The Effects of Shark Finning on the World

Prepared for

Christopher McCulloch

Yolanda Verge, Emma Laliberte, Maria Savage and Brittany Dalton

Students

CMSK 2101

October 16, 2015

I

Letter of Transmittal

155 Ridge RoadSt. John’s, NL Canada A1C 5R3

October 16th, 2015

Christopher McCulloch155 Ridge RoadSt. John’s, NL Canada A1C 5R3

Dear Christopher:

Here is our report The Effects of Shark Finning on the World, which you requested on September 16, 2015.

Within this report you will find an effects analysis on shark finning in which demand and distribution, effects, future damages, and call to action are discussed. We would like to draw your attention to the fact that there are no positive effects of shark finning; therefore, this report is based solely on negative impacts. Following the report body is the conclusions and recommendation which will inform you of various ways in which shark population can be restored.

We are available to answer any questions you may have regarding this report.

Sincerely,

Yolanda VergeYolanda Verge

Brittany DaltonBrittany Dalton

Emma LaliberteEmma Laliberte

Maria SavageMaria Savage

Summary

Table of ContentsLetter of Transmittal.........................................................................................................................I

Summary........................................................................................................................................III

List of Figures................................................................................................................................VI

Introduction......................................................................................................................................1

1.1 Purpose...................................................................................................................................1

1.2 Background............................................................................................................................1

1.3 Scope......................................................................................................................................2

1.4 Methodology..........................................................................................................................2

2.0 Demand and Distribution...........................................................................................................3

2.1 Demand..................................................................................................................................3

2.1 Distribution............................................................................................................................4

3.0 Current Effects...........................................................................................................................5

3.1 Ecosystems and Economies...................................................................................................5

3.1 Human Health........................................................................................................................7

4.0 Future Damages.........................................................................................................................8

4.1 Marine Ecosystems and Economies......................................................................................8

4.2 Human Health......................................................................................................................10

5.0 Call to Action...........................................................................................................................11

5.1 CITIES.................................................................................................................................11

5.2 National Measures...............................................................................................................11

6.0 Conclusion...............................................................................................................................14

7.0 Recommendations....................................................................................................................15

References......................................................................................................................................16

List of Figures

Figure 1. Global shark catch in tones..............................................................................................4

Figure 2. Top down control within a simplified four-level food web in a Marine Ecosystem.......6

P a g e | 1

Introduction

1.1 Purpose

This report examines on a global scale the demand and distribution of shark fins; the

current effects shark finning has on ecosystems, economies and human health; what possible

effects will be encountered in ten years and the changes being made to protect these animals.

1.2 Background

For humans, oceans are an important aspect of life, covering over 70.8% percent of the

earth’s surface (Trujillo & Thurman, 2011). According to the Department of Fisheries and

Oceans, 8.2 kilograms of fish, per person in Canada was consumed in 2014 (Government of

Canada, 2014). They provide a place for both recreational and commercial use, a place for waste

disposal and carbon storage and act as a highway for transporting goods. The first permanent

ocean can be dated back 4 billion years ago, however; life on earth dates back to only around 3.5

billion. The first fish appeared in the oceans around 510 million years ago, while the first shark

swam in our oceans almost 450 million years ago. Some scientist disagree the fossils dating back

450 million years ago are adequate enough to be categorized as sharks, however; there is no

disagreement of the shark fossils found dating back to 420 million years ago which is placing the

origin of sharks between 420 and 450 million years ago. To put into perspective, dinosaurs

appeared around 230 million years ago and modern human appeared only 60 000 years ago (Nee,

2004). That infers that sharks have been around over 100 times longer than humans and 3 times

longer than dinosaurs, making them a pre-historic creature. In the past 439 million years, earth

has seen five mass extinctions, including one, 251 million years ago, where 95 percent of earth’s

species were wiped out. Sharks survival of the five mass extinctions on earth has equipped them

with the ability to adapt and thrive in unfavorable conditions, when almost no other species can.

Due to a lack of natural predators, they have survival for millions of years, until the creation of

humans (Wild Aid, 2015). For years, humans’ entitlement has led to the exploitation of the

oceans, senselessly slaughtering species for profit, cultural and recreational purposes. Sharks are

unable to keep up with the humans growing demands and are quite possibly facing the end of

450 million year reign on earth.

P a g e | 2

1.3 Scope

This report will examine the international trade of shark fins and the direct impacts on the

oceans ecosystems mainly. It will outline the driving force of the trade; the current impacts on

the oceans and world populations and forecasts how a future without sharks would be. Current

demand and distribution is discussed based on recent knowledge from the largest market for

shark fin, effects are discussed based on current research conducted in areas where the decline in

shark populations are becoming visible with the future effects being based upon these recent

studies, as well as the call to action outlining what is being done and what needs to be done to

keep the shark population at a stable number due to their importance. This report must be

submitted by 12pm on October 16, 2015. Because there is such a mass amount of research being

done at this time, only select areas of research have been chosen for this report.

1.4 Methodology

Secondary research is the basis for the information stated in this report. The information

is acquired from Non-Profit Organizations, web pages, journal articles and books; however, most

information for the effects is acquired from the Non-Profit Organizations, Wild Aid and Oceana.

A complete reference list is included at the end of this report which will provide complete details

of each source used to compile the information used to write this analysis.

P a g e | 3

2.0 Demand and Distribution

Although overfishing is an issue, there would not be a shark decline as large if shark finning was

not a factor. Certain areas play an important role in the demand and distribution of sharks fins.

This discussion will be based mainly on the largest exporter of shark fins, where and why the

luxury is considered popular, where it is imported and exported and how it is exported.

2.1 Demand

The world's largest single(remove word) market for shark finninng is in Hong Kong, and

in 2008 nearly 10 million kilograms of shark fin were imported to China in 2008 (Oceana 2008).

Serving shark fin soup has been a part of the Chinese culture since the Ming Dynasty (1368-

1644), and its rarity and high cost meant it was only accessible to the very wealthy (WWF,

2014). Only (remove word, start with In) in China’s recent economic boom, shark fin soup has

become widely sought after for its status of wealth and respect and is served at high class

functions. for guests at high class functions (Rodgers, 2006). According to the Fisheries and

Aquaculture Organization (FAO, 2015), the highest period of consumption is October to

February, because it is a customary season for weddings in Asia. One bowl can cost as much as

100(one hundred) dollars (Rodgers, 2015). The peak of demand is during Chinese New Year(this

doesn’t make sense, its just randomly put in there)(FAO, 2015). 100 million sharks are killed

each year annually with 73 million used for their fins (Duggan, 2014). Such high demand is

reflected in the health benefits associated with eating shark fin,(these sentences repeat the same

thing, you don’t need the first one.) FAO believes the reason for the high rate of consumption is

due to the popular belief that it increases appetite, nourishes blood and supplies vital energy, and

benefits kidneys, bones and lungs. On the other hand, Sea Stewards (n.d., para 1) proves that

consuming shark fin soup is a danger to health and one bowl would exceed the recommended

mercury level exposure for humans. In fact,(you haven’t talked about the process of the dried fin,

so maybe explain how they treat it and dry before)the process of shark finning requires treatment

and drying of the fins, which can concentrate the mercury levels, making them higher than

untreated shark meat. treating and drying shark fins can actually concentrate the mercury and

make the levels higher than untreated shark meat (Seastewards, n.d., para 1). Pappas (2012)

released data from an analysis of shark fins and they were found to carry high concentrations of

B-N-methylamino-L-alanine (BMAA). BMAA is a neurotoxin linked to Alzheimer’s and Lou

Gehrig’s disease.

P a g e | 4

Research was conducted to try and determine accurate counts for sharks killed and sold

by weight. He combined official data with the weights of fins from fin auctions in Hong Kong

(Clarke, 2006). Much of the trade happens on the black market so the calculated biomass is

believed to be three to four times higher than the calculated number (Clarke et al., 2006). Some

countries even have ways to avoid the law like body to fin ratio, which interferes with proper

records and management suggesting the catch is much larger than expected (Stewards, 2013).

Figure 1 below shows the Global Shark Catch in tones based on **SOURCE AND DATE.

WWF (2014) states the world's biggest importer of shark fins, Hong Kong, has dropped by

34.7% in 2013. This decline is due to the agreement to ban shark fin soup at government

functions (WWF, 2014), and the campaign of Yao Ming (Duggan, 2014). This slight drop in

quantity is visible in Table 1.

Figure 1. Global shark catch in tones. SOURCE

2.1 Distribution

145 countries participate in the shark fin industry (Duggan, 2014). FAO (n.d.) According

to FAO, the countries with the highest ..claims that the countries with the highest domestic sales

in primary production are India, Indonesia, Somalia, Japan and the United States. In 1997, Japan

was the leading exporter of dried, unsalted fins in 1997.;however, Fin consumption is rare in

Japan,. The fins of Mako, Hammerhead and Sandbar sharks are all commonly exported from

Hong Kong and Singapore. (This is a random sentence you didn’t even mention Singapore

above) According to the FAO (n.d.), national statistics in Japan indicated that 13.4 million

P a g e | 5

dollars’ worth of fins was exported in 1997 with 11.9 million dollars of that sent to Hong Kong.

There are 7 basic preparation techniques for shipment. Wet fins are fresh, chilled and

unprocessed. Raw fins are dried with skin intact. Semi prepared fins have the skin removed but

the fibers intact. Fully prepared fins are in strands of cartilaginous plates showing separately.

Frozen and prepared fins are fully prepared and frozen as stated in the name. In brine fins are

prepared and stored in salt water, while fish nets fins are boiled, separated, dried and packaged in

loose groupings (FAO, n.d.).

P a g e | 6

3.0 Current Effects

Sharks are referred to as keystone species. They are species that play an important role in

maintaining a proper balance in the area they occupy, and different species are found in many

areas across the globe. It is said that removing keystone species can have tremendous effects on

an ecosystem it occupies. With the growing demands of humanity most sharks are nearly gone,

and unfortunately with low reproductive rates they may not recover. Understanding how sharks

have effects on the species living around it, as well as economies and humans is needed to

further analyze the problem at hand.

3.1 Marine Ecosystems and Economies

“Where sharks are eliminated, the marine ecosystem loses its balance” (Wild Aid, 2015).

Since sharks have been present for a very long period of time throughout history they have

evolved to have a large interdependency with many different ecosystems. They keep populations

genetically healthy and strong by preying on the weak and sick, as well as controlling certain

species population size by feeding on very young to avoid overpopulation (Wild Aid, 2015).

Sharks also play a key role in the distribution and behaviors of certain species by intimidation,

which does not allow the species to overconsume in an area before moving on to the next

keeping plant life at a steady balance (Wild Aid, 2015). Sharks are also a sign to fisherman that

the bounty is plentiful and to ocean and environmental health by feeding on dead matter that

causes bacterial growth and the spread of disease (Baretto, 2013).

Shannon, Cury & Shin (2001), conducted experiments to see how a marine ecosystem

would function in the removal of the top predator, which can be seen in Figure 1 on the

following page. The top predator was removed from the ecosystem and an increase in forage fish

and phytoplankton was observed (Shannon, Cury & Shin, 2001). This study proved just how

interdependent marine species are to one another. Studies specifically related to sharks have been

recently conducted to observe the immediate dangers of declining shark populations. In the Mid

Atlantic, 11 species of shark have been pushed to extinction. Sharks in this area preyed on

roughly 14 species and 12 of those species have gown plentiful and caused severe damages to the

ecosystem. The increase in those species caused an overconsumption of bivalves, which then

caused damage to underwater plant life, water quality and destroyed the areas scallop fishery

(Wild Aid, 2015).

P a g e | 7

Figure 2. Top down control within a simplified four-level food web in a Marine Ecosystem. From The Functioning of Marine Ecosystems, by P.Cury, L. Shannon, and Y.J. Shin, 2001, section 3. Retrieved from

ftp://ftp.fao.org/fi/document/reykjavik/pdf/07Cury.PDF

In another study conducted in the Northern Line Islands in 2009, the removal of sharks caused

coral disease to grow and spread which was observed by one island having no sharks with a low

abundance of coral while the other had many sharks and a high abundance of coral (Wild Aid,

2015). The last study to be discussed was on tiger sharks in Hawaii versus the health of sea grass

beds. Although sharks do not consume sea turtles naturally they have a tendency to intimidate

the animal. In an area where sharks were absent and sea turtles were present the sea grass

habitats were destroyed because the shark was not present to intimidate the turtles out of one

area, which caused overconsumption and eventually death of an entire area that is needed for

shelter, reproductive areas and food for other organisms (Wild Aid, 2015).

The loss of sharks has not only caused negative effects on the ecosystems, but certain

economies as well. As previously mentioned sharks aid in maintaining healthy balances of other

marine organisms. When sharks disappear other organisms overpopulate and overconsume

certain forage fish and bivalves that humans consume as well. This causes a collapse in certain

fisheries which in turn damages the economy. Ecotourism is another rapidly growing sector that

P a g e | 8

involves ocean ecosystems which brings wealth to certain communities. Every year people are

becoming more interested in travelling to other countries to dive sites that are largely abundant

with life, sharks being the number one animal of interest (Wild Aid, 2015). For now this industry

is prosperous, but with the decline in shark populations it is not looking sustainable unless action

is taken.

3.1 Human Health

Shark is mostly consumed in areas that serve shark fin soup; however, shark steak is sold

in super markets in other areas as well. Shark meat contains 1400 micrograms of Methyl-

Mercury, but the legal limit set by the Environmental Protection Agency is only 0.1 microgram

per kilogram of body weight. This means that a single portion of shark steak consumed by a 155

pound person contains fifty times the legal limit (United Conservationists, n.d.). Some medical

risks associated with Mercury consumption include: damage to a developing brain of a fetus

resulting in mental disabilities, brain development irregularities in young children and increased

instances of autism, irregularities in blood pressure, increase in the risks of heart disease,

increase of neurological problems including memory loss and fatigue, low sperm count, erectile

dysfunction and even some cases of sterility (United Conservationists, n.d.). The health risks to

humans from consuming this apex predator is not worth the little nutritional value it contains. It

is not advisable that sharks be consumed due to these risks.

P a g e | 9

4.0 Future Damages

With respect to the previous discussion, the decline in shark population will be disastrous to the

marine ecosystem, certain economies as well as to human health. There are numerous negative

effects being observed today, and there will be more observed within the next ten years. This

discussion will be based on the impacts of shark finning within the next ten years to the marine

ecosystem, economies and to human health.

4.1 Marine Ecosystems and Economies

As mentioned previously, sharks are an important keystone species to the underwater

world which means the removal of their population will cause the whole food web to change in

various ways. This top predator maintains the ecosystem’s balance by controlling populations

below them. Due to sharks having an important role in the ocean, disastrous effects will occur if

their population continues to decline within the next ten years (Wild Aid, 2015). Four processes

which will be significantly impacted would be the abundance of species, water quality, seagrass,

and coral reefs.

The first negative effect which will happen when shark population is at its minimum is

the abundance of other species will either thrive or decrease. For example, great sharks (sharks

greater than two meters in length) control the distribution of prey through intimidation. When

species fear sharks they change their habitat use which shifts the abundance in lower tropic

levels. This controls community structure and influences diversity. Great sharks also change

what they feed on when certain populations are low. This allows the prey species to gain

abundance again. This ability of sharks to do this is an important feature in a diverse, healthy

ecosystem; however, within ten years this process will likely come to a halt. When great sharks

are unable to perform their ecological role, a population such as the family of rays will increase.

Rays feed on shellfish such as scallops. When scallops are no longer available to rays, they will

feed on other shellfish until their population is scarce. When the rays run out of food, their

population will decrease as well as many others. As it is clearly seen, when a top predator is

eliminated from the food chain, it creates a domino effect where the food web is juristically

altered (Oceana, 2008).

With regards to the previous ray example, water quality will also be effected in ten years.

If great shark populations become significantly low, ray populations will increase which effects

P a g e | 1 0

shellfish populations. Shellfish feed on phytoplankton which they filter from the water. Due to

shellfish being the filtration system for the ocean, their population decrease will cause more

stress to coastal areas. As a result algal blooms and dead zones could occur, which will damage

ocean ecosystems (Oceana, 2008).

Another example of a negative impact which will cause destruction to marine ecosystems

in ten years is the grazing of seagrass beds. The tiger shark’s prey will select their habitat based

on the presence of their predator. Although they prefer the middle of the seagrass beds due to its

richness in nutrients, they will feed along the edges in order to avoid predation. The influence of

tiger sharks maintains the abundance of seagrass which is a nursery ground for fish. If the tiger

shark’s population decreases it will cause over-grazing of seagrass. Over time, the seagrass will

be unsuitable for fish to nurse; therefore, the population of fish will decrease (Oceans, 2008).

The last example which will be discussed with regards to marine ecosystems is coral

reefs. A decrease of sharks can cause a domino effect on the diversity of coral reefs on a local or

regional scale. In order for corals to grow they must compete with macro algae to gain an area to

settle on the reef. It is possible for corals to do this due to the herbivorous fish feeding on the

algae. One of the fish which sharks feed on in coral reef areas is the grouper. Grouper fish feed

on herbivorous fish which as mentioned, feed on algae. Since sharks eat groupers it regulates the

chain so groupers do not eat too many herbivores. If shark populations declined, groupers would

be abundant whereas herbivores would not. This results in an overgrowth of algae where corals

cannot live or grow. Also, it decreases the amounts of niches for fish which decreases species

diversity. Some coral reefs in the world already demonstrate this damage; therefore, in ten years

there may not be any coral reefs left (Oceana, 2008).

Sharks not only make the ocean diverse and healthy, they also contribute to the economy.

Many people believe a decrease in shark population will result in an abundance of fish where

more money is available to the economy; however, this theory is not accurate. As discussed

previously, sharks are an important part of the marine ecosystem. If shark finning continues and

the population becomes extinct in ten years, the fishery will likely cease due to lack of diversity.

High population of sharks contributes large amounts of money into the economy by keeping the

fishery abundant, and tourists around. People spend a lot of money to travel to areas with sharks

P a g e | 1 1

to witness the diversity of the underwater world. This places money into our economy which will

no longer happening if shark finning continues (Oceana, 2008).

4.2 Human Health

Shark fin soup is one of the world’s most valued products; however, it is very toxic as

mentioned previously. Animals are unable to secrete heavy metals such as mercury from their

bodies. Overtime mercury gradually builds up which is harmful for human consumption. It is

not unsafe to consume shark fin soup, but if it is eaten on a regular basis the individual will

bioaccumulate mercury and become sick. The effects of mercury on humans are known to be

neurological, renal, cardiovascular, and immunological. In extreme cases death or coma may

even occur. Since animals are constantly accumulating mercury in their bodies they become

more unsafe to consume. If the shark species are still around in ten years, it is possible they may

be too dangerous to eat which eliminates this product from the menu (Environment Canada,

2013).

P a g e | 1 2

5.0 Call to Action

5.1 CITIES

The protection of the oceans species is a topic of discussion that has been around since

the 1960s. Marine Protected Areas (MPA) and government regulations help to conserve the

ocean populations. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna

and Flora (CITIES) was drafted in 1963. The international agreement allowed countries to

voluntarily participate in a legal binding agreement, providing a framework at a national level to

provide protection for endangered species. Today, CITIES has over 181 members, from around

the world and is the only organization able to monitor the trade of shark fins (CITIES, 2013). In

2004, CITIES placed the Great White Shark under Appendix II, resulting in strict trade

conditions. It stated that any member of CITIES requires a permit to export specimens under the

appendix. The permit also states the specimen has to be harvested sustainably and legally. The

implementation of the proposal became controversial amongst some CITIES members, due to

the high market demand for the white shark products (Martin, J. 2007). Due to declining

population, in 2014 five other sharks were listed Appendix II, including: Basking, Whale,

Porbeagle, Oceanic Whitetip, Hammerheads. Prior to the addition of the five species, workshops

were held worldwide to provide countries with the tools needed to implement a sustainable trade

of sharks. Shark fin identification was one of the main topics taught to provide boarder control

personal with the tools to identify CITIES listed shark fins. Hong Kong is a country situated in

the heart of the shark finning market. Worldwide, approximately 50% of the annual fin imports,

travel through Hong Kong. Cooperation between CITIES and Hong Kong, are underway to

ensure the implementation and protection of the updated listings in Appendix II (PEW, 2015).

With worldwide cooperation, the CITIES movement is the first of its kind and is a huge step in

protecting the population of sharks.

5.2 National Measures

According to The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), a quarter of

the world’s sharks are facing extinction and trades, such as; shark finning, are driving causes.

CITIES has been a large driving force behind nations participating in proactive measures to

ensure the protection of sharks. In recent years Bahamas, Cook Islands, Egypt, Fiji, and French

Polynesia have banned shark fishing, the sales of shark fins and other shark products. Since

P a g e | 1 3

November 2012, American Samoa has banned shark finning and the possession of sharks within

three nautical miles of its shoreline to ensure the protection of the local shark species. Many

other countries have placed regulations on Shark finning, such as, Costa Rica. Regulation

AJDIP/47-2001 stated fins must be attached to a shark’s carcass when landed. The law was

removed in 2003, but reinstated in 2006 (Wild Aid, 2015). The regulation left no restriction on

the trade of the shark fins and as a result, in 2011, approximately 400 000 shark fins were

obtained for the industry and over 30 tons of fin was exported. Due to global pressures, in

October 2012, President Laura Chinchilla was forced to sign an executive order closing the

loopholes in AJDIP/47. Some Non Government Organizations (NGO), like Sea Sheppard, are

calling out Costa Rica’s for still being in involved in the shark fin trade. They claim that Costa

Rica still allows neighboring country Nicaragua, to ship shark fins from its ports, proving that

Costa Rica is still heavily involved in the lucrative market (Paul Watson, 2012). Corruption and

greed make it very difficult and as many countries struggle to ban the billion-dollar trade, but it

is possible. On September 25th 2009, the countries of Palau declare a banned on all commercial

shark-fishing activities and announce the world’s first national shark sanctuary. The change from

shark fishing to shark saving was a risk-taking action but in the end, it paid off and shark tourism

has replaced the lucrative profit of the shark fin sales. The implementation of the shark

sanctuary has brought back large and small ocean species, all of them flourishing. The sanctuary

covers over 250 islands and six years later, large and small species thriving. Tova Bornovski, of

the Micronesian Shark Foundation, estimates one shark is worth approximately 180 thousand

dollars per year and over 2 million dollars in its lifetime. This means, a live shark brings in a

thousand times more money than a dead shark, all the while, allowing the oceans to thrive. Shark

tourism creates a sustainable and reliable economy for the country (Smithsonian Channel, 2014).

Progressive actions have proved to be successful while benefiting both the ecosystems and the

economy. These actions are steps towards ensuring the survival of a 450 million year old species.

Along with large groups taking action against shark population decline, small businesses are as

well. Some postal companies such as DHL and American Airlines have pledged not to ship shark

fin (Seastwwards, n.d.). This is a small step towards reducing the decline in shark populations

worldwide. As a single person things can be done to inform people of the current global situation

and how important certain species are. Do not purchase or support the product and always keep

in mind each species that exists has a certain role to play on a larger scale.

P a g e | 1 4

6.0 Conclusion

P a g e | 1 5

7.0 Recommendations

P a g e | 1 6

References

Baretto, M. (2013). The Problem of Shark Finning. Retrieved from

http://diveadvisor.com/sub2o/ocean-threats-series---the-problem-of-shark-finning---part-i

Clarke SC et al. (2006). Global estimates of shark catches using trade records from commercial

markets. Ecology Letters 9:1115-1126.

Cury, P.,Shannon, L., & Shin, Y.-G. (2001). The Functioning of Marine Ecosystems. Retrieved

from ftp://ftp.fao.org/fi/document/reykjavik/pdf/07Cury.PDF

Duggan, J. (August 7, 2014). Sales of shark fin in China drop by up to 70%. Retrieved from

www.theguardian.com/environment.

Environment Canada. (2013). Health concerns. Retrieved from

https://www.ec.gc.ca/mercure/default.asp?lang=En&n=0EB35C98-1

Fisheries and Aquaculture Organization (2015). Shark utilization, marketing and trade.

Retrieved from www.foa.org/docrep/005/x3690e/x3690e0p.htm

Oceana. (2008). Predators as prey. Washington, DC: Griffen, E., Miller, K.L., Freitas, B. &

Hirshfield, M.

Pappas, S. (February, 2012). Shark fin soup comes with a side of toxins. Retrieved from

http://www.livescience.com/18636-shark-fin-soup-neurotoxin.html

Rodgers, M. (2015). The Shark Fin Soup Industry. Retreived from

http://www.sharksider.com/shark-fin-soup/

Seastwwards (n.d.). Isn’t shark fin soup healthy? Retrieved from http://seastewards.org/shark-

finning/isnt-shark-fin-soup-healthy/

Trujilo, A. Thurman, H. (2011). Essentials of Oceanography. 10th edition.

United Conservationists. (n.d.). Why Ban Shark Finning? Retrieved from

http://fin-free.com/factsheets/top-reasons-to-ban-the-fin/

P a g e | 1 7

Wild Aid. (2015). Sharks Roles in the Oceans. Retrieved from

http://www.sharksavers.org/en/education/the-value-of-sharks/sharks-role-in-the-ocean/

WWF (April 10, 2014). Shark fin imports to world's biggest market drop by a third. Retrieved

from wwf.panda.org

https://www.cites.org/eng/disc/what.php

JULIE MARTIN

http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/gwilr39&div=12&id=&page=

PEW http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2015/09/protecting-sharks-

enforcing-cites-a-global-effort

http://www.seashepherd.org/commentary-and-editorials/2012/10/15/costa-rica-bans-shark-

finning-or-have-they-568

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/videos/category/smithsonian-channel/a-live-shark-is-worth-

1000-times-more-than/?no-ist

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/stats/commercial/consumption-eng.htm