Elements 5 gains TV recognition: A short doco on Madison Stewart and her fight to protect sharks...
WHAT YOU CAN DO TO HELP SHARKS ON THE GREAT BARRIER REEF: copy paste into your email to send, or print off and post... addresses listed below.
To whom it may concern,
I am writing to you regarding the East Coast Inshore Fin Fish Fishery (ECIFF) approved under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) and the present negligence of scientific foundations for the special needs of shark fisheries. I am concerned about the fate of sharks in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, World Heritage Area and Queensland East Coast subject to a quota of 600 tonnes a year, for use as both food in Australia and to supply export markets for shark fins. Significant weaknesses are present in this fishery, there is minimal vital information on many of the shark species caught within the Great Barrier Reef where most of the quota is filled. There is no information to credit its sustainability, or the allowed quota. Not enough is being done to protect vulnerable species, a large majority of the catch is by-catch (it has been suggested that this is unavoidable using the current methods of fishing), and taking into consideration that in one year an entire population of sharks could be wiped out, it is concerning to think this fishery will continue for the next three.
Shark meat is not valuable or even safe meat and the shark fin trade has been internationally recognized as the reason for the collapse of shark populations worldwide. Sharks from within our GBR Marine Park and world heritage area are now contributing to this trade, a bad image for our country especially with many less developed nations creating shark sanctuaries in their waters (Palau, Bahamans, Indonesia and so on). You are hurting the fishing industry, tourism industry and ecosystem while showing the world Australia’s desperation for profit is compounded by a poorly run Fisheries department. I want an end to all target shark fishing through the ECIFF immediately, and the licenses to target sharks revoked.
On the 28th of September 2011, academics from James Cook University in Queensland stated, “sharks inhabiting Australia's Great Barrier Reef are in decline due to over fishing”. Illegal fishing is occurring on a mass scale in our waters from both foreign and local licensed vessels, yet we spend time trying to establish legal fisheries, drawing our attention from enforcing what we already have. Professor Sean Connolly says “populations of coral reef sharks in the Indo-Pacific, including the Great Barrier Reef, are now severely depleted,” Coral reefs have proven difficult to manage sustainably, in part because of the multispecies nature of reef fisheries, the complexity of trophic interactions and other factors. Removing top predators such as sharks, can lead to increases in the numbers of the prey normally targeted by those predators. Removing sharks from the Great Barrier Reef has the potential to destroy entire ecosystems, perhaps most concerning, in ways that cannot be predicted until it is too late. This is why researching this fishery by continuing the extraction of sharks it is not a viable solution, especially with an unjustified quota.
Sharks cannot be managed in the same manner as teleost fishes, they are basically non-renewable resources. As well as being naturally less abundant than most other types of fish, their longevity and low fecundity make them particularly vulnerable to over- exploitation. Consequences of their potential collapse will extend from the shark fishery into other fisheries. In America on the north Atlantic coast, certain shark species have declined up to 50 and 75 percent, this lead to increased predation resulting in the collapse of a century- old scallop fishery, yet to return. In the past, vast areas of Ocean have been deprived of Sharks, as in Asia, the Caribbean and the Pacific Coast of the Americas. The little evidence available suggests the species caught within the ECIFF will not survive the current level of extraction. Some of the species classified as target catch in the ECIFF are already facing a severe status on the IUCN red list of threatened species.
CSIRO observers on trips with the ECIFF vessels operating to target sharks discovered “75 per cent were found to be particularly vulnerable to even small levels of fishing mortality” Out of the 6 species of shark that have dominated the catch in the ECIFF:
3 are listed as ‘near threatened’
one is listed as ‘endangered.’
More than 60 species make up both the by catch and target catch, out of the identified species….
7 are classed “data deficient”
13 “Vulnerable”
18 “Near threatened”
8 “critically endangered”
3 “endangered”
(from the IUCN red list of endangered species)
70 per cent of the total shark catch is currently represented by five shark species:
- Australian blacktip shark (Carcharhinus tilstoni)
- common blacktip shark (Carcharhinus limbatus)
- spot tail shark (Carcharhinus sorrah)
- scalloped hammerhead (Sphyrna lewini)
- milk shark (Rhizoprionodon acutus).
Two of these species are ‘near threatened’, one is ‘endangered’, a clear failure to manage the protection of vulnerable species if they make up the dominant catch. In 2006 research concluded that the abundance of these two species, the grey reef shark (Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos) and white tip reef shark (Triaenodon obesus) had declined from un-fished levels by 97% and 80%, respectively, based on visual survey data and demographic analysis. The authors suggested that these species had been overfished within the GBR. Both the white tip and grey reef sharks were listed as ‘high risk’ species by the ECIFF Scientific Advisory Group. New information shows and the Fisheries department assures me, that the ECIFF does not interact with these reef sharks. However, the grey reef shark was amoung the 6 species that dominated the catch during observer trips in previous years of the fishery, suggesting only that there are no longer reef sharks to catch because they have been wiped from the reefs they remain loyal to in previous years of the fishery. (as suggested by most divers and tourism operations who have noticed the decline).
My concerns also lie within the uncontrolled catch of the scalloped hammerhead shark (Sphyrna lewini), which is endangered and the second highest caught shark. As well as being identified as having a high sustainability risk by CSIRO, they are prone to gender flocking, meaning entire populations of females could be fished out. Also the white-spotted guitarfish (Rhynchobatus djiddensis), which is an umbrella name for different species of guitarfish unprotected due to taxonomic confusion. Very little is known about the biology or population status of these species. Their fins are the highest valued for Asian delicacies, making their place in the catch a concerning one and giving fishermen the motive and the means to illegally harvest these species and target them.
The ‘no take’ zones of the GBR make up 33% of the total area, this was labeled as one of the reasons this fishery would not affect the reef and could continue. However it has been shown through research that “abundances of sharks on no-take reefs were also heavily depleted and remarkably similar to the legally fished zones”. (Fisheries Research 95 (2009) Effects of fishing on tropical reef associated shark populations on the Great Barrier Reef) In fact, the numbers of reef sharks reported by Research in zones closed to fishing were on average above but not significantly different from numbers in open zones. Suggesting these protected areas are either illegally fished, or do not cover the home ranges of certain species of sharks. Therefore there are no real or effective protection zones for sharks, dismissing the one assumption this fisheries continuation was based on.
In Cairns Australia, each scuba diver spends at least $6000 in the region, most while on dive boats, and rated a shark sighting as No. 1. "Each sighting of a shark by a diver is worth $1375 to our economy” Dr Alastair Birtles JCU stated. The Great Barrier Reef is worth 3.3 Billion dollars annually in tourism alone to our economy, the ECIFF is worth apx. $19.6 million dollars annually. The jobs held by the fishermen targeting sharks are at threat and a threat to the jobs of everyone in the reef related tourism industry, and every industry that relies on it. From live-aboard dive operators, to hotels, restaurants, car rental etc, all are at risk from losing their main attraction, sharks. For logbooks to be a substantial part of the continued research of the ECIFF is also risky as they are known to be faulty documents at the hands of fishermen who fail to fill them, add false information or are unable to indentify sharks. The use of the ‘gauntlet’ approach is said to be the only sustainable method to fish sharks and is used in the ECIFF, however we do not have the required information on individual species and their population statuses to apply the gauntlet approach effectively. We blindly take large numbers of a species internationally recognized as collapsing before knowing anything about them, in an ecologically complex marine reef, (where removing sharks can have an effect not noticed until it is too late) is this how we establish a fishery?
It is time to invoke the precautionary principal. The onus of proof that Shark fishing can be sustainable and should be allowed to resume would lay squarely with the fishing industry. This is being overlooked in the ECIFF. Sharks are currently extracted in mass numbers with no insight on the effects. The research into these species and fisheries management underway is a stalling process while sharks are fished possibly faster than they can reproduce. This is a gross neglect of what we have off our coastline, and only a few steps behind a collapsed fishery as a result of failure to read and act on the warning signs, which is required of you in your job. Under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act) through which this fishery was approved, protecting threatened species and ecological communities is recognised as a matter of national environmental significance. Consequently, any action that is likely to have a significant impact on listed threatened species and ecological communities under the EPBC Act must be referred to the Minister and undergo an environmental assessment and approval process. This should be required for the ECIFF before continuation is allowed.
Target shark fishing is taking an unacceptable toll on an important ecosystem. We have a flourishing tourism stronghold on this reef, we are setting out to devastate it with a fishery that will provide us with a short term profit. Divers no longer visit our reefs knowing they are now a fishery, a noticeable change is occurring in our ecosystems at the hands of the mass extraction of sharks. There is no demand for shark meat in Australian and we should be leading the way in conservation for our mass surrounding ocean, not having an involvement in the shark fin trade. The Australian government must acknowledge that there is an extremely poor knowledge on which to base management, a potentially devastating quota with no scientific justification, and due to the lack of knowledge and lack of selectivity in the ECIFF, the acceptable level of take for a dedicated shark fishery is nil. We will no longer allow your injustices towards the shark species to continue at the hands of public demeanor for their kind, their importance in our oceans is recognized and our apex predators should not be for sale, if you cannot prove they will survive it. I urge you to call an immediate halt to target shark fishing both commercial and recreational through the ECIFF, and revoke its approval.
I………………………………………………., do not agree with the removal of sharks from within the Great Barrier Reef marine park and East Coast of Queensland through the East Coast Inshore FinFish Fishery.
(personal message)
yours sincerely,
(your name) (address) (date)
WHERE TO SEND THE LETTER:
Hayley.Gorsuch@rrrc.org.au
contact me if there are any questions: Madison Stewart pelagic_pip@hotmail.com
contact me if there are any questions: Madison Stewart pelagic_pip@hotmail.com
Elements 5 on youtube
GRAPH: Are we seeing a collapse in the shark populations?
CLICK TO ENLARGE GRAPH:
(2005) The declining catch seen here is a result from the closures of inshore waters to fishing as part of the rezoning of the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) Marine Park in July 2004 and the subsequent buyout of 59 active net fishing licenses under the GBR Structural Adjustment Package.
(2009) Decrease in overall harvest in 2009–10 compared with previous years due to the implementation of new management arrangements. Further closures to commercial and recreational fishing have been introduced in the 2008 Zoning Plan for the Moreton Bay Marine Park (Commencing 1 July 2009, AFTER the visible decline in catch on the graph.). Total Allowable Commercial Catch levels in place for sharks and Rays (600 t).
Welcome to the other side of the beautiful Great
Barrier Reef… the one where sharks are taken for their fins and body, with no
scientific justification of how or how many, and no one to stop them from doing
so… except you. Now begins the required reaction from the people to end legal
target of sharks inside the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park and World Heritage
area…
legal shark fishery in Australia.
growing awareness
screenings
GRAPH: Are we seeing a collapse in the shark populations?
CLICK TO ENLARGE GRAPH:
THE BEGINNING
RISE: the number of days fished per boat, per year increased from
the 1990-1992 period to the 2002-2004 periods.
(2005) The declining catch seen here is a result from the closures of inshore waters to fishing as part of the rezoning of the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) Marine Park in July 2004 and the subsequent buyout of 59 active net fishing licenses under the GBR Structural Adjustment Package.
(2009) Decrease in overall harvest in 2009–10 compared with previous years due to the implementation of new management arrangements. Further closures to commercial and recreational fishing have been introduced in the 2008 Zoning Plan for the Moreton Bay Marine Park (Commencing 1 July 2009, AFTER the visible decline in catch on the graph.). Total Allowable Commercial Catch levels in place for sharks and Rays (600 t).
(2011) The most likely explanation for the
reduced northern catch is the effect of severe tropical cyclones in January
2011 and the lengthy recovery period following those natural disasters. (only
289 tonnes caught in 2011)
The basics of what we are seeing: Every
movement in the shark catch is suggestively justified by new management plans,
increased effort etc. EXCEPT: for the year 2008- 2009- where the management
plans were not put in place until AFTER the decline.
Since the shark fishery begun and altered
into a dedicated fishery, the catch effort, boats, restrictions and management
plans have changed. A vast reduction of catch is witnessed in this graph (and
not reaching the quota) the government claim this is due to their management
plans, this graph shows that could be possible, but outlines the one year where
no new management plans, restriction or closures were present, and yet the shark
catch followed the declining trend.
This suggests shark numbers are suffering,
and as a result the fishery is not meeting its quota. The one year, 2008, is
the only year where no new management plans, restrictions or closures occurred before
the decline in actual shark catch.
Before making the allowed quota of the
overall shark harvest only 600 tonnes in 2009, it was previously going to be
set at 900 tonnes, perhaps a reason for it being set lower… was the realization
that the quota would never be filled.
It should also be
noted that after the decline, the quota caught never reaches the quota allowed.
Why they aren’t filling their quota according to them is because of their
management plans, the other explanation is the shark population has collapsed
and the availability of target species has declined.
LATEST NEWS:
Watch 'time will tell' by Madison Stewart
WINNER of the beneath the waves film festivals 'best conservation message'
HELP THE GREY NURSE SHARKS:
Critically Endangered on the East Coast of Australia, protected, and iconic, the grey nurse were hunted to near extinction in the 70’s because of their looks, but they are placid, Labradors of the sea, and the first shark I dived with… so to see this one become mangled at the hands of not only fishermen but the Australian government who have opened critical habitats zones of these sharks to recreational fishing… is another one of those injustices that we cannot ignore if we tried.
New Grey Nurse sharks are being injured all the time! This shark will slowly die from spinal injuries unless it is put down… its hanging out at our dive site right now. As I sunk next to her yesterday the extent of her mangled jaw was horrific… a single hook can kill a shark, yet areas where countless grey nurse congregate can be fished as a hobby where they accidentally hook these sharks, We MUST fully protect all 5 critical habitats found in Queensland waters as 'no-take' marine sanctuaries with a 1.5km radius…
write to these people, send this image, and demand action is taken for the Grey Nurse… Luke.Foley@parliament.nsw.gov.au, burrinjuck@parliament.nsw.gov.au, office@hodgkinson.minister.nsw.gov.au, tony.burke.mp@environment.gov.au
Picture by Lynton Burger.
ELEMENTS 5
Underwater Film
Photos: Ernst Stewart. Mike Callender. Dominee Banks.
Export markets exist
for mullet roe, shark fins
and small mackerel products from the fishery. The commercial net fishery occurs
in inshore coastal and estuarine waters along the whole Queensland east coast.
Source: Ecological assessment of the East
Interesting findings that
compromise sustainability:
The
by-catch of the fishery has been recorded larger than the actual primary target
catch.
It is noteworthy that the primary target species of shark in
the ECIFF (Australian blacktip shark, C. tilstoni and Spot-tail shark, C.
sorrah) accounted for only 40 per cent of total catch of sharks and rays,
with a further 18 species taken.
In
addition, the overlapping species distributions of many sharks and rays suggest
it would be very difficult to target a particular species without significant
by-catch of other species at higher risk of overfishing, particularly if large
mesh nets are used.
Threatened and Endangered
species making a significant large part of the catch:
The scalloped hammerhead (Sphyrna lewini)
was a significant part of the Queensland shark catch (18 per cent of commercial
catch in the ECIFF during observer trips), and is one of the species that risk
assessments by QDPI&F and CSIRO have identified as having a high
sustainability risk.
The grey reef shark (C.
amblyrhynchos) made up 6.6 per cent of the shark catch. Based on the
average catch of sharks from 1990 to 2005 (793 tonnes per year, from data in
Attachment 4 Figure 1), these proportions equate to estimated catches of 143
tonnes per year for scalloped hammerhead and 52 tonnes per year for grey reef
shark. Other species considered to be at high risk in QDPI&F's published
assessments include the great hammerhead (S. mokarran) (2.9 per cent of
catch) and white-spotted guitarfish (Rhynchobatus djiddensis) (0.4 per
cent of catch).
75% of the catch deemed unsustainable by CSIRO.
All
20 species of sharks and rays observed in the ECIFF commercial catch were
assessed, and of these 75 per cent were
found to be particularly vulnerable to even small levels of fishing mortality. We note that 75 per cent of
the species in the above table (in bold text) have the same or a higher value
of the index of productivity, and therefore, would also be particularly
vulnerable to even small levels of fishing mortality.
It has long been recognized that the
longevity and low fecundity of sharks makes them particularly vulnerable to
over-exploitation. This led Holden (1973) to question whether any
elasmobranches fishery could be sustainable? The answer Holden supplied to his
own rhetorical question was a provisional 'yes' provided there was
"caution because so much depends on the biology of the species exploited"
The governments
reasoning for the three-year extension of the fishery (decided on the 28th
of February review) can be found here:
"Due to the implementation of area and
seasonal closures, gear, size and harvest restrictions and the harvesting
method used in the fishery, significant impacts on the Great Barrier Reef
Marine Park or the World Heritage values of the Great Barrier Reef World
Heritage Area are considered unlikely”
Contradiction to this
statement can be found in scientific documents form which each of the following
statements were extracted:
"Sharks inhabiting Australia's Great
Barrier Reef are in decline due to over fishing" (September 2011, JCU
research)
"Shark populations in other countries with
significant coral reefs in our region are going to be in much worse shape even
than ours are -- and ours are not in good shape."
“Overfishing of sharks is now recognized as a
major global conservation concern, with increasing numbers of shark species
added to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature’s list of
threatened species,”
“Many shark species are highly vulnerable to
overfishing - and many of the world’s shark fisheries are in dire straits as a
result. In addition, sharks are highly vulnerable to ‘bycatch mortality’; that
is, being caught incidentally in fisheries that target other species.For
instance, populations of coral reef sharks in the Indo-Pacific, including the
Great Barrier Reef, are now severely depleted,”
Ongoing, rapid declines in many shark species worldwide, coupled
with evidence that shark depletion can have substantial, cascading effects on
community structure and dynamics, have made assessing the status and trends of
shark populations a high priority in conservation biology.
The wide variety of life-history characteristics and space
utilisation means inshore shark populations are likely to be affected in a
range of different ways and to varying extents by anthropogenic influences such
as fishing. Stocks of some species are known to be shared with other
nearby jurisdictions, so unsustainable fishing practices in these areas would
also potentially affect GBRWHA populations (Ovenden et al. 2009), as would
illegal fishing encroaching on northern Australian waters (Field et al. 2009).
Coral reef shark populations are declining
rapidly due to fishing according to research published in the December 5th
issue of the journal Current Biology. The paper says that "no-take
zones" -- areas where fishing is prohibited -- can be effective in
protecting sharks but only when the no-take regulations are strictly enforced.
Examining two common species of sharks on the
Great Barrier Reef in Australia, the researchers found that both populations
are in the midst of a rapid population decline -- 7% per year for white tip
sharks and 17% per year for gray reef sharks, showing that current shark
conservation strategies are not effective.
(These results
demonstrate that the commercial fishery operating on the Great Barrier Reef has
a substantial interaction with shark species commonly considered to be strongly
associated with coral reefs. Observer data from the fishery indicated that grey
reef sharks were the most commonly encountered species, he most concerning and recent results from
research has reported that populations of white tip reef sharks and grey reef
sharks have collapsed on reefs in the northern and central Great Barrier Reef.
To put in protection for these species, the ECIFF vessels were allowed only 1
per trip. That’s 200 vessels, making as many trips as they want.)
"These findings indicate that current management
of no-take areas is inadequate for protecting reef sharks, even in one of the
world's most-well-managed reef ecosystems. Further steps are urgently required
for protecting this critical functional group from ecological extinction,"
wrote the team of researchers led by Dr. William D. Robbins of the School of
Marine and Tropical Biology at James Cook University in Townsville, Australia.
Researcher fear sharks inhabiting Australia's
Great Barrier Reef are in rapid decline due to over fishing.Sharks inhabiting
Australia's Great Barrier Reef are in decline due to over fishing, researchers
warned Wednesday after developing what they said was a new way to measure
falling numbers.On Wednesday, academics from James Cook University in
Queensland said scientific evidence reveal a substantial drop in shark numbers
worldwide and some species are in threat of extinction.
"Shark declines are quite rapid," Professor Sean Connolly said. Researchers
drew evidence by studying the grey reef and whitetip reef sharks' growth rates,
reproductive capability and projected morality rates in the Great Barrier Reef.
Researchers found that the results using all the various methods of assessing
shark populations were in close agreement and that sharks were declining due to
fishing.
This evidence follows a signing an agreement by
eight countries - including the Marshall Islands an Palau - to prohibit
commercial fishing of sharks in almost three million square kilometres of
ocean.The countries have also pledged to work towards saving sharks from
extinction by developing and maintaining sanctuaries for the endangered animal.
The researchers say that because sharks are
"apex predators" that play an important role in "maintaining
healthy reef ecosystems", their decline threatens the overall welfare of
the reef ecosystem. As an example, the authors cite overfishing of sharks as a
possible contributing factor to the collapse of Caribbean coral-reef
ecosystems.
Coral reefs have proven difficult to
manage sustainably, in part because the multispecies nature of reef fisheries,
the com- plexity of trophic interactions, and the times scales on which
processes manifest may allow coral reefs to appear healthy long after serious
degradation has occurred. This also means that signs of degradation may not be
readily apparent in the infor- mation that many managers use to evaluate the
condition of reef systems (metrics such as catch data or coral cover). what is
going to happen to our GBR?
REFRENCES:
Population Growth Rates of Reef Sharks with and
without Fishing on the Great Barrier Reef: Robust Estimation with Multiple
Models by Mizue Hisano, Sean R. Connolly and William D. Robbins is published in
PLos ONE 6.9, September 2011.
POSITION STATEMENT
Effects of fishing on tropical reef associated
shark populations on the Great Barrier Reef
Evaluating catch and mitigating risk in a
multispecies, tropical, inshore shark fishery within the Great Barrier Reef
World Heritage Area
Source: Ecological assessment of the East
Coast
Inshore Finfish fishery Compiled by: Brad Zeller and Natale Snape (Queensland department
of primary industries document)
Interesting findings that
compromise sustainability:
Recorded commercial
shark catch in this fishery plummeted between 2003 and 2006. In this period
there was only a slight decrease in fishing effort, indicating that reduced
catches resulted from a reduction in the availability of target shark species.
The
by-catch of the fishery has been recorded larger than the actual primary target
catch.
It is noteworthy that the primary target species of shark in
the ECIFF (Australian blacktip shark, C. tilstoni and Spot-tail shark, C.
sorrah) accounted for only 40 per cent of total catch of sharks and rays,
with a further 18 species taken.
In
addition, the overlapping species distributions of many sharks and rays suggest
it would be very difficult to target a particular species without significant
by-catch of other species at higher risk of overfishing, particularly if large
mesh nets are used.
Source: (the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
Position Statement on the conservation and management of sharks and rays in the
Queensland East Coast Inshore Finfish Fishery. The Statement was developed to
inform the Queensland Government review of the fishery. In February 2009 the
fishery was declared an approved Wildlife Trade Operation until February 2012.)
Threatened and Endangered
species making a significant large part of the catch:
The scalloped hammerhead (Sphyrna lewini)
was a significant part of the Queensland shark catch (18 per cent of commercial
catch in the ECIFF during observer trips), and is one of the species that risk
assessments by QDPI&F and CSIRO have identified as having a high
sustainability risk.
The grey reef shark (C.
amblyrhynchos) made up 6.6 per cent of the shark catch. Based on the
average catch of sharks from 1990 to 2005 (793 tonnes per year, from data in
Attachment 4 Figure 1), these proportions equate to estimated catches of 143
tonnes per year for scalloped hammerhead and 52 tonnes per year for grey reef
shark. Other species considered to be at high risk in QDPI&F's published
assessments include the great hammerhead (S. mokarran) (2.9 per cent of
catch) and white-spotted guitarfish (Rhynchobatus djiddensis) (0.4 per
cent of catch).
75% of the catch deemed unsustainable by CSIRO.
All
20 species of sharks and rays observed in the ECIFF commercial catch were
assessed, and of these 75 per cent were
found to be particularly vulnerable to even small levels of fishing mortality. We note that 75 per cent of
the species in the above table (in bold text) have the same or a higher value
of the index of productivity, and therefore, would also be particularly
vulnerable to even small levels of fishing mortality.
Approximately
25 species were described as ’least likely to be sustainable’ in the ECIFF by
CSIRO.
Catch
and effort for sharks and rays in the ECIFF has increased substantially in
recent years, especially amongst those fishers who deliberately target sharks,
and more recently rays.
Source: (the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
Position Statement on the conservation and management of sharks and rays in the
Queensland East Coast Inshore Finfish Fishery. The Statement was developed to
inform the Queensland Government review of the fishery. In February 2009 the
fishery was declared an approved Wildlife Trade Operation until February 2012.)
It has long been recognized that the
longevity and low fecundity of sharks makes them particularly vulnerable to
over-exploitation. This led Holden (1973) to question whether any
elasmobranches fishery could be sustainable? The answer Holden supplied to his
own rhetorical question was a provisional 'yes' provided there was
"caution because so much depends on the biology of the species exploited"
The reason the ECIFF is listed as sustainable is because it focuses on
using the gauntlet approach to fish sharks, however the approach is only
plausible if the biology of the species is well known. The majority of sharks
taken in this fishery, especially within the GBR marine park, lack exactly this
information. Little to no research has been done on the fecundity or population
curves of these targeted and by catch species, it is only occurring now, thus
making the ‘gauntlet’ approach of sustainably fishing sharks
The governments
reasoning for the three-year extension of the fishery (decided on the 28th
of February review) can be found here:
"Due to the implementation of area and
seasonal closures, gear, size and harvest restrictions and the harvesting
method used in the fishery, significant impacts on the Great Barrier Reef
Marine Park or the World Heritage values of the Great Barrier Reef World
Heritage Area are considered unlikely”
Contradiction to this
statement can be found in scientific documents form which each of the following
statements were extracted:
"Sharks inhabiting Australia's Great
Barrier Reef are in decline due to over fishing" (September 2011, JCU
research)
"Shark populations in other countries with
significant coral reefs in our region are going to be in much worse shape even
than ours are -- and ours are not in good shape."
“Overfishing of sharks is now recognized as a
major global conservation concern, with increasing numbers of shark species
added to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature’s list of
threatened species,”
“Many shark species are highly vulnerable to
overfishing - and many of the world’s shark fisheries are in dire straits as a
result. In addition, sharks are highly vulnerable to ‘bycatch mortality’; that
is, being caught incidentally in fisheries that target other species.For
instance, populations of coral reef sharks in the Indo-Pacific, including the
Great Barrier Reef, are now severely depleted,”
FISHING A THREAT:
Ongoing, rapid declines in many shark species worldwide, coupled
with evidence that shark depletion can have substantial, cascading effects on
community structure and dynamics, have made assessing the status and trends of
shark populations a high priority in conservation biology.
(Population Growth Rates of Reef Sharks with and without Fishing on
the Great Barrier Reef: Robust Estimation with Multiple Models School of Marine and Tropical Biology, James Cook University,
Townsville, Australia, 2 ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James
Cook University, Townsville, Australia.)
The wide variety of life-history characteristics and space
utilisation means inshore shark populations are likely to be affected in a
range of different ways and to varying extents by anthropogenic influences such
as fishing. Stocks of some species are known to be shared with other
nearby jurisdictions, so unsustainable fishing practices in these areas would
also potentially affect GBRWHA populations (Ovenden et al. 2009), as would
illegal fishing encroaching on northern Australian waters (Field et al. 2009).
Coral reef shark populations are declining
rapidly due to fishing according to research published in the December 5th
issue of the journal Current Biology. The paper says that "no-take
zones" -- areas where fishing is prohibited -- can be effective in
protecting sharks but only when the no-take regulations are strictly enforced.
Examining two common species of sharks on the
Great Barrier Reef in Australia, the researchers found that both populations
are in the midst of a rapid population decline -- 7% per year for white tip
sharks and 17% per year for gray reef sharks, showing that current shark
conservation strategies are not effective.
(These results
demonstrate that the commercial fishery operating on the Great Barrier Reef has
a substantial interaction with shark species commonly considered to be strongly
associated with coral reefs. Observer data from the fishery indicated that grey
reef sharks were the most commonly encountered species, he most concerning and recent results from
research has reported that populations of white tip reef sharks and grey reef
sharks have collapsed on reefs in the northern and central Great Barrier Reef.
To put in protection for these species, the ECIFF vessels were allowed only 1
per trip. That’s 200 vessels, making as many trips as they want.)
"These findings indicate that current management
of no-take areas is inadequate for protecting reef sharks, even in one of the
world's most-well-managed reef ecosystems. Further steps are urgently required
for protecting this critical functional group from ecological extinction,"
wrote the team of researchers led by Dr. William D. Robbins of the School of
Marine and Tropical Biology at James Cook University in Townsville, Australia.
"The apparent failure of no-take zones to
protect sharks makes it clear that the mere legal prohibition of fishing in
marine protected areas is inadequate; such prohibitions must be part of
statutory or community-based enforcement regimes that achieve nearly universal
compliance from reef users", the write. "Our data suggest that for
coral-reef sharks, immediate and substantial reductions in shark fishing will
be required for their ongoing collapse to be reversed."
Researcher fear sharks inhabiting Australia's
Great Barrier Reef are in rapid decline due to over fishing.Sharks inhabiting
Australia's Great Barrier Reef are in decline due to over fishing, researchers
warned Wednesday after developing what they said was a new way to measure
falling numbers.On Wednesday, academics from James Cook University in
Queensland said scientific evidence reveal a substantial drop in shark numbers
worldwide and some species are in threat of extinction.
"Shark declines are quite rapid," Professor Sean Connolly said. Researchers drew evidence by studying the grey reef and whitetip reef sharks' growth rates, reproductive capability and projected morality rates in the Great Barrier Reef. Researchers found that the results using all the various methods of assessing shark populations were in close agreement and that sharks were declining due to fishing.
This evidence follows a signing an agreement by
eight countries - including the Marshall Islands an Palau - to prohibit
commercial fishing of sharks in almost three million square kilometres of
ocean.The countries have also pledged to work towards saving sharks from
extinction by developing and maintaining sanctuaries for the endangered animal.
The researchers say that because sharks are
"apex predators" that play an important role in "maintaining
healthy reef ecosystems", their decline threatens the overall welfare of
the reef ecosystem. As an example, the authors cite overfishing of sharks as a
possible contributing factor to the collapse of Caribbean coral-reef
ecosystems.
Robbins and colleagues say that immediate action
is needed to stem shark population decline on the Great Barrier Reef.
Coral reefs have proven difficult to
manage sustainably, in part because the multispecies nature of reef fisheries,
the com- plexity of trophic interactions, and the times scales on which
processes manifest may allow coral reefs to appear healthy long after serious
degradation has occurred. This also means that signs of degradation may not be
readily apparent in the infor- mation that many managers use to evaluate the
condition of reef systems (metrics such as catch data or coral cover). what is
going to happen to our GBR?
REFRENCES:
Population Growth Rates of Reef Sharks with and
without Fishing on the Great Barrier Reef: Robust Estimation with Multiple
Models by Mizue Hisano, Sean R. Connolly and William D. Robbins is published in
PLos ONE 6.9, September 2011.
Citation: "Ongoing Collapse of Coral-Reef
Shark Populations." Robbins, W.D., Hisano, M., Connolly, S.R., Choat, J.H.
Current Biology 16, 2314—2319, December 5, 2006. DOI 10.1016/j.cub.2006.09.044
POSITION STATEMENT
Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
Position Statement on the conservation and management of sharks and rays in the
Queensland East Coast Inshore Finfish Fishery
[Post publishing note] This Great Barrier Reef
Marine Park Authority Position Statement in relation to the Queensland East
Coast Inshore Finfish Fishery was developed in June 2007.
Effects of fishing on tropical reef associated
shark populations on the Great Barrier Reef
M.R. Heupela,∗, A.J.
Williamsb, D.J. Welchb,c, A. Ballaghb, B.D. Mapstoned,1, G. Carlose, C.
Daviesf, C.A. Simpfendorferb
Fisheries Research 95 (2009) 350–361
Evaluating catch and mitigating risk in a
multispecies, tropical, inshore shark fishery within the Great Barrier Reef
World Heritage Area
Alastair V. HarryA,E, Andrew J. TobinA, Colin A.
SimpfendorferA, David, J. WelchA,B, Amos MaplestonA, Jimmy WhiteA, Ashley J.
WilliamsA,C and Jason StapleyD
CSIRO PUBLISHING
