[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
EXAMINING THE REGULATION OF SHARK FINNING IN THE UNITED STATES
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
THE INTERIOR, ENERGY, AND ENVIRONMENT
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
November 2, 2017
__________
Serial No. 115-51
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov
http://oversight.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
28-612 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Trey Gowdy, South Carolina, Chairman
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland,
Darrell E. Issa, California Ranking Minority Member
Jim Jordan, Ohio Carolyn B. Maloney, New York
Mark Sanford, South Carolina Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of
Justin Amash, Michigan Columbia
Paul A. Gosar, Arizona Wm. Lacy Clay, Missouri
Scott DesJarlais, Tennessee Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts
Trey Gowdy, South Carolina Jim Cooper, Tennessee
Blake Farenthold, Texas Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia
Virginia Foxx, North Carolina Robin L. Kelly, Illinois
Thomas Massie, Kentucky Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan
Mark Meadows, North Carolina Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey
Ron DeSantis, Florida Stacey E. Plaskett, Virgin Islands
Dennis A. Ross, Florida Val Butler Demings, Florida
Mark Walker, North Carolina Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
Rod Blum, Iowa Jamie Raskin, Maryland
Jody B. Hice, Georgia Peter Welch, Vermont
Steve Russell, Oklahoma Matt Cartwright, Pennsylvania
Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin Mark DeSaulnier, California
Will Hurd, Texas Jimmy Gomez, California
Gary J. Palmer, Alabama
James Comer, Kentucky
Paul Mitchell, Michigan
Greg Gianforte, Montana
Sheria Clarke, Staff Director
William McKenna, General Counsel
Ryan Hambleton, Interior, Energy, and Environment Subcommittee Staff
Director
Becca Brown, Counsel
Sharon Casey, Deputy Chief Clerk
David Rapallo, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on the Interior, Energy, and Environment
Blake Farenthold, Texas, Chairman
Paul A. Gosar, Arizona, Vice Chair Stacey E. Plaskett, Virgin Islands
Dennis Ross, Florida Jamie Raskin, Maryland
Gary J. Palmer, Alabama Jimmy Gomez, California
James Comer, Kentucky (Vacancy)
Greg Gianforte, Montana
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on November 2, 2017................................. 1
WITNESSES
Ms. Lora Snyder, Campaign Director, Oceana, International
Headquarters
Oral Statement............................................... 4
Written Statement............................................ 7
Assistant Commander Brandi L. Reeder, Fisheries Law
Administrator, Law Enforcement Division, Texas Parks and
Wildlife Department
Oral Statement............................................... 14
Written Statement............................................ 16
Alistair D.M. Dove, Ph.D., Vice President of Research and
Conservation, Georgia Aquarium
Oral Statement............................................... 23
Written Statement............................................ 25
EXAMINING THE REGULATION OF SHARK FINNING IN THE UNITED STATES
----------
Thursday, November 2, 2017
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on the Interior, Energy, and
Environment
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
Washington, D.C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:04 p.m., in
Room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Blake Farenthold
[chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Farenthold, Palmer, Comer, and
Plaskett.
Mr. Farenthold. The Subcommittee on the Interior, Energy,
and the Environment will come to order.
Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a
recess at any time. We are expecting votes on the floor of the
House around 2:30. We'd like to get as far as we can, at least
through the opening statements, and perhaps our witnesses'
initial testimony, and then we have a couple of votes. We take
the House picture, which actually is very fast, and we'll get
back here as soon as we can to finish that up. I apologize, but
there probably will be about a half hour or so recess in the
middle of this to allow us to do our voting.
So good afternoon. Today, the Subcommittee on Interior,
Energy, and the Environment will examine the regulation of
shark finning in the United States. Despite the fact that shark
finning is illegal in U.S. waters, many coastal states continue
to face issues with shark finning enforcement. Today, we'll
explore opportunities to combat the terrible practice of shark
finning through discussing issues of enforcement, possible
benefits of a ban, and the importance of sharks in the global
ocean ecosystem.
The United States has made great efforts to protect sharks
in our territorial waters by passing the Shark Finning
Prohibition Act of 2000, and the Shark Conservation Act of
2010. The 2000 law prohibited the importation of shark fins
without the corresponding carcasses and the finning of sharks
in U.S. water. The 2010 law went a step further, prohibiting
U.S. vessels in international waters, and all vessels in U.S.
waters, from transporting shark fins without the corresponding
carcass or from removing any shark fin while at sea.
My home State of Texas recently joined the effort to end
this inhumane treatment of sharks. On June 10, 2015, Texas
became the 10th State to ban the trade of shark fins when
Governor Abbott signed H.B. 1579 into law. Prior to this, Texas
had emerged as a hub for shark fins with the State fin trade
growing by 240 percent since 2010, after the passage of fin
trade bans in California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois,
Massachusetts, Maryland, New York, Oregon, and Washington. With
the passage of H.B. 1579, Texas is the first Gulf State to pass
the shark fin trade ban, and I'm proud of the effort Texas has
made to eliminate the fin trade.
Now is the time for the U.S. to prohibit the trade of shark
fins completely as well. That's why I've cosponsored Chairman
Royce's bill, the Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act of 2017,
which prohibits processing, selling, and purchasing of shark
fins at the Federal level. In addition to this important piece
of legislation, I have also introduced the Justice Attributed
to Wounded Sharks Act, or the JAWS act. This bill would end the
United States importation of seafood products from countries
that do not prohibit the practice of shark finning.
Sharks are a necessary component to a healthy ocean, yet
millions of sharks are traded annually for their fins, leaving
certain species increasingly vulnerable, if not endangered.
Without sharks, the ocean's ecosystems would be unbalanced.
Sharks maintain equilibrium and order by ensuring population
control and habitat boundaries, which is a critical component
for ocean life. It is my hope that this hearing today will
allow us to pinpoint solutions that will protect sharks and put
an end to the inhumane practice of shark finning.
I'll now recognize the ranking member of the subcommittee,
Ms. Plaskett from the Virgin Islands, for her opening
statement. Ms. Plaskett, you're recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Plaskett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this
hearing. We can all agree that sharks play an invaluable role
in our ecosystem. I believe we can also agree that this is
concerning that the shark population continues to decline. We,
as Americans and citizens of this world, can do more to stop
this decline.
However, what I cannot agree on is the need for a hearing
on shark finning today instead of a hearing on the ongoing
humanitarian crisis in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Mr. Chairman,
most of my constituents remain in the dark because utility
service has not been reestablished since Hurricanes Irma and
Maria. According to reporting by The Miami Herald, 2 months
after Hurricane Irma, and 1 month after Hurricane Maria, and I
quote: Less than a third of the St. Thomas residents, 16
percent of the St. Croix's customers--which is where I live--
and hardly anyone on St. John has power. Unlike Florida and
Texas, normal life has not resumed in the U.S. Virgin Islands.
There are children who still do not have a school to go to.
According to The Miami Herald, many schools are still too
damaged to reopen. Others are destroyed, are still in use as
shelters. Limited curfews are still in effect. The curfew was
lifted a day ago. But the schools are still closed in many
instances.
I am very concerned about the likelihood of many Virgin
Islands' residents who depend on tourism for their income.
On September 29, Ranking Member Cummings and I requested
that Chairman Gowdy hold an emergency hearing on the
humanitarian crisis caused by the hurricanes in the U.S. Virgin
Islands and Puerto Rico. Chairman Gowdy declined this request
and held member-only briefings with FEMA, the Department of
Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, and the
Department of Health and Human Services. I'm grateful for those
briefings, but that is not a hearing, and it would have been
nice if I had been consulting as to the time of those briefings
since in more than one instance, I was traveling back to the
ravaged Virgin Islands. Although the daily experiences of my
constituents would have been highly relevant, two of these
briefings were scheduled at times when I was traveling.
It is long past the time for the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform to conduct oversight hearings on the slow and
ineffective response to the devastation. I know that our
President has said that it's a 10 out of 10. But living on the
islands, I do not feel that, caused by the hurricanes in the
U.S. territories of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
With all due respect to this chairman, Chairman Farenthold, the
witnesses, and the many people who, like me, care deeply about
the survival of sharks in our ecosystem--we have many in the
Caribbean and throughout our island--it is offensive that we
are holding a hearing on this subject at a time when the U.S.
Virgin Islands does not have one fully functioning hospital.
Mr. Chairman, there is no better time to reach across the
aisle than this. American citizens in the U.S. Virgin Islands
are suffering and questioning if their government is concerned
about them, or has forgotten about them. Let's answer these
questions and resolve their fears with a resounding: No, we're
here for you, we're looking out for you, and then let's prove
it by conducting hearings on the slow and ineffective Federal
response to the hurricanes in the U.S. Virgin Islands and
Puerto Rico. Thank you.
Mr. Farenthold. If the gentlelady will yield for a second.
I have had conversations with the chairman of the full
committee on this issue. There is some concern that our doing
oversight at this time might further slow the recovery efforts.
No one is more sympathetic than I am, because we went through
something very similar in the district I represent. Many of the
towns I represent were devastated. We had the advantage, of
course, of not being an island, and the necessary relief and
repair efforts were much easier to get to our physical
location.
But you can, please, accept my promise that this will be
looked into, because not only do I have friends in the Virgin
Islands, I also fully understand what it is like to--I mean, it
was tough for me going a week without electricity. I can't
imagine going a month without electricity. I did learn pretty
much everything I like to do and everything I like to eat
requires electricity.
So you have my assurance that we're going to do our best to
do oversight into this matter, and do everything that we can to
make sure that we are better prepared to deal with disasters
both on the mainland and on the islands like Puerto Rico and
the Virgin Islands. And, in fact, I'm planning on speaking
again to the chairman about it today, because I do think it is
time to get moving on this.
And, I agree, he does have a tendency to schedule things on
fly-in days when those of us who are further away have trouble
getting here. So rest assured, we will work on it.
Ms. Plaskett. Thank you.
Mr. Farenthold. And this hearing has been in the planning
stages for several months.
Ms. Plaskett. Thank you.
Mr. Farenthold. So thank you very much.
With that, I'd like to take a moment to introduce our
witnesses.
Ms. Lora Snyder is a Campaign Director for Oceana
International Headquarters. Welcome.
We have assistant commander game warden Brandi L. Reeder.
She is a Fisheries Law Administrator for the Texas Parks and
Wildlife Department, Law Enforcement Division. And I'm happy to
be talking to somebody about fisheries enforcement on something
other than Red Snapper.
And then we have Dr. D.M. Dove. He is the Vice President of
Research and Conservation for the Georgia Aquarium. I was
tempted to invite someone from the Texas State Aquarium, but we
didn't want to be too Texas heavy. And we really do appreciate
your coming up from Georgia to visit with you.
So welcome to all of you.
Pursuant to committee rules, we ask that you rise and be
sworn in before you testify.
Would you please stand and raise your right hand. Do you
solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to
give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,
so help you God?
Let the record reflect that all witnesses answered in the
affirmative.
You all may be seated.
All right. Well, in order to allow time for discussion, and
so we can hopefully get the initial statements done before
votes, we ask that you limit your testimony to 5 minutes. Your
entire written statement will be made part of the record.
You've got a clock in front of you that will count down from 5
minutes. A green light means you're good to go. A yellow light
means speed up, you've only got a minute left. And red light
means please wrap it up.
Also, please remember to turn your microphones on. Since
we're budget conscious here in Washington, we don't buy the
most expensive fancy microphones. So it will help everyone
here, the closer you are to the microphone, the better chance
we have of hearing you well.
So at this point, we'll start with Ms. Snyder. You're
recognized for 5 minutes.
WITNESS STATEMENTS
STATEMENT OF LORA SNYDER
Ms. Snyder. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify
before you today on the issue of current shark finning laws,
and the global shark fin trade.
My name is Lora Snyder. I'm the Director of Oceana's Sharks
and Responsible Fishing Campaigns. Oceana is supportive of
efforts in Congress to conserve shark populations, including
the Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act, which would prohibit the
sale and possession of shark fins in the United States.
As predators, sharks play vital roles in ecosystems all
over the world. However, some species are now in serious
trouble. Some populations have declined by more than 90
percent. And if more action is not taken, other populations
could share a similar fate. This could be damaging to the ocean
ecosystem and to commercial fishers as their target species
become depleted due to the unchecked growth of mid-level
predators.
These declines are disturbing for those in the diving and
tourism industry as well. A recent report found that shark-
related dives in Florida generated more than $221 million in
direct expenditures, and fueled over 3,700 jobs in 2016. This
stands in stark contrast to the entire shark fin industry in
the United States which exported less than $1 million of fins
last year.
The demand for shark fins is one of the main reasons for
declines in shark populations. Every year, up to 73 million
sharks ends up in the global shark fin trade. The demand for
these fins fuels shark finning, the act of slicing the fins off
a shark and dumping its body back at sea where it will drown,
bleed to death, or even be eaten alive by other fish. As you
mentioned, this practice is illegal in U.S. waters.
Congress has already passed two bills to ban shark finning,
which have increased protections for sharks, but more needs to
be done as these laws do not get to the root of the problem.
Too many sharks are being killed to fulfill the demand for
shark fin soup. New studies have revealed that 91 percent of
the fins in the global trade are from unsustainable sources.
The U.S. continues to import shark fins from countries that do
not have bans on finning, and cases of finning are still being
uncovered.
To help ensure that they aren't participating in this
damaging trade, 12 States and three territories have already
banned the trade of shark fins. Private corporations are also
refusing to ship or sell shark fin products, including Amazon
and Grubhub. Over 50 percent of international airlines have now
banned shark fins, as have 17 of the 19 biggest shipping lines.
However, as companies and States close the door on the fin
trade, other doors remain open and the market shifts
accordingly. For example, after a number of States enacted
their bans, trade activity in the United States shifted
primarily to Texas. Texas then passed the ban, and now we've
seen that the trade has moved to Georgia. We are engaging in a
game of Whack-a-mole. As one State closes its door, activity
pops up elsewhere.
On a national scale, the United States is actively
importing fins from countries such as China, that do not have
comparable finning regulations as the United States. In
addition, it's unclear how many fins are coming into this
country. According to a report by the Food and Agricultural
Organization, other countries report sending seven times as
many shark fins as the U.S. reported receiving. Even more
disturbing, according to NOAA'S database, fins are still being
imported and exported from some States that have bans on
buying, and selling, and transporting, and possession of shark
fins.
Congress has made its stance clear on this issue, and yet,
we still are creating economic incentive for the Act to
continue. Fins from fin sharks, even likely including fins from
sharks that are threatened or endangered, are being bought and
sold in the United States. Additionally, previous laws did not
address the main problem: Too many sharks are being killed, in
large part, due to the demand for their fins.
But this is a solvable problem. A national ban, like the
Shark Fins Sales Elimination Act, would solve many of these
issues. As the U.S. has led the world in fisheries management,
and in halting the trade of other trafficked wildlife products,
like ivory and rhino horns, so, too, should we reclaim our role
as a leader and show the world that we will not contribute to
the demand for fins. We shall not participate in the trade of a
product that hurts shark populations, especially given the fact
that sharks are critical to maintaining healthy and abundant
oceans.
Thank you.
[Prepared statement of Ms. Snyder follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Farenthold. Thank you.
Assistant Commander Reeder, you're recognized for 5
minutes.
STATEMENT OF BRANDI REEDER
Ms. Reeder. Good afternoon, Chairman Farenthold, members of
the subcommittee. My name is Brandi Reeder, and I'm an
assistant commander game warden, and the Fisheries Law
Administrator for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Law Enforcement
Division. I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak with
you today about this very important topic. I'm hopeful that my
testimony will provide you with useful information to help you
in your examination of Federal regulations prohibiting shark
finning.
The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department is the State agency
primarily responsible for management of native species and
enforcement of statutes and regulations promulgated to ensure
protection of the State's natural resources. We work closely
with the U.S. Coast Guard, NOAA, Office of Law Enforcement,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife and Border Patrol to ensure State and
Federal fishery priorities are addressed.
Texas has 376 miles of coastline, and approximately 4
million surface acres of saltwater that we're responsible for
managing. Coastal fisheries creel surveys, and the commercial
trip ticket data program, supplied in my written testimony, it
is evident that the shark fishery in Texas is minimal. The
commercial shark trade in Texas has been almost nonexistent for
many years. While recreational fishing pressure remains high,
there appears to be a slight decline in harvest. Recreational
catch-and-release of sharks appears to be increasing. The
practice of shark finning has only been observed in limited
instances over the course of the last 10 years.
As you are obviously aware of the passage of Representative
Lucio, III's House Bill 1579, I won't go too far into how that
was built. However, I will say that it was a comprehensive
piece of legislation that was proactively put in place to
combat shark finning in Texas. The bill came into statute in
July of 2017, and it provided an offense to buy, sell, offer
for sale, possess for purpose of sale, transport, or shipment
for the purpose of sale, barter or exchange of shark fins. It
provides a class B misdemeanor with enhanced penalties to a
class A misdemeanor, which puts in place potentially up to a
$4,000 fine and up to 1 year of jail. This is a very aggressive
penalty, and will help serve as a deterrent to the behavior.
In the first year of the implementation of the statute, we
made sure to inform the public through press release, and we
have found, overall, that through education and through this
statute, it's been very easy to enforce as mere possession of a
shark carcass, without fins, or possession of shark fins
themselves, for any commercial purpose, is a violation.
We have had a few instances to where we've observed shark
fin cases. We had two back in 2012. And the most recent is in
September of this year, in which we had the Animal Welfare
Institute had notified us of possible violations in certain
restaurants. So following up on that, two of our game wardens
found shark fins in a restaurant, and then were directed over
to a local retail shop and found 38 more shark fins--well, with
incomplete shark carcasses. And 44 cases were filed. During
that case, it was obvious that both parties knew that the
possession of the shark fins were illegal.
Moving on. Illegal Mexican lancha incursions in Texas State
waters is still a problem. The illegal fishing activities
continue in Texas State waters. Unfortunately, it is difficult
to estimate the impact of this illegal fishing on shark
populations off of Texas. Since 2011, Texas game wardens have
seized over 25,000 miles of illegal gill net and over 20 miles
of illegal longline from the Gulf of Mexico. Sharks are
commonly caught in this gear.
The United States Coast Guard estimated 800,000 pounds of
red snapper have been illegally harvested annually during
incursions of Mexican lanchas between 2013 and 2014. U.S. Coast
Guard and Texas Parks and Wildlife game wardens have seen a
reduction in sharks retained in lancha encounters as the market
for red snapper has increased dramatically. Fewer sharks are
being observed in confiscated gill nets and longline gear.
Anecdotally, recent shark encounters have been only a quarter
of the numbers observed in previous years.
Let me see here. The United States Coast Guard continues to
site and intercept a large number of lanchas each year. The
problem does not appear to have decreased even with focused
enforcement efforts.
In summary, shark fishing is not a large fishery in Texas,
commercially or recreationally, resulting in few observed cases
of shark finning during patrols in State waters. Sharks offered
for sale in Texas typically come from either interstate or
foreign imports. The recent encounter of shark fins in a
restaurant in the Dallas-Fort Worth area were imported from
another State, offered as an off-menu item. This suggests that
there may be an underground market for this product. While in
the retail establishment it was clear the manager knew
possession of the shark carcasses without fins was illegal and
the individual tried to remove the remaining carcasses from the
freezer where they were found.
The proactive statute developed by Texas Representative
Lucio III, and passed in 2015, provided penalties which were
strong enough that repeated violation is not anticipated. Law
enforcement experience demonstrates that regulations or
statutes must provide penalties sufficient to deter the
behavior on the first violation as subsequent offenses become
more difficult to detect as future sales will be conducted more
covertly. Cooperative, targeted enforcement efforts between
State and Federal law enforcement are critical to discontinue
shark finning across the United States.
This concludes my testimony, and I'll be happy to answer
any questions.
[Prepared statement of Ms. Reeder follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Farenthold. Thank you very much.
Dr. Dove, you're recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF ALISTAIR D.M. DOVE
Mr. Dove. Good afternoon, committee members, and thank you
for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Dr. Alistair
Dove, and I'm the Vice President of Research and Conservation
Programs at the Georgia Aquarium in Atlanta, which is a
nonprofit organization inspiring awareness and preservation of
our oceans and aquatic animals worldwide. I'm a broadly trained
marine biologist with a current focus on the biology and
conservation of whale sharks and manta rays, which I've been
studying around the world for the last 10 years.
U.S. shark fisheries are better managed than those of most
countries, and for some species, at least, may even meet the
definition of being sustainable over the long term. But in
relative terms, it's not an especially high-value fishery.
Sharks make up just 0.12 percent of the value of all U.S.
fisheries, and shark fins make up less than a quarter of that
tiny fraction. In fact, sharks are more valuable alive for the
ecosystem services they provide, or as the targets for wildlife
tourism. A recent analysis from Oceana showed that one in five
scuba diving trips in Florida was specifically targeted at
sharks, and together, these provided $126 million worth of
value to the economy and supported over 3,800 jobs in Florida
alone. That's 19 times more than the combined value of all
commercial shark landings in the United States.
But given the expertise of some of my fellow witnesses, I
think I'd like to focus my comments more on the importance of
sharks for a healthy marine ecosystem.
We need a healthy ocean because it provides half of the
oxygen we breathe. Literally, every second breath you're taking
today was provided by the ocean, protein for billions of people
every day, a buffer against climate change, and the greatest
repository of undiscovered medicines on the planet, as well as
a means to conduct more than 90 percent of international
commerce through shipping. And a healthy ocean needs healthy
shark populations.
There are nearly 500 species of sharks. So it's important
not to overgeneralize their biology or to imagine that every
shark looks like a great white, a tiger, or a hammerhead. There
are sharks that are as small as 6 inches when they're fully
grown. And the two largest species, the basking shark and the
whale shark, are not toothy predators but peaceful, filter-
feeding giants, ostensibly more similar to whales than their
toothier relatives. Many, many species of sharks are drab deep
sea species that feed on small invertebrates near the bottom,
and many of these species are poorly known to science.
It's important to recognize that new species of sharks are
still being discovered on a regular basis. But with regard to
the more familiar types, an ocean without large predatory
sharks is like a sky without eagles or the Serengeti without
lions. Science has repeatedly shown us that removal of these
top-level sharks can cause a domino effect with significant
impacts on the rest of the food web in a process that
scientists call a trophic cascade. This appears especially to
be the case on coral reefs, where sharks are often the top-
level predators, but also, the second-tier predators like the
smaller gray reef sharks, black tip sharks, white tip sharks,
and things like that.
Many marine biologists will tell you a handy rule of thumb
about the health of ocean ecosystems is that if you go scuba
diving and you don't see a shark, there is a problem. And,
conversely, the richest and most productive ecosystems the
world over are those with vibrant shark populations. I've been
lucky enough to witness this firsthand in the Galapagos Marine
Reserve at a place called Darwin's Arch, which is home to
enormous schools of tuna, and jack, and other pelagic and reef
fishes. But it's also home to healthy populations of Galapagos
sharks, silky sharks, black tip sharks, the largest whale
sharks in the world, and schools of scalloped hammerhead sharks
too numerous to count. According to one published study,
Darwin's Arch may have the highest shark density anywhere in
the world, and, yet, it's overflowing with other types of
marine life as well. It seems counterintuitive in some way,
but, nonetheless, it's true.
Sharks have been fulfilling their key roles in the ocean
for nearly 400 million years, which is millions of years before
dinosaurs, or, indeed, any other land vertebrates. But,
unfortunately, their life history has a critical flaw, that
they tend to be long-lived, late to mature, and have relatively
few well-developed offspring. It's actually a reproductive
strategy that's quite similar to our own. But, unfortunately,
this means that they're very sensitive to disturbance, and it
can take a very long time for shark populations to recover if
they get knocked back. This makes them a poor target for
fisheries, certainly compared to a bony fish like a herring,
for example, whose life cycle is done in just a couple of
years, and can lay millions of eggs during that period. And
this is, perhaps, why so few shark fisheries have achieved
certification for long-term sustainability.
In summary, the market demand for shark fins and meat has
historically provided powerful incentives for overharvesting of
shark populations internationally and here in the U.S. Science
shows us that some U.S. species may be able to support
sustainable fisheries. But the life history of most shark
species makes them population-sensitive to disturbance and slow
to recover. It's essential that we effectively regulate shark
fisheries and restore those species that are already depleted
because the healthy shark populations are needed if we want the
ocean to continue to provide us with new medicines, food, and
the very air that we breathe. Thank you.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Dove follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Farenthold. Thank you.
And seeing as how we've not yet called votes, we'll get
started with some questioning. We'll start with the gentleman
from Kentucky.
Mr. Comer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Snyder, good to see you again. In your experience, can
you elaborate on the response of restaurateurs in States that
have banned shark finning.
Ms. Snyder. Yes. Thank you. So in California--California
was one of the first States to pass a ban. And during that,
there was some pushback from some of the restaurant community.
But as more and more States pass bans, we saw that--we didn't
see it as much. And, you know, there's been a lot of really
amazing efforts done by groups like WildAid and Yao Ming of
raising awareness of these issues. So I would say back, you
know, a few years ago, that we saw response, but we haven't
been hearing anything lately.
Mr. Comer. Okay. Ms. Reeder, there have been reported
issues with Mexican fishermen illegally sharking in Texas
waters. What has Texas law enforcement done to attempt to
combat this practice?
Ms. Reeder. Thank you. We work in cooperation with the U.S.
Coast Guard. We've made targeted enforcement through our border
operations, and we put focused effort on the border to try and
limit and deter these incursions.
Mr. Comer. Great.
Dr. Dove, do you feel that sustainable shark fisheries is a
potential solution to the problem? Why or why not?
Mr. Dove. So it's important that we separate the issues of
sustainable shark fisheries for meat and fisheries that are
related specifically to the fin trade. I think it's important
that we probably discourage the fin trade in any form. But it
is possible, according to fishery scientists, that some shark
species can be fished sustainably, species like the spiny
dogfish on the East Coast of the United States. So it's always
important when we talk about this question to separate the
issues of fishing for fins and fishing for meat. And I think in
the case of fins, it's losing popularity. In China, the
consumption is down about 80 percent since 2014. So I think
it's time to let this practice go, and for the United States to
take a lead role in setting an example to not encourage that
behavior to persist anymore.
Mr. Comer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll yield my time
back.
Mr. Farenthold. Thank you very much. We'll now recognize
the ranking member, the gentlelady from the U.S. Virgin
Islands, for 5 minutes.
Ms. Plaskett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Dove and Ms. Snyder, I wanted to ask you, with regard
to climate change. Do you agree that climate change--or do you
believe that climate change has caused the warming of our
oceans?
Ms. Snyder. Yes. And as the Director of Responsible Fishing
at Oceana, so the shellfish industry in the United States is
worth about $3 billion. And we know with ocean acidification,
that there could be negative impacts for that industry that
we're already seeing in the Pacific northwest for some of the
oyster farms.
Ms. Plaskett. And the warming is causing--how does that
affect the shellfish?
Ms. Snyder. So with any change in the chemistry of the
water, the shells, which are hard, it can impact their ability
to be strong, essentially.
Ms. Plaskett. Got it. Thank you.
Dr. Dove?
Mr. Dove. Yes. We know since the beginning of the
Industrial Revolution that the ocean has absorbed more than 25
percent of the additional carbon dioxide emissions, and almost
90 percent of the heat. So the ocean has been doing us a huge
favor for a very long time in absorbing a lot of these
emissions. The scientific consensus is clear that climate
change is the real thing. I think most scientists have moved on
these days to addressing what is the severity of the impact
going to be, and what steps can we take to ameliorate those
impacts to minimize the effect on society.
Ms. Plaskett. So in the amelioration of that and what can
be done, you talked about healthy oceans as a buffer. Could you
elaborate on that?
Mr. Dove. So healthy oceans have a number of different
perspectives. We would love to see oceans that are abundant,
producing, you know, plenty of food, and medicines, and other
ecosystem services like that. But they provide other intangible
services, too, including the protection of coastlines from
storms that would--which I don't need to tell you anything
about that.
Ms. Plaskett. Sure.
Mr. Dove. And so that's a very important service that we
get from the ocean. And it's directly and intimately tied to
the relationship between carbon pollution and the warming and
acidification of oceans.
Ms. Plaskett. When you talk about that, I know in the
Virgin Islands, in particular, our coral reefs are really
important to keeping sharks and as well as, you know,
regulating the amount of waves that come into the general
vicinity of our beaches. And the coral's health really has a
lot to do with the warming of the ocean.
Again, Dr. Dove and Ms. Snyder, could you each briefly
describe for us the effects of climate change and as a form of
warming on sharks and other aquatic life besides shellfish?
Mr. Dove. So we know in the case of sharks, they are cold-
blooded animals, and their metabolism is driven by the
prevailing temperature. So the more things warm up, the more
their metabolic demands increase. And with respected to
acidification, which is the flip side of carbon pollution in
the ocean, more acidic oceans make it hard for sharks to smell
their way around. Which, they live in an olfactory world. They
smell their way around. And acidification has been demonstrated
to change the way sharks sense their environment and impact the
way they can smell their food. And that's a problem for them.
Ms. Plaskett. Would it help them not just smell their food,
but maybe smell prey or those that are--an attack against them?
Mr. Dove. Exactly. So it may affect them in both in their
roles--especially if they're lower-level sharks, these are
predator sharks, we would call them. They have to be able to
smell prey, but they also have to be able to smell predators
that might be after them as well.
Ms. Plaskett. Okay. Thank you.
Ms. Snyder.
Ms. Snyder. Yes. I'll just add that in some of the studies
they did show that the sharks were more lethargic. And then
there was also a study that looked at the taking away of so
many sharks, and how that could potentially impact populations
that eat sea grass. And seagrass is, you know, very good at
capturing carbon. And so when you remove too many sharks and
that next level booms, that there are impacts on the amounts of
CO2 released from that. In fact, I think the study said that it
was equal to all the cars in Australia.
Ms. Plaskett. Great. And could you tell us, what could we
be doing as legislators to combat this and to assist?
Ms. Snyder. Well, again, from the fisheries' perspective,
we do know that with changing ocean temperatures, that some
fish stocks are shifting. So I think as we are thinking about
how to manage our fishery stocks, we need to be taking that
into account and dedicating science to seeing where are the
fish moving and how can we better manage those populations.
Ms. Plaskett. Okay. Dr. Dove?
Mr. Dove. I think it's important as we go forward that we
fill some of the knowledge gaps that we have about the impact
of climate change. It's one of the most active areas of
research right now.
Ms. Plaskett. So how would we, as legislators, facilitate
that for you?
Mr. Dove. So through support of basic science research
through the National Science Foundation, and NOAA, and other
agencies that provide funding for basic research across the
country that can help answer some of those questions.
Ms. Plaskett. Thank you. Perfect. My time is up. I yield
back.
Mr. Farenthold. You hit that right on the mark. I should be
so lucky. We may finish this before the votes. So we appreciate
it.
But I do have--I do have a couple of questions. And we'll
start with Dr. Dove. And we'll let Ms. Snyder weigh in on this.
The shark finning trade is--basically takes the fin because
it's the most valuable piece of the shark for whatever
properties it--people believe it has. The shark finning
legislation typically prevents finning the shark and just
taking the fin. And I think Ms. Reeder testified that they did
have the whole shark in the restaurant that they busted in the
Dallas-Fort Worth area. Is shark meat a desirable fish for
serving at a restaurant or for human consumption? And why yes?
Why no?
Mr. Dove. The values of the U.S. fishery landings in total
would argue not. I mean, you can look at the total value of
shark fisheries in the United States at about $6.6 million in
2015, and compare that to crab, which is $678 million, more
than 100 times more than the shark fishery. So I think people
vote with their taste buds a little bit, and those relative
values will tell you about what are the most valued fisheries.
It's not to say there isn't a place for shark or even a place
for sustainably harvested shark. It's just so difficult to
thread the needle and make that worth doing as the market value
simply isn't there, if you ask me.
Mr. Farenthold. Ms. Snyder, did you want to weigh in on
that?
Ms. Snyder. Yeah. I just think it is important to note,
when you look at the most popular species in the Hong Kong fin
trade, you look at those specific 14 species, and over 70
percent of them are at high risk or very high risk of
extinction. So, as Dr. Dove mentioned, there are around 500
species of sharks. So, when you look at the ones that are the
most popular, a number of them are in serious trouble.
Mr. Farenthold. So, as a sportsman, you know, I have always
been taught that you eat what you shoot, you eat what you
catch. And so, in Hong Kong, they are only selling the fins;
they are not selling the rest of the shark, because they
consider there to be little economic value there. Is that
correct?
Ms. Snyder. I don't know that you could say that there is
no shark meat there, but a bowl of shark-fin soup can go for
over $100. And so, you know----
Mr. Farenthold. That is higher than Washington, D.C.,
prices for food.
Ms. Snyder. Yes, it is.
But you also can look--like, for the hammerheads. So a
number of hammerhead species, you know, face serious declines
and are listed under international agreements of needing
additional protection. And you look at the price, even in the
Gulf of Mexico, a price per pound for the meat compared to the
price per pound for the fin. So the meat goes for 25 cents, and
then the fin can go for over $16 per pound.
Mr. Farenthold. All right.
And, Ms. Reeder, you do enforcement in Texas. Do you see a
lot of recreational fishermen actually keeping their shark, or
is it more of a catch-and-release sport? Do you have any
numbers on that?
Ms. Reeder. We don't have numbers on whether they are
retained or whether they are done in caught-and-release. The
thing is that, overall, the fishery itself is not very large on
the recreational end. We do have plenty of recreational
fishermen who really love that sport and are avid about it,
which is why I believe that we have seen more catch and release
of sharks.
I do want to make one small correction, though, is that on
the case that we had in Dallas----
Mr. Farenthold. Right.
Ms. Reeder. --some of those carcasses were actually cut in
a way that the fillets were not available. They were actually
harvested or cut and processed in a manner in which it was
really just the back meat, just a very limited amount of back
meat, and the anal and caudal fins were left.
Mr. Farenthold. All right. Thank you very much. I
appreciate that clarification.
What is your biggest challenge in dealing with the shark-
fin trade as a law enforcement person?
Ms. Reeder. I would say that, in the end, it is that if it
goes covert, it becomes so much more difficult to detect.
Our officers--so, to give you an example, we have 551 sworn
game wardens in the State of Texas. We have a handful of
dedicated investigators. So whenever you take those numbers and
you put it to a covert operation to where you are having to
involve your investigators, you reduce your capabilities. So
you reduce your effectiveness.
So, as we deploy more efforts to detect and deter this
behavior, if it goes to a more covert and underground market,
itis going to be more difficult to combat.
Mr. Farenthold. And that is why you are an advocate of
strong penalties for a first offense. Is that correct?
Ms. Reeder. Absolutely.
Mr. Farenthold. All right.
Finally, Ms. Snyder, you mentioned that--I believe it was
you--the panel did mention that the demand for shark fin in
China, which is kind of a hub for that, is going down. Do we
know why that is going down? And is that something we can help
perhaps deal with on the demand side?
Ms. Snyder. It was actually Dr. Dove who mentioned that,
but I can speak to it a little bit.
And then you can jump in there.
Mr. Farenthold. So I am out of time. I will let you finish,
then Dr. Dove, and I will technically be within the rule
because I have quit talking.
Ms. Snyder. Okay.
So I would say, you know, that there have been--I mentioned
WildAid and Yao Ming and a lot of really positive efforts in
China. In addition, the Chinese Government made it illegal to
serve shark-fin soup at government functions.
And then you also saw the three state-owned Chinese
airlines have also put bans on shipping shark fins, and Chinese
shipping companies have as well, and that there has been a lot
of activism within China of raising awareness for this. So that
could be in large part why.
But I will also let Dr. Dove speak to that.
Mr. Dove. So I understand that there are three main reasons
why ithas declined in China.
The first is the aforementioned campaigns from WildAid and
WWF and Yao Ming and others. It is the ``When the buying stops,
the killing can too'' campaign.
But there is also a group of pro-environment business
leaders in China who have been advocating for better actions on
shark and shark fins.
But I understand that one of the biggest impacts was an
austerity measure from Xi Jinping that essentially instructed
all state party officials to limit expensive activities, not
just shark-fin soup but cigarettes and alcohol and other
activities too. So it was sort of a case of, you know, a type
of environmentalism that came from a central authority.
Mr. Farenthold. All right. Thank you very much.
Ms. Plaskett, unless you have something else?
All right. I want to say thanks again for you guys coming
up.
Ms. Plaskett. And thank them for all the work.
Mr. Farenthold. Absolutely. Thank you for all the work you
are doing. Sometimes it is thankless, doing what you do, but we
certainly appreciate it.
And, as you can see by some of the legislation that we have
discussed today, it is something that we are aware of here in
Washington, D.C., and hopefully can continue to move forward on
this.
So I want to thank you again for appearing.
The hearing record will remain open for 2 weeks for any
member to submit written opening statements or questions for
the record. If we do get any questions, we will get in touch
with you and see if you could answer those in writing, and we
will include those in the record.
If there is no further business, without objection, the
subcommittee will stand adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 2:47 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[all]