Australia: excellent News!

Fantastic: Australia's proposed networks of MPAs. Click for detail - detailed maps here.

And talking about leadership.
Check this out.



Bravo Tony Burke - this is really bold and visionary!
As one of my smart Ozzie friends explains

The decision is fantastic for a couple of reasons:

• A vast area of the ocean has been afforded protection at various levels – I don’t know the exact pre-Aussie announcement numbers but I think as of 2011, about 7.5M km2 were protected globally so this adds another 40% ish
  

• It includes a significant backbone of highly protected sanctuary zones in which no extractive activities are allowed (fishing, mining, oil and gas) of some 800,000 km2. This is the largest network of SANCTUARIES in the world.

• Australia is the first country to demonstrate its commitment to marine sanctuaries throughout its EEZ. This sends a clear message globally that highly protected marine “national parks” are recognized as an important strategy in ensuring healthy oceans. Our challenge to date has not been that sanctuaries don’t work, but that we have too few of them globally.

Story here, here and here, official details here.
Like in any good compromise, both the more radical environmentalists and the fishermen are unhappy, and the opposition is trying to use this for political gain. I say, screw them all, this is just simply brilliant!
Kudos to Burke and everybody else involved, especially once again Pew under the leadership of Barry Traill, Michelle Grady who lobbied for the South-West Network and Imogen Zethoven of the Coral Sea campaign!

Now..
What about the Grey Nurse in NSW, the Shark fishing within the GBR and the abominable slaughter in Queensland!
Leadership please!

Cristina: non c'è due senza tre!

Cristina doing her thing in the SRMR - stellar pic by Ozzie Sam. Click for detail!

La Zenato has done it again!

Check out her brilliant newest blog post.
Like her previous posts here and here, it ultimately amounts to nothing more than common sense.

Indeed,
In this context, a simplistic approach that calls for stopping fishing all together is not going to work, is not realistic, and is set up for failure.
At some point the need to sustain food sources for a community clashes with the need for ‘ecological sustainability.’

And thus, this is the lesson I learned in Fiji:
Viable protection needs to come from within the place where sharks are located, it needs to be understood and promoted by the local people, and it needs to be presented in a spirit of cooperation and understanding. My personal opinion is that we need to support education and engage in an open conversation with all parties involved, including ourselves, the visitors.

Could not agree more - with one caveat.
With human development having run roughshod over marine resources, there are now too many people wanting to eat too little fish - and if that is true, both sides of that conflicting dichotomy need to be addressed.

There is only one solution, and that is, to achieve real sustainability.
And if so, it means that we must find ways to allow for those depleted fish stocks to recover; but at the same time, we must finally have the courage to speak out about the ultimate cause of the current problem, i.e. human population growth and the growth of the individual ecological footprints.

That is of course an eminently political challenge.
The clash Cristina mentions is real, especially in those developing countries where eating fish is a necessity and not merely a luxury - and I doubt that any amount of education alone will ever be sufficient to achieve the necessary consensus.

Long story short?
What I'm trying to say is that democracy is great - but when times are tough, democratic processes do not always lead to the best solutions.
Right now, what we need is leadership, and consensus will hopefully come at a later stage when the benefits of those bold measures will become apparent to everybody.
Thankfully for Fiji, it appears that we have just that.

Enjoy Cristina's post.

Welcome to the Anthropocene!

Click, and then click again for (grim) detail! Source.

CITES?

So CITES doesn't give a damn about Sharks.
Yes, maybe - and now what?

What about removing the infamous Dr. Giam?
Let me be crystal clear about this: he's an asshole and getting rid of him would certainly be a good thing. The Sea Shepherd petition focuses on Giam's conflict of interest and the org has accumulated a body of evidence that you can review here.
But just to play the devil's advocate: is being biased reason enough for dismissal - and if so, what about the pro-Shark NGOs like Pew or the WWF that are admitted to the sessions of the animals committee and that are clearly equally biased, only this time in favor of the good cause?
And provided one had the better arguments: wouldn't debating Giam be more credible?

And anyway, will Giam's dismissal save Sharks?
Frankly, I am not at all convinced it would, and this is why.

CITES is not primarily about conservation.
The T stands for Trade, and the treaty is about how to trade wildlife once it has been deemed sufficiently endangered to warrant its listing onto one of its appendices. The decision for that listing is not within the authority of any committee, let alone a person like Giam: instead, all such decisions are being taken by the parties, ie the countries that have signed the treaty. Furthermore, only a party can propose that such a listing be considered and a vote be taken, this at a formal so-called meeting of the Conference of the Parties, or CoP, the paramount decision-making body of CITES.
So far, zero Sharks have ever been proposed for a full trading ban under Appendix I.
The Only Elasmobranchs listed there are the Sawfishes, whereas only three Sharks are listed for regulated trade under Appendix II. Other Sharks have been proposed for listing under Appendix II but have failed (and in 2007) to reach the required 2/3 majority of votes in favor.

And the infamous animals committee?
It travels, meets, deliberates and pontificates and is supposed to advise the parties - and contrary to what is being asserted, it very much "cares" about Sharks, only not in the way we would like it to!
The transcripts appear to show that whereas there have been a lot of discussions, there is certainly no consensus, and that some of the Asian countries are clearly opposing having any further Shark species listed, to the point that China even appears to favor a review (= de-listing?) of the Basking Shark, Whale Shark and Great White!
And you may also want to read this that makes a lot of sense!

And now what?

The next meeting of the CoP is less than one year away.
So far, only two proposals for listing Sharks have been submitted:

• The listing of Scalloped Hammerheads (and by extension, Smooth and Great) on Appendix II is being proposed by Costa Rica and Honduras.

• Europe is proposing the listing of the Porbeagle onto Appendix III (only)

Better than nothing - but is that good enough?
I fear that as long as Pretoma continues to report a glaring disregard of the laws by Costa Rica's fisheries agency, I remain rather skeptical about the Costarican proposal - and then there's of course this.
And Europe? I'm frankly not much impressed, Appendix III just means a lot of paper pushing and no real protection.
And then there's the USA that is still pondering whether to even do anything; and after all the frothy activism and resounding defeat last time, it very much appears that this time around, nobody will even bother to propose to list the Northern Bluefin, let alone its critically endangered Southern cousin!

Yes the global economy continues to suck and it really looks like it's gonna be Realpolitik all over again!
Hardly the right backdrop for attaining the enthusiastic support of 67% of the votes - and if I had to venture a prediction, the final result will be even worse than last time!

Which brings me straight back to this post!
Remember the outrage and remember the ensuing discussions?
To paraphrase Alex the Sharkman
But... Will the lesson be learned or will this disaster just be "forgotten", only to be repeated again when the time comes?

Indeed, that is precisely the question!

• Have the Shark conservationists met, are they coordinating their efforts and pooling their resources, and are they going to be sending their best, most seasoned negotiators to represent the whole Shark conservation movement - or are we going to see yet again the same convention tourism by yet again the same motley uncoordinated naïve and clueless group of amateurs who will pay themselves a trip to Pattaya in order to protest, pontificate and vociferate?


• Do we a have a champion, ie a country in favor of Shark conservation that is already vigorously, and ruthlessly lobbying in favor of Shark conservation in order to counteract what Japan, Inc. and possibly others are undoubtedly already perpetrating once again - or will the pro-ban countries and conservationists once again be ambushed by a fait accompli that has been orchestrated long before the meeting?
  

Anybody taking bets?
And if the answer to the above is negative: is this even a cause worth spending so much time, energy and money on, or should those resources not rather be prioritized in favor of more successful strategies?
Yes it always boils down to the same old questions!

And the good news?
I just happen to believe that CITES is the wrong body to deal with fisheries issues.
Like possibly Alex, I believe that in reality, it is the countries and the RFMOs that dispose of the relevant local know-how, and that it is them who ultimately carry the responsibility of protecting their fish stocks.
And there, things look much better: since the ignominious Doha conference, several countries and states have enacted Shark fishing and trading bans, and some RFMOs have also protected some species of Shark.

Think global, act local.
Nowhere is this more true than in Shark conservation.

Commander Naqali - well said!

Read this.

Great to see that Government cares about all the stakeholders - including the fishermen!
Step-by-step...

PS: & here's a very nicely worded letter by David!
Thanks buddy! :)

A whole lotta Bull - Video!

As I said, big but not that big!
Great job by Dan Crowell and great to see Joe - and may we be witnessing the birth of yet another Shark Man here?
Oh and note Neil's Bistro Mario Batali Edition Crocs - always the fashionista! :)

Cloudbreak, Fiji - right here, right now!

Details here.

H/T: Sea Monster

Is Fiji's Tuna Industry facing Extinction?

Canned Tuna. There's heaps upon heaps of it - but is it possibly too cheap?

I was frankly dismayed by this article.
No not about the fact that the Tuna Industry wants to keep exploiting Sharks - that I knew already.
I was dismayed because apparently, Fiji's Tuna Industry is facing total collapse.

If so, fishing for Sharks will not save it.
It would merely establish a second unsustainable fishery on top of an apparently nonviable one. The result would be that Shark stocks would be quickly exhausted with devastating effects for marine ecosystems including the Tuna, meaning that in only a few years we would end up with no Sharks, no Tuna and even less Fish.
That surely cannot be the solution!

But that's not really the topic here.
I've said it before, everybody here wants the Tuna Industry to survive.
This is a vital component of Fiji's economy and everybody, and this very much including government, should lend a helping hand in assuring that both the local Tuna fishing and Tuna processing sectors can survive in the long term and continue providing for employment and opportunities for many generations to come.
This obviously mandates that the Industry be sustainable but also profitable.

For that to happen, it appears that the fishery needs to be reformed.
I really ignore the details - but if it is really true that Fiji's Tuna Industry is in such dire straights like its spokesman asserts, then the likely reasons could be.

• That Tuna stocks are depleted.
  That is highly likely.
  You may want to re-read this post about the appalling shenanigans that happen within the WCPFC where outsiders like specifically Japan are stalling any efforts to curb quotas in line with the best scientific advice. This year specifically has been particularly depressing as previously reserved regions have been opened to allow the Philippines to further exploit the already ravaged stocks of Bigeyes,
  If those foreign powers continue to interfere and sabotage the attempts to safeguard those precious stocks, Fiji should do what is best for Fiji and set its own targets and rules, very much like the PNA have already done.
  In the end, there is only one long term solution, and that is to fish sustainably, and this very much also by defining the quotas in line with the precautionary principle.
  Interestingly, this is what Mr. Southwick himself appears to be advocating here!

and/or

• That there is Overcapacity.
  There are probably already too many boats fishing for too few Fish and if so, Fiji should reduce the number of fishing licenses that are being awarded and thus increase the profit margin for individual vessels.
  There, I'm principally thinking of the licenses awarded to foreign vessels.
  Their track record is unequivocal: they have already overfished their own stocks, have zero regard for our well being but will instead catch whatever they can get their hands on, and then sail on once our stocks are equally depleted, leaving Fiji to contend with the long-term consequences - or am I to believe that the price of the licenses contains a component for mitigation? I wish!
  I say, Fiji first! If the Asians want to eat Tuna caught in Fiji, let them buy Fijian Tuna caught by Fijian fishermen and exported by Fijian processing plants!
  Did I hear, and what happens to the development aid by those countries, namely Europe, Taiwan and the US to name but a few?
  If they want to assist us by paying for poverty alleviation and development, we are certainly grateful. But to link it to an unsustainable fishery that depletes our national resources and ultimately impoverishes the nation and its population cannot possibly be acceptable, not economically and not ethically - or am I missing something here?
  

and/or

• That the fishery is not profitable.
  If so and if all costs have already been slashed, then the price of Tuna must increase. Canned Tuna is probably too cheap and the time where it was viewed as some kind of junk food must come to an end.
  One smart strategy for convincing customers to pay more, is to have the fishery certified like once again the PNA have already achieved. That of course implies that the fishery is truly sustainable, meaning that bycatch and other ecological impacts will need to be reduced, as already required by, the current MSC environmental standard. Another group, the ISSF is asking its members not to work with vessels that fin Sharks
  In fact, the Fijian Albacore longline fishery is currently being assessed and my hope is that the Industry as a whole will decide to follow that route.
  I say, let's brand our Tuna.
  With Fiji Water having already paved the way and Government facilitating the process, let's establish Fiji Tuna as being Tuna that has been caught sustainably in pristine waters by happy, friendly and fairly compensated fishermen!
  

But the current unsustainable fishing for Sharks must stop.
At best, it is a short term stop-gap measure that is merely detracting from the need to urgently tackle the real issues at hand. But it is of course much more than that: if it continues unchecked, it will lead to the collapse of all fisheries - and this very much including the local fishery for Tuna!

And that's not something anybody can possibly want.
Correct?

Head-butting Bumphead Parrots!

What an awesome Fish! Source.

I always thought they looked like Buffalo, and now I know why.
Check this out.



From the paper.

Though rumored to use their forehead to ram corals prior to ingestion, the enlarged cephalic hump of Bolbometopon may be a classic example of a secondary sexual characteristic resulting from sexual selection, such as the massive horns in male bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis). In addition, Bolbometopon males exhibit what appears to be an “ossified ridge” on the forehead that may serve a similar function as the cranial appendages of artiodactyls.


How could this dramatic aspect of its social and reproductive behavior have gone unnoticed?
We propose two reasons:
1) Low population densities resulting from overfishing dampen competition for resources (females or spawning territories) and/or disrupt the social system so that headbutting contests are uncommon and no longer advantageous.
2) Headbutting contests are common, but negative responses to humans in exploited populations preclude observations of natural behavior. Quantitative estimates of historical abundance are not readily available for Bolbometopon, but numerous sources employing indigenous ecological knowledge indicate that precipitous declines in giant bumphead parrotfish populations and decreases in catches correspond with increases in fishing pressure via the advent of spear guns and underwater flashlights.

Story here.

The Bumphead Parrots are rare in Fiji.
Locally hunted to extinction by spearos who shoot them at night when they sleep among the corals, they can still be seen in Namena and above all, in the north at the Great Sea Reef.

Anyway, awesome stuff!

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!

Lucia, muito obrigado!

Collision! Another brilliant one from Lill's newest crop!

Very nice!
Lucia Malla is a Brazilian blogger and marine biologist came for a visit last October together with husband, fellow biologist and underwater photographer Andre Seale. Regular reader may remember Andre's name from the post about the extinction of the Galapagos Sharks at St. Paul's Rocks.

One day is of course not enough and October, the worst possible time.
But we did rustle up a few Bull Shark but above all, we found the time for some really interesting conversations about the challenges of Shark conservation.

Now Lucia has written a post about her experience in Fiji.
Looks like she did like it - and if you follow the numerous links she has posted, you will find a lot of research but also several blog posts by various blue bloggers dealing with the deluge of nonsense that is being spouted by the sharktivists, or as Lucia puts it,
I also tried to link to important discussions, so people THINK a little bit more about the whole shark issue.

So here's to more THINKING and less frothy activism!
Thank you Lucia!

PS: o melhor mergulho com tubarões do mundo = The Best Shark Dive in the World! :)

Blue Shark and Giant Squid!

How cool is that!
Story here.

Posters for Baja!

Good stuff!

From an e-mail by Dr. José Leonardo Castillo-Geniz
Investigador Titular "C", Programa Tiburón, Centro Regional de Investigación Pesquera de Ensenada, B.C., Instituto Nacional de la Pesca (INAPESCA), carr. Tijuana-Ensenada km 97.5, El Sauzal de Rodríguez, C.P. 22760, Ensenada, B.C., México

Just to inform us about the informative campaign (posters) of the legal protection status of the white shark in Mexican Waters that is going without problems, with the support of the technical staff of the National Fisheries Institute of Mexico (INAPESCA).
I share sore photographs of it from the fishery camps of the west coast of BC.
I express my sincere thanks for the invaluable support of Pam Baker EDF, Fernando Aguilar Club Cantamar, Juan Carlos Cantu of Defenders of Wildlife Mexico and my good friend Mauricio Hoyos-Padilla.

Well, better late than never!
What I suggested, rather facetiously in 2010 has now eventuated.
GW researcher Mauricio Hoyos and others are distributing posters throughout Baja in order to educate the local fishermen that Great Whites are protected and should not be targeted.

Love love love this pic! :)

All awareness is good - but will it help in this specific case?
Baja is the scene of a daily carnage of Elasmobranchs, among which GWs - but contrary to recent alarmist reports, this is not a targeted fishery for GWs, not for the fins nor for the jaws. Those GWs are mostly sub-adults, juveniles and YOYs that are being caught incidentally when generally fishing for Sharks, and even the adult GWs that have recently been reported from the Sea of Cortez have not been caught intentionally but were found drowned in nets.

If you think about it, this is only logical.
Whereas I now think that this number is suspect, Great Whites do sit very much at the top of the food pyramid and are thus rare by definition, with the global population probably only numbering somewhere in the tens of thousands - and thus, trying to establish a targeted fishery that would be trying to find them in the vastness of their global range would be commercially suicidal.
Of course this is not the whole story as recent tracking studies has revealed migratory highways and hotspots - but under the caveat that the most prominent hotspots like e.g. Guadalupe need to be strictly protected, it is never the less true that a targeted fishery makes no commercial sense whatsoever.

But if most catches are only incidental, will educating the fishermen help?
Domeier mentions a 3-month general shark fishing ban which is actually the correct measure when trying to limit incidental catches. It is likely the result of this fiasco and although it is far from being the announced moratorium, it is certainly a step in the right direction.

That is, if only it were respected and enforced!
Apparently neither is the case - and with that in mind, the poster initiative may indeed be of help insofar as it might prompt some fishermen to release at least those GWs that would be still alive.

The good news?
More and more young GWs being caught are probably an indication that the measures protecting the Sharks but also their mammalian prey are slowly having a positive effect - this not only the in the Eastern Pacific and in the Western Atlantic where sightings are on the increase, but also in Australia and South Africa.

Yes as always it is complicated! :)

OCEAN2012 - great Stuff!

Check this out.

This is great - the initiative but also the animation!



Like in all good projects, Pew are behind this.
More info and resources here.

Kudos!

It's that Time of the Year again!

Fantastic pic - bravo Lill!

This is from today's dive - click for detail.
Need I say more.

In answer to the comment by the Saffron Pimpernel: stacked bulls, tight lens - click for detail!

Chumphon Pinnacle - the Video!

Juvenile Bull Shark at Chumphon Pinnacle. Source.

This is as unequivocal as it gets!
Forget the debate: the Sharks at 02:08 ff are most certainly not Grey Reefs!

I've also perused the paper by Juerg that states
The Chumphon Pinnacle sharks are most similar in external morphology to the bull shark and the pigeye shark (Carcharhinus amboinensis). From the latter, the bull shark differs in its lower, less erect first dorsal fin and higher, more erect second dorsal fin. Furthermore, the ratio of first:second dorsal height is 3:1 or less in Carcharhinus leucas, but over 3:1 in C. amboinensis.
Case closed.

Anyway, enjoy the video - very nice!



H/T: Robin!

Is Sean Van Sommeran a Liar and a Cheat?

Marine debris - this is apparently SVS' tag

Who knows!

You may want to read this brilliant post by Patric.
It concerns this alarming report by Dr. Michael Domeier on the Marine CSI Facebook page.

I must say, I have a grudging admiration for SVS.
They guy is clearly passionate about Sharks and Shark conservation, and contrary to the petitioning Facebook warriors, he's actually out there doing stuff for which I totally respect him! But on the other hand, I totally dislike most of his opinions and especially, the way he has chosen to present them - and no I'm not gonna engage in some debate, Socratic or otherwise!

And Domeier?
I've certainly not been kind to him in the past, something I now regret. No not really in terms of the issues I have raised - but because even during the Junior controversy, the man has always come across as a true gent and because his research is just simply stellar.
Incidentally, if you ever want to talk with any authority about GWs, you simply must read the book he has edited! It contains all of the relevant peer reviewed science, and Domeier's revision of the life history of the Eastern Pacific GWs will simply blow your socks off, promise!

But this is not about those two people.
They are who they are, there is obviously a long and complicated history and they certainly appear not to like each other - so forget the stories, from the dipshit page no less, about stolen tags, Junior and Architheutis etc, they are just a symptom of that wonderful Californian GW research community and got zero incidence here.

This is about this story, and I cite.

After the massive shark was brought ashore, someone spotted the algae-covered white tag near the base of the female shark's dorsal fin. She saw Van Sommeran's contact information on the tag, then called and emailed him...
The wife of one of the fishermen - Paulina Leon - asked him about a possible reward. In the past, anglers in the area have returned transmitter tags to researchers for reward money....
After a few brief communications with the woman, Van Sommeran is still trying to get more pictures and information about the shark.

This is apparently that e-mail, posted here, c/p.

Pelagic Shark Research Foundation

White Shark Landed off Mexico, a Rare Catch for Panga Fisherman; it may have carried ID tag from California according to reports:

2012/4/9 Paulina L.

Hi
This is Paulina, I just called you because we found one of your shark
detector, haha how do you name it?
How can I send it to you?...
you can call me back at --- --- 17 02

Note the date of that e-mail.
But the Shark was only caught one week later???

As I said, who knows.
But my money is certainly on MD!

PS: further comments by MD here.
150-odd comments on that dipshit Facebook page later, everyone is till waiting for an explanation of how a mysterious Paulina Leon could write an e-mail on April 9 about an event that happened on April 15...

South Africa - Great White Research and other Stuff!

No this time I'm not going to rant.
But I could!

I could rant about some disgruntled GW cage operators.
I could state that they didn't quite have the guts to openly take on Mr. Fischer & Mr. Boyd and that they have instead enlisted the help of some local Kraut who has quickly morphed into a monster, true to the meaning that Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim. I could also speculate that apart from having the usual inflated opinion of self, the guy may suffer from a medical condition called, obviously only in German, Querulantenwahn.

Be it as it may, several open letters and public warnings later, the genie is now out of the bag.
Prompted by the dire warnings of the Querulant and by a totally unrelated Shark strike, the surfers and water recreationists have latched on to the issue of chumming (debunked here) and I wish the cage operators the best of luck. Were I so inclined, I could state that they they will now reap what they have sown, that justifying baited Shark dives smack in front of a major town was always a stretch and that the delicate balance has now been irrevocably upset. Talk about having shot themselves in the foot!
But fear not, I shall not do that!

I could also rant about the couch farting fireman.
I could tell you he has been described to me as somebody who has done a Shark dive and now thinks he knows something about something, that his two brain dead petitions have achieved precisely zero as anticipated, and that he has gone as far as to accuse Fischer of having caused the death of several Sharks 1,500 miles away. Wow!
And I could mention the proud rolling out of his ludicrous Hartzell tag, to be placed with a pole into the center of the dorsal fin that will be inevitably shredded as soon as the gizmo will start collecting flotsam like any other trolling lure.
And it got a GPS antenna no less - I mean, seriously!
But I shall not - tho I'm still holding my sides!

And what about that Facebook group.
I could tell you how several of us blue bloggers were initially intrigued, only to be quickly dismayed by the rubbish posted there, and have stopped bothering. I could also elaborate why I believe that it represents the very worst of social media and that I consider it to be nothing more than the appalling circular echo chamber of, to cite a friend, a bunch of dipshits with an opinion and a keyboard, among which even a barlafüs da Milan who vocally demonstrates his utter scientific ignorance and lack of decorum by publicly rubbishing his peers. Soci, ma indova ta l'é truvad al tó dottor: alla Pavesi?
Notable exception: Michelle Wcisel who has taken it onto herself to gleefully, and charmingly deconstruct the deluge of stupidities posted there. Were I so inclined, I would tell her not to waste her time by engaging with morons and instead devote her energy to further researching and protecting Sharks, that Einstein was correct and that stupidity cannot be cured. PS: it sure looks like she has come to the same conclusions - kudos! :)
But as I said, I shall not do that.

Fischer?
I really got nothing to add there - maybe apart from the fact that I could wonder about the exact relationship between the non-for-profit OCEARCH and the for-profit Fischer Productions, and about possible US tax implications of that synergy. And I could state that I don't believe for a minute that OCEARCH will fund the next five years of GW research in SA.
But again, I shall not - and we shall see!

Leaves the local research community, and the authorities.
I could talk about the utter fiasco in terms of outreach, this by the authorities but especially, by Alison Kock and Shark Spotters. They had obviously known about the project for months and were ideally suited for engaging and informing the public about the unequivocal advantages of researching the philopatry of the South African GWs, for conservation but especially in terms of improving public safety. I could add that enlightened opinion pieces are great - but that it is more important to walk one's talk!

But I shall do none of that.
All I shall do is to invite you to read this interview with the concerned researchers. Without in any way wanting to approve of the way this has been handled, it addresses and convincingly rebuts many of the raised arguments and it finally sheds a light on the research aims.

Still, for my liking, this remains too vague.
Scientific research does not consist in slapping on some tags in order to then "see what happens". Especially in this specific case where the protocols, albeit substantially improved, are still highly invasive, it behooves the researchers to be much more specific and to explain which previously formulated hypotheses are being tested, and why the chosen invasive methods are best for achieving those specific aims.

Concerning the posting of the tracks.
There is clearly a downside to publicizing that information without simultaneously enacting supporting conservation measures. This is part of a larger ethical debate I shall be posting about soon. *Doch doch Dirk, auch ein blindes Huhn... :)

And here endeth the non-rant!

Comments policy.
This is not a chatroom.
But everybody is welcome to post a comment - this once and within the length limits dictated by Blogger, after which I shall feel free to delete whatever I wish.

* PS: post about philopatry, tracks etc here.

Religions and Babies: simply epic!

Wow wow wow!

This really is as good as it gets: totally lucid, unbiased and unequivocal!
I had not heard of him before - but from now on, Hans Rosling will forever be one of my heroes.

Required watching - seriously!



And what about Fiji?
I was concerned to see the comparable PNG mentioned among the very much lesser developed countries, went digging and found the graphs: this one for PNG and this one for Fiji - and here are the predictions about absolute numbers.
So it looks that there's still quite a bit to be done.

The good news?
Religion per se is not an obstacle.
That is, provided that it adapts!

Fearless!

Click for detail!

Gotta hand it to recently certified Mrinalini Sharma.
She is here to shoot 3G, a Bollywood psychological thriller where I understand that she plays a ghost, and has taken some time off to experience the Shark Dive - and she's not even afraid of posing with the infamous BAD boyz!

Well done!
Which begs the question, now that Mrinalini has paved the way, will Neil Nitin Mukesh do us the honors as announced?