In keeping with my promise to research the data behind FWC's
proposed Hammerhead and Tiger sharks ban I found this
published paper on hammerhead stocks and which formulas
are used to estimate populations of the species. Yes there is alot
of mumbo jumbo and "big word school" talk. But here are some of
the more interesting and understandable statements from the paper.
icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/66/2/367.full.pdf - Similar
"The scalloped hammerhead has been classified recently as globally endangered in the IUCN RedList, the smooth hammerhead as near threatened, and the great hammerhead as data deficient (IUCN, 2006). There are no estimates of population growth rates for great or smooth hammerheads, but they can be very different."# 2008 International Council for the Exploration of the Sea. Published by Oxford Journals.
"A lack of data and an inability to identify individual species easily
often preclude the development of species-specific assessments of
fish stocks. It is therefore widely recognized that completion of
species-specific assessments for many taxa will take time. Because
of these difficulties, fish stock assessments have often had to focus
on species aggregates, such as the large and small coastal shark complexes
in the USA (Corte´s, 2002a; SAFMC, 2006). Complex-based
assessments, however, need to be improved before single-species
stock assessments can be conducted, for the hammerhead
complex and for other fisheries, such as those for the snapper–
grouper complex in the US South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico."
In other words whole groups of fish are included in the population studies not just
one single speices. So the great hammer is thrown in with the other types of hammers
and a conculsion is drawn based on that formula. If there is one group in that species
that is hurtin then the whole group looks hurt. So because the scalloped is in that group
it is assumed that other hammers are also in danger. Which does not take into effect the differences or variables in the two sub species. Like maybe great hammers have more pups or are better survivors etc.etc etc.
Please feel free to add any relavant info to this thread that has to do with the proposed ban on the two shark species in Florida.
Now's the time folks befrore it's done and all we can do is
bitch about it. Take a little time to reach out to anyone
who could effect this change. Government,state and local
reps. as well as media that covers sport fishing or extreme
sports. Hell if they can make a show about skinnin a seal and
making a coat out of it I don't think a catch and release show
about a monster sharks will be too much for the eco dudes...........
You are absolutely correct about the lack of species-specific data. The large coastal species complex is a lumped. As I wrote earlier, we are proposing reporting requiriements for landed fish BEFORE instituting an arbitrary prohibition. We need brief emails to the following addresses opposing this draft rule. Also listed is example text. Evryone's voice counts. We need to hurry though, the next meeting is Sept. 7
Send emails to: Commissioners@MyFWC.com
Send mail-in comments to:
Kathleen Hampton
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 620 South Meridian Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-1600
Example text
I am opposed to the draft rule amendment of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s (FWC) shark rule 68B-44, F.A.C. that would prohibit the recreational and commercial harvest of great, scalloped and smooth hammerhead sharks, and tiger sharks from state waters of Florida. The current bag limits of 1 per person or 2 per vessel, whichever is less, are adequate to sustain the fisheery. As an alternative, I support the deferment of rule adoption, and institution of reporting requirements (similar to that for billfish) on all harvested sharks. Such reporting will provide reliable data on the harvest of these animals in state waters of Florida, and provide a scientific basis for future management decision-making.