<<

WildAid Bleeding the oceans dry? The and decline of global stocks Bleeding the Oceans Dry? The overfishing and decline of global sharks stocks © 2009 WildAid UK All rights reserved. Produced by WildAid Charitable Trust (UK) Registered Charity No 1126040 1 Amwell Street, London EC1R 1UL Researched and written by Tori Timms Chris Williams Edited and additional text Marcel Bigue Peter Knights Steve Trent Cover photos © WildAid Design by Daniel Brown

WildAid would like to thank the following (whose generous assistance in no way implies their agreement with or endorsement of the contents, conclusions or recommendations in this report):

For supporting WildAid’s Conservation Program Tod Bensen Robert Cudney The Keith Campbell Foundation for the Environment The Charles Fipke Foundation The David and Lucile Packard Foundation The Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund Julie Packard James Sandler Dr. Colin Simpfendorfer Ryan and Joanna Weidenmiller

For their assistance with information, photos and support Angie de Burgh Dr Nick Dulvy Sonja Fordham Sarah Fowler Jerry Griffiths Eleanor Kennedy Rob Stewart

Printed on recycled paper.

About WildAid WildAid’s Shark Conservation Program aims to: ❧Raise awareness globally about threats to WildAid UK is a registered charity in the United sharks Kingdom working for effective conservation of wildlife and natural environments, with special ❧Promote sustainable management of shark focus on wildlife trade. populations ❧End the practice of finning globally WildAid is a US registered public charity based in San Francisco with representation in the Galápagos ❧Reduce excess demand for shark fin Islands, Beijing and New Delhi, with affiliate In addition, WildAid is providing financial and Canadian and UK registered charities. technical support to the Galápagos Islands for patrolling and enforcing the Marine Reserves. In WildAid’s mission is to end the illegal wildlife addition, we are working to strengthen enforcement trade in our lifetimes. WildAid focuses on reducing of key MPAs of the Eastern Tropical Pacific Corridor the demand for unsustainable and illegal wildlife and bolster regional cooperation. products through public and policy maker education. To learn more visit www.wildaid.org Picture: Fishermen slaughtering a .

© Jurgen Freund/ www.jurgenfreund.com

Contents

foreword 2

executive summary 4 Commentary By Nicholas K. Dulvy and Sarah L. Fowler 6 Pressures on Sharks

overfishing 8

9

gear 10

the trade in shark fins 11

the catch and trade data deficits and the challenge to sustainable fishing 12

natural vulnerability 13

habitat loss 14

pollution 14 The decline of shark populations

declines 15

regional decline 20

consequences of decline 22

conservation and management of shark populations 23 Commentary By Sonja Fordham 24

conclusions 27

recommendations 28

references 29 F o r e w o r d

Foreword

harks are in trouble. And they need urgent The global production and trade of shark products has action to prevent the collapse and possible doubled since 1991 and now is worth around US$310 of populations and entire species million globally with as many as 79 million sharks S– events that will cause far wider ecological disruption killed each for their fins. Alarmingly, it appears and with it massive economic losses, decreased food that the majority of consumers are eating shark fin security and social problems. How do we know this unknowingly. A survey conducted by WildAid and the to be the case? We can simply look at what the latest China Wildlife Conservation Association in 16 cities science tells us is happening to sharks, and it presents a across China found that 35.1% of those surveyed had clear, profound and compelling warning. Collapses in consumed shark fin soup, but that 76.3% did not even populations of up to 99% have been recorded. Sharks know it was made using sharks. have swum in our seas and oceans for over 400 million Some may ask why we should we care about – they are living – yet within the space sharks? Again, science presents some compelling of our lifetimes we could wipe out most of them. answers. When shark populations are wiped out, it Why is this happening? Simple: over-fishing, can have a devastating impact on other species within wasteful and destructive fishing practices and, the marine environment, some of them commercially increasingly, the growing demand for shark fins. valuable species that are needed for food, employment Over the past 25 years shark catches have increased and income. dramatically, driven by booming populations, Can anything be done about the threats now facing increasing affluence (particularly in Asia) and an sharks? Yes, there is no doubt that a few, economically increasingly accessible global market and today and logistically viable steps could make a profound demand for shark products is greater than ever. difference to their conservation and survival. © Rob St Rob © ewar t/Sh arkwa t er . c om

2 b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y F o r e w o r d

First, we urgently need to see controls placed on the Also necessary is the adoption by fishing, trading level of exploitation of sharks to bring it to sustainable and consuming nations of mechanisms to monitor levels – we need to stop consuming so much shark fin. their activities and create accurate, up-to-date data – Consumers need to recognize that their individual exactly how many sharks are being caught, traded and choices generate a demand that is driving the decline in consumed and by whom? China has a special role to sharks. By that same token, consumers must be aware play in this – a leadership role – that will benefit the that they have the potential to effect change, enabling entire planet, millions of people and countless species. sustainable fishing efforts to expand and thrive, There is nothing to stop either individuals or ensuring that sharks will still swim in our waters in the governments taking up these actions to prevent the future. At the same time, governments need to promote decline and loss of these invaluable species and much far greater education and awareness among consumers that encourages them to do so – all that is necessary are of the problems and solutions. leaders. We believe in China’s ability to take on this Binding agreements on national, regional and role and lead the world in reducing the consumption international scales must be reached and actively of sharks to sustainable levels, preventing the illegal enforced, to manage and conserve sharks, before it fishing and wasteful practices that all too often is too late. Shark catches – both directed catch and characterize industrial fishing and, perhaps most bycatch – must be reduced, and the highly wasteful importantly, among its consumers, to stop eating shark practice of finning prohibited and enforced. The fin soup. invasion of protected areas and marine reserves by shark fishermen, operating illegally and driven by Steve Trent mounting demand for fins, can and must be stopped. President, WildAid

About 520 million people – around 8 percent of the world’s population – depend on and aquaculture as a source of protein, income or family stability*.

While around 90% of the world’s fishers operate at and depend upon small-scale, local fishing operations, accounting for around half the global catch, more and more fish each year harvested from our oceans are taken by a heavily industrialized globalised fleet of industrial vessels. Today no part of the ocean is out of reach for modern fishing vessels, and some deep water trawlers harvest fish down to a depth of over 1.5km. For virtually all species of fish there is simply nowhere left to hide. While efficiency in industry may be good, in fishing if you are too efficient you leave nothing to restock the population. Overfishing is now a , with more than 80% of fisheries for which there is data are believed to be either fully exploited or over-exploited. We can reasonably conclude that the maximum yield from our seas and oceans of wild fish has already probably been reached.

* http://www.fao.org/news/story/ru/item/20188/icode/

b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y 3 Executive Summary

Executive Summary

In recent years, shark catches have hit a record high. People may perceive sharks as invulnerable killing Statistical analysis of shark fins traded through Hong machines, widely-spread, with inexhaustible populations, Kong indicate that as many as 79 million sharks are but the reverse is true. Sharks are naturally vulnerable, caught and killed each year, equivalent to as much as reaching sexual maturity late and producing few young, 1.73 million tons of shark. This is significantly more than which means they have a low resilience to fishing. the reported catches to the United Nations Food and Based on the data available, we now know that 20% of Agriculture Organization (FAO). all shark species, and more than 50% of pelagic sharks Half the global catches of sharks, skates and rays are targeted by high-seas fisheries, are threatened with not caught by targeted fisheries, rather they are caught extinction. Some species, such as the oceanic whitetip as bycatch. Some are kept for their meat, although this is shark, are already locally extinct. In the Mediterranean, traditionally considered to be of low quality, and many 18% of shark species are considered to be ‘Critically others have their fins removed and then are discarded Endangered’, 11% are ‘Endangered’ and 13% are back into the ocean. This practice, called ‘finning’, wastes ‘Vulnerable’. Only 11% are legally protected. as much as 98% of the shark. It is also extremely cruel, and the finned sharks either drown or bleed to death. Much of the shark fishing industry goes unreported and unregulated, and can be illegal (IUU fishing). In fact, despite anecdotal information suggesting declines and collapses in shark fisheries in West and East Africa, parts of Latin America and many other parts of the world, there is a general paucity of records and monitoring efforts. This lack of catch and trade data makes it very difficult to establish the health of shark populations, and subsequently makes it extremely difficult to plan and develop conservation and management strategies.

what is a shark?

harks, skates and rays belong to the subclass Elasmobranchii, which in turn is part of the marine class . They are different from other fish because of their cartilaginous skeletons. There are more than 500 known species of shark in the world. Sharks first appeared around 400 million years ago and thrived in the world’s oceans ever since; outliving the sdinosaurs and surviving the end- (251 million years ago), when as much as 95% of all species were wiped out1. Their current population declines can therefore serve as an indicator of humankind’s adverse impact on marine ecosystems2.

© Bigue/wildaid

4 b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y Executive Summary

Despite the mounting concerns of the Food and Instruments used by Regional Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Organizations (RFMOs) to control , the United National General Assembly (UNGA), and particularly fin to weight ratios, are criticised for being the parties to the Convention on International Trade in difficult to enforce, for making shark catch information of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), hard to collect, and for being open to abuse. little implementation of shark management and More accurate and fine resolution catch and trade data conservation plans has taken place. Of the frameworks in is essential to shark management and conservation place, the majority are non-binding and poorly enforced. planning, and with Hong Kong as the world’s leading Of the more than 500 known species of shark, only three entrepôt for shark fins, China is excellently placed to lead are protected in the majority of countries in which they monitoring efforts. are encountered. Demand for shark products needs to be reduced, and The majority of Regional Fisheries Management consumers can play a central role in this. Particularly, Organizations (RFMOs) have now banned shark finning, focus should be paid to consumers of shark fin, as yet only around 20 shark fishing countries have issued demand for fins encourages the wasteful and barbaric complementary national bans. practice of finning. National governments should evaluate the net worth of conserving shark populations for tourism, rather than as exporting them as food and curios. In the Maldives, shark-generated tourism is worth three times the amount of exported shark products – driving the decision to introduce a national ban on targeted shark fishing.

b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y 5 Pressures on sharks

C o m m e n t a r y

Global Threat Status decline thresholds for Endangered and where fishing pressure is low and of the World’s Sharks, Critically Endangered are 70 and 90% fisheries tightly regulated. respectively. Fisheries have long since moved Rays and Chimaeras By the end of 2007, almost half beyond the narrow confines of the By Nicholas K. Dulvyi and Sarah L. Fowlerii (591) of all chondrichthyans had shallow coastal waters of continental been evaluated at a global scale and shelves. Trawlers and longliners are The status of the world’s 1000 or more 126 species or 21.3% of the known now fishing the deep waters of the species of sharks, rays and chimaeras chondrichthyans were threatened. As continental slopes beyond the shelf (chondrichthyans) will soon be known far as we can tell no chondrichthyans edges. Here exist numerous poorly- when the Global Shark Red List have become globally extinct, however known species of and dogshark, Assessment draws to a close at the end a number of species are classified many of which have slow histories of 2009. The GSRLA is the product Critically Endangered and have not and low capacity to cope with the of ten workshops and a decade-long been seen for decades. An example is mortality imposed by fishing fleets. concerted effort by more than 300 the Pondicherry shark Carcharhinus Where scientific data exist some scientists coordinated by the World hemiodon, known only from 20 dogfishes have declined by over 99% Conservation Union (IUCN) Shark museum specimens captured from in a quarter century of fishing (less Specialist Group. Even without the the heavily-fished inshore waters of than three generation spans) and benefit of the complete results, the Southeast Asia, and not seen since are Critically Endangered, such as conclusions published so far suggest 1979. A small proportion of species Harrison’s dogfish (Centrophorus concerted action is required to stabilize has been assigned with Endangered harrissoni). These fisheries and and recover many chondrichthyan status (29 species or 5%), and 75 these species are poorly understood, populations. There are two main species (12.7%) have been found to consequently many deepwater findings: sharks rays and chimaeras be Vulnerable. A further 117 species species were assigned Data Deficient include similar proportion of (18%) were listed as Near Threatened, categorizations by the IUCN Shark threatened species as other largely because past declines were not Specialist Group. and a large number of quite severe enough to qualify them Fishing fleets have also expanded chondrichthyans are so poorly known as Vulnerable and on the basis of the out over the surface of the high seas that they were categorized as Data ongoing or increasing potential threat of the world’s oceans. The number Deficient. Both underscore the need faced by these species. The regional of true oceanic pelagic sharks is for shark fishing nations to develop Red List status of the sharks, rays and low, comprising around 6% of all an International Plan of Action for chimaeras has been completed for the chondrichthyans; however they are the Conservation and Management of NE , Mediterranean mostly large charismatic predators, Sharks. Sea and Australasia: around thirty such as hammerheads, threshers Sharks, rays and chimaeras are species are threatened (classified as and mako sharks and many swim as threatened as other vertebrate Critically Endangered, Endangered alongside the tuna and billfishes groups, such as , and or Vulnerable) in each region. The targeted by ocean-wide fisheries. Once . Here, “threatened” threatened species include inshore caught, the shark fins are removed and means that a species has qualified for sharks and rays with relatively shallow sold on to feed growing Asian demand one of three IUCN Red List categories: depth distributions that are highly for shark fin soup. The relatively low Critically Endangered, Endangered accessible to and catchable by inshore productivity of most of these oceanic or Vulnerable. Species are assigned trawl, net and longline fisheries, such pelagic sharks, the high value of fins to one of these threatened categories as skates, angel sharks, and increasing demand for shark fin based on their past or past, current and . These species have soup means that, unless specific action and projected trends in population declined because they are caught as is taken to manage the incidental size. To qualify as Vulnerable, a species a byproduct of fisheries focusing on shark catch, they will inevitably has to have declined (or experience an other more abundant and productive decline at a faster rate than the more ongoing decline or projected to decline fish species. The types of fishing gears productive tunas and billfishes. It is into the future) in adult abundance used in coastal waters tend to be fairly estimated that 23-73 million sharks, of greater than or equal to 50% over indiscriminate and tend to catch all mainly oceanic pelagic sharks, are the time period of either ten years or species larger than the net mesh size. killed each year to supply the Hong the time spanning three generation Consequently, sharks and rays can Kong-based trade in soup fin. The large lengths, whichever is greater. The three- decline almost unnoticed provided tunas of the world are in decline, so it is generation long time span accounts the catches of other targeted more little surprise that many of the largest for the different life histories of species productive fishes remain relatively oceanic sharks are also threatened. and their capacity to cope with and high. In Australian waters, however, According to the consensus of scientists recover from elevated mortality, many inshore endemics (found only in that undertook the IUCN Red List such as from fishing. The qualifying Australian waters) are Least Concern, assessments of these 64 oceanic sharks

6 b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y Pressures on sharks

C o m m e n t a r y © Wi © ld Ai d

and rays over half (54%) face an and fate of sharks alongside mammals, i Nicholas K. Dulvy is an IUCN Shark Specialist Group North East Pacific elevated risk of extinction – 31% or birds, amphibians and corals – the Member and Canada Research Chair in 20 species are threatened (16 species poster children of the past decade of Marine and Conservation, are Vulnerable, four are Endangered) global change, and (2) to prioritize Simon Fraser University.

and an additional 15 species (23%) lie species and populations, geographic ii Sarah L. Fowler is IUCN Shark SG Co- just outside the threatened categories locations and specific fisheries for Chair and Northeast Atlantic Member and Managing Director of NatureBureau and were assigned a Near Threatened management action. A decade ago, International. status, including the manta ray in 1999, the Food and Agriculture (Manta birostris) and the blue shark Organisation of the United Nations (Prionace glauca). A number of recognized the high priority of shark species appear to be safe: 12 species fisheries management by adopting were assigned a Least Concern listing, and promoting the International not least the large salmon shark Plan of Action for the Conservation (Lamna ditropis), which appears to and Management of Sharks (IPOA- have benefited from improved fisheries Sharks). Nevertheless, few (~10%) management, the bizarre goblin shark fishing nations are managing shark (Mitsukurina owstoni) and their shark fisheries and the great the ectoparasitic cookie cutter sharks majority have yet to make significant (Isistius spp.). progress towards the development The scientific community has of shark management plans. known the and scale of the The Global Shark Red List findings problems facing chondrichthyans for underscore the need to urgently a couple of decades now. The global develop and implement IPOAs for status assessment provides more badly- sharks rays and chimaeras. needed detail: (1) to compare the states

b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y 7 Pressures on sharks

Pressures on sharks Overfishing

“Recent estimates indicate that exploitation has depleted large predatory fish communities worldwide by at least 90% over the past 50-100 years.”

— M y e r s & w o r m , 2 0 0 5 3

hark fishing has reached The increases in global these declines, and so fishing a critical level in recent shark catches are deceptive in in an area with no sharks but years, with more than that they are indicative of the increased catches of rays would 125S countries now engaging in technological advances in fishing still indicate an increasing catch. the trade of shark products4. efficiency and a wider geographic Overfishing is one of, if not Between 1984 and 2004, reported effort, rather than a sustained the, single greatest threat to world catches of sharks grew by or greater supply of sharks. sharks, pushing many species more than 200,000 tons5, and the In fact, many shark stocks are to the brink of extinction6. As a annual reported catch now rests actually decreasing dramatically. whole, a third of pelagic sharks at approximately 800,000 tons6. This is because sharks are now are threatened, but of those But these are only the reported targeted in areas where they were targeted by high-seas fisheries 8 figures. Based on shark fin trade previously unexploited and are Below: Total more than half are at risk . data it is estimated that 30 - 52 targeted more intensely than ever fishery produc- Recent studies have observed million sharks, equivalent to as before. In many cases, more and tion for all species global declines in predatory fish much as 1.73 million tons of more juveniles are being caught, of sharks, skates to around 10% of pre- sharks, are caught and killed each so while catches are sustained or and rays, from all industrial abundance3. Some areas submitting year. Depending on statistical increase the stock may be headed information to fisheries have shown up to a 99% 9 analysis, this figure could be as toward collapse. Vague categories the FAO, 1950- loss of sharks . high as 79 million sharks a year7. in catch data also act to disguise 200610 Total Fishery Production for Sharks (ISSCAAP Group) 1000000

900000

800000

700000

600000

500000 onnes T

400000

300000

200000

100000

0 1950 1952 1954 1956 1958 1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year

Table 1 Major importers of key shark products, 2000-2005

Fresh/chilled shark meat (not fillets) Fresh/chilled and frozen shark fillets Fins, dried salted Fins, other Spain Italy China, Hong Kong China, Hong Kong USA Spain China Indonesia Italy France China, Macao Taiwan Mexico Germany Malaysia UK Greece Thailand

Source: FAO, 2007 cited in Lack & Sant, 200811

8 b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y Pressures on sharks

Bycatch © E © n vi r o n m

ost fisheries en t target a specific al J us ti

species or group of ce Fo

species.M Everything else caught is unda

termed ‘bycatch’. In some cases tio

this is used, in many it is simply n dumped overboard, invariably dead. For some fisheries, bycatch dwarfs the catch of targeted species; the shrimp industry in the Gulf of Mexico is among the most wasteful in the world, with a 10:1 ratio of bycatch to shrimp12. It was estimated that around 50% of the global catch of sharks, skates and rays was part of the target, especially as Above: Investiga- “If left un-finned, survival taken as bycatch13. the targeted species decline. For tors find fishermen rates for discarded sharks Traditionally, shark meat example, in 2005, in the Spanish finning a has been of low value and so longline swordfish fishery in caught as bycatch. can be high, even up to sharks caught were thrown the northeast Atlantic the shark 60% of sharks released Below: A 15-foot ~ back. However, because of the catch was greater than the great white is may survive.” 14 high market value of the fins, swordfish . Sharks caught as caught and killed combined with easy processing bycatch on longlines can often — C a m p a n a e t a l ., 2 0 0 5 as accidental i n i c e s , 2 0 0 7 1 5 and storage, many sharks may survive release, but are more bycatch in a now be finned or even become invariably finned. driftnet. ank Photob ne i Mar / ell b p m a om C T d ./ Lt eas S Our e v a © S

b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y 9 Pressures on sharks

Commercial fishing gear

Long lines Purse seine Protecting our beaches? netting Longlines are often used by Beach-nets are designed to trap and kill shark t en tuna, swordfish, mahi mahi and Purse seine fishing is primarily species that are considered dangerous to beach tm billfish fisheries. Thousands of used for catching schooling fish users. They have been criticised for giving the epar D baited hooks may be set off a such as sardines. A purse seine illusion of complete protection of bathers and ure t main line that can be kilometres is a large wall of netting that surfers by acting as a barrier to sharks, when uacul

Aq long. As many as 10-20 million encircles a school of fish. in fact 40% of sharks are caught on the beach 19 and blue sharks are caught as side of the nets on their way back out to sea . es i er

h bycatch by longlining efforts As with commercial fishing gear, the nets catch s 16 / Fi

O each year . both target species, such as great whites, FA f bull and tiger sharks, and non-target species y o es t (harmless to ) such as reef and nurse ur 20

Co sharks . Along the coastline of KwaZulu-Natal, ns

tio South Africa, anti-shark nets catch an average of ra t 628 sharks, 237 rays, 58 turtles and 53 dolphins llus 21 t i e annually . N The bottom of the netting is then Entangling pulled closed (like a drawstring nets purse), trapping the fish. Shark bycatch in purse seine fisheries Driftnets are vertical, weighted targeting tuna totalled up to nets which float in the current 1,500 tons in 200418. and left to drift for hours or even days. Despite a UN Trawling moratorium on their use, as well

as numerous national bans, this Trawlers drag a cone-shaped ank method is still used by many net behind a boat. With various Photob ne countries. It is particularly modifications this can be set to i Mar

wasteful – with an estimated any height in the . t/

85% of catch thrown back into This is considered the most ers Ay

the sea17. indiscriminate form of fishing, na © Fio

Ghost nets

Lost and discarded fishing gear makes up about 10% of all marine litter22. The gear is designed to be extremely durable, and is often made of synthetic materials that do not biodegrade. This with bycatch rates ranging from means that lost and discarded fishing gear can Gillnets tend to be in fixed 60% of the target fish as in some continue to attract marine organisms, ensnaring position. Before their use was temperate groundfish fisheries, to them and killing them, indefinitely. This is banned in the high sea, typical over 10 times the amount of target known as ‘ghost-fishing’. One study based in bycatch rates for pelagic gillnets species in some tropical shrimp the Puget Sound, Washington, calculated that a were of about 30-40% of the fisheries6. Bottom trawling also discarded net could potentially catch an average total catch6. damages the ocean floor. of 92 invertebrates, 13 fish and seven seabirds each month23. n tio unda Fo ce

ti Above: A bull us

Right: An illegal J

al shark is killed in trawler fishing t en an anti- m

in Sierra Leone n o

r off Durban

waters. vi n © E

1 0 b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y Pressures on sharks

The trade in shark fins

hark fins account largest producer of shark fins for 40% of the global globally (1660 tons), followed market value of shark by Singapore (1000 tons) and Strade, but only 7% of the India (455 tons)26. Hong Kong volume11. Therefore, the relative is the world’s largest entrepôt, value of shark fin is much higher through which more than 50% than that of shark meat. It was of the global fin trade passes, recently reported that a set of for easy access to consumer shark fins can sell for as much as markets7. In 2005, Hong Kong d US$700 per kg in Asia7, making Ai imported 5,776 tons of dried ld

the fins of large sharks worth © Wi shark fins and 4,572 tons of thousands of dollars. There frozen shark fins27. Above: Shark fins Below: Dried is increasing concern that in Much of the shark fin during the drying shark fin for sale some fisheries shark bycatch is process in Hong Kong bought by Asian consumers playing a significant role in the is used in ‘shark fin soup’, or economics of fishing operations. ‘fish wing soup’ (Yu Chi). This The combined effects of factors is a soup made of processed such as increased operating shark fin, vegetables and meat costs and the high value of shark stock. Traditionally, the dish fins makes retention of shark was served at the banquets bycatch very attractive11. It has of Emperors, as an expensive been reported that the crews show of hospitality to guests. of some longline tuna vessels However, in recent years it operating in the western and has been served more widely central Pacific can obtain as including at all-you-can-eat much as half of their wages from buffets and even in cat food. shark fin revenue24. It is deemed by some to have Because of the difference in various medical benefits and market value between shark fins aphrodisiac effects. However, and meat, many fishermen are there is no documented encouraged to engage in the ank scientific evidence for this, and deplorable and wasteful practice Photob a number of studies have found ne of shark finning. Shark finning i that shark fins can contain high Mar entails the live capture of sharks gh/ levels of dangerous substances eau and the removal of their fins. In R including methylmercury, DDT

leen 28

order to preserve storage space th and arsenic . a on the fishing vessel for high © K value produce, the live sharks are then thrown back into the ocean Commodity Production and Trade: Shark Fins, 1976-2006 where they will either drown Source: FAO FishStat Database, accessed 2009 or bleed to death. As much as 800000 98% of the shark is wasted. This practice is widely condemned, 700000 and has been banned by many countries, yet it continues today. 600000 The production and trade 500000 of shark fins has followed an upwards trajectory since the 400000 onnes mid-1970s. Asian countries are T the source of greatest demand 300000 for this fishery product, with 200000 China, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia importing the 100000 greatest quantities of shark

11 0 fins . According to the FAO, 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 in 2004 Indonesia was the Year

b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y 1 1 Pressures on sharks © © M i ke A. A. Mc Coy/ Mar i ne Photob ank

The catch and trade data deficits and the challenge to sustainable fishing

ccurate catch data is also highly variable amongst Above: Finned shark catch figures reported to is essential to any regions (most notably there is a sharks from the FAO- which is the primary sustainable fisheries paucity of data from the Indo- a Taiwanese global fisheries data collection fishing vessel. management.A Yet information Pacific)30. This means that it is facility7. on shark catches is sadly hard to get a reliable picture of Since trade data could deficient worldwide, making the ‘data poor’ areas, which are equally be used to monitor it impossible to monitor shark frequently in the developing trends in fishing and abundance. Where data is world or the high seas. population, and since Hong available, it is often only in the Bycatch and other mortality Kong represents the world’s form of aggregated landing are often excluded in catch largest entrepôt for shark fins7, statistics- making it harder to data, adding to an incomplete it makes sense that China take discern if a species is declining account of fishing further the lead in tracking the shark or if smaller, younger sharks are compounded by deliberate fin trade. Comprehensive, fine being caught. There might only misreporting and IUU fishing resolution identification and be limited information gained (Illegal, Unreported and recording of shark fins being due to generic species codes Unregulated Fishing)7. This is traded would provide a vital such as ‘shark’ or ‘other’2, or highlighted by recent studies overview of exploitation and because of poor or incomplete of the fin trade. Global shark shark abundances, and would identification. Only 20% of all catches estimated by using shark be an important step towards shark catches reported to the fin trade records reveal that sustainable fisheries. FAO are recorded by species29. shark biomass in the fin trade is The quality and quantity of data three to four times higher than

1 2 b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y Pressures on sharks

Natural vulnerability

he fearsome Atlantic dusky shark doesn’t Even modest levels of fishing reputation of sharks reproduce until it is at least 20 can cause population as invulnerable killing years old, and the spiny dogfish machines,T combined with the carries her pups for nearly two depletion and stock collapse assumption that the oceans are years31. in most shark species. limitless and that populations Such traits result in very low of wide-ranging marine species rates of population increase and are inexhaustible, lead many very low resilience to fishing to believe that sharks are mortality. Because of their low ‘extinction proof’. However this population resilience, even has been conclusively shown modest levels of fishing can to be false5. In fact, the inverse cause population depletion and is true; sharks are naturally stock collapse in most shark vulnerable. Sharks typically species32. But global fishing grow slowly and are long-lived, efforts aren’t modest, and in reaching sexual maturity later reality shark populations are and having only a few offspring declining both regionally and with high investment of energy globally due to intense and far- in those offspring30. The female reaching industrial fishing. © Wi © ld Ai d

b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y 1 3 Pressures on sharks

Habitat loss

Changes in world mangrove area, 1980-2005 abitat loss is mangrove losses. More than half Source: FAO, 200711 considered a of the world’s original mangrove principal cause of forest area (estimated at 32 Africa Hloss of biodiversity on land33, million hectares) has already but in the oceans it can be just been lost, and the current rate Asia as devastating; sharks and their of decline is estimated to be North and Central America food base are affected by damage around 1% per year34. Coral to mangroves, reefs, sea mounts reefs are also under threat; it Oceania and estuaries, and by destructive is estimated that 19% of the fishing practices such as bottom original area of coral reefs has South America trawling, dynamite fishing and been lost globally. Fifteen per 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 pollution. cent of reefs are estimated to 1000 ha

Decades of shrimp be seriously threatened with 1980 1990 2000 2005 aquaculture, charcoal loss within the next 10–20 production and logging, years and 20% are predicted such as mangrove clearance exploration and drilling for to be under threat of loss and dam building, is degrading oil, tourism, and urban and within 40 years35. Meanwhile, the tropical river and estuary agricultural expansion have all pollution combined with river habitats of river sharks in the contributed to extensive global and estuary (mis)management, Australasian region36. © R © ena t

Pollution a F errar i L i e go

he release of sewage rre t a

and industrial / Mar

effluent, the dumping i ne ofT garbage and agri-chemical Photob runoff have wide ranging ank impacts, contaminating beaches, oceans and . The runoff of nitrogen and phosphate-based fertilizers is devastating for coral reef health, often resulting in ; encouraging algal growth and subsequently decreasing oxygen levels, which can result in significant fish kills. Similarly, fertilizers have been linked to specific coral diseases including black band disease. Every year an estimated 10 million tonnes of plastic ends up in the ocean, so that oceans, plastic in this soup Above: Marine build up inside them to now there are 13,000 pieces of has disintegrated over time pollution in Port dangerous concentrations. plastic litter floating on every into smaller fragments. These Honduras Marine A 2005 study found both Reserve. square kilometre of ocean37. fragments act like ‘sponges’ polychlorinated biphenyls Oceanographers have identified absorbing the chemical (PCBs) and organochlorine an area twice the size of the pollutants in the water. pesticides (DDTs) in the livers Continental US, a ‘plastic soup’, Mistaking the fragments for of Mediterranean sharks38, both where the millions of tons of food, many marine animals of which are considered to have marine litter has aggregated. will accidentally ingest these severe adverse effects on Like in other parts of the chemicals which may then and environmental health.

1 4 b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y The decline of shark populations

The decline of shark populations Species declines

he International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species™ catalogues and highlights those and animals that are facing a higher risk of global extinction. In 2006, the IUCN conducted its first comprehensive regional assessment of selected marine groups, and sharks and rays were among the first to be assessed. The assessment highlightedT the serious decline of shark populations, both regionally and globally. Of the 547 shark, skate and ray species listed, 20% are considered to be threatened with extinction25. © I UCN R UCN

Assessing the level Extinct (EX) ed Li s of threat for individual species (EW) t/ www

Threatened Categories .i ucnredl he IUCN Red List of Threatened Critically Endangered (CR)

Adequate data i Species™ provides taxonomic, Extinction s Endangered (EN) t.o risk r

conservation status and distribution g informationT on plants and animals. The list Vulnerable (VU) Evaluated is designed to determine the relative risk of extinction for each species, cataloguing Near Threatened (NT) and highlighting those organisms that are All species Least Concern (LC) facing a higher risk of global extinction. It is internationally recognized as a sound source Data Deficient (DD) of information to be used in conservation and management decision-making. Not Evaluated (NE)

Table 2 The main species in the shark trade and a basic assessment of threat

Trade Threats Main Species Main products in trade International Domestic Targeted Bycatch IUU Recreational Environmental in Trade (in order of importance) fishing fishing fishing Change White Shark Fins, jaws, teeth ** * * ** * * Basking Shark Fins, liver oil, meat ** * ** ** * Whale Shark meat, liver oil, fins *** * *** * * Spiny Dogfish meat and fins **** ** **** *** * Porbeagle Meat and fins *** ** *** * * Fins and rostra *** ** * *** ** * * Pelagic sharks Fins and meat ***** *** *** ***** ** ** Gulper sharks Liver oil, meat and fins *** ** *** ** * * School Shark, meat and fins ** **** **** ** * * * Smooth-hounds, angle sharks, skates and rays Requiem sharks, Fins and meat ***** **** **** **** ** * * hammerheads, shovelnose rays, guitarfishes Freshwater stingrays, ornamental fish trade, ** ** *** ** ** * *** Leopard Shark, meat Grey Nurse Shark & Longtail

* Greater number denotes higher threat level

Source: Lack & Sant, 2008 [p8]

b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y 1 5 The decline of shark populations

Shark declines

1. Blue shark Prionace glauca Whilst they are not considered AA

the most desirable shark species O by traders, blue sharks make up at least 17% of the Hong © AFSC/N Kong market of shark fins, and an estimated 10.7 million blue sharks are killed each year for 2. Spiny dogfish IUCN Status: The global the global trade in fins30. They or spurdog threat level for the spurdog was make up 75% of EU catches in Squalus acanthias upgraded to ‘Vulnerable’ in the central Atlantic and 88% of The spiny dogfish, also known 2006. However, in the Northeast catches in the Indian Ocean5. as the spurdog, is Europe’s most Atlantic the population has The reported world catch of commercially important shark declined by more than 95%, and blue sharks more than doubled species. Traditionally it was so for this region it is listed as between 2000 and 2007, fished for its liver oil, but now it ‘Critically Endangered’. reaching 45,000 tons in 200729. is prized for its meat. In the UK, Blue sharks have declined by 50- spurdog is sold as rock salmon 3. Porbeagle 70% in the North Atlantic39 and or huss and sold in fish and shark are the most common species in chip shops. In Germany, its belly Lamna nasus bycatch in the Pelagic Long Line flaps are smoked to make the North Atlantic populations of (PLL) fisheries of the Atlantic, delicacy Schillerlocken. In France, the porbeagle shark have been constituting 17-32% of overall fresh spurdog meat is sold as seriously over-exploited by catch between 1987 and 1995. aiguillat commun or saumonette Above: The targeted longline fishing efforts. As of 2000, estimated annual d’aiguillat31. spiny dogfish is In the 1960s, the collapse of the Europe’s most 24 totalled 1,575 mt . Spurdogs are commercial Northeast Atlantic population IUCN Status: Although characteristically late to mature, important shark. led to the intense exploitation of the blue shark is considered reproducing very slowly (the the Northwestern populations, the most abundant and fast female carries her pups for two Below left: Blue decimating that population in reproducing shark of the larger years), and mature females sharks account just six years. Renewed efforts for 17% of shark ocean (pelagic shark), it was tend to aggregate making them fins on the Hong in the 1990s led to further listed as ‘Near Threatened’ on highly vulnerable to overfishing. Kong market. declines, to around 11-17% of the IUCN Red List in 2000. During the twentieth century, virgin biomass within three Despite concerns over stock there was a 95% decline in Below right: The generations of porbeagle shark30. declines, IUCN scientists biomass of spiny dogfish in EU proposal to Elsewhere, declines of > 99.99% list porbeagle convening in 2007 could not the Northeast Atlantic, with a sharks under over 56 years have been observed reach a consensus to heighten 75% decline in the Northwest CITES failed in in Camogli, Genoa40 and >90% in its threat status to ‘Threatened Atlantic in just 10 years, and 2007, despite the southwest Atlantic41. with Extinction’ on a global a 60% decline detected in the their being a spe- IUCN Status: Listed as scale. Black Sea between 1981 and cies vulnerable to ‘Vulnerable’ in 2006. extinction. 199240. h Murc y AA O nd © A © N

1 6 b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y The decline of shark populations

4. Shortfin 5. Oceanic 6. Hammerhead mako whitetip shark shark Isurus oxyrinchus Carcharinus longimanus family Sphyrnidae Second only to the blue shark Over a period of 50 years, Hammerhead species have in landings by European fleets, oceanic whitetip sharks declined experienced some of the the mako is also a prime target by more than 99% in the Gulf greatest declines of all shark for sports anglers5. Its meat is of Mexico- rendering them populations43. Semi-oceanic considered to be of high quality, ecologically extinct9. Although hammerhead sharks are the Below left: A mako and its aggressive nature makes considered to be ‘Vulnerable’ shark is caught second most traded species for it a prime game fish. The meat globally, it is labelled as by a recreational the fin market, comprising 4-5% is consumed fresh, frozen, ‘Critically Endangered’ in the fishing vessel. of the fins in the Hong Kong smoked and dried salted; the Northwest and Western Central market, or up to 2.7 million oil is extracted for vitamins; the Atlantic30. Below right: Oce- individuals/ 90,000 mt7. They anic whitetips fins used for shark-fin soup; IUCN Status: Upgraded to are now a ‘rare are specifically targeted by the hides processed into leather ‘Vulnerable’ in 2006. exception’ in the Indian fleets and fishermen for and the jaws and teeth used for Gulf of Mexico, export to Hong Kong4. In the ornaments42. where they were Atlantic, hammerhead decline IUCN Status: Its global threat once common. has been estimated at 89% since 43 status was upgraded from ‘Near Bottom 1986 . Threatened’ to ‘Vulnerable’ in right: Ham- IUCN Status: The IUCN 2007. merheads have global threat status for the experienced some scalloped hammerhead shark of the greatest (Sphyrna lewini) was upgraded to declines of all shark species. ‘Endangered’ in 2007. © P © e t er Ko el b l / htt / p ://bi lder . pe t er - k o el b l . de ©Rob St ©Rob ewar t/Sh arkwa t er . c om ank Photob ne i Mar t/ ers Ay na © Fio

b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y 1 7 The decline of shark populations

7. Thresher 8. Ganges shark 9. Glyphis gangeticus shark family Alopiidae This species is known only from Carcharodon carcharias the lower reaches of the Ganges- The great white shark has Hooghli river system, West relatively lower productivity Bengal, India. There have been Left: Threshers than other large sharks, making very few samples of the species are considered to them particularly vulnerable to

AA be ‘functionally O caught and studied, the most exploitation45. Overfishing of

© N extinct’ in some recent of which was caught in parts of the Medi- the species has led to dramatic 2001 but was eaten and could terranean. declines; catch ratios of white Thresher sharks have only be identified from its jaws. to other large shark species experienced drastic declines in It is currently still fished, despite Above: Despite its dropped from 1:22 in the 1960s fearsome reputa- the Mediterranean, notably the restrictions, using gillnets and tion, the great to 1:651 in the 1980s and the Ionian Sea and Spanish waters. appears in the international white shark is Northwest Atlantic population Overall, one study concluded trade in shark jaws as curios, it actually more vul- declined by 79% in as little as 8 that the decrease in abundance is likely to be in the oriental fin nerable to exploi- years43. was >99.99%39. At these levels trade and is consumed locally tation than other IUCN Status: The great white is large sharks. sharks can be considered for its meat44. listed as ‘Vulnerable’. ‘functionally extinct’ in coastal IUCN Status: Listed as and pelagic waters of the ‘Critically Endangered’. northwest Mediterranean40. IUCN Status: Three species of thresher shark (Alopias pelagicus, A. superciliosus and A. vulpinus) were added as ‘vulnerable’ (VU) to the IUCN Red List in 2008.

1 8 b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y The decline of shark populations

10. Whale Shark Data from the rest of the Below: The mean Rhincodon typus world show similarly steep shark length of reductions in catch sizes. In whale sharks Whale shark fishery data, sighted off though limited, points to a Gujarat, India, whale shark Australia has decline in catches within a catches declined by 40% from decreased by short period of time. Whale 1999 to 2000, before the nearly 2m, indi- 46 shark catches from Taiwan’s Government closed the fishery . cating that adults At Ningaloo Reef, Western are being fished, commercial fishery declined by leaving only around 70% between 1997 and Australia, whale shark sightings juveniles who are 200146. Between the late 1990s over the last decade revealed not reproductively and 2005, the average length of that the mean shark length active. whale sharks caught off Taiwan decreased linearly by nearly declined from 10-20m to 4.6m46. 2m, and abundance declined 47 It is likely that this reduction by 40% . These declines have in mean length is a direct result persisted despite whale shark of the larger (breeding) females protection in Australian waters, being ‘fished out’ from the which indicates that the declines shark population in the waters are a result of fishing outside surrounding Taiwan. In 2008, Australian waters. the Taiwanese whale shark IUCN Status: Listed as fishery closed. ‘Vulnerable’. © Rob St Rob © ewar t/Sh arkwa t er . c om

b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y 1 9 The decline of shark populations

Regional decline

“It is estimated that populations of large sharks have declined regionally by 90% or more.”48

The Mediterranean with blue shark representing West Africa 75% of all shark catches5. In The greatest recorded declines 2005, 5,776 tons of dried shark In 2007, the Sub-Regional of sharks, skates and rays have fins and 4,572 tons of frozen Fisheries Commission (CSRP) been in the Mediterranean. shark fins were imported to announced that shark catches Of the 71 species living and Hong Kong, the world’s largest in West Africa had declined to breeding in the Mediterranean shark fin market52. Nearly around 50% of the 1990s level54. Sea, 18% are considered to be half of the frozen shark fins Between 2002 and 2008, catches ‘Critically Endangered’, 11% came from Spain, with notable dropped from 30,000 to 10,000 are ‘Endangered’ and 13% are quantities from France and the tons, with the average length ‘Vulnerable’49 predominantly Netherlands. By 2007, sharks of sharks also declining55. The as a result of bycatch. In were considered the main target CSRP linked these declines to 2008, only 11% had any form fish species of the European the intensified fishing effort of protection50. Declines in Union surface longline over the last two decades to meet biomass are generally greater fleet (mostly Spanish and the demand for fins in Asia and than declines in abundance, Portuguese), with more than 200 meat consumed in countries which may indicate that younger efficient vessels over 24 metres such as Ghana and Nigeria. and smaller sharks are being long27. There is much concern caught. over unreported Atlantic shark Gulf of Mexico In this region, thresher, catches. By studying the amount hammerhead and mackerel of shark fins traded through Longlining and shrimp sharks have declined in Hong Kong, one scientist trawling have caused severe abundance by 99% over the last estimated the actual blue shark of sharks in Below: A shrimp 200 years40. Porbeagle and mako catches are up to 5 times higher the Gulf of Mexico. Researchers trawler off Belize. sharks, as well as the Maltese than reported. For the shortfin found a 79% decline in dusky As a result of Skate, are also highlighted mako this figure could be nearly sharks between the 1950s and shrimp trawling, 53 as at significant risk. The as high . some shark spe- 1990s, and were unable to shortfin mako and porbeagle cies have experi- find dusky sharks in the north 9 are both prized for their meat enced as much as since 1973 . Oceanic white tips and fins, and are listed as a 99% population declined by 99% and silky sharks ‘Critically Endangered’ in the decline. by 90%9. All three species may Mediterranean51. Meanwhile the soon disappear from the area. Maltese Skate, found only in the Mediterranean, and is listed as ‘Critically Endangered’ by the IUCN. Bottom trawl fisheries are the main cause for population declines of 80%51.

The Atlantic

In the Central Atlantic, sharks are mainly caught as bycatch in the surface longline fisheries for tuna and swordfish, where the shark catch rate can be as ank high as 68% of the total catch5. Photob ne According to official sources, i Mar /

European vessels catch around e g d i r

31,000 tons of sharks per year in b this region, mostly consisting of ck Sto e i blue shark and shortfin mako, ul © J

2 0 b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y The decline of shark populations © Rob St Rob © ewar

Pacific t/Sh arkwa t

A recent study of reef sharks on er . c the Great Barrier Reef found om that immediate and substantial reductions in the fishing of both reef and pelagic sharks was necessary to prevent their ecological extinction56. It recommended that the threat status for whitetip and grey reef sharks be upgraded. Marine reserves off the accidental bycatch. Finning is Above: Reef sharks 86% decline in shark abundance coast of Central and South also a problem for other marine on the Great between the 1970s and America are literally besieged protected reserves (MPAs) in Barrier Reef are 1990s61. The silvertip shark by shark finning operations. the region. Costa Rica, Panama so depleted in has experienced the greatest The fact that foreign vessels and Colombia also struggle numbers that they declines of the five most travel large distances and risk with a lack of resources and are approaching abundant species observed in legal action rather than fish means of efficiently patrolling. ecological extinc- the area. The decrease in shark tion. legally off the coast is probably In Costa Rica, sharks can still be numbers is attributed to a an indicator of coastal stock landed at private docks where rapid intensification of fishing crashes. Cocos Islands off Costa authorities are not permitted to efforts in the surrounding Rica is routinely surrounded enter. waters by Mauritian and Sri by longline vessels that enter A number of shark fisheries Lankan fishermen. In the the reserve at night laying in the Pacific have collapsed as 1980s, an agreement between specially disguised longlines to a result of severe population the governments of Britain and poach sharks. Major finning depletion. The gillnet fishery off Mauritius enabled Mauritian operations have been seen in southern California, USA, for reef fishermen to operate in Mexico’s Revilligigedos Islands, the Pacific angel shark initially the archipelago under licence Panama’s Coiba and Columbia’s experienced an upwards trends targetting finfish, but likely Malpelo. in landings in the 1980s, but catching sharks as bycatch. Since 1994 shark fishing currently is closed until further Meanwhile, Sri Lankan vessels has been prohibited in the notice59. Similarly, commercial operate in the water illegally Galapagos and recreational fishing of the to meet the local demand for (GMR), but every year it is sevengill shark off California has shark meat and to export fins. estimated some 12,000 sharks been effectively terminated51. A number of illegal vessels have are poached for their fins in the Indonesia is currently the been caught by British Indian GMR. In 2007, an investigation world’s top shark fishing Ocean Territory (BIOT) fisheries with the Ecuadorian country, catching nearly 117,000 patrol vessels62. Environmental Police led to the tons in 200729. Bali, Kupang and The annual production of seizure of more than 19,000 Surabaya are leading centres of shark, skates and rays in India shark fins57. This poaching is shark finning and trading, and is around 70,000 tons, over carried out by a small number the majority of business done 4% of the total marine fish of locals, who coordinate with with traders in Hong Kong, landings4. The whale shark larger vessels moored outside Singapore and Taiwan60. Surveys has become a regular fishery the GMR which then transport conducted in selected fishing in successive years off Gujarat the fins to the continent, Peru villages indicate that the fin coast for its meat, fins, liver, or to Asia. Large scale fishing trade in Indonesia is booming, skin and cartilage. More than has been identified as the single totally uncontrolled and a thousand whale sharks were greatest threat to the GMR, predominantly controlled by hunted off the Saurashtra coast and yet there is still pressure mafia-style organizations61. during 199862. Sharks are mainly from domestic and foreign caught for their fins, and these fishing interests to legalize Indian Ocean are mainly exported to other shark fishing58. This pressure Asian countries. In 2001, the was likely a contributing factor The Chagos Archipelago, in Government of India passed to the 2007 amendment made the central Indian Ocean, has legislation prohibiting the to the national ban, legalising suffered the severe effects of fishing of all elasmobranches, the sale and export of shark both legal and illegal fishing but this was repealed later in the meat and fins caught as activities; with an estimated year4.

b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y 2 1 Consequences of decline

Consequences of decline

Loss of an apex “Fishing at the early stage of fisheries development most probably predator approximated natural predation. Nowadays, fishing approximates

Sharks are often at the top ‘extermination’ with dramatic effects on aquatic ecosystems.” of the in marine — S t e r g i o u , 2 0 0 2 6 3 ecosystems, they are apex predators, so their removal often used in clam chowder, that dugongs and turtles were or depleted numbers can is now commercial extinct prevented from overgrazing drastically affect the rest of the and the century-old shellfish sea grass by tiger sharks, whose ecosystem. They regulate the industry in the area has declined presence forced them to graze populations of species beneath significantly. more widely without lingering them, removing the sick and Similarly, pelagic stingray in one area for too long, weak and preventing species populations have exploded in allowing natural regrowth66. In from monopolizing ecosystem the tropical Pacific, believed Prince William Sound, Alaska, resources. Recent research to be caused by the 10-fold simulations found that the in North Carolina, USA, has declines of tuna, billfish and removal of the Pacific sleeper shown that the decimation sharks48. In the Caribbean, due sharks lead seals to hunt in of large shark species has to the overfishing of sharks, deeper water for walleye Pollack caused a collapse of the local groupers have increased in rather than the normal diet of shellfish industry. As large turn decreasing the numbers Pacific herring, which in turn sharks declined so populations of algal-grazing fish, such effects the marine ecosystem67. of their prey (smaller sharks, as parrot fish65. This enables skates and rays) have increased. unrestricted algal growth across Cownose rays (Rhinoptera the reef, impacting adversely on bonasus) increased tenfold to biodiversity and the health of : changes in the over 40 million individuals the reef, further undermining relative abundances of a number and are estimated to consume the resilience of the reef to of species in an ecosystem as a 840,000 tons of bivalves . result of increases or decreases annually, which includes The presence of sharks can Below: Sharks are in one species. Trophic cascades commercially important bay also affect the feeding behaviour generally the apex ensue from both direct predation scallops (Argopecten Irradians)64. of prey species. Studies in predator in most and risk effects of predators. The Quahog, a hard clam Shark Bay, Australia, found ecosystems. ©P e t er L a mb

Scientists use mass- er balance models of ti/Sh ecosystems to assess the arkwa t ecological consequences er . c of population declines om in top marine predators. A recent review of 34 of these models, covering reef and open ocean ecosystems, suggested that large sharks are the most commonly identified keystone species. This means that sharks have a far greater impact on ecosystem structure than they should do based on their abundance48.

2 2 b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y Conservation and management of shark populations

Conservation and management of shark populations

oncern over shark conservation and management “Whereas be monitored and restricted. population declines of shark populations, enabling Asia is the These three are also listed in the has been mounting their sustained long-term use, Appendices of the Convention Csince the 1990s, and since and parties were urged to adopt source for the on Migratory Species (CMS also then has led the Conference national plans of actions by demand for known as the Bonn Convention) of the Parties (CoP) to the 2001. However, the agreement shark fins as along with a further four shark Convention on International was voluntary and non-binding. species. However, parties to Trade in Endangered Species Up until 2009 implementation well as much the CMS are negotiating on of Wild Fauna and Flora of the IPOA and its offshoots opposition to a less formal Memorandum (CITES), the Food and have been limited, but greater shark fishing of Understanding (MoU), Agriculture Organization of efforts could be expected in the rather than a legally binding the United Nations (FAO) future after the FAO presents and trade instrument for international and the United Nations a report at the request of the limits, Asian cooperation on migratory shark General Assembly (UNGA) to UNGA in September 2009. countries do species. call for greater conservation Only a small number of Despite the rapid and and management of sharks. species are protected under not bear the devastating depletion of However, international international conventions. responsibility shark populations, and the measures to protect sharks Only ten species are listed in for the plight international nature of the shark have been undermined by the appendices of CITES, which product trade, certain CITES patchy implementation, non- provides an international legal of sharks parties have strongly resisted binding agreements and lack of framework for controlling and alone.” listing shark species on CITES. complementary domestic bans regulating trade in endangered — S o n j a The reasons cited include lack and national action plans. and threatened species. Listing F o r d h a m of trade data (a catch 22 as In 1999, the FAO drew under Appendix I is tantamount until they listed on CITES there up an International Plan of to a ban on the international is no current international Action for the Conservation trade of a species and, as of mechanism to require and and Management of Sharks 2007, six species of sawfish were enforce the reporting of trade (IPOA Sharks), part of the Code listed under this appendix. Great data) and the difficulty of of Conduct for Responsible white, basking and whale sharks accurately identifying the species Fisheries. This was an agreement are listed under Appendix II, of shark from which detached between parties to ensure the which requires their trade to fins originate.

Regional and national action on shark fishing

Regional fisheries body Action Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Ban on targetted shark fishing marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) Quota on thorny skate North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC) Ban on targeted fishing of basking shark and spiny dogfish International Commission for the Conservation of Agreed to reduce fishing mortality of shortfin mako Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) and porbeagle sharks Requires the release of bigeye thresher sharks caught as bycatch Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission Seeking stock information for blue, oceanic whitetip, (WCPFC) mako and thresher sharks

Countries with national restrictions placed on shark fishing include: American Samoa; Australia; Brazil; Canada; Cape Verde; Colombia; Congo-Brazzaville; Costa Rica; Egypt; El Salvador; EU countries; French Polynesia; India; Israel; Maldives; Mexico; Namibia; Nicaragua; Oman; Palau; Panama; Seychelles; South Africa; USA

Source: Lack & Sant, 2009

b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y 2 3 Conservation and management of shark populations

C o m m e n t a r y The European Union In 2009, the European Stepping up shark sharks. A regional thorny skate quota Commission presented the conservation for the Northwest Atlantic is the only ‘European Action Plan for the international catch limit for a member Conservation and Management By Sonja Fordham of the shark Class and now stands at of Sharks’ in line with the aims twice the level advised by scientists. of the IPOA Sharks. Provisions The last fifteen years have seen This situation persists despite dozens of suggested in the action plan to tremendous advances in the shark and ray species being listed and meet these aims include increased conservation of sharks and yet these highlighted as endangered or declining numbers of onboard observers, fascinating species remain among the under numerous international wildlife prohibition of discarding most oceans’ most imperiled inhabitants. conventions. sharks as bycatch, science-based In 1994, growing concern about Of the roughly 400 species of shark, catch limits for sharks and a re- declining shark populations prompted only white, basking and whale sharks iteration of the EU ban on shark the Convention on International are protected in most of the countries in finning, although special permits Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) which they are regularly encountered. authorizing shark finning will to call on countries around the world These three species are also the only still be allowed as long as vessels to examine the biological and trade sharks for which international trade comply to regulations requiring status of sharks, which in turn led to is regulated through CITES. A CITES that the weight of the fins they the development of an International ban on trade in sawfish, among the land does not exceed 5% of the Plan of Action (IPOA) for Sharks most endangered of the shark Class, dressed (gutted and beheaded) through the United Nations Food and was adopted a decade after it was carcass weight of the shark70. Agricultural Organization (FAO). initially proposed and does not apply During 2009, this action plan The landmark Shark IPOA, adopted to all species. will be sent to both the Council in 1999, directs shark fishing nations Too often, significant steps forward of Ministers and the European to craft national and regional plans are hampered by lack of follow up Parliament and the Commission of action to improve shark fisheries action or even steps back. In late will draw up legislative proposals data collection, ensure shark catch is 2008, Parties to the Convention to convert the plan into concrete sustainable, safeguard particularly on Migratory Species (CMS) took measures. vulnerable populations, minimize groundbreaking action by adding waste, protect biodiversity and commercially valuable shark species The Maldives leads conserve ecosystem function. — spiny dogfish, porbeagle and mako the way In March 2009, the Ten years later, however, sharks — to the CMS Appendices. Just Maldives extended the national implementation of the Shark IPOA days later, however, Parties could ban on reef shark hunting, has proved pitifully slow. Most of not agree that the developing CMS banning shark fishing within the world’s shark fishing countries global instrument for migratory the Maldives’ atolls and lagoons have not yet completed national shark conservation should apply to and in the waters up to 12 miles shark action plans. Only a handful of these species. Parties to the Barcelona off the Maldivian atoll coast. countries impose catch limits on their Convention for the Protection of the The Minister of Fisheries and shark fisheries; still fewer can report Mediterranean Sea have listed giant Agriculture, Dr. Ibrahim Didi, success in terms of shark population devil rays on an Annex associated announced that within a year recovery. Around the world, shark with endangered status and need for the government would extend fisheries data collection and reporting strict protection, and yet, roughly a this ban to all of the country’s remain grossly inadequate, and most decade later, Malta and Croatia are territorial waters, protecting finning bans are too lenient. the only Mediterranean countries to oceanic sharks and enabling The Mediterranean boasts the have banned take of the species. In a complete ban on all shark world’s only regional shark action 2004, the International Commission product exports. The government plan and yet its poor implementation for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas hopes the ban will create a ‘safe leaves the vast majority of (ICCAT) became the first RFMO to haven’ for sharks, rebuilding Mediterranean shark and ray species, adopt a ban on shark finning, but their populations71. The decision 42% of which are threatened with nearly five years later, only 14 of to impose this ban was taken extinction, completely unprotected. ICCAT’s 48 Contracting Parties have based on evidence that sharks Although two of the world’s nine adopted complementary finning bans are more valuable as tourist most relevant Regional Fisheries for their waters. Worldwide, although attractions than as exported meat Management Organizations most RFMOs have banned finning, and fins; in 1992 tourists paid a (RFMOs) have taken steps to only the EU and 20 of the more than total of US$2.3 million for shark discourage targeted shark fishing, 100 shark fishing countries have watching dives while the export none of these bodies has adopted any adopted domestic finning bans; many of shark products only earned a concrete, international catch limits for of these contain loopholes. EU officials revenue of US$0.7 million71.

2 4 b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y Conservation and management of shark populations

C o m m e n t a r y © Wi © ld Ai d

pledged in early 2009 to strengthen As demand for shark products IPOA and related shark conservation the EU finning ban by reducing the grows in the absence of management, initiatives has never been more urgent. allowable fin to body ratio by which so does the number of shark and To turn the tide, countries must work appropriate proportions of shark parts ray species categorized by IUCN as unilaterally and collaboratively to on board are measured. A month Threatened with extinction. Currently, improve shark data collection, limit later, however, the EU attempted to IUCN classifies 21% of 591 assessed shark fishing, protect particularly weaken the Indian Ocean finning ban shark, ray and chimaera species vulnerable shark species, strengthen by replacing the ratio with untested as Threatened (in the Vulnerable, finning bans, and develop plans of methods involving placing severed fins Endangered or Critically Endangered action for long-term conservation. in plastic bags — a complete departure categories of the IUCN Red List). Shark conservationists have from their brand new shark plan. Only one quarter of these species are had substantial success in the last It is clear that, whereas Asia is the considered to be of Least Concern. fifteen years, and yet, progress in source for the demand for shark fins as Data are insufficient to determine the most cases is still being outpaced by well as much opposition to shark fishing conservation status of another 35%. rising commercial interest in shark and trade limits, Asian countries do While data on shark catches products and rapid depletion of not bear the responsibility for the plight are generally lacking and many shark populations. Public concern of sharks alone. For example, the mysteries of sharks’ habits remain, for the welfare of sharks has grown EU is the source of the bulk of shark there is plenty we do know about dramatically in this time, but is not yet fins in trade as well as a persistent sharks and much of it is cause for reflected in today’s inadequate shark demand for shark meat, and yet, EU concern. Scientists regularly stress fishing policies. We must immediately shark management is notoriously that the tendency of most sharks to step up our efforts if we are to ensure weak. Despite scientists’ conclusions grow slowly and produce few young sustainable shark fisheries, rebuild that the Northwest Atlantic porbeagle leaves them especially vulnerable depleted populations, and save some shark population needs 100 years to to overfishing. Experts also tell us shark species from extinction. People recover and that landings from the that most sharks serve as important must not only change the way they even more seriously depleted Northeast predators and that losing them is think about sharks but also care enough Atlantic population should not be likely to have cascading, negative about their survival to act on their allowed, targeted porbeagle fisheries effects on marine ecosystems. behalf. Vocal, informed and persistent continue legally in Canada and These factors helped provide the citizens demanding more for sharks France. New Zealand and Canada impetus for the development of the from their policymakers offer the best were leaders in the fight to defeat the Shark IPOA and yet the management hope for securing a brighter future for EU’s 2007 proposals to list porbeagle priority assigned to sharks — at local, these valuable yet vulnerable animals. and spiny dogfish under CITES and national and international levels

New Zealand still allows shark finning — remains very low. The need for Sonja Fordham is the Policy Director for under certain circumstances. serious recommitment to the Shark the .

b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y 2 5 Conservation and management of shark populations © P. K P. © ra The 5% of weight rule gh/ Innerspace RFMOs are criticized for the instruments used to control shark 29

V

finning , predominantly fin to weight ratios of which the ‘5% i s io of weight’ rule is most common. This rule is a feature in many ns strategies on shark management and conservation, such as the US Shark Finning Prohibition Act (2000). It stipulates that the weight of the fins onboard a vessel must not exceed 5% of the weight of the shark. In some legislation, the weight of the shark is further defined as the weight of a dressed (gutted and beheaded) carcass. This distinction is important because a shark’s head and liver are very heavy in relation to the rest of its body. By using the weight of the dressed carcass it means that vessels can fin many more sharks and conform to legislation. US scientists believe that figure is too high, allowing fishermen to land two or even three fins for every carcass, with the remains of the rest of the sharks dumped overboard. Further problems with the rule include68: ● The difficulty in collecting species-specific data once the fins are removed ● The difficulty to enforce the rule Above: US scientists believe that the 5% of weight rule ● The capability of fishermen to mix and match the higher value is too high, allowing fishermen to land two or even fins and meat three fins for every carcass, with the remains of the In June 2008, the US National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) rest of the sharks dumped overboard. filed new rules that require federal shark fisheries in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico to land sharks with their fins still “Controls on finning are a blunt naturally attached. It is hoped that the new rules, which are part instrument that have no capacity to provide of Amendment 2 to the Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fisheries differential protection to those shark species Management Plan, will aid shark management and conservation by facilitating species identification and data collection and by most at risk from overfishing” 69 ensuring that vessels are not engaged in shark finning at sea . — L a c k & s a n t , 2 0 0 9 : p 1 5

Snapshot

● The Mediterranean is the only region with Sharks ● RFMOs continue to rely on instruments such a regional shark action plan, yet 42% of are more as the 5% rule to control finning, which have sharks and rays in the Mediterranean are still been questioned on a number of issues threatened with extinction valuable as tourist ● There are around 500 known species of shark, ● Only two of the nine most relevant Regional attractions yet only three are protected in the majority of Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs) countries in which they are encountered; the have taken action to discourage targeted than as great white, the basking and whale shark shark fishing, and none have implemented exported international catch limits for sharks ● meat and Only 10 species are listed in the annexes of CITES ● ICCAT became the first RFMO to ban finning fins in 2004, and since then the majority of RFMOs ● Eleven species are recognized as ‘high have followed suit. However, only 20 shark priority’ threatened species under the Helsinki fishing countries (plus the EU) have adopted Convention, yet no management action has complementary, domestic finning bans been taken to address this

2 6 b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y Conclusions

Conclusions

hark populations have declined drastically and rapidly over Srecent decades. For certain species these declines have been as great as 99%, and some species are now considered to be ecologically extinct. In the Mediterranean Sea, the region with the greatest shark declines, 18% of sharks are considered to be ‘Critically Endangered’, 11% are ‘Endangered’ and 13% are ‘Vulnerable’. Sharks are not the plentiful, invulnerable animals people imagine them to be. Overfishing through targeted fishing and bycatch represents the single greatest threat to sharks. Intense, widespread fishing efforts have reduced large predatory fish communities to 10% of the levels 50-100 years ago. Commercial © sharkwater.com fishing gear is notoriously unselective, and in some fisheries the ratio of bycatch involve reducing demand to their backs on this delicacy there to target species is as great as more sustainable levels, and would no longer be a reason for 10:1. Shark meat wasn’t always significantly reducing the fishermen to fin. so valuable, so historically targeted catch and bycatch of It is possible for us to sharks weren’t targeted species. sharks. manage and conserve sharks However, growing demand The overwhelming question so that they continue to for shark products and shark is how to shift to better swim in our waters, and it is fins has encouraged targeting managed, more sustainable important that we do so. As and sharks caught as bycatch fisheries. It is likely that this these keystone species move to be retained. In order to get will require both push and closer and closer to extinction, enough shark fins onto our pull factors, and that market marine ecosystems will suffer. plates, fishermen are turning pressure will play an integral Prey species have experienced to the deplorable and wasteful role in this shift. More accurate population explosions and practice of shark finning: slicing and detailed catch and trade displayed significant changes fins from live sharks and then data will be absolutely essential. in behaviour. More effective dumping the rest. As a leading importer of shark fisheries management, and It is clear that current products, and with the largest greater conservation of sharks, conservation and management entrepôt for the shark fin trade, has powerful economic efforts, both national and China would be an excellent incentives. As well as ensuring international, are falling short candidate to lead collection and the sustainability of fisheries, of the efforts required to collation efforts for trade data. and therefore incomes and conserve and protect sharks All countries should be taking livelihoods, protecting sharks and are unlikely to improve in steps to develop and implement also offers another revenue the immediate future – if and national plans of action stream for many countries; when they are in place it may (NAPAs), and globally it is time as tourist attractions. As the be too late. It is necessary to to bring an end to the wasteful Maldives’ shark fishing ban has inspire political will and to act and cruel practice of finning. already shown, sharks are worth to halt these population declines Demand for fins drives this more alive than exported as over the short-term. This will practice, so if consumers turned food.

b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y 2 7 Recommendations

Recommendations

Goal 1: A overall reduction of Goal 3: Greater conservation shark fishing effort of sharks

Fishing has reduced shark populations to 10% their A third of shark and ray species are classed as threatened pre-industrial levels, and targeted catches and bycatch with extinction yet only 3 species are protected by CITES. of sharks must be reduced. This will be best achieved A number of parties have argued against the listing of through market pressures – reducing consumer demand further species on the grounds that there is insufficient – and also through catch limits, tighter enforcement trade data available and the difficulty of identifying the of fishing legislation and a greater preventative action species from which detached fins originate. However, the against illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. only available mechanism for gathering such trade data Effective, proactive steps must be taken to reduce would be to list all sharks in CITES Appendix III, which bycatch. This may include a reduction in overall fishing requires the reporting of country of origin and export effort, or the modification of fishing gear with the aim of permits. Readily available DNA testing now means that reducing bycatch mortality. species can be accurately identified. Greater areas should be designated marine reserves Goal 2: More effective fisheries in order to protect key life-cycle areas for marine management biodiversity. These must be managed and restrictions on fishing enforced. International financing should be made Overfishing represents the single greatest threat to available if necessary. sharks, and lack of catch data on country of origin or species identification hampers more effective fisheries Goal 4: A global ban on finning management. Even in the most sophisticated fisheries catch data is lacking and it would seem beyond the Fin to weight ratios are a weak control on the wasteful capabilities of many areas, such as Indonesia, to collate and barbaric practice of finning, and regional fisheries accurate data. However, the global trade of shark management organisations (RMFOs) must re-evaluate products does have a bottleneck, where data could be their use. Landing sharks with all their fins naturally cheaply and easily collected and collated in order to attached is a possible alternative. There must also be monitor shark exploitation. China (including Hong greater enforcement of RFMOs bans on finning, and Kong SAR) is both consumer and processor for the vast national governments should introduce domestic majority of the world’s shark fin trade, possibly in excess finning bans. of 90%. Shark fin traders already distinguish between European countries should call an end to the species to get the best prices, often keeping detailed provision of special fishing permits which permit the records which are kept in private hands. removal of shark fins at sea. China and Hong Kong could legislate to require mandatory declarations of all fin imports by species, Goal 5: Consumer action

weight and catch area by shark fin importers and then Wi © collate and publish this data widely. Accuracy of the Consumers ld Ai species identification could be randomly checked using should help d now readily available DNA identification tests. In this protect sharks way catch, and therefore population trends, could be by reducing their identified and the data fed into the IUCN and CITES consumption listings processes. of shark meat National governments should develop national and products, plans of action (NPOAs) for sharks. These should and by stopping make provisions for sustainable catch, data collection, eating shark stakeholder consultation, waste minimisation, fin altogether. biodiversity protection, ecosystem preservation Avoiding dishes such as shark fin soup will curb the and special attention to threatened and vulnerable demand that encourages fishermen to engage in finning. populations. Dedicated fisheries managers must be Individuals can also show their support for countries appointed to ensure that fishing is sustainable. Where that protect their shark populations, such as the fishing methods are deemed to be inappropriate or Maldives, by booking their holidays in these locations. destructive in terms of bycatch, managers should seek Concerned citizens could also write to their fisheries and promote alternatives. National governments should minister to voice their concern about the depletion of monitor and regulate the trade and markets of marine shark populations, and to encourage the use of catch products more stringently. limits.

2 8 b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y R e f e r e n c e s

References

1. Benton. M & Twitchett. R (2003) How to kill (almost) all life: The end-Permian 38. Storelli. M, Storelli. A & Marcotrigiano. G (2005) Concentrations and hazard extinction event. Trends in Ecology and . Vol. 18 (7): p358-365 assessment of polychlorinated biphenyls and organochlorine pesticides in shark liver 2. Kyne. P & Simpfendorfer. C (2007) A Collation and Summarization of Available Data from the Mediterranean Sea. Bulletin. Vol.50 (8): p850-855 on Deepwater Chondrichthyans: Biodiversity, Life History and Fisheries. IUCN SSC 39. IUCN (22/02/07) More oceanic sharks added to the IUCN Red List. - http://www. Shark Specialist Group, Institute flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/organizations/ssg/redlistupdate2007.pdf 3. Myers. R & Worm. B (2005) Extinction, survival or recovery of large predatory fishes. 40. Ferretti. F, Myers. R, Serena. F & Lotze. H (2008) Loss of Large Predatory Sharks Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci. Vol. 360 (1453): p13-20 from the Mediterranean Sea. . Vol. 22 (4): p1-13 4. Verlecar. X, Snigdha, Desai. S & Dhargalkar. V (2007) Shark Hunting – an 41. IUCN. Lamna nasus (Northeast Atlantic subpopulation) - http://www.iucnredlist. indescriminate trade endangering elasmobranchs to extinction. Current Science. Vol. org/details/39343/0/full 92(8): p1078-1082 42. Stevens, J. 2000. Isurus oxyrinchus. In: IUCN 2009. IUCN Red List of Threatened 5. European Commission (last updated 05/02/09) Press Corner: Questions and answers Species. Version 2009.1. . Downloaded on 03 June 2009 – shark action plan. – 43. Baum. J et al (2003) Collapse and Conservation of Shark Populations in the http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/press_corner/press_releases/2009/com09_01_en.htm, Northwest Atlantic. Science. Vol. 299 (5605): p389 - 392 accessed on 14/04/09 44. Compagno, L.J.V. 2007. Glyphis gangeticus. In: IUCN 2009. IUCN Red List of 6. Bonfil. R (2000). The problem of incidental catches of sharks and rays, its likely Threatened Species. Version 2009.1. . Downloaded on 03 June consequences and some possible solutions. Shark Conference 2000, Hawaii, 21-24 2009. February 45. CITES [2004] CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS FOR AMENDMENT OF 7. Clarke. S et al (2006) Global estimates of shark catches using trade records from APPENDICES I AND II: Inclusion of Carcharodon carcharias in Appendix II. CoP13 commercial markets. Ecology letters. Vol. 9: p1115-1126 Prop. 32 Rev.1 8. IUCN (25/06/09) Third of open ocean sharks threatened with extinction - http:// 46. DEH, Government of Australia (2005) Whale Shark (Rhincodon typus) Issues Paper. www.iucn.org/?3362/Third-of-open-ocean-sharks-threatened-with-extinction Department of the Environment and Heritage, Australian Government. ISBN 0 6425 9. Baum, J & Myers. R (2004) Shifting baselines and the decline of pelagic sharks in the 5082 4 Gulf of Mexico. Ecology Letters. Vol. 7: p135-145 47. Bradshaw.C et al (2008) Decline in whale shark size and abundance at Ningaloo 10. FAO FishStat Database, accessed 15/01/09 Reef over the past decade: the world’s largest fish is getting smaller. Biological 11. Lack, M. and Sant, G. (2008). Illegal, unreported and unregulated shark catch: A Conservation. Vol.141 (7): p1894-1905 review of current knowledge and action. Department of the Environment, Water, 48. Heithaus. M, Frid. A, Wirsing. A, Worm. B (2008) Predicting ecological consequences Heritage and the Arts and TRAFFIC, Canberra of marine top predator declines. Vol. 23(4): p202-10 12. Shepherd. T & Myers R (2005) Direct and indirect fishery effects on small coastal 49. IUCN (16/11/07) Press Release. Mediterranean Sea: most dangerous place on elasmobranchs in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Ecology Letters: 8. for sharks and rays. - http://www.iucn.org/about/union/secretariat/offices/iucnmed/ 13. Stevens, J. D. Et al, (2000), ‘The effects of fishing on sharks, rays and chimaeras communication/press_releases/?58/Mediterranean-Sea-most-dangerous-place-on- (chondrichthyans), and the implications for marine ecosystems. Journal of Marine Earth-for-sharks-and-rays Science. Vol. 57: p476-494 50. IUCN (28/10/08) Mediterranean Cartilaginous Fishes. http://cmsdata.iucn.org/ 14. Megalofonou, P. et al, (2003), ‘ and estimated discards of pelagic downloads/sharks_lr.pdf sharks from the swordfish and tuna fisheries in the Mediterranean Sea’, Fisheries 51. Bester. C (accessed 15/04/09) Biological Profiles: Sevengill shark. Ichthyology Bulletin: 103 Department, Florida Museum of Natural History. http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/ 15. ICES WGEF Report, (2007), ‘ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management: Gallery/Descript/Sevengill/Sevengill.html ICES CM 2007/ACFM:27’, REF. LRC, Report of the Working Group on 52. Oceana (2007b) Treated as Trash. http://oceana.org/fileadmin/oceana/uploads/ Elasmobranch Fishes (WGEF) europe/reports/Treated_As_Trash.pdf 16. Smith. D (25/10/07) Sharks Harmed by Long Line Fishing. Ecosystem preservation. 53. Clarke. S (2004) Report of the 2004 inter-sessional meeting of the ICCAT - http://ecosystem-preservation.suite101.com/article.cfm/sharks_harmed_by_long_ subcommittee on bycatches: shark . SCRS/2004/014 Col. Vol. Sci. line_fishing Pap. ICCAT. Vol.58 (3): p799-890 17. Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF) (accessed 21/04/09) Illegal driftnetting in 54. Exit Stage Right (10/10/07) West Africa’s sharks risk extinction - http:// the Mediterranean. - http://www.ejfoundation.org/page166.html exitstageright.wordpress.com/2007/10/10/west-africas-sharks-risk-extinction/ 18. Oceana (2008) Shark fisheries- http://oceana.org/europe/what-we-do/shark- 55. African Press Agency (17/09/08) West African Shark Catches Show Drastic conservation/research-photos/shark-fisheries/ Reduction - http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/sharks/InNews/drastic2008.html 19. Save our Seas Foundation. Shark nets update - http://www.saveourseas.com/ 56. Robbins. W (2006) Ongoing Collapse of Coral-Reef Shark Populations. Current sharknets (accessed 22/06/09) Biology. Vol. 16: p2314-2319 20. National Geographic (2002) South Africa Rethinks Use of Shark Nets - http://news. 57. Sea Shepard (13/06/07) Sea Shepherd Galapagos Sting Results in Seizure of Over nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/06/0603_020604_shark2.html 19,000 Shark Fins - http://www.seashepherd.nl/galapagos/galapagos_defending_ 21. KZN Sharks Board (accessed 12/05/09) Reducing mortalities. - http://www.shark. sharks.html co.za/mort.htm 58. Foundation (2007) Charles Darwin Research Station Fact Sheet: 22. UNEP (2009) Marine Litter: A Global Challenge. Nairobi: UNEP. 232 pp Sharks in Galapagos. Charles Darwin Foundation for the Galapagos Islands. 23. Natural Resources Consultants, Inc. (15/05/08) RATES OF MARINE SPECIES Galapagos, Ecuador MORTALITY CAUSED BY DERELICT FISHING NETS IN PUGET SOUND, 59. Bester. C (accessed 15/04/09a) Biological Profiles: Pacific angel shark. Ichthyology WASHINGTON. Northwest Straits Marine Conservation Initiative. Department, Florida Museum of Natural History. http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/ 24. Gilman. E, Clarke. S, Brothers. N, Alfaro-Shigueto. J, Mandelma. J, Mangel. J, gallery/descript/pacificangelshark/pacificangelshark.html Petersen. S, Piovano. S, Thomson. N, Dalzell. P, Donoso. M, Goren. M, Werner. T 60. Al-Janahi. A & Cherian. T (2008) Shark Finning. Marine Resources Research Centre, (2007) Shark Depredation and Unwanted Bycatch in Pelagic Longline Fisheries: UAE Environmental & Agricultural Information Centre. - http://www.uae.gov.ae/ Industry Practices and Attitudes, and Shark Avoidance Strategies. Western Pacific uaeagricent/Fisheries/Sharkfin1_en.stm Regional Fishery Management Council, Honolulu, USA. 61. Anderson. C (January 1998) Shortage of sharks at Chagos. Florida Museum of 25. IUCN (04/05/07) News Release: Release of the 2006 IUCN Red List of Threatened Natural History. The IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group: Shark News Vol. 10 Species reveals ongoing decline of the status of plants and animals. - http://www. 62. Pravin. P (2000) Whale shark in Indian coast - Need for conservation. Curr. Sci. Vol. flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/organizations/ssg/2006Mayredlist.pdf 79: p310-315 26. Hareide. Net al (2007) European shark fisheries: a preliminary investigation into 63. Stergiou. K (2002) Overfishing, tropicalization of , uncertainty and fisheries, conversion factors, trade products, markets and management measures. ecosystem management: resharpening Ockham’s razor. Fisheries Research. Vol. 55 European Elasmobranch Association (1-3): p1-9 27. Oceana (2007a) Hunted for Fins. http://www.oceana.org/fileadmin/oceana/uploads/ 64. Myers. R et al, (2007) Cascading Effects of the Loss of Apex Predatory Sharks from a europe/reports/hunted_for_fins.pdf Coastal Ocean. Science. Vol. 315 (5820): p1846 - 1850 28. WildAid (2009) In the Soup: how mercury poisons the fish we eat. WildAid UK, 65. Bascompte. J, Melián. C & Sala. E (2005) Interaction strength combinations and the London overfishing of a marine food web. PNAS. Vol.102 (15): p5443-5447 29. Lack. M & Sant. G (2009) Trends in global shark catch and recent developments in 66. Wirsing. A, Heithaus. M & Dill. L (2007) Living on the edge: dugongs prefer to forage management. TRAFFIC International, Cambridge UK in microhabitats that allow escape from rather than avoidance of predators. 30. Dulvy, Baum, Clarke, Compagno, Cortés, Domingo, Fordham, Fowler, Francis, Behavior. Vol. 74: p93-101 Gibson, Martínez, Musick, Soldo, Stevens and Valenti (2008) You can swim but you 67. Frid. A, Baker. G, Dill. L (2008) Do shark declines create fear-released systems? Oikos. can’t hide: the global status and conservation of oceanic pelagic sharks and rays. Vol. 117(2): p191-201 Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems. 68. Oceana (2007c) U.S. Shark Finning Regulations. - http://www.oceana.org/sharks/ 31. Fordham. S (2006) Shark alert: Revealing Europe’s impact on shark populations. threats/finning-sharks/us-shark-finning-regulations/ Shark Alliance. 69. Oceana (19/06/09) U.S. Government Issues Shark Finning Ban in Atlantic Ocean 32. Musick. J, Burgess. G, Cailliet. G, Camhi. M & Fordham. S (2000) AFS POLICY and Gulf of Mexico Waters. - http://oceana.org/north-america/media-center/press- STATEMENT #31b: Management of Sharks and Their Relatives (Elasmobranchii). releases/press_release/0/806/ Fisheries. Vol. 25(3): p9-13 70. European Elasmobranch Association (EEA) - IPOA-Sharks. http://www.eulasmo. 33. Purvis. A, Jones. K & Mace. G (2000) Extinction. BioEssays. Vol. 22 (12): p 1123-1133 org/v.asp?level2=6489&depth=2&level3=6489&level2id=6489&rootid=6463&nextlev 34. FAO (2007) FAO Forestry Paper 153: The world’s mangroves 1980-2005. Food and el=6489 Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome 71. Maldives Marine Research Centre- http://www.mrc.gov.mv/index.php?cID=99 35. Wilkinson. C ed (2008) Status of Coral Reefs of the World: 2008. Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network and Reef and Rainforest Research Center, Townsville, Australia. 36. Martin. R (accessed 12/05/09) The Mysterious, Endangered River Sharks (Glyphis spp.). ReefQuest Centre for Shark Research - http://www.elasmo-research.org/ conservation/river_sharks.htm 37. UNEP (2009) Marine Litter: A Global Challenge. Nairobi: UNEP. 232 pp

b l e e d i n g t h e o c e a n s d r y 2 9 WildAid 1 Amwell Street London EC1R 1UL +44(0)207 837 1242 [email protected] www.wildaid.org