2012 - The Bad and the Ugly: Track back!

So there - here comes the juicy part!

WARNING - LAST CHANCE TO STOP READING!

You have been warned!

1. Track back

Last year's list is here!

• Shark Research Institute.
  
  Meh.
  The Jersey Girl, the remarkable prez (Film maker, German TV star and one of the top 26 Shark experts on the planet no less!) and the other featured names, or whatever, continue to shine through... wait for it.... NOTHING!
  Did they once again mooch off other peoples' achievements? Who knows and frankly, who cares! And this? Q.e.d, see above under Shark Con! So don't be a sucker - and should you want to donate to a REAL Shark research institute, choose one that actually DOES engage in research and send your money to Doc's Shark Lab!
  
  But THIS is scary!
  Remember the Doha fiasco?
  Has there been a moment of accountability and reflection, and have the lessons be learned?
  
  The question then and now is
  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 Bangkok in order to protest, pontificate and vociferate?
  And in the case of the SRI, I hear: hobnob, small talk and sippy champagny?
  
  Take a wild guess!
  I've talked to a lot of people who have attended Doha and their assessment of the SRI delegation has been nothing short of DEVASTATING - and now those folks want to do it again!
  I mean, seriously, just go and check out Jupp's Facebook page that is all about the SSCS and zero about the SRI (= because there's NOTHING to report - q.e.d. again!), and look at the righteous platitudes, populist hogwash and Watson-esque poetry he chooses to propagate - from the PRESIDENT of a Shark RESEARCH Institute?!? Seriously!!!
  
  And THOSE are the people that are asking for your money to go and represent YOU?

• Shark Angels.
  
  Turns out that I was wrong in lumping them all together!
  There are valiant members who shine through brilliant advocacy at the grassroots level, and the Franco-Belgian chapter is actually quite impressive - so kudos to them.
  South Africa? Meh - it's one year later and STILL zero results!
  
  And then there's the Californian outlayer consisting of Andersen and her claque of sycophantic half-sized bimbos sporting black-dyed chicken feathers (seriously!) and rabid vegan sea shepherdettes that are frankly a bloody disgrace - see Part Four under Operation Requiem!
  
  The question being: is that even Shark Angels - and do the other legit members want to be associated with that whacky shit?
  And if not: maybe one should get rid of the narcissism and the KRAZY and boot her out, just like Shark Savers have done a long time ago, only to emerge much improved and way more credible in the process?

• United Conservationists
  
  What if conservation became easier than rallies, protests, radical groups and letter writing? What if the ability to save ecosystems, species and ultimately humanity was put into your hands and was as easy as the click of the mouse? What if the power returned to the people? What if we united and started a revolution to save the planet, and ultimately ourselves?
  
  Yeah, right - WHAT IF!
  Long story short: NOBODY GIVES A SHIT - thankfully!
  There's now, I hear, a movie nobody apart from daddy's paid journalists has watched; a book nobody apart from daddy's paid journalists has read; a campaign that is unraveling (and here); a REVOLUTION that ain't happening; a non-for-profit (maybe!) without a board now that mummy and daddy have stepped away; and a guru-esque salesman who has fallen victim to his own marketing - which also covers what I've written under Personality Cults one year ago!
  Hell, it is so bad that even Andersen has fled the sinking ship!
  Time to shut this down and go get an honest job, how about that!

• The California Shark Fin Ban is holding.
  
  For now!
  The way I read it, an injunction has been rejected pending the case proper - or was this the final judgement? If so, phewww; if not, good luck - and I mean it!
  
  And this being CALIFORNIA, the Sharktivists have already embarked on the next flawed Shark conservation initiative - see the next section!

• Erik the Mad Hatter of Sharkitarianism.
  
  My research into sharks lead me to a ground breaking and shocking scientific discovery and I spent years of research with scientists and experts around the world to get all of the data down for my book, "The Sixth Extinction". What I have written is by far the most powerful conservation book and in fact the most important book that anyone will ever read.
  
  Excerpt below!

• ABC4
  
  I must say, he really IS a great shooter - watch this.
  
  
  
  I will never like the riding and am really disappointed that GoPro promotes that shit to their thousands upon thousands of customers.
  
  But overall, excellent stuff!
  And, people tell me that this year, he has not partaken in any outright Shark porn!
  
  And still, I just don't like or trust the man - which I'm sure causes him countless sleepless nights :)
  E.g., does one really have to pander to the loons and trolls in order to belong, or whatever?

• Discovery Channel
  
  I once signed the boycott petition and don't watch that shit unless somebody tells me I have to - and nobody has. I hear that things are slowly improving, which is good news indeed.

• Erich Ritter
  
  He's still at it!
  After more than a decade of spouting pseudoscience, we're STILL waiting for the GROSSE WURF, the rolling out of his seminal peer-reviewed paper on his visionary THEORY OF EVERYTHING on Shark-human interaction!
  
  Instead, he has written a BOOK - ANOTHER one! Yay!
  No I'm not posting titles and links lest I be accused of aiding and abetting - just this: would you buy a book purporting to teach you about Bird-human, or Mammal-human interaction - get the gist? Not to mention the fact that he really hasn't got a leg to stand on - those very same lunatic hypotheses have already been falsified by a hungry Bull Shark nearly a decade ago, camera running!
  Anyway, see below!
  
  WARNING!
  A friend who has watched it writes, That's 6 minutes and 42 seconds of my life I will never get back!.
  Indeed - you have been warned!
  
  
  
  6:38
  In the presence of Bull Sharks in shallow water: Recommendation: STAND STILL!
  WOW - pass the coochie to the left hand side!

To be continued!

PS: Check out Part One, Part Two and Part Four!

Deciphering Philopatry - good or bad Science?

Great HH with one of Neil's new tags.

Want to go and catch yourself some Salmon Sharks?
Nothing could be easier: go fishing in the Northern Gulf of Alaska in November - and bingo! And if you believe that the fishermen have not long discovered the TOPP tracks - think again!

As Juerg writes in his correspondence to Nature.

Two faces of marine ecology research

The ecology of animal movement is one field that would benefit from sound evaluation of the risks, benefits and ethics of its important research findings (Nature 484, 415 and Nature 484, 432–434; 2012 read it!).

Scientists can now track the complex horizontal and vertical movements of a wide range of marine species, including tuna, sharks and turtles. These results reveal biodiversity hotspots and inform conservation policies by providing insight into animal behaviour and ecology. However, they also guide fishing operations towards resource-rich locations — putting further strain on both target and by-catch species.

Too many species face severe stock depletion because of intense fishing, pollution and other anthropogenic pressures. The detrimental implications of marine ecological research results must be acknowledged.

Juerg Brunnschweiler
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH Zurich), Zurich, Switzerland.
But there is of course also this.

It is possible, by marrying electronic tag data with oceanography, to gain a sufficient understanding of ecosystem function to enable more effective management of ocean resources.
Specifically, this study shows that when bluefin tuna enter the Gulf of Mexico, they are going to specific locations, where cool, productive water in “cyclonic eddies” makes its way along the continental slope. So during April and May, when they are spawning, bluefin tuna are relatively concentrated – whereas yellowfin tuna remain disbursed broadly throughout the Gulf.

This suggests that it would be possible to protect the bluefin, which are accidentally caught on longlines intended for yellowfin, by restricting fishing in those specific areas where the bluefin are spawning; but that such restrictions need not reduce yellowfin catch rates since they are more uniformly distributed.

Or this.

Great white sharks are found in waters all around New Zealand. National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA), and Department of Conservation (DOC) scientists are investigating the long distance movements of great white sharks inside and outside New Zealand’s territorial waters to improve our understanding of their species’s migratory patterns.
It will assist with designing management measures to reduce shark bycatch in fisheries.

Niwa principal scientist Malcolm Francis said despite the process sounding rough, the safety of the sharks was at the heart of the project.
As part of a wider study which began in 2005, it is hoped the research would return population figures and migratory behaviour of the protected species to assess how many sharks were being killed in fishing nets and lines.

Yes it looks like we got ourselves an ethical debate!
But maybe not so much - and whilst you're pondering, here's a rather epic video about that GW tagging in New Zealand.
Enjoy!



So what about those tracks.
As Bob Hueter already stated in 1998,

I consider the issue of philopatry and natal homing in sharks to be the most important issue in shark biology today, and I challenge all shark researchers to test this hypothesis rigorously in their respective research areas.

Nearly every type of shark research can play a role in this, for the ramifications of philopatry, if true for most shark species, would be profound. It certainly would affect our views of shark evolution and genetics, and it would shape new perspectives on the physiology and ecology of shark species. It would fundamentally affect studies of shark population dynamics, and perhaps most importantly, it would drastically change conventional views of shark fisheries science for the management and conservation of shark populations.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars and thousands of tags later, we now know this.
Sharks and Fishes are not randomly distributed throughout the oceans. Instead, they frequent well determined seasonal, behavior-, gender- and age-related hotspots and travel between these focal points on well determined marine highways.
Or as Hueter and Heupel write in 2004 (read it, this is seminal stuff!)

Many shark species are highly migratory, some covering thousands of miles of ocean in a single year.
However, with the emerging evidence of philopatry in various shark species, it would be wise from a conservation and management perspective to not view this group of marine fishes as oceanic nomads, but rather as more sophisticated, long-distance travelers with a number of discrete homes in the sea. How precise those homes are will need to be established with further research and analysis.

For us Shark conservationists, those data about philopatry are absolutely vital.
As I've tried to show here, many Sharks continue to fall victim to incidental catches despite of being protected, something that can be countered by establishing seasonal localized fishing bans; and like in the case of Playa or, say Vietnam, those localized and seasonal measures may be easier to achieve than trying to enact blanket protection of a species year-round and country wide.

This I believe is also the next step after having established those Shark sanctuaries.
With the big announcement hopefully looming, we're consequently already mulling the next big project that is hopefully going to lead to the full protection of the Shark nurseries, and thus of the valuable big pregnant females during the birthing period.
Keep watching this space!

But what about those published tracks?
Are those publications, maps, interactive websites and apps not simply showing the way for anybody wanting to go and kill the animals? And there is of course also the Anthropogenic Allele Effect, specifically the possible impact of poorly regulated tourism on the animals once newly discovered hotspots are being publicized - like e.g. here!
Like Juerg appears to assert, I fear that this is very much the risk!

Solutions?
Like I said, maybe it's not that difficult.

• Research and data per se are neither bad nor good; and if the track record is any indication, nobody is going to ever be able to stop scientific progress whatever the associated risks. That's just how things roll in science.


• But the risks are real - re-read the examples in Nature.


• Hence the inevitable conclusion, that whoever conducts the research cannot just disassociate himself from the possible consequences. Instead, it behooves the researchers to be fully accountable for their actions, and to be instrumental in mitigating the potentially negative implications of their queries. Obviously, this is easier said then done - but shying away from one's ultimate responsibility won't do, either!

But to come back to the topic of this post.
The data derived from telemetry studies (nice synopsis here!) are vital - but posting those tracks can only happen, if at all, with the utmost of circumspection.
It's exactly like in the case of Fish spawning aggregations where the ichthyologists have learned the hard way that it is better not to publish the exact locations: I say, unless there is unequivocal, robust and above all, fully enforced local management and/or protection, those data should be withheld and only shared with the relevant authorities and like-minded researchers, and this only in the aim of enacting adequate conservation and management measures.
And even once those measures have been enacted, it should be amply sufficient to publish large scale maps and keep the fine scale and exact GPS coordinates a secret.

Or am I missing something here?

Part Two: The BAD and the Ugly!

Yum yum!

And now, to the juicy part!

But first.
This is when somebody will inevitably start shouting, how dare you attack fellow conservationists and invoke global peace and harmony and-so-on and-so-forth.

So lemme state this loud & clear, I don’t hate anybody here.

What I however do hate is bullshit.
And in the spirit of qui tacet consentire videtur, I will always reserve the right to criticize situations I don’t agree with - and if they happen to be in the public domain, I will also feel perfectly entitled to do so publicly!
I also believe that like in science, progress in conservation is achieved via dialogue but also, via robust debate where opinions may get heated but where everybody who is legit accepts that those are just the rules of the game – and where those who do not are simply not scientists and conservationists but posers and bullshitters.

In brief, where I’m coming from is that whereas it is great that Shark conservation has become sizzling hot and is uniting many passionate voices around a great common cause, bullshit continues to be bullshit and shenanigans, shenanigans - and the great common cause is in no way an excuse for any of that.
And like in real life, people are sometimes simply incompatible and thus mutually exclusive.

If you don’t agree, stop reading now - HNY and have a great life!
Seriously, spare yourself the aggro because the following aint gonna be pretty – but if you cannot resist and end up being outraged, spare me the lessons in ethics and instead, debate the assertions!

If the meteoric rise and the astounding successes of Pew teach us one lesson, then it is that the correct way to save Sharks is to pursue their protection by pragmatic, science-based advocacy and by hard work and smart negotiations aimed at legislative changes.
The rest is just stupid fluff and hot air, and counter productive to boot. We are not the ones who enact Shark protection - and rest assured that the people who do have zero time, zero patience and zero respect for the vocal clamoring of the Shark whacks!

Again, Shark conservation is inextricably liked (q.e.d.) to political and economic considerations, and he who does not understand that is just a fool.
Shark fishermen don’t hate Sharks, they want to make a buck – and the authorities don’t subscribe to conservation because they have changed their perspective and suddenly love Sharks, they do so because they have been convinced of the (eminently economic) need for sustainability and in the case of Sharks, because they have learned about the importance of several (not all!) species in regulating the marine environment and thus, of their economical value all the way to generating millions in income from tourism.

Shark finning?
The finning bans are archaic and ineffective and thus not anymore worth pursuing in isolation. Yes finning is an ethical abomination and needs to be abolished – but what is killing the Sharks is Shark fishing and if you care to open your eyes, you will quickly discern that many of the major Shark fishing hubs are processing the whole animals as the meat is increasingly sought after by ever increasing populations starving for protein, and other products like leather, squalene and even the eggs are introduced into the wider economy.

The facts and numbers?
Science is in continuous flux and the data do indeed change – but until they do, the latest peer reviewed science remains the best approximation of the truth.
Thankfully, there are now plenty of resources where anybody can consult the latest insights and data, meaning that those who continue to operate with inflated statistics and outlandish assertions lack any excuses and credibility whatsoever. The facts are plenty horrible as it is – so let’s please stick to those and refrain from the usual stupid inflated hyperbole!

The industry?
If there has been one trend at this year’s DEMA, then it has been Shark conservation - and everybody in the dive industry is now claiming that he has always been deeply and passionately involved.
Great – if only they all did walk the talk!

Instead, the usual shenanigans have continued unabated.
Don’t get me wrong, I know that nothing is just black or white. Competition is continuously leading many Shark diving operators to ever up the ante, this also very much in order to satisfy the continuous requests for ever more adrenaline by their clients. There is also an insatiable demand for images featuring stunt work with Sharks.
I understand that these are businesses and that those folks are merely trying to make a buck – but I certainly do not subscribe to the notion that these developments are inevitable, the more since we at BAD are doing very well indeed by promoting a totally different kind of experience, do not enable Shark porn and have in fact continuously tightened our protocols as a result of the stupendous increase in large Sharks visiting Shark Reef.

But you can’t have it both ways.
Stunt work with Sharks and promoting gratuitous adrenaline thrills got nothing to do with Shark conservation, period!

And the much-invoked Demystifying and Changing Perceptions about these Misunderstood animals?
Indeed - respectable Shark diving operations do that daily, and this without having to resort to those stupidities, and so do respectable Shark media!

Think about how the same was achieved with the terrestrial top predators: certainly not by showcasing scantily clad death-defying bimbettes perambulating in the savannahs and the Sundarbans and also not by turning alpha predators into pets by allowing tourists to physically interact with them, let alone ride them!

Changing perceptions by attempting to “prove” that we’re not on the menu of Sharks actually perpetuates the myth by reducing the animals’ fascinating and complex life history to one element only, that of shark-human interactions where some of the large species actually do devour people – which is perfectly normal and merely illustrates that they are the opportunistic top predators they just happen to be!

Nobody in his right mind asserts that Lions and Tigers are harmless – but most of us have learned to respect and love them for what they are, beautiful, charismatic and awe inspiring essential elements of their natural habitats, and very much endangered.
Think BBC documentary: that’s how you do it – and yes, the rest is just moronic BS!

Anyway, I’m digressing – here’s the list.

• Least credible Shark Conservation Org: Shark Research Institute
  
  Founded in the early nineties and once rightfully considered to be the visionaries and trailblazers in Shark conservation, this org has simply ceased to evolve and is now quite obviously well past its sell-by date.
  A motley grouping of baby boomers whose claim to fame, if any, lays way back somewhere in the distant past, they doggedly cling on to outdated concepts, data and strategies and achieve nothing substantive in the process. This year’s media by some of their featured members have been simply appalling, see below, to the point where the whole org is little more than a purveyor of clients for Amos’ pinnacle expeditions and has frankly become a major embarrassment to the cause - and being my usual polite self, I will certainly leave it at that!

• Most disappointing Shark Conservation Org: Shark Angels
  
  A great concept combining a promising initial triumvirate of passionate and good looking female Shark advocates, Shark Angels could have become the next big thing in Shark conservation.
  Well, after several years of waiting it turns out that it did not. Pretty girls posing with cardboard signs next to dead Tiger Sharks are just that, pretty - and the actual track record is that they have certifiably saved zero Sharks from the nets of the KZNSB or otherwise, not then and not after several years of pretty PSAs and obscure conservation work in SA. Now it appears that the epicenter has been moved to Canada and I remain equally unimpressed. Did I hear Toronto? Yes, maybe - but then again, maybe not so much!
  Up next? Canada. And the world... we shall see!

• Conservation Snake Oil of the Year: United Conservationists
  
  Wow. How could I be so blind!
  Like all strokes of genius, it’s so compellingly simple: humankind just needs to stage a media-based Revolution under the leadership of those visionary dreamers and doers - and the Planet will be saved! Because we are all inherently good deep down inside - and if you give us 50k, we'll even take you diving! We are the 99%!
  Send us your money and we will save the Sharks, Lemurs and Tigers! And we will end Ocean Acidification because once they see my movie, the uneducated masses in China, the US, Europe, India and Russia will rise and force global governments to agree on reducing emissions! Just like the Arab Spring – or whatever, just send us the money!
  Seriously!

• Least impressive Shark Conservation Achievement: California Shark Fin Ban
  
  As they say in German, The Better is the enemy of the Good.
  Talk about a missed opportunity! Nice – but given the impressive widespread good will, resources and star power, this is simply not good enough! Check out the legislation, corollary with exemptions and analysis: this is a (bad) licensing law that bans the possession of Shark fins (notabene, fins that are imported from Asia where they first get processed for consumption) and clearly unilaterally targets the principally Asian consumers of Shark fin soup in California.
  Is that really Shark conservation? Does closing down the Californian shark fin market really impact the global trade and really save Sharks, let alone combat Shark finning, one of the stated aims of the legislation? Convince me!
  
  Plus, there is this.
  The demise of California’s Blues and Makos is legendary - and yet with this law, the local commercial and game fishermen are still free to go and kill California’s Sharks, and anybody is still welcome to continue eating Shark steaks and to consume all other Shark products. And the outlawed fins of those Californian Sharks? Betcha that they get exported to Asia!
  Compare that to the excellent progress in Florida where more and more Sharks are being protected – still think this is an achievement to be proud of?
  But as I said, nice!

• Curiouser and Curiouser: Erik Brush (& Co!)
  
  "On the day that too many sharks have gone you will not know that a line has been crossed. It is only a while afterward that the sudden unleashing of methane hydrate into an already weakened atmosphere will show us our error. Then we will long for our predatory friends that could have regulated the food chain and kept the gas exchange of phytoplankton working for all life!" - Self Quote.
  
  New Age meets Shark conservation meets pseudoscience - and, meets the (obviously mad!) Hatter!
  Check out IMEC, Brush’s curious Facebook page and his curiouser personal website and tell me if I’m not right! And we've even got ourselves a new and mysterious Alliance!
  
  Anyway, all of this would just be harmless and actually, quite entertaining albeit in a bizarre way, were it not for the fact that the self professed marine biologist, Shark specialist and friend of Doctor Erich Ritter has managed to accumulate quite a loyal following (really? Are we witnessing the dumbing down of Hollywood?), among which some prominent representatives of the SRI who very much appear to endorse his pseudoscientific ramblings.
  Does Collier really think that Erik’s Shark math is very nice?
  Does the President of the SRI (doesn't R stand for Research?), apparently a German TV star and associate of Brush, really totally agree with Erik’s assertion that Sharks are the most critical factor besides human pollution to global warming and mass extinction?
  Whatever – right? But the cartoons are cute!

• Shark Pornographer of the Year: ABC4
  
  Well, no need to further post any evidence here.
  Andy is actually a nice personable guy, an accomplished cameraman and also brave to the point of being crazy - and thus highly sought after when it comes to filming stunts with large predatory Sharks. Several other cameramen do the same and although I hate the imagery they produce, I know that that’s what the market wants and respect them as professionals as I understand that they do what they do because competition in that field is fierce, jobs are scarce and they got bills to pay.
  What however riles me here is Andy's total hypocrisy of regularly partaking in Gurney’s despicable productions, see below, and then turning around and pretending to be a fervent Shark conservationist. Thing is, even if that were true, for every person conceivably heeding Andy’s self-professed conservation messaging, thousands are being certifiably influenced against Sharks by watching the images he produces.
  Can’t have it both ways buddy – either finally walk the talk, or take the $$$ and shut the F up!
  And the exact same applies to those Shark diving operators who continue to enable that shit - and no, I'm not about to post names lest I once again get accused of engaging in some food fight or the like: they know who they are and so do you!

• Shark Porn Production House of the Year: Gurney Productions
  
  Again, follow the link here.
  Discovery’s go-to people for those appalling Shark Week programs featuring idiotic scripts, idiotic experiments and idiotic anchors, they really transcend negative attributes. Absolute scum!

• Shark Porn Channel of the Year: Discovery Channel
  
  I’ve long stopped watching that shit that is Shark Week – but sometimes I catch a glimpse whilst zapping thru the wonderful selection of Fiji’s Sky Pacific and guess what, nothing whatsoever has changed. Not that they would care in the slightest - but I will continue to boycott Shark Week and BAD will continue to turn down those yearly requests for atrocious film shoots!

• Worst Shark Porn: How Sharks Hunt
  
  Featuring the chain wrapping of Emma, courtesy of ABC4 and Gurney - nothing to add to what I said there.

• Most embarrassing Shark Conservation Advocacy Stunts: Bikini Bimbettes and Warriorettes
  
  And I cite from a message by one of the Shark Greats – you would be amazed (and the bimbettes, totally ashamed!) if I told you her name!
  
  How I hate the latest bit of National Geographic Society shark porn!
  Absolutely ghastly that they have fallen so low, pandering to the lowest common denominator--sex and sharks. Not a scintilla of redeeming quality. I say this sight unseen as I refused to watch it after seeing the trailers.
  
  But that would be but one, albeit particularly pathetic example.
  Why some otherwise modern and emancipated women would agree to demean themselves by partaking in these embarrassing stupidities will forever remain a mystery to me – and undoubtedly, to the other 99.9% of intelligent modern and emancipated women who love Sharks but don’t engage in those shenanigans!
  
  Oh - did I hear Demystify and Changing Perceptions?
  By “proving” that Sharks don’t strike bikini bimbettes? Well guess what, they do, so sorry folks – and that makes them neither good nor bad, nor does that fact in any way diminish the validity of the assertion that we need to protect them!
  The swimwear stunts and experiments are moronic pseudo-conservation and pseudoscience that presumes that everybody out there watching is a retard – thing is, most people are not and will quickly identify them as what they really are, highly embarrassing self promoting publicity stunts!
  Tip o’ hat: Erich Ritter– and we all know how that one ended!

• Lifetime Achievement Award for Pseudoscience: Erich Ritter for Sharkitarianism
  
  Yes the above link is plenty sufficient!
  And after more than a decade of spouting those outlandish and I may add, very much self-debunked theories: still eagerly awaiting the first peer-reviewed paper on the subject!

• Most preposterous Assertions by Shark Expert: Ralph Collier
  
  George eat your heart out!
  Having managed to completely supplant him as this year’s undisputed token Sesselfurzer, Collier and his Shark farts have been nothing short of spectacular. From the epic dog analogy to having linked JAWS with the starvation of Grizzly Bears by means of the dreaded domino effect, the man is truly a cornucopia of moronic pseudoscience. Will he be able to further exceed this year’s stellar performance and grace us with more, forever unforgettable tidbits of hot perfumed air?

• Shark Conspiracy Whacknut of the Year: H E Sawyer
  
  Huzzah!
  We've finally got ourselves our very own, home-grown conspiracy – and shame on Wikipedia for not having posted it on the ominous list!
  So it turns out that not only are the numbers a conspiracy concocted by the scientific intelligentsia, but that all of us are (once again!) nothing but the puppets of Big Oil!
  
  Because, and I cite, shark conservation is actually a fig leaf for oil & energy corporations, through their ‘charitable trusts’ to ring fence large areas of international waters through MPAs, MCZs and ‘shark sanctuaries’ with the purpose of leasing it out to other oil & energy corporations, & using the money from that to fund the science that supports the policy of ring fencing large areas of international waters for ‘protecting sharks’ etc!
  
  Utter humbug? Far from it, here is the proof, black on white!
  Wow - makes Erik the Mad Hatter of Sharktivism look like a genius in comparison! If these are really the exhaust fumes of democracy, may I humbly suggest that this may indeed be this year’s ultimate Furz from the Sessel. May I further humbly suggest that the man urgently get himself a life and quite possibly, a diagnosis by a qualified psychiatrist, chop chop!
  
  As a reminder, here’s what the despicable cabal of evil has been doing in 2011 - unequivocally highly suspect!

Story here - check it out!

• Stupidest Shark Media: Guadalupe Mermaid
  
  Yes that would be the f@$%ing mermaid – and I’m still completely astounded by the sheer scope of the bullshit, hubris and mind-blowing stupidity!

• Irritating: Personality Cults
  
  Just one example among several.
  
  See, some of our founders made a little movie called Sharkwater. Soon NGOs started popping up and government policy started changing. All it took was information and a spark, and the world will never be the same.
  
  Have we got ourselves a case where the salesman is starting to believe his own marketing, with symptoms of incipient guru-esque megalomania?
  There is no doubt that Sharkwater hit a nerve and that it has done much for popularizing Shark conservation among the masses. But Rob is not the visionary trailblazer, Shark conservation did not start with Sharkwater and the recent spectacular successes are not at all attributable to that movie!
  
  Anyway, it is just one example and certainly not the most brazen one.
  The Heroes and heroines, warriors, whisperers, experts, specialists and whatnot are all legit if the moniker is being assigned by others - but when it is self promotion and really nothing more than branding, it becomes irritating.
  Does sharktivism really need its own version of the Kardashians and the associated frothy adulation and gossip? Maybe – but like in real life, I don’t like it one bit!

• Most Brazen Conservation Heist: Shark Research Institute
  
  Having nothing much to show for, the SRI is now mooching on other people’s hard work by insinuating that they were somehow responsible for all (!) of this year's Shark conservation achievements. From the SRI's Winter Newsletter - and I cite
  
  Thanks to you — our members — 2011 has been a very good year for sharks. Through SRI active participation, advocacy and legislative efforts we have achieved spectacular results. We still have work to do, but look at what has been accomplished this year alone!
  Give yourself a pat on the back!! Thanks to your support, 2011 has been a fantastic year for sharks. This year alone:
  * Honduras announced creation of 92,665-square mile shark sanctuary.
  * The Bahamas converted 243,244 square miles into a shark sanctuary.
  * The Marshall Islands, Guam and Palau created a region-wide 2 million square-mile shark sanctuary.
  * Chile banned shark finning in its water.
  * ICCAT agreed to reduce fishing of shortfin mako shark and porbeagle sharks (At least get your facts right! I thought you were there?)
  * The trade in shark fins, outlawed in Hawaii in 2010, was also prohibited in Guam, Oregon, Washington and California
  
  Certainly cleverly worded!
  I say, how cheap, sad and frankly revolting - simply unforgivable!

• Low Point of Academic Competition: Junior Controversy
  
  Got some time to waste?
  Read this and track back through the links. What you will discover is an ignominious smear campaign against Michael Domeier orchestrated by competing researchers. Dunno and don’t care much about what happened after it backfired, except for noticing that the Monterey Bay Aquarium has obviously not severed its contacts to the very much implicated Sal Jorgensen and Scot Anderson of TOPP.
  All very revealing and very disturbing!

• Stupidest Shark Conservation Memes and Slogans.
  
  Here, I did a quick brain storming session with some of my Shark friends.
  In no particular order: the Oxygen myth; No Fin No Shark No Future period (can anybody please tell me what that means?????); Fintastic; and last but not least, Fins Up!

And here endeth the list - happy I finally got it off my chest!

And, are you pissed off?
I sure hope so - the question being, at whom!
Comments welcome!

The proper Way

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

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

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

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

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

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




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

Plenty to discover, plenty to learn.
Enjoy!

Australia - WTF?

Patric is right.
If you are a Shark, take a left in Sydney and get the hell outta there!

Examples?
We've blogged at length about the appalling decision by the NSW minister for primary industries Katrina Hodgkinson to lift the fishing ban at the Grey Nurse aggregation sites Fish Rock and Green Island which are still enumerated in the Ministry's pamphlet but now acutely threatened.
The submission period (this one is excellent - read it!) has closed on August 26th - and what has happened since? So far, I hear, nada de nada de nada, meaning that the Ministry has given no feedback whatsoever and that the sites are still open for fishing.
Sadly, I'm not at all surprised.

Then, much like in SA, there's the shark nets and drumlines.
They are hopelessly antiquated and ecologically unsustainable (and here) and in other countries, they have been widely replaced by equally effective modern beach safety techniques. But when the public continues to advocate culling "rogue" Sharks after somebody gets attacked, rolling back those perceived protective measures may be politically impossible. Read this excellent feature from the Save our Seas Foundation on the problems of coexisting with Sharks and the various measures implemented - an here's a good one about Shark nets in Oz.
Incidentally, I was particularly appalled by this article. In it, one Terry Peake has the audacity to make the following statements.

“There’s a lot of ‘green money’ tied up in shark research.
Certain organisations are given money to protect something, so they do whatever it takes to say they’re protecting it, then at the end of tenure they present facts saying protection must continue so they receive more grants,”

As fishing stocks deplete, sharks are starting to adapt their food sources.
“Sharks need food with a high fat content and in the past humans wouldn’t provide that. However they’re getting desperate. Now we’re hearing stories about people completely disappearing, not just being bitten. It’s not a case of mistaken identity anymore, sharks are adapting out of necessity.”

Yes, this would be totally Vic Hyslop redux!
Shocking - but then again, maybe not so much. One could put it away as the ramblings of merely yet another unhinged Shark hating lunatic, were Terry not the Australian investigator of the GSAF, a bogus Shark Attack database closely affiliated with the equally bogus Shark Research Institute, the home base of other luminaries like Ritter, Collier and Amos - and I spare you the links to posts on this blog, the more as you can search for them yourself!
I say, quousque tandem - and Jupp, should you read this, get the hell outta there - ehrlich, in Freundschaft!

But I'm digressing as always.
Back to the Ozzie Shark fiasco and we find the Queensland East Coast Inshore Fin Fish Fishery ECIFFF that is taking 600 tons (or maybe more) of Sharks from the GBR Marine Park each year.
Yes read that again - from a Word Heritage Area!

I mean, seriously!
It has been known for years that any such fishery is completely unsustainable and that reef Sharks in the GBR are in big trouble - last confirmed by this open source paper as recently as last month.
And now, Fisheries Queensland has made a submission to have this abomination declared an approved Wildlife Trade Operation, this based on a rather problematic (!) report and this in diametrical contrast to the aspirations of the dive industry.
And the Federal Government is asking for comments.

Enter Madi Pip Stewart.
I must say, I am increasingly impressed by this very young underwater cinematographer, by her passion, by her product, by her outreach, by the quality of her statements. Anyway, you want to check out her blog where you will find a template for a comments letter and also, an assessment of Elasmobranchs caught in the GBR. Once again, very impressive indeed!
The consultation period closes on October 21 - and alas, I once again fear that the end result will not be in favor of Sharks, Pip passion or no Pip passion!

But the conservation fiasco not only limited to Australia's Sharks.
South Australia and NSW are bowing to the pressure by the anglers and other ocean recreationists and re-zoning their marine parks.

Furthermore, the Commonwealth is completely ignoring unanimous scientific advice, and that of the community, when defining its marine parks in the South West Bioregion that features an exceptionally high concentration of iconic marine species, many of which are endemic and can thus be found nowhere else on the planet. And worse than that, it is now actively muzzling and censoring dissenting researchers, Texas style.
Bravo to Corey for speaking up - and having talked to a few friends, it is exactly like he says!

So, WTF is going on?
Ever since the fratricide of Rudd and the subsequent botched elections, the Labour-led government there has been nothing but an appalling joke whereby anything and anybody, let alone useless baggage like ideals and principles are being sacrificed on the altar of self serving political survival - and yes I'm trying to be polite!
Gone are the days where Australia was a shining beacon of visionary conservation, gone the days where it could lecture the Pacific Island States who are now showing Big Brother the way forward.

Solutions?
Alas, short term, I am rather skeptical.
The political trend appears to be pointing towards a shift to the right where Big Mining and Big Oil are calling the shots - and obviously, those entities could not care less about Australia's ecosystem, marine and otherwise. But as long as there are young passionate people like Madi, there is hope, at least in the long term.

Fingers crossed!

Shark Research Committee - Fundraiser!

Source.

Behold!

Yes, Ralph Collier wants your money.

In exchange, you get some awesome stickers and/or an awesome t-shirt and/or an awesome book that is being highly praised by none other than Dr. Ueber-Charlatan, Chief Scientist (!!!), Global Shark Attack File, Shark Research Institute!

Wow - if that doesn't say it all!

And the stupendifabulous ultra-mega-secret DNA research?

Like I said, nobody lifts Sharks out of the water merely in order to obtain DNA samples - and when the researchers draw blood, they do so in order to investigate other matters! The whole breathy bit about the revolutionary pioneering completely noninvasive procedure that will not require removing a shark from the ocean and exposing it to potential injury that could result in serious health consequences or even death is meant to impress the anti-OCEARCH crowd who have gobbled up the bait hook-line-and-sinker and are busy promoting this nonsense in their circular echo chambers.

Oh and then, I find this.

And this. And this. And this. And this.

Interesting - but he loves Seals, see at top!

Anyway.

Don't be a sucker.

Give your money to reputable researchers - or even better, treat yourself to a Shark dive with a reputable operator!

Tiger Beach - cool Research!

Hallelujah!

More pro-Shark features in the Florida press!
This time, it's a great article about Guy Harvey's research on Tiger Sharks in the Bahamas.

Yes, that would be "That" Guy, he of the T-shirts!
His bio mentions that Guy Harvey is a unique blend of artist, scientist, diver, angler, conservationist and explorer, fiercely devoted to his family and his love of the sea! And a real nice chap on top of that!

But much more than that, he is also the founder of the Guy Harvey Research Institute that is fiercely committed to the preservation of Fish and particularly, the big game Fish and Sharks. In fact, GHRI conduct some of today's most innovative Shark research and our Juerg often collaborates with them when doing his thing on Shark Reef.

And on top of that, he has done this!



Is this Guy cool - or what?

This time, Guy and his folks have gone to Tiger Beach to tag some Tigers.
It's a cool undertaking which aims at understanding the movements of those animals in the area - much like what we do in Fiji with our small-scale movement research. Whereas we feed the acoustic transmitters and sometimes attach them externally by using a spear gun, they rope in the Sharks and attach the tags internally. Not sure if I like that in terms of the stress they inflict on the animals - but it's fast, really quite harmless and they must have their reasons for believing that it's the best way to go.

And, it's for the best of causes.
Because as I read with great joy, it involves the Bahamian Government and has the aim to eventually have the area declared a Shark sanctuary!

Where did I hear that one before?
Great that things have been set in motion!

PS hat tip to Felix!

Shark-proof Wetsuits - Questions by Mark Gray!

Source.

And it gets even better!

Mark is this dude.

A renown Shark photographer, he is above all a fellow Shark diving industry professional - and having discovered those Shark repellent wetsuits, he has taken on SAMS and is publicly, and doggedly asking precise questions about their, and I cite, scientifically designed and developed shark repellent wetsuit technology.

Here is the latest exchange.

I c/p it lest as so often, it gets "accidentally" deleted - much like the mentioned "other posting" that has disappeared from SAMS' FB page.

• 

  Mark Gray So you baited up two tiger sharks and they didnt bite the bucket you had your wetsuit wrapped in...........is that the science your using?

  Saturday at 4:52pm · Like
• 

  Shark Attack Mitigation Systems - SAMS Mark, our response to your other post on the site today refers. To clarify, the one minute video sets out one very short extract of a complex testing process, which has been conducted independently by University of Western Australia since January. We welcome you to investigate the science in more detail. The link to which you have responded sets out the science page at the SAMS website, and the FAQ page at http://www.sharkmitigation.com/faq.html may provide more information if you would like to check it out.

• Mark Gray So the research hasnt involved Great White Sharks? Bit irresponsible in Marketing your products and stating that they "Protect" and "hide" without testing on the major species of sharks which has cause the fatalities in Australia in recent years..........?
• 

  Shark Attack Mitigation Systems - SAMS Mark, we are trying to come up with a positive solution, based in science. Independent testing will be an ongoing process, potentially taking many years as we discover how the full range of predatory species respond and progressively refine the visual technology. All ocean users are at risk and discretion and caution is always necessary. We think people know that. We are offering information on what we have found so far scientifically, and an alternative to a black neoprene wetsuit so that ocean users can consider that option and make a choice. We are very clear that we are not offering guarantees. Who could? We invite you to also contribute positively to this page. We have responded to two of your posts already on the same theme. If you have suggestions as to how we could better inform, such as making the position clearer on our website or including more detail in our FAQ's then please let us know. We would welcome your constructive contributions.

  
  
• 

  Mark Gray Well according to your previous posting the testing program has only started in January this year with that testing program only conducted on Tiger sharks with baited drums???. Wouldnt it be wise and responsible to do further testing on different species, namely Great Whites and Bull sharks and using test subjects which honestly represent how your wetsuits present themselves to potential predator shark (ie moving dummy surfer or diver)? With all your press releases and your youtube clip you refer to your products as "Protecting" or "Hiding" from a potential shark attack and base all your supporting evidence on a test which produced very limiting results. You have entered into a full scale marketing event without doing your homework on the so call technology and the testing involved. Now if you can not answer my questions from my own experience with sharks on a regualr basis and with little common knowledge well maybe you have a take a reall good look at your product and how your market it and yourself to the community and consumers. I have asked in a previous posts questions which I and I bet alot of others out there would be asking and the last response I recieved from you was to quote "Mark, we note and respect your perspectives and views" but failed to answer the questions at hand.

• Mark Gray I accept your invitation to contribute positively to this page. What I would like to see is some more transparency to the technology, research, and what you conveyin your marketing of your products to the general public. I would like to see these 10 questions answered: 

   1. When did the in field testing start?
  2. When did your marketing campaign start?
  3. Has there been any testing of your wetsuits on Great White and Bull sharks?
  4. Has there been any other testing procedure which has not included baiting of sharks for attracting? If so what have they been?
  5. Has there been any testing which involved moving a simulated subject wearing you wetsuit through the water (both Diving and Surfing)?
  6. What in field testing program has been used to determine how Cryptic your wetsuits are? And how are the results differ with different visibility, water colour, overhead light ?
  7. Are the Cryptic dive wetsuits loose their ability to “Hide” when a scuba tank, BCD and fins are added?
  8. How does the Cryptic dive wetsuit hide the noise and sight of the bubbles of a scuba diver?
  9. Has the results of the research conducted by the WA University been published and if so which publication?
  10. Do you personally wear your SAMS wetsuit when your diving or surfing?
• 

  Shark Attack Mitigation Systems - SAMS Mark,
  
  Responding as follows:
  
  1. When did the in field testing start? January 2013 – refer previous post.
  2. When did your marketing campaign start? We have not started marketing, we did a media release to let people know what we are doing on Wednesday last week, and opened up the website for review, together with this Facebook page to encourage discussion.
  3. Has there been any testing of your wetsuits on Great White and Bull sharks? Not as yet, we have covered this in your earlier posts and elsewhere in the forum. The next set of tests are proposed to be with Great Whites.
  4. Has there been any other testing procedure which has not included baiting of sharks for attracting? If so what have they been? Not at this stage, the University of Western Australia is precluded from using humans or humanoid forms of any kind and have determined that the existing testing process is satisfactory. Baiting is a necessary practicality to get any engagement with sharks in experimental conditions.
  5. Has there been any testing which involved moving a simulated subject wearing you wetsuit through the water (both Diving and Surfing)? Not as yet.
  6. What in field testing program has been used to determine how Cryptic your wetsuits are? And how are the results differ with different visibility, water colour, overhead light ? We have responded to this question elsewhere on the site yesterday and will include in our FAQ’s at our website.
  7. Are the Cryptic dive wetsuits loose their ability to “Hide” when a scuba tank, BCD and fins are added? We have responded to this in your previous post.
  8. How does the Cryptic dive wetsuit hide the noise and sight of the bubbles of a scuba diver? Obviously it doesn’t.
  9. Has the results of the research conducted by the WA University been published and if so which publication? We have responded to this in the posts above.
  10. Do you personally wear your SAMS wetsuit when your diving or surfing? Yes.
  
  Mark, you have now posted somewhere between 20 and 30 questions to this page in the course of a couple of days, most of them repetitious. Some include personal statements that verge on troll-like behavior. We have respectfully attempted to answer them.
  
  We accept that you are not a fan of what we trying to achieve. Equally there are many people who see logic in the concept and wish to explore it further. Over the last few days, this has included previous shark attack victims making contact with us to see how they can help us in our trials.
  
  We will not be responding to any further posts from you, we hope you understand. If you continue to post in this manner we will, with regret, be obliged to exclude you from the forum.

  
  
• Mark Gray its a shame that after you have invited me for constructive contributions in a previous post your now no longer going to response to my valid questions regarding your product. I am all for trying to achieve a much safer aquatic environment for all to enjoy but I am not a fan on the ways and means in which your company has mislead the general public by telling them that you are scientifically backed, have the technology which has proven itself, hides you from the shark when diving and putting the fear of god into the genral public especially in your youtube clip stating "now the deadliest coast in the world". You have based your whole product line on unfinalised research (Results from 6 months of a 24 months research project) and on a single species of shark which is not the major cause of fatal attacks here in Australia, under different conditions which would not apply for which your products are inteded to be used for. Your Youtube clip and media releases do not included any of the cautionary comments which you have included in you website and your response to my questions above show that your more concerned about getting your product out into the public eye well before any of the scientific results and conclusions have been finalised which to me makes me believe that your company is more concerned with making a quick buck and not addressing the public saferty of water users. Lie to the genral public and you will be bitten on the arse but my concern is more for the safety of potential users of your products who have bought your product based on your mistruths and false advertising.

 Mark has summed up his conclusions as follows.

 Mark Gray From the SAMS face book page they finally answered done of my point blank questions.

1. The field testing is a 24 month on going process which started January 2014. Final results are still 18 months away.
2. The field testing is based on one species of shark (tiger) which was attracted by baits
3. The field testing has not involved Great White sharks or Bull Sharks to date
4. The field testing does not include testing similar sized subject which would represent the shape and movement of a surfer or diver. According to SAMS bait is required to attract sharks to the test subjects.
5. The cryptic dive suits are tested in clear water on a bright day not results given regarding low light, cloudy, or reduced visibility water quality.
6. Cryptic dive suits also require cryptic patterns to be also applied to scuba tanks, BCD, fins to make the wetsuit cryptic.
7. Cryptic dive wetsuits will not hide the user from the sight of their bubbles or the noise of their breathing.
8. SAMS acknowledged that GWS do attack using a breach method on silhouette prey on the surface.
9. SAMS also acknowledged that sharks also use other senses other than vision to hunt prey.

On the basis that field testing was performed by using baited drums on the test subjects of two tiger sharks in clear water in bright days with this testing only in its 6 month out of 24 set aside for a finalized conclusion makes me believe that SAMS is more interested at cashing in on the fears if the general public that spending time for proper ethical research to base their products on.

And to the Oceans Institute, this:

Sounds like your cashing in with the developers and using half truths to sell wetsuits that "Protect" and "Hide" you from all species of sharks. 

This is making your research look like as joke and is tied up with a bunch of snake oiler promising the world but delivering nothing

Bingo.

As I first mocked, and then stated: it's just total BS and shameless profiteering!

Meanwhile, in la-la land...

David has unearthed yet another priceless life saving  video by Eternal Youth Empire aka Israel-Light  - how to retard ageing by a whopping 30%!!!

And this time, it's all, gasp, for free!

Behold!

But beware!

You got to clean up the pineal gland, or it's all for naught!

Yes this is (caps lock) SCIENCE!

Exactly like her striped wetsuit - and incidentally, EXACTLY like the wetsuits by SAMS!

To be continued no doubt!