The question of whether or not shark feeding or scenting is acceptable often sparks heated debate among divers. There are valid arguments on both sides. Here, we aim to better understand why these practices often cause controversy.
First of all, there’s a significant difference between feeding and scenting, although we commonly group them together. Shark feeding involves baiting sharks by hand or casting fish pieces into the water from a boat. The sharks receive an edible reward for appearing in the area. Shark scenting involves creating a scent slick, usually with fish inside a bait drum or similar device. This draws sharks without actually feeding them.
Pros of shark feeding and scenting
There are a few places in the world where one can reliably encounter sharks in great numbers without feeding or scenting. However, whether because many shark species are shy or because there are simply not enough sharks left for them to naturally occur in great numbers, in many cases, a reliable, lengthy interaction means operators must feed or scent. For those who favor feeding and scenting, this fact alone makes such practices acceptable, as they allow people who may otherwise never see sharks to interact with them. Many people consequently become invested in their conservation as a result.
Some shark encounters, specifically those conducted inside a cage or on snorkel, allow non-divers and even non-swimmers to appreciate these magnificent predators in their natural environment. These experiences therefore introduce shark conservation to people outside the realms of diving and science. Of course, the value of shark feeding and scenting as conservation tools depends on the nature of those encounters. Some companies operate as eco-tours with a specific focus on education and conservation. Others contribute to research efforts either financially or by allowing scientists to conduct research during their excursions.
Feeding and scenting is a valuable tool for collecting data. It allows scientists to get close enough to a shark species to accurately record information such as size, gender and behavior. Without sufficient data, legislation cannot protect sharks. This makes the research scientists conduct during baited dives imperative. Feeding and scenting is far preferable than the alternatives, which include catching and hauling sharks onto research platforms (thereby exposing them to injury and stress), and studying dead sharks, killed specifically for that purpose.
Giving sharks an economic value
Because most commercial shark encounters depend on feeding or scenting for their success, we could also that these practices are justified because they give sharks a tangible economic value. For example, the town of Gaansbai in South Africa is the beating heart of that country’s cage-diving industry, which uses scenting techniques to draw in the local great whites. A 2003 study found that tourists who visited solely to dive with the great whites accounted for 50 percent of local business sales, making the town dependent financially on the white sharks for survival.
The same study found that the white-shark industry generated approximately $4.2 million each year for South Africa. This perhaps explains why the great white is the only shark species to enjoy legal protection in that country. The cage-diving industry started there in 1989 and the legislation giving great whites full protection passed in 1991. One of the biggest threats to dwindling shark populations worldwide is the demand for their fins for use in Asian cuisine. However, if the shark-encounter industry can prove that a live shark is worth far more than a dead one, that may soon change.
In order for this argument to carry any weight, dive centers and tour operators must make every effort to give back to the surrounding communities, as locals are usually the ones who would otherwise benefit from shark finning or fishing.
Cons of shark feeding
One of the major concerns related to shark feeding and scenting is the potential risk to humans. This can apply both to those diving with the sharks and to other water users who may unwittingly be mean those diving with the sharks or to other water users in the area. The negative ramifications of shark attacks are twofold. The first of which is, obviously, that the human victim may suffer terrible injury or die. Shark attacks also invariably sparks resentment toward sharks, which in turn causes a significant setback to shark- conservation efforts in that area. It may even lead to an ill-advised shark cull. Therefore, some people argue that it’s foolish to encourage close interactions between people and sharks lest an attack occurs.
There are also concerns that feeding, in particular, can cause sharks to associate people with food. Similarly, feeding them may condition sharks to associate the sound of a boat engine with food. If this is the case, other boaters and water users may attract unwanted shark attention.
Altering natural behavior
The argument that we can alter natural behavior by feeding and scenting is valid, although the behavior modification depends on the specific circumstances. For example, South Africa’s great whites frequent the Western Cape in search of abundant natural prey, the fur seal. Tour operators use scent slicks to attract the sharks to the cages. When the sharks realize there’s no food in it for them, they lose interest and leave.
In other areas, the effect of feeding and scenting on the sharks’ natural behavior is much more marked. Further up the South African coast in KwaZulu-Natal, scent slicks were initially meant to draw tiger sharks near cage-free divers. Over the years, however, the practice has attracted large numbers of oceanic blacktip sharks as well. This has vastly increased the prevalence of this species in an area where they were previously uncommon. Some experts believe that the shifting population could negatively affect the marine ecosystem, due to an absence of predators in one region and an unnatural concentration of them in another. Because sharks cannot survive via feeding, pressure will presumably fall on prey species further down the food chain when large numbers of sharks move into an area where they do not naturally occur.
However, there are also examples that prove the arrival of sharks into a previously barren region can be beneficial. Fiji’s famous Beqa Lagoon now boasts a thriving marine ecosystem thanks to its shark-feeding industry. Local government prioritized marine conservation as a result of the financial value of that industry. Previously, unsustainable fishing practices nearly destroyed the reefs in the area.
Now, those same reefs support an astonishing array of marine life that extends far beyond the region’s famed sharks. Similarly, shark-feeding or scenting hotspots in the Bahamas, French Polynesia and South Africa also coincide with some of the world’s healthiest and most productive reef systems.
Finally, there is concern that shark feeding may alter a shark’s ability to hunt for itself. This seems unlikely for two reasons. First, millions of years of evolution have perfected sharks’ predatory instincts. This makes it somewhat arrogant to think that our influence could reprogram them in a matter of decades. Second, the food a shark receives during a feeding is equivalent to no more than a small snack. This is not nearly enough to sustain the animal.
The debate will continue
There are legitimate arguments on both sides of the feeding/scenting debate. Certainly, these practices can cause real concern if they impact either the marine ecosystem or human safety negatively. At the same time, there are also convincing justifications for feeding or scenting, particularly regarding their value in promoting shark conservation to a wider audience and facilitating scientific research.
If you do choose to encounter sharks during an organized feed, research the operator before committing to a dive. Make sure that they have safety protocols in place that protect both you and the sharks. Operators should never encourage divers to touch the sharks. You should also receive a full safety briefing before you enter the water. Choose an operator with a conservation focus, one that’s involved with community-outreach programs. or scientific organizations. Make sure the operator aims to challenge the “Jaws” myth rather than perpetuate it. In this way, you’ll know that your experience is beneficial to both you and to the sharks.
