Fiji's Sharks in Peril - Paper!

Remember? It is still happening!

Well well - watch.

And this is the paper.

Shame that it's hidden behind a paywall, the more as it is being hailed as a major achievement which it quite possibly is - but I will leave that determination to others.

What however irritates me is the characterization of Fiji.

The press release has quite obviously been re-worded as the initial version stated that Fiji's Sharks are functionally extinct which is a load of horse manure -  but even after the redaction, we are still being flagged as being particularly problematic which is just not true.

Here's the corresponding graph - click for detail.

Seriously, WTF?

Fiji down at the bottom - and then e.g. Tonga of all places near the top? Lemme tell 'ya that having extensively dived, and lived in both countries, this is just wrong wrong wrong in so many ways - which obviously begs the question, may other data sets be equally faulty?

So what exactly happened?

Having consulted the relevant map for Fiji, I learn that having dropped 382 BRUVs on 14 sites, they only recorded 5 Shark and 7 Ray species, and this only on 28.7% of the videos which is perplexing to say the least. But having asked, it turns out that instead of tapping the available local capacity and know how, they decided to parachute in some dude from New Zealand who I hear may have only sampled the sites of a particular NGO and not a representative cross-section of Fiji's reef ecosystems - and if so I can certainly leave it at that. *

Now compare that fiasco to the data of the GFSC.

Or to the fact that in our little region alone, we harbor at least 10 frequently encountered Sharks = GHH and Zebra, plus our usual Bull, Tiger, Sicklefin Lemon, Tawny, Silvertip, plus Grey, Whitetip and Blacktip Reefies, with several other diving operators and also research papers reporting the same and even more, equally ubiquitous reef-associated species like Scalloped Hammers or Blacktips from many other locations.

And then there's the simply massive data set from the hundreds of  BRUV drops by Projects Abroad that had incidentally been initiated in collaboration with the very same Demian Chapman who is one of the paper's leading authors - surely one should have added those sightings, too?

And the data from Tonga?

They are from a grand total of 24 drops on two sites... see what I mean?

Anyway - it is what it is.

Whereas the situation here is most certainly not remotely as bad as depicted, there is equally clearly room for improvement, see e.g.this old assessment, Kerstin's papers here and especially here, and also the description of Fiji's Elasmobranch fishery here at page 188 ff.

In brief and despite of the reduction in the Asian demand for their fins, our Reef Sharks and the juvenile Sharks in the riverine nurseries are now increasingly being targeted as an alternative source of protein as many of the traditional food Fish stocks are being depleted.

And to top it off, we're now witnessing a massive Covid-19- induced increase of indiscriminate fishing and poaching that is  threatening years of conservation efforts and also indirectly threatening our Shark populations by obliterating their prey.

Talking of which, I really did like reading that

Without an absolute estimate of the abundance of sharks, it is difficult to know how effective the estimated levels of conservation potential might be in restoring shark populations in reef ecosystems that have been degraded by overfishing.

Although research has shown that fully recovered reef fish communities have biomasses between 1,000 kg ha−1 (ref. 27) and 1,500 kg ha−1 (ref. 12), we have no current estimate of the size of the forage base that is required by a recovered shark population, or how the bottom-up effects of prey biomass might influence the recovery potential of reef sharks.

A key question remains as to whether management strategies that only pursue shark conservation can make substantial or limited gains, relative to those that include the restoration of the wider reef ecosystem.

If the restoration of the whole ecosystem is necessary to fully restore shark populations, our results underscore the need for managers to engage with the wider social, economic and cultural drivers of marine exploitation.

Could not agree more!

Long story short, the paper is certainly welcome.

Far from being defeatist, the authors suggest several pathways for improvement that I can only second, albeit with the usual general caveats (= e.g. follow the links here).

The good news is that here in Fiji, there is already some progress, namely the fin ban, the CMM for Sharks by the WCPFC  (incidentally once again courtesy of the simply unequaled Shelley) and an upcoming, WWF-sponsored, long overdue NPOA (Sharks) that will provide a framework for subsequent regulations and pacify the FAO.

And then, hopefully, we will get The Big One.

No, likely not a Shark Sanctuary but instead this comprehensive regulation - and having checked, all appears to be on track for the December deadline at the end of this year!

In any case, we stand ready.

Thanks to Tashi Blue's boundless and also, infinitely endearing passion and commitment, her My Fiji Shark project has been able to accumulate a nice little war chest that will greatly help us assist with the implementation of the regulation.

So fingers crossed and yes, very much to be continued!

But I'm digressing as always.

Enjoy the Shark paper!

Oh and, Adopt your Shark now!

* PS - Demian informs me that there was no parachute science as the vast majority of drops was effected over several years by that local NGO - which obviously begs the question, what went wrong?

Wrong habitat/site selection? Lousy bait?

Anyway, it is what it is.

Are we ready for more Sharks?

Source.

Good question!

Read this.

It pretty much completely summarizes this timely little scientific article, so no need to write synopses etc. In brief, those Shark conservation successes may turn out to be be fleeting - especially in those highly populated and/or highly tourism-dependent areas where Shark-human conflicts may increase as a consequence, see e.g. the situation in Cape Cod where IMO we're already only a few Shark bites away from the next Shark/Seal cull.

The authors write,

While widespread success in recovering elasmobranch populations is some time away, scientists, advocates and managers need to be prepared for societal conflicts that may arise when and where it does occur. In particular, implications for current and future conservation management need to be considered as part of conservation strategies in the context of how humans will interact and potentially compete with recovering species.

This will require, from the outset, increased public education and outreach regarding the potential future implications of conservation success and strategies to reduce conflict in order to avoid negative responses to successful conservation outcomes or the thwarting of future conservation endeavours.

That is certainly correct. 

But education and outreach can only go so far, and methinks that akin to what is happening in the highly intractable and complex issue of terrestrial human-wildlife coexistence and human-wildlife conflict mitigation, all will have to be highly species-, location- and context-specific.
And in some cases = where and when other less invasive approaches fail, we may well have to accept that some individual animals may have to be sacrificed so that their populations can continue to survive - see the paper's example of the Galapagos Sharks vs the Hawaiian Monk Seals that is highly reminiscent of Eric's Shark profiling proposal.

As always we shall see shall we not.

And anyway, I say, wouldn't that be a nice problem to have = so first and foremost, let's please make sure that Shark populations recover!

But back to more pleasant matters. 

Let's go Shark diving - sustainably!

PS - Michael Domeier here.
Like him I abhor the illegal out-of-cage diving with GWS and especially, the Shark riding and molesting. But unlike him I really do not believe that any resulting bites would have any implications whatsoever on Shark conservation - rather, nowadays the victim would be rightly berated for having been a fool and the news cycle would quickly move on.

 

Martin about Shark Feeding!

Ring a bell? Click for detail - source.

Read this.

Very nice, and thanks!

The part about Shark feeding mostly echoes what we've been asserting for now many years, to wit this rather random collection of posts. And check this out, too - or if you really got too much time on your hands, feel free to peruse this about Shark feeding in particular and this about our industry in general!

Yes it is complicated - but then again, maybe not so much!

And the conservation aspect?

Yes some of us very much including Martin's Shark Diver are deeply embedded into conservation, and there is even a global alliance of Shark diving operators whose members must have a track record of being active in both conservation and research.

But I would argue that we are the exception.

Yes nowadays everybody is "Eco", and everybody is raising awareness and dispelling the myth, and all of that nonsense.
But the Shark diving industry is obviously a business where one needs to make a profit - and whereas those breathy pronouncements that one is doing it For the Sharks are cheap, pun intended, actually devoting resources to conservation (and research) is costly and time consuming - even if in the long term, protecting one's principal business asset would obviously be a great business strategy!

And all those awareness-raising media?

I will even concede that even when prima facie it's all about personal vanity and $$$, the heart is often in the right place. But as per the comment of JoySeaGal, I can categorically assure you that when advocating Shark conservation with the Authorities, those narcissistic media count for less than nothing! 

Oh and incidentally, this is how you do it correctly = this is strategic, intelligent, focused, targeted and with zero personal ego involved!

Anyway.

Ultimately, one has to look at real track records.

Ultimately, the only thing that counts are tangible benefits for Shark populations - and there, the overall impact of Shark diving operators is rather dismal, especially when compared to the awesome potential.

Alas!

But I'm digressing as always.

Thank you Martin - and yes I will gladly confess that we are mighty proud of our achievements.
Shark tourism is certainly not the be-all and end-all solution to Shark overfishing, and much remains to be done, also in Fiji - but we're certainly working on it, and we're even collecting funds for implementing some forward-looking local remedies.

In diesem Sinne - let's go Shark diving!

And please, Adopt Your Shark Now, the more as Valentine's Day is beckoning!
Hint hint!

Vinaka Vakalevu.

Recovery of Sharks within a well enforced MPA - Paper!

Very nice - watch!

Paper here, synopsis here.

I must say that contrary to other papers looking at different aspects of those reefs off Western Australia where I am weary of some of the conclusions, I am quite impressed by this one as the evidence for the rapid recovery of those Sharks appears to be rock solid as e.g. evidenced by the video below.

This is good news indeed.

Provided that there is strict enforcement, MPAs appear to be an effective tool in the protection of at least those comparatively less migratory coastal Sharks - and if so, there is certainly reason for hope.

Of course for us this is nothing new.

But good to see our data (and here!) confirmed by research from other parts of the word.

Enjoy the paper!

Challenges and Priorities in Shark and Ray Conservation - Paper!

Well done, and I cite,

Over-Simplification Can Hinder Effective Shark Fisheries Management 

The general tendency for sharks to grow more slowly, mature later, and produce fewer young than most fished species is fundamental to the appropriate elevation of their conservation priority and the prevention of population depletion. The fact remains, however, that life history characteristics vary widely across shark species, with many capable of supporting a significant level of fishing if such extraction (in all forms) is limited to science-based levels.

After more than two decades of expanding efforts to publicize sharks’ inherent vulnerability, people appear to increasingly believe that sharks cannot withstand any fishing at all.
Similarly, there appears to be a trend toward blanket bans on fishing and trading, with a focus on shark fins. While complete bans are appropriate, and even long overdue with respect to species that are exceptionally threatened (like sawfishes) and exceptionally vulnerable (such as devil rays), in other cases the unequivocal messages and ‘one size fits all’ remedies may serve to hinder policies needed to curb fishing and ensure sustainability.

Under a general perception that sustainable shark fishing is impossible, there is reduced support for the work necessary to formulate comprehensive fishery management policies that allow for sustainable take while addressing unintentional bycatch, and the need for population assessment. Governments convinced that managing shark fishing is a losing proposition and/or publically unacceptable may opt for full protection, but may also shy away from attempting to set any limits at all. Those opting for blanket bans may be reluctant to admit and address significant incidental shark mortality and/or enforcement inadequacies.

However

Sharks Contribute to Food Security in Poor and Developing Nations

While shark meat, in some cases, provides a high value product (e.g. gummy shark in southern Australia, porbeagle in Europe, and skates in Korea), it is more often a cheap source of animal protein. The low value stems from the relatively low quality of the product (due to high levels of urea) and the fact that it is often dried for non-perishable storage and transport. While domestic catch and consumption is common, some countries rely heavily on imports and exports, e.g. Sri Lanka, Uruguay, Brazil, Peru, Indonesia, and India. According to FAO statistics, more than 90% of the world’s reported shark catch is taken by 26 fishing nations (Figure 2), one-quarter of which (7/26) are among the least developed nations (with low or medium Human Development Index scores; Figure 2). Moreover, 40% of the reported global shark catch comes from seven of the major shark fishing nations with the lowest Human Development Indices, most of which border the Indian Ocean (Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Yemen, and Tanzania) and Eastern Atlantic Ocean (Nigeria and Senegal; 
.....
Generally, it is costly to replace fishery losses in countries where seafood provides a high proportion of animal protein. It is understandably difficult for governments in nations facing extreme poverty and food security crises to prioritize shark conservation, particularly when scientific advice for sustainable catch levels is lacking. Similarly, conservationists as well as governments of developed countries are understandably reluctant to press struggling governments for such actions.

Bingo.

Yes in theory, some (but most certainly not all!) Elasmobranchs can be managed and fished sustainably - but in practice, this is currently not possible in many impoverished Shark fishing nations.

Solutions?

Like I never cease to repeat, we are quickly running out of time.
With that in mind, I strongly advocate cheaper and simpler bans now, and costlier and more complicated management at a later stage once it becomes practically feasible. AND, let's not forget that in order to succeed, species protection alone is not gonna be good enough!

Anyway, awesome paper.

Once again, required reading (and understanding!) if you want to be taken seriously when talking about Shark conservation.

Enjoy!

Abundance and spatial Distribution of Reef-associated Sharks - Paper!

Shark Reef Marine Reserve: protecting the Sharks, their prey and their habitat! Great pic by Ozzie Sam!

And I cite.

Our study found shark abundance to be primarily driven by fish biomass amongst lower trophic levels and functional groups.

The importance of fish biomass in predicting shark abundance suggests the necessity of ecosystem level protection, involving all species and functional groups, rather than species-specific policies, such as shark sanctuaries, which might still permit on-going depletion of prey species.
Similarly, studies across a range of marine ecosystems have found that assemblages of top level predators such as sharks require both healthy environments in terms of prey availability, and a wide range of habitat zones to accommodate different species’ habitat preferences and to permit resource partitioning and ontogenetic changes in habitat use. Individual species or life stages preferentially use particular habitat zones or depth ranges, and, though often highly site-resident, reef shark species have been shown capable of making long movements between neighbouring reefs.

This implies that marine reserves that encompass a wide variety of habitats within the boundaries of the protected area may be more effective in preserving species diversity in the shark assemblage and providing the habitat niches required at different life stages. Very large MPAs such as the BMR, in contrast to more narrowly scoped or zoned protection regimes, have the additional advantage of protecting not only known and surveyed habitats but also the unknowns.

Bingo.

Like I've been stating for a while, e.g. here, we really need to shift away from the current narrow focus on species protection towards a much more holistic approach - and those mega-MPAs are an excellent way of achieving that aim.

Enjoy David and Jessica's paper!

Poaching in a Shark Sanctuary!

And talking of different Shark Sanctuaries.

Read this.

Whereas yours truly has always supported them as stop-gap measures, my pal Patric has always been a staunch, and vocal skeptic of the effectiveness of Shark Sanctuaries; and I must congratulate him for having made the personal effort and come up with clear evidence for poaching in the Marshalls and beyond.

But is the system broken like he asserts?

Dunno - and neither does he!

As always, it's a matter of nuance.

Shark poaching does not automatically invalidate a Sanctuary.

The way I see it, the aim of the Sanctuary legislation is not Shark preservation but Shark conservation - and where I'm coming from, conservation does not consist in preserving every last individual but instead, aims at preserving populations, or species.

And this I believe is being achieved by keeping mortality below sustainable levels.

Granted, others may differ - but that's how I see it.

And when it comes to the Marshalls and for the matter, to most if not all of those Sanctuaries, we simply do not have the hard data to make a final judgement about their effectiveness as conservation tools. 

But of course we can make educated guesses.

Looking at the list by Pew, I suspect that French Polynesia and New Caledonia "work" because of strong French monitoring and enforcement; and the Bahamas and some other Caribbean ones may benefit from the economic importance of Shark tourism and the fact that there was never a noticeable commercial Shark fishery there in the first place. The others are certainly a mixed bag, from likely suspect in Honduras, the Cooks, Western Samoa and definitely the Maldives, to "difficult" in Micronesia where the Marshals and Palau are probably the "best" and the FSM with its shredded Mantas the worst.

But again, this is merely guesswork - and one would really hope that Pew will one day step up and provide some scientific evidence for what has been successful, and what has not, as they should!

Long story short?

Despite of the preferences of the professional Shark people, this is the real world where in many developing countries, western-style science-based fisheries management will remain wishful thinking for a very long time indeed; and there, Shark Sanctuaries may be one viable quick-fix solution, this very much in line with the precautionary principle. Yes there are certainly other strategic approaches - but from what I can discern, they will once again take a lot of time to fully implement.

I ask, do we really have that time?

And if the answer is, probably not, should we maybe consider abandoning the current entrenched ideological positions in favor of practical solutions = short term prohibition that can later be eased in favor of management?

C'mon people.

Aren't we ultimately all working towards the same goal = shouldn't the tribalism, money and recognition only be of secondary importance?

Just asking!

Cut the Bull!

A tad intimidating and, literally, Blunt!

Read this!

Poor Michele!

Blunt and intimidating huh - and to think that I was really on my very best behavior and merely trying to be useful by providing some, I thought, valuable and impartial guidance!

Damned if you do, damned if you don't!

And the infamous education and awareness thing?

Regular readers of this blog know that it's one of my pet hates as it is so often invoked as an excuse for bad things with Sharks by the brazen self promoters, Shark molesters and new age idiots. 

Don't get me wrong here.

We here do it every day, and hope that some of our in-depth conservation and research briefings "stick", and that our customers will go home and amplify the message among their friends. 

But the very vast majority of the recent Shark conservation victories are not based on plebiscites but instead, have nearly always been the result of the right people talking to the right people at the right time, and of heaps of hard, persistent and anonymous work on the ground.

And Shark Stanley I hear you ask?

Dunno and likely never will - or is anybody about to finally analyze these things?

But my gut tells me that it was certainly nice but by no means mission critical = the victories at the last CITES CoP were the result of stellar but incredibly tedious and hard work by several individuals and NGOs, not of a social media campaign featuring cute Shark and Manta cutouts!

Long story short?

I  believe that education and awareness are possibly (?) valuable as a long term strategy;  but in the short term and considering the urgency of the task at hand, they remain a poor substitute for focused conservation work. And I equally remain of the opinion that intelligent and highly educated young people like Michele ought to channel their passion into more efficient and effective undertakings!

But I'm digressing as always.

Great blog post by a really nice promising marine conservationist.

Enjoy!

CO2 and Sharks - Paper!

Read this.

Bingo.

Granted it's only one species, and the tests have been performed in a lab - but it stands to reason that under the same environmental conditions, those effects will be at least similar in the wild, and this for all Sharks.

Long story short?

Where many Shark conservationists are still stuck in species conservation (or god forbid, in finning bans), we really need to shift to a more holistic view that takes into consideration all the major threats to the marine ecosystem. Like Jaguars will not be able to survive without jungles, even the best protected Sharks will not survive if we continue to destroy their habitats and annihilate their prey.

You may want to re-read this.

It's old and thankfully, there has been progress on several fronts; and still, I believe it to be correct in its broad outlines - especially when it comes to the part about sustainability, and the need to refrain from uninformed activism and radical positions!
As in e.g. Jupiter - boy has that been an education!

Anyway.

I'm digressing as always.

Enjoy the paper!

Chris Lowe - excellent Article!

And I cite - the link is mine.

The rise in public and media interest is closely related to the increased focus from a wide array of elasmobranch conservation organisations, many of which religiously sound alarm bells, but often without any need or use for the supporting science....

While sounding the alarm is necessary and will always be needed to promote change and conservation, I worry about its effect on how we do science. I see an unfortunate trend where the best way to make our science important and relevant is to focus on ‘the-sky-is-falling’ issues. Of the past 20 elasmobranch-related grant proposals and manuscripts I’ve reviewed, more than 80% have resorted to ‘the sky-is-falling’ statements to justify the importance their research, regardless of whether they offered a concrete remedy. In addition, there are already signs of ‘the-sky-is-falling’ science having the undesired effect of generating hopelessness among the public and, more disturbingly, among legislators. Crying wolf without good cause is weakening managers’ ability to implement adequate strategies.

Absolutely correct!

You must really read this brilliant article by Chris Lowe, the President of the American Elasmobranch Society.

Well said!

And since we're at it.

Think the recent deluge of pics of the aloha chick posing next to big sharks is conservation like she would have you believe?

Think again.
It's nothing more than the same old self-promotion for, gasp, money - and the inevitable tired old image of her riding a GWS, a protected species, is not only not conservation, it is instead evidence of illegal out-of-cage diving and also animal harassment  = really nothing to be proud of!

So much for "don't be fooled by appearances, I'm more than just a pretty face" as per her recent plea. I say, as long as the chick continues to define herself through those stupidities, caveat emptor - and yes I can certainly leave it at that!

And the Sharkette taking some other random galeophobic gal Shark diving?

I wish it were that simple! Every single one of us Shark diving operators does the very same thing on a daily basis, albeit sans the bombastic noise, the self promotion and the media hype! Were that a legit conservation strategy, the decline in Shark populations would have been halted decades ago!

Plus let's never forget that those same tame friendly Tiger Beach denizens remain wild animals that would have no compulsion whatsoever about snacking on some unfortunate Haitian boat people they would chance upon - meaning that using controlled Shark diving as some kind of "proof" against the hazard of Shark strikes is both stupid and totally misleading!

It's like I said quite a while ago.

The fishermen in, say, Indonesia, UAE and even Spain where the slaughter is happening really don't give a shit about those shenanigans but will only stop fishing for Sharks and killing them as bycatch if and when adequate legislation will prevent them from doing so. Case in point: as we speak, a group of generous philanthropic individuals and foundations are anonymously (!) pumping several million dollars into Shark conservation - and guess what: bimbos and Sharks are not a part of the global strategy mix!

But I'm digressing as always.

All I really wanted to say is, read Chris Lowe's excellent article.

Enjoy!

PS: Case in point: what is better, the drama about some random galeophobic chick, or this? :)

Sharks in Fiji - Status Report!

Blacktip Reef Shark - one of the species that is increasingly being targeted for food. 
Stellar pic by Ozzie Sam!

So what about Helen's report.

And I cite

So far no significant decrease in coastal shark populations has been seen, good news for those of us fearing that shark-fin fishing was continuing to damage shark stocks, but we can only confirm this one way or the other by continuing these surveys over the long term.

Yes and no!

But first, watch Eli's video!

Bravo Eli, totally agree!

See what I mean?

This is obviously Mexico where the situation appears particularly grim - but having conducted additional investigations that will be disclosed in due course, I can reveal that the situation here in Fiji is slowly trending that way, too. 

Here and throughout the Pacific Islands, coastal fisheries are at risk. 

Much of the fishing is clearly unsustainable and as a consequence, many of the prized big reef Fishes have disappeared at least around the principal islands, or have become simply too expensive - and the once reviled Sharks are being increasingly fished and consumed as an alternative source of protein. Furthermore, Sea Cucumber stocks have all but collapsed, to the point that a single White Teatfish now yields a staggering 150 dollars, notabene to the fisherman - and as a consequence, the traders are diversifying into Shark fins and further driving the depletion of both Sharks but also Guitarfishes whose fins have a high count of ceratotrichia, the ingredient of the infamous soup.

Yes stocks overall show no signs of depletion - yet.

But they do in selected hotspots, and on our dive, we are recording the disappearance of many of our named Shark. So far, numbers-wise, they are being replaced by the many new sub-adults - and incidentally, remember Catlin et al! 

But if I go through the list, old beloved regulars like Kinky, Cilla, Fold, Second, Valerie, Lee, Crease, Twist, possibly Sickle, Moana, Ms Big, Jaws, JJ, Chopper and probably also Scarface have all been MIA for a long time indeed which is really breaking our heart - so you can maybe understand my elation at seeing Bumphead after close to a year of absence!

Solutions?

Obviously, a drastic improvement of the management of all fisheries (= even if we selectively protected the Sharks, how would they survive without their prey?) - for which we need better data!
This combined with much better regulation of the trade - the more since at present, it is not even being regulated by Fisheries but instead, only by the local municipalities! And please, more fully legislated, well enforced and smartly managed full no-take MPAs with sufficient connectivity so that their effect is bigger than the sum of their physical areas, together with the protection of critical habitat like the nurseries and spawning aggregation sites.

And the oceanic Sharks?

There the situation in Fiji is much much better!

Thanks to the remarkable progress and the hard work of many good people at CITES, CMS and the WCPFC, all the principal commercially viable oceanic Sharks with exception of the Blues and Makos are de facto fully protected as Fiji cannot be bothered with all that paperwork and has decided to simply prohibit the fishing, landing and trading of those species. But of course implementation may still be somewhat sketchy, and the important issue of incidental mortality remains largely unresolved.

Solutions?

Possibly better implementation, certainly once again better regulation of the trade and once again, data data data about that incidental mortality!

Long story short?

Fiji's Sharks are still doing relatively well and no, we certainly don't need a Sanctuary that is IMO presently not feasible politically anyway. And we definitely (!) need no more breathy public campaigns and no more trotting out of the usual charlatans that will only piss off the powers that be, the more as they are very much aware of, and are presently actively addressing the problems at hand.

There is no urgent Shark crisis in Fiji - so, let's do things right.

What we do need is sufficient resources in order to assist the Fisheries Department, Customs, Biosecurity, the Police, the Judiciary etc in better implementing the present legislation; what we do need is a new coastal fisheries law that includes smart management strategies; what we do need is new regulation of the trade in marine products; and in the specific case of Sharks, what we do need is better data so we can preempt and intervene when and if necessary.

Any takers for lending a helping hand?

Shark RAT? Guest Post by Ian Campbell!

Shark research, management & conservation intelligentsia meeting in Townsville, see below!

Are you intrigued? :)

Here goes.

Ian Campbell is currently working for WWF’s Global Shark and Ray Initiative running the sustainable management component. He is also a Shark diver and a member of the SRMR management team.

From NGOs to the public and private sector, Ian has over 20 years’ experience in fisheries policy, ecology and fishery management working extensively within both the UK and internationally. Previous employment has included overseeing the reform of the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy for the Pew Charitable Trusts, fisheries observer on blue-fin tuna vessels, inshore fisheries management and as a commercial diver in the offshore sector.

Ian holds a Bachelor’s degree in Applied Marine Biology from Heriot-Watt University and a Master degree in Environmental Science from the University of Strathclyde.

This is an important initiative.

Having just returned from a meeting with major stakeholders, see at top, I've asked him whether he wouldn't mind submitting a guest post presenting it to the wider public.

Here is Ian's post.

Shark divers – An underused resource?

Everyone who is even remotely interested in sharks (and rays, don’t forget these charismatic shark pancakes of wonder) is abundantly aware of the pressures they are facing.

Fishing pressure, habitat loss, unsustainable consumption, or even fanciful claims of being “evolved for extinction” everywhere you look they are under the cosh. The pressure that sharks are under have probably best been summed up by the 2014 paper (and here - notice the part about research and data collection?) led by the IUCN Shark Specialist Group which concludes that almost a quarter of all sharks and rays (over 1,000 species assessed) are faced with the very real threat of extinction. Remember, this is not the claims of an environmental NGO, but an independent assessment of the current state of shark and ray populations by 128 experts from 35 different countries. Here’s a simple chart highlighting the different levels of threat.

As you can see, despite what you may hear from some campaigns, not all sharks are threatened, and some are in worse shape than others, but, for WWF, one of the biggest areas of concern is the shaded grey area on the left side of that chart. From all the 1,042 species assessed, 487 are “data deficient”.

Basically, virtually nothing is known about almost half of all sharks and rays.

Effective management and designing plans to reduce mortality is virtually impossible when faced with this lack of basic understanding. Imagine trying to balance your budget without knowing how much money you have in your account to start with, or the amount of interest you are receiving or paying out.

There are a number of conservation initiatives out there which lay claims to conserving sharks, from finning bans to fin trade bans (there’s a difference), from sanctuaries to species protections and from policies to plans. Some of these are more useful than others, but if any of them are to be truly effectual then one thing is key to them all: DATA!

Without a basic understanding of shark and ray populations both around the coast and in offshore waters, then making decisions for the long-term survival of these species is little more than a best guess. Yet there are a multitude of areas rich in information, but not necessarily being channeled in the right direction.

Divers, fishermen, market traders, even shark and ray researchers produce data every day, yet it is surprising how little of it actually makes its way to ministerial departments or independent bodies to assist with informed decisions for conservation. WWF are seeking to bridge this gap. We are developing a project in collaboration with some of the world’s leading shark researchers to create standard methodologies to maximize the benefits from untapped resources.

In 1999, the Food and Agriculture Organisation produced guidelines for countries to undertake a step-by-step process to developing long-term, sustainable shark management plans (known as National Plans of Action, NPOA).

This process seems relatively simple. Firstly, collect data on sharks and rays in the form of a Shark Assessment Report. Then use this data to develop your NPOA. While this does sound simple, and has been done in places like Australia, the EU and NZ (to varying degrees of vigour), the Pacific Islands have had to get by using the limited resources at their disposal. There are some NPOAs currently in existence in the region, such as the Cook Islands and Samoa. Other countries have draft versions waiting government endorsement, such Fiji and Tonga, while some countries such as Palau want to declare shark sanctuaries. These efforts for conservation & long-term planning are great, although all of these measures have one oversight in common. They are built on a lack of data. None of the countries have produced Shark Assessment Reports, so cannot fully know the issues within their territorial waters. This is not the fault of the Pacific Islands, gathering data can be time consuming for departments with limited resources, and the analysis requires specific technical expertise. Organizations such as the FFA and SPC are providing a great service, although their remit extends way beyond just looking at sharks.

So here is where WWF are stepping in.

As mentioned, we are collaborating with shark expertise far and wide to develop our shark ‘Rapid Assessment Tool-kit’ (or shark RAT). The main function of this is to design ways to collect and analyze data on coastal and pelagic sharks that can then be used to produce a Shark Assessment Report. The very basic baseline data in this report can in turn used by governments to develop conservation strategies that are then based on some sort of understanding.

Where is this data going to come from?

Well, there are a lot of sources we will be exploring from genetic and socioeconomic surveys at landing sites to extensive underwater video surveys, but one untapped goldmine is the information collected by divers. In Fiji, there is the Great Fiji Shark Count which is starting to produce comparable info. At present, this isn’t incorporated into management plans, so it’s high time it is.

There are also other things dedicated shark divers can be doing.

Ever been on a surface interval that seems to go on for ages? Sat at the bar for the post-dive drinks to talk about what you saw? How about these hours are spent helping screen underwater video footage that shows what happens at your dive site when no-one is in the water? Pretty much every diver would be able to recognise whether a shark or ray was in shot, and a huge number would even be able to say what species it was. Collecting and screening this type of data would take a massive burden off an already overstretched ministry or fisheries/shark specialist.

Obviously, we are well aware of the multitude of challenges that lay ahead for the project to be fully successful, and some methodologies that may look good on the page may fail spectacularly when introduced to the real world. But we have to try. Improved management for sharks and rays is the only thing that is going to directly reduce mortality. Not shark fin soup campaigns, or putting all your eggs into “ending finning” and certainly not cavorting in swimwear near sharks.

Last week WWF held a 3 day workshop where 12 of the best minds in their respective fields (I’m not including myself, I just took notes and provided the tea and coffee) provided input and direction.

As well as academic researchers from the fields of genetics, citizen science and eco-tourism, we had input from FFA, SPC and SPREP. Everyone we have spoken to has been enthusiastic and willing to support us. The people in attendance will now provide advice and recommendations to the project. Professor Colin Simpfendorfer, the co-chair of the IUCN Shark Specialist Group also gave us a name, although how serious he was is up for debate. WWF now convenes the Pacific Rapid Assessment Tool-kit Scientific Advisory Committee, or PRAT-SAC. Maybe the first thing we need to work on is the name?

The project is embryonic and there is a lot of hard work ahead, but with a little direction, continued enthusiasm and, more importantly, collaboration, then slowly we’ll restore the balance for sharks and rays

Here's to that - thanks buddy, appreciate!

Sustainable Shark Fisheries in lesser developed Countries?

Devastating - unsustainable small-scale Shark fishing. Source.

So there.

Remember this post?

Back then, it did earn me plenty of flak from the movement - but times have moved on and the concept of sustainable fishing of some (!) species of Sharks is apparently becoming more accepted, to the point that I was very happy to read this really quite excellent post on the Ocean Campus website.

I could not agree more when I read that

... countries are beginning to put measures in place to increase the sustainability of their shark fisheries, and research is constantly being done to further their efficiency. 
In my opinion, it is the development of these biologically based, best practices, concerning reproductive traits and ecology of shark species which hold the greatest potential in minimising shark stock collapses and population declines. Fragmenting the conservation effort by targeting single practices (such as implementing shark finning bans) can obstruct the development of more effective shark management tools.

But of course, there is a big BUT!

From the paper.

Abstract.
(...)
PERMANOVA analysis showed that over-exploited and depleted fisheries employed different sets of measures than fisheries with healthier stocks, and a non-metric multidimensional scaling ordination illustrated that a broad set of regulatory measures typified sustainable fisheries.
SIMPER and regression tree analyses identified that the dissimilarity was most related to enforcement capacity, number of species harvested, fleet (vessel) controls, limited entry controls and rotational closures.

The national Human Development Index was significantly lower in countries with over-exploited and depleted fisheries.
Where possible, managers should limit the number of fishers and vessel size and establish short lists of permissible commercial species in multispecies fisheries. Our findings emphasize an imperative to support the enforcement capacity in low-income countries, in which risk of biodiversity loss is exceptionally high. Solutions for greater resilience of XYZ stocks must be embedded within those for poverty reduction and alternative livelihood options.

Trends in sustainability and exploitation
(...)
Management measures
Enforcement (and compliance) capacity varied greatly among fisheries and tended to be weak in tropical fisheries in low-income countries.(...)
The PERMANOVA contrasts showed that, in terms of variables potentially controllable by the fishery manager, under-exploited, moderately exploited and fully exploited fisheries were similar, but differed significantly from management variables employed in over-exploited and depleted fisheries. The subsequent SIMPER analysis identified that enforcement capacity was the management tool most strongly related to the dissimilarity between unsustainable and sustainable fisheries.
Nonetheless, other management variables were also important and contributed only slightly less to the dissimilarity than enforcement capacity. Specifically, the other management measures important in the majority of difference between sustainable and unsustainable fisheries (in descending order of importance) were the following:

1. fleet (vessel) controls,
2. limited entry controls, 
3. rotational harvest closures, 
4. the total number of species harvested by fishers, 
5. licensing and reporting requirements, and 
6. the number of regulatory measures used by the manager

Discussion

We aimed to relate management measures to sustainability of XYZ fisheries, and our analyses indicate that resilience of social-ecological systems (SESs) of XYZ fisheries will come from strengthening enforcement capacity, allowing only a small number of species to be harvested, applying input controls, reducing the number of fishers per unit of fishing ground and improving the socio-economic state of human communities. (...)
Stocks of commercially valuable species have been depleted at a comparably fast rate over much of their distribution. Many XYZ species face a high risk of extinction through overfishing coupled with inherent biological and ecological vulnerability. Apart from an unlikely reduction in demand from Chinese consumers, we believe that sustainability and resilience of troubled XYZ fisheries will only come from the adoption of radically different approaches to management.

Enforcement drives sustainability 
While marine reserves, international trade agreements and stock assessments may be important tools for sustaining XYZ stocks, our analysis highlights the importance of enforcement capacity in fisheries sustainability.
Indeed, many fisheries struggle with deterring fishers from illegal activities by compliance measures or strict penalties. The SIMPER and RT analyses both indicated that depleted and over-exploited XYZ fisheries predominantly had weak enforcement capacity. Thus, fine-tuning management regulations or developing complex management plans are less likely to succeed in protecting minimum viable populations of XYZ than investment in compliance and enforcement. (...)  

Conclusions

Stocks of commercially valuable species have been depleted at a comparably fast rate over much of their distribution.
Many XYZ species face a high risk of extinction through overfishing coupled with inherent biological and ecological vulnerability. Apart from an unlikely reduction in demand from Chinese consumers, we believe that sustainability and resilience of troubled XYZ fisheries will only come from the adoption of radically different approaches to management.
Recent assertions about improved management of XYZ fisheries have centred on regulatory measures and management actions, marine reserves and international regulations, research, monitoring and harvest strategies.
Our findings reveal that a new paradigm is needed for managing XYZ fisheries; one in which resources are shifted from the development of complex management plans to enforcement and compliance of simple sets of regulations and to tackling the socio-economic challenges of coastal fishers that transcend fisheries. 

The best devised management plans will fail if disincentives to illegal fishing activities are not strong enough and/or if underlying poverty of fishers is not improved. We also conclude that multiple management measures are needed in XYZ fisheries but not so many that they cannot be easily understood and enforced.
In addition to compliance and enforcement, the key regulatory measures appeared to be the following:

1. a small list of permissible species for exploitation, 
2. fleet controls, especially on the size of boats in the fishery, 
3. limited entry controls to restrict the number of fishers, and 
4. licensing and reporting requirements.

Evidence of slow growth, low natural mortality and high longevity in some species underscores the need for more conservative management strategies than in the past and cautions the use of conventional fisheries science underpinned by estimations of maximum sustainable yield.  
The great variation in the scale of fishing activities, management systems and technical capacities of management bodies means that multiple, country or region-specific solutions will be needed to redress the shortcomings in collapsed fisheries.

Operationalizing an ecosystem approach to fisheries management (sensu Garcia et al. 2003) requires a greater involvement of stakeholders, consideration of alternative management systems and a higher priority of social science in management institutions.
Resilience in XYZ fisheries will come about only if fishers are part of the management system and can adapt quickly to changes in the resource. In the vast majority of global fisheries, regulations towards sustainability are commonly undermined by political pressures (Mora et al. 2009).

Transformation of the management paradigms currently undermining XYZ stocks, therefore, inevitably needs to be supported by decision-makers resolutely if these animals are to remain valuable to the livelihoods of coastal peoples and provide the eco-services that contribute to healthy marine ecosystems. 

There you have it.

The poorer the countries, the more depleted the stocks.

And if we want to establish sustainable fisheries, we have to develop simple, often country-specific management tools, we have to involve the stakeholders - but we also have to tackle poverty and above all, we have to boost compliance and enforcement.

Chances of the latter eventuating anytime soon?

The paper - have you divined the species XYZ?

It's not at all about Sharks - it is about Sea Cucumbers!

Thing is, when it comes to lesser developed countries in the tropics, I can find plenty of literature about large-scale, industrialized commercial fisheries for pelagic Sharks but nothing about those small-scale artisanal fisheries that are wreaking havoc on the coastal species.

The Sea Cucumber paper is an excellent proxy not only because it sheds a light on those coastal fisheries but also because in places like Fiji, the Sea Cucumber traders are increasingly promoting Shark fins as a high-value alternative for those depleted and ever more rare Sea Cucumbers. Both fisheries supply the same essentially Asian consumer markets, involve the same people and socio-economic issues, and follow the general trend whereby they are equally often not, or badly managed and unsustainable (e.g here), and exploit the same lack of resources (and often lack of determination and/or corruption) and resulting insufficient to nonexistent enforcement by the local authorities.

Solutions?

It's same old same old.

• Legislate Shark Sanctuaries as stop-gap measures.


• Where possible, create alternative livelihoods e.g via tourism or aquaculture.


• Eventually and where adequate, establish science-based and sustainably managed fisheries, however with much smarter, and way cheaper monitoring and enforcement.
  In the case of those small-scale commercial fisheries, monitoring every single fisherman and landing site is mission impossible - the good news being that the bottleneck are the fin traders that are both driving the fisheries and aggregating, processing and exporting the fins. They are relatively few, easy to identify and easy to monitor. Reverse the burden of proof and let them prove that the trade is sustainable and legal, and make it a condition of their license to provide the data required for management.

There you have it - not easy but not impossible, either.

Or am I missing something here?

 

Sustainable Shark Fins - encore!

Indeed!

Hah!

I totally missed this when it came out.
Please do take the time to watch it.

And now, read this op-ed by KT Tan.

Same old same old - remember this post? 

There you will also find links to excellent answers by Shark Savers to those allegations. In essence, KT's arguments once again detract from the fact that the majority of the fins originate from completely unregulated, unsustainable and often illegal fisheries.

So no need for me to dwell on a rebuttal.

But of course there's also a big kernel of truth!

It is certainly completely wrong to engage in unilateral Asia bashing. 

And from a conservation point of view, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to ban the fins of (already dead) Sharks that have been fished sustainably, let alone been certified - the more since if you watch the interview with the Singaporean fin trader at the end, there already appears to be a trade in sustainably sourced fins.

So, it's back to square one isn't it.

The various campaigns to curb the demand for Shark fin soup are laudable, and the successes are impressive - nice synopsis with excellent comments by Sam here. But like she correctly remarks, Sharks continue to be targeted for other reasons, and bycatch rates plus IUU remain a grave concern.

Solutions - and I am of course repeating myself!

• Depending on local circumstances (!), let's stop fighting for absolute bans and instead advocate full sustainability - which before you start getting agitated  does of course imply finning bans!

But to facilitate the monitoring and the enforcement, this is what we should ask for

• That anybody wanting to pursue any Shark fishing activity come up with independent proof that what he does is fully sustainable

• That anybody trading in Sharks and Shark parts come up with independent proof that his merchandise originates from sustainable and legal fisheries and has been obtained by legal means

As long as that proof is not forthcoming, the pressure on the industry should be kept up.

But once the industry shows a willingness to reform,

• Let us help establish and grow a premium market for certified Shark fins from sustainably managed Shark fisheries!

I know - not what the breathy sharktivists want to hear.

But it is the right thing to do. Like I said, you may oppose it and and then find yourselves trying to catch up later - or you can embrace it and be at the forefront of smart pragmatic conservation.

The choice is yours.