Saving Seafood

DAVID SHIFFMAN: The Case Against Shark Fin Trade Bans

May 15, 2017 — The following is an excerpt from a story published in Southern Fried Science on May 13:

The United States Congress is considering a nationwide ban on buying, selling, or trading shark fins. While several of my posts and tweets have briefly discussed my stance on such policies, I’ve never laid out my full argument in one post. Here is why I, as a shark conservation biologist, oppose banning the shark fin trade within the United States.  The short answer is that the US represents a tiny percentage of overall consumers of shark fin, but provide some of the most sustainably caught sharks on Earth, as well as important examples of successful management, to the world. This means that banning the US shark fin trade won’t reduce total shark mortality by very much, but will remove an important example of fins coming from a well-managed fishery while also hurting American fishermen who follow the rules. Also, a focus on these policies promotes the incorrect belief that shark fin soup is the only significant threat to sharks, and that addressing the tiny part of that problem locally represents the end of all threats. For the longer answer, read on. And for the case for shark fin bans, please see this guest post from Oceana scientist Mariah Pfleger.

Shark fin trade bans do not allow for a sustainable supply of shark fins to enter the marketplace, punishing American fishermen who are doing it right. Sustainable trade is incompatible with a total ban on trade, at least in the same place and time. The United States has some of the most sustainable managed shark fisheries on Earth. When these fisheries provide fins to the marketplace, it shows that fins can absolutely come from a well-managed shark fishery. This can be an important example for international fisheries negotiations and associated advocacy (e.g., “the United States manages their shark fisheries well, and so can you, here’s how.”) According to Dr. Robert Hueter of Mote Marine Laboratory, a nationwide ban on the shark fin trade “will cause the demise of a legal domestic industry that is showing the rest of the world how to utilize sharks in a responsible, sustainable way.” (And yes, sustainable shark fisheries absolutely can exist and do exist, although there are certainly many more examples of unsustainable shark fisheries.) Several experts in international fisheries negotiations have privately told me that the US has more negotiating power when we can say “manage your fishery sustainably like we do” instead of “you should manage your fishery sustainably, but we decided to stop participating in this market entirely”/ “we won’t buy your product regardless of how sustainable you make it.”

Most shark scientists, including me, prefer sustainable trade to banning all trade in general. As part of my Ph.D. research, I surveyed the members of the world’s largest professional societies focusing on sharks. 90% of respondents believe that when possible, sustainable fisheries exploitation is preferable to banning all exploitation or trade. (Shark fin bans themselves received the second-lowest support, and second-highest opposition, of any policy tool I asked about.)

Read the full story at Southern Fried Science

Sustainable Shark Alliance Applauds Recent Seizure of Illegal Shark Fins by Florida Wildlife Officials

April 4, 2017 – The Sustainable Shark Alliance (SSA), representing shark fishermen and dealers on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, calls for an investigation into the recent illegal shark finning incident reported last week near Key West.

The SSA vehemently opposes the reprehensible and illegal act of shark finning. U.S. domestic shark fishermen adhere to the legal and sustainable shark fishing quotas set by the National Marine Fisheries Service. The following was released by the SSA:

The Sustainable Shark Alliance, a coalition of shark fishermen and dealers along the Gulf and Atlantic coasts, applauds Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission efforts to combat unlawful shark finning in a reported enforcement action involving a Key West shrimp boat. Such alleged unlawful activities, where a shark’s fins are removed and its carcass is discarded, harm the legal and federally permitted shark trade by U.S. fishermen laboring under conservative catch quotas and strict anti-finning laws.

Shark finning has long been illegal, and shark finning in the United States is extremely rare. Given the frequency of at-sea and dockside enforcement inspections, this violation is clearly an outlier.

The SSA strongly urges state and federal law enforcement agencies to remain vigilant in their efforts to eliminate illegal activities, including identifying the would-be buyers and ultimate customers for the fins. The legal shark fishery is closely monitored: harvesters must report catches of individual sharks and total amounts landed, and buyers must have federal permits and report all sharks purchased to the federal government. Exports are also reported, though the SSA supports enhancing the system for tracking shark fins after they leave the dock.

“This reprehensible activity harms law-abiding U.S. fishermen,” said Shaun Gehan, attorney for the SSA. “While some groups will use this unfortunate incident to push an agenda of banning fin sales, the fact is such laws will not dissuade criminals as would meaningful penalties such as those now before the Florida Legislature.” Nearly all fins harvested in the United States are exported to China.

The ability to sell fins is essential to the economic survival of SSA members. On average, fins account for fifty percent of the value of the landed catch. Given restrictive harvest limits and the costs associated with operating fishing vessels, loss of fin income would make it unprofitable for the fishery to continue. This would harm U.S. fishermen and their communities, while boosting profits for foreign fishermen not subject to the same strict conservation laws and oversight.

Sharks are managed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) under a very restrictive quota system that has been in place since the mid-1990s. As a result, populations of large and small sharks have been sharply increasing.  In its last survey, NMFS found the most sharks in the survey’s 29-year history, 65 percent more than the one prior.  Given the success of domestic shark management, efforts to ban fin sales have been opposed by fishery managers and leading scientists specializing in sharks.

Air China bans shark fin cargo, reflecting dramatic shift in attitudes

January 9, 2017 — BEIJING — Air China has become the first airline in mainland China to ban shark fin cargo, marking a dramatic shift in attitudes toward trade in endangered wildlife here and throwing a lifeline to shark populations threatened with imminent extinction.

The news, released late Friday, came just a week after China announced plans to ban its domestic ivory trade, a landmark decision of vital importance in ending an epidemic of elephant poaching in Africa.

It marks the country’s gradual transformation from being the biggest source of the problem — as the largest market in illegal wildlife products — to becoming a major part of the solution.

“Scientists estimate that fins from up to 73 million sharks a year are used for shark’s fin soup, with much of the trade in shark fin destined for China,” said Alex Hofford, a wildlife activist from the conservation group WildAid in Hong Kong, which applauded Air China for taking “an ethical stance” to help protect sharks and oceans. “It’s a bold move, and this is likely to have a huge and lasting impact on shark populations and marine ecosystems worldwide.”

Hofford said the decision by China’s national flag carrier “puts FedEx to shame” — the U.S. multinational courier company has resisted repeated calls to take a similar step, despite a petition signed by 300,000 people, and an appeal from a coalition of animal welfare conservation groups who expressed concerns that its service could be used to carry fins of endangered shark species. That would be a violation of the Convention on Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).

Read the full story at the Washington Post

Selling shark fins now banned in Rhode Island

January 3, 2017 — PROVIDENCE, R.I. — Selling shark fins is now banned in Rhode Island as it is in Massachusetts.

A law took effect Sunday that makes it a crime to own or sell a shark fin unless it’s used for scientific research or in preparing a shark for ordinary consumption.

Rhode Island became the 11th state to ban shark fin sales when Democratic Gov. Gina Raimondo signed legislation into law in June. Hawaii was the first in 2010. Massachusetts banned the sales in 2014.

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission voted in August to approve a new rule that allows fishermen to bring smooth dogfish, a type of shark, to land with fins removed, as long as their total retained catch is at least 25 percent smooth dogfish.

The rule change better incorporates the Shark Conservation Act of 2010 into management of the dogfish, staff with the fisheries commission said. Dogfish are harvested from Rhode Island to North Carolina, and are among the many shark species that fishermen bring to land in states from Maine to Texas.

Read the full story at the Gloucester Times

‘Indiana Jones’ shark gains protection at Cites meeting

October 4, 2016 — Known for its long whip-like tail, the threatened Thresher shark is among a number of marine species given extra protection at the Cites meeting.

Devil rays and Silky sharks have also been given additional safeguards.

These shark species have seen huge population falls over the past decades, due to the demands of the shark fin trade.

Devil rays are valued for the gill plates which are used in Chinese medicine.

Campaigners believe the safeguards under Cites will make a real difference to these species survival.

Few sharks protected

It’s estimated that around 100 million sharks of all types are killed in commercial fisheries – with their fins often destined for markets in China and Hong Kong.

Despite the scale of the fishing, there are just eight species given some protection under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites).

At the previous Cites meeting in Thailand in 2013, hammerhead, oceanic whitetip and porbeagle sharks were added to Appendix II as well as all species of manta rays.

Appendix II means that trade is allowed but it has to be shown to be sustainable.

Read the full story at the BBC

ALEX RILEY: The Shark Fin Ban That Should Be Banned

September 23, 2016 — Every year, fishers haul up to 73 million sharks onto boats across the world’s oceans and trim their fins. In many cases, the rest of the body is thrown overboard to swim without propulsion. And without propulsion, no life-giving water flows over the sharks’ gills. They drown.

This is shark finning, a cruel practice that feeds the demand for the Chinese delicacy of shark fin or fish wing soup. From boat to bowl, it is tasteless.

To curb the death toll [of sharks], the US Congress plans to introduce the Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act of 2016. The bill was originally outlined to Congress by the advocacy organization Oceana* as part of a growing movement to outlaw all shark fins across the US. If passed, to sell or possess shark fins would be a punishable offense. It’s the ultimate protection from being made into soup.

Strange, then, that people who dedicate their lives to protecting sharks are vehemently opposed to the bill.

In a letter to Senator Bill Nelson, Bob Hueter, director of the Center for Shark Research at the Mote Marine Laboratory in Sarasota, Florida, outlines his objections. At best, it’s unnecessary, he says. At worst, it harms rather than helps shark populations.

For one, shark finning is already illegal in the United States (as well as in Canada, Australia, and Europe). Returning to shore with fins that have no corresponding body is like docking straight into a court hearing. According to Lindsay Davidson, a PhD candidate from Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, this fins-attached policy “is the gold standard for ensuring finning is not occurring.”

But fishing for sharks within a set quota is completely legal, at least for now. This allows commercial fishers to sell the meat just like any other fish, as well as the skin, liver oil, and, yes, the fins. It’s not finning, it’s heavily managed fishing; a practice that is sustainable and makes use of the entire shark rather than just its most coveted cuts.

The proposed ban would change that. The meat could still be eaten or sold, but any fins would have to be tossed overboard, thrown into the trash, or used for display or research purposes by a museum, college, or university, to avoid breaking the law. “It’s going in the opposite direction from the goal of any fishery,” says Hueter. That is, to “utilize as much as you can, and throw away as little as you have to.”

Read the full opinion piece at Hakai Magazine

Shark scientist opposes fin trade ban

August 8, 2016 — On Friday, Dr. Robert E. Hueter, Director of Mote Marine Laboratory’s Center for Shark Research, wrote to Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) in “strong opposition” to S. 3095, The Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act.

“S. 3095 will be ineffective in making a dent in the global problem of shark overfishing,” Dr. Hueter wrote. “Instead, it will punish the wrong people by putting American commercial fishermen, who are fishing for sharks legally and sustainably, out of business.”

Dr. Hueter added that the U.S. has “one of the best systems in the world for shark fisheries management and conservation,” and that S. 3095 would promote wastefulness in the U.S. shark fishery.

Read the full letter here

Fishing regulators tighten rules for removing shark fins

August 3, 2016 — Regulators are tightening restrictions on the last species of shark whose fins can be removed at sea by fishermen in the U.S.

Smooth dogfish are the only sharks from which American fishermen can remove fins at sea. Many other sharks can be hunted, but fins can’t be removed until the sharks are processed on land.

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission voted Tuesday to approve a rule that allows fishermen to bring smooth dogfish to land with fins removed, as long as their total retained catch is at least 25 percent smooth dogfish. Right now, they can bring ashore as many as they want.

The rule change better incorporates the Shark Conservation Act of 2010 into management of the dogfish, said the staff with the fisheries commission. The dogfish are harvested from Rhode Island to North Carolina, and are among the many shark species that fishermen bring to land in states from Maine to Texas.

Sharks are also hunted for their meat, but their greatest value is in their fins, which are used to make shark fin soup.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the Portland Press Herald

Vote coming on rules about removal of dogfish fins

July 28, 2016 — OLD LYME, Conn. — Interstate fishing regulators will vote on changes to rules that govern removal of fins from some coastal sharks by fishermen.

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission is considering an amendment that would allow fishermen to bring smooth dogfish to land with fins removed as long as their total retained catch is at least 25 percent smooth dogfish.

Current rules say fishermen can bring ashore as many dogfish with fins removed as they choose. The vote is scheduled for Tuesday.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the New Jersey Herald

Shutting Down ‘Shark Finning’: US Fishermen Promise a Fight

July 26, 2016 — American fishermen are digging in for a fight over a proposal to shut down the vestiges of the U.S. harvest of shark fins, prized for soup and traditional medicine in Asia, and send a message to the rest of the world.

The traditional “finning” of sharks — in which they are pulled out of the water, have their fins sliced off and are discarded into the sea, often still alive but unable to swim — is already illegal in the U.S., but fishermen are still allowed to hunt sharks and have their fins removed during processing on land.

A bill backed by Sen. Cory Booker, a New Jersey Democrat, and others promises to ban the sale and possession of shark fins to ensure U.S. fishermen and seafood dealers no longer participate in the global fin trade. Supporters say the bill would close loopholes left open by measures passed in 2000 and 2010 to protect sharks.

“America can become a global leader by shutting down the domestic market for shark fins,” Booker said.

Jeff Oden, a former North Carolina shark fisherman who left the business about 10 years ago to focus on other species amid mounting regulatory pressure, said the legislation is well intentioned but won’t stop international finning, and could actually increase pressure on sharks.

“Other countries that are less likely to be as sustainable as us will fill our void,” Oden said.

Shaun Gehan, a lawyer who represents shark fishermen, said the inability to sell fins would devastate the shark fishing business, which he described as conservatively managed already. Eleven states already have laws against the sale of shark fins, though shark fin soup can still be found on the menu in Chinese restaurants in many states.

Read the full story from the Associated Press in the Portland Press Herald