Elsewhere on DAFF
Response to Draft 2011 National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks, received from Michael Beasley
PDF [82kb]The worth of sharks
Home to over 300 species of elasmobranchii, Australian waters should be a haven for sharks. Instead, their worth as top oceanic predators has been reduced to the value of a fin in a bowl of soup, or a serving of flake with some chips. These incredible creatures which have evolved over 350 million years are vital to the health of our oceans yet they are steadily being driven to the brink of extinction. Today’s sharks need to receive our full protection if we wish to be able to observe them in the decades and centuries to come.
Even if we do not realise the true ecological value of sharks, at least we are beginning to realize that living sharks are worth more than dead sharks from an economic point of view. A recent study conducted by the University of Western Australia put a huge value on individual Palauan sharks (up to $2 million during its lifetime) With Australia’s dive industry booming and many flocking to our abundant and pristine marine environments from around the globe the evidence is clear– sharks are far more valuable alive in the ocean than dead in a bowl of soup.
Sadly global shark populations are now down to their last 10% with several species being down to their last 1 or 2%. We are killing 100 million sharks a year using ever more efficient techniques. Most sharks are killed just for their fins similar to the rhino being hunted for its horn. Sharks, biologically like whales and dolphins, are extremely vulnerable to fishing impacts, for they are slow growing, have extremely low reproductive rates and are mostly long lived.
When the United Nations developed the International Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks in 1999, Australia agreed to take positive action to ensure the conservation and management of sharks and their long–term sustainable use. Since then Australia has adopted the Shark–plan 1 but we are yet to see any significant action taken for the conservation of Australian sharks. I am deeply concerned that the draft Shark–plan 2 is a document of inaction that will not serve to protect sharks in Australian waters. It lacks ‘teeth’, lacks action and lacks funding to support implementation. Rather than taking shark conservation forward, the draft plan is a backwards step from Shark–plan 1.
Australia’s approach to shark conservation risks falling well behind best international practice. I urge the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry to bring Australia into line by ensuring Shark–plan 2 is a real plan of action that can serve to protect sharks in Australian waters. To take our nation forward the Shark–plan 2 must:
- Identify and protect critical habitats for all shark and ray species listed under Federal, State and Territory legislation.
- Phase out commercial shark fishing within all Australian waters.
- Ban all imports of shark fins and shark products
- Enact Australian federal legislation to make it a crime to sell, possess and distribute shark fins
- Phase out the use of shark nets across Australia and replace them with modern shark deterrents
- Fully and immediately protect shark species listed as Endangered or Critically Endangered by the IUCN;
- Implement trials of actions to reduce shark and ray bycatch in fisheries.
- Ensure that the CSIRO/AFMA Ecological Risk Assessments are used to assess and determine risks to sharks from fishing.
- Improve transparency and accountability by ensuring that representatives from environmental NGOs are included in the Shark Implementation Review Committee, which is responsible for the execution and oversight of the plan.
- Include a resourcing plan and funding commitments to ensure the actions of the plan are delivered, the public is adequately educated and legislation is enforced.
- Help ensure that all sharks are landed with their fins naturally attached until the stronger regulations (listed above) come into effect.
Given that sharks hold a very important ecological role as apex predators in marine ecosystems we must be very careful when it comes to altering their numbers. Removing a significant number of sharks (as we have done in the past and continue to do) can lead to devastating impacts to entire food chains. When shark numbers are depleted entire food webs can shift leading to irreversible environmental and social impacts.
At present, our knowledge of about 47% of global shark species is too limited to even assess if they are individually threatened. Likewise, in Australia there are many shark species that may qualify as threatened but are referred to as ‘data deficient’. So far only 9 species of Australian sharks have been able to achieve protected status. In 2004, the National Oceans Office stated that the occurrence of sharks and rays in the Gulf region is scarce and their basic biological information is lacking for almost all species.
Endangered and threatened sharks on the IUCN Red List of Endangered Species include: speartooth shark, freshwater sawfish, great whites, grey nurse sharks, dwarf sawfish, green sawfish, white spotted guitarfish, grey reef shark, white tip reef shark, great hammerhead, scalloped hammerhead, eastern angel shark, eastern longnose spurdog, Harrisson’s dogfish, leafscale gulper shark, longfin mako, eastern sawshark, bronze whaler, silky shark, spinner shark, spotted eagle ray, tiger shark, whale shark, whitecheek shark, milk shark, pigeye shark, spotted wobbegong, and banded wobbegong.
Weak fising regulations and enforcement in the past have meant Australian shark numbers have continued to decline.For example The 2010 Gulf of Carpentaria Fin Fish Fishery Regulatory Impact Statement proposed that “an in–possession limit of 100 kg of shark fillet will be introduced to apply to all line fishers in the Gulf of Carpentaria at all times.” but without proper enforcement, I believe this proposal is flawed on the grounds that once the 100 kg quota is reached there is little to stop fishermen from dropping off their catch and returning to the water to catch more. New legislation must be unwavering and watertight.
I support Wildlife Queensland’s call for a halt to shark fishing in this fishery and a phase out of all shark fishing in Queensland waters. I would like to see this extended to every other Australian state and territory. Until that time, current commercial fishing regulations must urgently be amended so that all shark species landed at sea are required to have their fins attached until they reach land. There have been many cases where fishermen have attempted to throw off authorities by carrying the bodies of legally–caught finned and frozen sharks so that they can collect the fins of more valuable protected species and claim they are only targeting non–protected species.
I believe part of this problem is due to severely limited on board observer systems in areas where significant infringements have occurred. This allows fishermen to simply adjust their practices for the duration of an observed trip to ensure fishing areas chosen offer minimum opportunity for observers to witness illegal activities, and destructive fishing practices– in particular netting which has led to the drownings of dugong, turtle, protected sharks and inshore dolphin species. (The selection of the appropriate type of person to fill the observer role and the need to circulate such observers over a wide range of boats will be critical to the objectiveness of the data collected). Given this, the whole system is currently open to manipulation by virtually any member of the commercial fishing industry.
A hard quota that limits shark catches to no more than the historical annual average should also be set until such a time as shark fishing is completely phased out.
By allowing the targeted fishing of sharks and the removal of fins the Government is actively supporting the export of shark fins in the unsustainable and wasteful global shark fin industry.
Australia has a great opportunity to establish itself as a leader in the growing shark conservation movement. We cannot afford to fall behind the rest of the world on this very important issue. Instead we must aim to take a leaf out of the nations that areleading the way in shark conservation. Palau is just one of these nations.
Palau is home to 135 endangered or vulnerable shark and ray species. It is also the home to the world’s first shark sanctuary which was established on September 25, 2009. Palau’s shark sanctuary ensures commercial shark fishing within Palau’s EEZ is illegal. The sanctuary protects about 600,000 square kilometres of ocean– an area roughly the same size as France. President Toribiong who approved the Sanctuary also requested a worldwide ban on shark fishing– a request that Australia should heed.
Honduras quickly followed Palau’s lead to became the second country to sign a bill that prohibited the commercial fishing of sharks in its waters. The signing of the bill effectively transformed the 92,000 NM. EEZ of Honduras into a permanent sanctuary.
This shows there is a growing momentum in favor of sharks. Even though most countries still focus on a resource sustainable policy, I believe what we really need are full species protection measures like those shown by Honduras. But progress is made even though the level of protection is not yet where it needs to be. Several members of the Association of Pacific Island Legislatures (APIL) including Palau, Hawaii, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Guam adopted protective legislation that prohibits the possession, selling, offering for sale, trading, or distribution of shark fins. APIL’s general assembly requested their remaining members to adopt similar legislation for a unified regional ban.
APIL is comprised of the following nations: the Northern Marianas, Guam, Palau, Yap, Chuuk, Pohnpei, Kosrae, the Marshall Islands, Kiribati, American Samoa, Nauru and Hawaii.At the same time, the US Pacific West Coast states including Oregon, California, and Washington have all passed bills that ban the trade and distribution of shark fins.
In Fiji, the ministry of fisheries is drafting a legislation to ban the trade of shark meat. In part of Colombia, all shark fishing has been banned and in Mexico, a ban was implemented that prohibits the fishing of all shark species in federal waters on both coasts between May and August of each year.
When it comes to protecting the world’s oceans in general, we are still a long ways away from the goal set almost a decade ago. In 2002, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the World Summit on Sustainable Development made a commitment to protect 10 percent of the world’s oceans by 2012. With a few mere months to go, estimates are that only between one and two percent are now actually protected at some level, and only about 0.1 percent are classified as “no–take” zones. In light of this goal, it’s disappointing to think that less than 4% of Australia’s waters are protected, especially when our nation is home to some of the most pristine, fragile and bio–diverse waters on the planet.
I only hope that shark protective measures will increase further and faster if we want to save these apex predators from becoming extinct.
Grey nurse sharks
Fish Rock and Green Island are among the most important critical habitat areas for Grey Nurse Sharks on the east coast of Australia yet the recent roll back of safeguards at these sites leave totally inadequate measures for the ongoing protection of this critically endangered species.
This is just one further step in the full–frontal assault on the future of our nation’s marine environments. I find it disturbing that since taking office in March, the Coalition government has not only dissolved grey nurse shark protection in these areas but have also abolished measures introduced to give the Solitary Islands and Jervis Bay Marine Parks better protection.
On top of this there is no policy rationale to justify the NSW Government’s support for the moratorium on marine parks as the government already has the power to decide if and when it will declare a new marine park or alter marine park boundaries or zonings. Supporting sweeping and unjustified shifts in policy before the review has concluded suggests the government’s claims it is taking the politics out of marine parks are hollow.
Under the precautionary principle of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act it would be proper scientific procedure to carry out the review and only then remove any unnecessary protection. This is just common sense.
The Labor Government’s January 2011 Fish Rock and Green Island fishing restrictions were basically only allowing for surface fishing (trolling, spinning, and spear fishing) to be carried out near critical habitats and major aggregation sites of the Grey Nurse Shark. Studies have shown that other forms of line fishing (baited, lures, jigs etc.) have had an impact on the populations of the Grey Nurse and other sharks and as a result of these fishing methods, a number of these sharks have died or received injuries.
To quote the DPI’s own discussion paper regarding the protection of Grey Nurse Sharks,
“Hook and line fishing has been identified as the major threat to the species survival and is the largest source of Grey Nurse Shark mortality; causing approximately 12 known mortalities per annum. Hook and line fishing in areas important for the survival of threatened fish species was listed as a Key Threatening Process affecting Grey Nurse Sharks in 2002 by the NSW Fisheries Scientific Committee.”
Twelve "known" mortalities per year must be recognised as a serious impact on a critically endangered species of which there are estimated to be less than 500 left.
The Grey Nurse Shark study on the DPI website also states the following:
“Grey Nurse Sharks clearly interact with static baits deployed close to their aggregations. All bait types were taken at all times of day, and Grey Nurse Sharks were the only bait–takers after dusk. Even the least taken bait types resulted in frequent (10%) shark interactions, demonstrating that bottom–set baits pose a high interaction risk when deployed around grey nurse shark aggregations.”
Dr Will Robins’ study, Investigating the behavioural response of Grey Nurse Sharks to recreational lures and baited lines, which was conducted at Fish Rock also shows that Grey Nurse Sharks respond to bait and lure fishing.
The Stevens Review of Grey Nurse Shark protection, commissioned by the previous NSW government, also recommended “no commercial or recreational fishing (including spearfishing) within 1.5km of the critical habitat sites.
In 2008, the Australian Marine Sciences Association (AMSA) NSW issued a position statement in full support of marine protected areas and fully protected marine sanctuaries. AMSA is Australia’s largest association of marine scientists and this statement reinforces the need for a proper marine sanctuaries network for NSW, with sanctuary protection for Grey Nurse Shark sites as a priority.
Necropsies by Fisheries have shown sharks with external hooking often have hooks inside their throat or stomach and this can lead not only to outside deformation but also to a slow death through internal infection and starvation.
The CSIRO considers hooking of the Grey Nurse Shark to be a key threatening process.
Bansemer and Bennett state in their study “The closure of Fish Rock to all forms of fishing within at least a 1 km radius is justified and would likely result in a significant decrease in the hooking rate of this species and potentially assist with the Grey Nurse Shark’s recovery.”
On the other side of the science, there is not one peer reviewed paper in the world which says sanctuary areas or marine parks do not work.
Sadly it seems the AMSA , DPI, CSIRO and other credible scientific research bodies has been brushed aside and the NSW Government has instead sought the opinions of prevalent and biased recreational fishing communities. For obvious reasons, there is little credible science to be found in these views. The fishermen who spend a majority of their time above the water, largely oblivious to the happenings below them, cannot be relied upon for thorough and accurate information regarding the true impact they’re having on Grey Nurse Sharks.
If anyone is to know the true plight of the Grey Nurse Sharks and their natural environment as well as the scientists who study them, surely it is the people who dive with them. These are the people who have witnessed first–hand the impact that recreational fishing has had on the Grey Nurse Sharks and their ecosystem at large, yet they are clearly under–represented when their opinions come up against those of the larger fishing communities.
Dive operators at South West Rocks who regularly visit local Grey Nurse Shark aggregation sites regularly report seeing hooked and injured sharks. These divers continue to contribute to the mounting photographic evidence that fishing is having a sustained and significant negative impact on the sharks.
Each and every day of delay for strong protection measures presents an unacceptable risk that another Grey Nurse Shark will be killed or injured.
I call on the governments to heed the scientific advice before them and provide better protection to the Grey Nurse Sharks by upgrading their habitats to the status of Commonwealth Marine Parks. These areas must be set aside to ensure the future health of our oceans. They should never become vote buying tools of federal, state, and local governments.
With less than 500 Grey Nurse Sharks left along the east coast of Australia, action to protect their key sites needs to be immediate.
Shark nets
Shark nets are an out–dated and barbaric method of ‘protecting swimmers’.
This practice was implemented in the 1930’s and over the past 70 years has never been updated to make use of harmless, modern technological devices which now exist to deter sharks such as Shark Shields
Australian shark meshing programs continue to kill vulnerable and endangered shark species, and indiscriminately kills other non–target species such as dolphins, turtles dugong whales and their calves. This happens 24 hours a day while the nets are in operation
The tourism industry in Australia relies on live sharks to attract tourism dollars (for example Great Barrier Reef dive tourism industry), and the Shark Nets in Australia are showing the world that Australia is lagging in the field of marine conservation and protection.
In New South Wales, the shark meshing program has been officially listed as a “Key Threatening Process” to marine life by the NSW Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries under the NSW Fisheries Management Act 1994 (FM Act), and the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act). With this understanding by the NSW Government it is confusing and ridiculous that the NSW shark meshing program is still in use.
In QLD from 1985 – 2008 (23 years) the Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries reported that 28,830 Sharks were caught and subsequently died within the shark control program. Queensland use a mix of species selective drum–lines and highly unselective nets.
It is imperative that action is taken immediately to remove the shark nets from Australian beaches to stop the pointless killing of marine life that occurs along our coastline everyday.
Below are several common misconceptions about shark nets:
Misconception 1
‘The shark nets are a physical barrier that prevent sharks from reaching the shallow swimming areas of the surf beaches.’
Reality – "The shark mesh nets do not act as a complete barrier to sharks reaching beaches as they are not permanently set in the water, do not cover the whole length of the beach, and do not extend from the water surface to the seabed. In fact, approximately 40% of shark entanglements occur on the beach side of the nets, because sharks are able to swim over and around the nets."
Misconception 2
‘The shark nets act as a deterrent to shark migration patterns and sharks actively avoid the nets.’
Reality – No research has been conducted to further test this hypothesis and it remains unfounded. Nevertheless, it has been stated as fact in the media more than once in recent years, ‘The only reason for the nets is to kill sharks to reduce their populations’.
Misconception 3
‘If the shark nets are removed, shark attacks would rapidly increase.’
Reality – Sharks have a very low reproductive potential. As a result recovery of reduced populations is very slow, which is why sharks (and rays) are in decline throughout the world.
Misconception 4
‘The small number of threatened and protected grey nurse sharks and great white sharks caught annually in the shark meshing nets are really an insignificant number and do not constitute a threat to their survival.’
Reality – "The Grey Nurse Shark population is extremely susceptible to mortality from fishing. In modelling experiments, all the scenarios where fishing–related mortality was present, the total grey nurse shark population declined. " Shark meshing is gill–net fishing, and must be included in that directive.
Sharks in the Great Barrier Reef
There are about 125 species of sharks and rays on the Great Barrier Reef, however little is known about the biology or ecology of most of these species. For most species, basic information about how long they live, how often they reproduce or how quickly they grow has not been studied.
Scientists are yet to find one single shark fishery that can be described as sustainable – including the fisheries catching sharks in our own waters.
In 2008, the Australian government proposed to establish dedicated shark fin fisheries in the Marine Parks of Moreton Bay, Great Sandy Straits and the World Heritage listed Great Barrier Reef. The Great Barrier Reef is the largest coral reef system in the world. It plays a key role in the Australian economy, attracting more than 2 million tourists a year who spend some $3.3 billion of reef–related industries. The coral sea that lies just beyond its boundary is teeming with some of world’s most stunning and unique fish and shark life yet many of these species remain unprotected.
70 000 sharks are legally allowed to be taken from the Great Barrier Reef each year. This figure is horrendous enough on its own, however, illegal shark fining is also rife in our waters. By the government removing or failing to grant marine park protection to significant shark aggregation sites they are putting sharks everywhere at grave risk. Sharks are being illegally removed from Australian waters by the tens–of–thousands and as the demand for shark fins increase in the Asian markets this figure continues to steadily grow.
Shark fining is an unsustainable and barbaric fishing method. An estimated 75 million shark are killed each year for their fins alone. During the shark finning process the shark is hurled onto a boat where its own weight is capable of crushing its organs. The fins are then cut from a shark’s body and the shark is then thrown back into the ocean alive. Sharks need to keep swimming to pass water over their gills to breathe, or they suffocate. With their fins removed, they will either bleed to death, suffocate or be slowly preyed upon by other marine life. In some cases it will take the shark days to die an agonising death.
The future of Australia’s sharks
We need sharks. We need them to control the fish and other marine life that control the air we breathe. We need them if we are to have any future hope for this planet.
Given the above information, it is evident that Australia must become a leader in shark conservation. We must set an example for others nations and develop a new era of shark awareness . I therefore call on our leaders and decision makers to heed the scientific advice available to them and ensure the survival of our sharks now and into the future.
Michael Beasley
15 Jul 2011