Eyes on the size: accuracy of visual length estimates of white sharks, .

Visual estimates have been used extensively to determine the length of large organisms that are logistically challenging to measure. However, there has been little effort to quantify the accuracy or validity of this technique despite inaccurate size estimates leading to incorrect population assessments and misinformed management strategies. Here, we compared visually estimated total length measurements of white sharks, , during cage-diving operations with measurements obtained from stereo-video cameras and assessed the accuracy of those estimates in relation to suspected biases (shark size, and observer experience and gender) using generalized linear mixed-models and linear regressions. Observer experience on board cage-diving vessels had the greatest effect on the accuracy of visual length estimates, with being more accurate (mean accuracy ± standard error: 23.0 ± 16.5 cm) than (39.9 ± 33.8 cm) and (49.4 ± 38.5 cm). Observer gender and shark size had no impact on the overall accuracy of visual length estimates, but overestimated sharks less than 3 m and underestimated sharks greater than 3 m. Our findings show that experience measuring animals is the most substantial driver of accurate visual length estimates regardless of the amount of exposure to the species being measured. were most accurate, even though observe white sharks more frequently. Our results show that visual length estimates are not impacted by shark size and are a valid measurement tool for many aspects of research, provided they come from people who have previously been involved in measuring animals, i.e. .