Does shark feeding alter behavior?

Tim and Jorge

I think I wasn't clear enough on my point that while my objection to chumming is purely academic, the reality is that regular chumming gathers the sharks in a specific area, which possibly makes them more VULNERABLE to being fished. It begs the question, is the PR effects and business interests enough to offset the risks to the last bastions of healthy shark populations?

I've already mentioned Aliwal , but with reports of shark fishing in the Bahamas now surfacing, I think it pertinent to question this activity even more. I can give you quite a few examples where sharks spotted in areas and dived for them (chumming or not) resulted in the sharks being hunted shortly after. Of course we should also come down hard on the illegal (or quasi legal) legal fishing of sharks in the sea. We have to accept that while shark diving 'may' have PR benefits, it also puts the sharks on in a spot on the map, making them more susceptible to being fished.

I hate to redirect anyone away from the forum, but I think this is a video that takes the issue to heart.

http://hd2o.tv/flog/uncategorized/stephen-...rd-of-director/

DO NO HARM! It isn't that hard to live up to that philosophy. Next one is BE MINDFUL AND DON'T TOUCH anything (but sand). I can understand scientific studies luring animals/ sharks with bate for the purpose of study, but recreational? We have no God-given rights or reasons and yet we take man-given liberties. In the name of entertaining ourselves... shameful.

I'm with Drew on strobes too. Flash that mega-strobe in your own face a few times then decide if natural light isn't better, not for your composition, but for Nature's sake. Better yet, let someone else strobe when you're not expecting it as I figure the fish don't expect to have their eyes blown out.

I am adamant with my film crew about not disturbing the environment, the subjects, and I do not create any expectations of human visits. I see divers who can't even manage buoyancy much less shoot a camera. Others that drift into coral formations to 'get the shot', fins slapping in a panic to get away- with no regard. To quote Stephen Frink, "We are aliens, underwater trespassers, totally foreign and totally inefficient underwater." We have no rights or position in nature to touch, disrupt, influence, or alter anything in that environment. Something as trivial as satisfying our morbid human curiosity can damage the delicate balance of the surrounding ocean community. Pavlow's classical conditioning of learned behavior means they will respond to food. Sharks by nature will become more aggressive in anticipation. Evident in a prior post.

Accepted human behavior is to touch and feel everything. It’s human to scientifically explore our world to expand our knowledge of space, earth and even oceanic frontiers. That kind of beneficial scientific inquiry has been valuable to mankind. However UN-humane contamination of space and earth has yet to prove to Mankind that this behavior must be curtailed. Today, protecting and preserving the precious, albeit strained and threatened underwater environment must become a higher priority for nations, explorers, adventurers and especially recreational/ casual visitors.

But your in a WetPixel forum, so you already knew that!

Protect + Preserve, Do no harm,

We have no rights or position in nature to touch, disrupt, influence, or alter anything in that environment.

Of course we do. It is inherent that every animal does this as a matter of course. Who says nature didn't intend man to dive underwater?

Yours is an extreme position which you are entitled to but which is only arbitrary. There is a vast difference between "do no harm" and "touch nothing" and there is no ethical argument for equating the two. If we touched nothing then we'd starve to death.

I can understand scientific studies luring animals/ sharks with bate for the purpose of study, but recreational? We have no God-given rights or reasons and yet we take man-given liberties. In the name of entertaining ourselves... shameful.

I dive and photograph for my own entertainment. To somehow automatically equate human interaction with animals and/ or the environment as harmful or unethical is absurd in my opinion. Drew has presented some very cogent arguments as to why such interactions could be harmful in some situations, but to imply that this is always 'shameful' in the absence of harm to the animals is absurd.

As Craig said equating 'do no harm' and 'touch nothing' or interact with nothing has no ethical justification.

I hate to redirect anyone away from the forum, but I think this is a video that takes the issue to heart.

I'll let Stephen answer for himself whether he's being taken out of context. You do know you can embed the video in the forums?

I can understand scientific studies luring animals/ sharks with bate for the purpose of study, but recreational? We have no God-given rights or reasons and yet we take man-given liberties. In the name of entertaining ourselves... shameful.

Well, seeing how video of natural predation are much more sort after, it would be interesting to compare the veracity of observed behavior when chummed vs natural feeding behavior. As for rights, I pretty much think that being alive gives you a right to go and do whatever you want. It's only when it affects other people will you get clobbered and lynched, but that's why we have societal rules as well.

Let's just face facts. Being image chasers, we have to interact. Even in feeding frenzies, the predators and prey know you are there. In fact, sometimes the predators are put off by human presence. Now if it were possible to shoot with a 600mm lens from far away, I'd do it in a flash. No deco to worry about and this cold temperature business is really ridiculous.

I liken the coral reef to the plains of the serengetti and the water holes. Lots of different animals interacting and wary of each other but giving enough distance, just go about their own business. Ever seen the white tip sharks hunt at night, say in Cocos? Lights or not, they still do their thing. And probably the lights help them a little bit too.

Anyhow, going back on topic, interaction with actions isn't necessarily a bad thing. However, the number of shark hunting increasing in 'protected' areas by known shark dives, it does raise questions on such practices.

DO NO HARM! It isn't that hard to live up to that philosophy. Next one is BE MINDFUL AND DON'T TOUCH anything (but sand). I can understand scientific studies luring animals/ sharks with bate for the purpose of study, but recreational? We have no God-given rights or reasons and yet we take man-given liberties. In the name of entertaining ourselves... shameful.

 

I'm with Drew on strobes too. Flash that mega-strobe in your own face a few times then decide if natural light isn't better, not for your composition, but for Nature's sake. Better yet, let someone else strobe when you're not expecting it as I figure the fish don't expect to have their eyes blown out.

 

Protect + Preserve, Do no harm,

i'm nearly not posting this for fear of shooting myself in the foot, but do you think a group of subsistence living longliners are going to look at you going diving and not touching/flashing/baiting anything at all and think to themselves "oh man i got it all wrong...i shouldn't be out on this rusty unseaworthy boat 24 hrs a day trying to feed my family, i should just just give it all up, live in a grass hut on the beach and live off bananas for the rest of my life, yeah peace and love dude"

baiting situations happen because of peoples desire to dive with sharks and learn from that experience. i doubt very much if you would meet one single person who has dived in a baited environment and come out of the water with a negative view of sharks. they become ambassadors for the sharks wellbeing.

i'm still of the opinion that we should be talking about baiting in the context of what would happen to those sharks if it didn't happen. would there still be a healthy population of great whites if there was not a group of people making a lot of money doing shark viewing tours?

i really find this holier than thou attitude to diving quite destructive and unrealistic. oh and when was the last time you saw a person have his eyes burn't out by having his/her portrait taken?

Have you all seen the movie sharkwater? A very good film, in my opinion. One that ought to be purchased, viewed and then given to a friend of family member to watch. Public awareness is important. Honestly, the oceans are dying, and feeding a few hundred sharks on a regular basis is not going to endanger them any more (provided the images are not the consistently the "shark on attack", giving them bad p.r.) Sharks eat, what, once every 7 or 8 days? They are not eating machines. They happen to have extraordinarily efficient digestive systems.

But I digress. The problem is FINNING. Not, feeding. Ask any shark, and it will tell you, "I prefer to be fed than finned." Long line fishing is also the problem. Ask any shark, and it will tell you, "Please, take out the miles of long lines and I'll be happy."

As consumers of seafood, we are all part of the problem. So long as we make it profitable to destroy our oceans, they will be destroyed. Educate yourself, eat fish that is caught responsibly or is farmed. Or, if you do not wish to be bothered, give up eating seafood entirely.

In my opinion, whether to feed the shark or not is simply irrelevant. There will be no more sharks left to feed, or not, in the lifetime of our children or grandchildren.