Shortfin
makos swim through the ocean like they own the place, moving swiftly and
decisively below the surface, or cruising up on top displaying their
distinctive blue-black dorsal fin, like a flag, to the sun.
Along the northeast coast, they’re the shark most sought out by
anglers, because they are a fish of superlatives. Shortfin makos are the
fastest shark in the ocean, capable of swimming as fast as 45 miles per hour. They are also among the
highest-jumping sharks, able to launch themselves more than 20 feet into the air, something that they often do after being
hooked. And makos are arguably the most beautiful shark in the sea,
streamlined and symmetrical, with a deep blue back that gradually fades along
blue-silver sides to a snow white belly.
Unfortunately for the mako, it is also one of the best-tasting sharks—so good tasting, in fact, that
its meat is sometimes mislabeled as swordfish.
As a result, a lot of makos
are killed every year by recreational and commercial fishermen.
Scientists didn’t realize just how many makos were being killed
until some time last year, when a team of biologists working out of Florida’s
Nova Southeastern University published results from a satellite tagging program, which indicated that
as much as 30% of the shortfin mako population may be harvested by fishermen
each year.
That represents a fishing mortality rate ten times higher than
previously believed, and one that is not sustainable. Shortfin makos take a
very long time to mature; about 50% of the females are not yet mature when 18 years old. Once
mature, they normally give birth only once every three
years, producing between four and sixteen live young each time they
do so.
Such late maturity and slow
reproductive rate does not allow the shortfin mako to tolerate significant
fishing mortality.
That was confirmed late in 2017, when the International Commission
for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) released a new stock assessment indicating that the shortfin mako
was badly overfished, and that severe overfishing was still occurring. The
assessment, which drew its conclusions from three different population models,
revealed that the North Atlantic stock of shortifin makos had declined sharply,
and that such decline would continue unless fishing mortality was reduced by
75%.
That is a difficult target, as much of the mortality is caused
by longline bycatch in the pelagic swordfish and tuna fisheries, not by
intentionally directing fishing effort on the makos themselves. Even if it can
be met, a 75% reduction would not guarantee the recovery of the North Atlantic
stock. While it would halt the decline, it would have only a 25% chance of
rebuilding the stock to sustainable levels by the year 2040. In order to have
even a 50-50 chance of rebuilding the stock in that time, fishing mortality would have to be cut to zero.
That’s not just a difficult
goal, it’s a practical impossibility. The ICCAT assessment made it clear that
even if no further shortfin mako landings were allowed, the 75% reduction in
fishing mortality might not be achieved due to the level of bycatch in the
longline fishery, where about 30% of all makos caught would still die.
In addition, not all of ICCAT’s contracting members were willing
to completely ban mako landings in order to better assure the recovery of the
species. Some, unfortunately including the United States, didn’t want to forego all of the short-term economic
gainsthat flow from a limited shortfin mako harvest. Thus, ICCAT
ultimately came up with a compromise recommendation that would significantly
reduce shortfin mako landings, but still allows some fish to be killed.
On March 1, 2018, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
announced emergency regulations intended to comply with the ICCAT recommendation.
The emergency regulations
prohibit commercial fishermen, other than pelagic longliners, from harvesting
shortfin makos. Pelagic longliners, which are required to have video monitoring
equipment on board that records all fish caught, may retain all shortfin makos
that are already dead when the fishermen haul back their gear; all live makos
must be released.
The emergency regulations
also increased the minimum size on shortfin makos caught by recreational
fishermen from 54 inches (fork length) to 83 inches.
The emergency regulations
became effective on March 2, but will only be in force for 180 days. NMFS could
extend them for another 186 days, but after that, they will expire. In order to
begin the process of providing more permanent protection for the shortfin mako,
NMFS also solicited public comments on a wide range of possible management
measures.
NMFS reviewed all of the comments received, and has prepared a proposed Amendment 11 to the Consolidated Highly Migratory Fishery
Management Plan (Proposed Amendment) which, if adopted, will
give the shortfin mako protections similar to those provided by the emergency
regulations.
However, they are some
significant differences.
While the emergency
regulations consisted of only one commercial and one recreational fishing
measure, the Proposed Amendment asks the public to comment on a range of
possible alternatives, including “preferred alternatives” that, absent
substantial and convincing public comments to the contrary, are likely to be
adopted by NMFS. However, even such preferred alternatives differ somewhat from
the emergency regulations now in effect.
While the emergency
regulations only allow pelagic longliners to retain shortfin makos that are
already dead when brought to the boat, the Proposed Amendment’s preferred
commercial alternative would permit any commercial fishing vessel to do so,
provided that such vessel has a commercial shark permit and has installed a
video monitoring system that will allow NMFS to determine whether any shortfin
makos landed were actually dead when first brought aboard. Purchasing,
installing and maintaining such video monitoring systems is fairly costly, so
it’s not clear how many vessel operators will take advantage of the proposed
change.
Non-preferred commercial alternatives range from making no
permanent changes to the regulations at all, which would violate both the
United States’ obligations as a contracting party to ICCAT and the conservation
and stock rebuilding provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, to
completely prohibiting the commercial harvest of shortfin makos. Most differ
from the preferred commercial alternative only in the level of monitoring
required, although one would also impose a minimum size.
There are two preferred recreational alternatives. One would
perpetuate the 83-inch minimum size established by the emergency regulations.
The other would require anglers fishing pursuant to federal Highly Migratory
Species permits to use non-stainless steel, non-offset circle hooks whenever
fishing for sharks with bait, a requirement that currently applies only south of latitude 40o 43′ North,
or approximately the latitude of Chatham, Massachusetts.
As was the case with the
non-preferred commercial alternatives, non-preferred recreational alternatives
run the full gamut from status quo (once the emergency regulations expire) to a
complete prohibition on landings. Most non-preferred alternatives proposed
varying size limits, mostly based on the sex of the shark, or imposed fishing
seasons that had different and arguably inequitable impacts on anglers in
different states.
Finally, the Proposed
Amendment contains a preferred alternative that would direct NMFS to develop a
shortfin mako rebuilding plan in cooperation with ICCAT, which is expected to
complete its rebuilding plan in 2019. A unilateral NMFS rebuilding plan was a
non-preferred alternative, as shortfin makos in the North Atlantic are caught
by fishermen from many nations, with the United States only accounting for
about 11% of the overall harvest.
While there may still be some
doubt about what NMFS’ final shortfin mako management measures will look like,
there is no doubt that the mako is in serious trouble, and that such management
measures are badly needed.
The public can help bring the process to a prompt and favorable
conclusion by going to the NMFS webpage describing the Proposed Amendment, and
sending their comments to NMFS before the October 1, 2018 deadline.
Hopefully, people will decide
to do so, for our seas would be a far emptier place if makos weren’t around.
---
This essay first appeared in “From the Waterfront,” the blog
of the Marine Fish Conservation Network, which can be found at
http://conservefish.org/blog/
No comments:
Post a Comment