Shark Fin Trade: A Threat to Marine Ecosystems and Economies
Sharks are majestic creatures, a class of fish with pectoral fins that are not connected to their heads. Sharks form one of the oldest vertebrate groups on the planet has existed for over 400 million years. However, this will cease to be the case due to the growth of fishing globally and their slow growth and reproductive rates. There is an increased demand for shark fins in the Asian market as shark soup forms most of the luxury Asian cuisine. This demand, coupled with the sharks' inherent vulnerability, has led to progressive depletion of the shark population around the world. On the bright side, several governments have taken protective stances, led by Hawaii in 2010 which prohibited the possession, trade and distribution of shark fins. This paper assesses the situation in our oceans in the past 8 years right after the Hawaii bill, before the shark fin trade elimination act of 2017, and after the bill was passed. It mainly shows how shark harvesting is dangerous to the species and the ocean's ecosystem.
The Impact of Conservation Acts on Shark Finning
In 2010, the United States Congress put in place a shark conservation act which was meant to prohibit shark finning. The act stated that all sharks that reached the United States had must have had their fins attached to their bodies. This was meant to largely reduce the death of several sharks through finning in the oceans where they were mostly captured, their fins removed, then they were tossed back into the oceans to die of different reasons such as bleeding to death, suffocation or attacks from other predators. Even with this positive step, shark fins remained traded as most supplies came from fisheries approved by the United States or from countries that did not have such policies in places. Another positive act of 2010 was by Hawaii, which became the first U.S state to prohibit acts related to trade and possession of shark fins (Godin 998).
The Role of Shark Conservation Laws in Shark Populations
The Shark Conservation Act was signed into law in January 2011 which saw the reduction of shark imports in the USA to about 380 metric tons in 2011 from the previously reported 500 metric tons in 2009. Other data from United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FOA) shows that as of 2011, approximately 73 million sharks are killed every year. This mass slaughter has led to the death of two-thirds of the shark species and the remaining are on the brink of extinction. This puts the role sharks play in the ecosystem into jeopardy (Shiffman 406).
Overexploitation of Oceanic Sharks and Disruption of Migration Patterns
The most targeted sharks are the hammerheads, oceanic whitetip, porbeagle, shortfin mako, and the threshers. Since oceanic sharks are highly migratory, they are overexploited by fishermen. FAO reports that over 40% of the oceanic sharks fall prey to the fishermen and this destroys the order of the ecosystem in that the fishing activities disrupt the migration patterns (Dent 17). This is because each fisherman targeting the oceanic sharks needs to be familiar with their migration patterns and an attempt to capture one of the sharks during this period often ends in a lot of struggle and a destruction of the travel patterns. These migration patterns once served as tourist features for the high-ended individuals who would pay to go snorkeling and deep-sea diving just to witness the sharks' immigration. In fact, the latest research shows that the North Atlantic population of the scalloped hammerheads has gone down by 83% as of January 2011 since the 1980s and the oceanic whitetip's population is 70% down since the 1990s.
Legislative Efforts to Protect Sharks and Oceans
On the bright side, several U.S. states have followed Hawaii's lead and enacted shark fin legislation. As of 2017, these states had passed the shark fin bills; Texas, Delaware, Massachusetts, New York, California, Illinois, Oregon, Maryland, Washington, American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands. Such laws prevent individuals from heinous benefits gained from shark fin trade. They also help protect the oceans because sharks make up the marine life that is the ecosystem of the oceans. Shark finning, as stated earlier, is one of the main reasons contributing to the dangerously low numbers of sharks in the oceans. Sharks are among the oldest predators to exist in the universe, way before the dinosaurs, and the inhumane finning brings the species to the brinks of extinction. This situation is bad for our oceans because the current system has them on the predator's list if they are eliminated the system is broken down. The question then remains; which species will be the predators to fill the void left by the sharks?
The Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act of 2017
In 2017, US representatives Ed Royce and Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan brought up the Shark Fin Sales Elimination act which prohibits the sale, purchase and possession of shark fins in the United States. This was an attempt to put an end to the slow painful and inhumane deaths the sharks suffer from after their fins have been harvested. It was also aimed at attaining healthy shark populations across the oceans and healthy economies for the different countries. Even though finning is profitable to individual businesses especially Chinese restaurants, it is not as beneficial to the entire economy compared to the money attained through shark viewing. This act helps eliminate the shark fin market in the 50 states of the USA and sets an example for other nations too.
The Ecological and Economic Effects of Shark Harvesting
There are several effects brought on by the stated shark harvests. For instance, the food chain is broken and the health of the oceans is noticeably reduced. Sharks maintain the lesser species in a food chain through shifting their prey's spatial habitat. This alters the diet and strategies of the other species. The spatial control also maintains seagrass and coral reef habitats, which is keeping the ocean healthy. Sharks also help remove the sick and the weak in the ocean as well as maintaining the balance between competing species to ensure diversity between the prey and the predators. However, the loss of sharks in the ecosystem has brought about a decline of seagrass beds, coral reefs, and lack of commercial fisheries (Graham 378).
The Destabilization of Marine Ecosystems and Economies
This effect on the ocean is attributed to a chain of activities starting with the fact that larger predatory fish multiplied with the shark absence in the ecosystem and they feed on the herbivores. As an effect, there will be fewer herbivores leaving room for macroalgae to expand into one alga dominance threatening the coral life system (Ward-Paige 16). In addition to that, the loss of sharks in the ocean indirectly leads to less diversity of species in the water. A study done in North Carolina showed an increased ray population attributed to the loss of sharks. The rays in the study ate up all the bay scallops leading to the closure of the fishery. There has also been a disappearance of clams, another bivalve species which can be attributed to the rays and indirectly to the sharks. This proves that their reduction in number has altered the species diversity in the ocean (Dulvy 30).
The Ineffectiveness of Shark Finning Bans
The loss of sharks also destabilizes the marine ecosystem. In this scenario, the loss has led to some species overpopulating and others underpopulating. The decimation of the tiger shark and blacktip populations on the east coast of the US has increased the octopus' population and also decreased the lobster population. Fewer sharks have also led to decimated shellfish population which in its own manner destabilizes the marine system. The lesser the shellfish they are, the less the water gets filtered thus there is decreased water quality in our oceans. We can also look at the loss of sharks as a factor for the overpopulation of certain species and possible transmission of diseases. Sharks prey on the old and the sick of the lower species and without sharks, the older species get to live on thus the over-population and the sick and weak remain with the species thus chances to transmit sickness are high.
The Economic Viability of Shark Fin Trade vs. Ecotourism
Shark finning does not support ecotourism but brings losses to this sector and the neighboring communities. This is because most divers and tourists pay a lot of money to see live sharks with different fish species in a vibrant habitat. Also, locations with high populations of sharks have a pristine biomass of high marine life which supports ecotourism and fishing. For example, a sea diver pays approximately $500 for a sea dive in such a habitat whereas a fisherman in shark fin trade gets $50 per fin. The economy gets approximately ten times more if the society supports ecotourism rather than shark finning (Cisneros-Montemayor 385).
The Continued Challenges in Eliminating Shark Fin Trade
These effects in mind, have, however, not led to the reduction of shark finning in the world. In fact, shark fin trading still occurs in the United States even after the ban. Looking at past data from 2011 after the conservation act was passed, the United States of America was still ranked position 7 in 2011 with an average of 32,483 captures of sharks in the country. This does not account for the imports to the country which were also approximated at 250 metric tons a year. The exports that financial year were put at a low of 38 metric tons, ranking the US at number 17. These are the data reported by the National Oceanic and Administrative Authority (NOAA). However, the Food and Agriculture Organization noted that another country claimed to have received 295 metric tons from the United States. This shows that the shark finning business has deep roots in the system and it operates outside the system too (Clarke 199).
Progress Towards Ending Shark Fin Trade
The 2017 ban on shark finning in the USA eliminates possession of shark fins, sale, or their distribution within the United States. Even though the ban is on all shark fins, it is especially against sharks' fins obtained at sea via inhuman practices and brought in. However, this is likely to be ineffective since California remains a big market for shark fins and there is still demand for the fins across the country. Also, the fins imported into America make up for 0.2% of the entire fin trade market. This means that the ban has an effect on the fin consumption in the country but does not make a decent dent in the global fin trade. Furthermore, most of the countries from whom shark fins in the USA are imported from have neither a conservation ban nor any ban enacted to prevent shark finning. America's largest shark fin imports were from China, Indonesia, Japan, and Thailand. These countries have no types of bans introduced. Australia and New Zealand have bans that require fins to be naturally attached to the shark when it is brought ashore.
Progress and Challenges Ahead
Looking on the bright side, there have been reductions in the amounts of shark fins traded globally since 2000 with a hike in 2010. This comes with all the sensitizations happening on the importance of sharks and the inhumanity of shark finning practices, and the shark finning prohibition act by the USA in 2000. Looking at China, the largest Shark fin importer, their imports in 2000 were at an estimated $392 billion and as of 2010, they were at $296 billion. Coincidentally, the imports in the United States as of 2000 were $2.403 billion and reduced to $1.895 billion in 2011. This gradual decline over the decade also applies to their exports. It is evidence showing that there should be an expected drop in shark fin trade in the USA leading to the total elimination of the trade in the country if the ban is upheld.
Conclusion
With the above insight, my final conclusion is that even though shark fin trade looks lucrative, it is not ideal for the marine ecosystem and for the eco-tourism of the country. The 2017 ban enacted by the USA is a progressive step that leads to preservation of shark life, the ocean and it is not bad for USA's economy because more the more the sharks, the higher the eco-tourism rates.
References
http://oceana.org/reports/international-trade-shark-fins-endangering-shark-populations-worldwide
https://saveourseas.com/how-many-sharks-are-caught-each-year/
http://louisbacon.com/lets-prove-that-americans-dont-want-shark-fins-in-the-us/
http://ocean.si.edu/ocean-news/shark-finning-sharks-turned-prey
Cisneros-Montemayor, Andrés M., et al. "Global economic value of shark ecotourism: implications for conservation." Oryx 47.3 (2013): 381-388.
Clarke, Shelley C., et al. "Population trends in Pacific Oceanic sharks and the utility of regulations on shark finning." Conservation Biology 27.1 (2013): 197-209.
Dent, Felix, and Shelley Clarke. "State of the global market for shark products." FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture technical paper 590 (2015): I.
Dulvy, Nicholas K., et al. "Extinction risk and conservation of the world’s sharks and rays." Elife 3 (2014).
Godin, Aurelie Cosandey, and Boris Worm. "Keeping the lead: how to strengthen shark conservation and management policies in Canada." Marine Policy
34.5 (2010): 995-1001.
Graham, Nicholas AJ, Mark D. Spalding, and Charles RC Sheppard. "Reef shark declines in remote atolls highlight the need for multi‐faceted conservation action." Aquatic Conservation: marine and freshwater ecosystems 20.5 (2010): 543-548.
Shiffman, D. S., and N. Hammerschlag. "Shark conservation and management policy: a review and primer for non‐specialists." Animal Conservation
19.5 (2016): 401-412.
Ward-Paige, Christine A., et al. "Large-scale absence of sharks on reefs in the greater-Caribbean: a footprint of human pressures." PloS one 5.8 (2010): e11968.
