Global Anti-Shark-Finning Campaign

Shoppers on Regents Streets in central London Likely got more than they bargained for this afternoon. In a dramatic illustration of how sharks are caught and killed for their fins, Alice Newstead, perfomance artist and former employee of LUSH Fresh Handmade Cosmetics, voluntarily had her skin pierced with actual de-barbed shark hooks and hung suspended from the ceiling in the window of one of LUSH’s busiest shops for all to see.

As a crowd gathered to watch in horror, Newstead said, “I am doing this because the demand for shark fin soup and other shark products is wiping out the shark population.” Unlike the 100 million sharks who are brutally slaughtered each year for their fins, Newstead commented, “I will be left with scars, but the wounds will heal.”

“Sea Shepherd is deeply impressed by LUSH’s commitment to shark conservation and its willingness to use its 500+ storefronts as a global platform for educating the public on such a critically important issue,” said Kim McCoy, International Executive Director of Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. “We applaud Alice for her courageousness in using her body as a tool to help educate consumers about the urgent need to protect sharks. She is an inspiration to us all.”

“Sea Shepherd will be presenting Alice Newstead with an award for courage for her incredible achievement in focusing public attention on the worldwide slaughter of sharks,” said Captain Paul Watson, Founder and President of Sea Shepherd. “What she and LUSH have contributed to this conservation effort is enormous. The cruelty of the shark finning industry was brought intimately into focus with the piercing of Alice’s flesh and the dripping of her blood down her back. LUSH, Sea Shepherd, and Alice are very much aware that if we drive sharks to extinction, we will destroy our oceans, and if we do that, civilization will collapse and humanity will disappear.

What Alice did was not just for the saving of sharks, but for the salvation of humankind. Our admiration for her sacrifice is profound, and the scars that she will bear represent a rare courage demonstrating that we all must do what we can with the talents we possess to save our oceans.”

Today’s dramatic enactment of the gruesome manner in which sharks are caught kicks off the beginning of a global campaign between LUSH and Sea Shepherd. Each of LUSH’s storefronts across the UK now hosts window displays featuring Sea Shepherd’s jolly roger flag, LCD screens playing a continuous loop of Shark Angels footage, and other educational materials.

LUSH’s staff are dressing as pirates and handing out Sea Shepherd shark brochures (PDF) in an attempt to educate consumers about the desperate plight of sharks. Among other things, LUSH is urging consumers to boycott restaurants that serve shark fin soup and health food stores that sell shark cartilage supplements. LUSH has also delivered letters to local restaurants and health food stores asking them to “wash their hands” of this barbaric industry and stop selling shark products.

To assist these businesses in “cleaning up their act,” LUSH has created a new and cruelty-free product especially for this campaign, called Shark Fin Soap. The UK stores plan to sell a limited batch of 11,416 bars, with 100% of the proceeds going to Sea Shepherd. Why 11,416 bars? In recognition of the fact that a staggering 11,416 sharks are killed every hour, and that populations are being wiped out faster than they can reproduce.

SHARK EVOLUTION

Shark Evolution

Sharks have been around for a very long time. The first known sharks evolved about 400 million years ago, more than 200 million years before the dinosaurs, and were very common predators. Over 2,000 species have been identified from the fossil record, compared to the 1,000 or so species known to exist today.
The earliest known sharks were very different in appearance from their modern counterparts. Some looked more like eels than fish. Many of them had rounded snouts, rather than the pointed ones we associate with today’s sharks. They had smaller brains and their teeth were smooth, rather than the sharp-edged or serrated teeth typically seen in modern sharks. Their fins were less flexible and manoeuvrable, and it’s likely that ancient sharks were less agile than their modern cousins. But in some ways they were very similar to the animals we call sharks today, having the same cartilaginous skeletons, multiple gill slits and replaceable teeth.

Sharks are classified into eight orders, each according to common physical characteristics that group related species together. Although this seems simple, classifying sharks is not easy, because the actual characteristics used to define them are not always immediately obvious.

Some of the characteristics that are used to differentiate sharks include the number of gill slits, the number and type of fins, the presence of a membrane over the eye, the type of reproduction and even the structure of valves in the intestines. As a result, two species that look quite similar may be members of completely different orders, such as the mako shark and blue shark; while two others that look quite different can be members of the same order – dogfish and hammerheads, which both belong to the order Carchariniformes, are a good example of this.
Classifying sharks is so complicated that even experts cannot agree on precisely which species belong where. Some authorities put the frilled shark, of which there is only one known species, into a separate order, called the Chlamydoselachiformes. Meanwhile others assign a group known as the bramble sharks, whose two species most taxonomists place in the Squaliformes, to its own order called the Echinorhiniformes.

The eight most commonly recognised orders are:

• Heterodontiformes: Bullhead Sharks, containing a single genus and only 10 species including the Horn Shark.

• Orectolobiformes: Carpet Sharks. 34 species, including the Whale Shark, the Nurse Shark and the Zebra Shark.

• Lamniformes: Mackerel Sharks.16 species, including well-known sharks such as the Great White and the Mako.

• Carchariniformes: ground sharks. The most complex group with over 270 species, including Tigers, Hammerheads and Blacktip Reef Sharks.

• Hexanchiformes: cow sharks. Four species, with either six or seven gills.

• Squaliformes: Dogfish Sharks. About 115 species, including Dogfish, Catsharks and Lantern Sharks.

• Squatiniformes: Angel Sharks. About 18 species, all with a distinctive flattened body shape.

• Pristiophoriformes: Sawsharks. Eight species, all with distinctive saw-like snouts.

The great diversity of sharks is reflected in their distribution around the world. Sharks have adapted to occupy every kind of saltwater ecosystem on every continent. They can be found in open oceans, coral lagoons, mangrove swamps, river estuaries and shallow seas. Some species of shark regularly frequent freshwater too, for example - the bull shark is known to travel over 3,000 kilometres up the Amazon River. Many people assume that sharks are mostly confined to warm water. It is true that many well-known species of shark, such as the tiger shark, are best adapted for life in warm tropical seas - although tigers have been found in the icy waters of the north Atlantic off the coast of Iceland. But other species prefer cooler water, including the infamous great white shark, and even the coldest seas are home to a wide variety of shark species. Wherever you live, the chances are there are sharks of some kind very close to your country’s nearest coastline. It’s easy to be misled by the popular image of the shark as a voracious predator. While it’s true that some species do attack and consume large prey, most sharks are adapted to eat other, more abundant local food sources. Ironically, the largest shark of all, the whale shark, lives almost exclusively on a diet of plankton and small fish, while hunters, like white sharks, eat everything from large fish to seals and even whale carcasses. In between these extremes, sharks are known to feed on everything from small crustaceans - such as crabs and lobsters - to squid, schooling fish, bottom-living molluscs and even sea-birds. Perhaps the most famously greedy and opportunistic of all is the tiger shark. All sorts of things have been found in the stomachs of the tiger shark, including vehicle licence plates, gasoline canisters, tyres, lengths of chain and other man-made objects as well as a galaxy of natural items, such as sea snakes, turtles and albatrosses. The decline in the number of sharks has serious consequences for the ecosystems in which they live. Sharks are a vital part of the food chain, and their predatory nature helps to keep populations of their prey species in check. Without sharks to help maintain a healthy balance, marine environments are at great risk of permanent damage. Like hundreds of other fish species, sharks are under increasing pressure from the global fishing industry. As stocks of edible fish decline all over the world, many fishing fleets are turning to sharks as an alternative food source, with potentially catastrophic effects, not just on shark populations, but on the marine ecosystem too. Shark populations take a long time to recover from overfishing. They grow very slowly and take a long time to reach sexual maturity – 20 years or more in some species. When they do reproduce, they produce very few offspring compared to other food fish species. These factors have already endangered several species of shark, particularly in coastal areas with large populations to feed, such as the North Atlantic coast of America. Part of their bad reputation.- Sharks were forcibly and memorably dragged into the public eye in 1975 by Jaws, Steven Spielberg’s legendary film about a man-eating great white. Loosely based around a series of real-life shark attacks in New Jersey in 1916, Jaws was a huge hit around the world. The film has genuine suspense, alongside graphic depictions of shark attacks. Spielberg and his team built an amazingly lifelike mechanical shark (nicknamed Bruce) that was used for many of the film’s scenes, although much of the most memorable footage involved real white sharks filmed by divers from a cage. Subsequent attempts to depict sharks been less well received. 1999’s Deep Blue Sea - a film about a group of scientists who accidentally create a trio of super-intelligent man-eating sharks while researching a cure for Alzheimer’s disease - was altogether less riveting than Jaws and did little to improve the relationship between sharks and humans. One exception was 2003’s animated movie, Finding Nemo, in which Barry Humphries gave a memorable performance as a ferocious Australian shark trying to mend his predatory ways. The shark’s name? Bruce, of course.

Shortfin Mako Shark

The shortfin mako shark is a sleek spindle shaped shark with a long conical snout. This shark has short pectoral fins and a crescent shaped caudal (tail) fin. There is a distinct caudal keel on the caudal base. Its second dorsal fin is much smaller than the first. The teeth are are slender and slightly curved with no lateral cusps, and are visible even when the mouth is closed. There is marked countershading on this shark: dorsally it is a metallic indigo blue while ventrally it is white. The shortfin mako can grow to lengths of 3.9 meters (13 feet). There is still some uncertainty about its life-span, but it is suspected to reach ages of between 11-23 years. As one of the fastest sharks in the ocean, this powerful shark can attain burst swimming speeds of up to 35 km/h (22 mph) and can leap clear of the water to heights of up to 6 meters (20 feet). These qualities have made this species a sought after sport fish in some parts of its range. Distinguishing Characteristics Teeth are visible even when the mouth is closed Teeth are long and slender with smooth-edged cusps Distinct countershading, dorsally blue and ventrally white Moderately short pectoral fins Underside of the snout is white Lunate tail and caudal keel Diet The shortfin mako feeds mainly upon bony fishes including mackerels, tunas, bonitos and swordfish, but may also eat other sharks, porpoises and sea turtles. Reproduction Female shortfin makos usually become sexually mature at a length of 3 meters. Developing embryos feed on unfertilized eggs in the uterus during the gestation period of 15-18 months. The 4-18 surviving young are born live in the late winter and early spring at a length of about 70 cm, but have no placental connection during development (ovoviviparity). It is believed that females may rest for 18 months after birth before the next batch of eggs are fertilized. Habitat Shortfin mako sharks live in tropical and temperate offshore waters. They are a pelagic species that occur from the surface down to depths of 150 meters (490 feet). This shark is seldom found in waters colder than 16 degrees Celsius. Range The shortfin mako is found worldwide. In the western Atlantic it can be found from Argentina and the Gulf of Mexico to Browns Bank off of Nova Scotia. In Canadian waters these sharks are not abundant as they prefer warm waters, but neither are they rare. Shortfin makos are often found in the same waters as swordfish as they are a source of food and both fish prefer similar environmental conditions.

DID YOU KNOW....

There have been only 49 incidents of nurse shark attacks in 500 years.
This nurse shark waits for dinner to swim by.

THE NURSE SHARK

The scientific name for the nurse shark sounds like something Bilbo Baggins might have said to summon elves to his rescue: Ginglymostoma cirratum . Actually the name is a mix of Greek and Latin and means "curled, hinged mouth" to describe this shark's somewhat puckered appearance.

The origin of the name "nurse shark" is unclear. It may come from the sucking sound they make when hunting for prey in the sand, which vaguely resembles that of a nursing baby. Or it may derive from an archaic word, nusse, meaning cat shark. The most likely theory though is that the name comes from the Old English word for sea-floor shark: hurse.

Nurse sharks are slow-moving bottom-dwellers and are, for the most part, harmless to humans. However, they can be huge—up to 14 feet (4.3 meters)—and have very strong jaws filled with thousands of tiny, serrated teeth, and will bite defensively if stepped on or bothered by divers who assume they’re docile.

They use their strong jaws to crush and eat shellfish and even coral, but prefer to dine on fish, shrimp, and squid. They are gray-brown and have distinctive tail fins that can be up to one-fourth their total length. Unlike most other sharks, nurses are smooth to the touch.

Nurse sharks are found in the warm, shallow waters of the western Atlantic and eastern Pacific oceans. They are abundant throughout their range and have no special conservation status, although the closeness of their habit to human activities is putting pressure on the species.

Type: Fish

Diet: Carnivore

Average lifespan in captivity: Up to 25 years

Size: 7.5 to 9.75 ft (2.2 to 3 m)

Weight: 200 to 330 lbs (90 to 150 kg)

Group name: School or shoal

Did you know? Nurse sharks are nocturnal, and will often rest on the sea floor during the day in groups of up to 40 sharks, sometimes piled on top of each other.

AFTER THIS GALLERY OF DIVING GROUPS .....

THE ROLE OF SHARKS IN THE ECOSYSTEM

Fishes of the class Chondrichthyes are commonly referred to as the ‘cartilaginous fishes’ as they have skeletons made of cartilage, unlike most other fi shes whose skeletons are made of bone. However, parts of the skeleton and the jaws in particular, may be calcifi ed to produce stiffer and stronger structures. The class comprises the Holocephali (chimeras,ghost sharks, elephant fish, silver sharks and ratfi sh) and the Elamobranchii (‘true’ sharks and rays), with the true sharks of Australia represented by 27 families in eight orders (see Last and Stevens, 1994; Compagno, L.J.V., 2001). Worldwide, there are about 1200 known species of sharks, rays and chimeras, making up about 5 percent of all fi sh species. Australia is fortunate in having a particularly rich chondrichthyan fauna, with about 300 species currently described.
Of the 370 extant shark species worldwide, almost half (170 species) can be found in Australian waters. Nearly all live in the marine environment with few able to tolerate the brackish lower reaches of rivers. The bull shark (Carcharhinus leucas) is however commonly found in estuaries and rivers in tropical and warm temperate regions, and Glyphis spp. may penetrate many kilometres up certain rivers of the northern part of Australia.
Sharks occur in a broad range of marine habitats from shallow coastal waters (<> 2000 metres). They occupy waters from the warm equatorial zone off Australia’s northern coast to the cool temperate conditions in the Southern Ocean. Within this
large geographical area sharks can be found living in a broad variety of environments. In the open ocean some are pelagic, living their whole lives in upper and middle waters, while others are more benthic, living on or near the ocean floor, as are many species associated with the continental slope. Coastal and shelf waters offer a wide range of habitats in terms of depth, water conditions (e.g. temperature, turbidity, salinity, dissolved oxygen) and substrate (e.g. coral reefs, rocky reefs, sand, mud). Some shark species have very narrow, preferred habitats, whereas others are able to utilise a range of different habitat types. Species within each of the 27 Australian shark families have fairly similar body forms and, as morphology effectively determines a shark’s ability to exploit the environment, sharks within each family tend to play similar roles in the ecosystem.

For example, mako sharks (Isurus spp.) with their streamlined, torpedo-shaped bodies, are generally able to swim relatively fast and with energetic economy. They can move large distances and can prey on a wide variety of marine fauna (in particular teleost fi shes) with their large, powerful jaws and teeth. Sharks with dorso-ventrally fl attened body forms, such as wobbegongs (Eucrossorhinus, Sutorectus and Orectolobus spp.) are adapted for a demersal life-style using cryptic patterning and colouration of the body surface as camoufl age in their sit-and-wait predator role.

Trophic levels

To understand the role of sharks in the ecosystem it is fundamentally important to know what they feed on. Sharks are broadly perceived as apex predators within marine communities and, overall, with a mean trophic level of 4.0, occupy the same trophic level as marine mammals. [Trophic levels are calculated from knowledge of what and how much a shark eats. The following are examples of plant and animal trophic levels (TL): Plants occupy a TL of 1.0; most
invertebrates, TL ≈ 2.5; teleost fishes and cephalopod molluscs, TL ≈ 3.2; and marine mammals, TL ≈ 4.0)]. The great white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) has the highest trophic level (TL = 4.5) due primarily to marine mammals making up about 20 percent of its diet. At the other extreme, the zebra shark (Stegostoma fasciatum) that feeds exclusively on molluscs has a trophic level of 3.1. So, while all sharks are higher-level predators they are not all true apex predators.

Loss of apex predators

A commonly asked question is ‘What would be the effect on the marine ecosystem of losing one or more shark species?’

The answer is, however, uncertain. It is recognised that removal of top predators in terrestrial and marine ecosystems can cause a ‘top-down’ effect on organisms at lower trophic levels. This has been clearly demonstrated in the case of the kelp forest ecosystems of the North Pacific Ocean where sea urchin populations increased as the populations of sea otters (a major predator of urchins) declined due to commercial exploitation. The increased abundance of algae-eating sea urchins promoted a decline in the kelp forests, changing the whole local ecology.
In the North Atlantic the over-fi shing of cod (Gadus morhua) stocks resulted in a dramatic population crash and broad-scale closure of the fishery. Cod stocks have failed to recover, probably due to a fundamental change in the food web, with other ground fish now exploiting the niche that cod once occupied.
In the case of sharks, it is very difficult to determine what the effect of extinction or local extirpation of species on the marine ecosystem might be. This is due to the complex nature of their environment leading to practical problems of year-round sampling and an inability to conduct manipulative experimentation with most species of sharks. It is reasonable to hypothesise that there will be a measurable effect on the community structure following removal of a shark species.
The problem lies with predicting what the effect may be. For example, the loss of C. carcharias, our top shark predator, might result in population explosions of seals, sea-lions, smaller cetaceans and other shark species, based on our knowledge of its diet. Increases in those species, themselves apex or near apex predators, would probably have flowdown (or higher-order) effects that also lead to changes at the community or ecosystem level.


Processes of predator loss

The greatest reductions in shark populations occur as a direct result of directed commercial fisheries in Australian waters, with sharks, such as gummy shark (Mustelus antarcticus) being a principal target in the southern fi sheries off the coasts of New South Wales, South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria and Western Australia. Furthermore, there is a significant bycatch of sharks in fisheries targeting other fi sh species, and recreational fi shing also results in the reduction of shark numbers. Commercial fishing has the potential to severely impact shark populations in almost all habitats, from shallow coastal to deep ocean environments. It is of current concern that deepwater
(> 200 metres depth) fisheries either targeting chondrichthyans, or operating a mixed fi shery that impacts sharks as bycatch, are operating without a good understanding of shark species ability to withstand fishing effort. Species may be extirpated before we even understand their role in these ecosystems.
In addition to fishing pressures, there are other, anthropogenic factors that may produce population declines, including habitat modification or destruction, and pollution.
These effects tend to occur in the coastal environment, linked to urban growth along our coastline. While limited in geographical terms, these factors may have a disproportionate effect on some shark populations, as many species utilise inshore, shallowwater environments as birthing and/or nursery grounds. High mortality of newborn and juvenile sharks has the potential to disrupt inshore communities and poor recruitment through to maturity may have ecosystem level effects. Incidental removal of apex species that play an important role in food-web structures, irrespective of the means, could lead to cascading ecological changes.
Importantly, the Australian Government launched (May 2004) its Shark-plan as part of the International Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (www.daff.gov.au/sharkplan), which should help to ensure the long-term sustainable use of Australia’s shark populations.


Research into understanding the role of sharks in the ecosystem

An understanding of the role of a particular shark species in the ecosystem requires fundamental information about its life history. One also needs to know how sharks interact with other species on a temporal (e.g. tidal, diurnal, seasonal) scale. For most sharks their role in the ecosystem will also change over the course of their life, with the largest changes probably occurring during the period of growth up to sexual maturation.
Unfortunately, we know relatively little about the biology of many Australian sharks. For instance, Last and Stevens (1994), in their identifi cation guide to sharks and rays of Australia, listed 32 catsharks (Family Scyliorhinidae) of which little is known about the biology of at least 20 of these species.

Shark distributions

Geographic and bathymetric (depth) distributions are available for most shark species (Last and Stevens, 1994), although this information is being constantly revised as a result of continuing shark-related research. These data inform us about the broad distributions of different species, but fail to inform about the preferred habitats, possible movement patterns, population sizes, or other important factors that would assist in determining their role in the ecosystem.
The use of various tagging methodologies does, however, provide some of this information. Standard tagging involves the insertion of a tag bearing a unique identification code into a captured shark and its subsequent release. If recaptured, information on the shark’s growth and gross movement can be determined. More modern technologies involve the deployment of electronic tags that allow the position of the shark to be determined. This can be on a fi ne scale, using acoustic telemetry (ultrasonic ‘pinger’ tags that can be followed using a hydrophone system in a boat) or on a coarser scale by using archival tags. Archival tag data, once recovered, allows largescale movements such as migration patterns to be established.

Both methods are currently in use to help understand the biology of the grey nurse shark (Carcharias taurus) which is critically endangered on the eastern coast of Australia. The costs associated with each technology effectively limit scientific investigations to ‘key’ species.

Feeding strategies

Sharks feed on an extremely wide range of prey items. Within the Australian fauna the megamouth shark (Megachasma pelagios) and the whale shark (Rhincodon typus) sit at one
extreme with a large zooplankton component to their diet. At the other extreme sit the great white shark and the broadnose sevengill shark (Notorynchus cepedianus) that feed on a range of invertebrates and vertebrates, and include a high proportion of mammals in their diet.

Pelagic sharks

Feeding strategies also show considerable variation. The megamouth shark and whale shark are both massive sharks, growing to over 5 metres and 12 metres respectively, that filter-feed, swimming with mouth agape fi ltering food from the water as it passes over the gills.
Many of the pelagic species, such as the whaler sharks (Family Carcharhinidae)
are fast swimmers with ventrally placed mouths and relatively large teeth. This combination allows them to feed on a wide range of invertebrates and vertebrates, particularly teleost fishes, rays and other sharks.


Demersal sharks

Demersal sharks occupy open habitats, including sand andmudflats, as well as complex, close habitats such as areas of boulders, rocky and coral reefs. Those sharks living on or near the seafloor generally have ventral mouths containing many relatively small teeth (e.g. horn sharks and carpet sharks) or anterior-facing mouths containing numerous sharp teeth (e.g. wobbegong sharks). The former are usually small (<>

Dietary analysis

Dietary analysis lies at the core of understanding the possible role of sharks in their environment. There have been many studies of the diets of sharks, each based on identifying the stomach contents of individual fish. Studies clearly show that many species exhibit ontogenetic shifts in diet, presumably 4 reflecting a changing ability to capture and ingest prey items as the shark increases in size.

For example, in the small, reefdwelling epaulette shark (Hemiscyllium ocellatum) of Heron Island Reef, Queensland, juveniles predominantly eat worms, whereas adults favour a diet containing a greater proportion of crabs and shrimps, perhaps reflecting a better ability to deal with hard-bodied prey. Similarly, a study in Shark Bay, Western Australia, clearly shows shifting diets in four elasmobranch species with increases in body size, and evidence of resource partitioning between elasmobranch species occupying the same habitat.

While these studies inform us about what sharks prey on it does not provide insight into the effect of their presence in the ecosystem. It allows us to infer what the effect maybe–for example, a species feeding exclusively on one speciesof crab may be inferred as having an influence on that crab’s population–but without some form of manipulative experimentation it remains uncertain whether there is a significant effect. Another difficulty is exemplified by the observation that one species of elasmobranch may exhibit grossly different diets, not only related to its size, but also to its locality. In an area with a mud substrate worms might dominate the diet, but in another area, with a sand or rock substrate, it may be dominated by crabs or teleost fishes. Sharks may be specific about what they eat, searching out a particular prey group, or they may be opportunistic, feeding on whatever they find. In the fi rst case the diet will be unrepresentative of the community structure compared to the latter case.
The observation that a species can shift its diet makes interpretation of its role in the ecosystem difficult. We are only starting to understand the plasticity of dietary composition. Many of the pelagic species, such as the whaler sharks (Family Carcharhinidae) are fast swimmers with ventrally placed mouths and relatively large teeth.

SPEARFISHING (Facebook diving group)

Common Interest - Activities
Description:
Speafishing isn't just a sport,
it's an addiction!

WE ARE NOW THE LARGEST SPEARFISHING GROUP ON FACEBOOK

Admins
Sal DeCarli (C. Connecticut)
(creator)

Officers:
Sal DeCarli (C. Connecticut)
Grand Pu'ba

912 memmers


GALLLERY OF SPEARFISHING

Spearfishing going mad (Facebook diving group)

Spearfishing goning MAD
Sports & Recreation - Water Sports
Description:
spearfishing , diving , freediving group
the group is a proparty of the MAKOs of the red sea team
Contact Info:
Email: eng_murhaf_ashi@hotmail.com
Location:
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

272 Members

Murhaf Ashi (Saudi Arabia)
(creator)


Officers:
* Murhaf Ashi (Saudi Arabia)
Mako team leader
* Tamer K. Aburamadan (Saudi Arabia)
PADI captin
* Abdullah Nasser
Mako member class A
* Mulham Ashi (Saudi Arabia)
mako member class A +
* Faisal F. AlAmoudi
Mako member
* Loai Felemban
Mako member

GALLERY OF THIS GROUP:

SHARKWATER FILM - SHARKS THE HEAD OF THE ECOSYSTEM

Sharks are Head of the Ecosystem

DURBAN, THREE NON-AGGRESIVE ADULT TIGER SHARKS KILLED BY A FISHERMAN

These majestic animals are a massive eco-tourist attraction in the area and killing them can be compared to the slaughter of lions – a tragic loss of one of nature's awesome creations.
Tiger sharks have limited protection in the Marine Protected Area (MPA) of Aliwal Shoal where divers from around the world come to see them. Although the fisherman claims he caught the sharks outside the MPA (he was seen earlier that day fishing within the MPA area), he landed them in the MPA, which is against the law. As a result of eye witness reports, followed by public outcry, the fisherman is in the process of being charged.

It is suspected that a further five Tiger sharks were killed previously this year. This is a serious blow as dive operators report identifying only about 20 to 30 different large Tiger sharks during a season.

South Africa is considered a shark diving Mecca of the world and Aliwal Shoal is one of the shark diving hotspots of the country. Every year thousands of tourists come to South Africa to have a unique diving experience with some of the oceans top predators. This eco-tourist industry brings in millions of rands of revenue, and provides job opportunities in a country with a high unemployment rate.

It is estimated that Tiger shark diving in Aliwal Shoal generated over R18 million (USA$2,5 million) during 2007, while White shark cage diving in Gansbaai alone generates approximately R289 million per annum (USA$40 million). One Ragged-tooth shark is estimated to be worth R50 000 per annum (USA$7 000) and can live for 40 years or more. In its lifetime it is therefore worth approximately R2 250 000 (USA$310 000). This same shark if slaughtered will fetch only R1 000 once off (USA$140 – shark meat, depending on size and species, is worth only between R3-R18 per kilogram – USA$40c-2,5). Quite evidently the socio-economic value of a live shark far outweighs the value of a dead shark and the loss of any one of these species will therefore have severe impacts.

Despite this, of the over 200 different species of shark found in South African waters, only White sharks, Whale sharks and Basking sharks are fully protected. All other species may be legally caught and killed. Ragged-tooth sharks, Tiger sharks and Bull sharks have limited protection within MPAs. This limited protection of so few species is of little help since these animals know no boundaries and therefore remain vulnerable outside MPAs. Added to this, this protection is of little use when the existing laws are not adequately enforced.
The South African government owes it to its citizens, the world and future generations to protect its natural resources, as well as to support the lucrative and high profile shark ecotourism industry, including those who depend upon it for their livelihood.

• We therefore demand that the Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Mr. Marthinus Van Schalkwyk, ensures that Marine and Coastal Management (MCM) immediately improves protection of the following sharks of high eco-tourist value in the following ways:

• Tiger sharks, Ragged-tooth sharks, Bull sharks and Cow sharks may not, under any circumstances, recreational or commercial, be slaughtered and if caught they must be released – this protection is to apply not only in all MPAs but in all South African waters;
• Hammerhead sharks are given MPA protection (they may not be caught or landed in all MPAs);
  
• Blacktip sharks, Bronze whaler sharks and Dusky sharks are given protection within the Aliwal Shoal MPA (they may not be caught or landed in the Aliwal Shoal MPA)
• Scientific research is implemented in order to set sustainable quotas that will ensure the conservation of the Blacktip shark, Bronze whaler shark and Dusky shark, added to this;
• The Demersal Longline Fishery may never be allowed to extend beyond East London in order to restrict catches of the Blacktip shark, Bronze whaler shark and Dusky shark;
• Drumlines, or any similar baited device that aims to target, catch and/or kill any large shark are declared illegal fishing devices throughout South African waters;
• MCM's compliance department immediately launches tangible measures to adequately enforce laws for currently protected shark species both in and out of MPAs.

How to support this petition
We cannot wait for government to do something – it will simply be too late. We therefore implore you to help us save our sharks. Our power collectively must not be underestimated if we are to ensure the survival of the rest of our Tiger shark population as well as that of other species we are privileged to still be seeing in our oceans. If you support this petition then please take the following simple steps – your signature will help:

1. You can either log onto www.aoca.org.za and go to the petition link in the navigation bar and follow the instructions
   
2. Alternatively you can email AOCA directly at info@aoca.org.za and write your own comments. Be sure to write in the subject line: Support of AOCA Petition for Protection of SA Sharks.
   This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it

Diving is all about the freedom to go just about anywhere, whenever you please. Sadly, legislation is threatening that freedom, but divers can halt this banning by just having a say in things.

DIVERS RAISE YOUR VOICES IN EVERY COUNTRY IN THE NAME OF OUR FLAG, TOWARDS SHARKS PRESERVATION.

Here a real cruelty called tournament:

Montauk Shark Tournament

Only days after congress passed the Shark Conservation Act of 2008, the slaughter of sharks is happening right here in our own backyard.
This weekend the Star Island Yacht Club Shark Tournament will take place in Montauk, NY.
The 2008 Annual Shark Tournament is being held June 12–14. This year's website boasts a prize pool of more that $1,000,000 the largest yet, which means that more sharks than ever are going to be killed. The greed and ignorance of the few will affect all of us.
Why must these types of actions always lead to the decimation of species before we stop the madness?

PLEASE HELP US AND HUNDREDS OF OTHERS IN PROTEST OF THE STAR ISLAND YACHT CLUB SHARK TOURNAMENT THIS WEEKEND.

Please bring your cameras and join Wendy Heller from DivePhotoGuide.com this Saturday and help cover this horrible event so that it can be broadcast to the world in efforts to create more awareness and help save our sharks. We will be working with major media to prevent this event from continuing next year.

You can also join the Humane Society rally to show your support Saturday June 14th from 4-5pm pm at the intersection of West Lake Drive and Star Island Drive, Montauk, NY. For more information on the rally, please contact Kathryn at kkullberg@humanesociety.org.
For details on Wendy's coverage location at the Shark Tournament pls. email Wendy or contact us at

718-748-0324.

We look forward to your support - this is more important for the ocean and for our futures than most people will ever know. We are causing irrepairable harm that will be felt for generations to come.

More info:

• Humane Society on Shark Tournaments

• Star Island Yacht Club Shark Tournament - Associated Press

• Declaration, Manifesto for Immediate Worldwide Shark Conservation Actions

Dear members, buddies, don´t turn your back on this, I´m sure all of you know that Sharks are so important in the marine ecosystem, I don´t want to imagine our Oceans without them. Tell the world, friends, Media press, everyone so we can give our support.

LET´S SAY NO, STOP KILLING AND FILING POCKETS WITH SHARK FINNING COVERED LIKE A ROMAN AGE TOURNAMENT.

Lizbeth Maria Aguirre
I´M A DIVER
Creator
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=11692617157