Thousands of sharks are cruelly killed worldwide every day due to the lucrative shark finning trade. This practice is negatively impacting marine life, as sharks are the greatest ocean predators and maintain the delicate balance of the marine ecosystem. Shark finning consists of removing the fins and discarding the rest. The sharks are alive during the process, and when tossed back into the water without fins they cannot swim, thus sinking to the depths where they asphyxiate and / or are devoured by other fish. The fins are primarily consumed in China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Asian communities elsewhere in the world for making shark-fin soup. Efforts to stop the practice of shark finning vary, ranging from demanding fisheries to bring sharks to land before removing the fins, to prohibiting the trade of shark products, to the total ban of shark fishing. Legislation varies significantly between countries and states, ranging from zero to absolute protection, whereby absolute means prohibiting the possession, sale, importation and exportation of shark fins. The economic implications of the shark-fin trade are considerable, which renders the application of laws and regulations very difficult. However, the increasing business of diving with sharks offers an alternative that shows us that the value of a living shark is far greater than when it is sold for parts. Analyzing legislation from the United States, as well as international legislation, aims to show its weakness when it comes to efforts to protect sharks, and in particular the application of the concept of shark welfare when legislating in their favor. The case study will focus on the Kristin Jacobs Ocean Conservation Act, investigating and analyzing the legal efforts made in the state of Florida (USA) to stop shark finning, and analyzing the legal implications for shark welfare.
Conservation targets in marine protected area management suffer from shifting baseline syndrome: A case study on the Dogger Bank
