By Tayte Stefaniuk
A history of negative shark-human encounters and mass media manipulation has amplified coastal recreationists’ fear of shark attacks. By implementing shark-control programs, governmental agencies across the globe hope to create an environment where users feel safe to avoid potential losses in tourism and associated financial ramifications. However, understanding the ecological impacts, efficacy, financial costs, and ethics forces us to question the current management methodologies.
Coastal waters are an important area to humans for recreation, revenue generation, and general well-being. Rapid urbanization of coastlines and an increase in the popularity of water-based recreational activities has enlarged the geographical intersection of humans and sharks.
For many shark species, coastal areas are an inherent part of their ecological niche. This holds true for the three species which contribute the most to fatal attacks on humans.
Great White Shark (Carcharodon carcharias)
The movement of great white sharks appears to be characterized by periods of fidelity at aggregation sites and swimming between them. These aggregation sites are often aligned with islands containing rookeries of seals. For many shark species, coastal areas are an inherent part of their ecological niche. This holds true for the three species which contribute the most to fatal attacks on humans: Coastal waters are an important area to humans for recreation, revenue generation, and general well-being. Rapid urbanization of coastlines and a proliferation in the popularity of water-based recreational activities has enlarged the geographical intersection of humans and sharks.
Bull Shark (Carcharhinus leucas)
Individuals of all ages and of both sexes are inherently present within the river estuarine-marine continuum. Being able to survive in all salinity ranges allows females to access upper portions of rivers for pupping, which greatly benefits the offspring (both neonates and juveniles) by providing an abundance of food and a lack of predators. Adult bull sharks readily occur nearshore with large scale coastal migration.
Tiger Shark (Galeocerdo cuvier)
The tiger shark is highly reliant on coastal areas as much of their prey exists there (e.g. dugongs, green sea turtles, and smaller elasmobranchs).
Shark-human Conflict
Whilst the incidence of shark attacks is still relatively low (you are more likely to get bit by a New Yorker), mass media demonization of these organisms has cultivated fear. Fear can impair objective risk analysis, especially with respect to low probability–high consequences incidents.
Expectations:
Reality:
Consequently, the audience has a fear of shark attacks when bathing in coastal areas, reducing the level of visitors. To prevent financial losses, governmental agencies across the globe (such as Australia, South Africa, and France) have implemented shark-control programs which involve the culling of sharks via nets and/or drumlines (baited hooks).
Shark Nets
Numerous bodies of scientific research demonstrate that the employment of mesh-nets along beaches is correlated with fewer shark attacks. However, correlation does not mean causation. There could be a plethora of other factors affecting the size of shark populations and attacks.
The effectiveness of shark nets has also been challenged using other pieces of evidence. For example, 65% of shark bites in NSW occur at netted beaches. Moreover, the targeted species of bull, tiger, and great white sharks only represent a small proportion of the NSW catches. Larger shark species (over 4 meters) like great whites aren’t often caught because they tend to tear holes in nets. The majority of sharks caught in the protective meshing program are relatively smaller species or juveniles, and therefore less likely to inflict harm on beach users. Moreover, the bycatch of dolphins, dugongs, and sea turtle species greatly outweighs the intended targets.
This ecologically destructive and arguably ineffective shark-management strategy is also costs millions of dollars a year to implement.
Drumlines (baited hooks)
The sensitivity of sharks to olfactory stimuli means that they can be attracted to the baits on the drumlines. Drumlines are more selective than nets, taking fewer nondangerous sharks but a higher proportion of the potentially dangerous bull, tiger, and great white sharks. There are also much lower rates of marine mammal and turtle bycatch with this technique and for the animals that are caught, survival is significantly higher. Drumlines are also cheaper than nets. Nonetheless, it is highly regrettable that these extraordinary animals are being slaughtered, especially considering that the effectiveness of reducing attacks on humans is inconclusive.
Concerns
Aside from animal welfare ethics, sharks should be protected because they are keystone species. Being at the top of the food chain means that they help control the population sizes and health of species below them, preventing any single species from becoming too dominant. This balance ensures that the ecosystem remains diverse and healthy, with a stable food web.
Solutions
Non-lethal strategies such as shark spotter programs, aerial drone surveillance, electronic tagging and acoustic telemetry enables us to monitor shark population movements and migratory patterns to ensure public safety. Furthermore, the use of shark deterrent technologies such as electric repellents and shark shields have proven effective in avoiding human-shark encounters.
Furthermore, public education campaigns can help dispel myths and foster a better understanding of sharks and reduce unnecessary fear. By prioritizing coexistence over eradication, governments can address safety concerns while supporting ocean conservation.
Learn more about innovative technology at SharkSafe Barrier
– www.sharksafesolution.com
– Instagram @sharksafebarrier
