Atlantic Shortfin Mako: Chronicle of a Death Foretold?

Abstract

This article outlines recent events concerning the conservation and management trajectory of a highly migratory shark species, the shortfin mako (Isurus oxyrinchus), in the North Atlantic, where it has been routinely captured recreationally and as part of commercial fishing operations alongside other species. Noting recent warnings concerning the high mortality of the species in this ocean region, and the threat of imminent population collapse, this article sets out a number of applicable law of the sea provisions, and carries out an evaluation of relevant measures for target and incidental capture species, discussing their applicability to the mako fishery. It also presents an analysis of regional and global governance actions taken to date by the international community and by individual actors, noting a number of shortfalls, and outlining potential responses.

Shark Fishing vs. Conservation: Analysis and Synthesis

“…Their failure to respect the RFMO's scientific recommendations was in violation of UNFSA and UNCLOS regulations, which establish a clear duty to protect not only target species, but those caught as bycatch, as well as to refrain from the perpetration of actions which cause damage to the marine environment and threatened species. A duty to cooperate with other States in the conservation of living resources was also violated, which is particularly noteworthy given that both the EU and the USA have taken on the role of policing the rest of the world in terms of IUU fishing [14]. This detailed analysis indicates that both the USA and the EU are operating at some legal risk, i.e., of being challenged for violating their own laws and therefore actually perpetrating IUU fishing as governments [14].…”

“…A duty to cooperate with other States in the conservation of living resources was also violated, which is particularly noteworthy given that both the EU and the USA have taken on the role of policing the rest of the world in terms of IUU fishing [14]. This detailed analysis indicates that both the USA and the EU are operating at some legal risk, i.e., of being challenged for violating their own laws and therefore actually perpetrating IUU fishing as governments [14].…”

“…The willingness of the fishing industry to pillage without regard for the health of the biosphere and the resulting ecological harm [39,53], the level of bycatch that has been treated as tolerable [15,40,162], and the readiness to put short-term financial interests first [14,20,29,42,121] illustrate its failure to take biodiversity into account, in spite of international agreements to the contrary.…”

“…At the same time as the shark fin trade has expanded, some 90% of teleost fish stocks have become seriously depleted through decades of industrial overfishing [10]. As a result, due to the value of their fins, sharks became the most lucrative target, with the result that numerous fisheries around the world began to hunt them for the first time [3,[11][12][13][14]. Pelagic sharks have been hardest hit [3,9,15]; earlier studies found that they provide most of the fins on the market [1,2,6].…”