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.

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 18^th 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/

Oceanic Whitetip Sharks and Overfishing Apex Predators

     Dr. Gerry Goeden

I was recently bemoaning the sorry state of the Oceanic Whitetip Shark and mentioned that there was just a Conference of the Parties (CITES) meeting in Bangkok earlier in March to look at their protection. What was only a few years ago the most abundant large predator on Earth is now little more than a memory thanks to overfishing and shark finning.

 An Oceanic Whitetip Shark and accompanying pilot fish

I also made mention of the fine work of Dr. Shelley Clarke who estimated from market surveys that between 26 million and as many as 73 million sharks were harvested each year worldwide. Her best estimate was 38 million sharks killed annually.

We may have had that wrong. 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.

Their shocking findings are that shark fishing 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.

Carcharhinus melanopterus on a Guam reef

"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."

Why am I so upset? It was never fun swimming around in a 1000 m of water with things described by Jacques Cousteau as "the most dangerous of all sharks". Why should I care if they are gone?

The research I was doing at that time looked at the make up of the marine fish community as it was exposed to fishing pressure. Specifically, to fishing aimed at top predators on the coral reef. I was trying to find out how much fishermen were reducing the stocks of valuable food fish on the Great Barrier Reef. I found that stocks were devastated by up to 95% in some places.

But I discovered something that wasn’t known before. I came up with a mathematical expression that predicted changes in the entire fish community. I published the work in 1982.

That’s right! Not just the species the fishermen were catching; it looked like everything changed and more importantly, it looked like it might never change back. Sadly, this idea didn’t catch on and was buried in scientific libraries. Everyone believed that if you left things alone for a while they would repair themselves and go back to the way they were in the “good old days”. This comes from the idea of ‘renewable resources’ and is the way we see the world around us.

Hammerhead sharks are seriously endangered and facing extinction

The years past and things started to go very wrong in the Caribbean. Reefs there were being over-run by seaweed, fish were gone, and corals were dying. From about 2000 researchers were looking at a variety of possible causes. By March, 2009 researchers had found that fish abundance that had been stable for decades had given way to significant declines from 1995. 

By June, 2012 Dr. Roff had completed a study raising concerns about the future of Caribbean coral reefs. Seaweeds were blooming so fast that corals were unlikely to recover in the absence of enough seaweed eating fish.

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 can harm other species, and may negatively affect commercial fisheries, Heithaus explains.

Science has been nailing the problem down to over exploitation of the apex predators – sharks and some groupers. It was during the last two years that this research caused my early work to be dusted off and looked at again. My 1982 concept is now becoming a cornerstone of contemporary thinking in coral reef management.

Put simply, we must have all the species in reasonable numbers if we are to maintain healthy and sustainable fisheries. Eliminating an apex predator is like pulling a couple of ‘chips’ out of your computer. It still runs but it doesn’t run the way you want it to.

In my earlier work I forecast that “the concept of renewable resources may not be broadly applicable to the coral reef and the relationship between (apex) species abundance and (change) – may be less a management tool than a picture of the demise of the reef fish community as we know it”.

A juvenile Oceanic Whitetip Shark

Fancy words? Not really. Where nature is concerned we just have to understand that most of the time we don’t understand. We can’t go into an ecological system that evolved hundreds of millions of years before man set foot on the planet and think we can exploit it however we wish and that it will simply cope with our being there.

If we can learn anything from natural history it is that when systems begin to collapse there is a point from which there may be no turning back. If you doubt this then ask the dinosaurs for their opinion.

(This is the second in this series. For more information on sharks please visit my earlier post.)


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/