Philippine Shark Fishing Ban: senator pushing legislation to protect all sharks and rays

Philippine Senator Loren Legarda is receiving considerable coverage in local news outlets for her proposal to put forth legislation that would ban the catching of all sharks and rays in Philippine waters. Her proposal goes beyond the type of shark fin ban that has been initiated elsewhere, such as in several U.S. west coast states and Hawaii. Legarda seeks "to declare as unlawful the wounding or killing of sharks and rays, unless there is threat to human life or safety. The shark’s fin soup and the selling of shark’s fin will likewise be prohibited to eliminate the demand that results in the massive killing of sharks."

This proposal, Senate Bill 2616, was actually first proposed over a year ago, in November, 2010, and mirrors similar legislation that was proposed in July, 2010 by Representative Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo which has been languishing in committee since then.

The senator cites several arguments for pushing for this legislation, “Sharks, as predators of the sea, play a vital role in regulating the ecological balance, particularly the health of important commercial fish species, population balance, and protection of coral reefs. Being a country with about two-thirds of the known marine species of the Pacific living in its coastal waters, the Philippines plays a crucial role in protecting marine species.”

Being that Senate Bill 2616 has been on out on the floor for some time, I find this sudden attention to be of interest. This morning, I counted five different Philippine news outlets picking up the story and, as much of what I read was verbatim from one source to the next, it was clear that a press release had been circulated. News reports claim that the senator's renewed drive was a result of recent local reports of shark finning operations taking place, and there's no reason to doubt that.

“Clearly, the absence of the law forbidding the catching of sharks, gives people the courage to continue the practice, which could eventually lead to the extinction of shark species in the country, especially [sic] that they reproduce slowly,” said Legarda in a statement on Sunday.

However, the release of Legarda's statement could also be propitious as a response to recent statements made by a panel of experts at a forum held in Singapore and sponsored by the Institute for Southeast Asian Studies. Expressing their controversial views were Dr. Giam Choo Hoo, a member of the United Nations Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES), Prof. Steve Oakley of Shark Savers Malaysia and Hank Jenkins, president of Species Management Specialists. The three put forward the position that prohibiting the trade in shark fins will not dramatically reduce the number of sharks killed worldwide. They noted that many countries such as Germany, France, Australia and Iceland have long killed sharks for their meat.

“Even if shark’s fin were banned, these countries would continue to catch sharks for the meat,” said Oakley.

Giam used statistics from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) to say that 70 percent of all sharks caught are done by local fishermen in developing countries who consume the entire shark, not just selling the fins. And Jenkins was critical of the statistics that are often used regarding the number of sharks caught worldwide. He questioned the accuracy of 73 million caught each year, saying that it was a manipulation of data originally research by marine scientist Shelley Clarke who put the number at 38 million in 2000 with a wide variance of 26 million to 73 million.

While the idea that shark finning is not the sole issue threatening sharks (albeit the most distasteful) or that catch numbers can be widely inaccurate and prone to manipulation are actually valid points of discussion and consideration, the manner in which they were presented in Singapore has raised the dander of many shark advocates (read here, here, here) and pro-shark organizations. The panel's most inflammatory statement was probably made when, as reported in The Jukarta Post, they insisted, "there is no evidence that live finning - cutting sharks’ fins off before throwing the sharks back into the sea - is a prevalent practice. 'Although practiced by some fishermen, it is illegal, relatively infrequent and condemned by the industry,' said Jenkins."

Just a few days following these statements, Senator Legarda reignites discussion and news buzz regarding her Senate Bill 2616. Coincidence? Perhaps, but it's not much of a stretch to imagine the Singapore news coming to the senator's attention and generating a reaction.

Definitely, the impact of shark finning and total shark consumption and the accuracy of the estimated numbers require more research. But they are not easy facts to ascertain. Extinction is the ultimate test bed for measuring the impact that sharks have on a marine ecosystem, but there is a wealth of data to date that can provide indications without going to such a ridiculously extreme approach. With more and more data, computer models can be further refined to determine impacts based on species and specific environments or locales.

Statistics regarding catch and population numbers will always be a bit elusive and subject to abuse. How many sharks are caught specifically for fins and/or meat versus how many are caught as accidental bycatch will always need to be extrapolated from sources of varying reliability. And when you add to that the number sharks that go unreported due to illegal activity, it becomes even more challenging. However, even a low end number like Clarke's estimated 38 million is an astounding toll to impose on an animal being caught in the wild whose reproductive rate is low. To reach a level of commercial "sustainability" is a lot to ask of nature when it comes to sharks.

So, we can either downplay the potential or theorized impacts on shark populations and proceed as we have been for decades, waiting for a possible negative outcome that would be irreversible; or we follow Senator Legarda's lead and move towards total protection. That would require facing stiff economic and political challenges in transitioning market demands and the direction of commercial industries, ranging from fishing to tourism, but it would be a fine testament to our ability - some would say a god-given right - to exercise true stewardship of the seas.

Source: Manila Bulletin.com
Source: GMA News
Source: Business World Online
Source: philSTAR.com
Source: Journal Online
Source: Jakarta Post

Post-Shark Week Progress: basking shark taggings and California's AB376

Now that Discovery Channel's Shark Week has concluded and the entertainment frenzy that surrounds it has subsided, we all can get back to some serious-minded steps in research and policy to advance our understanding and conservation of these animals. Here are a couple of recent developments:



Basking Shark Tagging in Monterey

With each new study on sharks, scientists learn a little more about the wonderful world of sharks, but there are still some species that are shrouded in mystery. Take the basking shark, the second largest of all sharks, next to the whale shark, and one not to be feared as it is a filter feeder like baleen whales.



Preferring cold water, the basking shark has been studied in the North Atlantic, but limited studies have taken place in the Pacific. The Pelagic Shark Research Foundation has just started a more detailed tagging program in and around Monterey Bay, CA, utilizing satellite tracking tags that have been successfully used on other species like great white sharks. To date, only basic number/color identification tags have been used. With the use of an archival satellite tag - which can store various position, depth, and speed data for later retrieval via satellite - the foundation can accumulate more detailed and accurate data as to the movements of basking sharks.



Sean Van Sommeran, founder and director of the Pelagic Shark Research Foundation, describes the basking shark as "elusive" and, as they are recognized as threatened, are considered "commercially extinct."



Working in conjunction with Stanford University and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Van Sommeran's foundation has tagged one sub-adult basking shark at around 15 to 16 feet in length and plans to tag more.



California's AB376 Anti-Shark Fin Bill Advances

This Monday, California's Assembly Bill 376, which prohibits sale, possession, and distribution of shark fins - much like legislation already passed in Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington - will take the next step on its way to a final vote. The bill will go before the Senate Appropriations Committee and for many of the bill's supporters, the big issue here is whether there will be any amendments tacked on to the legislation that will weaken it and provide loopholes for commercial operations to continue.



You can support and participate in various efforts being staged by a variety of shark advocate groups - Sea Stewards, based in San Francisco, is planning a bus ride tomorrow to Sacramento to make a physical presence in support of AB376. However, one of the best ways to make your voice heard is through direct communication to the members of the committee. Sea Stewards has provided a listing of the members' email addresses and sample email content.



senator.kehoe@sen.ca.gov,

Senator.Alquist@SENATE.CA.GOV,

senator.runner@sen.ca.gov,

senator.price@sen.ca.gov,

senator.walters@sen.ca.gov,

senator.lieu@sen.ca.gov,

senator.alquist@sen.ca.gov,

Senator.Pavley@senate.ca.gov

Dear Senators,

I urge you to vote for AB 376 without amendments. Scientists have testified that the suggested amendment to allow shark fins from domestic fisheries cannot be enforced and will lead to increased fishing pressure on domestic sharks and allow black market fins to enter the market.

Also, the MSC certification of fins is not a viable option. To date there has not been a well managed and sustainable shark fishery. Focused shark fisheries lead to collapse of the population. Sharks are vital for ecosystem health.

For these reasons please support this bill as written.

sincerely,

There are some powerful forces at work in opposition to AB376 that have pulled out all the stops to amend, if not defeat the bill, using accusations of anti-Asian sentiments or lost commercial and state revenue. It's getting down to the wire and the lobbyists will be playing hardball on both sides. Let your sentiments be heard by the elected officials - oddly enough, in this world of ineffectual politics, it can make a difference.



Read about basking shark tagging in the Santa Cruz Sentinel.

Read about AB376 and what you can do at SeaStewards.org.

Shark Conservation Progress: encouraging regional steps; next up - international regulations

Shark conservation has certainly been making some progress over the past couple of years. Several nations have instituted new regulations within their waters regarding commercial shark fishing or the total prohibition of shark fins. Here is a short list of developments:

Bahamas: The Bahamas National Trust, with support from the PEW Environment Group, was able to get substantial citizen support for its declaration of a Bahamas Shark Sanctuary. The sanctuary was created by adding an amendment to the Fisheries Resources Jurisdiction and Conservation Act to prohibit commercial shark fishing along with the sale, importation and export of shark products.

California, USA: Because of it's two large ports in San Francisco and Los Angeles, a considerable amount of shark product trade is done through California. Assembly Bill 376, a ban on import/export of shark fins similar to Hawaii's ban that went into effect last year, has passed the Senate Natural Resources & Water Committee and now moves on to the Senate Appropriations Committee. While facing strong opposition from shark industry-supported groups that claim a racial prejudice, since most of the market for shark products is with Asians, the legislation has also received considerable support from a host of vocal pro-shark groups and celebrities. Though the legislative process is complicated, passage appears to be likely. The biggest concern is whether, in making its way through the political machinations, the legislation remains intact or becomes watered down with exceptions or loopholes.

Honduras: Honduras also established a shark sanctuary in late June. President Porfirio Lobo Sosa signed the sanctuary bill into law, making permanent a 2010 moratorium on commercial fishing for sharks in the 92,665 square miles of Honduras' exclusive economic zone, which covers both its Pacific and Caribbean coasts.

Guam: The Association of Pacific Island Legislatures (APIL) issued a resolution in June stressing the need for additional actions to protect sharks. The resolution, reached at APIL’s general assembly conference in Palau, states that the association agrees with “protective legislation in Palau, Hawaii, CNMI (Northern Marianas) and Guam.” The member states of APIL are the Northern Marianas, Guam, Palau, Yap, Chuuk, Pohnpei, Kosrae, the Marshall Islands, Kiribati, American Samoa, Nauru and Hawaii. The exclusive economic zones of all APIL member nations total an area larger than the land masses of the continental United States and European Union countries combined.

Washington, USA: Following the lead of Hawaii, the state of Washington passed legislation in May that bans the sale, trade, and distribution of shark fins. The legislation received near unanimous support in the House and 100% backing in the Senate.

Oregon, USA: The state of Oregon is moving forward with legislation to ban the sale and trade of shark fins. Legislation has passed the House and is awaiting hopeful passage in the Senate. As is the case with other US state legislation, it does not affect or eliminate existing legal commercial shark fishing regulations, but focuses on only shark fins.

Asian Markets: Taking aim at the heart of the problem, Asian market demand, a recent poll of 1,000 Hong Kong residents showed 78 percent of respondents considered it “acceptable” to leave shark fin soup off the menu at events like weddings. In another sign that the topic is getting top-level attention, a deputy of the National People’s Congress in Beijing, Ding Liguo, filed a proposal last month to ban trade in shark fins, according to a report from Xinhua, the state-run news agency. “Only legislation can stop shark fin trading and reduce the killings of sharks,” Mr. Ding said, adding that the mainland, Hong Kong and Taiwan consume 95 percent the world’s fins. There's still a long ways to go in altering Asian market demand, but these are encouraging signs.

The environmental argument for protecting sharks - the disruption of marine ecosystems caused by the loss of top predators like sharks - is having some resonance with various governments. Another motivator is, as is often the case, economics. More and more substantiated reports are coming out showing that a live shark has a much greater long-term value - sometimes in the millions of dollars - than a dead shark with respect to tourism dollars, either through shark ecotourism or simply the maintenance of a healthier reef for swimmers, snorkelers, and divers by the presence of a balanced shark population.

However, as important as these national efforts are, they only impact regional waters or cause shark fin import/export centers to move elsewhere. International waters are still left wide open. While the shark conservation movement has begun to move beyond the early emotional position regarding the barbarity of shark finning to focus more on the environmental and economic impacts, thereby gaining more political traction, the next major step is to harness the momentum and weight of all these efforts to date to bring about change on an international level. Through United Nations environmental committees and other worldwide groups like the IUCN and CITES, regulations and protection can hopefully be put in place that, in essence, know no oceanic boundaries.

Encouraging steps forward, but there is still a long way to go. Hopefully, the shark is as patient as we are slow.

Read about the Bahamas Shark Sanctuary in the Caribbean News.
Read about California's AB376 in the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Read about the Honduras Shark Sanctuary in UPI.com.
Read about the push for greater protection in the South Pacific in Pacific News Center.
Read about Washington state's shark fin legislation in Shark Defenders.
Read about Oregons shark fin legislation in the Oregon Capitol News.
Read about Asian market demand for shark products in The New York Times.

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.