Massive mako shark caught off Nova Scotia

[archman]

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.........

Ah, perhaps NOW I understand the confusion. It's a question of ethical definitions. Hmmm... let's use the ethics of the "humble" marine ecologist, fisheries scientist, and/or marine management official, since these are some of the few perspectives of any relevance here, and they're all fairly similar.
Here's the gist of what would be going through our minds, minus nitpicky details.

This tournament most likely has little impact on the fishery and the ecology, so therefore it is perfectly valid to hold it. Let's take advantage of the situation and get some measurements.

There are of course personal feelings of inefficiency regarding animal capture, use and/or disposition, but those don't fall under our code of ethics. If they did, we'd have a heck of time performing our jobs in the field, and convincing the fishing lobby that our intentions are not biased. Our ethical code is to the ecology/habitat, not to the individual organism (unless its a critical component).

If you would like my personal opinion, I wish they had released that large mako rather than kill it too. But that's an emotional response, not a professional one. Professionally, it really doesn't matter to me one way or the other. If it's released, it may hatch some more pups and contribute to the ecology. If it's killed, we can get some useful additions to our species population database and trophic models. I'd flip a coin, or defer to the judgement of the local regulatory agency.

***********
Oh, and I don't mind being wrong aquaoren... I quite often am, and apologize publicly for it. I need my error to be comprehensively argued to me, however. After nearly a decade of performing research and teaching undergrads the horrors of biology, I'm still constantly surprised by what I don't know. My older colleagues say it's ALWAYS like that. It's why we don't retire!

 

[Otter]

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.

Given the uproar this has caused here and abroad, I'd take a bet that without the legitmacy conferred via scientific study by field biologists, this event would either not have happened OR will not happen in the future. Then field biologists would have to ride shotgun on finning boats and have to work harder to get their samples out of the thousands of tons of sharks finned annually. Either the field biologists are being manipuated by the promoters or vice versa.

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.

There in lies the rub. To often, scientists seek truth and knowledge without care for the means....that it is their God given right to do so as scientists and those who oppose that right are luddites or 'activists'. Too infrequently they realize that, in obtaining this knowledge, they have actually left the world less well off -- yet hide in the protective shroud of science.

I heard the crowd of spectators and spoke to them about how much sharks can teach us. I truly believe that I changed many people's minds about sharks, children and adults alike.
So until you've been there, please don't judge me so harshly. Thanks.

As the resident cynic, I find it rather coincidental for someone IN the picture ACTUALLY there to show up on Scubaboard and defend her actions. Perhaps I underestimate the pervasiveness of SB! In any case, assuming your are who you say you are...and with no disrespect intended, I would expect a 19 year old Biology Student to truly believe [she] changed peoples minds. I am unconvinced that displaying the dead carcass, of such a rare animal changed it in a positive way. Maybe it was the public disembowling that did it?

 

[archman]

Given the uproar this has caused here and abroad, I'd take a bet that without the legitmacy conferred via scientific study by field biologists, this event would either not have happened OR will not happen in the future.

Good gravy Otter, you're not a saltwater fisherman are you? Their political lobbying clout is ENORMOUS. If you think the scientific community holds much sway over them, get a few drinks into your local marine resource specialist and have them cry into their beer about it. Fishermen can and do hold fishing tournaments all flipping over the place, all the time. Just not in Nova Scotia waters much, apparently.

Second (even though I'm repeating this for at least the fourth time), there isn't ANY scientific legitimacy conferred by this tournament. Tournaments aren't planned with scientists in mind... oh no, not one iota! We're just tag-alongs. And if we start getting "uppity" with the fishermen, we frequently aren't invited on the boats, or even the tournaments themselves. Generally speaking, scientists are GUESTS on these things. I've been to a few myself, so I know.

I'm also not aware of where the "public uproar" you're referring to is coming from, other than this thread. Cite me a link to a mainstream public news source. There are periodic opinion columns every few years or so decrying tournament fishing events, but they're more of a fad thing. Here today, forgotten tomorrow.

There in lies the rub. To often, scientists seek truth and knowledge without care for the means....that it is their God given right to do so as scientists and those who oppose that right are luddites or 'activists'. Too infrequently they realize that, in obtaining this knowledge, they have actually left the world less well off -- yet hide in the protective shroud of science.

What on earth kinds of scientists are you referring to?! MAD SCIENTISTS? You're obviously not thinking of ecologists, nor fisheries scientists. Protecting ecosystem functionality is our particular turf, more than anybody else. We do the studies, write up the reports, present the findings, and hope by some miracle that the political flunkie placed over us doesn't screw us over. Without ecologists, there would NO SCIENCE to back up the environmental movement. Push comes to shove, ecologists are just about the ONLY wholly dedicated, full time environmentalists around. And when you hit this job FULL time like we do, you'll quickly realize how many compromises, disappointments, and deals-with-the-devil are required in order to do your job effectively. High ideals, "hippie" ecologists don't cut the mustard in the real world.

The only other scientists that are relevant to this thread would be ichthyologists, the fish-biologists. Don't confuse them with fishERIES biologists (that study stocks), even though many of them perform both roles. I suppose A FEW of them still like to dissect fish just for kicks... have you ever dissected a fish? It's very messy, and not much fun even when you know what you're doing. When I meet an ichthyologist that enjoys this, I'll let you know. At this point in time, the score would be something like 0-20'something.

As the resident cynic, I find it rather coincidental for someone IN the picture ACTUALLY there to show up on Scubaboard and defend her actions. Perhaps I underestimate the pervasiveness of SB!

Yes, you're underestimating it. We must get a scubaboard member every month or so that shows up in a public media photograph or report. They shamelessly post about it, and link the photo/material! Usually it's something scuba-related of course.
Becky provided more than enough material to prove her presence there... and anyway what sort of lunatic would make that up?

I would expect a 19 year old Biology Student to truly believe [she] changed peoples minds. I am unconvinced that displaying the dead carcass, of such a rare animal changed it in a positive way. Maybe it was the public disembowling that did it?

Yes, it was. And if you do not believe Becky regarding how powerful such educational tactics are, you can try me instead. I and other field educators use it all the time. Works like gangbusters on children and college students. Show 'em a dead animal or damaged ecosystem... they either get disgusted with "mankind" right then and there, or sulk about it on the van ride back, or better yet, call up their friends on their cell phone and whine. Read the bottom of post #30, I think I commented on experiential education back around there...

I'm going to go watch some mindless television now.

 

[Nomaster]

Is there no way to examine the specimen without destroying it?

This was the most amusing quote in the whole thread. Even more so since this is a response to the examination of a 1035 pound mako shark. I can't imagine how you would inspect the stretching of the uterus of a huge mako when its alive. I would imagine hazard pay for molesting a fish with that many teeth would be quite high.

Lions, tigers, bears, snakes, and all manner of other big bad ferocious animals,
OH MY!

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.........

During my years of studying ecology, my view of what was sound and ethical scientific study changed markedly. What we understand before we walk many moons in another man's moccasins often can't bridge the gap of our different understanding.
My changed views did not stop me from leaving the laboratory of my major professor who's ethics I felt were none-the-less non existent.
I don't believe that it is productive to become incendiary because of a lack of understanding or even a difference in view. In this case, archman has done a bang up job of explaining his views, and whether you agree with his ethics or not, he has expressed them and they are good and plain to see in this thread and many of the other threads which he has posted and educated in.
Wait for the heat of emotion to subside before the flames of your passion obscure the message you wish to convey.

Tom

a.w. I'm very happy that I didn't read this page before posting, if I had I wouldn't have posted because archman did a much better job of illustrating what I wanted to say than I could ever imagine myself doing.
And there you have it, both his professional and his personal ethics out for the world to view. You really do need both, but often your personal ethics will kill you because of what you have to suck up to work in your profession.