Conservation - Asia Bashing?

Click for detail.

STOP FINNING ASSHOLE?
Think the badge will really impact the international Shark fin trade?
The bad news: think again! The good news: at least it was produced by PangeaSeed, a Japanese (as opposed to Western) Shark conservation org!

Which brings me straight over to this most excellent post by Patric.
Indeed, who are we to tell the Asians what to eat, or how to manage their very own resources - the more as we have, and continue to amply prove how bad we are at doing the same in our own back yard! Baltic Sea anybody? Mediterranean? Bears, Wolves, Otters, Lynxes, let alone Wisent in Western Europe? Virgin forests in the US and Europe? And the list goes on and on and on and on!
Here's a small reminder of what we have done to our oceans!



But I'm digressing as usual.
The fact is that in all those conservation initiatives, terrestrial and marine, it always boils down to the same basic points:

• Sustainability not Prohibition
• Legislation but also Enforcement - flanked by Mitigation and Education
• our absolute willingness not to demonize the "other" side, but to engage in Dialogue and to accept pragmatic Compromises instead

Is that so difficult to comprehend?

When it comes to Asia in particular.
Yes, the bulk of the demand for many endangered species originates there - but the perpetrators are others and the ecological damage happens elsewhere!
Please re-read this with respect to the Northern Bluefin! And when it comes to Sharks, if you haven't already, check out this report by TRAFFIC and Pew about who are the biggest killers of Sharks!

And then, there's this - and yes I will never stop repeating myself!
You gotta differentiate between markets that are demand limited and those that are supply limited.

The poster child for the former is whaling.
The demand for Whale meat by the Japanese and Korean consumers is already low, and dwindling. With that in mind, there really is no commercial justification for sending those expensive fleets to Antarctica, nor is there really any remaining strong commercial incentive for killing those Dolphins in Taji. Instead of the strident and uncompromising activism that many, even within the most passionate conservation circles define as unacceptable eco-terrorism and that has led to a nationalistic counter push by the Japanese authorities, the most promising strategy is to target the last remaining demand - whilst at the same time, appeasing the Japanese by granting them a face saving official quota of non-endangered Whales like Minkes and yes, Dolphins.
In that regard, I was totally impressed when I read this statement by Ady Gil of ex Sea Shepherd affiliation

Ecorazzi: Can you tell us a bit more about what you’re doing in Taiji?
The reports I’ve read is that your intent on “building bridges”. Many have asked how that might be different as opposed to what SS has done there over the last several months.

Ady Gil: The only way to make a change in Japan is to have the Japanese people want a change. We can not come here to their country and TELL them what to do. As horrible as the dolphin hunt is, and I have seen it with my own eyes, it is what they do. No different than factory farming in the US. If there was a culture of “Cow Loving”, if we thought that cows are “cute”, if cows played with balls and hoops, we would feel the same about cow slaughter.

The fact is that the majority of the people in Japan love dolphins. Tangalooma in Australia offers its guests a better way to interact with dolphins, other people only get to see them in aquariums. Japan has 100 of the 500 aquariums world wide, (data that I got from an official person in Japan).

We have posted statistics about Taiji. Fisheries are a declining business here.
It just went down from about 12% to about 8%, in 5 short years, of total business revenue in the city. Building the bridges will possibly open their eyes to use the treasure that they have, hundreds of dolphins in the oceans, to bring people here, to watch and swim with dolphins, and revive the economy in Taiji.

Amazing - and totally agree that this is the way forward!

Not so when it comes to supply limited markets!
Examples? Shark fins, Tuna but also, Tigers, Bear gall bladders and especially, Elephant Ivory!
I've added the latter three as perfect examples of how useless it is to try and address the problem by trying to curb the demand by re-educating the consumers. The fight for Tigers and Elephants is among the oldest of conservation initiatives, with all species listed under CITES I - and yet and despite a plethora of initiatives, celebrity endorsements and petitions, and even public condemnation by China itself, Asian demand continues to drive the species to the brink of extinction.

Why?
Because to be successful, one would have to re-educate hundreds of millions (!!!!) of consumers!
Please re-visit this and watch the following video posted by Patric: THIS is the scope of what we're up against when it comes to Sharks - do you really think that a few hundred posters, those celebrity endorsements and those "stop finning" initiatives will make a difference?
Why do some continue to insist on those very same failed strategies?



Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

The solution, as practiced today in terrestrial conservation?
Protect the animals where they are being hunted - along with, yes you guessed it, mitigation (like that of compensating would be poachers, establishing tourism ventures that provide for jobs, etc) and education!
Sound familiar?

Yes, that too is gonna be bloody hard!
The trade in endangered species, whether legal or not, is highly lucrative and there will always be obstacles, push backs and setbacks.
But that's precisely why I so strongly believe that we need to pool and prioritize ALL of our resources and focus ALL of our energies on those local initiatives - and that at the same time, we need to stop squandering them elsewhere!

Please, give it some serious thought - it really is the only way forward.

PS Richard's take here: always the elder statesman!

Manta Rays - the next Battlefield!

Heartbreaking - dead Mobula, pic by Shawn Heinrichs

Good on these people.
They are finally shining a light on a massacre that has been happening away from the public eye and in the shadow of Shark fishing, the indiscriminate slaughter of Mantas (yes that would be a plural!) and Mobulas.
The project is called Manta Ray of Hope and you can learn about it here.

Shame on me, actually.
The fact is, I've known about it for many years but have frankly totally underestimated its scope.
I've actually even eaten Manta Ray (and not liked it) back in the 80ies in La Paz, Baja where it was being served in all of the restaurants - and apparently still is. Back then, I've also witnessed alot of Mobulas being landed by the native Sperm Whale fishermen of Lamalera and more recently, I've discovered it in a Filipino recipe for a faux Shark dish, and I've even posted disheartening Elasmobranch fishing statistics from 2009 featuring a marked rise in Manta Ray and Mobula landings.
Totally mea culpa for not having caught on to it.

Now, it appears, things have escalated to new dimensions.
Watch this.



More here in an interview with Shawn.

So, apparently, Manta gill rakers are the new fad in Chinese medicine.
I really know way too little about this to venture an educated opinion, apart from the fact that it behooves us all to do whatever we can to try and save these wonderful animals.
I have learned that Mantas only have a single offspring every several years and from that fact alone, it appears unequivocal that any commercial fishing for them is undoubtedly completely unsustainable and simply devastating - maybe even more so than that for Sharks!

Being my usual me, I still would like to raise a couple of points.

• Big Kudos for this initiative!
  BUT, is this more than a mere media-based awareness campaign, i.e. are there real people on the ground pursuing real, tangible pro-Manta conservation measures - and how successful has that been so far?
  Strategies?
  How can we help?


• Is the gill raker trade really driving the fishing, or is it merely a by-product of it?
  I'm asking this because of the shocking population explosion in the lesser developed countries where millions, if not billions of small subsistence fishermen are wiping out the marine resources through veritable protein mining all the way down through the trophic levels and laterally, by consuming what were previously considered to be "junk fish", like Sharks (and here). The answer to this question will likely determine the best way to proceed, see below.
  


• This is most certainly a supply limited fishery.
  Like in the Elephant ivory trade (and that for Shark fins!) where the Asian demand will always be high enough to justify poaching the last Elephant, the demand for those damn gill rakers will always be high enough to wipe out the last Manta. Yes the demand for gill rakers may be a recent, and maybe reversible fad - but let me warn against only trying to re-educate the consumer via a media campaign.
  Like I never cease to repeat, supply limited fisheries need to be tackled where the fishing takes place, i.e. through local fishing bans, MPAs and Sanctuaries.


• One suggestion.
  What about expanding the current Shark sanctuaries to include the protection of Mantas and Mobulas. As far as I know, none of those countries has any active Manta Ray fishery so it should be relatively uncontroversial? Anybody talking to the unequaled team at Pew?

OK, enough wisdom, or whatever.
This is really a great undertaking and timely wake up call, and I totally support it and will do whatever I can to be of assistance.
Seriously, anytime - just say the world.
Again: Kudos!

And because they are so lovely, here's another video.
It depicts Mantas being cleaned by the beautiful endemic Mexican Clarion Angelfish. Hat tip: DNS.
Enjoy!

Certified Shark Fin Soup?

Once again, I'm irritated.

A friend has just sent me the link to the following Video.

Let's start with the positives.
It's by two Shark advocates, Alex Hofford & Paul Hilton who are being described as "passionate", it highlights the global plight of Sharks and the barbaric practice of finning, and it features a nice clip on 6:58 of Scarface, all of which is great.

On the negative side, it starts with the usual incorrect statement and is painfully long and tedious. Anything beyond three minutes needs to be absolutely brilliant, or the viewer will loose interest - and I'm afraid that this just isn't.
Plus, as so often, I fear that like the Sea Shepherd clip, it achieves nothing tangible. It's laudable in its intention, certainly personally rewarding for its authors - but alas, it's irrelevant in terms of reducing the number of Sharks that are being killed for their fins.

Let me elaborate - once again.
Shark fisheries are supply limited, meaning that the demand for Shark fins greatly outweighs the supply, and this by orders of magnitude.
Does anybody dispute this?

And if not, why do all those people insist in squandering all that money, time and energy in trying to "re-educate" the consumers of Shark fin soup?
Who are we to tell those people what to eat anyway?

But more importantly, it just doesn't make sense!
If the demand for Shark fins is, say, three times the supply, then we would have to convince more than two thirds of all potential consumers in order to have any effect in reducing the number of Sharks being killed! If it's four times, more than three fourths! Get the gist?
How many people would that be?

Does anybody really believe that this can be achieved via those fashionable Beijing posters, the translation of Sharkwater into Mandarin, videos like this one, or one of those countless competing petitions?
Really? Will they succeed in convincing hundreds of millions of people to change their behavior????

C'mon guys, get real!
I've said it before and will continue to say it: the solution to overfishing is to promote sustainable fisheries, not prohibition. That is where we need to direct our energy and our scarce conservation Dollars, not into ineffective activism!

Ideas?
Southern Fried Science have re-visited the issue of Supply Side Conservation in this post.
Can we maybe adapt some of those recommendations to Sharks?

Dolphin-free Tuna was certainly very bad for the Tuna and an ecological disaster on top of that - but it was great for Dolphins. Following the recommendations of Seafood Watch has become fashionable and works. In my lifetime, the fashionable and ubiquitous Lady Curzon was replaced by Mockturtle and Trepang soup. As we speak, the unsustainable Caviar is gradually being replaced by surrogates. I've seen people pay a premium for eggs from happy free-range chucks.
Consumers may not be willing to completely change their habits, but they can certainly be educated and convinced to choose better products if presented with alternatives - and I see no reason why this would not apply to the consumers of Shark Fin soup.

Maybe one could work with the Shark Fin Industry and create a brand of certified Shark fin soup? From Sharks that have not been finned? From species that are not being overfished?
Could one develop a surrogate?

Just a suggestion.
Certainly more tedious and less fashionable and thus less personally rewarding than making a lot of noise and dishing out money for a good cause - but I believe, better for the Sharks.
And that's what ultimately counts.

Or not?

Desperately seeking Change!

As promised, back to the Sharks.

If this is true, many of us got to seriously re-think our approach to Shark Conservation.

It says that many fisheries, Shark fishing included, are completely supply limited.
In a nutshell, it would mean that the demand for Shark fins greatly outweighs the supply and that consequently, even if we managed to convince a lot of people not to consume Shark fins, it would have little to no effect on the market and thus, on the supply side represented by the size of the Shark fishing industry.
Couple that with the fact that price elasticity for Shark Fins is probably very close to zero (meaning that demand is not likely to decrease with increasing prices, and that prices will thus rise as stocks get depleted and always balance, or even outpace the rising cost of having to find increasingly rare Sharks in an increasingly empty Ocean) and that fishermen are perfect examples for the Tragedy of the Commons, and we are faced with a problem of truly epic proportions.

From that point of view and assuming (probably correctly) that the total sum of money available for Shark Conservation is finite, the answer to this particular debate is clearly No, go invest your money into more effective projects instead!

So, should we now re-focus all of our energy onto disrupting the supply side?
Declare Shark fishing to be immoral and illegal and prosecute anybody engaging in it?
As much as I would like to do that because I really do love Sharks and hate seeing them killed, I'm convinced that such an approach would not only utterly fail, but create a whole new set of problems on top of that.
Just think of the drug trade (and incidentally, the drug mafia is already part and parcel of the Shark fin trade) and you see where I'm coming from. Prices would skyrocket, violent conflicts would escalate and the slaughter of Sharks would continue unabated.
Plus, it would mean persecuting and criminalizing the fishermen, many of which are poor and are just trying to eke out a meager living in order to feed their families. That just can't be right, can it.
And they will not just take it laying down. Again, think of the coca farmers. Or the purported reasons for the piracy on the Horn of Africa.

Like it or not, any viable solution will have to end up being a pragmatic compromise.
The Asians and their predilection for Shark fin soup are a fact and no amount of rhetoric is going to change that in the foreseeable future - certainly not to the extent of significantly impacting the trade. Plus, and yes I'm repeating myself, who are we to dictate what they may, or may not eat!
And at the same time, fishermen need to be allowed to fish.

What to do?

The solution lays in trying to steer the discussion towards Sustainability.
And that means that we cannot just demand that the other side embrace our point of view: like it or not, we must be willing to engage in dialogue about killing some of the very animals we love and are trying to protect!
If we succeed, we can at least influence how many get killed, how and when - but the battle about keeping alive all of them is a lost cause.

Like in the case of Tuna, Billfish and actually, many Fishes that are currently being targeted commercially (want a current overview of the extent of the debacle? Read, this!), Sharks are being overfished to the point where some species are severely threatened.
Short-term (whatever that may mean, as some estimates talk about centuries), stocks need to be allowed to replenish and the fisheries targeting those species need to be pulled back accordingly.
But long term, there needs to be a consensus for allowing fishermen to harvest sustainable quotas.
Yes, of Sharks, too!

Thankfully, many of the principal NGOs and Government Agencies have embarked on this pragmatic and solution-oriented route. It's a complicated and multi-pronged process that is often polarizing and controversial (read this!). But I like agree with the general direction, and those who take it onto themselves to see it through deserve our respect and gratitude.
Well, most of the time.

Alas, the sheer magnitude and complexity of the task at hand implies that it will always be slow-moving - and time is of the essence!

This is where we, the small guys, can be of value.
Smallness can be a huge advantage - the main one being: No Committees!
Nothing gets watered down to the smallest common denominator but instead, we can create a positive ground swell that will ultimately benefit the "big boys", too, by being fast and nimble, vocal and irreverent, out-of-the box and politically un-correct, sometimes even visionary.
Or outright crazy, like wanting to base a Shark Conservation Project on the premise that it's perfectly OK to exploit Sharks commercially - and even -anathema!- to hand-feed them! What are the chances of that ever being approved by consensus?

And what about the fundamentalist and dogmatic zealot fringe, be it the idealistic Huggers or the Eco-Terrorists? They sure make a lot of headlines and some might say, they do so at the expense and to the detriment of the "movement".
But then again, is there such a thing as bad publicity? Plus, they will always remain the fringe, with the advantage that the majority will appear reasonable and moderate in comparison!

In a way, this is a true democratic process, where knowledge and opinions circulate freely via the electronic media and extremism, propaganda and disinformation are quickly identified, exposed and eliminated along with the fraudsters. And where like in Science, an open and often, robust dialogue will mostly lead to the right conclusions.
Don't we all wish that this would happen everywhere?

So yes, the task is daunting indeed!
But all together, big and small, cold realists and hopeless idealists, we can turn this thing around!
Looking for a Sea Change? Literally?
That would be us!

Let's get it done!

Shark Fin Soup – nothing but a Myth?

From the website of Wild Aid.
Demand for shark fin soup, an expensive delicacy in Chinese culture, has skyrocketed in the last twenty years due to growing Chinese economy.

Not so fast! says this article in the Guy Harvey Magazine.
Apparently, Shark Fin soup hasn’t got anything to do with centennial Chinese culture, nor is it some status symbol originally reserved for the Ming emperors, nor is it particularly expensive nor is the increasing consumption in any way linked to the advent of a wealthy middle class in China.
Instead, the article says, the load of bull surrounding the international regulation, historical legacy, and modern demand for shark fin soup got too big and smelly for me to ignore. It turns out that what you believe about shark fin soup is largely a matter of what lie you’re willing to swallow.

So, why do they eat the tasteless slimy stuff?
Because they can: because it’s there, because it’s actually cheap and because they couldn’t care less about its provenience:

…as Fuchsia Dunlop noted in Shark’s Fin and Sichuan Pepper, “The Chinese don’t generally divide the animal world into the separate realms of pets and edible creatures.” “When I was living in China, animal cruelty was just not an issue,” Dunlop told me. “There was no kind of emotional identification with animals at all.
“For most Chinese, there’s no difference between eating a wild animal or a domesticated one. A shark might as well be a cow, or a hamster. As travel writer Maarten Troost notes: “The Chinese have an expression: ‘We eat everything with four legs except the table, and everything with two legs except the person.’ They mean it, too.”
So, the Chinese are hungry, numerous, unsentimental, subject to the same insidious, aspirational marketing forces as everyone else.

And all those campaigns targeting the Asian consumers?
Frankly, dunno – meaning that I remain unconvinced: the article itself contains statements by the Mary and conflicting statements by a representative of the Pew. And when I interview our numerous Asian customers, most of which are of Chinese origin, the picture remains equally ambiguous and equally bleak: from what I’m being told, whereas consumption may be dropping among the younger urban generation in places like Hong Kong, Singapore and KL, it remains high elsewhere, especially in mainland China – and that would mean that tens, if not hundreds of millions would still need to be reformed before a single Shark would be spared!
And yes, I’m rather stubbornly repeating myself, check out the above link!

Plus, there’s this.
Assuming that the usual volunteer bleeding hearts are going to step up and stop the shark carnage simply isn’t realistic.
There are lots of volunteer bleeding hearts doing that already and their efforts have difficulty competing against commercial concerns that can spend tens of millions of dollars lobbying in order to protect hundreds of millions of dollars in profits.
Probably true!

Solutions?

• If the trade is supply limited, one must target the supply side: you protect African Elephants and Rhinos in Africa, not by trying to curb the demand for ivory and Rhino horn in Asia – by the same token, you gotta protect Sharks (and e.g. Tuna) where they are being harvested! Conversely, as there really is no real demand for Whale meat in Japan and whaling is thus demand limited: you protect Whales by eliminating the remaining tiny demand in Japan, not by targeting the whalers in Antarctica: let go of the ideology so they can let go of their nationalistic phobia, give them a quota - and then let them try to justify whaling from a purely commercial POW!

• We got to focus on sustainability, not on prohibition, meaning that we must be willing to compromise! Who are we anyway to tell anybody what to eat as long as that is being done sustainably! Granted, for most species of large Sharks, sustainable harvesting appears unrealistic – but at least in theory, some of the smaller species are adequately plentiful and fecund to warrant a quota.

• Finning is wasteful and cruel and needs to be stopped.

• Any strategy will only be successful if on top of legislation, it includes enforcement, mitigation and education. The latter require adequate resources that are generally lacking in third word countries, meaning that we must contribute with more than mere rhetoric. I have no doubt that every single fisheries official is acutely aware of the problems and of the need to fish sustainably, and that given the adequate support (including the eradication of corruption where necessary), he will be eager to implement forward looking policies. So, let’s not only lecture and petition, let’s be part of the solution and the implementation as well!

• In order to be credible, we gotta be rational, goal oriented and smart – and fact based, see above!

• And finally, since I’m at it: we must avoid duplication of efforts and prioritize our resources, the latter meaning that we must strive to attain a maximum of results, measured in less Sharks being killed, for the resources we invest.

It always boils down to the same rules, doesn’t it.
Let’s go do it!

PS bravo Patric for having written this. As to whether the Asian mafia controls the Shark fin trade: as the trade has greatly expanded and gone mainstream, they probably do not control it anymore - but they sure use it for money laundering!

Dear Mary

Bravo Terry: great Photography amidst a deluge of forgettable pics from Lupe!

I must apologize for the delay in answering your comments.
Thing is, we’re currently incredibly busy (95% doing, 5% ranting) - and I felt that I needed to devote some time to formulating a more exhaustive response.
So there.

First of all, I really want to thank you for having raised your voice in protest - and I commend you for having done it openly.
I know who you are and admire you for your passion, commitment, eloquence and intelligence. We’re clearly not on the same page on this one – but I very much welcome this discussion as I strongly believe that we will only progress by engaging in dialogue, some of which needs to be controversial and robust. And yes, that sometimes includes ranting, especially in the context of a blog like this one!
Let’s however never forget that in the big scheme of things, we’re on the same side and that this is a squabble between friends, not foes!

Let me try to put things into context.
As you know I’m basically a full-time Shark conservationist. I do what I do the way I do it , and I say what I say based on a specific set of assumptions.
Please bear with me if I try and describe them as follows.

Assumption 1

The Big Gorillas are Population Growth and even more problematic (and largely overlooked), the fact that everybody is striving to attain a “better” life which in practical terms translates into increasing one’s Ecological Footprint.
That is simply not sustainable and if left unchecked, the future looks grim indeed – as in: there will be no future!
If so, we will descend into Chaos and Anarchy, and Conservation will be the least of our concerns.

Assumption 2

One of the immediate consequences of the above is that Life expressed in terms of Biodiversity is experiencing a severe bottleneck, especially when it comes to terrestrial habitats where anthropogenic extinctions are rampant.
Hopefully, we will come to the conclusion that this is not what we want (Ed Wilson’s Biophilia) and if we do, the future will consist in some form of less diverse “Nature” which will however not just “be”, but which we will have to actively manage.
Yes that includes Shark stocks, too!

Assumption 3

When it comes to the Oceans, I believe that the situation is somewhat different.

I believe that we generally grossly under-estimate the size, fecundity and regenerative powers of Marine ecosystems.
Yes there’s widespread pollution, habitat degradation and blatant overfishing: but despite of our best efforts, it appears that we’ve “only” managed to exterminate a small number of Marine Mammals, no Marine Cetaceans and, possibly with the exception of some obscure deep-sea Sharks, zero Marine Fishes!

Yes the Cod, Orange Roughy and Chilean Sea Bass fisheries have collapsed and the Northern Bluefin Tuna appears to be critically endangered – but there are still Cod, Orange Roughies and Chilean Seabass and Northern Bluefins and if we just leave them alone, populations will very likely recover. We may pollute and bomb a Reef to smithereens: but just leave it alone, and it will miraculously recover within the shortest period of time.

Those, I understand, are the facts – I’m not saying that this is great and that we should thus feel free to continue to reap and pillage: but anthropogenic terrestrial and marine extinction rates are clearly very different.

Consequently, I advocate the creation of a multitude of MPAs (the more and bigger, the better) where Biodiversity can shelter in order to re-colonize the surroundings once we finally decide to just leave them alone.
That’s the good news.

Assumption 4

The bad news is that anthropogenic Climate Change and especially, its ugly cousin Ocean Acidification (read this!) may indeed tip the scale towards a total collapse of Marine habitats and related widespread Marine extinctions.
If so, all for which we so valiantly fight (and rant) will have been for naught.

But one has to choose one’s fights and like in the case of the Big Gorillas, this is not where I’ve chosen to be active. We at BAD are however certainly trying to make a (ridiculously small) contribution by always trying to reduce our Carbon footprint and advocating a greener lifestyle.
Let’s just hope that a Nobel Prize and an Oscar will prove sufficient to sway the masses (and the politicians!) to do the right thing – tho after Copenhagen, I’m far from believing that this is anywhere close to being a done deal…

Assumption 5

Species protection does not work. What works is habitat protection.

Assumption 6

I believe that the totality of resources (as in people, brain power, time and money) available to Conservation (and incidentally, to Research) is finite.
And not only that: the sum has been decreasing due to the global recession and also due to the plethora of other competing “worthy” causes, as in Haiti, AIDS, teenage pregnancies, poverty alleviation and-so-on-and so forth – many of which, alas, are directly contributing to making the Big Gorilla even bigger!

If the above is true, and I believe it is, we are looking at a classical zero sum game whereby if we invest any resources into a particular project, we are automatically crippling other projects.

To me, the inevitable consequence of the above is that we must define our priorities and invest those resources prudently and with a view to attaining the best possible results in the most effective and efficient way – very much like the ROI in the “real” world.
And like in the “real” world, we have an obligation to question the efficiency and effectiveness of those different projects and to hold the project leaders accountable - for their success but also for their failure, and this in absolute terms but also, in relative terms when compared to possible alternatives!

Take The Cove: all that hype and praise irritates me!
The movie decries the fact that some Japanese trap some Dolphins, a non-endangered species, in Japan. Some are exported for Dolphin shows; some are killed in unethical ways and then eaten. Certainly all very disturbing - but that's a (legitimate) animal welfare and not a conservation issue!

Did I hear: "sentient being"? And the Vaquita? Please read the link!
Couldn’t all those resources have helped in trying to reverse the decline of the Vaquita, maybe the most critically endangered Cetacean – the more as its demise is very much happening just south of the border? And who, please, is fighting for the Yangtze Dolphin?

Am I entitled to ask those questions?

I also believe that in this day-and-age, the only justification for investing those scarce resources into biological Research is that it directly benefits Conservation and that it satisfies the most stringent ethical imperatives.
And, we must strive to avoid redundant duplications (please, no more tagging of Pacific GWs!), we must oblige scientists to collaborate (which they mostly do) and we must ask that those scientists we finance produce regular results as expressed in scientific publications, etc.

As an example, I’m highly distressed when I hear that Taxonomy, the science that documents Biodiversity, is on the decline, to the point that an increasing number of Institutions are dropping it from the curriculum, that the current Taxonomists have issues of succession and that funding for expeditions is drying up.
Did you know that Jack Randall, the greatest Fish Taxonomist in history, is currently unemployed and unfunded? How is that possible???

And why are there so many competing research projects, NGOs and initiatives targeting the very same issues and incidentally, squandering so much money on aggregate overhead? How can that be beneficial to the cause?
In that regard, Kudos for having established the SSN – very much the way to go!

Now when it comes to Shark Conservation, which is what I do.

Assumption 7

I believe that apart from the doomsday scenarios of Climate Change and Ocean Acidification, the biggest threat to Sharks is overfishing.
In that, I’m partly contradicting my previous argument about the Ocean’s unbridled regenerative powers. I do this in view of the fact that Sharks have a much lower fecundity than most Fishes and that some populations seem to be quite small, as in, apparently, 3-4,000 in the case of GW and maybe even less for some deep-water species.

Assumption 8

I however also believe that the status of Shark stocks is not uniformly catastrophic but that it varies according to species and to regions.
The consequence is that in order to be credible and efficient, we should prioritize our resources in order to direct them to the preservation of those species that are most threatened.
Trivial – but are we doing so?

Assumption 9

The ultimate solution to overfishing is not prohibition, it is to fish sustainably.
This is a central theme of this blog.
The sooner we accept that, the sooner we'll be able to help the Sharks.

In a nutshell, I believe that killing Sharks for food is OK as long as it is done sustainably.
This means that where they are depleted, stocks must be allowed to recover and after that, fishing quotas must remain below the rate of replenishment. I believe that to be true of all fisheries, be it for Sardines, Tuna, Sharks or, yes, Whales!

The practice of finning however is a completely different topic: it is ethically reprehensible for being both wasteful and extremely cruel and needs to be stopped.

Assumption 10

I believe that the fisheries for Sharks (i.e. mainly for their fins) is supply limited, meaning that the demand for Shark Fins greatly outweighs the supply. This is why Shark fins remain one of the most expensive marine commodities.

No clue why the soup has gone down-market.
Maybe because the Shark fishermen catch more Sharks? Maybe because they have reduced their overhead/fin by becoming more efficient? Maybe because cheaper soups contain less desirable and thus cheaper fins? Maybe because there are less fins in one unit of cheap soup?

Anyway, if that is true, I believe that targeting the demand is a very very long shot indeed!
Take your example: 200 posters were noticed by 19% of Beijingers, of which 82% said that they would forego the soup – gives a penetration of 16%.
Now, as I said, if the demand were 4 times the supply, you would need a penetration of more than 75% before a single Shark (!!!) would be spared! How many eaters of soup are there? How many is 75% of that? How many posters would have to be deployed where? How much would that cost?
Is that realistic? Is that the best possible way of investing those resources?
And if it is not – may I criticize it?

One common friend sent me a message stating that when Shark conservationists squabble, no Sharks are being saved.
I disagree! “Squabbling” about the most efficient strategies does save Sharks if it improves the strategies and saves more Sharks! And again, this is never meant ad personam, at least not by yours truly – tho I understand that it may come across as such, which is deplorable but sometimes inevitable!

Anyway, with that in mind, I believe that Shark Conservation should target the supply side by concentrating on the Countries where the Sharks are being caught and exported from and where their demise is creating the biggest negative impact.
Yes that may sometimes be a long shot, too – but I strongly believe that given the right amount of resources and flanked by education and alternatives for the fishermen, it still is the better strategy.

I believe this to be true because it is in the ultimate interest of those Countries to preserve their stocks at sustainable levels and to avoid the collapse of their Marine Ecosystems.

The bulk of the consumers, on the other hand, must only contend with issues of availability and price, and if you’re lucky, with ethical considerations - IMO, not a very strong motivator for changing one’s habits.
Sure did nothing for Rhinos and Elephants, another supply limited commodity – whereas protecting them in Africa seems to work.

And talking of ethics: this is why I did propose the certified Shark Fin soup as an alternative to changing habits altogether.

With that in mind, I believe that the way to go is as follows – and yes, think “Rhinos and Elephants”.

A. The establishment of MPAs in order to preserve the Sharks’ habitats.
Here, I believe that we already dispose of a global network that needs to be activated, and that is us in the Dive Industry. Every single dive operator should be held accountable for protecting the resource he derives his sustenance from – this not only because it’s only fair and ethical, but also because it’s good business!

As an example, the single most photographed, filmed and loved Shark in the Universe is Emma.
So, why are all those countless Emma- and Shark-loving bigwigs not actively engaged in getting Emma and Tiger Beach protected – or are they, very much silently, petition-less and behind the scenes? Yes the “political” situation is complicated and some feathers may well get ruffled – but then, when was Conservation easy? And how much sweeter could success possibly be?
Or am I just ranting – again?

B. The establishment of pro-Shark legislation.
No widespread conservation is possible without the adequate legislative framework.
Achieving this is not trivial but certainly not impossible. Most Governments are open to good arguments, the principal one being that the indiscriminate slaughter of Sharks has devastating effects rippling down through the trophic chain, all the way to the demise of entire Marine ecosystems.

Generally, this consists in advocating sustainable fisheries and ideally, moratoriums (all the way to Shark Sanctuaries) as long as some stocks are too depleted or until there are sufficient data to determine sustainable levels.
The recent protection of Lemon Sharks in Florida is an excellent example of the former and the Honduran moratorium, an excellent example of the latter.
Kudos!

Can this be replicated in, say, Yemen? I betcha it can – but somebody has to go and do it! Who, and who’s going to pay for that?
And how about Ecuador, Colombia, Costa Rica and Mexico where the fishermen are slaughtering “our” Scalloped Hammerheads? Don’t know if it has: but if not, shouldn’t Sharkwater rather be translated into Spanish and be shown there, where it happens?

How many Shark fishing countries have no pro-Shark legislation and what can be done to change that?

C. Which leads me straight over to the need for effective enforcement.
Now this is really the biggest challenge of them all. Here, we are confronted with a lack of resources, often coupled with indifference and corruption, especially in lesser developed countries. This I believe is where we need to direct the bulk of our resources, be it in terms of personal efforts, funds and hardware but also, education and the establishment of alternatives for the fishermen.

In Fiji, we currently compensate the fishermen for not fishing in the MPA but also employ Fish Wardens who have the authority to enforce the law.
And we’re pretty big in outreach, via the local media all the way to a local PSA but also, our youth sponsorship program and presentations to local communities.
In the future, we would like to expand Shark awareness to the school curriculum – but we simply lack the necessary time and manpower and are thus currently trying to outsource it to one of the local NGOs.

D. We should also sponsor research so that our decisions are backed by objective data.
As you know, this is one of the cornerstones of our Fiji Project.

E. "Other"?

Shark Free Marinas Initiative anybody?
Yes the initiator may, or may not be the Antichrist – but is it saving Sharks? Incredibly efficiently so, as signing up costs precisely zero?
21 in Fiji – and how many in the USA? Australia? South Africa? Asia?
How about that for petty squabbling and tribalism huh.

Petitions?
My hunch is that they only make sense when coupled with real action “on the ground”.
Thus, I believe that the Florida Lemon Shark petition and the Hawaii Shark Preservation letter campaign were useful in reinforcing the arguments of the people pursuing those local projects. I believe that the Discovery petition was largely a flop because nobody really cared to go and pursue any direct follow-up with the network – though having said this, I hear that things there may be changing, hopefully for the better.
The other petitions, to me, are just a total waste of time – especially all those competing “stop finning” gigs! More than happy to be proven wrong though!

Activism?
Not convinced!
Conservation is about hard facts, hard and often tedious work, perseverance and commitment, often difficult negotiations.
Yes, and of course passion – but passion alone just aint good enough!

All-to-often, activism is just too hopelessly amateurish, too emotional, too little fact-based, too confrontational and too little solution-oriented. Too often, I fear that it harms rather than being helpful. Too often, I get the impression that the perpetrators are mainly interested in personal aggrandizement and that the initiatives are nothing but marketing stunts – and this includes many of those pro-Shark websites which are so long on pontificating and petitions and so short on results!

And what about our own ideologies and stereotypes. Very unhelpful.
“Sharks” are not “misunderstood”, at least not by the people who take the time to learn about them! People who don’t take the time to learn about dogs “misunderstand” them – wow, what a profound message!
Which species are we talking about anyway: Whale Sharks? Cookie Cutters? Swell Sharks?
Do we “understand” them?

Yes I’m being facetious - but seriously: our biggest capital is to be honest and objective, especially when we are trying to counter the anti-Shark stereotypes!
Romanticizing interactive encounters with large predatory Sharks is stupid and as such, bad marketing. Using numbers that are based on conjecture and untested (although certainly plausible) hypotheses is counter productive. Right now, the only verified number is approx. 30 to 70, which is 50 and not 100, full stop – and that’s just a number, it says nothing about sustainability which is all that counts!

Can we maybe just be a little more humble and less righteous, the more since Conservation is so complicated? Maybe progress towards more facts and less truthiness (read this!)?
Can we maybe just open our eyes and wonder at the magnificence of what is instead of trying to make things up?

In a way, it is the very deluge of platitudes, pseudoscience and exaggerated doomsday scenarios in all those pedestrian wannabee Sharkwater clones that has helped spawn rubbish like Shark Con – and I’m certainly gonna leave it at that, the more as I firmly believe that we should just ignore it and not contribute to its marketing by engaging in the usual vociferous con-troversies!

We are the amateurs.
Can we please listen to what the professionals are telling us – the principal message being that extreme positions (on both sides!) are inhibiting Conservation and appropriate Management measures?

There you have it Mary!
This is basically where I personally come from - and yes, alas, it includes a lot of skepticism!
But having said this, we’ve certainly come a long long way and I remain very hopeful that we will succeed in turning things around!

Dunno if I’ve managed to adequately address your reservations.
But I’m thankful for having been given the chance to put things into context.

You too, take care!

Shark Fin Trade: Facts, Speculation or BS?

 

I'm confused.

The HK Shark fin industry is whining.

Apparently, Shark fin imports to HK are down by 20-30% following the airline and shipping line fin bans, the graft crackdown and the success of the various anti-fin initiatives by the Shark activists.

At the same time, Peter Knights is shouting victory, to wit

“People said it was impossible to change China, but the evidence we are now getting says consumption of shark fin soup in China is down by 50 to 70 percent in the last two years,” said Peter Knights, executive director of WildAid, a San Francisco-based group that has promoted awareness about the shark trade. The drop is also reflected in government and industry statistics.

“It is a myth that people in Asia don’t care about wildlife,” Knights said. “Consumption is based on ignorance rather than malice. ”

Wow.

But then, I read this

Recently, we have been hearing persistent claims of declining shark fin imports into Hong Kong. But many of the reports - both in local and international media - have been guilty of peddling misinformation, which has created confusion around the real issue.

Claims from the shark fin industry of a drop in imports of some 30 per cent - and even one report of 70 per cent - are exaggerated. Data from the Census and Statistics Department clearly indicates a 19.8 per cent drop in imports from 2011 to 2012. What's more, for the 15 years up to and including 2011, shark fin imports have remained relatively constant at about 10,000 tonnes a year, albeit with some fluctuations.

That contrasts significantly with the figure of 1,162 tonnes recently reported for 2012. The exaggerated drop in the 2012 figure, which was widely reported, is probably a result of the fact that the codes under which shark fin products are reported were revised in the 2012 government data.

A large quantity of fins were recorded against a previously rarely used code and omitted from the total figure reported.

The decline also started well before major airlines, led by Cathay Pacific last December, took the bold and much welcome step of banning the carriage of shark fin. About 15 per cent of all shark fin is imported into Hong Kong by air; the majority still comes by sea.

Yet, despite the 2012 decline, Hong Kong has retained its leading and historic position representing about 50 per cent of the global total, indicating that the drop is likely to be global in nature. The good news could be that demand and consumption are falling - which has also been widely reported. The bad news could be that there are simply fewer sharks in the oceans, a very real possibility according to scientists. Or, it could be a combination of both.

Whichever way, until we see a significant downward trend that can be attributed to reduced consumption, there is much reason for concern. Overfishing is driving many shark species towards extinction and by the time we see such a trend emerge, it will probably be too late to do anything about it.

I would have to agree with Sophie.

The decline is quite possibly due to reductions at both ends, the demand side but also the supply side - the latter due to depleted Shark stocks but also, hopefully, to better Shark protection and management measures in the countries they are being sourced from.

But is it really so?

With Shark fins originating from a supply limited fishery - is the drop in demand already sufficient to have an effect on the trade? 

If so, then the inevitable consequence would be that prices must have dropped when compared to the prices of the same fins (in kind, quality and size) of the same species that were being quoted, say, last year. If so, then the reduction in demand but also the crackdown on corruption and the slower economy are having an effect.

If prices have however remained the same or even risen, then the advocacy is not (yet) having any effect on the trade (and thus the fishing), and the self congratulatory victory laps may be a tad premature.

Do we have that information?
Alex?

2011: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly - Part One!

Shark pic of the Year!

So there.
2011 is slowly petering out, the shop is closed so that the staff can enjoy a well deserved rest and I’ve got some spare time on my hand – so brace yourselves for a lengthy recap of 2011!
You have been warned!

This time, it’s not gonna be about BAD.
Thanks to our clients that have once again visited us in record numbers, we did very well indeed – and so did Shark Reef where biodiversity continues to increase and where once again, we recorded a record number of Bulls - and it ain’t over yet: from what we can already see now, we will very likely witness a further increase in 2012!
As of September 1st, we are also completely carbon neutral after having sponsored the planting of 330,000 mangroves, very likely a world first – and again, this is just an intermediate step as we’re currently planting more in order to offset the carbon footprint of our clients!
Finally, we’ve again met some wonderful new people, many of which researchers, and are involved in several ground-breaking projects that will hopefully come to fruition next year.
Keep watching this space!

But as I said, this post is not about us.
2011 has been an exceptional year for global Shark conservation and outreach. It has also seen the continuation of the usual shenanigans.

And without further ado – 2011 as seen by DaShark!

The Good

This is the easy part.

But lemme first tell you where I’m coming from here.
The way I see it, the only metrics for effective Shark conservation is that less Sharks are being killed, full stop. The rest is just fluff and we shall talk about it later.

Having now been involved in Shark conservation for close to a decade and having seen the varying success of various approaches, I remain firmly of the opinion that regardless of the anger at seeing the all-pervasive global slaughter of Sharks, the only winning strategy when advocating Shark conservation is to remain strictly fact-based, pragmatic and willing to compromise.
Successful conservation is always the result of negotiations where we are asking others to enact pro-Shark legislation - and whereas sometimes popular support (and thus petitions) may help, the arguments must never the less be rock solid. Never forget that legislation can as easily be repealed – and it will if the arguments supporting it are proven to have been fraudulent!

By the same token and very much like the science it is based upon, Shark conservation remains always in flux and is evolving rapidly based on the latest science but also on the success (and the failings) of the latest conservation initiatives.
As an example, legislation has evolved massively in 2011 as the forces of evil have shown considerable cunning in exploiting loopholes and otherwise circumventing the law, and as it has become painfully evident that the best legislation will always remain completely toothless unless it gets adequately enforced. The latter requires considerable resources for capacity building, monitoring and prosecution that must be an integral component of any such initiative in developing countries.

And one last thought.
As the global recession is far from over, 2011 has seen a further shrinking of the resources available to research and conservation. With that in mind and because the Shark fin industry is supply limited, we need to prioritize our resources and invest them where the Sharks are being killed - and yes, like an old broken record, I'm repeating myself - and will continue to do so, over and over again!

Anyway, here is the list.

• Most impressive Shark Conservation Org: The Pew Environment Group's Global Shark Campaign.
  
  I must confess that for once, I’m quite at a loss of positive attributes here. I was going to painstakingly try and enumerate the many achievements but thankfully, they have done so themselves. Far from the huge bureaucratic overhead of the established NGOs, this is but a tiny group: but its members are smart, dedicated and extremely hard working individuals who know how get the job done and who like in the real world, operate under a strict regime of deliverables, deadlines and accountability. And no, they don't achieve their success by throwing money at the problems as some of their pathetic detractors claim, but by being solution-oriented, strictly science-based, pragmatic and diplomatic - and thus widely accepted as valuable expert interlocutors by the powers that be.
  The strategy has been to concentrate on the supply side by successfully advocating changes in fisheries policies at national, regional and global levels.
  This is how you do it – which of course begs the question, what have all the other, bigger, more established and more vocal orgs been doing all these years!
  


• Most improved Shark Conservation Org: Shark Savers
  
  Shark Savers continues to evolve and I like where it is going, the more as I’m good friends with several of the people involved, some of which for a very long time indeed. 2011 has seen a long overdue consolidation at the top where the org is now being steered by intelligent, pragmatic and solution-oriented individuals, resulting in solid Shark conservation successes. Case in point: this year's Florida Shark protection measures where they have played a preeminent role, the stellar project Manta Ray of Hope, see below, and much along the lines of think global act local, this recent victory in the Midwest (bravo Penny!).
  


• Most promising new marine Conservation Org: One World One Ocean
  
  This is a brand new undertaking and there is thus no track record except for a stellar PSA.
  But I like the people, the pragmatic message and the mission and look forward to many successes in the years to come. The principal difference to other media-based initiatives: no personal self promotion but above all, a long term track record of getting the message across – meaning distribution distribution distribution!


• Most impressive individual Shark Advocate: Stefanie Brendl
  
  The victim of an appalling and by no means resolved witch hunt in Hawaii (check on the oldest posts), Stefanie has not given up but instead, completely re-invented herself and become one of the most respected global Shark advocates in the process. Following their ground breaking Shark fin ban in Hawaii, she and Senator Clayton Hee have successfully expanded the concept to several US territories and states. Their approach has been quiet, rational, pragmatic and science-based diplomacy instead of activist clamoring. Passionate, goal-oriented and doggedly determined, Stefanie gets the job done whilst operating in the background and leaving the limelight to others – deservedly and alas, very much not so, see Part Two.
  So here’s to Stefanie, heroine of Sharks!


• Most impressive Shark Conservation Achievement: Bahamas Shark Sanctuary
  
  Who would have thought!
  Having previously talked to literally scores of insiders about the need to protect the Sharks there, everybody was telling me that getting meaningful conservation enacted in the Bahamas was strictly mission impossible – and then Pew and the BNT (and yes: many others did help) managed to pull it off without any notable hiccups in a matter of mere months! This is a massive achievement and a testament to the quality and effectiveness of the approach by Pew and it cannot be applauded enough!


• Best new Elasmobranch Conservation Initiative: Manta Ray of Hope
  
  Although not directly an initiative by Shark Savers (or is it?), it is very much associated with them. Once again, kudos for a brilliant, important and timely project!


• Best Shark Conservation Resources: Reports by Pew
  
  Once the clear niche of Oceana of which I used to be a fan but where I am increasingly becoming critical, the reports authored by Pew are a meticulously researched treasure trove of hard facts, always up-to date science and pragmatic solutions – the latter very much setting them apart from the widespread whining and lamenting! A must-read for anybody wanting to stay abreast of modern, solution-oriented Shark conservation!


• Best Outreach in Shark Research: Neil Hammerschlag and the RJ Dunlap Marine Conservation Program
  
  This is how you do it.
  This is simply brilliant outreach via blog, Facebook, video and undoubtedly many more outlets, showing that Shark research can be fascinating, fun, hip and young. I remain concerned by those SPOT tags and only time will tell whether the data will somehow justify the invasive methods – but all-in-all, I really do like the people and the energy and am impressed by the passion and also by the willingness to tackle some of the more controversial aspects of Shark research.
  Well done!


• Best Shark Conservation print Media: Juliet Eilperin
  
  Juliet’s contribution to catapulting Shark conservation into the mainstream media has been invaluable. Extremely well informed and (frustratingly) balanced, she continues to crank out stellar pro-Shark pieces that directly counteract the appalling hype by the tabloids.
  


• Best Shark Conservation television programs: CNN
  
  Bravo and thank you CNN for having embraced the cause of Shark conservation with frequent, balanced and always interesting programming!


• Best Nature Programming: BBC
  
  Who else – the measure of all documentary work, the one and only, the best of the best, forever emulated and forever unrivaled and unmatched!
  Need I elaborate? I sure hope not!


• Best Shark Conservation Movie: Sanctuary: The Last Stand for Sharks
  
  So far, it appears that it has only been shown to select audiences in the Bahamas. Funded by Pew and (I believe) produced by Shawn, it combines great visuals with strict scientific data. I’ve seen it at DEMA and it is my hope that there will be a less Bahamas-centric director’s cut for viewing by a larger audience.
  Great job Shawn, I'm actually quite impressed!


• Best Shark Picture: this one, featured at the top!
  


• Best Shark Dance: David Shiffman
  
  Nobody and i mean Nobody! comes even close to David’s beautifully choreographed species-specific routines combining his dazzling footwork with exquisite artistic expression, period! Here’s to the Fred Astaire of Shark conservation - and frugal fashionista to boot!
  


• Most promising Shark Conservation Newcomers, ex aequo: Madi Pip Stewart, Christine Shepard, David Diley
  
  The common denominator: passion and a lot of talent.
  But as always, this is only the beginning. Having witnessed how other promising talents have quickly succumbed to the temptations of fame and money, or just simply lost interest, only time will tell whether these are mere blips or whether we are witnessing the start of careers that could be remarkable indeed.
  So far so great!
  


• Best Shark News Website: Shark Year Magazine
  
  It may well be an old hat but having only discovered it recently, it's new to me. Shark Year Magazine impresses by being exhaustive in covering all aspects of Shark news from fishing to strikes to the latest science.


• Best Shark Info Website: Elasmodiver
  
  Andy Murch’s Shark website is truly a treasure trove of information, often interspersed with personal and intelligent observations by the author who proves to be a true Shark expert – and this for once in a positive sense!


• Best Shark Blog: Underwater Thrills
  
  How could it be any different!
  His is the other watchdog blog and like this scribe, Patric does not shun to dabble in controversy of which there is plenty – especially if you got no patience for bullshit! The difference being, where I regularly get outraged and start firing broadsides, he retains his composure and dissects sarcastically, something which is both way more effective and also, way nastier! Whereas we sometimes disagree vehemently, we are united by the fact that we get called names by very much the same people, something I carry as a badge of honor – as I suspect does he!
  


• Best Marine Science Blog: Southern Fried Science
  
  In all honesty, this is likely the last year where I would assign the honors to them. I sense that the boyz are growing up and being kept increasingly busy pursuing their professional careers. Blogging is excruciatingly time consuming and requires staying on the ball, something very few can afford once they enter the daily treadmill. But for 2011, SFS has continued to be my very favorite marine blog, this largely to the epic posts mentioned below.


• Best Blog Posts on Shark-related Issue: WhySharksMatter on the Junior Controversy.
  
  I must say, David’s two posts here and here, and especially, the ensuing epic threads and moderation by both David and Andrew have been nothing short of stellar. This is a brilliant exercise in investigative journalism shining a cold spotlight on the Californian GW research scene - more in Part Two.


• Best Shark Facebook Pages, ex aequo: Shark Defenders and Shark Savers
  
  There is now a legion of Shark conservation Facebook pages and making a choice has been difficult. My personal criterion: whether or not they allow the Shark whacks to post their ramblings – and both these pages do thankfully not but instead, they are regularly updated and feature interesting news and causes worth pursuing.


• Most deserved Accolades: Doc becoming a featured Nat Geo Explorer
  
  Whereas it is quite impossible to overstate Doc’s contribution to Shark research and Shark conservation, I believe that his true legacy will be that he has found the time to educate and mentor a whole new generation of brilliant and equally passionate Shark researchers who are truly among the crème de la crème in their field.
  

So, have I already managed to piss somebody off like usual?
Wait til you see Part Two! :)