Saturday, October 4, 2014

RACING EXTINCTION and SHARKS













It's isn't often that I feel it's important to advertise something. The world is knee deep in ads for everything from pills to airplanes. But this up and coming film is worth a mention.





If you are passionate about sharks and other endangered species, passionate about ocean conservation, or just want the world to be a nice place then give some thought to this film. Tell your friends about "Racing Extinction" by  Oscar®-winner Louie Psihoyos (The Cove) .




Spend a few minutes watching the trailer and see what you think. Just copy and paste the URL into your search engine.



http://vimeo.com/95903058



















goedenquotes.blogspot.com
underwaterinternet.blogspot.com
goedenscience.blogspot.com
drgerrygoeden.blogspot.com
goedensnews.blogspot.com
gerrygoeden.blogspot.com
geraldgoeden.blogspot.com
goedenspress.blogspot.com
einsteinsnature.blogspot.com
youngmarinescientist.blogspot.com
gerryquotes.blogspot.com
goedenmarineecology.blogspot.com


Saturday, August 9, 2014

SHARK FACTS FOR YOUNG MARINE BIOLOGISTS





I get lots of questions from young marine biologists and sharks are at the top of the list. Here are a few facts about these amazing animals.







The whale shark is the largest fish in the ocean and the basking shark is the second largest.


 

 The Basking Shark




That a Tiger Shark’s jaws are strong enough to bite through a sea turtle.

A very large Tiger Shark caught near Hawaii


Sharks are temporarily paralyzed (tonic immobility) when put on their backs. This allows us to handle them safely without harming them.

Shark skin is so rough that was used to make sandpaper, called shagreen. The texture comes from tiny ‘teeth’ that take the place of scales.

More people die from bee stings and lightning strikes than are killed by sharks.

Photographing sharks on assignment

A shark’s teeth are being constantly replaced. A shark may grow 30,000 teeth during its life.


The Great White Shark is found mostly in cold waters



A whale shark's skin is about 10 cm thick, and is the thickest skin of any animal.

Sharks were called sea-dogs until the late 16th century.

Electroreception in sharks is so sensitive that they can sense turtles, fish, and other prey up to 20m away. 

The name shark started in the Caribbean and may have come from the Mayan word, “xoc” pronounced "shock" or "shawk".


Shark teeth are constantly replaced

Sharks can’t control their buoyancy and must keep swimming or sink to the bottom.

Many shark ‘babies ‘take “survival of the fittest” seriously. The stronger pups of some species eat their weaker brothers while they are still inside the mother waiting to be born.


Lots more people drown in bathtubs than get eaten by sharks.


The strange Hammerhead Sharks are now endangered thanks to shark fining and over-fishing


Monday, June 16, 2014

Shark Attacks; The Australian Story



A Florida attack victim required 100 stitches but survived.


I’ve spent the last 40 years in the waters of the Great Barrier Reef. During the ‘early days’ I saw so many sharks that I included them in my census work just because they were all around me. In many places, sharks of all species averaged about 15 individuals per hectare of reef slope.

I was always concerned about them following behind me as I was towed along the reef edge. I saw myself as an overgrown fishing lure and Australia’s reputation as the shark capital of the world didn’t settle my nerves during those long hours underwater.

So how real is the case against sharks?

According to the Australian Shark Attack File (15 April, 2014), there have been 595 unprovoked shark attacks in Australia of which 158 were fatal. Those numbers might make you think twice about going into the water but let’s look at when they happened. In fact the data spans a 100 year period so unprovoked attacks have been averaging about 6 per year and resulting in less than two deaths per year.

State 
# Cases
Fatal
Injured
NSW
203
47
105
QLD
208
67
126
WA
86
19
53
SA
43
17
20
VIC
33
4
19
TAS
11
2
6
NT
11
2
7
Total
595
158
336

If we dig a little deeper into the Australian Shark Attack Files we find that there have been 956 cases since 1791 of which 228 were fatal. The ‘shark capital of the world’ has a risk rate of just one death per year. They go on to state;

“Based on the same calculations used by the International Shark Attack File for the annual risk of death during one's lifetime' from various activities in America – Australia has a 1 in 3,362 chance of drowning at the beach and a 1 in 292,525 chance of being killed by a shark in one's entire lifetime”.


Although shark attacks are infrequent, there is a heightened awareness due to occasional serial attacks; “it’s out there and I’m next”. Horror fiction like Jaws (1975) appears on TV just often enough to keep this fear alive and even so-called “nature” shows only show sharks in frenzied feeding.

According to Time/ CNN : Zoologists today estimate elephants around the world kill 500 people a year while the great white sharks (Jaws)  kill only 4 people.

Incredibly, there are about 24,000 lightning deaths (one every 20 minutes) and 240,000 lightning injuries annually (Royal Aeronautical Society, 2003). When was the last time we read stories of the lurking danger above or watched a movie where people were struck down like dominoes by searing thunder bolts?

On March 1, 2013, "Global Catches, Exploitation Rates and Rebuilding Options for Sharks," was published by Dr. Worm and other researchers from Dalhousie University, the University of Windsor in Canada, as well as Stony Brook University in New York, Florida International University (FIU) in Miami and the University of Miami. A very powerful team of scientists.

 Sharks are killed for their fins. These are made into soup.

Their shocking findings put the carnage at 97 million sharks in 2010. The possible range of mortality falls between 63 and 273 million annually. This equates to somewhere between 7,200 and 31,000 sharks per hour.

"This is a big concern because the loss of sharks can affect the wider ecosystem," said shark researcher Dr. Mike Heithaus in March, 2013 (executive director of FIU's School of Environment, Arts and Society).

John G. West, publishing in the prestigious Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research states, “The way people use the ocean has changed over time. The rise in Australian shark attacks, from an average of 6.5 incidents per year in 1990–2000, to 15 incidents per year over the past decade, coincides with an increasing human population, more people visiting beaches, a rise in the popularity of water-based fitness and recreational activities and people accessing previously isolated coastal areas. 

Sharks are curious and seldom threaten divers.

There is no evidence of increasing shark numbers that would influence the rise of attacks in Australian waters. The risk of a fatality from shark attack in Australia remains low, with an average of 1.1 fatalities per year over the past 20 years. The increase in shark attacks over the past two decades is consistent with international statistics of shark attacks increasing annually because of the greater numbers of people in the water.

Sharks do injure and kill people as do most other large animals and many other things we all take for granted in everyday life. I’ve spent thousands of hours in the water with sharks and do not see them as my enemy. Until we can deal with sharks honestly in both the media and our own minds we will not be able to protect them and the oceans they swim in.

Recent attempts to cull shark numbers in Western Australia are the result of our human reaction to predators that might attack us. It is the same response we have elicited to large predators over the last 15,000 years and which has generally resulted in extinction of those species.

But this time may be different. Research shows that as shark numbers plummet the ecological stability of the sea is lost and life-sustaining fisheries collapse. What a tragedy to discover we lost such an important battle through our own primitive fears and self deception.




Many thanks to my friends Ellen Cuylaerts and Shawn Heinrichs for their excellent photos.

Wednesday, April 9, 2014

Sharks, whales, ivory, and drugs; the world's most lucrative elicite products


 


This report published in the Epoch Times on April 8, 2014


The Guardian reported (4TH April, 2014) that Japan’s biggest online retailer, Rakuten, will stop their whale meat and dolphin meat sales by the end of April after the International Court of Justice ordered Japan to immediately halt its annual whale hunts in the southern ocean.

Rakuten said it had asked sellers to cancel sales of whale meat products on its website “in accordance” with the ICJ ruling. Monday’s verdict in the Hague. It should be pointed out that it did not cover whale meat sales within Japan, which are legal, or the country’s slaughter of whales in the north-west Pacific and in its own coastal waters.

The decision by Rakuten comes soon after the UK-based Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) exposed the company as the world’s biggest online retailer of whale products and elephant ivory.
Now I can’t recall that Japan ever had permits to study the biology of elephants by turning them into carved ornaments and chess pieces. The prohibition of ivory hunting in Africa and even the shooting of poachers haven’t stopped the practice if Rakuten’s sales are an indicator. 

Banning a desirable commodity raises its price and drives it into the black market; look at drugs and guns for example. Until recently Rakuten’s website carried more than 28,000 advertisements for elephant ivory and 1,200 for whale products, according to the EIA and the Humane Society International.

So what does this have to do with sharks?

Justin McCurry writing for the Diplomat (11 Feb, 2011) had visited the fishing docks of Kesennuma City, Japan in an undercover operation. Kesennuma netted some 14,000 tons of sharks in 2009, for which the Japanese operation earned more than 2.4 billion yen.

 
 Asian shark markets like these turn over thousands of tons each year.

But it’s important to understand that fishing for sharks isn’t just a problem created by the Japanese. It’s true that they are successfully capitalizing on the trade of threatened species but as far as sharks go, they aren’t doing the killing.

On March 1, 2013, “Global Catches, Exploitation Rates and Rebuilding Options for Sharks,” was published by Dr. Worm and three other researchers from Dalhousie University teamed up with scientists from the University of Windsor in Canada, as well as Stony Brook University in New York, Florida International University (FIU) in Miami and the University of Miami. A very powerful team indeed.


 
 Shark fins are usually dried in the sun allowing the activity to go on as small scale operations.


Their shocking findings are that fishing for sharks is now globally unsustainable. Their more recent estimates put the carnage at 97 million in 2010. The possible range of mortality is between 63 and 273 million annually. This equates to somewhere between 7,200 and 31,000 sharks per hour.

“Sharks are similar to whales, and humans, in that they mature late in life and have few offspring” said Boris Worm. “Our analysis shows that about one in 15 sharks gets killed by fisheries every year. With an increasing demand for their fins, sharks are more vulnerable today than ever before.”


 

Because shark fins are so valuable and boats are limited in the amount of cargo they can carry, most shark finning is done at sea. The low value shark carcasses are dumped at sea and only the high priced fins return to market. 

Most shark finning is done in under-developed countries but the fishermen benefit little from the high prices the product fetches at the retailers.




Save our Seas Foundation provide shark fin statistics up to 2006.
Country Catching……..Shark Fin Landings
Indonesia………………107,290 tons
India…………………….81,237 tons
Spain……………………55,790 tons
Argentina………………..46,461 tons
Taiwan…………………..40,776 tons
USA……………………..36,906 tons
Mexico…………………..29,315 tons
So, who is buying them?

Country Buying……….Shark Fin Imports
Hong Kong……………….58%
China……………………..36%
Malaysia…………………..2%
Indonesia………………….1%
Taiwan…………………….1%
Thailand…………………..1%
Others…………………….1%
I was surprised to see Malaysia in the number three spot. According to Victoria Mundy-Taylor and Vicki Crook of the wildlife trade investigators, Traffic, “Malaysia imported 6,896 tonnes of sharks fins (dried, prepared and salted) from 2000-2009, the fourth highest importer globally.”

“Malaysia also caught 231,212tonnes of sharks from 2002 to 2011,” which is the eighth highest globally, accounting for 2.9% of the total global reported shark catch during that period.

   






Victoria Mundy-Taylor and Vicki Crook were quick to point out that as a signatory to the CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora), Malaysia has an international obligation to implement measures intended to ensure the international trade in products of the shark species protected under the Convention is both legal and sustainable.

As far as I know, there is no ban on shark and manta ray trading in Malaysia. The eastern Malaysian state of Sabah is said to be considering bans on shark fishing and finning but has held back wanting similar provisions to be included in the federal Fisheries Act 1985.

There does not seem to have been any action yet. Even though shark fishing for most species is now clearly unsustainable, it’s difficult to put an end to traditions and business success in this rapidly growing Asian economy.

The next vexing question is how the shark traders of developing countries would react to bans that halt their income in these super-competitive economies.


 
 This harmless whale shark is the world's largest fish species and now faces extinction.


How willing will a trader be to give up his income and improving standard of living because the “western” world tells him to? I think the answer is he won’t change and corruption will ensure that there is business as usual.

I don’t want to rain on the conservationist’s parade, but banning shark fins in Asia will probably drive the business underground. 



Roof top drying of illicit shark fins.
According to Mr. T. Packard of the conservation group, PangeaSeed, shark fins are the third most valuable illicit product in the world today. Drugs and guns are first and ivory is fourth in terms of cash generated.

Shark conservation must go ahead if we want to stop the ocean’s ecosystem from passing through a tipping point that may catapult us into a disastrous world fisheries situation.

But we will never achieve this with an iron fist. Conservation groups and governments must provide alternative business enterprises if they are not to drive the shark fin trade deep into the black market.

Within 30 years shark fin soup will no longer symbolize prosperity. Instead it will be a tribute to man’s greed and lack of commitment to his own future.

I wish to thank Shawn Heinrichs and Nancy Boucha for the excellent photographic work.







http://youngmarinescientist.blogspot.com/
http://geraldgoeden.blogspot.com/
http://goedensnews.blogspot.com/
http://goedenquotes.blogspot.com/
http://gerrygoeden.blogspot.com/
http://goedenscience.blogspot.com/
http://goedenmarineecology.blogspot.com/
http://gerryquotes.blogspot.com/
http://einsteinsnature.blogspot.com/
http://drgerrygoeden.blogspot.com/
http://underwaterinternet.blogspot.com/

Sunday, February 9, 2014

The 'Shark Menace'; The Real Risk of Shark Attacks


A big part of the problem in conserving sharks is that we don't understand them. We see them as a threat and of no real benefit.








My interest in sharks was like everyone’s – morbid. A shark attack with photos was front page news and each sparked debate in the dive clubs over the best way to avoid becoming the next victim. I sometimes carried a ‘bang stick’ so I could fight these villains if it came to the worst.



 


When I started work on the Great Barrier Reef back in the '70's, I got a surprise. The sharks seemed bigger, more numerous, and very brave compared to their Caribbean brothers. Australian shark attacks were front page stories and dominated the news for days.



And yet there I was working for hours every day, year after year within metres of these predators and all I had to do to avoid trouble with the tropical species was respect their territories and not swim around with speared fish on my belt.


 



The November issue of Conservation Biology published a review of media coverage of sharks. According to Meredith Gore, MSU assistant professor of fisheries and wildlife, Australian and U.S. news articles were more likely to focus on negative reports featuring sharks and shark attacks rather than conservation efforts. "The most important aspect of this research is that risks from ­- rather than to -- sharks continue to dominate news coverage in large international media markets," said Gore.



So how real is the case against sharks?

 Every year about 100 shark attacks are reported worldwide. In 2011,  just 17 fatalities were recorded as having being caused by sharks, out of 118 attacks.  Although shark attacks are infrequent, there is a heightened awareness due to occasional serial attacks; “it’s out there and it’s after me”. Horror fiction like Jaws appears on TV just often enough to keep this fear alive and even “nature” shows only show sharks in frenzied feeding




Shark attack experts are adamant that the danger has been greatly exaggerated. According to the International Shark Attack File (ISAF), between the years 1580 and 2011 there were 2,463 confirmed unprovoked shark attacks around the world, of which 471 were fatal. Surprisingly, that’s only 1.09 fatalities per year for the last 431 years.

 Australia is ranked second in terms of global shark attacks with 877 attacks since colonial settlement in the 18th century; it’s ranked the highest in terms of shark fatalities, with only 217 during this long period.

According to Time/ CNN : Zoologists today estimate elephants around the world kill 500 people a year while the great white sharks (Jaws)  kill only 4 people.

Incredibly, there are about 24,000 lightning deaths (one every 20 minutes) and 240,000 injuries worldwide annually (Royal Aeronautical Society, 2003). When was the last time we read stories of the lurking danger above or watched a movie where people were struck down like dominoes by searing thunder bolts?





Why is shark conservation so important and why is it being neglected?

The first part of this question is easy. Sharks are in big trouble. "Overfishing of sharks is now recognized as a major global conservation concern, with increasing numbers of shark species added to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature's list of threatened species," say Mizue Hisano, Professor Sean Connolly and Dr William Robbins from the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies and James Cook University.

On March 1, 2013, "Global Catches, Exploitation Rates and Rebuilding Options for Sharks," was published by Dr. Worm and other researchers from Dalhousie University, the University of Windsor in Canada, as well as Stony Brook University in New York, Florida International University (FIU) in Miami and the University of Miami. A very powerful team indeed.

Their shocking findings put the carnage at 97 million in 2010. The possible range of mortality is between 63 and 273 million annually. This equates to somewhere between 7,200 and 31,000 sharks per hour.

 


Now in March, 2013; "This is a big concern because the loss of sharks can affect the wider ecosystem," said Mike Heithaus, executive director of FIU's School of Environment, Arts and Society. "In working with tiger sharks, we've seen that if we don't have enough of these predators around, it causes cascading changes in the ecosystem, that trickle all the way down to marine plants." Such changes harm other species, and destroy commercial fisheries, Heithaus explains.

Why we are neglecting shark conservation is harder to answer. First, there have been powerful economic reasons to turn a blind eye to shark fishing and shark finning. These may not have been good reasons but greed is a characteristic of human behaviour and we make lots of poor decisions because of it.


 

A second explanation comes from deep in the primitive part of our brains. Our prehistoric ancestors had the very same fears that we do according to Psychology Today. We were ‘designed’ to be afraid; fear was our operating manual for things we didn’t understand or that could do us harm. Fears protected our ancestors. “Our distant ancestors who were afraid of heights didn’t fall off cliffs, those that feared wild animals didn’t get eaten, those that ran the fastest left the rest behind---and they survived.” 

Surveys of people show different fears for different cultural groups but amazingly many fears are of animals never encountered by the people who fear them. Top of the list is spiders and number 10 are alligators and crocodiles. Sharks come in at number six according to Animal Planet.






Elephants are not on our list of feared animals and we donate millions of dollars each year to protect them even though they kill thirty times more people than sharks. Why can’t we see that the health of our ocean hangs in the balance and that we are making decisions with our ancestor’s fears and not with our future in mind?

 This report is based on similar articles by myself published in Epoch Times. It is posted here for educational purposes only. I wish to thank my friends Ellen Cuylaerts and Shawn Heinrichs for their amazing photos.

http://youngmarinescientist.blogspot.com/
http://geraldgoeden.blogspot.com/
http://goedensnews.blogspot.com/
http://goedenquotes.blogspot.com/
http://gerrygoeden.blogspot.com/
http://goedenscience.blogspot.com/
http://goedenmarineecology.blogspot.com/
http://gerryquotes.blogspot.com/
http://einsteinsnature.blogspot.com/
http://einsteinsnature.blogspot.com/
http://underwaterinternet.blogspot.com/