Fish Warden Course!

Behold!

This is the fish warden class of 2015!

This is the fourth fish warden course we sponsor, and the lineup obviously comprises many BAD boyz and Galoa villagers that will patrol the SRMR - but there is also Ron from Projects Abroad, plus several participants from Vunibau and even the USP that will henceforth patrol and protect the precious Bull, Lemon and Scalloped Hammerhead nurseries in the mouths of the Navua and the Rewa, respectively!

Our thanks go to the Department of Fisheries, The Ministry of Environment, the Police, the Ministry of iTaukei Affairs and the office of the Roko Tui Serua for all having kindly assisted in this endeavor!
And to Nani for having organized it all! :)

Just like I said.

Like always the proof is the doing, not in those breathy announcements and idle talk!

 

Saving the Sawfishes - Global Strategy!

Click for detail - whole infographic here!

Bravo IUCN!

All Sawfishes are threatened with extinction.

And whilst some countries like the USA do a good job at protecting them and trying to re-establish critical habitat, others require urgent action.

You can read it all here.

This is excellent, impressive work and a must read for fisheries managers, researchers and conservationists alike - and for smartass anglers, too!

Kudos!

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!

There’s no Business to be done on a dead Planet!

Doing the right thing for the environment makes for good, financially sound business.
Government, the private sector, and science need to come together and cooperate to find ways of solving the major environmental challenges we face.

More thoughts by Yvon Chouinard, the founder of Patagonia here.
And here are the direct consequences of his credo for his company.

I am impressed!

SRMR - Step by Step

The Shark Reef Marine Reserve continues to deliver.

Here's another recent publication by Juerg - please click on it for details.
You may be surprised that it does not focus on Sharks - but ever since its inception in 2004, the SRMR has been the backdrop for a whole array of scientific research projects ranging from Fish Taxonomy all the way to Shark Behavior.
In a way, this a sort of open air laboratory where experiments can be predictably replicated and observations cover a large uninterrupted time frame, allowing us to record unusual behavior but above all, long-term changes throughout the seasons and as overall local conditions improve owing to our stewardship, thus attracting more species and more individuals.

This little piece was published in Coral Reefs.
It adds yet another footnote to the life history of the ubiquitous Sharksucker, Echeneis naucrates. It eloquently illustrates how disposing of such a unique research station enables to discover behavior that would otherwise remain largely undetected.

About Biodiversity, with E. O. Wilson

The distribution of marine biodiversity varies widely throughout ocean basins. The abundance and diversity of most taxa tends to be highest near continental and island margins that are less than 2,000 meters deep. Please click to enlarge.

This is about Assumption 2.

Ed Wilson is one of my heroes.
Now 81, his mind remains as sharp as a razor.
Along with other seminal books like Quammen's The Song of the Dodo, his The Future of Life (read this great interview) is one of the publications that convinced me that something needed to be done, right now. Choosing to focus on the Oceans, and Sharks in particular, was then nothing more than a corollary and largely spawned by my life long passion for diving and underwater imagery.

Anyway, I'm digressing as usual.
Enjoy!

Dancing with the Devil?

It’s that time of the year again.

The Humpback Whales are slowly moving towards Vava’u.
And very shortly, a related migration will see the delegates of the IWC meet in Agadir, Morocco, on June 20 to 25.

IWC meetings are always controversial, but this one especially so.
After lengthy and more or less secret negotiations, a proposal will be tabled aimed at ending the whaling moratorium in favor of allocated quotas for Japan, Norway and Iceland (only). In exchange, those countries would relinquish their fake scientific whaling and agree to be fully regulated and also, monitored by the IWC.

Obviously, nobody is happy.
The conservationists are crying foul and advocating that all whaling, scientific or not, must end, period. The whaling countries are unhappy as the quota system would reduce the total numbers of killed whales.

But such is the nature of pragmatic compromises: everybody must make concessions and nobody wins outright.
But whereas the discontent is only human nature, personal egos and ideologies are not the topic at hand. The topic at hand is the survival of whales as a species, and how best to achieve it – and this in a real world and not some utopic vision that continues to fail in practice.
And yes there's plenty of shenanigans including blatant bribery. But let's not be holier than thou - having been an investment banker, I can assure you that we very much engage in the very same practices, and worse!

The question is, is it acceptable to kill some whales in order to better preserve the species?
I say: in this specific case, absolutely yes!
It’s the same old conundrum facing all marine conservationists dealing with fisheries: in this world where people want to eat animal protein, the long term solution can only be sustainable harvesting, meaning that we will have to accept that some of our pet animals will be killed.

In exchange, conservationists must however get a say about which species get killed along with how many, when, where and how they get harvested, and they must also be able to rigorously monitor the hunt in order to ensure that everybody adheres to the agreed upon rules.
From what I can see, the proposal appears to pursue precisely those aims.

Plus, in the case of whales, the good news is this.
Contrary to Sharks, whaling is demand limited - and the demand is rapidly waning.
Once you eliminate the ego factor and the irrational perceived issues of nationalistic pride, whaling makes no commercial sense whatsoever. With that in mind and if left to simple issues of offer and demand (and if one disregards the various non-controversial indigenous harvesting exceptions) whaling may well die of natural causes or become biologically irrelevant, especially if it remains confined to species where stocks appear sufficiently robust, as Minkes.
Indeed, as the Pew remarks, other threats to whales may well become equally, if not more relevant- especially Climate Change!

Over to the Sharks and this post by Patric Douglas.
My first reaction was Boy, there really REALLY are some colossal back-stabbing morons out there – and I wasn’t referring to Patric!
I’m not at all privy to any additional details – but if what I read is true, and I have no reason to doubt it, then it just once again reinforces my strong belief that I will never, ever want to be part of those horrible circles!

Anyway, Patric just does what Patric does: he thinks laterally.
As a consequence, some of his proposals are really way out there where I have problems following, at least at first glance - but time after time, as results are being achieved and emotions are being superseded by pragmatism and dispassionate analysis, I discover that I end up by ultimately agreeing with his ideas.

Thing is, and contrary to the revelations, or whatever, by the usual detractors, Patric and I are neither close personal friends (we’ve met once), nor do we do business together, nor do we co-ordinate our posts in order to pursue some sinister common agenda aimed at world domination.
We just happen to be two of the most active bloggers on Sharky matters and due to the relative paucity of topics, we often end up covering the very same issues at the very same time. Over time, we’ve developed a degree of mutual respect and yes, friendship as it appears that we share many common beliefs and thus tend to reach the same conclusions. And yes, we’ve also co-operated on some projects, like this one, or this one – which I am proud of and for which I’m thankful for Patric’s support – and I suspect, vice versa!
End of explanation.

Anyway, back to the topic, i.e. Patric’s suggestion.
Would it be OK to partake in the Shark fin trade in order to fund Shark conservation?

Repugnant as that may seem at first glance, the arguments in favor would be this.

• The web-based Shark fin trade is a fact and it is certainly plausible that in view of the potential earnings, it continues unabated regardless of some past conservation victories – meaning that as some trading platforms get closed down, new ones are being created
• The idea is that of re-routing part of the already existing trade, not of increasing it by creating more demand – if that can be substantiated, and I believe it can, no incremental harm is being done
• Shark conservation could sure use those funds – especially if the sums mentioned in Patric’s post are in any way realistic! Wow just think of the possibilities!
• Apart from earning money that would be invested into Shark conservation, partaking in the trade could yield valuable additional information about volumes, origins, prices, species, etc

The con arguments are obviously ethical and would also have to center around the risk of misappropriation and mis-allocation of funds.
The latter can however be overcome by a stringent regimen of checks and balances.

Which leaves the ethical conundrum.
Being who I am and like in the case of game fishing for Sharks, I can certainly never imagine myself being part of that process – money or no money!

But others may well.
And if so, and if done properly, I can only wish them the very best of success!

Mind you: reluctantly!

Just 200 left - maybe!

Check this out.



This is happening 200 miles from San Diego.
As always in real conservation, the situation is complex and riddled with setbacks: no instant gratification here, no fashionable posters, certainly no Oscars - just a lot of tedious, dogged and often frustrating work with little to show for in the short term.
But it is critically important - and you can help!

There are just between 150 and 200 Vaquitas remaining.
It is the World's rarest and most endangered Cetacean, to the point where it may well go extinct during this decade.

Japanese Dolphins are not endangered - and Taji is 8,000 miles away.
Just wanted to put things into perspective.

Malta - again!

The Maltese shenanigans continue.
That Country sure brings out the worst and the best!

If you want to keep abreast of what's going on in Doha, please consult this informative website - or enjoy the toothy comments by Lesley Rochat!
It's same-old same-old, with a defeat for Shark Conservation (good comments here) the latest bad news.
Thank you China, Russia and Japan!

Good One!

I did like this feature.

Together with Sharks, Crocs are probably the most maligned of the big predators, and equally endangered.
Yes I did see the reference to one of nature's most lethal killing machines - but overall, this is very much aimed at sending out the message that Crocs and people can co-exist, even underwater - provided that we are careful to know our limits and not to stress the creature.
Indeed - always be respectful!

I say, well done!
For the message and for the stellar pictures!
Tho considering who took them, the latter was kind of a foregone conclusion!

Scanning the Horizon

Caribbean Lionfish Hunter (yup this is a link)

A large group of smart people have gotten together this September and defined some nascent conservation issues for 2010, both threats and opportunities.

The resulting paper is called A Horizon Scan of Global Conservation Issues for 2010 and you can download it here, and yes, as you should, you would have to pay for that. Or, you may want to consult the useful synopses posted on Conservation Bytes and Planet Earth Online.

It spans a list of 15 topics, some of which surprising like International Farmland Acquisitions by foreign governments, some somewhat obscure and eclectic like the effects of Nanosilver in Wastewater, some visionary as in Synthetic Meat or releasing Aerosols into the Stratosphere to combat Global Warming to outright scary as in Artificial Life.
In very general terms, they all illustrate the complexity of our environment and the vast, and often totally unexpected ramifications of our actions upon it.

As in the case of the Lionfish invasion of the Western Atlantic.
Likely the progeny of aquarium pets that escaped or were discarded in Florida during the early nineties, they have completely overrun the Caribbean and are inexorably threatening South America.

You can check out the progression here.

This what the paper says (links are mine).

Invasive Indo-Pacific Lionfish.
Small numbers of predatory Indo-Pacific lionfish (mainly Pterois volitans) were first recorded in waters along the eastern coast of the United States in 1992 .
The source of introduction is uncertain. The rate of lionfish range expansion was initially slow, but increased markedly after the colonisation of Bahamian coral reefs in 2004.
Lionfish are now established throughout most of the northern Caribbean and have been recorded as far north as Rhode Island and south to Colombia. Where they are established, lionfish are found at densities far exceeding those reported for their native range (e.g. > 390 lionfish/ha in the Bahamas compared to about 80/ha in the Red Sea).
Lionfish grow to a maximum length of about 45 cm, and prey on a wide variety of fish and invertebrates. On experimental reefs in the Bahamas, young lionfish reduced the recruitment of native coral reef fish by nearly 80%; the effects of lionfish on natural reefs are still unmeasured.
Lionfish are protected by venomous spines, and while small lionfish can be eaten by large groupers, such predators are rare throughout the Caribbean.
Lionfish are, however, now being fished and offered on the menu of some Bahamian restaurants.

The pests obviously have no "natural" predators in the Caribbean and the local predators that could fulfill the role of regulating their population, like the larger Groupers and the Sharks, are severely depleted. I fear that despite of the valiant efforts of those who promote fishing and eating them (nice collection of recipes here), they are there for good, like, say, the cane toad in Oz (and alas, in Fiji as well).
Maybe, eventually, the Lionfish populations will somewhat balance out, the more as there is evidence that all individuals are the descendants of very few females and that, at least in theory, after experiencing such a severe population bottleneck, they would eventually have to crash back to their effective population size, like the Cheetahs. Maybe, some local predators, parasites or pathogens will learn to exploit the new resource and thus keep the numbers in check.
But it sure is a very very long bet and not likely to happen anytime soon, at least not soon enough to be of real practical use.

Thing is that ever since we've "evolved" to become a global nuisance, these migrations and infestations have become so frequent to constitute the norm rather than the exception.
Just think about our animal baggage, be it domesticates, many of which have gone lethally feral, stupidly introduced species like Fiji's ubiquitous and invasive Minah and Mongoose, or unwanted followers like the Norvegian Rat or the Bedbug. Or the plants, be it agricultural or ornamental, like the Traveller's Palm I'm looking at whilst writing this is Fiji - originally, endemic to Madagascar!

And recently and as always, mostly unwittingly, we've started meddling on a truly epic scale.
By building canals we've created highways for marine invasions between the Med and the Red Sea and between the Pacific and the Caribbean. By heating up the planet, tropical pests like disease-bearing Mosquitoes, Rodents and Fire Ants and pathogens are ever expanding (and check out this example of how anthropogenic marine invasions are affecting Great Britain) and according to the above mentioned paper, there's a risk that as the Arctic melts, it will lose its function as a barrier between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, with unknown consequences for those two ecosystems - as in: adios Deadliest Catch!

Anyway, I'm ranting as usual.
All I wanted to say is that it sure is complicated and always interconnected - and that we should never forget that Marine, and Shark Conservation are but one facet of a much bigger and alas, equally bleak picture.

OK, back to the Sharks.

Required Reading!

This February, Why Shark Matter has come up with this epic post.

It discusses the following data.

“Ten thousand sets of purse seine nets around immature tuna swimming under logs and other debris will cause the deaths of 25 dolphins; 130 million small tunas; 513,870 mahi mahi; 139,580 sharks; 118,660 wahoo; 30,050 rainbow runners; 12,680 other small fish; 6540 billfish; 2980 yellowtail; 200 other large fish; 1020 sea turtles; and 50 triggerfish.”

“Ten thousand sets of purse seine nets around mature yellowfin swimming in association with dolphins, will cause the deaths of 4000 dolphins (0.04 percent of a population that replenishes itself at the rate of two to six percent per year); 70,000 small tunas; 100 mahi mahi; 3 other small fish; 520 billfish; 30 other large fish; and 100 sea turtles. No sharks, no wahoo, no rainbow runners, no yellowtail, and no triggerfish and dramatic reductions in all other species but dolphins.”

A whopping 198 (!!!) responses later, the debate is far from being over.

It is intelligent, controversial, passionate and highly entertaining and goes right to the heart of the complexities of conservation, one of the ongoing threads on this blog. It is great reading and I invite you to go explore it - and to add any opinions you may wish to share.
There - not here!

Bravo USA!

I'm being kept busy (and quite frankly fascinated) by this - but this is important!

Great news!!!
The USA have announced their support for Monaco's proposal to list the critically endangered Northern Bluefin Tuna under Appendix I of CITES!

Bravo bravo bravo!!!

Hat tip: Sea Notes, by the Monterey Bay Aquarium

Brilliant!

Thank you The Dorsal Fin!

They've unearthed this simply brilliant conservation video.
Enjoy!

Told you so!

Didn't I!

The Ozzies were clearly too naïvely optimistic: Trust the Europeans to eff it up at the very last minute!
The guys didn't even wait to look at the "latest assessment" by the ICCAT as originally announced but have already decided to drop the demand to have the critically endangered Northern Bluefin Tuna listed under CITES I.

The instigators of this turn-about: Malta and Spain!
And who's surprised!

Remember the Turbot War?
Having contributed to the demise of the Canadian Cod Fisheries and cleaned out the Atlantic (shocking study here!) in general and the Mediterranean in particular, the Spanish Fisheries are now poaching Tuna in the South Pacific. And in case you wondered why a Shark conservation blog would bother to rant about the plight of the Tuna, read this: yes Spain is now one of the principal suppliers of Shark fins! Sharks may have been mere bycatch once - but now, Spanish fishing boats are specifically targeting them and finning them "clandestinely", meaning that everybody knows but nobody does anything about it!

As to Malta, what can I say.
Meet George Pullicino (standing next to Maltese European Fisheries Commissioner Borg in this pic), the big (!) honcho in charge of Fisheries - and apparently, as pro-Fish-killing and anti-Conservation as they get!
On his "watch", Malta's fishing industry is progressing from fishy to fishier to outright brazen.

Talking of which, the latest scandalous development is George's blatant ignoring (as in deleting of e-mails, unopened) of the pleas by our friend Alex to stop the indiscriminate slaughter of the Med's last Angel Sharks, a genus which is protected under European Law.
Fortunately, the matter is likely to be resolved, as Alex now disposes of a letter by the European Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries stating that
...angel sharks are to be released whenever caught in all EU waters and may not be retained on board. This is clearly stated in Annex III (point 19) of our Fishing opportunities Regulation for 2009 (EC No 43/2009). The pictures you show are clearly an evidence of non compliance on this provision.
and signed by César Deben, Director - in the name of Borg!
It couldn't be more unequivocal than that!
Kudos to Alex! And shame on George!
We shall be watching!

But back to the Tuna.
The proposal by the Commission was defeated by an unholy alliance of Mediterranean Countries comprising the two ring leaders and Greece and Cyprus. And France, another one of the notorious quota violators who came back on their word! And Italy, equally guilty!
Yes that would be a paltry six nations, many of which culpable of multiple violations of current Law, blocking a proposal that is supported by a overwhelming majority of twenty-one!
Don't we just love Federalism!

I read that apparently, Monday's move postpones a decision on whether to place bluefin tuna on an endangered species list. EU environment ministers are now expected to reach a final position by the end of the year.

Promises promises.
We shall be watching!

"Are we screwed?"

Yes these are boats! Click on pic!

See for yourself.

I've blogged about it before: if you thought that the main consequence of CO2 emissions will be Sea Level Rise, think again.
Remember Cleopatra's wager?

And no, it's not a conspiracy! Ask the Pacific oysters!
Movie review here.







Want to watch a lecture about the whole disheartening fiasco?
Grab a bag of popcorn and sit back - yes, it's half an hour long!
Things have certainly not improved since then in 2005!
Scary, scary stuff!

Maltese Shenanigans

Gone - probably forever .

Joe Borg sure talks the talk.

His assessment of the Achievements by the EU Fisheries Commission he heads proudly claims this.

Sustainability
Achieving sustainability in biological, economic and social fields has been an ongoing challenge. The basis of the Commission’s work has been to regain a sustainable resource base to allow EU fishermen to secure a viable future. This will also be a crucial objective for the European consumer whose expectations for healthy and sustainably-caught fish products are ever increasing.

a) Ecological sustainability
In order to put fisheries onto a firmer sustainable footing, the 2002 reform of the CFP foresaw a move from a short-term approach towards long term plans for major stocks in EU waters.
These plans include a number of provisions for conservation measures aimed at preventing fi sh stocks from being overexploited and restoring them to levels that can produce maximum sustainable yield. These measures seek to avoid that the pressures of fishing activities targeting certain stocks jeopardise the reproductive capacity of the stocks concerned or puts them at risk of collapsing. A number of such plans have already been established whilst others are expected to be adopted by the end of 2009.

Over the past five years the Commission has adopted ten long term plans for the following important stocks:
• Northern hake from the Bay of Biscay to the North Sea
• Southern hake off the Iberian Peninsula
• Nephrops off the Iberian Peninsula
• Plaice and sole in the North Sea
• Sole in the western Channel
• Sole in the Bay of Biscay
• Cod in the Kattegat, North Sea, Skagerrak eastern Channel,West of Scotland and Irish Sea
• Cod in the Baltic Sea
• Herring in the West of Scotland Sea
• Bluefin tuna

Although the Commission is still far from extending the coverage of such plans to all European fisheries, an irreversible framework for better stock management, which will form the basis of our future action, has been set. There has been a definite change in the mind-set of policy planners and stakeholders who now make the request to have such plans developed in the interest of putting both the stocks and operators that live off these stocks on a surer footing

Well well, all very impressive indeed!

But how about walking the walk?
Like all of the apex predators in the Atlantic, the Atlantic Bluefin Tuna is all but gone and the EU is seriously contemplating having the species listed under Appendix I of CITES.
Finally!

If backed, this would result in an effective trading ban for all CITES members.
It would also effectively remove the issue from the direct control of the EU and its increasingly controversial Fisheries Commissioner who attempts to procrastinate further by asking for the usual "more data" - a scam that even game fishermen (!) decry.
What part, exactly, of Biologically Extinct does Joe not understand???

Thing is, Borg hails from Malta and the Maltese are obviously not amused, as the ban would apparently jeopardize the livelihood of the majority of their fishermen. As always with fisheries politics, it's the Tragedy of the Commons pure and simple: never mind the the consequences - as long as you can continue to reap and pillage!
And guess who's responsible for the drastic decline in stocks in the first place!

Malta is a major operator of Tuna pens.
As Greenpeace puts it, fishers corral schools of half-grown tuna and tow them in floating pens to marine ranches where they are fed and fattened until they can be killed and shipped to Japan.
There are rules banning fishing fleets from taking undersize tuna out of the Mediterranean, but none that prevent catching immature tuna and fattening them in floating pens. Every country on the Mediterranean (except Israel) takes advantage of this loophole and maintains tuna ranches offshore. The fishers from Spain, France, Italy, Greece, Turkey, Cyprus, Croatia, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco and Malta are capturing half-grown tuna by the hundreds of thousands.
If you had to design a way to guarantee the decimation of a breeding population, this would be it: catch the fish before they are old enough to breed and keep them penned up until they are killed.

On top of that, existing fish farms have harmed the environment, polluting coastal ecosystems and putting additional pressure on wild fish populations by spreading disease and toxic chemicals. According to our friend Alex, the Maltese farms spread a diabolical stench and have already led to the pollution of several beaches and the demise of several of Malta's premier dive sites.

Borg's term is due to expire at the end of this year and Malta would have to re-nominate him.
Will he once again pander to his constituency - or will he see the light and ensure that his legacy will include having turned around the fate of the Mediterranean's most iconic predator?

Call me a defeatist - but I remain skeptical.
"Europe" being "Europe", the decision by the the Commission is yet again a compromise inasmuch as the ban will be subject to the "latest assessment" by the International Convention on the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas. So far, ICCAT's track record in terms of conservation has been nothing short of ignominious and there's no reason to assume that they will not try their very best to have the ban stalled or revoked altogether.

Believe it or not, this table dates back to 2001!

Fingers crossed that I'm wrong!

Awesome!

Check out this video by the Save our Seas Foundation!

Feeding Frenzy-Manta Rays of the Maldives from Save Our Seas Foundation on Vimeo.

The Ocean’s Nazis?

This was yesterday's dive! And 30 Bulls!

Are you still wondering what kind of "education" people get from watching Discovery Channel?

Look no further than this astonishing article!
Proof positive!

It's so bloody preposterous that I first took it for a spoof - but alas, it probably ain't.
I really don't know much about US politics but if being anti-Conservation is what US Libertarianism stands for, I shall be very happy never to endorse them!

But back to Discovery.
This is a direct consequence of Shark Porn - and this is why so many people are pissed off!
So, guys, make a choice as you really cannot have it both ways: if you really care about your "green" branding and the income it generates, you really gotta stop this shit.

Please.

PS: Sharky has just weighed in with a much more eloquent post.

Conservation Conundrums

Two apparently different topics dominate the headlines.

One one side you have the battle to protect the Whales.
Much loved and even glorified, they are at the center of a bitter feud that has led to the collapse of the latest Whaling Conference. Once nearly extinct, some species have miraculously come back from the brink, to the point that some Countries want to resume hunting them - and actually do, often in very unethical ways. The anti-whaling activists are dead set against it and the fight is turning increasingly violent.



On the other side you have the ongoing decline of the Tuna.
Everybody wants to eat them and stocks have been depleted to the point where many species are severely threatened and the Northern Bluefin Tuna is all but extinct. Once romanticized as some kind of heroic feat by intrepid fishermen, the killing is increasingly depicted as what it really is, the extermination of a species.



Whereas the Fisheries Agencies are finally trying to limit the catches, the fishermen have started to fight back as their existence is being threatened. Once again, violence is on the rise.

But really, these are just two examples of the same conundrum.
I've blogged about it a while ago when talking about the Shark fin industry: in order to protect the animals we love, we will have to accept that some of them are killed.

What I'm talking about is sustainable fishing.
Provided that the stocks are sufficiently plentiful (or after a moratorium, once we have allowed them to recover), we will have to accept a compromise: in exchange for agreeing to preserve the species, fishermen will have to be allowed to harvest sustainable quotas.

If that is true - and assuming that ethically speaking, all life has the same value regardless of personal preferences (and assumed cognitive faculties, etc.)

• some species of Tuna can probably be harvested sustainably. Other species, like the Northern Bluefin should be fully protected until stocks replenish (tho from what I hear, it may already be too late)
• some species of Shark can probably be harvested sustainably. Other species like the Hammerheads (please read the link) should be fully protected.
• most probably, the same applies to the Cetaceans where the populations of some Dolphins and e.g. Minke Whales appear quite robust, whilst other species warrant full protection.

Do I like it? Hell, No!

But pragmatically speaking, it's probably the only way forward - as long as we cannot curb the demand . And when it comes to Sharks and Tuna, chances for that are very slim indeed.

The sooner we accept that, the sooner we will work towards achieving tangible and hopefully, long lasting results - which is ultimately the only thing that counts.