Massive mako shark caught off Nova Scotia

[Tresj2]

The fact that these animals are caught and sometimes killed for scientific reason is understandable. It's the package in which it is delivered that is questionable here, because it sends the wrong message. If a group of researchers would have gone out to sea with one, two or three fishermen and would have doen their thing without creating this sensational event around it, the context in which it would have happened would have been completely different. Now there is this big gung-ho event which only (or so it seems in this context) purpose is fill the sensation seeking need of people and the big egos of the fishermen. The fact that there is some research done, is probably not even noticed by the majority of the people present, let alone the ones that are watching this on TV. So what is the message that comes across: "Hey, it's ok to catch and kill a shark see! Wow I want to catch me a big one like that myself...."

I don't think many people would understand or respect a situation where research needed to be done on a whale and Discovery channel would come up with a whale catching event, invite a buch of Japenese whalers, haul the biggest whale out of the sea and pop the champagne on TV. Few people would understand. Its often not what you do or say, but about how you do or say it.

The problem with threads this long is that you often don't take the time to read all the inbetween responses before you reply, when you've been away for a couple of days. So apologies if all of the above has been chewed on already. (my personal disclaimer )

Gurt
----------------------------
www.divestart.com - where and when to find your favorite critter!

 

[archman]

The problem with threads this long is that you often don't take the time to read all the inbetween responses before you reply, when you've been away for a couple of days. So apologies if all of the above has been chewed on already. (my personal disclaimer )

PLEASE take the time. You would find a few posts that clarified the rarity of this event, and how tightly regulated it is.

 

[aquaoren]

As a veterinarian who has more than minor experience in the field of experimantal surgery and research, I really can not be described as a "flower watcher" and still I'm disgusted to see such a waste. I'm actually one of the guys that PETA would have nothing against getting killed
There was no scientific justification for catching this shark regardless what Beckyfish said. If you'll ask her more, you'll most likely get the answer that there were no new results that were unknown previously. There are more than enough sharks cought daily in nets as bycatch and thrown dead overboard. These pathological examinations can be done on these animals that are already dead without having to kill anything additionaly beside the fact that such exams are best made in a controlled environment (laboratory) and not on the harbours docks. I don't think the DFO would have trouble collecting couple of these sharks for the scientists and the fisher would be even happier if they could get something for the shark instead of throwing them overboard.
Lets face it how it is: There is a commercial shark fishing derby and the scientists that are supposed to protect the oceans flora and fauna and inform the public have nothing better to do than give such an event a quasi "scientific legitimacy". Of course it is much more fun to spend the day in the harbour with fresh air rather than in a laboratory but while doing it, don't call it a scientific excursion. Students in the early years of their studies tend to be fairly enthusiastic about everything and very little critical of what they are being told by their peers.

 

[mempilot]

This is a very good post and a point of view that hasn't been voiced until now: The scientist that can't justify the means to the end. There are a lot of opinions, some are scientific, some are emotional, and some are conservationist. Some are a blend of more than one. The right answer, well I guess we'll never know since we'll be dead when it matters.

Is there a way to bring back shark populations like they did the buffalo, etc... or would this just be too much for society to handle.

As a veterinarian who has more than minor experience in the field of experimantal surgery and research, I really can not be described as a "flower watcher" and still I'm disgusted to see such a waste. I'm actually one of the guys that PETA would have nothing against getting killed

There was no scientific justification for catching this shark regardless what Beckyfish said. If you'll ask her more, you'll most likely get the answer that there were no new results that were unknown previously. There are more than enough sharks cought daily in nets as bycatch and thrown dead overboard. These pathological examinations can be done on these animals that are already dead without having to kill anything additionaly beside the fact that such exams are best made in a controlled environment (laboratory) and not on the harbours docks. I don't think the DFO would have trouble collecting couple of these sharks for the scientists and the fisher would be even happier if they could get something for the shark instead of throwing them overboard.
Lets face it how it is: There is a commercial shark fishing derby and the scientists that are supposed to protect the oceans flora and fauna and inform the public have nothing better to do than give such an event a quasi "scientific legitimacy". Of course it is much more fun to spend the day in the harbour with fresh air rather than in a laboratory but while doing it, don't call it a scientific excursion. Students in the early years of their studies tend to be fairly enthusiastic about everything and very little critical of what they are being told by their peers.

 

[archman]

There was no scientific justification for catching this shark regardless what Beckyfish said. If you'll ask her more, you'll most likely get the answer that there were no new results that were unknown previously.

You probably missed reading my postings regarding the current knowledge of pelagic sharks.

There are more than enough sharks cought daily in nets as bycatch and thrown dead overboard. These pathological examinations can be done on these animals that are already dead without having to kill anything additionaly beside the fact that such exams are best made in a controlled environment (laboratory) and not on the harbours docks.

Unlike veterinary medicine, field biology is far messier and cruder. Facilities, equipment, and most importantly funding are difficult to come by. So we confine ourselves to simple measurements and subsampling. Regarding using bycatch specimens for analyis, you can track down my earlier postings about that too.

I don't think the DFO would have trouble collecting couple of these sharks for the scientists and the fisher would be even happier if they could get something for the shark instead of throwing them overboard.

This is already done... we call these people fisheries observers.

Lets face it how it is: There is a commercial shark fishing derby

Uh, no. It's a recreational one. Very big difference.

...and the scientists that are supposed to protect the oceans flora and fauna and inform the public have nothing better to do than give such an event a quasi "scientific legitimacy".

Oh, we have plenty other things to do with our time. Conservation and environmental activism are generally not part of our job descriptions, however. It's more of a hobby with me.

Of course it is much more fun to spend the day in the harbour with fresh air rather than in a laboratory but while doing it, don't call it a scientific excursion.

no one is doing that except certain posters on this thread. I believe I already corrected them, more than once.

Of course, this thread being in the "Whine & Cheeze" forum now, my interest in correcting erroneous assumptions/opinions is much diminished.

 

[JustinW]

There still is not a problem with recreational catch of any game fish for any purpose. It just should not be wasted after being caught. Shark populations in general may be in decline, but that doesn't mean that the specific species they are after are, in fact, thresher, blue and mako are very stable in their population numbers. For those of you out there saying its terrible because these guys are doing it for ego, I just don't see what that even matters. If you still think it matters, you need to read some Orwell and familiarize yourself with the term "thought-crime." Think of when most people go fishing recreationally, almost all of them are focused on catching a big fish, yes it is for the ego, but as long as it isn't wasted, I don't see how ego even matters. Ego is the straw man in this whole debate.

 

[aquaoren]

You probably missed reading my postings regarding the current knowledge of pelagic sharks.


Unlike veterinary medicine, field biology is far messier and cruder. Facilities, equipment, and most importantly funding are difficult to come by. So we confine ourselves to simple measurements and subsampling. Regarding using bycatch specimens for analyis, you can track down my earlier postings about that too.


This is already done... we call these people fisheries observers.

Uh, no. It's a recreational one. Very big difference.
Oh, we have plenty other things to do with our time. Conservation and environmental activism are generally not part of our job descriptions, however. It's more of a hobby with me.

no one is doing that except certain posters on this thread. I believe I already corrected them, more than once.

Of course, this thread being in the "Whine & Cheeze" forum now, my interest in correcting erroneous assumptions/opinions is much diminished.

It's a shame that you didn't get the main idea of my post and I find it somewhat disturbing as well coming from someone who is proclaiming to be a scientist.
My main concern was that this was a commercial fishing derby. Regardless that the fisherman were recreational fisherman, in the moment that there is entry money, prizes and someone makes a $ of it, it is commercial whether you agree with it or not. Even if the proceeds would go toward a good cause, in the moment that some kind of money is being generated it is commercial.
So instead of staying away from such an event, some scientist decided to give it a semi scientific legitimacy by participating.
Nobody expects Conservation and environmental activism from you but some ETHICS would be nice Instead of cutting the shark up infront of all the people, an information boot would have done more to public education and I may have admitted than that something good may have come out of it if they would have done it in conjunction with the fishing derby. I'm asking myself what the value is in talking to a Mob that is in blood and adrenalin rush (Not all people but a large amount of them).
Please don't lecture me about the current knowledge of things. A big part in lack of knowledge in science is the inability or lack of interest in sitting down and going through the facts that are known (doing your homework, pretty much) and learning from them. Same research is being ran parallelly because of lack of cooperation and knowledge what other researcher are working on. Resources and materials are being wasted.
Nobody have forced you to respond to my posting and I'd not comment on your last sentance because if I'll do, I'll ran the danger of being banned for attacking a moderator personally I'll tell you only that implying that other are wrong (erroneous opinion?) is saying that you're right per se. It is arrogant and can lead you the wrong way in life AND profession. You have an opinion too and that's good for you but it does not make it neccessarily true. It is only someones opinion. I've seen so many like you that were unwilling to even consider that they may be wrong so they wasted years doing something that didn't work because of their inability to stop, think, see the bigger picture, be self critical and reevaluate your work and thesis. Hope you'll do better and don't forget the Ethics.

 

[justleesa]

OMG, that is big!!!!!!!!

 

[archman]

It's a shame that you didn't get the main idea of my post and I find it somewhat disturbing as well coming from someone who is proclaiming to be a scientist.

Oh I hear this all the time. I work in a building filled with geneticists and cell biologists. They don't have much idea about contemporary ecology, field science, or resource management policy either, but they think they do. They get emotionally irritable too when I correct them. I assume you're exhibiting the same behaviour. I don't insult other peoples' professions, please don't insult mine.

My main concern was that this was a commercial fishing derby. Regardless that the fisherman were recreational fisherman, in the moment that there is entry money, prizes and someone makes a $ of it, it is commercial whether you agree with it or not. Even if the proceeds would go toward a good cause, in the moment that some kind of money is being generated it is commercial.

You are making personal interpretations of terms that already have strict and well established definitions. You may argue your opinion of what is/not a commercial fishery all you want on this board. I will merely state the professional consensus, and clarify if it necessary.

So instead of staying away from such an event, some scientist decided to give it a semi scientific legitimacy by participating.

The tournament has NO scientific legitimacy. For the umpteenth time, this event was a tightly regulated, highly infrequent, recreational shark tournament, open to the public, that just so happened to have field biologists present to take certain measurements. That's ALL this was.

Nobody expects Conservation and environmental activism from you but some ETHICS would be nice Instead of cutting the shark up infront of all the people, an information boot would have done more to public education and I may have admitted than that something good may have come out of it if they would have done it in conjunction with the fishing derby. I'm asking myself what the value is in talking to a Mob that is in blood and adrenalin rush (Not all people but a large amount of them).
Please don't lecture me about the current knowledge of things. A big part in lack of knowledge in science is the inability or lack of interest in sitting down and going through the facts that are known (doing your homework, pretty much) and learning from them. Same research is being ran parallelly because of lack of cooperation and knowledge what other researcher are working on. Resources and materials are being wasted.

This is an emotional rant, probably written rather quickly. If you do not wish for me to "lecture you", please do not post incorrect statements. Your comments relating to the public have some merit, but your ones about fisheries scientists are quite absurd. I recommend following the advice you posted above

sitting down and going through the facts that are known (doing your homework, pretty much) and learning from them

I do this several hours a week on average, often in response to questions posed on this very board. You will see very few statements made by me that I am not fully prepared to back up and cite. As a courtesy I often back them up anyway. You may peruse many of my previous postings to verify this.

Nobody have forced you to respond to my posting and I'd not comment on your last sentance because if I'll do, I'll ran the danger of being banned for attacking a moderator personally I'll tell you only that implying that other are wrong (erroneous opinion?) is saying that you're right per se. It is arrogant and can lead you the wrong way in life AND profession.

My prime interest on this board is education. What I do is spend great amounts of time dispelling myths, clarifying facts, and reporting verifiable observations regarding the marine environment. Rarely will you see me post personal opinions. Professionals keep opinion to a minimum, as you likely know. I accord the majority of my science-related posts at that professional level. If you search through the marine life and ecosystem forums, you will see that quite clearly.

 

[aquaoren]

Oh I hear this all the time. I work in a building filled with geneticists and cell biologists. They don't have much idea about contemporary ecology, field science, or resource management policy either, but they think they do. They get emotionally irritable too when I correct them. I assume you're exhibiting the same behaviour. I don't insult other peoples' professions, please don't insult mine.


You are making personal interpretations of terms that already have strict and well established definitions. You may argue your opinion of what is/not a commercial fishery all you want on this board. I will merely state the professional consensus, and clarify if it necessary.

The tournament has NO scientific legitimacy. For the umpteenth time, this event was a tightly regulated, highly infrequent, recreational shark tournament, open to the public, that just so happened to have field biologists present to take certain measurements. That's ALL this was.

This is an emotional rant, probably written rather quickly. If you do not wish for me to "lecture you", please do not post incorrect statements. Your comments relating to the public have some merit, but your ones about fisheries scientists are quite absurd. I recommend following the advice you posted above

I do this several hours a week on average, often in response to questions posed on this very board. You will see very few statements made by me that I am not fully prepared to back up and cite. As a courtesy I often back them up anyway. You may peruse many of my previous postings to verify this.

My prime interest on this board is education. What I do is spend great amounts of time dispelling myths, clarifying facts, and reporting verifiable observations regarding the marine environment. Rarely will you see me post personal opinions. Professionals keep opinion to a minimum, as you likely know. I accord the majority of my science-related posts at that professional level. If you search through the marine life and ecosystem forums, you will see that quite clearly.

You got me wrong, i didn't want to insult your profession, I was rather considering it being a poor scientist if you have no ethical boarders and you personally and not your whole profession appear to be having trouble with this concept
For the rest, I'll tell that for an open discussion that will bring results in the end, both participants have to have an open mind. Since you've proven to me again in the 2nd response that you're either unwilling or unable to aknowledge that you may be wrong to some degree, it would be rather a waste of my time to continue this discussion with you.
BTW, there is nothing that would resemble an emotional rant in on my side questioning your ethics, maybe when you'll advance more in your carreer you'll realize the importance of it...
Do more home work.........Over, out.........