U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

28–612 PDF 2018

EXAMINING THE REGULATION OF SHARK FINNING 

IN THE UNITED STATES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

THE INTERIOR, ENERGY, AND ENVIRONMENT 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT 

AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

November 2, 2017 

Serial No. 115–51 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov 

http://oversight.house.gov 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

Trey Gowdy, South Carolina, Chairman 

John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee 

Darrell E. Issa, California 

Jim Jordan, Ohio 

Mark Sanford, South Carolina 

Justin Amash, Michigan 

Paul A. Gosar, Arizona 

Scott DesJarlais, Tennessee 

Trey Gowdy, South Carolina 

Blake Farenthold, Texas 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

Thomas Massie, Kentucky 

Mark Meadows, North Carolina 

Ron DeSantis, Florida 

Dennis A. Ross, Florida 

Mark Walker, North Carolina 

Rod Blum, Iowa 

Jody B. Hice, Georgia 

Steve Russell, Oklahoma 

Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin 

Will Hurd, Texas 

Gary J. Palmer, Alabama 

James Comer, Kentucky 

Paul Mitchell, Michigan 

Greg Gianforte, Montana 

Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland, Ranking 

Minority Member 

Carolyn B. Maloney, New York 

Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia 

Wm. Lacy Clay, Missouri 

Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts 

Jim Cooper, Tennessee 

Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia 

Robin L. Kelly, Illinois 

Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan 

Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey 

Stacey E. Plaskett, Virgin Islands 

Val Butler Demings, Florida 

Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois 

Jamie Raskin, Maryland 

Peter Welch, Vermont 

Matt Cartwright, Pennsylvania 

Mark DeSaulnier, California 

Jimmy Gomez, California 

SHERIA CLARKE, Staff Director 

WILLIAM MCKENNA, General Counsel 

RYAN HAMBLETON, Interior, Energy, and Environment Subcommittee Staff Director 

BECCA BROWN, Counsel 

SHARON CASEY, Deputy Chief Clerk 

DAVID RAPALLO, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE INTERIOR, ENERGY, AND ENVIRONMENT

Blake Farenthold, Texas, Chairman 

Paul A. Gosar, Arizona, Vice Chair 

Dennis Ross, Florida 

Gary J. Palmer, Alabama 

James Comer, Kentucky 

Greg Gianforte, Montana 

Stacey E. Plaskett, Virgin Islands 

Jamie Raskin, Maryland 

Jimmy Gomez, California 

(Vacancy) 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on November 2, 2017 ........................................................................ 1 

WITNESSES 

Ms. Lora Snyder, Campaign Director, Oceana, International Headquarters 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 4 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 7 

Assistant Commander Brandi L. Reeder, Fisheries Law Administrator, Law 

Enforcement Division, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 14 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 16 

Alistair D.M. Dove, Ph.D., Vice President of Research and Conservation, 

Georgia Aquarium 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 23 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 25 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(1) 

EXAMINING THE REGULATION OF SHARK 

FINNING IN THE UNITED STATES 

Thursday, November 2, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE INTERIOR, ENERGY, AND

ENVIRONMENT

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM, Washington, D.C. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:04 p.m., in Room 

2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Blake Farenthold 

[chairman of the subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Farenthold, Palmer, Comer, and 

Plaskett. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. The Subcommittee on the Interior, Energy, 

and the Environment will come to order. 

Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a recess at 

any time. We are expecting votes on the floor of the House around 

2:30. We’d like to get as far as we can, at least through the opening 

statements, and perhaps our witnesses’ initial testimony, and then 

we have a couple of votes. We take the House picture, which actually is very fast, and we’ll get back here as soon as we can to finish 

that up. I apologize, but there probably will be about a half hour 

or so recess in the middle of this to allow us to do our voting. 

So good afternoon. Today, the Subcommittee on Interior, Energy, 

and the Environment will examine the regulation of shark finning 

in the United States. Despite the fact that shark finning is illegal 

in U.S. waters, many coastal states continue to face issues with 

shark finning enforcement. Today, we’ll explore opportunities to 

combat the terrible practice of shark finning through discussing 

issues of enforcement, possible benefits of a ban, and the importance of sharks in the global ocean ecosystem. 

The United States has made great efforts to protect sharks in 

our territorial waters by passing the Shark Finning Prohibition Act 

of 2000, and the Shark Conservation Act of 2010. The 2000 law 

prohibited the importation of shark fins without the corresponding 

carcasses and the finning of sharks in U.S. water. The 2010 law 

went a step further, prohibiting U.S. vessels in international waters, and all vessels in U.S. waters, from transporting shark fins 

without the corresponding carcass or from removing any shark fin 

while at sea. 

My home State of Texas recently joined the effort to end this inhumane treatment of sharks. On June 10, 2015, Texas became the 

10th State to ban the trade of shark fins when Governor Abbott 

signed H.B. 1579 into law. Prior to this, Texas had emerged as a 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
2 

hub for shark fins with the State fin trade growing by 240 percent 

since 2010, after the passage of fin trade bans in California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, New York, Oregon, and Washington. With the passage of H.B. 1579, Texas is the 

first Gulf State to pass the shark fin trade ban, and I’m proud of 

the effort Texas has made to eliminate the fin trade. 

Now is the time for the U.S. to prohibit the trade of shark fins 

completely as well. That’s why I’ve cosponsored Chairman Royce’s 

bill, the Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act of 2017, which prohibits 

processing, selling, and purchasing of shark fins at the Federal 

level. In addition to this important piece of legislation, I have also 

introduced the Justice Attributed to Wounded Sharks Act, or the 

JAWS act. This bill would end the United States importation of 

seafood products from countries that do not prohibit the practice of 

shark finning. 

Sharks are a necessary component to a healthy ocean, yet millions of sharks are traded annually for their fins, leaving certain 

species increasingly vulnerable, if not endangered. Without sharks, 

the ocean’s ecosystems would be unbalanced. Sharks maintain 

equilibrium and order by ensuring population control and habitat 

boundaries, which is a critical component for ocean life. It is my 

hope that this hearing today will allow us to pinpoint solutions 

that will protect sharks and put an end to the inhumane practice 

of shark finning. 

I’ll now recognize the ranking member of the subcommittee, Ms. 

Plaskett from the Virgin Islands, for her opening statement. Ms. 

Plaskett, you’re recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. We can all agree that sharks play an invaluable role in our 

ecosystem. I believe we can also agree that this is concerning that 

the shark population continues to decline. We, as Americans and 

citizens of this world, can do more to stop this decline. 

However, what I cannot agree on is the need for a hearing on 

shark finning today instead of a hearing on the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Mr. Chairman, most of my 

constituents remain in the dark because utility service has not 

been reestablished since Hurricanes Irma and Maria. According to 

reporting by The Miami Herald, 2 months after Hurricane Irma, 

and 1 month after Hurricane Maria, and I quote: Less than a third 

of the St. Thomas residents, 16 percent of the St. Croix’s customers—which is where I live—and hardly anyone on St. John has 

power. Unlike Florida and Texas, normal life has not resumed in 

the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

There are children who still do not have a school to go to. According to The Miami Herald, many schools are still too damaged to reopen. Others are destroyed, are still in use as shelters. Limited curfews are still in effect. The curfew was lifted a day ago. But the 

schools are still closed in many instances. 

I am very concerned about the likelihood of many Virgin Islands’ 

residents who depend on tourism for their income. 

On September 29, Ranking Member Cummings and I requested 

that Chairman Gowdy hold an emergency hearing on the humanitarian crisis caused by the hurricanes in the U.S. Virgin Islands 

and Puerto Rico. Chairman Gowdy declined this request and held 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
3 

member-only briefings with FEMA, the Department of Defense, the 

Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of Health 

and Human Services. I’m grateful for those briefings, but that is 

not a hearing, and it would have been nice if I had been consulting 

as to the time of those briefings since in more than one instance, 

I was traveling back to the ravaged Virgin Islands. Although the 

daily experiences of my constituents would have been highly relevant, two of these briefings were scheduled at times when I was 

traveling. 

It is long past the time for the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to conduct oversight hearings on the slow and ineffective response to the devastation. I know that our President has 

said that it’s a 10 out of 10. But living on the islands, I do not feel 

that, caused by the hurricanes in the U.S. territories of Puerto Rico 

and the U.S. Virgin Islands. With all due respect to this chairman, 

Chairman Farenthold, the witnesses, and the many people who, 

like me, care deeply about the survival of sharks in our ecosystem—we have many in the Caribbean and throughout our island—it is offensive that we are holding a hearing on this subject 

at a time when the U.S. Virgin Islands does not have one fully 

functioning hospital. 

Mr. Chairman, there is no better time to reach across the aisle 

than this. American citizens in the U.S. Virgin Islands are suffering and questioning if their government is concerned about 

them, or has forgotten about them. Let’s answer these questions 

and resolve their fears with a resounding: No, we’re here for you, 

we’re looking out for you, and then let’s prove it by conducting 

hearings on the slow and ineffective Federal response to the hurricanes in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico. Thank you. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. If the gentlelady will yield for a second. I have 

had conversations with the chairman of the full committee on this 

issue. There is some concern that our doing oversight at this time 

might further slow the recovery efforts. No one is more sympathetic 

than I am, because we went through something very similar in the 

district I represent. Many of the towns I represent were devastated. We had the advantage, of course, of not being an island, 

and the necessary relief and repair efforts were much easier to get 

to our physical location. 

But you can, please, accept my promise that this will be looked 

into, because not only do I have friends in the Virgin Islands, I also 

fully understand what it is like to—I mean, it was tough for me 

going a week without electricity. I can’t imagine going a month 

without electricity. I did learn pretty much everything I like to do 

and everything I like to eat requires electricity. 

So you have my assurance that we’re going to do our best to do 

oversight into this matter, and do everything that we can to make 

sure that we are better prepared to deal with disasters both on the 

mainland and on the islands like Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. And, in fact, I’m planning on speaking again to the chairman about it today, because I do think it is time to get moving on 

this. 

And, I agree, he does have a tendency to schedule things on flyin days when those of us who are further away have trouble getting here. So rest assured, we will work on it. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
4 

Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. And this hearing has been in the planning 

stages for several months. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. So thank you very much. 

With that, I’d like to take a moment to introduce our witnesses. 

Ms. Lora Snyder is a Campaign Director for Oceana International Headquarters. Welcome. 

We have assistant commander game warden Brandi L. Reeder. 

She is a Fisheries Law Administrator for the Texas Parks and 

Wildlife Department, Law Enforcement Division. And I’m happy to 

be talking to somebody about fisheries enforcement on something 

other than Red Snapper. 

And then we have Dr. D.M. Dove. He is the Vice President of Research and Conservation for the Georgia Aquarium. I was tempted 

to invite someone from the Texas State Aquarium, but we didn’t 

want to be too Texas heavy. And we really do appreciate your coming up from Georgia to visit with you. 

So welcome to all of you. 

Pursuant to committee rules, we ask that you rise and be sworn 

in before you testify. 

Would you please stand and raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you’re about to give is 

the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you 

God? 

Let the record reflect that all witnesses answered in the affirmative. 

You all may be seated. 

All right. Well, in order to allow time for discussion, and so we 

can hopefully get the initial statements done before votes, we ask 

that you limit your testimony to 5 minutes. Your entire written 

statement will be made part of the record. You’ve got a clock in 

front of you that will count down from 5 minutes. A green light 

means you’re good to go. A yellow light means speed up, you’ve 

only got a minute left. And red light means please wrap it up. 

Also, please remember to turn your microphones on. Since we’re 

budget conscious here in Washington, we don’t buy the most expensive fancy microphones. So it will help everyone here, the closer 

you are to the microphone, the better chance we have of hearing 

you well. 

So at this point, we’ll start with Ms. Snyder. You’re recognized 

for 5 minutes. 

WITNESS STATEMENTS 

STATEMENT OF LORA SNYDER 

Ms. SNYDER. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the 

committee. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify before you today on the issue of current shark finning laws, and the 

global shark fin trade. 

My name is Lora Snyder. I’m the Director of Oceana’s Sharks 

and Responsible Fishing Campaigns. Oceana is supportive of efforts in Congress to conserve shark populations, including the 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
5 

Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act, which would prohibit the sale 

and possession of shark fins in the United States. 

As predators, sharks play vital roles in ecosystems all over the 

world. However, some species are now in serious trouble. Some 

populations have declined by more than 90 percent. And if more action is not taken, other populations could share a similar fate. This 

could be damaging to the ocean ecosystem and to commercial fishers as their target species become depleted due to the unchecked 

growth of mid-level predators. 

These declines are disturbing for those in the diving and tourism 

industry as well. A recent report found that shark-related dives in 

Florida generated more than $221 million in direct expenditures, 

and fueled over 3,700 jobs in 2016. This stands in stark contrast 

to the entire shark fin industry in the United States which exported less than $1 million of fins last year. 

The demand for shark fins is one of the main reasons for declines 

in shark populations. Every year, up to 73 million sharks ends up 

in the global shark fin trade. The demand for these fins fuels shark 

finning, the act of slicing the fins off a shark and dumping its body 

back at sea where it will drown, bleed to death, or even be eaten 

alive by other fish. As you mentioned, this practice is illegal in U.S. 

waters. 

Congress has already passed two bills to ban shark finning, 

which have increased protections for sharks, but more needs to be 

done as these laws do not get to the root of the problem. Too many 

sharks are being killed to fulfill the demand for shark fin soup. 

New studies have revealed that 91 percent of the fins in the global 

trade are from unsustainable sources. The U.S. continues to import 

shark fins from countries that do not have bans on finning, and 

cases of finning are still being uncovered. 

To help ensure that they aren’t participating in this damaging 

trade, 12 States and three territories have already banned the 

trade of shark fins. Private corporations are also refusing to ship 

or sell shark fin products, including Amazon and Grubhub. Over 50 

percent of international airlines have now banned shark fins, as 

have 17 of the 19 biggest shipping lines. However, as companies 

and States close the door on the fin trade, other doors remain open 

and the market shifts accordingly. For example, after a number of 

States enacted their bans, trade activity in the United States shifted primarily to Texas. Texas then passed the ban, and now we’ve 

seen that the trade has moved to Georgia. We are engaging in a 

game of Whack-a-mole. As one State closes its door, activity pops 

up elsewhere. 

On a national scale, the United States is actively importing fins 

from countries such as China, that do not have comparable finning 

regulations as the United States. In addition, it’s unclear how 

many fins are coming into this country. According to a report by 

the Food and Agricultural Organization, other countries report 

sending seven times as many shark fins as the U.S. reported receiving. Even more disturbing, according to NOAA’S database, fins 

are still being imported and exported from some States that have 

bans on buying, and selling, and transporting, and possession of 

shark fins. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
6 

Congress has made its stance clear on this issue, and yet, we still 

are creating economic incentive for the Act to continue. Fins from 

fin sharks, even likely including fins from sharks that are threatened or endangered, are being bought and sold in the United 

States. Additionally, previous laws did not address the main problem: Too many sharks are being killed, in large part, due to the demand for their fins. 

But this is a solvable problem. A national ban, like the Shark 

Fins Sales Elimination Act, would solve many of these issues. As 

the U.S. has led the world in fisheries management, and in halting 

the trade of other trafficked wildlife products, like ivory and rhino 

horns, so, too, should we reclaim our role as a leader and show the 

world that we will not contribute to the demand for fins. We shall 

not participate in the trade of a product that hurts shark populations, especially given the fact that sharks are critical to maintaining healthy and abundant oceans. 

Thank you. 

[Prepared statement of Ms. Snyder follows:] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
7 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 1 here 28612.001
8 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 2 here 28612.002
9 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 3 here 28612.003
10 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 4 here 28612.004
11 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 5 here 28612.005
12 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 6 here 28612.006
13 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 7 here 28612.007
14 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. Thank you. 

Assistant Commander Reeder, you’re recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF BRANDI REEDER 

Ms. REEDER. Good afternoon, Chairman Farenthold, members of 

the subcommittee. My name is Brandi Reeder, and I’m an assistant 

commander game warden, and the Fisheries Law Administrator for 

the Texas Parks and Wildlife Law Enforcement Division. I want to 

thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today about this 

very important topic. I’m hopeful that my testimony will provide 

you with useful information to help you in your examination of 

Federal regulations prohibiting shark finning. 

The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department is the State agency 

primarily responsible for management of native species and enforcement of statutes and regulations promulgated to ensure protection of the State’s natural resources. We work closely with the 

U.S. Coast Guard, NOAA, Office of Law Enforcement, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife and Border Patrol to ensure State and Federal fishery 

priorities are addressed. 

Texas has 376 miles of coastline, and approximately 4 million 

surface acres of saltwater that we’re responsible for managing. 

Coastal fisheries creel surveys, and the commercial trip ticket data 

program, supplied in my written testimony, it is evident that the 

shark fishery in Texas is minimal. The commercial shark trade in 

Texas has been almost nonexistent for many years. While recreational fishing pressure remains high, there appears to be a 

slight decline in harvest. Recreational catch-and-release of sharks 

appears to be increasing. The practice of shark finning has only 

been observed in limited instances over the course of the last 10 

years. 

As you are obviously aware of the passage of Representative 

Lucio, III’s House Bill 1579, I won’t go too far into how that was 

built. However, I will say that it was a comprehensive piece of legislation that was proactively put in place to combat shark finning 

in Texas. The bill came into statute in July of 2017, and it provided 

an offense to buy, sell, offer for sale, possess for purpose of sale, 

transport, or shipment for the purpose of sale, barter or exchange 

of shark fins. It provides a class B misdemeanor with enhanced 

penalties to a class A misdemeanor, which puts in place potentially 

up to a $4,000 fine and up to 1 year of jail. This is a very aggressive penalty, and will help serve as a deterrent to the behavior. 

In the first year of the implementation of the statute, we made 

sure to inform the public through press release, and we have found, 

overall, that through education and through this statute, it’s been 

very easy to enforce as mere possession of a shark carcass, without 

fins, or possession of shark fins themselves, for any commercial 

purpose, is a violation. 

We have had a few instances to where we’ve observed shark fin 

cases. We had two back in 2012. And the most recent is in September of this year, in which we had the Animal Welfare Institute 

had notified us of possible violations in certain restaurants. So following up on that, two of our game wardens found shark fins in 

a restaurant, and then were directed over to a local retail shop and 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
15 

found 38 more shark fins—well, with incomplete shark carcasses. 

And 44 cases were filed. During that case, it was obvious that both 

parties knew that the possession of the shark fins were illegal. 

Moving on. Illegal Mexican lancha incursions in Texas State waters is still a problem. The illegal fishing activities continue in 

Texas State waters. Unfortunately, it is difficult to estimate the 

impact of this illegal fishing on shark populations off of Texas. 

Since 2011, Texas game wardens have seized over 25,000 miles of 

illegal gill net and over 20 miles of illegal longline from the Gulf 

of Mexico. Sharks are commonly caught in this gear. 

The United States Coast Guard estimated 800,000 pounds of red 

snapper have been illegally harvested annually during incursions 

of Mexican lanchas between 2013 and 2014. U.S. Coast Guard and 

Texas Parks and Wildlife game wardens have seen a reduction in 

sharks retained in lancha encounters as the market for red snapper has increased dramatically. Fewer sharks are being observed in 

confiscated gill nets and longline gear. Anecdotally, recent shark 

encounters have been only a quarter of the numbers observed in 

previous years. 

Let me see here. The United States Coast Guard continues to 

site and intercept a large number of lanchas each year. The problem does not appear to have decreased even with focused enforcement efforts. 

In summary, shark fishing is not a large fishery in Texas, commercially or recreationally, resulting in few observed cases of shark 

finning during patrols in State waters. Sharks offered for sale in 

Texas typically come from either interstate or foreign imports. The 

recent encounter of shark fins in a restaurant in the Dallas-Fort 

Worth area were imported from another State, offered as an offmenu item. This suggests that there may be an underground market for this product. While in the retail establishment it was clear 

the manager knew possession of the shark carcasses without fins 

was illegal and the individual tried to remove the remaining carcasses from the freezer where they were found. 

The proactive statute developed by Texas Representative Lucio 

III, and passed in 2015, provided penalties which were strong 

enough that repeated violation is not anticipated. Law enforcement 

experience demonstrates that regulations or statutes must provide 

penalties sufficient to deter the behavior on the first violation as 

subsequent offenses become more difficult to detect as future sales 

will be conducted more covertly. Cooperative, targeted enforcement 

efforts between State and Federal law enforcement are critical to 

discontinue shark finning across the United States. 

This concludes my testimony, and I’ll be happy to answer any 

questions. 

[Prepared statement of Ms. Reeder follows:] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
16 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 8 here 28612.008
17 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 9 here 28612.009
18 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 10 here 28612.010
19 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 11 here 28612.011
20 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 12 here 28612.012
21 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 13 here 28612.013
22 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 14 here 28612.014
23 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. Thank you very much. 

Dr. Dove, you’re recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF ALISTAIR D.M. DOVE 

Mr. DOVE. Good afternoon, committee members, and thank you 

for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Dr. Alistair Dove, 

and I’m the Vice President of Research and Conservation Programs 

at the Georgia Aquarium in Atlanta, which is a nonprofit organization inspiring awareness and preservation of our oceans and aquatic animals worldwide. I’m a broadly trained marine biologist with 

a current focus on the biology and conservation of whale sharks 

and manta rays, which I’ve been studying around the world for the 

last 10 years. 

U.S. shark fisheries are better managed than those of most countries, and for some species, at least, may even meet the definition 

of being sustainable over the long term. But in relative terms, it’s 

not an especially high-value fishery. Sharks make up just 0.12 percent of the value of all U.S. fisheries, and shark fins make up less 

than a quarter of that tiny fraction. In fact, sharks are more valuable alive for the ecosystem services they provide, or as the targets 

for wildlife tourism. A recent analysis from Oceana showed that 

one in five scuba diving trips in Florida was specifically targeted 

at sharks, and together, these provided $126 million worth of value 

to the economy and supported over 3,800 jobs in Florida alone. 

That’s 19 times more than the combined value of all commercial 

shark landings in the United States. 

But given the expertise of some of my fellow witnesses, I think 

I’d like to focus my comments more on the importance of sharks 

for a healthy marine ecosystem. 

We need a healthy ocean because it provides half of the oxygen 

we breathe. Literally, every second breath you’re taking today was 

provided by the ocean, protein for billions of people every day, a 

buffer against climate change, and the greatest repository of undiscovered medicines on the planet, as well as a means to conduct 

more than 90 percent of international commerce through shipping. 

And a healthy ocean needs healthy shark populations. 

There are nearly 500 species of sharks. So it’s important not to 

overgeneralize their biology or to imagine that every shark looks 

like a great white, a tiger, or a hammerhead. There are sharks that 

are as small as 6 inches when they’re fully grown. And the two 

largest species, the basking shark and the whale shark, are not 

toothy predators but peaceful, filter-feeding giants, ostensibly more 

similar to whales than their toothier relatives. Many, many species 

of sharks are drab deep sea species that feed on small invertebrates near the bottom, and many of these species are poorly 

known to science. 

It’s important to recognize that new species of sharks are still 

being discovered on a regular basis. But with regard to the more 

familiar types, an ocean without large predatory sharks is like a 

sky without eagles or the Serengeti without lions. Science has repeatedly shown us that removal of these top-level sharks can cause 

a domino effect with significant impacts on the rest of the food web 

in a process that scientists call a trophic cascade. This appears especially to be the case on coral reefs, where sharks are often the 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
24 

top-level predators, but also, the second-tier predators like the 

smaller gray reef sharks, black tip sharks, white tip sharks, and 

things like that. 

Many marine biologists will tell you a handy rule of thumb about 

the health of ocean ecosystems is that if you go scuba diving and 

you don’t see a shark, there is a problem. And, conversely, the richest and most productive ecosystems the world over are those with 

vibrant shark populations. I’ve been lucky enough to witness this 

firsthand in the Galapagos Marine Reserve at a place called Darwin’s Arch, which is home to enormous schools of tuna, and jack, 

and other pelagic and reef fishes. But it’s also home to healthy populations of Galapagos sharks, silky sharks, black tip sharks, the 

largest whale sharks in the world, and schools of scalloped hammerhead sharks too numerous to count. According to one published 

study, Darwin’s Arch may have the highest shark density anywhere in the world, and, yet, it’s overflowing with other types of 

marine life as well. It seems counterintuitive in some way, but, 

nonetheless, it’s true. 

Sharks have been fulfilling their key roles in the ocean for nearly 

400 million years, which is millions of years before dinosaurs, or, 

indeed, any other land vertebrates. But, unfortunately, their life 

history has a critical flaw, that they tend to be long-lived, late to 

mature, and have relatively few well-developed offspring. It’s actually a reproductive strategy that’s quite similar to our own. But, 

unfortunately, this means that they’re very sensitive to disturbance, and it can take a very long time for shark populations to recover if they get knocked back. This makes them a poor target for 

fisheries, certainly compared to a bony fish like a herring, for example, whose life cycle is done in just a couple of years, and can 

lay millions of eggs during that period. And this is, perhaps, why 

so few shark fisheries have achieved certification for long-term sustainability. 

In summary, the market demand for shark fins and meat has 

historically provided powerful incentives for overharvesting of 

shark populations internationally and here in the U.S. Science 

shows us that some U.S. species may be able to support sustainable fisheries. But the life history of most shark species makes 

them population-sensitive to disturbance and slow to recover. It’s 

essential that we effectively regulate shark fisheries and restore 

those species that are already depleted because the healthy shark 

populations are needed if we want the ocean to continue to provide 

us with new medicines, food, and the very air that we breathe. 

Thank you. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Dove follows:] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
25 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 15 here 28612.015
26 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 16 here 28612.016
27 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. Thank you. 

And seeing as how we’ve not yet called votes, we’ll get started 

with some questioning. We’ll start with the gentleman from Kentucky. 

Mr. COMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Snyder, good to see you again. In your experience, can you 

elaborate on the response of restaurateurs in States that have 

banned shark finning. 

Ms. SNYDER. Yes. Thank you. So in California—California was 

one of the first States to pass a ban. And during that, there was 

some pushback from some of the restaurant community. But as 

more and more States pass bans, we saw that—we didn’t see it as 

much. And, you know, there’s been a lot of really amazing efforts 

done by groups like WildAid and Yao Ming of raising awareness of 

these issues. So I would say back, you know, a few years ago, that 

we saw response, but we haven’t been hearing anything lately. 

Mr. COMER. Okay. Ms. Reeder, there have been reported issues 

with Mexican fishermen illegally sharking in Texas waters. What 

has Texas law enforcement done to attempt to combat this practice? 

Ms. REEDER. Thank you. We work in cooperation with the U.S. 

Coast Guard. We’ve made targeted enforcement through our border 

operations, and we put focused effort on the border to try and limit 

and deter these incursions. 

Mr. COMER. Great. 

Dr. Dove, do you feel that sustainable shark fisheries is a potential solution to the problem? Why or why not? 

Mr. DOVE. So it’s important that we separate the issues of sustainable shark fisheries for meat and fisheries that are related specifically to the fin trade. I think it’s important that we probably 

discourage the fin trade in any form. But it is possible, according 

to fishery scientists, that some shark species can be fished 

sustainably, species like the spiny dogfish on the East Coast of the 

United States. So it’s always important when we talk about this 

question to separate the issues of fishing for fins and fishing for 

meat. And I think in the case of fins, it’s losing popularity. In 

China, the consumption is down about 80 percent since 2014. So 

I think it’s time to let this practice go, and for the United States 

to take a lead role in setting an example to not encourage that behavior to persist anymore. 

Mr. COMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll yield my time back. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. Thank you very much. We’ll now recognize the 

ranking member, the gentlelady from the U.S. Virgin Islands, for 

5 minutes. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. Dove and Ms. Snyder, I wanted to ask you, with regard to 

climate change. Do you agree that climate change—or do you believe that climate change has caused the warming of our oceans? 

Ms. SNYDER. Yes. And as the Director of Responsible Fishing at 

Oceana, so the shellfish industry in the United States is worth 

about $3 billion. And we know with ocean acidification, that there 

could be negative impacts for that industry that we’re already seeing in the Pacific northwest for some of the oyster farms. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
28 

Ms. PLASKETT. And the warming is causing—how does that affect 

the shellfish? 

Ms. SNYDER. So with any change in the chemistry of the water, 

the shells, which are hard, it can impact their ability to be strong, 

essentially. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Got it. Thank you. 

Dr. Dove? 

Mr. DOVE. Yes. We know since the beginning of the Industrial 

Revolution that the ocean has absorbed more than 25 percent of 

the additional carbon dioxide emissions, and almost 90 percent of 

the heat. So the ocean has been doing us a huge favor for a very 

long time in absorbing a lot of these emissions. The scientific consensus is clear that climate change is the real thing. I think most 

scientists have moved on these days to addressing what is the severity of the impact going to be, and what steps can we take to 

ameliorate those impacts to minimize the effect on society. 

Ms. PLASKETT. So in the amelioration of that and what can be 

done, you talked about healthy oceans as a buffer. Could you elaborate on that? 

Mr. DOVE. So healthy oceans have a number of different perspectives. We would love to see oceans that are abundant, producing, 

you know, plenty of food, and medicines, and other ecosystem services like that. But they provide other intangible services, too, including the protection of coastlines from storms that would—which 

I don’t need to tell you anything about that. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Sure. 

Mr. DOVE. And so that’s a very important service that we get 

from the ocean. And it’s directly and intimately tied to the relationship between carbon pollution and the warming and acidification of 

oceans. 

Ms. PLASKETT. When you talk about that, I know in the Virgin 

Islands, in particular, our coral reefs are really important to keeping sharks and as well as, you know, regulating the amount of 

waves that come into the general vicinity of our beaches. And the 

coral’s health really has a lot to do with the warming of the ocean. 

Again, Dr. Dove and Ms. Snyder, could you each briefly describe 

for us the effects of climate change and as a form of warming on 

sharks and other aquatic life besides shellfish? 

Mr. DOVE. So we know in the case of sharks, they are cold-blooded animals, and their metabolism is driven by the prevailing temperature. So the more things warm up, the more their metabolic 

demands increase. And with respected to acidification, which is the 

flip side of carbon pollution in the ocean, more acidic oceans make 

it hard for sharks to smell their way around. Which, they live in 

an olfactory world. They smell their way around. And acidification 

has been demonstrated to change the way sharks sense their environment and impact the way they can smell their food. And that’s 

a problem for them. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Would it help them not just smell their food, but 

maybe smell prey or those that are—an attack against them? 

Mr. DOVE. Exactly. So it may affect them in both in their roles— 

especially if they’re lower-level sharks, these are predator sharks, 

we would call them. They have to be able to smell prey, but they 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
29 

also have to be able to smell predators that might be after them 

as well. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Okay. Thank you. 

Ms. Snyder. 

Ms. SNYDER. Yes. I’ll just add that in some of the studies they 

did show that the sharks were more lethargic. And then there was 

also a study that looked at the taking away of so many sharks, and 

how that could potentially impact populations that eat sea grass. 

And seagrass is, you know, very good at capturing carbon. And so 

when you remove too many sharks and that next level booms, that 

there are impacts on the amounts of CO2 released from that. In 

fact, I think the study said that it was equal to all the cars in Australia. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Great. And could you tell us, what could we be 

doing as legislators to combat this and to assist? 

Ms. SNYDER. Well, again, from the fisheries’ perspective, we do 

know that with changing ocean temperatures, that some fish stocks 

are shifting. So I think as we are thinking about how to manage 

our fishery stocks, we need to be taking that into account and dedicating science to seeing where are the fish moving and how can we 

better manage those populations. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Okay. Dr. Dove? 

Mr. DOVE. I think it’s important as we go forward that we fill 

some of the knowledge gaps that we have about the impact of climate change. It’s one of the most active areas of research right 

now. 

Ms. PLASKETT. So how would we, as legislators, facilitate that for 

you? 

Mr. DOVE. So through support of basic science research through 

the National Science Foundation, and NOAA, and other agencies 

that provide funding for basic research across the country that can 

help answer some of those questions. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you. Perfect. My time is up. I yield back. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. You hit that right on the mark. I should be so 

lucky. We may finish this before the votes. So we appreciate it. 

But I do have—I do have a couple of questions. And we’ll start 

with Dr. Dove. And we’ll let Ms. Snyder weigh in on this. The 

shark finning trade is—basically takes the fin because it’s the most 

valuable piece of the shark for whatever properties it—people believe it has. The shark finning legislation typically prevents finning 

the shark and just taking the fin. And I think Ms. Reeder testified 

that they did have the whole shark in the restaurant that they 

busted in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. Is shark meat a desirable 

fish for serving at a restaurant or for human consumption? And 

why yes? Why no? 

Mr. DOVE. The values of the U.S. fishery landings in total would 

argue not. I mean, you can look at the total value of shark fisheries 

in the United States at about $6.6 million in 2015, and compare 

that to crab, which is $678 million, more than 100 times more than 

the shark fishery. So I think people vote with their taste buds a 

little bit, and those relative values will tell you about what are the 

most valued fisheries. It’s not to say there isn’t a place for shark 

or even a place for sustainably harvested shark. It’s just so difficult 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
30 

to thread the needle and make that worth doing as the market 

value simply isn’t there, if you ask me. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. Ms. Snyder, did you want to weigh in on that? 

Ms. SNYDER. Yeah. I just think it is important to note, when you 

look at the most popular species in the Hong Kong fin trade, you 

look at those specific 14 species, and over 70 percent of them are 

at high risk or very high risk of extinction. So, as Dr. Dove mentioned, there are around 500 species of sharks. So, when you look 

at the ones that are the most popular, a number of them are in serious trouble. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. So, as a sportsman, you know, I have always 

been taught that you eat what you shoot, you eat what you catch. 

And so, in Hong Kong, they are only selling the fins; they are not 

selling the rest of the shark, because they consider there to be little 

economic value there. Is that correct? 

Ms. SNYDER. I don’t know that you could say that there is no 

shark meat there, but a bowl of shark-fin soup can go for over 

$100. And so, you know—— 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. That is higher than Washington, D.C., prices 

for food. 

Ms. SNYDER. Yes, it is. 

But you also can look—like, for the hammerheads. So a number 

of hammerhead species, you know, face serious declines and are 

listed under international agreements of needing additional protection. And you look at the price, even in the Gulf of Mexico, a price 

per pound for the meat compared to the price per pound for the fin. 

So the meat goes for 25 cents, and then the fin can go for over $16 

per pound. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. All right. 

And, Ms. Reeder, you do enforcement in Texas. Do you see a lot 

of recreational fishermen actually keeping their shark, or is it more 

of a catch-and-release sport? Do you have any numbers on that? 

Ms. REEDER. We don’t have numbers on whether they are retained or whether they are done in caught-and-release. The thing 

is that, overall, the fishery itself is not very large on the recreational end. We do have plenty of recreational fishermen who 

really love that sport and are avid about it, which is why I believe 

that we have seen more catch and release of sharks. 

I do want to make one small correction, though, is that on the 

case that we had in Dallas—— 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. Right. 

Ms. REEDER. —some of those carcasses were actually cut in a 

way that the fillets were not available. They were actually harvested or cut and processed in a manner in which it was really just 

the back meat, just a very limited amount of back meat, and the 

anal and caudal fins were left. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. All right. Thank you very much. I appreciate 

that clarification. 

What is your biggest challenge in dealing with the shark-fin 

trade as a law enforcement person? 

Ms. REEDER. I would say that, in the end, it is that if it goes covert, it becomes so much more difficult to detect. 

Our officers—so, to give you an example, we have 551 sworn 

game wardens in the State of Texas. We have a handful of dediVerDate Nov 24 2008 09:54 Mar 29, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\28612.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
31 

cated investigators. So whenever you take those numbers and you 

put it to a covert operation to where you are having to involve your 

investigators, you reduce your capabilities. So you reduce your effectiveness. 

So, as we deploy more efforts to detect and deter this behavior, 

if it goes to a more covert and underground market, itis going to 

be more difficult to combat. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. And that is why you are an advocate of strong 

penalties for a first offense. Is that correct? 

Ms. REEDER. Absolutely. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. All right. 

Finally, Ms. Snyder, you mentioned that—I believe it was you— 

the panel did mention that the demand for shark fin in China, 

which is kind of a hub for that, is going down. Do we know why 

that is going down? And is that something we can help perhaps 

deal with on the demand side? 

Ms. SNYDER. It was actually Dr. Dove who mentioned that, but 

I can speak to it a little bit. 

And then you can jump in there. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. So I am out of time. I will let you finish, then 

Dr. Dove, and I will technically be within the rule because I have 

quit talking. 

Ms. SNYDER. Okay. 

So I would say, you know, that there have been—I mentioned 

WildAid and Yao Ming and a lot of really positive efforts in China. 

In addition, the Chinese Government made it illegal to serve 

shark-fin soup at government functions. 

And then you also saw the three state-owned Chinese airlines 

have also put bans on shipping shark fins, and Chinese shipping 

companies have as well, and that there has been a lot of activism 

within China of raising awareness for this. So that could be in 

large part why. 

But I will also let Dr. Dove speak to that. 

Mr. DOVE. So I understand that there are three main reasons 

why ithas declined in China. 

The first is the aforementioned campaigns from WildAid and 

WWF and Yao Ming and others. It is the ‘‘When the buying stops, 

the killing can too’’ campaign. 

But there is also a group of pro-environment business leaders in 

China who have been advocating for better actions on shark and 

shark fins. 

But I understand that one of the biggest impacts was an austerity measure from Xi Jinping that essentially instructed all state 

party officials to limit expensive activities, not just shark-fin soup 

but cigarettes and alcohol and other activities too. So it was sort 

of a case of, you know, a type of environmentalism that came from 

a central authority. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. All right. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Plaskett, unless you have something else? 

All right. I want to say thanks again for you guys coming up. 

Ms. PLASKETT. And thank them for all the work. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. Absolutely. Thank you for all the work you are 

doing. Sometimes it is thankless, doing what you do, but we certainly appreciate it. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
32 

And, as you can see by some of the legislation that we have discussed today, it is something that we are aware of here in Washington, D.C., and hopefully can continue to move forward on this. 

So I want to thank you again for appearing. 

The hearing record will remain open for 2 weeks for any member 

to submit written opening statements or questions for the record. 

If we do get any questions, we will get in touch with you and see 

if you could answer those in writing, and we will include those in 

the record. 

If there is no further business, without objection, the subcommittee will stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 2:47 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

Æ 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER