Shark conservation and management policy: a review and primer for non‐specialists

Abstract

There is increasing concern for the conservation of sharks among scientists, environmental conservation advocates, and the interested public, but misunderstanding among policy non-specialists about which conservation and management policies are available, and which might work best for certain situations, persists. Here we present a review of fisheries management and conservation literature relating to sharks. Policies are broadly divided into target-based policies that aim for sustainable fisheries exploitation (e.g. fisheries quotas) and limit-based policies that aim to prevent all fisheries exploitation of entire taxa (e.g. marine reserves). A list of the pros and cons of each policy is included, as is a decision tree to aid in selection of the most appropriate policy. Our goal is that this paper will allow policy nonspecialists, including scientists without policy training, environmental activists, and concerned citizens, to make informed decisions when advocating for shark conservation.

Bright spots of sustainable shark fishing

“…The prevalent view has been that only the most productive species with fast life histories can be managed sustainably [4]. We found that some species with relatively low productivity -with the most common r max values between 0.1 and 0.2 -can support sustainable fi sheries ( Figure 1).…”

“…Tens of millions of sharks are caught and traded internationally each year, many populations are overfi shed to the point where global catch peaked in 2003, and a quarter of species have an elevated risk of extinction [1][2][3]. To some, the solution is to simply stop taking them from our oceans, or prohibit carriage, sale or trade in shark fi ns [4]. Approaches such as bans and alternative livelihoods for fi shers (e.g.…”

“Advocacy” and “Activism” Are Not Dirty Words–How Activists Can Better Help Conservation Scientists

“…To address the problem of uninformed activists weighing in shark conservation matters, such as producing petitions or letter writing campaigns for policy actions that were irrelevant (or other well-intentioned but ultimately misguided campaigns), Shiffman and Hammerschlag (2016b) produced a primer of shark policy facts that could be used by activists to better hone their campaigning. This primer could be used as a model by other conservation scientists to help better inform the activism community.…”

Shark recreational fisheries: Status, challenges, and research needs

“…The growing realization that sharks could be negatively affected by CR fisheries interactions has spawned a handful of studies focusing on recreational angling (e.g., Campana et al 2006;Robbins et al 2013;Danylchuk et al 2014;French et al 2015), including some human dimensions work (Babcock 2009;Gallagher et al 2015;McClellan Press et al 2015), but many significant gaps in knowledge and research remain. Mortalities from recreational fishing are a form of fishing mortality, and thus they are important for stock assessments and fisheries management plans, although this information is not always available [i.e., the Southeast Data Assessment and Review; SEDAR (e.g., Atlantic sharpnose shark, blacktip shark, bonnethead shark) NOAA Fisheries 2006; Shiffman and Hammerschlag 2016a].…”