China and Shark Fins: chipping away at the wall

As a follow up to my recent post on shark conservation advocate Stefanie Brendl, here's something from my friends at SharkDiver, running an interesting post today about recent developments in China. SharkDiver seems to always be on top of the latest news regarding sharks and shark conservation and here is news about a Chinese lawmaker taking a position against shark fins. One can only hope that this gentleman and his supporting colleagues will be able to affect real change.

Change in China? Lawmaker Urges Shark Fin Ban

A Chinese lawmaker has proposed that the country's top legislature ban the trade of shark fin, a high-end delicacy consumed by wealthy people in China and East Asia.

Shark-fin trading generates enormous profits, but encourages overfishing and the brutal slaughter of sharks, of which some 30 species are near extinction, said Ding Liguo, deputy to the National People's Congress, the top legislature.

He has filed a formal written proposal to the legislature, together with a dozen of other lawmakers.

China is now the biggest market of shark fin, consuming 95 percent of the world's total with Taiwan, Hong Kong counted, said Ding Wednesday, a billionaire and executive chairman of Delong Holdings Limited, at a panel discussion of the ongoing parliament session.

Shark fin soup has become an essential part of any respectable banquet in China over the years. And there are no laws in China banning shark fin trading, he said, adding a publicity campaign against shark fin consumption has had limited impact.

"Only legislation can stop shark fin trading and reduce the killings of sharks," Ding said, adding China should take the lead in banning the trade.

Fin trade encourages shark-finning, a practice in which the fins are typically cut off while the shark is still alive. The shark then dies a slow death.

Shark fins are used to make a soup that is a high-end staple on the menu of most upscale restaurants. Many of them make the delicacy a signature dish to lure customers, as Chinese culture has lauded shark fins to boost virility and enhance skin quality.

Further, shark fin soup represents wealth, prestige and honor as the gourmet food was coveted by emperors in China's Ming Dynasty because it was rare, delicious and required elaborate preparation.

With both culinary and symbolic significance, the dish is popular at important occasions such as weddings, banquets and important business deals.

Treated with this Chinese cuisine is a show of respect, honor and appreciation to the guests. Ordinary people normally can't afford to have the dish.

Price of shark fins is up to 4,000 yuan (about 600 U.S. dollars) per kilogram, said Huang Liming, duty manager at the medium-level Hongxing Seafood Restaurant in southern Guangzhou city. Shark fins could be sold up to 10,000 yuan per kilogram in upscale restaurants, Huang said.

But sales of shark fins have declined 30 percent recently from a year earlier to at most 0.5 kilogram each day as people prefer healthier and environmental-friendly food, Huang said, adding most of the delicacy is consumed by businessmen.

"People are mistaken by the supposed nutritional value of shark fin," Ding said.

"Research shows the nutritional value of shark fin is similar to that of poultry, fish skin, meat and eggs. It is tasteless and its low level nutritional value is hard to absorb by the body." He said.

Further, it contains high levels of lead and mercury, which most people know little about, he said, adding he neither eats shark fins nor treats guests with the dish.

Ding proposed that governmental officials take the lead in stopping the consumption of shark fin, and that state-owned hotels and restaurants stop serving shark fin.

Zhang Xingsheng, managing director of North Asia Region of The Nature Conservancy (TNC), started an online poll on microblog website of Sina.com since Jan. 8, calling on the country's legislature to ban overall shark fin trading.

As of Wednesday, 27,370 people have voted for the ban, and 440 voted against the ban.

Shark Fin Legislation: Support efforts in Guam and Northern Mariana Islands

Building the need for shark conservation, one piece of legislation at a time, there are two important shark fin bills - one for Guam and the other for the Northern Mariana Islands - that are coming to a head and could use the support of those who feel that the rapid depletion of the worldwide shark populations due to industrial shark fishing must come to an end. Both of these bills have strong supporters within the island governments but there is also strong resistance from fishing interests and lobbying from shark product distributors.

I received an email today from Stefanie Brendl who, as a Hawaiian shark diving operation owner, worked diligently to support the Hawaiian ban of shark fins that was passed in May, 2010. Following many email conversations over the past few years, I was pleased to have Stefanie be on the shark conservation panel I organized for the BLUE Ocean Film Festival in Monterey, CA last August. At the time, she was in discussions with WildAid and other major NGOs on how to capitalize on Hawaii's bold move to protect sharks and export "anti-shark fin fever" to other countries. She has been a very busy person ever since.

Here is her latest update on the status of the Guam and CNMI (Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands) legislation. They both could use your written support - not bellicose rants, mind you, but respectful and well-thought out, intelligent responses. And a few well-chosen facts or scientific references wouldn't hurt either - politicians respond to data as well as opinions.

Time again for more shark fin bill action!
Some of you will have already heard about the shark fin bills (based on last years Hawaii fin bill) in progress in Guam and the CNMI (Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands).

CNMI
CNMI legislator Diego Benavente introduced almost the exact same bill as Hawaii last August, prohibiting possession and trade of shark fins. The measure has traveled through the House and Senate and has made it to Governor Fitial's desk, waiting to be signed into law. The opposition has mounted a last minute full blown effort to kill this bill. All hands are needed to help this bill take the last hurdle.
When Senator Hee and I were there in December, Governor Fitial stated that he would be in support, but lobbying by opposition has caused a delay of the signing and has endangered passage of this bill. Short, but powerful statements from all Shark and Ocean conservation organizations will help push this over the finish line.
We didn't need it until now.
But its time to bring everything we have to the table! Passage of this bill is key to setting the pace in the region. With Guam and other Islands considering shark fin legislation it is imperative that this bill will pass into law!

So please take a few minutes to urge Governor Fitial to sign bill HB 17-94

Deadline: Now

Send email or call
fitial@yahoo.com
(670) 664-2282

(CNMI time zone is GMT +10)

GUAM
Vice Speaker BJ Cruz and Senator Rory Respicio of the Guam legislature introduced a similar measure last week. see attached bill 44-31.
Strong opposition is already mounting in Guam, mostly from the fishing community and some members of WESPAC (Western Pacific Fisheries Council, the regional Fisheries Management Organization). Some of this opposition is based on the misunderstanding that this bill will affect local fishermen, but as they do not fin sharks, (which is now illegal due to the Federal Shark Conservation Act), this bill will not hinder their fishing activities. It will disrupt the commercial take of sharks and fins, which is beneficial to all fishing communities.
Explaining your view on why sharks are important to the ocean eco system and why such legislation is necessary in the form of testimony will be most valuable.

The first scheduled public hearing will be next week on Feb 1st. In order to get traction for this bill we need as many supportive statements as possible submitted before the hearing. See message and instruction from Senator Cruz' office below. I have attached the bill and the hearing notice.

Message from Senator Cruz' office
Please find enclosed in the attachment the memo related to the time and date for the Public Hearing for Bill No. 44-31 (COR). The hearing is for 5:30PM on February 1, 2011. Please attend this meeting and submit as much written and oral testimony and supporting data as possible. The best way to neutralize the opposition and support the environment is to turnout in mass numbers with knowledge and information.

Please submit written testimony, scientific documentation, essays, and petitions to the address below. Please Cc Mike Lydia when you send electronic documents and feel free to drop documents at the Office of Vice Speaker Cruz so that they may be transmitted to the Office of Senator Respicio.

(Guam time zone is GMT +10)

Honorable Rory J. Respicio
Majority Leader
Suite 302
155 Hesler St.
Hagåtña, Guam 96910
Ph.: (671) 472-7679/3545/6
Fax: (671) 472-3547
e-mail: roryforguam@gmail.com
Committee on Rules, Federal, Foreign & Micronesian Affairs, and Human & Natural Resources

Mike Lydia email: mike.lidia@senatorbjcruz.com

Learn more about the CNMI legislation on its supporters' Facebook page.
Learn more about the Guam legislation from Shark Defenders.

Congress Squabbles Over Conservation: biodiversity protections held up while Senators debate merits

Discovery's Tree Hugger blog site and Washington DC's The Hill both ran important news items on several pieces of conservation legislation being stalled in the U.S. Senate, primarily due to the efforts of one Senator Tom Coburn (R.-Okla.). His position was that the five bills, supported by several key Republican colleagues and ranging from issues regarding shark finning to marine mammals to great cats and canids to cranes, were a waste of money.

"The problems that are facing this country are so big and so massive that our attention ought to be focused on those large problems, not on five separate bills that have been proffered for special interest groups," the senator was quoted as saying.

While the current economic situation in the United States, and globally, is without question one of the more pressing issues today and will garner greater priority and attention than longer term environmental issues, the politics of fear combined with the campaign jargon of the moment must not derail responsible policymakers from making decisions that have implications, both environmental and economic, far beyond simply the conservation of a particular species. Maintaining a healthy biodiversity is not just a feel good moral issue, it is one that has concrete implications over a range of industries and worldwide economies.

As noted in Tree Hugger, The Huffington Post described Senator Coburn's actions this way, "Cautious spending is an important value, but so is the defense of animals from cruelty, the rescue of marine creatures injured by human actions, or the protection of wild species from extinction. Coburn has corrupted a laudable principle of fiscal conservatism, and used it to negate and nullify valuable initiatives designed to protect vulnerable species at serious risk."

Read the entire article in Discovery's Tree Hugger.
Read the entire article in The Hill.
Read the entire article in The Huffington Post.

Dealing With Plastics: California legislation proposed

While oil pollution is, understandably, capturing a lot of our attention of late, there are other forms of ocean pollution that need our continued attention. Plastics, in its multitude of forms, constitutes a major ongoing threat not only to marine animals but the entire marine ecosystem.

Much has been written about the North Pacific Gyre, a congregation of floating plastics coming together due to the various movements of Pacific Ocean currents. While it contains pieces of plastics that pose immediate threats to fish, marine mammals, and birds due to entanglement or ingestion, there is the additional problem of what becomes of the plastics over time. Sunlight combined with water/wave action breaks the plastic down into smaller and smaller particles which can be ingested by smaller and smaller creatures - down to the plaktonic level - which means that the plastic can permeate its way through the entire oceanic web of life.

Plastics seemingly last forever. Their so-called biodegradability involves breaking down into base components, which means the separation of the various chemicals used in the production of plastics - chemicals which can prove to be toxic and, again, enter the food chain at base levels, impacting plankton, and more. So first you have large plastics pieces - discarded bags, bottles, soda can container rings, rope, netting, etc. - that can ensare, entangle, or if ingested, block the digestive tracts of a variety of sea creatures. Then as the plastic breaks down, there are the micro-particles that can be consumed by smaller creatures. And finally, there are all the chemicals being given off: low-level poisons that can have a cumulative effect.

Plastics: the "gift" that keeps on giving.

To address the issue requires industrial science to generate improved or alternative products - a new generation of plastics or plastic-like products that break down safely, as opposed to the current specific and unrealistic set of precise circumstances (light, temperature, moisture) needed for "successful" biodegradation. And there must be a more responsible use of plastics on the part of the consumer to reuse and/or recycle.

And there is also the need for legislation to nudge both industry and the consumer in the right direction. The Sea Turtle Restoration Project recently alerted its California members of upcoming state legislation to restrict the use of plastic bags, bottle caps, and more (plastics endanger leatherback turtles that feed on the plastic or became entangled). Within California, several cities have already banned the use of plastic shopping bags or instituted stiffer fines for plastic littering. Here are the three bills:

AB 2138 (Chesbro) - Plastic Ocean Pollution Reduction, Recycling and Composting Act

AB 2138 would prohibit food providers from distributing single-use food packaging and bags unless they are accepted for either recycling or composting in at least 75% of households in a jurisdiction and are recovered at rate of at least 25%. This policy will make the fast food sector financially responsible to:

• Switch to packaging that is compatible with the recycling and/or composting services available in the communities they serve.
• Work with local governments and recyclers to increase processing and market capacity for recyclable and compostable packaging alternatives.
• Work with consumers to ensure that their packaging is recycled or composted.
• Single-use food packaging litter kills endangered sea turtles that become entangled or mistake it for food. Single-use packaging is a primary source of urban litter and oceanic litter pollution, according to storm drain and beach cleanup studies. Polystyrene, plastic bags and other non-recyclable packaging have a high propensity to be littered because they are light and aerodynamic and are consumed away from home. Up to 80% of ocean pollution is litter from urban runoff, and non-recyclable single-use food packaging is a primary component of urban litter.

AB 1998 (Brownley) - Carryout Bags
AB 1998 will reduce dangerous plastic bag litter pollution by banning plastic bags at large retail outlets. Plastic bags are a primary component of urban litter pollution. And urban litter pollution is the primary component of marine litter pollution. Plastic already outweighs plankton in the North Pacific Gyre. Plastic pollution costs California families hundreds of dollars annually in hidden litter clean-up costs. Current retailer practices result in the distribution of approximately 19 billion plastic carryout bags annually.

AB 925 (Saldaña) - Plastic Bottle Caps
Requires plastic bottle caps be attached to the plastic container and be recyclable. As more than half of all single use beverages in plastic containers being consumed outside of the home, these plastic bottle caps can easily become part of the litter and waste stream. Beach clean-up studies find that plastic bottle caps are among most littered items. AB 925 proposes to address this problem by requiring that the bottle caps remain connected to the bottle, more than 60% of which are currently recycled, thereby significantly reducing the waste, litter and threat to wildlife posed by discarded bottle caps.

Californians can and should voice their support for these bills (they can click on each assembly bill listed above to send an email). And for you non-Californians, check your own state's government web site to see if similar legislation is in the works to protect the quality of life where you live. It doesn't matter whether your state has an ocean coastline or is landlocked, we all have bodies of water - be they freshwater or saltwater - that can be adversely effected by the growing volume of plastics we have produced over decades.

I suspect that plastics, in one form or another, are here to stay. If that be the case, then it behooves us to produce, use, and recycle plastics more responsibly. Or it will bury us.

Learn more about plastic pollution at the Sea Turtle Restoration Project.

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.

Hawaiian Monk Seal: stronger legislation proposed to protect island state's biodiversity

While some controversy brews over Hawaii's position regarding shark ecotourism and the legislation it generated, the state has taken a strong and positive position with respect to protecting endangered species. The state senate has proposed legislation (SB2441) that would increase the fines and potential incarceration for the intentional or knowing taking of an endangered species, moving it from a misdemeanor to a felony.

In strengthening its concern for the state's biodiversity, the bill specifically mentions the Hawaiian green sea turtle, nene goose, and Hawaiian monk seal as they are currently considered endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act. The bill cited a man who was convicted of shooting a Hawaiian monk seal and, under current state law, was fined only $25.00. The new legislation expands the punishment up to $5,000 (as much as $50,000 for multiple violations) and potential one-year imprisonment.

Threats to sea turtles have been mentioned often in this blog. The Hawaiian monk seal has seen a declining population for decades and its numbers could drop below 1,000 in a few years. Last year, the population - which is declining by 4% annually - saw the lowest number of recorded births during breeding season. But in 2009, the National Marine Fisheries Service, at the behest of several conservation groups, announced it would designate critical habitat on the main islands for the seal.

“The [proposed] law shows that monk seals are an important part of Hawaii’s natural heritage that must be respected,” said Miyoko Sakashita, oceans director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “This is one among many conservation measures needed to prevent the extinction of Hawaiian monk seals.”

So, some good news for a change. Hopefully, the state legislation (which is currently moving through committees), along with the federal efforts, will help turn the tide in favor of Hawaii's unique and wide-ranging biodiversity.

Read press release from the Center for Biological Diversity.

Hawaii Shark News: prohibitions, good and bad

There are some interesting shark conservation and ecotourism developments coming out of Hawaii. I received emails from Stefanie Brendl, who operates Hawaii Shark Encounters, noting some good news and not so good news. Okay, bad news first. . .

Legislation To Ban Shark Encounters
For nearly a year now, Hawaii has been wrestling with the on-again, off-again issue of curtailing all shark ecotourism operations. It has become a political football between island council members and state legislators with arguments including appeals to fear-based public misconceptions, rebutting scientific studies, and projections of small business and tourism economic losses. (More background info from prior posts in April and July.)

The issue has resurfaced with legislation again designed to curtail all shark ecotourism operations. The shark ecotoruism opponents have complicated matters with a series of similarly worded pieces of legislation, blitzing the political landscape with as many as five separate legislative proposals. However, two amendments have been proposed that would "grandfather" in the two existing operations on Oahu's North Shore.

The text of all the proposed bills (HB2459, HB2664, HB2705, HB2483, SB2330, and the amendments HB2900 and SB2655) can be read at the Hawaii state web site (click here).

If you would like to express support to the Hawaii legislators that are championing for the continuation of the current shark ecotourism operators, you can email:
Senator Robert Bunda, senbunda@capitol.hawaii.gov
Representative Michael Magaoay, repmagaoay@capitol.hawaii.gov

Legislation To Prohibit Shark Fins
Here's the good news. Stefanie has relayed the announcement of proposed legislation to prohibit the sale and distribution of shark fins in the state. Specifically designed to address a loophole that has allowed containers of shark fins to be sold and shipped through Hawaiian ports, the legislation, SB2169, will address a long-standing issue in international shark conservation as Hawaii is a recognized distribution center for shark products. As an example, for my shark conservation speaking engagements, I use a can of shark fin soup as a prop - a product of Thailand, distributed in Hawaii and which I purchased from an online Hawaiian distributor/merchant. (The only such purchase I have ever made, by the way.)

Supporters of the legislation are also hoping to refine the wording so that it can expand the definition of shark fin products to include shark fin soup itself.

As often is the case with new legislation, there will be several public hearings. If you would like to provide public testimony (no rants, just solid reasonable commentary), there is an online process (click here).

Or you can email your support to the two senators who introduced the bill:
Senator Robert Bunda, senbunda@capitol.hawaii.gov
Senator Clayton Hee, senhee@capitol.hawaii.gov

Palau's Shark/Fishing Legislation: a reputation for conservation at risk

Palau has been a favorite dive tourist destination for many years because of its wonderful reefs and bountiful fishlife. And the island has, in the past, taken active steps to protect its shark populations with aggressive action against illegal shark finning operations. All of these efforts have contributed to the island's tourist economy and sound conservation policy.

But that all could potentially be undone with recent legislation that was introduced to both allow for commercial shark fishing and allow for the use of purse seining - a method that brings in a large amount of by-catch. Palau commercial fishing interests have been working with Philippine fishing groups and the combined influence on Palau legislators has produced SB8-44 (which drops the ban on shark fishing) and SB8-50 (which drops an export tax on fish caught by purse seining).

According to FinsMagazine, the collective result of the laws would be:

• To permit and encourage the killing of sharks in Palau’s waters
• To promote shark finning
• To promote fishing methods that according to Monterey Bay Aquarium “result in large amounts of unintended catch” including sharks, dolphins, turtles, rays and juveniles:
  http://www.montereybayaquarium.org/cr/cr_seafoodwatch/sfw_gear.aspx
• To exempt fishing companies from any export taxes on fish taken from Palau’s waters
• To make it practically impossible for Palau’s law enforcement personnel to successfully prosecute alleged violators in the courts
• To risk destroying Palau’s sustainable tourism industry
• To risk destroying Palau’s marine resources through unsustainable practices
• To gamble on all of the above for no apparent gain to Palau or Palauans.

This issue has made the rounds of several shark blogs recently, but opinions from everyone - from divers to land-bound ocean advocates - are needed to remind the Palau government that the negative impact on tourism and the island's marine ecology will ultimately outweigh the short-term gains in a working relationship with Philippine commercial fisheries.

Email the Palau Chamber of Commerce (pcoc@palaunet.com) and Belau Tourism Association (bta@palaunet.com) and the government tourism office Palau Visitors Authority (pva@visit-palau.com) .