Historical knowledge of sharks: ancient science, earliest American encounters, and American science, fisheries, and utilization

In western civilization, the knowledge of the elasmobranch or selachian fishes (sharks and rays) begins with Aristotle (384–322 B.C.). Two of his extant works, the “Historia Animalium” and the “Generation of Animals,” both written about 330 B.C., demonstrate knowledge of elasmobranch fishes acquired by observation. Roman writers of works on natural history, such as Aelian and Pliny, who followed Aristotle, were compilers of available information. Their contribution was that they prevented the Greek knowledge from being lost, but they added few original observations. The fall of Rome, around 476 A.D., brought a period of economic regression and political chaos. These in turn brought intellectual thought to a standstill for nearly one thousand years, the period known as the Dark Ages. It would not be until the middle of the sixteenth century, well into the Renaissance, that knowledge of elasmobranchs would advance again. The works of Belon, Salviani, Rondelet, and Steno mark the beginnings of ichthyology, including the study of sharks and rays. The knowledge of sharks and rays increased slowly during and after the Renaissance, and the introduction of the Linnaean System of Nomenclature in 1735 marks the beginning of modern ichthyology. However, the first major work on sharks would not appear until the early nineteenth century. Knowledge acquired about sea animals usually follows their economic importance and exploitation, and this was also true with sharks. The first to learn about sharks in North America were the native fishermen who learned how, when, and where to catch them for food or for their oils. The early naturalists in America studied the land animals and plants; they had little interest in sharks. When faunistic works on fishes started to appear, naturalists just enumerated the species of sharks that they could discern. Throughout the U.S. colonial period, sharks were seldom utilized for food, although their liver oil or skins were often utilized. Throughout the nineteenth century, the Spiny Dogfish, Squalus acanthias, was the only shark species utilized in a large scale on both coasts. It was fished for its liver oil, which was used as a lubricant, and for lighting and tanning, and for its skin which was used as an abrasive. During the early part of the twentieth century, the Ocean Leather Company was started to process sea animals (primarily sharks) into leather, oil, fertilizer, fins, etc. The Ocean Leather Company enjoyed a monopoly on the shark leather industry for several decades. In 1937, the liver of the Soupfin Shark, Galeorhinus galeus, was found to be a rich source of vitamin A, and because the outbreak of World War II in 1938 interrupted the shipping of vitamin A from European sources, an intensive shark fishery soon developed along the U.S. West Coast. By 1939 the American shark leather fishery had transformed into the shark liver oil fishery of the early 1940’s, encompassing both coasts. By the late 1940’s, these fisheries were depleted because of overfishing and fishing in the nursery areas. Synthetic vitamin A appeared on the market in 1950, causing the fishery to be discontinued. During World War II, shark attacks on the survivors of sunken ships and downed aviators engendered the search for a shark repellent. This led to research aimed at understanding shark behavior and the sensory biology of sharks. From the late 1950’s to the 1980’s, funding from the Office of Naval Research was responsible for most of what was learned about the sensory biology of sharks.

Options for achieving a 50% cut in industrial carbon emissions by 2050.

Carbon emissions from industry are dominated by production of goods in steel, cement plastic, paper, and aluminum. Demand for these materials is anticipated to double at least by 2050, by which time global carbon emissions must be reduced by at least 50%. To evaluate the challenge of meeting this target the global flows of these materials and their associated emissions are projected to 2050 under five technical scenarios. A reference scenario includes all existing and emerging efficiency measures but cannot provide sufficient reduction. The application of carbon sequestration to primary production proves to be sufficient only for cement The emissions target can always be met by reducing demand, for instance through product life extension, material substitution, or "light-weighting". Reusing components shows significant potential particularly within construction. Radical process innovation may also be possible. The results show that the first two strategies, based on increasing primary production, cannot achieve the required emissions reductions, so should be balanced by the vigorous pursuit of material efficiency to allow provision of increased material services with reduced primary production.

Harmful algal blooms in coastal waters: options for prevention, control and mitigation

This report is the product of a panel of experts in the science of blooms of unicellular marine algae which can cause mass mortalities in a variety of marine organisms and cause illness and even death in humans who consume contaminated seafood. These phenomena are collectively termed harmful algal blooms or HABs for short. As a counterpart to recent assessments of the priorities for scientific research to understand the causes and behavior of HABs, this assessment addressed the management options for reducing their incidence and extent (prevention), actions that can quell or contain blooms (control), and steps to reduce the losses of resources or economic values and minimize human health risks (mitigation). This assessment is limited to an appraisal of scientific understanding, but also reflects consideration of information and perspectives provided by regional experts, agency managers and user constituencies during three regional meetings. The panel convened these meetings during the latter half of 1996 to solicit information and opinions from scientific experts, agency managers and user constituencies in Texas, Washington, and Florida. The panel's assessment limited its attention to those HABs that result in neurotoxic shellfish poisoning, paralytic shellfish poisoning, brown tides, amnesic shellfish poisoning, and aquaculture fish kills. This covers most, but certainly not all, HAB problems in the U.S.

Weighing your options: how to protect your property from shoreline erosion, a handbook for estuarine property owners in North Carolina

If you own property on one of North Carolina’s estuaries, you can use this guide as a tool to learn about the choices you have to control your shoreline erosion and help decide which approach may be right for you. In North Carolina, we make a distinction between waterfront property that is located on the estuary, referred to as estuarine, shoreline, soundfront or riverside property, and waterfront property located directly on the ocean, referred to as oceanfront. Why? State laws and regulations addressing estuarine and oceanfront property, and the available erosion control methods, are quite different. This guide focuses on estuarine property. We’ll introduce you to the six main erosion control options in use in North Carolina and give you information about the out-of-pocket costs and tangible benefits of each option. We’ll also give you information about “hidden” costs and benefits that you may want to factor into your decision-making. You are fortunate to have a piece of estuarine shoreline to call your own, whether it’s your year-round residence or a weekend getaway. And if you’ve noticed some shoreline erosion lately, you’re probably a little concerned. But there are ready solutions.

Boundary options for a research area within Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary

Gray’s Reef National Marine Sanctuary (GRNMS) is exploring the concept of a research area (RA) within its boundaries. The idea of a research area was first suggested in public scoping meetings held prior to the review of the Gray’s Reef Management Plan. An RA is a region specifically designed for conducting controlled scientific studies in the absence of confounding factors. As a result, a multidisciplinary group gathered by GRNMS was convened to consider the issue. This Research Area Working Group (RAWG) requested that a suite of analyses be conducted to evaluate the issue quantitatively. To meet this need, a novel selection procedure and geographic information system (GIS) was created to find the optimal location for an RA while balancing the needs of research and existing users. This report and its associated GIS files describe the results of the requested analyses and enable further quantitative investigation of this topic by the RAWG and GRNMS.

Atlas of the shallow-water benthic habitats of American Samoa, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Ocean Service (NOS) initiated a coral reef research program in 1999 to map, assess, inventory, and monitor U.S. coral reef ecosystems (Monaco et al. 2001). These activities were implemented in response to requirements outlined in the Mapping Implementation Plan developed by the Mapping and Information Synthesis Working Group (MISWG) of the Coral Reef Task Force (CRTF) (MISWG 1999). As part of the MISWG of the CRTF, NOS' Biogeography Branch has been charged with the development and implementation of a plan to produce comprehensive digital coral-reef ecosystem maps for all U.S. States, Territories, and Commonwealths within five to seven years. Joint activities between Federal agencies are particularly important to map, research, monitor, manage, and restore coral reef ecosystems. In response to the Executive Order 13089 and the Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000, NOS is conducting research to digitally map biotic resources and coordinate a long-term monitoring program that can detect and predict change in U.S. coral reefs, and their associated habitats and biological communities. Most U.S. coral reef resources have not been digitally mapped at a scale or resolution sufficient for assessment, monitoring, and/or research to support resource management. Thus, a large portion of NOS' coral reef research activities has focused on mapping of U.S. coral reef ecosystems. The map products will provide the fundamental spatial organizing framework to implement and integrate research programs and provide the capability to effectively communicate information and results to coral reef ecosystem managers. Although the NOS coral program is relatively young, it has had tremendous success in advancing towards the goal to protect, conserve, and enhance the health of U.S. coral reef ecosystems. One objective of the program was to create benthic habitat maps to support coral reef research to enable development of products that support management needs and questions. Therefore this product was developed in collaboration with many U.S. Pacific Territory partners. An initial step in producing benthic habitat maps was the development of a habitat classification scheme. The purpose of this document is to outline the benthic habitat classification scheme and protocols used to map American Samoa, Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Thirty-two distinct benthic habitat types (i.e., four major and 14 detailed geomorphological structure classes; eight major and 18 detailed biological cover types) within eleven zones were mapped directly into a geographic information system (GIS) using visual interpretation of orthorectified IKONOS satellite imagery. Benthic features were mapped that covered an area of 263 square kilometers. In all, 281 square kilometers of unconsolidated sediment, 122 square kilometers of submerged vegetation, and 82.3 square kilometers of coral reef and colonized hardbottom were mapped.