International shark fishing and management

5. PERCEPTIONS AND MANAGEMENT OF SHARKS

5.5. International shark fishing and management

"Theappearanceofma nas apredatorhasconfrontedsharks withamortality source that theycannotwiths tand" (NM FS, 1997 in Stone eta!., 199 8, pp.215).

Commer ci al shar k fishing has increased in volume over the past decades. Estima ted 182,000 ton s of shar ks were caug ht in 1994. However, due to lack of, and incomplete dat a the actua l sha rk catch es could be much high er (Anak, 2002) . In fact 50% of the sha rks caughtare actua lly bycat ch rathe r than fro m targeted shark fishing (Ste vens et al., 2000).

The most popular shark product is the fin. The fins are used as food to a larg e exte nt in Asian countries, but fin produ ct s are also cons umed in man y othe r parts of the world includin g Euro pe and the U.S.A. The fins have no spec ific taste and are similar to rice noodles after bein g boil ed and treated. Almos t all spec ies of sha rks are used for the purpose of har vestin g the fins.The value ofthe fins is relati vely high ran gin g from US$

40 to over US$ 500 per kg (Ana k, 2002; Fon g & Anderson,2002). A bo wl ofshar k fin soupcansellfor over US$ 100 (Ellis, 2003).Sha rkfirming is known to be cond ucted in a very inh umane mann er,with the shar k ofte n bein g stillalive whi le its fins are cutoff. The finless sha rk isthen thrown backin tothe seato suffera slow death(Stoneetal., 1998).

Sha rk meat is becomin g increasin gly popular and sha rk meat product s are found in Europ ean supermarkets often sold as "grayfish" or "rock salmon". In Aust ralia shar k meat is sold as "fla ke". The Austr alian s have the ir own version of fish and chips ; flake and chips. A probl em with the comme rc ia l fishin g of shar ks is the high le vel of urea in

the shark body,requirin g relati vely immedi at e tre atment such as freezin g or icin g (Ana k, 2002).

The rough shark skin is used in product s includingboot s,handbag s and watchs tra ps ,and data from the U.S.A . sho ws an increase in the value and import of sha rk skin produ cts.

Shark liver oil is often used in the processin g of sha rk skin products. Shark liver oil is also used in cosmetics and pharm aceut ical products (Anak, 2002). Shark cartilage is beli e ved to have a re ver se effec t against cance r and is used in supple me nts, but this medi cal effect is yet tobe 100%pro ven (Ana k,2002) .

Other shark product s include teeth and jaws ofte n sold as souve nirs . Shark meat and sma llersharks are ofte n used as bait , and left overshark product s are used as fertili zer for aquaculture feed (forexamplefor shri mp farming) andevenas feed for dom esti c anima ls (Anak, 2002) . Live sha rks are also popular in captivi ty for aqua riums . Aquar ium s are very popular touri st attrac tio ns and ofte n include ed uca tio na l features and inform ati on about the sharks for the public. Aquar iums can play a very importa nt role in ed uca ting and raising the gene ra l awa re ness of both children and ad ults con cerning shar ks . The display of the different species of sha rks and informati on abo ut their beh aviour and biolog ycan also contribute in changin g man ypeopl e ' s per ception of the shar kjustas the mon ster from the famo us mo vieJawsdid (Anderson,2002).

Commer ci al sha rk fish eries have grow n in sma ll island states such as the Maldi ves in the Indian Ocean even thou gh tuna is stiII the main resource for the country's fishing ind ustry. The shar ks caught were traditi onall y used locall y with their oils used for treating the wooden boat s. Tod ay most of the sharkcatches are exported, mainl y for the fins. A conflic t has evolved foll owin g an incr ease in ree f shark fishing since the mid 1970s. The ree f sha rks are caught for the same purpose as the oceanic spec ies; fins and salt-d ried meat to export. The two main parti es of the conflic tsare the reeffish ermen and the local dive touri sm ope rators as reef shar ks are one of the main attrac tio n for dive tourists visiting the Maldi ves . Esti matio ns from 1992 showed that shark dive tourism as an expo rt was worth US$ 2.3 million compared to that of US$ 0.5 from reef shar k

produ ct expo rts. Estimates of the econo mic worth of a sing le reef sha rk as a tou rism resour ce compared to a dead reef shar k, also show the econo mic high value of shark touri sm (US$ 3,300 vers us US$32 resp ecti vely). Howe ver , the econo mic ben efits from tou rism are not directl yreachingthe fishermen ' s pock ets,but can be assumed to impro ve the gene ra l social well-be ing of the local community. Tourist dive operators in the Maldi ves have becom e fro nt spo kes men for shar k conse rva tion. Con sequ ently severa l marine areas, including 15 dive sites, were esta blished as Marin e Prot ect ed areas in 1995 (Ande rso n& Hafi z, 2002).

Austr alia has targ eted shar k fisheri es which are cons ide red import ant , maybe espec ially for the dom estic dem and of sha rk meat. In the differ ent areas of water aro und Austra lia fishe rmen target different spec ies according to their location. However , ther e has been a noti ceable redu cti on in catch es per unit effort and concern for the ecological lon g term effec ts ofthe sha rk fisheries emerge d in the 1980s. But the shark fishe rycontinues under various manage ment plans .Australia also hasprotecti ve shark-gillne ts in Queen sland and New South Wales off cert ain popular beach es, in addi tion to baited drumlines in Queen sland. The sha rk catches have sig nifica ntly reduced since the introducti on of the nets in 1937 (New South Wales) and 1962 (Q uee ns land).There is also a conce rn abo ut the bycatch of turtles, dugon gs, rays and dolphins. Additiona lly, most of the sha rks caughtare not used for scientific research (as oppose toin SouthAfrica), but dumped into the sea (Stevens, 2002).

Shark s live lon g, grow slow ly, mature late in their lifecycle and produce few offspring and targe ted commercialshar k fishing is doubted to be able to exist sustai na bly. This is called "K-se lecte d" life history and is usu all y a result of bein g apex spec ies witho ut natur al pred ators (Stone et al.,1998).Addition ally,sha rkscaug htas bycatch areoften not rep orted but belie ved to account for a significant amo unt of total catches. Tren ds in commerc ial targeted shark fish eri es allover the worldshow the sametrend. Initiallythere are very high catch numbers of sharks, followed by a rap id decrea se and collapse. Examples from Ireland , Nor way and Californi a on targeted sha rk fishin g show that a catches peaks in the first few years of the syste matic fishing, followed by a very rapid

decline.Once overexploited, sharkstocks do not easily recover (Walker, 2002; Fong &

Anderson, 2002; Stevens et al., 2000). This trend is also evident in the research conduct edin KwaZulu-Natal bytheNatalSharks Board (Dudley & Cliff, 1993).

Theremoval of the top predatorspeciescan have irreversible biological effects down the food web and decrease productivity and diversity. Apex predators are more fragile to abundance harvesting and even the recreational fishing of these species can have very negative effectson thetotal marinebiodiversity (Agardy,2000).

Sale et al. (2005) state that there is currently an increasing general global threat to all fisheries of collapse. No-take areas or sanctuaries can support and improve different marine species. Larger areas might bethemost effective, with the possibilities ofahigher number of different species and the likelihood of the individual species to be protected during variousstages of their life cycles. However, smaller areas are alsoseenas useful ina spilloveraspect. Smaller or multi-use areas alsoallows thelocalcoastal communities regions within which they can continue to fish as this might be imperative for life sustaining purposes whether for financialincome orasprotein resources.

One of the biggest problems for commercial shark fishing is the lack of monitorin g and reliable data on the actual number of total catches, both targeted and bycatch.

Additionally, lack of total knowledge about the sharks may hinder the sustainability of theinternational sharkfishery. rUCNrecommends that all regionaland national fisheries agencies should developecologica llysustainable management plansspecifica lly fortheir shark fishingindustry (Anak,2002).

5.5.J.Internationalshark fisherymanagement plans

The USA has ahistory ofsharkfishery datingback tothe 16^thcentur y and has especially during last century experienced severalexamples of productive first couple of years of shark harvesting,followed by rapid declines.The 1980s sawadomestic growing demand for fresh shark meat and foreign demand for shark fins triggering arapid boost in shark fisheries.Concern for the unregulated fisheries and overexploitationofsharks lead tothe

development of the Atlantic Sharks Fishery Management Plan in 1993, managed by federalauthorities.The main concern relating to shark fishing wasthe lack ofcatch data and the controversial practice of shark fishing for fins. Some of the management strategies included quotas,permits,the presence ofobservers, prohibition of firming and establishment of recreational bag limits. In 1997 certain species were protected; Whale sharks tRhincodon typus), Sand tiger sharks (Odontasp is tauru si and Bigeye sand tiger sharks (Odonuispis noronhaii and Basking sharks tCetorhinus maximusi , The Great White tcarcharodon carchariasi was only allowed to be caught on a catch and release bases for recreational fishermen (Stone et al., 1998). In 1997 the National Marine Fisheries Services stated that large coastal sharks were over fished and that pelagic and smallcoastal fish were fully fished .Simultaneously the number of permitt ed boats had increased andgreatlyexceededthe potential quotatobe caught(Stoneet al., 1998).

International concern for the ecologicaleffects of increasing demand and trade of shark products, parallel with poor knowledge of the global shark stocks, became an increasingly debated topic globally in the early 1990s. There is a need for improved fishery management and shark speciesconservation(Fowler, 2002; Walker, 2002; Fong

& Anderson,2002).

An important institution in this process was and still is the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).CITES and otherorganizations including United Nations Food and Agricultur al Organization (FAO) formed specialist groups on sharks and their ecological status due to fishing and damaged habitat. CITES was formed in 1975 and established international legislation against the trading of endangered species and regulations towards the protection of endangered species. CITES is considered as very influential on the internati onal political scene concerning natural resource management, with 150 country state members (Fowler, 2002; Walker, 2002). Several reports of the international ecological status of sharks from various specialists groups contributed to the I

o"

CITES Conference of Parties in 1997. CITES recommended that FAO developed and imple mented a shark management plan to be adopted by the different countries (Fowler, 2002). The FAO International Plan for the Conservation and

Management of Sharks (IPOA-Sharks) was finished in 1998, following meetings the same year in Tokyo of the Technical Working Group on the Conservation and Management ofSharks and meetings in Rome; Consultation on Management of Fishing Capacity, Shark Fisheries and Incidental Catch of Seabirdsin Longline Fisheries(FAO, 1998).The [POA-Sharks is a voluntaryaction plan forshark fishery management to be adopted and adapted for each individual nation state, and each nation isresponsible for developing,implementing and monitoringits ownshark-plan. It isrecommendedthat all countries contributing to shark killing should participate, and one of the leading guidelines concerns the importanceof sustainingstocks:"Management and conservation strategies should aim to keep total fishing mortality for each stock within sustainable levels by applying theprecautionary approach"(FAO, 1998).

In South Africa the Marine and Coastal Management (MCM) branch of DEAT has appointed a Chondrichthyan Working Group responsible for the development of a National Plan of Action (NPOA) in order to complywith the [UCN IPOA-Sharks.The South African NPOA is estimated to be completed during 2005. It is suggested by the MCM to utilize the White Shark Eco-tourism as a case study of shark conservation in South Africa(MCM,2005b).