David Shiffman

Books reviews: read up on sharks and grouper before the AES/ASIH meeting

July 23, 2012July 23, 2012 David Shiffman

Uncategorized

In just three weeks, the American Elasmobranch Society and the American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists will hold their annual meeting. This year, it will take place in Vancouver, British Columbia as part of the World Herpetology Congress. I’ll be presenting, and I’m looking forward to seeing many of our readers there. Those of you who will be attending this conference, as well as anyone with an interest in sharks and other marine fishes, may be interested in these great new marine science books!

1. Groupers of the world: a field and market guide (by Matthew Craig, Yvonne Sadovy de Mitcheson, and Phillip Heemstra). Grouper are some of the most economically important fish in the ocean, and it’s important that scientists, managers, and eco-conscious consumers have access to the latest scientific and conservation information about these fish. As fisheries landings have increased greatly in recent years (the 300,000 tons landed in 2008 are 10 times the landings from the 1950’s), many species are rapidly declining in population. Recent research showed that 12% of known grouper species are Threatened (Vulnerable, Endangered, or Critically Endangered according to IUCN Red List standards) and another 13% are Near Threatened. Mating behaviors like spawning aggregations and the tendency to change sex further complicates management.

In addition to introducing readers to the field and summarizing the latest scientific discoveries, this book serves as a detailed reference guide to the 163 known species of grouper. The authors demonstrate how to identify each species using more than 300 beautiful color photographs and line drawings, and detailed maps show where each can be found. The population status (including major threats and some proposed solutions), IUCN Red List conservation status, life history information and known feeding behavior is also reviewed for each species. $79.95, CRC Press.

Shark fin soup, conservation, and racism: A Storify of yesterday’s twitter discussion

July 19, 2012 David Shiffman 3 Comments

Uncategorized

Accusations of racism and cultural imperialism have long plagued the shark conservation movement. Earlier this week, a second lawsuit was filed in California opposing their shark fin ban. One of the reasons given for the Chinatown Neighborhood Association’s lawsuit was discrimination against citizens of Chinese descent. According to the San Francisco Examiner:

“[Chinatown Neighborhood Association Member Marcus] Lee noted that the law allows consumers to eat shark meat steaks, but not shark fin soup, leading to racial tensions. “How can you save the shark if you ban eating only the fins, but not the shark meat?” Lee asked. “This ruling is not the solution to the problem. In order to save the sharks, you might as well ban the whole shark entirely.” “

An earlier lawsuit against California’s fin ban, filed by the Asian-American Rights Committee of California, also pointed out the cultural significance of shark fin soup. According to the Huffington Post:

” “Shark fin soup is an Asian cultural delicacy with origins in the Ming Dynasty. It is a ceremonial centerpiece of traditional Chinese banquets, as well as celebrations of weddings and birthdays of one’s elders,” the committee wrote in its complaint. “

My personal views on this issue are complex. Populations of many species of sharks are declining at alarming rates (which has numerous negative ecological consequences), the single largest driver for these declines is demand for shark fin soup, and this demand primarily comes from Asian cultures. With very few exceptions, conservationists are not racist, and there are very good reasons to campaign for reducing shark fin soup consumption (and reducing shark fishing in general) . There’s a big difference between criticizing something because it’s different from your own culture and criticizing something because it creates negative ecological and economic ripple effects worldwide. However, when conservationists who are primarily Westerners criticize something that is done primarily by non-Westerners, it undeniably creates what politicians call troubling “optics”. In short, I don’t think campaigning to reduce shark fin consumption is racist, but I can understand how some people might.

I asked my twitter followers what they thought of the claim that criticizing shark fin soup is racist, and added some of the best contributions to the excellent discussion that resulted to a Storify. Check it out below, and feel free to continue the discussion in the comments below.

The Beneath the Waves Film Festival is touring the U.S. West Coast

July 18, 2012 David Shiffman 3 Comments

Uncategorized

Regular readers know that we are big fans of the Beneath the Waves Film Festival, which shows marine science and conservation movies (I’m actually a co-organizer). If you’ve been excited to attend the festival after reading about it on Southern Fried Science but haven’t been able to attend, this could be your chance. The flagship event takes place each March as part of the Benthic Ecology conference, but this year the festival has expanded to include a variety of public screenings throughout the country.

South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley slashes funding for coastal science and sustainable development

July 12, 2012January 9, 2024 David Shiffman 4 Comments

Science

Earlier this week, South Carolina governor and rising tea party star Nikki Haley cut all state funding for the South Carolina Sea Grant Consortium. Sea Grant programs are a critical part of the United States’ marine and coastal research network. In addition to providing millions of dollars in scientific grants, the national Sea Grant college program (of which the South Carolina consortium is a member) connects scientists, educators, and citizens with the goal of “helping citizens utilize scientific information to support a vibrant economy while ensuring ecological sustainability” (source). In total, there are 32 Sea Grant programs throughout the country, which help coordinate research and strategic goals with experts in every state that borders an ocean or one of the Great Lakes.

Despite Governor Haley’s claims, the Sea Grant Consortium is basically the opposite of big government and wasteful government spending. Though they are administered centrally by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, each Sea Grant program is independently run. According to Executive Director Rick DeVoe,

“It is important to note that the programs we undertake are developed as a result of the input we solicit from our stakeholders along the coast and inland – businesses and organizations, NGOs, and people who depend on coastal and marine resources for their livelihoods, their pleasure and their quality of life….The S.C. Sea Grant Consortium generates and applies science-based information on issues and opportunities to enhance the practical use and conservation of coastal and marine resources to foster a sustainable economy and environment in the state and region.”

The state contribution pays mostly for local staff and facilities that are used to apply for and distribute grants. Since much of the funding for grants they distribute comes from the Federal government, the entire state-contributed budget for the South Carolina Sea Grant Consortium is a little over $428, 000 out of a total state budget of around $21,000,000,000, less than the total salaries of the Governor’s personal staff. Cutting this critical program thus results in a 0.002% reduction in state government spending, right after the state of South Carolina got more than $1.4 billion in increased tax revenue as a result of the economy improving.

Genetics study reveals 79 potentially new species of sharks and rays: what does it mean for science and conservation?

July 3, 2012July 3, 2012 David Shiffman 3 Comments

Conservation, Science

When Dr. Gavin Naylor and his team started a genetic survey of existing shark and ray species, they didn’t expect the results of their project to make international news. Their recent paper (which, at over 250 pages and complete with more than 100 figures, is nothing short of epic), however, is too striking to ignore. The results indicate that there may be as many as 79 previously unrecognized cryptic species of sharks and rays.

A cryptic species is defined as a group that looks almost exactly like another, and may even live in the same region, but is genetically distinct. We’ve known that cryptic species of sharks and rays exist for some time, such as manta rays and scalloped hammerhead sharks, but 79 is a lot; as of the paper’s publication, only 1,221 species of sharks and rays were recognized.

According to Dr. Naylor,

“Organisms become genetically differentiated over time through the cumulative effects of mutation and recombination mediated via drift and selection. When they differentiate in isolation they eventually become so different from the parental stock from which they were derived that they can no longer produce fertile offspring when crossed with them. Some biologists use the point of reproductive inviability as the point at which new species should be recognized….. For practical purposes we recognize “new species” as being genetically or morphologically distinctive from previously recognized forms.”

The study’s methods, though enormous in scope, were relatively basic. According to Dr. Naylor, the study utilized a technique very familiar to geneticists: “standard DNA extraction, PCR, Sanger sequencing, alignment and analysis of a protein coding mitochondrial gene”. To achieve the goals of understanding both evolutionary relationships of sharks and rays and parasite host specificity ( where certain parasites associated only with one species), Dr. Naylor and his team obtained and analyzed samples from as many species as they could. The numbers are impressive- 56 of 57 known families of elasmobranchs were represented among the 4,283 samples from 305 species of sharks and 269 species of batoids. In other words, this study included approximately half of all known elasmobranch species, including many that had never been analyzed genetically before. Since 1986, when the project began, samples have been obtained in more than 50 countries, mostly through the team’s own field work!

An 8th grade WhySharksMatter gets career advice

July 2, 2012 David Shiffman 3 Comments

Science

A few weeks ago, I went home to Pittsburgh to surprise my mom for Mother’s Day. While there, I had the unenviable task of emptying out my childhood bedroom in preparation for my parents moving to a smaller place. I was apparently a bit of a pack rat growing up- while cleaning the room, I found every birthday card I had received and every test I had taken from elementary school through high school. I also found the results of my 8th grade career aptitude test, taken in 1999.

Based on my skills and interests, the “Career Futures” computer had recommended three potential careers for me: high school science teacher, military officer specializing in intelligence gathering, and marine biologist. Some of you may also know that three years later, my high school guidance counselor half-jokingly recommended that I consider a career as the leader of a cult, but that’s a story for another time.

While taking a break from cleaning out my room, I looked over the full reports for each career choice. The description of the career of a marine biologist was of particular interest, since that’s what I actually ended up doing with my life (I am definitely not secretly working as a military intelligence officer, nothing to see here, move along).

World Oceans Day #OceanFacts

June 26, 2012 David Shiffman

Science

On World Oceans Day, I asked the online marine science and conservation community to tweet their favorite facts about the ocean using the hashtag #OceanFacts . Dozens of people joined the discussion, and more than 300 #OceanFacts were contributed. These tweets cover a variety of topics, from marine invertebrates, fish, sharks, and marine mammals to facts about the ocean itself and conservation policy. The discussion also inspired a great deal of humorous posts, including an entire spinoff #OceanFibs hashtag. Some of my favorite #OceanFacts tweets are saved in the Storify below.

What shark finning means (and doesn’t mean): a primer and quiz

June 18, 2012June 26, 2012 David Shiffman 82 Comments

Conservation, Science

Shark finning, one of the most wasteful, unsustainable, and inhumane methods of gathering food in the history of human civilization, has rightly become a hot topic in the marine conservation movement. However, there is a great deal of confusion among activists concerning this problem and the best way to solve it. Those of you who follow me on twitter have seen me point out numerous recent anti-finning “awareness campaigns” which feature photographs of sharks that have not actually been finned.

Shark finning does not mean removing the fins from a shark. This is really important and seems to be a source of some confusion- not every shark fin for sale in markets is the result of shark finning! Shark finning means removing the fins from a shark while still on the fishing vessel and dumping the rest of the shark overboard. This is a problem because its wasteful (less than 10% of the weight of a shark is used), because its easy to quickly overfish a population even from a small boat (fins don’t take up a lot of space on board), and because its almost impossible for managers to know how many of each species were harvested. As stated above, this practice is also shockingly inhumane, as the sharks are often still alive when they are dumped overboard.

Medusa: Scientists document rarely seen deepwater sharks using baited video cameras

June 14, 2012June 14, 2012 David Shiffman 1 Comment

Science

The deep sea is one of the largest, least explored, and most unique ecosystems on the planet. An enormous variety of weird and wonderful creatures make the deep sea their home, including many species of sharks. A new project, headed up by our friends at the Cape Eleuthera Institute, hopes to learn more about these sharks.

According to Edd Brooks, CEI’s shark research and conservation program manager,

“About half of all known species of sharks make this cold, dark high pressure environment their home, and new deep water species are being described all the time. The issue we are currently facing is that basic information about the taxonomy, biology and ecology of these animals is virtually non-existent, yet they are already being harvested by commercial fisheries. The little we do know about deep water species is worrying, in that they are thought to be more sensitive to fishing pressure than all other fish – and look what we have managed to do their more robust shallow water cousins already. The worry is that in some areas, we are already be losing species before they can be described taxonomically.”

Kangaroo court: an unjust criminal justice system for animals in National Parks?

June 12, 2012June 12, 2012 David Shiffman 6 Comments

Conservation, Science

On August 25th of last year, a man was brutally killed while vacationing in Montana. An expert forensics team was called in to the scene of the crime, and quickly determined from blood patterns next to a half-eaten PowerBar that the victim had been surprised and attacked from behind while taking a break from a hike. His badly damaged body was found partially buried nearby, with wounds indicating that he tried to fight back against his attacker.

A search of the area resulted in locating hair, which was soon found to belong to a suspect in another local killing from a few weeks prior to this attack. Footprints found at the scene were the same size as those of the suspect in the earlier killing as well. DNA samples were taken for future analysis. The suspect and her two small children were taken into custody.

The case was rapidly brought not before a jury of the suspect’s peers, but before a panel of local experts, including members of the forensics team that investigated the case. The suspect was found guilty even before all of the samples from the crime scene had been processed. The penalty was death for the suspect and life imprisonment for her children. The accused was not represented by a lawyer, no appeals were permitted, and she was dead within a few weeks of the attack on the unfortunate tourist. Once the DNA evidence had been processed, the detection of another suspect at the scene of the crime raised some doubt that the correct individual had been taken into custody, but it was too late to stop the execution.

How could such a trial happen in the United States of America in the 21st century? We are a nation of laws! We pride ourselves on suspects being innocent until proven guilty! The answer is simple. The now-executed suspect in this series of grisly deaths was, in fact, a grizzly herself- a grizzly bear. The series of attacks has focused public attention not just on the dangers associated with hiking in areas where large wild predators live, but on the bizarre system of pseudo-justice used by the National Parks Service to determine what to do with animals that kill or injure humans.