Pressure

The sharks of the Great Barrier Reef are affected by a variety of pressures. Although fishing activities place the most direct pressure on sharks, factors such as habitat degradation and tourism may apply indirect pressure on shark populations. The individual pressures discussed in the following section may occur simultaneously, resulting in multiple pressures on the sharks and rays of the Great Barrier Reef.

Pressure: Commercial fishing

Global trends in shark fisheries

Sharks have historically been harvested for meat, fins, cartilage and shark liver oil. Since the mid 1950s, sharks have come under increasing pressure from commercial fishing. Data from the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation show a steady increase in reported global shark landings from approximately 271,813 tonnes in 1950 to 824,772 tonnes in 2001 (Sant, G, pers comm. Nov 2003). However, there is concern that the actual shark catch may be twice that recorded in fisheries logbooks due to under-reporting of both catch and bycatch.⁵

Much of this increased fishing pressure has been driven by increased demand for alternative sources of fish protein as traditional fisheries have declined, and rising demand for shark liver oil and cartilage.⁵⁸ Since the 1980s, economic success throughout Asia has made luxury items such as shark fin soup more affordable. As a result, the global demand for shark fins has dramatically increased.^58,37 Given their conservative life history traits, sharks are unable to sustain the levels of fishing that most teleost fishes can maintain. There are many examples of collapsed shark fisheries around the world, including shark fisheries subjected to monitoring and management efforts. Well known examples of ‘boom and bust’ shark fisheries include the Californian soup-fin shark fishery, the porbeagle shark fishery in Norway, the school shark fishery off southern Australia, the spiny dogfish fishery in the Northern Atlantic and the common skate fishery in Western Europe.^5,6,8,58 While Australia lands only a small fraction of the global shark harvest,^5,58 sharks comprise 4.9% of Australia’s total capture fishery production, the fourth highest such statistic in the world.⁴⁰

Commercial shark fisheries in the Great Barrier Reef

In the Great Barrier Reef, sharks are taken as both target species and as bycatch  in various fisheries. However, there is no designated shark fishery in the Great Barrier Reef and sharks are taken by fishers participating in net and line fisheries along the Queensland east coast. Consequently, there are no fisheries management plans in place that consider the vulnerable nature of sharks to fishing pressures (see Response: Management of the Great Barrier Reef net fishery).

In the Great Barrier Reef, over 90 % of the reported commercial shark harvest  is taken by some 200 vessels participating in the coastal and offshore gillnet fishery.^38,40 The gill net fishery is also known as the N1 and N2 gillnet fisheries, and catches and harvests shark along with mackerel, barramundi, threadfin salmon and other finfish. The remaining 10% of the reported shark harvest is taken by the reef line and trawl fisheries. The reef line fishery retains mainly silky sharks, blacktip reef sharks and whitetip reef sharks for their fins,³⁷ while the trawl fishery has previously reported landings of between 10 and 30 tonnes of shark per year.^38,60 However, sharks are no longer retained by the trawl fishery, and the practice of removing shark fins and discarding the carcass at sea is now prohibited in Queensland waters (see Response: bycatch and shark finning). For more information on these fisheries, see Management status – fisheries and Environmental status – fishes.

In recent years, the proportion of the total shark harvest taken from the Great Barrier Reef has risen from approximately 60% of the total Queensland east coast harvest in 1993, to 84% of the harvest in 2003.³⁴ The total Gross Value of Production derived from sharks taken from the Great Barrier Reef has risen from A$2.1 million in 1988, to A$7.7 million in 2003. ³⁴

Species composition of the Great Barrier Reef shark harvest

There are no long-term data on the numbers of individual shark species taken by commercial fishers in the Great Barrier Reef. Additionally, many sharks are difficult to identify and the taxonomy for some species has not been adequately studied. Since 2001, steps have been taken to improve the recording of shark catch (see Response) and preliminary data from projects undertaken by the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC) and CRC Reef Research Centre (CRC Reef) are now available. Observers on board commercial fishing vessels have now collected data on the species composition of the catch for four fishing trips. These data suggest that while the catch composition of shark species varies between areas and fishing depths, the catch appears to be dominated by the Australian blacktip shark (Carcharhinus tilstoni) (32% of shark catch) and the scalloped hammerhead shark (Sphyrna lewini) (18% of shark catch). ³⁸ Other sharks taken include the spot tail shark (C. sorrah) (7.7% of shark catch), the white-cheek shark (C. dussumieri) (7.5% of shark catch), milk shark (C.Rhizoprionodon acutus) (6.8% of shark catch) and the grey reef shark (C. amblyrhynchos) (6.6% of shark catch) ³⁸. A further 14 species taken in lower numbers.

Nevertheless, more data over longer periods are required to gain an adequate understanding of the species composition of the catch. Until there is better information about the catch composition and the resilience of these species to fishing pressure, the sustainability of current fishing levels cannot be determined.

Pressure on sharks is increasing in the Great Barrier Reef, with annual shark harvests tripling in recent years and increased fishing effort targeting sharks.

Trends in shark catch and fishing effort on the Great Barrier Reef

The pressure on sharks in the Great Barrier Reef has been steadily increasing since 1990, with more specialist shark fishers entering the gillnet fishery and more effort being directed to target sharks.³⁸ CFISH logbooks record a four-fold increase in the reported shark harvest from about 326 tonnes in 1994 to 1294 tonnes in 2003 (Fig. 1). The rise in CPUE is most probably explained by changes in fishing activity. Estimates of targeted shark fishing effort (as the percentage of fishing days targeting shark) have risen by 28% over the same period (Table 2). In 2001, the Townsville region was the most productive shark fishery along the east coast, with an estimated 30% of the total catch and 21% of the effort.³⁸ For more information about gillnet and reef line fisheries and their management, see Environmental status – fishes and Management status – fisheries.

 

While fisheries logbooks indicate that fishing pressure on sharks is increasing, at this time they cannot provide more detailed information on fishing effort and population condition due to the data’s limitations (see condition – data on stock condition from fisheries logbooks). Furthermore, until logbook data are validated, the reported figures for shark harvests can only be considered as indicative.

Table 2. Changes in gill net fishery catch and effort, and an estimate of the targeting of shark by gill net fishers in the Great Barrier Reef. Data from Rose et al, 2003b.

	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001
Total days	3565	3664	3524	4765	3826	3959	4706	5112
% of fishing days ‘targeting’ shark	32	34	32	31	28	29	39	41
Total shark harvest (tonnes)	209	218	222	306	353	413	637	628
% of the total shark harvest resulting from targeted effort	56	58	58	63	72	72	80	76

Pressure from fisheries in adjacent regions

Many species of shark that occur in of the Great Barrier Reef are highly migratory. For example, tagging and genetic studies have shown that Australian blacktip shark and spot tail shark populations should be considered as a single population across northern Australia.⁵³Another study using satellite tracking has shown that tiger sharks travel large distances throughout northern Australia (Fitzpatrick, R, pers comm. 2003). Consequently, Great Barrier Reef shark populations may experience fishing pressure from fisheries in adjacent regions such as the Northern Shark Fishery, the Coral Sea fishery, the Eastern Tuna and Billfish Fishery, as well as fisheries in Indonesia. It is clear that the main pressure on sharks of particular conservation concern, such as the whale shark, great white shark and grey nurse shark, is the catch and bycatch of these species by fisheries throughout the rest of Australia and the wider Indo-Pacific region. However, identifying the specific impacts of these fisheries is very difficult, and the pressure these fisheries place on sharks in the Great Barrier Reef is not known. Further, it is unclear how many sharks are taken as targeted catch or bycatch in these fisheries (see below).

Pressure: Incidental catch and shark finning

Bycatch

Around the world, bycatch  is often poorly reported and as a result, the total catch and impact of fisheries on shark stocks is often underestimated. Bonfil (1994) suggests that the actual global catch of sharks is double the reported catch due to the poor reporting. The 2001 Australian Government Shark Assessment Report suggests that across Australia, unrecorded bycatch levels may be up to 50% of the recorded catch,³⁷and that much of this bycatch was finned (see Pressure: shark finning).

Many sharks such as the leopard shark (above) are taken as bycatch in various fisheries. Bycatch is a major issue in the management and conservation of sharks as it is generally poorly recorded, and may have significant impacts on shark populations.

In Australian waters, sharks are also caught as bycatch  in trawl fisheries, and in open ocean (pelagic) fisheries such as the Eastern Tuna and Billfish Fishery and Coral Sea fishery. A study of the Northern Prawn Fishery in the Gulf of Carpentaria found that 56 of the 70 shark species known to inhabit the area were taken as bycatch by prawn trawlers. This research also showed that over half these sharks died during capture.^40,55 In 1998 and 1999, the Eastern Tuna and Billfish Fishery captured between 10,000 and 14,000 sharks, most of which are thought to be bycatch. Blue sharks and porbeagle sharks are the main species caught by the fishery. Both species are sharks of concern and are listed on the IUCN Red List.⁴⁰

Bycatch may also result in the take of vulnerable shark species. Research conducted on the Northern Prawn Fishery suggests that the sharks most at risk from trawl bycatch are those that are already scarce, are easily captured by trawl nets, and/or have low reproductive capacities. These species include sawfishes and some rays.⁵⁵ Sawfishes are particularly vulnerable to netting and trawling as their large toothed rostra are easily entangled. Bycatch in fishing nets is thought to be the major factor in the decline of these sharks.³³

There is little information about the levels of bycatch on sharks in the Great Barrier Reef. The East Coast Trawl Fishery is thought to have taken a significant amount of shark bycatch, however the introduction of Bycatch Reduction Devices in 2000 may be reducing bycatch levels.²⁰ The effectiveness of Bycatch Reduction Devices in reducing the bycatch of sharks is currently being investigated (see Response). Sharks are also taken as bycatch in the gillnet and reef line fisheries, but little is known about bycatch levels, the species caught or the number of sharks that fishers discard or release alive. The survival rate of those sharks released alive is also unknown, as is the catch of vulnerable shark species in these fisheries. Consequently, the total catch and impact of commercial fisheries on shark populations in the Great Barrier Reef is hard to determine.

Shark finning

In recent years there has been increasing attention drawn to the practice of cutting the fins off sharks and discarding the shark, sometimes still alive, back into the sea. Shark fins are prized by Asian markets for shark fin soup, a delicacy that has become more affordable with the increasing affluence of Asian countries.³⁷ According to some Australian shark fin traders, the fins of tiger sharks and guitarfish have the highest value, followed by the fins of hammerhead, blacktip and whitetip reef sharks and sawfish. Demand has raised fin prices and dealers may pay fishers up to A$275 per kilogram of dried shark fin.³⁷

Finning may result in additional pressure on shark populations. Since shark fins fetch high prices, some fishers may choose to fin any sharks taken as bycatch instead of returning them to the water. For example, in Hawaii the numbers of sharks retained by fishers rose from 2,200 sharks in 1991 to 60,000 sharks in 1998 of which approximately 99% were finned.³⁷ Alternatively, high prices may prompt some fishers to begin targeting sharks specifically for their fins. By retaining only the fins, fishers can maximise profits per trip as hold space is retained for only the most valuable products. Furthermore, shark finning is often not reported in logbooks, leading to the actual pressure on shark stocks being underestimated.

Shark finning in the Great Barrier Reef and Coral Sea

In Queensland, the practice of shark finning has been restricted since 2002 (see Response), meaning that fishers in Queensland are no longer allowed to remove fins from sharks and discard the carcass. A national review of shark finning released in 2001 suggests that prior to the 2002 restriction of shark finning, significant numbers of sharks taken as bycatch in Queensland waters were finned.³⁷ Additionally, much of the shark taken by coral trout and crayfish vessels on the Great Barrier Reef were caught specifically for their fins.³⁷

Nevertheless, relatively little is known about the trade of shark fins in the Great Barrier Reef. Data from the Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries (QDPI&F) suggest that between 108kg and 280kg of shark fin were produced between 1995 and 1997, however the actual level of shark fin derived from Queensland waters is unknown.³⁷ Differences between the various fisheries and the attitudes of fishers to finning have hindered efforts to derive reliable estimates of the quantities of shark fin that have been generated by shark finning in Queensland.³⁷

Finned grey reef sharks. The high prices paid for shark fins have prompted fishers around the world to fin sharks taken as bycatch. It is no longer permitted to fin sharks and discard the carcasses at sea in Queensland waters and the Great Barrier Reef. Photo courtesy of R and V Taylor.

Outside the Great Barrier Reef, a large number of sharks were finned by the Eastern Tuna and Billfish Fishery operating in the Coral Sea, and by foreign longline vessels permitted to operate in Australian waters.³⁷

Shark finning may also generate conflict with other users of the Great Barrier Reef. Recreational divers and tourism operators have reported finding finned shark carcasses at key dives sites in the Great Barrier Reef and Coral Sea. In some cases, the sites are renowned for the large numbers of sharks present and tourists chose to dive these sites specifically to see sharks. Encountering finned carcasses at such sites has a negative impact on the tourism industry given the economic value of sharks to the Great Barrier Reef tourism industry as dive attractions (see Pressure: tourism). Shark finning has been recognised as a wasteful and unsustainable practice and shark finning is now banned or restricted in fisheries operating in Queensland and the Coral Sea (see Response: bycatch and shark finning).

Pressure: Recreational fishing

A review of the recreational catch of sharks was undertaken as part of Australia’s Shark Assessment Report released in December 2001. Recreational fishing is a major leisure activity with an estimated 800,000 Queensland residents participating in the fishery.⁶⁰ There are no recreational size or catch limits currently in place for sharks in Queensland, however recreational fishers may not retain protected shark species and must abide by zoning provisions when fishing in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (see Response).

Recreational catch of sharks and rays

 In 1997 and 1999, the QDPI&F conducted telephone interviews and surveys of recreational fishing diaries. These surveys suggest that sharks are a minor component of the catch kept by recreational fishers, comprising 0.3% of the total number of fish retained by recreational fishers in 1997, and 0.2% of the retained catch harvest in 1999. However, given the number of recreational fishers in Queensland, these harvest rates equate to approximately 71,000 and 43,000 sharks retained by recreational fishers in 1997 and 1999 respectively. A national survey of recreational fishers conducted in 2000 and 2001 estimated that 35,899 sharks are retained by Queensland anglers every year.²⁷

Using an estimated average weight of 15kg per shark retained (based on the Australian Shark Assessment Report),⁴⁰ the recreational shark harvest can be estimated as between 538 and 1097 tonnes per year. These levels are significant when compared to the commercial shark harvest fisheries across Queensland.

Recreational bycatch

The national survey of recreational fishers suggests that across Australia, up to 81% of sharks caught by recreational fishers are released.²⁷ Unfortunately, there is little information on the recreational bycatch and release rates of sharks in Queensland. It is also not known how many sharks survive after being released. An additional concern is that some recreational fishers may not recognise the ecological value of sharks and instead, view them as “pests”. This may motivate some recreational fishers to destroy any sharks caught or use them for bait instead of releasing them. The lack of public understanding about the ecological values of sharks and their vulnerability have been recognised as a significant issue that is currently being addressed at a national level (see Response: international and national management initiatives). 

Given the vulnerability of sharks to over fishing, the lack of data and difficulties in managing and monitoring recreational fishing, the harvest of sharks by the recreational sector is a growing concern. For more information about recreational fishing in the Great Barrier Reef, see Environmental status – fishes.

Pressure: shark control programs

Shark control or bather protection programs have operated in Queensland since 1962, and since 1937 in New South Wales. Currently, the Queensland Shark Control Program (QSCP) deploys six nets and 127 drum lines within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. The program operates on the principle that reducing the local population of potentially dangerous sharks reduces the risk to swimmers.^14,16 QSCP data show that between 1990 and 2000, an average of 916 sharks were caught per year. Approximately 33% of the sharks caught during this period are considered as dangerous to humans (23% of the catch being tiger sharks, 9% bull sharks, <1% great white sharks).¹⁴

While the Queensland Shark Control Program aims to reduce local populations of potentially dangerous sharks such as the tiger shark (above), it also takes non-threatening sharks and rays, and other marine species.

Overall, the QSCP captures some 75 species of sharks and rays, many of which are relatively benign to humans.¹⁴ The QSCP also captures sharks of conservation concern such as sawfish, grey nurse and great white sharks, as well as other threatened species such as dugongs and marine turtles (see Environmental status – marine mammals and Environmental status – marine reptiles). The QSCP annual catch of sharks is very low compared to the commercial and recreational catch, however the program appears to have contributed to localised depletions of some sharks, including relatively benign species.^30,43 QSCP contractors are urged to release benign species, but all ‘large’ sharks, including protected species such as the great white shark, are still retained. The program has been reviewed due to concerns about the cost and effectiveness of the program, and the take of bycatch species including threatened species such as the grey nurse and great white shark. These reviews have led to the replacement of nets with drumlines in some areas.⁴³ Research has demonstrated that drumlines can be as effective as nets in catching target shark species whilst reducing impacts on threatened species, nevertheless, research is currently being conducted to identify mechanisms to further reduce the QSCP’s impact on bycatch species (see Response).

Pressure: habitat loss and ecosystem degradation

Many fishes, including sharks and rays, rely on inshore habitats for food, shelter or as nurseries for juveniles and pups. One study in northeast Australia suggests that a third of the fish species present were dependent on estuaries in some form.⁴ Research on nearshore areas off Townsville revealed that at least eight species of sharks utilise inshore habitats, such as seagrass beds, as nursery areas for their pups.⁴⁶ Furthermore, such habitats are important foraging grounds for species such as tiger sharks.¹⁷

While the extent of habitat destruction evident in some areas of the world has not occurred in the Great Barrier Reef, habitats such as seagrass meadows and inshore coral reefs are under increasing pressure. Nearshore habitats may be affected by coastal development and the increasing run-off of sediments, pesticides and nutrients from the land. This increased run-off is a result of development, particularly agriculture, in catchments adjacent to the Great Barrier Reef. The impacts of run-off are being exacerbated by the loss of coastal habitats such as rainforests and wetlands that would otherwise ‘filter’ run-off. The run off of land based pollutants may result in excessive levels of nutrients that lead to more frequent algal blooms and ecosystem imbalances, smothering of inshore habitats by increasingly fine sediments, and the disruption of biological processes by increased levels of toxic pollutants. For more information on the status and pressures on important shark habitats, see Environmental status - seagrasses, Environmental status - inter-reefal and lagoonal benthos, and Environmental status - water quality.

Habitats such as seagrass meadows are important nursery and foraging grounds for sharks.

Other factors may also exert pressure on the habitats that sustain the sharks and rays of the Great Barrier Reef. Climate change is predicted to cause changes in temperature regimes, sea level and weather patterns, which will subsequently have significant effects on habitats such as seagrass beds and coral reefs. Furthermore, these changes may also alter ocean circulation patterns and food web dynamics. While climate change is unlikely to directly affect shark populations, it may exert a significant, albeit indirect pressure on shark populations if critical habitats and food webs are degraded. More information on the habitats utilised by sharks can be found in the following chapters: Environmental Status - water quality; Environmental status - seagrasses; Environmental status – inter-reefal and lagoonal benthos and Environmental status – corals.

Direct pressures from pollution

As apex predators, large sharks may accumulate high levels of toxic pollutants in their bodies over time. An analysis of sharks taken in the Northern Shark Fishery revealed that the flesh of large sharks had levels of mercury that exceeded limits recommended by the National Health and Medical Research Council.^24,25 In March 2004, Food Standards Australia New Zealand advised that pregnant and breastfeeding women should consume less that 150grams of shark or flake per fortnight.¹⁵ Similar advisories have been released in the United States and United Kingdom.^56,57 In the Great Barrier Reef, fishers avoid large sharks due to these concerns. In Southeast Asia, education campaigns by conservation groups have highlighted the risk of mercury contamination in shark fins used to make shark fin soup.³ Apart from the risks to consumers of shark products, there is concern over the potential effects of these pollutants on the health and reproduction of these sharks. However, these effects have yet to be investigated.

Pressure: Traditional use and cultural connections

Sharks and rays are an important food source for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities. Many Indigenous communities have a wealth of traditional knowledge about the habits and behaviour, hunting and use of these animals. Fishing is a significant part of both the culture and day to day lives of Indigenous Australians in northern Australia, with over 90% of the community taking part in fishing activities.¹⁰

Sharks and rays are important to Indigenous Australians as a source of food, but many tribes have strong cultural connections with sharks and rays through totems and stories.

In parts of northern Australia, sharks and rays are seasonal foods that are usually caught between October and April. Some Aboriginal communities on the Cape York Peninsula consider certain species of stingray to be in season after the first thunderstorms of the wet season, or after the arrival of the Torres Strait Pigeon (Ducula spilorrhoa).⁴⁷ To some Aboriginal groups in the Kalumburu region of north-western Australia, the flowering of the Bush Almond is a sign to start fishing for stingrays.¹²
 

Traditional fishers catch rays using spears thrown from the bow of a boat, or when wading. Stingray spines may be used as spear tips, and their livers are considered a delicacy by many traditional communities.²⁹After capture, the livers are checked and a large white/pinkish liver indicates that the animal is suitable to eat.⁴⁷In the Hope Vale and Lockhart River Communities on the Cape York Peninsula, small sharks such as the blacktip reef shark(Carcharhinus melanopterus) are eaten as well as rays, although they are not preferred. In these communities, sharks and rays are usually prepared as buunhdhaarr: the liver and flesh are separately washed, boiled, minced and then re-mixed together. Buunhdhaarr may be eaten straight or combined with onion and fried as meat patties.⁴⁷In these communities the cowtail ray (Pastinachus sephen), thorny ray (Urogymnus asperrimus) and mangrove ray (Himantura granulata) are amongst the preferred species of ray, while rays with two caudal spines, such as the blue-spotted stingray (Dasyatis kuhlii) and blue-spotted fantail ray (Taeniura lymna) are considered inedible. Manta rays are also considered inedible.⁴⁷

Little is known about the numbers of sharks and rays harvested by Indigenous communities in the Great Barrier Reef. In 2000 and 2001, a national survey of recreational and Indigenous fishers was undertaken. The survey results suggest that Indigenous fishers in Queensland catch an estimated 3,800 sharks and rays per year, most of which are taken from inshore waters.¹⁰ 

The Bandjin people tell the story of a giant shovelnose ray carrying two warriors into the sky, forming the constellation more widely known as the Southern Cross.

Many Indigenous communities have strong cultural connections with sharks and rays that are expressed through art, Dreamtime stories and totems. Rays are depicted in ancient rock art paintings as well as modern artworks, and are totems for individuals and tribes. For example, the diamond stingray or Yawa is the totem for the Wuthathi people of Shelbourne Bay in north Queensland, and the shark is the totem of the Miriam Islanders of the Murray Islands in the eastern Torres Strait. A Dreamtime story told by the Bandjin people from the Hinchinbrook region tells the tale of two warriors who were carried into the sky by a shovelnose ray. The ray forms the constellation more commonly known as the Southern Cross, with the two warriors (the two pointer starts Alpha and Beta Centauri) being dragged along behind it (Butler, R., pers comm., Feb 2005). There are many more Dreamtime stories that tell of sharks and rays carving out rivers and landscapes, and their close relationship with ancestors and traditional customs. More information about the cultural significance of sharks and rays to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people may be found at the Great Barrier Reef Traditional Owners website.

Pressure: tourism

Tourism is a major commercial activity undertaken in the Great Barrier Reef, generating A$4.2 billion per annum.² While thousands of tourists visit the region every day, most interactions between sharks and tourists in the Great Barrier Reef are passive with tourists encountering sharks by chance while snorkelling, diving or reef walking. Shark feeding is not permitted in the Great Barrier Reef, but several tourism companies operate long distance live-aboard dive vessels and conduct shark feeds on reefs in the Coral Sea.
 

Scuba divers commonly encounter white tip reef sharks (above) on the Great Barrier Reef. Sharks are an important natural attraction to the Great Barrier Reef dive industry, and shark watching may generate significant economic benefits.

It has been suggested that the intensive use of dive sites and harassment of sharks and rays by divers, may displace these animals from frequently visited sites.¹ In some areas of the Florida Keys, diving and boating activities have been identified as a disturbance to nurse sharks mating in shallow waters.⁷ Nevertheless, tourism activities on the Great Barrier Reef are closely managed (see Response) and there is little information to suggest that tourism places significant pressure on sharks in the Great Barrier Reef. In contrast, tourism activities can promote the conservation and sustainable use of sharks as living resources. Sharks have an iconic status in the marine tourism industry in many areas including the Great Barrier Reef ¹, and shark ecotourism has been used in many areas to promote shark conservation efforts. Furthermore, the economic value of shark tourism is significant. A study in the Maldives during 1993 found that a single grey reef shark generated approximately US $33,500 per year at the most popular shark watching dive site, and was worth on average US $3,300 per year across all shark watching dive sites. In contrast, a dead grey reef shark was calculated to have a one-time value of US $32. In the Caribbean, the value of a single live Caribbean Reef Shark has been estimated at between US $13,300 and US $40,000 per year.¹ The income generated by shark ecotourism has prompted increased awareness and community education of shark conservation, as well as providing economic benefits for local communities.¹ For more information on tourism in the Great Barrier Reef, see Management status – tourism and recreation.