GREAT WHITES IN GREAT PERIL?
GREAT WHITES IN GREAT PERIL?
By Mike Lee, September 16, 2012, Environmental Issues
It seems unthinkable that the ocean’s most fearsome predators need more help to survive, but that’s what many conservationists believe. They’re pushing federal and state governments to rank white sharks among the most endangered species and afford them more protections from fishing nets.
While no one knows how many white sharks once plied the waters off California, recent counts suggest there are just a few hundred adults and near-adults in the region. The modest numbers stand in stark contrast to public interest in the toothy carnivores, which has exploded in recent decades thanks in part to a proliferation of shark-themed TV shows.
Despite all the attention, the latest push for more safeguards highlights how little scientists know about the conservation status of white sharks and the uncertainties about how best to keep them from blinking out.
Some support species act listings because they typically boost research money — presumably helping answer pivotal questions — while others said there’s a risk of creating too many rules without a clear benefit. New protections likely would hamper fishing for other species that share space with white sharks and fuel the long-running debate about the effectiveness of the Endangered Species Act.
Geoff Shester, California director of the international conservation group Oceana, said invoking the controversial law “will help us find the missing pieces” of data to build population trends for white sharks.
“If we wait to get perfect information to find an answer to that question … it could be too late,” he said. “We could have lost one of the most important predators off of California that is keeping the entire food chain in check and is one of our most important allies in terms of healthy oceans.”
Far-ranging white sharks are widely recognized for playing a crucial role in coastal ecosystems by controlling populations of seals, sea lions and other creatures. They are considered vulnerable because they mature slowly and have few offspring.
California banned targeting white sharks in 1994, and they are protected by several national and international laws. Despite those efforts, conservation groups said unintentional netting of white sharks in the United States and Mexico is “unsuitably high” and should be curtailed.
NOAA expects to complete an initial review of proposed protections for white sharks in the northeastern Pacific Ocean by early October. At that point, the agency will either reject requests for a species act listing or launch an in-depth assessment of the population due out by next summer. A NOAA spokesman deferred comment, citing the ongoing investigation.
Similar analysis is under way at the state Department of Fish and Game, where officials are planning to issue a first look at listing white sharks by February.
White sharks are among roughly 450 species of sharks that roam the world’s oceans. They have been harmed both by accident and by design, such as killing them for fin soup or to sell body parts such as jaws and teeth.
“The larger shark species tend to be doing rather poorly,” said Andy Nosal, graduate student and shark expert at Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego. “In some species, we are seeing population declines in excess of 90 percent compared to several decades ago. In other — typically small — species such as the leopard shark, the population appears to be stable or even increasing.”
Despite widespread concern about white sharks, Nosal said proponents of species act protections have a lot to prove. “In the absence of hard numbers showing population trends, it’s very difficult,” he said.
The case for more restrictions rests on research that shows the group of white sharks in the northeastern Pacific Ocean is genetically distinct, along with what is billed as the first rigorous estimate of the shark abundance off Central California.
In a 2011 article in the journal Biology Letters, scientists described using bait to lure sharks at Tomales Point and the Farallon Islands — areas of high shark concentration near San Francisco — and photographing them. They identified individual sharks using the trailing edge of their dorsal fins, which they compared with fingerprints, then used mathematical models to create a Central Coast population estimate.
The research suggested about 220 mature and nearly mature white sharks are in the area, a number that surprised the researchers. The journal article said it represents “far lower abundance than other apex predators” such as orcas and polar bears, and offered possible explanations. Those include a naturally low “carrying capacity” for white sharks in the region, and fishing-related mortality.
The study didn’t determine whether California’s white sharks are headed for demise or need more protection, said Peter Klimley, a shark expert at UC Davis and one of the article’s authors.
“There just might not be a lot of them, and the population might be healthy and normal,” he said. “It’s not necessarily problematic or alarming. … If you have a record over time and you get the numbers decreasing, then you’d worry.”
Klimley raised a different concern. “What I find so frightening is that people are always regulating something without the need to regulate and there are poor men trying to make a living fishing,” he said.
Not surprisingly, fishermen are leery about invoking the powerful species act, which can have unanticipated and costly consequences.
“I’m not really sure what good a listing would do other than bring some attention to the petitioners — might be good for fundraising for them — or another anti-gillnet campaign,” said Zeke Grader at the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations in San Francisco.
But to environmental advocates, the recent white shark counts trigger deep concern.
“A population estimate this low presents significant inherent extinction risk, as it is likely far below its minimum viable population size,” Oceana, the Center for Biological Diversity and Shark Stewards, said in an August petition to federal officials.
Two months earlier, WildEarth Guardians filed a similar document with NOAA.
“Now it is the sharks who ‘need a bigger boat’ to survive — the legal ark of the Endangered Species Act,” said WildEarth’s Taylor Jones, referencing a memorable line from the 1975 thriller “Jaws” that sparked widespread fear and interest in great whites.
Besides bycatch, conservationists raised concern about the historical depletion of pinnipeds that sharks eat, along with pollution of coastal waters and ocean acidification linked to climate change.
They are pushing for “hard limits” on incidental capture of white sharks, particularly in set gillnet and drift gillnet fisheries off Southern California. And they want more independent observers on fishing vessels to report bycatch of white sharks, a strategy to improve knowledge of unintentional deaths.
Ocean’s Shester said expanded shark protections wouldn’t necessarily eliminate gillnet fishing off Southern California but they could force changes in when and where nets are deployed.
It seems unthinkable that the ocean’s most fearsome predators need more help to survive, but that’s what many conservationists believe. They’re pushing federal and state governments to rank white sharks among the most endangered species and afford them more protections from fishing nets.
While no one knows how many white sharks once plied the waters off California, recent counts suggest there are just a few hundred adults and near-adults in the region. The modest numbers stand in stark contrast to public interest in the toothy carnivores, which has exploded in recent decades thanks in part to a proliferation of shark-themed TV shows.
Despite all the attention, the latest push for more safeguards highlights how little scientists know about the conservation status of white sharks and the uncertainties about how best to keep them from blinking out.
Some support species act listings because they typically boost research money — presumably helping answer pivotal questions — while others said there’s a risk of creating too many rules without a clear benefit. New protections likely would hamper fishing for other species that share space with white sharks and fuel the long-running debate about the effectiveness of the Endangered Species Act.
Geoff Shester, California director of the international conservation group Oceana, said invoking the controversial law “will help us find the missing pieces” of data to build population trends for white sharks.
“If we wait to get perfect information to find an answer to that question … it could be too late,” he said. “We could have lost one of the most important predators off of California that is keeping the entire food chain in check and is one of our most important allies in terms of healthy oceans.”
Far-ranging white sharks are widely recognized for playing a crucial role in coastal ecosystems by controlling populations of seals, sea lions and other creatures. They are considered vulnerable because they mature slowly and have few offspring.
California banned targeting white sharks in 1994, and they are protected by several national and international laws. Despite those efforts, conservation groups said unintentional netting of white sharks in the United States and Mexico is “unsuitably high” and should be curtailed.
NOAA expects to complete an initial review of proposed protections for white sharks in the northeastern Pacific Ocean by early October. At that point, the agency will either reject requests for a species act listing or launch an in-depth assessment of the population due out by next summer. A NOAA spokesman deferred comment, citing the ongoing investigation.
Similar analysis is under way at the state Department of Fish and Game, where officials are planning to issue a first look at listing white sharks by February.
White sharks are among roughly 450 species of sharks that roam the world’s oceans. They have been harmed both by accident and by design, such as killing them for fin soup or to sell body parts such as jaws and teeth.
“The larger shark species tend to be doing rather poorly,” said Andy Nosal, graduate student and shark expert at Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego. “In some species, we are seeing population declines in excess of 90 percent compared to several decades ago. In other — typically small — species such as the leopard shark, the population appears to be stable or even increasing.”
Despite widespread concern about white sharks, Nosal said proponents of species act protections have a lot to prove. “In the absence of hard numbers showing population trends, it’s very difficult,” he said.
The case for more restrictions rests on research that shows the group of white sharks in the northeastern Pacific Ocean is genetically distinct, along with what is billed as the first rigorous estimate of the shark abundance off Central California.
In a 2011 article in the journal Biology Letters, scientists described using bait to lure sharks at Tomales Point and the Farallon Islands — areas of high shark concentration near San Francisco — and photographing them. They identified individual sharks using the trailing edge of their dorsal fins, which they compared with fingerprints, then used mathematical models to create a Central Coast population estimate.
The research suggested about 220 mature and nearly mature white sharks are in the area, a number that surprised the researchers. The journal article said it represents “far lower abundance than other apex predators” such as orcas and polar bears, and offered possible explanations. Those include a naturally low “carrying capacity” for white sharks in the region, and fishing-related mortality.
The study didn’t determine whether California’s white sharks are headed for demise or need more protection, said Peter Klimley, a shark expert at UC Davis and one of the article’s authors.
“There just might not be a lot of them, and the population might be healthy and normal,” he said. “It’s not necessarily problematic or alarming. … If you have a record over time and you get the numbers decreasing, then you’d worry.”
Klimley raised a different concern. “What I find so frightening is that people are always regulating something without the need to regulate and there are poor men trying to make a living fishing,” he said.
Not surprisingly, fishermen are leery about invoking the powerful species act, which can have unanticipated and costly consequences.
“I’m not really sure what good a listing would do other than bring some attention to the petitioners — might be good for fundraising for them — or another anti-gillnet campaign,” said Zeke Grader at the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations in San Francisco.
But to environmental advocates, the recent white shark counts trigger deep concern.
“A population estimate this low presents significant inherent extinction risk, as it is likely far below its minimum viable population size,” Oceana, the Center for Biological Diversity and Shark Stewards, said in an August petition to federal officials.
Two months earlier, WildEarth Guardians filed a similar document with NOAA.
“Now it is the sharks who ‘need a bigger boat’ to survive — the legal ark of the Endangered Species Act,” said WildEarth’s Taylor Jones, referencing a memorable line from the 1975 thriller “Jaws” that sparked widespread fear and interest in great whites.
Besides bycatch, conservationists raised concern about the historical depletion of pinnipeds that sharks eat, along with pollution of coastal waters and ocean acidification linked to climate change.
They are pushing for “hard limits” on incidental capture of white sharks, particularly in set gillnet and drift gillnet fisheries off Southern California. And they want more independent observers on fishing vessels to report bycatch of white sharks, a strategy to improve knowledge of unintentional deaths.
Ocean’s Shester said expanded shark protections wouldn’t necessarily eliminate gillnet fishing off Southern California but they could force changes in when and where nets are deployed.
Summary:
The sharks were recently added onto the endangered species list. People are confused as to why such event can occur when the great white is the most feared marine organism because of the ability to eat whatever comes its way. But in reality the predator of the great whites are not the problem. It's us humans. We are slowly losing our great whites due to overfishing and fish/gill nets. The population of the species has been decreasing rapidly since forever. In 1994, California banned the targeting of sharks to protect them.
I chose this article because we need to be educated on how we are losing our animals because of our own faults. The reason why this article was so interesting is because nobody would expect the great white to be a member of the endangered species when all they do is eat most marine animals that get in its way but because of things such as overfishing, nets, and even taking their jaws or teeth to make a profit has been the biggest cause to the decrease in its population. If we limit our fishing for sharks then we can strip it of its label as an endangered species. Also if we had seasons (only that one time of the year will the person be able to fish for the resource) then we would be able to have as much sharks as before.
I chose this article because we need to be educated on how we are losing our animals because of our own faults. The reason why this article was so interesting is because nobody would expect the great white to be a member of the endangered species when all they do is eat most marine animals that get in its way but because of things such as overfishing, nets, and even taking their jaws or teeth to make a profit has been the biggest cause to the decrease in its population. If we limit our fishing for sharks then we can strip it of its label as an endangered species. Also if we had seasons (only that one time of the year will the person be able to fish for the resource) then we would be able to have as much sharks as before.