Saving the shark - WellBeing Magazine

Madison Stewart has been swimming with sharks, including species considered dangerous, since she was 12. Sometimes hand-feeding them, sometimes even hugging them, she finds them very predictable. Like a “shark whisperer”, she is able to tune into these underwater giants; she compares them to large puppies. Based in Byron Bay, the so-called Shark Girl, even at the age of 20, has become a high-profile advocate for the marine creatures.

In the Bahamas, to make the documentary film Tears of a Mermaid, activist model Hannah Fraser was photographed dancing underwater with tiger sharks, stroking them as they swam past. Marine conservationist Shawn Heinrichs is quoted in the trailer as saying, “These sharks actually appreciate affection and they want to connect with us, so much so that they prefer that over food.”

However, when most of us think of sharks, the more sensational media clichés tend to win out, whether we’re watching a DVD of Jaws or reading about sharks as “brutal predators” in the tabloid press. These ideas have become a meme that has taken on a life of its own and the path of least resistance is to pander to it rather than set the record straight.

There are certainly risks in interacting with sharks at close quarters, but such experiences point to a very different perspective that usually evades attention in the media.

Shark attacks

A major misconception concerns the risk of a shark attack. The real figures are almost insignificant: between 2009 and 2013, worldwide average fatalities from unprovoked attacks were just eight. Compared to the rest of the world, though, Australians are disproportionately likely to be on the receiving end, with a long-term average of one fatal attack a year.

However, the number of incidents is slowly rising. Likely contributing factors are an increased number of person-hours spent in the water, while sharks tend to come closer to the shore, possibly because of the depletion of fish stocks. With improved medical care, the global probability of dying from a shark attack has dropped over the past century from 50 per cent to 8 per cent.

Only a few shark species, including the great white, oceanic whitetip, tiger and bull, are a risk to humans. In most cases, though, it’s thought that when sharks attack they’re taking exploratory bites or confusing us with prey species. To minimise the risk of a shark attack, stay in shallower water, don’t bathe at dusk, night or dawn, avoid murky water and don’t swim between sandbars.

Conservation

Across the globe, shark populations are diminishing as a result of human impacts. Today, around a third of the world’s shark species are threatened with extinction and populations of all threatened and endangered sharks are either decreasing or unknown. Along with a 2.5-fold growth of the global shark catch between 1950 and 2010, some species have seen their populations fall by more than 90 per cent over the past 20 to 30 years. Protecting sharks is an increasing focus of activist groups.

In the marine environment, sharks are apex predators that support the whole ecosystem. When they disappear, corals tend to be overwhelmed as algae-eating fish are displaced while fisheries can suffer when predator fish decimate commercial target species. With low fecundity and a slow growth rate, it takes a long time for shark populations to climb back from over-exploitation.

Threats against sharks are wide-ranging and include:

Harvesting for their fins, meat and other by-products
Bycatch in other fisheries
Recreational fishing tournaments, especially where “catch and release” techniques are not used
Human pollution of the oceans, including discarded plastics
Depletion of fish stocks
Habitat alteration, such as dredging and coastal development

In addition to their fins and meat, sharks are caught for shark-liver oil, sometimes taken as a complementary cancer supplement due to the immune-boosting effects of its alkylglycerols. Shark cartilage is ingested for perceived cancer benefits and used as a source for chondroitin supplements alongside shark-free bovine sources. Cartilage can also be used for pet chew treats.

The squalene found in a range of cosmetics may be derived from shark liver, so alternatives from vegetable sources are worth tracking down. Some traditional Chinese medicines also make use of shark fin.

Protection in Australia & New Zealand

Currently, eight shark species are protected from commercial or recreational fishing in Australia and two are off limits in New Zealand.

Australia’s current shark strategy, known as Shark-Plan 2, has been criticised by conservation groups on several fronts: there is no guiding policy, all actions are voluntary, no funding sources are identified and there is a patchwork of measures across federal, state and territory authorities. In New Zealand, the Draft National Plan of Action 2013 has been endorsed by Forest and Bird.

While Australia has an impressive network of new marine sanctuaries, since the 2013 election the federal government has declined to implement exclusion zones for commercial and recreational fishing. In South Australia, a proposal to remove sanctuary zones from marine parks had passed halfway through parliament at the time of writing.

In New South Wales, where future of the critically endangered grey nurse hangs in the balance, a decision is still pending on whether to extend permanently a temporary amnesty on recreational fishing in marine sanctuaries, which is opposed by 220 marine scientists. Grey nurse sharks have been found swimming with hooks in their mouths and these can cause nasty injuries or death.

NZ does not have similar policies in its marine protected areas but these are restricted to the waters around a few offshore islands.

The waste of shark finning

An estimated 100 million sharks are killed every year by commercial fisheries, many just for their fins. Commonly this involves the practice of live finning, where the fin is painfully removed with a hot metal blade and the finless shark thrown overboard to die from suffocation or be eaten by predators. However, with the practice banned by an increasing number of countries, shark finning is slowly on the way out.

The motivation behind this industry is money. The price of a single fin reached hundreds of dollars in the late 2000s before it tumbled in response to a drop-off in demand. In China, raised awareness led to a 50–70 per cent fall in consumption of shark-fin soup between 2011 and 2013. A parallel trend has been noticed in neighbouring Hong Kong. From a health perspective, shark fins contain mercury and a chemical called BMAA, both of which have neurotoxic effects.

In Australia, shark finning is no longer lawful; sharks must be landed with the fins attached. However, it’s likely that fins are still being imported from live-finned sharks. A ban on the shark fin trade is supported by a range of marine conservation and environmental groups. NZ, previously been one of the world’s top 10 shark-finning and exporting countries, implemented a ban on the practice in October 2014.

A growing list of countries, including Ecuador, the Bahamas, the Maldives, Brunei and a range of Pacific Island nations, have gone one step further and implemented bans on possessing and trading in fins. Inevitably, this shift towards criminalisation encourages illegal smuggling but it is slowing the depletion of shark numbers.

A further threat to sharks comes from the secretive Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade liberalisation agreement being negotiated by 12 countries including Australia and New Zealand. The draft environmental chapter of the TPP, exposed by WikiLeaks in January 2014, is unenforceable and contains weak language. Additionally, any country that bans finning or the fin trade could be sued by corporate interests under the agreement’s investor-state dispute settlement provisions.

Shark fishing

The Australian Marine Conservation Society (AMCS) does not see any shark fishery, in Australia or overseas, as being sustainable.

Bycatch is another issue. Globally, sharks are the most common incidental catch, which contributes to their increasingly threatened status. The tuna industry seems to be the worst offender — Australia’s Coral Sea tuna fishery caught nearly 2000 sharks in the year 2011–12. However, there has been some progress and, in response to Greenpeace lobbying, Australian and New Zealand tuna brands are abandoning destructive fish aggregating devices in favour of pole and line. The South Australian gummy shark fishery is catching dolphins and sea lions in gillnets, although the permitted numbers are subject to a cap.

New Zealand’s shark fisheries target most species found in the country’s waters and, like Australia’s, are based on a quota management system despite deficient data on numbers of ocean sharks. Even though it received a Marine Stewardship Conservation tick, the country’s hoki (blue grenadier) fishery is controversial for its bycatch of the basking shark, which is classified vulnerable. Purchase of hoki is discouraged by three sustainable fish lists: AMCS (Australian Marine Conservation Society), Forest and Bird (NZ) and Greenpeace (NZ).

In both Australia and New Zealand, shark is frequently used in fish and chips. In Australia, especially Melbourne, shark tends to be known as “flake”, which indicates either gummy or vulnerable-classified rig shark. In New Zealand, rig shark (colloquially known as “lemon fish”) is widely used. As a rule, if there is a lack of labelling information, it’s probably best to assume shark.

All three sustainable fish lists discourage the purchase of shark, which also has comparatively high mercury levels. Food Standards Australia New Zealand recommends that pregnant women and young children eat shark no more than once a fortnight, if no other fish is consumed in that period. The US Food and Drug Administration is even more cautious, advising the same population segment avoid shark altogether. It would be helpful if a warning were required to be posted at seafood counters.

In response to lobbying by Madison Stewart, Woolworths stopped selling blacktip reef sharks from the Great Barrier Reef. However, other retailers are yet to follow suit.

Nets & culls

At the top of the controversy league table is the practice of shark culling and the use of large-mesh gillnets designed to trap sharks. Worldwide, these nets are used only in parts of NSW, Queensland and the South African province of KwaZulu-Natal. The New Zealand city of Dunedin has just voted to remove its nets.

Other species are being caught in the nets, including turtles, fish, dugongs and the occasional humpback whale calf, and some of these are endangered. In NSW, roughly 40 per cent of sharks are entangled on the beach side, demonstrating that the nets are not an effective barrier.

In January 2014, the Western Australian government began a contentious three-month shark cull in response to a spike of seven fatal attacks on the state’s beaches between 2010 and 2013. However, an opinion poll held in early 2014 found that 80 per cent of those surveyed were opposed, with only 15 per cent supportive.

The weapon of choice here is drum lines, which are baited hooks attached to the sea bed. Sharks over three metres in length are killed while the others are released. But there are doubts as to how many of these survive given the incidences of severe head injuries; many sink to the bottom or float belly-up on the surface. Drum lines are also used in Queensland and KwaZulu-Natal.

The effectiveness of this program has come under scrutiny. While the target was great white sharks, all catches so far have been tiger sharks, which are rarely involved in fatal attacks. Being vulnerable to extinction, the great white is protected under Australia’s Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act but Environment Minister Greg Hunt gave the WA cull a special exemption, the primary concerns being public safety and tourism revenue.

Culling is opposed by marine scientists and conservation groups and has attracted large numbers of protestors. In February 2014, six thousand people crammed onto Cottesloe Beach near Perth for a shark-cull protest rally.

In both NSW and KwaZulu-Natal, the minority of sharks found alive in nets or on drum lines are released out to sea. In Queensland, species considered dangerous are culled, with the result that only a tiny minority are released. In all three regions, advocates of culling — notably politicians — point to a steep drop-off in human fatalities, yet a close analysis of the Queensland figures shows that fatalities there had been dropping for 40 years prior to the introduction of drum lines and have since remained fairly steady.

Other parts of the world such as Hawaii, New Zealand and Florida employ different strategies, some of which are also being used in Australia. High-tech alternatives include the Shark Shield personal electronic deterrent and tracking devices on sharks that send SMS alerts to lifesavers when in the vicinity. Special sonar buoys can detect shark-shaped objects in the water. Spotter aircraft are frequently deployed and warning flags and signs displayed on beaches.

Worth more alive than dead

Palau is an island chain in the Western Pacific whose economy is strongly oriented to diving-related tourism. A recent study has estimated that each individual shark is worth US$1.9 million (AU$2 million/NZ$2.3 million) to Palau during its lifetime.

Along with several other Pacific islands, Honduras, the Bahamas and the Maldives have declared shark sanctuaries in their waters totalling 12.7 million square kilometres.

Elsewhere, shark is still on the menu, including in Australia and New Zealand. For declines in numbers to reverse, we need to be looking for more sustainable choices and to be taking action before every shark species is either endangered or extinct.