Why do people want to protect and preserve sharks?

Question

Would`nt it be a good thing if they became extinct? They are top of the food chain, so without them there would be more fish for fishermen to catch. Also it would be safer for swimmers. I cant think of any way that their existance benefits mankind.

Answer 1

Of the various types of sharks, there are only 4 which are consistently dangerous to humans (great white, tiger, oceanic whitetip and bull sharks.). If swimmers were more aware of the presence of these types of sharks, there would be fewer attacks. Even the current number of attacks is incredibly small;

"In 2005 the International Shark Attack File (ISAF) took an investigation on 105 shark attacks. Out of those 105, 58 of the attacks were unprovoked. In 2005, according to the International Shark Attack File, there were a total of 58 unprovoked attacks recorded worldwide, of which four were fatal."

As far as your assertion that there would be more fish for fishermen, that is an assumption based completely without indicating evidence. Most of the fish consumed by most varieties of sharks are not fish gathered by commercial fishermen.

Even the sharks which compete with commercial fishermen for food do not consume enough fish to impact the catch.

The fact is that commercial fishing has depleted it's current supply of fish to dangerous levels without sharks, whales, or other marine animals helping. If you are worried about more/better catches for the fishermen, then they should institute more efficient methods to insure long term viability of the fish in the sea.

Answer 2

Why should we preserve sharks? It is a question that can be asked about all creatures. The environment has developed over many centuries and in the process there was a certain balance in nature. When the wolf and coyote populations were reduced, we in the USA have way to many deer. Scientists have also pointed out that top predators serve an important function - they help their prey species breed healthy. It is easier for a shark/lion/wolf to capture a sick animal. By selectively pruning the populations they prey on of the genetically and physically infirm they ensure that the healthiest ones are the ones that breed the future generations. This is good for nature.
The suggestion that if we eliminated sharks there would be more fish for humans to catch needs to be examined carefully; the populations of large tuna, swordfish, cod, redfish, krill, anchovies, menhaden, etc were never in danger of extinction and there were more sharks then than now. When man began to fish on an industrial basis with huge ships, gigantic nets, miles of "long-lines" with tens of thousands of hooks we saw fish populations crash. Fifty years ago it was not uncommon to catch a 1,500 lb swordfish, today a 300 lb specimen (a baby by swordfish standards) is a trophy. Cod fishing had to be banned for a while to save cod for the future. The fad for blackened redfish nearly depleted those stocks. The Chilean sea bass was so over-fished by man that when you buy it today what they are selling you is toothfish.
Medically the shark is very interesting. Did you know that it is extremely rare to see infection on one? If we could learn their secret antibiotic mankind would be saved from a lot of sickness and suffering. Very few people are killed by sharks, more people are killed by lightning!
Lastly, on the side of the sharks is - sport fishermen kill the ones they catch, most other sport fish are catch and release today. We don't really eat shark anyway. Most of the shark caught are caught by commercial fishermen who cut off their fins and toss them back in the water (sharks with no fins drown because the cannot move through the water). They serve no real nutritional function.
The shark helps to maintain a balance in nature. It harms very, very few people, it has some fascinating potential medical uses, and they are beautiful.

Answer 3

Sharks should be saved because without them, like you said there would be more fish. With so many more fish, the whole food chain could be thrown off. Those fish will consequently need to eat more, creating a lack of resources in the water for them. Then we might lose all of those fish and end up having neither sharks nor ocean fish at all.

The same is a problem with ANY endangered species. If we let wolves or foxes become extinct, rabbits would overpopulate and they already reproduce quickly.

I enjoyed this discussion, a star for you :-)
I hope you find my answer to be helpful to your opinion :-)

Answer 4

Sharks are a natural part of sea life. The oceans would suffer due to their absence. There are so many species of shark. and they all have their own role in a healthy ocean. The amount of fish a shark consumes does not necessarily have an impact on fishermen. It is other abuse of the commercial fishing that is hurting the ocean. All creatures need to eat, but there needs to be a balance.

Answer 5

This is a rather simple suggestion - in view that it concerns "swimmers". I think all living things balance nature in many ways. Vultures and other carrion eating animals are not edible by humans - imagine the state of the environment if carcasses of dying animals, birds etc.. were not disposed of by recycling. Highways would be far safer if it were not for stupid, impatient and temper prone people. You haven't suggested rendering these extinct.
I don't like mosquitoes or blackflies, but many birds that provide enjoyment to our lives rely on them to survive.
I say everything in nature has a reason - and I don't imagine anyone will improve on that by killing off what they think has no purpose.

Answer 6

well first of all there are plenty of fish in the sea...and if we didnt have sharks the ocean would be a dirty place..cause they eat dead animals and stuff like that...thats why people want to protect sharks.....and u have to swim at ur on risk or just follow the shark rules u know the rules on telling how to prevent from getting attack by a shark..well i hope this helps and i hope u understand why we need sharks too.

Answer 7

People are subjective and they tend to favor what animals to save, what not to save. Let's say there's a species of spiders that is becoming an endangered species, I'm willing to bet that most people would care less if they go extinct.

Answer 8

We should probably help all non eatable animals extinct too. I can't see how their existance benefits mankind.

Answer 9

Why would anyone want to preserve humans, we are violent, selfish, stubborn, destructive and apparently have no regard for any living creatures but ourselves.