RESUMO
Shark depredation is a complex social-ecological issue that affects a range of fisheries worldwide. Increasing concern about the impacts of shark depredation, and how it intersects with the broader context of fisheries management, has driven recent research in this area, especially in Australia and the United States. This review synthesises these recent advances and provides strategic guidance for researchers aiming to characterise the occurrence of depredation, identify the shark species responsible, and test deterrent and management approaches to reduce its impacts. Specifically, the review covers the application of social science approaches, as well as advances in video camera and genetic methods for identifying depredating species. The practicalities and considerations for testing magnetic, electrical, and acoustic deterrent devices are discussed in light of recent research. Key concepts for the management of shark depredation are reviewed, with recommendations made to guide future research and policy development. Specific management responses to address shark depredation are lacking, and this review emphasizes that a "silver bullet" approach for mitigating depredation does not yet exist. Rather, future efforts to manage shark depredation must rely on a diverse range of integrated approaches involving those in the fishery (fishers, scientists and fishery managers), social scientists, educators, and other stakeholders.
RESUMO
Marine harbours are the focus of a diverse range of activities and subject to multiple anthropogenically induced pressures. Support for environmental management options aimed at improving degraded harbours depends on understanding the factors which influence people's perceptions of harbour environments. We used an online survey, across 12 harbours, to assess sources of variation people's perceptions of harbour health and ecological engineering. We tested the hypotheses: 1) people living near impacted harbours would consider their environment to be more unhealthy and degraded, be more concerned about the environment and supportive of and willing to pay for ecological engineering relative to those living by less impacted harbours, and 2) people with greater connectedness to the harbour would be more concerned about and have greater perceived knowledge of the environment, and be more supportive of, knowledgeable about and willing to pay for ecological engineering, than those with less connectedness. Across twelve locations, the levels of degradation and modification by artificial structures were lower and the concern and knowledge about the environment and ecological engineering were greater in the six Australasian and American than the six European and Asian harbours surveyed. We found that people's perception of harbours as healthy or degraded, but not their concern for the environment, reflected the degree to which harbours were impacted. There was a positive relationship between the percentage of shoreline modified and the extent of support for and people's willingness to pay indirect costs for ecological engineering. At the individual level, measures of connectedness to the harbour environment were good predictors of concern for and perceived knowledge about the environment but not support for and perceived knowledge about ecological engineering. To make informed decisions, it is important that people are empowered with sufficient knowledge of the environmental issues facing their harbour and ecological engineering options.
