Date of submission
Status of Shark Stocks
Protection of all species in the ecosystem, especially the imperiled species, for reasons fundamental among them socioeconomic and environmental is crucial. Debate centering on whether the shark species is imperiled or not, has effects on allocation of funds meant for conservancy efforts. However, the agreement from both sides is on sharks importance and their sustainability as crucial. This expose elucidate positions informing both sides. Further, the expose will identify the most strongly supported side and identify probable lobbies that support either side.
Baum and Myers used data on the number of catches to ...view middle of the document...
Both sides of the debate agree on progress in the study of demographic rates and shark population modeling. Thus, both sides agree that this progress ensures accuracy in establishing the status of the shark population. Burgess et al. pointed out that, studies by Baum et al. in 2003 and another one by Baum and Myers in 2004 overstated the decline in shark population. In this regard, Burgess et al. pointed out that, the two studies based their inferences on limited data sets that were inappropriate in estimating the abundance of shark population (“Is the collapse real?”). It is crucial to note that, these two studies were responsible in informing conservatory efforts meant to protect the shark.
Burgess et al. further point out that, Baum et al. consideration of some data sets unsuitable while drawing their inferences was wrong and never considered increase of other shark species. (“Reply to Robust estimates”). Thus, discrediting some data sets makes the conclusions biased. Effectively, the establishment of a sharp decline in the number of sharks based on the set of data these researchers used was wrong. Furthermore, failure to use the set of data classified as unsuitable does not validate the other data used in making the conclusions. Thus, their findings posit that conservatory efforts are not essential since there are no threats on sharks.
From the foregoing, both sides raise valid points concerning data on the shark population. However, the issue centers on validity of the set of data used in drawing conclusions. Hence, the side opposed to imperiled sharks discredits the other in the debate by claiming that the set of data used to draw this conclusion was wrong. Nevertheless, the side advocating for conservancy efforts has an upper hand in the debate since it explains the reasons for discrediting some data sets. In this case, Baum, Kehler and Myers observed that, relative abundance indices, such as sampling data in a small geographical area, might adversely underestimate the extent of the declines in the shark population. In effect, this eventually makes the opposing side in the debate lack other basis to support their arguments.
It is evident that, societies have moved beyond using fish for survival needs. This is a fact recognized by those identifying with a decline in shark population. As a result, human-fish interactions is not limited to food purposes only but also to angling and sport fishing. In addition, captured sharks are crucial laboratory experiments meant to benefit the human population. Hence, the shark population is on the decline based on these factors as the side advocating their conservation propose. On the other hand, capturing sharks is distressful and even inhumane to some people. Posner argued that, teleost fish, this is the class containing the shark species, has the ability to feel and experience pain. In effect, humanity should respect the shark species and every human being should support the...