Rebuttal to Shiffman and Hueter, Shark Finning Fisheries Lobbyists


"The Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act" is considered to be vital in the fight against shark finning. Yet shark fisheries lobbyists David Shiffman and Robert Hueter are doing their best to block it. They have published a paper opposing the legislation, which has been echoed by the press in ways suggesting that banning the shark fin trade in the United States could be "bad for sharks."

But their short and vacuous paper gives only three reasons to support their position and concerns itself with the well-being of shark fisheries, not sharks. 
 
Firstly, they state that passage of the Act will "undermine decades of progress made towards ensuring sustainable shark fisheries in the United States and around the world." But in the absence of any evidence or reasoning in support this allegation, it remains nothing more than an opinion. The statement is neither scientific nor relevant to the real issue.

The second reason given is that the legislation "will likely have little effect on global shark mortality." Likely? This too is just an opinion. Indeed, the facts indicate that the extinguishing of the shark fin trade inside the US will strike a hard blow and weaken the international fin racket, much of which is in criminal hands. The sharks being caught up by finning are those species at the highest risk of extinction, and the US remains the seventh worst nation in the world in supporting shark finning.

The third reason given is that if the Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act is passed, it will "contribute to the misconception that demand for shark fin soup is the only threat facing shark populations worldwide." 
 
They have an assumption that a "misconception" exists and that it is a reason for the United States to continue to support shark finning. This absurd statement should have prevented it from being published in the first place. 
 
And those are the only "reasons" the authors could find to use to argue against this important piece of legislation! Indeed, their weak arguments actually underline the importance of the bill. 
 
The authors then go on to emphasize how complicated the subject is, so much so that others don't understand it, which is a common theme in Shiffman's papers. He presents himself as an authority with important information for the enlightenment of others, while subtly insinuating that conservation efforts are somehow on the wrong track. But if you try to find real science in his articles you will come up empty handed. 
 
Shiffman has admitted to being financed by everything from Sharknado2 to a variety of fishing interests, and this latest paper is only one in a series of articles he has published in the effort to give the scientific ring of authority to shark fishing and finning. 
 
When industry finances academic research papers, the conclusions drawn will always favor their interests, and once published, those ideas are accepted as being scientific. Thus, paying for 'science' provides the fishing industry with a way to launder biased, non-scientific ideas into a form that will have the same credibility as pure research, just as criminals launder money. Remarkably, the academic community accepts this practice, and it is used openly by the fishing industry. (More here)

Pure research, such as the global study of shark depletion carried out by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature's Shark Specialist Group (IUCN SSG) found that fisheries management has failed this entire line of animals, which are of incalculable ecological importance. Their findings are of even more concern because catches are believed to be three or four times greater than reported. Most catches of sharks and rays are neither recorded nor reported, are not regulated, and are discarded at sea.

Representatives Ed Royce and Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan introduced the The Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act on March 9, 2017. If passed, it will effectively remove the United States from the global shark fin trade as well as re-establishing the country as a leader in oceanic and shark protection. 

Ila France Porcher
 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Letter to the Discovery Network

Image
To the Discovery Network: Members of our Internet shark discussion forum, SHARK-L, have been asked by your marketing representatives to help promote your famous Shark Week sequence. This letter, signed by list members and friends, is our formal response to the request from your grass roots agency, New Media Strategies, for our support of the programming. How can we support Discovery Channel when we are fighting for shark conservation, and its biggest obstacle is the monster image given to sharks by the media, including Shark Week programs? Further, some of us who have been directly involved in the production of your documentaries feel disgusted at the way that our interviews were censored and our words twisted around. Our group is comprised of scientists, researchers, educators, media companies, and many NGO's, lobbyists and others. In aggregate we represent a strong network of influence that can help or hurt the efforts of any Shark related programming or initiatives. In...
Read more

On the gestation period of the blackfin reef shark, Carcharhinus melanopterus in waters off Moorea, French Polynesia

Image
Originally published in the Journal "Marine Biology" at: http://link.springer.de   Abstract Underwater visual and photographic observations, over a four year period, monitored the presence of mating wounds on female Carcharhinus melanopterus . Mating begins in November and continues until the end of March as each female follows her own temporal cycle. Correspondingly, parturition begins in September and continues until January. Each female again mates 1.5 to 2.5 months after parturition, thus completing an annual reproductive cycle. The gestation period is 286 to 305 days, with slight individual differences. All resident sharks under observation followed this pattern. Evidence of reproductive events presented by transient females conformed with the pattern of the residents. Introduction The few studies postulating a gestation period for the reef blackfin shark Carcharhinus melanopterus have varied greatly in their conclusions. Based on an examin...
Read more

SHARKS DON'T BITE like we do

Image
Though sharks have gained a mythical reputation for being biters, their behaviour in nature is the opposite of what we would expect from the vicious animals depicted in the media. I had many opportunities to observe sharks under circumstances in which I expected them to bite, as a dog, cat, horse, or bird would tend to do. Yet they did not.  All other species, wild and tame, with whom I had the intimacy I shared with sharks, had bitten me sooner or later, either by accident or in a fit of pique; even my pet dog sometimes grabs my hand in her teeth along with the offered cookie.  Further, while the blackfin reef sharks I knew enjoyed roaming with favourite companions, I never saw them fighting with each other. They had friends but no enemies ! For years people had told me, and I half believed myself, that one evening I would be bitten and would bleed to death, or faint and drown. Since I was alone far from shore as night was falling, I could expect no one to...
Read more