Shark Tourism Under Siege - Second Boat Burned

We have been following the news out of Hawaii this month as things are once again heating up for the commercial shark diving industry there.

This morning news of a second commercial shark diving boat that has been set ablaze on Oahu less than one week after a first boat was burnt almost to the waterline.

The cause?

Arson.

The blame?

Local island politics, and an atmosphere of anger, fear, and politically enabled groups and individuals who have created this terror campaign.

This ongoing campaign was started in one small political office in the Capitol seeking a wedge issue to stir up local constituents and has lead to two vessels deliberately burned, and a failed court case involving Super Secret GPS devices with excuses about national security.

By either stirring up groups with false information and fear tactics about sharks, enabled with town hall style political meetings, to not curbing starkly terroristic threats and anger directed at two small commercial shark diving operations, a few local politicians, in our minds, are responsible for two boat burnings in Hawaii.

Angry rhetoric in any form can be a boon for politicians, especially when the target is defenseless.

Angry rhetoric can also be dangerous in the hands of politicians who fail to see what long term effects false information and fear can have on unstable members of the populace.

It is time for the politicians involved in the ongoing attempt to destroy two commercial shark diving operations on Oahu to step up to the plate and calm their troops down. Two boat burnings in one month is a legacy that no one wants on their political record and clearly someone in the politically created, fueled, and enabled anti-shark diving crowd is not firing on all cylinders.

We say enough is enough. For all the fear that the anti-shark diving crowd has directed at the sharks, it is the groups themselves who have become the most predatory and who have caused the most damage.

Seacology Announces Desal Plant at Isla Guadalupe

MEXICO, Guadalupe Island, Baja California Pacific – Sea water desalination system in exchange for a 1,235-acre marine reserve for a duration of 10 years.

Guadalupe Island, with a total land area of 80,000 acres, is one of the most remote islands of Mexico. The island’s only community is mostly fishermen and their families who have been using the island for decades, fishing lobster and diving abalone. Guadalupe Island has one of the best preserved marine environments of Mexico. Since the decree in 2007 of the “Guadalupe Island Biosphere Reserve”, the management and regulated protection of its natural resources is under the federal authority of the Natural Protected Areas Commission.

Guadalupe Island is one of the best examples in the world of an ongoing island ecosystem recovery where different entities (governmental and nonprofit) are participating. A water desalination plant is the local community's most urgent need. A desalinization system will be purchased with the help of Seacology in exchange for the creation and protection of a 1,235-acre marine reserve for a period of 10 years, where fishing, extraction of resources, damage to the sea floor, contamination or any other kind of damage is forbidden.

The desalination system will be able to supply as much as 3,000 gallons per day. The water supply could also support reforestation and restoration projects, particularly in the remaining patches of endemic forest. In 2000 and 2002, Seacology funded projects to construct and maintain fences to keep invasive goats out of the most sensitive areas containing endemic plant species. Goats have since been eradicated from the island.

2009 - CNN INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF THE SHARK ENDS

As this decade closes CNN has a nice wrap up story on shark conservation and some of the highlights of the 2009 "International Year of the Shark."

We could not have summed up a year in shark conservation any better.

Kudos to all who participated with unique shark conservation efforts that effected real and lasting conservation changes.

Your passion, dedication, and conservation successes are what keep sharks from extinction.

Farewell to the "Decade of shark awareness" and hello to the "Decade of shark action."

CNN shark conservation wrap here.

Miami Green Oceans Forum 2009

Looking back on 2009, one of the highlights for Shark Diver and Shark Divers in a year that was filled with conservation excitement was attending the Green Oceans Forum as a guest speaker in Miami.

Attended by a who's who in ocean conservation from Sylvia Earl to National Geographic and Monterey Bay, I met and dined with some of the brightest minds in ocean conservation over three days. Our presentation was about sharks, reefs, and monetized eco solutions that are "out of the box."

By "out of the box" I mean ready to go today. Real and lasting solutions that radically change regional shark conservation efforts and are born from 20 years experience in global eco tourism.

The Green Ocean Forum also included several outstanding media PSA's that caught the entire conference attention with simple yet powerful and compelling statistics:

"At the Americas Business Council, we believe that bringing brilliant minds and change-makers together plays a vital role in disseminating messages to audiences worldwide. Yet, we do not stop there. Our Forums serve as the first step in bringing about change. At ABC, we believe that solutions created during forums must be implemented in the short- and long-term; and every year we innovate our strategies in order to make sure that our Forums translate into sustainable solutions and results."

NBC's Today Show D- on Sharks

If there was some kind of award for shoddy, hyper inflated, negative shark coverage, NBC's The Today Show would get it.

Over the past several years they have been the media leaders in 1970's style "horror shark" media hits.

If there was an award for honestly in shark media, new Blue Blogger Dorsal Fin would get it.

This week DF earned an extra tall shark statue for calling out The Today Shows ongoing and dare we say it, "moronically half fabricated shark based clap trap."

Actually, we liked that so much we'll say it again, "moronically half fabricated shark based clap trap."

The media's responsibility for balanced shark reporting is paramount and the only way they will be made to come to their senses is if we all take the time to point out when they stray completely off the media reservation.

In The Today's Show case that is several times a year, with few if any media hits highlighting research, science, and the ongoing decimation of worldwide shark populations.

Balance. In the world we live in it is needed now more than ever.

Kudos to Dorsal Fin for providing some.

Casting White Sharks as Villians...Again

We have been keeping tabs on a new production in the works called The Reef.

This mornings news from Australia confirms suspicions that another "white shark attack film" is in the offing, just in time for 2010:

AN overturned hull is causing some consternation near Shelly Beach but the person most affected by the makeshift shipwreck is a movie character. Thankfully.

The character shall remain nameless. Best to say he or she meets a “grisly demise” in the waters of Hervey Bay this week and a great white shark is probably involved at some level.

Complete Story

Shark Feeding – The Debate Continues

Another blog post making the rounds on the Internet discusses "shark feeding" - once again.

While the conversation about chumming and habituating sharks is a perennial favourite, clearly more study needs to be done with operators enabling research at sites where sharks, people, and chumming occur.

Shane Pinder Blog

This is a continuation of the topic of shark feeding dives started in an earlier post.

Scuba Diving Forum posted a comment to that post that included a link to a very interesting article on the Shark Foundation site about a study on the impact on white shark cage diving.

The study concluded that chumming for white sharks does not condition or habituate them because the sharks don’t receive any food in the chumming process.

I wonder though if the research on white shark cage diving applies to the type of shark feeding done in the Bahamas and other parts of the Caribbean.

The conclusion that white shark cage diving does not result in the conditioning of white sharks to associate humans with food seems to hinge on the fact that white sharks are not fed during cage dives. The water is chummed with blood to attract them and the food on bait line is pulled away from them so that they never actually get a reward.

This is not what happens on shark dives in The Bahamas. The sharks do receive a reward (food). The article does refer to conditioning of three shark species in captivity -

“Conditioning has been demonstrated in a captive situation in the lemon shark, Negaprion brevirostris (Clark 1959, Wright & Jackson 1964), nurse shark, Ginglymostoma cirratum (Aronson et al. 1967) and the bull shark, Carcharhinus leucas (Wright & Jackson 1964). ”

These species are all present in Bahamian waters.

The article also discusses the demonstrated learning ability of Tiger sharks (also present in Bahamian waters) - “The learning ability of sharks is also demonstrated under natural conditions. For two weeks a year in June off the shallows of Hawaii, tiger sharks (Galeocerdo cuvier) congregate to feed on young albatross that take land on the waters surface whilst learning to fly (Martin 2003). Although the sharks initially have very little success in preying on the chicks, within 3-5 days they learn the technique needed to successfully capture the young birds and, on missing a prey item, to swim a short distance upwind to where the panicked bird will land (Martin 2003).”

The question is still whether or not the type of shark dives which involve sharks obtaining a reward (food) condition sharks to associate humans with food.

If these dives do create conditioning, does it follow that sharks are then more likely to attack humans in areas where they have been conditioned to associate humans with food?

From personal experience, I know that there are dives sites close to shark feeding sites where you can expect to see sharks even though no feeding is going on. In my experience, while the sharks at these sites have not been aggressive, they certainly hang around during the entire dive. They don’t appear to be bothered by such close contact to humans.

On dive sites that are not close to shark feeding sites, it is unusual to see any sharks. If you do happen to see a shark, it is usually only a glimpse of it as it cruising by in the distance. It doesn’t hang around.

Have a look at the article posted by Scuba Diving Forum about the study done by the Shark Foundation. What are your thoughts?

• Does this study help to confirm that shark dives in which sharks get food do not condition sharks to associate food with humans?

• Do you think that shark dives that result in sharks being fed condition sharks to associate food with humans?

• If sharks are conditioned by these types of dives to associate food with humans, does that make it more likely that shark attacks will occur?

Hawaii Shark Diving - RTSea's Take

Gotta hand it to Richard Theiss over at RTSea's blog this morning for summing up the current commercial shark diving blow back in Hawaii in a nice little bow.

Well reasoned and to the point - when you see an Op-Ed like this one it's hard to do anything but re-post the whole thing, Kudos:

Once again, because of lack of foresight combined with glaring local media coverage, shark ecotourism has taken another hit, this time as a local issue in Hawaii with implications that could impact responsible operators statewide.

In Maunalua Bay on the island of Oahu, a boat owner faced a room full of 200 angry residents protesting his proposed shark diving operation. With one man against an angry mob and news cameras at the ready, it was destined to be a one-sided argument (see story and video). After reading more articles to gather additional details, it would appear that there are two issues at work here.

First, the critics are citing the two common arguments in opposition to shark ecotourism: that the activity disrupts the natural feeding behavior of the sharks, thereby jeopardizing the sharks; and that the activity makes the sharks associate humans with food, thereby making humans a preferred food source.

Secondly, this brouhaha once again points to the importance of shark ecotourism operators to consider the conservation and political components of shark ecotourism, not just the commercial aspects. Better planning and solicited expert support on the part of the boat operator could have avoided all of this.

Okay, first issue: chumming/feeding disrupts the sharks' normal feeding behavior. Well, it's not that simple. First, there are several methods for attracting the sharks: using fish oil as a scent attractant, using ground or cut up fish, and/or using hang bait (for larger sharks) or feeding by hand (for smaller reef sharks). Secondly, what is the frequency? Several boats a day to the same location, feeding the same sharks day after day? Or occasional trips, sometimes dictated by seasonal shark migration patterns. And lastly, what shark species are we talking about? Feeding a white shark with 2-3 pound tuna or bonito scraps or feeding whole fish to small whitetip reef sharks?

There are many recognized shark researchers who will support the contention that, unless done with high frequency and volume, sharks will not become detrimentally dependent on the food sources of shark ecotourism operations. While I have my own personal and scientifically unsubstantiated concerns about some of the stingray tourist attractions that see a steady stream of visitors, my anecdotal experiences in filming great white sharks at Isla Guadalupe, as an example, indicate that the small hangbaits the sharks occasionally succeed in catching do not disrupt their normal predation of seals, sea lions, large tuna or floating carrion like dead whales. And again, there are recognized scientists that will back up that contention.

The other criticism leveled is that shark ecotourism makes the sharks associate humans as a food source. This accusation plays on the fears the uninformed public has about sharks and once again there are experts who will debunk the myth. As a filmmaker, I have been exposed to sharks much more so than the typical cage-bound diver and I have yet to see a shark behave in a manner that says because of chumming/bait in the water it has re-programmed itself to select humans as a primary food source. Could a shark mistakenly bite a human in the presence of bait or some other attractant? Of course; mistaken identity is the cause behind the vast majority of shark-human interactions worldwide, regardless of shark ecotourism activities. In addition to my open ocean activities with sharks, I have spent over 8 years in aquarium settings feeding fish in the presence of sharks or feeding sharks specifically and never did I see the sharks make the A=B connection (food=humans) that critics propose.

One of the news articles cited a comment from a critic at the meeting who compared the situation to the dangers of feeding bears at Yellowstone Park. Apples and oranges. Mammalian intelligence is different from shark intelligence. Bears have a broader taste palette and due to their foraging through trash can develop a taste for the foods we eat - so they will tear apart a tent or rip off a car door to get at a bag of Famous Amos cookies or Oscar Mayer hot dogs. While it is true that bears can attack humans and even develop a taste for human flesh, that has not proven to be the case with sharks: we are not on their menu.

This takes us to the second major issue and the one that is at the crux of this incident. The boat operator failed because he did not have the foresight to see that shark diving is evolving into shark ecotourism - and with that evolution comes greater responsibility on the part of the operators regarding supporting and promoting safe protocols, providing conservation education, and considering the political/PR interactions with various factions (pro & con) and the media.

It would appear that the boat operator did not have all his ducks in a row and found himself up against a hostile crowd, totally unprepared and without any sound arguments or strategies. First, for any successful ecotourism operation there is site selection (as with any business: location, location, location). I'm not familiar with Maunaloa Bay, but perhaps it is not the best location for viewing sharks. Human use density, shark biodispersion/density, dock facilities in relationship to other tourist activities (politics) - all have to be considered beforehand. And consideration must be given as to the species of sharks the operation intends to attract and the methods by which it will be done. Next, getting the support from recognized experts to counter the arguments mentioned earlier. Followed by developing relationships with local conservation, scientific, and community groups regarding educational opportunities and providing logistical support for scientific study. All has to be done before you put out your shingle and the first cage is lowered into the water.

All of this might seem to be a pain in the rear to someone who just wants to cash in on the growing shark craze but, sorry, that's where we are at today. The pure adrenaline adventure of seeing a shark is being supplanted by the opportunity to be enlightened to the beauty and importance of these animals which are vital to a healthy marine ecosystem. That's the difference between shark diving and shark ecotourism. And for the sharks, this extra burden of responsibility is a good thing.

An important sidebar to this entire incident has to do with an unfortunate loophole in the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act which prescribes some very important marine conservation regulations but, as often is the case with other legislation, was subject to amendments which generate loopholes. From 3 miles (beyond state regulated waters) to 200 miles offshore, the Act limits shark feeding to only harvesting or research. In other words, if you want to hook and either catch or release a shark, baiting/chumming is okay. But if you only want to observe and appreciate the shark, baiting/chumming is illegal. Shark ecotourism operators therefore must either operate illegally, or hook a shark (which runs counter to its conservation position), or insure that there is some valid research taking place on each boat trip.

How this loophole might be corrected is of major importance to all shark ecotourism operators in Hawaii and conceivably elsewhere. What the shark ecotourism operators need to do is to come together and agree on a set of responsible protocols regarding their operations, safety, conservation education, research support, and public relations so that they can present a unified position, backed by sound arguments and expert support, to local, state, and federal politicians and decision-makers. This may be asking a lot of local small businessmen, but it is what they are now faced with.

As a filmmaker, I have seen the advantages of responsible shark ecotourism in promoting shark conservation to the benefit, not the expense, of both sharks and people. I do not have a personal financial interest in any shark ecotourism operation but, as someone with a media and marketing background, I am willing to put my opinions forward as to the future direction of shark ecotourism.

The real tragedy in all of this is what is happening to sharks populations right now worldwide. Responsible shark ecotourism can be one component in combating the slaughter of tens of millions of sharks.