Executive Summary
Sharks are among
the most successful predators in the sea, with few known enemies and an
evolutionary history dating back more than 400 million years. As apex predators, sharks fill an important
niche, in preying on sick or weak prey. Altering food webs by removing
predators, prey, competitors, and alternative hosts of parasites can result in
unintended changes in populations and marine ecosystems. The removal of sharks occupying the role of
top predators in their ecosystems can have unexpected consequences for whole
ecosystems. My thesis has two primary questions. The first is to evaluate the status of large
coastal sharks, small coastal sharks, and pelagic sharks that may transit or
inhabit Rhode Island
waters. The second part, is to assess
what the State can do to protect and conserve sharks, given the migratory
nature of many of these species, and the existing fisheries management
structure.
In recent decades
humans have increasingly expanded their recreational and commercial activities
within the shark’s ecosystems and the life histories of most sharks make them
highly vulnerable to overfishing and slow to recover once their populations
have been depleted. The number and size
of commercial fisheries for sharks has increased globally in response to the
public appetite for more and different sources of protein, luxury meals,
nutritional supplements, and other shark products. The main sources of mortality for sharks in U.S.
waters include: recreational fishing, commercial fishing, and bycatch from
commercial fishing. Sport fishing and
shark fishing derbies continue to attract growing numbers of people. The number of recreational fishermen
targeting sharks in Rhode Island’s
Snug Harbor Tournament grew three-fold in only 13 years, from 1986 to 1999. Within Rhode
Island, recreational fishers landed more sharks in
the 1990s, than the commercial sector, though because of bycatch, commercial
fisheries most likely result in greater mortality for sharks than the
recreational sector. While many shark tournaments are now run as
tag-and-release programs, not including Rhode Island’s
Snug Harbor Tournament or the Oak Bluffs Tournament in Massachusetts, an estimated 25 to 30 sharks
still die needlessly. In
addition, contestants in the recreational shark fishing tournament at Snug Harbor
land the largest sharks in order to be considered for the trophy. Additionally,
the lack of species-specific and size-specific catch and discard data, in
identifying what is caught, remains one of the greatest impediments to improved
shark fishery management.
During seasonal
migrations and during different periods of their life, sharks migrate freely
through state, federal, and international waters. Because sharks are migratory, and do not
abide by any arbitrary jurisdictions, consistent and proactive management among
states is not only fair, but also necessary to secure the recovery of these
shared living marine resources. The
uncertainty regarding the scientific assessments, including those of maximum
sustainable yield (MSY), the intrinsic rebound rates of species, predator-prey
relationships, competition with sympatric species, landings data, gear-specific
habitat damage and the effects of bycatch, can be high, if data are available
at all, which makes decision making difficult.
Furthermore, failing to implement shark fishery management at the state
level may undermine shark conservation and management efforts at the national
level. Federal assessments have
determined that overfishing is occurring for pelagic sharks and large coastal
sharks, and the entire large coastal shark complex has been determined to be
overfished in the waters of the U.S. Atlantic.
Furthermore, independent assessments by the fisheries biologists Ransom
Myers and Julia Baum, in 2004, documented declines of more than 50% for all
species in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean in the past 15 years, with the
exception of makos, which they determined had declined by approximately 39%.
U.S.
participation in international fishery management initiatives is guided by the Atlantic
Tunas Convention Act, and the Agreement for the Implementation of the
Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea relating to
the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory
Fish Stocks. As part of its’ treaty
obligations, a U.S. National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management
of Sharks (NPOA) has been developed by the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS), in consultation with stakeholders, to fulfill the national
responsibility of the United States. Management of sharks is carried out at the
Federal level by NMFS through Fishery Management Plans (FMPs) for Highly
Migratory Species (HMS), which include tuna, swordfish, billfish, and
sharks. Comprehensive regulations, which
include limited access and weight limits for commercial vessels, recreational
bag limits, and a prohibition on the catch of 19 species, have only recently
been implemented. The NPOA
recommends that the Interstate Marine Fisheries Commissions and appropriate
State agencies analyze the fisheries under their jurisdiction to determine if
their elasmobranch catches are sustainable. To date, neither the Atlantic States Marine
Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) nor any of the New England
states have done so.
In addition, Rhode
Island currently has no regulations in place for sharks, other
than those for spiny dogfish, despite the fact that Rhode Island ranked 2nd for the
North Atlantic States (VA-ME) in terms of pounds of shark landed in 2002. This may be because there are seven HMS
dealers in the state, which accounted for both pelagic sharks and large coastal
sharks being landed at a greater rate than any other state in New
England in 2002. Rhode Island, does,
however, retain jurisdiction over the management of sharks from the shore to 3
nmi, thus possessing the ability to regulate sharks within this boundary, as
well as over vessels registered within the state. While the majority of sharks landed are caught
some 60 to 100 offshore in Federal waters, there is direct evidence of landings
within state waters of some of the most vulnerable shark species. Furthermore, the lack of species specific
data for what sharks are caught make any biomass assessments virtually
impossible.
The Ocean State
thus has a prime opportunity to become engaged in affording protection to these
vulnerable species through several means.
Viable recommendations, which might meet less resistance from fishermen,
include:
- Adopt
federal regulations by reference in R.I.§ 20-7 and § 20-11, within it’s
jurisdictional waters;
- Improve
data collection, e.g. by requiring catch report cards for all HMS
fishermen;
- Require
fishermen to display and possess a species ID guide;
- Convene
workshops for HMS fishermen which discuss the importance of
catch-and-release for the recreational sector as well as the function and
vulnerability of sharks in the ecosystem;
- Allow
greater transparency between State and Federal agencies and independent
requests for data; and, finally,
- Require
additional observer coverage on commercial vessels.
More proactive measures which
should be considered, but which may be less likely to be adopted immediately
because of opposition from both the commercial and recreational sectors,
include:
- Restricting
the take of overfished sharks within state waters;
- Requiring
a recreational shark license;
- Imposing
and enforcing a bycatch quota, and,
- Approving
shark repellant technology to limit bycatch.
Beyond these actions, the Federal
government should consider the broader development of Marine Protected Areas as
well as market-based tools, including requiring eco-labeling on products, which
could assist and influence the purchasing habits of concerned citizens.
The threat to shark populations is part of an immense
problem confronting world fisheries. Most seas have been fished to the limits
of their productivity. Advances in fishing technologies, along with rising
demands by a growing human population, have led to heightened efforts to catch
sharks, in addition to most other fish.
As a result, the stability of marine ecosystems is in serious danger,
and it is incumbent on states, as well as the Federal government, to act to
protect and restore the populations of these sea creatures.