Home

My Daughter Jemma's 21st birthday and yet another attempt to catch a shark. Our fourth attempt in just two weeks in fact. Just when I was deciding what charity shop to donate the boats shark tackle to, we got our first run. Not a typical porbeagle shark run and at first I thought that a tope had risen for the bait. Within a few seconds though, it became apparant that this was the real thing. Andy Tomes from Charminster took control of the rod while all the other lines were reeled in. After about 10 minutes and while drifting at over 2 knots, our shark became entangled in a pot buff. For a moment it looked like we were going to loose the fish but some swift manouvering of the boat and a little help from Lady Luck soon saw Andy having direct contact with the shark again. It took several laps of the boat and a whole hour before the fish was finally alongside and ready to be boated. Until today we had intended to release any sharks but todays charter had decided to keep the first one caught so somehow, without the use of gaffs, (We don't carry gaffs on Tango Bravo) we had to lift the fish into the boat. It took twenty minutes to do this and it was achieved using a series of ropes. The shark was exhausted from its hour long battle and so securing ropes to it was fairly easy. The fish measured 7 foot 6 inches from tip of nose to tail and the weight was estimated at around 200lb. The remainder of the day failed to produce another run, but some sport was had with several tope that were hooked on light gear.

Firstly though, a bit of history. I am not new to catching sharks off Poole. I used to target sharks with some success during the late eighties when I used to own and operate the charter boat, "Louis John" and before that from a smaller boat "Little Gem". I gave up shark fishing because in those days the method of laying a scent trail was by slaughtering hundreds or thousands of mackerel. Catching them just to mash up and throw back into the water. This is a method that I know some anglers / skippers still use today. Probably some of the same anglers that are now criticising me for killing one fish. I however could not justify this slaughter. Last year, responding to demand from my customers I began to target the sharks again. Our scent trail now comes from a mixture of minced up fish guts and left over bait collected from a series of fishing trips, combined with minced up discarded trout from a local fishery. The collection of enough rubby-dubby for just one shark trip is expensive in time and money and is done purely to avoid the easier option of mass mackerel slaughter. How many other anglers / skippers would go to such lengths in the name of conservation?

The four shark trips that we did last year resulted in 3 fish being hooked. None of these were succesfully brought to the boat and there was no intention by anglers or crew to land any of them. This year has seen us do a further four shark trips. The first three resulted in no sharks either being hooked or sighted and again, all onboard had agreed to release any that were caught. Our fourth trip this year is the one that you now all know about. For this trip the anglers had expressed a wish to land their first shark. They had all sampled a shark before having caught and landed one from another Poole charter boat several years ago. As paying anglers on my boat, they are entitled to keep for their own consumption any fish of legal size that they catch. My job is to encourage catch and release whenever possible whilst at the same time, ackowledging the crews rights as fare paying anglers. In this case, we agreed to release all, if any subsequently caught sharks.

When we finally hooked this particular shark, it battled for an hour. Our first sight of the fish was at the end of the fight when at just 20 foot trace length it appeared on the surface as it swam towards the front of the boat. The fish appeared healthy and the trace was handlined in. This was done carefully as I had expected the shark to make another run. The shark didn't run again, but instead appeared alongside the boat belly up. Its tale hung low in the water and the fish appeared dead. It took only about fifteen to twenty seconds to retrieve the trace and in this small amount of time, the shark either just gave up through exhaustion or suffered some major organ failure. I cannot explain why this happened. I have never seen it before, but the fact is, that even if this shark was to have been released, it could not have been. Any of you anglers / skippers who are reading this and think that you are going to target sharks and expect to just T-bar them off, may just get a surprise, like I have had. We may all think that we are being good guys by promoting "catch and release" but the fact is that when we put our lines in the water, for whatever species of fish we are after, there is a real risk, and a high risk, that the fish we hook will die. That applies to bass, bream, shark or any fish.

Now then, onto the disposal of the shark. The facts are these. A picture of the shark, together with its captor, two other members of the charter and two staff of United Fisheries was printed in the Evening Echo on Thursday night, the 27th July. The short article with the picture suggested that the fish was accidentally caught and that it was going to be disposed of by United Fisheries to local restaurants. This is of course illigal and as a strong campainer against black fish sales, I would want to see action taken against the anglers and United Fisheries, if the story was true. The report in the echo however was simply the result of a foolish and ill thought out attempt by the anglers to gain some sort of recognition for their achievement and a reporter that took "poetic license" to the extreme. The reporting of the shark being accidently hooked should have got alarm bells ringing with the readers of the Echo who already knew of the capture. What I understand actually happened was that the shark was taken to United Fisheries for weighing and to be professionally cut up into steaks, to be shared among the six members of the charter. The proprieter of United Fisheries is a personal friend of one of the anglers. I am led to believe that he was rewarded with a piece of the shark for his efforts, but for his own use. Surely if United Fisheries really did take delivery and intended to sell a fish from an illigal source, do you really think they would say so to an Echo reporter? Still, you know the old saying, " Never let the truth get in the way of a good story"

As I have already stated above, I welcome debate about fish conservation. I can even accept critism when it is deserved. I am not without blame in this matter, but I have learned lessons from it. For those of you anglers and skippers that have now read this, you can criticise me with the full weight of the facts, but please, try not to be hypocritical. We are all guilty of killing sea life for our own pleasure, no matter how well intended we may think we are. And when you criticise me for the death of this one fish, remember that I actively promote "catch and release" on my boat. We release over fifty percent of bass landed including most of the bigger ones. We have minimum size limits for bass, brill and turbot that far exceed those of both the Channel Islands and the UK. We rarely land rays, tope or conger and we don't slaughter thousands of juvenile sandeels in the hope of maybe getting a few sizeable ones for bait. Overall I run a very conservation minded boat, encouraging and influensing anglers to do the same. And it is to those anglers that I now give my thanks, for battling in my corner on my behalf over the past three days. If you really do have concerns about conservation, then why not target your efforts at the unlicensed semi-professional bass anglers. There are many of them.

My plans for the future. With a further shark trip booked in for this year and several already booked for 2007. I intend to carry on targeting sharks from my boat. As a result of this incident I am seeking advice on how best to ensure that the shark is able to be released. I am also only accepting bookings on the basis that all sharks will be released whenever possible.

Finally. There seems to be a belief that we hooked this fish from some Steve Porter secret mark. There is no secret. I start my drift on the 26 northing and either go east or west with the tide. Usually, during the day, the tide changes and we drift back again. This shark was hooked during an easterly drift approximately S,SE of the Needles. Incidently, when we are shark fishing, we usually put a couple of rods down for the bass and you would be surprised at just where they turn up. The bass are nearly always released.

And the final finally. If having read this, you still feel the need to send me abusive emails, then please have the courage to say who you are, or at least get a "grown up" to talk to me. Thanks.