SHARKWATER FILM

The Canadian born photographer and filmmaker never held a video camera before he began the Sharkwater project — but that is not apparent when you see the film. On the contrary, the imagery is beautifully framed, inspiring, and stunningly breathtaking. The images that Stewart sets forth will awe you, and will capture your heart.

Stewart set out to create a film that would simply depict how beautiful sharks are in their natural habitat. The finished product, however, ended up evolving into so much more. Instead, we’re drawn into an amazing story of human drama, organized crime, corruption, and greed.

The film kicks off with clips from military training videos archived from the 1960s. As might be expected, they depict sharks as ruthless and bloodthirsty man-eaters. The clips belie the ignorance of their times with suggestions such as putting one’s face in the water and yelling to deter a marauding shark.

While it provides an almost humorous relief to the serious subject matter, it is important to realize that 40 years ago, these films were definitive and authoritative. Forty years ago, we held these precepts to be truth. We look back and laugh, because now we know better. …Or do we?

The chasm between reality and the popular beliefs sustained and fueled by exaggerated media is still enormous.

In reality, sharks do not eat people, and they are not mindless killers. As long as people view sharks as dangerous predators, they won’t care about saving them, and this is exactly what Rob Stewart hopes to change.

Early in the film, Stewart begins to debunk some of the mystery and fear around sharks as he holds and pets an eight foot long Caribbean reef shark as if it were a lapdog. From this point on, his understanding of sharks and his community with the underwater world is evident.

In an effort to capture even more compelling underwater footage of sharks, Stewart joins renowned conservationist Paul Watson and the controversial Sea Shepard team aboard the Ocean Warrior. The team is invited and implored by the President of Costa Rica to help patrol the waters surrounding Cocos Island, one of the places celebrated as a gathering area for sharks, and where illegal shark fishing often takes place.

Complete with colliding ships, gunboat chases, espionage, corrupt courts, and spurious charges of attempted murder, the adventure that ensues is nothing short of epic.

Organized crime and conspiracy surrounding the shark fin industry is deeply entrenched. With dried fins sometimes fetching in excess of $400USD per pound, it is a multi-billion dollar industry rife with greed and corruption.

But it is more than corrupt government officials, or the “shark-fin mafia” that threaten Stewart’s life. Shortly after the entire crew must hurriedly flee from Costa Rica, Stewart is diagnosed with necrotizing fasciitis, the “flesh-eating” disease. Rare but deadly, the disease threatens to claim Stewart’s leg, and possibly his life. Alone, with only hope by his side, Stewart remains bedridden in a Panamanian hospital for an agonizing week before doctors can make any prognosis.

Determined more than ever to make a difference, Stewart defies reason and returns to Costa Rica. Knowing he would be arrested on sight, he and his crew must sneak back into the country. Ironically, when they arrive in Puntarenas, they are able to blend in — Protesters line the streets, demonstrating against shark finning and illegal shark fisheries. “Costa Ricans were rallying for sharks. . . I realized our adventure had helped awaken a country”, remarks Stewart with renewed faith.

Over the next four years, Stewart shot more than 400 hours of footage in 15 different countries. In addition to interviews with shark and conservation experts like Erich Ritter, Patrick Moore, and Rex Weyler, Sharkwater includes commentary from average beachgoers, showing how desperately fear and hate of sharks are ingrained. As one Australian angrily believes, “they’re the scourge of the ocean, and everyone should go and catch one.”

Sharks have been an integral part of the oceanic ecosystem for 400 million years, but their populations have declined by more than 90% in the last 50 years alone. It is estimated that more than 100 million sharks are killed for their fins each year.

Shark finning is neither humane nor sustainable. Any shark is taken, regardless of size, age, or species. After its fins are cut off, the shark is thrown back into the water. Unable to swim, and bleeding to death, the shark suffers a slow and torturous death.

Much of the demand for the fins stems from shark fin soup, a traditional asian dish often served at weddings and special events. Once a rare delicacy consumed by Chinese aristocracy, the dish is viewed as a symbol of status and power, and is gaining in popularity as China continues to modernize and its 1.2 billion people become more affluent.

Indeed, there is an uphill battle to be fought, but there is hope.

The Sharkwater crew interviews one Chinese bride who, defying long tradition and facing cultural stigma, makes a statement by refusing to serve shark fin soup at her wedding banquet. We can only hope that this — what is now seen as a controversial decision — will eventually become the norm.

With its spellbinding cinematography and riveting story, Sharkwater has won awards at every film festival where it has appeared. Sharkwater will change the way people view sharks and the ocean. It will open their eyes. . . and, hopefully, their hearts. You can create pet chrome emblems with Shark image to create awareness too.

Killing Sharks

Sharks have a great deal to fear from humans. Compared to the 10-15 people killed by sharks each year; over 100 million sharks perish at the hands of humans annually and many populations may face extinction. Sharks are killed for many reasons, including fear; food, sport, and ‘machismo’, but the great majority perish due to simple greed. Many shark products have commercial value, including: the flesh; the skin for high-quality leather; teeth and jaws for ornaments; liver oil for cosmetics, medicines, vitamin A, and skin-care products; and cartilage for false cancer ‘cures’. However; the product that drives the market are the fins. After drying, collagen fibers are extracted from them, cleaned, and processed to make ‘shark fin soup’. In spite of the fact that these fibers have little flavor or nutritional value, the soup is considered a delicacy, and may sell in the Orient for more than $100 ( £65) a bowl.

Over the years, shark fisheries have come and gone. In the early part of the century, sponge fishermen in Florida killed sharks to boil them down for their oil. The oil was then thrown on the ocean to smooth the surface of the water and make it easier to see the sponges from the boat. That ended when a plague killed off the sponges. In the 19405 to .19505 a number of shark fisheries sprang up to supply the market for vitamin A. That ended with the discovery of a method for its synthetic production. However; most shark fisheries, such as the one for dogfish sharks to supply the ‘fish and chips’ market in the UK, have ended only when the number of sharks dropped too low for the fishery to be sustained.

The explosive growth of the Chinese economy and rapid expansion of trade with the outside world during the 1985 and 1995 created an unprecedented situation. Suddenly there was an insatiable demand for shark fins of almost any size or type. Improvements in shipbuilding and navigational electronics meant that shark fishing boats could now go anywhere in the world, moving from one place to another as local shark populations were destroyed. The fins are now so much more valuable than the rest of the shark that the carcass is often discarded after the fins are removed, to save storage space on the boat. Often the fins are sliced off when the shark is still alive and the mutilated shark is dumped back into the water to die a slow and agonizing death.

Why should we be concerned about this situation? After all, wouldn’t the ocean be much safer without sharks? The answer is no. The chance of being attacked by a shark is already less than the chance of being struck by lightning. The real dangers for people in the water are drowning, exposure, and being struck by a boat. In the USA, for example, drowning incidents outnumber shark attacks by 1,000 to I. Without sharks, the whole experience of being in a natural ocean wilderness would be immeasurably reduced. It would be like being on the Serengeti with no lions or cheetahs. In losing the opportunity to view these magnificent and superbly-adapted predators in the wild, we are also losing part of our spiritual connection with nature.

But something else would be changed as well -the whole ecology of the ocean. Predators control the populations of their prey species in a beneficial way. They eliminate diseased and genetically defective individuals, and they stabilize population fluctuations. On land, when we have removed the natural predators of deer; for example, their populations have exploded until they overgrazed their food supply and died of starvation and disease. In the ocean we are not sure what all the consequences of removing the apex predators from the food pyramid might be. We do have one example, though. A shark fishery in Tasmania collapsed after two years of over fishing. Shortly afterwards, the fishery for spiny lobsters also collapsed and fishermen observed a lot of octopus in the area. Octopuses are both major predators of spiny lobster and an important food item for sharks. It seems that once the numbers of octopus were no longer controlled by the sharks, they became too numerous and decimated the lobsters. Economically, for those other than shark fishermen, it doesn’t make sense to allow sharks to be fished out, not only because of the possible damage to sustainable fisheries, but also because of the loss of earnings from divers coming to see sharks. Worldwide, shark-watching has become a multi-million dollar business.

Why do shark populations collapse so quickly when people begin fishing them? The answer lies in the life history of these animals. In many aspects, sharks are more similar to mammals such as whales, dolphins, or ourselves, than to other fish. Whereas most fish reach maturity in only a few years and produce thousands or millions of eggs per year; sharks take many years to reach maturity. Some species may not begin to reproduce until they are over 15 years old. Some species produce as few as two pups biannually, averaging only one offspring per year: So when a population is over fished, it may take many years to recover; or it may never recover: Some scientists believe that sharks should never be fished at all, that their biology is too fragile to withstand any exploitation. Perhaps sharks should have the total protection given to marine mammals in many countries. Unfortunately, sharks do not have big ‘fan clubs’ as dolphins do.

Although both are large predators with slow reproductive rates, sharks are handicapped, from a.: public relations perspective, by the fact that their mouths appear to be frowning, and that they must open their mouths to pass water over their gills, exposing their teeth. Dolphins, on the other hand, always appear to be smiling, because of the shape of their mouths. Since they breathe through the blowholes on top of their heads, they do not have to open their mouths and expose their formidable teeth in order to get oxygen. But even the dolphin’s smile may not protect it from the greed inspired by the high prices being offered by international buyers of shark fins. In a number of countries, fishermen are slaughtering dolphins to chop up for shark bait.

We should create save our sharks and dolphins lanyards to create awareness