PUTRAJAYA: Shark’s fin soup is off the menu at all functions and events organised by the Natural Resources and Environment Ministry and agencies under it.
Natural Resources and Environment Minister Datuk Seri Azmi Khalid made this pledge as a commitment to the drive by the Malaysian Nature Society’s Selangor Branch Marine Group to encourage individuals and organisations to stop serving the delicacy at corporate functions.
“Ultimately, by refraining from the consumption of shark’s fin soup, it is hoped that the ministry can contribute to conservation efforts of the shark species,” according to a statement from the ministry yesterday.
The marine group had embarked on a series of activities and programmes to promote awareness on the plight of sharks and their importance to the marine ecosystem.
Source: The Star, Nation, 15/9/07
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Shark’s fin soup: Leave sharks alone for our good and theirs
By Gerard Wong
Cheah Hooi Giam of Penang ("Campaign lacks strong bite" — NST, Aug 20) concedes that sharks breed slowly and are over-harvested and endangered. But it is intriguing to see that he does not agree with the campaign against consuming shark’s fin soup.
Shark campaigners have never denied the fact that Western countries are guilty of depleting shark populations in their own waters.
In fact, shark conservationists in the West lobby their own people to stop shark game fishing, implement laws to prevent shark over-harvesting and enforce quotas and fishing-equipment regulations. At the same time, we cannot deny the Asian preference for shark’s fin soup.
Even if it were true that the majority of fins are not taken by the "shock and awe" tactic described by Cheah, the end product is the same: Whether eaten for the fins or the meat, sharks are being harvested for consumption and this will be detrimental to the marine ecosystem and in the long run, to ourselves.
As to the value of shark oil and shark cartilage as anti-cancer supplements and other health tonics, a search of the Internet will reveal that many of the sites trumpeting their nutritional and health benefits are connected to those who are making money out of their sale.
More alarmingly, national health authorities worldwide have warned against the consumption of large, top predators of the ocean such as sharks, swordfish and marlin because of their accumulated high mercury and other chemical contents.
These poisons can be detrimental when consumed by pregnant mothers as they can affect the nervous system of their foetuses. In men, an overdose of these chemicals has been proven to result in sterility.
Thus, other than to fatten the pockets of those who sell shark fins and shark-derived products, its consumption could be more hazardous to humans than is publicly acknowledged.
Just as the Western world should refrain from consuming and over-harvesting sharks, we in Asia should refrain from eating their fins, cartilage and oil.
Source: 4/9/07 NST Online - Letters
Cheah Hooi Giam of Penang ("Campaign lacks strong bite" — NST, Aug 20) concedes that sharks breed slowly and are over-harvested and endangered. But it is intriguing to see that he does not agree with the campaign against consuming shark’s fin soup.
Shark campaigners have never denied the fact that Western countries are guilty of depleting shark populations in their own waters.
In fact, shark conservationists in the West lobby their own people to stop shark game fishing, implement laws to prevent shark over-harvesting and enforce quotas and fishing-equipment regulations. At the same time, we cannot deny the Asian preference for shark’s fin soup.
Even if it were true that the majority of fins are not taken by the "shock and awe" tactic described by Cheah, the end product is the same: Whether eaten for the fins or the meat, sharks are being harvested for consumption and this will be detrimental to the marine ecosystem and in the long run, to ourselves.
As to the value of shark oil and shark cartilage as anti-cancer supplements and other health tonics, a search of the Internet will reveal that many of the sites trumpeting their nutritional and health benefits are connected to those who are making money out of their sale.
More alarmingly, national health authorities worldwide have warned against the consumption of large, top predators of the ocean such as sharks, swordfish and marlin because of their accumulated high mercury and other chemical contents.
These poisons can be detrimental when consumed by pregnant mothers as they can affect the nervous system of their foetuses. In men, an overdose of these chemicals has been proven to result in sterility.
Thus, other than to fatten the pockets of those who sell shark fins and shark-derived products, its consumption could be more hazardous to humans than is publicly acknowledged.
Just as the Western world should refrain from consuming and over-harvesting sharks, we in Asia should refrain from eating their fins, cartilage and oil.
Source: 4/9/07 NST Online - Letters
Sharks & Appetites: Compelling reasons for a ban
By Ahmad Ali
Co-Regional vice-chair, IUCN Shark Specialist Group Southeast Asia Region
I refer to the comments by Cheah Hooi Giam of Penang ("Campaign lacks strong bite" — NST, Aug 20) on the issue of shark’s fin soup and shark finning.
The IUCN Shark Specialist Group considers that shark finning (the removal and retention of shark fins and the discard at sea of the rest of the carcass) threatens many shark stocks, the stability of marine ecosystems, sustainable traditional fisheries, food security and socio-economically important recreational fisheries.
It is, therefore, contrary to the principles of the United Nations-FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (Article 7.2.2 (g) and to the guiding principles, objective and aims of the UN-FAO International Plan for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (IPOA-Sharks).
Trade and landings data indicate that finning activity is widespread, largely unmanaged and unmonitored. Because of the biological characteristics of sharks, it also leads to unsustainable levels of mortality.
Finning and discarding of shark carcasses is wasteful of protein and other potential products derived from sharks (it utilises only two to five per cent of the shark). This wastage prevents socio-economic benefits from accruing when other shark products are processed on shore and is a threat to food security (the latter particularly when undertaken by distant fleets in the waters of developing countries).
Finning causes the death of millions of sharks. This potentially threatens the survival of rare and vulnerable species and, by removing large numbers of top predators from the oceanic ecosystem, may have dramatic and undesirable ecological impacts that could potentially threaten yields of other commercial species.
Finning impedes the collection of the species-specific scientific data that are essential for monitoring catches and landings and implementing sustainable shark fisheries management (as required under international agreements and statutes).
We consider, therefore, that a ban on shark finning is justified throughout the world's oceans and high seas.
We also urge states that take sharks in target or bycatch fisheries to implement fully the UN-FAO IPOA-Sharks by developing national and regional plans of action that incorporate the guiding principles of a precautionary approach and recognise the nutritional and socio-economic importance of shark catches in some regions, and minimise waste and discards from shark catches and promote their use through, inter alia, implementing finning bans.
Such bans should require sharks to be landed with fins attached. Or, if this is not possible, all parts should be landed together at a ratio that should not exceed five per cent of fin to dressed carcass weight.
Source: 24/8/2007 NST Online - Letters
Co-Regional vice-chair, IUCN Shark Specialist Group Southeast Asia Region
I refer to the comments by Cheah Hooi Giam of Penang ("Campaign lacks strong bite" — NST, Aug 20) on the issue of shark’s fin soup and shark finning.
The IUCN Shark Specialist Group considers that shark finning (the removal and retention of shark fins and the discard at sea of the rest of the carcass) threatens many shark stocks, the stability of marine ecosystems, sustainable traditional fisheries, food security and socio-economically important recreational fisheries.
It is, therefore, contrary to the principles of the United Nations-FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (Article 7.2.2 (g) and to the guiding principles, objective and aims of the UN-FAO International Plan for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (IPOA-Sharks).
Trade and landings data indicate that finning activity is widespread, largely unmanaged and unmonitored. Because of the biological characteristics of sharks, it also leads to unsustainable levels of mortality.
Finning and discarding of shark carcasses is wasteful of protein and other potential products derived from sharks (it utilises only two to five per cent of the shark). This wastage prevents socio-economic benefits from accruing when other shark products are processed on shore and is a threat to food security (the latter particularly when undertaken by distant fleets in the waters of developing countries).
Finning causes the death of millions of sharks. This potentially threatens the survival of rare and vulnerable species and, by removing large numbers of top predators from the oceanic ecosystem, may have dramatic and undesirable ecological impacts that could potentially threaten yields of other commercial species.
Finning impedes the collection of the species-specific scientific data that are essential for monitoring catches and landings and implementing sustainable shark fisheries management (as required under international agreements and statutes).
We consider, therefore, that a ban on shark finning is justified throughout the world's oceans and high seas.
We also urge states that take sharks in target or bycatch fisheries to implement fully the UN-FAO IPOA-Sharks by developing national and regional plans of action that incorporate the guiding principles of a precautionary approach and recognise the nutritional and socio-economic importance of shark catches in some regions, and minimise waste and discards from shark catches and promote their use through, inter alia, implementing finning bans.
Such bans should require sharks to be landed with fins attached. Or, if this is not possible, all parts should be landed together at a ratio that should not exceed five per cent of fin to dressed carcass weight.
Source: 24/8/2007 NST Online - Letters
Shark's fin soup: Campaign lacks strong bite
By Cheah Hooi Giam
Recent campaigns asking the public not to consume shark’s fin soup is based on cultural and personal prejudices. The anti-shark’s fin soup campaign is launched based on two premises:
• That shark’s fin soup is the main cause of the declining numbers of sharks; and,
• That harvesting shark’s fin by "live finning" is cruel.
The campaign ignores the fact that 20 countries take up 80 per cent of the world’s annual harvest of sharks (Britain, Spain, the United States and many European countries being among the top).
Most sharks are harvested for their meat but often as a by-catch in pelagic fisheries. Shark meat and oil are valuable commodities commonly consumed in many countries.
In fact, the Porbeagle shark and the Spiny dogfish, said to be endangered, have been fished by generations of fishermen in temperate waters (the UK and the US) and it is this over-harvesting that is causing their decline.
The meat from these sharks is prized in fish and chips shops. It is more appropriate for anti-shark’s fins campaigners to take their campaigns to the consumers of fish and chips.
Further, contrary to popular belief, shark cartilage is not harvested solely for shark’s fin soup. In fact, shark cartilage is used extensively, especially in North America, as an anti-cancer supplement.
A glance in the Internet shows thousands of sites selling shark cartilage supplement. The anti-fins campaign also regularly shows "shocking" film footage of "live finning" of sharks. "Live fin-ning" refers to the alleged removal of only the fins and throwing the carcass back into the sea.
In reality, live finning is not the norm. But, media image of this has been shown around the world to "shock and awe" people. However, even if live finning is practised, it is laughable if not hypocritical to suggest that this is a cruel way to harvest sharks. What animal species that humans consume does not involve bleeding that animal to death?
The fact that sharks breed slowly is not in dispute. The fact that they may be endangered due to over-harvesting is also not in dispute. But, to target shark’s fin soup as their cause of decline is to ignore the facts.
Source: 20/8/07 NST Online – Letters
Recent campaigns asking the public not to consume shark’s fin soup is based on cultural and personal prejudices. The anti-shark’s fin soup campaign is launched based on two premises:
• That shark’s fin soup is the main cause of the declining numbers of sharks; and,
• That harvesting shark’s fin by "live finning" is cruel.
The campaign ignores the fact that 20 countries take up 80 per cent of the world’s annual harvest of sharks (Britain, Spain, the United States and many European countries being among the top).
Most sharks are harvested for their meat but often as a by-catch in pelagic fisheries. Shark meat and oil are valuable commodities commonly consumed in many countries.
In fact, the Porbeagle shark and the Spiny dogfish, said to be endangered, have been fished by generations of fishermen in temperate waters (the UK and the US) and it is this over-harvesting that is causing their decline.
The meat from these sharks is prized in fish and chips shops. It is more appropriate for anti-shark’s fins campaigners to take their campaigns to the consumers of fish and chips.
Further, contrary to popular belief, shark cartilage is not harvested solely for shark’s fin soup. In fact, shark cartilage is used extensively, especially in North America, as an anti-cancer supplement.
A glance in the Internet shows thousands of sites selling shark cartilage supplement. The anti-fins campaign also regularly shows "shocking" film footage of "live finning" of sharks. "Live fin-ning" refers to the alleged removal of only the fins and throwing the carcass back into the sea.
In reality, live finning is not the norm. But, media image of this has been shown around the world to "shock and awe" people. However, even if live finning is practised, it is laughable if not hypocritical to suggest that this is a cruel way to harvest sharks. What animal species that humans consume does not involve bleeding that animal to death?
The fact that sharks breed slowly is not in dispute. The fact that they may be endangered due to over-harvesting is also not in dispute. But, to target shark’s fin soup as their cause of decline is to ignore the facts.
Source: 20/8/07 NST Online – Letters
Campaign against shark’s fin soup based on sad facts
By Khatijah Abdullah
Conservationist
I was amazed when I read Cheah Hooi Giam’s “Economical with the Truth” (Sunday Star, Aug 5).
His statement that the campaign asking the public not to consume shark's fin soup is based on cultural and personal bias is extremely strange.
Strange for the fact that there is no culture in this country that stops people from taking the soup; and what personal gain can anyone achieve by influencing others not to consume shark's fin soup?
Such campaigns were started based on the alarming facts below:
Fact 1: It is estimated that 100 million sharks are killed annually;
Fact 2: A recent estimate of sharks killed in the fin trade alone stands at 73% of the total number of sharks killed;
Fact 3: The fin is considered the most valuable part of a shark, selling for more that US$700 per kg (compared with US$10 per kg for its meat!)
Fact 4: Spiny dogfish and porbeagle sharks are caught in Europe, and their meat is used in the fish and chip industry, their fins are sent to Asia for use in shark's fin soup.
Live finning is not a myth! It is true and is happening simply because fisherman want to maximise their catch for the day by disposing of shark bodies in the sea and keeping room on their boat for fins.
Malaysia is a signatory to CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) but not a member of IWMC (International Wildlife Management Conservation Fund).
Why do we want to preserve sharks?
a) Sharks stand as a top predator in the food chain. Their depletion will undoubtedly disturb the ecosystem which also includes humans.
b) Sharks are one of the creatures that have a very slow reproduction system. Hammerhead sharks, only reproduce once a year with a gestation period of 10-12 months.
d) Fins contain mercury. Thai health officials reported in 2001 that local shark's fin soup contained mercury about 42 times above the safe level.
I am very sure that our local NGOs would be very happy to start other conservation campaigns as recommended by Cheah in due time but for now, it’s the sharks that need our utmost attention because it has already been proven that their survival will in turn affect our lives, given the time.
Source: 8/8/07 The Star - Letters
Conservationist
I was amazed when I read Cheah Hooi Giam’s “Economical with the Truth” (Sunday Star, Aug 5).
His statement that the campaign asking the public not to consume shark's fin soup is based on cultural and personal bias is extremely strange.
Strange for the fact that there is no culture in this country that stops people from taking the soup; and what personal gain can anyone achieve by influencing others not to consume shark's fin soup?
Such campaigns were started based on the alarming facts below:
Fact 1: It is estimated that 100 million sharks are killed annually;
Fact 2: A recent estimate of sharks killed in the fin trade alone stands at 73% of the total number of sharks killed;
Fact 3: The fin is considered the most valuable part of a shark, selling for more that US$700 per kg (compared with US$10 per kg for its meat!)
Fact 4: Spiny dogfish and porbeagle sharks are caught in Europe, and their meat is used in the fish and chip industry, their fins are sent to Asia for use in shark's fin soup.
Live finning is not a myth! It is true and is happening simply because fisherman want to maximise their catch for the day by disposing of shark bodies in the sea and keeping room on their boat for fins.
Malaysia is a signatory to CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) but not a member of IWMC (International Wildlife Management Conservation Fund).
Why do we want to preserve sharks?
a) Sharks stand as a top predator in the food chain. Their depletion will undoubtedly disturb the ecosystem which also includes humans.
b) Sharks are one of the creatures that have a very slow reproduction system. Hammerhead sharks, only reproduce once a year with a gestation period of 10-12 months.
d) Fins contain mercury. Thai health officials reported in 2001 that local shark's fin soup contained mercury about 42 times above the safe level.
I am very sure that our local NGOs would be very happy to start other conservation campaigns as recommended by Cheah in due time but for now, it’s the sharks that need our utmost attention because it has already been proven that their survival will in turn affect our lives, given the time.
Source: 8/8/07 The Star - Letters
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
