The IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group
Shark News 9: June 1997
|
Sharks and CITES: an Update
Shark fins on sale in Hong Kong. Photo: Brad Wetherbee.
|
As we reported in the last issue of Shark News (8:1-2), sharks have
been the focus of much attention within CITES (the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species) following the passage of
the shark resolution (Conf. Res. 9.17) at the 9th CITES meeting in
1994. Sharks will again be on the agenda at the 10th CITES meeting
taking place in Zimbabwe in June 1997. Actions related to sharks that
will be debated by CITES Parties will include:
- Adoption of the CITES Animals Committee report on the biological
and trade status of sharks;
- Proposal to list all sawfish species on Appendix 1; and
- Resolution to establish a working group for marine fish species.
Sharks in CITES
No cartilaginous fish is currently listed on the CITES Appendices.
However, a number of shark species are seriously depleted and
international trade is one of the major contributors to shark declines
throughout the world. Although marine fish have not received the
attention they deserve by CITES, there is no a priori reason why
sharks and other fishes would not fall under its purview; CITES is
dedicated to the conservation of all wild animals and plants in
international trade.
In a recent statement, CITES and Marine Fisheries, IUCN states
that it "considers CITES an appropriate mechanism for the control of
trade in commercially exploited marine fishes and other marine
fisheries species" and that "the treaty was designed for and should be
used to control trade in species whose survival is threatened or whose
populations are subject to unsustainable exploitation as a result of
international trade."
Some argue that the conservation of commercially valuable
marine fishes should be left to domestic and regional fisheries
management bodies. In many cases, however, these authorities have
failed to prevent overfishing and, in the case of sharks, there are no
international and few domestic management regimes in place.
It is important to understand that CITES is restricted to conservation
issues involving international trade and has no management authority.
Rather, management of listed species is the obligation of the appropriate
domestic fisheries and wildlife agencies or of regional or international
management authorities. Therefore, listing of species on CITES confers
no direct management, other than requiring that countries involved in
trade demonstrate that export of the listed species is not detrimental
to the biological status of its population. The listing of species does,
however, draw attention to the need for domestic management of
declining populations. Appendix I prohibits trade in the listed
species, whereas Appendix II requires that any trade be carefully
monitored.
Animals Committee shark report
The shark resolution passed at the last CITES meeting (1994) mandated
the CITES Animals Committee to undertake a study of the biological
and trade status of sharks.
Three reports - from the SSG (The Implications of Biology for the
Conservation and Management of Sharks), TRAFFIC, and the US
government - were submitted to the Animals Committee at their
meeting in Prague in 1996 in fulfilment of this resolution. These
reports were subsequently combined by the Committee into a single
document, Biological and Trade Status of Sharks, which will be
presented for adoption by the CITES Parties in Zimbabwe.
The main recommendations of the Animals
Committee report (see CITES Recommendations article) include the
need for improved species-specific fishery, trade,
and biological data by all Parties and UN FAO,
and an increase in research and management
efforts for elasmobranchs.
Sawfish and other listing proposals
A number of sharks were proposed for listing on
CITES. The US received proposals to list the
western North Atlantic populations of dusky
shark (Carcharhinus obscurus) and spiny dogfish
(Squalus acanthias) on Appendix II and all
sawfishes on Appendix I. The United Kingdom
received a petition to list the basking shark
(Cetorhinus maximus) on Appendix II, and
Australia was asked to list the white shark (Carcharodon carcharias)
on Appendix I.
Of these, the only elasmobranch listing proposal that will be
considered by CITES Parties in Zimbabwe is for the listing of sawfishes
(all Pristiformes) on Appendix I. Although the US declined to support
the proposals for C. obscurus or S. acanthias, they have publicly stated
that the depleted status of these populations in the western Atlantic
qualifies these species for listing on Appendix II.
The status of sawfish populations has been of concern to many
SSG members. At the last formal meeting of the Shark Specialist Group
in Brisbane, Australia (August 1996), an informal poll found unanimous
support from those present for the listing of sawfishes on CITES.
Limited population and trade data are available for most sawfishes
because they have not been of commercial importance and therefore
few resources have been applied to their study. This lack of data may
be used to block their listing on CITES, perhaps by inferring that trade
is not a significant factor in their decline. However, for a species that
qualifies biologically for an Appendix I listing (as sawfishes do), it is
only necessary to demonstrate under the new CITES listing criteria that
the species "is or may be affected by trade." There is clear evidence
that sawfishes are still in trade. Some SSG members argue that there
is little doubt that some sawfishes are in serious trouble and that any
level of trade is unsustainable. In addition, they argue that the
precautionary principle should be applied by CITES where there is
strong scientific concern about the status of the species in question,
as is the case for sawfishes.
Marine Fishes Working Group
The US has proposed a resolution, which will be debated in
Zimbabwe, to establish a Working Group for Marine Fish Species.
Listing marine fishes will pose unique challenges to CITES, which
to date has focused on terrestrial species. This Working Group,
fashioned after the successful Timber Working Group, could - if
approved - address the range of implementation issues that might
arise with any future listing of marine fishes, including elasmobranchs.
The Working Group could also help direct the Parties, FAO, and other
fisheries bodies in improved data collection and standardisation for
the purposes of CITES, and help to carry out the other recommendations
of the Animals Committee's shark report (see CITES Recommendations article). The Marine
Fishes Working Group is one way that CITES can fulfil its responsibility,
much neglected until now, towards the conservation of over-exploited
marine fishes in trade. IUCN endorses the establishment of a CITES
Working Group for Marine Fish Species.
Action needed
Getting adequate attention for the conservation needs of overexploited
elasmobranchs within the context of CITES is an uphill battle. Yet
trade is a major contributor to the decline of many shark populations
around the world. As we go to press, several SSG members are
departing for Zimbabwe and will be available to delegates to provide
data and other information supporting the above initiatives. The next
issue of Shark News will report on the outcome of the conference and
the activities which will take us up to the 11th Conference of Parties
in the year 2000.
|
|
|
|
|
