Of frogs and sharks...

...or how DNA research gives clues to the longevity of speciation and the subsequent effect in real terms of the loss of species.

Phew..after making that title I think I need to lie down. So, this article from Stony Brook University gives us an insight into a soon to be published paper in the jouirnal "Ecology Letters" which attempts to explain why it is that certain areas contain more species than others, despite having similar ecosystem characteristics; for example, some tropical rainforests outside of the Amazon basin have no more species than some sites in temperate North America. The reason for the high diversity in the Amazon is not due to the warm and humid conditions as we might expect, but the length of time that the species have been in the area, developing over an enormous time span greater than 50 million years. It seems the later in history that a colonisation occurs, the lower the species diversity will be in that region. Although this particular study used tree frogs as a study group, the report states that the findings could have implications for other species such as trees, birds and insects - and why indeed not for sharks?

This next report highlights the ability of DNA to pinpoint the home range of sharks when they are targetted and sold in the fin markets. By analysing DNA scientists have been able to identify a difference between sharks of the same species living along different continents. This allows the science and conservation community to identify shark fins sourced in world markets and identify whether these are being illegally sourced from protected regions.

There is a considerable link between the two articles. By trading strongly in low fecund species, we are not just risking the temporary absence of one or other type of shark, we are disturbing the development of species that has taken millions upon millions of years to occur. As we know, apex predators play a vital role in the trophic pyramid and so if we remove a key species, we are not just removing one organism from time, we are disturbing the building blocks of our most critical environment - the ocean. If that one building block took, let's say, 200 million years to develop, then how many blocks and mortar will fall around it, and how many millions of years of ecological constitution are we undoing? How serious, how long lasting, how never-mending will be the cascade?

Jim Abernathy - Shark Superhero!

It is not news at all that Jim Abernathy was recently bitten by a shark on one of his shark diving operations in the Bahamas. What is news, and what is incredible, in fact, I can't quite believe it myself, is that The Sun Newspaper has published an article that CELEBRATES SHARKS!! This is the paper that, at the site of anything vaguely fin shaped or toothy, heads straight for the JAWS headline. How many times have we seen "Jaws seen in etc.." headlines and cringed at those poor testosterone deprived journos at The Sun. Apparently it is the lack of being able to use the Jaws headline that leads the lads at the red top paper to create other such corkers as "STICK IT UP YOUR JUNTA" (Falklands war), "WHAM BAM! SAM CAM TO BE MAM" (UK Prime Minister's wife is pregnant" and "OBAMA LAMA DING DONG" (President Obama meets the Dalai Lama).
Watching from afar the events as they unfolded after Jim's accident, I was impressed by the way that the media was handled. The reports coming from the US channels were sobering accounts of how the real news on the agenda was the world decimation of sharks species through demand for sharks fin soup, and that the accidental bite to him was way down the agenda. If anyone knows how the media works, this was not something that happened by accident.
It is a great shame that the USA has a president and not a king or queen, because, in true Sun newspaper over-the-top fashion, I am going to say that Jim Abernathy should receive a nighthood for actually getting The Sun to print something positive about sharks.

Africa Leads...

It's not often that you read a truly inspiring newscast from an NGO. Many are laced with propagandist hype and fireside assuage, promising to "work harder next year". More promises
equals more requirement for cash. It's not a difficult equation.

However, there is a hardened example for all of us to take notice of and inspiration from in the shape of Lesley Rochat. I for one was taken aback by her calm ability to film sharks being finned
in front of her aboard a South African longliner last year, which transpired in her film
Sharks in Deep Touble. The real lesson to be learned from Lesley Rochat though is her ability to create organic energy from in integration of effort from many sources. She is the founder of the AfriOceans Conservation Alliance which draws together efforts, pooling resources to assist in the fight for true marine conservation objectives.
This is not just empty discourse. Lesley's recently published blog about her new initiative 'AfriOceans Warriors' is proof that there is not just talk emanating from the Rochat camp, there is action. Real organic, community integrated action. The crux of the idea around these new ocean warriors is that it they are the ocean guardians of tommorow, that in the inspiring words of her blog they are "fighting for their constitutional right to inherit healthy oceans". I have long been a proponent of the idea that it is our children that we should be looking to to pick up the recently thrown down gauntlet to save our oceans. I posted this video on youtube back in May 08 relating to the same issue, and I am really pleased to see that a major organisation is tackling the essential involvement of our youth in ocean conservation. I firmly believe that when you show the importance of ocean conservation to a child, the change doesn't only happen when the child grows up and gains power as an adult, it happens straight away. The child talks about it to their friends, to their family, they disseminate their new found passion in a way that is more consuming than fire. Yes they are our tommorow, but they are also our today.