Multiple Shark Products Are Used Domestically and Traded Internationally

Sharks, unlike other fishery targets, provide a variety of items. Meat and fins are the two most important items. Shark flesh is a low-cost source of animal protein for both human (fresh, salted, or dried) and food animals (as fish meal). The majority of shark flesh is commonly eaten or domestically, while significant amounts are traded worldwide. Shark fins are utilized as a main component in a festive, generally costly soup in Asia (as well as Asian cultures across the globe), and are derived from just a few number of species (majority larger true sharks, as well as certain rays). The comparatively shark fins with high value has fueled the growth of some shark fisheries, in addition to the preservation of incidentally captured sharks in numerous others. 

Shark fin demand has expanded in tandem with consumer wealth, but has recently been curtailed by increased consumer education campaigns and regulatory compliances. Skin, liver oil, gill plates (from devil and manta rays), vertebrae, and jaws/teeth are other less common shark items. Generally speaking, many shark species are prepared for various parts that are intended for various markets, and are frequently sourced and re-exported all over complex, changing, and largely unsupervised global trade connectivity to clients who may have little knowledge of what they are consuming. Aside from the usage of dead shark goods, live sharks are trafficked for exhibition in public and private aquariums, although nothing is known about the numbers involved or its worth. Multiple demand factors influence fishing techniques due to the diversity of shark-derived items and changes in connected markets throughout time.

Sharks Contribute to Food Security in Poor and Developing Nations

While shark flesh can be a high-value commodity in some circumstances (for example, gummy shark in southern Australia, porbeagle in Italy, and skates in South Korea), it is more commonly a low-cost animal protein reserve. The poor value arises from the product's fairly low quality (because to high quantities of urea) and the reality that it is frequently desiccated for quasi storage and transportation. While local catch and consuming are prevalent, certain nations, such as Uruguay, Brazil, Peru, Indonesia, and India, rely substantially on imports and exports. As per FAO figures, 26 fishing states capture more than 90% of the world's recorded shark harvest, one-quarter of which (7/26) belong to the least advanced countries (with low or moderate Human Development Index scores)

Furthermore, 40% of the worldwide shark harvest comes from 6 different shark fishing countries with the poorest Human Development Indices, the majority of which bordering the Indian and Eastern Atlantic Oceans. Around one (7/23) of the poorest countries fishing nations supply fins to Hong Kong. Top shark 'creators' Indonesia, India, Namibia, and Mauritania have overlap in key shark fishing and trade nations among the lowest developed states. In general, replacing fishing losses is expensive in nations where seafood supplies a substantial amount of protein. It is understandable that governments in countries suffering extreme poverty and food security problems find it difficult to emphasize shark conservation, especially when scientific guidance on sustainable harvest levels is scarce. 

Consequently, conservationists and developed-country governments are naturally hesitant to urge struggling states for such policies. Financial and technical help from wealthy nations and aid groups is often recognized as a more efficient and cost-efficient path to sustainability; nonetheless, linked programs must be improved and prioritized.

Over-Simplification Can Hinder Effective Shark Fisheries Management

Sharks' overall proclivity to grow more gradually, mature later, and generate fewer young than other fished species is critical to appropriately elevating their conservation emphasis and preventing population decline. Nevertheless, life cycle traits vary greatly among shark species, with several capable of tolerating a high degree of fishing if removal (in all forms) is confined to science-based limits. People tend to be increasingly convinced that sharks cannot tolerate any fishing after more than twenty years of escalating attempts to promote sharks' intrinsic fragility. Likewise, it appears that there is a tendency toward universal restrictions on fishing and commerce, with a particular emphasis on shark fins. While comprehensive bans are suitable and even way overdue for species that are amazingly challenged (such as sawfishes) and amazingly vulnerable (such as devil rays), in other cases, unambiguous messages and "one size fits all" solutions may stymie policies needed to reduce fishing and maintain the sustainability.

There is less support for the work required to develop complete catchment management rules that allow for healthy take while resolving unintended bycatch and the requirement for evaluated immediately since there is a prevalent belief that sustainability shark fishing is unattainable. Governments determined that controlling shark fishing is a losing venture and/or politically unpalatable may choose for total protection, but they may also avoid setting any limitations at all. Those who want blanket bans may be unwilling to acknowledge and confront considerable unintentional shark fatalities and/or implementation shortcomings. Bans on the selling of shark fins, in particular, can impair sustainable fishing activities while having little impact on death rates. When the justifications for total prohibitions are challenging to apply, sharks that are relatively plentiful, financially useful, and/or flamboyantly challenged sometimes slide between the gaps and receive less attention. Finally, there is a growing number of successful shark fisheries management practices, mainly in the United States and Australia. However, if these insights are to serve as useful models for other nations, they must be embraced and disseminated. Generally, management techniques do not need to be flawless in order to help shark populations; instead, a combination of tactics tailored to the features of the shark and linked fisheries has the best chance of properly balancing present realities.

Global market for shark fins, in notably, and the accompanying practice of 'finning' (slicing off a shark's fins and abandoning the body at sea), are usually represented as the most serious dangers to sharks. Scientific data does not support this perception. More than 40 nations have banned shark finning and/or shark fins. Restrictions on at-sea shark fin extraction are critical to effectively eliminating waste and meeting government promises to reduce finning, and they can also help to enhance species-specific shark capture statistic. Generally, management techniques do not need to be flawless in order to help shark populations; instead, a combination of tactics tailored to the features of the shark and linked fisheries has the best chance of properly balancing present realities.

Global market for shark fins, in notably, and the accompanying practice of 'finning' (slicing off a shark's fins and abandoning the body at sea), are usually represented as the most serious dangers to sharks. Scientific data does not support this assumption. Over 40 nations have banned shark finning and/or shark fins. Restrictions on at-sea shark fin extraction are critical to effectively eliminating waste and meeting government promises to reduce finning, and they can also help to enhance species-specific shark capture statistics.

In light of these problems and scarce resources, we will now detail our strategy to choosing different types, fisheries, and so geographic regions.