It's summertime in the U.S., folks are vacationing, heading to the beaches (well, maybe not the Gulf, unfortunately) to frolic in the surf. And like clockwork, the media reports begin to pile up, one after another: sharks reported cruising the coast, increases in sharks, attacks on the rise, it's the revenge of the evil elasmobranch . . . ad nauseam.
Following a very successful week of programming for the Discovery network (this year, Shark Week brought in its highest ratings ever at over 30 million viewers), there have been reports of white sharks seen along Southern California beaches along with indications that the population of white sharks in California is increasing; surfers are having close encounters of the third kind; shark incidents in Australia are filling the news pages of sites like Underwater Times; and South Africa has issued a coastal shark warning. I think it peaked last week but there was a moment where it seemed like the world was about to be swallowed up.
It's not the individual reports that are necessarily the problem - I'll give the reporters the benefit of the doubt that what they are writing is researched and factually accurate. And there have been some very good articles from the likes of Pete Thomas, as an example (although, Pete, you succumbed to the "summer of the shark" title temptation). My concern is the collective result of all this reporting and the impact it has on the general public's view towards sharks and, by extension, shark conservation. It makes for titillating summer media but without the all-important ingredient: context, context, context.
Sharks migrate along the California coast, giving birth in the deep coastal canyons. And this happens elsewhere in the world. Ergo, we get juveniles cruising the coastline, feeding and fattening up before the migratory impulse hits them and off they go on their annual journeys. It happens every year. Perhaps there might be a spike in sightings, maybe in actual number, but those have always been considered anomalies. Is the California population actually increasing? Well, if it is, as recently reported, then that would be GREAT! But still no reason to fear, statistically-speaking.
And speaking of statistics, we all know that with more people in the water, the chances of a sighting or an encounter goes up. Drastically? Well, no - but that always seems to get glossed over.
So, the bottom line is: this shark activity is all VERY NORMAL! Time of year, migratory and birthing patterns, increased numbers of people in the water - with these factors there is bound to be an increase in sightings or encounters. Sharks just don't need the accompanying hysteria when its whipped up by the media. Shark conservationists are having a tough enough job as is.
BTW: Regarding shark conservation, there is some interesting headway being made in Hong Kong, where Asian-based conservation groups are promoting anti-finning policies. Read the latest from The Daily Caller.
Shark Nets - long standing shark "deterrents" strung along some of the more popular beaches in South Africa and Australia - have become a source of concern among conservationists. It's a concern perhaps not as widely shared among the general population, or beach goers in particular, because of a fundamental lack of understanding as to what the nets can or cannot do.
In an excellent article in Africa Geographic, written by premier underwater photographer Thomas Peschak, chief photographer for the Save Our Seas Foundation, the history and issues regarding South Africa's shark nets are detailed.
As Thomas, a South African himself, points out, the nets have been in place in his country for over 40 years, totaling some 27 miles by the late '80s. The problem with the nets is that they actually don't deter or keep out the sharks - they catch and kill them. The Natal Sharks Board reported that nearly 34 thousand sharks were caught in these nets from 1978 to 2008, the majority of which were species that posed no threat to humans. Interestingly, for those who felt safe from any "killer" shark, a large percentage of the sharks were caught on the beach side of the net, as the shark was making its way out of the area.
But the nets - basically gill nets by design - are random killers, catching turtles, dolphins, and even whales. This unintended bycatch has fueled the conservation debate and the trend in South Africa is slowly moving towards the use of drum lines (baited hooks) and even a possible reduction of the use of any nets or deterrents at all in less populated beaches.
Peschak takes the realistic position that we can not expect all nets or deterrents to disappear any time soon; as long as there are large numbers of beach goers - representing a sizable tourist economy - then the priority of providing a "safe" beach will probably prevail. But he asks the proverbial question: if science can make such advances as cancer cures and moon landings, could we not come up with a method of shark deterrence that is less destructive? I concur. The methods have not changed much in 3 to 4 decades and have only reinforced both the idea that humans have a greater right to the oceans than its inhabitants and that sharks as a whole are dangerous and must be dealt with severely (an attitude illustrated in the Australian press regarding the government policy to hunt down and slaughter any shark reported to have been involved in biting a human).
Click here to view a great video of Thomas Peschak discussing the history and status of SA shark nets (contains a PDF download link to his Africa Geographic article).
In early October, I posted information about CNN's Planet in Peril series (Oct. 10 posting). They will be covering several important shark issues, among other important environmental topics. The show will air on December 11 (check your local listings for exact times).
It appears that the show will cover shark finning/shark conservation and shark ecotourism. The video previews available on the shark finning segment cover familiar ground for those of you familiar with shark conservation issues. Hopefully it will enlighten some of the less informed. Of course, the biggest issue in saving sharks is finding effective ways to change the cultural midset regarding shark fin soup and other related products. Much like the criticisms hurled against the ineffectiveness of the "drug wars", we must wrestle with the demand for the product with equal attention and force.
The other shark issue that CNN touches on is shark ecotourism. They look at a South African operation and then touch on whether baiting white sharks is teaching them to attack surfers and swimmers (it makes for an exciting story). It's an argument often used by opponents, but in my experience and from what I have learned from respected scientists who have studied these animals for a lot longer than I have spent filming them, it just doesn't hold water. These sharks are more discriminating than most uninformed people give them credit for. Attracted to fish chum and chasing/biting hangbait consisting of tuna, bonito, or something similiar, does not make a white shark suddenly develop a taste for human flesh and begin seeking out surfers or swimmers as their next prey. Surfers have been and probably will always be subject to mistaken identity for the large pinnipeds (seals, sea lions) that white sharks feed on.
I did find it noteworthy that the South African shark diving operation CNN chose to film had an incredibly small cage that fit the divers in like slices of bread in a toaster (a cameraman could barely fit a decent video housing in there) and they dragged the hangbait right up to the cage, causing the shark to bang up against the cage - dramatic fun for the tourists but potential harm for both the shark and the divers. This is not responsible shark ecotourism.
It's summertime in the U.S., folks are vacationing, heading to the beaches (well, maybe not the Gulf, unfortunately) to frolic in the surf. And like clockwork, the media reports begin to pile up, one after another: sharks reported cruising the coast, increases in sharks, attacks on the rise, it's the revenge of the evil elasmobranch . . . ad nauseam.
Sharks migrate along the California coast, giving birth in the deep coastal canyons. And this happens elsewhere in the world. Ergo, we get juveniles cruising the coastline, feeding and fattening up before the migratory impulse hits them and off they go on their annual journeys. It happens every year. Perhaps there might be a spike in sightings, maybe in actual number, but those have always been considered anomalies. Is the California population actually increasing? Well, if it is, as recently reported, then that would be GREAT! But still no reason to fear, statistically-speaking.
