Marine Conservation Issues

[Lisbeth]

From a letter sent to gmlsmit by Centre for Environmental Rights <no-reply@cer.org.za>

Dear CER Subscriber,

Latest news from our website:
'Proposed amendments to Coastal Management Act published for comment by 31 Jan
2012'

The Minister of Mineral Resources has published a draft National Environmental
Management: Integrated Coastal Management Amendment Bill for public comment. The
proposed amendments highlighted below will have a number of significant
implications, and we urge all practitioners, experts and affected parties to
have a look and submit comments where necessary (including comments of support
for [...]

To read the full post on our site, click the following link:
http://cer.org.za/news/proposed-amendme ... -jan-2012/

Best regards,
The Centre for Environmental Rights

[Poplap]

Threats to our marine life

73 million sharks killed each year... and seemingly in the Bahamas only.


Have a look here: http://www.skynews.com.au/eco/article.a ... 22461&vId=

[Bushcraft]

Hi E,

I sent the below to every paper in KZN, ski boats clubs, Natal Sharks Board and Carte Blanche 4 years ago. Never had a response

I have watched the killing of sharks off Warner Beach for more then 3 years now. I and many others have complained to all the local authorities/associations. (More then 20 phone calls personally). The general response is that a commercial ski boat angler is allowed to catch and kill as many sharks as he wants. The 2 boats operating in the area, on a good day, are killing 100 sharks a day. These are juvenile Grey sharks which are sold to a fish factory for export. It is sad to see that some of the local teenagers on a fishing ski have seen that money can be made and are now killing the sharks and selling them to the commercials. The commercials in the Rocky Bay area have also been killing and selling sharks for years.

I find it amazing that during the opening of uShaka Marine Park 9 Grey Sharks died and it made the front page of all the local newspapers, but thousands are killed by ski boat fishermen annually and nobody does anything.

My Question: Can Angling Associations, Natal Sharks Board, Natal Parks Board and the Local Government not stop this senseless killing of sharks?

Hiya Boskuns - It seems it is warped all over.


I think the same goes for crayfish, abalone, alikreukel, fish and what not around our coastline.


Why not create jobs with better policing of those poaching around our coastline?

When I was in Mozambique just recently, a South African born manager of a coastal accommodation establishment told me that when she first came to live and work in Moz. less than two decades ago, the fish market in Maputo was a thing to behold. Good catches of many different species was commonplace. Now apparently it is a rather sad spectacle with fish stocks allegedly decimated by illegal fishers allegedly from Asia coming in and acting with impunity. Not enough money and resources to police the fishery. I cannot vouch for the absolute truth of this story but it sounds very familiar. Here in Australia we are continually fighting a battle to keep Asian fishing boats out of our waters. We, however are fortunate to be relatively well resourced - the downside is we have an immense area of coastline to protect.
For a story that is positive I encourage you to go to http://www.fishfight.net. It may be a marine battle on the other side of the world but it is one worth supporting. Read all the information to get a handle on how current North Sea fishing quotas are contributing to the decline instead of the protection of fish stocks.

I heard a bit of a different side to the tragedy of the Mozambique saga. If you traveled North a few years back the roads where in an abominable state, yet if you travel them now you find you travel on great roads. I hear this was from an agreement with another country that if they fixed the roads that the government would open its waters to them for fishing.....needless to say it has been stripped of almost all the life. I was up North past Inhambane diving at a reef that was a so called must but was very disappointed, there was mostly juvenile life on the reef and this was been caught by the locals as all the big fish have been "net" caught and the reef itself was broken from these nets trawling over them.
Very sad to see what is happening to the oceans

Threedogs, thanks for the link. Signed the petition. Shocking! The human race never fails to amaze me. In a bad way.


Thanks for the info shared, TD and JN. Very, very sad. Two decades ago we walked on abalone and alikreukel at Pearly Beach in the Western Cape. Now you are lucky if you find any of these. Who should we thank for this? Poachers. Killing a rhino is as bad as harvesting bags full of abalone for the Asian market. And those supposed to police part of the poaching gang...


Chinese arrested with abalone: News24: South Africa: News
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/.../C ... balone-201...
6 Nov 2010 – Chinese arrested with abalone: News24: South Africa: News. Two Chinese nationals have been arrested for possession of abalone and bribery ...

• R5m abalone bust - 5 men arrested: News24: South Africa: News
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/.../R ... -arrested-...
21 Oct 2010 – R5m abalone bust - 5 men arrested: News24: South Africa ...

• 3 arrested over abalone: News24: South Africa: News
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/.../3 ... e-20100723
24 Jul 2010 – 3 arrested over abalone: News24: South Africa: News. Three ...
Show more results from news24.com

• 12 arrested in South Africa for abalone smuggling - Assata Shakur ...
http://www.assatashakur.org › ... › Afrikan World News
1 post - 1 author - Last post: 8 Feb 2007
12 arrested in South Africa for abalone smuggling 1 hour, 9 minutes ago. South African police have arrested 12 smugglers found with 1.6 ...

• allAfrica.com: South Africa: Authorities Arrest 17 Suspected Abalone ...
allafrica.com/stories/200802150163.html
15 Feb 2008 – Cape Town — Barely three weeks after the diving ban regulations on abalone were Gazetted, authorities have arrested 17 suspected poachers ...

• Abalone Syndicate Members Arrested
feikemanagement.blogspot.com/.../police-run-abalone-syndicate-me...
20 Jul 2011 – "Police-Run" Abalone Syndicate Members Arrested. The Cape ... of Fisheries (and its predecessor, MCM) and the South African Police Service. ...

• Officer & Reservist Arrested in Abalone ... - Environment South Africa
http://www.environment.co.za/...south-a ... rested-in-...
24 May 2010 – Government Authorities Arrest Police Officer and Reservist in Abalone ClampdownWEDNESDAY, 15 AUGUST 2007: The Department o.

Greed over rules everything good
I must look for an email I received the other day concerning turtle egg harvesting in Puerto Rico. The 10 or so pics show 100's of sacks full of turtle eggs being dug up and carried away by people on only one part of the beach. Can we be surprised that marine turtels are in huge trouble.

[Lisbeth]

I have written an article for a Danish web magazine about the shark nets on the KwaZulu-Natal South Coast and I thought of sharing it with you. I have posted a similar article on the "other forum" a few months/years ago, but I have added to it and thought maybe some of you haven't seen it. This article will be translated and edited by the editors, but here is my version:

IS THERE STILL A NEED FOR SHARK-NETS AND DRUM-LINES TODAY?

This is indeed a very contentious issue and many conservationists are lobbying against the use of shark-nets and drum-lines off the coast of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

Background and the Whaling connection.

The whaling industry started in Durban, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa in 1907 by the Norwegians. During 1908 106 whales were caught and killed during the first whaling season from March to September.

It is said that the whale carcasses floating in the water where the slipway and whaling station were build attracted so many sharks that nobody dared to swim there.

It seems that the catching of whales was easy without the need to sail much more than 150 miles from Durban. Whales were killed by shooting them with a 165 pound metal harpoon loaded with explosives. The whales were then pumped full of air to make them buoyant and towed back to Durban.

In 1912 there were 13 whaling companies registered with only 6 ever operational.

Not many people are aware of the fact that the whaling industry in Durban had a huge influence on sharks as well. The whaling stations created an abnormal large population of abnormally large sharks. The sharks had a royal time following these whale ships and feeding of the towed carcasses. Many whales were lost as the sharks would bite through the whales blubber and sink them en-route to the whaling station.

The whaling stations in Durban have created a “smorgasbord” of shark bait up and down from the Bluff, moving in the current and arriving at the northern beaches of Durban all the way down to the beaches of Amanzimtoti in the south. This oily and bloody slick of bait secured the presence of sharks at these beaches where most shark attacks took place during the peak of the whaling industry.

During 1975 the whaling operations in Durban ended. One reason was fact that the conservation movement was gaining momentum with growing pressures to ban whaling.

After the whaling period the shark numbers normalized ending the period of the “super-shark”. The problem at that time was that most people were incited against sharks and there was no hope for shark conservation to begin.


Shark attacks and the history of shark-nets in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.


According to records 2 shark attacks on humans took place in the 1930’s in the KwaZulu-Natal. Between 1940 and 1952 there were 32 shark attacks, 7 of those were fatal. People were in a state of shock and panic. In 1952 seven gill nets were installed off the Durban’s beaches. These nets were each 130 meters long and things improved for a few years as thousands of sharks were captured and killed.

Then came “Black December” of 1957-1958 where 5 deaths occurred over a 107 day period. Holiday makers flocked home in horror of the carnage.

It was during this time that the Navy started depth-charging sharks. Can you imagine this? War was declared on the sharks. Cage-like barriers were also installed but abandoned due to the fact that they couldn’t withstand the high impact surf.

As from 1962 modern shark-nets were installed when the Natal Sharks Board and Natal Anti-Shark Measures Board (Today known as the KwaZulu-Natal Sharks Board) was founded as a statutory body. Since 1964 nets were also installed at several other large holiday resorts. According to records there are at present approximately 40 kilometres of netting installed at 37 towns and holiday resorts along a 325 kilometres stretch of coastline.

The working of shark-nets.

Most of the shark-nets are 214 meters long, 6 meters deep and have a stretch mesh of 51 centimetres. They are secured at each end by two 35 kilograms anchors. The nets are laid in two parallel rows approximately 400 m offshore and in water depths of 10-14 meters.

These shark-nets are repaired and cleared of dead carcasses on working days and not during public holidays and weekends by the KwaZulu-Natal Sharks Board.


The Baited Drum-Lines.

A drum-line consists of a large, anchored float (buoy) from which a baited hook is suspended. The quantity of gear varies but most beaches are “protected” by 2 nets or 1 net and 4 drum-lines.

Baited drum-lines are also not physical barriers, instead they fish for sharks.

The main reason for the drum-lines is the fact that many dolphins, whales, sea tortoises and other fish species are caught in the shark-nets and I think the reasoning was that the nets should be replaced by baited drum-lines to protect such other species. But it seems that this is not the case…nets are still in use and drum-lines were simply added.

The argument against shark-nets and drum-lines.

Shark-nets are basically gill-nets, indiscriminately catching harmless species, such as dolphins, skates, rays, whales, tortoises, etc. Shark nets cause irreparable damage to the eco system and need to be replaced by a more environmentally acceptable method. An electrical reveller (the Pod), may replace the gruesome nets. Due to the harsh nature of our coastline, the technology to supply this device with a reliable power source in the ocean is, unfortunately, still years away.

Shark nets are not barriers, sharks can move freely in and out of the nets. They can also see the nets a lot of time, and avoid them. They can move between the nets, under the nets, around the nets and in from the sides without even coming near the nets. People are often shocked to realise this, but it is no secret. Many sharks are caught in the nets on their way back to sea (beach side of the net)!! . Keep in mind that shark netting works by reducing the shark population and NOT by preventing access of sharks to the beaches.

Shark nets were very effective as a culling method and have been working very well, so well in fact that according to statistics the chances of getting eaten by a shark are about zero percent. It is said that if all shark nets were to be removed you will not be at risk of shark attacks due to the reduced shark numbers. It can be argued that you are safer swimming on a public holiday or a weekend, when the nets are not checked, at a non netted beach adjacent to a netted beach due to the fact that all sharks, dolphins, sea tortoises, other fish species, etc, caught during a weekend are basically chumming the water at the netted beach!!

South African shark nets, put in place to protect mainly surfers and holiday-makers, capture between 800 and 2200 sharks per annum and catches are highest in those years when the sardines move close inshore during winter along the KwaZulu-Natal coast. Most sharks caught and killed are harmless species. More sharks are also caught in these nets during floods due to the fact that the dirty water may prevent sharks from detecting and avoiding the nets.

The Great White shark is protected in South Africa due to reduced numbers, but ironically, 20 to 50 of this species are caught by the KwaZulu-Natal Sharks Board in shark nets each year, probably more than were killed by trophy fishermen before the ban.

Today shark populations are in a very bad state. Whale and dolphin carcasses are floating ashore almost untouched after spending weeks floating in the ocean. Human corpses from drowning are discovered days later untouched. Where are all the sharks, you may ask? Well they are not there anymore and they are in dire need of conservation.

Keeping in mind that baited drum-lines also do not form a barrier between the ocean and the swimming beaches. However, baited drum-lines attract sharks to swimming beaches and most people are unaware of this fact.

Misconceptions and fear of sharks.

People in general have a lot of misconceptions about sharks. The greatest culprit of them all was the film “JAWS”! Misconceptions such as “sharks are roaming the shore lines to catch humans” and “sharks are attracted by as little as a drop of human blood” are common. It is a highly debated question whether human blood attracts sharks at all. Sharks are attracted by fish blood and fish oil and to a great extend by vibrations and electrical impulses though.

Why do people fear sharks? The main reason is the fear of getting attacked and injured or even killed by sharks while swimming in the sea and that may be due to ignorance.

For many years sharks were portrayed, by the media, as these highly dangerous animals who devour anything, even humans that cross their path. Such completely unfounded statements were propagated at random, even without having taken the time to observe the behaviour of these animals in more detail.

A good starting point in addressing fear of sharks is to have a look where sharks fit in the greater oceanic and environmental picture…what other “dangerous” creatures are there? Are you afraid or feel anxious or apprehensive about pet dogs, malaria mosquitoes, bees, cone shells, stone-fish, lion-fish, box jellyfish or even the beautiful blue ring octopus?

Let’s have a closer look at some statistics to have a better perspective on where sharks stand in the statistical picture:

Pet dogs account for 31 deaths per year in the U.S.

Bee stings are the largest killer of humans in the U.S. directly caused by animals. 53 people are killed per annum by bees.

Internationally, malaria carrying mosquitoes are widely regarded as the most deadly creatures on the planet, killing an estimated 3 million people per year.

Sharks attacks and fatalities are not that common. Only 471 fatal attacks from 1580 to 2008 were recorded.

In reality, less that 1 person per year is killed by a shark in the U.S.

Conclusion.

The time for shark-nets and drum-lines are finished and the most successful way of ridding people’s fear of sharks is a comprehensive educational campaign based on the latest research findings which explain shark behaviour. People should be informed about the plight of sharks before it’s too late. Sharks are at the top of the oceanic food-chain and fulfil a crucial role as such.


(SOURCES: http://www.sharksavers.org/en/education ... weave.html http://www.shark.co.za/nets.htm)
http://www.fad.co.za/Resources/whaling/whaling.htm )

Coming up: statistics

It is estimated that over the last three decades, more than 33,000 sharks have been killed in the KwaZulu-Natal shark nets. And if that's not alarming enough, 2,000+ turtles, 8,000+ rays, and 2,000+ dolphins were also ensnared and killed.

HERE ARE THE STATISTICS OF THE APPROXIMATE ANNUAL SHARK CATCHES IN NETS ON THE KWAZULU-NATAL COAST, SOUTH AFRICA OF SOME SPECIES AS PROVIDED BY THE NATAL SHARKS BOARD DEALING WITH (A) ANNUALLY BEFORE 1994 AND (B) ANNUALLY FROM 2005 TO 2009:

Great White Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 20 – 50
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 27

Bull (Zambesi) Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 50
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 15

Tiger Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 30 – 50
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 50

Mako Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 20
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 8

Raggedtooth Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 100 – 200
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 75

Java Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 20
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 10

Dusky Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 150 – 350
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 150

Sandbar Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 20 – 50
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 10

Copper Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 10 – 400 (depending on sardine run)
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 10

Blacktip Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 100 – 200
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 70

Spinner Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 100 – 200
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 55

Great Hammerhead Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 20
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 2

Scalloped Hammerhead Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 100 – 200
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 70

Smooth Hammerhead Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 50
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 40

HERE ARE THE STATISTICS OF THE APPROXIMATE ANNUAL HARMLESS ANIMAL CATCHES IN NETS ON THE KWAZULU-NATAL COAST, SOUTH AFRICA OF SOME SPECIES AS PROVIDED BY THE NATAL SHARKS BOARD AS (A) ANNUALLY BEFORE 1994 AND (B) ANNUALLY FROM 2005 TO 2009


Turtles
Before 1994 (Annually): 80
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 60

Dolphins
Before 1994 (Annually): 75
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 43

Whales
Before 1994 (Annually): unknown
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 5

Batoids (Rays/Guitarfish)
Before 1994 (Annually): 355
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 201

It is clear that the average annual shark catches are down because of the reduced shark numbers. The same is applicable to harmless animals.

Coming up: a few photos and some interesting facts.

It is estimated that over the last three decades, more than 33,000 sharks have been killed in the KwaZulu-Natal shark nets. And if that's not alarming enough, 2,000+ turtles, 8,000+ rays, and 2,000+ dolphins were also ensnared and killed.

HERE ARE THE STATISTICS OF THE APPROXIMATE ANNUAL SHARK CATCHES IN NETS ON THE KWAZULU-NATAL COAST, SOUTH AFRICA OF SOME SPECIES AS PROVIDED BY THE NATAL SHARKS BOARD DEALING WITH (A) ANNUALLY BEFORE 1994 AND (B) ANNUALLY FROM 2005 TO 2009:

Great White Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 20 – 50
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 27

Bull (Zambesi) Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 50
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 15

Tiger Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 30 – 50
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 50

Mako Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 20
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 8

Raggedtooth Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 100 – 200
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 75

Java Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 20
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 10

Dusky Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 150 – 350
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 150

Sandbar Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 20 – 50
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 10

Copper Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 10 – 400 (depending on sardine run)
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 10

Blacktip Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 100 – 200
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 70

Spinner Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 100 – 200
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 55

Great Hammerhead Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 20
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 2

Scalloped Hammerhead Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 100 – 200
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 70

Smooth Hammerhead Shark
Before 1994 (Annually): 50
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 40

HERE ARE THE STATISTICS OF THE APPROXIMATE ANNUAL HARMLESS ANIMAL CATCHES IN NETS ON THE KWAZULU-NATAL COAST, SOUTH AFRICA OF SOME SPECIES AS PROVIDED BY THE NATAL SHARKS BOARD AS (A) ANNUALLY BEFORE 1994 AND (B) ANNUALLY FROM 2005 TO 2009


Turtles
Before 1994 (Annually): 80
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 60

Dolphins
Before 1994 (Annually): 75
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 43

Whales
Before 1994 (Annually): unknown
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 5

Batoids (Rays/Guitarfish)
Before 1994 (Annually): 355
2005 to 2009 (Annually): 201

It is clear that the average annual shark catches are down because of the reduced shark numbers. The same is applicable to harmless animals.

Coming up: a few photos and some interesting facts.

[Lisbeth]

Thank you Theuns, for posting this very informative and interesting piece on the sharks. I hope that a lot of people will read it and spread the voice that the shark is an important link in the biodiversity system and the extinction and even decline of any of the species would put many other fish families in danger as their natural source of food would grow too much and put other species in danger and so on and so forth. Not only, but to imagine dolphins, turtles and other wonderful species trapped in the shark nets, makes me once again sad and angry with humans, who only think of how to get the most out of a holiday and the holiday resorts of how to attract most people, without thinking of the consequences and above all the authorities not considering preservation and conservation

Let us not forget how important the life in the sea is to the life on earth. Afterall the sea is where it all started

Astonishing numbers Theuns, and to think the nets are there to protect humans who venture into the realm of these dangerous creatures. My opinion is.... you want to play in their pool, you take your chances.
Whatever happened to the studies that were going on to replace the nets with some kind of ultra-sonic beam?

2,5 TON shark fin seized today! 2,5 TON! Outrageous. How many sharks paid with their lives to generate 2,5 TON shark fin! Abalone was seized today.

When and where will the human race stop??!! When??!!

In the October Ecology Letters, Clarke's team estimates that finning claims between 26 million and 73 million sharks annually.



http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic ... -Fin_Trade

I once (not so long ago) made a comment on this forum that said that so many people could give two hoots for conserving for tomorrow, take what you can now whatever the cost and hey, if you can make all kinds of money at it, screw the earth and mother nature. I was branded as a rascist for this remark, but please would someone tell me I'm wrong.
I feel desperately sorry for future generations in this world, but kids, some of us tried to preserve what we had so you could enjoy it too.

:( Use, abuse, exploit, eradicate, extinguish. It clearly doesn't matter what the colour of your skin is. Recent Saffies arrested for rhino hunting were white syndicates. To make things worse, vets being part of the suspects. So it cuts across the board. Poaching abalone, sharks or rhinos... Chopping down yellow wood trees for profit (tree poaching in my view).


We have ended up in the 21st century with a human race that seemingly has no cognisance of the fact that there is no need to preserve. Merely to exploit for their own benefit. A sense of entitlement and absolutely no sense of ethical standards. None, whatsoever. In fact, criminals, to say the least.

MHO - these people have always been around,
they know the difference between right and wrong...
but the way WRONG is being punished,
is no longer a frightful thing to them.

You can see it in land claims mostly, as an example,
use what there is today,
no matter or interest in tomorrow.
And I am referring to all unruly peeps of all races in S.A.

We honestly need to restructure our ways of punishment instead of making them into monuments.

Abalone worth more than R200 000 has been found in the possession of a 48-year-old man.

http://thenewage.co.za/39156-1011-53-Ma ... alone_haul (30 December 2011)


:(

Chinese national arrested in Bellville abalone bust
6 Feb 2012

A Chinese national, who will appear in the Bellville Magistrate Court tomorrow morning, was arrested around 14h00 today, Monday, 6 February 2012 and 5 736 dried abalone as well as various drying processing equipment were confiscated in the biggest abalone-bust so far this year.

Following a tip-off from the public, several officials of the Monitoring, Compliance and Surveillance-division (MCS) of the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF), the Hawks and the Environmental Crime Investigation Unit of SANParks, raided the property in the Bellville area that was used in its entirety as an illegal processing plant.

These three partner-organisations will continue to investigate the case and we expect that more arrests will be made in the near future.

DAFF thanks the public for their support and reiterate our plea for continued support of all our efforts to bring such illegal activities to an end and to bring these criminals to book.

Source: http://www.info.gov.za/speech/DynamicAc ... &tid=55586

[Lisbeth]

WWF

9th February 2012
Save the last 130 western gray whales
The western gray whale is on the edge of extinction.

There are probably fewer than 130 remaining with less than 26 breeding females.

Every year, they come to feed off the coast of Sakhalin Island, Russia, but now a new oil platform threatens the survival of this critically endangered whale.
We want the banks behind the project - BNP Paribas, Credit Suisse and Standard Chartered - which have two platforms in this area already, to demonstrate that they can be a force for good and oppose plans for another oil platform.

Sign up to show your support for western gray whales and help persuade the banks to do the right thing.

Mr Scruff and the whale

[Sprocky]

2012-06-13 12:32

Cape Town - South Africa's fishing resources are under threat from overfishing and some industry players are working to improve sustainable fishing practices, a researcher has said.

"The answer is 'yes and 'no'. There are many industries out there acting really responsibly and it's about creating the incentive to do so," WWF SA Responsible Fisheries programme manager Dr Samantha Petersen told News24.

She said that some industries were ignoring sustainable practices and that they posed a threat to fish stocks.

"There are still a large number of industries that are overharvesting; many of the fisheries resources internationally and locally, are over exploited."

Calculation of the fishing resources is difficult because monitoring procedures are not in place, said Petersen, who won the UNEP/CMS Thesis Award on Migratory Species Conservation in 2008.

Poaching

"How we calculate that is another significant challenge and I think it's something that going to come up at the forum today [Wednesday].

"One of the key challenges is the complete collapse of the South African Fisheries Observer Programme - a key component in delivering the information required to effectively manage our fisheries resources," she added.

Many in SA feel strongly about rhino poaching, but there are other less visible animals that don't generate much public sympathy like the Riverine Rabbit, Giant Golden Mole, and the Samango monkey because they are not as "visible" in the public imagination.

"The fact that our marine resources are out of sight out of mind is often why we don't capture the public's imagination. Poaching is a significant challenge but in many cases the drivers are very different to the rhino, for example," Petersen said, moments before her presentation at the Responsible Fisheries Forum in Cape Town.

The biggest challenge for us in South Africa is our inshore resources which are easily accessible from the coast and the state of many of our impoverished coastal communities is that they depend on these resources for their food security and their livelihoods.

Petersen said that poor socio-economic conditions often drive people in local communities into poaching, but she also conceded that the criminal syndicates exploit marine resources like abalone.

She argued that enforcement alone could not eliminate unsustainable fishing practices and that co-operative action was needed from all stakeholders in the industry.

"There's been this over-reliance I believe on the regulatory system and compliance and enforcement being the only solutions. There're limited resources that can be put into continuous enforcement. At the end of the day, what you need is the buy-in of the fishing industry to understand why these regulations are in place."

[Richprins]

The alien Mediterranean mussel (Mytilus galloprovincialis) is rapidly transforming our coastline by forming dense 'mats' in the extremely narrow and highly diverse coastal zone where little else can grow or survive, much like a dense stand of alien vegetation on land. It is resulting in the mass mortality of our indigenous 3-Spot Swimming Crab (Ovalipes trimaculatus) through attachment to its eye-stalks and mouth parts preventing the crab from feeding, identifying predators and also breaking its life cycle by preventing the crab shedding its carapace in order to grow.

This is what SANParks say about the Mediterranean mussel...

“In the Garden Route the current density and contribution of the Mediterranean mussels to the overall mussel population in the mid zone have doubled those from the previous year " (2010 SANParks Annual report)

and this what they are going to do about it...

“It would be extremely difficult to implement a programme that could meaningfully control the recruitment of alien mussel and enhance the recovery of the indigenous mussel population.” (Garden Route National Park Management plan)

Nothing.

Why? Because 'commercially' it will be too expensive to do anything about it.

The truth is something can be done:

1) Public participation – consult us the public. Don’t just consult us when it comes to buying National Park resources. There are nearly 50 000 000 of us. Chances are some of us can come up with some good ideas that wont cost too much money to implement.

2) Remove the bag limit on Mediterranean mussels which is set at 30 per day. Currently if you are caught with more than 30 of these highly invasive organisms you will be fined. As this would be open to abuse of other mussels, SANParks should find a way of marking these organisms with some sort of non-toxic paint.

3) determine the impact of ‘commercial mussel farms’ which are breeding these organisms (Saldanha is one such area)

[Sprocky]

2012-06-20 11:40

Cape Town - A new study on electronic shark "shields" has found that while they may reduce the chances of an attack, they fail to repel sharks in all cases, the Cape Times reported on Wednesday.

The study tested a popular local shark shield, a device strapped onto the ankle to emit electronic waves uncomfortable to a shark's delicate senses.

Shark ecologist Charlie Huveneers tested the shield for over two years, using tuna bait at the Neptune Islands off Australia and seal decoys in False Bay, Cape Town.

He told the newspaper that he found no difference in the proportion of bait consumed, regardless of whether the device was activated.

Local shark scientist Alison Kock, who collaborated with the local part of the study, said results showed the shields worked under some conditions and not others.

"In South Africa we found significantly fewer predatory strikes on the seal decoys, but in Australia it didn't stop the sharks getting the bait and coming very close to the device."

The shield did, however, increase the distance at which white sharks turned away from the tuna bait.

- SAPA

[Dzombo]

A proposal to declare a whale sanctuary in the South Atlantic Ocean has been defeated at the International Whaling Commission (IWC) annual meeting.

Latin American countries argued that declaring a sanctuary would help whale conservation and whale-watching.

The bid gained more than half of the votes but fell short of the three-quarters majority needed to pass.

Observers noted that the vote was orderly and without rancour, in marked contrast with previous years.

Further votes at the meeting in Panama are anticipated, on issues ranging from subsistence hunting by indigenous peoples to whether the United Nations should be asked to take charge of whale conservation.
Eco-tourism

Marcos Pinta Gama, Brazil's commissioner to the IWC, said he was disappointed by the result, but pleased that the vote had happened.

"We believe that the sanctuary is a very important initiative in order to ensure the protection of whales within the whole South Atlantic, to promote the non-lethal use of cetaceans and and benign research that's important for conserving whales," he told BBC News.

Whale-watching and ecotourism, he said, were becoming important industries for coastal communities.

"In many countries including Brazil, those activities are bringing in financial resources to local communities, it's really expanding, and we think the sanctuary would very much strengthen this kind of activity in the region."

The proposal covered almost the entire Atlantic Ocean south of the Equator, from the west coast of Africa to the east coast of South America.

It would have joined up with the two existing whale sanctuaries approved by the IWC, in the Southern and Indian Oceans.

However, delegations opposing the motion said there was no need for it.
'Symbolic issue'

They pointed out that countries such as Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil can do what they want in their coastal waters where whale-watching takes place, and that there is no whale hunting in the region anyway.

A Japanese statement said that as there is already a global moratorium on commercial whaling, adding a sanctuary here was unnecessary - "building a roof on top of a roof".

And Joanne Massiah, minister of state for Antigua and Barbuda and the Caribbean nation's IWC commissioner, described the sanctuary proposal as "a feel-good, self-serving measure".

Even some delegates voting for the sanctuary said in private that it was principally a symbolic issue.

However, Mr Pinta Gama said the sanctuary would enable better conservation of migratory species that might not be hunted in the South Atlantic but were under threat elsewhere.

With 38 votes in favour and 21 against, the bid failed to pass the three-quarters threshold.

For the rest of the week, most attention will fall on whaling by indigenous groups - mainly in the Arctic, but also in the Caribbean.

Denmark, on behalf of its territory of Greenland, has submitted a bid to increase the number of whales hunted by Inuit people.

But some other nations, including EU members, are concerned by a recent report that found whalemeat on sale to tourists, raising questions over whether the Greenlanders really need quotas as large as those they currently have.

The EU is supposed to maintain a united front in forums such as the IWC, and a joint position is being decided back in Brussels.