The End of the Line? 2007

Home , Peter Benchley, Save Our Seas Foundation

Written, edited and produced by WildAid special thanks to Louis Buckley Jennifer Hile

Photos: cover © Justin Ebert back cover © Marcel Bigue / WildAid this page © Bruce McCoubrey Design by Beowulf Grimbly & Xiaoxiao Sun In memoriam of Peter Benchley, author and conservationist

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 Shark Conservation Program Anonymous Donor AVINA Barbara Delano Foundation David and Lucile Packard Foundation Disney Wildlife Conservation Fund Erika Knie Firedoll Foundation Helaine Lerner Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund Dan Rice Dr. Stephan Schmidheiny Robert Stephens Save Our Seas Foundation Thornton Foundation Wallace Global Fund Wendy P. McCaw Foundation Wildlifeline Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich and Rosati Foundation for their assistance with information, photos, and support Christopher Angell Mr Abdulrazak, Kenya Wendy Benchley Nicola Beynon George Burgess Merry Camhi Shelley Clarke About WildAid Andy Cobb Leonard Compagno Mathieu Ducrocq WildAid’s Shark Conservation Program aims to: Bob Endreson Mark Erdmann Sonja Fordham ◆ Raise awareness globally about threats to sharks Sarah Fowler Malcom Francis Suwanna Gauntlett ◆ Promote sustainable management of shark populations Charles Goodfellow Mr Ishmael, Kenya Clive James ◆ End the practice of finning globally Kelly Kok Leena Kumarappan Mr K.H. Kwong ◆ Reduce excess demand for shark fin Jerome Manning Rick Martin Bruce McCoubrey In addition, WildAid is providing financial and technical support to the Neal Myerberg Galápagos Islands for patrolling and enforcing the Marine Reserves. Wai Yee Ng Julie Packard Linda Paul Through the WildAid 100% Direct Fund all public donations can go Clare Robertson Jeff Rotman straight to field protection with no administrative or overhead deductions. Amadou Saine Mr. Shafi, India Howard Shaw WildAid is a US registered public charity based in San Francisco with Alex Smailes representation in London, the Galápagos Islands, Beijing and New Delhi. Malcolm Smale Colin Speedie John Stevens Carol Stimson Michael Sutton Tony Wu WildAid-s mission is to end the illegal wildlife trade in our lifetimes.

Columbia Tristar Discovery Channel Asia WildAid focuses on reducing the demand for unsustainable and illegal Ocean Wildlife Campaign wildlife products through public and policy maker education. The Shark Trust Universal Home Video Printed on recycled paper. To learn more visit www.wildaid.org Awareness, Protection, preservation and the conservation of the Marine Environment through Education and Research.

The Save Our Seas Foundation is a non profit Swiss foundation with Headquarters in Geneva Switzerland, a Marine Research facility located in the Red Sea and a field office in the United Arab Emirates. The organization implements and supports scientific research, educational programs and produces High Definition documentaries around the world, assisting organizations and individuals to achieve key conservation goals. Contents The Save Our Seas Foundation has supported 55 projects in 30 countries FOREWORD 3 during its three years of operation. It has produced over 30 educational EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 publications and numerous High Definition Documentaries which have won awards in several film festivals. AN INTRODUCTION TO SHARKS 6

HOW WE USE SHARKS 8 This publication aims to provide the reader with an informative overview of the plight of sharks in our world’s Oceans. It outlines recommendations to WHY WE NEED SHARKS 12 curtail shark exploitation, identifying the desperate need to change people’s THREATS TO SHARKS 15 perceptions of sharks in the hope that they will reduce or stop the consumption of shark products. INCREASING FISHING 16

OVERFISHING 18 It is vitally important that we work together to help sustain and preserve the marine life in our world’s oceans to ensure ecological balance for our future BYCATCH 19 generations. THE SHARK FIN TRADE 21

“As long as there are people who care, we can and we will make a LACK OF MANAGEMENT 24 difference.” ILLEGAL FISHING 26

– The Founder, Save Our Seas Foundation OTHER THREATS TO SHARKS 28

SPECIES AT RISK 30 To learn more visit www.saveourseas.com HONG KONG – THE GLOBAL HUB 37 SOS Foundation Head Ofﬁce, CHINA 38 6 Rue Bellot 1206, Geneva, Switzerland. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS 41

ANNEX: ADDITIONAL DATA 43 Marine Research Facility P.O. Box 10646, Jeddah 21443, K.S.A. REFERENCES 44

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 1 Hammerhead sharks in the Galápagos Foreword

ince earliest times, human beings have relied on wild This report is not a scientific study or a systematic global trade resources. For most of our history, we were just another review. Rather it is an attempt to assemble a broad overview in S link in the food chain, another predator. Increasingly lay terms of the factors likely to affect the survival of sharks. And our ever-expanding populations, our technology and organization it is a call to action. mean we have become a superpredator with few of nature’s Using sharks sustainably is not just an option for the poor checks and balances. We now farm resources to produce them on fishing communities that depend on shark meat as a protein the scale we desire—and fisheries are one of the world’s last great source, it is a necessity. Nor is it an option for those who wish to wild harvests. Yet, in the last fifty years humanity has proven continue eating shark fin soup. No sharks, no shark fin soup. It is beyond a doubt that the oceans are not infinite. What seemed to be sadly ironic that in countries such as Kenya and Brazil people are an inexhaustible supply as recently as twenty years ago has, in losing their subsistence food to supply one of the world’s most many areas, been taken to its limits and beyond. Leading marine expensive culinary items. biologists recently warned that we had been wrong to suppose that As well as being a food security issue, it is likely that removing we could not cause the extinction of a marine fish species—we are sharks will have serious repercussions for many other species, already doing this. which may ultimately disrupt fisheries with far greater economic Sharks are likely to be in the first round of marine extinctions value. We may only discover this when it is too late. caused by human activity. As top predators they are naturally What hope then for sharks, and ultimately the oceans? relatively scarce, but also highly vulnerable. Some have gestation The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization periods longer than an elephant, produce only a (FAO) has recognized the crisis and asked its 190 handful of young and take up to 25 years to mature. members to devise management plans by February When they have faced directed fishing pressure, some “Sharks are 2001. However, the response of member states has populations have crashed, taking decades for a stock likely to be in been poor to date and other international bodies have to recover, if ever. been slow to play their role in conserving shark stocks. Though they have swum the oceans since before the first round Solutions will come only from a combination of the dinosaurs, they have never faced a predator as of marine actions: learning more about sharks, reducing fishing voracious as industrialized humanity. Traditionally extinctions” pressure, stopping unnecessary bycatch, monitoring they have been seen as more of a nuisance by shark fishing and trade, and more effective fishermen than a saleable commodity and so were enforcement of regulations. However, none of these relatively little impacted on a global scale. Many of measures will be effective if the demand for shark the poorest fishing communities consume shark meat themselves products— and in particular the fins—is not reduced to as it has so little market value. sustainable levels. But in the last few decades the situation has dramatically This requires a truly global effort, but also strong leadership changed. As other fisheries have been depleted, fishermen have from Asia, where a dramatic leap in awareness, concern and self- compensated with sharks. A relatively obscure custom of the restraint among consumers is needed. There is nothing wrong with wealthy from southern China—using the needles of shark fins in eating shark fin soup, there are just too many of us doing it. The soup as an ingredient to add texture, but not flavor—has industry needs regulating to prevent stock depletions and the burgeoned to the point where shark fin soup has become an almost wastage of “finning”. Those who wish to maintain the tradition of ubiquitous dish at weddings, banquets and business dinners shark fin soup should be the loudest voices calling for regulation. throughout the Chinese world. What was once eaten on a special We still have an irrational fear of sharks which may explain occasion by the privileged few is now regularly eaten by hundreds our lack of will to conserve them. Perhaps because we fear the of millions of people. unknown and so much about sharks is still a mystery. Yet The word has gone out to fishermen far and wide that shark increasingly the well-informed are developing a respect for these fins mean money, regardless of whether the rest of the body is magnificent predators, some of nature’s most successful designs. dumped overboard. The shark fin trade has gone global, fisheries Divers now cherish encounters with sharks, as terrestrial tourists management for sharks has been left at the starting blocks. Only a do with elephants and gorillas, suggesting new ways for us to profit handful of countries have any management of shark fisheries at from sharks without destroying them. all, and only three species are protected internationally. There is little data and monitoring of catches to alert us to population S N

O crashes. The consequences are easy to predict, but hard to Peter Knights I S I V

E document, as so little reliable data is available. Executive Director, WILDAID C A P S R E N N I Steve Trent /

N N

A President, WILDAID M U H

. P

. C

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 3 Executive Summary

● Sharks have been swimming the world’s oceans for over 400 ● Despite declines, only great white, basking and whale sharks, million years – 100 million years before the first dinosaurs covered under CITES regulations, are protected inter- appeared on land. They inhabit every ocean and play a vital nationally. Other than that, only a handful of countries role in maintaining the health of marine ecosystems. We manage shark fisheries. utilize them for a number of products, such as meat, cartilage and fins and they are a critical food source for many ● Effective conservation and management are hindered by in developing countries. They are an increasingly important meager insight into the biology, distribution, migration and revenue source for dive tourism around the world. exploitation of most shark species.

● Yet sharks are being overfished in many parts of the globe, ● Sharks are highly vulnerable to overfishing because they are and many populations have declined by as much as 90%. As generally slow-growing and long-lived. Females reproduce other fish stocks have dwindled due to overfishing, and late in life, and have few offspring. This makes them demand for fins has expanded, sharks are increasingly inherently unable to withstand heavy, protracted targeted. Reported world catches rose from around 625,000 exploitation – and slow to recover following declines. As a metric tons (mt) in 1985 to over 810,000 mt in 2004. These result, shark fisheries often follow a “boom and bust” figures are likely to be a gross underestimate, however, with pattern. one recent study claiming that shark catches are at least four times higher. Of the 546 shark species assessed by the World ● As shark populations plummet worldwide, Marine Reserves Conservation Union (IUCN), 110 (20%) are classified as are the new target of illegal fisheries. Many of the world’s endangered, threatened or vulnerable. marine protected areas, such as the Galápagos Islands and Cocos Island, are now regularly fished illegally for in creas ing ly valuable shark fins.

4 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? Cat shark, the Philippines.

● Artisanal fishermen in the developing world are losing their shark fin soup. 2,200 (9%) reported eating it three times or catches to modern technology. In many areas, shark more. abundance has declined due to the arrival of modern longliners and trawlers, many foreign-owned and fishing ● During the finning process, a shark is hauled up on deck, its illegally. With human populations increasing and shark fins sliced off, and the animal – sometimes still alive – is stocks decreasing, poor countries are being deprived of an thrown back into the sea to bleed to death. This practice is essential source of protein. not only cruel, it is incredibly wasteful as finning only utilizes 1–5% of the shark’s body-weight. ● The demand for shark fin soup is at an all-time high. As affluence grows in Asia, and in China particularly, so does ● Consumers are largely unaware of the origins of shark fin. the market for luxury items. One recent study estimated that Studies in Mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan show fins from between 26 and 73 million sharks are traded that consumers have little understanding of where shark fin globally each year, while reported world trade in fins has soup comes from (as shark fin soup in Chinese is “fish wing nearly tripled from 4,900 metric tons in 1987 to 13,600 mt in soup”), of overfishing, of illegal shark fishing, or of the 2004. Shark fin is one of the most expensive seafood practice of finning. They wrongly believe in some cases that products: at up to US$100 per bowl for shark fin soup, fins grow back, that shark fin is flavorsome and nutritious, demand – and profit – are greatly increasing pressure on and that it has medicinal properties. In fact, as apex predators, shark pop ula tions. Now sharks in all regions of the globe are sharks accumulate the toxic load of the animals below them sought solely for their fins. in the food chain and their long life-spans exacerbate this effect. Shark meat and fins have been found to contain ● A survey conducted by WildAid and China Wildlife dangerous levels of methylmercury, a potent neurotoxin in Conservation Association (CWCA) in 16 Chinese cities found humans, which if ingested can be particularly hazardous to that 8,400 people out of 24,000 surveyed (35%) had eaten fetal development and is linked to male infertility.

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 5 An Introduction to Sharks K A B N R O J B

L E A H C I M

WHALE SHARK Rhincodon typus

WHAT IS A SHARK? ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE MIGRATION

Sharks comprise about seven percent of Since they are often the “apex”, or top Some shark species migrate vast living fish species. They inhabit almost predators in their ecosystems, the distances to find food or to reproduce: every marine ecosystem on earth and are depletion or removal of sharks is likely to found in all the world’s oceans, as well as affect marine ecosystems and the ● In 2000, a blue shark, Prionace glauca, many inland waterways. Unlike most abundance of other fish species in ways tagged off Tasmania was caught off GOBLIN SHARK fish, shark skeletons are composed of that cannot currently be predicted. Many the coast of southwest Africa, 9,500 Mitsukurina owstoni cartilage.1 marine experts believe that sharks are kilometers (km) away.3 Sharks and their close relatives, vital in maintaining marine biodiversity skates, rays and chimaeras – known and are concerned that some species may ● A spiny dogfish, Squalus acanthias, collectively as chondrichthyans – fall into become extinct before their ecological tagged off Washington State, US, two main groups. Elasmobranchs role is fully understood. appeared in Japan seven years later, a include the 490 or so species which journey of 6,000 km.4 people generally recognize as “sharks,” LEARNING FROM SHARKS WOBBEGONG along with around 630 species of skates ● In 2003–2004, researchers tracked a Orectolobus ornatus and rays. Chimaeras, such as elephant Scientists are still discovering the unique female great white shark (Carcharodon fish and ghost sharks, are thought to characteristics of shark biology. It is carcharias) across the Indian Ocean 2 comprise 50 species. known that they have extra senses, like from South Africa to Australia and their electrosense (which picks up elec tri - back again in just nine months – a EVOLUTIONARY SUCCESS cal fields), and that some species can gen - distance of more than 20,000 km. er ate body heat for greater mus cle effi - This makes it one of the fastest long- In evolutionary terms, sharks are one of ciency. The hydrodynamics of their skin distance journeys for any swimming the most successful families of animals, has even inspired the swim wear indus try. animal – only tuna come close.5 thriving in the world’s oceans for Fastskin, a swimsuit devel oped by the hundreds of millions of years. The Australian manufacturer Speedo, repli - ● Whale sharks (Rhincodon typus) earliest shark species predate the first cates the microscopic tooth like struc - undertake very long distance dinosaurs by 100 million years. They tures on shark skin to reduce drag and migrations. Studies off the Malaysian survived mass extinction events with tur bu lence, increasing swim ming speeds. and Philippine coastline indicate that their diversity relatively intact and may The US Navy is reported to study shark whale sharks swim an average of 24 therefore make excellent indicator skin and propulsion in con sid er ing a new km/day and have a minimum range of species in gauging the effects of human gen er ation of submarines, whilst NASA is 2,000 km. One tagged whale shark activity on marine ecosystems. reported to consider using shark skin as a traveled 13,000 km over 37 months as model for the hull of the Space Shuttle. it migrated from the Sea of Cortez, Mexico, to the western Pacific Ocean.6 Note on terminology In this report, “shark” refers to all chondrichthyans except in citations, verbatim quotations, or where explicitly The fact that sharks can cross entire oceans stated otherwise. The term “fishermen” refers to individuals of either gender engaged in fishing activity. makes it imperative that shark man age- ment becomes a global issue, not one regu- All weights have been converted into metric tons (mt) and all values to US dollars. lated in just a handful of countries.

6 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? GREAT WHITE SHARK .

Carcharodon carcharias D T L

N O I T A C U D E

E F I L D L I W

S E P O O H

A R A B R A B

N O I T A R T S U L L I

GREAT HAMMERHEAD Sphyrna mokarran

SAND TIGER SHARK BASKING SHARK Odontaspis taurus Cetorhinus maximus THRESHER SHARK Alopias vulpinas

MAKO SHARK Isurus oxyrinchus

GOBLIN SHARK Mitsukurina owstoni

TIGER SHARK Galeocerdo cuvieri

BLUE SHARK Prionace glauca

WOBBEGONG Orectolobus ornatus HORN SHARK FRILLED SHARK Hetereodontus francisci Chlamydoselachus anguineus LEOPARD SHARK Triakis semifasciata

SHARK FACTS

● Sharks range from the world’s largest fish, the plankton- and lateral line and pit organs (which pick up weak eating whale shark, which can reach 14 m in length, to vibrations).1 the 15 cm spined pygmy shark, Squaliolus laticaudus. ● Sharks are capable of learning and can display complex ● Most shark species are small and harmless to humans. social behavior. They have brain-to-body ratios well Half of them reach less than 1 m in length and 80% are within the range of birds and mammals.3 smaller than an adult human.1 ● Sharks diverged from bony fish 400 million years ago, ● Some shark species lay eggs and others give birth to live evolving without swim bladders or lungs, and with teeth pups, sometimes after lengthy gestation (pregnancy) not in sockets but attached to the jaw by soft tissue and periods. continually replaced. Sharks have no gill covers, bony fin spines or prominent scales. Shark skin is covered with ● Sharks have seven senses: hearing, sight, touch, smell tiny tooth-like projections called “denticles”, which (which can range for several miles), taste, electrosense, channel water to reduce friction.1

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 7 In Asia many types of shark are eaten. water to aid removal of cartilage, and How We Use The Japanese, for instance, consider meat then sun-dried on racks. Once this is from the mako shark to be highly complete, they are transferred to a cool Sharks palatable and it can fetch prices drying room to prevent softening and, comparable to swordfish (Xiphias gladius).9 finally, refrigerated. Fins are also usually Sharks are used worldwide for a variety Both blue shark and spiny dogfish meat bleached to give them a desirable whitish of purposes. The many products derived are also eaten, although the former needs color – methods involve smoking with from sharks include meat and fins for to be processed quickly to avoid sulphur overnight or treatment with human consumption; liver oil to produce deterioration.Shark meat is often hydrogen peroxide.11 At the cooking lubricants, cosmetics and vitamin A; ground into a paste called “surimi”9 . stage, the fins are soaked again, this time cartilage as a purported (but unproven) Other shark parts are eaten in various to remove their fishy odor. After they medicinal treatment; skin for leather; countries: shark skin is eaten in Japan, have softened, further preparation is up and jaws and teeth for curios and Taiwan, the Solomon Islands and the to the chef.12 trinkets.7 Maldives; liver in Japan, China and the Because of its association with Solomon Islands; and shark stomach is privilege and social rank, shark fin soup MEAT consumed in the Solomon Islands, is served to celebrate important events Uruguay and Taiwan.7 such as weddings, birthdays, or corporate Shark meat is eaten in most, if not all, functions. There is also the issue of countries of the world, although SHARK FIN SOUP “face” (respect), which is of paramount consumption is much lower than that of importance in the Chinese culture. As a bony fish species. Unless quickly Shark fin, known as yu chi in China (“fish leading chef in Singapore explained, “If processed, the high urea content can wing” in English), has been considered a you don’t serve shark fin soup at render some shark meat inedible. In delicacy in Chinese cuisine since the weddings, or at important dinners, the some countries in the developing world, Sung dynasty (AD 960–1279), and shark host will look very cheap and that is not such as Sri Lanka, Mexico and parts of fin soup was established as a traditional giving face to your guests”.13 This display Africa, shark meat is a significant part of component of formal banquets by the of wealth and generosity is measured by the human diet and provides much of Ming dynasty (AD 1368–1644).10 the cost of the food and reflects on the the protein requirements of poorer Although originally a southern Chinese efforts of hosts to provide their best communities. dish, shark fin has spread throughout hospitality to guests. In the west, however, shark meat is Chinese communities in Asia and the For many superstitious Chinese, even traditionally viewed as inferior. To make rest of the world, and is now standard the words for shark fin have a bounteous it more appealing the spiny dogfish, a fare at weddings, banquets and corporate ring. In the famous Chinese saying Nian widely eaten shark species, is marketed functions. nian you yu, meaning “yearly prosperity”, under names like rock salmon in the UK, The processing of raw shark fins has yu means “plentiful” (in terms of saumonette (“little salmon”) in France, multiple stages and involves removal of material wealth) and because it has the and Schillerlocken (“locks of Schiller”) the skin, cartilage and any attached meat same tone as yu (fish), it is important and seeaal (“sea eel”) in Germany.8 to leave only the fine collagenous fibers that a fish dish is served at Chinese New Recently, mako (Isurus oxyrinchus) and known as “needles”. First, the fins are Year meals to represent and welcome thresher (Alopias vulpinus) meat has begun blanched in very hot water and the skin prosperity. Although steamed fish is to increase in popularity. scraped off. Next, they are placed in ice often used symbolically, consumers now often eat shark fin as well.14 Shark fin soup can be very expensive. Depending on the amount of fin in the soup, the price can range from US$10 to as high as US$100 per bowl. Although the quality and texture of shark fin is important in making the soup (the longer and thicker the strands, the better

N and costlier they are), the ﬁns are essen- N A D M I D

A tially tasteless. The ﬂavor of shark ﬁn R D E L

I . W M

soup lies entirely on the preparation of © © the broth, which is usually chicken soup. The broth is prepared separately from Above & Upper left: Shark meat is eaten the fins and they are combined just in most countries around the world before serving. As a leading chef in and is an important source of protein in many developing countries. Singapore explained, “The fins with their noodle-like tissues have no taste in D I A Left: “Rock salmon” in British “fish themselves and are used only as a soup D L

I 13 W

/ and chips” is spiny dogﬁsh, a species of thickener”. Y E R B shark. Even though it is widely known that U O C

C shark ﬁns lack ﬂavor, the demand for M

. B

8 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? D I A D L I W shark fin soup continues to escalate. In © recent years, it is rumoured that restaurants are putting less and less shark fin into the soup, or in some cases, to mixing real shark fin with artificial fibers.15 Far from turning their backs on shark fin, consumers are opting instead for a dish that contains a whole unbroken fin – evidence that it is the authentic product.13

IS SHARK FIN GOING DOWN- MARKET?

WildAid’s recent research in the consumer markets reveals that shark fin is going down-market. Having gained reputation over the centuries as a symbol of wealth and success, soup and other Above: Shark fins are often served whole to prove they are the real thing. products made from shark fin are now becoming commonplace.16

● Singapore now boasts US$8.99 All- You-Can-Eat shark fin buffets. Fins on sharks ● Japanese consumers can now buy shark fin bread, sweet shark fin first dorsal fin cookies, shark fin sushi, instant shark second dorsal fin fin noodles at US$4.20 per serving and, perhaps most alarming of all, shark fin catfood. lower part of the tail ● In a restaurant in Qingdao on anal fin Mainland China, a set menu pectoral fin consisting of abalone, bird’s nest and ventral fin shark fin soup was advertised at a cost of just US$24.

● Dried shark fin retailers in Qingdao and Shanghai sell 12-gram boxes of fin fiber for US$6.50.

● Press reports from Shanghai reveal 4 that the economic recession has 1 prompted consumers to opt for cheaper, mass produced shark fins. 6 3 2 5 While it maybe argued that this development will reduce the “mystique” of shark fin and, thereby, its consump tion, it FIRST GRADE: LOWER GRADE: seems far more likely that it will simply 1. first dorsal fin 4. second dorsal fin encourage consumers to believe that they 2. pair of pectorals 5. pair of ventral fins can still buy into the symbolism of shark 3. lower lobe of the tail 6. anal fin fin but at a price affordable to all.

The most coveted fins on a shark’s body are the first dorsal, pectorals and lower lobe of the caudal fin, and these are usually sold as a set from each shark. The smaller second dorsal and pelvic fins – known as “chips” – are also taken, but are much lower value and many fins are mixed from several sharks.17 The upper lobe of the caudal fin contains no fin needles17, but is still frequently harvested.18

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 9 LIVER OIL Mercury poisoning The use of shark liver oil as a lubricant The flesh of large, slow-growing Developing fetuses are at greatest risk and source of vitamin A in the 1930s and predatory fish, like sharks, is known to from mercury exposure as methyl- 1940s sparked a boom in several shark contain high levels of mercury. This is mercury can pass through the placenta fisheries. However, the development of because mercury is stored in the and adversely affect the developing synthetic substitutes caused the shark muscle tissues of fish, and when a brain,28,29 and high mercury levels have liver oil market to collapse and although predatory fish eats another fish, it also been linked to infertility in it is still used in the production of assumes all of the mercury stored in men.30,31,32 pharmaceuticals and cosmetics, reported the body of its prey. Therefore, the Numerous studies have confirmed production is now extremely low.7 higher up the food chain a fish is that shark meat contains methyl- positioned, and the older it gets, the mercury at levels that exceed the safe greater the concentraion of mercury limits for humans.33,34,35 As a result, stored in its body.25 various health advisory bodies have Mercury enters the environment in recommended lowering or avoiding the both organic and inorganic forms consumption of shark meat and other from natural (volcanoes, mercury large predatory fish: young children S deposits, etc) and man-made (coal and women of childbearing age are N O I S I V combustion, metal processing, etc) advised to avoid shark by the Food E C A P sources. In the ocean, inorganic Standards Agency (UK), US Food and S R E N N mercury is converted into organic Drug Administration and US Environ- I / E

36,37 N I methylmercury by micro-organisms, mental Protection Agency. R R E P

which are fed upon by plankton. However, it is not just shark meat D

Methylmercury thus enters the food that can contain dangerous levels of © chain and gradually accumulates in mercury. Tests commissioned by Other traditional uses include as apex predators like sharks, swordfish WildAid and carried out at the state-run wood preservative on boat hulls, fuel for and tuna.25 Thai Institute of Scientific and street lamps, and in the manufacture of Methylmercury is a potent Technological Research in 2001 showed skin healing products.7 neurotoxin that affects the brain, shark fins to contain mercury spinal cord, kidneys and liver.26 In mild concentrations up to 42 times higher cases of poisoning, adults complain of than the safe limit for humans.38 reductions in motor skills and dulled senses of touch, taste and sight.27

Mercury health effects

● Deteriorates nervous system

● Impairs hearing, speech, vision and gait

● Causes involuntary muscle movements

● Corrodes skin and mucous membranes

● Causes chewing and swallowing to become difﬁcult

10 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? CARTILAGE SKIN JAWS AND TEETH

Shark cartilage is increasingly marketed Tanned skin is used to make leather, the The jaws and sharp pointed teeth of as a health supplement and alternative main markets for which are the USA, sharks are used to make traditional cure for certain diseases, including Germany, France and Japan. Stingray weapons and jewellery, trinkets, curios asthma, eczema, arthritis and even cancer skin is also used in luxury leather and souvenirs for tourists. – claims which have little or no scientiﬁc products in the USA.24 Untanned skin, basis (see box below). Chondroitin, called Shagreen, is used as sandpaper in derived from shark cartilage, has been the woodworking industry. used as an ingredient in artiﬁcial skin for burn victims.7 S S N N O O I I S S I I V V

E E C C A A P P S S R R E E N N N N I I S / / T E E T N N A I I R R W

R R E E E I P P S

. . U D D S

Sharks and Cancer

The promotion of crude shark cartilage as a cure for and this has led to the development of various potential cancer has contributed to at least two significant cancer therapy drugs, currently under going clinical negative out comes: a decline in shark popula tions, and a trials.21,22 However, there is absolutely no scientific diversion of patients from effect ive cancer treatments.19 evidence that consump tion of raw shark cartilage or its The idea was popularized in the best-selling book crude extracts has any effect in pre vent ing tumor “Sharks Don’t Get Cancer” by William Lane, published growth19, and in 2004, William Lane’s company, Lane in 1992 in the United States, which justifies using crude Labs-USA Inc., was ordered to refund money to cartilage extracts on the (false) basis that sharks very purchasers of illegally marketed, unapproved shark rarely get cancer.19 A survey carried out by WildAid last cartilage-based drugs.23 year in China confirmed that it is a widely held belief The idea that sharks don’t get cancer is also incorrect, that sharks are immune to cancer and that eating shark as illustrated by a 2004 study that described benign and fin soup or crude extracts of shark cartilage can prevent malignant tumors in 21 chondrichthyan species. Tumors and even cure the disease.20 of the skin, blood, nervous, digestive, excretory, Research has shown that shark cartilage does contain reproductive and endocrine systems, as well as the some “anti-angiogenic” properties – that is, it can stop cartilage itself, were all found.19 the blood supply necessary for the growth of a tumor –

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 11

S E R U T C I P

L L I T S

S D R A W D E

K R A M Why We Need Sharks ©

A MAJOR SOURCE OF PROTEIN KENYA FOR POOR COASTAL COMMUNITIES 6,500 artisanal fishermen account Many coastal communities in the for 80% of Kenya’s developing world depend on shark meat marine catches. as an important source of protein. The Sharks are valued as meat is often sun-dried or salted to a source of meat preserve it. For some communities in and are usually India, Africa, Mexico and Sri Lanka, for dried, salted and example, shark meat is the primary – and consumed locally.42 sometimes only – source of protein. The Fishermen and reliance on sharks has increased as over- fish dealers in Kenya fishing has depleted stocks of other fish. have report ed WildAid’s research has shown that serious declines in Artisanal fisherman in the Banc d’Arguin National Park, West shark catches in a number of traditional shark catches and, Africa. Many (shark) fisheries in the developing world are declining following the arrival of industrial fishing vessels, often from abroad. shark fisheries have declined – sometimes without ex cep tion, drastically. The declines have often they blame this on coincided with the arrival of industrial the appearance of (and often foreign) fishing vessels in the industrial longliners and shrimp trawlers SPIRITUAL ASPECT OF SHARKS area, which frequently operate in flagrant over the past decade.43 A spokesman for breach of local fishing regulations. Such the shark-fishing village of Ngomeni in Sharks retain a spiritual importance in declines are poorly documented at local northern Kenya reported that, before the numerous beliefs around the world: or national level, as few developing arrival of the longliners, a night’s catch countries have active fisheries would feed the village and provide ● In Hawaii, the shark is an animal deity management or systems for collecting enough meat for sale outside the village. still revered today as the greatest even basic data. Now it does not provide enough for the Aumakua (guardian angel). Stories village.44 exist of canoe paddlers getting into INDIA At least 20 trawlers were reported to difficulties at sea, only to be guided to be in the immediate vicinity of Ngomeni, a safe place by a shark.39 Research conducted by WildAid has each using 3–5cm mesh nets, which were revealed the extent of shark catch “sweeping the sea clean” and leaving ● In Vietnam, the whale shark was declines and their impact on artisanal virtually nothing for the shark fishermen known as Lord Fish. Its remains were fishermen. Coastal communities in the of Ngomeni (who have always used given sacred burials. States of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil 20–23 cm mesh nets). Malindi, a Nadu have reported a significant decline traditional fishing village for generations, ● In Fiji, the shark god was known as in shark catches over the past six years. In has experienced severely reduced Dakuwaqa, from whom the high 1999, WildAid visited 15 fishing landings and now sharks and other fish chiefs were believed to be direct communities on the east coast and are trucked in from Mombasa, 90- descendants. interviewed a number of traditional minutes away.45 fishermen. Although unable to make ● In Japan, the shark was an important assessments of individual species’ MEXICO mythological figure worshipped as the declines, locals suggested that overall God of Storms. shark catches had declined by between Sharks are described as a resource vital to 50–70% over the previous five years.41 the Mexican economy46 and many poor ● In parts of Senegal, sharks are believed Fishermen in Chennai (Madras) have Mexicans subsist on a diet of shark to be harmless to humans. If a shark reported to WildAid that commercial meat47. The bull shark, Carcharhinus leucas, does attack, it is said to be “invaded” vessels operating within India’s coastal is widely eaten in Mexico and is probably by an evil spirit. In the village of Ngor, waters are posing a serious threat to the most important species from a there is a sage who claims to remove artisanal catches. Shark finning on these commercial point of view.46 evil spirits from invaded sharks and commercial vessels is viewed as a major render them harmless.40 reason for the apparent declines.41

12 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? GUARDIANS OF OUR OCEANS

Although research on the ecological role of sharks is scarce, it is known that some shark species play a vital role in marine S E

ecosystems and are therefore crucial indicators of marine R U T C I P

health. The depletion or removal of sharks may lead to increases L L I T S

or declines in other species, with unpredictable consequences /

H T

for ecosystems. Sharks maintain the “genetic ﬁtness” of their U M H C S

prey by removing the sick and the weak and help to keep their I R F 48 R

population sizes in check. It is likely that the removal of a E T E P

significant number of sharks will affect numerous species below © them in the food chain. This should be of special concern to fishermen and others who make their livelihoods from the sea. One recent study in the tropical Pacific Ocean identified SHARK ATTACKS: FACT & FICTION considerable declines in large predators (sharks, billfish and tunas) since the start of industrial fishing in the 1950s.49 Sharks always get bad press. They are seen as monsters of the Conversely, several smaller species of fish were found to have deep, waiting to devour any human who dares to venture into increased in abundance over the same time period, probably the water. Books and films, such as Jaws, are often blamed for because of the reduction in number of their predators. this myth, but sharks have been people’s worst nightmares Similar results were found in the northern Gulf of Mexico for centuries. Lurid headlines reinforce this on the rare where large coastal sharks (dusky, Carcharhinus obscurus; tiger, occasions that an attack takes place. Galeocerdo cuvier; great white; and hammerhead, Sphyrna spp.) Resort developers have been known to employ shark have declined precipitously due to overfishing.50 As a result, experts to remove any possible predators from the area.52 several small shark species (Atlantic angel shark, Squatina Hawaii maintained a shark eradication program for decades dumeril; smooth dogfish, Mustelis canis), previously preyed after the death of a schoolchild in 1959, and in some parts of upon by their larger cousins, have been able to thrive.50 the world concern for shark attacks is so great that The significance of these changes for the functioning of swimming areas are cordoned off by massive shark nets.53 the marine ecosystem and biodiversity are unclear. However, Only three (white, tiger and bull) species account for more in another recent experiment carried out in the Caribbean, it than half of all atacks on humans, and when sharks do was suggested that overfishing of sharks can have a domino attack, it is likely that they have mistaken humans for their effect, ultimately leading to the degradation of entire coral normal prey. It is believed that many shark attacks are reef ecosystems.51 Overfishing means that there are fewer actually attempts by the shark to identify whether or not an sharks to feed on carnivorous fish such as groupers (family object in the water is edible: there are numerous examples of Serranidae) – causing an increase in their numbers and their sharks biting a human and then, realizing its mistake, ability to prey on herbivorous parrotfishes (family Scaridae). swimming away.54 The removal of plant-eating parrotfish in turn allows algae to According to the International Shark Attack File (ISAF), thrive on the reef, smothering the coral and increasing its the number of shark attacks in 2005 fell for the fifth year in a vulnerability to human disturbances.51 row, with 58 unprovoked attacks and four fatalities recorded A 2004 study on a Fijian reef fish community also worldwide.55 However, the longer-term trend reveals a steady observed that the removal of large predatory fishes can have increase in attacks over the past century. Overall, the 1990’s disastrous effects on coral ecosystems. A decrease in the had the highest attack total (470 with 61 fatalities) of any abundance of top predators led to an increase in the decade, and the first decade of the 21st century looks to be abundance of coral-eating starfish, and consequently a 35% continuing that upward trend. In the first half of this decade decline in corals and replacement by algae.52 there have so far been 310 attacks.55 George Burgess, Director of the ISAF, points out that the increase in attacks is “a reflection of human population growth and increased interest in aquatic recreation rather than a rise in the rate of attacks”. In fact, all other factors M

O being equal, there are likely to be more attacks each year as C . S C I

P human population grows and we spend increased leisure A E S

/ time in the sea. However, “the attack rate is not increasing – N N A

M in fact it is likely decreasing as a result of diminished shark R R E H

stocks and large increases in human utilization of our D

R 56 A

H nearshore waters”. C I R

© Shark attack is undoubtedly a potential danger that must be acknowledged by anyone who frequents marine waters, Top right: Universal studios theme park. Despite their fearsome reputation, on average less than six people are but it should be kept in perspective. It is statistically more killed by sharks each year. dangerous to get into a car and drive to the beach than it is to get into the water. More people are killed each year by Above: The depletion of sharks could have catastrophic lightning, by bee stings, by dog bites or by slipping in the effects for marine ecosystems and mean lower catches of bath than are killed by sharks.54 other ﬁsh in the future.

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 13 S E R U T C I P

L L I T S

E K

Ecotourism industries based on viewing whale sharks generate at least US$47.5 S E J - I million annually – signiﬁcantly more than they are worth as meat and other products. N A D ©

SHARK TOURISM local dive operators. Today, dive tourism sharks is a major attraction, drawing The realization that sharks are worth far is expanding and markets sharks as the US$2.3 million every year – 100 times more alive than dead is gradually taking main attraction. A single live reef shark is more than the export value of shark hold around the world. During the past estimated to be worth US$250,000 meat.57 In 1993, a study found that a decade, shark-based ecotourism because of dive tourism, whereas a dead single reef shark had a renewable value of operations have developed in numerous reef shark has a one-time value of US$35,500 per year from diving, while locations, and today some of the most US$50–60 to a fisherman.59 the same shark brought only US$32 to a vociferous calls for global shark fisherman.58 conservation come from nations that THE PHILIPPINES have a developed or developing marine BELIZE tourism industry. Tourists are prepared In the Philippines, fishermen who once to pay huge sums of money to view and targeted whale sharks in the Donsol In Belize, divers from all around the even dive with sharks. region have been retrained as tour guides world visit the town of Placencia to for whale shark-watchers. Business is observe whale sharks in Gladden Spit AUSTRALIA booming, with over 7,000 tourists Marine Reserve. The number of whale visiting Donsol’s whale sharks in 2005 – shark tour operators in Placencia has Ningaloo Marine Park in Western up from 867 tourists in 2002.60 This has grown from just one in 1997 to 22 in Australia is an example of a whale shark created more than 300 jobs and in 2005 200461 and a study in 2002 concluded tourism success story. It has been contributed more than US$620,000 to that over a six-week peak tourist period, prospering since the early 1990s and the Filipino economy.60 Some groups the industry was worth US$3.7 million whale shark tourism in Ningaloo reef is contend, however, that this is only a to the town.57 From national tourism now estimated to be worth in excess of fraction of what could be earned if statistics, it is calculated that each live US$10 million.57 The area probably hosts correct management and financial whale shark is worth around US$35,000 more whale shark observers than assistance were put in place.60 annually. If a shark lives for 60 years, anywhere else in the world.58 each individual would therefore be worth THE MALDIVES over US$2 million if it repeatedly visits BAHAMAS ecotourism sites through out the Tourism is the largest industry in the Mesoamerican Barrier Reef.57 In the Bahamas, longlining was outlawed Maldives and is a significant source of in the mid-1990s following campaigns by income to the country. Diving with

14 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? S E R U T C I

Threats to Sharks P

L L I T S

S N A V E

B O B

BIOLOGICAL VULNERABILIT Y years and she will produce a maximum of though increased growth rate and 20 live pups at a time. juvenile survival may provide some As apex predators, sharks are not Lemon shark (Negaprion brevirostris) compensatory mechanisms. designed for heavy predation, either by pups develop over a twelve-month Classical models of fisheries other marine species or by humans. period, and their mothers require management assume that recruitment Whether caught in directed fisheries or as another year before mating again. Thus, rate (the number of fish added to the bycatch, most shark species are unable to a mating pair of lemon sharks barely population each year due to withstand protracted periods of heavy reproduce themselves over the 24-month reproduction and migration) is virtually exploitation. reproductive cycle. Typically 8–12 pups independent of stock size. These models Shark species are generally slow- are born every other year, with a first year are less applicable to sharks because growing and long-lived, breeding late in mortality approaching 50%. At birth, a generally recruitment rate and stock size life, with long breaks between lemon shark pup averages 60 cm in are positively related.63 That is, the more reproductive cycles. They produce very length and weighs around one kilogram. sharks, the higher the birth rate. limited numbers of live young or eggs. It grows less than 10 cm in its first year of Conversely, a reduction in the number of This makes them inherently vulnerable life and requires 13–15 years to become sharks causes a reduction in birth rate. to overexploitation and slow to recover sexually active.62 from decline. ABSENT FROM THE ABYSS Unlike most fish, sharks invest heavily SEGREGATING BY AGE AND SEX in a small number of well-developed Whilst most fish thrive to depths of young. Most sharks feed their young A further characteristic makes sharks around 9,000 m, marine biologists inside their bodies with a yolk, while vulnerable to overfishing. Most sharks recently discovered that sharks have others provide embryonic nutrition segregate by sex and size. This means failed to colonize depths greater than through a placenta. Shark mothers often there are groups consisting solely of 3,000 m, possibly due to a lack of food in give birth in nursery areas which are mature females, and if targeted by these remote regions. separated from the rest of the fishermen, the effect on breeding can be This means that they are confined to population. devastating. just 30% of the world’s oceans: surface Unlike sharks, most fish species are waters, ocean margins, around oceanic adapted to a fluctuating environment FEWER SHARKS CAN MEAN islands, mid-ocean ridges and and are referred to as “r-selected” species. LOWER BREEDING RATES seamounts. All shark populations are They are usually small, mature quickly, therefore within reach of human mate early, and produce large numbers of If overfished most species of fish can fisheries, a fact that raises further small offspring which receive little or no compensate by increasing egg concerns about the vulnerability of this parental care.62 production to take advantage of group to overexploitation, as unlike most decreased competition for food. Because fish, there is no hidden reserve of sharks NOT DESIGNED FOR HEAVY sharks produce relatively few eggs or in the deep sea.64 PREDATION pups, they are not capable of doing this,

Sharks are completely different. They are Top: Some generally described as “k-selected” sharks produce species. That is, they grow slowly to a elaborate egg large size, mature late in life, reproduce cases. seasonally (year after year), and produce a few large offspring – either as eggs or as Left: Many live young – which experience a lower sharks, like this natural mortality rate. They may have spiny dogﬁsh, been the ﬁrst vertebrate group to evolve a have long pregnancies and k-selected life history. While predation give birth to levels on sharks were low the k strategy 62 small numbers of served them well. live young. S E

The spiny dogﬁsh is perhaps the most R U T C I

extreme example of the k-selected life P

L L I T history. Living up to 70 years, the female S

N does not breed until she is over twelve A M T O R years of age. Gestation can be up to two F F E J

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 15 Increasing Fishing How many sharks are caught every year?

Global exploitation of sharks is very In the absence of reliable catch difficult to quantify, as catch reporting statistics, an alternative method of Despite their known vulnerability to is often unreliable and can be mislead - identifying the true level of exploita - overfishing, sharks have been ing. Member countries of the United tion is to examine the quantities of increasingly exploited in recent decades. Nations Food and Agriculture Organ - shark products in trade. Data A number of factors are responsible for isation (FAO) report their shark gathered during a recent study of the this trend, including improvements in catches in different ways and with vary - shark fin trade in Hong Kong revealed fishing technology, processing and ing degrees of detail, and vast amounts that the total catch of sharks must be consumer marketing, expanding human of shark catch are not recorded at all. between 1.1 and 2.3 million metric populations, and declines in other fish However, from the data available, it tons per year, which equates to stocks, all of which have made sharks a is clear that the exploita tion of sharks between 26 and 73 million sharks67. As more valuable fisheries resource. Shark and related species has increased shark landings (excluding skates, rays fisheries have experienced rapid growth dramatically since the onset of and chimaeras) reported to the FAO since the mid-1980s due to an increased commercial fishing. Global reported are in the region of 400,000 metric demand for shark products (fins in landings of chondrichthyans have tons annually67, this means that particular, but also meat, skin, cartilage, grown by almost 300%, from around between 65% and 85% of the total etc), especially in Asian markets. Between 270,000 mt in 1950 to over 810,000 mt catch is therefore unreported, worth 1984 and 2004, world catches of sharks, in 2004.65 Assuming each animal an estimated US$292–476 million in rays and chimaeras (chondrichthyans) weighs on average 15 kg, this means shark fin value alone.68 grew from 600,000 to over 810,000 that total reported catches in 2004 The top three shark fishing nations metric tons.65 In addition, many represent over 50 million sharks, rays of the world are Indonesia, India and thousands of sharks have been taken and chimaeras. Spain, which between them accounted accidentally in tuna longline fisheries However, actual catches are likely for 25–40% of reported global catches every year since their introduction in the to be much higher – possibly double between 2000–2004.65 Other major 1960s. the reported catch rate66 (i.e. 100 shark fishing nations include million) – once other factors are taken Argentina, Brazil, France, Iran, Japan, into con sidera tion. For instance, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, thousands of metric tons of sharks are Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, discarded at sea, either whole or with the United Kingdom and the United their fins removed, and the weights of States. These countries each report these discards are unaccounted for in catches of more than 15,000 mt fishery logbooks7. Many landings are annually.65 also taken in countries that don’t While the People’s Republic of monitor their fishing industry, or are China is by far the world's largest caught and consumed locally, thereby consumer of shark fin, it reported bypass ing official record keeping.7 shark catches of only 100–300 mt

WORLD CHONDRICHTHYAN CATCHES 1950-2004 World chondrichthyan catches 1950-2004

1,000,000

900,000

800,000

700,000

600,000 s e s n M n n O o C o t .

t 500,000 c

N i r c A t i e r M t T M e O 400,000 R m F F E J

/ 300,000 N A M T O

R 200,000

F F E J

0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 Above & opposite page: Tens of millions 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 of sharks are killed in ﬁsheries around 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 the world every year. SOURCE: FAO FISHSTAT

16 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? between 2000 and 2003 and negligible M O C 65 . N

quantities in prior years. However, A M T O

Chinese distant-water ﬂeets only R F F E J

recently began reporting shark N A M

bycatches in areas controlled by T O R

Regional Fisheries Management F E J

Organizations (RFMOs) and have no © logbook requirements for sharks in other areas.69 Hong Kong reports SHARK MEAT PRODUCTION AND TRADE similarly low catches.65 Although global catches of With the introduction of commercial Markets for shark meat sufficiently chondrichthyans have remained fairly refrigeration in the 1950s, consumption valuable to warrant inter nation al trade stable up to now, this is the product of of shark meat gained in popularity, and are generally centered in Europe, for considerable regional variation, with today, the greatest quantity of inter- example in Spain, France, Italy and the declining catches in heavily fished national trade in shark products is in the UK, and are based on rays and small regions masked by increasing catches form of fresh, chilled or frozen meat69 – sharks. However, international trade in as fishermen move into new areas.7 For imports totaled more than 90,000 metric whale shark meat is believed to support example, there have been significant tons in 2004.65 However, the price of the market in Taiwan and anec dotal declines in the catch of countries such shark meat is generally low and sharks evidence from the Philippines sug gests as Pakistan, Brazil, Mexico and Korea are targeted specifically for their meat in there are markets for whale shark meat in since the 1980s, whilst the catches of only a small number of fisheries, Hong Kong, Singapore and Japan.69 Indonesia have sky-rocketed – virtually primarily in temperate waters. Examples FAO statistics show a considerable doubling since 1988. In Pakistan, include trawl fisheries for spiny dogfish increase in the production of shark meat catches for 2004 of 27,000 mt are the in the North Sea and off the northern worldwide. Over the period 1985–2004, lowest reported for 20 years and 50% coasts of the USA and Canada; and trawl reported production of chondrichthyan lower than the country’s peak catch in and gill net fisheries for soupfin shark meat grew by more than 150%, from 199965. (Galeorhinus galeus), gummy shark 40,000 mt to around 103,000 mt.65 (Mustelus antarcticus) and spotted estuary Nevertheless, these figures still only rep- smooth-hound (Mustelus lenticulatus) off res ent around 10% of reported catches Australia and New Zealand69. In warmer (see below), which suggests, assum ing CHONDRICHTHYAN CATCHES BY waters, directed harpoon fisheries for both sets of figures are accurate ly COUNTRY, 2004 figures in metric tons whale sharks are banned in India and the reported, that a large propor tion of shark Philippines, but are still pursued in meat is either used domestically (for Indonesia 121,750 69 India 61,314 several other countries. example for subsistence or local market Spain 51,071 use), or discarded at sea.69 Taiwan 43,797 Mexico 32,245 Argentina 32,039 USA 30,732 Thailand 27,944 Pakistan 27,363 A comparison between production, imports and exports of chondrichthyan meat & chondrichthyan catches 1976- Japan 27,150 GLOBAL PRODUCTION AND T2R0A04DE OF SHARK MEAT 1976-2004 Malaysia 25,154 France 21,613 1,000,000 Brazil 20,041 Sri Lanka 19,510 900,000 Iran 18,318 800,000 New Zealand 16,647 United Kingdom 16,066 700,000 Nigeria 13,560 600,000 Portugal 12,765 s e s n n n o Yemen 12,750 o t t

500,000 c c i i r r Korea, Republic of 12,265 t t e e Canada 11,804 M m 400,000 Australia 11,392 Venezuela 11,294 300,000

Maldives 9,475 S O

U 200,000

Senegal 8,887 R C E :

Peru 8,640 F

A 100,000 O

Uruguay 6,172 F I S H 0

Other 98,564 S T

A 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4

T 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 Total 810,322 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2

Meat production Meat imports Meat exports Catches SOURCE: FAO FISHSTAT

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 17 ● Catches of porbeagle sharks (Lamna ● North Atlantic populations of Overfishing nasus) in the Northeast Atlantic leafscale gulper shark (Centrophorus peaked in 1947 then declined squamosus) and Portuguese dogfish BOOM AND BUST SHARK dramatically. This collapse led to (Centroscymnus coelolepis) have crashed FISHERIES intensive target fishing by the by 80% in just ten years, since the Norwegians and Danes in the development of an unregulated gillnet Shark populations are generally fragile Northwest Atlantic in the 1960s; fishery in the mid-1990s. These deep- when targeted by unregulated fisheries, between 1961 and 1964 their catch sea sharks are targeted by Spanish resulting in a pattern of “boom and rose from 1,800 mt to 9,300 mt and vessels for their oil which is sold to bust”. Rising catches are followed by then declined to less than 200 mt. cosmetic and health companies, and rapid declines and very slow recoveries – Renewed target fishing in the 1990s also for their meat. Deep-sea sharks when stocks are protected. Some led to a further population decline of reproduce very slowly and according populations do not recover. 83–89% within three generations.72 to ICES – the organization responsible Industrial shark fisheries have grown for marine research in the North steadily since the 1920s and have ● A harpoon fishery for the basking Atlantic – are in extreme decline.71,74 frequently involved the targeting of new shark (Cetorhinus maximus) off the west shark populations or species, as catches coast of Ireland began in 1770 and Many more shark fisheries are likely to be from established shark fisheries decline.66 lasted until the 1830s, when the in serious decline, but are not formally species became scarce. The stocks documented. However, anecdotal reports ● The collapse of the soupfin shark subsequent ly recovered and the fishery from artisanal fishermen, divers, fishery in the US Pacific is typical. The was revived in the 1940s, but the catch researchers and recreational fishermen in fishery expanded spectacularly in 1938 quickly peaked and declined by the many parts of the world reveal that areas with the discovery that liver oil was end of the 1950s.6 where sharks were once abundant have rich in vitamin A. Catches peaked at become depleted. WildAid research in 4,000 metric tons (mt) in 1940, ● US Pacific angel shark (Squatina Costa Rica, Ecuador, India, Kenya, Mexico crashed in 1942 and by 1944 were california) catches peaked in 1985–86 and Senegal confirms this. down to only 300 mt. More than 50 at 560 mt but decreased quickly to years on, and despite the lack of 120 mt three years later. A ban in 1994 Another indication of declines is the fishing, the population has still not “likely averted population collapse”.72 widespread illegal fishing of sharks in recovered to its former level.17,70 marine reserves and the large-scale ● A fishery for bluntnose sixgill sharks incursions into Australian waters by ● Landings of spiny dogfish in the (Hexanchus griseus) began in the Indonesian boats. It seems unlikely that Northeast Atlantic peaked at almost Maldives in 1980, peaked in 1982–84 fishermen would risk loss of their boats 70,000 metric tons in the 1960s, when and collapsed by 1996. Other fisheries and gear unless legal sources were Norwegian and UK vessels targeted for this species, in Australia, New seriously depleted. the species. However, the stock is now Zealand, France, Brazil and possibly depleted – possibly down to 5% of its Argentina, are all reported to have original size – with landings at their declined.73 lowest levels since World War 2 Can sharks be (around 6,000 mt).71 ● The common skate (Dipturus batis), as the name implies, was historically one sustainably harvested? of the most abundant skates and rays in the Northeast Atlan - Thirty years ago it was unclear whether tic. It was widely dis trib - long-term sustainable fisheries for uted in the seas sur - sharks could ever be possible. Today, it round ing the British is thought that economically viable Isles, though catch rates and biologically sustainable yields can of this species declined be taken from more productive species during the 20th century under careful management, for due to over fishing. By the example the gummy shark caught off 1970s the common skate southern Australia.75 was considered extinct in However, the majority of shark fish - the Irish Sea, and they eries are still unregulated and the high also dis ap peared from catches of a number of coun tries are the English Channel and almost certainly un sustain able. A the south ern and central preliminary evaluation of shark species North Sea.72 world wide by the FAO identified severe pop ula tion declines for nearly all the D I

A Left: Fishermen in 26 shark species for which catch or D L I

W many parts of India landing data was available for more /

T 73

T have seen catches of

A than ten years. W

18 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? Bycatch

TALES OF DISASTER: Bycatch is a term used to refer to any caught as bycatch are often finned, with species caught accidentally while fishing the distinction between target and shark ● Research surveys in the Gulf of for other “target” species. It is respon sible bycatch species in creas ing ly disappearing. Mexico (1972–2002) demonstrate for mortality in a wide range of species: Rates of shark bycatch depend to a precipitous declines in coastal sharks non-target fish, seabirds, whales, dolphins, great extent on the fishing gear used: and rays taken as bycatch in areas of turtles and sharks. A great deal of bycatch intensive shrimp trawling. Smooth is discarded at sea and never appears in ● In coastal areas, trawl fisheries are butterfly rays (Gymnura micrura) have the records. Where bycatch must be thought to be responsible for the declined by more than 99%, bancroft reported, it is often under-reported. largest bycatch of sharks, skates and numbfish (Narcine bancroftii) by 98% rays, amounting to hundreds of and bonnethead sharks (Sphyrna According to the FAO, there are few thousands of metric tons annually.76 tiburo) by 96%.50 fisheries that do not result in bycatch of sharks, skates and rays. Indeed, much of ● Tuna purse-seine nets occasionally ● A recent study of the Moroccan the difficulty in monitoring shark stocks result in large-scale shark bycatch and driftnet fleet found that pelagic shark arises because the majority of sharks are gillnets are also considered to be the species are suffering massive bycatch caught as bycatch, which is almost cause of heavy shark bycatch.77 rates, with blue shark, shortfin mako entirely undocumented and totally and thresher shark (Alopias vulpinus) unregulated. ● While less indiscriminate than some num ber ing half the target catch In cases where bycatch is recorded, the other fishing methods, the widespread (sword fish). In excess of 100,000 of numbers are significant, sometimes even use of longlines, combined with the these ocean-going sharks are greater than the targeted catch. Previously, sheer length of lines and number of estimated to be caught by the fleet in many fisheries sharks caught accident - hooks, means that more ocean-going annually – a level of fishing pressure ally were thrown back, sometimes still (pelagic) sharks are caught as bycatch well beyond the repro duc tive capacity living, or the lines cut. But now, with in longline fisheries than in any other for these species.78 demand for shark fin growing, sharks fisheries on the high seas.76 S N O I S I V

E C A P S R E N N I

R O L Y A T

. V

Sharks are caught as bycatch in most of the world’s ﬁsheries N A

. R

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 19 ● Sharks represent a large bycatch of respectively, since the onset of bycatch.86 Allowing for some post-release global high-seas longline fisheries industrialized offshore fisheries for mortality, it is clear that a very large targeting tuna and swordfish tuna and billfish, in which they are proportion of sharks caught on longlines (dominated by vessels from Taiwan, caught as bycatch. Oceanic whitetip survive if released rather than finned. Japan and Spain) and are retained sharks comprised about 60% of shark primarily for their fins. The bycatch is bycatches in the 1950s but by the comprised mainly of blue, oceanic 1990s this figure was only 2%.80 whitetip (Carcharhinus longimanus) and silky sharks (Carcharhinus falciformis). UNNECESSARY WASTE In 2000, it was estimated that up to 470,000 metric tons of these three Some shark species are able to survive for species were caught accidentally in the long periods on hooks. Research in Brazil Pacific Ocean in just one year.79 found that from a total of 508 sharks of different species observed in longline ● Populations of oceanic whitetip and fisheries, 88% arrived alive on deck.85 In silky sharks in the Gulf of Mexico Hawaii, it is estimated that 86% of blue plummeted by 99% and 90%, sharks are alive when landed on deck as D I A D L I W

E U G I B Left: Many sharks caught on L E C

R longlines would survive if A M

Reducing shark bycatch

More than seven million metric tons of marine life is Several promising new methods are currently now in discarded by the world’s fisheries every year.81 development. In 2006, an invention that involves placing International concern at this massive wastage has led to strong magnets just above the baited hooks on longline the development (but not always the implementation) gear won first prize in the 2006 WWF International of methods and technological innovations to minimize Smart Gear Competi tion. The design utilizes the fact these bycatches. Significant focus has been placed on that sharks are able to detect and are repelled by reducing the numbers of endangered species such as magnetic fields, meaning fewer sharks are captured whales, dolphins, sea turtles and seabirds caught in accidentally and less fishing gear is lost to non-target fishing gears82, but sharks, despite being frequent species.83 Other fish do not respond to these magnets, bycatch species, important in marine ecosystems, and so catch of targeted species, like tuna, is un affect ed. extremely vulnerable to overexploitation, have received Chem ical repellents are an other app roach also be ing relatively little attention. test ed.84 Sadly, many fishermen are likely to reject such innovations, because sharks, or at least their fins, have become such valuable bycatch.

20 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? The Shark Fin Trade

A combination of two factors led to an explosion in the demand for shark ﬁn soup over the past twenty years. Firstly, the rapid expansion of East Asian economies, particularly that of Mainland China, creat ed a vastly increased middle class sector with disposable income, and D D I I A A D D L what began as a rare and expensive del i- L I I W W

/ / cacy is now standard fare at most wed- N N E E H H C C dings and corporate functions. Secondly, © © the con sump tion of shark fin soup in China, discouraged under Mao Tse-tung Above: Shark fins are among the most expensive seafood products in the world, as an elitist practice, was politically retailing at up to US$1,000 per kilogram “rehabil itated” in the late 1980s. The result is a massive surge in the international fin trade, prompt ing fisher men turnover of US$771,000 per month. death. This practice is not only cruel, it is worldwide to target sharks for their fins Given a profit margin of between also incredibly wasteful, as finning only and to remove the fins from sharks 10–15%, one of Hong Kong’s largest utilises 1-5% of the shark’s body-weight.89 caught as bycatch in other fisheries. Fin dealers, rumored to have a turnover of traders systematically spread the word US$129 million per year, could be It is impossible to establish the precise that fins are valuable to fishermen the making an annual profit of at least number of sharks slaughtered in this way world over, often provid ing equipment US$12 million.10 annually, as few fishermen will openly and monetary advances in order to The lucrative and unregulated nature admit to finning sharks and the practice secure fins. of the trade attracts involvement by occurs at sea where there are no other Today the rapidly expanding and criminal elements, with fierce witnesses. However, there is enough largely unregulated shark fin trade competition for shark fins leading to evidence to suggest that finning is represents one of the most serious widespread corruption, gangland wars widespread in numerous fish eries, that threats to shark populations worldwide, and contract killings.16 In Colombia, for huge numbers of sharks are finned every and shark fins are now among the most example, drug dealers became involved in year, and that the vast major it y of these expensive seafood products in the world, the shark fin trade as a way of laundering mortalities go unreported. The World commonly retailing at US$400 per kg10, drug money.88 Conservation Union’s (IUCN) Shark with the most expensive selling for Specialist Group estimates that tens of US$1,000 per kg87. To put this in HOW MANY SHARKS ARE millions of sharks are finned worldwide perspective, shrimp or prawns retail at FINNED EACH YEAR? every year,89 while one recent study around US$6 per kg. estimated that fins of between 26 and 73 A recently published report on the During the finning process, a shark is million sharks are traded globally each dried seafood trade in Asia revealed that hauled up on deck, its fins sliced off, and year (although this figure includes both one shark fin trader, who considers the animal - sometimes still alive – is finned sharks and those whose bodies are himself a medium sized operator, had a thrown back into the sea to bleed to retained for other purposes)67.

GLOBAL PRWOorDldwUidCe sThaIOrk fNin imApNorDts, eTxpRorAtsD anEd pOrodFu cStiHon A19R76K-2 0F0I4N 1976-2004 LEADING SHARK FIN IMPORTERS 2004 1% 16,000 1% 1% 1% 2% 14,000

12,000

10,000 s n s o e t n

36% n c o

i CHINA HONG KONG

t CHINA HONG KONG r 8,000 c t i r e t e

m 58% M

6,000

Malaysia Malaysia Indonesia 4,000 Indonesia Taiwan Taiwan Thailand Thailand Other Other 2,000 SOURCE: FAO FISHSTAT

Note: all shark ﬁn statistics are taken from the FAO, but 0 frozen shark ﬁns have been corrected by a factor of 0.25 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 as they are believed to be four times heavier than their 10 Imports Exports Production SOURCE: FAO FISHSTAT dried equivalents.

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 21 Estimating the scale of the global trade Reported world production of shark The dumping of millions of sharks at in shark fin products is also ex treme ly fins in 2004 totaled 3,909 metric tons, sea results in significantly decreased com pli cated and data on im ports, but as many countries do not record shark catches in many developing exports and production figures rarely shark fin production (e.g. China), this countries. Fishers in eastern India and on match.7 The industry is still largely figure must be considered an the east and west coasts of Africa have conducted in the “grey mar ket” and fins underestimate.90 Nevertheless, reported reported serious declines in their catches, change hands for cash in many cases, and production of shark fins would still dating back to the arrival of large, often transactions go unrecorded. account for catches of more than industrial (and usually foreign) fishing The only available global database on 260,000 metric tons*, which is equivalent vessels off their coastlines. Many coastal the shark fin trade, held by the FAO, to around a third of reported global fishing communities in low-income shows that the trade has escalated enor- chondrichthyan catches. However, if countries rely on traditional shark mously in the past two decades. In 1987, sharks caught for the fin trade were fisheries to provide a vital source of a total of 4,907 mt of shark fins were im- finned and discarded, the 260,000 mt protein, and wastage on this scale port ed world wide. By 1994 this had risen would not be included in the catch figure increasingly threatens their livelihoods to 10,652 mt, and ten years on, reported and would therefore represent an and food security.89 world imports peaked at 13,614 mt.90 additional take.7 Furthermore, as it is extremely More than 90% of shark fin imports In 2004, Indonesia was the world difficult to identify many shark species reported to the FAO in 2004 were to leader in shark fin production from their fins alone, finning impedes Hong Kong (57%) and China (36%). (1,660 mt), followed by Singapore the collection of vital species-specific Other notable importers are Malaysia, (1,000 mt) and India (455 mt). These catch, bycatch and landings data. Indonesia, Taiwan and Thailand.90 three collectively account for 80% of Without such information, shark stocks There are, however, problems with the shark fin production reported to the cannot be accurately assessed and accuracy of these figures, the main issue FAO90. China has never reported any sustainable management is therefore not being that any given shipment of fins shark fin production to the FAO.90 possible.89 may be recorded as an import in every country it passes through, meaning that FINNING: A CRUEL WASTE FAVORITES FOR FINNING there is almost certainly double (or triple) counting. With export figures this At one time, it is likely that global Which shark species are most commonly is less of a problem as most countries catches of whole sharks provided used for finning? DNA-based species distinguish between exports and re- sufficient fins to supply the markets of identification on samples from Hong exports (exports of a product that did East Asia and East Asian communities Kong – the world’s largest shark fin not originate within the country) and as worldwide. However, as shark meat is market – found that between 34–45% of a result the exaggeration in export data is considered to be inferior to that of most fins belong to only 14 shark species.92 not so large.90 commercially exploited fish species, Blue sharks form a particularly large Export statistics do nonetheless particularly tuna and swordfish, the component of the market (17%), possibly indicate an expanding market, with profits to be made from shark meat are because they are the most common exports doubling since the late-1980s to naturally much lower. Limited space on- bycatch species in high seas longline reach 6,220 metric tons in 2004. China board fishing vessels, combined with the fisheries targeting tuna and swordfish. accounts for 40% of reported exports, increasing value of shark fin, has made it Other species, including the followed by Indonesia, Taiwan, the economically advantageous for some hammerhead, shortfin mako, silky, United Arab Emirates, Malaysia and commercial vessels to discard the bulky sandbar, bull, and thresher sharks Japan.91 shark bodies while retaining the valuable represent at least 2–6% of the trade.92 An alternative estimate, which fins, which can be sun dried and stored Fins of all three CITES listed sharks – accounts for double counting and is compactly without refrigeration. great white, basking and whale – are based on national customs statistics, put the total quantity of shark fins in trade at around 10,000 metric tons in 2000, and growing at a rate of 6% a year. However, A Growing Recognition of the Shark Fin Soup Problem the authors state that this figure is likely to be an underestimate for a number of After fierce criticism from conserv a - "After careful consideration and reasons: fins harvested illegally are not tion ists, the Walt Disney Company – a thorough review process, we included in official record keeping, shark creator of the blockbuster Finding were not able to identify an fins produced and consumed within the Nemo, an aquatic adventure story same country are absent from trade with the tagline: “fish are friends, not environ ment ally sustainable statistics, and only the largest shark fin food” – bowed to pressure and fishing source, leaving us no markets (Hong Kong, China, Taiwan, removed shark fin soup from alternative except to remove Japan and Singapore) – not all markets – restaurant menus inside the new were included in the study.10 Hong Kong Disneyland theme park. shark’s fin soup from our wedding The dish was to be served at expensive banquet menu." “Fairytale” wedding banquets.94 I R E N E C H A N , D I S N E Y H O N G K O N G V I C E - * Applying a dried fin-to-body-weight ratio P R E S I D E N T F O R P U B L I C A F F A I R S . 9 4 of 1.5%.

22 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? The case for a ﬁnning ban

● Finning is responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of sharks every year.

M ● The removal of the ocean’s top O C . N

A predators may have serious, M T

O widespread effects for marine R F F E J

/ ecosystems and potentially

N A

M threaten yields of other T O R

F commercially important species. E J © Above: Shark finning wastes 95-99% of the animal. It is now a common practice in ● Finning is hugely wasteful – fisheries around the world. throwing away 95% of a valuable protein source should not be an internationally traded, although it seems opt instead for regulations requiring that option in a world where fish the large size of these fins renders them shark fins must not total more than 5% stocks are declining and millions more appealing as trophies than for of the weight of sharks on board.95 of people face chronic hunger. consumption.69 Traders in Hong Kong Although some nations have claim that the fins of basking and whale introduced legislation to control shark ● Finning prevents species-specific sharks are “coarse and taste of ash”, and finning (see below), the highly migratory catch data from being collected. great white fins are considered to be of nature of many shark species means the Without such information, similarly poor quality.69 However the only way to ensure full protection is to sustainable management of recent seizure of fins from 21 juvenile enact a ban on finning not only within shark fisheries is not possible. great whites indicates that they may have the waters of individual nations, but on some value as food, since small fins are the high seas as well. unsuitable for display purposes.93 Traders over 140 countries, passed a have been shown to deliberately mislabel “Finning causes the death of tens of resolution re commend ing that all fins from CITES listed shark species as States require shark fins to be landed other, unprotected species; but even millions of sharks. This potentially attached to their bodies. without deliberate subterfuge, rare fins threatens the survival of rare and may be mixed within large volumes of vulnerable species and, by removing ● The first international ban on shark other similar fins and thus become nearly finning was introduced by the impossible to detect.92 large numbers of top predators from International Commission for the the oceanic system, may have Conservation of Atlantic Tunas “The trade in shark fins through dramatic and undesirable ecological (ICCAT) in 2004. This was followed in 2005 by the Inter-American Tropical Hong Kong, which is likely to be impacts that could potentially Tuna Commission (IATTC), the indicative of the volume of the global threaten yields of other species.” 89 Indian Ocean Tuna Commission trade, is growing at an annual rate of (IOTC) and the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO). six per cent and appears to be linked FINNING BECOMES UNACCEPTABLE to increases in disposable income in ● Shark finning is prohibited in all Mainland China.” 69 ● In December 2000 the US adopted Australian States (out to three legislation to prohibit shark finning in nautical miles) and in Common- all US waters. Finning was previously wealth-managed (federal) fisheries HOW TO BAN SHARK FINNING banned on the Atlantic coast and in (which cover the area from 3–200 nm Californian waters. from the shore). The simplest way to implement a ban would be require all sharks to be landed ● The European Union banned shark ● In February 2006, the Seychelles whole, making the possession of detach- finning in 2003 for all vessels banned finning by all foreign-owned ed fins on board vessels an offence.95 This operating in EU waters and all EU vessels, including those registered would simplify enforce ment and vessels, wherever they fish. under or flying the Seychelles flag. The eliminate cheating and also provide ban does not apply, however, to much-needed data about the number ● In 2003 the UN General Assembly Seychellois-owned fishing boats. and species of sharks being taken, since recommended that Member States sharks with their fins attach ed are far ban shark finning. ● Shark finning has also been outlawed easier to identify by species. However, by several other major shark fishing relatively few countries that prohibit ● In November 2004, the IUCN, made nations, including Brazil, Canada, finning (Costa Rica is an example) up of over 1,000 governmental and Costa Rica, Ecuador, Oman and require sharks to be landed whole; most non-govern mental organizations from South Africa.

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 23 LACK OF CATCH, BYCATCH AND countries, even though more than two TRADE DATA Lack of thirds of reported chondrichthyan landings occur in developing countries Management where management is often weakened by As sharks were historically regarded as a lack of funding for research and low-value “trash” fish, there was little enforcement of regulations. In addition incentive to collect catch, bycatch and to unrestricted fishing by domestic fleets, trade data. A significant portion of global UNMANAGED FISHERIES poor enforcement means that industrial shark catches still go unrecorded and, fleets from other nations are often found when they are documented, species- Shark fishing on the whole is widely fishing illegally in the waters of develop- specific information is sparse or non- unmanaged. In the past, sharks lacked ing countries, catching sharks and existent and shark species are frequently commercial value, so comparatively little further decimating fish stocks.75 categorized together, or even as is known about many species’ abund- Domestic initiatives are vital for the “unidentified marine fish”.75 ance, range, distribution, reproductive conservation and management of shark The only source of information on behavior and response to external populations, particularly for those global shark catches is the FAO, which stresses. Records of shark catches are species with restricted distributions. relies on data collected from nations vague and few countries break down How ever, it is important to recognize individually and so is restricted to the their shark catch by species.75 that many species and populations of same limitations noted above. Some Today, sharks continue to be a low shark are distributed widely, or undergo nations fail to report any catch data (they priority for conservation and research in long migrations between the waters of may be discarding sharks at sea after many nations because of their low overall multiple States and on the high seas. taking their fins, or intentionally economic value (considering flesh and Therefore, for many shark species, inter - withholding information), leaving the fins together) and the fact that sharks national initiatives are essential for FAO to extrapolate data from previous consti tute a small proportion of marine effective management.98 years. fish eries.75 The FAO’s latest catch statis tics Species-specific (and ideally stock- show that chondrichthyan landings specific) catch, bycatch and biological accounted for only around 1% of the total The rising demand for shark fins data is fundamental if shark populations world fish catch in 2004, with sharks com - continues to fuel their exploitation, are to be managed sustainably and global prising approximately half of this total.65 but paradoxically they continue to be shark landings monitored in any There are currently no binding meaningful way. Without knowledge of international agreements for the protec- a low priority for conservation and the level true of exploitation, it is tion of sharks (with the exception of research because of their low impossible to accurately assess the status CITES, which deals with issues of trade, economic value (considering flesh of shark populations, meaning not directly with shark manage ment – 75 management is likely to fail. see opposite), and at the national level, and fins together). International trade in shark products only Australia, Canada, New Zealand, is also very poorly documented. Customs Japan, the UK and the US have developed codes are often unspecific and species of specific shark management programs. shark are frequently only Some countries, such as Brazil, Costa categorized under a heading of Rica, Ecuador, Israel, Malta, Mexico, “dogfish and other sharks”.7 Namibia, Oman, the Philippines, and Some countries have a separate South Africa, have restrictions ranging category for shark fin (although from a ban on finning in national waters, not by species), but customs’ to a prohibition on the catching of records for shark skin, liver oil specific species, to the closure of directed and jaws are rarely documented, shark fisheries during certain seasons. and trade of shark cartilage goes And in a few areas, shark fishing is totally unreported.7,69 Several banned completely – for example, in countries simply do not report Egypt there is a total ban on shark fish ing their statistics on trade in shark in the Red Sea96, and shark fishing is products at all. These numerous prohibited in all Congolese waters.97 shortcomings mean that But considering that well over 100 accurately assessing the volume different nations report shark catches to of international trade in shark the FAO, and 24 boast annual catches in products in general, let alone by excess of 10,000 metric tons65, it is clear species, is virtually impossible. that there is a serious lack of compre hen - S N O sive management. I S I V

A major problem with the manage- C A P S R

ment of shark ﬁshing is that compre- E N N I

hensive shark management plans are H G A mainly being created in developed R Left: The results of a ﬁnning K

. P operation in Costa Rica ©

24 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? International Agreements

FAO International Plan of Action for Convention on International Trade in The Convention on Migratory Species Sharks (IPOA) Endangered Species (CITES) (CMS)

In 1999, the FAO adopted an CITES was established in 1975 to en - The Bonn Convention on the International Plan of Action for Sharks sure that international trade in wild Conservation of Migratory Species of (IPOA), with the overall objective of animals and plants does not threaten Wild Animals (CMS) recognizes the ensuring the conservation and their survival. It provides an inter- need for countries to cooperate in the management of sharks and their long- nation al legal framework for the pre- conservation of animals that migrate term sustainable use. The initiative, ven tion of trade in endangered species, across national boundaries, or between which is voluntary, calls on States to and for the regulation of trade in areas of national jurisdiction and the produce a Shark Assessment Report species that may otherwise become high seas. Its membership has grown (SAR) and, if they have shark fisheries, threat ened.98 Participation is vol un - steadily and now incorporates 97 to draw up a National Plan of Action tary, but countries that agree to the Parties. The CMS provides a framework (NPOA) identifying research, Con ven tion are legally bound by it. At for setting up protection measures for monitoring and management needs for present, 169 countries are Party to endangered migratory species.102 all shark species in their waters.98 CITES.101 The basking shark and the great Progress by 2001 – the year by which Currently, only three species of white shark, listed in 2005 and 2002 NPOAs were to be completed – was shark – the basking shark, whale shark respectively, are registered on both very disappointing, with only 29 States and great white shark – are listed by Appendix I and II of the Convention, reporting to the FAO on progress with CITES. All are listed on Appendix II, while the whale shark, added in 1999, IPOA implementation. By September which means that Parties to CITES is listed solely on Appendix II.102 2002, none of the major shark fishing must strictly regulate and monitor nations had produced a SAR, and a trade in these species. Export permits Regional Fisheries Management review of draft and completed NPOAs can only be granted if it will not be Organizations showed nearly all to be inadequate.98 detrimental to the survival of the Thirteen States have now reported species, and that the products were Regional Fisheries Management that they have completed either a SAR, not obtained illegally.101 Organizations (RFMOs), created NPOA, or both, including eight major under international agreements, are shark fishing nations – Australia, Brazil, responsible for the management of Japan, Mexico, Taiwan, Thailand, the high seas fisheries and fish stocks that UK and the USA – although Thailand’s migrate through the waters of multiple and Brazil’s are not available for review countries. Many RFMOs are solely and their status is uncertain.99 At concerned with management of present, only the NPOAs of Japan, the particular species (often tuna and their UK, Australia and the USA are available relatives) and shark populations are to view on the FAO Fisheries website. usually not covered. Five States – the EU, Indonesia, Italy, Several RFMOs* have, however, in Malaysia and South Africa – have draft the past two years, agreed to SARs or NPOAs, while a further 47 resolutions banning shark finning and States report that they are working encouraging data collection, research, towards implementation, including and the development of bycatch eight major shark fishing nations. Two mitigation measures for sharks. of the latter – Canada and New Zealand Nevertheless, such actions fall well – are already implementing shark short of the requirements of the IPOA- fisheries management independently of Sharks100 and, at present, ICES and the IPOA-Sharks.99 ICCAT are the only RFMOs known to Worryingly, however, 32 States, be utilizing shark fisheries and/or including three major shark fishing bycatch data to develop stock nations – Nigeria, Sri Lanka and assessments.98 Taiwan, which collectively account for almost 10% of global catches – state Other agreements and bodies that that they have not or will not be could help in the conservation of implementing the IPOA-Sharks.99 And sharks include the UN Agreement on

in 2005, an expert consult ation that D I Straddling and Highly Migratory, and A D L assessed the effective ness and I Fish Stocks the Convention on W achievements of the IPOA-Sharks © Biological Diversity. concluded that despite the great beneﬁt A basking shark ﬁn on display in it could bring to the conservation of Singapore. Basking sharks are now * The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), the Inter-American shark populations, it is constrained by protected internationally under CITES Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC), the Indian the lack of priority given to the issue.100 and the CMS. Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC), and the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organisation (NAFO).

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 25 Illegal Fishing D I A D L I W

MARINE RESERVES UNDER GALÁPAGOS ISLANDS large groups of hammerheads and the 42 SIEGE other resident species of shark. Accord- The Galápagos Islands, designated a ing to a local scientist: “Diving here While only three shark species enjoy any UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1978, depends on sharks. If you reduce their degree of international protection under suffer extensive illegal fishing incursions numbers or make them aggressive, you CITES, some sharks are protected in from both local and foreign boats have ruined dive tourism.” 105 marine reserves, which are usually “no (mostly from Costa Rica and Colombia), Despite a general lack of information take” or restricted fishing areas. specifically targeting sharks for their on shark populations, anecdotal Because of the difficulty and expense fins.88 information points to a worrying decline. of patrolling large areas of ocean, marine Local residents report that fishing for The owner of a diving company in the reserves are often poorly protected in sharks began in the 1950s, but growing archipelago reported that “huge schools developing countries. WildAid has found demand for fins resulted in intensive of hammerheads, often numbering up to that they are increasingly under pressure fishing in the 1980s, which has 300, could be seen in the area 15 years from illegal fishing, shark fin being one continued at a high level despite a ban on ago. Nowadays tourists are lucky to see of the most lucrative targets. In some large-scale shark fishing in 1998.88 20 or 30.” 88 protected areas, illegal fishing now Until recently, Ecuador was a major More than 80,000 international threatens dive tourism and divers are exporter of shark fins to East Asian tourists, worth US$140 million, are reporting reductions in shark numbers. markets. According to the World Trade attracted to the Galápagos Islands every To maximize profits while fishing Atlas, between 1997–2003 Ecuador year, representing around a third of illegally, fishermen will often take only exported 850 metric tons of shark fins to Ecuador’s US$430 million tourism fins, dumping carcasses overboard. In China, Hong Kong, Singapore and business. By contrast, Ecuador is this way, a relatively small boat can catch Taiwan – an amount estimated to have reported to earn just US$1.5 million thousands of sharks in a short period, required the lives of 1.7 million sharks88. from the shark fin trade, accounting for effectively fishing out an entire area. Despite a prohibition on the export of the death of 200,000 sharks.88 shark fins since October 2004, fins continue to be harvested and exported COCOS ISLAND MARINE

E 104 N

I illegally . RESERVE, COSTA RICA R R E P Most of these ﬁns – an estimated 80% G U O

D of Ecuador’s exports – are taken from Cocos Island is famed as one of the

© sharks in Galápagos waters, where they world’s top dive sites and is billed as are officially protected. Scant environ- “The Island of Sharks.” Fishing within mental monitoring and enforce ment 12-miles of the island, a World Heritage means reliable estimates of sharks killed Site, is prohibited, but commercial in the Galápagos are hard to come by, fishers routinely ignore the ban and but the volume of dried shark fin illegally catch and fin sharks at night, produced from the Island of Isabela (the according to the authorities.88 largest island in the archipelago) is Local shark populations, mainly great estimated to be as much as 1,500 kg per hammerheads inshore and silky sharks month, represent ing approximately offshore, are suspected to be dwindling. 3,000 sharks.88 Currently there are more than 80 local Shark fins are smuggled out of the boats that are formally accused of fishing Galápagos in a variety of ways. Some illegally, and several foreign operators companies use large “mother ships”, have been arrested. One Ecuadorian which are stationed just outside the vessel, the San Jose 1, was captured and Marine Reserve and are regularly confiscated and the captain imprisoned. supplied with fins by small, fast moving A Colombian vessel was also impounded boats, usually at night. In other cases, and forced to pay a US$18,000 fine. Top right: Marine reserves in developing fins are packed into suitcases and Pirate fishing is a great problem in Costa countries seldom have resources to smuggled from the Galápagos by plane. Rican waters and in cludes Taiwanese enforce their regulations. The main Shark fins have been found hidden in vessels. Similar situa tions are known to patrol vessel for the Galápagos has fuel-transport vessels and also on board exist in other central American nations; only been kept in service with outside support. cargo ships, concealed in coffee sacks and for example, there is evidence of Costa petrol containers.88 Rican vessels in Guate malan and Above: Sharks caught in an illegally-set The Galápagos Islands are famed for Nicuaraguan waters, all long lining and net in the Galápagos Marine Reserve. providing opportunities to dive with catching sharks.106

26 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? Left: Galápagos park rangers intercept Breaking other a suitcase full of shark ﬁns. countries’ laws

Although very few countries have direct protection for sharks, many have fishing regulations designed to protect traditional and domestic fisheries. However, develop ing small artisanal fishing boats from the countries rarely have the resources to poverty stricken communities along the enforce these regulations and so un- nearby Veraguas coast.88 scrupu lous fishermen, often from Dive operators have reported a abroad, take advantage of this to fish

O marked decrease in the number of illegally. G A P A

L sharks, rays, and other large ﬁsh as In West Africa, for example, A G

A commercial ﬁshing increased over the countries such as Guinea, Sierra N O I C

A last ﬁve years. The longline and nylon Leone, and Liberia suffer from some N

U gillnets widely employed by the of the highest levels of illegal fishing Q R A P fishermen also create unintended in the world, as foreign industrial © bycatch of sea turtles. Scientists from vessels from Europe and the Far East The Park Service and Coast Guard are Oregon State University recently plunder their precious marine aware of the situation around Cocos reported seeing no sharks at all while resources, upon which millions of Island, but lack the resources to combat diving around Coiba.88 people depend for food and illegal fishing. The Save Our Seas livelihoods.111 Foundation provided a fast patrol boat POACHING EPIDEMIC HITS AUSTRALIA Guinea is estimated to lose to the Parks authority in 2003 to provide US$110 million worth of fish to so- year round enforcement of the 12-mile Even when countries are able and willing called “pirate” fishing every year, fishing exclusion zone surrounding the to invest hundreds of millions of dollars Sierra Leone US$29 million, and island. However, some illegal fishing into fighting illegal fishing, protection Liberia US$10 million – a potential continues and local dive operators are for sharks cannot be guaranteed. In source of income these impoverished becoming increasingly concerned that it Australia, increasing numbers of States can ill-afford to be without. will seriously impact their operations.107 Indonesian fishermen are encroaching Across the whole of sub-Saharan into the country’s tropical northern Africa, losses to pirate fishing are COIBA NATIONAL PARK, waters as overfishing has depleted shark estimated at around US$1 billion, PANAMA populations in many other parts of which is roughly equivalent to a Southeast Asia. With shark fin worth up quarter of Africa’s total annual fish Situated 70 km off the Pacific coast of to US$700 per kilogram on the Chinese exports.68 Panama, this newly designated World market, Indonesian fishers are prepared Heritage Site is attracting a growing to take huge risks, including hefty fines number of tourists drawn by its and jail terms, to pursue these lucrative remarkable biodiversity and pristine catches. If they are not caught, a single Flags of Convenience natural environment. Coiba National trip can provide the same economic Park is one of the largest marine parks in return as a year of fishing in Indonesian One common way in which the world and contains the second waters. fishermen circumvent management largest coral reef in the Central-Eastern According to government sources, up and conser va tion measures and Pacific Ocean.108 to 25,000 metric tons, or more than 1 avoid penalties for illegal fishing is by Despite stepping up patrols, illegal million sharks, are poached annually registering under a “Flag of Conven i- fishing around Coiba is rampant and from Australia’s territorial waters 109 ence” (FOC). Although international increasing. Commercial fishing boats, which is more than double Australia’s law specifies that the count ry whose both local and from Costa Rica, target reported shark catches in 2004.65 Sharks flag a vessel flies is respon sible for sharks along the island’s coast using are finned and their carcasses discarded – controlling its activities, certain longlines and gillnets. In 2002, citing the illegal in all Australian waters. coun tries allow vessels of any problem of shark fin soup, the then The situation has got so bad that the nationality to fly their flag for a few Director of Coiba National Park, Minster of Defence recently authorized hundred or thousand dollars, and Clemente Nunez, reported that around the Navy to shoot at boats that do not then ignore any offences committed. 100 boats come to fish around Coiba submit to inspection, and there are These so-called FOC coun tries are every month.88 reports of the Navy being attacked with often devel op ing States, and so lack Although larger scale operators samurai swords when boarding illegal the resources (or the will) to monitor present a persistent law enforcement fishing vessels.110 and control vessels flying their flag, problem both around Coiba and in especially when the fish eries being Panamanian territorial waters generally, plundered do not belong to them.112 a local NGO has warned that a more serious long term threat comes from

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 27 Left: Sharks accumulate high concentrations of toxic compounds Other Threats to dumped in the ocean. Sharks

POLLUTION RECREATIONAL FISHING S E R

Sharks, as predators at the top of many U Recreational shark ﬁshing is a popular T C I P

food chains, are known to accumulate L pastime whose proponents have often L I T S

/ high concentrations of toxic compounds sounded the alarm on declining catches R E F dumped in the ocean. A and lobbied for protective measures. H C S

Heavy metals, such as cadmium, I However, recreational ﬁsheries can V E K

mercury and lead, are highly toxic in © contribute significantly to shark animal tissues even at low concentrations mortality.116,119 and research carried out on heavy metal Data from the US National Marine pollution in sharks shows that they can Fisheries Service for 2004 shows that inhibit DNA synthesis, alter heart func- over 12 million sharks, skates and rays tion, disrupt sperm production and alter were caught by anglers in US waters, of blood parameters.113 MARINE DEBRIS which 359,000 were retained.120 In fact, Among the heavy metals found in estimated recreational catches of large sharks, mercury is known to reach partic - Every year an estimated 10 million metric coastal sharks were higher than ularly high levels. Mercury is responsible tons of plastic ends up in the ocean.117 commercial landings in 15 of 21 years for causing severe neuro logical damage in This detritus is known to harm many between 1981 and 2001.116 Off California, many organisms, and although the dan - marine species, including sharks, shortfin mako and leopard sharks gers posed to humans from consum ing through entanglement or choking.118 (Triakis semifasciata) are the primary shark meat are well documented, its eff ects Discarded commercial fishing gear is a targets, with the recreational catch of on sharks themselves are poorly known. big factor, with devastating affects for leopard sharks six times the commercial Organochlorine contaminants (OC) marine wildlife. Modern fishing gear is catch.116 also accumulate at high levels in sharks. A constructed from synthetic fibers that are Parts of the US East Coast may well recent measurement of OCs in Greenland non-biodegradable. This means that host more recreational fishing for large sharks (Somniosus microcephalus) showed snagged or lost gear and torn fragments sharks than anywhere else in the world. them to be one of the most contaminated of net may continue to catch fish One annual shark fishing tournament in organisms in the Canadian Arctic. There indefinitely – a phenomenon known as Massachusetts awards extra points for is almost no information on the effects of “ghost-fishing”. Smaller fish caught in catching 250 lb (113 kg) or more mako, OC contamination in sharks, but it has the net act as bait and attract larger fish, thresher or porbeagle sharks.121 Porbeagle been associated with hormone disruption such as sharks, that get entangled and sharks are classified as Endangered by the and low fertility in bonnetheads.114 die due to injury or asphyxiation. The IUCN in the Northwest Atlantic Concentrations of Tributylin (TBT), a impact of ghost fishing and other marine following serious declines. In 2005, 2,500 compound used in anti-fouling paints on debris on shark populations is different sharks were caught at this boats, was detected in the kidneys of blue unknown.116 tournament in just two days. sharks caught off the Italian coast115 and cadmium, lead and arsenic have been found in tissue samples of several shark species in the eastern Mediterranean35. The presence of these substances is likely to cause severe damage to basic biological functions. More than two million metric tons of oil enter the marine environment each year from a mixture of natural sources, terrestrial runoff, discharges from tankers and ships, oil refineries, oil spills and the rupture of oil pipelines. Hydrocarbons and other toxicants in oil S can contaminate the flesh of sharks, but N O I S I V

the impacts from oil spills are most likely E C A P felt through the effects on sensitive S R E

116 N N I

coastal habitats. /

R E B U R G

. S

28 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? In Australia, where large numbers of sharks are caught by recreational fishing, spearfishing has had a negative effect on Australian populations of the Critically Endangered grey nurse shark (Carcharias taurus), leading to a voluntary fishing ban in 1979. The species is now protected in all Australian waters.116 Increasingly, recreational fishermen are moving towards a catch-and-release policy for most large species. However, Y R N

this practice is not without problems, as E H

T recreational fishermen usually allow Coastall devellopment threatens T O C L sharks to “run with the bait” before shark breediing and nursery grounds.. O W hooking them, which results in more gut- © hooked animals. Virtually all recreational releases of large fishes involve cutting the the local population size of sharks and Many species of shark are primarily leader, leaving animals with hooks in the thus the threat to swimmers. associated with coral reefs. The gut, throat, or moving mouth parts which On average, some 1,500 sharks are widespread destruction of these habitats can cause serious injury or death. This caught in the Australian program each – due to sedimentation and pollution, could be solved by the use of de-hooking year and about 1,200 in South Africa, rising sea temperatures associated with tools, allowing even gut-hook removal.119 including a large proportion of species global warming, and destructive fishing that are not considered dangerous to practices – undoubtedly has major BEACH MESHING humans. In Australia, grey nurse and impacts for sharks.116 great white sharks, both protected under Mangrove forests are another coastal Netting of popular bathing beaches as a national law, are caught in beach meshes habitat critical to many sharks, serving as protective measure against shark attack along with many other marine animals a nursery ground for both them and has been practiced for more than 50 such as whales, dolphins, dugongs, seals, their prey species.116 Like coral reefs, years, mainly in Australia, South Africa turtles, rays and bony fishes.122 mangroves are among the most and New Zealand, and is thus a localized Analysis of data from all programs threatened habitats in the world today, threat to certain shark populations.116 indicates that beach meshing causes with massive losses due to aquaculture, Beach meshing programs do seem to significant declines in the abundance of agriculture, coastal development, have been successful in reducing the most shark species that are regularly mining, pollution, and damming of number of attacks, but it is a common captured.7 rivers.123 misconception that they physically prevent sharks from entering bathing HABITAT LOSS AND SUB-SEA CABLES waters. The nets, which are set on the DEGRADATION bottom, often do not reach the surface Sharks possess acute “electro-reception” and are open at both ends, so sharks can Little is known about precisely how and “magneto-reception” capabilities for swim over and around them. However, altered and contaminated habitats affect navigation and hunting purposes. those sharks that swim into them the health and productivity of sharks. Communications cables running become entangled and “drown” – this is However, considering the rapid rate at beneath the seabed produce a complex the purpose of shark nets: they reduce which coastal habitats are being array of electric and magnetic fields that destroyed around the world by human are likely to affect shark behavior.116 activities, shark species that rely on inshore waters for nursery grounds, or CLIMATE CHANGE AND OZONE inhabit coastal or estuarine habitats, THINNING would appear to be the most likely to be affected by habitat change.116 Climate change is expected to alter the Some of the most threatened shark marine environment through changes in species are those restricted to freshwater weather patterns, water temperature, sea M O C . and estuarine habitats. The Ganges shark level, tidal and current patterns, coastal N A M

T (Glyphis gangeticus), for example, has erosion and storm frequency. This could O R F F

E almost completely disappeared from its affect the food supply, migration routes, J

A limited range due to human-induced and distribution of shark species, and the M T O R

habitat changes. Freshwater areas are stability of ecosystems. Ozone depletion F F E J much more accessible to human also has the potential to alter shark © exploitation than marine areas, and the habitats through its effects on whole 116 Above: A three meter tiger shark caught tropical rivers and lakes where freshwater ecosystems. in an anti-shark net off Durban Beach, shark species occur are mostly in Natal Coast – South Africa. developing countries with large and expanding human populations.116

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 29 Unless stated otherwise, all information in the following section is taken from the Species at risk IUCN Red List 200672 and Fishbase126.

SHARKS IN DECLINE BRAZILIAN GUITARFISH ANGEL SHARK While there is still very little comprehensive global data on the decline Rhinobatos horkeli Squatina squatina of shark species, research carried out in the past few years in speciﬁc regions and on speciﬁc shark populations has revealed dramatic declines. Some shark populations have declined by more than 80% in the past 50 years:

89% decline in hammerhead sharks in the NW Atlantic in the past 15 years;124 IUCN Classiﬁcation: Critically Endangered. IUCN Classiﬁcation: Critically Endangered.

80% decline in thresher sharks in the NW Max. size: Length 1.4 m. Max. size: Length 2.5 m, weight 80 kg, 124 Atlantic; longevity not known. 79% decline in great white sharks in the Distribution: Western Atlantic: Lesser NW Atlantic;124 Antilles to Southern Brazil. Distribution: Eastern Atlantic: from Scandinavia to northwest Africa; 65% decline in tiger sharks in the NW Reproduction: Not known. Mediterranean and Black Seas. Atlantic;124 60% decline in blue sharks in the NW Threats: Overfishing. Reproduction: Age at maturity unknown, Atlantic;124 males mature at 80–132cm and females at Notes: Extremely vulnerable to over- 128–169cm. Litter size: 7–25. 87% decline in blue sharks in the tropical exploitation because inshore breeding and Pacific;49 nursery grounds are fished heavily. Threats: Bycatch. 99% decline in oceanic white tip sharks in Population off southern Brazil decreased by the Gulf of Mexico since the 1950s; 96% from 1984–94; the species faces Notes: Formerly a common and important extinction in the near future if fishing demersal predator in coastal areas of the 90% decline in oceanic silky sharks in continues. Northeast Atlantic, Mediterranean and Gulf of Mexico since the 1950s;80 Black Seas during the 19th and early 20th 88% decline in angel sharks in Brazilian centuries. Most of this region is now waters;72 subject to intensive demersal fisheries, and the species is highly vulnerable from birth It is important to note that these onwards to bycatch in bottom-trawls, set- shark populations are not exposed to nets and longlines. Abundance has declined unusual levels of fishing mortality – dramatically in the past 50 years; is now there is no reason not to assume that declared extinct in the North Sea, population declines of this magnitude extirpated from large areas of northern are not replicated in other species and Mediterranean and uncommon throughout populations worldwide. In fact, global most of remainder of its range. populations of large predatory fish (excluding sharks) have already been shown to have declined by 90% since the onset of industrial fishing.125 Considering that sharks are more vulnerable to overexploitation than other fish, declines of at least the same magnitude seem highly likely. IUCN’s Red List of Threatened Species 2006 contains assessments of 547 sharks and related species. Of these, 20% (110) are classified as “Critically The IUCN Red List Endangered,” “Endangered” or “Vulnerable”, whilst a further 37% (205 The IUCN Red List is the most comprehensive inventory of the global species) are classified as “Data Deficient”, conservation status of plant and animal species. Species are assessed on a formal meaning that insufficient information is set of criteria and placed in one of nine categories: Extinct, Extinct in the Wild, available to assess a species’ risk of Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable, Near Threatened, Least Concern, extinction. Many species have not been Data Deficient and Not Evaluated. assessed at all, however. 72

30 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? GIANT FRESHWATER BLUE SHARK GANGES SHARK STINGRAY Prionace glauca Glyphis gangeticus Himantura chaophraya

IUCN Classification: Lower Risk/Near IUCN Classification: Critically Endangered. Threatened. Max. size: Length 3 m. Max. size: Length 4 m, weight 205 kg, longevity 20 years. Distribution: Indo-West Pacific: Hooghly River, Ganges system, West Bengal, India, Distribution: Worldwide in open ocean – and likely from the vicinity of Karachi, probably the widest ranging Pakistan. Reported from Taiwan. Probably IUCN Classification: Vulnerable; Thailand chondrichthyan. confined to turbid waters of rivers, sub-population Critically Endangered. estuaries and inshore waters in this area. Reproduction: Males mature at 1.8–2.8m Max. size: Length 5 m, width 2.4 m, weight length and 4–5 years and females at Reproduction: Not known. 600 kg. 2.2–3.2m length and 5–6 years. Gestation period is 9–12 months and internally Threats: Caught as incidental catch in other Distribution: Asia and Oceania: Mekong hatched eggs are nourished by a placental fisheries. and Chao Phraya river basins; also from yolk sac. Pups are about 40 cm in length eastern Borneo, New Guinea and northern and 4–135 are produced per litter. Notes: The Ganges Shark is known from Australia. only three museum specimens, all collected Threats: Bycatch and finning: usually in the 19th Century. After an extensive Reproduction: Not known. caught with pelagic longlines (targeting search in the Ganges River over the past tuna and billfish) but also hook-and-lines, decade, a few additional specimens were Threats: Habitat alteration and pelagic trawls, and even bottom trawls near caught in 1996. degradation of the Thai riverine systems coasts. It is utilized fresh, smoked, and (human induced) and overfishing. dried-salted for human consumption; its PORBEAGLE SHARK hides are used for leather; fins for shark-fin Lamna nasus Protection: Thai government trying to soup; and also for fishmeal and liver oil. implement an experimental captive Also considered a game fish and taken by breeding program. sports anglers with rod and reel.

Notes: H. chaophraya has a characteristic Notes: While blue sharks are among the rounded disk with a prominent snout and most abundant, widespread, fecund and small eyes, and possesses a venomous sting faster growing of all the sharks, and a IUCN Classification: Vulnerable; Northwest on a large whip-like tail. Inhabits sandy pelagic species that is widely distributed Atlantic subpopulation Endangered; bottoms of estuaries and large rivers, throughout the world’s oceans, they are Northeast Atlantic subpopulation Critically feeding on invertebrates and fishes. also the most heavily fished sharks in the Endangered; Mediterranean subpopulation Possibility of biological extinction in the world. The impact of annual fisheries Critically Endangered. wild considered extremely high in some mortality (mainly of bycatch), estimated at habitats although status in Australia is 10 to 20 million individuals, is likely to be Max. size: Length 3.5 m, weight 230 kg, probably favorable. having an effect on the world population, longevity 30 years. but monitoring data are inadequate to assess the scale of any population decline. Distribution: Cold waters of North and However a recent study the longline fishery South Atlantic, South Pacific. in the tropical Pacific Ocean found that blue sharks have declined by 87% since the Reproduction: Males mature at eight years 1950s and that the mean mass of and females at 13. Females give birth to live individuals caught has dropped from 52 kg young, with 1–6 pups per litter. to 22 kg.49 Threats: Porbeagle sharks are targeted for meat, oil, fishmeal and fins for shark-fin soup. Also a popular gamefish.

Notes: The eastern and western North Atlantic populations have both been serious - ly over-exploited by directed longline fish - eries. Found singly and in schools, por beagle feed on small pelagic schooling fishes, other sharks and squid. With a mini mum popu la - tion doubling time of more than 14 years, they are very susceptible to over fishing.

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 31 DUSKY SHARK PONDICHERRY SHARK SMALLTOOTH SAWFISH Carcharhinus obscurus Carcharhinus hemiodon Pristis p ectinata

IUCN Classification: Lower Risk/Near IUCN classification: Critically Endangered. IUCN Classification: Critically Endangered; Threatened; Vulnerable in western North North and Southwest Atlantic Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. Max. size: Length 2 m. subpopulation Critically Endangered.

Max. size: Length 4 m, weight 180 kg, Distribution: Indo-West Pacific: Gulf of Max. size: Length 7.6 m, weight 350 kg, longevity 45 years. Oman to Pakistan, India, and possibly Sri longevity 40–70 years. Lanka. Distribution: East, West and North Distribution: Western and eastern Atlantic; Atlantic, western Indian Ocean and western Reproduction: Not known. Indo-West Pacific; possibly Mediterranean and eastern Pacific. and eastern Pacific. Threats: Fishing for meat. Reproduction: Among the slowest-growing, Reproduction: Slow growing and late latest-maturing of known sharks, bearing Notes: An extremely rare inshore shark, maturing: large females produce between small litters after a long gestation, and one known only from around 20 specimens in 15 and 20 young per year; the young are of the most vulnerable of vertebrates to museum collections. Subject to expanding born at 70–80 cm. Size at maturity is depletion by man because of its very low widespread and unregulated fishing, last estimated as 3.2 m. intrinsic rate of increase. Mature at the age recorded from market surveys in 1979. of 20 years (2.8 m in length), have Subsequent market surveys in 1982, Threats: The principal threat to all gestation period of 16 months, produce 1996/97 and 1999/2000 in India, Malaysia sawfishes is fishing, both targeted and eight young per litter. and Philippines failed to find any specimens. bycatch, because their long tooth-studded saw makes them extraordinarily vulnerable Threats: Overfished in western Atlantic. COMMON SKATE to entanglement in any sort of net gear, Taken on commercial longline as a bycatch and habitat destruction. Eradicated from Dipturus batis in swordfish/tuna fishery. the majority of its former range in the US.

Protection: Protected in US Atlantic after Notes: Targeted for food, liver oil and serious declines. sport; saws are sold as tourist souvenirs and adult fish stuffed for display. Sawfish Notes: Found in coastal and offshore have been wholly or nearly extirpated from waters but not oceanic. Adults are large areas of their former range in the commonly found at depths of 200–400 m, North Atlantic and the Southwest Atlantic young in shallower waters. Feeds on coast by fishing and habitat modification. bottom and pelagic bony fish, sharks, Remaining populations are now small and skates, rays, cephalopods, gastropods, IUCN Classification: Critically Endangered. fragmented. It is apparently extinct in the crustaceans, sometimes human refuse. It is Mediterranean and likely also in the utilized fresh, dried-salted, frozen and Max. size: Length 2.8 m, weight 97 kg, Northeast Atlantic. smoked for human consumption; hides for longevity 50 years. leather; fins for shark fin soup; and liver oil extracted for vitamins. A 2004 study found Distribution: Eastern Atlantic: Norway, that the dusky shark population of the Gulf Iceland, the Faroes to Senegal, including of Mexico declined by 79% between the western Mediterranean and western Baltic. 1950s and the late 1990s.80 Similar declines are expected to have occurred worldwide. Reproduction: Attain sexual maturity at 1.2 m and around 10 years of age. Common skate are egg-layers and females produce about 40 eggs annually.

Threats: Overﬁshing: caught by bottom trawlers and traditionally landed due to its large size, D. batis is taken in targeted ﬁsheries where/when abundant, and as a bycatch elsewhere within its range. Its slow growth and reproductive rate makes it very vulnerable to over-exploitation.

Notes: Once abundant in Northwest Europe, now extirpated from much of former range. Populations around UK extremely depleted.

32 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? GREY NURSE SHARK with environmental change such as global populations. In the period 1962–1972, 180 warming.127 sharks were caught in beach meshing Carcharias taurus around New South Wales and Queensland, Also known as sandtiger shark and spotted Protection: Protected in Australian States but in recent years (1993–2003) there have ragged-tooth shark. of New South Wales (NSW), Queensland been only 11 mortalities. This decrease has and Tasmania. Listed as Vulnerable in been attributed to the declining grey nurse IUCN classification: Vulnerable. Australia, recently proposed for shark population.129 Endangered. Fully protected in South Max. size: Length 3.2 m, weight 160 kg, Africa, Namibia and the Maldives. Receives 3. Recreational fishing: Between 1961 and longevity 30–35 years. full protection on the Atlantic and Gulf 1980, 405 Carcharias taurus were landed by coasts of the USA. fishing clubs on the NSW coast. Distribution: Widespread in inshore waters Recreational fishermen noted a decline around the main continental landmasses in Notes: during 1960s and 1970s and implemented subtropical and cool temperate areas, a voluntary fishing ban in 1979. Never the- except for the eastern Pacific. 1. Overfishing: Grey nurse sharks have been less, the main current threat to grey nurse fished throughout their range in the past. sharks in southeast Australia is probably Reproduction: This large coastal species They are utilized fresh, frozen, smoked and the accidental capture of juveniles by has one of the lowest reproductive rates dried for human consumption, and also for recreational line fishers, and current figures known among sharks, giving birth to one or fishmeal, liver oil, fins, and hides for indicate no subsequent recovery. Until two large young every two years. Males leather. Its flesh is highly appreciated in 1980s, was perceived as “man-eater” owing reach sexual maturity at around 10 years of Japan. No directed fishery since 1984, but to fierce appearance; many killed by spear- age, females at around 15 years. bycatch in other fisheries has caused fishers and scuba divers and also caught concern, although full impact is unknown. live to sell to aquaria. Today, with Threats: Populations in several areas have In Australia accidentally caught on baited protection and increased public awareness, been severely depleted by commercial lines targeting wobbegong sharks there are very few reports of kills by fishing, protective beach-meshing and (Orectolobus spp).128 divers.128 spear fishing. Recovery is hindered by intrinsically low reproductive rate. 2. Beach meshing: The Australian States of Australian populations, which amount to New South Wales and Queensland have no more than 500 individuals, are also introduced beach meshing to protect extremely isolated and as a result have very bathers from potentially dangerous sharks. Below: Fewer than 500 grey nurse low genetic diversity. This makes them These nets are thought to be one of the sharks are estimated to remain in susceptible to disease and less able to cope major threats to grey nurse shark Australian waters. S N O I S I V

E C A P S R E N N I / T T A W

. D

. J

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 33 S N O I S I V

E C A P S R E N N I

L L E B P M A C

. T

A number of ﬁsheries for the second largest ﬁsh in the world, the basking shark, have collapsed.

BASKING SHARK 1. Overfishing: Basking sharks have been land (probably bycatch). The Norwegian hunted for several centuries to supply liver fishery dates from 16th century but expan- Cetorhinus maximus oil for lighting and industry, skin for d ed in 1960s owing to increased demand leather, and flesh for food and fishmeal. for liver oil. Norwegian catches peaked in IUCN Classification: Vulnerable; Modern fisheries yield liver oil, meat, 1970 and 1975 at around 18,000 mt but Endangered in Northeast Atlantic and cartilage and fins, which due to their large have since declined to only 181 mt in 2004. North Pacific. size attain extremely high prices in inter- According to ICES, this fishery has now national trade to East Asia. In the past, ceased. Max. size: Length 12 m, weight 4,000 kg, basking sharks have been fished using nets longevity 50 years. or harpoons in Norway, Ireland, Scotland, 2. Bycatch: Basking sharks are sometimes Spain, Iceland, Canada, Japan, China, landed and sold after becoming entangled Distribution: Found throughout the world’s California, Peru, and Ecuador. in gillnets or pot lines or caught in trawls, sub-arctic and temperate waters: the Most basking shark fisheries appear to but bycatch is rarely reported. Where western and eastern Atlantic, western have collapsed after initial high yields and reports do exist, bycatches in coastal areas Indian Ocean and western and eastern this species is considered to be extremely are relatively high: for example, up to 120 Pacific. vulnerable to overfishing. For example, basking sharks are taken each year in the between 1947 and 1975, basking sharks bottom gillnet fishery of the Celtic Sea. Reproduction: Males and females attain were netted and harpooned sexual maturity between the ages of 12–16 off the west coast of Ireland and 16–20 years, respectively. Six pups are with peak annual catches Basking shark total catches 1950–96 produced per litter with a 2–4 year interval reaching over 1,000 animals. 20,000 between litters. By the 1970s catches had declined by over 90% due to

s 16,000 n

Threats: Targeted for liver oil, ﬁns, skin and over ﬁshing. Similar stock o t

meat. crashes have occurred in i 12,000 r S O t U e

ﬁsheries in California, Canada R C m E :

8,000 Protection: Strictly protected in British and and Japan. F A O

US Atlantic waters; listed on Appendix II of In recent years, the FAO I S H

4,000 S the Bonn Convention; listed on Appendix II only received reports of T A of CITES. catches in the Northeast T Atlantic from Norway and 0,000 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 Notes: Second largest ﬁsh after whale occasional catches from 5 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 shark; plankton feeder. Portugal, Spain and New Zea- 1 Year

34 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? GREAT WHITE SHARK with relatively low natural mortality. SPINY DOGFISH Females do not reproduce until in excess of Carcharadon carcharias 4.5m. Owing to low reproductive potential, Squalus acanthias recover slowly from overexploitation. IUCN Classification: Vulnerable. Also known as piked dogfish and spurdog. 1. Trophy fishing and trade in jaws and Max. size: Length 6 m, weight 3,400 kg; fins: Due to its reputation as a dangerous IUCN Classification: Vulnerable; Northeast longevity around 30 years. fish, largely blamed on the 1975 film Jaws, Atlantic subpopulation Critically it is popular as a game fish among Endangered; Mediterranean, Northwest Distribution: Worldwide, along continental enthusiasts and has been targeted for its Atlantic and Northwest Pacific margins of all temperate seas and entering teeth and jawbones since the 1920’s. In subpopulations Endangered; Black Sea, tropics. South Africa offers of up to Northeast Pacific and South America US$20,000–50,000 have been made for subpopulations Vulnerable. Reproduction: Males mature at about great white jaws and US$600–800 for 3.5 m (8–9 years) and females 4.5 m individual teeth. A fin set from a large Max. size: Length 1.5 m, weight 9 kg, (12–15 years). Females give birth to a litter individual may be valued at over US$1,000. longevity 70–100 years. of 2–10 pups every 2–3 years. The high value of great white shark products encourages poaching, clandestine Distribution: Spiny dogfish are found in Threats: Sport fishing, bycatch, trade in trade and flouting of protective laws. temperate and sub-arctic waters; principle jaws and fins. However, many dive operators are catching populations are in the North Atlantic, the on to the idea that great white shark cage eastern South Pacific, the South Atlantic off Protection: From the perspective of diving can be extremely lucrative and this South America, the Cape coast of South domestic management, is the most widely type of ecotourism is continuing to expand Africa, the southern coasts of Australia and protected shark in the world, with capture and develop around this species. New Zealand and the North Pacific. Little and trade in this species prohibited in mixing occurs between populations. South Africa, Namibia, Maldives, Malta, 2. Bycatch: The majority of great whites are the USA, and Australia (except beach caught accidentally in commercial fisheries Reproduction: Females reach sexual meshing). Listed on CITES Appendix II operating longlines, gillnets, trawls etc. maturity at 12 years, males at six. since 2004, it was also listed on both They rarely survive if returned to the ocean Pregnancy of up to two years – thought to Appendices I and II of the Convention on and are often killed by fishermen. A recent be the longest of any vertebrate. Litter sizes Migratory Species in 2002. study of shark populations caught as average between 6–7 pups, but may be up bycatch in the Northwest Atlantic longline to as many as 20 pups per litter. Notes: Most famous (and feared) of all fishery (targeting swordfish and tuna) sharks, gained global notoriety from found that great white sharks have declined Threats: Overfishing. blockbuster movie and book Jaws. Perceived by 79% the Northwest Atlantic in the past as unstoppable “killing machine” but in 15 years.124 Similar declines in other areas Protection: None. reality, this supreme predator is highly are likely. vulnerable. Naturally scarce, it is long-lived Notes: Possibly the most abundant shark worldwide, supporting fishing industry of S

E global importance, but highly vulnerable to R U T

C overﬁshing due to exceptionally slow I P

L L

I growth and reproduction. Spiny dogﬁsh are T S

/ highly migratory, traveling in large, dense N E K T I “packs”, segregated by age and sex. Mature A

N I V

L females are targeted by ﬁshermen due to E K

1. Overfishing: The principle threat to spiny dogfish worldwide is overfishing from direct and indirect commercial fisheries. Spiny dogfish meat is eaten in Europe, Australia, New Zealand, South America and Japan, but they are often regarded as “trash fish” and discarded. Most large-scale spiny dogfish fisheries, though initially yielding high catches, have depleted populations and collapsed. In the Northeast Atlantic, where catch effort is effectively unlimited, stocks have declined by 95%. Mediterranean and Black Sea stocks are also unmanaged, with a decline of more than 60% reported in a Black Sea stock assessment for 1981–1992. Mature females have declined by 75% in just 10 The great white shark is targeted as years in the Northwest Atlantic, where US a trophy and for its jaws and fins. federal efforts to manage the stock are hampered by high bycatch, continued

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 35 and unsuitable for soup but are highly WHALE SHARK valued as restaurant signboards in east Rhincodon typus Asia, whilst the soft meat (known as “tofu shark”) is in great demand in Taiwan and IUCN Classiﬁcation: Vulnerable. may fetch prices up to US$17 per kg.69 A 10-ton shark recently sold for US$21,400 Max. size: Length 14–20 m, weight 34 on the Taiwanese market.57 metric tons, longevity 60–100 years. Today, whale sharks continue to be targeted in Pakistan, where recent landings Distribution: All tropical and warm are unknown, and Taiwan. Taiwanese temperate seas, oceans and coastal areas catches appear to have declined since the around the globe. 1980s, with annual landings from one particular site decreasing from 50–60

S Reproduction: Litter size may be up to 300. sharks per year in the mid-1980s, to 10 or E R U

T Gestation period is unknown, but average less in the 1990s. In 1995, landings C I P

L reproductive age is 35–63 years. throughout Taiwan were approximately I T S

250–272, but between 2001 and March N E K T

I Threats: Targeted for meat and ﬁns. 2002 it was reported that 113 whale sharks A

N I

V were taken. The domestic catch has L E K Protection: Listed on Appendix II of the apparently decreased by 60–70% since © Convention on Migratory Species in 1999 surveys ten years ago. exploitation in Canadian Atlantic waters, and Appendix II of CITES in 2003. It has There are now serious concerns that and regular defiance of scientific advice by been legally protected in the Philippines whale shark populations are decreasing in US Atlantic States. since 1988 and in India the whale shark many regions as a result of unregulated European demand continues to fuel became the first fish to be protected under fisheries, and despite being protected in markets around the world. Fisheries and the Wildlife Protection Act. It is also illegal several countries, it is suspected that illegal population trend data indicate that the to fish for whale sharks in Australia, hunting of whale sharks still continues with southern part of the Northeast Pacific Honduras, the Maldives and the USA. impunity. The species’ low reproductive stock has also declined through overfishing, rate, highly migratory nature, and low but stocks appear stable off Alaska. The Notes: The world’s largest fish is well abundance make it particularly vulnerable only data identified from the Northwest known for being a gentle giant; like the to exploitation. Scientists recently found Pacific are from Japan, where landings of basking shark, whale sharks filter-feed on a that the average size of whale sharks spurdog declined around 80% in variety of planktonic organisms. spotted off the Australian coast has shrunk 1952–1965, and inshore spurdog catches Ecotourism industries based on viewing in the past decade from 7 m to 5 m – an declined 80–90% from the mid-1970s to whale sharks are now developing in several extremely worrying sign considering whale late 1990s. Unregulated and expanding locations. These generate at least US$47.5 sharks do not reach sexual maturity until target and bycatch fisheries take spiny million worldwide annually – significantly they are 6–7 m in length. The researchers dogfish in South America (Europe reports more than it is worth as meat and other suspect that the decline in size is a imports from this region), where products.57 symptom of overfishing and due to the population declines are reported. New capture of the largest sharks.130 Zealand manages the species, which is 1. Overfishing: Small harpoon and taken in target and bycatch fisheries, entanglement fisheries for whale sharks through its Quota Management System. have taken place in India (banned in 2001), There is only limited fishing pressure in Pakistan, Taiwan, the Philippines (banned Australia and South Africa, with most in 1998), and the Maldives (prior to catches discarded. protection in 1995). These took whale sharks primarily for their meat, liver oil and/or fins. The huge fins are low quality

Top: The spiny dogﬁsh is sold as “rock salmon” in ﬁsh and chip shops. With a e d . i g

gestation period longer than an o y a b u

elephant, it is vulnerable to overﬁshing. c s . w w w

D N

Right: The meat and ﬁns of whale U E R F sharks are highly valued in many Asian N E G markets. A 10-ton shark recently sold R U J for over US$21,000 in Taiwan. ©

36 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? Hong Kong is the center of the world’s shark ﬁn trade.

metric tons between 1998 and 2002.67 In SOURCES OF FINS Hong Kong – 2004, imports reported to the FAO amounted to 11,000 mt, although this Sharks are finned in all the oceans of the The Global Hub figure includes both processed and world to feed the markets of East Asia. In unprocessed fins.90 2004, Hong Kong imported unprocessed Hong Kong, as the gateway to China and Shark fins (in unprocessed form) shark fins from 80 countries131. This is a with its international trading status, has arrive in Hong Kong by sea from all slight decrease from the 85 and 86 been the center of the global shark fin around the world, and are then shipped countries exporting shark fins to Hong trade for many years, with a large across the border to processing factories Kong in 1999 and 2000, respectively, and proportion of the remaining trade in Guangdong Province (Mainland a major reduction from the 125 transiting Singapore and, increasingly, China). Once processing is complete, countries recorded in 1995.69 Mainland China. Just as it had been for some of the fins are re-imported to Hong Topping the list of countries the global ivory trade (both legal and Kong for consumption or re-export, for importing shark fin into Hong Kong in illegal) prior to 1989, Hong Kong acts as example to overseas Chinese com mu ni- 2004 were China, Taiwan, Spain, an entrepôt, with some fins consumed ties69. The remainder of the processed Singapore and Indonesia. These domestically but a great deal re-exported prod uct is sold within Main land China, exporters represent a mixture of to other parts of the Chinese-speaking primarily for domestic consumption.69 producers (for example, Taiwan, Spain world. With the continued liberalization of and Indonesia) and countries trading A recent analysis of national customs the Mainland market, it is believed that fins for processing and consumption statistics for the major trading centers shark fins are increasingly bypassing (China and Singapore).131 for shark fin – Hong Kong, Mainland Hong Kong and instead traveling directly Changes since 1998-2000 include China, Singapore, Taiwan and Japan – to the Chinese mainland69. However, expanding production in Brazil and showed that 50% of the global trade declared imports to Hong Kong show no Costa Rica, and a reduction in exports passes through Hong Kong. Between sign of declining – in fact they continue from India, Yemen and the USA, which 1991 and 2000, the trade in fins through to grow – and the mainland pro por tion dropped outside the top ten exporters to Hong Kong, which is likely to be of reported fin imports is not increas- Hong Kong in 2002131, possibly as a result indicative of the volume of the global ing69. Nevertheless, other signs provide of the Shark Finning Prohibition Act.69 trade, grew at an annual rate of six evidence of the expected trend: trade in percent, most likely due to increases in shark fins between key Southeast Asian disposable income in Mainland China.69 trading centers (e.g. Singapore, Malaysia Declared imports of unprocessed fins and Thailand) and Mainland China has to Hong Kong rose from 6,900 to 9,800 noticeably expanded in recent years.69

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 37 Examination of declared imports of potential consumers of shark fin soup in China shark meat into Mainland China reveals a Mainland China exceeds the populations massive increase since 1998 – from around of all the other markets in the world com- Until twenty years ago, China was a rela- 300 mt to over 5,000 mt – which would bined. Given the con tin u ing economic tively small player in the inter national suggest either an increasing trend of development and rising standards of liv- trade in shark fins. But in the late 1980s, declaring shark fins as shark meat, or an ing, it is expected that demand for shark the Chinese authorities relaxed the long- expanding market for frozen shark meat fin will continue to grow over time,7 with held official attitude to shark fin soup as (or both).90 Interestingly, Main land China’s potentially devastating consequences for an unacceptable sym bol of wealth and biggest reported sup pliers of shark meat shark populations worldwide. privilege, thereby open ing the door to a are also the coun try’s biggest suppliers of vast new market. Rapid economic devel- fin, namely Singapore, Japan and Spain.69 “Hong Kong’s hold on the shark fin opment, especially in southern China The vast majority (90%) of shark fins and the cities of Beijing and Shanghai, imported by Mainland China are des- market is weakening as the trade in led to huge increases in disposable tined for processing plants in Guang- China expands, but Hong Kong is still a income and the creation of a new middle dong Province.69 China does not report major center, with at least 50 wholesale class. New found wealth could be demon- production figures to the FAO, but strated to friends and business associates exports have been around 2,000 mt per or retail shops selling shark fins, and by serving shark fin soup. year since 1996; in 2004 China’s exports approximately 20-30 medium-to-large The precise level of shark fin con sump - amounted to 2,476 mt, making it the importing traders.”131 tion in China is almost impossible to biggest exporter of shark fin worldwide quantify. China does not report the vol- with a 40% share of the reported total.90 ume or species com po si tion of its shark Regardless of any ambiguities sur- “Worldwide, based on an average catches, and for reasons that remain rounding China’s exact share of the glob- unclear, Chinese import statistics do not al fin trade, it is unquestionable that unit price and estimates of volume appear to reflect the true quantity of Mainland China has become the world’s from customs data, the [shark fin] shark fins in trade.69 Declared imports of largest consumer of shark fin. With a trade is probably worth US$400-550 shark fin into Mainland China rose from middle-class estimated to number in 131 around 3,000 mt in 1992 to 4,400 mt in excess of 100 million, the number of million.” 1996, but have fluctuated at around 4,000 metric tons ever since, showing no real growth.90 Imports in 2004 peaked at 4,776 mt, representing 36% of global imports and second only to Hong Kong.90 Chinese import figures are thought to be inaccurate for a number of reasons. A large proportion of China’s shark fin imports are under-reported or smuggled into the country to avoid high taxes levied on imports. Furthermore, since 2000, Chinese customs codes have required that imports of fresh, chilled and frozen shark fins be recorded under the broad category of “shark meat”.69 Together, these factors render compilation of accurate figures on China’s share of the global shark fin trade virtually impossible.69 D I A D L I W

Between October 2005 and January 2006, WildAid and the China Wildlife Conservation Association (CWCA) conducted a survey of restaurants, grocery stores and wholesale markets in 16 major Chinese cities, including Shanghai, Beijing, and Guangzhou, to study the amount, price and attitudes towards shark ﬁn on sale. The study also included a ques tion- naire to gauge consumer attitudes towards shark ﬁn soup and awareness of shark ecology. A brief summary follows:

● Of the 472 restaurants surveyed, 124 (26%) sold shark ﬁn dishes. These were mid to high-end range restaurants.

● Of the 144 grocery stores surveyed, 20 (14%) sold shark ﬁn, indicating that shark ﬁn is now more accessible than ever to the average consumer.

● Only three of the 101 wholesale markets surveyed sold shark ﬁn.

● 80% of interviewees did not know what shark fin (known as “fish wing” in Chinese) is made from. Although the average man on the street is not the main consumer of shark fin, this trend may be shifting as restaurants provide “economy” shark fin dishes to

appeal to more customers. Some S O N A P grocery stores have also started selling /

Y E L

shark ﬁn. N E H

K R A M

● 35% of those interviewed had © consumed shark fin. 41–60-year-old Above: Shopping crowds on Nanjing Lu, Shanghai. As China’s economy continues to men were the main consumers and, as grow, shark populations will be increasingly threatened unless consumer habits change. expected, consumption was most prevalent among those with a higher income and standard of education. China's GDP per capita vs Global shark fin imports 1976-2004 CHINA’S GDP PER CAPITA VS. GLOBAL SHARK FIN IMPORTS 1976-2004 ● 31% of shark fin consumers chose to 16,000 1400 eat shark fin for its nutritional value 14,000 and 49% said potential health risks 1200 would stop them eating it. 12,000 1000

10,000

● Other reasons for eating shark ﬁn s s n

e 800 o n t n

$ o c t

soup were curiosity (27%), taste (23%) i

r 8,000 c i t U r t e e

and social status (19%). m M 600 6,000

● Deep-sea ﬁsh were commonly believed 400 to be subject to less pollution and 4,000

200 thus more nutritious. Shark ﬁn is also 2,000 believed to balance yin and yang.

0 0

6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 ,9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2

Global shark fin imports China's GDP per capita SOURCE: FAO FISHSTAT

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 39 Common views expressed by consumers during the survey:

PERCEPTION RESPONSE FACT:

Shark fin soup is a status symbol “I order shark fin in entertaining very Many shark species are being hunted to extinction for the and serving it shows respect to important clients.” luxury of a bowl of soup. Finning wastes up to 99% of the one’s guests. shark and this wastage is jeopardizing food security and livelihoods around the world. Declining shark populations could also have catastrophic effects for marine ecosystems and mean lower catches of other fish in the future. Fierce competition for shark fins among criminal gangs has led to widespread corruption, gangland wars and contract killings.

Shark fin soup is highly nutritious. “Deep sea fishes are safer because they Sharks, like other long-lived predatory fish, accumulate are less affected by environmental high levels of mercury in their tissues, and tests have shown pollution.” shark fins to contain mercury at concentrations harmful to humans. Mercury is highly toxic and causes damage “It must be nutritious, as it is low fat and primarily to the brain and spinal chord, especially in is expensive.” developing foetuses. It can also cause male infertility.

Shark ﬁn soup is indisputably high in protein and low in fat; however, nutritional analysis shows that in comparison with other common – and far cheaper – foodstuffs, it is nothing special. For example, a bowl of chicken soup contains more fat and less iron than an equivalent serving of shark ﬁn soup, but more calcium, carbohydrate, protein and energy .

Shark fin has many medicinal “Helps fight cancer.” It is widely believed that sharks don’t get cancer and eating properties. shark fin soup or crude extracts of shark cartilage can “Shark fin soup has anti-aging prevent and even cure cancer. Recent research has shown properties.” that sharks do get cancer (including in their cartilage) and eating shark cartilage or fin has absolutely no effects “Good for skin and boosts energy levels.” among cancer sufferers.

Sharks are vicious killers – they “If you don’t kill others, others will kill Of the 490 species of sharks, fewer than 30 (just 6%) are would eat us if given the chance. you. It’s a natural law.” known to attack humans. So far this century, an average of 5.5 people have been killed by sharks each year; in “Sharks are ferocious animals that attack comparison, more than 100 million sharks are killed by humans.” humans every year – tens of millions for their ﬁns alone. D I A

40 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? Conclusions & Recommendations

WildAid concludes WildAid recommends Measures to conserve sharks to date have focused entirely on To assist in shark management, demand reduction programs are managing the supply. As long as the high prices and high needed now in key consumer countries. China, as the world’s biggest levels of demand for shark products, fins in particular, are not market for shark fin, is best placed to influence this situation. In addressed, such measures are likely to have limited success. addition, there should be a major international effort to raise WildAid found there is little or no awareness of the threats to awareness of the threats to sharks and to discourage the ongoing sharks among consumers or of the waste involved in finning expansion of consumption of shark products. Alternatives to shark or the extent of illegal fishing for sharks. fin soup should be actively promoted.

FAO recommends WildAid concludes WildAid recommends

Control access of There is an urgent need to assist some Marine Reserves must be protected as a matter of urgency with fishing vessels to developing countries in preventing international financing if necessary. If properly patrolled, they are shark stocks. illegal fishing within their coastal among the few areas where sharks are assured of protection. waters, as few have the resources to Establishing which areas need closing during particular seasons and monitor and control the waters under identifying and protecting shark pupping and nursery grounds should their jurisdiction which can extend also be priorities. It will also be necessary to police such restrictions. 200-miles out to sea. Developed fishing nations should support these efforts financially.

Decrease fishing Many fisheries managers lack basic Basic research is urgently to be carried out on catch levels, effort and effort for any information to establish whether or composition. In the interim, a highly precautionary approach must shark fishery not a fishery is sustainable. Evidence be taken to quota-setting, area closure, bycatch reduction, species where catch is often clearly indicates sharks are protection, and other management measures. Sharks will face unsustainable. being overfished. The “boom and increasing environmental pressures from pollution, global warming, bust” history of directed shark ozone depletion, etc. Allowances should be made for these factors fisheries and the fact that sharks’ life when using a precautionary approach to shark management. history makes them extremely vulnerable to overexploitation means that sustainability should be assumed the exception, not the rule.

Improve the Finning not only wastes 95–99% of The UN should enact an immediate ban on shark finning in utilization of the shark, but also makes accurate international waters. Some shark species migrate many thousands of sharks caught. monitoring of shark catches miles. Only an international ban would make sense for these species. impossible. The burgeoning demand Some nations already prohibit finning nationally; while similar bans for shark fin over the past 20 years is do not exist in other countries’ waters and on the high seas, their very likely to continue. If it does, the attempts to conserve sharks are compromised. practice of taking sharks for their fins Governments should enact immediate bans on finning in national will become even more widespread. waters. Enforcement could be made appropriate to the needs and As human populations grow, this resources of developing countries. Specific ports could be designated constitutes a truly shameful waste of for shark landings, and on-board and beach-side observers could the world’s resources. also be used.

Improve data Few countries record accurate catch Data collection must be vastly improved in almost all countries. collection and data by species, which is the first step Catch and landings data should be species-specific. On-board monitoring of toward ensuring sustainable fisheries. observers could be used more extensively in monitoring catch effort, shark fisheries. volumes and composition.

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 41 FAO recommends WildAid concludes WildAid recommends

Train all concerned Many fishing communities have their All fisheries should, at the very least, use species identification cards. in identification of own local names for shark species. Simple, inexpensive, waterproof cards showing the main species in shark species. There is no provision for these to be the area with local names have been produced by Taiwan, for translated into commonly recognized example. names.

Facilitate and Top shark specialists are concerned by Research at all levels is an urgent priority, and not only for little encourage the paucity of data on individual known species. Governments of major shark-fishing nations should research on little species, particularly those known to put far more resources into research on species and stock known shark be heavily fished. abundance, shark biology, reproductive behavior, migration patterns species. and responses to fishing pressure. Further research should also be done on predator-prey relationships and potential ecosystem changes following shark declines.

Obtain utilization Numerous factors hamper this Trade and utilization data should be species-specific and should be and trade data on process: poor reporting, the cash submitted to the FAO and to CITES in a timely manner. The Convention shark species. basis of many transactions, complex on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) export and re-export arrangements has designed a plan to track toothfish shipments in international trade. and aggregation of data. These data The system is based on certificates of origin and could equally be are not compiled on a national (let applied to the international fin trade. The FAO should be more pro- alone an international) basis. active in its data-gathering. Many nations keep detailed import and export data, in some cases making it available to the public.

Ban or restrict Unnecessary shark bycatch is caused Highly damaging fishing methods must be limited or prohibited if certain destructive by inappropriate fishing gear and/or the goals of fisheries managers are to ensure sustainable fisheries fishing practices, destructive deployment of fishing and maintain employment in the fishing industry. There should be e.g. limit length of gear. considerable reduction of shark bycatch through the use of longlines, etc. appropriate and selective fishing gear and fishing techniques.

States that Many developing nations currently Wealthier nations, particularly those that have benefited contribute to lack the resources to manage their considerably from trade in shark products, should support these fishing mortality shark fisheries sustainably. countries’ research and management efforts financially. For example, on a species or a Hong Kong has undoubtedly profited more than any other city or stock should nation from the shark fin trade and yet has put few, or no, resources participate in its into sustainable management of sharks. It is in the long-term interest management. of consumers that sharks are managed sustainably.

42 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? Annex: Additional data

WORLD IMPORTS OF WORLD EXPORTS OF WORLDWIDE PRODUCTION OF SHARK FIN 1976-2004 SHARK FIN 1976-2004 SHARK FIN 1976-2004 World imports of shark fin 1976-2004

16,000 7,000 7,000

14,000 6,000 6,000

12,000 5,000 5,000

10,000 4,000 4,000 s s s n n s s s n o o e e e o t t n n n

8,000 t

n c c n n i i c o o o i r r T T r t t T t e e

e 3,000 3,000 m m m 6,000

2,000 2,000 4,000

1,000 1,000 2,000

0 0 0

6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2

LEADING SHARK FIN LEADING SHARK FIN LEADING SHARK FIN Leading shark fin producers 2004 IMPORTERS 2004 EXPORTERS 2004 PRODUCERS 2004 1% 1% 1% 1% 14% 2% 13%

3% 3% Leading shark fin producers 2004 40% 3% 7% 43% Indonesia Singapore 36% 13% India CHINA HONG KONG 12% El Salvador CHINA HONG KONG Taiwan 58% 8% Other 3%

3% Malaysia China 43% Indonesia Indonesia Indonesia Malaysia China Taiwan Taiwan Indonesia Indonesia Singapore Thailand 13% United Arab Emirates Taiwan Taiwan India Other Malaysia Thailand 12% United Arab Emirates El Salvador Malaysia 26% Other Japan Taiwan 15% Japan Other Other Other

26% China’s shark fin and Finned whitetip reef shark meat imports ﬁgures in metric tons

Shark ﬁn Shark meat 1992 3,023 172 1993 3,080 541 1994 3,375 547 1995 Not reported 772 1996 4,363 485 1997 4,389 577 1998 4,236 313

1999 4,062 1,215 S N O I S I

2000 4,646 3,953 V E C A P

2001 3,129 2,801 S R E N N I

2002 3,555 5,198 /

D N

2003 A

3,818 4,713 L K C I R

2004 4,776 5,135 T S . M

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 43 24. Boncompagni, T. (2003) Details: For Fashionistas a 46. Applegate, S.P., F. Soltelo-Macias and L. Espinosa- new skin game. Wall Street Journal, 1 August 2003. Arrubarrena (1993) An Overview of Mexican Shark Fisheries with Suggestions for Shark Conservation in References 25. Ferreira, A.G, Faria, V.V., de Carvalho, C.E.V., Lessa, Mexico. US Natl. Mar. Fish. Serv. NOAA Tech.Rep. R.P.T. & da Silva, F.M.S. (2004) Total mercury in the NMFS 115: 31–37. night shark, Carcharhinus signatus in the Western Equatorial Atlantic Ocean. Brazilian Archives of Biol. 47. Rose, D. (1998) Shark Fisheries and Trade in the and Tech. 47(4): 629-634. Americas. Vol.1. TRAFFIC North America. 1. Taylor, L. ed. (1999) Sharks, Weldon Owen. 26. Järup, L. (2003) Hazards of heavy metal 48. Last, P.R. & Stevens, J.D. (1994) Shark and rays of 2. Compagno, L.J.V. (2000) “Sharks, fisheries and contamination. British Medical Bulletin 68(1): 167- Australia. CSIRO Australia. Melbourne, Australia. biodiversity”, Sharks 2000 Conference. Hawaii. 21-24 182. February. 49. Ward, P. & Myers, R.A. (2005) Shifts in open-ocean 27. Knobeloch, L., Steenport, D., Schrank, C., & fish communities coinciding with the commencement 3. Stevens, J. January 2001. Personal communication. Anderson, H. (2006) Methylmercury exposure in of commercial fishing. Ecology 86: 835-847. 4. Fowler, S. June 2000. Personal communication. Wisconsin: A case study series. Environmental Research 101: 113-122. 50. Shepherd, T.D. & Myers, R.A. (2005) Direct and 5. Bonfil, R. et al. (2005) Transoceanic Migration, Spatial indirect fishery effects on small coastal Dynamics, and Population Linkages of White Sharks. 28. Grandjean P., Weihe, P., White, R.F., Debes, F., Araki, elasmobranches in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Science Vol. 310 No. 5745: 100-103 S., Yokoyama, K. (1997) Cognitive deficit in 7-year-old Ecology Letters, 8: 1095-1104 children with prenatal exposure to methylmercury. 6. Fowler, S.L. & Cavanagh, R.D. (2005) “Species Status Neurotoxicology and Teratology.19: 417–428. 51. Bascompte, J., Melián, C.J. & Sala, E. (2005) Reports”, in Fowler, S.L. et al (comp. and ed.) 2005. Interaction strength combinations and the Sharks, Rays and Chimaeras: The Status of 29. Oken, E., Wright, R.O., Kleiman, K.P., Bellinger, D. overfishing of a marine food web. Proc. Natl. Acad. Chondrichthyan Fishes. Status Survey. IUCN/SSC Amarasiriwardena, C.J. Hu, H., Rich-Edwards, J.W. & Sci. USA 102: 5443-5447. Shark Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland Gillman, M.W. (2005) Maternal fish consumption, 52. Dulvy, N.K., Freckleton, R.P., & Polunin, N.V.C. and Cambridge, UK. Chapter 8, pp 213-392. hair mercury, and infant cognition in a US cohort. Environmental Health Perspectives 113(10): 1376- (2004) Coral reef cascades and the indirect effects of 7. Clarke, S. et al. (2005) “Socio-economic Significance of 1380. predator removal by exploitation. Ecology Letters 7: Chondrichthyan Fish”, in Fowler, S.L. et al (comp. 410-416. and ed.) 2005. Sharks, Rays and Chimaeras: The 30. Dickman, M.D. & Leung, K.M.C. (1998) Mercury and 53. Gaffney, R. (2000) “Tourism and jaws”, Sharks 2000 Status of Chondrichthyan Fishes. Status Survey. organochlorine exposure from fish consumption in Conference. Hawaii. 21-24 February. IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland, Hong Kong. Chemosphere 37(5): 991-1015. Switzerland and Cambridge, UK, pp 19-47. 31. Leung, T.Y., Choy, C.M., Yim, S.F., Lam, C.W. & 54. International Shark Attack File http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/sharks/ISAF/ISAF.htm 8. TRAFFIC (1996) The World Trade in Sharks: A Haines, C.J. (2001) Whole blood mercury concentrations in sub-fertile men in Hong Kong. Compendium of TRAFFIC’s Regional Studies. 55. International Shark Attack File (2005) Worldwide TRAFFIC International. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 41(1): 75-77. Shark Attack Summary http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/sharks/statistics/2005 9. Kanda, Mayuri (2000) Personal communication. 32. Choy, C.M.Y., Lam, C.W.K., Cheung, L.T.F., Briton- attacksummary.htm 10. Clarke, S. (2004) Understanding pressures on fishery Jones, C.M., Cheung, L.P., Haines. C.J. (2002) 56. Burgess, G. (2000) Personal Communication. resources through trade statistics: a pilot study of Infertility, blood mercury concentrations and dietary seafood consumption: a case-control study. four products in the Chinese seafood market. Fish 57. Wildlife Conservation Society (2005) Largest Fish and Fisheries 5: 53-74 International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 109: 1121-1125. Requires Global Protection. http://www.placenciabreeze.com/archives/2005_Arch 11. Vannuccini, S. (1999) Shark utilization, marketing ive/June_05/june_05_conserva.htm and trade, FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 389, Food 33. Adams, D.H. & McMichael, R.H. (1999) Mercury and Agriculture Organisation of the UN, Rome, 1999. levels in four species of sharks from the Atlantic coast of Florida. Fishery Bulletin 97(2): 372-379 58. Burgess, G.H. (2005) “Ecotourism”, in Fowler, S.L. et al (comp. and ed.) 2005. Sharks, Rays and Chimaeras: 12. Anon (1999) Mr X, Confidential fin trade source. The Status of Chondrichthyan Fishes. Status Survey. Personal Communication. 34. de Pinho, A.P., Guimaraes, J.R.D., Martins, A.S., Costa, P.A.S., Olavo, G., Valentin, J. (2002) Total IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland, 13. Anon (2000) Confidential Singapore chef, November Mercury in Muscle Tissue of Five Shark Species from Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Chapter 4, pp 32-34. 2000. Personal Communication. Brazilian Offshore Waters: Effects of Feeding Habit, Sex, and Length. Environmental Research 89(3): 250- 59. Shark Specialist Group (2002) A Statement by the 14. Wu, Victor. January 2000. Personal Communication 258. IUCN Species Survival Commission’s Shark Specialist Group (SSG), March 2002 15. Brawand, E. (2000) “Bite Into Shark’s Fin”. Taipei 35. Storelli, M.M., Ceci, E., Storelli, A., Marcotrigiano, http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/organizations/ssg/gal Times Online Edition, 10 November 2000. G.O. (2003) Polychlorinated biphenyl, heavy metal aplat.htm and methylmercury residues in hammerhead sharks: 16. WildAid, 2003. Shark Finning: Unrecorded Wastage contaminant status and assessment. Marine Pollution 60. WWF (2005) Whale shark ecotourism contributes to on a Global Scale. WildAid, San Francisco, USA. Bulletin 46: 1035-1048. Filipino economy http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/what_we_do/mari 17. Musick, J.A. & Bonfil, R. (2005) Management 36. Food Standards Agency (2006) www.food.gov.uk ne/news/index.cfm?uNewsID=23534 techniques for elasmobranch fisheries. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 474. Food and Agriculture 37. US Food and Drug Administration & US 61. Quiros, A. (2005) Whale Shark “Ecotourism” in the Organisation of the UN, Rome, 2005. Environmental Protection Agency (2006) What You Philippines and Belize: Evaluating Conservation and Need to Know about Mercury in Fish and Shellfish, Community Benefits. Tropical Resources Bulletin, 18. Clarke, S. (2007) Personal Communication. http://www.epa.gov/ost/fishadvice/advice.html Volume 24, Spring 2005. Yale Tropical Resources Institute. 19. Ostrander, G.K., Cheng, K.C., Wolf, J.C., Wolfe, M.J. 38. Menasveta, P., Inkong, S. & Charoensri, P. (2002) (2004) Shark cartilage, cancer and the growing threa Mercury Contents in Dried Shark Fins in Bangkok 62. Gruber, S. H. (2000) “Life style of sharks”, Sharks of pseudoscience. Cancer Research 64: 8485-8491. Markets. Journal of the Royal Institute of Thailand 2000 Conference. Hawaii, 21-24 February.

20. WildAid & China Wildlife Conservation Association 39. Maxwell Sr., Kauluwehi, C. (2000) “The cultural 63. Compagno, L.J.V. (1990) “Shark exploitation and (2006) Wildlife Consumption Survey & Public aspects of sharks”, Sharks 2000 Conference, Hawaii, conservation”, in US National Marine Fisheries Attitude to Wildlife Consumption, Report in China. 21-24 February. Service, NOAA Technical Report, NMFS 90, pp 391- WildAid Internal Report. February 2006. 414. 40. Âme, Senegalese ﬁsher, Ngor, Senegal, October 2000. 21. Gingras D., Boivin, D., Deckers, C., Gendron, S., Personal communication. 64. Priede, I.G. et al. (2006) The Absence of Sharks from Barthomeuf, C., Beliveau, R. (2003) Neovastat - a Abyssal Regions of the World’s Oceans. Proceedings novel antiangiogenic drug for cancer therapy. Anti- 41. WildAid (1999) Shark Fisheries in the UAE and India. of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, Volume Cancer Drugs 14(2): 91-96. WildAid Internal Report. April 1999. 273, Number 1592 / June 07, 2006. Pages 1435 - 1441.

22. Æterna Laboratories. 2003. Æterna Laboratories 42. Comagno et al. (2005) “Subequatorial Africa” in 65. FAO (2006) Capture production 1950-2004 reports Phase III trial results in renal cell carcinoma Fowler, S.L. et al (comp. and ed.) 2005. Sharks, Rays with Neovastat. Æterna Laboratories News Release, and Chimaeras: The Status of Chondrichthyan 66. Bonﬁl, R. (1994) Overview of World Elasmobranch 24 September 2003. Fishes. Status Survey. IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Fisheries. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 341. FAO of http://www.aeternazentaris.com/en/page.php?p=60& Group. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, the United Nations, Rome. q=46 UK, Chapter 7, pp 113-131. 67. Clarke, S. et al. Global estimates of shark catches 23. Food and Drug Administration (2004) U.S. District 43. WildAid (1999) Shark Fisheries in Kenya. WildAid using trade records from commercial markets. Judge issues permanent injunction against Lane Labs- Internal Report. July 1999. Ecology Letters, 9: 1115-1126 USA, Inc. and orders ﬁrm to refund money to purchasers of illegally marketed unapproved drugs. 44. Ismael, O. (1999) Beach leader, Ngomeni village, 68. MRAG (2005) IUU Fishing on the High Seas: Impacts FDA News Release, July 13, 2004. Kenya. Personal communication. on Ecosystems and Future Science Needs http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/NEW0108 69. Clarke, S. (2004) Shark Product Trade in Hong Kong 6.html 45. Abdulrazak, M., Fishmonger, Malindi, Kenya (1999) Personal communication. and Mainland China and Implementation of the CITES Shark Listings. TRAFFIC East Asia, Hong Kong, China.

44 T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 70. National Marine Fisheries Service (2001) United 92. Clarke, S.C., Magnussen, J.E., Abercrombie, D.L., 114. Manire, C.A., Gelsleichter, J., Rasmussen, L.E.L. & States National Plan of Action for the Conservation McAllister, M.K. & Shivji, M.S. (2006) Identiﬁcation Cortes, E. (2001) “Infertility in Bonnethead shark, and Management of Sharks. of Shark Species Composition and Proposition and Sphyrna tibura, in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico may be Proportion in the Hong Kong Shark Fin Market caused by endocrine disrupting chemicals in the 71. ICES (2006) Sharks in trouble? Based on Molecular Genetics and Trade Records. environment”. American Elasmobranch Society http://www.ices.dk Conservation Biology Volume 20, No. 1, 201-211 Meeting 2001.

72. IUCN (2006). 2006 Red List of Threatened Species 93. Shivji, M.S., Chapman, D.D., Pikitch, E.K. & 115. Carsolini, S., Focardi, S., Kannan, K., Tanabe, S., www.redlist.org Raymond, P.W. (2005) Genetic profiling reveals illegal Borrell, A. & Tatsukawa, R. (1995) Congener Profile trade in fins of the great white shark, Carcharodon and Toxicity Assessment of Polychlorinated Biphenyls 73. Castro, J.I, Woodley, C.M. Brudek, R.R. 1999. A carcharias. Conservation Genetics 6: 1035-1039 in dolphins, Sharks and Tuna collected from Italian preliminary evaluation of the status of shark species. Coastal Waters. Marine Environmental Research Vol. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 380, Food and 94. New Scientist, 2 July 2005. Shark fin soup dropped 40 (1): 33-53. Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, from Disney’s menu. Rome. 116. Stevens, J.D., Walker, T.I., Cook, S.F., Fordham, S.V. 95. IUCN (2003) Shark Finning. Information Paper, June (2005) “Threats Faced by Chondrichthyan Fish”, in 74. Hareide, N-R. et al. (2005) A preliminary Investigation 2003. Fowler, S.L., R.D. Cavanagh, M.Camhi, G. H. Burgess, on Shelf Edge and Deepwater Fixed Net Fisheries to G.M. Cailliet, S.V. Fordham, C.A. Simpfendorfer and the West and North of Great Britain, Ireland, around 96. Hurghada Environmental Protection and J.A. Musick.(comp. and ed.). 2005. Sharks, Rays and Rockall and Hatton Bank. ICES CM 2005/ N:07. Conservation Association (HEPCA) (2006) Chimaeras: The Status of the Chondrichthyan Fishes. www.hepca.com Status Survey. IUCN/SSC shark Specialist group. 75. Schleussel, V. & Barker, M.J. (2005) Managing global IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. shark fisheries: suggestions for prioritising 97. WildAid The End of the Line? Shark News Update. Chapter 5, pp 48-57. management strategies. Aquatic Conservation: WildAid, San Francisco, USA. Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 15: 325-347. 117. Greenpeace (2006) The Trash Vortex, 98. Fowler, S.L. & Cavanagh, R.D. (2005) “International http://oceans.greenpeace.org/en/our- 76. Bonfil, R. (2000) The problem of incidental catches of Conservation and Management Initiatives for oceans/pollution/trash-vortex sharks and rays, its likely consequences and some Chondrichthyan Fish”, in Fowler, S.L. et al. (comp. possible solutions. Sharks 2000 Conference, Hawaii, and ed.) 2005. Sharks, Rays and Chimaeras: The 118. Sazima, I., Gadig, O.B.F., Namora, R.C. & Motta, F.S. 21-24 February. Status of Chondrichthyan Fishes. Status Survey. (2002) Plastic debris collars on juvenile carcharhinid IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland, sharks (Rhizoprionodon lalandii) in southwest 77. Ferreira, C. (1998) to Bruce McCoubrey, Personal Switzerland and Cambridge, UK, pp 58-69. Atlantic. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 44: 1147-1149 Communication. 99. CITES (2004) “Conservation and Management of 119. Safina, C. (1998) “Recreational fishing and 78. Tudela, S., Abdelouahed, K.K. Maynou, F., El Sharks”, Thirteenth meeting of the Conference of the conservation”. Living Oceans Program, National Andalossi, M. & Guglielmi, P. 2005. Driftnet fishing Parties, Bangkok, 2-14 October 2004. Audubon Society, USA, in Shark News 11. Newsletter and biodiversity conservation: the case study of the of The IUCN Shark Specialist Group, July 1998. large-scale Moroccan driftnet fleet operating in the 100. United Nations General Assembly (2005) Oceans and Alboran Sea. Biological Conservation 121: 65-78. the law of the sea – Sustainable fisheries, including 120. Pritchard, E.S. (2005) Fisheries of the United States – through the 1995 Agreement for the Implementation 2004. National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of 79. Stevens, J.D., Bonfil, R., Dulvy, N.K. & Walker, P.A. of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention Science and Technology (2000) The effect of fishing on sharks, rays, and on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating http://www.st.nmfs.gov/st1/fus/fus04/index.html chimaeras (chondrichthyans), and the implications to the Conservation and Management of Straddling for marine ecosystems. ICES Journal of Marine Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, and 121. Grandy, J.W. (2005) The Shark Killers. The Boston Science, 57: 476-494 related instruments – Report of the Secretary-General Globe, August 3, 2005.

80. Baum, J.K. & Myers, R.A. (2004) Shifting baselines 101. CITES, viewed May 2006, http://www.cites.org 122. Paxton, J. (2003) Shark meshing program in need of and the decline of pelagic sharks in the Gulf of urgent review. Nature Australia, Spring 2003. Mexico. Ecology Letters, 7: 135-145. 102. CMS, viewed May 2006, http://www.cms.int http://www.ids.org.au/~cnevill/marineSharkMeshNS W_Paxton.htm 81. Kelleher, K. (2004) Discards in the world’s marine 103. Willock, A. & Lack, M. (2006) Follow the leader: ﬁsheries. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 470. Food Learning from experience and best practice in 123. EJF (2004) Farming the Sea, Costing the Earth: Why and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, regional ﬁsheries management organizations. WWF we must green the blue revolution Environmental Rome. International and TRAFFIC International. Justice Foundation, London, UK.

82. EJF (2005) What’s the Catch? Reducing Bycatch in EU 104. Alvaro, M. (2006) Soccer Star Weighs in to Save 124. Baum, J.K., Myers, R.A., Kehler, D.G., Worm, B., Distant Water Fisheries. Environmental Justice Sharks. EcoAmericas, 24 January. Harley, S.J. & Doherty, P.A. (2003) Collapse and Foundation, London, UK. Conservation of Shark Populations in the Northwest 105 Tye, A. (2000) Acting Director of the Charles Darwin Atlantic. Science Vol. 299: 389-392 83. WWF (2006) Shark-Saving Magnets Pull in $25,000 Foundation. In Larry Rohter. New York Times News Prize for American from International Smart Gear Service. In The Oregonian 28 December 2000. 125. Myers, R.A. & Worm, B. (2003) Rapid worldwide Competition. WWF Newsroom. depletion of predatory fish communities. Nature Vol. http://www.worldwildlife.org/news/displayPR.cfm?pr 106 Cailliet, G.M. & Camhi, M. (2005) “Northeast Pacific”, 423: 280-283 ID=281 in Fowler, S.L. et al (comp. and ed.) 2005. Sharks, Rays and Chimaeras: The Status of Chondrichthyan 126. Fishbase, viewed June 2006, http://www.fishbase.org 84. Le Page, M. (2005) Beware – shark repellent testing in Fishes. Status Survey. IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist progress. New Scientist, 26 February 2005. Group. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, 127. Stow, A. et al. (2006) Isolation and genetic diversity of UK. Chapter 7, pp 172-186. endangered grey nurse shark (Carcharias taurus) 85. Amorim, A.F., Arfelli, C.A., & Fagundes, L. (1998) populations. Biology Letters. 1:1, -1 Pelagic elasmobranchs caught by longliners off 107. Ambiente Ecologico (2003) Modern-Day Pirates southern Brazil during 1974–97; an overview. Marine Plunder Saltwater Booty near Costa Rica’s Fabled 128. The Marine Group, Environment Australia (2000) & Freshwater Research 49:621-32 Cocos Island, http://www.ambiente- Draft Recovery Plan for Grey Nurse Sharks in ecologico.com/ediciones/2003/086_01.2003/086_Pub Australia. 86. Dunn, R. (1999) Transcript of the testimony of licaciones_AmbienTema-in.php3 Russell Dunn, Asst. Director, Ocean Wildlife 129. Australian Goverment, Department of the Campaign, before the House of Representatives 108. UNEP-WCMC. Coiba National Park, World Heritage Environment and Heritage (2005) Death or injury to Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife Sites, viewed May 2006. http://www.unep- marine species following capture in beach meshing and Oceans. 21 October 1999. wcmc.org/index.html?http://sea.unep- (nets) and drum lines used in Shark Control wcmc.org/sites/wh/coiba.html~main Programs 87. SEAFDEC (2006) Shark Production, utilization and http://www.deh.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/nomi management in the ASEAN region (2003-2004), 109. Government of Western Australia (2005) Illegal shark- nations/shark-control-programs.html Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center, fin boats coming too close for comfort. Media Bangkok, Thailand. Statement, 28 September 2005, 130. Black, R. (2006) World’s biggest fish shrinking. BBC http://www.mediastatements.wa.gov.au News Website, Tuesday 17 Janaury 2006. 88. WildAid (2005) At Rock Bottom: the declining sharks of the Eastern tropical Pacific. WildAid, San 110. McCloughlin, R. (2007) Australian Fisheries 131. Clarke, S. (2006) The World Shark Fin Trade & Francisco, USA. Management Authority, Personal Communication. China’s Role. Presentation for the International Shark Conservation Meeting, Beijing, 7th November 20 89. IUCN Shark Specialist Group (2003) IUCN Shark 111. EJF (2005) Party to the Plunder: Illegal fishing in Specialist Group Finning Statement. Guinea and its links to the EU. Environmental Justice http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/organizations/ssg/ssg Foundation, London, UK. finstatementfinal2june.pdf 112. EJF (2005) Pirates and Profiteers: How Pirate Fishing 90. FAO (2006) Fisheries commodities production and Fleets are Robbing People and Oceans. Environmental trade 1976-2004 Justice Foundation, London, UK.

91. Clarke, S. (2006) Personal Communication. 113. Simpfendorfer, C. (2000) “Environmental threats to sharks”, Sharks Conference 2000. 21-24 February.

T H E E N D O F T H E L I N E ? 45