Western Australia's White Sharks: recent fatal encounters bring calls for shark witch hunts

With three fatal encounters with white sharks occurring in just the past few weeks, officials in Western Australia (WA) are reacting, or shall I say overreacting, by suggesting that efforts get underway to catch and kill the shark or sharks responsible.

In the end, this is nothing more than a political attempt to appease the public, to show that the government is doing something to ensure the safety of its citizenry. If Australian officials want to do something that is realistic, you close the beaches, do a shark survey of the area which includes tagging so as to better understand where local white sharks are traveling. And you re-educate, reinforce in the minds of the public that these waters do not belong to mankind; they belong to the animals that normally inhabit them. Man is the intruder, not the sharks.

As reported in the Science Network/Western Australia, shark experts are making their opinions known about any wholesale taking, or culling, of sharks. "WA Premiers Research Fellow and Professor of Neuroecology in the School of Animal Biology and UWA Oceans Institute, Professor Shaun Collin says the culling of any species of sharks is not the solution. 'Not only will this be indiscriminate killing of a protected Australian species (under both the EPBC Act and state legislation), there is no way of being sure the sharks caught will be those responsible for the attacks.'"

"Shark Ecologist within the Marine and Ecology Program at the South Australian Research and Development Institute Dr Charlie Huveneers says shark attacks are still very rare events with a low probability of occurrence. 'There is no scientific evidence to suggest that the short time period between the recent attacks is a reflection of an increased population of [great white] sharks,' Dr Huveneers says."The office for the Minister of Fisheries has reported that while the great white shark is protected under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act of 1999, there is an exemption for the killing of a shark if a human life is in danger.

But one has to examine the actual application of such an exemption. Does it refer to defending a human who is about to be bitten or has just been bitten by a shark and, therefore, it becomes more a case of immediate self-defense? Or does it get broadly applied as a perverse preventative measure: mankind versus the shark, who has the greater right to be there in the ocean? Man?

It all seems to be taken right out of the script for Jaws: an incident followed by public outcry and officials trying to appear as if they are doing something to make the beaches safe once again.

“It sounds a little bit like taking revenge, and we’re talking about an endangered species,” said marine zoologist and shark researcher Barbara Weuringer of the University of Western Australia.

However, unlike the Hollywood movie, there isn't a shark swimming in the waters off Australia with a taste for human blood. While that can be said of rare documented experiences with other land predators like lions or bears, thereby necessitating the removal of that particular animal; it is not the case with sharks - ever.

Hopefully, shark experts will be able to have sufficient influence with government officials, so that some ridiculous oceanic witch hunt does not transpire. What has occurred in Western Australia is a statistical anomaly - to be sure, a tragic one - but an anomaly nonetheless. And tracking down and killing numbers of white sharks may, perhaps, quell any public outcry, but by no means will it guarantee that there won't be another shark-human interaction tomorrow.

If you would like to make your opposition to any shark culling in Western Australia brought to the attention of officials of the Australian fisheries department, David Shiffman of the RJ Dunlap Marine Conservation Program at the University of Miami, brought to my attention a petition site. Click here to visit the website.

Read about scientific opposition to shark culling in the Science Network/Western Australia.
Read more about the recent fatal shark encounters in Western Australia in The Washington Post.
Visit the Care2 petition website.

The Ocean - Mysterious and Odd: large one-celled organisms and walking fish

It sound a little well-worn or even a bit corny, but the ocean is full of mysteries. It's no joke - and a sad commentary on our priorities - when we say that we know more about the back side of the moon than we do about our oceans right here on Earth. And we keep finding more surprises.

Take for example, a single-celled organism the size of your fist. In the deep abyss regions of the world's oceans, that's actually not that uncommon. They're called xenophyophores and there are dozens of different types that live in the cold, dark areas of the world's seas, like the Mariana Trench - an area that culminates in the deepest known spot in the ocean at a depth of nearly seven miles.

Mongabay.com reports of a recent research study conducted by the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in the Mariana Trench that found xenophyophores living at a new recorded depth of 6.6 miles. The organisms were discovered using a high definition "dropcam" - a remote camera developed by Scripps and the National Geographic Society.

Xenophophores previously studied have been found to be a home for a variety of multicelluar organisms, so what has been traditionally thought of as one of the most desolate and lifeless regions on the planet may turn out to be otherwise, much like the profusion of unique life forms found at supposedly inhospitable deep sea ocean vents.

"As one of very few taxa [genus or species] found exclusively in the deep sea, the xenophyophores are emblematic of what the deep sea offers. They are fascinating giants that are highly adapted to extreme conditions but at the same time are very fragile and poorly studied," explains Lisa Levin, director of the Scripps Center for Marine Biodiversity and Conservation. "These and many other structurally important organisms in the deep sea need our stewardship as human activities move to deeper waters."

Also in Mongabay.com, Jeremy Hance writes about another oceanic oddity: the handfish. This small fish, unique to Australia, has pectoral fins that allow it to walk on the bottom. Well, more than just allow it to; it prefers to. And that makes it distinctly different from other fish that have fins that can act like terrestrial limbs but also swim conventionally.

There are 14 species of handfish, all living in Australia, and one species in particular, the spotted handfish, has the distinction of possibly being the first marine fish to go extinct in recorded history. The IUCN gives the spotted handfish its most alarming status label of Critically Endangered. The spotted handfish lives in just one location: Tasmania's Derwent estuary, a body of water that is threatening the handfish with decreasing habitat, warming water temperatures, and even poaching.

Several Australian marine conservation organizations, including the Derwent Handfish Recovery Project, are working to protect the future of these small ocean oddities. The loss of any one of these small bottom dwellers may not be catastrophic in and of itself, but their fate can be emblematic of a larger future waiting to befall entire marine ecosystems due to man-made activities. While sea creatures evolved out of the oceans, switching from fins to limbs, the poor handfish is not quite ready to get up and simply walk away.

Read more about xenophyophores in Mongabay.com.
Read more about handfish in Mongabay.com.

A Week for Sharks: CA shark fin ban is now law, Australia concerned over shark diving

It's been a week for sharks, particularly in California. Governor Jerry Brown signed AB 376 into law which bans the trade and possession of shark fins in California. This was a critical piece in a mosaic of shark fin distribution in the northern Pacific ocean.

As reported by COARE (Center for Oceanic Awareness Research and Education), "California's ban complements bans in place in Hawaii, Washington, and Oregon, effectively shutting the west coast of the United States to fin traders. It is estimated that the United States is responsible for 70% of the world's fin imports outside of Asia. With a staggering 85% of those U.S.-bound fins passing through California, AB 376 will have a tremendous impact on shark conservation."

Now we must watch for where the next distribution hubs will appear - there's too much at stake financially for some of these shark fin distributors to simply throw in the towel. And there is also the concern over illegal activities.

But the tide does seem to be turning and other nations are considering tighter regulations or out right bans on shark products. My personal concern is that, for some of the general public, sharks have become the cause d'jour and while there are some hard working advocates who, I am sure, will keep the fires burning for more conservation and regulation, I worry that the general public might tire of the cause - in today's Information Age, attention spans can dry up in the blink of an eye - and without public support, commercial shark fishing lobbyists and business representatives will jump on the opportunity to sway politicians in their favor. Only time will tell.

"The world has been watching and waiting. With similar efforts underway in parts of Canada, and with a ban proposed in China, California's efforts hopefully will ripple into many other places," said COARE.

However, one avenue whereby people can appreciate sharks up close in the wild may soon be curtailed or at least limited. Australia is one of three or four primary locations in the world where people can cage dive to view great white sharks. But Australia's ABC News reports that there are new findings that white sharks are staying in close to coastal areas, where they are often baited for the shark diving operators, and anecdotal reports of an increased number of shark/surfer encounters has some saying that the number of operators should be halved from four to two and that the number of days in which they can chum for sharks should also be reduced. (Click image to view video.)

There have been studies, both in Australia and Hawaii, that show that the sharks' response to chumming over a given period is a transitory behavior and does not equate into 1.) a significant change in the shark's normal feeding behavior and 2.) that the sharks do not equate the boat-supplied food with humans. However, some thought should be given to the fact that in Australia, they are currently chumming for white sharks as much as 270 days a year - double that of just a few years ago.

On a personal note, today I am leaving for San Diego, California to embark on my seventeenth trip to Isla Guadalupe off the coast of Baja, Mexico, compliments of Shark Diver. Isla Guadalupe is one of the world's premier sites for viewing great white sharks. A population migrates to the island in the fall months and though Mexican government regulations have greatly scaled back any baiting of the sharks, there are still plenty of encounters to keep the cage-bound divers thrilled and satisfied. I will be accompanying my friend and photojournalist, Budd Riker on his inaugural trip as he takes notes and pictures for a future photo magazine article.

While some zealous Mexican conservation groups have expressed concern that the shark diving operators at Isla Guadalupe have, over the years, disrupted the normal behavior of these sharks; in the seven years that I have been coming to the island I have yet to see any evidence or reason for concern. When the sharks were more vigorously chummed and baited in the past, the sum total of what they consumed was a mere drop in the bucket compared to the normal requirements for their diet which, for adults, consists of primarily seals and sea lions. And as the sharks would inhabit the waters around Isla Guadalupe for just three to four months, it is reasonable to assume that they didn't spend the next eight months wasting away, waiting for when they would return to Mexican waters for some leftover fish parts.

So, I will be heading out in just a few minutes and will post a follow up when I get back in a few days. In the meantime, shark advocates, no time to rest on our California legislation laurels. There's still more work to be done.

Grey Nurse Sharks: Project Aware pushes for greater protection

For you shark advocates, here's an important post from my friends at Beqa Adventure Divers in Fiji regarding protection for Grey Nurse Sharks (GNS) in Australia. It's a good follow up to a post I wrote in February of this year on these very sharks.

NSW Grey Nurse Sharks: Bravo PADI!

I must say, I'm increasingly impressed by PADI Asia Pacific.

The team of Mike Holme has been nothing short of stellar whenever we have contacted them for assistance and advice, and now I learn that Project AWARE has thrown its weight behind the campaign aimed at restoring adequate protection for New South Wales' highly vulnerable stocks of GNS after the latest shameful fiasco.

Please read this appeal and please, do act now.
This is industry leadership and I am particularly happy to find an excellent letter that contains all the recommendations I've posted here. This is terribly urgent and important, the more as all the science shows that for all practical purposes, depleted Shark stocks have no real chance of rebounding once they get wiped out as that would take decades if not centuries, i.e. way beyond any reasonable time frame - and I trust that I don't need to remind you of the consequences for the marine environment including the future of those ignorant fishermen!

The GNS stocks are literally on the brink and we simply cannot afford to get this wrong.
The only way we can avert this ecological catastrophe is to show those inept politicians and their rabid cronies from the Fishers and Shooters party that the public wants nothing to do with their appalling disregard of the health of the environment.

Please, do write a letter now.
Please send a copy to David at david.roe@projectaware.org.au and please, do mobilize your friends. Bloggers, please do re-post.
Submission close on Friday, August 26.
Once again, kudos to PADI.

Visit PADI Asia Pacific's website.

Japanese Whaling: Australia files with the International Court of Justice

The end of last year's whaling season in the southern oceans was a dismal economic failure for Japan due, in no small part, to the actions of anti-whaling organizations like the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (SSCS). But it is not exactly clear as to what Japan is planning to do for the upcoming season. Radical activist groups like SSCS are ready to do battle with the Japanese whaling fleet and should that occur, there will certainly be media coverage in the form of news reports and, perhaps, more episodic television.

However, equally important are the quiet efforts that are taking place on the international front, in the world courts. This week, the Australian government filed a written submission to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) calling for an end to Japan's whaling activities in the Antarctic ocean. This is the next step in an international legal battle that has been brewing since Australia first petitioned the ICJ in 2009, advocating a global ban on whaling.

As reported by the Dow Jones Newswire, "'Despite Australia repeatedly calling on Japan to cease its illegal whaling activities, Japan has refused to do so. That is why the Australian Government has taken this case in the ICJ. The [Australian] Government believes the whaling carried out by Japan is commercial, not scientific, and does not fall within that narrow exception,' the Australian government said in a statement."

Japan's rationale that they can engage in whaling under a "scientific research" provision within the rules of the International Whaling Commission has been questioned by many nations. And there appears to be ample evidence that the whales that have been taken have ended up in the commercial marketplace which is viewed as a direct violation of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling.

Australia's submission with the ICJ will be sealed until 2012, after Japan has had time to prepare a written response. It is hoped that the international legal body will take up the issue and rule in favor of Australia and the whales. It may seem a slow and tedious process, but it is another powerful force - as powerful as the more attention-grabbing activist groups - albeit working from the opposite end of the anti-whaling notoriety spectrum.

Let us hope that the Japanese government will recognize that they are rapidly becoming boxed in a corner by world opinion and should reconsider their position on a destructive and antiquated cultural and commercial activity.

Ocean Conservation: taking steps in public awareness and gillnet management

Sometimes progress in ocean conservation must be measured in inches instead of yards. Whether that will be sufficient to ward off an ecosystem collapse or a species extinction depends on the specific issue and whether such progress might slowly build upon itself and begin to expand exponentially. In any event, it all has to start somewhere. Here are a couple of encouraging examples.

Ocean Conservation Exhibition in Taiwan
In Taiwan, this week saw the opening of a marine ecology exhibition in Taipei City's National Taiwan Museum. Designed to highlight the nation's unique ocean diversity (over 400 varieties of coral and 3,000 species of fish), the exhibition will feature live specimens including a red coral valued at over $344,000USD and a Japanese spider crab - the world's largest crab species - in addition to multimedia presentations that highlight coral spawning, mangroves, and shallow-water hydrothermal vents.

What makes this exhibition, which runs until early August, so special is that Taiwan is an important gateway to Asian markets for a variety of commercial seafood - much of which is being overfished. Asian cultures can often be resistant to outside influences or opinions that can be perceived as criticizing their way of life. An event such as this is an incremental step in changing public perceptions internally about endangered species, such as sharks and tuna, and developing a greater appreciation for marine natural resources - before they are all gone.

“As an island, Taiwan is inextricably tied up with the ocean,” said Huang Shu-fang, curator of the event and chief of the museum's research section. “It is important we learn about the abundant marine species and their habitats.” Echoing that sentiment was Jeng Ming-shiou of the Academia Sinica's Biodiversity Research Center. “We hope the event will help raise public awareness of the importance of protecting the ocean.”

Australian Gillnet Regulations
Commercial gillnets are notorious for claiming the lives of countless sea creatures that are discarded as accidental bycatch. In many cases, the majority of what gillnets ensnares is thrown away. Gillnets can catch sharks, turtles, even dolphins - anything that can get caught up in nets that can stretch for miles.

In southern Australia, the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) has put additional gillnet management regulations into effect to better protect sea lions and other non-target species. The new regulations cover the Gillnet, Hook and Trap (GHAT) Sector of the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery.

“These changes are designed to offer better protection to non-target species in the fishery, particularly Australian sea lions, and to improve data collection on interactions with threatened, endangered and protected species,” said Dr. James Findlay, Chief Executive Officer of AFMA.

Predictably, representatives for the commercial shark fishing industry complained that the new gillnet regulations will increase their costs. However, gillnet fishermen have to take much of the blame for the need for stricter management policies as the commercial gillnet fishers have been shown to be under-reporting the level of interactions with threatened, endangered, and protected species.

“It is clear that some vessels have not been accurately reporting interactions with protected species as required as a condition of their access to the fishery. Accurate information on the level of fishery interactions with non-target species is essential to ensure that our fisheries are managed in an ecologically sustainable manner,” said Dr, Findlay.

In addition to a restriction in the use of gillnets in and around over 30 sea lion colonies, thereby doubling the total area under protection from 6,300 sq. kilometers to 18,500 sq kilometers, the use of either on-board scientific observers or remote cameras to monitor the catch was increased. Those vessels that participate in the remaining open gillnet fishing areas in South Australia will be continuously observed, either in person or electronically.

Ocean conservation, one step at a time. And, hopefully, not a second too late.

India's Whale Sharks: a migrating population may be unique to India

For many years, marine scientists have studied the migration patterns of marine animals, trying to better understand the animal's behavior by unlocking the secrets as to why these long-range movement patterns exist. Spawning grounds, food opportunities, seasonal temperature changes - all have entered into the mix, depending on the species or the location.

In the South Pacific and Indian Ocean Ocean, there was a long held belief that a population of whale sharks migrated from Australia to waters off India's Gujarat coast. In the winter months, whale sharks would disappear from Australian waters and reappear in Gujarat, about 300 to 500 strong. The theory was that the sharks were migrating to warmer waters.

But a new study by Wildlife Trust of India (WTI), wherein genetic samples from Australian and Indian whale sharks, along with identifying photographs, were taken and compared, it appears that the two regions may, in fact harbor two distinct populations. According to Arun Kaul, WTI senior director, there were no corresponding DNA indicators between any of the samples taken.

“The samples collected so far have not found a match anywhere in the world, which means they are unique,” Kaul said.

Whale sharks, like many other sharks, can also be photographically identified because their white-spotted markings - along with any other distinctive scars or deformities - act like a fingerprint. The WTI study did not find photographs that showed a whale shark in both Australian and Indian locales.

WTI pointed out that this was a preliminary study and that more work needed to be done to further identify migration routes for these sharks (after all, the Australian whale sharks were going somewhere during the winter months; just, apparently not to India) and to determine whether any cross-breeding is taking place.

I recall when I first became interested in the white sharks at Isla Guadalupe and learned of the "White Shark Cafe" where it appeared that both sharks populations from Isla Guadalupe and the Farallon Islands were both migrating to. It was a tantalizing thought that these two distinct populations were meeting in the mid-Pacific to cross-breed and maintain a healthy gene pool. However, to date, all DNA samples taken have not yet shown any connection between the two groups. It's also not completely clear as to whether all of the sharks migrate or whether there are some who, for whatever reason, stay back. Some divers, who dive Guadalupe in the summer months before the usual return fall migration of the white sharks, have reported seeing a shark or two at the edge of visibility, hanging out in deep water.

Could this be happening in Gujarat? The seabeds in Gujarat are rich in plankton - a primary whale shark food source - and sea grass which feeds many small fish that end up as whale shark prey. But the whale sharks don't stay all year round, so if not Australia, then where are they going?

A coalition of research groups including WTI, Wildlife Institute of India, Space Applications Centre, National Institute of Oceanography, Australian Institute of Marine Science, University of Illinois and others is being formed to carry on a more intensive study. The prospect of a unique population of whale sharks at Gujaret is not only of scientific interest, it is also a source of national pride. In 2000, as many as 500 whale sharks were landed off Gujaret, but in 2001 whale shark hunting was banned and hunters became protectors, viewing the whale sharks as a valuable natural resource. Fishermen free whale sharks caught in their nets and discussion are underway regarding the economics of ecotourism, as several agencies step up an awareness campaign.

“Perhaps we have discovered a population that could be endemic to Indian territorial waters,” said Satish Trivedi, senior official, community development, Tata Chemicals, Ltd (who funds a "Save the Whale Shark" campaign in India), commenting that such a discovery is significant for India.

Read about Gujarat whale sharks in LiveMint.com.

Australia's Grey Nurse Sharks: NSW anglers under new restrictions to protect sharks

In New South Wales, Australia, sportfisherman who fish the waters off Fish Rock and Green Island, in the southeast corner of the continent, west of Melbourne, are having to adapt to new fishing techniques and restrictions imposed by the NSW Primary Industries Ministry. The rules were put in place to help protect the grey nurse shark, also known as the sand tiger shark. Congregating in large numbers, these sharks were being accidentally hooked because of the baiting techniques being used.

The fishermen were using bait and wire line, or trace, to fish right off the island's rocky shoreline. Unfortunately, with grey nurse sharks being the typically bottom-feeding scavengers that they are, a baited hook became a tempting target.

“Recently published research suggests that grey nurse sharks are being accidentally hooked in the vicinity of Fish Rock and supports the requirement for increased protection at this site," said Steve Whan, NSW Primary Industries Minister. "Other research being conducted by Industry & Investment NSW at Fish Rock has shown that grey nurse sharks will readily take a range of commonly used baits suggesting the existing rules are unlikely to protect the species from accidental hooking.”

A benign but threatening-looking shark
Grey nurse sharks are not considered a particularly dangerous shark, even though they can grow to be up to 14 feet in length and carry a rather awesome mouthful of long, dagger-like teeth designed for snagging and holding on to fish that they catch with a quick side-to-side snap of their heads. Because of that array of dental armament combined with a rather mild temperament, they have become a popular shark in public aquariums.

When I was a dive team leader at the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach, CA, I had the opportunity to spend time with three or four grey nurse sharks (called sand tigers in the U.S.). They were very curious sharks and so, if I was filming, I would have a safety diver behind me with a short pole to shoo away any shark that got a bit too curious. Other times, divers would be in the shark exhibit to clean and another diver would always be watching his or her dive buddy's back. It was a prudent precaution, but not because the sand tigers looked at any of us as a potential meal. It was more a case of curiosity and a bit of a territorial attitude that they exhibited. In fact, it was always a point of concern with the staff, when introducing a new shark or other animal into the exhibit, that the sand tigers might pick on the new arrival. Like West Side Story, the gang of "sharks" in Long Beach were protecting their turf.

I always enjoyed diving with the Aquarium's sand tiger/grey nurse sharks, in addition to the blacktip reef sharks and zebra sharks also on display. But with the sand tigers, you always maintained a careful eye on where they were.

Incremental but important steps
Back in New South Wales, sportfishermen are still allowed to fish at Green Island and Fish Rock, but they must confine their fishing techniques to using artificial flies or lures - devices that seem to not interest the nurse sharks there. Commercial fishing was not affected by the new regulations as they operate further offshore and away from the nurse shark aggregations. The New South Wales government made a sensible incremental step, recognizing the desire of locals anglers to have fishing access while at the same time acknowledging that something needed to be done to avoid needlessly killing the grey nurse sharks there.

Progress can be measured in big steps, like the various anti-shark fin legislative proposals that have passed or are close to passing in several countries. And it can be measured in small steps, like those that are protecting Australia's grey nurse shark.

Read about New South Wales' grey nurse sharks in The Coffs Coast Advocate.

Australia's Queensland Floods: aftermath poses grave risks to coral reefs

Nature has an uncanny way of healing itself from its own natural disasters, like forest fires, hurricanes and wind storm damage, and even volcanoes. The damage can be devastating but, given sufficient time, nature recovers. Time is the key factor. Time to rejuvenate and time for it to prepare for the next calamity, many of which being cyclical.

But when events happen one right after another or are working in concert to weaken the ecosystem's ability to withstand a particularly powerful disaster, or if we add man-made factors into the mix, then nature can find itself in dire peril.

Such is the case following the heavy rains and flooding that have recently taken place in and around Queensland, Australia. The flood waters don't simply evaporate but, instead, continue to move towards open sea. Swollen rivers feed into the ocean and they bring along three elements that are dangerous to the coral reef systems, offshore and to the north, that make up Australia's famed Great Barrier Reef: fresh water, sediment, and fertilizers/herbicides.

When great quantities of fresh water are introduced into a coral reef, the corals suffer tremendously as they are strictly salt water creatures. As the fresh water moves further offshore, it blends with the salt water and so the negative effects of too much fresh water are primarily limited to reefs and islands relatively close to shore.

Sediment that fans out at the mouth of rivers can also block sunlight and cover the corals. These fine particles essentially choke the corals, preventing them from feeding effectively and, with the loss of sunlight, starving the symbiotic algae that grows within the coral's tissues. Through photosynthesis, the algae converts sunlight into organic energy for the coral's benefit. But, with floating sediment, that life-giving process is disrupted.

Perhaps the corals could withstand those abuses, but then we must add man's contribution: fertilizers and herbicides. Washed down from farmlands, these chemicals stimulate plant growth, in particular seaweed and algae. Both compete for space with the coral and typically the coral loses. Nature has a way of balancing the relationship between plants and corals so that both can coexist, but with the introduction of fertilizers and other plant stimulants, that balance is thrown off kilter. Corals are rather slow growing, whereas sea plants, particularly when chemically stimulated, are very fast growing. It becomes an aquatic land grab and the seaweeds and algae soon take over.

However, even with the added impact of man-made fertilizers, coral reef ecosystems could deal with these three factors were it not for the fact that they are continually being bombarded and weakened by other hazards. Climate and temperature change, acidification, pollution and disease - one hit after another can have a cumulative effect that can leave the coral reefs exposed and overwhelmed by the negative effects of a natural disaster like the one that occurred in Australia.

The Queensland flooding has been a recent event and researchers are only now beginning to see and monitor the residual effects of the floods working their way out to sea. Coral damage from flooding has happened before and the reefs were able to heal themselves within a decade. But life in the Great Barrier Reef is different now, more precarious and fragile.

"The problem is that all forms of disturbances, loads of sediments/nutrients/pesticides, as well as bleaching events from warming seawaters, more intense cyclones and more frequent outbreaks of coral predators such as the crown-of-thorns starfish, all increase in frequency and intensity," says Dr. Katharine Fabricius of the Australian Institute for Marine Science. "This gives the reefs often not enough time to recover before they get hit again."

Read about the effects of Australia's floods on BBC News.

Coral's Fight or Flight: Coral Sea reserve proposed, but some corals can migrate to the poles

The Coral Sea, while known to some as a World War II battle zone or the name of a super aircraft carrier, it is in reality a body of water off the northeastern coast of Australia, southeast of Papua New Guinea, that has remained relatively unscathed from industrial fishing and other human impacts due to its remoteness and sometimes rough seas.

To preserve its good health, efforts are underway to make it a protected marine reserve. The Australian-based Cairns and Far North Environment Centre (CAFNEC) is pushing for having the Coral Sea designated as a marine park that would provide for marine tourism, recreation, and scientific research, while limiting or prohibiting commercial fishing to protect the billfish, sharks , and tuna that either pass through or call the Coral Sea home.

While the idea of a Coral Sea marine reserve has been endorsed by many scientists (as many as 250 from 35 countries have gone on record in support of the reserve), there has been opposition from local recreational fishermen who see it as a step-by-step strategy leading to expansion along the entire east coast of Australia. However, proponents recognize the needs of the locals and say that expansion is not on their agenda. But protecting one of the few unspoiled tropical areas in the ocean is.

Corals head toward the poles
Protecting areas like the Coral Sea would be a good short-term strategy measure. In the long term, we need to consider what might be happening to coral reefs as ocean temperatures continue to rise. Coral thrives within a relatively narrow temperature range and as the waters become warmer, which has been documented as ongoing for several decades, coral reefs experience "bleaching" events where the symbiotic algae that lives within the soft tissues of the coral, providing much of their color, vanishes. This weakens the coral and often proves fatal.

But a new study, about to be published in Geophysical Research Letters, claims that many coral species are migrating towards the poles, to more suitable water temperatures. And the rate that these corals appear to be traveling is quite remarkable: up to 14 km (8.7 mi) annually. With average speeds of 1 km for terrestrial plants and animals and 5km for bottom dwelling sea creatures, these corals would appear to be sprinting. The study combined data with that of others who have tracked coral migrations for years and the researchers noted that of nine coral species studied, four species (all of which considered "near threatened" or "vulnerable" by the IUCN) had moved, most likely with floating larval polyps being aided by currents headed towards the poles, as found along the east coasts of the United States, South America, Africa, and Australia.

Does this mean that corals will simply out run climate change? Not necessarily. The components of climate change and the impacts on coral reefs are complex, from temperature increases to acidification to epidemics which could lead to shifts in the types of corals that stay and flourish, or migrate, or die. One way or another, the tropical reef zones will be disrupted.

In discussing coral's ability to persevere and survive in changing conditions by migrating to more hospitable environments, Paul Sammarco of the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium was quoted in NatureNews, "For corals it is good news, but for ecosystems, maybe not."

Read about the Coral Sea in Cairns.com.au.
Read about coral on the move in NatureNews.com.

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.

Wobbegongs: behavior to light can help determine ocean health

One of the more unusual sharks found throughout the temperate and tropical waters of the western Pacific Ocean is the wobbegong. A bottom-feeder, the wobbegong has camouflaging motley coloration and frilly appendages around its mouth that some believe act as a lure for unsuspecting prey.

While the populations of various shark species that cruise the reefs can be used as a barometer as to the overall health of the ecosystem, according to researchers in Australia, the behavior of the wobbegong can also be used as an indicator of a healthy environment. By studying the behavior and understanding what geographical or habitat factors determine that behavior, then any recorded change in behavior may point to changes in the marine environment.

Dr. Susan Theiss of the University of Queensland has studied the light sensitivity of several wobbegong species and how different sensitivity establishes different levels of activity. She reported, "It appears that the wobbegong species we studied have different visual adaptations that could be linked to times of increased activity. For example, the spotted and dwarf spotted wobbegongs are probably more active in low-light conditions such as night time, or in the early morning or late afternoon, whereas the western and ornate wobbegongs are visually suited to a range of light conditions."

Professor Shaun Collin of the University of Western Australia, who also worked with Dr. Theiss in the study, said, "Almost nothing is known about the behaviour of wobbegongs, but what our research on the visual systems can do is predict their behaviour, so we look at the shark's visual system at the level of the photoreceptors, which are the cells that detect light. If you see these common species interacting and behaving normally in a particular environment, this can be a good indicator of the health of that part of the ocean."

Marine biologists study the role that sharks play as predators and scavengers in maintaining a healthy marine ecosystem. Declining shark populations, due to commercial overfishing, can have pronounced effects on the ocean environment - from changes in the health of other fish species to degraded water quality and even reduced oxygen levels. By monitoring the behaviors of animals like the wobbegong shark, researchers gain insight into how animals respond to changes in their environment.

"This research is important in establishing general trends and predictions in biogeography and ecology that we don't yet have data for," Dr Theiss said.

Oh, and yes, we are related. I am her proud uncle. Dr. Theiss is a U.S. national working for the University of Queensland and I someday hope to get across the Pacific and have her show me some of her frilly-mouthed friends first hand.

Read about the wobbegong research in Science Alert.

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.

Australian Marine Reserves: government review approves the science that supports their parks

One of the bright spots in ocean conservation has been the worldwide adoption of marine reserve areas. From Hawaii to Australia to the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean, marine reserves or parks that prohibit or strictly limit recreational and commercial activities are being recognized as a positive step in preserving delicate marine ecosystems and allowing biodiversity to flourish. A lot more reserves are needed but what we have is a start.

But what defines a marine reserve? What is the method or methods by which the boundaries are determined? Well, this is where scientific research - past and ongoing studies - plays a crucial role. It requires research that examines a whole range of factors - biodiversity, population studies of specific species, water quality and movement patterns, topographical seabed mapping, and more. No one study can do it all, so research accumulates and from this wealth of knowledge, recommendations are made to determine the location and size of the protected area.

But not everyone agrees on the science. Lobbying forces that represent recreational or commercial fishing, and other business interests such as mining and mineral exploration, often question the validity and accuracy of the science. And so the battle rages for the attention and vote of the politicians and decision makers in charge.

Recently, Australia's Department of Environment, Climate Change, and Water commissioned an independent review of the scientific research used to determine its marine reserves, and the results heavily favored the available scientific research. Newly designated areas in New South Wales (NSW) had been heavily criticized, but it would appear by the review that the research that, both, had been done and was planned for the future was sufficient to support the marine reserves.

''The independent review panel found evidence of much ongoing or completed research and monitoring that has taken advantage of established marine parks within NSW,'' the authors of the review wrote, as reported by the Sydney Morning Herald.

''These are resulting in presentations at conferences and scientific papers published in the international literature, and the reputation of the work being done is, on the whole, excellent.''

The Sydney Morning Herald also quoted Dr. Klaus Koop, the department's conservation and science director, who felt that marine parks not being supported by science was an idea that has been debunked. However, he did make one interesting observation.

''One of the things that we haven't done well enough, perhaps, is communicating exactly what we've done and … what we've found,'' Dr Koop said.

I am a proponent of good media communications for scientific research and that often means a lot more than just published articles in academic journals. Researchers need the assistance of those with media expertise, like myself, in communicating their work to a broader audience - one that includes policy makers, commercial interests, and the general public. The more the information is disseminated in easy-to-understand results and implications, the more challenging it becomes for opposing forces to dismiss or question its legitimacy.

Read the Sydney Morning Herald article.

Shark Nets: Thomas Peschak reports on the past and future

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).

Of Regulations & Reefs: U.S. and Australia consider climate change effects

In the United States, the Obama administration is considering ordering all federal agencies to evaluate any major actions to be taken by considering either their impact upon or how they would be affected by climate change.  As reported by Jim Tankersley in the Los Angeles Times, the order would expand the scope of the National Environmental Policy Act and represents a step forward in recognizing the impact of global warming in the U.S. and is considered a victory for environmentalists.

"The act already requires federal agencies to consider environmental impacts such as land use, species health and air and water quality when approving projects.  By formalizing a requirement to consider effects on climate -- a step some agencies already take -- the administration would introduce a broad new spectrum of issues to be considered."


But it's not a done deal yet.  According to Nancy Sutley, head of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, the decision is not yet final.  This will provide time for climate change opponents and business interests to get their lobbying efforts into high gear.  Admittedly, the current environmental impact report process is a drawn out one that has delayed more than a few projects in the past.  Having to make the additional consideration as to whether a shoreline road project might impacted by rising sea levels or whether rising temperatures might mean that different species of trees would replace trees cut down in a clear-cutting project - as was cited in the Times article - will provide environmentalists with additional reasons to question certain federal agency plans.  So, expect the battle lines to be drawn.

But if the current administration is going to hold true to its concerns about addressing climate change, then this step is probably a good one.  

The article quoted David Bookbinder, chief climate counsel for the Sierra Club as saying, "People will think longer and harder and smarter about what they build when they understand that the environment around them is changing." 

Read the LA Times article. 

On the other side of the globe, in Australia, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) has dismissed claims from some local scientists that the corals of the Great Barrier Reef are currently not at risk from climate change.  GBRMPA chairman, Dr. Russell Reichelt said there is strong scientific consensus, research and fieldwork to confirm that the increase in ocean temperatures brought on by global warming poses the greatest risk to the future health of Australia's coral reefs.  This refutes the contrary position taken by Dr. Peter Ridd, who believes the threat is greatly exaggerated.

According to an article in the online Cairns.com.au, Dr. Reichfelt says that coral bleaching is the most compelling evidence of the effects of temperature change and that the incidence of coral bleaching and its severity have been increasing over the past two decades.

"You’ve got animals and plants there that are adapted to withstand up to the normal [temperature] limits," Dr. Reichfelt said. "If you’ll take it above what they’re adapted to, they’ll die." 

Read Cairns.com.au article.

   

Crocodile Hunting: Australia rejects safaris to manage population

Sharks are not the only predators subject to discussions regarding their numbers and possible interactions with man. In the Northern Territory of Australia, crocodile populations have increased from a record low of 3000 in the 1970's, for both salt and fresh water species, to an estimated number today of 80,000 for just the saltwater species alone. The increase was the result of legislation that protected the crocodiles and limited any government-sanctioned culling to 600 per year.

But with that apparent ecological success story and the unfortunate deaths of four people by crocodiles, all in the month of March of this year, the Northern Territory government proposed "crocodile safaris" to allow tourists and trophy hunters to increase the number of crocodiles hunted with the idea that would correct the problem of crocodile-human interactions.

The proposal was rejected by Australia's environment minister who has, instead, increased the number of eggs that can be harvested and the number of crocodiles that can be legally culled.

Peter Garrett, environment minister, said, “I am of the view that safari hunting is not a suitable approach for the responsible management of crocodiles.” The prime minister of the Northern Territory has said that he would continue to press for the safaris.

This situation brings into question the entire issue of how does one "manage" any species to sustain its population, if management is required at all? With tourists and hunters entering the picture, one could not guarantee that the most "appropriate" animals would be taken - appropriate meaning older mature males or females who have had the opportunity to reproduce (if this is applicable to crocodiles; and I must admit I know little about them).

Another issue to consider is the circumstances behind the rash of human fatalities. Are crocodiles encroaching upon humans? Are humans, through increasing development or urbanization, encroaching upon the reptiles? Is the Northern Territory, when in a healthy environmental condition, an area where these and other types of animal interactions are to be expected? (A crocodile cruising down the main street in Miami is one thing; a croc resting near the green at the 9th hole of a golf course next to the Everglades is a different story.)

And then there's the concept, suggested by some, to let nature take its course, that the growing population of crocodiles would ultimately self-regulate based on available prey and natural selection (an increased population can also mean more sick and less "successful" crocodiles which would, over time, ultimately impact the population and balance it out in line with the overall ecosystem). The counter-argument would question how long this natural selection would take, since the current Northern Territory crocodile population has been growing steadily for over 30 years.

Sharks in the oceans, mountain lions and coyotes in the hills, even lions in the savannahs - all have populations at risk and all have the potential for human interaction. If we choose to regulate the species ourselves, we must do it with an eye on the entire health of the ecosystem in which they live and to remind ourselves who is encroaching on who.
Read entire article in Embrace Australia.