I'd like to meet:

More Sharks Added To Endangered List

.February 23 2007 at 02:08AM By Jeremy Lovell---Scientists added several species of deep sea sharks on Thursday to the World Conservation Union's (IUCN) endangered Red List due to overfishing.---At a meeting in Oxford, England, the scientists listed all three species of thresher sharks - known for their scythe-like tails - as "vulnerable globally", and moved the short-fin mako to "vulnerable today" from "near threatened".---"The qualities of pelagic sharks - fast, powerful, wide-ranging - too often lead to a misconception that they are resilient to fishing pressure," said Sarah Fowler of the IUCN's Shark Specialist Group.---"This week, leading shark scientists from around the world highlighted the vulnerability of these species to overfishing and concluded that several species are now threatened with extinction on a global scale," she added.------The scientists decided that the blue shark, the world's most abundant and heavily fished pelagic shark, should remain in the "near threatened" category despite a decline in numbers of 50-70 percent in the North Atlantic and scant conservation measures.---Scientists later added the semi-pelagic scalloped hammerhead shark to the "endangered" category, while the pelagic stingray was put in the "least concern" category which is still part of the IUCN's Red List.---The Red List categories range from "extinct" to "not evaluated".---Pelagic sharks are taken unintentionally in high seas during swordfish and tuna fishing, and increasingly targeted as new markets develop for their meat and demand grows for their fins.---Bans on shark finning - slicing off a shark's fins - have been adopted for most international waters, but standards of enforcement are low, IUCN said.---"Despite mounting threats and evidence of decline, there are no international catch limits for pelagic sharks," said Sonja Fordham, Shark Alliance's policy director.---"The workshop results underscore the urgent need for international fishery commissions to limit fishing for these vulnerable species and strengthen regulations on the wasteful practice of finning," she added.---She said the hammerhead was among the most endangered species from shark finning because their meat had very low value but their fins were highly prized for the Asian delicacy shark-fin soup.---

Add A Banners to your Profile.

~

~ ..

~This page is dedicated to creating awareness about the annihilation of our oceans top predator. This page does not accept donations.Please Tell Your Friends To SaveTheShark,,!

Shark Fin Soup Is A Recipe For Disaster

For at least a year if not two, participants at the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) predicted one or more "non-use" NGOs would launch a made-for-media campaign against the sustainable use of sharks. The pattern and methodology was equally predictable. The first surprise, however, came in the timely inclusion of "Jaws" author, Peter Benchley (it is the 25th anniversary of his blockbuster movie by the same name, complete with a two-cassette "anniversary" version of the film for video). --- The second surprise was that the NGO/animal rights/environmental groups eyeing such an enterprise created a wholly new entity comprise of Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) staffers, called WildAid. Both are very deft moves. --- Organized ostensibly to "reduce consumption of shark fin soup" thereby devaluing the hunt shark's fins, the effort is on target to blitz the worldwide media with its allegations of environmental danger to sharks and rash claims of widespread "shark finning" for a 30-day period beginning July 20. Initial activities focused on the largely Singapore-based Shark Fin soup industry, enabling the anti-soup activists to lace their campaign rhetoric aimed at an ill-informed Western audience with innuendoes that play to the anti-Asian sentiment and their audience's ignorance of Asian cultural practices. ------ The campaign is financed by the San Francisco-based, Barbara Delano Foundation. Peter Knights, the WildAid shark soup spokesman and an EIA co-founder, is said to have effective control over the Foundation and directs grants from its endowment rumored to be $200 million although $40 million is the figure used in its literature. Knights is said to direct foundation grants primarily to EIA-involved projects. --- The Barbara Delano Foundation itself was created in 1985 by Barbara Delano Gauntlett, granddaughter of Dr. William E. Upjohn, founder of the Upjohn pharmaceutical company. Suwanna Gauntlett, president of the Foundation, is the only non-EIA member on the WildAid board. Ironically, the pharmaceutical industry is under equally heavy attack by many of the same NGOs backing the WildAid effort for its live-saving research involving plants and animals.The genesis of the WildAid campaign was the NGO-orchestrated and Barbara Delano Foundation-financed "Shark Conference 2000" held in Hawaii this past February. Holding "conferences" with select government and academic attendees is also characteristic of NGO methodology. It's a technique developed by the anti-shrimp farm and fishery movement with their "Shrimp Tribunal" in the early '90s. Then they rented a meeting room at the UN Complex in New York to give the proceedings the illusion of UN sponsorship. A brilliant PR move. --- Equally characteristic of NGO rhetoric associated with campaigns such as WildAid's anti-soup crusade are the deceptively manipulative devices employed. For example, WildAid is decrying the shark fin soup industry because of the great value placed on shark fins. At the same time, the WildAid literature says the market for shark fins is threatening poor fishermen from impoverished fishing villages throughout the world who depend upon shark meat for a "cheap" source of protein. At the same time, they ignore the reality that those same coastal fishermen not only savor shark meat to feed their families but also supply a great deal of the fins to the soup industry in order to bolster their meager income. India, for example, is a major fin provider. --- If WildAid truly cared about sharks and people too it would recognize the fact that the sustainable use of shark resources provides both, meat for protein as well as economic benefits from selling the fins, hides, cartilage, carcasses and oil in a sustainable manner. Apparently attempting to inject reality into an issue is detrimental to the new NGO's fundraising and headline grabbing plans.---The anti-Shark Fin Soup campaign led by WildAid, a new face on the "non-use" NGO circuit, has begun with the characteristic name-calling and perfunctory denials. The sparring by opposing sides provides interesting eco-theater. Unfortunately, the earth and its inhabitants cannot often afford such entertainment when serious matters of survival are at hand. A close look at WildAid and its rhetoric brings that point home. One tends to speculate how WildAid's campaign, that claims its aim is to decrease consumption of shark fin soup to remove pressure on shark populations, might differ if it had been launched in the West rather than in Singapore. In Singapore, WildAid spokesman, Peter Knights, toes a fine line. He avoids the overt or implied prejudice fostered by the international NGO community's continual portrayal of Asian nations and cultures as predators on the environment ruthlessly in search of exotic foods and medicines. Instead, he maintains a polite, if somewhat restrained public tolerance of traditional Asian dietary practices. --- Knights is quick to tell the Asian press that his group simply wants to "bring shark (fin soup) consumption to sustainable levels". Who determines what "sustainable levels" of soup consumption might be or who is or is not allowed to eat the delectable dish are fine points Mr. Knights neglects to mention. Images of an international "soup police" beguile the imagination. --- The champion of shark fin soup is Dr. Giam Choo Hoo, a member of England's Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons. At the opening bell of WildAid's campaign, Dr. Giam squared off against Mr. Knights and WildAid's fantastically wealthy benefactor, the Barbara Delano Foundation. --- The San Francisco-based Barbara Delano Foundation is the creation of an heir to the Upjohn Pharmaceutical family fortune with reserves estimated publicly to be $40 million, but within animal rights/environmental circles rumored to be five times that amount. Mr. Knights has been termed variously the Foundation's "program director" and its "executive director". Regardless of which Foundation hat he wears, he is said to insure that the Foundation's resources place the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) projects as their highest funding priority. --- Dr. Giam's first body punch doubled Mr. Knights who howled "foul" in protest. Dr. Giam labeled Mr. Knights and his WildAid colleagues "extremists". Not so rejoined, Mr. Knights. In an editorial response, Mr. Knights asked "is the UN extremist, too?" and delivered a quote attributed to the UN Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO) on the plight of sharks that appeared to place FAO in WildAid's camp. Touché? Well, almost. --- That FAO quote was the opening line of a 1998 FAO press release. Ironically, the release was trumpeting the very thing Knights and WildAid denies exists: a global shark fishery management plan. --- The subsequent report issued by FAO, that included the draft of the shark plan, roundly condemned the press release as inflammatory and inaccurate. Penning an exaggerated opening line for a press release is expected from PR personnel hoping to attract the eye of a news editor and draw a pat on the back from his or her boss. Using only that hyperbolic single line is not the stuff upon which a sound conservation program is built. --- An examination of Mr. Knights and WildAid's website demonstrates other unseemly exaggerations directly related to his attempt to wrap the credibility of the United Nations and FAO about their "save the shark from soup" campaign. --- On their homepage, WildAid claims "there are no international management plans (for sharks) whatsoever". Yet, the news release Mr. Knights waved in defense of his organization against Dr. Giam was touting the FAO's creation of just such a plan..--- ---At the request of the 1994 Conference of Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), FAO began work on such a plan almost immediately. In 1998, representatives from 80 FAO member nations met and hammered out a draft management plan. Under its guidelines, member nations are expected to have their own "shark plans" in effect by the next convening of FAO's Committee on International Fisheries (COFI) in 2001. --- Apparently too, Mr. Knights and WildAid never read any other FAO literature on sharks beyond that two-year old release. If they had, WildAid's website claim that "no effort has been put into the management of shark catches" or that there is "very little data on overall shark catches" should never have been made. The report on FAO's meeting on the "management" of "shark fisheries" stated that work on collecting such data had begun by no less than nine regional fishery management organizations at least two years before WildAid was hatched. --- The Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC), the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas (ICES), the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization, the Sub-regional Fisheries Commission of West African States, the Latin American Organization for Fishery Development, the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission, the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT), and the Oceanic Fisheries Programme of the Pacific Community all sounded the alarm to member nations to collect needed data. A number had already established regional databases to store and analyze shark information. --- A "who's who" of WildAid's staff and officers tends to further support Dr. Giam's allegation that the WildAid campaign was an extreme attempt by extreme people. Three of four listed principals are EIA. The forth is the President of the Barbara Delano Foundation, Barbara Delano's daughter, Suwanna Gauntlett. There are few peers in the international animal rights and environmental movement as extreme as EIA. --- Truth is the first principle needed if we are to preserve the world's wild places and wildlife, on land or sea, for present and future generations. WildAid and its campaign against shark fin soup appears to have little or no regard for factual accuracy in the claims they levy against shark fishermen, soup makers and consumers alike. No matter the hat they wear or the organization they represent, extremists who shield the truth from the probing light of the public make poor champions of sharks or any other cherished part of the earth. ---The growing debate over the worldwide status of sharks has become quite intriguing from the point of view of a life long professional conservationist. From my vantage and experience as former Secretary General of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and as head of IWMC- World Conservation Trust today, I must say that the arguments put forth by both sides seem plausible and persuasive. However, cooperation, not confrontation, is the hallmark of any successful conservation effort for any species, terrestrial or aquatic. --- On the issues surrounding sharks, there are certain areas of agreement. The first is that the alleged practice of "finning" live sharks is both wasteful and deplorable. No one defends such behavior. Consumers and fisheries alike must take steps to prohibit the practice and punish the practitioners. --- The second, apparently, is that with the exception of latent or overt bias by those who condemn any cultural practice or tradition that differs from their own, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with consuming shark fin soup. To the contrary, anyone who has partaken of the dish easily understands the passions of its many champions. --- Third, both sides, publicly at least, subscribe to the principle that "sustainable use" is or should be the end goal of any credible and successful conservation effort. --- With so much, apparently in common, why an organization lead by Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) founder, now WildAid Executive Director, Peter Knights would attack statements made by Dr. Giam Choo Hoo, a member of England's Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons on the other? --- The answer lies in the credibility of each side's claims. A close look finds one side woefully lacking in any semblance of credibility particularly if one attempts to follow or even identify any strain of consistent logic in its arguments. --- WildAid, via its website, claims that economically depressed subsistence fishermen in India, Kenya and Brazil "depend on shark meat as a low cost source of protein" and condemn the quest for shark fins by the shark fin soup market as taking food from their families' mouths. It strains the imagination to believe that destitute shark fishermen in these nations would seek only "cheap" meat and not sell valuable fins of sharks to supplement their meager income. WildAid's illogical portrayal also ignores India's role as a major supplier of fins used by the soup industry. --- WildAid's discussion of sharks as "incidental bycatch" of commercial fisheries seeking other "more valuable species" is equally puzzling. WildAid claims the demand for shark fin has lead to widespread "finning" where "90-95% of the shark is wasted" in part because "its meat is difficult to store". Given the worldwide commercial market for shark species such as mako, thresher, spiny dogfish and others, what species has meat so radically different that makes it so "difficult to store" versus the flesh of commercially sought sharks. WildAid never says. In fact, it never says what species are "finned" and their meat, teeth, cartilage, hides, oil etc. wasted by a fishing vessel from any part of the world. --- The suggestion is that "finning" live animals is widespread. No evidence to that effect is offered. Economically, such waste is hard to conceive by any nation. Isolated incidents are acknowledged. But, lacking supporting evidence, to call it a pressure driving shark species to the brink of extinction appears the grossest sort of hyperbole. --- Examples of WildAid's misrepresentations not only in words but in photos too abound on the WildAid website. One example is a photograph of a dead hammerhead shark that appears to contradict a number of points the group strives to make. The caption describes the hammerhead as "caught by Indian fishermen" and adds "although its meat has little value, its fins make an attractive target." --- Perhaps, WildAid is relying on readers' short attention span and shorter memory to recall that earlier the website said these same Indian fishermen are supposed to object to the fin trade and relish shark flesh. Contrary to WildAid's characterization of hammerhead shark flesh, the United Nations Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO) says these sharks are "taken in coastal fisheries around the world" with their "meat utilized fresh, fresh-frozen, dried, salted and smoked for human consumption." Hides are processed for leather, oil for vitamins, and what remains is used for fishmeal. Someone values their flesh. --- Speaking of credibility, another WildAid photo on their homepage purports to show sea turtles "caught in shrimp nets," also in India. Take a close look. The Indian fisherman who uses the nets shown in the picture has to be either a multimillionaire or incredibly fat or both. The mesh size of the nets is so large, that the shrimp they catch must weigh between ten and fifteen pounds each. --- WildAid's least credible statement is "there are no international management plans whatsoever" for shark. FAO, at the urging of CITES in 1994, began work on a global shark fishery management plan. That work was completed in 1998. In February of 1999, the Committee on Fisheries of the FAO adopted an International plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks, contrary to the trumpeted claim by EIA/WildAid that no management plan exists. FAO hopes all member nations will implement their own "shark plans" based on the FAO guidelines by the next meeting of FAO's Committee on International Fisheries (COFI) in 2001. --- Conservation of sharks or any species depends upon cooperation. Cooperation is fostered by trust and trust is built on the ability of all parties to speak and act credibly. WildAid appears lacking in the latter. For that reason, WildAid's campaign to "inform consumers" of the circumstances that bring the fins to their soup, should leave those same consumers satisfied that the world's shark population is doing just fine, no thanks to WildAid.--- ---Imagine life surrounded by celebrities, rock and movie stars and starlets made larger than life by Hollywood special effects and multi-million dollar incomes. Then ask yourself how is it that animal issues attract so glittering an array of personalities while starving and sick children draw the attention and care of saintly septuagenarians like Mother Teresa? The newly founded animal group, WildAid, and its campaign to save sharks from shark fin soup pots are no different. Unfortunately, most of Hollywood's pretty people appeared busy for the send-off of its "save the shark soup" campaign, so WildAid had to settle for aging author and mega-millionaire, Peter Benchley, as it's celebrity icon. Looks and age aside, WildAid's coupe is that their shark crusade happened to coincide with the 25th Anniversary of Benchley's epic film, "JAWS." But all is not lost. --- Benchley, on a Hollywood-sponsored promotion tour for the newly repackaged "Anniversary" edition of the film on video, is able to advocate for sharks at no additional charge. --- While Benchley may lack Pierce Brosnan's good looks (Brosnan likes to front for the extreme animal rights group, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals or PETA) or sex appeal of a super model, he definitely falls into the category of celebrity animal advocate a la Brigitte Bardot. Both he and Bardot are past their productive professional years and well into "old age" and relish the new-found attention brought with close association with animal groups and causes. As a result, both are now white-hot passionate about animals. Perhaps one could coin the phrase describing this phenomenon as the "Brigitte Bardot Syndrome." --- In many ways, Bardot is archetypal of the extreme elements within the animal and environmental movements. Bardot knows how to capture media attention, with or without her clothes. Like the extreme animal groups, she holds herself as a repository of "correct thinking" and does not hesitate to unleash her anger against any who doubt her position even when fact and science suggest otherwise. In a word, like so many animal and environmental groups, Ms. Bardot is "intolerant." --- Intolerance is a very appropriate word to describe Brigitte Bardot and extreme animal/environmental groups in general. In 1997, she was found guilty and fined by the French Courts for her open advocacy of racial intolerance toward non-French cultures, in particular, émigrés from Islamic nations. Animal groups like WildAid, despite their protests to the contrary, really are intolerant of the traditions and heritage of cultures other than their own. WildAid, founded and populated by members of the Environmental Investigative Agency (EIA), may claim it harbors no ill sentiment toward Asian cultures. But, its EIA lineage suggests differently. --- EIA has been party to or led campaigns against Asian traditional medicine, against cultures around the world, including some of the most endangered, whose diets include whale and marine mammal products, and against rural Africans denying them their sovereign right to manage their own wild resources, to mention a few. ---Wildlife in the Gulf of Mexico

--- Benchley's press tour circling the globe has indeed opened numerous opportunities to spread the "gospel of sharks" according to WildAid. In one press interview, WildAid campaign director Peter Knights is quoted as hoping to enlist the world's children to "put in a good word for the sharks." One would hope that any good word from children echoes sound conservation practices and biological facts regarding the species. Indeed WildAid and the world have a responsibility to teach children the truth, so they, like "informed consumers" of more advanced years, may make equally informed decisions. --- To date, WildAid, EIA and others have exhibited a cavalier attitude toward the truth and demonstrate a penchant for mouthing emotion-filled but fact-empty statements about sharks and the environment in general. Let's hope our children learn to distinguish between the "donut" of resource conservation and the "hole" being peddled by WildAid and friends. --- As Benchley parrots the claims about sharks espoused by WildAid, yet unfounded by science and fact, it is not without great irony that one British interviewer brought up an --- Writing in Financial Times (July 15/16 Weekend FT), Nigel Andrews noted that a spat between "JAWS" producer/director Steven Spielberg shortly after the film hit the big screen resulted in Spielberg naming a character "Major Benchley" in his film, "CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND." Major Benchley, according to Andrews, is the person in the film "who misinforms and misdirects the UFO watchers." It seems Mr. Benchley is reprising the role of Major Benchley by "misinforming and misdirecting" the press and public on sharks, shark fin soup and the cultures who value both. --- When all is said and done and the sound and fury surrounding the WildAid/Benchley anti-soup tour subsides, perhaps the best position to take is this: Bless the animals and the children but the company and compassion of Mother Teresa is preferable to Mr. Benchley and Brigitte Bardot.(Have you hugged an Apex Predator today?)

vidyokanal ~~~~~
~~

a

Music:

Click on picture to play with Shelly

SeaShepherd.org on "longline fishing"

It is the policy of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society to directly intervene to stop the illegal use of longlines.~LONGLINE CAMPAIGN~What is a Longline?~A longline is a fishing line usually made of monofilament. The length of the line generally ranges from 1.6km (1 mile) to as long as 100km (62 miles). The line is buoyed by styrofoam or plastic floats. Every hundred or so feet, there is a secondary line attached extending down about 5m (16 feet). This secondary line is hooked and baited with squid, fish, or in cases we have discovered, with fresh dolphin meat.~The baited hooks can be seen by albatross from the air and when they dive on the hooks, they are caught and they drown. Other forms of marine wildlife see the bait from the waters below and get hooked when they try to eat the bait.~The lines are set adrift from vessels for a period of 12 to 24 hours.~What Are These Longlines Doing to the Albatross?~A seafaring symbol for centuries, immortalized in Coleridge's Rime of the Ancient Mariner, albatrosses roam widely across vast expanses of the oceans of the world, rarely coming ashore except to breed on remote oceanic islands in or near the Southern Ocean.~Unfortunately for the various species of albatross in this remote part of the world, fleets of hundreds of fishing vessels from Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Indonesia hunt the Southern bluefin tuna, sharks, and billfish.~Albatross and other seabird species are caught and dragged underwater to their deaths on these deadly, baited hooks as they are launched from the ships.~As many as 100 million hooks a year are set by the Japanese fleet alone in the Southern bluefin tuna fishery. Tens of thousands of birds are being killed annually.~One conservative calculation for albatross killed on Japanese longliners is 44,000 per year. The actual figure could be double that, according to researchers, but data on albatross kills by other nations' fishing vessels is not available.~Twelve of the world's 14 albatross species are believed to be dying in the tens of thousands each year in this way. Because of the large number of birds affected, commercial fishing has been identified as the most serious threat to the survival of most albatross species.~What Are These Longlines Doing to the Sea Turtles?~Many species of sea turtles fall victim to the deadly hooks of the longliners.~20,000 loggerhead turtles are captured every year by the Spanish longline fishery in the Mediterranean Sea, and 4,000 of them are believed to die because they are returned to the sea with the hook still embedded in their throats.~Sea Shepherd crew have recorded dozens of turtle carcasses along the Pacific coast of Central America. When examined, all the dead turtles were found to have hooks embedded in their throats.~According to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), 75% of the loggerhead turtles and 40% of the leatherback turtles taken by United States-based pelagic longliners in the Atlantic are caught on the Grand Banks in the North Atlantic .~The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) reports that 40,000 sea turtles are killed annually in the global longline fisheries.~Leatherback turtles, the largest turtles in the world, will be extinct within a few decades if current fishing practices continue. That is the conclusion of marine researchers speaking at the 2002 annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Denver. "We've done specific analysis on beaches where we've got a lot of data and we expect them to disappear in 10 to 30 years," said Larry Crowder, from Duke University, North Carolina.~What Are These Longlines Doing to the Sharks?~Longlines are the most significant factor in the rapid diminishment of shark populations in the oceans. Longlines ranging from one mile in length to over one hundred miles in length are baited with fish, (often illegally killed dolphins or seals), and are meant to target shark, swordfish, and tuna. The sharks targeted are caught mostly for their fins (which account for only 4% of their body weight) and also for their cartilage, liver oil, and teeth. The longline fishermen remove the fins and toss the still living shark back into the sea to die an agonizing death. Unable to swim, they slowly sink towards the bottom where other fish eat them alive. If longlines are not abolished, the oceans will lose most species of sharks within the next decade. Please visit our Shark Finning page for more information.~What Sea Shepherd is Doing?~Currently Sea Shepherd is tackling the problem in both pelagic waters and in territorial waters of some nation states.~Our legal authority to intervene within territorial waters of a nation state is by way of agreement with the respective state. Presently, the Sea Shepherd has a contractual agreement to intervene against illegal fishing activities in the marine reserve waters of the Galapagos National Park, and very soon will have an agreement with Colombia’s Malpelo Island National Park.~Intervention in International Waters The use of longlines in international waters is not illegal in itself. However, if the lines take an endangered or threatened species, they become illegal because the taking of an endangered species is a violation of the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES).~International maritime law dictates that a longline that does not bear an identifying flag is in effect legally salvageable, i.e., free for the taking because it is not attached to the ship or boat that deploys it.~When Does Sea Shepherd Intervene?~A Sea Shepherd ship and crew will intervene to confiscate longlines if any of the following evidence is found:~1. An albatross caught on a hook on any section of the longline 2. A sea-turtle caught on a hook on any section of the longline 3. Any line that is not utilizing bird-scaring devices 4. Any line that is not identified by a flag or electronic device that displays a fishing license number, name of ship, and nationality~So far, in every case of our discovery of a longline at sea, there has been an intervention, because the crew did not see any evidence of identification or of bird-scaring devices.~Where Has Sea Shepherd Confiscated Longlines?~Sea Shepherd Conservation Society has been confiscating longlines since 1989. We have taken lines as short as 0.5 km (0.3 miles) and as long as 100km (62 miles).~Sea Shepherd Flagship R/V Farley Mowat Longline Confiscations:~In March 2002, Sea Shepherd crew confiscated an illegally set Costa Rican 30 km (18.6 mile) line in the Pacific territorial waters of Guatemala with the permission of the Guatemalan government.~In April of 2002, Sea Shepherd crew confiscated numerous lines from the Marine Sanctuary of Cocos Island in cooperation with Costa Rican Park rangers.~In August 2002, Sea Shepherd crew confiscated 12 km (7.5 mile) of longline set in the waters of the Marine Sanctuary of the Galapagos National Park and turned it over to the Galapagos Park Rangers.~In September 2002, Sea Shepherd crew confiscated a 60 km (37.3 mile) line of unknown origin set in the pelagic waters between Tahiti and New Zealand.~During 2002, Sea Shepherd confiscated and destroyed over 100 kilometers (over 60 miles) of illegally set longline.~In the process, four sea turtles, sixty-seven sharks, and over a hundred large fish were found alive and released back to the sea.~Dead fish, birds, and turtles are put back into the sea. The fish is not utilized as food on the Farley Mowat because the Sea Shepherd ship has a policy of not serving fish as food onboard the vessel.~In March 2003, the Farley Mowat confiscated longlines near the Cook Islands and south of Hawaii.~During the months of May through August 2004, the crew of the Farley Mowat intervened and confiscated lines near the Galapagos, around Colombia ’s Malpelo Island and in the Galapagos Corridor between the Galapagos and Panama.~In April of 2005, the Farley Mowat deployed 16 net ripper devices on the Tail of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland to discourage illegal bottom dragging.~January 2006 - The Farley Mowat confiscated a Uraguayan tootfish longline inside the Australian Antarctic Terriotorial waters. A total of some four kilometers of line was confiscated.~What Has Sea Shepherd Done with Confiscated Longlines? The monofilament line is incinerated onboard ship. The twine line is kept and utilized onboard ship for tie-downs and for knot braiding on the ship’s rails. The hooks and swivels are kept for display purposes. The lead weights are melted down for dive weights.~Additional Rules, Conventions, Treaties, Resolutions and Laws The following are also guidelines for determining the illegality of longlines being deployed in the world’s oceans:~Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR): In 1992, the Australian government enacted strict regulations requiring all longline vessels in CCAMLAR waters to use a series of avoidance measures. The U.S. adopted these measures in March 1995 for all U.S. flagged vessels in CCAMLR waters.~Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT): Since 1992, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand have ordered seabird mitigation measures to be used in their Southern bluefin tuna longline fishery and made the use of bird-scaring lines mandatory in their fisheries. In 1996, Australia required all vessels fishing below 30 degrees south latitude to use bird-scaring lines.~World Conservation Union (IUCN): In October 1996, the IUCN adopted a resolution urging nations to "adopt the goal of eliminating seabird by-catch within longline fisheries" and "...implement seabird by-catch reduction measures immediately within longline fisheries." In April 1997, the U.S. adopted regulations for all Alaskan longliners requiring the use of some methods to avoid killing seabirds. This was spurred by the killing of an endangered species, the short-tailed Albatross.~Bonn Convention: In 1997, all of the world’s albatross species were listed as protected.~Article 7.6.9 of the United Nations FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries adopted by all member nations: Provides that states should take appropriate measures to minimize waste, discards, catch by lost or abandoned gear, catch of non-target species, both fish and non-fish species, and negative impact on associated or dependent species, in particular endangered species. It further provides that states and regional fisheries management organizations should promote, to the extent practicable, the development and use of selective, environmentally safe, and cost effective gear and techniques.~P.O. Box 2616, Friday Harbor, WA 98250 (USA) Tel: 360-370-5650 Fax: 360-370-5651~---

A Few Facts:

--- FACT: Sharks evolved long before dinosaurs walked the earth --- FACT: Shark fins are one of the most valuable items taken from the sea --- FACT: Consumer demand has prompted a massive surge in its demise --- FACT: By 2017, 20 species of shark could be commercially extinct --- FACT: 100 million sharks are slaughtered each year --- FACT: Shark fins contain high amounts of murcury --- LAWS: http://www.american.edu/ted/SHARK.HTM.

A Bad Reputation

WHY SHARKS DON'T DESERVE THEIR BAD REPUTATION. --- With the weather hotting up and summer holidays on the way, the beach is where we'd all like to be. --- Or is it? --- News of a shark attack at Ocean Grove is worrying for surfers and swimmers in our region. But as Steve Martin heard on South West Drive this week, sharks do not deserve their bad reputation. --- According to Craig Thornton, a consulting marine biologist at the Melbourne Aquarium, attacks are very rare. "Most of those sharks out there are really not hunting anything that's anywhere near as big as us," he said on Drive. --- "If they see a flash of white in front of their eyes... and they have a crack, really it's a bite and spit and they get as much of a fright as we do," he said. --- "It's very rare that a shark actually turns around and has a second go at a person." --- Craig Thornton told Steve great white sharks are found right along the south west coastline, but generally stay in deep water. "There's also no question that there are some very big sharks in coastal waters that do attack," he said. --- "But the interactions that we see in close to shore are with smaller schooling sharks that are hunting schooling fish, like snapper." --- This week the Melbourne Aquarium launched a Grey Nurse Shark Conservation Project – an effort to find out more about another feared species. --- "One of the unfortunate things was that its fearsome appearance... meant that it was targeted by spear fisherman and fisherman alike for many many years in Australia," Craig told Steve. --- "The grey nurse is very nearly gone," he said. --- The Conservation Project will involve ongoing research into grey nurse shark reproduction to help ensure the survival of the species.

Movies:

More Shark Facts

Largest Living ~ The biggest shark is the whale shark (Rhincodon or Rhiniodon typus), which can be up to 50 feet (15 m) long. It is a filter feeder and sieves enormous amounts of plankton to eat through its gills as it swims. It is also the biggest fish. The second biggest fish and shark is the basking shark (Cetorhinus maximus) which is about 40 feet (12.3 m) long and is another filter feeder..Biggest Meat-Eater ~ The Great white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) which grows to be up to 21 feet (6.4 m) long. Great whites up to 37 feet (11.3 m) long have been reported, but not verified..Largest Extinct ~ The largest shark known was the Megalodon (Carcharodon or Carcharocles megalodon); it is now extinct. It was an ancient, meat-eating shark that lived between 25 million and 1.6 million years ago. It was up to 40 feet (12 m) long and its teeth were each the size of a person's hand!.Smallest ~ The smallest sharks are: Dwarf Lanternfish (Etmopterus perryi), which is about 7 1/2 to 8 inches (19 - 20 cm) long for fully-grown females and 6 to 7 inches (16 - 17.5 cm) long for adult males Spined pygmy shark (Squaliolus laticaudus), which is about 8 inches (21 cm) long for fully-grown females and 7 inches (18 cm) long for males Pygmy ribbontail catshark (Eridacnis radcliffei) , which is about 6 to 7 inches (15 - 16 cm) long for fully-grown females and 7 to 7 1/2 inches (18 - 19 cm) long for males..Most Dangerous ~ The oceanic white-tipped sharks are the most fearless predators. Jacques-Yves Cousteau says that it is: "the only species of shark that is never frightened by the approach of a diver, and they are the most dangerous of all sharks.".Fastest ~ The fastest swimming sharks are the mako sharks and blue sharks, which can even leap out of the water. They are also probably the fastest fish. Estimates of their speed varies; some say that they can swim at about 60 miles per hour (97 kph), while more conservative estimates are about 22 mph (35 kph). There hasn't been enough observation of their speeds to have an definitive answer...Largest Mouth ~ The whale shark has the biggest mouth among sharks..Longest Tail ~ The thresher sharks have the longest tail among sharks; the upper lobe of their tails are about the same length as their bodies. Strongest Bite ~ The strongest shark bite belongs to the dusky shark (Carcharhinus obscurus); its jaws have been measured to exert 132 pounds of force..Most Common ~ The piked dogfish shark (Squalus acanthias) is very abundant, especially in the North Atlantic Ocean. It is a small shark, about 63 inches (1.6 m) long..Largest Eggs ~ The whale shark was long thought to be oviparous (an egg 14 inches (36 cm) long was found in the Gulf of Mexico in 1953; this would be the largest egg in the world). Recently, pregnant females have been found containing hundreds of pups. Whale sharks are viviparous, giving birth to live young. Newborns are over 2 feet (60 cm) long..Deepest Diver ~ The Portuguese shark dives down over 9,000 feet (2750 m). This is over 1.5 miles. Longest Migration ~ The Blue shark had been known to migrate from 1,200-1,700 miles (2000-3000 km) in a seasonal journey from New York state in the USA to Brazil. Largest Litter ~ One Blue shark was found with 135 pups in her uterus.

Television:

---

SOME MORE INFORMATIVE ARTICLES:

--- http://www.wildaid.org/eng.asp?CID=1 --- http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/archive/20 03/01/20/urbananimal.DTL --- http://www.thailandlife.com/sharkfinsoup.html --- http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/07/31/world/main517011.s html --- http://www.seachoice.org ------

The "Dr.Evil" Plan

It seems like science fiction, but the U.S. military would like to use sharks as underwater spies. The folks at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), who dream up the future of weapons and military systems, envision squads of sharks prowling the oceans with sensors that could transmit evidence of explosives or other threats.

~

Heroes:

~

TRIPLE THREAT

World Fin Trade May Harvest up to 73 Million Sharks per Year 25 September 2006---.The first real-data study of sharks harvested for their valuable fins estimates as few as 26 million and as many as 73 million sharks are killed each year worldwide—three times higher than was reported originally by the United Nations, according to a paper published as the cover story in the October 2006 edition of Ecology Letters.---.“The shark fin trade is notoriously secretive. But we were able tap into fin auction records and convert from fin sizes and weights to whole shark equivalents to get a good handle on the actual numbers,” says lead author Shelley Clarke, Ph.D, an American fisheries scientist based in Hong Kong and Japan.---.A team of researchers calculated the number of sharks represented in the fin trade using a unique statistical model and data from Hong Kong traders. When the figures were converted to shark weight, the total is three to four times higher than shark catch figures reported to the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO).---.“Without any real data, numbers as high as 100 million had been floating around for a while, but we had no way of knowing whether or not this was accurate,” says Ellen Pikitch, Ph.D., co-author and executive director of the University of Miami’s Pew Institute for Ocean Science. “This paper, which produces the first estimate based on real data, shows that the actual number of sharks killed is indeed very high but is more likely to be in the order of tens of millions, with a median estimate of 38 million sharks killed annually.”---.Concern about the shark finning trade has grown over the past few years as demand has surged beyond sustainable levels for slow-to-produce shark populations and without regulation in most countries. Three shark species are listed on the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES), and 20 percent are threatened with extinction according to the 2006 Red List of Threatened Species.---.Used in shark fin soup, a delicacy served at Chinese weddings and other celebrations for centuries and more recently at business dinners in Southeast Asia and the Pacific Rim, fins are the most valuable part of the shark, which typically are sliced off as the shark, sometimes still alive, is thrown back into the ocean. The shark fin trade appears to be keeping pace with the growing demand for seafood—up five percent per year in mainland China.---.Determining whether shark populations can continue to withstand the magnitude of catches estimated by Clarke and her team depends upon the size and status of each population.---.“One of the most productive sharks is the blue shark, and it appears that the catch rate is near the maximum sustainable level,” says Clarke. “But such assessments were not available for other, less productive shark species. It is quite likely that sustainable catch levels have already been exceeded in some cases.”------.The United Nations FAO compiles catch records for sharks and other fish, based on information submitted from member countries. Where possible, the FAO attempts to verify the accuracy of the figures, but verification often is not practical. Many sharks may be recorded as unidentified fish and thus not be recognizable as sharks in the FAO records.---.“Due to the low value of shark meat in many markets, shark fins may be the only part of the shark retained, and often these fins are not recorded in the catch log or when landed at ports. I knew we had to somehow access the major markets if we were to accurately estimate the number of sharks killed,” says Pikitch, who initiated the project.---.The mission of the Pew Institute for Ocean Science is to advance ocean conservation through science. Established in by a generous multi-year grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts; the Pew Institute for Ocean Science is a major program of the University of Miami’s Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science For more information, visit www.pewoceanscience.org.--------- What kind of shark are you?
The Nurse Shark. . Gentle, Lethargic, Unobtrusive. . You're the Nurse Shark and are as gentle as a shark possibly can be. Usually you're found minding your own business in underwater rock crevices or on the floor of some warm, shallow, sea. It appears to most people that you sleep a lot, but really, you're just more deliberate and active when others arent. Most of the time you're so passive you let anyone, even bothersome people, play with you. Sometimes those people even forget you're a shark, but when pushed too far, you toothily remind them.
~ Swim with me.~

Hidden Cost of Shark Fin Soup: Its Source May Vanish

~The New York Times - 1/5/2006 By: Juan Forero~MANTA, Ecuador - Early every morning, the cold water lapping up on the beach here is stained red with blood as surly, determined men in ragged T-shirts drag hundreds of shark carcasses off wooden skiffs and onto the white sand.~Using eight-inch boning knives with quick precision, they dismember the once-mighty predators, cutting off heads, carving up big slabs of meat, slashing off the tails. Most important, they cut off the fins - dorsal and pectorals - a "set" that can fetch $100 or more.~"That is what is really important, the fins," said Luis Salto, 57, as he cut up sharks. "They sell in China."~Indeed, the fins are exported in a quasi-legal network to Hong Kong, Beijing, Taiwan, Singapore and other corners of Asian affluence. There, a heaping bowl of shark fin soup, said to offer medicinal or aphrodisiac qualities, is dished up for up to $200.~This taste for fins, marine biologists say, is ridding the world's oceans of one of its most ancient creatures, threatening ecosystems already buffeted by overfishing. Some sharks, like the hammerhead and the great white, have been reduced by upwards of 70 percent in the last 15 years, while others, like the silky white tip, have disappeared from the Caribbean.~~"If you go to any reef around the world, except for those that are really protected, the sharks are gone," said Ransom Myers, a marine biologist at Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia. "Their value is so great that completely harmless sharks, like whale sharks, are killed, for their fins."~The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization conservatively estimates that 856,000 tons of shark and their cousins, rays and skates, were caught in 2003. That is triple the quantity 50 years before, as shark fin soup has caught on as an Asian status symbol.~Fins sell for as much as $700 per kilogram in Asia, making big sharks worth thousands of dollars. In the vast dried seafood market of Sai Ying Pun on Hong Kong Island on a recent day, shark fin stores had no shortage of buyers.~"Serving shark fins in banquets is a tradition for Chinese people," said Chiu Ching-cheung, chairman of the Shark Fin Trade Merchants' Association in Hong Kong. "Without shark fin, a Chinese banquet does not look like one at all."~Shark fin soup - which can have mushrooms, fine dried ham, other seafood and clear chicken stock or water, simmered for up to eight hours - is common at wedding banquets or other celebrations. Served to impress guests, it has grown more popular, environmentalists say, as China's middle class has expanded.~~"Catching sharks, for a lot of fishermen, was not a viable financial proposition because the meat was of low value," said Peter Knights, executive director of Wild Aid, a San Francisco-based environmental group. "That's all changed now because the fins are so valuable."~While Asia's environmental movement has grown, with aid of stars like Jackie Chan and the director Ang Lee, experts say education on overfishing is an uphill battle. With the waters off Asia largely depleted, fishermen are focusing on regions that still swarm with sharks, like the cold, deep waters of the Pacific from Peru north to Central America.~On a recent day, Captain Nelson Laje, 42, piloted a 60-ton trawler, La Ahijada, into Manta's port, its hold filled with 150 blues and threshers, among the most common of Pacific sharks. His crew tied chains around bundles of sharks, which were hoisted onto the wharf to be quickly heaved onto refrigerated trucks.~"They do not want us to capture the sharks, but we need them to pay our expenses and make a living," Mr. Laje said. "The shark, the fishing, will never end. Fishing will only end when the water ends."~(I don't understand a word, but the picture says a thousand of them.)~Some of the world's richest fishing grounds, full of everything from tuna to white fish of all kinds, are found off this tiny Andean country. There are also up to 38 species of shark.~By a conservative estimate, more than 279,000 pounds of shark fins, representing about 300,000 sharks, were exported from Ecuador to China and Hong Kong in 2003, twice as much as in the mid-1990's. Under pressure from environmental groups, Ecuador prohibited exporting shark fins in 2004. Fishing for sharks is also illegal, though fishermen are permitted to possess and sell sharks they catch incidentally.~But with resources for enforcement inadequate and an influential fishing industry bucking regulations, Ecuador's government has been unable to contain shark fishing, the exportation of fins or the internationally reviled practice of finning, where the fins of sharks are sliced off on the high seas and the carcass is left behind, environmentalists and the Environment Ministry say.~More than 60 countries have banned finning since 2004.~Alfredo Carrasco, an Environment Ministry official who oversees natural resources management, acknowledged that the lack of resources permits "illegal actions." But he also put blame on Asian countries, where fin imports are legal.~~Eloy Chiquito, 43, begins his day at 5 a.m., when he arrives at Manta's beach with his knife. Mr. Chiquito says he knows the shark population is being cut back. But he argues that there are still days when hundreds of sharks are dragged onto the beach, a sign to him that shark populations remain healthy. "We can get 50 or hundreds," he said.~When Antonio Llambo, a navy inspector, arrived on a recent day to warn about fines and other penalties, the men with the knives barely glanced up. The buyers did not lose a step, scrambling over shark carcasses with fistfuls of dollars.~"That's the dynamic in Ecuador - people do what is illegal," Mr. Llambo said, with a look of resignation.~Alyssa Lau contributed reporting from Hong Kong for this article.The Great White Shark Song

~~[URL=http://www.speedtest.net][IMG]http://www.speedtest.ne t/result/248819070.png[/IMG][/URL]