Thursday, September 10, 2020

RESPECT AND RESPONSIBILITY (OR THE LACK THEREOF) IN RECREATIONAL SALTWATER FISHERIES

 

Last week, The New York Times published an article on surf fishing for sharks here on Long Island.

It’s something that has been going on for a very long time, but for many years, it has passed under the radar, as a handful of traditional surf fishermen, secretive folks by nature, spent the dark hours of summer pursuing big, toothy fish from the beach.

In some areas, such as Florida and Texas, shark fishing from the surf has been a big deal for a long time, with anglers developing ways to fish heavy gear, and catch truly big fish, from the beach.  

The world-record tiger shark, a fish of 1,780 pounds, was caught off a pier in South Carolina back in 1964, and while that wasn’t exactly the same as catching it from the surf, the angler still had to stand up to a fish weighing nearly a ton, without being able to maneuver or back down the way boat fishermen do.

While that tiger shark was far larger than the typical shark caught from the beach—it was a world record, after all—southern shark fishermen regularly catch fish of more than 500 pounds while standing on the sand.

Further north, the fish are typically smaller; here on Long Island, most are either sandbar sharks weighing less than 100 pounds, or sand tigers, which might weigh more than twice that much, but are typically smaller.

And that’s a big part of the problem.

If we discount dogfish, surfcasters fishing north of Chesapeake Bay are most likely to catch one of three shark species—sandbars, sand tigers, or duskies.  None of those species are doing well.  The National Marine Fisheries Service lists both sand tigers and dusky sharks as “prohibited species” that must be immediately released by recreational or commercial fishermen.  Recreational fishermen are also prohibited from keeping sandbar sharks, although there is a very small, very restricted, and very heavily monitored commercial fishery for that species.

Thus, there is a real question as to whether it is appropriate for recreational fishermen to target those species.

I’ll note right here and now that I am a shark fisherman, and have been for more than 40 years.  But I fish from a boat, and each year, in order to obtain a shark endorsement for my Highly Migratory Species permit, I have to watch a brief video and take a brief quiz intended to refresh my memory of how to identify and safely release prohibited species of shark in a way that will best assure each shark’s survival. 

As a boat fisherman, I never take a hooked shark out of the water, do my best to minimize fighting and handling times and, when the time for release arrives, use a bolt cutter to cut through the hook, so that it doesn’t remain in the fish once it’s again swimming free.

But because surfcasters operate solely within state waters, no such permit is required.  And once a shark is caught, the needs and future health of the fish too often take a back seat to the sort of photos and videos that attract a lot of attention on social media.

As The New York Times reports,

“…The prize [for catching a shark from the beach] is usually a very impressive selfie before the shark is released—or something darker.  One picture shared in a private Facebook group this summer showed a sand tiger shark discarded on a Long Island beach with its head cut off.

“’The shark angling community has a greater percentage of people that have this macho-man ‘I’m going to conquer giant beasts’ attitude,’ said David Shiffman, a marine conservation biologist and shark expert at Arizona State University.

“One particular set of photos from July caused a stir:  In them, a college student from suburban Manhasset, N.Y. posed for a series of pictures, flexing and reclining alongside a large shark that he had caught and later released.  In one, he pulled its nose up to show its teeth…”

It’s probably important to note that sharks’ jaws are hinged to open downward, and that the fish don’t have a neck that normally arches well backward when the shark bites something, so bending the shark’s head back that way places unnatural stress on the spine.  In fact, I remember fishing for cod on New England party boats when I was young, and seeing the boats’ mates bend the heads of spiny dogfish back in just that way, until the spine snapped and the fish was returned to the water to swim, upside down, in weak circles until it died.

Bending the head back, even if less violently, will never do the shark too much good.

Not all surf-based shark fishermen approve of mishandling fish that way, something that the Times makes very clear.  But most of them will remove the fish from the water for photos and to remove the hook, leaving the weight of the fish’s entire body unsupported, and forcing it to put unnatural pressure on the animal’s organs and connective tissues.  Given that sharks don’t have any bones—the skeleton is composed entirely of softer and more flexible cartilage, that doesn’t do the fish any good, either.

As the Times notes,

“the nature of land-based shark fishing, as opposed to fishing from a boat, brings a high probability that the shark will be harmed at some point between its initial hooking and ultimate release…

“Just because a shark swims away doesn’t mean that it will survive for very long afterward, according to shark experts.  Stress and exhaustion from the fight on the line—and abrasions from being dragged up the sand—can leave lasting damage.

“In almost no case, Dr. Shiffman said, should there be time to pose for photographs.  ‘Doing it right, leaving the shark in the water so that its gills are partially submerged, you don’t get as cool a picture,’ he said.  ‘But you’re less likely to kill the shark.’”

Yet to those who see themselves as social media celebrities, getting the “cool…picture” is the whole point.  In this “photos or it didn’t happen” age, the simple satisfaction that the traditional surfcaster felt when he landed a fish is no longer enough.  Internet likes and, for many, the Internet followers that can lead to a profitable YouTube channel, are what matters most.

Thus they abandon the realm of the responsible sportsman, who always gives the highest priority to the health of the resource that he or she pursues, and worship on the altar of Internet fame—or notoriety, depending on one’s point of view.

What makes that worse, and a further death knell to any notion of sportsmanship, is that in many places, targeting prohibited species is illegal.

That’s certainly true here in New York, where the state’s Department of Environmental Conservation informs anglers that

“It is illegal to take or possess prohibited shark species.  The definition of ‘take’ includes pursuing, hunting, killing, and capturing prohibited shark species.  Anglers must release any prohibited shark immediately, in a manner that maximizes its chances for survival.  Do not fish for or target prohibited sharks.

“Commonly encountered prohibited shark species found in New York state waters include the Sandbar (‘Brown’), Dusky, and Sand Tiger sharks.  These three species are primarily the only species of large (non-dogfish) shark anglers will encounter from shore.”

So surf fishermen who target sharks pretty well know that they’re illegally targeting prohibited species, but do it anyway, showing no respect for the fish and no responsibility as anglers as they continue to drag such sharks, which already have enough problems, over the sand.

They try to justify such behavior, with the Times reporting that

“Shark anglers would say they don’t ‘target’ particular species and that they cannot always control what gets hooked on their lines.”

But when prohibited species make up more than 90 percent—probably more than 95 or 98 percent—of your catch, it’s hard to credibly argue that you’re really fishing for the legal blacktips, tigers, threshers, or hammerheads that might very, very rarely take a bait, and only caught one of the prohibited sharks by accident.

The argument doesn’t gain any credibility when some anglers, including some video celebrities, are recommending that shark fishermen tell all and sundry that they’re targeting bluefish, not sharks, in order to get around the law. 

And it’s not only sharks that engender such misbehavior.  A popular angling discussion board, which generally focuses on striped bass and surfcasting topics, in currently embroiled in a hot debate about whether a photo that shows a Florida tarpon lying in an inch or two of water, being lapped by the waves, violates a Florida regulation that prohibits removing large tarpon from the water.

Once again, the angler involved is an Internet celebrity, apparently an “influencer” that pushes particular brands of fishing gear, and the photo was originally posted by the rep of a fishing rod company, who was trying to engender interest in the company’s products.  

A Florida fisheries manager weighed in, saying that in his opinion, the tarpon photo probably violated the state regulations and endangered the health of the tarpon, but that didn’t do much to stem the discussion of whether the fish was really harmed, whether the law was broken, and whether the promotional shot was ethical.

The rod company rep claimed that he would also seek an opinion from the State of Florida, but has not provided any such opinion as yet, claiming that the state never responded.

That could even be true, but the fact remains that, once again, the desire to get a good Instagram photo trumped any sense of responsibility for the health of the fish or complying with the intent—and probably the letter—of Florida law.

But another Florida angler found out the hard way that the law means what it says.  After a Florida college student posted a photo of himself holding a goliath grouper—another species that may not be removed from Florida waters—on the Internet, he was visited by fish and wildlife enforcement officers, charged with a misdemeanor, and briefly held in the local jail before being released on a $7,500 bond.

That’s a big price to pay for irresponsibility and a moment of Internet fame.

But anglers’ lack of respect for the fish that they catch, and their failure to take responsibility for those fishes’ survival, doesn’t only extend to prohibited or heavily protected species such as some sharks, tarpon, and goliath grouper.

Ever since the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission adopted Addendum VI to Amendment 6 to the Atlantic Striped Bass Interstate Fishery Management Plan, with its 28 to 35-inch slot limit, the Internet has been flooded with photos of big striped bass—fish well over 35 inches—being held out of the water while photos were shot.

Some of those photos show fish with their bellies bulging with unsupported internal organs.  Some show fish with anglers’ hands shoved under the gill plates, putting the gills themselves at risk.  Some show fish that seem to be losing quite a bit of blood.

But all of those photos show fish with a decidedly reduced chance of survival, because anglers thought that posting bass photos on the Internet was more important than getting the fish back in the water quickly—or never taking it out in the first place—even though the photos meant that the fish was more likely to die.

It’s a sad story that is constantly repeated in this Internet age, and just demonstrates why anglers need to begin showing more respect for their quarry, and accepting the responsibility that goes with catching a fish:  If you’re not going to kill it and eat it, you have an obligatio to do all you can to make sure that it doesn't die after release.

In these days when so many fish stocks are not in good shape, risking a fish’s survival just to take a few photos and get your 15 minutes of Internet fame is not a responsible option.

 

No comments:

Post a Comment