Across from my desk, I have a poster of a great white leaping from the water. Bought the day after I went cage diving in South Africa, the iconic image was captured by Chris Fallows. Any time I have to deal with someone annoying, I look at the massive teeth in the photo, and I'm instantly bolstered. "Grrr..." I think. "Don't fool with me!" Consequently, it should come as no surprise that Chris Fallows is something of a hero to me.

Equal parts wildlife photographer, conservationist, researcher, and superhero, Chris Fallows is most famous for photographing South Africa's great white sharks breaching. Shooting sharks since 1998, Fallows and his wife Monique are active shark conservationists and recognized authorities on great white shark behavior. Recently, I caught up with Chris and asked him about his work with great whites and other sharks. Not surprisingly, he has some very pointed opinions about these important fish and people's ambivalent attitude toward them. Check out this installment of 10 Questions for... and see what he has to say! (As an aside, in my excitement, I forgot to ask him about his involvement with the Mountain Dew commercial. I'll have to cover that in a follow-up.)

Without further ado...

Recently, we reported that Hawaii Shark Encounters was in hot water with local officials. Although state law bans commercial operations in Hawaii from feeding sharks in state waters, the law doesn't prohibit shark viewing activities (as long as there's no feeding involved). Haleiwa-based Hawaii Shark Encounters maintains that the sharks its customers view are drawn to the surface by the sound of boat engines. According to their website, the sharks "learned that certain boats would hand out scraps of fish. We went to the same places and acted just like a crab boat, but instead started to introduce a cage." However, local divers and fishermen claim that the company has been feeding sharks, and their home page seems to show a man dropping fish into the water.

Recently, Jenna Rose Robbins visited Hawaii. In the entertaining and descriptive trip report she filed for the Seattle PI, I think she inadvertently busted Jimmy Hall and his operation. Three time during the report, she refers to feeding sharks:

• "As the chum hit the water, only the usual suspects emerged, daunting enough in their dental capacity: 10-foot Galapagos and slightly shorter sandbar sharks, all writhing and vying for the fish parts tossed near our cage."
• "Despite the frenetic feeding surrounding me.."
• "As I helped the crew hand-feed chum from the back of the Kainani..."

Oops. In her efforts to capture the essence of her experience, I think Robbins accidentally outed Hawaii Shark Encounters, clearly documenting their willful breaking of the law. Is there some way I could be reading too much into this, or do you agree?

Tonight, federal officials will meet with community members on Oahu to discuss the possibility of limiting local shark tours. Of course, shark feeding has long been a boiling cauldron of emotion, policy, ecology, and dreams. While some people feel that feeding sharks only acclimates them to those boats that perform the feeding, others maintain that sharks grow accustomed to humans when fed, which can pose a problem: "I'm hungry. Feed me...or I'll bite you!"

Although state law bans commercial operations in Hawaii from feeding sharks in state waters, the law doesn't prohibit shark viewing activities (as long as there's no feeding involved). Haleiwa-based Hawaii Shark Encounter Tours maintains that the sharks its customers view are drawn to the surface by the sound of boat engines ("The sharks learned that certain boats would hand out scraps of fish. We went to the same places and acted just like a crab boat, but instead started to introduce a cage.") However, scuba divers and fishermen charge that the company has been feeding sharks and that the operation is attracting sharks to the area. Hard to say from Florida what the truth is, but, interestingly, it appears that the image on their home page shows a man feeding sharks.

I have to admit: cage diving with great whites in South Africa is about as cool a dive experience as I've ever had. In that tiny cage, in the big ocean, with those magnificent, smooth machines slowly cruising past me is a memory I'll carry forever. However, a little piece of me cringes each time I see footage of a cage diving operation chumming the water so people can see a shark up close. Amazingly, though, it seems that a new breed of adventurer is not satisfied with merely looking through a steel cage at the sharks. What do they want to do? They want to go "shark riding."

You've seen "shark riding" if you saw Jean-Michel Cousteau in Sharks at Risk, in which he and Andre Hartman hang onto the dorsal fin of a great white in order to demonstrate that sharks are not mindless killers. (If they were killers, certainly they would have attacked and killed Jean-Michel, right?)

While it's important to get close to sharks -- to demonstrate that they're not, in fact, brainless killers -- some scientists are concerned that too much human interaction with sharks could change them. According to Robert Hueter, director of Mote's Center for Shark Research, interacting too much with sharks could leave the animals "affected in the sense that their behavior is going to be changed." In other words, perhaps sharks will begin to associate humans with food -- or with the responsibility of having to give free rides. And what happens if a shark decides that he's had it up to here with giving tourists free rides and reacts in a "sharky" way? Who's fault will it be? In reality, it'll be the fault of the community that was interacting with (antagonizing?) the shark, but they won't be blamed. Rather, the shark will once again be labeled as mindless killer.

So what's the right thing to do? Should humans be allowed to go shark riding? Should countries world-wide ban the experience? Has Cousteau -- in an attempt to show that sharks are gentle --inadvertently skewed people's perception of them, and even convinced us that they're too gentle?

[Via Newsvine]

Last night, I eagerly sat down to watch the opening night of Discovery Channel's 19th annual Shark Week. (This has been going on for nineteen years?! Wow!) Mike Rowe, host of Dirty Jobs, is this year's host, and although I wasn't too thrilled initially about his serving as host, I have to admit that I found him rather engaging. The centerpiece of Day One was "Jobs That Bite," in which Rowe spends time with people whose jobs "bite" -- because they work with sharks. Speniding much of his time in South Africa, Rowe did an excellent job showing the dirty side of shark research.

All in all, I really enjoyed the special, and it made me excited for the remainder of the week. (Don't forget: tonight is Shark Attack Survivors.)

Last night, I sat down to watch Part III of Jean-Michel Cousteau's Ocean Adventures Series. During the episode, Cousteau said the point of Part III -- dubbed "Sharks at Risk" -- was to dispel two myths: first, that sharks are not mindless man-eaters; and second, that the ocean is not brimming with the creatures. Impressed with -- but mildly bored by -- Parts I and II, I was hoping "Sharks at Risk" would be tighter, more focused, and...well...better.

The verdict? Sharks make good TV.

Great White Adventures, acclaimed filmmaker/photographer Norbert Wu, and Wetpixel editor/underwater whiz-kid Eric Cheng have announced a second expedition (the first trip sold out) to spot great white sharks in August 2006. Norb and Eric will be joining Great White Adventures as guests and informal presenters during a Great White Adventures' 5-day trip off Guadalupe Island, Mexico from August 25 to August 30. The trip (which costs $2895) includes 3 days in the water off the Solmar V, a 112' luxury vessel that comfortably holds 22 divers when full; however, the trip is limited to a maximum of 16 divers.

For an overview of the 5-day trip -- which is like the 7-day trip...only shorter -- check out Wetpixel. To make a reservation or to get someone to answer any questions you have about the trip, contact Great White Adventures directly. To sponsor me in this trip, shoot me an email.

If you're headed to Orlando this summer, I have a restaurant tip for you: why not try out Sharks Underwater Grill? Located within Sea World, the Grill's menu offers blackened sea scallops, filet mignon, pan-seared snapper and more, all prepared with "Floribbean" flair. (The children's menu features popcorn shrimp, salmon, and chicken.)

What's really unusual about this restaurant, is the fact that it's inside a 660,000-gallon aquarium! While you eat, you can watch the Grill's 50+ sharks swim past, eyeing the fresh fish on your plate. If you want to build up your appetite before dinner, you can sign up for a ($150) cage dive inside the aquarium.

On the one hand, dining adjacent to an aquarium sounds a little creepy. After all, I wouldn't go to a steak restaurant and watch cows mill about a field as I dig into my rib eye. On the other hand, I bet the atmosphere is cool, and the food sounds great!

The South African government recently published its draft Great White Shark Cage Diving Policy and Regulations (PDF), which outlines how non-consumptive shark use (i.e., cage viewing) will be handled in the coming years. For example, the policy indicates that no more than 14 permitted vessels may engage in cage viewing in a given year. Essentially, the policy is meant to limit intrusion into the world of great whites, in order to protect them. Great idea.

In comment to the draft, Gregg Oelofse of Cape Town's environmental resource management department, claims that many of its citizens believe that the nine sharks attacks (like the one on Henri Murray) in the last 6 years are the result of  "conditioning" -- specifically, the baiting and chumming methods used in the cage diving industry. To that end, Oelofse wants the expansion of the Great White shark cage diving industry stopped until scientific evidence demonstrates irrefutably that chumming does not increase the risk of shark attacks or harm the shark ecology. Oelofse acknowledges that some studies have suggested that cage diving does not condition sharks, but he claims there is a need for ongoing research.

While protecting these animals is critical, I believe that exposing people to sharks is just as important. And, naturally, the best way to expose people to them is to go diving with them. I went cage diving in South Africa in 2001, and while the boat operator did not throw food into the water, he did drag tuna steaks through the waves to attract sharks: he did not allow the sharks to eat the food. While I'm confident that sharks, as smart as they are, are capable of learning that the hope of food exists in location X at time Y, I do not believe they are forgetting their own hunting skills, relying on humans for feeding, or beginning to associate humans with meals. (If anything, they might be associating motors with meals.) That said, when I went on land-based safaris in Africa, I never considered throwing a hunk of meat on the ground to attract lions to the vehicle. So why would I condone dragging fish through the water to attract sharks?

It's a tough question. What do you think?

I know that diving in and of itself is hardly reason to go on vacation. Consequently, here's a photo safari you could enjoy...while suffering through the torture of diving. From August 8-13, Handler Photo is organizing a great white photo safari off Guadalupe Island. Although the boat holds 22 passengers, Mauricio Handler is restricting the trip to 16, so there's plenty of room on the boat. Of course, that also means there's lots of pool-time for you to snap your shark shots. The trip, which departs from San Diego, costs $2895.

If August is too soon for you, but you still want to travel with Handler, he has a few other trips planned for later in the fall and early next year. And if you're wondering whether you might learn something from Handler while on the trip, just take a moment and check out his portfolio. Oh, yeah, he knows his stuff.

[Via Dive Photo Guide]

 

Back in November, I mentioned South Africa’s Shark Lady and her “Crystal Cage” – a virtually invisible Lexan cage with 250 times the impact strength of glass. Capable of withstanding an attack by a great white, the Crystal Cage isn’t really a cage at all. Rather, it’s a 7-foot-tall, 5-foot-in-diameter tube into which a diver can fit. Given that it was developed by a woman known as the Shark Lady, therefore, it should come as no surprise that the tube is for viewing sharks. 

The Shark Lady, whose real name is Kim Maclean, claims her Crystal Cage is a better way to view sharks. Because the cage is clear, she believes it provides more of a connection between nearby sharks and the person inside. (I wonder how easy it is to photograph through a curved Lexan wall?) Further, Maclean believes that it’s better for the sharks. Not only are there no sharp edges to cut the shark, “traditional” steel cages create a lot of electro-magnetic disturbance, which annoys the big fish. 

“The main reason I do this [lead cage diving excursions] is because people are so misinformed about sharks,” says Maclean. Not to sound like a cynic, but I believed her until I read that a day of diving in the Crystal Cage costs $1,800. Nevertheless, the Shark Lady has developed a new way to interact with one of the planet’s most amazing creatures. If you’re interested – and wealthy – you can try out a Crystal Cage beginning mid-2006 at the earliest. 

Over at Gadling, Erik turned me on to Jon Rawlinson’s RAD blog. I’ve been following Jon’s progress closely, because he’s recently been traveling through parts of Africa where I’ve been. Recently, he’s been in South Africa, and I see that he’s just posted a great narrative about shark cage diving in Gansbaai – the same place I dove with great whites in 2001! It’s a great read, and you can feel his enthusiasm literally dripping from his words: especially when he mentions that the shark’s tail swatted the cage he was in. If you want to know what cage diving is like, check out his piece. (He mentions that he didn’t use a reg, because the bubbles scare away the sharks. When I did my dive, I was told the same thing, but we were still allowed to use a reg.)

Additionally, he also posted a nifty little video blog about the trip, meaning you can see what the boat, the cage, and the sharks were like! Awesome work, Jon. I wish I’d been there with you!

Here’s an interesting piece from Bloomberg News. According to the report, Henri Murray’s recent attack by a Great White has actually increased shark tourism in South Africa’s Shark Alley! Some people watch NASCAR races hoping for a wreck; I wonder if some tourists pay to dive with sharks in the sick, morbid hope that they’ll see an attack.

The article explains that cage dive operators chum the water to attract sharks. Chumming the waters implies throwing fish-bits into the water for the sharks to collect. In my experience, that isn’t what happens. The operators drag through the water fish-bits tethered to lines, but they never let the sharks actually take the food. (Is it better or worse not to let the sharks eat the food?) Regardless, this is an interesting piece that explores both perspectives of the cage diving industry.

A question for you: If you went on a shark cage dive, would you think you received greater value if you saw a real-live attack? Personally, I think it would scare the snot out of me, and I might never scuba dive again.