So Cal Shark Encounter: Reasonable Media Coverage

Living in Southern California has its advantages   And one of them is that when the rare shark-human interaction occurs, it is usually put into relatively fair perspective by the media with a modicum of hysterical hype.

Such was the case for a recent encounter off of Catalina Island involving a paddleboarder and possibly a juvenile great white shark.  ABC News covered the event with interviews with my friend, Luke Tipple, and it was a fairly balanced piece of reporting; balanced in the sense that they didn't treat the shark as a roving man-eater, nor did they treat it as a cute but embarrassed little fish who made a silly little mistake.

SharkDiver.com covered it in its blog, Ultimate Thrills: Swimming With Sharks and added the ABC News video segment.  This network has repeatedly provided fair coverage of shark-related events.  I have supplied shark footage for them in the past and have yet to be disappointed in how it was used.  CBS News also does a fairly good job; I provided some on-camera color and a reasonable voice when there was a rare fatality that occurred in San Diego.  NBC News, on the other hand, has been a bit more prone to stirring up fear and excitement.  Here's SharkDiver's post:

Catalina Shark Nibbles and Good Media 

Monday, May 7, 2012

Fortunately when occasional shark attacks occur in Southern California there's a few solid voices out there with ready quotes for the media.

This week was no exception and the quotes given were without the typical "re-branding effort" of top order predators that we are beginning to see in the conservation space.

Sharks are sharks, occasionally they attack things and sometimes those things happen to have a human element to them.

Sharks are not misunderstood, they are not soft and cuddly, and they are toothy.

Accepting the basic tenants of sharks does not make them less viable for conservation, but it does allow people to make "informed decisions" about where they should be when sharks are present.

Shark News: not a couple of good weeks if you're a shark

It hasn't been a particularly good couple of weeks for sharks.

First there was the large 20-foot, 4000-pound female white shark that was caught in the Sea of Cortez.  Reportedly caught accidentally in the fishing nets of some local fishermen, it garnered media attention because of its massive size.  As it turns out, it apparently had a research tag showing it had traveled from the coast of central California.  Conjecture is that it traveled to the Sea of Cortez to give birth as this is a popular theory being proposed and studied by researchers.

The Sea of Cortez is an area that is being heavily fished by local fishermen and several species are being hard hit by the overall level of the catch.  If juvenile white sharks are being taken - evidence of which has been seen in local fish markets - and females are being caught, either accidentally or deliberately, for a slow-reproducing animal like the great white shark, this is not good news.

Next up was the unfortunate fatal attack on a bodysurfer in South Africa.  There have been fatal attacks throughout the years, but what raised the hackles of locals and caught the attention of the media was the fact that a film production company/research group was in the area apparently chumming to attract sharks for tagging purposes.  South African government officials, who had issued the permits to allow the research, pulled those permits and from there it's been a media communications nightmare of accusations and a lot of CYA.

The production company had been filming in the past for National Geographic Channel's Shark Men series, but Nat Geo issued a response saying that they had not been working with this particular company for some time.  South African government officials are being accused of faulty vetting of the operation in issuing the permits, but it's been said that there were scientists on board to ensure that no reckless behavior for the sake of dramatic film footage was taking place.  And the production company claims that their actions were well within acceptable practices.

Then along comes a preliminary research study from Australia that says there may be a causal link between chumming used by shark diving operators and behavioral changes in white sharks.  The report itself says it's not conclusive and does not imply that, because of chumming, white sharks are purposely seeking out humans, but it certainly added fuel to the fire of the anti-shark locals.  It's quite a media mess and at this point it's hard to tell what the final results might be as to whether we'll see some knee-jerk reactions against the sharks by officials trying to placate those who believe they have greater rights to the seas than do the sharks.  At the very least, it's bad P.R. for the sharks; the spectre of shark nets or a crack down on all shark diving operators always looms in the background.

Finally, the media outlets have been jumping all over a new study from the University of Hawaii and British Columbia's University of Victoria which says that Pacific reef shark populations have declined by as much as 90 percent or more in the past few decades.  This decline has been noted in other studies, but this particular study had an interesting twist to it, as reported by The Washington Post's environmental writer, Juliet Eilperin.

The researchers study shark populations over 46 islands in the Pacific and not only found a decline but, conversely, found increases in shark populations wherever human populations decreased over the years and the productivity and temperature of the ocean increased.

“Our results suggest humans now exert a stronger influence on the abundance of reef sharks than either habitat quality or oceanographic factors,” said the researchers. 

Many of the islands involved in the study have laws and regulations in place to protect sharks but, as is the case with many conservation regulations worldwide, enforcement is lacking either due to lack of resources or political will.

Julia Baum, assistant professor at the University of Victoria and co-author of the study, said, “To me, enforcement of these islands is a major unsung conservation challenge, and I suspect that if this is not effectively addressed [as soon as possible], the reef sharks on these islands will be fished out within the next 10 years.”  

The Muppets' Kermit the Frog once sang, "It's not easy being green."  It's not easy being a shark either.  We need our green puppets for comic relief; and we need our sharks for something far more important: the preservation and natural balance of the sea's marine life.

Source: Sacramento Bee
Source: Mail & Guardian Online.  
Source: The Washington Post  
Photo: Brian Skerry

PETA on Sharks: hotly contested billboard reinforces stereotypes

During the course of writing this blog over the past couple of years, many of my readers have come to appreciate a certain civility and thoughtfulness that I try to bring to my work. It's obvious by the subjects that I discuss that I am pro-conservation, pro-ocean, and pro-shark to name a few, but I rarely engage in rude put-downs or coarse language.

But PETA's latest billboard campaign truly tests my resolve. By showing a human leg dangling from the jaws of a white shark with the headline, "Payback is hell," this pro-animal rights group sets public awareness and support back a few notches by reinforcing stereotypes of the shark as mindless killers. Or actually, not mindless at all but cunning and vengeful - right out of a bad Jaws sequel.

Though PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) spouts some obligatory quotes about humans being the ultimate predator, not sharks; their real message is an anti-meat, pro-vegan position - which is fine to express but not at the expense of one of the very animals you claim to be protecting.

They may have thought, "Oh, people will get it. It's just a shark, just a picture." Well, in a world where American presidents have their nationality and their patriotism questioned, where climate change is expected to be cured by prayer, and where fallen soldiers are called "faggots" and said to have deserved to die; it's not all that hard to imagine many people viewing the PETA billboard and confirming to themselves that sharks are selecting humans for attack and therefore do not need our protection or concern - proof that the only good shark is a dead shark.

There have been many who have been assaulting PETA for this billboard and their stated rationale (as a follow up advertisement to a recent shark bite incident near the Gulf of Mexico.)

"With the recent shark attack in the news, we thought that it was a good time to bring this discussion up that will hopefully save lives, both human and animals," PETA Campaign Manager Ashley Byrne told The Huffington Post. "Sharks are not the most dangerous predators on Earth, we are. Americans alone kill billions of animals for food every year, including fish. And while sharks are natural carnivores, people can choose what they eat."

That's right, Ms. Byrne, sharks are natural predators, feeding on a wide range of animals which, in turn, helps to maintain a healthy and balanced ecosystem. And with their continuing loss through commercial fishing, that balance is quickly being thrown out of whack. But the 50 injuries and 5 fatalities that people experience from sharks on average each year are not the result of a concerted campaign of retaliation, as your billboard moronically implies.

Shame on you. If you feel you need to promote such a ludicrous statement to support your cause, then I suggest you rethink your cause. People can be fooled with misleading images and headlines and so, because of that, it is incumbent on anyone who believes a cause to be righteous to deal in truth always.

"Payback is hell." It's stupid, lame, misleading and basically just a flat out lie. And it's serious, not intended as humor or satire - so we will take it as the serious statement that it is and I along with many of my conservation and shark advocate colleagues will choose not to ignore but to soundly repudiate it.

If you wish to express your views to PETA regarding the billboard, you may fill-out an online message form at the Peta website. Click here.

Seychelles Shark Incidents: statistical anomaly put media and authorities in overdrive

Shark frenzy is in high gear once again - and not due to the sharks, but by the news media which can seem to have a taste for blood greater than any ocean predator I have encountered. Recently, in the Seychelles, two separate attacks by sharks on bathers have occurred within two weeks of each other. That by itself is statistically unusual. Add to that the fact that it has been several decades since the last shark-human incident in these Indian Ocean islands and you have the basic ingredients for a sensationalized story and a knee-jerk reaction on the part of the Seychelles authorities.

With the most recent incident - a young man attacked while snorkeling in shallow water - several news outlets are devoting airtime and print space to both, the human tragedy - the attack was witnessed from shore by the young man's newly wed wife - and the ensuing hunt that is currently taking place for the "killer" shark.

The news media is taking every guess, hypothesis, crackpot assumption, and misconception as facts in this attack - I have read it was a white shark (unlikely based on the multiple bites this latest bather received); a bull shark measuring 18 feet in length (a size which would be a modern miracle in marine biology); a "rogue" shark as the culprit (whatever that means, a well-worn rationale to try to explain what amounts to the normal actions of a large predator in its natural environment); and so on.

And then there is the reaction of the authorities, enlisting the aid of local fisherman to deploy hooked and baited longlines in an attempt to catch the specific shark responsible. Now, I can understand their need to be seen as taking some sort of definitive action. They have a tourist trade to protect and perhaps merely closing beaches won't instill confidence for their tourism compared with catching and killing the shark responsible. However, in the end, there will undoubtedly be many sharks and other large fish caught and killed as a result of the shark hunt. And maybe they will succeed in catching a shark that contains human remains, but that will guarantee nothing.

The one indisputable fact is that the ocean is not our playground; it is home to a range of marine life from brine shrimp to blue whales, and every time we dip our toes in the water, we are intruding in their space. Urchins will stick and sting rays sting when stepped on, sea jellies will fire their nematocyst stinging cells when bumped, and sharks will, on very rare occasions, mistake a human as potential prey. This isn't meant to marginalize or dismiss the human tragedy or the visceral impact when a person is attacked by any predator, on land or sea. But it is the one constant whether you are using the oceans for recreation, scientific study, or commercial gain.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Shark Week & Conservation: the time of year when hype, reality, and rational voices vie for our attention

It's summertime, August is approaching, and that means it's time for Discovery Channel's Shark Week. This ratings bonanza for Discovery (over 30 million viewers last year) continues to thrill a large segment of the general public while infuriating many pro-shark activists with program titles like Deadliest Waters or Anatomy of a Shark Bite. There's no doubt that Discovery tries to have it both ways by providing a measure of conservation content (they actually did a rather well-balanced piece on shark conservation for Discovery News - see below) combined with programs that pander to the malevolent killer shark stereotypes. Discovery seems to have found a balance that allows them to have their cake while eating their vegetables too.



During this time period, sales of other shark-related films (like my first documentary, Island of the Great White Shark) enjoy a momentary surge; press reports of shark sightings and human-shark interactions increase in frequency; and shark advocates roll their eyes and wring their hands in frustration.

Case in point would be the following promotion for a Shark Week program picked up by outdoor writer Pete Thomas for GrindTV. South African photographer Chris Fallows has made a career filming sharks and is known for his striking images of great white sharks leaping into the air when ambushing prey. He is part of a Shark Week program titled Great White Invasion - Immediately sounds ominous, doesn't it? Chris is attempting to debunk some of the myths regarding the ferociousness of these apex predators by approaching one with a paddleboard.



The shark is curious, no doubt, but appears to realize that the board and its rider are neither prey (a seal or sea lion) nor something to scavenge, like a dead whale carcass. It's in shallow water so it's not going to attack with a powerful lunge from underneath, as is its usual method, so it swims about somewhere between mild curiosity and disinterest (notice the moment in the video when it simply treads water, looking at the board and its rider - probably thinking, What the heck is this?

The risk to Chris Fallows is that, in fact, some sharks like to bump objects to check them out, particularly if they are wondering if it is an inanimate carcass. I have experienced that before firsthand. While I hung over the side of a Zodiac (a sturdy inflatable raft) filming white sharks, a large 15-foot male approached us and then "bumped" the raft a good foot and a half into the air and, with a flick of his powerful tail, proceeded to smack me across the side of the head. Me and the captain got the message and headed back to the main boat, our adrenaline pumping and my left cheek stinging.

However exciting incidents like that may be or whatever heart-racing programs Discovery's Shark Week may have in store for us, the reality of what sharks themselves are experiencing at the hands of man cannot be overlooked. People may not love them - and the fact is, they don't have to - but they do need to respect them and understand their vital role in maintaining a healthy ocean as critically important predators and scavengers.

And it will be the wisdom of rational voices that ultimately gets the job done. In Australia, Mick Dowers, founder of the Anti-Shark Finning Alliance, makes his case on ABC Brisbane radio's Breakfast with Spencer Howson. What better way to start a cat fight than to then bring on a Chinese Australian to comment - let the fight begin, eh?! But, no. Two rational people with their own points of view discuss the issue calmly and you can begin to hear common ground developing.

Click the 612 ABC Brisbane logo to download audio file (mp3).


That's what it will take: rational people talking about a less than rational practice in an attempt to preserve both, a dwindling species and a fading cultural history.

Florida's Dead Shark Mystery: 15 small sharks wash ashore along west coast

Every now and then we get mysteries than can initially defy explanation or fuel the imaginations of those seeking easy justification of conspiracy or doomsday theories. With regards to the oceans, there have been coral die-offs, algal blooms, whale and dolphin beachings, and mass fish deaths that occur from time to time. And this week, one more strange event occurred that, at this moment, has marine scientists scratching their heads.

Sharks have washed ashore along the northern beaches of Manatee County, Florida. This is an area along the western or Gulf of Mexico side of Florida, south of Tampa. The dead sharks, fifteen so far, consisted of bonnethead, blacknose, and sharpnose sharks - relatively small sharks that cruise coastal waters.

As reported by Bay News 9, marine scientists from Florida's MOTE Marine Laboratory do not believe the sharks succumbed to any effects from the Gulf oil spill because the normal range and travel patterns of these particular species of shark would have precluded them from getting in harm's way. However, it is nonetheless unusual for so many sharks to be found dead within a specific area - the occasional shark, yes; but fifteen sharks in a week, no.

"There were no real indicators of what went wrong with them," said Dr. Nick Whitney, Staff Scientist for the Center for Shark Research at MOTE Marine Laboratory. "There are no obvious signs of damage from fishing or net damage or anything like that."

Tissues samples were taken for analysis to determine whether the sharks died due to the effects of a red tide - an algal bloom that can carry dimoic acid which has been shown to cause neurological disruptions and death in seals and fish. Recently, an isolated mass die-off of sardines in Manhattan Beach, California left the harbor with literally tens of thousands of dead fish either floating on the surface or piling up on the harbor bottom.

Being the shark admirer that I am, I found this all very disappointing; I have dived with bonnethead sharks and they are beautiful, delicate sharks - petite relatives to the larger hammerhead species.

I also found it a bit ironic as I had just recently read an article that had listed the "top five unfounded health hysterias." The editors of the Big Think blog ran their self-appointed five and four of them revolved around over-hyped perceived threats from autism-causing vaccines, fluoridated water, the SARS virus, anthrax . . . and number five was shark attacks.

Poor sharks - lumped together in our over-worked imaginations with other obscure or statistically remote diseases or medical conditions. And yet the great malevolent ocean monster is, itself, truly susceptible to mysterious maladies that can deprive the ocean of an important member of the marine community.

It's not easy being a shark.

Great White Shark: San Diego sighting adds one more juvenile to population

This past Thursday, in San Diego, California, a 5-foot juvenile great white shark was reported by two scuba divers at around 500 yards off shore of La Jolla Cove in about 30 feet of water. Lifeguards briefly closed the beach while they cruised the area but soon reopened the beach, issuing a precaution to swimmers and leaving it at that. The local press reported the sighting without any overwrought hysteria and moved on to their next sound bite.

Chock up one for common sense.

Frankly, it does my heart good to hear of these sightings. With each juvenile seen, we know there is one more shark to add to the white shark's precarious population; one more shark that can, in 10 years, reproduce and, as Matt Hooper said, "make little sharks." Juvenile white sharks do not pose a substantial threat to humans as they are fixated on fish as menu items. It won't be until they reach maturity that they graduate to pennipeds (seals and sea lions) and the possibility of a surfer or swimmer being mistaken for a seal could occur, and has occurred.

But why off of warm Southern California? Juveniles have been sighted from Malibu to San Diego. There are deep canyons that run along the coastline in which juvenile white sharks can comfortably cruise, feeding on fish, while adults have generally taken up their migration patterns that often bring them to areas of seal or sea lion concentrations, like the Farallon Islands off San Francisco and Isla Guadalupe far off the Baja coast.

A recent report from the Shark Research Committee, a California non-profit headed by well-known shark behaviorist Ralph Collier, cited 7 unprovoked shark attacks along the Pacific Coast in 2010; 5 in California waters and 2 off the Oregon coast. Only one attack produced a fatality. Of interest were the activities the people were involved in at the time of the incidents: 3 surfing, 2 kayaking, 1 paddle-boarding, and 1 boogie-boarding. All surface activities, all included an elongated shape with limbs or paddles in the water. When you add in the right conditions of low visibility or other possible attractants like heavy splashing or nearby pinnipeds, all lend themselves to the classic scenario of mistaken identity as the white shark executes its typical single-bite ambush technique which it uses on an unsuspecting seal or sea lion (although not definitively confirmed, the white shark was suspected in all seven incidents). The attacks also took place in the late summer/early fall. This is when many adult great whites are on the move, returning from their mid-Pacific migration, back to their coastal hangouts.

Given the image that is generally served up by the media, I don't expect the general public to rejoice with every sighting of a great white shark along the California coast. But it's good to know that the circle of life is still taking place for these threatened ocean predators who play such an important role in balancing the marine ecosystem. Hopefully, the juvenile white shark seen off La Jolla Cove will not encounter poachers and live to carry on the species.

Read about the white shark sighting in San Diego.
Read about the Shark Research Committee report.

Shark-Safe Beaches: testing aerial spotters and dismissing electro-magnetics

When people enter the ocean - to swim, surf, dive, or just frolic about at the water's edge - they are entering a different wilderness. In doing so, they expose themselves to a measure of risk from interaction with other animals, from a sea jelly sting or an urchin spine all the way up to an interaction with a larger animal like a shark.

To protect people from unwanted shark interactions, several methods of prevention have been tried over the decades. In Australia, there is an extensive network of netted beaches. The steel mesh nets are designed with openings small enough to ward off large sharks but large enough to allow smaller fish to pass through. The nets have been used for many years and, in combination with lifeguards acting as shark spotters, the process has been fairly successful. But not infallible.

Sharks can get through the nets on occasion due to the nets being moved about from currents or storm action, so to maintain a big picture overview, spotter planes are being deployed in New South Wales (south eastern Australia) as part of a test program during peak months of swimming activity. And the NSW government in Australia has deployed a novel method to keep their spotter pilots' skill sharp. Decoy or replica sharks will be placed in the water to check the effectiveness of the surveillance program. Lifeguards will be made aware of the days and times for the placement of the replica sharks, but not the pilots. Results of the tests will be included in the final evaluation as to the aerial surveillance program future.

Far to the west, following a recent series of shark attacks in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, a variety of safety measures are being considered. Nothing has been confirmed as yet because the government is weighing an appropriate response that also recognizes the probable causes for the attacks - reportedly everything from unregulated chumming to overfishing of the shark's usual prey to the dumping of dead sheep from a passing freighter.

One approach that apparently will not be used is something akin to electrified fencing. An organization, the Shark Academy, has proposed installing an electro-magnetic shield along the Egyptian coastline of Sharm El-Sheikh in the Red Sea, but the idea has been totally dismissed by the Governor of South Sinai, General Abdel Fadeel Sousha.

"He (the company's owner) showed us a video in a meeting in Sharm El-Sheikh on devices used to protect beaches from sharks and made verbal and purely theoretical proposals that didn't persuade me on a personal level," said General Sousha. "I asked him for a practical demonstration in front of a committee of experts so we could be sure the devices work effectively. This still hasn't happened."

A pretty far-fetched notion when you think about it. I have worked with divers who have used a protective device called a Shark Shield which emits a strong electro-magnetic pulse when needed and seems to be quite effective with medium-size sharks like lemon or blacktip sharks. But I've been told it also "rattles the teeth" of the diver when its discharged. So the idea of having something that strong running constantly across a beach seems rather unlikely.

Apparently, previous attempts at using electro-magnetic fields along beaches in Natal, South Africa and in Australia have been a dismal failure, not preventing the sharks from entering enclosed swimming areas but giving bathers a nice little shock instead.

Rather than rely on Rube Goldberg devices, common sense should prevail. Non-life threatening measures - such as nets and shark spotters - along with a better understanding and acceptance of the wild world we are venturing into is what's called for. While many of us hear the call to return to the sea, we must remember that we enter it as interlopers and strangers on someone else's turf.

Read about aerial shark surveillance in Powerboat World.com.
Read about Egypt's rejection of electro-magnetic fields in AhramOnline.

Egypt's Shark Frenzy: expert team issues findings

The furor that erupted in Egypt and amongst shark advocates over the recent spate of shark incidents in Sharm El-Shiekh, near the tip of the Sinai Peninsula, has begun to subside. The beaches and dive sites are, for the most part, all open and, most importantly, the events have fallen off the media spin cycle.

SharkDivers, which has been following this situation closely, forwarded to me a news release issued by the international team of experts that were brought in at the behest of the Egyptian government. Their conclusions touched on many of the suspicions that existed at the time of the last attack (see previous post). The majority of the factors cited in the news release centered around human activity - illegal human activity. And absolutely none of the suspected causes could be attributed to some malevolent behavior on the part of the sharks.

There have been reports that the Egyptian government will utilize steel nets to cordon off swimming areas. Hopefully that will be a temporary measure and that once the illegal activities have ceased, over time the sharks will resume movement patterns that may diminish the possibility of adverse shark-human encounters.

Global Shark Attack File

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

For additional information please contact:

Ralph S. Collier, Shark Research Committee/Global Shark Attack File
sharkresearch@aol.com

Marie Levine, Shark Research Institute
marie@sharks.org

Sharm El-Sheikh Shark Attacks: Update

Between November 30 and December 5, 2010 there were 5 unprovoked shark attacks reported from Sharm El-Shiekh, Egypt. Following these attacks the Egyptian government assembled an international team of experts to conduct a forensic analysis of the attacks: Ralph S. Collier, President of the Shark Research Committee and Director of the Global Shark Attack File; Marie Levine, Executive Director, of the Shark Research Institute; Moustafa Fouda, MSEA; Mohammad Salem, EEAA; and Nassar Galal, CDWS. The team gathered eyewitness testimony, examined the attack locations, and reviewed the forensic evidence, including all environmental factors present prior to each of the attacks. The following is a list of those factors they believed to be contributor to the attacks:

• The illegal dumping of sheep carcasses by animal transport vessels within 1.2 miles of the shore.
• The unique underwater topography of the area; i.e., deep water very close to shore allowing pelagic sharks and humans to swim in close proximity.
• Although fishing is restricted in the Sharm El-Sheikh region, unrestrained fishing in the Red Sea has depleted fish stocks and reduced the amount of natural prey available to sharks.
• Shark and human population dynamics, i.e., 5 million people visit Sharm El-Sheikh annually and numbers of sharks migrate through the area each year.
• Feeding of fish by glass bottom boats and swimmers drew the sharks close to the beach.
• Elevated sea temperatures resulted in higher metabolic rates of the sharks and increased their energy (food) requirements.
• Although prohibited, it is believed that some dive operators have been feeding the sharks, which could have habituated the sharks to humans as a source for food.

It was determined from forensic evidence and eyewitness testimony that two species of sharks were responsible for the attacks; shortfin mako, Isurus oxyrinchus, and oceanic whitetip, Carcharhinus longimanus. Historical data obtained from the Global Shark Attack File for Egypt confirmed additional incidents from 2004 to the present (www.sharkattackfile.net/).

Suggestions to reduce the potential for such future events were provided to officials for review and implementation.

Egypt's Shark Frenzy: incidents bring scientists in search of answers

Having taken a few days away from the RTSea Blog while on a film assignment, I return to find the public relations wheels in full spin at Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, with sharks being on the losing end once again.

Over the past few weeks, there have been five shark incidents in the waters off this popular Egyptian tourist resort, reaching a fevered pitch with the death of a 70-year old German woman who was snorkeling close to shore. There's no doubt that the frequency of these encounters is unusual and the pursuit of a cause-and-effect would be a sensible step. However, first the media and the knee-jerk reactionaries step in, ala Jaws, with beach and dive site closings, hunts for "killer sharks" and government officials concerned with the loss of substantial revenue for the Sinai tourist business. News coverage is laced with a multitude of theories put forth by a cavalcade of experts (as of this writing, there are 11 articles listed in UnderwaterTimes.com alone).

While the Egyptian government has enlisted the services of several shark experts and shark conservationists, including Dr. George Burgess of Florida's International Shark Attack File and Marie Levine of the Shark Research Institute, to investigate these attacks, hopefully, at some point, responsible parties will all collectively take a breath and step back to investigate the situation calmly and dispassionately.

Step One: Understanding the basics
With all the frenzied media proclamations of a shark attack binge taking place, some fundamental facts get sidelined. And while they have been mentioned many times before, it is worthwhile to touch on them one more time.

• Of the 380+ species of shark, there are only a handful that, given the right circumstances, pose any threat to humans.
• Large sharks are apex predators, top-of-the-pyramid hunters, just like "lions, and tigers, and bears, Oh my." And as such, we should not be surprised by their ability to inflict serious or fatal wounds.
• But unlike those land-based predators, sharks do not ever place humans on their menu. The overwhelming majority of shark attacks are the result of mistaken identity.
• Sharks play an absolutely critical role within the marine ecosystem as predators and scavengers. To eliminate sharks either regionally or globally simply for our own sense of personal safety would be total folly and absolutely disastrous for maintaining a healthy ocean environment.
• That the "killer" shark or sharks could be located and caught is utterly ridiculous. It is a totally random exercise, like finding a needle in a haystack, and typically results in innocent sharks getting killed (not that any sharks were guilty in the first place). Realistically, its purpose is to assure the public that steps are being taken to protect their safety - pacification through public relations without any real understanding.

According to the Hurghada Environmental Protection and Conservation Association, "Two individual sharks were caught on 2 December, one Mako shark and one Oceanic White Tip shark. Comparing the photographs of the Oceanic White Tip shark responsible for the second attack with the images of the captured Oceanic White Tip shark, it is clear that they don't show the same [shark].”

Step Two: Taking reasonable measures
Initially, Egyptian officials closed the beaches at Sharm el-Sheikh and many of the local dive sites, but by the weekend, all were re-opened. If one considers the topography of the Red Sea and how it impacts shark movements, it becomes apparent that such beach closures would seem perhaps reasonable but ultimately unnecessary.

"The Red Sea is one of a kind. It is narrow and deep and that means that whereas in the Mediterranean, sharks are found only in the middle of the sea, in the Red Sea they can arrive close to the shore. If you go out 50 meters in Eilat [Israel], you are already at a depth of 100 meters, so big sharks can get pretty close to the shore," said Dr. Avi Baranes of Israel's Interuniversity of Institute for Marine Sciences. I can personally attest to the underwater landscape of the Red Sea. It is one of my all-time favorite dive locations and I found that, at many sites, I could reach considerable depth while still quite close to shore.

But if you are a pelagic or open water shark, like the suspected oceanic whitetip shark, then it is unlikely that you will stay long in any one area. Said Dr. Mahmoud Hanafy, a biologist at the Suez Canal University, "[The government] adopted the wrong approach by shutting down the diving sites. It’s nonsense that they shut down a diving site like Ras Nosrani, and allow it in Ras Muhammad. A shark swims hundreds of kilometres a day. Today it can be in Ras Nosrani, tomorrow in Tiran, and after somewhere else. What’s the point of shutting down a site then?”

While calm is slowly being restored by those in charge, they are now beginning to turn to the experts for possible explanations as to the specific causes for the recent attacks and whether there is an overriding reason or issue at work here. There are very well respected shark experts in the region who have been studying the sharks of the Red Sea, Mediterranean, and Arabian Seas for many years. And assistance can be provided by major shark conservation organizations and other researchers globally.

But regardless of the group, it will take some time to ascertain the root causes. As reported in the U.K. Telegraph, "Elke Bojanowksi, a leading researcher on Red Sea sharks, admitted that the international team hastily put together to track the predators down was in possession of very few details. 'No one can honestly say whether it was one shark or more,' she said. 'We are trying to get more information on what happened and why it happened.'"

Step Three: Theories that must be investigated, not sensationalized It seems a reasonable assumption that something has served to increase the number of sharks closer to shore, thereby increasing the odds for shark-human interaction. But to make that determination, the researchers will need to calmly and methodically investigate a wide range of possibilities. In the end, it might be just one or a combination of factors. There are already many opinions and accusations swirling about, being picked up and sensationalized by the media. They range from the results of overfishing, to illegal shark feeding, to the dumping of livestock at sea.

As in many other areas of the world, the Red Sea has felt the impact of overfishing. This can mean a loss of potential prey for many sharks and could alter their behavior, with the sharks coming in closer to shore in search of food. Doing so would increase the likelihood of a shark coming in contact with a snorkeler or swimmer away from the beach. Then the odds of mistaken identity while seeking food begin to soar. However, it doesn't necessarily explain this recent rash of attacks that all took place within a fairly small area - just a three-mile stretch of shoreline.

Illegal shark feeding or chumming could be involved in attracting more sharks, thereby increasing the odds for an encounter. Now first, I need to say that based on my personal and professional experience, I do not subscribe to the notion that feeding sharks makes them associate man with food (as in becoming potential prey) - a theory often used as a rallying cry by shark diving opponents. It hasn't been scientifically proven and, in fact, there is documented research to the contrary.

However, repeated feedings can attract sharks to an area (conversely, when the repetitive feeding stops, the sharks dissipate), and if that area is in close proximity to bathers . . . well, there go those odds again. This is why responsible shark diving operations are always conscious of where their activities take place. They consider location, topography, the species in the area that might be attracted, the intensity or longevity of the feedings, the type of food or bait used, and the proximity of swimmers or bathers.

Researchers and government officials will need to investigate not the activities of legitimate dive operations but some of the local operators or other tourist operators who may not be so conscientious. Quoting an anonymous dive instructor, the U.K. Telegraph reported, “'It is more likely to be the glass-bottomed boats that take tourists out fish spotting for the day. Sharks are easily attracted by being fed.' An instructor working for Ocean College dive centre in Sharm el-Sheikh warned that the less reputable diving schools were using bait to entice oceanic whitetip sharks and impress their clients in a bid to compete with the more established companies."

The last of the current theories involves the dumping of dead livestock in the nearby waters by ships arriving from Australia with sheep and cattle bound for use in November's Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha. This would certainly attract sharks and increase the possibility of shark-human interactions, with sharks mistaking a swimmer of snorkeler for a floating carcass.

The Shark Diver blog immediately started investigating when the latest attack was reported and interviewed Jochen Van Lysebettens, manager of the Red Sea Diving College at Sharm el-Sheikh:
SD: So what is happening in Sharm el-Sheikh, what's the word on the street, what are the local dive shops talking about?
JVL: There are rumors, Chinese whispers, of sheep floating in the water.
SD: Sheep in the water? How does a sheep get in the water?
JVL: One instructor from another dive shop says he saw a dead sheep floating in the water a few days before the first attack, could have been transported and fallen into the water. Is it chumming or not, I do not know. But, as I said these are rumors only.

# # #

Once the proverbial shark mania has quieted down, perhaps the researchers will be able to determine a root cause to these recent events and the Egyptian government will take reasonable, measured steps that will address the issues. The one thing that has been clearly proven time and time again throughout the world: the sharks are not at fault. One way or another, mankind has encroached upon their domain, and nature has a way of telling us when we have gone too far.

It's the Summer of the Shark: yaawwnnnn. . .

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.

Great White Sharks and Boats: do they stalk small boats?

Great white sharks are known for their ability to ambush and capture large prey, like seals, sea lions, or elephant seals - a common prey because of their high fat content that provides the shark with the energy it needs. But do they selectively hunt and attack boats?

This is the question that The Dorsal Fin blog was asking in response to a recent press release covering the upcoming trans-Atlantic voyage of Wave Vidmar as he prepares for a solo-rowboat expedition this summer. Apparently, previous solo boaters have reported being followed by white sharks for hours, even days, and have experienced shark bites on their vessels.

The press release stated, "Typically Atlantic Great White sharks (Carcharodon carcharias) will follow the tiny ocean row boats for hours to days, then attack by biting the backs of the boats."

That's a pretty bold statement to make and one that The Dorsal Fin rightfully questioned. He received additional information from Wave Vidmar to clarify that four solo boaters had anecdotal experiences of white sharks following them, but that it was not necessarily "typical" behavior. Perhaps an over-ambitious public relations person felt that Vidmar's upcoming voyage needed a little extra sizzle, but let's put it in perspective based on what we do know about white shark predatory behavior.

First of all, great white sharks have two roles as predators: hunters and scavengers. As hunters, besides feeding on marine pinnipeds (seals) and large fish (like tuna), white sharks have been known to feed on cetaceans like dolphins, porpoises, and small whales on rare occasions. Studies have shown that their primary point of attack is on the caudal, or tail, area, as this will immobilize the cetacean.

As scavengers, white sharks have been shown to feed on a variety of cetacean carcasses including much larger whales. The sharks, attracted by the scent of the decomposing animal, will make a slow and careful investigation, and then commence feeding on the remains.

So, could either of these behaviors come into play involving a small boat? Perhaps. The shark may be first attracted to the vibrations given off by the rowing motion. Then the visual of a large dark body floating on the surface may further pique its curiosity - is this a floating carcass? The shark may very well follow the boat for some distance, making a determination as to whether this is viable prey. Bumping the boat or engaging in an investigative bite or nibble, often at the stern (the carcass' "tail"), is not uncommon. But a full-on rush from underneath, as when ambushing a seal, is highly unlikely.

From Great White Sharks: The Biology of Carcharodon carcharias, "While predation by sharks on cetaceans is relatively rare, many sharks scavenge dead cetaceans. White sharks are frequently observed feeding on carcasses of whales off Australia and the eastern United States."

I have had the personal experience of being bumped by a great white shark while sitting in a Zodiac inflatable, during filming. Of course, the "bump" from a 15-foot white shark is no little pat - the shark pushed the inflatable, and the two of us on board, a good foot out of the water. But the shark was merely checking out whether this black mass floating on the surface was a dead whale - it was in its scavenger mode and certainly was not trying to sink the inflatable to get after the two occupants aboard.

So, would a great white shark trail behind a boat and bump or bite it? It's possible. Would it track the boat for several hours? That's also possible; I have seen white sharks spend a considerable amount of time cautiously investigating a tuna head suspended in the water, used by shark divers as an attractant. Would a shark spend days tracking the boat? My gut feeling tells me that's a bit of a stretch. The boaters may be seeing more than one shark over a period of several days. Or it may be the same shark returning, its curiosity once again piqued. But the press release statement seems to imply that the shark is round-the-clock relentless in its pursuit. Sensational but unlikely.

Like the oceanic white tip shark I wrote about earlier, great white sharks are important ocean predators. But we must not think of them as only hunters, continually on the prowl. Their roles as scavengers is critically important and can be the source of their curiosity with surface objects like small boats.

Read the entire press release.
To get some detailed information on white shark hunting and scavenging behavior, read Great White Shark: The Biology of Carcharodon carcharias, edited by Drs. Peter Klimley and David Ainley. Of particular interest is Chapter 27: White Shark Predation and Scavenging on Cetaceans in the East North Pacific Ocean.

Oceanic White Tip Sharks: curious pelagic predators with an unfair reputation

A sleek but muscular body gliding effortlessly through cobalt blue water, its rounded snow-capped dorsal fin slicing the water just below the surface, the Oceanic White Tip Shark is one of the premier pelagic (open ocean) predators.

Beqa Adventure Divers's blog picked up on a series of terrific photos of oceanic white tips, posted by LupoDiver on a recent South Atlantic trip with Jim Abernethy's Scuba Adventures.

Oceanic white tip sharks are important open ocean predators and scavengers. As with most other sharks, they play a critical role in keeping the oceanic backyard clean and the populations of their prey healthy by culling the weak, injured, and sick. They are intensely curious as they do not live in a world of wall-to-wall animals, so anything that catches their attention either visually or by scent is quickly investigated.

Unfortunately, these sharks also have a bad reputation carried down through history as a man-eater. Often attracted by the low frequency sounds given off by sinking ships (not your typical underwater background noise), particularly from sinking warships, these sharks were known to attack sailors in the water - their hunting/scavenging instincts piqued by blood from wounded sailors. Sadly, what began as natural curiosity and a reaction to food stimulus in a limited-prey environment turned into a fearsome oceanic killer reputation. Turn down the anxiety level a few notches and you get a lot closer to the truth, as LupoDiver and his fellow divers discovered on their trip.

Beqa Adventure Diver also comments on LupoDiver's picture of a blue shark, another pelagic predator whose numbers have dropped considerably over the years, a favorite target for the commercial shark fisheries.

My first unexpected encounter with a shark in open water was with a beautiful blue shark, over 20 years ago, off Santa Cruz Island which is part of California's Channel Island chain. Following that, my first cage diving experience was being surrounded by a group of blue sharks. Now, Southern California's blue shark diving operations have all but disappeared and, sadly, I suspect I may never come across another blue shark without a lot of chumming and patience.

LupoDiver, treasure your experience with the oceanic white tip and blue shark. Like the great white shark and others, these are very unique and important members of a healthy marine ecosystem. Without them, both the oceans and mankind are the lesser for it.

White Sharks at Cape Cod: keeping the news in perspective

It was about a week ago that several shark blog sites, like SharkDiver's, started to post news about a congregation of white sharks appearing off Cape Cod in the northeastern U.S. While white sharks are not unheard of in this area, the higher than usual numbers were of interest - a statistical anomaly or evidence of a population increase (wouldn't that be nice, given their decline in numbers over the years)?

Scientists want to tag as many sharks as possible with satellite tags to hopefully accumulate data that might explain the concentration. And of course the media wanted to report this as another harrowing intrusion of malevolent ocean predators upon society. This morning, NBC's Today show reported on the efforts of the lead researcher and while their reporting was fairly even-handed (better than it has been in the past when it comes to sharks), they still referred to the scientist as a "shark hunter" rather than shark researcher or tracker. It's subtle but the title still invokes a man vs. man-eater image.

This past Wednesday, the Boston Globe reported that the spotter pilot who was assisting the researchers in locating and tracking the sharks claimed that several sharks made distinct threatening movements when a diver or surfer entered the water, as if to imply that the sharks were on the hunt for humans and as soon as a person entered the water the shark suddenly knew exactly where to go and what it would find. Here's a portion:

“They definitely knew they were out there,” Breen [the pilot] said of sharks sensing the swimmers. “Whether they’d bite them, I don’t know.”

Breen was hired to help the research team, which tagged three great whites on Tuesday, bringing to five the number of sharks tagged with tracking devices over the last week. The discovery of sharks off Chatham forced the indefinite closing of the town’s beaches, but some ignored warnings not to swim in the area.

In one near-miss, Breen said he watched as a shark approached a diver from a documentary crew making a film about the researchers. He said he was circling above the filmmakers’ boat when the diver jumped into the water to retrieve a piece of equipment.

“I saw a shark going real slow about a quarter-mile away, and then when the diver jumped in, all of a sudden I saw the shark head right for the boat, going from about 2 knots to 10 to 15 knots, in an instant,” Breen said.

He radioed the crew on the boat and told them to get the diver out -- right away. The diver was attached to a tether and he was pulled out.

“The shark definitely smelled something,” Breen said. “Their sensory perception is unbelievable. The shark was only about 100 feet when they pulled the diver out.”

I know, for those of you who know anything about sharks, you're doing a slow burn right now. Sharks don't "smell" people in the water, particularly at a quarter-mile away! A white shark has pretty good eyesight, but not that good. No, it's the shark's ability to "hear" or sense vibrations in the water (a trait shared by nearly all fish) that caught its attention as the diver jumped into the water. And these animals are naturally curious. I have been fortunate to have several close encounters with white sharks and these events came about not because I was the meal d'jour but because my presence peaked its curiosity; I was something out of the norm.

Sharks like the great white have a battery of sensory capabilities that, based on distance (far away to close) typically react in this order: vibrations/sound (lateral line and inner ear); smell; eyesight; electrical impulses (Ampullae de Lorenzini); and finally, taste.

If Breen had spoken with the research team who hired him before speaking with the press, he would have been set right and his sensationalistic story could have been diffused. But if you're looking for a hot story or a little attention, what good is that, eh?

Some of the beaches in the area have been closed which, dramatic as that may seem, might be prudent for a short while. The sharks are in an area with a seasonal breeding population of seals, which is probably what has attracted them. That there might be a slight uptick in the highly remote possibility wherein a swimmer could accidentally be mistaken for a seal - particularly if the swimmer is wearing a black wetsuit - may be sufficient reason to close a beach temporarily.

But let's hope that it doesn't inspire sportfishermen or even government officials to go on some wild hunting safari to clear the area of an animal who has more right to be there than we certainly do.

Surviving Shark Week: a mixed bag of response

Well, the screams have subsided and the water is once again calm as Discovery Channel's Shark Week comes to a close. Discovery pulled out all the stops this year with their promotional campaigns, using the Internet in particular to target their key markets.

The emphasis was clearly on shark attacks and the fear factor, probably more so than at any time in the 20+ year history of this programming phenomenon. To many, they clearly went over the top with more over-sensationalism and, in some case, fabrication than has been seen ever. And they will probably have substantial ratings numbers to justify their approach unfortunately.

But there has been some important blowback and not just from the diehard shark advocates that you would expect. No, there has been critical reviews from the New York Times, comedian/commentator Stephen Colbert, and others including Advertising Age (an important one because this can represent advertiser sentiment for next season; and advertising pays the bills).

So in the end, Shark Week 2009 could be a mixed bag: high ratings but some strong criticism that can reflect on the Discovery brand. Will there be a change in strategy next year? I suspect not away from the basic fascination/fear factor that the majority of the general public has regarding sharks. But intelligence, conservation, and well-thought out science can still mix with drama and mystery to produce exciting programming for viewers of all ages.

Shark Week certainly does pique interest; Amazon sales of my documentary, Island of the Great White Shark, rose this week as I am sure did many other shark-related DVDs. On another note, on the 19th of this month, there will be a special screening/discussion of Island of the Great White Shark for the California Legislative Assembly - an interesting follow up to Shark Week. There will be more details/press about this event coming soon.

AU Shark Fisheries: blames shark attacks on sustainability

Always on the hunt to increase their annual shark catch to satisfy the growing Asian demand, Australian fishery industry officials are continuing in their strategy to link three recent shark-human interactions with the need to expand on shark catch limits.

In an online article in The Australian, it was reported that in North South Wales, Australia's southeast territory and home to the three recent attacks, an increase in prey fish and Sydney Harbor's improved water quality may be a contributing factor to the number of attacks.

"NSW has worked very hard for the last couple of decades to try and ensure the sustainability of its fisheries. There is less fishing and the fishing is more controlled -- there is more abundant prey in Sydney Harbour and maybe more sharks because of this," said Rik Buckworth of the Northern Territories Fisheries Department. He also said other factors could be climatic changes and more swimmers at Sydney beaches. "The number of shark attacks doesn't mean there are more sharks around, per se, but they're localized on the feeding schools," said Taronga Zoo shark expert John West.

So, you improve the marine ecosystem by improving water quality and control fishing, which increases fish populations (ie: getting back to normal) . . . and that's a bad thing?

Well, according to fishery industry spokesman Duncan Gay, it is as he is blaming conservation-friendly policies for increases in predatory sharks in NSW waters - once again, the fear factor. He said high shark numbers could be linked to "bad government policy in closing up large amounts of the fishery and changing fishing habits."

In another related article, Dr. Gilly Llewellyn of the World Wildlife Fund says, "The calls for an increase to the shark fishing quota in NSW are driven by this opportunism. Some fishers are using the current media feeding frenzy around sharks to call for an increase in shark hunting levels and are making claims that have no scientific basis. They should be ignored." And other Australian fisheries department officials say there is no evidence that fishing restrictions have led to more shark attacks.

Could improved marine environments lead to a higher number of sharks? It's possible. Could the three recent shark-human interactions be simply a statistical anomaly? It's possible. Could the fishing industry be on a witch hunt, drumming up excuses so as to increase profits? Most definitely.