Saving Seafood

Shark Fin Sale Bans Would Hurt U.S. Fishermen Without Improving Shark Conservation, Management

February 19, 2020 — The following was released by NOAA Fisheries:

The United States has some of the best managed shark fisheries in the world. Our laws and regulations prevent overfishing while maximizing commercial fishing opportunities and the economic value of our shark fisheries. Part of our science-based management is allowing fishermen to sell both the meat and fins of sustainably harvested sharks.

For decades, U.S. fishermen have been barred from removing shark fins and discarding the body at sea, a practice known as shark finning. With a limited exception for smooth dogfish, sharks must be brought to shore with their fins naturally attached. Under current federal law, fishermen and dealers can then remove and sell the fins along with other parts of the shark.

Preventing shark fishermen from selling these fins would not improve domestic conservation and management. We are required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act to prevent overfishing in our shark fisheries regardless of whether fins are allowed to be sold or not. A ban on the sale of shark fins would only regulate which parts of a sustainably harvested shark can be used.

U.S. federal or state bans would also have little impact on the global fin market.The United States exports approximately 1 percent of all globally traded shark fins, and we import an even smaller percentage.

The largest impact of a national shark fin sale ban would fall on our fishermen. Because they have a higher economic value than shark meat, fins are key to any commercial shark operation. If fishermen were required to discard sharks fins that were harvested sustainably under strict federal management, they would have less income.

Domestic bans on harvesting fins would also undermine our efforts to promote international dialogue and negotiations on sustainable shark management. Responsibly participating in the global fin trade allows the United States to showcase our strong conservation and management practices overseas. Dive deeper into misperceptions surrounding the shark fin trade in a new feature story.

NOAA Fisheries is dedicated to preventing overfishing of our shark fisheries. As a global leader in conservation, we are also committed to advancing sustainable shark management practices around the globe. Both of these priorities are possible thanks to our transparent, rigorous, and science-based management process.

How Our Shark Finning Ban Helps Us Sustainably Manage Shark Fisheries

February 12, 2020 — The following was released by NOAA Fisheries:

Shark finning is often pointed to as a leading cause of decline in global shark populations. The wasteful practice has been illegal in United States federal waters for decades, though. Guy DuBeck, a highly migratory species fisheries management specialist, breaks down how a federal ban on shark finning works and the role it plays in protecting shark populations.

What is shark finning?  

Shark finning is the practice of removing a shark’s fins and dumping the rest of the body at sea.

It’s important to remember that shark finning happens at sea. Fishermen or dealers who remove fins after bringing the whole shark to shore are not “finning” sharks. They are sustainably selling all parts of the shark.

How did shark finning come to be?

Fins are easier to transport than a whole animal. And while there are commercial uses for the rest of the shark, their meat is less profitable. That’s why some foreign fishermen will remove fins at sea.

Why would fishermen want to harvest fins at all? 

Shark fins have a higher economic value than both shark meat and some other fish. So, fin sales are key to any commercial shark fishing operation. By selling the fins, U.S. fishermen are also making use of all parts of a sustainably harvested shark.

When did the United States ban shark finning? 

NOAA Fisheries first banned shark finning in the Atlantic Ocean in 1993 because of the role it played in overfishing. Congress extended the ban to any vessel in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone with the Shark Finning Prohibition Act of 2000 and Shark Conservation Act of 2010.

Under these laws, fishermen must bring a shark to shore with all its fins naturally attached. That specific requirement is what makes our ban so effective. For example, it prevents fishermen from finning one shark and using staples or tape to attach the fins to another carcass on the boat. This is a loophole other countries have had to deal with.

Read the full release here

MSC accepts inconsistency of shark finning rules, bans prosecuted clients

February 5, 2020 — As NGOs and industry come together to issue a joint letter to the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) asking for urgent action on shark finning, the MSC told Undercurrent News it is moving rapidly to act on this.

Tim Davies, head of fishery standards for MSC, said the organization was committed to playing its part in “eliminating the abhorrent practice” of shark finning.

It is already prohibited by the MSC fisheries standard, with a “fins naturally attached policy one of the options for certified fisheries” to demonstrate shark finning is not taking place. Alternatively, fisheries can show there is strong regulation, documentation and external validation in place, he said.

“Since these requirements were introduced in 2013, we’ve seen certified fisheries deliver significant improvements to eliminate shark finning. However, we recognize there have been inconsistencies in the application of our requirements. As a result, two separate reviews are underway to provide greater certainty shark finning is not taking place within MSC certified fisheries,” he said.

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

Roughly 1,400 pounds of shark fins seized in Florida

February 4, 2020 — Inspectors with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced on Monday they had seized roughly 1,400 pounds of shark fins hidden in boxes in Florida last month.

The agency said the shipment of severed fins arrived on Jan. 24 at Miami Port of Entry in roughly 18 boxes. They were believed to have come from South America and likely bound for Asia.

Officials estimated the total value of the fins to be worth between $700,000 and $1 million. They waited until Monday to share the news outside of law enforcement.

“The goal of this seizure is to protect these species while deterring trackers from using U.S. ports as viable routes in the illegal shark fin trade,” said Christina Meister, a spokeswoman for the Fish and Wildlife Service, according to the Miami Herald.

Read the full story at Fox News

Updated Shark Tagging Atlas Provides More than 50 Years of Tagging and Recapture Data

February 3, 2020 — The following was released by NOAA Fisheries:

A 52-year database of the distribution and movements of 35 Atlantic shark species revealed new information on some of the least known species. It also uncovered a few surprises about where sharks go and how long they live.

Scientists collected data for sharks tagged and/or recaptured between 1962 and 2013. The sharks were found in the Atlantic Ocean and associated areas, including the Gulf of Mexico, the Caribbean Sea, and the Mediterranean Sea. Participants tagged a total of 229,810 sharks of 35 species and recaptured 13,419 sharks of 31 species in that time span. The scientific journal Marine Fisheries Review recently published the data.

This new atlas updates an earlier version covering 1962 to 1993 and adds information on 22 species. Detailed profiles are provided for 14 shark species, including bull and tiger sharks and smooth dogfish. The updated data significantly extended their known ranges and movements.

The Cooperative Shark Tagging Program is the largest and longest-running in the world. The program is a collaborative effort among recreational anglers, the commercial fishing industry, biologists, and NOAA Fisheries. Its goal is to study the life history of sharks in the Atlantic Ocean.

Initiated in 1962 by biologist and shark researcher John “Jack” Casey at the Northeast Fisheries Science Center, the original group of 74 volunteer anglers began participating in the project in 1963. Since then the program has expanded to include thousands of participants along the entire North American and European Atlantic coasts, including the Gulf of Mexico.

“The program’s long-term data has shown the importance of tagging large numbers of each species and recording information in a database to determine shark movements,” said Lisa Natanson, a shark researcher in the Apex Predators Program at the Northeast Fisheries Science Center’s Narragansett Laboratory in Rhode Island. For example, until the tagging program was 34 years old, no one knew that tiger sharks cross the Atlantic.

Read the full release here

Fishing for fun takes a massive bite out of marine life

February 3, 2020 — The volume of fish caught recreationally more than tripled in the 60 years to 2014, and a recent uptick in recreational shark hunting is damaging fragile populations.

The United Nations agency that documents fishing statistics almost exclusively monitors commercial fisheries. To quantify the impact of pleasure fishing, Dirk Zeller at the University of Western Australia in Crawley and his colleagues reconstructed the amount of fish caught annually in 125 countries. The researchers analysed reports from events such as fishing jamborees and gathered data on factors such as the number of licensed recreational fishers per state to scale up to a global estimate.

Read the full story at Nature

Mako Shark Populations Take Half-Century to Recover from Overfishing and Bycatch Kills

January 27, 2020 — An essay in the January newsletter of the Rhode Island Saltwater Anglers Association claimed that populations of shortfin mako sharks — a popular sport fish and a tasty offering on local menus — are “in crisis,” with fewer and smaller mako sharks being caught compared to 25 years ago.

The piece — on pages 8, 31, and 32 in the association’s newsletter — written by Long Island, N.Y., attorney Charles Witek, a recreational fisherman who identifies himself as a consultant on fisheries management issues, also criticizes the measures adopted to reduce shark mortality and the long timeline for rebuilding the population.

“Even if such reductions could be achieved, it will take about 50 years to return the shortfin mako stock to something resembling a healthy level of abundance,” Witek wrote. “Which, in turn, means that I and probably most of the people reading this article, will never see a healthy mako population in our lifetimes.”

Although shark biologists in southern New England disagree that makos are “in crisis,” those surveyed agree that the species is being overfished and that, even if targeted fishing for the species around the world was eliminated entirely, it would likely take at least several decades for the species to recover to healthy levels.

Read the full story at EcoRI

New Report Reveals Economic Impact of Recreational Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fisheries

January 22, 2020 — The following was released by NOAA Fisheries:

In November, NOAA Fisheries released the findings of two studies on the economic impact of recreational fisheries targeting Atlantic highly migratory species. When combined with other NOAA Fisheries research, these reveal that HMS recreational fishing contributes an estimated $510 million to the U.S. economy each year.

Atlantic tunas, sharks, billfish, and swordfish—together known as HMS—are popular targets for anglers. In 2018, we issued more than 20,000 HMS angling permits to fishermen living across the country. There were also more than 200 tournaments targeting Atlantic HMS that year.

To understand how this robust industry impacts our national economy, we asked 1,806 anglers to break down their fishing trip expenses. We also collected cost and earnings information from 73 tournament operators and spoke with 104 tournament fishing teams. Both surveys were conducted in 2016.

Anglers reported spending an average of $682 for a day of fishing for Atlantic HMS outside a tournament. Daily expenses were highest in the Gulf of Mexico. We estimate they spent $300 more on average there than in New England. Regardless of where they fished, though, anglers say boat fuel was their largest expense. Bait costs came in as a distant second, followed closely by groceries.

Read the full release here

Florida wades into the culture war over shark finning

January 17, 2020 — Florida lawmakers are getting support for a pair of bills that would ban the possession, import, export and sale of separated shark fins in Florida.

The legislation, HB 401 and SB 680, are designed to discourage the controversial and inhumane practice known as “shark finning”.

Finning is already illegal in the United States but is still practiced by other countries. It involves pulling a live shark out of the water, cutting off its fin and tail, and tossing the live shark back in the water where it will either suffocate or be eaten alive by other animals.

While Florida law prohibits the practice of finning, the shark fin trade is legal in the state and there are fins being imported from other countries where bans on finning aren’t in place.

And, while most people can agree that finning is bad and should be discouraged, there are differing opinions on whether banning the fin trade altogether is the right approach.

“The emotional side of this is people hear about finning and they think it’s awful, and it is awful, and they say let’s just stop the practice. That’s sort of a feel-good approach, unfortunately, I don’t think it’s going to be very effective in terms of solving the worldwide problem and it is going to punish the wrong people here at home,” said Dr. Bob Hueter, Director of the Center for Shark Research at Mote Marine Laboratory in Sarasota.

Read the full story at WTSP

To Save Endangered Sharks, You Sometimes Need to Kill a Few

January 9, 2020 — Sharks are some of the most fascinating, most misunderstood and most threatened animals in the world. Many scientists of my generation chose to study these amazing animals explicitly because they’re threatened, and because science can help; this was a major motivation for my choice to pursue a career as a marine conservation biologist, and a major influence in similar decisions by other shark researchers whom I surveyed. As we progress through our education, some of us are surprised to learn that effectively protecting entire species of sharks sometimes requires killing individual sharks—and many non-expert shark enthusiasts are outright shocked to learn this.

Every once in a while, this conflict between the goals of animal welfare and the goals of species-level conservation spill out into the world of social media, when non-expert shark enthusiasts discover that sometimes scientists work with fishermen to gather research samples from the sharks those fishermen have (legally) killed. This happened again recently, when just such a partnership was criticized on twitter by some non-experts.

The truth behind this ‘controversy’ is simple: many of the most important types of scientific data that we need to effectively monitor and conserve shark populations require lethal sampling. To quote a  2010 essay on this topic, “Although lethal sampling comes at a cost to a population, especially for threatened species, the conservation benefits from well‐designed studies provide essential data that cannot be collected currently in any other way.”

Nonlethal methods are being developed and should be encouraged (note: this paper about developing of nonlethal alternatives linked to above is co-written by my PhD supervisor and an Arizona State University colleague)., but they’re a long way from being ready for widespread deployment.

Read the full story at Scientific American