Straits Times 28 Jun 08;
# By 2010, the Resorts World Sentosa marine conservation fund will provide $1 million each year for groups conducting research relevant to regional marine life. How will this help?
Executive director Peter Knights of environmental body WildAid tells SHOBANA KESAVA about how the sea's top predator has been devastated by the shark's fin trade
THE latest research on the effects of over-fishing has uncovered dire news on the shark population.
Four top predators - the hammerhead, blue, porbeagle and thresher sharks - have been decimated by 96 to 99.9 per cent since the 1800s.
# Why are sharks so important?
SHARKS are the flagships of the ocean, the equivalent of lions and tigers on land. As top predators, when they are removed from the ecosystem, the entire system is disrupted. They also reproduce slowly for a fish and so can take decades to recover from overfishing. Their rapidly diminishing populations are typical of what is happening as a result of overfishing worldwide.
They are also one of the oldest types of animals around, dating back some 400 million years. Although they survived the mass extinction that killed the dinosaurs 65 million years ago, some species may not survive just one human generation of industrialised fishing.
As well as their conservation, we are concerned that millions of sharks are 'finned' every year and their bodies dumped at sea, because shark meat has low value and takes up hold space meant for more valuable species like tuna, while the fins are in great demand, due especially to the booming Chinese economy.
# How can the trade in shark's fins be curbed?
FISHERIES management is often poor or non-existent and international protection is difficult because of a lack of historic catch data and no monitoring of the shark's fin trade by species. Until you list a species, there is no data and with no data, you can't get a species listed, so it's a Catch-22 situation for the sharks. Traditional conservation is always about trying to protect the supply.
But the reality is, the money involved often means that the protection isn't effective. Enforcement is not funded properly and people are paid high amounts to obtain these products.
I was originally an economist, not a biologist, and so WildAid's take on it is that if we can't influence the demand for these products, we cannot succeed in saving the populations.
The park director I interviewed in the Galapagos Islands in Ecuador said that the only thing people there could do to make more money than shark finning was the cocaine trade.
How do we fight that at the local level if the demand is so high? Our focus is that, when the buying stops, the killing can too. So we must reduce the demand if we are going to save this species.
It helps that iconic figures like action hero Jackie Chan, basketball star Yao Ming and other such figures have been helping to get our message across. Singapore stars who are popular in China would help too.
The environment is often bad news which people don't like to hear about. So, to keep it alive and interesting, the celebrity angle is just one of the ways.
# What about the argument that asking the Chinese not to consume shark's fin soup is an attack against their culture?
FIRSTLY, it's not in any culture to push species towards extinction, and saying things are 'cultural' implies culture is static. Culture hasn't changed more rapidly in history than it has done in Asia in the last 20 years. Our task is just to make this change part of everything else that is evolving at the same time.
At one time slavery was cultural in many societies, but that didn't mean it was right.
We're a fairly pragmatic organisation. I'm not vegetarian. And I'm not suggesting that there's anything wrong with eating sharks per se; it's just that there are too many people and too few sharks and the reality is, we need to change our behaviour before the soup runs out because there are no more sharks.
Shark's fin is consumed mainly in China and Japan, so we can't talk to other countries about its consumption, although we do talk to them about management and, in the case of the spiny dogfish (a small species of shark), about limiting the trade in fish and chips.
I have no problem with people eating sharks if it were done in an ethical and sustainable way. I take issue with the over-exploitation of a resource.
# How would you like to see governments changing?
INTERNATIONALLY, they should reverse the burden of proof as they have for the wild-bird trade in the United States.
Rather than having us prove that importing shark's fin damages the population, have importers prove that their activity is not illegal or destroying a population, because the overwhelming evidence is that shark trade is not managed properly and is not sustainable. It is easier to prove that only a certain amount is being taken in a sustainable way. There's no financial incentive to do it properly now, or disincentive for those who do damage.
Land the whole fish, not just the fins: That's what is just starting to happen. The US, European Union and some Latin American countries are starting to say that you have to land the whole shark, see it and monitor it so we're pushing for this internationally.
Then, we can prove that the fishing is sustainable and doesn't involve 'finning', so we can have certified shark's fins. The Marine Stewardship Council certifies fisheries where it is scientifically assessed and properly managed, and you can then have a premium brand which the public can buy, knowing that this is sustainable.
The shark's fin trade is so lucrative - a bowl of soup can range from US$10 (S$13.65) to US$150 - that you'd think it should be easier to manage. But the mark-up is huge for what is basically chicken soup with some cartilage in it and fisheries are very powerful in opposing change, so it isn't easy.
# What can Singaporeans do to promote shark conservation?
SINGAPORE has one of the most highly educated populations in the world and, as such, it can take a positive leadership role. Where we've always seen positive change in these areas is among younger, higher-educated people. People believe shark's fin is prestigious and if people in Singapore can say that there are other ways of showing prestige, then it is something that will be picked up in other parts of the Chinese world.
A Straits Times report of how 30 in 120 Chinese wedding banquets didn't serve shark's fin soup is a very positive thing to show - that you don't have to do it.
# By 2010, the Resorts World Sentosa marine conservation fund will provide $1 million each year for groups conducting research relevant to regional marine life. How will this help?
MARINE conservation is at least 30 years behind land-based conservation and the funding situation is the same. Such support is very significant, particularly in Asia, where there is very little funding opportunity for wildlife conservation.
Almost all organisations that work with animals, like Resorts World, have developed some conservation stance. There is sound business sense to it and the days of people wanting to see animals purely for entertainment are gone. People want to be educated when they take their children to see the animals. It's a global trend.
# Will you see success in your lifetime?
I ALWAYS get encouraged when people say 'I don't eat it any more' or 'I went to a wedding and it wasn't served', but the consumer base is massive, and growing with economic development in China. There are probably at least 100 million consumers there who couldn't afford shark's fin 10 years ago.
You've got to take the victories where you can get them. We managed to get the whale shark, the world's biggest fish, put on the endangered list and we will keep trying to get more species on that list.
This issue is not going to go away even in my grandchild's lifetime because the earth has finite resources and we are coming up against its limits - whether it is oil or water or global warming or anything else.
