Prima facie, it appears to dovetail beautifully with what I've been advocating for a long time, i.e.
attaining independent third-party certification that a determined Shark fishery, but
also the trade in Shark fins are being conducted
sustainably. Yes that's a lot to read so in order to spare you the inconvenience, lemme cite myself.
In a nutshell, this is what i believe.
As much as I love them and as much as I deplore it when they are being killed: Sharks are not sacred Fish.
For good or for bad, they are a source of protein and some people want to eat them
and yes, they are also a rather useless ingredient in an Asian soup.
But then again, at least two religions frown on us eating pork - what
would we say if they came and tried to tell us what to eat and what not.
Criticizing culinary preferences, cultural or not, is just not a good strategy for furthering conservation - advocating strict sustainability is.
Right now, we must advocate Shark conservation and as long as Sharks are being killed in huge numbers world wide, those sanctuaries are certainly the best way of trying to create a resemblance of balance.
But if in the future there will be uncontroversial proof
that harvesting specific quotas of specific Sharks in specific waters
is fully sustainable, then I believe that we will have to accept that
those quotas be extracted.
So, is this a good development?
At least
in theory, I cannot but applaud it - but like always, all depends on the specific details and my pal
Michael is already voicing the usual reservations vis-a-vis the MSC. And of course the sharkitarians are gnashing their teeth - but frankly, who cares.
Any preliminary evidence?
From what I can discern, the Department of Fisheries of Western Australia is anything but a bunch of exploitative Fish-murdering yahoos but instead, they very much appear to be extremely aware of the need to carefully manage their marine resources under the aspect of sustainability. The
MSC is WA's
chosen third-party certifier and Western Australia already boasts
MSC certification for its famous
rock lobsters.
Sounds great doesn't it.
But like Michael correctly remarks, there are unresolved questions about whether the MSC certifications is good enough. As always, this is an extremely complicated and controversial topic, way beyond the scope of this post. But should you really want to build an own opinion, I highly recommend that you start by exploring
this brilliant series of posts on
Sea Monster. Furthermore, you may want to consult
this description of the present Western Australian Shark fisheries, i.e.
Temperate and
Tropical.
I say, let's give this a chance.
Yes the MSC certification process may be partly inadequate - but if so, let's not just slam it but help improve it! As far as I know, it's the best (if not the only one) there is and in the specific case of Sharks, a MSC-certified fishery and/or fin trade would be
light years ahead of what is happening globally, i.e. rampant overfishing, cheating and poaching!
I've said it before,
we need to make a choice.
We can remain absolutely dogmatic and oppose
any fishing,
any trade and
any consumption of Sharks - and if so, I am intimately convinced that we will ultimately fail.
Or, we can honestly embrace the cause of sustainability, become part of the process and be able to come up with pragmatic
solutions. By being viewed as valued counterparts and not radical opponents, we will hopefully be granted a seat at the table in order to first define what full
sustainability needs to specifically encompass in a specific fishery, and then develop adequate mechanisms to achieve that aim.
Isn't that the much better strategy?
Or am I missing something here?
