Elements 5

2012-01-16T18:45:00.001-08:00

The Great Barrier Reef, is a world heritage site... not a place for the extraction of an unjustified number of sharks. The government are public servants, they work for us... i'd say now more than ever is the time to voice your opinion. send the letter below... ring fisheries, ask questions, demand answers... and overall... fight for what you love. From Madison Stewart.

OUR GBR SHARKS ARE NOT FOR SALE.

Madison Stewart- Latest- speaking up for sharks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V9QprdaQsM

OUR REACTION = THEIR ONLY HOPE.

In NSW Valerie Taylor, underwater legend for sharks and conservation, wrote many letters to fisheries not expecting much, but one man there agreed with her and pushed for their protection, in 1984, the grey nurse became the first shark protected anywhere in the world, and to this day are protected. She found out her letters brought their attention to the grey nurse shark and the need for protection of their species. Letters work, which is why I have adopted this method to save our sharks once again.

THE LETTER FOR YOU TO SEND:

Dear (name of person in government)

(Address)

(Your name)

I am writing to you regarding the assessment of the Queensland East Coast Inshore Fin Fish Fishery (ECIFF) under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). I am concerned about the fate of sharks taken within the ECIFF (480 tonnes annually in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park and World Heritage Area and 120 tonnes South of the GBRMP) for use as food in Australia and to supply export markets for shark fin. Significant weaknesses are present in the fishery, there is minimal vital information on many of the shark species caught within the Great Barrier Reef, and there is no information to credit its sustainability, or the allowed quota. I want the ECIFF to stop target shark fishing inside the GBR Marine Park and World Heritage Area immediately, and licenses to target sharks revoked.

We must invoke the Precautionary Principle and stop the extraction of the apex predators with no insight into the effects on the particular surrounding ecosystem. Shark fisheries around the world are suffering and we are following in the footsteps of removing the most important predator. Some of the species targeted and bycatch species are already facing severe status on the red list of threatened species. 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”. Our contribution to the shark fin trade and non-research based fishing for sharks within the Great Barrier Reef is affecting our reputation, thus tourism, especially with many less developed nations creating shark sanctuaries in their waters. If not a problem now, it is almost certain that the shark populations in the future will suffer if this level of fishing continues. Sharks are basically a non- renewable resource, and significantly vulnerable to fishing pressure, with life history traits closer to mammals, sometimes never to recover.

We cannot wait until the research into these sharks is done before we protect them because by then it may be too late. According to the Precautionary Principle, 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 and sharks are currently extracted in mass numbers with no insight on the effects or if they will survive, the insight into these species underway is a stalling process while sharks with such delicate life traits are fished possibly faster than they can reproduce.

When the review of this legislation is done in Feb 2012, I urge you to call an immediate halt to target shark fishing, and revoke its approval.

I………………………………………………., do not agree with the removal of sharks from within the Great Barrier Reef marine park through the ECIFF, or the decision to make it legal.

(personal message)

yours sincerely,

(your name)

WHERE TO SEND THE LETTERS:

There are 7 areas of fisheries and government to write to here, and there are two major food chains that we know source shark from the ECIFF legal shark fishing… all we can do, is demand a halt to the fishing and hope our stance is noted when the review occurs in February. (letter is listed below these).

MOST IMPORTANT:

"The minister is required to consider all the public comments received in response to the public comment notice, when making his decision about export approval for the fishery."

NATHAN HANNA

The Director Sustainable Fisheries Section Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities.

sustainablefisheries@environment.gov.au

Submissions may also be sent by fax to (02) 6275 9374, or email

Call Minister of the department, Nathan Hanna on (02) 6274 1917

ask for a halt to the licences to target sharks in the GBR when the review occurs, and what will be done to better protect the ENDANGERED scalloped hammerhead.

(also copy paste letter into here)

http://www.environment.gov.au/about/contacts/index.html

Mr Phil Gaffney on telephone 0732390436

Email: phillip.gaffney@deedi.qld.gov.au

Tara Smith, fisheries management officer

tara.smith@deedi.qld.gov.au

(both above) will have final say over the panels decisions on the fishery.

Tara: 07 3405 682

Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke

Title: Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities.

Email: Tony.Burke.MP@aph.gov.au

Queensland Fisheries Minister Craig Wallace.

mainroads@ministerial.qld.gov.au

Fisheries Queensland (the QLD fisheries department).

Email: callweb@dpi.qld.gov.au

Prime Minister Julia Gillard

The Hon Julia Gillard

http://www.pm.gov.au/contact-your-pm

You could also write to Queensland Premier Anna Bligh.

http://www.thepremier.qld.gov.au/tools/contactform.aspx

if you really feel like getting your shark groove on, you can contact woolworths and coles :) (who sell meat from the GBR whilst the fins are exported)

http://www.coles.com.au/Coles/Coles-Feedback.aspx

http://www.woolworths.com.au:80/wps/wcm/connect/website/woolworths/contact+us

LETTER FOR WOOLWORTHS AND COLES:

Dear (name of supermarket)

Are you aware that you are serving flake (shark meat) sourced from inside the Great Barrier Reef marine park by a particularly concerning fishery that is currently operating with licences issued by the Australian Government in 2009. These licences allow 600 tonnes of shark to be removed from the East Coast, GBR Marine Park and world heritage area each year, that’s an estimated 78,000 sharks. Research at James Cook University has been undertaken on the biology, abundance and status of some of these sharks, this work suggests that Great Barrier Reef populations of sharks are declining, down by as much as 97%.

The science surrounding this mass extraction of sharks is small, as we know almost nothing about most of the species being caught, and many are yet to be studied. There is no evidence to say it is sustainable, and the sharks are at particular risk due to their life traits, slow growing, late to mature, some only having one pup.

This fishery (the East Coast Inshore Finfish Fishery) includes 200 commercial gillnet vessels to target sharks and the valuable fins (reaching up to $300 US/ kg) are then exported for the Asian Delicacy ‘shark fin soup’. Internationally recognised as a barbaric and unsustainable practice as well as responsible for wiping out entire populations of sharks, shark finning is illegal in Australia. However when the whole body is landed, then the fins can be harvests, the meat is a by-product, one that you are selling, and therefore contributing to the potential devastations of Australia’s sharks and the shark fin trade.

As well as the shark meat posing potential risks, many heath organisations warn, women should not eat at all, Men should eat no more than 1 meal per month, Kids up to age 12 should not eat at all because sharks contain a large amount of mercury, a very dangerous substance. Also- smaller reef sharks pose the risk of ciguatera poisoning, dangerous bacteria found in some reef fish that sharks eat.

I urge you to boycott the by-product of the fin industry and contribution to the trade of shark meat from a fishery such as this one. There are methods to fish sharks sustainably, this fishery does not use them. Public demeanor towards sharks is the only factor preventing public pressure for their protection, I urge to take a stand at the hands of supporting environmental injustice in our waters.

The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority have themselves suggested that there should not be a shark fishery on the Great Barrier Reef at all because it can not be clearly demonstrated that it is selective and sustainable.

As a major supermarket chain operation in Australian selling fish stocks and buying form fisheries that rely on sharks place in the ecosystem to maintain the predation on those fish stocks, it is your duty and in your best interest to not buy from, trade or support the by product of the fin industry and the ECIFF.

Thank you for your time (your name/ personal message)

EVERYONE,

ON BEHALF OF THE SHARKS OF THE GREAT BARRIER REEF, thank you...

letters written by Madison Stewart

public pressure will be the only thing that creates change...

2011-11-28T22:00:00.000-08:00

'TIGER LIKES THE LENS' Madi with a tiger shark: Caribbean: Photo Ernst Stewart.

welcome!

Mission statement of the Great Barrier Resistance in association with Elements underwater filmmaking: through public awareness and reaction, we will work to expose and end the legal and illegal injustices occurring in our waters.

WHAT HAPPENED:

The 'East Coast Inshore FinFish Fishery' is a fishery operating in Australia, and within the fishery some 200 commercial gillnet vessels have licences allowing them to catch and target solely sharks. Removing 600 tonnes legally a year, an estimated 78,000 sharks, 80% of this catch, being caught INSIDE the Great Barrier Reef marine park and World Heritage area. Despite screaming from conservation societies, this was allowed, and now there are shark fisheries operating within our marine park, and it remains unknown to most of the public. As long as the body is kept (which is sold as 'flake' or cheap fish and chips and can be found in coles and woolworths) then the valuable fins can be exported to contribute to shark fin soup (Australia exporting 230 tonnes of shark fin a year). However shark fisheries have been long known to collapse, sharks are like dolphins in life traits, slow to mature, some only having one pup. 90% of the original shark population has been wiped out from our oceans. This is an extreme danger to sharks in the Great Barrier Reef especially because there is so little information on their population statuses and life history, many species are yet to be studied, this info is required when establishing a fishery. In turn this effects the reef and our fish stocks as sharks control it all, apex predators and top dog of the food chain, they are the major factor of a heathy ecosystem, and can be wiped out from a reef completely. No science justifies the removal of 600 tonnes a year, to overlook this is actually illegal. However it continues, and in the 'process' of studying these sharks, they are still being fished, meanwhile frequent reports that they are disappearing are occurring, this being the most recent one,

http://www.cairns.com.au/article/2012/01/11/200231_local-news.html

Currently the second highest caught shark in this fishery is the ENDANGERED scalloped hammerhead, the by-catch includes protected sharks, turtles, dolphins, dugongs, sting rays (one that has not been spotted in large numbers since its description more than 120 years ago). A statement from a frequent diver of the Great Barrier Reef "Since 2005 when this fishery started it is almost impossible to see a shark on many of the reefs which are suffering as larger predatory fish are eating all the little fish which feed on the algae that grow on the coral, which end up dying." I have seen these effects too, i am 18 years old, and began diving the GBR at age 12, too short of a lifetime to have my home threatened by the removal of the top predator and notice the effects... I plead the Australian public to fight back, because this fishery is wrong in ever way, it IS effecting our reef and sharks, and it WILL have an impact on our oceans they might not recover from, I for one will not wait until the research is complete whilst they fish our sharks in the mean time with no idea of the effects. This is injustice that became law... and the Great Barrier Reef is a world like no other, a sanctuary... we must fight for it.

my story:

My name is Madison Stewart, at 14 i left school and began home schooling and started to use an underwater video camera which to this day is my weapon in the war for sharks. The legal shark fishing in the Great Barrier Reef lit the fire i have run off since. It was my return to the reefs when i went to my known spots expecting to find sharks and anticipating seeing my finny friends again that i went a whole trip seeing not one shark, and lost my faith in the future i dreamt of to the time in which destruction was possible... i was 14 years old, and my sharks were gone. I try to use film to spark a love for the oceans powerful enough to encourage people to fight for its protection. I hope to have an impact on Australia enough to save the GBR's sharks form what will be almost certain destruction at the hands of our government... for the sharks, oceans, and the values i hold, we will not stop until they are safe.

600 tonnes a year, 78,000 sharks... TAKEN LEGALLY!

Shark fishing inside the Great Barrier Reef- you decide, send your letter before the review in Feb 2012. your reaction.. is their only hope.

Madison Stewarts 'Man Eating Shark'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8kEPf94Yvo&feature=related

Join us on facebook:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Great-Barrier-Resistance/170788912955837?ref=ts

Youtube channel and shark films!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/user/elements5pip?feature=watch

REFERENCES TO SHARK RESEARCH:

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

Assessments of target and bycatch species in the ECIFF

2011-10-08T15:17:00.001-07:00

THE ASESSMENTS OF ALL SPECIES CAUGHT BOTH TARGET AND BYCATCH IN THE ECIFF

Threatened species that the ECIFF may interact with:

Carcharias taurus – Grey Nurse Shark (east coast population) – Critically endangered Glyphis sp. A – Speartooth Shark – Critically endangered

Caretta caretta – Loggerhead Turtle – Endangered

Lepidochelys olivacea – Pacific Ridley, Olive Ridley – Endangered

Chelonia mydas – Green Turtle – Vulnerable

Dermochelys coriacea – Leathery Turtle, Leatherback Turtle, Luth – Vulnerable Eretmochelys imbricata – Hawksbill Turtle – Vulnerable

Natator depressus – Flatback Turtle – Vulnerable

Megaptera novaeangliae – Humpback Whale – Vulnerable

Carcharodon carcharias –White Shark – Vulnerable

Pristis microdon – Freshwater Sawfish – Vulnerable

Pristis zijsron – Green Sawfish

Dindagubba, Narrowsnout Sawfish – Vulnerable

Rhincodon typus – Whale Shark – Vulnerable

DOMINATED CATCH: 6 species, of these 3 are listed as near threatened, one is listed as endangered.

Carcharhinus tilstoni (Australian Blacktip Shark)

Status: Least Concern

What information is available on species mix suggests that while the majority of the targeted catch is based on relatively productive species (milk sharks, spot-tail and Australian blacktip) a number of much less productive species are also taken. An added complication is that catches of Australian blacktips (Carcharhinus tilstoni) appear to be mixed with the common blacktip (C. limbatus); these two species are very difficult to tell apart. However common blacktips are much less productive and their abundance in the catch would increase in southern areas of the fishery.

The scalloped hammerhead shark (Sphyrna lewini)

Status: Endangered

Pups occupy shallow coastal nursery grounds, often heavily exploited by inshore fisheries, and then migrate offshore as they mature.

Male Scalloped Hammerheads reach sexual maturity at an age of about 10 years. Females of the species reach sexual maturity an age of about 15 or 16 years.

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, Attachment 3), and is one of the species that risk assessments by QDPI&F and CSIRO have identified as having a high sustainability risk.

these proportions equate to estimated catches of 143 tonnes per year for scalloped hammerhead.

spot tail shark Carcharhinus sorrah

Status: Near Threatened

It is known now that its reproductive level is too low, and was exploited in previous fisheries where the population catch was reduced to only a quarter of previous years.

The spot-tail shark (C. sorrah) was a relatively large contributors to the catch numbers on observer trips.

(June 2007 ) To date, no stock assessments have been completed for sharks and rays taken in the ECIFF. Work is underway on stock assessments for the two principle target species (Australian blacktip shark Carcharinus tilstoni and Spot-tail shark C. sorrah). The 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 Reef27 (both of these species are caught by the ECIFF, see Attachment 3). The study notes the need to review the conservation status of these species28.

The lack of stock assessments and population estimates for sharks and rays caught in the ECIFF mean that population declines are unlikely to be detected for most species. In light of this, risk assessments are being used to infer the ecological sustainability of species and classify sharks and rays according to their relative vulnerability to overfishing.

The white-cheek shark Carcharhinus dussumieri, Widemouth Blackspot Shark

Near Threatened

This small species of shark is particularly susceptible to inshore fisheries, being caught commonly as bycatch in commercial trawling, artisanal fishing, hook-and-line fishing and gillnetting throughout its range. It has a low reproductive capacity, with a normal litter size of two, making it vulnerable to over-exploitation. It also enters the shark fin trade.

In Australia this species is classified as Least Concern, as regional fishing pressure appears sustainable. However, continued fishing pressures throughout its range will result in further declines and populations require monitoring.

The life history characteristics of this species, together with its small size, make local populations particularly sensitive to fishing-induced declines.

in Northern Australia appears fairly robust, there is evidence of severe depletions, including local extirpations, of this species in coastal waters throughout parts of its range in Asia (only a matter of time until this occours in Australia) There are no data on the age at maturity or longevity of this species.

milk shark (Rhizoprionodon acutus)

Status: Least Concern

The grey reef shark Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos

Status: Near Threatened

The Grey Reef Shark (Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos) is a widespread, social species that formerly was common in clear, tropical, coastal waters and oceanic atolls. Its restricted habitat, site fidelity, inshore distribution, small litter size, and relatively late age at maturity, along with increasing fishing pressure suggests that this species may be under threat. Although caught in tropical multi-species fisheries, it has considerably greater value in dive tourism if protected. With time and additional data, this Near Threatened assessment may need to be revised.

This shark shows high site fidelity and some local populations have been severely depleted by modest fishing pressure,

Because Grey Reef Sharks are found in clear tropical waters over coral reefs, they are ideal for non-consumptive (but much more lucrative) use in the form of tourism diving, as has been shown by Anderson and Ahmed (1993).

BY CATCH IN THE ECIFF (rays & sharks)

Rhinobatus typus Giant shovelnose ray (UNIVERSAL FISH CATALOGUE)

No common names are available for this name combination.

Common names might possibly exist under it's current name: Rhinobatos typus

Habitat: No habitat information has been entered yet.

Distribution: Indo-West Pacific.

Not listed on the IUCN red list.

Dasyatis kuhlii (Neotrygon kuhlii) Blue spotted Stingray

Status: Data Deficient

IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

Himantura uarnak (Reticulate Whipray)

Status: Vulnerable

Rhinotera neglecta (Rhinoptera neglecta)

Australian Cownose Ray

Status: Data Deficient

Loxodon macrorhinus Sliteye shark (Jordan's Blue Dogshark)

Status: Least Concern

Eusphyrna blochii (Eusphyra blochii) Slender Hammerhead or The winghead shark.

Status: Near Threatened

In Australia listed as least concern: FOR NOW. Its happened and been seen in the past in other countries from exploitation from fisheries, so what’s to stop it from eventually occurring in Australia. Within Australian waters it is only lightly exploited by gillnet and long line fishing.

There are no scientific data on its status, and biological data are incomplete, but based on anecdotal accounts and market surveys the population is assumed to have declined and is assessed as Near Threatened. In the future it may reach a level that would warrant a Vulnerable listing.

There are no conservation measures for this species.

Approximately 25 species were least likely to be sustainable in the ECIFF. Of these, Eleven species had a susceptibility rank above 2.33 and a recovery rank between 1.66 and 2.33 and were also least likely to be sustainable. These species include Eusphyra blochii.

Species of sharks and rays identified by the Scientific Advisory Group of the Inshore Finfish Management Advisory Committee in February 2007 as high or moderate risk: Eusphyrna blochii: high risk!

Orectolbus ornatus wobbegong

Near threatned.

Assessment is complicated by taxonomic uncertainties based on the identification of the PNG specimen. This species should at present be considered as an Australian endemic (L.J.V. Compagno, pers. comm.).

Age and growth of O. ornatus was attempted but could not be verified or validated (Huveneers 2007).

Commercial fishing is probably the main cause of the decline of this species in eastern Australia. Furthermore, observed site fidelity is likely to increase wobbegong?s susceptibility to fishing pressure. On an Australia-wide basis, wobbegong sharks are commonly caught in trawls, beach seines, gillnets, lobster pots and traps, by hook-and-line, and also by spearfishing. The flesh is now highly regarded as food, but in the past has generally been of only limited commercial value. Historically, the attractive skin has been used as decorative leather (Last and Stevens 1994). However, it is unknown if this practice is still occurring.

Sawfish Pristis clavata (Dwarf Sawfish, Queensland Sawfish)

Red List Category & Criteria: Critically Endangered

Australian populations have declined significantly as a result of bycatch in commercial gillnet and trawl fisheries throughout this limited range and this bycatch continues, in commercial and recreational fisheries.

Anoxypristis cuspidata (Knifetooth Sawfish, Narrow Sawfish, Pointed Sawfish)

Critically Endangered

K-selected life history have caused substantial reductions in abundance, the fragmentation of remaining populations and the virtual disappearance of this species from commercial catches in regions where it was once considered fairly common.

Age at maturity, longevity and average generation time are unknown.

The principal threat to all sawfishes is fisheries, both targeted and bycatch, commercial and subsistence.

Bycatch is comprised mainly of fish and elasmobranch species. Elasmobranchs taken as bycatch include and the protected narrow sawfish.

scientific observer program, and lower catch frequencies in the Qld Shark Control Program long-term data series, suggest that the abundance of sawfish is much reduced over their east coast range (N. Gribble, DPI&F, pers. obs., 2004).

Research into sawfish biology, distribution, catchability and survivability after capture is also being undertaken in the GoCIFF as part of the Shark Phase II project (Roelofs 2002). Results from this research will be used in the development of a full ecological risk assessment on the sustainability of a broad range of east coast elasmobranchs interacting with the fishery (N. Gribble, DPI&F, pers. comm., 2004). When available,

findings from the full risk assessment will be considered to ensure that the ECIFF management regime is sustainably managing east coast pristid catches. MEANWHILE…

Pristis pectinata (Wide Sawfish) – (expected to be restricted to the gulf and not found on the east coast)

Status: Critically Endangered

Pristis perotteti (Largetooth Sawfish)

Status: Critically Endangered

Pristis pristis (Common Sawfish)

Status: Critically Endangered

Pristis zijsron (Narrowsnout Sawfish)

Status: Critically Endangered

OTHER SPECIES CATCH AND RETAINED:

Carcharhinus altimus (Bignose Shark)

Status: Data Deficient

Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides

Red List Category & Criteria: Near Threatened

The Graceful Shark is exploited for its flesh and fins. There is no information available on the impact of fishing on C. amblyrhynchoides stocks.

The Graceful Shark (Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides) is a little-studied, coastal Indo-West Pacific species that is caught in commercial fisheries, but not as a targeted species. There is no evidence that this species faces a high extinction risk under the IUCN Criteria, but it has been impacted by fishing. Further research is required on its life history to aid in the assessment of this species.

Eleven species had a susceptibility rank above 2.33 and a recovery rank between 1.66 and 2.33 and were also least likely to be sustainable. These species include Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides, C. cautus, C. melanopterus, C. fitzroyensis, Eusphyra blochii and Rhynchobatus australiae.

(Table 2. Summary of the sustainability of species from the risk assessment of target and by- catch fisheries to sharks and rays in Northern Australia published by CSIRO in 2007*)

Carcharhinus amboinensis (Pigeye Shark, Java shark)

Status: Data Deficient

Where fisheries data are available, this species constitutes a very small component of the catch, suggesting that it may not be common.

Given its apparently sporadic distribution and low abundance, this shark may be unable to sustain heavy, localised fishing pressure. In the absence of further information, it is classified globally as Data Deficient. However, data are available from South Africa demonstrating a significant declining trend in catches, hence the Near Threatened assessment for the Southwest Indian Ocean Subpopulation. Given the low incidence of this species in commercial catches, there are no known conservation and management initiatives.

(data deficient because none are being caught to study- already fished out?)

Sawfishes were the least sustainable group with all four species having the highest susceptibility ranks due to the fact that they are captured by prawn and fish trawls, gill nets and long lines**. Other species that were least likely to be sustainable*** were C. amblyrhynchoides, C. amboinensis, C. brevipinna, C. leucas, C. limbatus, Glyphis sp. A, Glyphis sp. C, N. acutidens, S. mokarran, and E. blochii. (Table 2. Summary of the sustainability of species from the risk assessment of target and by- catch fisheries to sharks and rays in Northern Australia published by CSIRO in 2007*)

Carcharhinus brevipinna (Spinner Shark)

Status: Near Threatened

Is frequently captured in recreational and commercial fisheries. It is a species that frequents near shore waters as adults and has inshore nursery areas, making it highly vulnerable to fishing pressure and human-induced habitat alteration.

There are no conservation measures in place for this species.

As with most carcharhinid species, the Spinner Shark meat is sold under the name ?Blacktip Shark? because of wide consumer preference for the product. Probably it is represented in the shark catches in most areas within its range, but owing to confusion with the Blacktip Shark, it is likely that the species is not recorded in landings data. Fins are dried and shipped to the Far East where they are used in shark fin soup. In some areas the hides are likely to be utilized in preparing leather and the livers are used to extract oil.

The CSIRO risk assessment of target and by-catch fisheries to sharks and rays in Northern Australia provided fishery-level assessments, including for the ECIFF, plus a cumulative risk assessment for all northern Australian fisheries. Approximately 25 species were described as ‘least likely to be sustainable’ in the ECIFF (see Attachment 3 – Table 2). These species include: C. brevipinna.

Carcharhinus cautus (Nervous Shark)

Status: Data Deficient

Females mature at 5 to 6 years and reach maximum size at 16 years. Litters of 2 to 6 are produced at two-year intervals. Relatively little is known about its population structure and dynamics. It occurs in areas of northern Australia that are targeted by a moderate level of prawn trawling and coastal/estuarine gillnetting. This species is probably taken as a bycatch in both fisheries, but with a greater likelihood of being caught in the inshore gillnet fishery. Discard/release mortality is probably significant but these fisheries are not thought to be detrimental to the Australian population (where this species is assessed as Least Concern). It will also be taken (and presumably not discarded) in shallow coastal gillnet and line fisheries elsewhere in its range, where no data are available.

This species is threatened primarily by inshore gill-net fisheries throughout its range.

Future research should examine the level of bycatch in these fisheries, together with their attendant mortalities. individual sharks caught in nets die quickly of hypoxia. Practical action in the form of net restrictions will be the only effective measure. Research into population sizes and movements of individuals, via tag-release-recapture studies, is required to better understand this species.

East Coast Inshore Finfish Fishery

Approximately 25 species were least likely to be sustainable in the ECIFF (Figure 6.5-7 of Salini et al 2007). Of these, 14 species had susceptibility and recovery ranks above 2.33 and were the least sustainable species in this fishery. These species include C. amboinensis, C. brevipinna, C. leucas, C. limbatus, C. tilstoni, Glyphis sp. A, Negaprion acutidens, Pristis zijsron, P. microdon, S. mokarran. Eleven species had a susceptibility rank above 2.33 and a recovery rank between 1.66 and 2.33 and were also least likely to be sustainable. These species include Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides, C. cautus, C. melanopterus, C. fitzroyensis, Eusphyra blochii and Rhynchobatus australiae.

Carcharhinus fitzroyensis (Creek Whaler)

Status: Least Concern

Small numbers of this species are caught in northern inshore gill-net fisheries. Juveniles that use embayments as nursery areas are at potential risk of gill-netting, which could depress populations locally. However, the species is relatively fecund and populations should prove resilient.

East Coast Inshore Finfish Fishery

Approximately 25 species were least likely to be sustainable in the ECIFF (Figure 6.5-7 of Salini et al 2007). Of these, 14 species had susceptibility and recovery ranks above 2.33 and were the least sustainable species in this fishery. These species include C. amboinensis, C. brevipinna, C. leucas, C. limbatus, C. tilstoni, Glyphis sp. A, Negaprion acutidens, Pristis zijsron, P. microdon, S. mokarran. Eleven species had a susceptibility rank above 2.33 and a recovery rank between 1.66 and 2.33 and were also least likely to be sustainable. These species include Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides, C. cautus, C. melanopterus, C. fitzroyensis, Eusphyra blochii and Rhynchobatus australiae.

Carcharhinus leucas (Bull Shark)

Status: Near Threatened

It is caught in fisheries throughout its rang due to its freshwater roaming abilities.

The frequent use of estuarine and freshwater areas by the Bull Shark makes it more susceptible to deleterious human impacts than species of sharks occurring in other coastal or offshore areas.

Carcharhinus macloti (Hardnose Shark)

Status: Near Threatened

Although of small size, its life history may not be as productive as that of other small carcharhinids (e.g., Rhizoprionodon spp.), making it more susceptible to fishing pressure. It is assessed as Near Threatened because continuing fishing pressure may reduce the population to a level where it may meet the criteria for Vulnerable.

No species-specific conservation measures are in place.

Carcharhinus melanopterus (Blacktip Reef Shark)

Status: Near Threatened

Due to small litter sizes and long gestation periods, is vulnerable to depletion.

Although this species is used fresh and dry salted for human consumption and for its liver-oil (Last and Stevens 1994) it is considered to be of little commercial importance (Lyle 1987). Data concerning the take of this species in artisanal fisheries is scarce, but due to its inshore, shallow water habitat it is likely to be a target of such activities.

There are currently no conservation or management plans in effect for this species.

Eleven species had a susceptibility rank above 2.33 and a recovery rank between 1.66 and 2.33 and were also least likely to be sustainable. These species include C. melanopterus.

There are a number of chondrichthyan species that are associated almost exclusively with coral reefs, including the whitetip reef shark (Triaenodon obesus), blacktip reef shark (Carcharhinus melanopterus), grey reef shark (Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos) and Caribbean reef shark (Carcharhinus perezi) (Compagno, 1984). These species may be more susceptible to exploitation and changes in habitat quality than species that range broadly amongst habitats because of their high level of habitat association (Wetherbee et al., 1997; Garla et al., 2006a). Reef associated shark species often have complex distributions, however, making the interpretation of data associated with them complex.

Carcharhinus brachyurus (Bronze Whaler)

Status: Near Threatened

This species is slow to reproduce.

Although widespread, regional populations appear to be discrete, and movement of individuals between them is thought infrequent or absent, and it does not appear to be naturally abundant anywhere. Throughout its range, it is known to be exploited by fisheries, but landings are grouped together with other Carcharhinus species, meaning any population declines are likely to go unnoticed, and its coastal nursery areas are potentially vulnerable to development and pollution. This, together with life history characteristics that make it especially vulnerable to overfishing has led to the global assessment of C. brachyurus as Near Threatened.

It is mainly taken as bycatch in gill net and bottom longline fisheries for bony fishes and other sharks. It is also taken by bottom trawl and pelagic longline but only forms a minor component of the catch in these fisheries.

Carcharhinus falciformis: Silky shark

Red List Category & Criteria: Near Threatened

It is vulnerable to a wide variety of pelagic fisheries, and is taken in large numbers, but there are no population estimates and most catches are unreported.

Silky Sharks were found to represent at least 3?4% of the fins auctioned in Hong Kong, the world?s largest shark fin trading center?the 3rd highest after Blue Sharks (Prionace glauca) and Scalloped Hammerhead Sharks (Sphyrna lewini) (Clarke et al. 2006a)?and Hong Kong is thought to make up more than 50% of the global shark fin trade (Clarke et al. 2004, 2006b). Silky Shark fins are valuable to the trade, although they are not one of the highest value fin types (S. Clarke, unpubl. data).

Silky Shark ranks among the three most important sharks in the global shark fin trade, with between half a million and one and a half million Silky Sharks traded annually.

This oceanic and coastal-pelagic shark is circumglobal in tropical waters, where it dominates as a target species or bycatch in certain pelagic fisheries, particularly purse seines on drifting FADs (fish aggregating devices). Population dynamics and structure are poorly known.

Carcharhinus obscurus (Dusky Shark)

Status: Vulnerable

The Dusky Shark (Carcharhinus obscurus) is a large wide-ranging coastal and pelagic warm water species, which is among the slowest-growing, latest-maturing of known sharks, bearing small litters after a long gestation period. Its very low intrinsic rate of increase renders this species among the most vulnerable of vertebrates (including the great whales and sea turtles) to depletion by fisheries.

The fishery for C. obscurus off southwestern Australia developed in the 1940s, but rapidly increased in the late 1970s to produce annual catches of 500?600 t. The fishery uses demersal gillnets (16.5 to 17.8 cm stretched mesh) to target neonates in the nursery area and the selectivity of the nets results in very few individuals over three years of age being captured. The flesh of the young C. obscurus is highly regarded and fetches a good price on local markets. Fins are also sold. Current estimates are that 18?28% of neonates are caught in their first year. An assessment using demographic models indicated that the fishery was sustainable at the then level of catch provided the fishing mortality of animals larger than two metres was less than 4% (Simpfendorfer 1999). However, a more recent assessment (McAuley et al. 2005) found that the stock was less productive than previously thought, and that mortality of older dusky sharks in wetline fisheries outside the target fisheries was leading to a decline in recruitment. This assessment also estimated that the catch per unit effort (CPUE) of Dusky Sharks declined by more than 75% between the early 1970s and 2004, and that the decline was continuing. In 2006 additional management measures were introduced to the fishery (see below), including a maximum size limit for Dusky Shark. These management measures should arrest further declines, but continued monitoring and assessment will be essential to monitor the stock, and the effectiveness of these measures.

All this considered, the species is assessed as Near Threatened throughout Australian waters, close to meeting the criteria for Vulnerable. Continued monitoring and regular reassessment is recommended.

This species is estimated to have undergone population decline in several areas of its range.

The lack of large yolky ova in the ovary of late-term pregnant C. obscurus indicates that there is one year resting period between birth and mating, making the reproductive cycle at least three years long (Musick 1995, Branstetter and Burgess 1996, Romine 2004).

(The dusky whaler, Carcharhinus obscurus (Lesueur, 1818), is a widely distributed large aggressive pelagically feeding species with a typical elasmobranch life history. Off southwestern Australia, regulated mesh size of gillnets ensures the fishery principally captures neonates (age 0) with some juveniles (1–4 years old). Historically fishing mortality on adults has been zero. Simpfendorfer (1999) concluded that, "one possible strategy for the sustainable exploitation of long-lived, late-maturing, slow-growing, slow-reproducing marine species is to target exploitation at the youngest age-classes.")- Gauntlet Fisheries for Elasmobranchs – the Secret of Sustainable Shark Fisheries. (Jeremy D. Prince).

Carcharhinus plumbeus (Sandbar Shark)

Status: Vulnerable

Tagging, age and growth studies show that Sandbar Sharks are long-lived, with low fecundity and are consequently very vulnerable to over-fishing.

Sandbar Sharks are slow-growing K-selected species (Hoff 1990, Sminkey and Musick 1995). Although growth and age at maturity may be accelerated under captive conditions (Wass 1973), wild populations grow very slowly and mature at a relatively late age. The estimated generation and population doubling times of approximately 23 years, indicated a lengthy recovery period for the stock should it be reduced to lower than acceptable levels (McAuley et al. 2005). Regardless, Sandbar Sharks grow slowly and mature late. Longevity is 35-41 years (Musick 2005, McAuley et al. 2006).

It is an important component of shark fisheries in most areas where it occurs and has been severely overfished in the Northwest and Western Central Atlantic, Mediterranean, Southern Brazil and probably the Northeast Pacific. It has declined from fishing off western Australia and is common but not fished in Hawaiian waters (Romine et al. 2006).

Carcharhinus limbatus Black tip shark.

Red List Category & Criteria: Near Threatened

Its meat is well-regarded and its fins are highly marketable.

It frequents inshore waters as adults and has inshore nursery areas, making it highly vulnerable to fishing pressure and human-induced habitat alteration.

In Australia, it represents a minor component of the shark catch in northern Australia (Last and Stevens 1994). Blacktip Shark meat is primarily consumed locally and fins are dried and shipped to the Far East where they are used in preparing shark-fin soup. In some areas the hides are utilised in preparing leather and the livers are used to extract oil.

East Coast Inshore Finfish Fishery

Cumulative risk assessment for all northern Australian fisheries

By weight, the target species of the fishery, C. tilstoni/C. limbatus and C. sorrah, also dominated the catch, contributing ,51% of the catch (Table 4). (Between June 2006 and July 2009, observers were deployed on 149, often multiday, fishing trips within the GBRWHA. Observations were on 1188 separate net shots during 297 days onboard vessels, giving a total of 1452 km-net-hours (Table 2).)

Galeocerdo cuvier (Tiger Shark)

Status: Near Threatened

The Tiger Shark (Galeocerdo cuvier) is caught regularly in target and non-target fisheries. There is evidence of declines for several populations where they have been heavily fished, but in general they do not face a high risk of extinction. However, continued demand, especially for fins, may result in further declines in the future.

Tiger Sharks are undoubtedly caught by recreational fishers in many countries, and not only those documented above. Recreational fishing is likely to account for significant mortality in Tiger Shark populations in coastal waters of some countries.

There are no specific conservation or management measures in place for the Tiger Shark.

They grow quite slowly, which makes them vulnerable to declines in population due to overfishing.

(Between June 2006 and July 2009, observers were deployed on 149, often multiday, fishing trips within the GBRWHA. Observations were on 1188 separate net shots during 297 days onboard vessels, giving a total of 1452 km-net-hours (Table 2).) In this trip, they caught 20 tiger sharks.

Other species (e.g. Galeocerdo cuvier, Sphyrna mokarran) are absent from close inshore waters whereas adults are present (Hueter and Tyminski 2007). 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. (Evaluating catch and mitigating risk in a multispecies, tropical, inshore shark fishery within the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area)

Negaprion acutidens (Sharptooth Lemon Shark)

Status: Vulnerable

They are particularly susceptible to local depletion due their very small habitat range and limited movement patterns (Stevens 1984).

Furthermore, evidence of local extinctions in India and Thailand (L.J.V. Compagno, pers. comm.) indicates that this species is extremely susceptible to local inshore fisheries.

There are currently no conservation measures in place for this species.

East Coast Inshore Finfish Fishery

Cumulative risk assessment for all northern Australian fisheries

Approximately 25 species were described as ‘least likely to be sustainable’ in the ECIFF (see Attachment 3 – Table 2). These species include: Negaprion acutidens.

Rhizoprionodon taylori (Australian Sharpnose Shark)

Status: Least Concern

Caught frequently by inshore demersal gillnet fisheries off Papua, but rarely elsewhere. Utilized for its fins and meat (Ref.58048). Too small to be of any commercial importance

Triaenodon obesus (Whitetip Reef Shark)

Status: Near Threatened

Formally it was abundant over coral reefs, these sharks numbers are at lower levels than those found prior to widespread expansion of fishing in the past 20 years. The species' restricted habitat, depth range, small litter size and moderately late age at maturity suggest that with increasing fishing pressure this species may become threatened.

they may attain sexual maturity at eight to nine years and live to about 16 years.

heavy fishing pressure inshore and lack of management plan in most places suggest that this species may be under threat in heavily fished areas, including remote tropical reefs (Anderson et al.1998).

of the 200 vessels operating in the ECIFF, each one is limited to take only 1 white tip reef shark, per trip.

Meat and liver utilized fresh for human consumption (Ref. 244). The liver of this shark has been reported as toxic- meat with ciguatera poisoning!

Table 3. Species of sharks and rays identified by the Scientific Advisory Group of the Inshore Finfish Management Advisory Committee in February 2007 as high or moderate risk*. Triaenodon obesus: HIGH RISK!

There are a number of chondrichthyan species that are asso- ciated almost exclusively with coral reefs, including the whitetip reef shark (Triaenodon obesus), blacktip reef shark (Carcharhinus melanopterus), grey reef shark (Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos) and Caribbean reef shark (Carcharhinus perezi) (Compagno, 1984). These species may be more susceptible to exploitation and changes in habitat quality than species that range broadly amongst habitats because of their high level of habitat association (Wetherbee et al., 1997; Garla et al., 2006a). Reef associated shark species often have complex distributions, however, making the interpretation of data associated with them complex. There has been a range of studies on coral reef associated shark species, including life his- tory (Randall, 1977; Stevens, 1984; Robbins, 2006; Heupel and Bennett, 2007), distribution (Wetherbee et al., 1997; Pikitch etal., 2005; Papastamatiou et al., 2006), density (Friedlander and DeMartini, 2002; Stevenson et al., 2007) and behaviour (Johnson and Nelson, 1973; Randall and Helfman, 1973; Nelson et al., 1986; Economakis and Lobel, 1998) but there is little information avail- able on interactions between fisheries and these species or the status of populations.

Hemipristis elongata (Snaggletooth Shark)

Status: Vulnerable

There is no information on the age at maturity and growth of this species.

Recent species composition and catch data for fisheries within its range are required to assess the population trends, especially in areas where there is a very high level of fishing pressure.

Hemigaleus australiensis (Australian Weasel Shark)

Status: Least Concern

Sphyrna mokarran (Great Hammerhead Shark) , the great hammerhead shark (Sphyrna mokarran) was the third largest component of the total weight

Status: Endangered

Sphyrna mokarran is highly valued for its fins (in target and incidental fisheries), suffers very high bycatch mortality and only reproduces once every two years, making it vulnerable to over-exploitation and population depletion.

Although there is very little species specific data available, the absence of recent records give cause to suspect a decline of at least 80% in the past 25 years. Difficulties in species identification and accurate recording make an assessment of this species very difficult, however low survival at capture makes it highly vulnerable to fishing pressure, whether directed or incidental.

A large increase in the illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing in northern Australia in the last few years points to great concern that this species is being increasingly targeted for its valuable large fins. Recent Risk Assessments of northern Australian elasmobranchs indicate that it may be ?high-risk? however, due to a lack of data to form the basis of an accurate assessment, the species is considered Data Deficient in Australia at the present time. Further investigation of its status there is required. Given its vulnerability to depletion, low survival at capture and high value for the fin trade this species is considered to meet the criteria for Endangered globally based on the available evidence for declines of >50%. There is an urgent need for data collection in other parts of its range, but considering the high value of its fins and high fishing pressure in other parts of its range, similar declines are likely to have occurred elsewhere.

There are no known species specific conservation measures in place for S. mokarran.

East Coast Inshore Finfish Fishery

Cumulative risk assessment for all northern Australian fisheries

Despite being only 2.4% of the catch by number, the great hammerhead shark (Sphyrna mokarran) was the third largest component of the total weight (9.64%), owing to its large mean size at capture (Table 4). Conversely, catch by weight of some smaller species (e.g. R. acutus, R. taylori) as a proportion of total catch was lower than their respective proportion of catch by number.

Conversely, neonates of other species (e.g. Galeocerdo cuvier, Sphyrna mokarran) are absent from close inshore waters whereas adults are present (Hueter and Tyminski 2007). 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.

DPI&F is considering further management options for species assessed to be at relatively high risk to their sustainability, for example scalloped hammerhead shark (Sphyrna lewini), great hammerhead shark (Sphyrna mokarran) and white-spotted guitarfish (Rhynchobatus djiddensis) (Gribble et al. 2005).

The following sustainability estimates were made by Gribble et al. (2004a) for what is thought to be the major commercially exploited species in the Queensland East Coast shark fishery: highest relative risk to sustainability: Sphyrna mokarran (great hammerhead shark) and Rhynchobatus djiddensis (white-spotted guitarfish).

Sphyrna corona (Scalloped Bonnethead)

Status: Near Threatened

Sphyrna media (Scoophead Shark)

Status: Data Deficient

Sphyrna tiburo (Bonnethead Shark)

Status: Least Concern

Sphyrna tudes (Smalleye Hammerhead Shark)

Status: Vulnerable

Sphyrna zygaena (Smooth Hammerhead)

Status: Vulnerable

Dasyatis fluviorum (Estuary Stingaree)

Status: Vulnerable

Very little is known of its biology and ecology. The species is still relatively common in some southern Queensland estuaries and bays (Hervey Bay, parts of Moreton Bay), and these areas may be important for habitat protection (they are however, also heavily fished both commercially and recreationally and face development pressure).

Unidentified ray

Manta spp.

12 species listed, all listed as either…

near threatened, data deficient, or endangered.

Mobula spp.

9 species of mobula:

all listed as either:

near threatened, data deficient, or endangered.

Aetobatus narinari (Spotted Eagle Ray)

Status: Near Threatened

Inshore habitat and hence availability to a wide variety of inshore fishing gear (beach seine, gillnet, purse seine, benthic longline, trawl etc.), its marketability and the generally intense and unregulated nature of inshore fisheries across large parts of the species. Overall, pressure on the species is high and likely to cause population depletions. Management and conservation measures considering harvest and trade management need to be implemented immediately.

Aetomylaeus nichofii (Banded Eagle Ray)

Status: Vulnerable

Given actual (and increasing) levels of exploitation, rarity, low fecundity and global declines in catches of batoids the species is listed as Vulnerable. Research urgently needs to address biology and levels of abundance.

There are no current conservation measures in place for A. nichofii. The species may be protected in small areas of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park in Australia, although commercial fishing is still permitted in the majority of the park.

Aetomylaeus vespertilio (Reticulate Eagle Ray)

Status: Endangered

Uncommon eagle ray which has not been sighted in any great numbers since its description more than 160 years ago. This species would be highly susceptible to a variety of fishing methods in regions where the level of exploitation of marine resources is very high and is increasing (e.g., India, Thailand, Taiwan and Indonesia).

Highly susceptible to a variety of inshore demersal fisheries, including trawls, gillnets and trammel nets which operate intensively throughout its range

Rhinoptera neglecta (Australian Cownose Ray)

Status: Data Deficient

Little known cownose ray, possibly endemic to Australia. It is presumably taken as bycatch, particularly by gill net fisheries that overlap with its distribution. However, the extent of catches is unknown. On this basis, it is currently assessed as Data Deficient.

Unidentified eagle ray

Glaucostegus typus (Common Shovelnose Ray)

Status: Vulnerable

in Asia and the fins from large animals fetch particularly high prices, creating a significant incentive for bycatch to be retained. Very little is known about the biology or population status of this species. Given its susceptibility to capture by multiple fishing gear types, including trawl nets, gillnets and hooks and its high value fins, it is probable that numbers have been locally reduced by fishing throughout its range.

the high value placed on fins (even in Australia) the Australian population may meet the criteria of Vulnerable A2d, but more detailed catch data is required and it is thus assessed as Near Threatened in Australian waters.

The fins from Rhinobatos typus are widely considered as being amongst the most valuable of elasmobranchs (i.e., white-fin) and there is a significant incentive for fishers to remove the fins from large individuals when they are taken as either target catch or bycatch.

Further research into the population structure, biology and ecology of Rhinobatos typu is required to assess the extent to which fishing pressure, particularly in relation to finning, and habitat destruction is influencing this species within its range. Improved species composition data from all fisheries that take shovelnose rays and guitarfish is necessary.

Very little is known about the biology or population status of this species.

Rhynchobatus australiae (White-spotted Guitarfish)

Status: Vulnerable

Further investigation into the taxonomy of this species in this region is required to be able to make a more accurate assessment. There is no published information on the age and growth and natural mortality of Rhynchobatus australiae.

Rhynchobatus australiae is one of the most sought after elasmobranchs in southeast Asia (particularly Indonesia), with the dorsal fins and upper caudal fin considered to be of premium quality and fetch the highest prices (Chen 1996). A set of fins from a single individual have been reported to have fetched up to Rp 900 000 or US$396/kg (Chen 1996). The skins and flesh are also of good quality.

Anoxypristis cuspidate (Knifetooth Sawfish, Narrow Sawfish, Pointed Sawfish)

Red List Category & Criteria: Critically Endangered

(the classification just before endangered in the wild)

Conservation Actions: Also found within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park.

Due the virtual disappearance of this species from commercial catches in regions where it was once considered fairly common, the global population of this species is considered to be much less than 80% of its former levels 30 to 50 years ago.

The principal threat to all sawfishes is fisheries, both targeted and bycatch, commercial and subsistence. Their morphology, particularly the long tooth-studded saw, makes them extraordinarily vulnerable to entanglement in any sort of net gear, including primitive fishing technology, and regardless of population size (which was probably always fairly small). When sawfish are taken in bycatch, they are often retained (particularly in areas where there is no legal protection) because of the very high value of their products (meat is high quality and fins and rostral saws extremely valuable in international trade). They are also targeted opportunistically for the same reasons.

Pristis zijsron (Narrowsnout Sawfish)

Status: Critically Endangered

The genus Pristis is taxonomically chaotic with uncertainty regarding the true number of valid species (Compagno and Cook 1995a). The practical difficulties associated with resolving these taxonomic issues are acute, since it is extremely difficult to obtain specimens or tissue samples from these increasingly rare species for taxonomic research. P. zijsron is a member of the ?Pristis pectinata complex?, probably also containing P. clavata, with narrow-based, less tapered, lighter rostral saws, with more numerous (usually over 23), smaller teeth than species of the Pristis pristis complex.

Like all sawfishes, it is extremely vulnerable to capture by target and bycatch fishing throughout its range, which has contracted significantly as a result. All populations are now very seriously depleted, with records having become extremely infrequent over the last 30 to 40 years.

This species may occur in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, Australia.

Listed as Endangered by the Australian Society for Fish Biology.

Nominated and considered for listing as Vulnerable under the Commonwealth's Endangered Species Protection Act 1992, but listing not made because of lack of information.

Actions needed: Strict legal protection throughout range; monitoring of bycatch; collection of biological and demographic data from accidental captures and aquarium specimens.

This is the largest sawfish species, growing to at least 5 m and possibly over 7.3 metres long.

The record of seven green sawfish (Pristis zijsron) in the catch indicates this species is still present on the east coast of Queensland at least as far south as the Whitsundays (208S), even though it is now considered to be extinct in New South Wales waters (Fisheries Management Act 1994, NSW, No. 38).

East Coast Inshore Finfish Fishery

Stegostoma fasciatum (Leopard Shark)

Status: Vulnerable

Taken in inshore fisheries (demersal trawls, floating and fixed bottom gillnets and baited hooks) and seen in fish markets in Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Philippines, Pakistan, India, Taiwan, and elsewhere. There are limited data on population declines in these areas, with the exception of the Gulf of Thailand, but the species is susceptible to local inshore fisheries and coral reef habitat loss and damage because of its habitat preferences and limited dispersion.

In Australia, where this species is abundant, has a wide distribution and is captured only in very small numbers in prawn trawls, it is assessed as Least Concern.

Apart from baited hooks, S. fasciatum is susceptible to capture in a wide range of inshore fisheries. This, in combination with a narrow habitat range and limited dispersal makes this species vulnerable to population decline.

Chiloscyllium punctatum (Brownbanded Bamboo Shark)

Status: Near Threatened

Within Australia the species is assessed as Least Concern as a portion of its habitat is protected in marine parks and it is not a target species, except perhaps for the aquarium trade. It is an extremely hardy species that would presumably survive as a discard in any trawl bycatch. However, throughout much of the rest of its range, the species is likely to be threatened by overfishing for human consumption, habitat loss due to destructive fishing methods on coral reefs, and collection for the display-aquarium trade. It fails to meet the criteria for Vulnerable due to insufficient data, but is assessed as Near Threatened globally because of concern over the significant impact that these practices must be having on this species in much of its range.

Damage and destruction of coral reef habitat from dynamite fishing, other destructive fishing practices and pollution are known to be widespread in large parts of its range.

The species is protected in a significant proportion of its range on the east coast of Australia in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park and the Moreton Bay Marine Park. While fishing is still allowed in most areas of the parks, the species is not targeted and is likely to survive capture as bycatch.

Brachaelurus colcloughi (Bluegrey Carpetshark)

Status: Vulnerable

The Bluegrey Carpetshark (Heteroscyllium colcloughi) is a rare to uncommon species, endemic to the east coast of Australia and with a poorly known biology. Fewer than 20 specimens of this small, attractive but poorly known shark are recorded, mostly from inshore waters of Moreton Bay, Queensland. This shark seems to be rare as far as is known, despite coverage of available habitat. As presently known it has an extremely limited geographic and bathymetric range off Queensland and occurs in waters that are heavily utilised by people and which are subjected to intensive fisheries.

Age at maturity, average reproductive age and longevity are all unknown (Compagno 2001). The behavioural ecology of this shark needs to be investigated. Studies should include underwater census and tagging.

Bluegrey Carpetsharks are caught as limited inshore bycatch of fisheries and exploited at low levels for the marine aquarium trade. No information is available on trends in numbers or range, but they are not found in quantity at any locality despite reasonable survey coverage. Habitat degradation could become a problem as human usage of coastal waters increases, since it has a restricted distribution to areas heavily utilized by humans.

Only limited areas of its habitat are protected on the Great Barrier Reef, and the species is not directly protected.

REFRENCES:

International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources.

Red list of threatened species.

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

This Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority Position Statement in relation to the Queensland East Coast Inshore Finfish Fishery was developed in June 2007.

Issues of the take of shark in Australian waters

2011-10-08T15:04:00.001-07:00

The significant issues in regard to the take of shark in Australian waters include:

(a) a general lack of species identification and quantification of shark taken in some target and non- target shark fisheries

(b) lack of data collection and validation programs across some fisheries and jurisdictions

(d) lack of scientifically defensible stock assessments for some targeted and important byproduct species

(e) the need to define the processes for identification of threatened species (eg CITES)

(f) need for assessment of the adequacy of management for all shark species (decision framework, objectives, reference points)

(g) the lack of identification and use of appropriate management and conservation measures (State/Commonwealth/international)

(h) concerns for endemic sharks. (Eg. the majority of endemics are demersal and a large variety of shark species are taken by demersal trawling, but are currently mostly unquantified)

(i) where identified, the need to rehabilitate the chondrichthyan fauna on the continental slope (eg south-east)

(j) Assessment and management of the overall impact on shark species which are taken in two or more fisheries (within jurisdictional issues, transboundary issues, international)

(k) the need to develop shark bycatch reduction methods where appropriate (action – monitor use of BRD for chondrichthyans)

(l) shark finning (volume of shark killed for finning, ethics, waste, sustainability) (section 2.5); (m)impact of shark imports to Australia on overseas shark populations (eg transboundary stocks, lack of reporting of trade statistics)

(n) ecosystem effects of shark management practices (trophic cascade, impact of increased shark populations, impact of prey removal)

(o) impacts and management of recreational and charter fishing (including lack of systematic reporting, target game fishing of sharks)

(p) reporting of shark catches from all sources

(q) management of fisheries with different productivity (commercial viability) – need to reconcile different productivity in multi-species fisheries

(r) impact of environmental degradation on sharks (uncertain effects of habitat alterations, nursery habitat degradation)

(s) uncertain effects of seismic survey associated with oil and mineral exploration

(t) cryptic mortality (eg net drop out, ghost fishing)

(u) handling practices of returned catch eg hemiplegia (cryptic mortality through partial paralysis due to the structure of the spine and the large cartilaginous sheets associated with the dorsal fin. Deformity of the spine and subsequent overgrowth of cartilage in the region may then slowly destroy the spinal chord)

Extracts and more info:

Sharks play a key role as the oceans top predators, maintaining the vitality of the ocean ecosystems, consequently, reducing the number of sharks may have significant and unpredictable impact on other parts of the ecosystem. The main species of sharks to inhabit the Great Barrier Reef possess home ranges, meaning they do not leave the area and are now being fished before they can reproduce (some taking up to 25 years to reach sexual maturity), having major impacts on the ecosystem. Others are highly migratory and have nursing areas susceptible to inshore fisheries actions. This fishery operates along Queensland’s east coast and extends through the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area. . There has been increased pressure on shark populations with more specialist shark fishers entering the fishery. Recorded commercial shark catch in this fishery plummeted from 1298t in 2003 to 603t in 2006. In this period there was only a slight decrease in fishing effort indicating that reduced catches of this extent resulted from a reduction in the availability of target shark species. 22 species of sharks, rays, skates and chimeras are found in the Great Barrier Reef, and inhabit a wide variety of habitats. Sharks due to their reproductive capacity are generally unable to cope with the levels of fishing most fishes are able to sustain, many shark fisheries around the world have collapsed. Many include the same species that are caught as both target and bycatch in the ECIFF.

Recent work on the assessment of risk to the sustainability of sharks taken in the ECIFF identified the urgent need for information on biology, stock structure and optimal harvesting of these species. Management intervention for high risk species (such as scalloped hammerhead and great hammerhead sharks and white- spotted guitarfish) and the need for a further review of sustainability of sharks and rays is also required. However whilst research is underway, there is still a large amount of sharks being taken without knowing their biological data or the effects this is having on their species.

High and unselective mortality of sharks and rays from targeted fishing and incidental capture in the ECIFF poses a serious risk to this important functional group of predators and to the natural systems of the Marine Park. Risk assessments have shown that some species of sharks and rays in the ECIFF catch are at ‘high risk’ from fishing. By-catch in the ECIFF includes many species of sharks and rays, some of which are protected species (i.e. species in the Marine Park that are protected under the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Regulations 1983 Regulation 29, and need special management). On an observer trip, 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. “In contrast, the shark catch in the East Coast Inshore Finfish Fishery (ECIFF) is highly non-selective, and very little is known about the biology of the constituent species,” warns JCU researchers. “More than 20 shark species are caught in this fishery, but we know virtually nothing about their natural abundances, birth rates, death rates, or movement patterns,” explains submission co-author Dr William Robbins. “This is the kind of information needed to determine what levels of fishing are sustainable, and to set regulations that minimize the risks to the most vulnerable species.” The disregard shown for shark species in the marine park, world heritage area and east coast of Australia is unsettling, we are ‘legally’ destroying a near perfect ecosystem.

Australia exports approximately 230 tonnes of shark fin annually, conservatively estimated to be equivalent of 10,000 adult sharks, all to support the delicacy ‘shark fin soup’ a huge Asian industry, one recognized to be unsustainable and a contribution to the destruction of our oceans worldwide. Australia’s contribution to the shark fin trade is a bad image not only the tourism community that spend billions of dollars annually on reef related industries, but also the less developed nations such as Palau that have created shark sanctuaries in their waters, instead of profiting form the exporting of fins. Australia with its vast ocean area should be a leader in ocean conservation, yet the underwater recreational, conservation and scientific community look down on us worldwide for removing sharks form inside the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area with the insufficient data to call it a sustainable practice. Currently there are also no regulations on imported sharks, illegal or unsustainable may be exported to Australia, therefore contributing directly to the demise of shark species around the globe. We have fallen behind in our conservation efforts, in a short time this will lead to a collapse of fishing industries and the tourism industry surrounding the reef, as well as every industry surrounding tourism.

For 400 million years it has been sharks at the top of the oceans chains, they are the creatures for which the oceans foundations have been set, they affect everything, and therefore their decimation has the potential to destroy everything. We are killing an estimated 100 MILLION sharks a year, a rate so fast the effects are not yet conclusive… in one scenario, the removal of tiger sharks resulted in a population explosion of sea birds. The increased bird numbers led to uncontrolled predation by seabirds on fishes to the extent that fish populations collapsed.

ECIFF Letter to the government

2011-10-08T15:01:00.000-07:00

Madi is currently at ODEX (Brisbane RNA showgrounds) and will be screening her film today. Make sure you pop along and give her lots of support!

For those of you that cant make it to ODEX (and for those of you that are going) the following letter is concerning a topic very close to Madis heart. Please have a read and submit it to the government to let them know your feelings about the Australian East Coast Inshore Fin Fisheries (ECIFF). If you havent heard about the ECIFF before, you can find all of the information under the ECIFF tab on this website. Its a really important issue that needs to be addressed so please take the time to sign and submit and if you have any questions im sure that Madi would be happy to discuss it with you. Many thanks.

WHERE TO SEND YOU’RE YOUR LETTER ABOUT THE ECIFF REQUESTING BETTER PROTECTION FOR SHARKS IN THE GREAT BARRIER REEF:

sustainablefisheries@environment.gov.au

The Director Sustainable Fisheries Section Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities GPO Box 787 CANBERRA ACT 2601

Public comments will be received between 12 September 2011 and 21 October 2011.

Any comments received will form part of the documentation provided to the Australian Government Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities for a decision. Copies of comments may be made available to other persons with a particular interest in the application. If you wish to claim confidentiality for any part of your comments, would you please discuss the matter with the Director of the Sustainable Fisheries Section (02) 6274 1917.

For more info and documents on the ECIFF, visit…

http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/fisheries/qld/east-coast-finfish/submission-11.html

A letter you can use: I urge you to make it personal, if you are not within Australia, mention your tourism decisions being affected by the fishery and removal of sharks… can also add and take information at your will form other pages of this website to the letter if you choose to use it…

Thank you.

Madison Stewart ‘pip’

(your personal message)

I am concerned about the fate of sharks in the GBRMP since 2009 when the former minister Peter garret approved the Queensland East Coast Inshore Finfish Fishery (ECIFF). According to this quota, each year, 600 tonnes of shark from inside the marine park are caught and killed for use as food in Australia as well as to supply export markets for shark fins. Despite significant weaknesses in the fishery it was approved, and despite the lack of scientific research on shark populations in the area a number of species are being fished. I want the ECIFF to stop target shark fishing inside the GBR Marine Park and World Heritage Area immediately.

JCU researchers warn: “More than 20 shark species are caught in this fishery, but we know virtually nothing about their natural abundances, birth rates, death rates, or movement patterns,” explains Dr William Robbins. “This is the kind of information needed to determine what levels of fishing are sustainable, and to set regulations that minimize the risks to the most vulnerable species.” All evidence of what we know already points against the fishery, and we risk threatening species we know almost nothing about.

Sharks which keep to specific reef territories – gone.

Young Sharks from inshore nurseries on reefs – gone.

Migratory sharks traveling through these reefs – picked off one by one.

Congregation of same sex sharks like the gender flocking of hammerheads risks entire populations of females being wiped out.

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. More recently, independent research at James Cook University has been undertaken on the biology, abundance and status of the grey reef shark (Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos) and whitetip reef shark (Triaenodon obesus). This work suggests that Great Barrier Reef populations of grey reef sharks and whitetip reef sharks are declining, down by as much as 97%.

Sharks play a key role as the oceans top predators, maintaining the vitality of ecosystems and forming the structure of all species below them. Compared to teleost Fishes, Sharks are slow growing, mature late and have relatively few offspring, meaning that they are highly susceptible to exploitation in fisheries and depleted stocks take a long time to recover- if at all.

75 per cent of 20 species of sharks and rays from observers reports of catch with data known were found to be particularly vulnerable to even small levels of fishing mortality. The ECIFF focuses on the gauntlet approach to fish sharks, this is said to be a sustainable way of catching sharks, it operates on a size limit, 1.5 meters maximum for target catch of sharks. The approach is only plausible if there is significant information on the biology and status of the species. The majority of sharks taken in this fishery, especially within the GBR marine park, lack exactly this information. And the bycatch of larger sharks occurs frequently.

The ECIFF interacts with several threatened species, two of which are protected and require special management, two listed as critically endangered. More than 60 species make up the bycatch, 52 of those species both target and bycatch are identified, of them…

7 are classed “data deficient”

13 “Vulnerable”

18 “Near threatened”

8 “critically endangered”

3 “endangered”

(from the IUCN red list of endangered species) One species THE ECIFF interacted with was too new to even have a status. The scalloped hammerhead (Sphyrna lewini) was the second highest catch recorded and observed, it is listed as endangered, and identified as having a high sustainability risk.

Clearly the impact of the fishery over the past two years alone has been so dramatic that operators who make a living through the reef such as live aboard diving vessels (estimated that up to 25% or $1,375 of each visitor’s expenditure was directly attributable to the opportunity to see sharks) have protected the reefs they visit from fishing through agreements with then fishermen. The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority have themselves suggested that there should not be a shark fishery on the Great Barrier Reef at all because it can not be clearly demonstrated that it is selective and sustainable.

We must invoke the Precautionary Principle and stop the decimation of sharks on the Great Barrier Reef. . On the 28^th of September 2011, academics from James Cook University in Queensland said Sharks inhabiting Australia's Great Barrier Reef are in decline due to over fishing. We risk loosing not just species, but also an entire ecosystem. Our contribution to the shark fin trade and un-scientifically backed fishing of sharks from within the Great Barrier Reef is affecting our reputation, especially with so many less developed nations creating shark sanctuaries in their waters.

When the review of this legislation is done in Feb 2012 I urge you to call an immediate halt and revoke its approval. We do not know enough about these different species but what little we do know suggests that most cannot survive limited fishing let along the massive extraction which they are experiencing now. If anything we should be protecting unstudied species, not fishing them or setting un-backed quotas. If in the future there will be proof that harvesting specific quotas of specific Sharks in specific waters is fully sustainable, then we will accept that those quotas be extracted, until then… stop the legal targeting of sharks within the Great Barrier Reef.

Your sincerely…

(your name, occupation ect.)

ODEX 2011

2011-09-24T22:16:00.000-07:00

Madi 'Pip' Steward will be screening her movie 'Man eating shark' and giving a talk on shark conservation at ODEX in Brisbane in two weeks time. Make sure to pop along and give her your support - watch this space for information on times and days...

'Fearless' is entered into the PADI Sea the Change Conservation Competition

2011-08-27T18:39:00.000-07:00

Our film Fearless is entered into the PADI Sea the Change Conservation Competition. Please vote and help our film win so that we can further help reduce the decline of shark species.

Elements 5 Website

2011-08-27T18:23:00.001-07:00

We are currently under construction so please pop back now and again to see our progress!

Thank you for your support!

Elements 5 Team.