COARE: successful regional ocean conservation group expanding nationally

Even a casual look at the ocean conservation community and one finds that there are hundreds of non-profit organizations, each addressing an issue or issues of concern and applying their best available resources to bring about solutions.

At least that's what you hope for.

COARE (The Center for Ocean Awareness, Research and Education) has in just a few years, gone from being a small regional non-profit in the San Francisco area to an organization that is being recognized nationally.  Under the direction of its founder and executive director, Christopher Chin, COARE has managed to rack up some impressive wins, particularly in its work nationally with politicians and policy makers regarding shark fin legislation.  It is an organization worth looking into when you consider those last minute, end-of-the-year donations.

I tend to put ocean conservation groups into three tiers.  The lower tier is made up of many of the smaller groups, formed by well-intentioned individuals who either lack the resources or the strategy to move themselves beyond the position of supporting troop morale.  Collectively, they can have an impact in keeping a movement fired up at the grass roots level but, for one reason or another, many can't make the transition into the mid-tier.

Mid-tier organizations have worked hard to get to a point where they now are working with the real forces of change: policy makers, government officials, and even cavorting with the "enemy" in the hopes of winning over those political and economic forces that would oppose them.  Mid-tier groups often have to work the hardest of all three tiers, as they try to expand under limited means and sometimes find themselves working alongside top tier groups; and those efforts can further tap their economic resources. 

Top tier groups are the ones with the greatest resources (financial or otherwise), the celebrities, and the clout to be heard.  Their results are very tangible and quantifiable - or they should be if they deserve our dollars in support.

Christopher Chin and his team have worked hard and taken COARE right into that mid-tier level.  It is a challenging place to be, wrestling with the mid-tier pressures of expansion: expanding the organization and expanding the economic base.  However, Christopher sees it as an exciting position to be in and is making plans to carry COARE well beyond a regional entity.

I had the opportunity to interview Christopher about the origins of COARE, what it has accomplished, and where it is going.  You can begin to appreciate the amount of work involved in propelling an ocean conservation group forward by what he has to say.

RTSea: As founder and executive director of COARE (The Center for Oceanic Awareness,
Research, and Education), what motivated you to take the step to start your own
organization? What did you see that you could provide that other organizations
perhaps couldn't?

Christopher Chin: This is a great question, Richard, and one that I think every organization should ask itself.
 
The initial inspiration for COARE occurred nearly eleven years ago while I was diving and filming in Fiji.  It's actually a story that I put in writing for the first time on our blog, and I encourage you to check it out for the full story.  To make a long story short, I had an epiphany after a meaningful and personal interaction with a bull shark.  Afterwards, when I got out of the water, I decided that I needed to do something to make a difference.

I began to collaborate with other conservation-minded folks to figure out how we could be most impactful.  After a great deal of brainstorming, data-collecting, and consideration, we realized several things.  First, the power of the individual and each individual's influence were both often underestimated.  We also realized that there were two major roadblocks to any given individual's involvement: knowledge or awareness, and belief that his or her actions will make a difference.

A person unaware of an issue or situation could not possibly be inspired to get involved - and of course, if that person believed that his or her involvement was only symbolic and would not have an impact, then that person would be less enthusiastic about being involved.

We saw that most other organizations catered to those already indoctrinated in the conservation world, and saw that there was a need to enlighten and inspire the average person, and then to show that person how easy it is to make a difference.  We like to joke that "awareness" is our middle name.

RT: COARE is based in San Francisco. Are the majority of your projects and
efforts focused regionally, in the San Francisco Bay or northern California area?

CC: COARE participates in many issues that are local to the greater San Francisco Bay Area and throughout California because it's relatively easy for us to do so.  We're volunteer run and operated, and most of our volunteer resources are concentrated in California.   However, ocean issues are of worldwide concern, and also a worldwide responsibility, so we are also very involved at the national and global levels.

RT: Regionally-speaking, what are some of the major marine issues and how are you
addressing those issues and the implications they represent for local residents?

CC: In the San Francisco Bay area, there is a natural tendency for people to take notice of the San Francisco Bay, local estuaries, and the state waters of the Pacific Ocean.  It's relatively easy for residents so close to waterways to see and understand the impacts they have on the marine environment.

A great example of how that translates into issues and action is our policy work around single-use plastic bags. 

As you may already know, the City of San Francisco was the first city in the United States to implement a ban on plastic bags.  Back in 2007, this was landmark legislation, and many cities and counties throughout the U.S. - and around the world - have since followed suit with their own bans.

We've learned quite a lot over the years, and have an improved approach to these issues.  We wanted to strengthen that original ban so that it would apply to a greater number of establishments, and so that it would address a number of previously exploited loopholes.  We worked with a number of other organizations to support an improved and expanded ordinance, and we're proud to say that the improved San Francisco ban, now one of the strongest in the nation, went into effect last month.

Industry-backed opposition often talks about how such policy will kill jobs, cause hardship, or will simply be ineffective.  At both the governmental level and on the ground, we strive to show people that these claims do not hold water.  Of course, now that these policies are in effect in various places, we can see the differences; we see less single-use waste, and people everywhere realize that it's really not an imposition to bring your own bag. 

We're based in Oakland, and we're naturally looking forward to the countywide ban going into effect next year.  Other cities and counties around the Bay Area and throughout California have similar bans, or are considering them, and we're looking forward to re-proposing and heralding a statewide measure.

RT: Many small or mid-size environmental groups will focus their resources on
grass roots initiatives. Do you focus on that target audience or do you also
work with government or regulatory agencies regarding policy making?

CC: One of COARE's principal tenets is that every single person has the power to effect change, and we wholeheartedly encourage that.  We work diligently on grassroots initiatives because we believe that conservation efforts must become more popular and ubiquitous, and that such a wave will have tremendous power to influence the way the world works.

As important as grassroots efforts are, we also firmly believe that it's necessary to build a sound framework to focus conservation efforts and provide direction for our leaders.  With that in mind, we also do a fair amount of work with governmental, regulatory, and legislative bodies to create, support, and promote sensible and effective policies.  In fact, we've become a recognized leader in environmental policy work, particularly with regard to shark conservation.

RT: Safe to say that most ocean conservation organizations have the best of
intentions and are quite adept in citing and detailing the various marine issues
we face. But my position has been that the organizations that deserve the
financial support of the general public (particularly in these challenging
economic times) are those who can provide definitive results, not just talk. So,
here's an open forum; what are some of COARE's quantitative and qualitative results?

CC: COARE has seen and shared in a number of amazing victories this past year.  In many of them, we played a notable role, but it's important to recognize that in some cases we were part of a broader team.  While our support and involvement in such efforts was integral, we were not alone in those achievements.

In some efforts, however, we stood apart, or took more of a leadership role - and we're extremely proud of our results.

Similar to last year's shark fin ban in California (in which we were intimately involved), we worked on a number of new statewide proposals this past year.  Of the all statewide bills, the only one that succeeded was the measure we sponsored and led; SB4119, which prohibits the sale, possession, and distribution of shark fins in the State of Illinois, saw tremendous success.
 
As we were wrapping things up with AB376 in California last year, a number of people asked me, "What's next?"  When I told them I had my sights on Illinois, many looked at me quizzically... what most people don't realize is that after California and New York, Illinois has the largest market for fins, and Chicago's Chinatown is the fourth largest in the United States.  What we're addressing here is the consumption side of the conservation equation, and the fin market is not about ports or fishing efforts or landings; it's about the demand.  Yes, Illinois was a big victory!
 
We attribute our success to several things.  For one, we had some key partners like The Humane Society (HSUS) and Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) who helped with our lobbying efforts and legislative strategy.  We're eternally grateful for their support and for their faith in our leadership and enthusiasm.

We also started off with an extremely solid bill.  We crafted the language with comprehensive ideas and goals, and it was able to withstand the scrutiny of both chambers without any substantive changes.

Another key factor in our success, and a tremendous success in its own right, is that we won the support of the Chinese community in Chicago.  In the end, we had the restaurants on board as well as the Chinese press.  In fact, some of the most positive Chinese-language articles to date covering the shark fin issue were a direct result of our campaign.

While our Illinois campaign was the only statewide initiative to reach the finish line this year, I was honored to provide testimony for a number of other measures.  In fact, my appearance before legislative bodies has been extremely persuasive, and nearly every committee before which I've testified has voted unanimously in support.

If we can convince legislators who live about as far from the sea as one can get, (some of whom have never even seen the water) that sharks and the ocean matter to them and their constituents, we can do anything!


RT: A lot of my readers are shark advocates. Can you explain what the goals and
specific components are of your "Shark Safe" program?

CC: The Shark Safe Certification Program is designed to increase public awareness of the need for shark conservation and to reduce the sale, use, and trade of shark products like shark fins, shark cartilage, and shark liver oils.

Since sharks are universally recognizable, the shark-based logo draws attention and intrigue and immediately inspires interest.  People who aren't familiar with it are drawn to ask about it - allowing for teaching opportunities.  For consumers already familiar with the program and its aims, Shark Safe certification is designed to give discerning customers confidence that their choices help protect sharks, and thus the ocean.

While The Shark Safe Program might seem to be creature specific, the Program looks at ocean conservation in a comprehensive ecosystems manner.  The use of fishing gear and practices that result in shark bycatch generally tend to be wasteful, harmful to non-target species, or destructive to habitat.  Encouraging more sustainable and sound fishing practices is better not just  for sharks, but for the ocean as a whole.

RT: There might be a passionate, committed ocean conservationist reading this who
dreams of building the next Conservation International, Oceana, or WildAid. But
we must all walk before we can run. What advice would you give to anyone who is
considering starting an ocean conservation group?

CC: One of the recent trends in conservation that I find most encouraging is that of collaboration.  Many successful campaigns have seen the use of diverse coalitions to ignite broader public and legislative support for different policies and practices.  It is such collaboration that I believe is key to the success and viability of an organization and its programs.  We must realize our common goals and work around any differences to move forward.

If someone is interested in starting their own organization, it's likely for one of two reasons:  They believe that what they want to do is not already happening; or, that it's already happening, but they want to do it differently, or better.

If it's for the former reason, I'd encourage you to make sure that what you envision is really not already being undertaken.  If there are programs or organizations already working on the issue, I'd encourage you to join or support what's already in the works. Reinventing the wheel, or designing and building a new one from scratch, takes an enormous amount of time and effort - and those resources could potentially directly serve an effective program already in existence.

However, if you're sure that you can make a difference in a new and unique way, please follow your dream, your heart, and your passion, and you'll find that there is no greater reward than knowing that you are changing the world.

RT: Where do you see COARE heading in the next few years?

CC: It's encouraging to see COARE's growth over the years, and to see that we've been embraced and welcomed in the conservation community.  New organizations are often viewed with skepticism, and the "new kid on the block" is seldom taken very seriously. COARE has continuously and consistently made meaningful impacts - all while keeping the integrity of our mission and ideals in plain view - and people have taken notice.

COARE does a tremendous amount on a very slim budget.  What most people don't realize is that we're entirely volunteer led and run.  Not a single penny has gone to our management or administration since day one.  However, we are now at a point where our growth, both organizationally and in terms of impact, could leap forward exponentially with increased capacity.  We're ready to take on staff and expand our already stable and proven process.

If you already like who we are now, what we stand for, and what we do, you're going to love us as we continue to build and grow.

Source: COARE

Pacific Shark Populations In Decline: new study provides hard numbers on pelagic species

The results of a recent study published in Conservation Biology paints a disturbing picture of ongoing decline of sharks in the Pacific Ocean.  Now, to many who are familiar with the subject of shark finning and overfishing, this does not necessarily sound, unfortunately, like anything new - it is what many of us have been fighting about for some time.  However, it's an important report because it covers a wide period of time, has specific numbers, and notes that some areas in shark conservation that receive considerable public support may not be as effective as hoped.

The study by the Secretariat of the Pacific Community in New Caledonia, headed up by Dr. Shelley Clark, covers a fifteen-year period, examining catch records from several fisheries throughout the Pacific, and shows significant declines in the catch rates for blue, mako, oceanic whitetip sharks, along with declining average size in oceanic whitetip and silky sharks (following the same fate of tuna and billfish).  These are all, basically, pelagic or open water sharks that operate outside of most national ocean boundaries in international waters.

Oceanic whitetips were shown to be declining annually at a rate of 17%.  Based on just that number alone, that would mean that oceanic whitetips in Pacific waters have 5-6 years left.  Unfortunately, that could be accelerated because of how animal populations can reach a "tipping point" where their declining numbers can no longer be supported by any means of natural reproduction and the population suddenly collapses and they plummet to oblivion.

Blue sharks were also reported to be declining at a rate of 5% in the North Pacific.  Blue sharks are a bit more abundant and more productive, but they, along with the oceanic whitetip are highly sought after by commercial shark fishing operations.  Physically, these two species have particularly large pectoral fins so, quite literally, fishermen get more bang for the buck with a shark with large fins, in open international waters and, at least with the blue shark, are slightly more abundant.

The New Caledonia study goes on to report that, in international waters, shark fishing for fins or the entire carcass, has proved to be a difficult practice to regulate due to insufficient enforcement, complex laws regarding fin-to-carcass ratios (the result of compromises by international agencies to commercial interests), and no follow-through enforcement or prosecution at the domestic level.  And then there is the impact of illegal fishing or longline fishing where numbers of sharks are caught but were not necessarily targeted.  Time and time again, we find that laws or regulations that are in place mean nothing if there is insufficient enforcement and prosecution.  Pardon the pun, but too often the laws have no teeth.

As reported in a recent press release, Sonja Fordham, president of Shark Advocates International, had this to say about the report and the current state of regulations, "These findings underscore conservationists' messages that most finning bans are not properly enforced, and alone are not sufficient to reverse shark population declines.  Prohibitions on at-sea removal of shark fins not only bolster finning ban enforcement, but also facilitate collection of species-specific fisheries data that are key to refining population assessments and informing the establishment of urgently needed shark catch limits."

This is why it is critical for all shark conservationists to focus some of their interest, energy, and passion into prodding and supporting those organizations that work on behalf of sharks in the international arena.  It may seem a bit removed and you may feel a bit ineffectual compared to regional efforts like state or local shark finning or fishing bans, but, remember, most of the ocean is in international jurisdiction.  If we do not pressure these worldwide agencies to act responsibly, based on current scientific information, then we will find ourselves putting band aids on our local waters, while the open oceans are hemorrhaging badly.

Source: PRNewsire       

Defining Shark Finning: scientist champions complete shark fishery management

This past Monday, David Shiffman, who goes by the nom de plume "WhySharksMatter" on the blog Country Fried Science, posted an interesting scientific perspective on the issue of shark finning.  Concerned with how some shark advocates view the various facets of commercial shark fishing by lumping them all together as one big inhumane practice, David set about defining what is and is not shark finning.

Shark finning, specifically, is when a shark is caught, its fins cut off and the remaining live animal is discarded and thrown overboard to drown.  This is the inhumane and wasteful practice that has so many shark supporters fuming.

However, David wants to point out that if the shark is caught, finned, and the carcass kept on board, that does not necessarily constitute shark finning in the "classic" sense. And if the shark is caught and the fins are retained, with the idea that it will be processed further onshore, that does not fall under the heading of shark finning.

Three different commercial fishing techniques with different levels of waste and economic allure (a boat full of only fins brings in much more for its catch than a boat whose hull is full of whole shark carcasses).

David makes these distinctions because, as a scientist, he is concerned with the movement underway to pass shark fin prohibition legislation, as has been done in Hawaii and along the west coast of the U.S. with more states following suit.  It is viewed by some as perhaps a myopic approach to the problem of shark conservation and David supports a more comprehensive approach that includes shark fishery management including science-based quotas, selective species, and proper monitoring and enforcement.

I can understand his point of view in that shark fin bans do not address the whole range of issues regarding shark conservation.  In fact, this "silver bullet" approach - one that is often taken by societies because it can appear to be an easy fix - can often prove to be potentially counter-productive as it can be that once the legislation is passed, people falsely begin to believe the problem is now solved.  No more problem, we just banned it.

Shark conservation, like many other ocean conservation problems, is multi-faceted.  And it is governed by market demand (which fin bans do not address), scientific data, and commercial or economic interests (which can sometimes undermine the power and merit of the science-based positions).  However, while shark fin bans may not be the answer unto themselves, they can be a strong galvanizing component in a series of measures that constitute a complete shark fishery management policy.  That is, if you believe that sustainable management of today's populations of commercially-viable species is possible.  I, for one, have my doubts.

I take the position that commercial shark species have been sufficiently over fished to the point where the possibility of exercising sustainable catch levels no longer exists.  At best, moratoriums hold the faint chance that at some later date, many years down the road, a very limited shark fishery could perhaps be maintained.  I have always heeded the advice of Dr. Sylvia Earle wherein she sees eating fish, any fish, taken wild from the ocean amounts to eating "bushmeat."  Long ago, society realized that hunting had to be replaced with raising cattle and poultry to meet our needs; hunters and gatherers became farmers.  And from that historical perspective I have come to view sustainable seafood with a measure of skepticism.  It is like putting your finger in the dike to stop the leak, but someday the water will eventually reach the top and spill over.

If, according to David, shark advocates who promote shark fin bans are being a bit naive, I am perhaps guilty of being the same when it comes to my belief that aquafarming will ultimately be the answer.  Aquafarming, whether taking place on land or at sea, is currently fraught with problems ranging from pollution from concentrated fish waste and pharmaceuticals to unappealing cost-per-pound ratios (how much fish food is required to produce a pound of saleable fish).  It's the dreamer in me that says, if we can shift dollars from subsidizing or supporting a commercial fishing industry that is ultimately doomed to collapse and put those monies into addressing the challenges to developing safe and cost-efficient aquafarming, then perhaps sharks and a whole host of other marine species may have a fighting chance at survival.

David Shiffman's post is an interesting read and I recommend you take a look at it.  He presents the information as a primer followed by a brief quiz as to what constitutes finning based on a series of photos.  The string of comments that follow his post are also worth reading.  While shark fin prohibition legislation may rally the troops under an easy-to-support banner, it is not the definitive answer.  However, I believe that all other measures, while having some positive effect on the problem, will ultimately be outweighed by the basic reality that to meet the needs of a growing worldwide population, mankind will need to raise its seafood like it does its fruits, vegetables, beef, and poultry. 

Source: Country Fried Science

Tuna Fishing & Sharks: industry group gets tuna companies to oppose shark finning

Organizations that represent the commercial tuna fishing industry have often times been difficult groups to work with when it comes to limiting or curtailing fishing so as to preserve tuna populations that have dwindled to frighteningly low numbers in many parts of the world.  ICCAT (International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna) has been the subject of considerable criticism because of its repeated moves to maintain high catch levels in the face of recommendation after recommendation from scientists and conservation groups to reduce their catch levels significantly.  So, when any tuna organization makes a move that could be considered as truly positive for conservation, it deserves mention.

The International Seafood Sustainability Foundation (ISSF), an organization that works with the tuna industry in improving sustainability through fact-finding research, has taken a step forward on behalf of sharks.

On the ISSF website, it was announced, "This year we asked the tuna industry to take a step toward ending the practice of shark finning, the act of removing a shark’s fin while discarding the carcass at sea. It violates the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation’s (FAO) Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries as well as several other resolutions adopted by the FAO, other international marine organizations and national governments. It violates our principles too.

Right now, all ISSF Participating Companies have adopted a policy pledging not to do business with vessels that fin. They’re asking vessel owners to adopt the same policy by September of this year."

The ISSF was formed in 2008, bringing together scientists, industry leaders, and other experts in conservation to act as an advisory council to the tuna industry by making recommendations based on the latest evidence.

"ISSF stands for scientific fact-finding to identify best practices and ecologically sustainable solutions, using direct action to compel governments and industry leaders to support that scientific reasoning while advocating for continued improvement in all tuna fisheries. We believe that it is imperative to take a evidence-based approach that puts the focus on the fishery pushing governments and industry to favor more responsible, sustainable practices on the water."

There are 20 participating companies in the foundation including many of the major commercial tuna fishing brands like Starkist, Chicken of the Sea, and Bumble Bee.  As is often the case with industry-supported groups, positions taken by ISSF can be subject to a degree of skepticism.  After all, their primary goal for advancing the cause of sustainability is, fundamentally, the preservation of their business, and that can adversely affect the objectivity of the "evidence" upon which a position is based.

However, this new policy regarding shark finning seems pretty clear on the face of it.  Now, we need to see if the ISSF can actually deliver on their pledge.  And while they are at it, a bold policy regarding limiting the levels of legally-caught tuna while ensuring that participating companies do not do business with any illegal tuna fishing operations wouldn't be a bad idea.

Source: ISSF        

Illegal Shark Fins: officials arrest fishermen and not where you might expect

Two local fishermen got their comeuppance when they were arrested on April 8th for having on board their fishing boat a total of 2,073 shark fins. Government officials said that the catch represented as many as 529 sharks (which included 11 whole sharks they had on board).

The fishermen had the fins stored in a hidden compartment in the bow of the ship, which means they were aware that their catch was illegal. The limit for sharks in the waters they were apparently fishing in is 33. So, they were off by only a mere 496 sharks.

Hung Anh Tiet and Rick Nguyen, both from Texas, face fines totaling more than $26,000 and potentially 2 months in jail. Seems they're getting off pretty light compared to the sharks.

The interesting facet to all this is where this took place. Far away in the South Pacific, perhaps? Or maybe in the Mediterranean or Northeastern Atlantic? Try Louisiana. Right smack dab in U.S. waters, in an area that has been both trying to recover from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and wrestling with overfishing concerns of other Gulf fish species.

Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Enforcement reported that law enforcement officials board the vessel Lady Lyanna in the Delta National Wildlife Refuge in Venice, Louisiana. In a wildlife refuge no less.

Just two local fishermen. 529 sharks. Now imagine what could be carried out by a large commercial fleet. Can't blame the sharks for biting back every once in a while. . . while they still can.

Source: MailOnline
Source: Lone Star Outdoor News

EU Shark Fin Ban: proposal to land whole sharks could put a squeeze on shark fisheries

Making the rounds of many of the news outlets today is some good news offered by the European Union. Earlier this month, meeting in Brussels, the European Commission, siding with the opinions of 27 member nation fishery ministers, proposed amending EU regulations on shark fishing by recommending a total ban on shark finning both within EU waters and by all EU-registered vessels worldwide. Today, the Council of the European Union gave its approval of the measure.

While EU regulations have already prohibited shark finning, the actual execution was riddled with loopholes and special permits, all originally intended to promote commercial shark fishing management. However, monitoring and enforcement was difficult to attain and so, ultimately, a complete ban was deemed best.

As good as this all sounds, in reality it is an incremental step. Properly permitted vessels will still be able to take sharks, but they will be required to land them whole - fins attached. This is a disadvantage to the boat operators as whole shark carcasses will fill up a boat's hold with low value meat compared to the more highly prized shark fin. It could very well prove to be enough of an inducement for many boats to move out of the shark fin business altogether, finding it no longer economically worthwhile.

The proposed ban represents both a move by the EU to better monitor the shark fishing industry and to put the squeeze on what is viewed as an industry that would eventually collapse due to declining shark populations. While Asia is often criticized for its growing market demand for shark fin, it is the EU that happens to be the largest exporter of shark fins worldwide. As an example, according to some reports, the hammerhead shark has all but become extinct in the Mediterranean.

The EU fishery ministers are also seeking support for a measure that would ban the practice of discarding fish that do not meet qualifications or are commercially undesirable. What they are proposing is a major assault on bycatch. In essence, if you caught it, you keep it. And it could ultimately force fishing vessels to either utilize any and all approaches that would minimize bycatch (better fishing techniques, nets or hooks) or seek markets for catches that may not be as profitable. As reported by the Associated Press, the European Commission says that up to half of the whitefish and 70 percent of the flatfish caught by fisheries is discarded.

This proposal faces some stiff resistance from several member nations, particularly France and Spain, so time will tell as to whether it succeeds, But for now, the shark fin ban seems to be on track. The proposal awaits a first reading in the European Parliament before being formalized into law.

A positive step in a comprehensive, but complicated, strategy for shark conservation - addressing the dealers of shark fin products by simplifying shark fishery management policy and, in so doing, indirectly hitting them where it hurts most: the bottom line.

Source: Boston News
Source: Courthouse News Service

Industrial Shark Fishing: shark conservation must do battle with Goliath

Shark conservation is a tough sell. I've said that before. For all it's groundswell popularity in the last few years, it continually suffers from a primal hesitation people have to fully embrace it. There are passionate advocates but in the larger scheme of things, we are still a small segment of the total population. But some progress is being made.

Over the past few years, we have seen shark sanctuaries established in a few island nations and several states in the U.S. have initiated shark fin regulations or bans. This is all good news and it represents a step in the right direction in trying to impact the market for shark fins and shark-related products.

However, the next challenge is also the most formidable one: taking it to an international level that confronts the powerful economic realities of the shark finning industry. This is where highly-placed influence peddlers work the back room deals to maintain the status quo. And from an ecological standpoint, this is where the real damage is taking place.

The Pew Environment Group has a series of photographs, freely available for media use, that are staggering in their illustration of the scope of the problem. Looking at these photos, taken in Taiwan, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that it would be literally impossible for a species whose reproductive rate is low, as is the case with sharks, to be able to survive such industrial-level harvesting. The photo at the top of this post and the two below were taken by Shawn Heinrichs for the Pew Environment Group:

According to The New York Times, four of the leading nations involved in commercial shark finning are Taiwan, Indonesia, India, and Spain. And several developing nations assist by providing some of the boats and the crew - at bare subsistence-level wages. And that brings up another challenge: if world opinion were to succeed in curtailing the practice, we would also have the responsibility of providing an alternative source of income for these low-paid workers and fishermen. For them, feeding their families is a much greater priority than preserving sharks.

Several nations that provide sanctuary protections for sharks unfortunately offer these safeguards in name only as they do not have the resources available to enforce their regulations. A recent example is the slaughter of 2,000 sharks in Colombia's Pacific marine wildlife sanctuary by commercial boats, reportedly of Costa Rican origin. With no Colombian naval vessels in sight, it was reported that up to 10 boats entered the protected waters, freely taking hammerhead, Galapagos, and whale sharks.

While generating grass roots-level advocacy is important, shark conservation must now move forcefully into the international arena, getting organizations like IUCN, CITES, ICAAT, and the United Nations to wake up to the realities of what is happening in international waters. It will not be easy. Those industrialists who benefit from the shark have a lot at stake; they will fight hard. And international diplomacy by its very nature is painfully slow. So, the reality may be that, long before we run an oil platform dry or see sea levels noticeable rise due to climate change, we may witness the extinction of many species of shark.

Therefore, shark conservation, as a movement, must focus its efforts not only on general public awareness but must also develop strategies to take on the industry directly on a global level. It may be akin to David facing Goliath, but according to legend, David won.

See more photos of industrial shark finning at the Pew Environment Group website.
Read an overview of the shark finning industry in the New York Times.
Read about the recent slaughter of sharks in Colombia in the Guardian.

Shark Week & Conservation: the time of year when hype, reality, and rational voices vie for our attention

It's summertime, August is approaching, and that means it's time for Discovery Channel's Shark Week. This ratings bonanza for Discovery (over 30 million viewers last year) continues to thrill a large segment of the general public while infuriating many pro-shark activists with program titles like Deadliest Waters or Anatomy of a Shark Bite. There's no doubt that Discovery tries to have it both ways by providing a measure of conservation content (they actually did a rather well-balanced piece on shark conservation for Discovery News - see below) combined with programs that pander to the malevolent killer shark stereotypes. Discovery seems to have found a balance that allows them to have their cake while eating their vegetables too.



During this time period, sales of other shark-related films (like my first documentary, Island of the Great White Shark) enjoy a momentary surge; press reports of shark sightings and human-shark interactions increase in frequency; and shark advocates roll their eyes and wring their hands in frustration.

Case in point would be the following promotion for a Shark Week program picked up by outdoor writer Pete Thomas for GrindTV. South African photographer Chris Fallows has made a career filming sharks and is known for his striking images of great white sharks leaping into the air when ambushing prey. He is part of a Shark Week program titled Great White Invasion - Immediately sounds ominous, doesn't it? Chris is attempting to debunk some of the myths regarding the ferociousness of these apex predators by approaching one with a paddleboard.



The shark is curious, no doubt, but appears to realize that the board and its rider are neither prey (a seal or sea lion) nor something to scavenge, like a dead whale carcass. It's in shallow water so it's not going to attack with a powerful lunge from underneath, as is its usual method, so it swims about somewhere between mild curiosity and disinterest (notice the moment in the video when it simply treads water, looking at the board and its rider - probably thinking, What the heck is this?

The risk to Chris Fallows is that, in fact, some sharks like to bump objects to check them out, particularly if they are wondering if it is an inanimate carcass. I have experienced that before firsthand. While I hung over the side of a Zodiac (a sturdy inflatable raft) filming white sharks, a large 15-foot male approached us and then "bumped" the raft a good foot and a half into the air and, with a flick of his powerful tail, proceeded to smack me across the side of the head. Me and the captain got the message and headed back to the main boat, our adrenaline pumping and my left cheek stinging.

However exciting incidents like that may be or whatever heart-racing programs Discovery's Shark Week may have in store for us, the reality of what sharks themselves are experiencing at the hands of man cannot be overlooked. People may not love them - and the fact is, they don't have to - but they do need to respect them and understand their vital role in maintaining a healthy ocean as critically important predators and scavengers.

And it will be the wisdom of rational voices that ultimately gets the job done. In Australia, Mick Dowers, founder of the Anti-Shark Finning Alliance, makes his case on ABC Brisbane radio's Breakfast with Spencer Howson. What better way to start a cat fight than to then bring on a Chinese Australian to comment - let the fight begin, eh?! But, no. Two rational people with their own points of view discuss the issue calmly and you can begin to hear common ground developing.

Click the 612 ABC Brisbane logo to download audio file (mp3).


That's what it will take: rational people talking about a less than rational practice in an attempt to preserve both, a dwindling species and a fading cultural history.

California's Shark Fin Prohibition: AB 376 introduced to protect sharks

The momentum continues to build in opposition to shark finning with the introduction of Assembly Bill 376 in California. This piece of legislation is similar to the legislation passed in Hawaii, banning the possession, sale, distribution, and use of shark fins. This fills the gap left in the federal laws that prohibit shark finning within U.S. waters, but allow sale and distribution.

AB 376 was introduced by Assemblymen Paul Fong and Jared Huffman. I had the opportunity to come to know Assemblyman Huffman when my documentary, Island of the Great White Shark, played in the state capitol in 2010. At the time, Huffman and Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher were keenly interested in shark conservation. I'm glad to see the interest did not wane since then.

I have included a link to Pete Thomas' excellent post on the subject of AB 376. Of particular interest to me were two of the responses to his post. Both brought up the issue of Asian culture and seafood, which I discussed in a recent post. One comment, apparently from an Asian reader, brought up the cultural issue by questioning the right of non-Asians to tell Asians what to do regarding shark consumption - a perfect example of the cultural defensiveness that can crop up regarding this issue.

The other comment appeared to dismiss the Asian argument to use shark fins based on the fact that shark fin soup was a once delicacy reserved for royalty, but no longer. Unfortunately, the fact of the matter is that the demand for shark fin soup and other shark products has never been greater because what was once a luxury item for royalty is now consumed by Asia's growing middle-class. Shark fin soup can readily be found in cans or in the freezer section of many Asian markets, not just royal palaces.

As AB 376 moves forward, whatever resistance it experiences will be fronted by economic arguments but the independence or defiance of a culture steeped in a broad use of all types of seafood will, for some, be bubbling just below the surface.

Read Pete Thomas' post in Outdoors, action and adventure.

Guam's Dwindling Shark Population: new study supports need for protective legislation

Late last month, I ran a post on the efforts in Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands to initiate anti-shark fin legislation. Just a few days later, The Commonwealth of the Northern Marina Islands (CNMI) succeeded in passing the legislation, signed by Governor Fitial, and attention turned to Guam.

A public hearing was held this past Tuesday in Guam and opposition leaders, mainly in the form of fisherman represented by the Fishermen's Cooperative Association of Guam, made their case that the legislation was punitive to the fishermen and unnecessary. The fishermen take the position that there are more sharks in Guam than ever before and in no signs of disappearing.

Unfortunately, that position was challenged by the results of a scientific study conducted over a 12-month period that most decidedly showed that the number of sharks in Guam are at dangerously low levels compared to other nearby areas. By placing baited remote underwater video stations (BRUVs) at 75 different locations, only 10 sharks (mostly black tip reef sharks) were counted, which equates to 0.13 sharks per hour of footage according to Dr. Jenny McIlwain in her sworn testimony at the hearing.

Just 12 miles south of Guam, at Galvez Bank, 22 sharks were recorded - equating to 10 times the Guam average. Dr. McIlwain also pointed out that when comparing studies using the same techniques in Australia in areas where sharks were heavily commercially fished, Guam's numbers were still 4 times less.

The study was a joint venture of the Universities of Guam and Western Australia, and was funded by NOAA's Coral Reef Initiative. Stefanie Brendl of WildAid, in written testimony, stressed the importance of Guam's passage of this legislation. It represents a tropical Pacific movement to protect sharks that started in Hawaii. With more island nations taking action to prohibit shark finning in local waters, combined with international efforts, the shark finning industry - legal or otherwise - will be constantly on the move and finding fewer and fewer safe harbors to operate from.

Before final passage of the legislation, the Guam government might make some concessions to those fishermen who truly subsist from a limited shark catch. But given the scientific evidence presented at the hearing, it is difficult to conceive of any acceptable catch level that would not push the last remaining sharks of Guam toward extinction.
Read about the public hearing in the Marianas Variety.

Hawaii Shark Conservation: positive steps but more work lies ahead

On the shark conservation front, there are interesting news items out of Hawaii.

Some time ago, there was a growing movement afoot to eliminate all shark diving at the islands (see prior post). This all came about through one man's poorly thought-out attempt to establish a new operation in an area close to a large populace of recreational ocean users. Badly handled public relations triggered a firestorm of protest, based on emotional rationales, fear, and highly disputed assumptions. But the island of Maui was able to pass an ordinance banning any potential shark ecotourism operations and established operators in Oahu were similarly threatened. Hard work on the part of Oahu's operators, particularly Stefanie Brendl of Hawaii Shark Encounters, got legislators to see the weaknesses of opposition arguments and the potential for lost tourism revenue. So, for now, the furor seems to be subsiding in Oahu.

Almost simultaneously, some enlightened state legislators initiated legislation that would ban the sale, trade, and distribution of all shark fins. The proposed legislation, SB 2169, has gone through some ups and downs but just recently cleared Hawaii's House of Representatives. So that's one major hurdle that has been cleared. The next step in the state's bureaucracy is for the bill to go to conference to be reviewed by Senate representatives before reaching the Senate floor for a vote. This is all encouraging, but it's not a done deal yet.

While Asia receives the majority of the blame for the market demand in shark products, Hawaii is, quietly, one of the leading centers for trade and distribution of shark products. That means there will be forces at work to combat the bill, but its passage would certainly place Hawaii in the foreground of compassionate and sensible conservation, would protect a marine resource that contributes to a healthy ecosystem which impacts other recreational and commercial fishing activities, and would be in keeping with the islands' long cultural heritage of viewing sharks as a resource to be protected. Perhaps future legislation can address shark liver oil, cartilage, and other shark-related products as well.

Let's hope that responsible shark ecotourism and strong legislation to protect sharks commercially will be the order of the day in Hawaii. Sharks would certainly benefit from both.

My friends at the SharkDiver blog have posted the text of the bill, which is fortunately straight-forward and easy to read. Click here to read it.

Sharks, Rays & Whales: end of the week wrap-up

Here's a collage of several conservation items of interest to close the week:

Chinese Celebrity Promotes Shark Conservation. . . in China
Basketball sports celebrity Yao Ming, ranked as China's most successful celebrity six years running, has been actively promoting shark conservation for several years, often in conjunction with WildAid. Not only is it important to have someone who is Chinese to make the case for sharks and the elimination of shark finning, but it is also strategically critical to bring the issue to where the market for shark products is the greatest. To that end, a new television commercial featuring Yao will air on China central television, the country's main government-run broadcast outlet, in addition to having the commercial play on screens in government buildings.

According to WildAid president Steve Trent, many Chinese are not aware that shark fins (for shark fin soup) are obtained from sharks! And what can be a very effective tool in making the issue personal to the Chinese people is the unfortunate levels of mercury found in shark products. According to Trent, a 2007-2008 WildAid study indicated that a quarter of shark fin samples sold at Hong Kong markets were unfit for human consumption.

Read article in Mother Nature Network.

Panama Bans Fishing of Rays
Cousins to the sharks are the many varieties of rays in the oceans - from small round sting rays up to the manta ray which can reach 20 feet from fin tip to fin tip. This past week, the Panama government instituted a ban on all the fishing and commercialization of rays within its territorial waters. According to WildAid, "the Authority on Aquatic Resources of Panama (ARAP) informed that "the fishing, capture, transport, transfer, possession and commercialisation of rays [is now] totally prohibited" throughout the national territory."

This is a remarkable move on the part of a government because it was in response to an increasing level of catch but the decision was made without scientific evidence that the rays were at risk of being endangered or facing extinction within Panama waters. Unfortunately, decisions of this sort are typically made when a species is at grave risk; but here Panama has taken a preventative step and chosen to follow the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishing of the United Nations Fishing and Agriculture Organization (FAO). With the ban in place, scientific studies will now be initiated to determine current populations and what, if any, sustainable levels of fishing can be managed successfully.

Read WildAid news item.

Beached Sperm Whales Died of Ingested Plastic
Scientists have now determined that seven sperm whales that beached themselves last week on the shores of Foggia, Italy, had died due to the ingestion of plastic. The whales, ranging in length from 30 to 45 feet, died within a few days of coming ashore. The results of necropsies showed the whales stomachs contained a variety of plastic, which gets caught up in the digestive tract and causes blockages or can cause the tract to twist or strangle itself. In addition, the stomachs also contained other indigestible items like rope, tin cans, and other containers.

Sperm whales are toothed whales and eat a variety of fish but are particularly fond of squid. "They must have mistaken the objects for squid, one of their favorite foods," said Giuseppe Nascetti, who teaches marine ecology at Tuscia University.

Read UPI.com news item.

Shark Conservation Act of 2009: moving forward towards final passage

Returning from a week-long assignment, I was pleased to find that the Shark Conservation Act of 2009 had moved along one more step towards reaching President Obama's desk.

The Senate's version (S. 850), introduced by Sen. John Kerry, which is similar to the House version (H. 81) introduced last year by Rep. Madeleine Bordallo, passed the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee yesterday. Hopefully, any differences between the two pieces of legislation can be quickly ironed out so that it can move along towards a vote and then on to the White House.

The Shark Conservation Act of 2009 requires that all legally caught sharks within U.S. waters must retain their fins. That prevents shark finning and impacts the attractiveness of fishing for fins when the fishing boat must also retain the entire shark carcass, taking up more cargo space which is less profitable.

According to an Oceana.org press release, "Landing sharks with their fins still attached allows for better enforcement and data collection for stock assessments and quota monitoring. The Act would also close a loophole that allows the transfer of fins at sea as a way to get around current law. Additionally, the bill would allow the United States to take action against countries whose shark finning restrictions are not as strenuous."

You can log on to Oceana.org and send an email message to your senator, asking him/her to support passage of this important shark conservation legislation. We must also support international organizations like CITES and others that seek protection for sharks outside of U.S. or other national waters. International waters needed protection and enforcement, too.

Shark News Bites: some good, some bad

Here's a batch of shark news items, some good, some not so good . . .

Scotland to ban shark finning:
In a bold and welcomed move, Scotland has proposed a total ban on shark finning by Scottish or any other registered vessel operating in Scottish waters. European Union nations constitute the largest exporting group of shark fins to the Asian marketplace and their has been discussion for a new EU policy regarding sharks, but Scotland decided that there's no time like the present.

"As one of Europe's most important fishing nations we have a duty to show that we are serious about protecting the sustainability of our seas, their stocks and the wider marine ecosystem, not just through words but with action," said Rural Affairs Secretary Richard Lochhead.
(BBC News story.)

Shark nets to stay in Queensland:
According to the Brisbane Times, sharks nets in Queensland, Australia will remain for now. There had been discussion about their removal - albeit temporary - due to a higher number of whale calves that have been caught in the nets during the whale's migration season.

Shark control program manager Tony Ham says, "The program has been in place since 1962 and in that time we've had one fatal attack on a protected beach, at North Stradbroke island in 2006. There were a number of attacks prior to the program going in - some of those were pretty horrific and fatal. We believe the program does work."

Shark nets have often been controversial because on the one hand, they seem to prevent unwanted shark-human interaction, but on the other hand, it prioritizes the rights of humans to enter the ocean over the rights of sharks to be in their natural habitat.

Spanish supermarkets to no longer sell endangered shark:
Two of Spain's larger supermarket chains, Alcampo and Sabeco, have decided to no longer carry endangered shark meat in their stores, only distributing species that are not threatened (effectively eliminating all commercial shark species). One year ago, the same chains decided to stop selling bluefin tuna, which has been pushed to near extinction in European waters.

The stores are promoting the sale of sustainable or aquafarmed species such as talapia and farmed cod, in addition to working with smaller companies to supply mussels, trout, and salmon. In September, Spain's Ministry of Environment and Rural and marine Affairs initiated a ruling to begin on January 1, 2010 that prohibits Spanish fishing boats from taking thresher and scalloped hammerhead sharks - two species that have suffered major population declines.
(FiS Worldnews story.)

Petition to protect Lemon Sharks:
In the winter, lemon sharks congregate off the east Florida coast and with the demand of shark fins combined with the decrease in numbers of many other commercial sharks like the sandbar shark, the lemon shark is coming under consideration by local fisherman as a way to meet demand.

A coalition of scientists, divers, and shark conservation groups have enlisted the aid of Care2petitionsite.com to help circulate a petition to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, asking for the commission to take action on behalf of the lemon shark by adding the species to the Prohibited Species List. The coalition is hoping to generate 10,000 signatures and they are currently about a third of the way there. To sign the petition, click here.

Palau Shark Sanctuary: island nation declares economic zone a protected haven for sharks

Let's end the week on some great news! This just in from the United Nations: before the General Assembly today, the President of Palau declared its 230,000 sq.mile Exclusive Economic Zone a shark sanctuary. This is the first shark sanctuary recognized by any country and it will hopefully send a message to other countries, regardless of their economic standing, that in the end it is better business to save and protect sharks than to slaughter them. Bravo, to Palau's President Toribiong for taking this step!

Here is the press release from Palau's Shark Sanctuary (www.sharksanctuary.com):

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 25, 2009
LATE BREAKING NEWS!

PALAU DECLARES EEZ A SHARK SANCTUARY!

On Friday, September 25, 2009, H.E. Johnson Toribiong, President of the Republic of Palau, a tiny Pacific Island nation, declared the waters of Palau's Exclusive Economic Zone (230, 000 Sq. Miles / 620,000 Sq. Kms.), as the worlds first officially recognized SHARK SANCTUARY, during a meeting of the General Assembly of the United Nations, in New York.

President Toribiong also called for a global ban on shark-finning and for other nations to follow suit. Through his actions, President Toribiong has placed Palau at the very forefront of worldwide efforts to protect sharks.

This is a tremendous day for Palau and for worldwide efforts to protect sharks from absolute and unsustainable destruction!

Palau Shark Sanctuary deeply commends President Toribiong for his international leadership in world efforts to protect sharks.

We are very proud of President Toribiong and of Palau on this momentous occasion.

Well done Mr. President!

Thank You!

Dermot Keane
Palau Shark Sanctuary

As I had mentioned in a previous post back in April, Palau went through a rocky period regarding commercial shark fishing, pressured by some outside commercial interests. That makes this move all the more important.

You can learn more at the Palau Shark Sanctuary web site and blog. To write congratulations to President Toribiong, the address is: Office of the President, P.O. Box 100, Koror, Palau 96940.