Great Post by Gary!

Source.

Well said!

But first, watch this.

And here are Gary Stoke's comments.

They very much echo what I posted quite a while ago - this with the difference that back then, I was highly skeptical of the various grassroots initiatives in Asia, and could not have foreseen the effects of the Chinese crackdown on corruption. Now I stand partly corrected - although upon seeing that enormous amount of fins it appears clear that the fin trade may be reeling but is not about to simply vanish anytime soon. And of course the other drivers for the persistent astounding Shark mortality continue, meaning that the fight is far from over.

But I'm digressing as always.

All I really wanted to say is bravo Gary!

WildLifeRisk - one more gruesome Video!

Source.

And it's not only about those poor Whale Sharks.

Here's another look at the Shark slaughtering industry.

As per this older post by Gary, this is about much more than just the fins and the soup - and those in the movement that continue to indulge in racist attacks against the Asians would be well advised to have a long hard look at who kills the majority of Sharks (yes that would be the EU) and where the demand for those bogus dietary supplements comes from, namely predominanly Europe and the USA!

Solutions?

And yes, I'm very much repeating myself!

Anyway, watch.

Airline Fin Bans - remarkable Developments!

But first of all, huge congratulations!

Alex, Gary et al have booked more victories.

AeroMexico is banning Shark fins indefinitely as per the picture above - and Eva Air is doing so as of yesterday citing CITES - which is in itself interesting as CITES mandates nothing of the kind.

We'll take that anytime - and bravo guys and gals!

And Cathay?

Now this one is really interesting.

Like Airlines Fiji, Cathay has chosen the route of only allowing fins from sustainable sources - and has inevitably run into difficulties in doing so. So did Air New Zealand when first announcing the measure, and they have subsequently decided to avoid complicating their lives and opted for a full ban.

Not so Cathay.

They have delayed the implementation and are currently consulting with a team of experts about the best way forward. Duffy, Simpfendorfer and Sant are as good as it gets, and I just can't wait what they will come up with. My hope is that we will get a set of simple and practicable guidelines that will allow us to ascertain whether a Shark fishery is sustainable (beware of shifting baselines - maintaining the severely depleted status quo is not good enough!) and finally drive the conversation away from outright prohibition towards sustainability (do also read the links!) like it ought to happen in every fishery, for Sharks and otherwise.
That is the way forward and I can only applaud it

And if so, it may also finally put a lid on the pointless debates. 

Take those two MSC-certified fisheries - they are maybe not perfect-perfect but they are light years ahead of the current free-for-all that is happening elsewhere! And of course some Shark fisheries can be managed sustainably - and of course finning and sustainability are mutually exclusive!

The bitch will be tackling the issue of bycatch.

It is not a proper Shark fishery where one could assess the management.

Instead, it is the byproduct of a fishery targeting other species (and sometimes being certified as sustainable by the very same MSC!) - and because it is being declared as unwanted, inevitable and thus inherently unmanageable, it is the biggest glaring loophole accounting for a very large portion of the 97-odd million Sharks that are being killed each year. 

As an example, with Fiji not disposing of any officially declared Shark fishery, every single one of the 130 metric tons of Shark fins that are being exported out of Fiji every year is tacitly assumed to have been mere bycatch and to not have been obtained by illegal finning - and I spare you the links proving otherwise!

Solutions?

How about this?

Let the trade who wants to ship their fins conclusively prove, either by third party certification or by irrefutable evidence. that they originate from sustainably managed fisheries, and that they have been obtained by legal means!
And I they can't, don't accept the cargo!

Anyway, great stuff - to be continued no doubt!

Operation Requiem - Anniversary!

Where's the  babemobile now? Source.

So there.

This brief exchange reminds me of unfinished business.

It is now one year since Julie Andersen and Co got their hands on Sea Shepherd's pointy babemobile and embarked on a junket across the South Pacific - and it is now high time for one last look at that shit.

But first.

Remember the bombastic announcement?

It still makes me puke whenever I watch it.

Like I said from the outset, the whole BS about kicking ass, stopping at nothing, putting one's life on the line and being willing to DIE had nothing to do with conservation but was instead Andersen's attempt at starring on some sharky Whale Wars clone on Animal Planet. But worry not, I'm not about to bore you with yer another repetitive rant. Should you really have missed the whole kerfuffle when it happened, you can check out what I've posted here when I awarded it the Shark Conservation Con of the Year.

Instead, I want to talk about this.

Sounds great doesn't it - were it not for the fact that like the whole campaign, it's just simply a big heap of BS! To wit, protected one of the world’s largest marine reserves, stopped illegal fishing = boarded legal purse seiners in the PIPA! Talk about a double con: the specific activity but also the fake protected area! 

Anyway.

Even if one overlooks the details, the general gist of that page is that Andersen's junket has been a great Shark conservation success and that it has paved the way for greater and better things to come, see the reference to several partnerships with local governments and NGO’s and the laying of the groundwork for the establishment of locally protected marine areas in 3 countries.

And the reality one year later?

• Is the babemobile under its vociferous captain honoring the given assurances and patrolling the waters of Tonga, Kiribati and Vanuatu that gave such warm welcomes? 
• Are the SSCS and/or the Shark Angels working collaboratively with those several South Pacific governments and NGOs as announced - and if so, where, and what are the results? 
• And what of those LMMAs - what is the progress there?

Or may Operation Requiem STILL be nothing but a scam?

I'm asking because I am hearing and reading NOTHING - and I betcha it's because NOTHING is happening! From what I can discern, Andersen has been terminated, see below;  Fisk, meh; and the sly Ms Basset is back to being her radical shepherdette self in Hawaii. Initiatives from those quarters, let alone successes in protecting the Sharks in the South Pacific: a big fat zero.
On the contrary: Tonga under its Shepherd of the Sea has since opened its doors to unlimited Shark fishing and finning - and the PIPA has since been fittingly outed as a scam! 

Or not? Surprise me!

The Pacific Voyagers?
Having employed some of the voyagers, my impression was that this was nothing but yet another junket on other people's money, namely some wealthy and IMO hopelessly romantic and credulous German dude who came up with and financed the whole exercise - and observing the local leaders parade around in their big SUVs whilst preaching sustainability to others has certainly done nothing to dispel my reservations.
I believe that this pseudo-cultural retro movement does nothing in addressing the aspirations of the young generation of Pacific Islanders that are desperately looking for a vision of the future, foremost of which decent jobs and decent lives. For that, like anybody else, they will need to have a good education and then be willing to work hard - and I'm concerned to see zero reference to that in the Voyagers' messaging. But as always the proof is in the pudding, and it remains to be seen whether now that the voyage and with it, the indiscriminate funding have ended, there will be any lasting and tangible legacy.
But I'm obviously digressing - progress for Sharks, zero!

Sea Shepherd?

If my suspicion is accurate and NOTHING has happened in the past twelve months and that consequently, the overarching campaign is nothing but hot air - why, exactly, is this stuff still on their website? 

Whereas I will always remain opposed to the personality cult and its brand of radical activism, Sea Shepherd's largely overlooked Shark conservation activities in the Galapagos have been nothing short of stellar. And I must also say that as of late, I've been rather impressed with Gary Stokes' work at CITES and more recently, on the airline and shipping lines campaigns - the more since trusted friends think very highly of him. Plus, would that be a vintage BAD t-shirt? :)

So why tarnish the Shark conservation effort with this shit - the more as the Pacific is already so well served by the literally countless NGOs and especially, Pew?

Or again: surprise me!

And the breathy Director of Shark Campaigns?

According to this posting on SSCS France, she has been terminated because when questioned about her association with Scubapro that stands accused of supporting marine Mammal captivity, she has by no means put her life on the line, or whatever, but has instead chosen to continue taking Scubapro's money - and no I'm not at all surprised!

But fear not, she's obviously completely unfazed, still desperately kissing Discovery's arse and already working on her next Shark con - and talk about a revealing choice of name if ever there was one!

To be continued no doubt - alas!