DOCSLIB.ORG

Inquiry Into Shark Mitigation and Deterrent Measures

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Inquiry Into Shark Mitigation and Deterrent Measures Inquiry into Shark Mitigation and Deterrent Measures GREENPEACE AUSTRALIA PACIFIC SUBMISSION TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS REFERENCES COMMITTEE 2 March 2017 Index 1 Introduction 3 2 Summary 3 3 Recommendations 4 4 Term of reference #1: Research into shark numbers, behaviour and habitat 4 5 Term of reference #2: The regulation of mitigation and deterrent measures 6 under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, including exemptions from a controlled action under section 158 6 Term of reference #5: Bycatch from mitigation and deterrent measures 13 7 Term of reference #3, 4 and 6: The range of mitigation and deterrent 15 measures currently in use, emerging measures and alternatives to measures 8 Term of reference #7: The impact of shark attacks on tourism and related 18 industries 9 Conclusion 19 2 1 Introduction Greenpeace Australia Pacific (Greenpeace) welcomes the opportunity to contribute this submission to the Environment and Communications References Committee’s Inquiry into Shark Mitigation and Deterrent Measures (the Inquiry). ​ ​ 2 Summary Australia's beaches and healthy oceans are fundamental to our identity. They hold enormous value for Australians, and are a major drawcard for international visitors the world over. Greenpeace supports the ability of every person to safely enjoy Australia’s incredible beaches, and believes that marine life and beachgoers can coexist without unnecessary harm to either. Australia's ocean ecosystems are sources of immense biodiversity and are home to countless endemic and migratory species. As apex species in ocean ecosystems, sharks have a unique, irreplaceable and vital status in ocean ecosystems. Adopting shark mitigation and deterrence measures that could significantly and negatively impact shark populations, in particular threatened shark species, could have dramatic flow on effects for entire ocean ecosystems and cause severe damage to fragile systems. The NSW government has cited recent shark encounters as a reason for reconsidering their approach to shark mitigation and deterrence. However, the finite risk of humans being harmed by sharks must be considered in perspective. Surf Lifesaving Australia reports that people are 200 times more likely to die from drowning, than from a shark attack. Shark deterrent and mitigation measures that have adverse impacts on threatened marine species and ecosystems are regulated by the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act). Under the EPBC Act, these ​ ​ ‘actions’ are unlawful unless the Environment Minister (the Minister) grants an ​ ​ exemption. The Minister is required to consider a number of factors when deciding whether to grant an exemption. These factors include long-term environmental considerations, whether there is a threat of serious or irreversible environmental damage, the precautionary principle, the principle of intergenerational equity and the conservation of biological diversity. In making a decision, the Minister is not permitted to act inconsistently with Australia's obligations under the Bonn Convention or the Biodiversity Convention, which support the protection of migratory and threatened species. These matters considered, a number of shark deterrent and mitigation measures must not be implemented. Greenpeace considers the most effective approaches to shark deterrence and mitigation are those focused on reducing the likelihood of shark attack, restoring public confidence 3 in beach safety, while also having minimal impact on shark species and ocean ecosystems. Greenpeace calls for a long-term commitment to solutions that have been trialled and are evidence based, have minimal environmental impact, and are cost effective and practical to implement. The use of a combination of effective and low-environmental impact solutions would reduce the risk of shark attack without violating Australia's international obligations (see Recommendations). No shark mitigation and deterrent method can completely eliminate the risk of human encounters with sharks and this is an inherent risk associated with entering Australian oceans. The risk can be reduced significantly, but it cannot be eliminated completely. The scale of any policy response must be proportionate to the risks and the fact that the risks cannot be negated completely. 3 Recommendations In formulating its recommendations, Greenpeace has considered the practicalities of deploying equipment in the exposed coastline of Australia, the durability and longevity of methods, impacts upon human health and safety, stakeholder opinions, expense, the efficacy of technology at deterring or detecting sharks, and environmental impact. Greenpeace makes the following recommendations: ● Implement the Shark Spotters Program; ● Remove sunk shark nets currently in the ocean; ● Ban drum lines and culling methods; ● Implement trials of non-lethal barriers at popular swimming locations; ● Continue strong government and surf life saver shark safety education campaigns; ● Consider using drones to supplement shark spotting efforts; ● Consider investing in shark tagging programs to supplement shark spotting and research; ● Improving the response times of emergency services, Council Lifeguards and Surf Life-Saving clubs; and ● Reviewing beach patrolling strategies along the NSW coastline. 4 Term of reference #1: Research into shark numbers, behaviour and habitat Shark behaviour and its relevance to human harm from shark encounters will be briefly considered. This information is based on data on shark encounters and changing patterns of human water usage, and illustrates why the frequency of shark-related 4 incidents in Australia has increased. The data considered shows that an increase in shark interactions is not indicative of a crisis. As reported by John G West, coordinated by the Australian Shark Attack File, the number ​ ​ of shark attacks between 1990 and 1999 increased by 16% (at 6.5 incidents per year), compared to the prior decade, and increased by 25% during 2000 to 2009 (at 15 incidents per year). Importantly, while the frequency of shark attacks has increased over time, the number of shark encounters per million people in Australia has almost halved over the last 70 years, decreasing from 60 encounters per million people in 1930/1939 to approximately 30 encounters per million between 2000/2009. A range of factors are thought to have contributed to the increased frequency of shark attacks in Australia including: ● The number of people entering Australian oceans due to an increase in the Australian population; ● The number of tourists visiting Australian beaches; ● The amount of time people are spending in the ocean; ● The popularity of water-based fitness and recreation activities, causing people to enter the water more frequently and for longer periods of time; ● The number of people accessing previously isolated coastal areas; and ● Shark attack awareness and reporting. Greenpeace notes that Australian shark attack trends are consistent with global trends. The increase in the number of shark attacks globally is the natural result of the above factors. The increases in Australian shark attacks of 16% and 25% over each of the past two decades correlate to the increase in the Australian population and tourist numbers. This indicates that the shark attack increase could be affected by growth in the number of beach visitors. Since 1990, 12 species of shark have been identified as responsible for unprovoked shark attacks. 48% of shark attacks are attributed to the white, tiger and bull shark species, 20% to unidentified species in the Carcharhinidae family and another 20% to the wobbegong shark. Over the last two decades, only the white, bull and tiger shark ​ ​ species are responsible for fatal shark attacks. Therefore, Greenpeace makes recommendations that have been successfully tested on these three shark species. Greenpeace notes that while the white shark represent only 29% of attacks over the past 20 years, it is responsible for 68% of fatalities. 5 Between 1990 and 2009, the activities of victims were recorded for 186 incidents. At the time of these incidents, 49% of victims were wearing wetsuits. The following percentages of victims were doing the listed activities at the time of the incidents: ● 42% surfing on a surf or body board; ● 21% swimming; ● 14% SCUBA or hookah diving; ● 7% snorkelling; and ● 6% standing in shallow water. Over the last two decades, the time of day at which a shark attack occurred was recorded for 138 incidents. This data indicates that shark attacks occur in Australian waters at all times of the day, during all months of the year. 5 Term of reference #2: The regulation of mitigation and deterrent measures under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, including exemptions from a controlled action under section 158 The objects of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the ​ EPBC Act), as stated in section 3, include the protection of the environment, particularly ​ for matters of national environmental significance, conservation of biodiversity and heritage, and promotion of ecologically sustainable development. The EPBC Act regulates the environmental influence of the commonwealth government and its respective agencies. The EPBC Act applies when an ‘action’ is undertaken by a person which has ‘national environmental significance’, affects commonwealth land or is undertaken by a commonwealth agency. An action is defined inclusively
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NPOA Sharks Booklet.Indd
    National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (NPOA-Sharks) November 2013 South Africa Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Private Bag X2, Rogge Bay, 8012 Tel: 021 402 3911 Fax: +27 21 402 3364 www.daff.gov.za Design and Layout: FNP Communications and Gerald van Tonder Photographs courtesy of: Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF), Craig Smith, Charlene da Silva, Rob Tarr Foreword South Africa’s Exclusive Economic Zone is endowed with a rich variety of marine living South Africa is signatory to the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries – voluntarily agreed to by members of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) – and, as such, is committed to the development and implementation of National Plans of Action (NPOAs) as adopted by the twenty-third session of the FAO Committee on Fisheries in February 1999 and endorsed by the FAO Council in June 1999. Seabirds – aimed at reducing incidental catch and promoting the conservation of seabirds Fisheries and now regularly conducts Ecological Risk Assessments for all the commercial practices. Acknowledging the importance of maintaining a healthy marine ecosystem and the possibility of major detrimental effects due to the disappearance of large predators, South from the list of harvestable species. In accordance with international recommendations, South Africa subsequently banned the landing of a number of susceptible shark species, including oceanic whitetip, silky, thresher and hammerhead sharks. improves monitoring efforts for foreign vessels discharging shark products in its ports. To ensure long-term sustainability of valuable, but biologically limited, shark resources The NPOA-Sharks presented here formalises and streamlines ongoing efforts to improve conservation and management of sharks caught in South African waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Shark Catch Trends and Effort Reduction in the Beach Protection Program, Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa (Elasmobranch Fisheries - Oral)
    NOT TO BE CITED WITHOUT PRIOR REFERENCE TO THE AUTHOR(S) Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization Serial No. N4746 NAFO SCR Doc. 02/124 SCIENTIFIC COUNCIL MEETING – SEPTEMBER 2002 Shark Catch Trends and Effort Reduction in the Beach Protection Program, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (Elasmobranch Fisheries - Oral) S.F.J. Dudley Natal Sharks Board, P. Bag 2, Umhlanga Rocks, 4320, South Africa E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Shark nets have been set off the beaches of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, since 1952, to minimise risk of shark attack. Reliable catch data for each of the 14 shark species commonly caught are available from 1978 only. The nets fish in fixed localities very close to shore and there is an absence of fisheries independent data for most species. There is uncertainty about factors such as localised stock depletion and philopatry. Catch rates of seven species show a significant decline, but this figure drops to four with the exclusion of the confounding effects of the annual sardine run. Of the four, two are caught in very low numbers (Java Carcharhinus amboinensis and great hammerhead Sphyrna mokarran) and it is probable that any decline in population size reflects either local depletion or additional exploitation elsewhere. The other two species (blacktip C. limbatus and scalloped hammerhead S. lewini) are caught in greater numbers. C. limbatus appears to have been subject to local depletion. Newborn S. lewini are captured by prawn trawlers and discarded, mostly dead, adding to pressure on this species. As a precautionary measure, and in the absence of clarity on the question of stock depletion, in September 1999 a process of reducing the number of nets per installation was begun, with a view to reducing catches.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great Barrier Reed Marine Parks Shark Control Program
    Public information package The Great Barrier Reef Marine Parks Shark Control Program Associated with application G33288.1 Applicant: State of Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries GPO Box 46 Brisbane QLD 4001 All comments and submissions to: Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority Assessments and Permissions Team PO Box 1379 Townsville QLD 4810 Email: [email protected] Website: www.gbrmpa.gov.au/about-us/consultation Contents Introduction.......................................................................................................................................... 3 The Application ................................................................................................................................... 4 Program apparatus ......................................................................................................................... 4 Nets ................................................................................................................................................. 4 Drumlines ........................................................................................................................................ 5 Servicing apparatus ........................................................................................................................ 5 Proposed apparatus per location/beach within the GBRMPs ......................................................... 6 Management and mitigation strategies ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Historical Overview of the Origins of Anti-Shark Measures in Natal, 1940 - 1980
    A HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE ORIGINS OF ANTI-SHARK MEASURES IN NATAL, 1940 - 1980 Melissa Joyce van Oordt A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Arts University of KwaZulu-Natal, Howard College 2006 I declare that this thesis has not been submitted to any other university and that it is my entirely own work and that I have given due acknowledgement of all sources. Melissa Joyce van Oordt Supervisor Copyright by Melissa Joyce van Oordt 2006 © Table of Contents Abstract III Acknowledgments iv - vi Figures and Illustrations vii Abbreviations viii Prologue The emergence of beach recreation and anti-shark measures in Natal: 1900s - 1957 "Caution"l 1 - 16 Chapter One "Black December", Myths, Fear and Sharks "Undoubtedly it is a man-killer.,,2 17 - 48 Chapter Two Post-War Beach Recreation off the Natal coastline and the establishment of shark research institutions in Natal I Pietermaritzburg Archives Repository (PAR), Attorney General's Office (AGO) 1/8/47, 45A11895, 'Natal Water Police Point to The Attorney General: Superintendent of Water Police Reports on Danger of Sharks in Durban', 6th February 1895. 2 V. Coppleson. Shark Attack (Sydney: Angus and Robertson, 1988) originally published in 1958, p.2 on "Great Wh ites" 49 - 81 Chapter Three Anti-shark measures in Natal during the 1960s 82 -108 Chapter Four The 1970s, Anti-shark measures, Tourism, Media and Conservation 109 - 141 Conclusion 142 - 151 Bibliography 152 - 182 ABSTRACT This thesis studies the ongms of anti-shark measures in Natal, highlighting the relationship between beach recreation, anti-shark measures and the important influence of human perceptions of sharks.
    [Show full text]
  • UNEP/CMS/MS/Inf/10 PRESENT STATUS of SHARK FISHING IN
    UNEP/CMS/MS/Inf/10 PRESENT STATUS OF SHARK FISHING IN THE MARINE WATER OF BANGLADESH Abstract : The present study was done during the period April/2006 to March/2007. A total 22 species belongs to 17 genera and 11 families including sharks, skates and rays were identified. Out of this sharks comprises of 10 species, 08 genera belongs to 06 families. In the ray group 10 species, 07 genera and 05 families and 02 species of skates belongs to 02 genera and 01 family were identified. The total landed of sharks, skates and rays were 398.68 MT. The percentage composition should that the highest catch in percentage weight, Himantura uarnak was 41.11% and the lowest Amphotistius kuhlii which was 0.04%. The highest landing was in the month of June/06 was 81.935 MT and the lowest in the August/06 was 4.458 MT. *Bikram Jit Roy *Manju Prava Dey *Md. Fokhrul Alam *Niprandra Kumar Singha Scientific Officer, Marine Fisheries Survey Management Unite, C.G.O. Building-2, 6th Floor, Agrabad, Chittagong, Bangladesh. PRESENT STATUS OF SHARK FISHING IN THE MARINE WATER OF BANGLADESH Abstract : The present study was done during the period April/2006 to March/2007. A total 22 species belongs to 17 genera and 11 families including sharks, skates and rays were identified. Out of this sharks comprises of 10 species, 08 genera belongs to 06 families. In the rays group 10 species, 07 genera and 05 families and 02 species of skates belongs to 02 genera and 01 family were identified.
    [Show full text]
  • RE: Submission to the Senate Inquiry Into Shark Mitigation and Deterrent Measures
    Shark mitigation and deterrent measures Submission 35 Committee Secretary Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications PO Box 6100 Parliament House CANBERRA ACT 2600 AUSTRALIA 1 March 2017 RE: Submission to the Senate Inquiry into Shark Mitigation and Deterrent Measures Dear Sir/Madam, The Sunshine Coast Environment Council (SCEC) is grateful for the opportunity to provide our views on the Senate Enquiry into: The efficacy and regulation of Shark Mitigation and Deterrent Measures. The Sunshine Coast Environment Council (SCEC) is a regional environmental advocacy organisation working to promote and protect the natural values of Queensland’s beautiful Sunshine Coast. SCEC work with over 60 of our member groups to achieve the best possible outcomes for our region, and to ensure environmental policy is reflective of a sustainable future. SCEC acknowledges and deeply sympathises with the trauma and tragedy to humans that shark bites cause. We would like to be explicitly clear to all readers of this submission that, as an organisation, SCEC does not value the lives of marine life over or above the lives of humans. Instead, we acknowledge the importance and value of coexisting in a healthy marine environment, and recognise the need to respect the natural habitat of marine life without the need for anthropocentrism. As a central thread in a highly populated coastal community, SCEC acknowledges and understands the complexities surrounding human/shark encounter mitigation. We also acknowledge the government’s stance to put human safety above all else, and to maintain the public perception that governments are doing all they can to keep ocean users safe.
    [Show full text]
  • Queensland Shark Control Program
    Queensland Shark Control Program Queensland Shark Control Program Review of Alternative Approaches 59919123 Prepared for Qld Dept. Agriculture and Fisheries 20 September 2019 23 September 2019 Cardno i Queensland Shark Control Program Contact Information Document Information Cardno (NSW/ACT) Pty Ltd Prepared for Qld Dept. Agriculture and ABN 95 001 145 035 Fisheries Project Name Review of Alternative Level 9 - The Forum Approaches 203 Pacific Highway St Leonards NSW 2065 File Reference 59919123_Qld shark bite Australia control options review_ Cardno 20_9_19 www.cardno.com Rev_0.docx Phone +61 2 9496 7700 Fax +61 2 9439 5170 Job Reference 59919123 Date 20 September 2019 Version Number Rev 0 Author(s): Name: Craig Blount Effective Date 20/09/2019 Job title: Regional Senior Principal Approved By: Name: Marcus Lincoln Smith Date Approved 20/09/2019 Job title: Senior Principal Document History Version Effective Date Description of Revision Prepared by Reviewed by Rev A 12 September First draft for client Daryl McPhee, Craig Blount, Marcus Lincoln Smith 2019 review Will MacBeth, Dilys Zhang Rev 0 20 September Final for issue Daryl McPhee, Craig Blount, Marcus Lincoln Smith 2019 Will MacBeth, Dilys Zhang © Cardno. Copyright in the whole and every part of this document belongs to Cardno and may not be used, sold, transferred, copied or reproduced in whole or in part in any manner or form or in or on any media to any person other than by agreement with Cardno. This document is produced by Cardno solely for the benefit and use by the client in accordance with the terms of the engagement.
    [Show full text]
  • Sharks (NPOA-Sharks) Foreword
    National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (NPOA-Sharks) Foreword South Africa’s Exclusive Economic Zone is endowed with a rich variety of marine living resources. The sustainable management of these resources for the benefit of all South Africans, present and future, remains a firm commitment of the South African Government. South Africa is signatory to the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries - voluntarily agreed to by members of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) - and, as such, is committed to the development and implementation of National Plans of Action (NPOAs) as adopted by the twenty- third session of the FAO Committee on Fisheries in February 1999 and endorsed by the FAO Council in June 1999. NPOAs describe strategies through which commercial fishing nations can achieve economically and ecologically sustainable fisheries. South Africa published the NPOA-Seabirds – aimed at reducing incidental catch and promoting the conservation of seabirds in longline fisheries - in August 2008. South Africa has adopted an Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries and now regularly conducts Ecological Risk Assessments for all the commercial fishing sectors, widely consulting with all stakeholders regarding best management practices. Acknowledging the importance of maintaining a healthy marine ecosystem and the possibility of major detrimental effects due to the disappearance of large predators, South Africa was the first country to offer full protection to the great white shark, removing it from the list of harvestable species. In accordance with international recommendations, South Africa subsequently banned the landing of a number of susceptible shark species, including oceanic whitetip, silky, thresher and hammerhead sharks.
    [Show full text]
  • SHARK MESHING (BATHER) Bar Dixon Park PROTECTION PROGRAM Merewether
    Stockton Nobbys Newcastle NSW SHARK MESHING (BATHER) Bar Dixon Park PROTECTION PROGRAM Merewether Redhead A typical shark net in NSW waters installed from 1st September to 30 April, for a minimum of 14 days of each month. Set parallel to the beach, 500 metres from the shore. Sharks are able to swim around and over it. Swansea-Blacksmiths Whale pinger Dolphin pinger Floats Caves Catherine Hill Bay 4m Tiger Shark 150m mesh size Lakes White Shark 6m Bull Shark 60 X 60 cm Bronze Whaler Dusky Whaler Soldiers TARGET SHARKS Marine MAMMALS, reptiles & seabirds have The Entrance drowned in shark nets, INCLUDING Shelly whales, dolphins, seals, dugongs and turtles Around 40% 51 Beaches Terrigal Spinner Shark North Avoca of shark entanglements Target Sharks Avoca occur on the beach that have NOT Short fin Mako Copacabana side of the net been implemented Common Blacktip Shark MacMasters in shark attacks Broadnose Sevengill Shark Killcare Silky Shark Umina Palm Since the installation of SHARK NETS in there has been Whale 1937 Avalon 1 fatality,16 injuries,10 encounters at shark meshed beaches Bilgola Newport Mona Vale Shark nets indiscriminately capture Warriewood North Narrabeen target and non target sharks and rays, including Narrabeen Dee Why PROTECTED AND ENDANGERED species irrespective of age and sex. Curl Curl Harbord Queenscliff Contrary to popular belief, shark nets are NOT designed to North Steyne Their purpose is: Manly protect swimmers. “culling populations of large aggressive sharks, and deterring large sharks from Bondi establishing territories adjacent to metropolitan swimming beaches” Bronte DPI Report into the NSW Shark Meshing (Bather Protection) Program 2009 Coogee Maroubra A number of shark nets have gone missing during storms.
    [Show full text]
  • Sharks, Nets and More-Than-Human Territory in Eastern Australia Leah Maree Gibbs University of Wollongong, [email protected]
    University of Wollongong Research Online Faculty of Social Sciences - Papers Faculty of Social Sciences 2018 Shores: Sharks, Nets and More-Than-Human Territory in Eastern Australia Leah Maree Gibbs University of Wollongong, [email protected] Publication Details Gibbs, L. (2018). Shores: Sharks, Nets and More-Than-Human Territory in Eastern Australia. In K. Peters, P. Steinberg & E. Stratford (Eds.), Territory Beyond Terra (pp. 203-219). London, United Kingdom: Rowman & Littlefield International. Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] Shores: Sharks, Nets and More-Than-Human Territory in Eastern Australia Abstract In Australia, for eight months of each year Sydney's most popular beaches are laced with fishing nets. Stretching 150 metres (492 feet) across, and set within 500 metres (1,640 feet) of the shore, the nets are anchored off fifty-one beaches between Newcastle in the north and Wollongong in the south. The aim of the Shark Meshing (Bather Protection) Program NSW is to reduce the risk of dangerous encounters between sharks and people, and specifically to deter sharks from establishing territories (Department of Primary Industries NSW 2009, 2015). Program managers achieve such ends by devising and deploying tools and employing people to catch and kill sharks. By considering what happens when non-human animals are enlisted in territorialising practices of shore control, this chapter examin es and unsettles the interplay between multiple interpretations of territory and the political implications of those interpretations. The orkw traces the state of New South Wales' Shark Meshing (Bather Protection) Program to understand how ter- ritory is claimed, asserted, and confounded at the shore.
    [Show full text]
  • No. 46 No Shark Cull
    Submission No 46 MANAGEMENT OF SHARKS IN NEW SOUTH WALES WATERS Organisation: No Shark Cull Inc Name: Ms Sharnie Connell Date Received: 22/10/2015 Parliamentary Enquiry into the Shark Management in NSW Submission by No Shark Cull Inc Written by Sharnie Connell Submitted 22nd October 2015 Executive Summary Shark attacks are incredibly rare events with less than 10 fatal incidents occurring worldwide on average per year. Shark bites occasionally occur in clusters in small localised areas causing fear in the population fuelled by sensationalist media reporting resulting in Government officials who feel that drastic action must be taken. Despite this there is little evidence to suggest that people significantly change their ocean based recreation activities and there is no negative impact on tourism to areas or beaches affected by recent shark incidents. Serious declines in the abundance of shark populations have been recorded with 90% having been removed from global the ocean ecosystem in the last 60 years. Due to biological factors such as sharks being slow growing, late to mature and having low reproduction rates recovery plans for white sharks have not been in place for long enough to have a positive impact on population levels. Increases in the rate of shark bite have been documented and are a direct result of human factors such as 50% global population increase, changes to the abundance and location of food sources and habitat change. Shark bites are most likely to be caused by mistaken identity, curiosity, self defence and dominance displays no evidence exists to justify common misconceptions of sharks as mindless killing machines, sharks are not attracted to human blood or certain colours, they do not defend territories or target people for food.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeny of Lamniform Sharks Based on Whole Mitochondrial Genome Sequences
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 1-1-2003 Phylogeny of lamniform sharks based on whole mitochondrial genome sequences Toni Laura Ferrara Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Recommended Citation Ferrara, Toni Laura, "Phylogeny of lamniform sharks based on whole mitochondrial genome sequences" (2003). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 19960. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/19960 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Phylogeny of lamniform sharks based on whole mitochondrial genome sequences by Toni Laura Ferrara A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Major: Zoology Program of Study Committee: Gavin Naylor, Major Professor Dean Adams Bonnie Bowen Jonathan Wendel Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2003 11 Graduate College Iowa State University This is to certify that the master's thesis of Toni Laura Ferrara has met the thesis requirements of Iowa State University Signatures have been redacted for privacy 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1 LITERATL:jRE REVIEW 2 CHAPTER ONE: THE BIOLOGY OF LAMNIFORM
    [Show full text]