Better to be safe than sorry about sharks

Straits Times Forum 22 Dec 11;

SHARKS are caught virtually everywhere and indeed some member countries of the European Union are catching, consuming and trading sharks on a big scale ('They are not endangered; blame Western nations, not Asian tastebuds' by Mr Tan Keng Tat; last Thursday).

While it is true that not all sharks are definitively endangered, it is also true that we cannot be sure they are not, because there is insufficient scientific data on the number of sharks left today.

A high proportion of the species of sharks is listed as data deficient in the 'Red List' of threatened biodiversity compiled by the World Conservation Union.

There is no doubt that there are uncertainties with regard to the current conservation status of sharks.

So, it is better to be safe than sorry. Many shark species are very slow-growing, which means that a sudden drop in numbers can threaten their survival and hinder their chances of survival.

Christina Lee (Ms)
Campaigns Officer
Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (Acres)

Saving sharks: Not wrong to target Asia
Straits Times Forum 23 Dec 11;

MR TAN Keng Tat is wrong about shark-finning practices ('Misconceptions about sharks'; Dec 15).

Only the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) determines risk status - not, as Mr Tan claims, the United Nations Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites).

While Cites governs trade protection of species, it is based on the votes of 175 governments, and votes are subject to economic incentives, fin industry lobbyists and regulatory enforcement difficulties. For example, four proposals were introduced last year to list eight IUCN endangered shark species on a Cites global trade treaty, but Japan and China rejected the proposals.

It is not difficult to see why - shark's fin soup is a huge industry in this region. While much of the finning may not take place in Asia, it is to feed a voracious Asian appetite, and longlining is one of the newer tools of the trade.

Thankfully, eight countries signed a declaration in September to create shark sanctuaries in their waters.

Mr Tan compares sharks to frogs and snails, but unlike these animals, sharks cannot be farmed en masse. Sharks reproduce very late and have very few young, making them biologically vulnerable to overfishing.

Many companies are trying to drive change. Singapore's Fairmont Hotel, Cold Storage Singapore and China's Peninsula Hotel Group have removed shark's fin products from their inventory.

Basketball star Yao Ming, owner of the aptly named Shanghai Sharks, is now a WildAid ambassador to raise awareness about this issue.

More than 73 million sharks are killed each year for 5 per cent of their cartilaginous body parts that do not even have a taste. Once we fin these sharks to extinction, our children and grandchildren will inherit an irreversibly damaged marine ecosystem.

Let us support the sharks during the upcoming Chinese New Year, by giving them a holiday from our dining tables, and choosing abalone, fish maw soup or ginseng soup instead.

Dr Juliana Chan

Misconceptions about sharks
They are not endangered; blame Western nations, not Asian tastebuds
Straits Times Forum 15 Dec 11;

THE World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) Singapore's claim that more than 180 species of sharks were listed on the endangered list last year has no merit ('Removing shark's fin from the menu'; last Friday).

Last year's United Nations Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites) meeting in Doha declared that sharks are not an endangered species.

Members of the convention, who represent 175 governments, define an endangered species as one which is threatened with extinction and ban international commercial trade in such species.

The convention did not list any shark species as endangered.

Instead, the convention only sought trade regulation for three (basking shark, great white, and whale shark) out of about 400 species of sharks.

The three are not necessarily threatened with extinction.

Under Singapore's Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act of 2006, the same three species are similarly listed for trade regulation, and not on the list of species that are endangered or threatened with extinction.

Also, proposals to regulate trading of four more shark species at the Doha meeting were rejected.

Trying to stop a traditional culinary practice, especially when sharks are not an endangered species, is culturally insensitive and is bound to fail.

It is like asking the Japanese to give up their tuna sashimi, the French their frogs' legs and snails, Western socialites their caviar canapes or Englishmen their fish and chips, made from millions of pounds of meat from sharks like the porbeagle and the spiny dogfish.

The reality is that the main threats to the sharks are the well-equipped pelagic fisheries of developed nations like Spain, Portugal, France, Britain and the United States, using some 10km of longlines and up to 10,000 hooks.

These large-scale fishing dragnets target the more valuable blue fin tuna and swordfish, but millions of sharks are caught unintentionally and killed instead.

The Singapore chapter of the WWF's mission to save sharks is commendable. But instead of dwelling on polemics, it should campaign for longlines to be banned or regulated globally as this will reduce the bycatch exponentially.

Tan Keng Tat

Only 5 deaths annually, and sharks don't target humans for killing

IN THE article ('Hong Kong's shark's fin traders feel pressure to change'; straitstimes.com, Nov 28), a Hong Kong seller commented that there were so many sharks that they would kill us if we did not kill them.

It is a common misperception that sharks kill or eat humans. Popular culture has portrayed sharks as mindless man-eating machines that have developed a taste for human flesh, a la the hit movie Jaws.

Although millions of people swim, surf, snorkel and dive in the oceans annually, an average of five people die from shark attacks yearly.

People who are attacked by sharks usually die from blood loss, not because they are eaten. Sharks swim faster and are stronger and bigger than us. If they were out to kill us, diving with sharks would not have been possible, and the fatality rate would far exceed five.

On the other hand, the chances of getting killed by falling coconuts, lightning and bee stings far outnumber shark-induced fatalities.

Sharks play important roles in the marine ecosystem. They weed out the weak, sick and the dead marine life, thus preventing an outbreak of diseases. They improve the gene pool of their prey by leaving the stronger ones behind to reproduce.

As apex predators, their absence will affect the food chain negatively all the way down to marine vegetation and shellfish.

As Chinese New Year looms next month, we will repeat our shark conservation campaign held earlier this year.

We urge consumers to make informed decisions and celebrate the festive season with sustainability in mind.

Most reputable Chinese restaurants can offer ready alternatives to the traditional shark's fin soup for customers.

Jennifer Lee (Ms)
Founder
Project: FIN

He'll say it again with facts... Sharks aren't endangered, don't blame Asia
Straits Times Forum 24 Dec 11;

DR JULIANA Chan's claim that more than 73 million sharks are killed each year for 5 per cent of their cartilaginous body parts has no merit ('Saving sharks: Not wrong to target Asia'; yesterday).

Dr Shelly Clarke, whose doctorate is on the topic, estimated that 'as of 2000, the fins of 38 million sharks per year were being traded but that the number could range as low as 26 million or as high as 73 million'.

But she warned that she frequently reads the 73 million figure without any reference to the fact that it was her highest estimate; and almost as often she reads an estimate of 100 million for which she cannot find any scientific basis.

'Even more troubling,' she added, 'some sources quote these figures as the number of sharks killed for their fins. The truth is that no one knows how many sharks are killed for their fins'.

She cautioned that 'exaggeration and hyperbole run the risk of undermining conservation campaigns' and 'selective and slanted use of information devalues and marginalises researchers, who are working hard to impartially present the data'.

The United Nations Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites), whose members represent 175 governments, is the only global watchdog to regulate trade on endangered species, not the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

Cites has not listed any shark species on the endangered list and proposals to regulate trading on a few more species last year in Doha were rejected as they could not garner a two-thirds majority of the democratic votes.

Under the laws of Singapore, Britain, the United States, Japan, China and Malaysia, to name a few, no shark is listed on the endangered list.

Dr Chan's claim that 'longlining is one of the newer tools of the trade' to 'feed a voracious Asian appetite' is rhetoric. Pragmatism dictates that these fisheries target not sharks but more valuable swordfish and giant bluefin tuna.

But sadly, millions of sharks will continue to be caught unintentionally in longlines and killed by the industrial-scale fisheries in the West.

Excoriating Asia will not stop the deadly bycatch; only legislation or regulation will.

Tan Keng Tat