Index  |  Page 1     Page 2     Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6   |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Download
 

IWMC - World Conservation Trust

SEARCH

MAINPAGE
SUSTAINABLE USE
eNEWSLETTER
August
MEDIA CENTER

ELEPHANTS
FISH
MAMMALS
REPTILES
SEALS
SEA TURTLES
SHARKS
WHALES

ABOUT IWMC

CENSORED

CONTACT IWMC

EVENTS CALENDAR
WEB LINKS

Sustainable eNews

August 2002

IWMC
World Conservation Trust

 
Shark Stories Herald
Another CITES Meeting

 

We know it's time for CITES when we start hearing about danger to sharks from people.

A dead shark found on fishing gear off Australia recently attracted a great deal of attention because of the animal's size. The Great White was frozen and later studied by scientists who were interested in its fertility, general health, huge size, bite marks on its body indicating mating activity, and so forth. Peter Benchley, author of "Jaws", got into the act in a television special that focused on the danger to sharks that results when people fish for other species. Sharks often take fish that are caught on long lines. They get themselves caught, and drowned, in the process.

According to some, if people would just stop fishing at all, sharks would benefit. This plan of action is not likely to be accepted by responsible fishermen anywhere. Sometimes, sharks that are by-catch are saved and utilized, in whole or in part. Sometimes, they are of a species that no one wants, and so they are discarded. Markets are not uniformly available, and some species are so ammonia-scented, that to keep them on board, would taint the rest of the catch. In some cases, the fins are saved and the rest of the carcass is discarded. There are many reasons for the ways in which sharks are treated after they are caught.

In the EU, politicians and extreme NGOs recently cooperated to create legislation that would make it illegal to hunt sharks "just for the fins", as if that would be a benefit to the conservation of these animals. A similar piece of legislation back in 1983 prevented the import of the products of seals under the age of one year. These animals had been killed "just for their skins", which was a lie, but the claim worked to cause EU legislators to ban the product. The EU shark finning ban is a reaction to "environmentalist" information that the market for fins is endangering all species of sharks. Interestingly, the proposed regulation would not prohibit the use of shark fins as long as all the rest of the animal is utilized.

The market for shark meat is different in different cultures, and for different species of sharks. Some people consider some shark meat inedible. Some people consider it a delicacy. Some shark meat is less intensely flavored than others are, and so forth. There is no "general truth" about the broad term "shark meat" because there is quite a difference among species. The new EU regulations on shark fishing may be very difficult to enforce, and are of questionable conservation benefit.

The United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) has for years, been concerned with the conservation of marine fish species, and this organization is the one which should continue to be relied upon for scientific information on shark conservation.

Included in this activity are the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, and the FAO International Action Plan for sharks. CITES is not, therefore, an appropriate forum for discussions or official action on trade in shark species and shark products, since the FAO has acquired the expertise in this area. Incidentally, there is less green NGO influence in FAO Committee on Fisheries meetings than there is at CITES.

Therefore, we at IWMC feel confident that the FAO should remain the body responsible for major decisions about shark conservation. Inclusion of sharks on the CITES agenda would be inappropriate and not helpful to the conservation of these top of the food chain species.


Back to Top  |  Return to Index  | Back  |  Next Article