Jess - testing Shark Sanctuaries!

Good one!

Read this.

So Jess is back in the Cooks in order to test what she helped achieve, and I really do applaud her for it.

Really looking forward to her findings.

Contrary to some scathing commentaries by their detractors, the jury is still very much out on whether those Shark Sanctuaries work, or not. Until proven wrong, I continue to believe that they largely do (read the links, too!) and that they are the best available stop-gap, quick-fix solution pending the establishment of proper fisheries management.

But we shall see shall we not.

To be continued no doubt!

No more Shark Sanctuary in the Marshall Islands?

I was wrong.

The Marshalls are not among the "best" - read the above (= click for detail).

Yes this is not good.

In brief, the Shark protection in the Marshall Islands is quietly being rolled back, and nobody appears to give a rat's ass.
Once again, it's all about the money: the huge earnings, the jobs and the according political clout of the fishing industry versus the money needed for enforcement but also the establishment of  alternative livelihoods.
In fact I remember distinctly how back then, Pew strongly suggested that following the designation as a sanctuary, the Marshalls would become a world-renown mecca for shark tourism like Palau - which has very much unsurprisingly not happened as the logistics for running a dive operation there are just simply totally prohibitive.

And like I said back then, legislation can be reversed - and now it has.

And Pew - anybody anybody?

Yeah, right.

Dominican Republic: Shark Sanctuary!

Still in its infancy: Dominican Shark viewing tourism. Source.

Great News!

Read this.

The linked article tells about an indefinite fishing ban for Sharks and Rays, a 5-year moratorium for Sea Urchins and a  2-year moratorium for Parrot- and Surgeonfishes which is all excellent and once again cements the position of the Dominican Republic as a visionary conservation leader in the Caribbean.

And then there is this.

Where others brazenly claim credit where no credit is due, Rick praises others where much of the credit is his. In fact, this is actually his seventh Shark Sanctuary in the Caribbean - remember back then three years ago?

So, once again, bravo my friend.

I'm proud of 'ya in so many ways!

Sustainable Shark Fishing?

Sawsharks? Who would have thought... Click for detail!

Bingo, and I cite,

To some, the solution is to simply stop taking them from our oceans, or prohibit carriage, sale or trade in shark fins. Approaches such as bans and alternative livelihoods for fishers (e.g. ecotourism) may play some role in controlling fishing mortality but will not solve this crisis because sharks are mostly taken as incidental catch and play an important role in food security. Here, we show that moving to sustainable fishing is a feasible solution. 

Well - yes and no!

A big YES to sustainable fisheries and certified sustainable fins! 
And of course sustainable fishing for some, comparatively few species is possible, and of course establishing well managed fisheries for those species is very much a feasible goal, and of course, the developed countries should assist the developing ones, and of course full traceability would be great!

But only in the long term - right?

Because short term, it just simply aint gonna happen anywhere besides the USA, Australia, maybe NZ and Canada and hopefully once Europe.
And like I said a squillion times, we simply do not have that time and need fast, stop-gap solutions like fishing moratoria, Shark sanctuaries and even better, those mega MPAs that protect the Sharks, their prey and their habitat - and yes the latter largely work!

Later on, once good management has indeed been established, some countries may decide to relax the prohibition - but right now, it's by far the most practicable solution.

And the bycatch?

Read this - and this!
Long story short, that bloody bycatch is of course a cause of great concern, and mitigation is exceedingly complicated - and this incidentally under any scenario including a managed fishery!
But contrary to what is being suggested, this does not automatically invalidate those Shark sanctuaries, but it certainly greatly impinges on their effectiveness at reducing Shark mortality below sustainable levels.
Methinks they work and Nick does not - but as long as there is no scientific evidence one way or the other, we definitely need to give them a chance!

And one last thought if I may.

Commercial fishermen fish what the traders tell them to fish = it is the traders that drive the fishery and I would argue, it is they who also drive most of the IUU. Methinks we need to much more concentrate on the trade, especially domestically, the more as the traders are far fewer and much more visible (and thus much easier to monitor), and that by the nature of what they do they also dispose of a wealth of data about the fishery.

Think about it.

Anyway, nice paper.

Certainly useful and truthful - but with caveats!
And, do click on, and read the links! :)

Good article here, infographic here!

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!

Safina vs Hilborn - must read!

Source.

Awesome - and I cite.

Ray often makes tautological arguments about how well-managed fisheries can work. 
Of course “well-managed” fisheries work. But only a handful of countries have the capacity to have well-managed fisheries. Most are too poor for the monitoring, science, and enforcement required by the modern Western-style fisheries management that is Hilborn’s stock in trade. And in the tropics, such data-intensive management does not transfer well to fisheries targeting coral reef fishes, in which poor people from thousands of small villages (Indonesia alone has around 17,000 islands) exert heavy cumulative pressures to feed millions of people.

That’s part of why we have overfishing and depletion. 
And that is why we need new approaches, approaches that Ray Hilborn seems to think are unnecessary.

Totally true.

And the same also applies to the relentless underhanded clamoring of those professional Shark conservation folks that continue to snipe against the Shark sanctuaries!
Like I stated a million times, e.g. here, good management is the preferred solution as it allows for sustainable fishing = food security and income - but as long as those developing countries don't have the means, or the political will to implement good fisheries management, those Sanctuaries are an excellent stop-gap solution.

Talking of which, congrats for this new crop of Sanctuaries.

Like always, all will hinge on proper implementation, monitoring, enforcement and prosecution where the track record shows huge differences between the different existing Sanctuaries, from excellent in French Polynesia to probably rather lousy in, say, Honduras. But having the legislation on the books is a huge step in the right direction, so fingers crossed!

And bravo Rick as this is undoubtedly the result of his tireless efforts over the past several years!

PS - and no it's not at least 100m Sharks that are being killed!
It's at least 63 but probably around 100 - before making pronouncements, you got to at least bloody read the paper you have commissioned! :)

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?

Enforcement of Shark Sanctuaries - Case in Point!

Source.

The noose is definitely slowly tightening on those poachers.

Read this.

If true, this would be an absolutely egregious case of poaching and obstruction - the good news being that they were caught and that if convicted, this will act as a strong deterrent. And, the Marshall Islands would be pocketing a nice chunk of cash that would go a long way towards further improving their monitoring and enforcement.

And failing that, there's always the Indonesian approach, see at top - maybe a tad harsh but it sure send out a message! :)

Well done!

Shark Fin and Sea Cucumber Trade - epic Paper!

Totally unsustainable marine products - proudly brought to you by the Heep Tung Hong Group!

Wow - busted again!

And by the same person!

But first.

Download the PdF in this temporary link before it goes back down - chop chop!

And then read it - and keep the PdF handy!

So there we have it.

After years of outright speculation, conflicting reports and breathy propaganda by both the Shark fin industry and conservation circles, Shelley Clarke has once again reached past all the bullshit, rummaged though the piles of data hoarded in Hong Kong and is finally presenting us with real, scientific and unbiased evidence.

In her own words, the situation boils down to this.

• Shark fin capture production has peaked, sea cucumber production is increasing.
• Sourcing networks for both products are dynamic and resilient to changing conditions.
• Conservation attention and regulatory environment differ between taxa.
• Conservation and anti-corruption campaigns may have dampened shark fin trade.
• Better tracking of traded quantities is necessary for management and conservation.

This is really as good as it gets.

On top of the above, it contains a wealth of other details and really is a must-read and must-keep - so if you haven't already, do download and do read it, the more as this time, I'm certainly not gonna paraphrase anything!

Anyway, I say bravo and thank you!

I really got the feeling that for the very first time, we are finally being shown the entire, highly nuanced picture, and this without any self serving agendas. And no I'm not gonna dwell on the bullshitters - you all know all-to-well who has asserted what and can certainly draw your own conclusions!

My personal take-away?

• Yes there have been reductions both in the trade and the consumption of Shark fins in Hong Kong and possibly also China, and this owing to a variety of factors among which the recent conservation successes but quite possibly also the fact that Shark populations continue to get depleted at unsustainable rates.
  In fact, anecdotal evidence from here in Fiji but also many other locations indicates that the price of Shark fins has fallen below a tipping point whereby it does not anymore make much commercial sense to target Sharks and then ship the fins to Asia - so bravo to the various anti-consumption advocates in Asia for a job well done!

• But looking at the evidence, it appears equally clear that Shark fishing in general and the Shark fin trade in particular ain't gonna go away anytime soon - meaning that on top of the traditional conservation work, we must also advocate full sustainability = better fisheries management in terms of quotas, monitoring, enforcement and prosecution.

• There, I strongly advocate to reverse the burden of proof for both the fishermen and the traders as it greatly helps enforcement - and I equally continue to advocate that exactly like we do for other Fishes from sustainably managed Salmon to pole-and-line-caught Skipjack to MSC-certified Lobsters from Mexico and Australia, we need to help develop a market for sustainably managed Shark (fins and meat and possibly even other products) as if it is successful, this will drive the industry towards sustainability.
  It's stuff I've advocated before, and you can re-read it e.g. here, with links.

But now to something I've so far totally neglected - my bad!

In order to achieve any meaningful results both in traditional conservation but also in fisheries management, we absolutely require better data!

Methinks those data already exist, namely with the fishermen but above all, with the comparatively few traders. 

The problem of course is that those folks continue to lie and obfuscate whenever they get a chance, meaning that most official statistics are way off due to underreporting and that only very rarely, people like Shelley get access to robust data sets and are able to report more accurately about what is really going on.

With that in mind, fisheries legislation especially at the level of licensing should include strong wording mandating detailed and meticulous reporting to the management authorities and stiff penalties for non-adherence. This must also include mandatory reporting of bycatch, including whether the animals were released alive or discarded dead.

And what about those sanctuaries? 

Yes despite of the continued sniping by some quarters, I remain convinced that they work in that they greatly reduce Shark mortality as targeted fishing and the trade are forbidden and poachers are increasingly being apprehended - but let's be clear that even with those measures in place, there's still a ton of Sharks being killed!

For one, some sanctuaries contain exemptions for subsistence fishing that is by no means irrelevant, the more as I cannot discern any bag limits that would at least somewhat contain the damage.

And then there's the mortality of all that bycatch, and of that exempted catch-and-release game fishing. Many, many Sharks die on those lines, purse seines and coastal gillnets; and even assuming  that the fishermen want to release them alive (and the majority of commercial fishermen do not as handling feisty Sharks on deck is dangerous), many die before they reach the vessel and whilst they are being handled, and many more die post release.

And as far as I know, the current sanctuary legislation contains no wording about the need to collect data on that mortality. This must change in line with the preceding paragraph about fisheries legislation, as this incidental mortality is certainly significant and needs to be known in order to ascertain the ultimate success of the sanctuary legislation but also, in order to enact better mitigation measures.

So there you have it.

At the risk of repeating myself, this is excellent and required reading.

And as an aside, it's also really interesting to find a comparison between the Shark fin trade and that for Sea Cucumbers. Like I said, here in Fiji and in the SoPac in general, the Sea Cucumber traders have diversified into Shark fins and are very much the driver of the current unsustainable slaughter of our coastal Sharks.

Well done!

Pew - Eyes on the Seas!

Source.

Great stuff!

Watch the following.

Posted specifically for the usual naysayers that continue to assert that those Shark Sanctuaries are nothing but bullshit as nobody is enforcing the regulations. I say, SINOs my ass - yes it's hard work, yes it's frustrating and expensive but slowly slowly, the noose on those poachers is tightening!

Details here and here.

And here is an article from Palau showing how a poacher was apprehended with this technology.

Well done Pew - I'm impressed!

 

Maldives Shark Sanctuary - Case Study!

Maldives Shark Sanctuary - only a SINO? Source.

Interesting!

Remember this 2013 report by TRAFFIC?

Back then I was wondering why the Maldives were listed as exporters of Shark products despite of their designation as a Shark Sanctuary.

Now, I understand.

Read this.

The Maldives had always been an important Shark fishing nation (an here) - and when they decreed the sanctuary by forbidding Shark fishing but failed to adequately ban the possession of Shark products, the fishing and the trade did continue, this mainly due to insufficient monitoring and enforcement but also lack of awareness and compensation of the fishermen.

There are obviously lessons to be learned here.

Nothing spectacular mind you - just that those things need to be meticulously planned, and that whoever advocates them needs to take on his share in facilitating their implementation.

Remember?

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?

 

BVI - stellar!

Read this.

Bravo!

And no, nothing to add or comment.

Just this.

I am particularly pleased to discover Rick MacPherson standing tall in the above lineup. Having left CORAL greatly diminished and bereft of any visionary leadership, he is now pursuing Shark conservation in the Caribbean - and knowing the man, this is likely to be merely the first in a succession of upcoming conservation wins in that region.

Attaboy, I'm proud of 'ya!

Hawaii - Crunch Time!

Please read this.

Looks like NOAA are ready to make their move.

Insiders fear that spurned on by WESPAC, they are about to write to Hawaii, Guam and the CNMI telling them that their laws are being overturned. Hopefully the reaction will be, go fuck yourselves, after which it will be up to the courts to make a final decision next time anybody will be busted for possessing Shark fins.

Please sign the petition.

Thank you!

Chuuk - brilliant!

Chuuk has enacted a Shark Sanctuary.

Huge congratulations.

Now the Micronesian mega-sanctuary is factually, albeit not yet legally complete - that is, unless those bastards at WESPAC succeed in repealing those Shark protection measures in the American territories.

Have you acted?

If not: here's some motivation!

Recognize the Sharks? :)

Pew: bravo, well done!

Protect the Shark Sanctuaries in the Pacific!

Bravo Shark Savers!

Please sign the petition - more details here.

And BTW, do you like the picture? Those are our Sharks, and they are fully protected because they live in the SRMR! :)

Please stand with Guam!

Source.

Read this.

I totally support it.

It's about stopping NOAA and especially, those underhanded bastards at WESPAC from undermining the Pacific Shark Sanctuaries and culling the Sharks in the Marianas (and here!).

Please sign the petition.

Thank you.

WESPAC - more about the Marianas Shark Cull!

Micronesia Shark Sanctuary - very much at risk! Source.

Thank you Shark Defenders!

Obviously, mine was merely a heads-up.

Being from Saipan, Angelo is best suited to dig up the gory details - and he sure has!

Case in point, this document.

It makes the case for establishing a Shark fishery in the Marianas.
Prima facie and apart from the obvious "oversights" (e.g. Scalloped Hammers are endangered, highly vulnerable to fishing pressure and also listed under CITES 2 - but they have some of the most sought-after fins), I for one got nothing against well managed Shark fisheries that rely on sound science-based quotas and where monitoring and enforcement are ensured. I've stated multiple times that I consider those Sanctuaries to be stop-gap measures in view of the establishment of  properly designed, implemented, and enforced fisheries management plans, and I stick to that opinion. 

In theory, and provided that proper stock assessments etc indicate the feasibility of establishing a fully sustainable fishery for determined species, I would certainly not oppose a fully certified (!), fully sustainable food fishery for those Sharks.

But of course this got nothing to do with sustainability.
Angelo is perfectly correct - this is a cull, not fisheries management.

It is WESPACs continued attempt to subvert the unequivocal will of the people who have made it amply clear that they want no Shark fishing in those Pacific territories and States. Having that appalling gang of unelected bureaucrats overturning democratic processes is simply intolerable.

It's your ocean not theirs!

Angelo: solutions? 

Or is it already too late?

WESPAC - on the Attack!

Soon from Saipan? Source.

Read this shit.

So it looks like I was right after all.

Spurred on by those bastards (and here!) at WESPAC, NOAA is now mounting a full attack on the Pacific Shark Sanctuaries.

This aint looking good.

To be continued.

Is the Tide turning? Maybe!

Remember?

Compared to then, things are certainly looking up.

The principal reason appears to be China's fight against corruption that along with the initiatives by those Asian activists is having a notable effect on consumption and also on prices. The latter is particularly welcome because if the Shark fin trade becomes less profitable, it may ultimately lead to less targeted Shark fishing, especially in those more distant nations where the cost of shipping the fins to Asia may eventually become prohibitive.

Good synopsis of recent developments here.

But of course the fight is far from over.

Even assuming a massive and permanent reduction of the Asian demand for Shark fins, Sharks are being targeted for the chemical industry and increasingly, for food - the latter as a consequence of the continued population growth but particularly, of the fact that many Fishes that were considered vastly preferable have been largely fished away. Remember the examples from Mexico or Mozambique, and the excellent Shiver - and far from being the exception, this is happening everywhere in the developing word all the way to the SoPac and more recently, Fiji!

Those problems are not going to be solved by a focus on Asia alone.

They will only be solved by developing, legislating and more importantly, implementing good, smart fisheries management plans that focus on sustainability, this preferably following the establishment of Shark sanctuaries as stop gap measures to allow for the fact that right now, many of those countries simply lack the resources for implementation.

May I be repeating myself?

You betcha - but when I discover shit like this (pressing global, regional and national issues my ass - shame on you Avaaz!), it becomes pathetically obvious that much more repetition is needed!

But I'm digressing as always.

Much has been achieved, so kudos to everybody involved.

And there's much more work to do!