknown, often because of the absence of basic demographic information. As noted, the category of shark is a subset of the larger group of elasmobranches. This document focuses upon sharks because they are generally wider ranging, and of greater public appeal. Nevertheless, an organization such as described in this paper would inevitably consider all elasmobranchs.

Amongst the differences between shark and cetacean species is that the former are a significant component of incidental catch in longline and trawl fisheries.
Cetaceans occasionally become entangled in fishing gear, but the level of incidental catch for most species is relatively low compared to sharks. Unlike sharks, cetacean interactions with fishing gear are more frequently the result of specific targeting by fishers than by incidental bycatch. Consequently, fishers targeting cetaceans have more control over which species are landed.

The survival of any species ultimately rests on the health of its supporting populations.
Monitoring the status of many marine species often requires observed individuals to act as a proxy for the rest of the populations hidden beneath the surface of the ocean. This raises a second key difference between sharks and cetaceans; the necessity of the latter to breathe at the surface makes them far more visible and more avoidable. Because the biology of sharks do not require regular trips to the surface, none of the techniques used to assess and monitor cetacean populations are viable for monitoring shark populations, making estimation of shark abundance and demography far more difficult. For this reason, it is common to estimate the size of an entire shark population by extrapolation from a limited number of individual observations based on incidental bycatch, using stock assessment models.

Establishing an ICCMS could provide a repository for shark population data, potentially increasing the accuracy of management tools, such as stock assessment models.
Retrospective analyses of international organizations have facilitated the identification of many of the problems that reduced the effectiveness of the IWC during its formative years. An ICCMS is likely to face many of the same problems encountered by the IWC. For an ICCMS to be effective it must establish rules that allow selective incentives to be used to improve cooperation during decision making. It must also establish inter-governmental organization to promote its goals and objectives on an international stage.

Potentially of greatest importance is the establishment of relationships with epistemic communities.
The international community is more interconnected than ever before. Likewise, the relationships between independent scientists, government representatives, and members of epistemic communities are more intimate. This intimacy is likely to be the most effective tool an ICCMS would have to address the need for international management of sharks.

The issues involved in managing a highly migratory, straddling stocks like sharks, requires both international cooperation and domestic involvement and resource allocation.
Effective management of sharks is simultaneously too international and too local for any one group to effectively address the problem, a sentiment echoed as a fundamental principle underlying the CMSMoU on sharks.

An ICCMS would represent the physical embodiment of the conservation goals and cooperative efforts needed to sustainably manage shark resources.
Such an entity could be vital in addressing some of the most basic questions facing shark management and conservation, such as the extent of these specific stock declines and the methods most suitable for evaluating them. Without an ICCMS, the current management of shark species will likely remain unchanged with little chance of sustainably managing any shark stocks on a global scale. Likewise, without such an entity there will be no global check on the wasteful practice of shark finning.

The need for taking action to sustainably manage and conserve species of sharks is incontrovertible.
Whether an ICCMS is the optimal solution or action is debatable, and likely will be debated by colleagues in the now extensive epistemic community. For these reasons and for brevity, this paper does not propose the specific structure for an ICCMS despite highlighting ways such an entity could address the shortcomings of the IWC.

5.1. Afterward

Sharks are among the most threatened groups of marine species.
This paper has emphasized shark conservation and management issues drawing the attention of international governmental organizations and big international non-governmental organizations (BINGOs). The entities currently involved with international shark conservation and management range from the Food and Agriculture (FAO) of the United Nations (UN) via the International Plan of Action (IPOA-Sharks) and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS); to Regional Fisheries Management Organizations; and international governmental organizations such as the Convention on Migratory Species and Wild Animals (CMS) and the Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES); and organizations such as the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), as well as many others.

Despite these international efforts, increasing demand for shark fins and cartilage, sport fishing, and bycatch have led to the depletion of shark stocks that are 30% lower than two decades ago, and the lack of adequate conservation measure continues to drive several species close to extinction.

These words paraphrase a summary of a February 2010 CMS meeting and the signing of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on the conservation of migrating shark species.
It is serendipity that this meeting occurred just after acceptance of this paper by Marine Policy. The MOU would limit fisheries-related mortality of sharks to sustainable levels, with an emphasis on 7 species in particular [great white, basking, whale(shark), porbeagle, spiny dogfish, shortfin, and longfin mako sharks], but excludes other important shark species. Although the MOU prohibits the contentious practice of shark finning, mortality from bycatch and recreational fishing is not considered.
Despite the signing of the MOU by many of the CMS participating delegates, some key countries refused to sign, despite its non-binding nature.

The CMS meeting was followed the next month by CITES’ 15th Conference of Parties.
The meeting considered a slate of proposals, including protection of 8 shark species under Appendix II, and the Atlantic bluefin tuna under Appendix I. The 8 shark species denied listings were: the porbeagle, the scalloped, great, and smooth hammerheads, oceanic whitetip, and the spiny dogfish. The sandbar and dusky sharks were withdrawn and not proposed. Approval for listing would have limited trade on these species.

Signing of the CMSMOU, while non-binding, signaled a limited willingness by a few nations to take tangible, multi-lateral, steps toward shark conservation. The lack of action to list several shark species under the CITES appendices suggests an unwillingness to take more binding action.
The truly unfortunate aspect of failing to list these species under CITES, is that CITES can more effectively promote conservation because listing allows a country to enforce the trade limitations of Appendix I or II, regardless of whether capture occurred within its own EEZ or not. Failure to list the bluefin tuna, despite a local RFMO, further reinforces the point of this paper.

The effectiveness of an ICCMS will likely depend on a multi-pronged approach that engages member nations and promotes willingness to look beyond self-interest, as well as engaging non-governmental groups with the potential to promote shark conservation and management.

Gulf Oil Spill - Pushback?

Story here.

Wow.

Read this.
There's really no two ways about this: either David Jones is a courageous investigative journalist exposing a giant cynical eco scam by the scientists and liberals, or whatever. Or, he's a scumbag doing the bidding of the forces of evil.

Opinions?

Craig Ferguson and Shark Week

Craig Ferguson is totally, and I mean TOTALLY funny!





He is also a genuinely great guy.
This is not acting. The man has obviously had a wonderful, mind changing experience and has also got the talent for communicating it in simple and moving words.
Check it out – it very much reflects the reaction of many of our clients which is certainly one of the most gratifying aspects of our job.



See what I mean?

Just a couple of thoughts.

This is not what “Sharks” are.
In fact, this is not even what Caribbean Reef Sharks are!
Shark feeding dives got nothing to do with a natural situation. This is very obviously a highly conditioned group of animals that despite of all the pushing and wrangling for position are extremely docile because they are comfy with the presence of humans and intimately acquainted with the routine.

And yet, the feeders are fully garbed in steel mesh and wear protective helmets, and for good reason!
They do this because that’s the only long term sustainable way of doing this safely. Caribbean Reefs and their Indo-Pacific cousins, the Grey Reefs are the poster children for Shark feeding frenzies and consequently, feeding them is extremely risky. Yes they are strictly piscivorous and will not, ever, attack anybody with the intent of devouring him: but they are highly competitive and when presented with the scent of Fish, they can just simply go berserk and snap at anything they may take for food and possibly, for a competitor. I’ve seen this happen many times, mostly with non conditioned and totally wild animals – not nice!
Do not try this at home - Seriously!

And then, there’s this.
This it how you do it. Forget the romantic drama, the stupid pseudoscience, the gory scenes of finning, the ever raised index finger, the soap box and the pontificating. This is how you reach out to millions by portraying a famous but apart from that, completely ordinary dude doing something special and understanding something important in the process. So much like those stellar BBC clips I posted a while ago. And yes, I’m repeating myself!
Think about it.

Finally, and grudgingly! kudos to Discovery Channel.
I fully agree with Patric, this is great pro-Shark programming.
Let’s just hope this is the start of a learning curve about re-gaining the trust and the respect of their audience and elevating the brand to where I ought to be positioned.

Wild Waters - new must have Book!

From the description by Michael Patric O'Neill.

Wild Waters is a pictorial and written journal illustrating a handful of vibrant and diverse aquatic ecosystems — Indonesia's Komodo National Park, Lembeh Strait and Bali; Brazil's Bonito region; Mexico's Guadalupe Island; and my home for the last twenty years, South Florida.

On a global scale, these locations cover insignificant, minute territory, but they are unique and contribute exponentially to our planet's richness. These hotspots of biological wealth deserve our immediate attention and care. At the very least, people should be aware of them to understand what's at stake when our actions threaten sensitive areas.

Wild Waters showcases celebratory images as well as those depicting our heavy and messy footprints on the natural world. These photos are more relevant than ever because they can inspire us to make things better. As you follow my bubbles in Wild Waters, I hope you enjoy my images as much as I enjoyed making them.

This is what I like about the man.
Apart from being, without a doubt, one of the planet's leading underwater photographers (awards list here) and photojournalists, he always weaves in a message about conservation. Very much the educator, among his stunningly prolific list of publications, he has found the time to author a whole series of books for children that aim to educate and to foster an in-depth appreciation of the natural world.

Anyway, check out the sample pages - that's what I call being a pro!

Great Images from Cocos Island!

Great pic from the Nat Geo blog - and more pics here!

Here's another video by Howard and Michele.



They being who they are, it is of course stellar as always.
The Whitetip with the small, possibly endemic Gobio Pícaro and the feeding Spotted Eagle Ray are of course the kind of behavioral images for which Howard is famous. And then the Tiger Shark, maybe even the same male I posted about here!
Great stuff!

What however shocked me were the Hammerheads.
Granted, March may have still been under the influence of the El Niño when the all-important thermocline drops down to below 60m (yes I know that for a fact!) and sightings are thus rare. Still, if I think back to when a Hammerhead school numbered thousands, if not tens of thousands of individuals, this is just such a terribly sad sight!

But over to some absolutely amazing stuff.
Edwar Herreño is a Colombian marine biologist, former guide on the Hunters and now a freelance photographer and videographer operating in Costa Rica. Like his predecessor, the forever unequaled Mario Arroyo, he very obviously brings to the table a profound knowledge of the animals and of the environment where he works.
Please go and check out his amazing website: his imagery is quite simply exquisite and elevates the game to once again a totally new level of excellence. Unbelievably impressive stuff!

Enjoy!

Indeed!

Thanks Lupo!

Fantastic Video by Howard!

From the SA Sardine run, by Sasha.

Check this out!
It's of course by Howard and Michele Hall.
We've been friends for a very very long time, and I could go on for pages and pages extolling their virtues - but everything has already been said by others, and undoubtedly much better than I could ever hope for.

Just this.
Despite of their fame and very much like their heroes Ron and Valerie, they are among the kindest, most accessible and most humble people, ever.
That, to me, is the sign of true greatness.

Enjoy!

Tiger Sharks eating a Whale!

Pic from here, story here.

Get a whale carcass and the Tigers are there in no time!

This is a dead Sperm Whale off Port Douglas.
First posted by Patric, it's a bloody cool encounter!



As always, I'm struck by how deceptively placid the Sharks appear, and how tolerant of the cameraman - kind of reminds me of the Oceanic Whitetip scene in Blue Water White Death!
Well... I said kind of!

Plus, that's obviously not just your ordinary Shark grabbing whack.
As my friend Pete informs me, Shane Down is a veteran underwater cinematographer with extensive experience in interacting with those animals - and I may add, endowed with a pair of humongous cojones! Believe it or not, the guy is on snorkel!

Needless to say: Do Not try this at home!!!

Bravo Alison!

Alison Kock got principles and I say well done!

Halle Berry is filming something Shark related in SA.
This is a Hollywood production and as such, a great chance for global exposure and making some serious money on top of that. And yet, when asked to participate, Kock refused - and even managed to weave in some good pro-Shark sound bites!

As the she told the Daily Mail.

"After reading the script we decided it was not something we would like to put our names to.
Our mandate is to try to change people's perceptions of sharks. The first script that we got sounded very much like it had a thriller aspect to it and a personal kind of aspect to it as well.
But fighting off a shark, or surviving a shark attack - we couldn't see the positive side of that, as much as we tried."

Well said - and see? It's that easy not to be part of Shark Porn!
Others are obviously not so fussy - but that's another story for another post.

For those who don't know, Alison is an original Shark Angel, does research on Great Whites and co-runs the SOSF Shark Center in Kalk Bay near Cape Town, SA - Blog here.
She has previously been involved in brilliant pro-Shark media like this CNN feature with Anderson Cooper who himself is a real good man.

Ferretti et al. 2010 - the Facts

The Sharkdive, from lucky man Marty's fantastic new crop - and yes, those are links!

Back to the Sharks and to real science.
This new paper summarizes the current status of Sharks. It’s fascinating reading, sometimes counter intuitive and represents the facts as they are known today.

The good news is that the situation is not uniformly catastrophic but that there are great variations among species, habitats and geographic locations. The bad news is that it is fair to say that most large Sharks are acutely endangered.
Required reading for anybody wanting to speak about the topic.

Bold, italics and links are mine.

From

Francesco Ferretti, Boris Worm, Gregory L. Britten, Michael R. Heithaus and Heike K. Lotze
Patterns and ecosystem consequences of shark declines in the ocean.

Abstract

Whereas many land predators disappeared before their ecological roles were studied, the decline of marine apex predators is still unfolding.
Large sharks in particular have experienced rapid declines over the last decades. In this study, we review the documented changes in exploited elasmobranch communities in coastal, demersal, and pelagic habitats, and synthesize the effects of sharks on their prey and wider communities.

We show that the high natural diversity and abundance of sharks is vulnerable to even light fishing pressure.
The decline of large predatory sharks reduces natural mortality in a range of prey, contributing to changes in abundance, distribution, and behaviour of small elasmobranchs, marine mammals, and sea turtles that have few other predators. Through direct predation and behavioural modifications, top-down effects of sharks have led to cascading changes in some coastal ecosystems. In demersal and pelagic communities, there is increasing evidence of mesopredator release, but cascading effects are more hypothetical. Here, fishing pressure on mesopredators may mask or even reverse some ecosystem effects.

In conclusion, large sharks can exert strong top-down forces with the potential to shape marine communities over large spatial and temporal scales. Yet more empirical evidence is needed to test the generality of these effects throughout the ocean.

From the paper

Here, we attempt to synthesize what is known about the ecological role of sharks, which are among the largest and most wide-ranging predators in the ocean.
This topic has received urgent attention over the past decade, as studies have indicated rapid and widespread declines, particularly of large sharks, because of the direct and indirect effects of fishing.

This has prompted questions about the nature and scale of the ecological consequences.
In this study, we begin by briefly reviewing the ecological features of sharks, highlighting differences from other marine predators. We then analyse the current state and history of shark exploitation, searching for general patterns of community change in coastal, demersal, and pelagic ecosystems. Finally, we synthesize the expected and observed effects of sharks on marine ecosystems from experimental, empirical, and modeling studies. In the conclusion, we attempt to explain under which conditions sharks are expected to play a unique role, and how that role may depend on the ecosystem context.

This study is largely based on all major peer-reviewed papers published on this topic over the past decade, but also includes important earlier work.

Vulnerability to fishing

Most chondrichthyans are characterized by low growth rates, late sexual maturity, and low fecundity compared to bony fish, which makes them vulnerable to fishing mortality. A comparison of 26 shark and 151 bony fish populations found that sharks show twice the fishing extinction risk of bony fishes.
Also their ability to recover after depletion is low on average: rebound potential of 26 shark populations ranged between 14% (Mustelus californicus) and 1.7% (Squalus acanthias) per year with variability explained by a combined effect of size and preferred habitat.
In fact, it was highest for small coastal sharks, intermediate for pelagic and minimal for large coastal species. Deep-water sharks may be among the most vulnerable to fishing, with population growth rates 40–60% lower compared with pelagic, and 55–63% lower compared with coastal species. As a life history trade-off, most elasmobranchs invest more into juvenile survival and growth rather than fecundity.

Elasticity analyses show that changes in juvenile and adult survival and age at maturity have the highest contributions to population growth rate.
This explains why elasmobranch populations generally respond strongly to changes in both predation and fishing. While exploitation often leads to decreased ages at maturity and increased fecundities in teleosts , there is little evidence for such compensating responses in elasmobranchs.

Finally, while life history determines the level of mortality sharks can sustain, their vulnerability depends on the combination of life history, sensitivity to habitat loss and exposure to perturbations such as catchability and availability to fisheries.
The latter relates to many factors including geographic range, habitat use, behaviour, and body size.

Only over the past 5–10 years has the conservation status of many elasmobranchs been systematically evaluated by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
Its shark specialist groups concluded that elasmobranchs are primarily threatened by fishing (96.1%) including directed commercial (31.7%), by-catch (57.9%), recreational (0.7%) and artisanal ⁄ subsistence fishing (5.8%), followed by habitat destruction (2.9%) and pollution (0.4%, http://www.redlist.org).
Of the 1159 chondrichthyans known, 881 species have been evaluated globally with 42.8% listed as data deficient (DD), 25.7% least concern (LC), 13.9% near threatened (NT), 11.2% vulnerable (VU), 4.1% endangered (EN) and 2.4% critically endangered (CR, http://www.redlist.org).

Status varies by region, with the highest proportion of threatened (VU, EN, CR) species in the Mediterranean and NE Atlantic, while in the NW Pacific the situation appears less critical.
However, there is considerable uncertainty as many species are listed as data deficient or not yet assessed. Three regional IUCN assessments further highlight the critical situation in the Mediterranean and NE Atlantic, while providing a more optimistic assessment for Australia.

Coastal ecosystems

These studies suggest that even light fishing pressure by artisanal and subsistence fishing on remote islands or sharknetting programs along continental shores can be sufficient to cause dramatic declines in populations of large coastal sharks.
This would explain why such populations are now rare or absent in more impacted systems such as the Gulf of Mexico, Caribbean, and Mediterranean Sea. Moreover, shark-netting data suggest some patterns of ecological reorganisation. As large coastal sharks declined, catch rates of more fecund and wide-ranging species such as tiger (Galeocerdo cuvier) or hammerhead sharks (Sphyrna spp.) increased, at least temporarily, in shark nets in New South Wales, South Africa, and Queensland.
However, it is unclear at this point to which extent these reflect changes in abundance, distribution, or behaviour.

Demersal ecosystems

More than 90% of elasmobranch species worldwide inhabit demersal ecosystems on continental shelves and slopes which makes them vulnerable to trawl fishing. When trawling begins, catches of elasmobranchs are usually abundant and diverse including both small and large species despite the lower catchability of the latter. As fishing proceeds, this initial diversity and abundance can be eroded very quickly. Large sharks often disappear from catches, and the community becomes dominated by smaller elasmobranch mesopredators.
Moreover, major restructuring of elasmobranch communities can occur through differential vulnerabilities to fishing gears, variation in spatial occurrence relative to fishing areas, and release from predation and competition. Over time, trawl fisheries often expand towards further offshore and deeper grounds where elasmobranch communities are composed of less resilient species. At this stage, domains of developed trawl fisheries often exceed the habitat and dispersal range of many elasmobranch species, leaving no spatial refuges. This is the case of the Mediterranean, where a century of trawl fishing led to the loss of 16 of 31 recorded elasmobranch species in the Tyrrhenian Sea, six of 33 species in the Adriatic Sea and half of the elasmobranch species recorded in trawl fisheries in the Gulf of Lion since the 1950s

Pelagic ecosystems

Industrial fisheries in the open ocean started in the 1950s primarily to catch tuna and swordfish on the high seas. Fisheries statistics and scientific surveys were available from the beginning, and early catch rates essentially reflect unexploited fish communities.
Sharks constituted a substantial by-catch, and often a nuisance in causing damage to hooked target fish. In the Gulf of Mexico and Pacific Ocean, longliners caught about one shark for every two yellowfin tuna and in the Atlantic, 2–3 sharks for every swordfish.

This led to rapid declines in shark catches over the last 50 years.
In the Pacific, standardized catch rates of Carcharhinus falciformis decreased by 91.7%, while in the Gulf of Mexico those of C. longimanus were reduced by > 99% . In the NW Atlantic, 18 coastal and pelagic sharks showed declines in catch rates of 49–89% in <>

At the community level, declines are not uniform across species.
Less resilient carcharhinids usually declined first potentially benefiting more prolific species such as blue and mako sharks (Isurus oxyrinchus). From 1977 to 1994, pelagic fisheries landings in Brazil revealed the disappearance of 14 species of carcharhinids (dominated by C. signatus), and a concomitant increase of mako and blue sharks. Likewise, in the North Pacific, blue shark biomass is estimated to have increased by 20% relative to the 1970s (Sibert et al. 2006), and this species is now considered the most abundant shark in pelagic ecosystems. Mako sharks appear to have declined less than other large species in the Gulf of Mexico, Central Pacific and NW Atlantic.
However, when intense exploitation continues, all large sharks can be virtually eliminated such as in the Mediterranean Sea.

Approximately 21 oceanic elasmobranch species are commonly caught in high seas fisheries; these are broadranging species with circumglobal distribution.
Although there are no documented cases of local species extinctions, 58% of pelagic species are considered threatened by IUCN, more than any other listed group of chondrichthyans.

The high demand for shark fins in Asian markets is an important factor in the decline of pelagic species, which are often highly priced for their fins.
This has motivated new shark fisheries and prompted others to switch from bony fish to sharks. Pelagic sharks range across extensive, poorly monitored areas, thus the amount of sharks taken globally for their fins is estimated to be four times higher than that reported to FAO.

In summary, sharks have been increasingly threatened by the direct and indirect effects of fishing worldwide.
This has caused marked declines in shark populations, particularly larger and less resilient species such as carcharhinids. These declines have coincided with substantial reorganisation of elasmobranch communities, including the rise of smaller sharks and rays in some regions.

ECOSYSTEM CONSEQUENCES

We are just beginning to understand the potential ecological consequences of shark declines, largely because of the difficulties in studying sharks and their prey in their natural environments. Ecosystem models predict that in some situations sharks will exert considerable top-down impacts on their prey, while not in others.

And here follows a cornucopia of examples from across a wide range of habitats.

CONCLUSIONS

Our overview shows that in natural, unexploited systems, sharks often exhibit high abundance and diversity.
Yet even light fishing pressure is sufficient to cause strong population declines in vulnerable species, particularly large sharks. Such trends have been shown for artisanal and subsistence fishing on remote islands, shark netting programs, and in trawl and long-line fisheries in many regions, resulting in community shifts from large- to small-bodied species.

Population declines of large species often exceeded one, sometimes two orders of magnitude with some local extinctions.
Yet some more resilient species have not declined as drastically or have even increased, possibly via reduced competition or predation. Larger shark populations are still seen in some remote or protected areas, particularly in the Pacific, and may provide valuable opportunities to further understand the ecological role of sharks.

Yet, reported catches of sharks and other elasmobranchs are still increasing in most regions, possibly indicating that more fisheries target sharks where they have not been historically exploited, a trend partially driven by the rising demand for highly prized shark fins on Asian markets.
Many large sharks are the sole predators of smaller elasmobranchs and other marine megafauna, and the depletion of large sharks has likely contributed to considerable increases in these species in some regions. With their wide-ranging distribution and predatory role, large sharks in particular can spread their impacts across different ecosystems. Such spatial connectivity has also been shown to be important in freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems and may increase the connectivity and stability of ocean food webs.

Ecosystem models predict that the loss of sharks should result in complex community changes, including trophic cascades, mesopredator release, and consequent declines in some commercial fish.
The strength and persistence of these effects, however, appear to decrease from coastal and reef to demersal and pelagic environments. Observational studies suggest the presence of strong species interactions in some regions, mediated by direct consumption and risk effects, sometimes leading to trophic cascades. As fishing and netting effort has increased, declines in large apex-predatory sharks have coincided with widely documented increases in smaller sharks and rays, as well as mammals and turtles. These mesopredator increases may be partly explained by decreased predation mortality and risk effects, and have in some cases led to increased pressure on prey species, such as invertebrates and teleost fishes or even seagrasses. We must caution that many of the interactions are supported by limited empirical evidence. We are only beginning to study the complex ecological roles that large-bodied, wideranging predators such as sharks play.

Ritter and the Enablers

Lookee lookee – the Sharkitarians are on the move!

These are the upcoming trips of Ritter’s Sharkschool – and what is more interesting, the names of the enablers!
Don’t get me wrong, if a bunch of whackos want to go on a dive cruise or book a nice hotel in the tropics, all the power to them and especially, to those who take their money! Whackos are certainly one of the most lucrative market segments and the backbone of entire thriving industries – just think of the New Age movement and its various gurus and quacks or, with all due respect, look at the millions raked in by the global Whale watch industry!

But the Shark diving operators?
There’s really no two ways about this: by whatever metrics one applies, Ritter is just a bad, bad guy and any serious and self respecting operator needs to turn down his business, period!
Or is it once again all about the money, as in pecunia non olet?

But back to Doktor Ritter and his track record.
He has pretty much singlehandedly destroyed a thriving Shark ecotourism operation and conservation project on Walker’s Cay when he decided to take the money and allow Discovery to air the infamous footage of the Shark attack (no that was not an incident!) that cost him his calf. He has also conned several Shark NGOs, namely at least the Shark Foundation and Shark Project (and I suspect, at present, the SRI) of substantial amounts of research money without ever engaging in proper research, let alone publishing a single paper in exchange.
But then, one could argue that the past is the past and that it’s none of our business anyway, and I partly agree.

As for his scientific credentials, or lack of, what can I say.
It just so happens that I’ve studied Biology at the same University of Zurich as he and thus know that Ritter is a Wildbiologe, a very alpine and equally arcane discipline investigating the life history of Mountain Goats and the like. Having then self promoted himself to Shark researcher, he has published a couple of utterly irrelevant papers that few have read and nobody ever remembers, let alone cites.
Apart from that, the bulk of his productions consists in several idiotic little publications intended to educate, or whatever, the public at large that have been authoritatively reviewed as follows, and I cite

The lack of references also detracts from the ability to assess some of the claims and leaves one with the impression that most of the book is pseudoscience.

Finally, the volume is prone to hyperbole. For example, calling overfishing of sharks the largest ecological time bomb of all is absurd given our understanding of global climate change.

Although this book should be of interest to a general audience and is well intentioned, it does not add to our understanding of shark biology, their natural behavior, or their role in marine communities.

Ritter’s absurd non science quickly catapulted him to notoriety, and then to pariah status among his peers, at which he obviously decided to engage into what the Germans call Flucht nach vorne and to start thinking outside of the box – which quickly landed him way out there in left field and consequently, in the maws of a hungry Bull Shark.

Other would call it the ramblings of a lunatic - I call what he teaches Sharkitarianism.
Very much like New Age, it’s a mixture of truisms, pseudoscience, Rousseau-inspired romanticism and pseudo-visionary platitudes (check out the atrocious video!) that purports to breach the confines of petty conventionalism by creating a web of half truths and inane intuitive and always untested hypotheses, abusing scientific insights and language and accusing the perceived other side of being small minded, biased and intolerant - and in case I’m being too intellectually lofty here: it’s total bullshit, baloney, rubbish!
Case in point, the ramblings in the video I’ve posted here - pure snake oil!

The modus operandi is this – and lemme tell you, like all successful charlatans, the guy is crafty!
Having correctly, and cunningly diagnosed the Angstzination (a clever combination of the German world for fear and that for fascination coined by his then mentor and now victim Wegner of Sharkproject) for Sharks of the public at large, he has proclaimed himself to be the world’s foremost expert in Shark-human interaction.
The latter is a conveniently self-invented fusion of amateur psychology and untested, and obviously untestable insights from the Global (and once again, utterly irrelevant) Shark Attack File where he equally conveniently happens to be the resident Shark Behaviorist. And let’s not forget his stints as self-proclaimed Shark attack pathologist and his sanctimonious creation of SAVN, now apparently suspended!
Add to it the serendipitous occurrence, and above all, the survival of a veritable Shark attack and you have all the trappings for the start of a lucrative career as the world’s premier Shark Attack Guru - oh and for the German speakers: as Shark Shaman, too!
Wow - talk about having gone off the deep end!

But back to the topic at hand: this is precisely the insidiousness of Ritter’s proposition.
It’s exactly like Discovery’s recent roll-out. Forget the attempt at greenwashing by proffering Shark conservation sound bites - this is exclusively about making money by exploiting the fear of Shark attacks, pure Shark Porn!
By preaching to his disciples that they will only be able to safely interact with Sharks once they’ve given him their money, attended his seminars and learned his visionary techniques, he directly propagates the image of the ever lurking, man hunting monster.
Can you see that too - or is it once again just me who is blinded by conventionalism and incapable of thinking outside of the aforementioned box? Looks like I'm not alone!

As to the Fiji trip, now we know.
Nothing to add to what I said here – and no, it comes at no surprise!

Sardine Run - by Sasha!

Forget the Sharks - these birds are lethal!

The man is just insatiable!

Having just digested his latest portfolio from Fiji, here comes a batch from South Africa!
I'm of course talking about Alexander Safonov, aka patsOn, aka Sasha, good friend, very (!) suspect financial markets geek, prolific blogger and above all, gifted and ever more successful UW photographer. Ever since discovering his pics when he first came to Fiji, I've been a great fan of his talent and his perseverance - as have obviously others!

This I believe is his second foray to the Sardine Run - or is it his third?
Anyway, like in Fiji, the pics keep getting better - whether due to experience, luck or his new mega-super-duper wideangle lens, or all of the above!
Or is it the fact that like in Fiji, he's becoming ever more reckless in risking his life when confronting the surrounding army of big predators, close and personal - especially the Piranha-like killer Gannets, pictured above?

Just kidding!
The man is no fool and the descriptions are probably good marketing by the agent, garnished with a dash of the inevitable and endearing Russian heroism!

Well done мой друг - and come back soon!

Whales, Tuna and Kona Kampachi!

Marvelous article!

"Whale carpaccio – 130 kroners." Thus read the lead starter on the menu in an upscale Norwegian restaurant where I was dining on a winter evening not long ago.
Eight slices of whale arranged raw on a plate for the reasonable price of about £13. I have to admit that the prospect of ordering it was intriguing. A near global commercial whaling moratorium has been in effect since 1986, with only Norway, Iceland and Japan refusing to stop. I had never been to a country that still practised whaling, and I had certainly never seen whale on a menu. What would whale taste like, I wondered. Would it be fatty and chewy like beef, or would it have the loose, flaky texture of fish that don't need dense muscles to resist the pull of gravity? Would it be served like prosciutto, with a thin slice of Parmesan cheese? Or, since carpaccio is an Italian dish, would it be more appropriate merely to drizzle olive oil over the whale's buttery sheen?

Please read it!
Extremely well written, extremely well researched, it explores the issue of how our insatiable appetite for Tuna is leading to the extinction of a species, and possible solutions.
I cannot recommend this highly enough!

And here's a great interview and piece about the author, Paul Greenberg!