a ~

Sharks

Review and Discussion December 16, 2020

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Version 2

This is a review and discussion of sharks and shark-related topics in Florida.

Division: Marine Fisheries Management Authors: Kristin Foss, Nancy Sheridan, CJ Sweetman, Krista Shipley, Martha Guyas, and Jessica McCawley Contact Phone Number: 850-487-0554 Report date: November 6, 2020

Unless otherwise noted, images throughout the presentation are by FWC.

Outline

■ Background

■ Status of sharks

■ Shark management - federal and state

■ Overview of fishery

■ Current shark-related topics for Florida

■ Options moving forward

Staff will provide a background on sharks, status of sharks, shark fisheries management in federal and state waters, and an overview of the fishery. Staff will also provide an overview of current shark-related topics in Florida and will be seeking next steps for these topics.

Background ■ Over 500 shark and ray species found worldwide

0 16 shark species harvestable in Florida state waters

■ Vital role in marine ecosystems

■ Long-lived, slow to mature, few offspring

□ Susceptible to overfishing

■ Rapid declines in 1970s through early 1990s 0 Seen as an under-used resource

□ Increased demand

□ Large coastal sharks heavily impacted

■ Today, many shark populations are rebuilding in U.S.

There are over 500 shark and ray species found worldwide. Of those, 16 shark species can be harvested from Florida state waters; however, shortfin mako cannot be commercially harvested from Florida state waters because of harvestable gear restrictions.

As top predators, sharks play a vital role in marine environments by regulating ecosystem structure and function. Sharks are long-lived animals that are slow to mature and have few offspring. For example, white sharks (commonly known as great whites) can live up to 70 years and females do not start producing offspring until around age 15. Unlike many other fish species, which can produce thousands of eggs per spawning event and spawn multiple times per year, most shark species give birth to fewer than 10 pups per litter, and many do not reproduce every year. These life history characteristics make sharks highly vulnerable to fishing pressure and to overfishing. This is especially true for large coastal sharks, such as hammerhead, silky, and sandbar sharks.

In the mid-1970s through the early 1990s, shark stocks rapidly declined throughout the Eastern U.S. (Atlantic and Gulf) due to high rates of harvest and an increased demand for shark products, including meat, fins, and other shark products. At the time, sharks were seen as an underutilized resource that could be exploited further as a fishery target. Large coastal shark species became preferentially targeted relative to small coastal species due to their high meat content, large fin sizes, and proximity to land. In response to steep population declines, Florida began implementing shark fishing regulations in the early 1990s, quickly becoming a leader in shark conservation and aiding the rebuilding efforts in the U.S. Today, many shark populations are continuing to recover and numbers increasing due to successful state and federal conservation and management measures.

High Profile and Divergent Viewpoints

C21 WPEC

Fishennen complain there are too many sharks

TCPalm

Anglers blame shark-diving for half-eaten catches

Sharks are a high profile, high interest topic of discussion. The increasing interest magnifies social conflicts, and conflicting values and viewpoints are routinely highlighted across the media as it relates to the public perception of sharks or interactions with sharks. These headlines illustrate the difference in public perception between those that believe shark conservation remains important to a healthy ecosystem and those that believe the increases in shark populations have risen to a level where management measures are needed.

Worldwide Status ■ Internationally, many populations are overfished

0 Management lacking in many countries and international waters

■ National and international treaties provide some conservation measures

■ Regionally, some species recovering 0 Successful management

0 Tighter regulations on selling and shipping overseas 0 Growing appreciation for ecosystem and ecotourism value

Due to overfishing, many shark populations are declining or overfished on a global scale. The declining trends in shark populations globally are largely due to their unique life history characteristics (slow-growing, late maturity, few offspring) and a number of compounding factors including habitat degradation; bycatch; climate change; and a lack of cohesive management, monitoring, and enforcement throughout many countries and international waters.

However, several species have been protected by various national legislations (e.g., the U.S. Shark Finning Prohibition Act and Shark Conservation Act) and international treaties (e.g., the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species and Wild Florida and Fauna (CITES)). Largely due to these protections, some shark species are showing signs of recovery regionally.

Sustainable shark fisheries are increasing in frequency for a variety of reasons, including successful fisheries management. Rules and policies designed to protect sharks, such as prohibiting shark finning, are working. In recent years, as international awareness of global shark declines and public outcry over the inhumane practice of finning has increased, demand for shark fins has declined in some areas, like mainland China. However, in other areas outside of the mainland, like Macau and Thailand, these markets are emerging or expanding. Tighter regulations on selling and shipping shark products, increased interest in shark-related ecotourism, and a growing appreciation for the importance of a shark’s role in a healthy ecosystem has also contributed to the increase in sustainable shark fisheries.

Eastern U.S. Status • Some of the best-managed and sustainable shark fisheries in the world

0 Allows for sustainable harvest

- Florida state waters: 16 species

- Federal waters: 23 species 0 Oceanic whitetip is only ESA-listed shark off Florida

■ Preliminary recovery in southeastern U.S. due to management measures 0 Small sharks have a higher capacity to recover 0 Large sharks also showing signs of recovery

In contrast to continued concerns about the global status of sharks, some shark populations along the Eastern U.S. are responding well to state and federal fisheries management measures. Shark populations that are managed sustainably allow for some commercial and recreational harvest. In Florida state waters, 16 species can be harvested and 23 species are harvestable from federal waters.

The oceanic whitetip shark, found globally in deep, open oceans, was listed as Threatened under Endangered Species Act (ESA) by NOAA Fisheries. Currently, no other shark populations off the U.S. mainland South Atlantic or Gulf coast states are listed under ESA. However, the scalloped hammerhead is listed as threatened in the central and southwest Atlantic, which includes all waters of the Caribbean.

Research has shown a preliminary recovery of some shark species in the southeastern U.S. Small coastal sharks have a higher for recovery because they typically reach maturity and reproduce at younger ages. To this point, research indicates that some small coastal sharks are increasing in abundance, such as Atlantic sharpnose and bonnethead. Large coastal sharks mature at later ages and are slower to recover from declines; despite this, research indicates that some large coastal sharks, such as sandbar, blacktip, spinner, and tiger sharks are also increasing in abundance.

Rebuilding Populations ■ Life history characteristics make sharks vulnerable to overfishing

° Can take decades for a species to recover once depleted

■ Many species not assessed and status unknown 0 Data-poor, limited life history information

■ Managing to end overfishing and aid in population recovery

Species

Sandbar

Dusky

Status

Overfished, not undergoing overfishing

Overfished , undergoing overfishing

Rebuilding Timeline

2070

2107

Shark management measures are designed to help end overfishing and rebuild shark populations to a sustainable level. As previously discussed, shark life history characteristics make them vulnerable to overfishing, and once a population is depleted, it can take decades for a species to recover. As a result, some overfished species have a significantly long timeline to rebuild populations. For example, sandbar and dusky sharks are both in rebuilding plans and their timeline to rebuild is 2070 and 2107, respectively.

Additionally, many shark species have not been assessed individually, including bull, lemon, tiger, and nurse sharks, and their stock status is unknown. Many shark stocks are considered data-poor with too little available biological information, such as life history details, and fisheries data available to conduct a stock assessment.

U.S. Shark Fisheries Management State waters

■ Individual states

■ Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission

Federal waters

■ NOAA Fisheries' Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Division

There are many layers to shark management and sharks are managed by multiple agencies along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. Each state manages their respective state waters, and on the Atlantic coast, state management for coastal sharks is coordinated by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission through an Interstate Fishery Management Plan.

Beyond state waters NOAA Fisheries' Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Division regulates sharks from the state waters boundary up to 200 nautical miles offshore. In addition to managing sharks domestically in federal waters, NOAA Fisheries also participates in management on an international level through the International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT), CITES, and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Federal Regulations - Overview ■ HMS manages 42 shark species

0 23 species are harvestable

■ HMS permits required

■ Fins must be naturally attached when landed

Commercial ■ Season lengths vary based on available quota

■ Daily limits dependent on management groups

Recreational

■ Bag limit is 1 per vessel for most species

■ Size limits apply for most species

HMS manages 42 shark species; 23 species are harvestable and 19 are prohibited from harvest. These 42 shark species are divided into five management groups: large coastal, small coastal, pelagic, smoothhound, and prohibited.

Federal vessel permits are required for commercial and recreational shark fishermen in federal waters. The commercial permits include directed and incidental limited-access permits and smoothhound open-access permit (limited to smoothhound sharks only). Additionally, there is a limited Shark Research Fishery permit, which allows a limited number of commercial fishermen to harvest sandbar sharks and provide important fisheries dependent data to HMS for use in future stock assessments. In addition to the federal recreational permit, recreational fishermen are also required to obtain a shark endorsement, which requires completing an online shark identification and fishing regulation training course and quiz. All sharks that are retained must have fins naturally attached when landed.

There is a complex quota system for the commercial shark fishery to help ensure sustainable shark fisheries and help conserve vulnerable and overfished species. The season length for shark management groups varies based on available quota and other factors. For example, for certain sharks, the season closes when 80% of the quota is reached or is projected to be reached. Daily commercial trip limits vary by permit type and shark management group, and the retention limit can be adjusted throughout the fishing year based on available quota.

For the recreational shark fishery, bag limits vary by species, with a one shark per vessel for most species, and size limits apply for most sharks.

FWC Regulations Commercial and recreational

■ Harvestable species: 15 commercial and 16 recreational

■ Limits: 1 per person, maximum of 2 sharks/vessel 0 Minimum size for majority of species

■ Hook-and-line only

0 Non-stainless-steel, non-offset circle hooks required when using natural bait 0 Use of natural bait prohibited when using treble hooks

■ Must be landed with head, tail, and fins attached

■ Prohibited species must remain in water

■ Shore-based shark-fishing regulations

Federal permit required for commercial harvest

In general, FWC manages commercial and recreational shark harvesters with similar regulations. There are 15 shark species that may be commercially harvested and 16 sharks that may be recreationally harvested. The difference between the number of harvestable species in state waters centers on shortfin mako, which is prohibited from commercial harvest in state waters. Shortfin mako may only be retained commercially if the shark is caught dead in longline and gill nets; both gears are not allowed in state waters.

For shark species that can be harvested, anglers are allowed one shark per person per day with a maximum of two sharks per vessel. Several shark species for which harvest is allowed are subject to a minimum size limit of 54-inches fork length. Sharks without a minimum size limit include several small coastal species that do not generally reach 54 inches in length. The only allowable gear type is hook-and-line with non-stainless-steel, non-offset circle hooks when using natural bait, and the use of natural bait is prohibited when using treble hooks. All sharks that are harvested must be landed with the head, tail, and fins naturally attached. Any prohibited species caught must remain in the water. When shark fishing from shore, a Shore-Based Shark Fishing permit is required.

Commercial shark fishermen in Florida state waters are required to have an annual federal vessel permit in addition to the state’s commercial fishing license (the Saltwater Products License). Additionally, commercial harvesters may only sell their shark harvest to wholesale dealers who have a valid federal Atlantic shark dealer permit.

Florida's Harvestable Shark Species

... .

Small coastal species

Atlantic sharpnose

Blacknose

Bonnethead

Finetooth

Pelagic species

Blue

Common thresher

Oceanic whitetip

Porbeagle

Shortfin mako*

Other

Smooth dogfish

Florida smoothhound

Gulf smoothhound I] · · Blue italics = harvest only allowed in federal waters

Large coastal species

Blacktip

Bull

Nurse

Spinner

Great hammerhead

Scalloped hammerhead

Smooth hammerhead

Lemon

Sandbar

Silky

Tiger

This slide outlines the harvestable species in Florida state and federal waters. The species in blue italics are species that are prohibited from harvest in Florida state waters, but are allowed for harvest in federal waters. In federal waters, 23 species can be harvested commercially and recreationally. In Florida state waters, 15 shark species can be harvested commercially and 16 can be harvested recreationally. Commercial harvest of shortfin mako is not allowed in state waters.

FWC's Prohibited Species Rationale ESA Listed vs. Prohibited

■ ESA Listed = extinction concern, determined to be threatened or endangered

■ Prohibited = no harvest, not always a population concern

State regulations provide additional conservation ■ Protection for overfished stocks

■ Species identification challenges

■ Essential Fish Habitat for many species 0 Species aggregate to reproduce in coastal waters 0 Pregnant females vulnerable to harvest 0 Shallow state waters contain critical nursery habitat

Great hammerhead

Essential Fish Habitat

There are several reasons why FWC may consider prohibiting a shark species from harvest. First, when discussing prohibited species, there is often confusion between a prohibited species and an ESA listed species. A species may warrant an ESA listing if there is an extinction concern for the species population, and if that population is determined to be threatened or endangered. A prohibited species is species that may not be harvested or landed from state waters, but it does not always mean there is a population concern.

Regulations in Florida’s state waters provide considerable conservation benefits for many shark species. FWC may prohibit a shark for several reasons including to provide additional conservation measures for overfished populations, like dusky, sandbar, and scalloped hammerhead sharks. Additionally, identification is challenging among shark species, and species could be added to the prohibited list if they are difficult to distinguish from other prohibited species. For example, many ridgeback sharks, such as dusky, sandbar, and silky sharks, can be commonly misidentified.

Additional regulations in state waters can also provide protections during vulnerable stages of a sharks’ life history. NOAA Fisheries has identified Florida’s coastal waters as Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for several large coastal sharks, such as the great hammerhead, lemon, dusky, sandbar, and tiger sharks. EFH is defined as waters and substrate necessary for fish to spawn, breed, feed, or grow to maturity. Florida’s shallow state waters contain critical nursery habitat where pregnant female sharks occur in predictable locations at specific times of the year, making them more vulnerable to harvest. By limiting or prohibiting harvest of species particularly susceptible to fishing pressure in state waters at this important life stage, Florida is able to provide an extra level of shark conservation while maintaining harvest opportunities for many of these species in adjacent federal waters under the federal regulations.

Overview of Eastern U.S. Shark Fishery Recreational

■ Largely catch-and-release

■ Private boat effort decreasing

■ For-hire and shore effort has remained steady

■ Number of HMS tournaments vary by species and year

Commercial

■ Total permits issued decreasing

■ Landings and number of shark trips decreasing

■ Small number of fishermen land most sharks

This slide provides a high-level overview of the Eastern U.S. commercial and recreational shark fisheries in recent years.

Generally, from 2014 through 2020, the recreational shark fishery (both direct and indirect) is primarily a catch-and-release fishery, and largely an incidental fishery for most species. Smoothhound, Atlantic sharpnose, and bonnethead sharks are the most commonly caught species; however, species identification is a challenge and most sharks released are unidentified. Over the last six years, private boat effort has shown a declining trend, while for-hire and shore effort for sharks has remained steady. Tournaments targeting HMS species is a popular recreational activity throughout the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. From 2016-2019, the number of HMS shark tournaments targeting small coastal sharks and pelagic sharks have seen a declining trend, where tournaments targeting smoothhound and large coastal sharks have seen an increasing trend.

From 2014 through 2019, the total number of commercial shark permits issued decreased, and the number of inactive permits increased. Shark landings by weight and the number of trips landing sharks has decreased, particularly in the Gulf of Mexico in 2019. Additionally, a small number of shark fishermen account for a large portion of the commercial shark landings. For each of the shark management groups (large coastal sharks, small coastal sharks, pelagic, and smoothhound), the top three vessels landed approximately 15% of annual landings.

1989-2019 Florida Commercial Shark Landings 8,000,000 4,000,000

- State Pounds

7,000,000 - Federal Pounds 3,500,000

(/) • - Combined Pounds "O 6,000,000 3,000,000 C • 0 :::J - Combined Value 0 Cf) 0.. 5,000,000 - Federal Value 2,500,000 ::> ,f;

(fl

(/) • - state Va lue ,f; C)

4,000,000 2,000,000 (].) ,f; :::J "O ~ C C'O 3,000,000 1,500,000 _J

2,000,000 1,000,000

1,000,000 500,000

0 0

The figure shows 1989-2019 Florida commercial shark landings from state and federal waters. Years are depicted on the x-axis, landings in pounds are depicted on the left y-axis, and value in U.S. dollars is on the right y-axis.

In 1995, some fields on the trip ticket, such as area fished, became mandatory to report. It took about two years for those changes to be consistently reported. Prior to about 1997, many landings did not specify area fished on the trip ticket or those areas were incorrectly reported as being from state waters. To deal with potentially confusing or ambiguous data, those landings have been combined as both state and federal landings (blue bars). Additionally, the value may not accurately reflect the correct value given the discrepancy in reported areas, thus those values are also combined and depicted by a dark orange line.

Starting in 1997, the value of shark landings from state waters (black bars) is minimal, as indicated by the black line. Landings from federal waters (green bars) have also decreased over time, though value has shown decreases and increases over time, as show by the purple line. In recent years, the ex-vessel price per pound has increased.

The red arrows represent notable regulatory changes. The arrow above 1992 reflects when the commercial and recreational daily bag limit of one shark per person and a maximum possession limit of two sharks per vessel was established. The arrow above 1995 reflects when the Net Limitation Amendment for state waters went into effect. The arrow above 2006 indicates when 13 shark species were added to FWC’s prohibited list and when HMS finalized the consolidated shark fishery management plan.

Current Shark-related Topics for Florida

■ Shark fin legislation

■ Shore-based shark-fishing update

■ Shark feeding

■ Shark interactions with fishermen

There are a variety of shark-related topics and conflicts in Florida. This next several slides will provide a discussion of recent shark fin legislation, a shore-based shark-fishing update, shark feeding, and shark interactions with fishermen.

Shark Fin Legislation ■ "Finning" is removing fins at sea and discarding remainder of shark

0 Banned in U.S. but continues elsewhere

2020 Florida Legislation - Kristin Jacobs Ocean Conservation Act

■ Effective Oct. 1

■ Prohibits import, export, and sale of separated shark fins 0 Exception for commercial harvesters and dealers with a valid federal permit

as of Jan. 1, 2020

■ Requires FWC to evaluate potential impact of total ban (due by Dec. 31, 2021)

2019/2020 Congressional shark fin bills ■ Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act

■ Sustainable Shark Fisheries and Trade Act

In recent years, there has been a push by some shark advocates at both state and federal levels to ban possession and sale of separated shark fins. “Finning” is the practice of removing shark fins at sea and discarding the rest of the shark without bringing it to shore. The practice of finning has been banned in Florida since 1992 and in all U.S. waters since 2000; however, finning does still occur in other parts of the world. Proponents of banning the possession or sale of fins believe it would improve international shark conservation.

As part of the 2020 Florida Legislature, Governor Ron DeSantis signed into law the Kristin Jacobs Ocean Conservation Act. Effective Oct. 1, 2020, this law prohibits the import, export, and sale of separated shark fins in Florida. However, this bill provides exceptions for commercial harvesters and wholesale dealers with a federal HMS shark permit as of Jan. 1, 2020, allowing them to continue to buy and sell fins from legally landed sharks. This bill also requires FWC to evaluate the potential economic impacts of imposing a total ban on the Florida shark fin fishery, identify actions to lessen or offset such potential impacts, and evaluate potential impacts the prohibition may have on the shark population. This report must be submitted to the Governor, President of the Senate, and Speaker of the House of Representatives by Dec. 31, 2021.

Several shark fin-related bills were introduced during the 116th Congress. The Shark Fins Elimination Act (H.R. 737 and S. 877) was introduced by Delegate Sablan (Northern Mariana Island) and Senator Booker (NJ). These bills would make it illegal to possess, buy, sell, transport, or trade shark fins or any product containing shark fins. The Sustainable Shark Fisheries and Trade Act (H.R. 788 and S. 1008) was introduced by Congressman Webster (FL) and Senator Rubio (FL). These bills would establish a certification process to ensure any nation engaging in shark trade into or through the U.S. has regulatory conservation programs comparable to ones in place for the U.S.

Shore-based Shark-Fishing Update ■ Effective July 2019: helps address concerns about

shark conservation and public safety

■ Anyone fishing for sharks from shore must pass educational course and obtain annual permit

0 20,000+ completed course, 18,000+ permits issued 0 Educational course nationally recognized

□ Refresher course coming Spring 2021

■ Device capable of cutting leader/hook

■ Do not delay release of prohibited sharks

Shore-based shark-fishing has been a popular recreational fishery for decades and is largely focused on catch-and-release. FWC implemented new shore-based shark fishing regulations to address stakeholder concerns about shark conservation, public safety, and continued participation in this historical fishery that became effective in July 2019.

These regulations require anyone fishing for or harvesting sharks from shore to pass the online Shore-based Shark-Smart Fishing education course and obtain the annual, no-cost Shore-based Shark-Fishing Permit (mandatory for all shore-based shark anglers 16 years and older). From June 2019 – June 2020, over 20,000 people completed the online educational course and 18,134 permits were issued. Recently, the Shore-based Shark-Smart Fishing course was nationally recognized by the Association for Conservation Information and received third place among other wildlife agencies educational programs. Additionally, FWC will be releasing a refresher Shore-based Shark-Smart Fishing course for anglers who have already completed the original course in Spring 2021.

Additional requirements for those fishing for sharks from shore were also implemented in July 2019. These include the possession of appropriate line or hook cutters, and not to delay the release of prohibited shark species.

Shark Feeding

■ Introduction of any food/substance into the water by a diver/snorkeler to feed or attract marine species

■ Shark feeding is prohibited in state waters; allowed in federal waters

■ Staff supported legislation to prohibit shark feeding in federal waters

■ FKNMS proposal to expand fish feeding definition

FWC’s defines “fish feeding”, which includes shark feeding, as the introduction of any food or other substance into the water by a diver or snorkeler for the purpose of feeding or attracting marine species, except for the purpose of harvesting such marine species as otherwise allowed by FWC rules. The practice of feeding fish, including sharks, is prohibited in Florida state waters but is allowed in adjacent federal waters.

Staff has supported options for federal legislation that would prohibit shark feeding in federal waters off Florida in the past. Additionally, within the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Restoration Blueprint, there is a proposal to prohibit the feeding of fish, sharks, and other marine species while diving and from a vessel. The Commission supports this proposal and could consider updating statewide regulations to be consistent with the FKNMS, which would expand FWC’s definition to include prohibiting fish feeding from a vessel.

Shark Interactions • Successful shark conservation and management has led to increase in sharks

■ Increasing reports of shark predation on catch across reg ions

• Impacts I I

0 Loss of catch and mortality of released fish I 0 Lost revenues and gear damage

0 Reduces fishing efficiency

° Creates negative attitudes towards sharks

• Commonly reported key species include

0 Bull, great hammerhead*, sandbar*, and dusky*

Stakeholders have requested HMS, Councils, and FWC address issue

Successful shark conservation and management at both federal and state levels has led to an increase in shark numbers as some populations begin to recover. Over the years, there have been increasing reports of shark predation on fishermen's catch, where sharks will partially or completely consume an animal caught by fishing gear before it can be brought on board. These interactions are not a new phenomenon, and shark predation on catch occurs in both commercial and recreational fisheries throughout the Atlantic, Gulf, and even globally.

There are a range of biological, economic, and social impacts from these shark interactions. Sharks are opportunistic feeders and can selectively prey on weak or injured animals, especially fish caught by fishermen, which can lead to loss of catch and mortality of released fish. Additionally, these interactions can lead to costly losses of commercially valuable fish and gear damage. Furthermore, these interactions can lead to a reduction in fishing efficiency due to lost catch and having to relocate to different fishing grounds to avoid sharks, impacting the overall fishing experience. Finally, these increased and repeated predation interactions can foster an overall negative attitude towards sharks in general.

Some of the commonly reported key shark species involved in these predation events in Florida waters include bull, great hammerhead, sandbar, and dusky sharks. Of these species, great hammerhead, sandbar, and dusky sharks are prohibited from harvest in state waters, dusky is prohibited from harvest in federal waters, and both sandbar and dusky are under rebuilding plans. Other reported species include silky (prohibited in state waters), blacktip, spinner, blue, and Caribbean reef sharks (prohibited in state and federal waters). However, it is important to keep in mind that in some cases, it is unknown which shark species are responsible for these predation events.

Stakeholders have raised concerns and requested both the Gulf and South Atlantic councils, HMS, and FWC address this issue. Several groups have sent letters, including the Billfish Foundation, Bonefish and Tarpon Trust, West Palm Beach Fishing Club, and Sportsmen Fighting for Marine Balance.

Shark Interactions: Challenges

• Wide-spread effects across fisheries, user-groups, and regions

■ Limited research and reporting of shark interactions

• Some shark and prey species are both under rebuilding plans

• Evidence of learned behavior patterns

• Sharks play a crucial role in ecosystem balance and health

• Increases in shark populations and fishing participation has led to increased interactions

There are many challenges when trying to address shark predation on fishermen’s catch. These shark interaction events are widespread and impact a variety of fisheries, user-groups, and regions. There is limited research on this issue and limited reporting on these interaction events, especially in the recreational fisheries.

There are also biological effects, as several key shark species commonly reported in these interactions and prey species are both under rebuilding plans. For example, dusky and sandbar sharks are both are overfished and under rebuilding plans, and many of the involved prey species are under rebuilding plans, such as red snapper, certain grouper, and blue and white marlins.

Sharks are intelligent animals that use auditory, chemical, visual, and electrical cues to locate prey. There is some research and widespread anecdotal reporting that suggest associated learning behaviors with these shark interactions. For example, some reports show that sharks associate the sound of an engine or the sound of a spear gun being shot under water with the availability of easy prey. It is possible that sharks can form an association between fishing boats/gear and the presence of easy prey in the form of hooked or speared fish.

Finally, it’s important to remember that sharks are apex predators and keep ocean ecosystems in balance and healthy. Historically, many top predators have been exploited, which has created ecosystem imbalance. However, successful shark conservation and management in the U.S. has allowed the recovery of several shark species. As these species rebuild and population numbers increase, this can lead to an increased interaction with fishermen. Additionally, fishing participation by anglers is increasing. This concept also applies to rebuilding prey species, as these populations rebuild, there are more prey available for sharks to target. The shark’s prey base and target fish for anglers are often the same, and both the shark and prey populations are likely abundant for there to be increased conflict and interactions. To avoid upsetting the natural balance of ocean ecosystems, care will have to be taken on any potential management actions.

Shark Interactions: Next Steps HMS Next Steps

• White paper to review all aspects of Eastern U.S. shark fishery 0 Identify viable research opportunities 0 Prioritize future management actions

• Explore ways to obtain more and better interaction data

FWC Potential Next Steps

• May 2021: expert panel discussion

• Hold a forum focused on shark interactions

• Incorporate citizen science for reporting interactions

• Explore adjusting shark regulations

There are multiple management options that HMS is exploring and FWC can consider regarding shark interactions.

HMS is developing a white paper that will review all aspects of the Eastern U.S. shark fishery. This paper will help identify viable research opportunities and prioritize future management actions, and a draft of this white paper is expected in Spring 2021. Additionally, HMS is exploring additional ways to obtain more and better shark interaction data, including adding data fields to reporting apps where fishermen can report these shark predation events. HMS is also working on an amendment to the shark fishery management plan that would revisit how shark annual catch levels are set and could provide some flexibility to help address these shark interaction events in the future.

Moving forward, staff is proposing to have a panel of shark experts to continue discussions on shark interactions and other shark-related topics at the May 2021 Commission meeting. Additionally, staff recommend holding a forum focused on shark interactions with a variety of stakeholders, including commercial and recreational fishermen, NGO’s, divers, and concerned citizens, as well as other management agencies. FWC could also consider incorporating more citizen science opportunities for reporting these shark interactions, including through mobile apps like iAngler. Finally, FWC could also explore current shark regulations for state waters to see if any adjustments may be warranted.

Recap ■ Sharks are important top-level predators in marine ecosystems

■ Divergent viewpoints and values regarding sharks

■ U.S. has some of the most sustainable shark fisheries in the world

° Florida is a leader in shark conservation

■ Preliminary evidence of recovery, some stock statuses are unknown

■ Decreasing commercial participants and landings

■ Increasing reports of shark interaction events

° Conflict between sharks and fishermen

0 Signs of rebounding and healthy ecosystems

0 No easy, quick-fix solution

Shark management in the Eastern U.S. and Florida is complex with a variety of species and user-groups involved. It’s important to remember that sharks are top-level predators that play an essential role in ecosystem structure and function. Sharks continue to remain a high profile, high interest topic. Increasing interest in sharks magnifies social conflicts and conflicting stakeholder values, and viewpoints are routinely highlighted across the media as it relates to the public perception of sharks or interactions with sharks.

The U.S. has some of the best-managed and sustainable shark fisheries in the world , and additional Florida state regulations provide important conservation measures. Largely due to successful shark conservation and management, there is evidence of several shark populations recovering, such as sandbar, blacktip, and Atlantic sharpnose sharks. However, many shark stocks are data-poor with limited biological and fisheries data, and some stock statuses are unknown.

Over the last several years in the Eastern U.S., the number of commercial participants has decreased and there has been a decrease in shark landings by weight and the number of trips. Additionally, over the years, there have been increasing reports of interaction events between sharks and fishermen. Generally, conflict between anglers and top predators is a positive indicator of ecosystem health. Many shark populations have been historically overexploited, which created an ecosystem imbalance. However, successful shark conservation and management measures (in combination with successful management of other finfish that are prey for sharks) have allowed shark numbers to increase, improving overall ecosystem structure and function. There is no easy, quick-fix solution to address this issue, and there are many management challenges. However, there are opportunities for FWC and federal partners to think outside the box and help address this issue.

Direction Requested Commission direction requested on options moving forward

• May 2021: expert panel discussion

• Hold a forum focused on shark interactions

• Explore citizen science opportunities for reporting interactions

• Promote and market sustainable shark fisheries from "harvest to table"

• Explore adjusting FWC shark regulations

• Support Congressional action to eliminate shark feeding in federal waters

Continue to stay engaged with federal partners on all shark-related topics

Staff is seeking Commission direction on options moving forward regarding shark topics in Florida.

Specifically, staff recommends having a panel of shark experts to continue discussions on shark-related topics in Florida at the May 2021 Commission meeting; holding a forum focused on shark interactions with a variety of stakeholders and management agencies; exploring additional citizen science opportunities to allow fishermen to report their shark interactions; promoting and marketing sustainable commercial shark fisheries from “harvest to table”; exploring adjusting FWC shark regulations; and supporting Congressional action to eliminate shark feeding in federal waters.

Staff will also continue to stay engaged with federal partners on all shark-related topics.

The following slides are considered backup material and are not anticipated to be part of

the actual presentation

Prohibited Sharks in Florida

Small Coastal Species Atlantic angel shark

Smalltail shark

Caribbean sharpnose shark

Pelagic Species

Bigeye sixgill shark

Bigeye thresher shark

Longtin mako shark

Sevengill shark

Sixgill shark

Others

Basking shark

Whale shark

Spiny dogfish*

Large Coastal Species

Galapagos shark

White shark

Sand tiger shark

Narrowtooth shark

Bigeye sand tiger

Bignose shark

Caribbean reef shark

Dusky shark

Night shark

Sandbar shark*

Silky shark*

Lemon shark*

Great hammerhead*

Scalloped hammerhead*

Smooth hammerhead*

This slide includes a list of shark and shark-related species that are prohibited from harvest when fishing in Florida waters. Species in blue (also indicated by an asterisk) are those for which harvest is prohibited from Florida waters but not prohibited in adjacent federal waters. In federal waters, 19 species are prohibited from harvest. In state waters, 27 species are prohibited recreationally and 28 species are prohibited commercially. Commercial harvest of shortfin mako is prohibited in state waters