Top 20 ‘Rays,
stingrays, mantas nei’ catchers, 2002-2011 (total capture, tonnes, FAO
Fishstat). All countries reporting catches of ‘Giant manta’ (M.
birostris) and ‘Mantas, devil rays nei’ are also included - click for
detail!
Any takers? :)
“There was great elation when these
sharks and manta rays were listed in CITES this March, but although it
was a significant moment for the conservation world, now comes the task
of making these listings work in practice as time is running out for
some of these species,” said Glenn Sant, TRAFFIC’s Marine Programme
Leader.
“CITES listings do not take away the
need for comprehensive fisheries management, they represent one critical
part of that management through aiming to control trade and prevent
international trade in products of these species being sourced from
unsustainable or illegal fisheries.”
“Key to implementing the CITES regulations
will be the establishment of chain of custody measures to facilitate
enforcement and verification that harvest is legal,” said TRAFFIC’s
Research Officer, Victoria Mundy-Taylor, co-author of the new study.
Indeed!
You may want to reserve a good chunk of time to download and then read
this remarkable document by
Traffic, and big kudos to them for having done an extremely good job. It is as long and comprehensive as it is frustrating, and it illustrates the monumental challenge that is the implementation of the decisions taken this March.
And there are many surprises, like the unmasking of the Maldives as a major Shark fin exporting nation, page 5 which begs the question, how does that dovetail with the Shark sanctuary?
But I'm digressing as always.
I was particularly interested in Part III, page 27ff.
Read it! It talks about the challenges of implementing the provisions, this especially in those developing nations whose resources are simply not adequate for performing those tasks.
But is that the only solution?
Why is it that everybody assumes that e.g. the Non-Detriment Findings must be financed out of public coffers and conducted by public officials, and not by those who make the money, ie the Shark exporters? Those findings are akin to ecological impact assessments - and those are usually paid for by the applicants and performed by independent contractors, not the authorities!
Is there any rational and legitimate, and for the matter, legal reason why this cannot be applied to Fisheries?
Yes those paradigms need to be changed - especially now that the trade has become so big and so lucrative!
Opinions?