Search

The silky shark is the second most common shark in Southeast Asia's dried fin markets and is managed in the Atlantic Ocean by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT) and by three Indo‐Pacific regional fisheries management organizations (RMFOs). The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna reports ∼ 7% of global silky landings but there is a moratorium on the export of their fins. During a 4‐year period (2014–2017) we used genetic differentiation observed between Atlantic and Indo‐Pacific silky sharks to assess the contribution of Atlantic individuals to fins randomly obtained in the two largest shark fin markets in the world, Hong Kong and Guangzhou, China (N = 604). We did not detect any Atlantic fins in either market despite robust sampling effort with an estimated Indo‐Pacific contribution of 99.8% to these markets. These findings indicate that supply chains for silky shark fins in Hong Kong and Guangzhou primarily originate in the Indo‐Pacific and are mainly under the purview of three Regional Fisheries Management Organizations. Our results are consistent with the possibility that ICCAT parties have achieved high compliance with the ban on silky sharks. We suggest research and monitoring improvements that could enhance our understanding of the global trade of silky sharks and enable better fisheries management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Trade‐driven overexploitation threatens many sharks. Twelve of the world's most vulnerable shark species have been listed on the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) to regulate internationally traded products such as meat and dried fins. CITES records indicate that Hong Kong was the world's top legal importer of dried fins from listed sharks in 2015 (N = 8 species at that time), but traded a relatively small volume, with a few partners, in a small number of shipments (16). In contrast two CITES Appendix II listed hammerheads were consistently the fourth and fifth most common species (out of >80) in processed fin trimmings (N = 9,200) collected randomly from the Hong Kong retail dried fin market from February 2014 to December 2016 and were found in 100% of sampling events and in 66% of sampled retail vendors. This difference, and the fact that exporting nations previously known to land these species were not among those to report trade to CITES, suggest that listed species were often imported without CITES documentation in 2015. There are a number of incentives for trade hubs to meet their obligations to this treaty, which they could achieve by scaling up monitoring capacity and increasing inspection efficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]