The China Mail - New protections for oceanic whitetip sharks, but not eels

USD -
AED 3.672502
AFN 64.000029
ALL 81.501894
AMD 360.300301
ANG 1.789785
AOA 917.999928
ARS 1538.507797
AUD 1.422738
AWG 1.8025
AZN 1.677898
BAM 1.755348
BBD 2.014118
BDT 124.150744
BGN 1.747831
BHD 0.37735
BIF 3000
BMD 1
BND 1.281553
BOB 11.995315
BRL 5.385503
BSD 1.000013
BTN 95.207367
BWP 13.822349
BYN 2.947868
BYR 19600
BZD 2.01121
CAD 1.397321
CDF 2315.000297
CHF 0.822255
CLF 0.025025
CLP 988.119786
CNY 6.661102
CNH 6.65463
COP 3178.94
CRC 454.76167
CUC 1
CUP 24.000287
CVE 99.197463
CZK 21.753898
DJF 177.719676
DKK 6.68102
DOP 60.650375
DZD 135.26301
EGP 56.002289
ERN 15
ETB 161.149916
EUR 0.89395
FJD 2.24075
FKP 0.747647
GBP 0.746635
GEL 2.599154
GGP 0.747647
GHS 11.649517
GIP 0.747647
GMD 74.000066
GNF 8799.999657
GTQ 7.645879
GYD 209.614159
HKD 7.844085
HNL 27.000156
HRK 6.76901
HTG 131.054259
HUF 327.0915
IDR 18170
ILS 3.11488
IMP 0.747647
INR 95.267006
IQD 1514
IRR 1868414.999662
ISK 121.419633
JEP 0.747647
JMD 158.760361
JOD 0.708966
JPY 157.59796
KES 129.989677
KGS 87.448023
KHR 4072.99998
KMF 440.999894
KPW 899.999961
KRW 1335.301894
KWD 0.31104
KYD 0.833326
KZT 453.3167
LAK 22534.99989
LBP 89549.999695
LKR 332.450795
LRD 170.449866
LSL 16.629789
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.424992
MAD 9.833505
MDL 18.045072
MGA 4595.000356
MKD 55.021155
MMK 2099.909661
MNT 3597.883233
MOP 8.082337
MRU 40.240109
MUR 47.279726
MVR 15.450451
MWK 1736.000155
MXN 18.88925
MYR 4.054099
MZN 63.90998
NAD 16.629887
NGN 1346.859954
NIO 36.809505
NOK 9.22898
NPR 152.332146
NZD 1.77407
OMR 0.384488
PAB 1.000013
PEN 3.459795
PGK 4.49025
PHP 63.708502
PKR 276.602571
PLN 3.9231
PYG 5858.938516
QAR 3.645503
RON 4.771902
RSD 105.072008
RUB 81.248966
RWF 1475
SAR 3.7541
SBD 8.058206
SCR 13.983075
SDG 601.499746
SEK 9.826885
SGD 1.277835
SHP 0.748335
SLE 22.897847
SLL 20969.504398
SOS 571.497754
SRD 37.644498
STD 20697.981008
STN 22.3
SVC 8.749697
SYP 13001.999685
SZL 16.630013
THB 33.712025
TJS 9.190174
TMT 3.5
TND 3.0207
TOP 2.40776
TRY 49.930696
TTD 6.779691
TWD 32.613982
TZS 2649.713013
UAH 45.55389
UGX 4360.137679
UYU 40.22581
UZS 11995.00019
VES 887.479801
VND 25791
VUV 119.217464
WST 2.773901
XAF 586.392655
XAG 0.019619
XAU 0.000250628137
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.802288
XDR 0.707052
XOF 586.392655
XPF 107.305413
YER 236.167524
ZAR 16.623855
ZMK 9001.207781
ZMW 20.200416
ZWL 321.999592
SSP 5745.199062
MXV 2.128922
  • RYCEF

    0.4000

    19.71

    +2.03%

  • CMSC

    0.0000

    20.4

    0%

  • BTI

    0.4200

    56.05

    +0.75%

  • BP

    0.2800

    44.43

    +0.63%

  • RBGPF

    1.6000

    67

    +2.39%

  • RIO

    -0.1500

    94.41

    -0.16%

  • AZN

    -0.4300

    166.15

    -0.26%

  • GSK

    0.4600

    49.7

    +0.93%

  • BCE

    -0.4100

    20.56

    -1.99%

  • NGG

    -0.2500

    75.24

    -0.33%

  • VOD

    -0.0400

    16.58

    -0.24%

  • RELX

    -0.4500

    33.07

    -1.36%

  • BCC

    -0.5500

    76.59

    -0.72%

  • CMSD

    -0.0300

    20.27

    -0.15%

  • JRI

    -0.2500

    10.77

    -2.32%

New protections for oceanic whitetip sharks, but not eels
New protections for oceanic whitetip sharks, but not eels / Photo: © AFP/File

New protections for oceanic whitetip sharks, but not eels

The world's top wildlife trade body voted Thursday to effectively ban all international trade in the critically endangered oceanic whitetip shark but rejected a proposal to protect more species of eel.

Text size:

The decision to upgrade protection of the shark species was welcomed by conservation groups that have warned oceanic whitetips are on the brink of extinction.

"This was our last hope," said Barbara Slee, senior programme manager at the International Fund for Animal Welfare.

"This listing might just spare them from extinction."

The species has suffered dramatic declines linked to the shark fin trade, and is one of dozens of shark species proposed for greater protections at the meeting of signatories to the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

The 50-year agreement protects the world's most endangered animals and plants, and regulates trade in over 40,000 species.

Earlier, members meeting in Uzbekistan's Samarkand rejected new protections for eels that had been fiercely opposed by top consumers of the fish, led by Japan.

Eel populations are falling worldwide, scientists say, largely due to factors linked to human activity such as the pollution of waterways, destruction of wetlands, hydroelectric dams, and fishing.

European eels are considered critically endangered and their trade has been restricted by CITES since 2009.

Eels cannot be bred in captivity, so much of the trade is in wild-caught baby eels, with one species virtually indistinguishable from another.

The European Union and Panama sought to bring all 17 eel species under CITES Appendix II, placing new restrictions on trade.

The "harvest for international trade is a major cause of international decline," the EU's representative warned.

But Japan dismissed the proposal as unscientific and "excessive," backed by multiple countries including African nations who warned it would place undue administrative burdens on their authorities.

In a sign of the pressures around the issue, countries voted by secret ballot, a relatively uncommon procedure at the gathering, with nearly 75 percent of votes against.

The result was "not very surprising," said Oliver Tallowin, senior programme officer for wildlife use and trade at the International Union for the Conservation of Nature.

Japan's opposition had been made clear early on in a submission running over 100 pages.

There are also differing views on the pressures other eel species face, said Tallowin.

"International trade has to be a threat to the species and... that was something we couldn't say with any sense of certainty," he told AFP.

For Andrew Kerr of the Sustainable Eel Group, "the short-term commercial and financial side won the debate massively."

Kerr, who has called eel trafficking the "greatest wildlife crime" on the planet, said the vote was a "real pity," but there were some silver linings.

A separate resolution proposing measures including more data gathering on eels and conservation capacity-building was approved later in the day.

"We've had a missed opportunity this morning, but then the fact that everyone's talking about eel, that's a huge victory too," Kerr said.

The resolution means more data will be collectd that could support protection of all eel species in the future, added Tallowin.

"Once something has been rejected... that doesn't mean its going to go away."

Votes are finalised later in the meeting, though it is unusual for them to be revised.

H.Ng--ThChM