Lack of predators boosting Scottish shellfish?

In 1975 roughly 262,413 tonnes of demersal fish and 20,000 tonnes of shellfish were landed at Scottish ports.

In 2003 99,654 tonnes of demersal fish and 65,000 tonnes of shellfish were landed at Scottish ports. (Source: Realm of Scotland).

Demersal fish are the primary predators of shellfish and include cod, haddock, ling, monkfish, halibut, hake, and plaice, in other words all the fish that live and feed on or near the bottom of the sea.

As demersal fish stocks have dwindled due to overfishing it appears from the statistics that the shellfish on which the demersal fish feed are thriving.

With fewer and fewer predators except man, I expect Scottish shellfish and the industry that depends on them, to continue to thrive.

It is now time for 'seal-safe' farmed salmon

In a recent poll 64% of the UK public would be against farmed salmon if it involved the killing of seals.

Despite this UK salmon farmers shoot hundreds of grey and common seals every year that are said to be a threat to salmon or the sea-cage net.

It is believed that many more seals are killed around the UK by people involved with commercial fishing and salmon farming that pose no danger whatsoever to the profitability of their businesses.

The UK has 40% of the world's population of grey seals (164,000) and 20,000 of the far less common 'common' seals, a population that has seen some drastic declines in recent years. If these numbers appear on paper to be healthy, it is worth remembering that the African lion population has fallen from 150,000-200,000 in the 1980's to a mere 18,000-25,000 today, mostly as a result of conflict with farmers.

Seals are intelligent mammals that spend most of their time in the sea and feed on fish, a bit like dolphins and porpoises, but in the mind of the UK seafood business that's where the similarity ends.

In 1990 the 'dolphin safe' label was introduced by the US Dept. of Commerce and has spread so successfully around the world that it is now almost universally accepted that you make canned tuna as cetacean friendly as possible.

If this can be achieved for a wild-caught pelagic species like tuna then why on earth are we still having to slaughter seals in order to protect salmon that are being farmed in highly controlled sites?

We are killing seals for the same reason that we slaughtered the wolf in the 17th century to protect cattle and sheep, and endangering whole populations of wild animals to put cheaper food on our plates is not a practice that should be tolerated.

We've learnt our lesson with 'dolphin-safe' tuna, now let's have 'seal-safe' farmed salmon.

Ecological disaster as 300,000 farmed salmon lost?

Over 300,000 farmed salmon have been 'lost' by Meridian Salmon when 12 salmon cages broke loose in Shetland on Christmas Day.

A spokesman for Meridian said “It’s important to make a distinction between fish loss and fish escape. Over 300,000 adult Atlantic salmon were involved in the incident, but it remains unclear whether an escape of live farmed fish did occur or whether the fish died during the incident.”

Which means that there is a strong possibility that 300,000 farmed salmon are swimming about in the North Atlantic creating havoc in the marine ecosystem.

Why we need to be worried

When farmed salmon escape they can interact with wild salmon causing significant changes in the wild salmon stocks during ten salmon generations (about 40 years). In rivers with a high number of escaped farmed salmon it appears that the population is gradually dominated by the offspring of farmed and hybrids of salmon. Even after many decades without new escapes, it is possible that these populations will be dominated by descendants of escaped farmed fish.

Other consequences:

• Farmed fish have lower genetic variation than wild fish.

• Farmed fish hybridise with wild fish.

• The fitness of wild populations is reduced by immigration of farmed fish.

• Escaped farmed fish destroy, and compete with wild fish for spawning beds.

• The progeny of escaped farmed fish out-compete wild fish in the competition for resources in the river, both as fry and as parr.

• Farmed salmon increase the hybridisation between salmon and trout

• The size and fitness of the populations of salmon stocks will be reduced if the percentage of farmed salmon continues to be high.

The extinction of sharks

We got over the demise of the dodo, the passenger pigeon and even the Chinese river dolphin, but will we ever get over the upcoming possible extinction of sharks?

Conservative estimates reckon that between 30 to 70 million sharks are killed annually in commercial and recreational fisheries, and some conservation organisations put that figure closer to 100 million.

Sharks are killed for a whole manner of reasons, their meat is used for food, fins for soup, cartilage in health supplements, livers for oil, skin for leather and teeth for curios, some are even killed for the sheer pleasure of it.

And demand is increasing. As whitefish stocks have collapsed previously unprofitable shark fisheries have become commercially viable and shark meat more acceptable.

Even in the most optimistic of scenarios this slaughter cannot be sustained. Sharks do not produce huge numbers of eggs like other fish, their young are either born live or in egg cases and the average brood is only about 12 pups.

Sharks first appeared on earth some 400 million years ago, before land vertebrates and before many plants had colonised continents. Modern sharks, such as the mako and the porbeagle, are regarded as living unchanged for 100 million years. The oldest great white shark teeth date from about 65 million years ago, around the time of the extinction of the dinosaurs.

The fact that present-day sharks have not changed substantially for the last 100 million years suggests that they may have attained a level of evolutionary perfection that is unmatched by any other animal. And yet during the last 20 years alone humans have done more harm to sharks than had been done in the previous 100 million years, with some species of shark declining by 90%. It would be sadly ironic that having survived the extinction of the dinosaurs sharks may well disappear from this planet for the sake of shark-fin soup.

Humans have been responsible for the extinction of a single species of animal in the past but never have a whole class been endangered as we see with sharks. In barely the time it has taken to set up and establish a cohesive shark conservation strategy we are in danger of losing one of the most iconic and evocative animals this planet has ever known.

Shark fishing is mostly unregulated and conservation measures have been too slow in coming, but we can act now individually. If you see a Chinese restaurant selling shark fin soup, a health food shop selling shark supplements, a shop selling shark meat, or a media piece showing a 'sports' fisherman with his dead shark trophy, take five minutes of your time to tell them that this is totally unacceptable.

An ocean would not be an ocean without sharks, and as an apex predator they are crucial to the marine ecosystem. Yet the current situation for sharks couldn't really be much worse I'm afraid. We are on the brink of watching the extinction of a whole class of animal that the world cannot afford to lose this time.

Shark protection is finally gaining some momentum

There have been some small but significant developments recently in the fight to save sharks from possible extinction. Let's hope that it's a sign of more to come and that it is not too little too late.

Conservative estimates reckon that between 30 and 70 million sharks are killed annually in commercial and recreational fisheries, and some conservation organisations put that figure closer to 100 million.

Sharks are killed for a whole manner of reasons, their meat is used for food, fins for soup, cartilage in health supplements, livers for oil, skin for leather and teeth for curios, some are even killed just for the sheer pleasure of it.

Some species of pelagic shark such as the oceanic whitetip, blue, porbeagle and mako, have been pushed to the brink of extinction. As they travel the world's oceans they are susceptible to capture, particularly by longline fishing.

However, there might be some light at the end of the tunnel. The Pacific island nation of Palau recently declared that they would be creating a marine reserve for sharks. The sanctuary covers the full 230,000 sq miles of Palau's Economic Exclusion Zone, which stretches 200 miles out from its coasts. Within this region, all commercial shark fishing is banned. Previously, protection measures existed but certain levels of shark-fishing were allowed.

The Maldives in the Indian Ocean have also vowed to stop commercial fishing for sharks in its waters by 2010.

In the USA, a group calling themselves Shark Free Marinas was set up in 2008 to encourage marinas to operate a strictly catch & release policy for the shark fishing boats that operate from them.

Shark protection is also getting more support from celebrities such as January Jones from the HBO smash hit Mad Men, and a video featuring Olympic double gold medalist Amanda Beard has been released.

Even in Asia there is growing unrest over the practice of shark finning, most notably the Hong Kong based shark conservation website Shark Rescue.

In the Philippines the latest issue of Healthy Options Lifestyle Newsdigest is encouraging consumers to support eco-friendly habits rather than unwittingly supporting environmentally damaging practices like shark finning.

Unfortunately the shark conservation message isn't yet getting across to a wide enough audience, only last week in Florida, USA, a mature 750lb mako shark was gaffed from a boat, just for the fun of it apparently.

And whilst this kind of mindless slaughter of sharks is allowed to continue (and attract uncritical media coverage - the LA Times was an exception) sharks, and the people who want to protect them, still have a huge battle ahead.