lUCN
T h fl W o r ld C o n i f l r v t t i o n U n io n
Overview of the Conservation Status of
Cartilaginous Fishes (Chondrichthyans)
in the Mediterranean Sea
C o m p ile d b y R a c h e l D . C a v a n a g h a n d C la u d in e G ib s o n
IU C N R e d L ist o f T h r e a t e n e d S p e c i e s ™ - M e d ite r r a n e a n R e g io n a l A s s e s s m e n t N o . 3
>iSSC
S r a c i a i Survival C om m laalon
lUCN
The World Conservation Union
Overview of the Conservation
Status of Cartilaginous Fishes
(Chondrichthyans)
in the Mediterranean Sea
Rachel D . Cavanagh and Claudine G ibson
I n C o lla b o ra tio n w ith:
F in a n c ia l S u p p o rt:
C o re s u p p o r t to th e activ ities o f th e IL JC N
M e d ite rra n e a n o ffice is p r o v id e d by:
Shark I
¡penalise
djroup J
MAVA
D€ MEDIO AMBIENTE
JUÎ1TA DE M D M .U U R
CONSEJERIA » I MEMO AMBIENTE
The designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not im ply the expression of any opinion
w hatsoever on the p art of IUCN concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the
delim itation of its frontiers or boundaries. The views expressed in this publication do n o t necessarily reflect those of IUCN.
Published by:
Copyright:
The W orld Conservation Union (IUCN), Gland, Switzerland and Malaga, Spain.
© 2007 International U nion for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources.
All illustrations © 2007 Alejandro Sancho Rafel.
Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-com m ercial purposes is authorized w ith o u t prior
w ritten perm ission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknow ledged.
Reproduction of this publication for resale or o ther com m ercial purposes is prohibited w ith o u t prior w ritten
perm ission of the copyright holder.
Citation:
Cavanagh, Rachel D. and Gibson, Claudine. 2007. O verview o f the C onservation S ta tu s o f C artilaginous Fishes
(C hondrichthyans) in the M editerranean Sea. IUCN, Gland, Sw itzerland and Malaga, Spain, vi + 42 pp.
ISBN-978-2-8317-0997-0 (Book)
ISBN-978-2-8317-0998-7 (CD)
Cover design by:
Chadi Abi Faraj, IUCN C entre for M editerranean Cooperation.
Cover photo:
M obula m obular, an Endangered species p redom inantly restricted to the M editerranean Sea. © Maurizio W urtz.
Layout by:
NatureBureau, 36 Kingfisher Court, Ham bridge Road, N ew bury RG14 5SJ, UK.
Produced by:
NatureBureau
Printed by:
Inform ation Press, Oxford, UK.
Available from:
IUCN C entre for M editerranean C ooperation
C / Marie Curie 35
29590 Campanillas, Malaga, Spain.
Tel: +34 952 028430
Fax: +34 952 028145
w w w .uicnm ed.org
A catalogue of IUCN publications is also available at w w w .iucn.org/publications.
The tex t o f this book is p r in te d on 115gsm Allegro dem i-m att
Contents
A c k n o w le d g e m e n ts ....................................................................................................................................................................... v
1. I n t r o d u c ti o n .................................................................................................................................................................................1
1.1 C hondrichthyan fishes in the M editerranean ............................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Overview of threats to M editerranean chondrichthyans............................................................................................. 2
1.2.1 Life history characteristics.....................................................................................................................................2
1.2.2 Fisheries .................................................................................................................................................................. 2
1.2.3 Habitat loss, environm ental degradation and p ollution................................................................................. 3
1.3 M anagement im plications...............................................................................................................................................3
1.4 The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ - a tool for m anagem ent..................................................................3
1.5 The IUCN Shark Specialist G roup’s Red List p ro g ram m e........................................................................................ 4
1.6 O bjectives...........................................................................................................................................................................4
2. M e th o d o lo g y .............................................................................................................................................................................. 5
2.1 W orkshop p ro c e d u re ...................................................................................................................................................... 5
2.2 The precautionary a p p ro a c h ..........................................................................................................................................6
2.3 Regional and global assessm ents................................................................................................................................... 6
2.4 Geographically distinct p o p u latio n s.............................................................................................................................6
2.5 Review p ro c e s s .................................................................................................................................................................6
3. R esu lts a n d d is c u s s i o n ............................................................................................................................................................ 7
3.1 Summary of threatened statu s........................................................................................................................................7
3.2 Major threats ................................................................................................................................................................. 10
3.2.1 B ycatch.................................................................................................................................................................. 10
3.2.2 Life h is to ry ............................................................................................................................................................ 10
3.2.3 Target fisheries..................................................................................................................................................... 11
3.2.4 A nthropogenic activities.................................................................................................................................... 11
3.3 T hreatened species ...................................................................................................................................................... 11
3.4 Near T hreatened sp ecies............................................................................................................................................. 11
3.5 Least Concern sp ec ie s................................................................................................................................................. 11
3.6 Data Deficient sp ecies................................................................................................................................................... 12
4. C ase
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
s t u d i e s ................................................................................................................................................................................13
Maltese Skate Leucoraja m elitensis............................................................................................................................13
Giant devilray M obula m o b u la r..................................................................................................................................13
W hite shark C archarodon ca rc h a ria s......................................................................................................................14
Blue shark Prionace g la u c a ......................................................................................................................................... 15
Rabbitfish C him aera m o n stro sa .................................................................................................................................16
Spotted Ray Raja m o n ta g u i........................................................................................................................................ 16
Portuguese dogfish C entroscym nus coelolepis........................................................................................................17
Bigeye thresher Alopias superciliosus.......................................................................................................................17
5. I n te r n a tio n a l a n d re g io n a l in s tru m e n ts re le v a n t to th e c o n s e rv a tio n a n d m a n a g e m e n t
o f M e d ite rra n e a n c h o n d r ic h th y a n s ............................................................................................................................. 19
5.1 Global in stru m en ts....................................................................................................................................................... 19
5.1.1 The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals
(CMS or Bonn C onvention).............................................................................................................................. 19
5.1.2 The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES)..............................................................................................................................21
5.1.3 United Nations Convention on the Faw of the Sea (UNCEOS).................................................................... 21
5.1.4 United Nations Agreem ent on the Conservation and M anagement of Straddling Fish Stocks and
Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (UNFSA).............................................................................................................21
5.1.5 FAO International Plan of Action for the Conservation and
M anagement of Sharks (IPOA-Sharks).............................................................................................................. 22
5.2 Regional protection instrum ents................................................................................................................................. 22
5.2.1 The Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife andN atural H abitats........................ 22
5.2.2 The Barcelona Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and the
Coastal Region of the M editerranean S e a ........................................................................................................ 22
5.2.3 Action Plan for the Conservation of Cartilaginous Fishes (Chondrichthyans) in
the M editerranean Sea.......................................................................................................................................... 23
6. F is h in g r e s tr ic tio n s a n d m a n a g e m e n t a p p ly in g to c h o n d r ic h th y a n s in th e M e d ite rra n e a n ................24
6.1 Deepsea fisheries............................................................................................................................................................24
6.2 D riftnetting...................................................................................................................................................................... 24
6.3 Shark fin n in g ...................................................................................................................................................................24
7.
C h o n d ric h th y a n m o n ito r in g p ro g ra m m e s in th e M e d ite rr a n e a n .....................................................................25
8. C o n c lu s io n ............................................................................................................................................................................. 26
9. R e c o m m e n d a tio n s ...............................................................................................................................................................27
10. R e f e r e n c e s ............................................................................................................................................................................... 28
A p p e n d ix I. C h eck list o f c h o n d r ic h th y a n fis h e s in th e M e d ite rra n e a n S e a ........................................................ 33
A p p e n d ix 2. S u m m a ry o f th e IUCN’s R ed List C ateg o rie s a n d C rite ria V e rsio n 3.1 .......................................... 42
List o f T ables
3.1 Summary of th e regional and global IUCN Red List status of all M editerranean chondrichthyan
fish s p e c ie s ...................................................................................................................................................................................7
3.2 Summary of num bers of M editerranean species assigned to each IUCN Red List category,
regionally and globally .............................................................................................................................................................. 9
3.3 Historical, current and future threats to chondrichthyans in the M editerranean..................................................... 10
5.1 M editerranean chondrichthyans currently included in the text of International C onventions............................... 20
List o f F ig u res
1. Map of the M editerranean Sea and surrounding c o u n trie s............................................................................................... 1
3.1 Percentage of globally assessed chondrichthyan fishes (n=546) w ithin each IUCN Red List category,
IUCN Red List 2 0 0 6 .................................................................................................................................................................... 9
3.2 Percentage of M editerranean species w ithin each IUCN Red List category; regional assessment,
IUCN Red List 2 0 0 6 .................................................................................................................................................................... 9
3.3 The global status of the 30 threatened M editerranean species, IUCN Red List 2 0 0 6 .................................................. 9
3.4 Percentage of chondrichthyan species (n=7T) currently susceptible to each of the major threats in the
M editerranean, as detailed in the species’ IUCN Red List assessm ents....................................................................... 10
3.5 Percentage of chondrichthyan species (n=71) w ithin the M editerranean, for w hich bycatch in trawls,
longlines and nets, pose a major t h r e a t ............................................................................................................................. 10
5.1 Numbers of regionally threatened chondrichthyans (Critically Endangered, Endangered and
Vulnerable) granted some form of protection w ithin the M editerranean.................................................................. 19
iv
Acknowledgements
Assessing species for the IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species relies on the willingness of dedicated experts to
contribute and p ool th eir collective know ledge, thus
allowing th e m ost reliable judgm ents of a species’ status
to be made. W ithout their enthusiastic com m itm ent to
species conservation, this w ork w ould not be possible.
We w ould therefore like to thank all of the IUCN Shark
Specialist G roup (SSG) M editerranean m em bers and
in v ite d re g io n a l a n d in te rn a tio n a l e x p e rts w h o
participated at the San Marino workshop; Marco Affronte,
Irene Bianchi, Mohamed Nejmeddine Bradai, Simona Clö,
Rui Paul Coelho, Francesco Ferretti, Javier Guallart, Ferid
Haka, Nils-Roar Hareide, Farid Hemida, Cecilia Mancusi,
Imène Meliane, Gabriel Morey, Manal Nader, Guiseppe
Notarbartolo di Sciara, Persefoni Megalofounou, Titian
Schembri, Fabrizio Serena, Alen Soldo, Fausto Tinti, Nicola
Ungaro, Marino Vacchi, Ramón Bonfil, Nick Dulvy, Ian
F ergusson, Sarah F ow ler, C h arlo tte M ogensen and
Ransom Myers. W e w ould also like to thank all the SSG
m em bers w h o have sub seq u en tly b ee n involved in
reviewing assessments.
Particular gratitude is expressed to Imène Meliane and
Ameer Abdulla of the IUCN Global Marine Programme;
and Helen Temple of the IUCN Red List Programme for
reviewing this docum ent and especially to Sarah Fowler,
IUCN SSG Co-chair, for h er continual support.
W e gratefully acknow ledge Leonard C om pagno and
Fabrizio Serena for help in compiling the regional checklist
for this report, and Sarah Ashworth, Sarah Valenti and
Adei Heenan for all the w ork they have undertaken in
contributing to reviewing and editing species assessments.
W e w ould also like to thank Peter Kyne for extrem ely
helpful discussions.
Finally, w e w ould like to thank Alejandro Sancho Rafel
for providing the illustrations.
The w ork presented in this report was supported by the
IUCN Centre for M editerranean Cooperation, the David
and Lucile Packard Foundation and the UK D epartm ent
for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Defra).
Participants of the IUCN Shark Specialist Group Mediterranean Red List Workshop, September 2003, San Marino.
V
This report is dedicated to the memory of Dr Ransom A. Myers (1952-2007).
Ram attended the IUCN Mediterranean Red List Workshop and
gave so much of his boundless energy to shark conservation.
vi
1. Introduction
Chondrichthyans are a relatively small (approximately 1,200
sp ecies) ev o lu tionarily-conservative g ro u p th a t has
functioned successfully in diverse ecosystems for over
400 m illion years. D espite th eir evolutionary success,
many chondrichthyans are increasingly threatened w ith
e x tin c tio n as a re su lt o f h u m an activ ities a n d th e
conservative life history traits of this group of fishes.
Generally, chondrichthyans are slow growing and late to
mature, w ith low fecundity. These characteristics result
in very low rates of potential population increase w ith
little capacity to recover from overfishing (direct or
indirect) and o ther threats such as pollution and habitat
destruction (Fowler et al. 2005).
assessm ents is p re se n te d in this report, highlighting
species of conservation concern as w ell as those of least
concern. It is envisaged th at th e inform ation contained
w ithin this report will facilitate further developm ent and
im p ro v e d im p le m e n ta tio n o f th e U n ite d N a tio n s
Environm ent Programm e (UNEP) M editerranean Action
Plan (UNEP MAP RAC/SPA 2003) and the development of
priority research, conservation and management actions for
the region.
This IUCN overview summarises the SSG’s full report
(Cavanagh el ul. in prep.), w hich provides an in-depth
o v erv ie w o f re g io n a l issues an d co n tain s d etailed
summaries of IUCN Red List assessments for all chon­
drichthyan fishes that occur in the Mediterranean Sea.
In 2003, th e IUCN W orld Conservation U nion’s Shark
Specialist Group (SSG), in collaboration w ith the IUCN
C entre for M editerranean C ooperation, established a
regional g roup o f ex p erts to w ork m ore coherently
to w ard s im proved conservation and m anagem ent of
chondrichthyan fishes in the Mediterranean. One of the
prim ary aims of the group was to assess the threatened
status of each chondrichthyan species that occurs in the
Mediterranean by applying the IUCN Red List criteria. This
w ork constitutes part of the SSG’s global program m e to
complete IUCN Red List assessments for all chondrichthyan
fishes. A summary of the results of the M editerranean
1.1 Chondrichthyan fishes in
the Mediterranean
The M editerranean Sea covers an area of approxim ately
2.5 million km 2 (about 0.7% of the w orld’s ocean surface
area) and has an average d ep th o f 1,500m (reaching
5,200m at its d eep est p o in t in th e Ionian Sea). The
coastline extends for 46,000km and is b o rd e red by
21 countries (Zenetosef«/. 2002).
Figure 1. Map o f th e M editerranean Sea and su rrou n d in g cou n tries.
ü*d crJJJ
%
L
kV
....
Bay ot
!M Ji
V
4 «
SJ
□ i s r . 'j y
a la e*
L 'H LT1
Wn
ïym pinw
SM
, . .
Soil
M
X
IH W # ■
l
j
I o
I I I
Sn- ç/fHbt mH-
LU
.4 '
¡W. CLudSfn
S y ria
* sm
ive ile m
1
t
'i
Ad b
Although th e M editerranean is a semi-enclosed sea, the
chondrichthyan fish fauna is relatively diverse w ith an
estim ated 80 species (approxim ately 7% of total living
chondrichthyans), comprising 45 species of sharks from 17
families, 34 batoid species from nine families and one species
of chim aera (Compagno 2001; Compagno et al. 2005;
Compagno in prep a; Compagno in prep b; Serena 2005).
An illustrated checklist of all 80 species of chondrichthyans
thought to occur in the M editerranean Sea is provided in
Appendix 1. However, this report focuses on 71 of the 80
species as the occurrence of the remaining nine species within
the M editerranean is either infrequent, questionable, or
cannot be confirmed due to taxonom ic uncertainty (e.g.
shortnose spurdog Squalus megalops), and these nine
species are not know n to breed w ithin the region. They
include species w hich rarely occur in the Mediterranean at
the very edge of their range (e.g. milk shark Rhizoprionodon
acutus), occasional visitors from the Atlantic (e.g. silky shark
C archarhinus fa lciform is), or vagrants from the Red Sea
that have travelled through the Suez Canal (e.g. blacktip reef
shark Carcharhinus melanopterus).
world (Walker et al. 2005). These declines can be attributed
to a number of lactors, including the life history characteristics
of chondrichthyans in combination w ith the semi-enclosed
nature of the Mediterranean Sea and intense fishing activity
throughout its coastal and pelagic waters; effects of habitat
loss; environmental degradation; and pollution (Stevens et
al. 2005; Walker et al. 2005). Large coastal species (which
are biologically the m ost vulnerable to exploitation) and
species that occur in areas subjected to prolonged and/or
intensive fishing pressure are of particular concern. Such
species include the sand tiger shark Carcharias taurus, white
skate Rostroraja alba and porbeagle L am na nasus.
1.2.1 Life history characteristics
Although considerable variation occurs, chondrichthyans
exhibit strongly K-selected life history strategies especially
w hen com pared w ith teleost fishes (Cailliet et al. 2005).
C hondrichthyans are generally slow growing, late to
m ature, have low fecu n d ity and p ro d u ctiv ity , long
gestation periods, high natural survivorship of all age
classes and long life (Cailliet et al. 2005; Camhi et al.
1998). These biological traits result in low reproductive
potential and low capacity for population increase for
m an y s p e c ie s . S uch c h a ra c te ris tic s h av e se rio u s
im plications for chondrichthyan populations; limiting
th e ir capacity to sustain fisheries and reco v er from
declines (Cailliet e t al. 2005; Camhi e t al. 1998).
Endemism of chondrichthyans in the M editerranean is
low , w ith o nly fo u r b a to id sp ec ie s (M altese skate
Leucoraja m elitensis, speckled skate R aja polystigm a,
rough ray R. radula and giant devilray M obula m obular)
that could be considered endemic (Serena 2005). W ithin
the M editerranean, the distribution of chondrichthyan
fishes is not hom ogenous (Serena 2005). Some areas are
co n sid ered critical habitat for chondrichthyans. For
example, Tunisian waters provide a nursery area for white
shark Carcharodon carcharias. Aggregations of basking
shark C etorhinus m a xim u s, have been observed in the
northern Balearic region, the N orthern Adriatic and the
Tyrrhenian Sea (W alker et al. 2005). A strong correlation
b e tw e e n th e p re se n c e o f C. m a x im u s , chlorophyll
concentration and prey abundance in these areas indicate
they are im portant feeding sites (Sims 2003; Sims et al.
2003). Some species have a restricted range w ithin the
M editerranean, for exam ple a small population o f the
sm alltooth sand tiger shark O dontaspis fe r o x seems
resident in a particular area off Lebanon (Walker et al.
2005). The lo w rate o f exchange b e tw e e n isolated
p o p u latio n s, for exam ple angelshark S q u a tin a spp.
populations around the Balearics, leaves them especially
prone to local depletion, given that recolonisation rates
will be extrem ely low (Massuti and Moranta 2003).
1.2.2 Fisheries
T he c o m m ercial value o f c h o n d ric h th y a n s is lo w
com pared to that of teleost fishes and shellfishes in the
M editerranean. C urrently chondrichthyans re p resen t
0.78% of th e total landings in th e M editerranean Sea
(FAO 2006). B etw een 1970 an d 1985, landings o f
chondrichthyan fishes in the Mediterranean, as reported
to the Fisheries and Agriculture Organization of the United
N ations (FAO), in cre ased from 10,000t to 25,000t.
Subsequently, reported landings declined to l,0 0 0 t by
2004 (FAO 2006; SGRST 2003).
Benthic traw l effort has increased in the shelf and slope
area of the Mediterranean over the past 50 years (Aldebert
1997). Increased fishing intensity and technological
advancem ent of fishing gear has resulted in a decline in
many chondrichthyan species commercially captured by
trawls in the north-w estern M editerranean (Walker et al.
2005). Several demersal species are utilised commercially,
w hile only a few pelagic species are m arketed. The
m ajor c h o n d ric h th y an fishing co u n trie s w ith in th e
Mediterranean are Turkey, Tunisia, Greece, Italy and Spain
and the species most commonly taken in coastal fisheries are:
sm oothounds M ustelus spp., skates Rajids, catsharks
S cy lio rh in u s spp., dogfish S q u a lu s spp., eagle rays
M yliobatids and w hiptail stingrays D asyatids (W alker et
1.2 Overview of threats to Mediterranean
chondrichthyans
Available evidence indicates that chondrichthyans in the
M editerranean are generally declining in abundance,
diversity and range and are possibly facing a w orse
scenario than chondrichthyan populations elsewhere in the
2
al. 2005). Unfortunately, data collected are incomplete and
some of the most important landings are not recorded due to
several species being reported under one group. For example,
only thornback ray Raja clavata has separate records data
among the Rajids. Additionally, FAO data only report official
landings and therefore bycatch returned to the sea is not
included (Walker etal. 2005). Several species, (e.g. common
skate Dipturus batis, sawback angelshark Squatina aculeata
and smoothback angelshark S. oculata) are now considered
lo cally e x tirp a te d o r c o m m ercially e x tin c t in th e
M editerranean. Exploitation of such species continues,
however, as they constitute bycatch in many other fisheries
(W alkereta l. 2005).
and associated pollution have degraded critical coastal
habitats, such as nursery and spawning areas (Camhi et al.
1998; Stevens et al. 2005; UNEP MAP RAC/SPA 2003).
Fisheries activities such as intensive bottom-trawling reduce
the complexity of benthic habitats, affecting the epiflora and
epifauna and reducing the availability of suitable habitats for
predators and prey (Stevens et al. 2005). Pollution can
contaminate food sources, concentrating in animals at the
to p of the food chain and potentially affecting physiology
and functioning (UNEP MAP RAC/SPA 2003). A num ber of
studies have shown that some Mediterranean sharks, such as
the spiny dogfish Squalus acanthias, contain illegally high
(>0.50mmg/kg) concentrations of mercury. Trace metals and
organochlorine residues have been found in the eggs, muscles,
liver and kidneys of deepsea sharks such as guiper shark
Centrophorus granulosus and blackmouth catshark Galeus
melastomus, confirming that deepwater species are also being
affected by pollution (UNEP RAC/SPA 2002).
Although directed fisheries have caused stock collapse
fo r so m e s p e c ie s , m o re s ig n ific a n t th r e a ts to
chondrichthyans are m ortality in m ixed species fisheries
and bycatch in fisheries targeting m ore valuable species
(Musick and Bonfil 2005; Stevens e t al. 2005). There are
no M editerranean pelagic fisheries that target migratory
oceanic sharks. However, longline fisheries targeting
swordfish and tunas (w hich have increased in effort over
the past three decades) pose a great threat to susceptible
chondrichthyans taken as bycatch in this fishery (ICCAT
2001). Bycatch is poorly docum ented and data are rarely
in c o rp o ra te d in to natio n al an d in te rn a tio n a l (FAO)
statistics, therefore num bers of sharks caught as bycatch
can only be crudely estim ated (C am hi e t al. 1998).
Driftnetting catches large num bers of chondrichthyans.
This fishing m ethod, once used widely throughout the
Mediterranean, is now prohibited here (see 6.2), how ever
ille g al d riftn e ttin g still o c c u rs (WWF 2 0 0 5 ).
Chondrichthyans m ost vulnerable and frequently caught
w ith driftn ets in clude blue shark P rio n a ce g la u ca ,
com m on thresher Alopias vulpinus, shortfin mako Isurus
o xy rin c h u s, porbeagle L a m n a nasus, basking shark
Cetorhinus m a xim u s, giant devil ray M obula m obular,
pelagic stingray P tero p la tytryg o n violacea, requiem
sharks C archarhinus spp. and ham m erheads Sphyrna
spp. (Tudela 2004; W alker et al. 2005).
1.3 Management implications
Due to their life history characteristics, it is not appropriate
to apply conventional management models of teleost fisheries
to ch o n d rich th y an pop u latio n s, and th e n eed for a
precautionary approach to their m anagem ent has been
repeatedly highlighted (e.g. in FAO 2000; Fowler and
Cavanagh 2005a). International and regional conventions
and agreements relevant to Mediterranean chondrichthyans
are discussed in section 5 of this report. Protection has been
granted to a very small num ber of shark and ray species and
some fishing restrictions are in force. These restrictions are
often unsatisfactory, however. In general, the management
techniques and enforcement measures currently in place are
inadequate to ensure the long-term survival of many species
a n d p o p u la tio n s (C am hi e t al. 1998; F o w ler an d
Cavanagh 2005a).
1.4 The IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species™ - a tool for management
Recreational sport fisheries have increased noticeably over
the past few years, particularly off the Italian, Spanish and
French coasts. Although data are limited, target species
mainly include thresher sharks Alopias spp. and blue shark
P rionace glauca, w ith catches primarily com posed of
young individuals. Anglers are increasingly releasing their
catches alive (SGRST 2003; Walker et al. 2005).
The IUCN Red list of Threatened Species™(IUCN Red List) is
widely recognised as the most comprehensive, scientificallybased source of information on the global status of plant and
animal species. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria are
applied to individual species assessments (w hich contain
information on aspects such as ecology and life history,
distribution, habitat, threats, current population trends and
conservation measures), to determine their relative threat of
extinction. T hreatened species are listed as Critically
Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN) or Vulnerable (VU). Taxa
that are either close to meeting the threatened thresholds or
w ould be threatened w ere it not for ongoing conservation
program mes are classified as Near Threatened (NT). Taxa
evaluated as having a low risk of extinction are classified as
1.2.3 Habitat loss, environmental degradation
and pollution
Pressures resulting from hum an population grow th along
th e coastline are detrim entally affecting th e m arine
ecosystem and are contributing to the threats faced by
chondrichthyans. Rapid urban and industrial development
3
Least Concern (LC). Also highlighted within the IUCN Red
List are taxa that cannot be evaluated due to insufficient
knowledge, and therefore assessed as Data Deficient (DD).
T his c a te g o ry d oes n o t n e c e ssa rily m ean th a t th e
sp e c ie s is n o t th re a te n e d , o n ly th a t th e ir risk o f
extin ctio n cannot be assessed w ith th e cu rren t data
available (IUCN 2006).
America, N orth and Central America, the Mediterranean,
N ortheast Atlantic and W est Africa. There have also been
tw o generic workshops; one for Batoids (skates and rays)
and one for deepsea species.
IUCN Red list assessments can be used as a tool for measuring
and m onitoring changes in the status of chondrichthyan
biodiversity and our knowledge of the taxa. They are an
essential basis for providing targets for m anagem ent
priorities, and for m onitoring the long term success of
m anagem ent and conservation initiatives.
The tw o main objectives of the SSG’s regional assessment
process are:
■ to d evelop a netw ork o f regional experts to enable
species assessments to be continually up d ated as
new inform ation is discovered and to provide expert
opinion on policy and m anagem ent recom m end­
ations, and;
■ to a s s is t in r e g io n a l p la n n in g a n d p o lic y
d ev elo p m en t for the conservation and sustainable
m anagem ent of chondrichthyan fishes in different
regions th ro u g h th e provision o f com prehensive
inform ation reporting on their current status.
1.6 Objectives
1.5 The IUCN Shark Specialist Group’s
Red List programme
The SSG is currently part way through a program m e to
co m plete global assessm ents for all chondrichthyan
species (-1 ,2 0 0 w orldw ide) by the end of 2007. This
Global C hondrichthyan Assessment’ is primarily being
undertaken through a series of regional w orkshops in
order to facilitate detailed discussions and pooling of
resources and regional expertise. Regional assessments
are collated to produce the global assessment for each
species (unless a species is endem ic to the region, in
w hich case the regional assessment will also be the global
assessm ent). For w idespread species, som e regional
a sse ssm e n t c a te g o rie s m ay differ fro m th e global
assessment. To date, workshops have been held for seven
regions: Australia and Oceania, sub-equatorial Africa, South
This regional report summarises the results of the SSG’s
Mediterranean workshop. It provides a regional overview
of the conservation status of the chondrichthyan fish
sp e c ie s k n o w n to o c c u r a n d b re e d w ith in th e
M editerranean Sea. Its main outputs are:
■ a co m p re h en siv e sp ecies list o f M editerran ean
chondrichthyans;
■ IUCN Red List categories for each species;
■ a summary of the main threats affecting Mediterranean
chondrichthyans (illustrated by case studies); and
■ recommendations for the future.
4
2. Methodology
2.1 Workshop procedure
As the IUCN’s Guidelines fo r application o f IUCN Red List
criteria a t regional levels (IUCN 2003a) were in the process
of being developed at the time of the workshop, all species
had their status assessed according to the global IUCN Red
List categories a n d criteria (IUCN 2001). The nine IUCN
Red list categories are: Extinct, Extinct in the Wild, Critically
Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable, Near Threatened,
Least C o n cern , D ata D e ficien t an d N ot Evaluated.
Classification of species into the threatened categories
(Critically Endangered, Endangered and Vulnerable) is
through a set of five quantitative criteria based on biological
factors related to extinction risk, including: rate of decline,
population size, area of geographic distribution, and degree
of population and distribution fragmentation. These are
summarised in A ppendix 2. W orkshop participants did,
however, refer to the penultimate draft of the application of
IUCN Red List criteria at regional levels (Gärdenfors e t al.
2001), as appropriate.
The SSG held a regional IUCN Red List w orkshop in San
Marino, Septem ber 2003, w hich was funded by the IUCN
Centre for Mediterranean Cooperation and the David and Lucile
Packard Foundation. Thirty regional and international experts
from 14 countries convened to evaluate the Mediterranean
chondrichthyan fish farma and to formulate priorities for
conservation and management action in the region.
During the workshop, experts produced regional IUCN Red
List assessments for the 71 species of chondrichthyan fishes
known to occur and breed in the Mediterranean Sea. The nine
remaining species, whose occurrence in the Mediterranean is
questionable, or that are at the very edge of their range and
th e re fo re rare, w e re n o t evaluated (NE) regionally.
In fo rm a tio n o n th e s e s p e c ie s ’ o c c u rre n c e in th e
Mediterranean has been noted in their global assessment.
Expert preparation and evaluation of chondrichthyan species IUCN Red List assessments. IUCN-SSGMediterranean workshop, San Marino. ©Rachel Cavanagh.
5
2.2 The precautionary approach
submitted. Ah global assessments are subject to review before
being finalised and subm itted to the IUCN Red List, after
which time they will be periodically revisited and updated as
new information becomes available. The IUCN Red List is
updated yearly; readers are therefore urged always to consult
the current IUCN Red List (www.redlist.org), to obtain the
most up to date assessments.
The IUCN guidelines recom m end assessors should adopt a
precautionary, but realistic approach w hen applying criteria,
but that all reasoning should be explicitly documented (IUCN
2005). For example, w here a population decline is know n
to have taken place (e.g. as a result of fisheries) but no
management has been applied to change the pressures on
the population, it can be assum ed the decline is likely to
continue in the future. If fisheries are known to be underway,
but no information is available on changes in catch p er unit
effort (CPUE), data from similar fisheries elsewhere may be
used by informed specialists to extrapolate likely population
trends. Additionally, where no life history data are available,
the demographics of a very closely related species may be
applied (Fowler and Cavanagh 2005b).
2.4 Geographically distinct populations
The IUCN Red List allows for the separate assessment of
geographically distinct populations. These subpopulations
are defined as “geographically or otherwise distinct groups
in the (global) population betw een w hich there is little
demographic or genetic exchange “typically one successful
migrant individual or gamete p er year or less” (IUCN 2001).
Subpopulation assessments are displayed separately on the
IUCN Red List website and Mediterranean subpopulations
are identified in this report (Table 3.1).
2.3 Regional and global assessments
At the Mediterranean workshop, it was not always possible
to p ro d u ce th e global assessm ent for a species after
com pleting its regional assessment. This was largely due
to a lack o f inform ation from outside th e region. In
th e se cases, th e global assessm en t is cu rre n tly ‘in
preparation’, pending information from other regions and
subsequent review by the w ider SSG netw ork (-2 0 0
m em bers worldwide).
2.5 Review process
Since the M editerranean w orkshop in 2003, some species
assessments have been reviewed and updated at the SSG’s
N o rth e a st A tlantic w o rk sh o p (F eb ru ary 2006). All
M editerranean assessm ents and docum entatio n have
un d erg o n e significant review and editing follow ing
circulation to the w id er SSG netw ork. The resulting
assessm en ts are, th e re fo re , a p ro d u c t o f scien tific
consensus concerning species status and are supported
by relevant literature and data sources.
It should be noted that not all species assessments carried
out at the M editerranean w orkshop currently appear on
th e IUCN Red List (2006), as they require additional
in fo rm atio n b efo re th e ir global assessm ent can be
6
3. Results and discussion
3.1 Summary of threatened status
The regional threatened status of the 71 chondrichthyan
species know n to occur and breed in the M editerranean
Sea has been assessed.
A sum m ary o f th e n u m b e rs o f M ed iterran ean
chondrichthyans currently assigned to each IUCN Red List
category regionally and globally (2006) is presented in
Table 3.2. Currently, 35 of the 71 Mediterranean species
have existing global assessments. Twenty-three out of
these 35 species presently have updates to their global
assessm ent in p re p a ra tio n . All 36 o f th e rem aining
species, w h ich have not yet been evaluated globally,
have global assessm ents in p re p ara tio n . As species
assessments are continually being reviewed and updated,
readers are always urged to consult th e curren t Red
List (w w w .redlist.org), to obtain the m ost up to date
species assessments.
The IUCN Red List category assigned to each species during
th e w o rk sh o p an d /o r su b sequent review p ro cess is
presented in Table 3.1. For species assessed globally,
th is categ o ry (as seen o n th e IUCN 2006 Red List
(w w w .redlist.org)), and the year o f assessm ent are also
show n. The in p re p a ra tio n ’ colum n indicates w h e th e r
a n ew global assessm ent o r an update to an existing
global assessm ent is currently being prepared. Finally,
the ‘subpopulation’ column indicates w hether the species
h as a g e o g ra p h ic a lly d is tin c t s u b p o p u la tio n in
the Mediterranean.
Table 3.1 Sum m ary o f th e region al and global IUCN Red List status o f all M editerranean ch on d rich th y a n
fish sp ecies.
Scientific n am e
C om m on n am e
T hreaten ed Status
M editerranean
a ssessm en t
O xynotus centrina
Angular roughshark
CR A2bd
S q u a tin a aculeata
Sawback angelshark
S q u a tin a oculata
Sm oothback angelshark
T hreaten ed Status N ew /u p d ated
Global
global
a ssessm e n t
a ssessm e n t
(year subm itted) i n prep aration
NE
/
CR A 2bcd+3cd+4bcd
EN (2006)
/
CR A 2bcd+3cd+4bcd
EN (2006)
/
S q u a tin a sq u a tin a
Angelshark
CR A 2bcd+3cd+4bcd
CR (2006)
Pristis p e c tin a ta
Sm alltooth sawfish
CR A 2bcd+3cd+4bcd
CR (2006)
Pristis p ristis
Com m on sawfish
CR A 2bcd+3cd+4bcd
CR (2006)
Sub­
p o p u la tio n
D ip tu ru s batis
Com m on skate
CR A2bcd+4bcd
CR (2006)
Leucoraja m elitensis
Maltese skate
CR A 2bcd+3bcd+4bcd
CR (2006)
R ostroraja alba
W hite skate
CR A2cd+4cd
EN (2006)
G y m n u ra altavela
Spiny butterfly ray
CR A2bcd
NE
/
/
Carcharias ta u ru s
Sand tiger shark
CR A2abcd+3cd+4abcd
VU (2000)
/
/
Isu ru s o xyrin ch u s
Shortfin mako
CR A 2acd+3cd+4acd
NT (2000)
/
L a m n a n a su s
Porbeagle shark
CR A2bd
VU (2005)
Sq u a lu s acanthias
Spiny dogfish
EN A 2bd+ íbd (VU Black Sea)
VU (2006)
R h in o b a to s cem iculus
Blackchin guitarfish
EN A-ícd
NE
/
R h in o b a to s rhinobatos
Com m on guitarfish
EN A-ícd
NE
/
Leucoraja circularis
Sandy skate
EN A 2bcd+ 3bcd+ íbcd
NE
/
M obula m o b u la r
Giant devilray
EN A id
EN (2006)
O dontaspis fe r o x
Sm alltooth sand tiger
EN A 2abd+íabd
DD (2003)
/
Carcharodon carcharias
G reat w hite shark
EN A 2bc+3bc+ íbc
VU (2000)
/
C archarhin us p lu m b e u s
Sandbar shark
EN A 2bd+ íbd
NT (2000)
/
H eptranchias perlo
Sharpnose sevengill shark
VU A 2d+ 3d+ íd
NT (2003)
/
C entrophorus g ra n u lo su s
G uiper shark
VU A 3d+ íd
VU (2006)
A lopias vu lp in u s
T hresher shark
VU A2bd+3bd
DD (2001)
/
Cetorb in u s m a x im us
Basking shark
VU A2bd
VU (2000)
/
G aleorhin us galeus
Tope shark
VU A2bd
VU (2005)
/
7
/
/
Table 3.1 co n t’d. Sum m ary o f th e region al and global IUCN Red List status o f all M editerranean
ch o n d rich th y a n fish sp ecies.
T hreaten ed Status
M editerranean
a ssessm en t
T hreaten ed Status N ew /u p d ated
Global
global
a ssessm e n t
a ssessm e n t
(year subm itted) i n prep aration
Scien tific n am e
C om m on n am e
M ustelus asterias
Starry sm oothhound
VU A2ab+3bd+4ab
LC (2000)
/
M ustelus m ustelus
Sm oothhound
VU A2ab+3bd+4ab
LC (2000)
/
P rionace glauca
Blue shark
VU A3bd+4bd
NT (2000)
/
Sphyrna zy g a e n a
Sm ooth ham m erhead
VU A-ibd
NT (2000)
/
C him aera m onstrosa
Rabbitfish
NT
NE
/
H e xa n c h u s griseus
Bluntnose sixgill shark
NT
NT (2000)
/
D ip tu ru s o x yrh yn ch u s
Sharpnose skate
NT
NE
/
Leucoraja n a e vu s
Cuckoo skate
NT
NE
/
R aja clavata
Thornback skate
NT
NT (2000)
R aja p o lystig m a
Speckled skate
NT
NE
/
D asyatis centroura
Roughtail stingray
NT
NE
/
D asyatis p a stin a c a
Com m on stingray
NT
NE
/
P teroplatytrygon violacea
Pelagic stingray
NT
NE
/
M yliobatis a quila
Com m on eagle ray
NT
NE
/
R hin o p tera m a rg in a ta
Lusitanian cow nose ray
NT
NE
/
G aleus atla n ticu s
Atlantic catshark
NT
NE
/
Scyliorhin us stellaris
N ursehound
NT
NE
/
E tm o p teru s sp in a x
Velvet belly
LC
NE
/
Centroscym n us coelolepis
Portuguese dogfish
LC
NT (2003)
/
So m n io su s rostratus
Little sleeper shark
LC
NE
/
Torpedo m a rm o ra ta
Spotted torpedo ray
LC
NE
/
Torpedo torpedo
Ocellate torpedo ray
LC
NE
/
R aja asterias
Atlantic starry skate
LC
NE
/
R aja m ira letu s
Twineye skate
LC
NE
/
R aja m o n ta g u i
Spotted skate
LC
NE
/
G aleus m ela sto m u s
Blackm outh catshark
LC
NE
/
Scyliorhinus canicula
Sm allspotted catshark
LC
LC (2000)
H exa n ch u s n a k a m u r a i
Bigeye sixgill shark
DD
NE
/
E ch in o rh in u s brucus
Bramble shark
DD
DD (2003)
/
D alatias licha
Kitefin shark
DD
DD (2000)
/
Torpedo n o b ilia n a
G reat torpedo ray
DD
NE
/
Leucoraja fu llo n ic a
Shagreen skate
DD
NE
/
R aja brachyura
Blonde skate
DD
NE
/
R aja radula
Rough skate
DD
NE
/
R aja u n d u la ta
Undulate skate
DD
NE
/
D asyatis chrysonota
Blue stingray
DD
NE
/
H im a n tu ra u a rn a k
Honeycom b w hipray
DD
NE
/
T aeniura g ra b a ta
Round fantail stingray
DD
NE
/
A lopias superciliosus
Bigeye thresher
DD
NE
/
M ustelus p u n c tu la tu s
Blackspot sm oothhound
DD
NE
/
C archarhin us alt im us
Bignose shark
DD
NE
/
C archarhinus brachyurus
Bronze w haler shark
DD
NT (2003)
/
C archarhinus b re v ip in n a
Spinner shark
DD
NT (2000)
/
C archarhinus lim b a tu s
Blacktip shark
DD
NT (2000)
/
C archarhinus obscurus
Dusky shark
DD
NT (2000)
/
Sub­
p o p u la tio n
Table 3.2 S um m ary o f n u m b ers o f M ed iterran ean sp e c ie s a ssig n e d to ea c h IUCN Red List ca teg o ry
r e g io n a lly a n d glob ally.
N um ber o f M ed iterran ean c h o n d r ic h th y a n sp e c ie s
IUCN R ed List C ategories
R egion al A sse ssm e n t
G lobal A sse ssm e n t (IUCN R ed List, 2006)
Critically Endangered (CR)
13
5
8
4
Endangered (EN)
Vulnerable (VU)
9
7
Near T hreatened (NT)
13
12
Least C oncern (LC)
10
3
Data D eficient (DD)
18
4
N ot Evaluated (NE)
0
36
71
71
Total n u m b er o f s p e c ie s
Globally, of the 546 chondrichthyans assessed to date (figure
3.1), 20% (110 species) are considered threatened, 17%
(95 species) Near Threatened, 25% (136 species) Least
Concern and 38% (205 species) Data Deficient. The results
o f this study dem onstrate, how ever, th at th e status of
chondrichthyans in the Mediterranean appears far worse.
Considering threatened species alone, most of w hich have
global as well as regional assessments, a higher percentage
of Mediterranean chondrichthyans are clearly more seriously
threatened inside the Mediterranean than they are globally
(Figure 3.3). Thus, of the 13 species assessed as Critically
Endangered inside the Mediterranean, only five are also
Critically Endangered globally (three are Endangered, tw o
Vulnerable, one Near Threatened and tw o Not Evaluated).
Of the eight Endangered Mediterranean species, one is also
Endangered globally, while the others are Vulnerable (two
species), Near Threatened (one species), Data Deficient (one
species) or Not Evaluated (three species). Finally, only three
o f th e nine M editerranean V ulnerable species are also
Vulnerable globally. The others are Near Threatened (three
species), Data Deficient (one species) or Least Concern (two
species). O f course, the Data Deficient and Not Evaluated
global assessments may prove also to be threatened globally
F o rty -tw o p e r c e n t (30 s p e c ie s) o f M e d ite rra n e a n
chondrichthyan fishes are considered threatened (Critically
Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable) within the region.
O f these, 18% (13 species) are Critically Endangered, 11%
(8 species) are Endangered and 13% (9 species) are Vulnerable.
A further 18% (13 species) of Mediterranean chondrichthyans
are assessed as Near Threatened and 14% (10 species) are
assessed as Least Concern. Little information is known about
26% (18 species), w hich have therefore been assessed as
Data Deficient (Figure 3.2).
Figure 3.1 P ercentage o f globally
a ssessed ch o n d rich th yan fish es
( n=546 ) w ith in each IUCN Red
List category, IUCN Red List 2006.
Figure 3.2 P ercentage o f
M editerranean sp ecies w ith in
each IUCN Red List category;
reg io n a l a ssessm en t, IUCN Red
List 2006.
Figure 3.3 The global status o f th e
30 th reaten ed M editerranean
sp ecies, IUCN Red List 2006.
NE
- (17%)
CR
(17%)
DD
(7%)
LC
(7%)
NT
(17%)
LC
VU
(2 2 %)
(25%)
Key: CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered; VU: Vulnerable; NT: Near Threatened; LC: Least Concern; DD: Data
Deficient; NE: Not Evaluated
9
3.2.1 Bycatch
w hen more data becom e available, but it is notable that
only one species, th e d eep w ater Portuguese dogfish
Centroscymnus coeloloepis has a better conservation status
inside the Mediterranean than it has globally.
Chondrichthyan fishes are caught incidentally as bycatch in
most fisheries worldwide (Camhi et at. 1998). The extent of
bycatch is very often poorly docum ented, as a large
proportion of bycatch is estimated to be discarded at sea and
therefore unreported in official statistics (Camhi etal. 1998;
Stevens et al. 2005). All species of chondrichthyans in the
M editerranean have been and are currently threatened or
p otentially th re a te n e d th ro u g h bycatch in fisheries.
Furthermore, bycatch will remain a major threat if changes
to the current fisheries practices in the region are not
im plem ented. The percentage of species susceptible to
capture in various gear types as bycatch in the Mediterranean
are shown in Figure 3.5.
3.2 Major threats
A summary of the major threats to chondrichthyans in
the Mediterranean, as identified in the IUCN Major Threats
Authority File for each species IUCN Red List assessment,
is presented in Table 3.3. The percentage of chondrichthyans
currently susceptible to each of the major threat categories
within the Mediterranean is presented in Figure 3.4.
Table 3.3 H istorical, current and future threats to
ch o n d rich th y a n s in th e M editerranean. Note: More
than one threat category can be selected for each species.
T ype o f th reat
IUCN Red list assessment results show that bycatch in trawls
is cu rren tly co n sid ered to be th e greatest th re a t to
chondrichthyans in the Mediterranean, with all species affected
or potentially affected (albeit for certain pelagic species such
as blue shark Prionace glauca and makos Isurus spp.) it
may only be certain life stages that are affected. Bycatch in
nets (gillnets, purse seines and driftnets) is considered a
possible threat to 67 (94%) of Mediterranean chondrichthyans
and bycatch in longlines fisheries is a potential threat to 48
(67%) of species (Figure 3.5).
N o. o f s p e c ie s a ffec te d
P ast
P r e se n t F u tu re
th r e a t
th r e a t
th r e a t
Bye ate h
71
71
71
Life history
62
62
62
Pollution
23
23
23
H abitat loss / degradation
23
23
23
Hum an disturbance
22
22
22
Recreational fishery
16
14
14
Target fishery
15
6
8
Persecution
3
0
0
3.2.2 Life history
It is weU known that the K-selected life history characteristics
of m ost chondrichthyan fishes render them intrinsically
vulnerable to fishing pressure. Once depleted, their life history
traits also m ean that populations have little capacity to
recover. Sixty-two of the 71 species (87%) occurring in the
Mediterranean are considered particularly threatened as a
result of their inherently higher vulnerability due to limiting
life history characteristics (Table 3.3, Figure 3.4).
Figure 3.4 P ercentage o f ch on d rich th yan sp ecies
(n= 7 /) cu rren tly su scep tib le to each o f th e m ajor
threats in th e M editerranean, as d etailed in th e
sp e c ie s’ IUCN Red List assessm en ts.
100 %
90%
Figure 3.5 Percentage o f ch on d rich th yan sp ecies
(n= 71) w ith in th e M editerranean, for w h ich bycatch
in traw ls, lo n g lin es and n ets, p o se a m ajor threat.
80%
70%
60%
100%
50%
90%
40%
80%
30%
70%
20 %
60%
10%
50%
0%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Threat
Trawls
10
Longlines
Nets
3.2.3 Target fisheries
The species has a depth range that coincides w ith that of
trawling activity, however, and is now considered rare within
a decreasing area of occurrence.
Target fisheries are currently considered less of a threat to
sharks and rays than in the past. Historically, 15 species were
affected by targeted fisheries, but this num ber has now
reduced to six species (8%) (Figure 3.4). The reduction in
numbers of species affected can be explained by the fact that
some chondrichthyans, such as angelsharks Squatina spp.,
have becom e commercially extinct and are therefore no
longer targeted by fisheries.
Both species of sawfish in the M editerranean are seriously
threatened (Critically Endangered). Smalltooth sawfish
Pristis pectinata has been wholly or nearly extirpated from
large areas o f its form er range by fishing and habitat
m odification. C om m on saw fish P. p r is tis w as o nce
com m on in the Mediterranean but is now thought to have
been extirpated. Sawfishes are extrem ely vulnerable to
bycatch in nets due to their large rostra. W ithout timely
intervention there is a high probability that both of these
species will becom e extinct in the Mediterranean, if this
is not already the case.
3.2.4 Anthropogenic activities
A p p ro x im ate ly 32% o f all c h o n d ric h th y a n s in th e
Mediterranean are threatened or potentially threatened by
anthropogenic activities, such as pollution, disturbance,
habitat loss and degradation. Species most affected are those
w ith predominantly coastal habitats.
O ther seriously threatened species include the porbeagle
L a m n a n a su s (Critically Endangered), shortfin mako
Isurus oxyrinchus (Critically Endangered), sandbar shark
C archarhinus p lu m b e u s (Endangered), giant devilray
M o b u la m o b u l a r (E n d a n g e re d ), a n d b lu e sh ark
P rionace g la u ca (Vulnerable). Unsustainable fisheries
(target and bycatch, usually by longlines) are th e main
threats to these species.
3.3 Threatened species
Forty-two percent of Mediterranean chondrichthyans have
b een assessed as th re a te n e d (C ritically Endangered,
Endangered or Vulnerable) in the region. The status of all 30
of these species must be monitored particularly closely and,
crucially, m anagem ent and recovery plans should be
implemented without delay. Further research and monitoring
should also be conducted to better understand species’
biology, threats and conservation needs.
3.4 Near Threatened species
Thirteen species (18%) are assessed as Near Threatened,
reflecting concern that they are close to qualifying for a
threatened category and could do so in the near future. For
example, there is concern for several species that are taken
as bycatch in fisheries, yet may be unable to w ithstand
continued indirect exploitation pressure. These include the
sharpnose skate D ipturus oxyrinchus, com m on stingray
Dasyatis pastinaca and common eagleray Myliobatis aquila.
It is essential that these species are m onitored closely and,
where possible, management action should be taken to avoid
them becoming listed as threatened in the future.
Taxa at highest extinction risk in the Mediterranean include
several species of bottom-dwelling chondrichthyans highly
susceptible to trawling activities and w ith vulnerable life
histories. For example, the three species of angelsharks
S q u a tin a spp. are all seriously th rea ten ed (Critically
Endangered), having suffered severe declines and range
contractions, yet all w ere historically abundant (Walker et
al. 2005). Their demise is almost certainly due to intense
demersal fishing pressure from which they have been unable
to recover. A num ber of other demersal species are similarly
affected, such as the angular rough shark Oxynotus centrina
(Critically Endangered), formerly abundant but now rare with
localised extinctions. Its large spiny dorsal fins and relatively
large body size make it particularly vulnerable to trawls
(Aldebert 1997; Baino eta l. 2001; Dulvyeta l. 2003). The
same is true for many of the large skate species, such as the
com m on skate D ipturus batis (Critically Endangered), the
white skate Rostroraja alba (Critically Endangered) and the
sp in y b u tte rfly ray G y m n u r a a lta v e la (C ritically
E ndangered) w hose large size at m aturity m ean th at
exploitation and probable capture before breeding is likely
to be high. The Maltese skate Leucoraja melitensis (Critically
Endangered), a M editerranean endem ic, was formerly
com m on within a restricted range (Stehmann et al. 1984).
3.5 Least Concern species
Only ten chondrichthyan species (14%) in the Mediterranean
are not considered to be under any threat of extinction now
or in the foreseeable future. These species include some of
the catsharks (e.g. sm allspotted catshark Scyliorhinus
canicula and blackm outh catshark Galeus m elastom us)
and smaller skate species (e.g. Atlantic starry skate Raja
asterias and spotted skate R. montagui). Manyofthese species
are generaUy abundant and/or widespread with limited fishing
pressure; are not particularly susceptible to fisheries; or are
relatively productive and resilient to current pressures. These
species may still benefit from conservation management
action, even though they are listed as Least Concern.
11
3.6 Data Deficient species
available evidence). It is therefore essential to direct research
efforts and funding towards these species as w ell as those
in th re a te n e d categories (C avanagh e t al. 2003). This
is p a rtic u la rly im p o rta n t w h e n th e re are a p p a re n t
th re a ts yet v irtu ally no available data o n p o p u la tio n
sizes o r biological param eters. In addition, m any o f th e
large shark sp ec ie s such as the bigeye thresher shark
A lo p ia s su p erc ilio su s, c o p p e r shark C a rch a rh in u s
brachyurus, dusky shark C. obscurus and spinner shark
C. b revipinna p o se a p a rtic u la r dilem m a. Are th e se
species rare in th e M editerranean, o r just rarely caught
and reported? In most cases it is currently not possible to
b e c e rta in . S tudies like th e M e d ite rra n e a n Large
Elasm obranch M onitoring P roject (MEDLEM, h ttp ://
www .arpat.toscana.it/progetti/pr_m edlem _en.htm l) will
provide m ore information on the status of such species in
th e near fu tu re (W alker e t a l . 2005) and should be
encouraged and expanded.
This initial effort to produce IUCN Red List assessments for
Mediterranean chondrichthyans has confirmed that there is
a significant lack of information on the status of many species
in the region. Twenty-six percent of species assessed were
categorised as D ata D eficient, in d icatin g th e re is not
enough information to enable accurate assessment of their
extinction risk. This is often due to a lack of research, or
because species are (or have become) rare, or have a limited
geographic distribution. Therefore, they may be especially
vulnerable to anth ropogenic threats, in p articular over­
exploitation. R esearch efforts focusing on species for
w h ic h th e re is cu rre n tly little kn o w led g e m ust be
dramatically increased. A Data Deficient listing does not
m ean th at these 18 species are not threatened. In fact, as
knowledge improves, such species are often found to be
amongst the m ost threatened (or suspected as such from
12
4. Case studies
Eight case studies from M editerranean IUCN Red List
assessments are presented below, illustrating a range of
factors affecting chon d rich th y an po p u latio n s in th e
M editerranean Sea. The case studies provide examples of
species assigned to each of the six IUCN Red List categories.
Summaries of all species assessments from the region are
included in Cavanagh et al. (in prep).
global level on the basis of very rapid population declines,
which are estimated to exceed 80% in three generations. The
species now appears to be restricted to only one small
Mediterranean location, w hich is subject to heavy trawling
activity (Ungaro et al. 2006). Urgent protection of this
endemic species and its critical habitats is required to prevent
further decline of the remaining population. Further research
is also needed on the exploitation, distribution, biology and
ecology of this species, as well as trends in abundance (Ungaro
e ta l. 2006).
4.1 Maltese skate Leucoraja melitensis
(Clark, 1926)
4.2 Giant devil ray Mobula mobular
(Bonnaterre, 1788)
Mediterranean: Critically E ndangered A2bcd+ 3bcd+
4bcd
Global (M editerranean endemic): Critically Endangered
A2bcd+ 3bcd+4bcd (2006)
M editerranean: E ndangered A4d
Global: Endangered A4d (2006)
Mediterranean assessment authors: Ungaro, N., Serena, E.,
Dulvy, N.K., Tinti, F., Bertozzi, M., Pasolini, P., Mancusi, C.
and Notarbartolo di Sciara, G.
Mediterranean assessment authors: Notarbartolo di
Sciara, G., Serena, F. and Mancusi, C.
i
i
M
The Maltese skate Leucoraja melitensis is a Mediterranean
endemic that is under imminent threat of extinction. It was
previously found over a relatively restricted area (about 1/4
of the total area of the Mediterranean Sea) in the depth range
where trawl fisheries routinely operate (Ungaro et al. 2006).
This species is now extremely rare, recorded in only 20 out
o f 6 ,3 3 6 hau ls in b ro ad scale surveys o f th e n o rth
Mediterranean coastline from 1995-1999 (Baino etal. 2001;
Bertrand et al. 2000). Its main range now appears to be
restricted to the Sicilian channel. It is also now rare off Malta
and rare or absent off Tunisia, w here it was previously
considered moderately common (Bradai 2000; Schembri et
al. 2003; Stehm ann and Burkei 1984). Historically, L.
melitensis was reported from the Gulf of Lions but was not
found in com parable surveys carried out in the 1990s
(Aldebert 1997). Although population data are lacking, given
the small range of the remaining population the potential
detrimental impact of trawl fisheries is likely to be significant.
The Maltese skate is assessed as Critically Endangered at the
i
Àw
ii
i 9
h
*
The giant devil ray is a huge pelagic plankton feeder,
predom inantly restricted to the M editerranean Sea, w hich
gives birth to a single large pup at unknow n intervals. Its
limited range and low reproductive capacity make it very
vulnerable to overfishing. Although no direct fishery for
giant devil rays exists, high m ortality rates are reported
fro m a c c id e n ta l c a tc h in p e la g ic fish e rie s in th e
M editerranean. It is at threat from driftnetting, w hich
continues despite being banned in M editerranean waters
(WWF 2005), and from accidental capture by longlines, purse
seines, trawls and fixed traditional tima traps “tonnare”. The
giant devil ray is listed on Annex II List of endangered or
threatened species’ of the Barcelona Convention (see 5.2.2),
w hich requires Parties to ensure maximum protection and
aid the recovery of listed species. It is also listed on Appendix
II (Strictly protected farma species) of the Bern Convention
(see 5.2.1). These listings are only implemented in Malta and
Croatia. Recently, the General Fisheries Commission for the
Mediterranean (GFCM) and International Commission for the
13
Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT) introduced legislation
to ban the use of pelagic driftnets within the Mediterranean
basin. If implemented, this would eliminate one of the most
severe threats to the giant devil ray. Without implementation
of these measures, it is inferred that this giant ray will become
increasingly rare in the Mediterranean; it is assessed as
Endangered. Strict enforcem ent of protection and raising
aw areness w ith fisherm en may prevent this ray from
becom ing m ore threatened in the future (Notarbartolo di
Sciara eta l. 2006).
bottom trawls, driftnets and purse seines. C. carcharias has
a tendency to approach boats readily and to scavenge from
fishing gear, w hich increases their vulnerability, potentially
resulting in accidental entrapm ent or deliberate killing by
commercial fisherm en (Fergusson et al. 2005). In certain
regions, such as Sicily, the white shark has traditionally been
view ed negatively, as a costly interference to fisheries
(Fergusson et al. in prep.). The impact of habitat degradation
might be especially acute in th e M editerranean, w here
growing areas of intensive hum an inhabitation, especially
for tourism, overlap w ith w hite shark h a b ita t. Declines of
traditional regionally- important prey such as blue fin tuna
(Morey et al. 2003; Soldo and Dulcic 2005) alongside threats
to other im portant prey, including small cetaceans (Morey
et al. 2003) and o th er dem ersal and pelagic fishes, are
suspected to have had a serious impact on white sharks in
the Mediterranean (Fergusson pers. comm.).
4.3 White shark Carcharodon carcharias
(Linnaeus, 1758)
M editerranean: E ndangered A2bc+3bc+4bc
Global: Vulnerable (2000). Update in preparation
M editerranean assessment authors: Fergusson, I.K.,
Soldo, A., Morey, G. and Bonfil, R.
Entrapm ent in fixed tuna rearing pens and tow ed tuna
cages may also pose a threat to w hite sharks in the region.
Although little is know n of the direct im pacts of tuna
cages, th eir increasing use, evidence for u n re p o rted
encounters (Morey pers. comm.), and the potential for
w hite sharks to be illegally killed through conflict w ith
industry workers raises concerns. Similar issues are known
to have arisen in southern Australia and Mexico (Galaz
and Maddalena 2004).
Æ
The M editerranean w hite shark population is classified
as Endangered on the evidence of declines and the likely
fishery pressures placed upon their apparent reproductive
and nursery grounds in the Sicilian Channel (Fergusson
et al. in prep.). This species has been included in both
Appendices of the Convention of Migratory Species (Bonn
Convention) since 2002, w ith the objective of providing
a framework for an im proved coordination by range states
to adopt and enact protective measures (see 5.1.1). It has
also been listed on A ppendix II of the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) since
2004 (see 5.1.2). In the M editerranean, the w hite shark is
listed as an Endangered species’ on Annex II o f th e
B arcelona C onvention (see 5.2.2), and as a Strictly
protected species’ on Appendix II of the Bern Convention
(see 5.2.1). Since O ctober 1999 the w hite shark has been
protected in Maltese waters by specific legislation enacted
under its Environment Protection Act No. 5 (1991) Flora
and Farma Protection (Amendment) Regulations 1999, and
was also recently declared a strictly protected species in
Croatian waters.
This flagship species has long been the focus of negative
media attention as a result of its occasional lethal interactions
w ith humans and perceived nuisance to some commercial
fisheries (Fergusson et al. 2005). Due to this m uch
exaggerated p erception there are occasional attem pts to
capture and kill these sharks, w hich have been targeted in
the past for sportfishing, commercial trophy hunting or
human consum ption (although no directed Mediterranean
fishery has ever existed) (Fergusson et al. 2005). Although
currently under review, the w hite shark has been listed as
globally Vulnerable on the IUCN Red Fist since 2000.
However, it is considered to be at a higher risk of threat in the
M editerranean, and has th e re fo re b ee n assessed as
Endangered in this region (Fergusson et al. in prep.).
Historical quantitative data for Carcharodon carcharias in
the M editerranean are patchy, but available information
provides sufficient evidence for declines of 50-60% to be
inferred and an increasing scarcity of white sharks through
the latter half of the 20th century (Fergusson et al. in prep.).
Records are declining despite increased scientific monitoring
(especially in Italy, Malta, Croatia, Tunisia and Spain) and
considerable grow th in tourism and resort developm ent
during th e last 40 years, w hich should have increased
opportunities for sightings.
C o n se rv a tio n m a n a g e m e n t o f th is s p e c ie s in th e
M editerranean Sea poses a challenge as it is rare, wide
ranging and diffusely distributed, w ith little know n on
seasonal movements or key elements of its population biology
(F erg u sso n 1996; 2002). E ffective e n fo rc e m e n t o f
m anagement measures already in place could significantly
Offshore records in the M editerranean have included
captures across all size-classes made by pelagic longlines,
14
improve the situation for the w hite shark. An additional
approach could be to im plem ent a schem e of protective
management in critical habitats’, selected by interpreting
biogeographical data. Such efforts should focus upon the
Sicilian Channel and its environs (Fergusson 2002; Fergusson
eta l. in prep.).
Com parison of historical data from swordfish fisheries in
the Gulf of Taranto w ith a more recent study has revealed
that the catch rates in this area over the last 20 years have
decreased by an average of 38.5% (De Metrio e t al. 1984;
Megalofonou et al. 2005). Furtherm ore, during a study of
large pelagic fisheries in the Mediterranean from 1998-1999,
91.1 % of 3,771 blue sharks measured w ere under 215cm TL
and 96.3% under 257cm TL, indicating that the huge majority
had not yet reached m aturity (M egalofonou et al. 2005).
Similar results w ere obtained from the Bay of Biscay w here
all th e specim ens caught w ere im m ature (Lucio e t al.
2002).
4.4 Blue shark Prionace glauca
(Linnaeus, 1758)
M editerranean: V ulnerable A3bd + 4bd
Global: Near T hreatened (2000). Update in preparation
Recently this species has increased in commercial value
and incidental catches are now very rarely discarded
(Megalofonou et al. 2005), w ith the m eat m arketed in
Greece, Italy and Spain and fins exported to Asia. There is
strong concern that future tuna and swordfish catch quotas
will increase the dem and placed upon the blue shark, w ith
ad v erse c o n se q u e n c e s o n th e sto ck . F u rth erm o re ,
increased dem and for m eat and fins in th e N ortheast
Atlantic fishery could potentially result in the blue shark
also becoming a direct target species in the Mediterranean
Sea. Given the high probability for the persistent removal
o f significantly large num bers of this species from the
M editerranean and adjacent N o rth east A tlantic; and
concern over increased targeting; this species has been
assessed as Vulnerable.
M editerranean assessment authors: Soldo, A.,
Megalofonou, P., Bianchi I. and Macias, D.
P rionace glauca is believed to be among the m ost wideranging of all shark species. It is an oceanic shark, found
throughout th e w orld’s tropical and tem perate seas. The
p o p u la tio n in th e M e d ite rra n e a n is c o n s id e re d
independent of the North Atlantic population for fisheries
m anagem ent purposes, however, the extent of exchange
betw een these populations (if any) is poorly understood
(Fitzmaurice et al. 2005; Heessen 2003).
The UNEP RAC/SPA Action Plan for the Conservation of
Cartilaginous Fishes (Chondrichthyans) in the Mediterranean
Sea lists the blue shark among the main commercial species,
for w hich it primarily recom m ends the developm ent of
sustainable management programmes for fisheries catching
these species (as target or bycatch). The blue shark is also
listed on Appendix III Protected fauna species’ of the Bern
Convention, meaning the protection of this species is required,
but w ith a certain am ount of exploitation perm itted if
population levels allow (see 5.2.1). Im plem entation of the
recommendation outlined in the UNEP RAC/SPAAction Plan,
en fo rc e m e n t o f m easures re q u ire d u n d e r th e Bern
Convention, along w ith close m onitoring of catch levels
(including bycatch), w ould contribute to ensuring current
population declines do not continue. Studies such as the
M editerranean Large Elasmobranch M onitoring Project
(MEDLEM) should help to fulfil this need by providing further
specific data on the status of this, and other shark species, in
this region.
The blue shark constitutes a major bycatch of longline
and driftnet fisheries, m uch of w hich is often unrecorded
(Stevens 2005). It is a major bycatch and secondary target
species of European large pelagic fisheries, and there is
m ounting evidence that it is increasingly targeted for its
fins (Tudela et al. 2005). Even though driftnetting is
banned in M editerranean waters, this practice continues
illegally ( W F 2005) and th e driftnet fishery in the
Alboran Sea is catching large num bers o f blue sharks
(estim ated at m ore than 26,000 individuals p e r year)
(Tudela e t al. 2005).
Increasing effort of large pelagic fisheries throughout the
Mediterranean over the last 30 years is inferred to have had a
considerable im p act o n th e blue shark p o p u latio n .
15
4.5 Rabbitfish Chimaera monstrosa
Linnaeus, 1758
4.6 Spotted ray Raja montagui
Fowler, 1910
M editerranean: Near T hreatened
Global: Not Evaluated (an assessment has been completed
and submitted to IUCN for inclusion in the 2007 IUCN
Red List).
M editerranean: Least C oncern
Global: Not Evaluated (an assessm ent has been
com pleted and subm itted to IUCN for inclusion in the
2007 IUCN Red List).
Mediterranean assessment authors: Dagit, D.D., Hareide, N.
andClö, S.
Mediterranean assessment authors: Ungaro, N., Serena, F.,
Tinti, F., Bertozzi, M., Pasolini, P., Mancusi, C., Notarbartolo
di Sciara, G., Dulvy, N. and Ellis, J.
A
.
" iw> a '
C him aera m onstrosa is widely distributed throughout
the N ortheast Atlantic and w estern M editerranean Sea,
b u t rarely reco rd ed from the eastern M editerranean.
Although one of the b etter know n o f the chim aeroid
fishes, limited information is available regarding its biology
and ecology. Data on th e life-history p aram eters of
C. m o n s tr o s a are also lim ited, b u t it is long-lived
(estim ated 30 years for males and 26 years for females)
and likely to be vulnerable to population depletion (Calis
et al. 2005). In the Mediterranean, this species is found at
depths from 100m, but is m ost abundant betw een 500800m (Baino et at. 2001). Several specim ens have also
reported from the Balearic Sea at depths of 650m and
from th e eastern Ionian Sea at 800m (Sion et at. 2004).
Commercial trawling is intense betw een depths of 50700m in th e M editerranean (Colloca et ai. 2003). Bottom
trawling below depths of 1,000m in the M editerranean
h as b e e n p r o h i b i t e d b y th e G e n e ra l F is h e rie s
C om m ission for th e M editerranean (GFCM), although
th e effectiv en ess o f this m easure is unknow n. The
preferred depth range of C. m onstrosa occurs at depths
less th a n 1,000m , how ever, and it is th e re fo re still
vulnerable to deepw ater fisheries.
R aja m o n ta g n i is a small, relatively fecund skate, found
from Norway in the N ortheast Atlantic to Tunisia and
w estern Greece in the M editerranean Sea (Bauchot 1987;
S erena 2005; S teh m an n a n d B urkei 1984). In th e
M editerranean, the majority of the population appears to
exist betw een 100-500m, although it occurs from the
shallow s to 600m (Baino e t ai. 2001). As in te n se
com m ercial traw ling occurs b e tw e e n 50-700 m , th e
entire dep th range o f R. m o n ta g n i is w ithin th e depths
o f fish eries an d this species is cap tu red as bycatch
(Colloca et at. 2003). D espite these levels of fishing
p re s s u r e , a n d a lth o u g h te m p o ra l flu c tu a tio n s in
abundance have occurred, populations of R. m o n ta g n i
ap p ear to be stable in m ost p arts o f th e M editerranean
(Relini et at. 2000). The small body size o f this species
(average total length 60cm ), m eans it is possibly more
resilient to fishing impacts com pared to the larger-bodied
skate species. Therefore, this species has been assessed
as Least C o n c e rn in th e M ed iterran ea n , alth o u g h
population trends and bycatch levels should be m onitored
to ensure a stable population is m aintained. R. m o n ta g n i
m ay also benefit from general conservation m easures
(e.g. landing size regulations and effort reduction) to
ensure that it remains Least Concern in the future (Ungaro
e t at. in prep.).
Although no specific data on population trends over time
are available, considering this species’ preferred depth
range is entirely w ithin th e range o f cu rren t fishing
activity, its unproductive life history characteristics, and
suspected high rate of mortality to discards, this species has
been assessed as Near Threatened (Dagit et ai. in prep.).
Further information is required on deepwater fishing activities
(including catch and bycatch levels, effort and trend
monitoring). The ban on deepwater trawling below 1,000m
may afford some protection to the deepest part of the stock.
However, given that its preferred depth range is entirely
within the range of fisheries in this region, both present and
future fishing pressure are likely to be unsustainable for C.
montrosa and additional management measures are required.
16
4.7 Portuguese dogfish Centroscymnus
coelolepis (Bocage and Capello, 1864)
strict implementation of the GFCM deepwater trawling ban;
the efficacy of this measure should be monitored and bycatch
of deepw ater fisheries accurately rep o rted . If fishing
expands below 1,000m in the future, this assessment will
need to be revisited.
M editerranean: Least C oncern
Global: Near Threatened (2003), Update in preparation
Mediterranean assessment authors: Clö, S. and Hareide, N.
4.8 Bigeye thresher Alopias superciliosus
(Lowe, 1839)
M editerranean: Data D eficien t
Global: N ot Evaluated (in preparation)
Mediterranean assessment authors: Vacchi, M., Macias, D.,
Fergusson, I., Mancusi, C. and Clö, S.
C entroscym nus coelolepis is one of the deepest living
sharks. It is widely but patchily distributed in the Atlantic,
Pacific and Indian Oceans, living on or near the sea bottom
over continental slopes and upper and middle abyssal plain
rises. This species has v e ry slo w g ro w th an d low
fecu n d ity , re su ltin g in a v ery low in trin sic ra te of
increase and m aking it vulnerable to population decline
w here it is fished (Stevens and Correia 2003).
The M editerranean population of C. coelolepis appears to
be distributed deeper than populations in the Atlantic and
Pacific (Cio et al. 2002). Bottom traw l surveys indicate
th at it is found from 1,301m to a m axim um depth of
2,863m (Clb eta l. 2002; Grey 1956; Massuti andM oranta
2003; Priede and Bagley 2000; Sion et al. 2004). In traw l
surveys in the w estern M editerranean (Balearic Islands),
Massuti and Moranta (2003) recorded this species from
1,301-1,700m and Sion eta l. (2004) from 1,500-2,500m.
Both studies re p o rted th at C. coelolepis increased in
abundance at the greatest depths surveyed. The species
was also recorded using a video camera in the eastern
M editerranean at 1,500-2,500m in the Cretan Sea and at
2 ,3 0 0 -3,850m in the Rhodos Basin (Priede and Bagley
2000). In February 2005 the General Fisheries Commission
for the M editerranean (GFCM) adopted the Decision to
refrain from expanding deep w ater fisheries operations
below depths of 1,000m, w hich entered into force in
Septem ber 2005 (FAO 2005, see 6.1). The effectiveness
of this m easure is unknown.
Alopias superciliosus has been poorly docum ented in the
M editerranean and is considered scarce or rare (Barrull
and Mate 2002). There are no available data on catch trends
fo r th is sp ecies in th e region, alth o u g h significant
reductions in thresher sharks have been reported through
catch p er unit effort (CPUE) comparisons in the Northwest
Atlantic pelagic longline fishery (Baum et al. 2003), and
suspected declines have occurred elsewhere.
A. superciliosus is a bycatch of the semi-industrial fisheries
(swordfish and other pelagic fisheries) of southern Spain,
Morocco, Algeria, Sicily and Malta, and of artisanal trammel
and gillnet fisheries elsew here in the M editerranean Sea
(Bauchot 1987). In recent years, increasing num bers of
new records from the eastern M editerranean (sometimes
m ultiple captures) dem onstrate th at this species also
penetrates widely to the east of Malta, occurring in the
w aters off Israel (Levantine basin), in the Aegean Sea off
Turkey and southern Greece, and off southern Crete
(Fergusson pers. comm; Golani 1996). Evidence from
offshore pelagic fisheries in southern Sicily and Malta
indicate th at A. superciliosus is caught in unkn o w n
num bers each year, but routinely discarded at sea (hence
th e v e rn a c u la r nam e false th r e s h e r ’, b ec au se o f a
perceived low local value).
Although data for this species in the region are scarce,
there is no evidence that the population has declined.
The few data available indicate that C. coelolepis generally
increases in abundance w ith depth in the Mediterranean,
affording it refuge from fishing pressure. In the absence
of evidence for population declines, and given that the
GFCM Decision offers it refuge from fishing pressure,
C. c o e lo le p is is c o n s id e re d Least C o n c e rn in th e
M e d ite rra n e a n . A lth o u g h n o t ta rg e te d in th e
M editerranean Sea, any level of bycatch w ould be of
co n cern because o f this sp ec ie s’ intrinsic biological
vulnerability to depletion. Therefore its status will rely on the
Despite the apparent threat posed by bycatch, the lack of
records and further information on the population of A.
superciliosus in the Mediterranean prevents an assessment
beyond Data Deficient at this time (Vacchi et al. in prep.).
This species, like many other large shark species in this
region, poses a particular dilem ma - is it rare in th e
Mediterranean, or just rarely caught and reported? It is
17
important to note that this species may prove to be threatened
in the M editerranean and in need of urgent managem ent
action. The UNEP RAC/SPA Action Plan for the Conservation
o f C artilag in o u s F ishes (C h o n d ric h th y a n s) in th e
M editerranean Sea lists Alopias spp. w ithin the prim ary
group for w hich developm ent of sustainable fisheries
m anagem ent program mes is recom m ended (UNEP MAP
RAC/SPA 2003). Strict enforcement of existing regulations,
including the International Commission for the Conservation
o f A tlan tic T unas (ICCAT) b an o n d riftn e ttin g in
Mediterranean waters, adopted in 1992, is needed to prevent
this species from declining before an accurate assessment of
the population can be made. Research is required to provide
information on the status of this and other large shark species
in the Mediterranean. It is anticipated that studies like the
Mediterranean Large Elasmobranch Monitoring Project
(MEDLEM) will soon provide further information on the
status of such species and species-specific monitoring should
be a continued priority.
18
5. International and regional instruments
relevant to the conservation and
management of Mediterranean
chondrichthyans
P ro tectio n cu rrently gran ted to chon d rich th y an fish
species in the M editerranean Sea under various regional
and international conventions is summarised in Table 5.1.
Only tw o species; w hite shark C archarodon carcharias
and basking shark Cetorhinus m a xim u s, are listed on the
appendices of all four international conventions.
The Bern Convention Appendix III listing requires Parties
to protect these species, but a certain amount of exploitation
is perm itted if population levels allow (COE 2006). The
A nnex III listing on th e B arcelona C onventio n also
requires the exploitation of these species to be regulated
(EUROPA 2006a).
The giant devilray M obula m o b u la r also receives some
protection, being listed on Appendix II of the Convention
on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural
Habitats (the Bern Convention) and on Annex II List of
endangered o r th rea ten ed sp ecies’, o f th e Barcelona
C o n v en tio n . T he B ern C o n v e n tio n listin g re n d e rs
M. m o b u la r a strictly protected species (see 5.2.1), and
requires that Parties endeavour to carry out appropriate
m easu res w ith th e aim o f e n su rin g th e sp e c ie s is
m aintained in a favourable conservation state.
The numbers of threatened species (Critically Endangered,
Endangered or Vulnerable) granted some form of protected
status in the Mediterranean Sea are presented in Figure 5.1.
It is im portant to note how few of the threatened species
are listed under relevant conventions. A total of 30 out of
71 Mediterranean species (42%) w ere regionally assessed
as threatened. Of these, just eight (27%) are granted some
form of protection. This means 22 of the 30 threatened
species (over 73%) currently receive no form of protection
in the Mediterranean. Furthermore, only four of the 13
(31%) Critically Endangered chondrichthyans are afforded
any kind of protected status.
A further five species (shortfin mako Isurus oxyrinchus,
porbeagle L a m n a nasus, blue shark Prionace glauca,
a n g e ls h a rk S q u a t i n a s q u a t i n a , a n d w h ite sk ate
Rostroraja alba) are listed on A ppendix III of the Bern
Convention and on Annex III of the Barcelona Convention.
5.1 Global instruments
5.1.1 The Convention on the Conservation of
Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS or
Bonn Convention)
Figure 5.1 N um bers o f reg io n a lly th reaten ed
ch o n d rich th y a n s (C ritically Endangered,
E ndangered, V ulnerable) granted so m e form o f
p ro tectio n w ith in th e M editerranean.
CMS recognises the need for countries to cooperate in the
conservation o f animals th at m igrate across national
boundaries, if an effective response to threats operating
throughout a species’ range is to be made. The Convention
actively prom otes concerted action by the Range States
of species listed on its Appendices. CMS Parties should
strive tow ards strictly protecting the endangered species
on A ppendix 1, conserving o r restoring their habitat,
mitigating obstacles to m igration and controlling o th er
factors th a t m ight endanger th em (CMS 2006). The
Range States o f A ppendix II species (m igratory species
w ith an unfavourable conservation status th at n eed or
w o u ld s ig n ific a n tly b e n e f it fro m in t e r n a ti o n a l
c o o p e ratio n ) are en co u rag ed to co n clu d e global or
re g io n a l A g re e m e n ts fo r t h e ir c o n s e rv a tio n a n d
m anagem ent (CMS 2006). The w hite shark and basking
shark are listed on Appendices I and II of the CMS. The
i*
is
I
*
m
^ *
i
*
i
o
EN
CR
W
lUCN P a d L =1 C B legory
E) Not p ö ieeio d
fl
19
Table 5.1 M editerranean ch o n d rich th y a n s cu rren tly in clu d ed in th e tex t o f In ternation al C on ven tion s.
Bern C onvention
Convention on the
Conservation of
European Wildlife and
Natural Habitats (1979)
A ppendix I
A ppendix II
A ppendix III
S tric tly p r o t e c t e d
f l o r a s p e c ie s
S tr ic tly p r o t e c t e d
f a u n a s p e c ie s
P r o te c te d f a u n a s p e c ie s
White shark
Shortfin mako shark
C archarodon carcharias
Basking shark
C etorhinus m a x im u s
Giant devil ray
M obula m o b u la r
Isu ru s o x yrin c h u s
Porbeagle
L a m n a n a su s
Blue shark
P rionace glauca
Angelshark
S q u a tin a s q u a tin a
White skate
R ostroraja alba
CMS or
B onn C onvention
Convention on the
Conservation of
Migratory Species of
Wild Animals (1983)
A ppendix I
A ppendix II
S tric tly p r o t e c t e d
endangered
m ig r a to r y s p e c ie s
M ig r a to r y s p e c ie s w ith
a n u n fa v o u r a b le
c o n s e r v a tio n s t a t u s th a t
w o u ld b e n e fit f r o m
in te r n a tio n a l c o o p e r a tio n
White shark
White shark
C archarodon carcharias
Basking shark
C archarodon carcharias
Basking shark
C etorhinus m a x im u s
CITES
Convention on
International
Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora (1975)
C etorhinus m a x im u s
A ppendix I
A ppendix II
A ppendix III
S p e c ie s t h r e a te n e d
w ith e x tin c tio n —
tr a d e p e r m i t te d o n ly
in e x c e p tio n a l
c ir c u m s ta n c e s
S p e c ie s n o t c u r r e n tly
th r e a te n e d w ith
e x tin c tio n b u t t r a d e m u s t
be c o n tr o lle d in o r d e r to
a v o id u tiliz a tio n
in c o m p a tib le w ith th e
s u r v i v a l o f th e s p e c ie s
S p e c ie s p r o t e c t e d in a t
le a s t o n e c o u n tr y ,
w h ic h h a s a s k e d o th e r
C ITE S P a r tie s f o r
a s s is ta n c e in
c o n tr o llin g tr a d e
Basking shark
C etorhinus m a x im u s
White shark
C archarodon carcharias
Barcelona C onvention
(C onvention for the
Protection o f the
Marine Environment
and the Coastal
Region o f the
Medit er ranean)
(1976, am ended in 1995)
Protocol Concerning
Specially Protected Areas
and Biological Diversity
in the Mediterranean
(SAP-Bio) (1995)
A nnex I
A nnex II
A nnex III
C o m m o n c r ite r ia
f o r th e c h o ic e o f
m a r in e a n d c o a s ta l
a r e a s t h a t c o u ld b e
in c lu d e d in th e S P A M I lis t
L is t o f e n d a n g e r e d
o r th r e a te n e d s p e c ie s
L i s t o f s p e c ie s w h o s e
e x p lo ita tio n is
r e g u la te d
White shark
Shortfin mako shark
C archarodon carcharias
Basking shark
C etorhinus m a x im u s
Giant devil ray
M obula m o b u la r
Isu ru s o x yrin c h u s
Porbeagle
L a m n a n a su s
Blue shark
Prionace glauca
Angelshark
S q u a tin a s q u a tin a
White skate
R ostroraja alba
20
5.1.3 United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea (UNCLOS)
8th Conference of Parties in 2005 agreed to begin the
developm ent of a CMS Instrum ent for the conservation of
all migratory shark species listed on CMS. Progress towards
th is g o al w ill b e in itia te d in 2007. See: h t t p : / /
w w w .cm s.int/ for m ore information.
UNCLOS provides a fram ework for the conservation and
m anagem ent of fisheries and o ther uses of the sea by
giving Coastal States the right and responsibility for the
managem ent and use of fishery resources w ithin their
national jurisdiction (the territorial sea, w hich can extend
up to 12 nautical miles). UNCLOS also recognises Coastal
States’ right to claim an exclusive economic zone (EEZ)
of up to 200 nautical miles. The management goal adopted
by UNCLOS (Article 61(3)) is that of maximum sustainable
yield, qualified by environm ental and economic factors.
T he p ro v isio n s o f UNCLOS d irec tly re la te d to th e
conservation and m anagem ent of sharks include the duty
placed on Coastal States to ensure that stocks occurring
w ithin their jurisdictional w aters are not endangered by
overexploitation. See h ttp ://w w w .u n .o rg /D e p ts/lo s/
index.htm for m ore information.
5.1.2 The Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora (CITES)
CITES was established in recognition that international
co o p eration is essential for th e p ro tec tio n o f certain
species from over-exploitation through international trade.
It creates th e in tern atio n al legal fram ew ork fo r th e
prevention of trade in endangered species of wild fauna
and flora and for the effective regulation of international
trade in o th er species w hich may becom e threatened in
the absence of such regulation. Two M editerranean shark
species are listed on A ppendix II of CITES: basking shark
and white shark. Proposals to list tw o more Mediterranean
species on Appendix II (porbeagle L am na nasus and spiny
dogfish Squalus acanthias) and all species of sawfish
Pristidae on A ppendix I may be debated by the 14th
Conference of Parties in 2007.
W ithin the M editerranean, the majority of States have
established their 12-mile territorial waters (except Greece
and Turkey). A few countries are in the process of claiming
an EEZ. However, because of the difficulties associated
in the delimitation of w hat is a relatively narrow sea and
since most States w ant to maintain their basin-wide access
to fisheries, few have claimed an EEZ (Chevalier 2005).
As a consequence, there is a large area of high seas in the
M editerranean, w h ich requires cooperation b etw een
Coastal States to ensure th e sustainable use o f fisheries
re so u rc e s and co n se rv atio n o f m arine b iodiv ersity
(Chevalier 2005).
CITES’ o th er m ajor role in prom oting the sustainable
managem ent of wild species (arguably as im portant, if not
m ore im portant than species listings on its Appendices),
is through th e adoption of Resolutions and Decisions.
Resolution Conf. 12.6 encourages Parties, inter alia, to
id e n tify e n d a n g e re d sh a rk s p e c ie s th a t re q u ire
consideration for inclusion in the Appendices, if their
m anagem ent and conservation status does not improve.
Decision 13.42 encourages Parties to improve their data
collection and reporting of catches, landings and trade in
sharks (at species level w here possible), to build capacity
to manage their shark fisheries, and to take action on
several sp ecies-specific re co m m en d atio n s from th e
Animals Committee. Many of the latter taxa are threatened
in the M editerranean, including spiny dogfish, porbeagle,
w hite shark, tope shark G aleorhinus galeus, sawfishes
family Pristidae, g u ip er sharks genus C entrophorus,
requiem sharks genus Carcharhinus, guitarfishes Order
Rhinobatiformes, and devil rays family Mobulidae. Angel
sh ark s fam ily S quatinidae, sa n d tig e r sharks fam ily
Odontaspidae, and thresher sharks family Alopidae, w ere
also identified as of potential concern.
5.1.4 United Nations Agreement on the
Conservation and Management of
Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory
Fish Stocks (UNFSA)
UNFSA was established to im plem ent th e provisions of
UNCLOS p e r ta i n in g to th e c o n s e r v a tio n a n d
m anagem ent of straddling and highly m igratory fish
stocks. UNSFA (a d o p ted in 1995, ratified in 2001) calls
fo r Parties to p ro te c t m arine biodiversity, m inim ise
pollution, m onitor fishing levels and stocks, provide
a c c u ra te r e p o rtin g o f a n d m in im ise b y c a tc h a n d
discards, and g ather reliable, com prehensive scientific
data as th e basis for m anagem ent decisions. In th e
absence o f scientific certainty, it mandates a precautionary
approach to the m anagem ent of straddling and highly
m igratory stocks and species. C ooperation for such
s p e c ie s is a c h ie v e d th o u g h re g io n a l f is h e r ie s
arrangem ents o r organisations. A ccording to A nnex I
o f UNCLOS, Coastal States and o th e r States w ho fish in
areas w here highly m igratory species occur are required
to en su re th e c o n se rv atio n an d p ro m o te o p tim u m
utilisation of listed species.
Parties w ere also urged, through FAO and regional fisheries
organizations, to develop, adopt and im plem ent new
international instrum ents and regional agreements for the
conservation and m anagem ent of sharks, and to consider
recom m endations for activities and guidelines to reduce
mortality of endangered species of sharks in bycatch and
target fisheries (CITES 2006; Fowler and Cavanagh 2005a).
See http://w w w .cites.org/ for m ore information.
21
The follow ing chondrichthyans are listed on UNCLOS
A n n e x I, H ighly M ig rato ry S p ecies: six g ill sh ark
H exanchus griseus, basking shark, thresher sharks family
Alopiidae, requiem sharks family Carcharhinidae (including
blue shark), ham m erhead sharks family Sphyrnidae, and
mackerel sharks family Isaeidae (including shortfin mako
and porbeagle). O ther chondrichthyan species m ay be
classified as ‘straddling stocks’ (Article 63 (2)) under the
C o n v en tio n . This is o f p a rtic u la r rele v an ce to the
Mediterranean, w here State jurisdiction is not extended to
200 nautical miles. States are req u ired to agree upon
m easures to en su re th e co n se rv atio n o f qualifying
chondrichthyan species or stocks w hich straddle coastal
w a te r s a n d h ig h seas. T he fin a l m a n d a te is fo r
chondrichthyans that only occur on the high seas: fishing
States m ust individually, o r in cooperation w ith o th er
fishing States, take m easures to ensure these stocks
are c o n s e rv e d (F o w le r a n d C avanagh 2005a). See
h ttp ://w w w .o c e a n la w .n e t/te x ts /u n fs a .h tm fo r m ore
information.
European U nion has pledged to develop a draft plan of
action for sharks in 2007.
5.2 Regional protection instruments
5.2.1 The Bern Convention on the Conservation of
European Wildlife and Natural Habitats
The Bern Convention aims to conserve wild flora and farma
and their natural habitats, especially where the cooperation
of several States is required (SGRST 2003). The basking shark
and giant devil ray are b o th listed on A ppendix II of th e
Bern Convention, m eaning appropriate measures should
be taken to ensure the special p ro tectio n of th e species
(COE 2006).
Species listed on the Bern Convention are also added to the
EU Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the
conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and farma).
The main aim of the EC Habitats Directive is to prom ote the
maintenance of biodiversity. The Directive requires Member
States to take measures to maintain or restore natural habitats
and wild species (listed on its Annexes), at a favourable
conservation status, introducing robust protection for those
habitats and species of European importance (JNCC 2006).
This requires measures to be taken to maintain or restore to
favourable conservation status in their natural range, habitats
and species of wild flora and fauna of Community interest
and listed in Annexes to the Directive (SGRST 2003).
5.1.5 FAO International Plan of Action for the
Conservation and Management of Sharks
(IPOA-Sharks)
The implementation of the IPOA-Sharks is voluntary. It was
developed in 1999 by FAO w ithin the fram ework of their
‘Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries’ in response to
the request made in CITES Resolution Conf. 9.17 (Fowler
and Cavanagh 2005a). The IPOA-Sharks is supported by
Technical Guidelines (FAO 2000) addressed to decision
makers and policy-makers associated with the conservation
and m anagem ent of chondrichthyans. Its objective is to
ensure the conservation and m anagem ent of sharks (and
their relatives) and their long-term sustainable use. The
Technical Guidelines say ‘States contributing to fishing
mortality on a species or stock should participate in its
management’.
5.2.2 The Barcelona Convention for the
Protection of the Marine Environment and
the Coastal Region of the Mediterranean
T he C o n v en tio n fo r th e P ro te c tio n o f th e M arine
Environment and the Coastal Region of the Mediterranean
(Barcelona Convention) was adopted in 1976 and came
into force in 1978 followed by a succession of landmark
Protocols. It was revised in 1995 (UNEP 2005). The
Barcelona C onvention’s Protocol Concerning Specially
P r o te c te d A reas a n d B io lo g ica l D iv e rsity in th e
M editerranean lists three chondrichthyans (w hite shark,
basking shark, and giant devil ray) on Annex II ‘List of
endangered or threatened species’. A further five species
(shortfin mako, porbeagle, blue shark, angelshark, w hite
skate) are listed on Annex III of the Protocol, meaning
the exploitation of these species should be regulated.
A lthough th e s e reg io n a l in stru m e n ts are in p lace,
implementation has not yet followed (Serena 2005). Malta
and Croatia are the only States in the M editerranean to
have provided any legal p ro tectio n for listed species
(w hite shark, basking shark and giant devil ray) in their
national legislation. Species listed under these instruments
have continued to decline without any management, and are
in urgent need of protection measures (Serena 2005).
The IPOA-Sharks calls upon all States to produce a Shark
Assessment Report (SAR), to determ ine w hether or not
they need to develop and implement a National Plan of Action
for Sharks (NPOA-Sharks) (FAO 2000). An NPOA should
identify research, monitoring and management needs for all
chondrichthyan fishes that occur in the waters of a particular
State (Fowler and Cavanagh 2005a). It was intended that
NPOAs should have been completed by the FAO’s Committee
on Fisheries (COFI) session of early 2001 ; to date, however,
Italy is the only Mediterranean State that has prepared a draft
NPOA and this has not yet been im plem ented (CITES AC
2004). Tunisia has indicated that it intends to adopt an NPOA
for cartilaginous fishes in the future (Serena unpubl.). An
Action Plan for the Conservation of Cartilaginous Fishes
(Chondrichthyans) in the M editerranean Sea (see 5.2.3),
produced by UNEP, encourages the development of NPOAs
throughout the region (UNEP MAP RAC/SPA 2003). The
22
5.2.3 Action Plan for the Conservation of
Cartilaginous Fishes (Chondrichthyans) in
the Mediterranean Sea
applying to the conservation and management of sharks in
the M editerranean, outlined in this section, including the
Protocol concerning Specially Protected areas and Biological
Diversity (Barcelona Convention), the FAO IPOA-Sharks, and
the UN Fish Stocks Agreement (UNEP MAP RAC/SPA 2003).
The production of this Action Plan has identified specific
measures required for improving the conservation and
su stainable m an ag em en t situ atio n o f sharks in th e
M ed iterran ea n Sea. It is im p o rta n t, h o w e v er, th a t
recom m endations contained w ithin the Action Plan are
implemented and that the Action Plan is periodicaUy updated,
to ensure it is effective.
In 2003, the United Nations Environment Program m e’s
Regional Activity Centre for Specially P rotected Areas
(UNEP RAC/SPA), in collaboration w ith the IUCN Centre
fo r M ed iterran ean C o o p eratio n and th e IUCN SSG,
developed th e A ctio n P lan f o r the C onservation o f
C a r tila g in o u s F ish es (C h o n d r ic h th y a n s ) in th e
M editerranean Sea. The Action Plan was developed in line
w ith many of the international and regional instrum ents
23
6. Fishing restrictions and management
applying to chondrichthyans in
the Mediterranean
The General Fisheries Council for the Mediterranean (GFCM),
responsible for M editerranean fisheries, has not yet taken
a c tio n to im p le m e n t m an ag e m en t sp ec ific ally fo r
chondrichthyan fishes, w hether through a M editerranean
Shark Plan (under the FAO IPOA-Sharks) or other measures,
but is addressing the issue.
fleets operating (Tudela 2004; Tudela et al. 2005; WWF 2005).
Loopholes in Mediterranean fishing regulations have created
a new category of anchored floating gillnets. These modified
gillnets have, however, been described as an attem pt to
disguise driftnet fishing under another name, since they are
still large scale driftnetting gears that target large fish species,
and are therefore illegal (WWF 2005).
6.1 Deepsea fisheries
6.3 Shark finning
The GFCM recently decided to refrain from expanding
deep w ater fishing operations beyond the limit of 1,000m.
This Decision was adopted at the 29th session of the GFCM
held in Rome in February 2005 and came into force in
Septem ber 2005 (FAO 2005). It significantly reduces the
threat of potential exploitation pressure to highly vulnerable
deepwater species, many of w hich are seriously threatened
outside the Mediterranean. The restriction of deep w ater
fisheries has made it possible to list the Portuguese dogfish
C entroscym nus coelolepis and the little sleeper shark
S o m n io s u s r o s tr a tu s as Least C o n cern w ith in th e
Mediterranean region, because these species occur below
1,000m and are now protected from fisheries. Many other
deepsea chondrichthyan species occur at depths less than
1,000m (Sion et al. 2004), however, and are therefore still
vulnerable to fishing in the Mediterranean.
Shark finning refers to the removal and retention of shark
fins with the rest of the shark discarded at sea. This wasteful
practice results in the utilisation of only 2-5% of the shark
w ith the remainder being throw n away. Finning threatens
many shark stocks, the stability of marine ecosystems,
sustainable traditional fisheries and socio-economically
im portant recreational fisheries (IUCN 2003b). Increasing
dem and for shark fins, driven by traditional Asian cuisine,
has led to such a dramatic increase in world shark fin prices
that they are now extrem ely valuable. Thus the increased
incentive to target and fin sharks that might previously have
been released alive is now a major global concern (Rose and
McLoughlin 2001).
The extent of finning w ithin the M editerranean region is
u n k n o w n . T w o fin n in g re g u la tio n s a p p ly w ith in
M editerranean waters: the EU has adopted a finning ban
(R egulation 1185/2003, Europa 2006b), as has th e
International Council for the Conservation of Atlantic
Tunas (ICCAT 2005). Finning was likely occurring prior
to these regulations (SGRST 2003). To date there is no
inform ation on the enforcem ent of these regulations in
the M editerranean, but concerns have been voiced that
the EU Regulation may be ineffective because it allows
perm its to be issued for removing shark fins on board
and landing th em separately from th e carcasses. The
perm itted fin: carcass ratio adopted in the EU and under
ICCAT is also higher than in other regions of the w orld
and can potentially enable fishers to land few er sharks
than w ere actually finned (Fordham 2006; IUCN 2003b;
IUCN SSG 2003).
6.2 Driftnetting
The UN global m oratorium on all large-scale pelagic
driftnet fishing was adopted in 1992. Driftnetting w ith nets
g reater th a n 2.5km in length w as p ro h ib ited in the
Mediterranean by the EC in that same year and under a binding
Resolution by the GFCM in 1997. A total ban on driftnet fishing
came into force from the beginning o f2002. Also in 2003, the
International Commission on the Conservation of Atlantic
Tuna (ICCAT) banned the use of driftnets, making it illegal
for non-EU as w ell as EU fleets to use driftnets in the
M editerranean. Despite these bans, driftnetting in the
Mediterranean continues illegally with a large scale Moroccan
driftnet fleet and sizeable Italian, French and Turkish driftnet
24
7. Chondrichthyan monitoring
programmes in the Mediterranean
Lack of adequate scientific information is often cited as being
one of the reasons for failing to introduce or im plement
suitable management measures for chondrichthyan fishes. It
is widely recognised, however, that the need for precautionary
management is urgent and should proceed based on whatever
information is available. Several research and m onitoring
programmes have taken place and continue to operate in the
Mediterranean Sea that contribute knowledge, enabling efforts
to develop shark conservation and management to progress.
For example, the MEDLEM project (M editerranean Large
Elasm obranch M onitoring) collects data on incidental
captures, sightings and strandings of cartilaginous fishes in
the Mediterranean Sea. This project was initiatedin 1985, and
w as a c cep ted by th e FAO-GFCM Scientific Advisory
Committee meeting w hen presented in 2004 (GFCM 2004).
It is anticipated that the GFCM will officially adopt the MEDLEM
database in the near future. See http://www.arpat.toscana.it/
progetti/pr_medlem.html for more information.
objectives o f the surveys are (i) to contribute to the
characterization of bottom fisheries resources in th e
Mediterranean in terms of population distribution (relative
abundance indices) as w ell as dem ographic structures
(length distributions), and (ii) to provide data for modelling
the dynamics of the studied species (Baino et al. 2001;
IOF 2006). See http://w w w .izor.hr/eng/internatio n al/
m edits.htm l for more information.
The Italian national demersal survey program me GRUND
(Gruppo Nazionale Risorse Demersali), initiated in 1982,
covers the whole of the Italian coastline, which is divided into
11 areas. Each area uses their typical trawl gear to carry out
surveys. These are not identical but similar, as they all derive
from the original commercial Italian trawl (Fiorentini et al.
1999). See http://www.politicheagricole.gov.it/default.htm
for more information.
Additional information on species biology and ecology
can be obtained from scientific research carried out
through programmes such as tagging of migratory species.
For example, the MedSharks project uses techniques such
as photo-identification and tagging to carry out research
in th e M editerranean. Sandbar sharks C archa rh in u s
p lu m b e u s have been the focus of MedSharks research
since 2001, and basking sharks are also being m onitored.
See h ttp ://w w w .m e d sh a rk s.o rg /h o m e _ e n g .h tm for
m ore information.
The M editerranean International Bottom Trawl Survey
Project (MEDITS) was initiated in 1993, in response to
th e d ifficu lties o f o b tain in g estim ates o f dem ersal
reso u rces from fishing activity, and to su p p o rt th e
regulation of these heavily exploited demersal fisheries in
the Mediterranean. The aim of the MEDITS Project is to
provide standardised information on the status of these
resources within the Mediterranean region by carrying out
a universal programme of repetitive traw l surveys. The
25
8. Conclusion
This report presents the first comprehensive regional IUCN
Red List of chondrichthyan fishes of the Mediterranean Sea.
With 30 out of 71 species considered threatened (42% are
Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable); the
M editerranean region has some of the most threatened
chondrichthyan populations in the world. Currently, just
eight species (six sharks and tw o rays) are granted some
form o f p ro te c tio n u n d e r in te rn a tio n a l o r regional
agreements. Three main managem ent measures (deepsea
fisheries, driftnetting and shark finning bans) are now in
place in the Mediterranean; these should directly benefit
c h o n d ric h th y a n p o p u la tio n s . H o w e v er, e ffe c tiv e
implementation of these protection and management tools
is vital for these measures to have any beneficial impact.
It is clear th at additional m anagem ent m easures are
urgently needed for threatened species, and to regulate
exploitation of depleted commercial stocks.
Particularly vulnerable life history characteristics w ere
considered to contribute to the threatened status of 87% of
Mediterranean chondrichthyans, emphasising the need for
a p r e c a u tio n a r y a p p r o a c h to t h e i r m a n a g e m e n t
(FAO 1995).
Habitat loss, habitat degradation, hum an disturbance and
recreational fisheries all pose a threat to a num ber of
chondrichthyans in the Mediterranean. Considering the
usually high trophic level of this group of fishes and hence
contribution to ecosystem function, it is essential to
conserve th eir diversity as w ell as w hole ecosystems
(Tudela 2004). Healthy fisheries are dependant on the
productivity o f th e ecosystem . Responsible fisheries
m anagem ent should take into account th e pro fo u n d
in teractio n s b etw e en fisheries and th e ir su p p o rtin g
ecosystem s by applying th e ecosystem ap p ro ach to
fisheries (FAO 2003). Management measures such as ‘no
take zones’ and Marine Protected Areas could be employed
to reduce pressures on chondrichthyan populations and
safeguard critical habitats.
Due to insufficient knowledge and information, 18 species
have been assessed as Data Deficient. Despite the current
lack of data, this group could actually include some of the
m ost vulnerable chondrichthyans; increased funding and
research attention needs to be directed towards these species.
Although limited data availability is often cited as a problem,
it sh ould not, how ever, be used to justify th e lack
of management.
A ssessing th e th re a te n e d statu s o f M ed iterran ea n
chondrichthyans w ould not have been possible w ithout
th e collaboration of experts from many countries within
the region. However, information is still lacking from many
c o u n trie s , p a r tic u la rly in th e s o u th a n d e a s te rn
M editerranean. It is essential that this strong regional
cooperation continues, and that n ew collaborations w ith
o th e r countries are forged, so th at th e w ork carried
o u t to p ro d u ce this first evaluation o f th e th rea ten ed
sta tu s o f M e d ite rra n e a n c h o n d ric h th y a n s ca n be
p r o g r e s s iv e ly b r o a d e n e d a n d u p d a te d as n e w
inform ation becom es available.
Bycatch is considered the biggest threat to chondrichthyan
fishes in the Mediterranean, potentially affecting all species
present. In many cases it is unclear w hether current catch
levels are sustainable, mainly because of the lack of speciesspecific reporting. Any increase in fishing effort, particularly
if unregulated, is therefore an obvious cause for concern.
Im proved research and m onitoring of chondrichthyan
bycatch is vital.
26
9. Recommendations
The following recom m endations w ere formulated by the
participants of the IUCN SSG Mediterranean IUCN Red List
workshop, after considering the results presented in this
report and consulting w ith the UNEP RAC/SPA Action Plan
f o r th e C o n s e r v a tio n o f C a r tila g in o u s F ishes
(C hondrichthyans) in the M editerranean Sea. These
recom m endations are intended to com plem ent and take
fo rw a rd e x istin g advice fo r th e c o n se rv a tio n and
management of chondrichthyans within the Mediterranean
region, in light of newly collated information on the IUCN
Red list status of Mediterranean chondrichthyans summarised
within this report.
1. CITES Parties to im plem ent Resolution Conf. 12.6 on
the conservation and m anagem ent of sharks (h ttp ://
w w w .cites.org/eng/res/12/12-06.shtm ) and Decision
13.42 (h ttp ://w w w .cites.o rg /en g /d ec /v a lid l3 /1 3 42&43.shtml) directed to Parties, including speciesspecific recom m endations in docum ent CoP 13 Doc.
35 Annex 2 (http://w w w .cites. 0 rg/eng/c 0 p / l 3/doc/
E13-35.pdf).
2.
3.
4.
5.
Mediterranean States to develop and implement National
Plans of Action, as outlined by the UN FAO IPOA-Sharks.
6.
GFCM to initiate the developm ent of a Regional Shark
Plan and management strategies specifically aimed at the
conservation and sustainable use of commercially
exploited chondrichthyan fish species and species taken
as bycatch, in the context of the precautionary principle.
7.
GFCM and M editerranean States to develop and
support fishing practices that minimise bycatch and/
or facilitate live release.
8. The current moratoriums on driftnetting and deepsea
fishing sh o u ld rem ain in p lace b u t n e e d to be
strengthened to improve their effectiveness. Adequate
enforcem ent measures are crucial.
9.
Improve coordination betw een existing environmental
and fisheries organisations and international and regional
C onventions th at address shark conservation and
m anagement in the Mediterranean and Black Sea, by
increasing collaboration and ensuring a uniform
ap p licatio n o f th e ecosystem ap p ro ach and th e
precautionary principle.
M editerranean States to support existing research
programmes and develop new research programmes
on the biology, ecology and population dynamics of
threatened species and in areas that are poorly known or
under threat. Resources urgently need to be directed
towards species assessed as Data Deficient, w hich are
potentially threatened.
10. Financial donors, such as the EU, should highlight such
research programmes, including long-term monitoring,
as a priority for funding.
UNEP-RAC/SPA to update th e priority list o f species
in th e UNEP M ed iterra n ea n A ctio n P lan f o r the
C o n s e r v a tio n o f C h o n d r ic h th y a n F ish es an d
th e A ppendices o f th e SPA p ro to co l, in light of
this com prehensive IUCN Red List assessm ent of
M editerranean chondrichthyans, and to continue to
do so as m ore IUCN Red List assessments are becom e
available/are updated.
11. Researchers to identify and map critical habitats for
endangered species.
12. Mediterranean States should restore and protect identified
critical habitats through appropriate monitoring and
management measures.
13.
M editerranean States urgently to make provisions for
the legal p ro tection of species identified as being
threatened in the Mediterranean.
27
UNEP RAC/SPA, in conjunction w ith GFCM, should
develop and facilitate training, particularly in the fields
of taxonom y and m onitoring m ethods, (to enable the
accurate collection of species-specific landings) and
stock assessment.
10. References
Camhi, M., Fowler, S.L ., Musick, J.A., Bräutigam, A. and
Fordham , S.V. (1998). S h a rks a n d th eir rela tives Ecology a n d C onservation. IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist
Group. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cam bridge, UK.
iv+39pp.
Aldebert, Y. (1997). Demersal resources of the Gulf of Lions
(NW Mediterranean). Impact of exploitation on fish diversity.
Vie et M illieu 47: 275-284.
Baino, R., Serena, F., Ragonese, S., ReyJ. andRinelli, P. (2001).
Catch composition and abundance of elasmobranchs based
on the MEDITS Program. Rapp. Comm. Int. M er Medit.
36, 2001.
Cavanagh, R.D., Kyne, P.M., Fowler, S.L., Musick, J.A.
and B ennett, M.B. (eds.) (2003). The C o n serva tio n
Status o f A u stra la sia n C hondrichthyans: R eport of the
IUCN Shark Specialist G roup Australia and O ceania
Regional Red List W orkshop, Q ueensland, Australia, 7 9 M arch 2003. The University o f Q ueensland, Brisbane,
Australia, x + 170pp.
Barrull, J. and Mate, I. (2002). Tiburones del Mediterráneo.
Llibreria El Set-ciències, Arenys de Mar. 290 pp.
Bauchot, M.L. (1987). Raies et autres batoides. Pp. 845-886.
In: Fischer, W., Bauchot, M.L. and Schneider, M. (eds.).
Fiches FAO d ’identification p o u r les besoins de la pêche,
(rev. 1). M éditerranée et m er Noire. Z one de pêche 3 7.
Vol. II. Commission des Communautés Européennes and
FAO, Rome.
Cavanagh, R.D. eta l. (In preparation.). The Conservation
Status o f M editerranean Chondrichthyans. Report of the
IUCN Shark Specialist Group.
Chevalier, C. (2005). Governance of the M editerranean
Sea - Outlook for the Legal Regime. IUCN Centre for
M editerranean Cooperation, Málaga, Spain. 60pp.
Baum, J.K., Myers, R.A., Kehler, D.G., Worm, B., Harley, S.J.
and Doherty, P.A. (2003). Collapse and conservation of shark
populations in the N orthw est Atlantic. Science 299: 389392.
CITES Animals Committee (2004). Report of the analysis
of questionnaire responses on National Plans of Action.
In fo rm a tio n D o c u m e n t: AC20 Inf. 5. At: h t t p : / /
w w w .c ite s.o rg /c o m m o n /c o m /a c /2 0 /E 2 0 -in f-0 5 .p d f.
Accessed 12 Septem ber 2006.
Bertrand, J., Gil de Sola, L., Papakonstantinou, C., Relini,
G. and Souplet, A. (2000). Contribution on the distribution
of th e elasm obranchs in the M editerranean (from the
MEDITS surveys). B iología M a rin a M editerranea 7:
385-399.
CITES (2006). Decisions of the Conference of the Parties
to CITES in effect afte r th e 13th m eeting. Sharks.
Decision 13.42 and 13.43. At: http://www.cites.org/eng/dec/
validl 3/13-42&43.shtml. Accessed 12 September 2006.
Bradai, M.N. (2000). Diversité du peuplem ent ichtyque
et contribution à la conaissance des sparidés du golfe de
Gabès. PhD, Université de Sfax. Tunis, Tunisia.
Clo, S., Dalu, M., Danovaro, R. and Vacchi, M. (2002).
S e g re g a tio n o f th e M e d ite rra n e a n p o p u la tio n o f
C entroscym nus coelolepis (Chondrichthyes: Squalidae):
a description and survey. NAFO SCR Doc. 02/83.
Cailliet, G.M., Musick, J.A., Sim pfendorfer, C.A. and
S tev en s, J. D. (2 0 0 5 ). E co lo g y a n d Life H isto ry
Characteristics of C hondrichthyan Fish. Pp. 12-18. In:
Fowler, S.L., Cavanagh, R.D., Camhi, M., Burgess, G.H.,
Cailliet, G.M., Fordham, S.V., Simpfendorfer, C.A. and
Musick, J.A. (com p, and ed.). (2005). Sharks, Rays a n d
Chimaeras: The Status o f the C hondrichthyan Fishes.
IUCN SSC Shark S p e c ia list G ro u p . IUCN, G land,
Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
CMS (2006). Convention on Migratory Species: Appendix
I and II of CMS. At: h ttp ://w w w .cm s.in t/d o cu m en ts/
a p p e n d ix /c m s _ a p p l_ 2 .h tm # a p p e n d ix _ I. A ccessed
10 O ctober 2006.
COE (2006). Convention on the Conservation of European
Wildlife and Natural Habitats. Bern 19. EX. 1979. At: h ttp :/
/conventions, coe .int/T reaty/en/T reaties/H tm l/104 .htm.
Accessed 12th Septem ber 2006.
Calis, E., Jackson, E.H., Nolan, C.P. and Jeal, F. (2005).
Preliminary age and grow th estimates of the Rabbitfish,
C h im a era m o n stro sa , w ith im plications for fu tu re
resource managem ent. N orthw est A tla n tic J o u r n a l o f
Fisheries Science. Vol. 35: 21.
Colloca, F., Cardinale, M., Belluscio, A. and Ardizzone, G.
(2003). Pattern of distribution and diversity of demersal
28
assemblages of the central Mediterranean Sea. Estuarine and
Coastal Sh elf Science 56:469-480.
FAO (1995). Precautionary approach to fisheries. Part 2:
Scientific papers. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 350/2.
FAO, Rome. At: h ttp ://w w w .fa o .o rg /D O C R E P /0 0 3 /
W1238E/W1238E00.HTM. Accessed 4 April 2007.
Compagno, L., Dando, M. and Fowler, S. (2005). A Field
G u id e to th e S h a rk s o f th e W orld. H arperC ollins
Publishers Ltd., London.
FAO (2000). Fisheries Management-1. Conservation and
managem ent of sharks. FAO Technical G uidelines fo r
Responsible Fisheries. No. 4, Suppl. 1. FAO, Rome. 37pp.
A t : h t t p : / / w w w .f a o . o r g / d o c r e p / 0 0 3 / x 8 6 9 2 e /
x8692e00.htm . Accessed 4 April 2007.
C om pagno, L.J.V. (2001). Sharks o f th e W orld. An
annotated and illustrated catalogue of the shark species
know n to date. Volume 2. Bullhead, m ackerel and carpet
sh ark s (H e te ro d o n tifo rm e s , L am n ifo rm es a n d
Orectolobiformes). FAO Species Catalogue fo r Fisheries
Purposes No. 1, Vol.2. FAO, Rome.
FAO (2003). Fisheries Management-2. The Ecosystem
Approach to Fisheries. FAO Technical G uidelines f o r
Responsible Fisheries. No. 4 Suppl. 2. FAO, Rome. At:
h ttp : / / w w w .s a f m c .n e t/P o r ta ls /0 /E M H o m e /
MafacReportEcoMgmt.pdf. Accessed 4 April 2007.
Compagno, L.J.V. (In preparation a). Sharks of the World.
An annotated and illustrated catalogue of the shark species
k n o w n to d a te . V olum e 1. H e x a n c h ifo rm e s,
Squaliformes, Squatiniformes and Pristiophoriformes. FAO
Species Catalogue fo r Fisheries Purposes No. 1, Vol. 1. FAO,
Rome.
FAO (2005). N ew regulations for M editerranean fishing
tak e fo rce. At: h ttp ://w w w .fa o .o rg /fi/N E M S /n e w s/
detail_news.asp?event_id=32087. Accessed 15 July 2006.
Compagno, L.J.V. (In preparation b). Sharks of the World.
An annotated and illustrated catalogue of the shark species
k n o w n to date. Volum e 3. C archarhiniform es. FAO
Species Cataloguefor Fisheries Purposes. No. 1, Vol.3. FAO,
Rome.
FAO (2006). Fisheries Global Inform ation System (FIGIS)
At:h ttp ://w w w .fao.org/figis/servlet/
static?dom =root& xm l=fishery/index.xm l. Accessed 18
May 2006.
Fergusson, I.K. (1996). Distribution and autecology of the
w hite shark in the eastern N orth Atlantic O cean and
M editerranean Sea. In: A.P. Klimley and D.G. Ainley (ed.)
G reat W hite Sharks: The B io lo g y o f C a rch a ro d o n
carchariasp. Academic Press, San Diego. C hapter 30,
p p .321-345.
Dagit, D.D., Hareide, N. andClö, S. (In preparation). Rabbitfish
C h im a era m o n stro sa M editerranean IUCN Red List
assessment.
De Metrio, G., Petrosino, G., Montanaro, C., Matarrese,
A., Lenti, M. and Cecere, E. (1984). Survey on summerau tu m n p o p u la tio n o f P rio n a c e g la u c a L.(Pisces,
Chondrichthyes) during the four year period 1978-1981
and its incidence on swordfish (X iphias gladius L.) and
albacore (T h u n n u s alalunga (Bonn)) fishing. Oebalia
X:105-116.
Fergusson, I.K. (2002). O ccurrence and biology of the
great w hite shark Carcharodon carcharias in the Central
M editerranean Sea: A review. In: Vacchi, M., La Mesa, G.,
Serena, F. and Seret, B (Eds). Proc. 4th Europ. Elasm.
Assoc. Meet.,Livorno, (Italy) 2000. ICRAM, ARPAT and
SFI: 7-30.
Dulvy, N.K., Sadovy, Y. and Reynolds, J.D. (2003).
Extinction vulnerability in marine populations. Fish a n d
Fisheries 4, 25-64.
Fergusson, I.K., C om pagno, L.J.V. and Marks, M.A.
(2005). Great W hite Shark Carcharodon Carcharias. In:
Fowler, S.L., Cavanagh, R.D., Camhi, M., Burgess, G.H.,
Cailliet, G.M., Fordham , S.V., Sim pfendorfer, C.A. and
Musick, C.A. (eds.) Sharks, R ays a n d C him aeras: The
S ta tu s o f C h o n d ric h th y a n Fishes. IUCN/SSC Shark
S p e c ia list G ro u p . IUCN, G land, S w itz e rla n d a n d
Cam bridge, UK.
END (2005). Earth Negotiations Bulletin CMS - 8. Vol.
18, No. 27. In te rn a tio n a l In s titu te fo r S ustainable
Developm ent (USD). At: http://w w w .iisd.ca/dow nload/
pdf/enbl827e.pdf. Accessed 16 O ctober 2006.
Europa (2006a). Barcelona Convention: protecting the
M editerranean Sea. At: http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/
lvb/128084.htm. Accessed 12 Septem ber 2006.
Fergusson, I.K., Soldo, A.S., Bonfil, R. and Morey, G. (in
p rep aratio n ). W hite shark C archarodon carch a ria s
Mediterranean Regional IUCN Red List assessment.
E u ro p a (2 0 0 6 b ). M an a g em en t o f R e so u rc e s a n d
Environment Protection. Removal of Shark Fins. At: h ttp :/
/europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/166023.htm . Accessed
2 June 2006.
Fiorentini, L., Dremiére, P-Y, Leonori, I., Sala, A. and
Palumbo, V. (1999). Efficiency of the bottom trawl used for
the M editerranean international traw l survey (MEDITS).
29
J o u rn a l o f A q u a tic Living Resources 12 (3) 187-205.
Elsevier, Paris.
The Marine ichthyofauna of the Eastern Levant - History,
Inventory and Characterization. IsraelJournal o f Zoology.
Volume 42:15-55.
Fitzmaurice, P., Green, P., Kierse, G., Kenny, M. and Clark,
M. (2005). Stock discrim ination of the blue shark, based
on Irish tagging data. Coi. Vol. Sei. Pap. ICCAT 58(3):
1171-1178.
H e e sse n , H.J.L. (e d ) (2 0 0 3 ). D e v e lo p m e n t o f
E la sm o b ra n c h A sse ssm e n ts DELASS. E u ro p e a n
Commission DG Fish Study Contract 99/055, Final Report,
January 2003.
Fordham, S. (2006). Shark finning news. Shark Trust. At:
http://www.sharktrust.org/cgi/main.asp?newsfirst=1055.
Accessed 2 June 2006.
ICCAT (2 0 0 1 ). In te rn a tio n a l C o m m issio n fo r th e
C onservation o f Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). R eport for
biennial period 2000-2001. Part 1 (2000). Vol 2 . Madrid,
S pain 2001. At: h ttp ://w w w .ic c a t.e s /D o c u m e n ts /
BienRep/REP_EN_00-01_I_2 .pdf. Accessed 10 July 2006.
Fowler, S.F. and Cavanagh, R.D. (2005a). International
C o n s e rv a tio n a n d M an a g em en t In itia tiv e s fo r
Chondrichthyan Fish. Pp 58-69. In: Fowler, S.F., Cavanagh,
R.D., Camhi, M., Burgess, G.H., Cailliet, G.M., Fordham, S. V.,
Simpfendorfer, C.A. and Musick, J.A. (com p, and ed.).
(2005). Sharks, R ays a n d Chimaeras: The Status o f the
C hondrichthyan Fishes. IUCN SSC Shark Specialist Group.
IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
ICCAT (2 0 0 5 ). In te rn a tio n a l C o m m issio n fo r th e
C onservation o f Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). R eport for
biennial period 2004-2005. Part 1 (2004). Vol 1 . Madrid,
Spain 2005. At: http://www.iccat.es/Documents/BienRep/
REP_EN_04-05_I_l.pdf. Accessed 17 O ctober 2006.
Fowler, S.F. and Cavanagh, R.D. (2005b). Species Status
Reports. Pp. 213-361. In: Fowler, S.F., Cavanagh, R.D.,
Camhi, M., Burgess, G.H., Cailliet, G.M., Fordham, S.V.,
Simpfendorfer, C.A. and Musick, J.A. (com p, and ed.).
(2005). Sharks, Rays and Chimaeras: The Status o f the
C hondrichthyan Fishes. IUCN SSC Shark Specialist Group.
IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
IOF (2006). Project MEDITS: An international bottom trawl
survey in the Mediterranean. Institute of Oceanography
and Fisheries, Split, Croatia. At: h ttp ://w w w .iz o r.h r/
m edits/eng_g.htm . Accessed 16 O ctober 2006.
IUCN (2001). IUCN R ed List Categories a n d Criteria
Version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission. IUCN,
Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. ii + 30 pp. At:
http://www .iucnredlist.org/info/categories_criteria2001.
Accessed 15 June 2006.
Fowler, S.F., Cavanagh, R.D., Camhi, M., Burgess, G.H.,
Cailliet, G.M., Fordham, S.V., Simpfendorfer, C.A. and
Musick, J.A. (com p, and ed.). (2005). Sharks, Rays a n d
Chimaeras: The Status o f the C hondrichthyan Fishes.
IUCN SSC Shark S p e c ia list G ro u p . IUCN, G land,
Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. x + 4 6 lp p .
IUCN (2003a). Guidelines f o r A pplication o f IUCN R ed
List Criteria a t Regional Levels:Version 3.0. IUCN Species
Survival Com m ission. IUCN, Gland, Sw itzerland and
Cambridge, UK. ii+ 26pp.
Galaz, T. and De Maddalena, A. (2004). On a great white
shark, Carcharodon carcharias (Linnaeus, 1758) trapped
in a tuna cage off Fibya, M editerranean Sea. Annales, Ser.
Hist. N a t 14(2): 159-164).
IUCN (2003b). IUCN information paper on Shark finning.
At: http://w w w .flm n h .u fl.ed u /fish /o rg an izatio n s/ssg /
iucnsharkfinningfinal.pdf. Accessed 10 Septem ber 2006.
IUCN (2005). Guidelines f o r using the IUCN R ed List
Categories a n d Criteria.
At: h ttp ://a p p .iu c n .o rg /w e b file s/d o c /S S C /R e d L is t/
RedListGuidelines.pdf#search=%22iucn%20red%201ist%20
guidelines%22. Accessed 17 August 2006.
Gärdenfors, U., Hilton-Taylor, C., Mace, G. and Rodriguez,
J.P. (2001). The application of IUCN Red Fist Criteria at
Regional levels. Conservation Biology 15(5): 1206-1212.
Grey M. (1956). The distribution of fishes found below a
depth of 2000 m. Fieldiana Zool. 36(2): 75-183.
IUCN (2006). In tro d u c tio n - The IUCN Red List o f
Threatened Species™. At: http://w w w .iucnredlist.org/
info/introduction. Accessed 14 August 2006.
GFCM (2004). R eport o f th e Seventh Session o f the
Scientific Advisory Com mittee, Rome, 19-22 O ctober
2004. FAO Fisheries Report No. 763. Rome. At: h ttp ://
w w w .fa o .o rg /d o c re p /0 0 7 /y 5 8 5 0 b /y 5 8 5 0 b 0 0 .h tm .
Accessed 4 April 2007.
IUCN S ta n d a rd s a n d P e titio n s W o rk in g G ro u p .
(2006). Guidelines fo r using the IUCN R ed List Categories
a n d Criteria: Version 6.1. Prepared by the Standards and
Petitions W orking Group for the IUCN SSC Biodiversity
A ssessm ents Sub-Committee in July 2006. At: h ttp ://
Golani, D. (1996). First record of the bigeye thresher shark,
Alopias superciliosus (Lowe, 1839), from Turkish waters.
30
Rose, C. and McLoughlin, K. (2001). Review of Shark Finning
in Australian Fisheries. Final Report to Fisheries Resources
Research Fund. DOAFF Australia.
app.iucn.org/webfiles/doc/SSC/RedList/
RedListGuidelines.pdf. Accessed 12 September 2006.
IUCN SSG (2003). IUCN Shark Specialist Group Finning
Statement. At: http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/organizations/
ssg/ssgfinstatementfinal2june .pdf. Accessed: 2 June 2006.
Schembri, T., Fergusson, I.K. and Schembri, P.J. (2003).
Revision of the records of sharks and rays species from
th e Maltese Islands (Chordata: C hondrichthyes). The
C entral M e d ite rra n e a n N a tu r a lis t de O ceanología
A c a d e m ia d e C ie n c ia s d e C u b a a n d C en tro de
Investigaciones de Q u in ta n a Roo, Mexico. 4(1):71-104.
JNCC (2006). UK Clearing House Mechanism for Biodiversity:
EC H abitats D irective. At: h ttp ://w w w .c h m .o rg .u k /
cats.asp?t=393. Accessed 13 October 2006.
Lucio, P., Ortiz de Zárate, V., Diez, G., Rodríguez-Cabello,
C. a n d S a n tu rtú n , M. (2 0 0 2 ). D e s c rip tio n o f an
experim ental artisanal fishery targeting blue shark in the
Bay o f B iscay, 1 9 9 8 -2 0 0 0 . NAFO S ym posium o n
Elasmobranch Fisheries. Santiago de Com postela (Spain),
11-13 September 2002. At: http://w w w .nafo.int/science/
research/conferences/elasmo/schedule.html. Accessed 14
O ctober 2006.
Serena, F. (2005). Field identification Guide to the sharks and
rays of the M editerranean and Black Sea. FAO Species
Identification Guide for Fishery Purposes. FAO, Rome. 97pp.
Massuti, E. and Moranta, J. (2003). Demersal assemblages
and d ep th d istrib u tio n o f elasm obranches from the
co n tin en tal sh elf and slope off th e Balearic Islands
(w estern Mediterranean). ICESJournal o f M arine Science
60:753-766.
SGRST (2003). Report of the Subgroup on Resource Status
(SGRST) o f th e Scientific, T echnical and Econom ic
Committee for Fisheries (STECF): Elasmobranch Fisheries.
Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, 2225 July 2003.
M egalofonou, P., Y annopoulos, C., Damalas, D., De
Metrio, G., Deflorio, M., de la Serna, J.M. and Macias, D.
(2005). Incidental catch and estimated discards of pelagic
sharks from th e sw ordfish and tu n a fisheries in the
M editerranean Sea. Fishery B ulletin 103: 620-634.
Sims, D.W. (2003). Tractable models f o r testing theories
a b o u t n a tu r a l strategies: fo r a g in g b e h a v io u r a n d
h a b ita t selection o f free-ranging sharks. Journal of Fish
Biology 63 (Supplem ent A): 53-73.
Serena, F. (Unpublished). Table com piled following FAO
Expert Consultation to Review Im plem entation of the
International Plan of Action for Sharks at National Levels
held in Rome on 6 -8 D ecem ber 2005.
Sims, D.W., Southall, E.J., Richardson, A.J., Reid, P.C. and
Metcalfe, J.D. (2003). Seasonal movements and behaviour
of basking sharks from archival tagging: no evidence of
w inter hibernation. M arine Ecology Progress Series 248,
187-196.
Morey, G., Martínez, M., Massuti, E. andMoranta, J. (2003).
T h e o c c u rre n c e o f w h ite sh ark s, C a r c h a r o d o n
c a r c h a r ia s , a ro u n d th e B alearic Islands (w e s te rn
Mediterranean Sea). E nvironm ental Biology o f Fishes 68:
425-432.
Sion, L., Bozzano, A., D ’Onghia, G., Capezzuto, F. and
Panza, M. (2003). Chondrichthyes species in deep waters
of the M editerranean Sea. Scientia M arina 68 (Suppl. 3):
1 5 3 -1 6 2 . At h ttp ://w w w .ic m .c sic .e s /sc im a r/P D F s /
sm68s3153.pdf. Accessed 14th O ctober 2006.
Musick, J.A. and Bonfil, R. (eds.) (2005). Management
techniques for elasm obranch fisheries. FAO Fisheries
Technical Paper. No. 474. FAO, Rome. 251pp.
Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Serena, F. and Mancusi, C.
(2006). M obula m obular. In: IUCN (2006). 2 0 0 6 IUCN
R ed List o f Threatened Species. At: w w w .iucnredlist.org.
Accessed: 10 O ctober 2006.
Soldo, A. and Dulcic, J. (2005). N ew record of a great
w hite shark, C archarodon carcharias (Lamnidae) from
the eastern Adriatic Sea. C ybium 1 (29): 89-90.
Priede, I.G. and Bagley, P.M. (2000). In situ studies on
deep-sea demersal fishes using autonom ous unm anned
lander platforms. In: R.N. Gibson and M. Barnes (eds.),
Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev. 38: 357-392.
Stehmann, M. and Burkei, D.L. (1984). Rajidae Pp. 163196. In: W hitehead, P.J.P., Bauchot, M.-L., Hureau, J.-C.,
Nielsen, J., Tortonese, E. (eds.). Fishes o f the North-eastern
Atlantic a n d M editerranean. Volume 1. UNESCO, Paris.
Relini, G., Biagi, F., Serena, F., Belluscio, A., Spedicato, M.T.,
Rinelli, P., Follesa, M.C., Piccinetti, C., Ungaro, N., Sion, L. and
Levi, D. (2000). Selachians fished by otter trawl in the Italian
Seas. Biología M arina M editerranea 7: 347- 384.
Stevens, J. (2005). Blue shark Prionace glauca. In: Fowler,
S.L., Cavanagh, R.D., Camhi, M., Burgess, G.H., Cailliet, G.M.,
Fordham, S.V., Simpfendorfer, C.A. and Musick, C.A. (eds.)
S h a r k s , R a y s a n d C h im a e r a s : T he S ta tu s o f
31
Chondrichthyan Fishes. IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group.
IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
w w w .unep.org/regionalseas/Programmes/
UNEP_Administered_Programmes/Mediterranean_Region/
default.asp. Accessed: 12 October 2006.
Stevens, J. and Correia, J.P.S. (2003) C entroscym nus
coelolepis. In: IUCN 2006.2006IUCN Red List o f Threatened
Species. At: www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed 19 October 2006.
Ungaro, N., Serena, F., Dulvy, N.K., Tinti, F., Bertozzi, M.,
Pasolini, P., Mancusi, C. and Notarbartolo di Sciara, G.
(2006). Leucoraja melitensis. In: IUCN (2006). 2006 IUCN
Red List of Threatened Species. At w w w .iucnredlist.org.
Accessed: 1 September 2006.
Stevens, J.D., Walker, T.I., Cook, S.F. and Fordham, S.V.
(2005). Threats Faced by C hondrichthyan Fish. Pp. 4857. In: Fowler, S.L., Cavanagh, R.D., Camhi, M., Burgess,
G.H., Cailliet, G.M., Fordham, S.V., Simpfendorfer, C.A.
and Musick, J.A. (com p, and ed.). (2005). Sharks, Rays
a n d C him aeras: The Status o f the C ho n d rich th ya n
Fishes. IUCN SSC Shark Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland,
Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
Ungaro, N., Serena, F., Tinti, F., Bertozzi, M., Pasolini, P.,
Mancusi, C., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Dulvy, N. and Ellis,
J. (In p r e p a ra tio n ). S p o tte d ray R a ja m o n ta g u i
Mediterranean region IUCN Red List assessment.
Vacchi, M., Macias, D., Fergusson, I., Mancusi, C. and
C lo, S. (In p r e p a r a tio n ) . B igeye th r e s h e r sh a rk
Alopias superciliosus M editerranean Regional IUCN Red
List assessment.
Tudela, S. (2004). Ecosystem effects of fishing in the
Mediterranean: an analysis of the major threats of fishing
gear and practices to biodiversity and marine habitats.
Studies a n d Reviews. General Fisheries C om m ission fo r
the M editerranean. No. 74. Rome, FAO. 44pp.
Walker, P., Cavanagh, R.D., Ducrocq, M. and Fowler, S.L.
(2005). C h ap ter 7 - Regional Overview s: N o rth east
Atlantic (including Mediterranean and Black Sea). P86. In:
Fowler, S.L., Cavanagh, R.D., Camhi, M., Burgess, G.H.,
Cailliet, G.M., Fordham, S.V., Simpfendorfer, C.A. and
Musick, J.A. (com p, and ed.). (2005). Sharks, Rays a n d
Chimaeras: The Status o f the C hondrichthyan Fishes.
IUCN SSC Shark S p e c ia list G ro u p . IUCN, G land,
Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
Tudela, S., Kai, K.A., Maynou, F., El Andalossi, M. and
Guglielmi, P. (2005). Driftnet Fishing and biodiversity
conservation: th e case study of the large-scale M oroccan
d riftn e t fle e t o p e r a tin g in th e A lb o ra n Sea (SW
M editerranean). Biological Conservation 121. 65-78.
UNEP MAP RAC/SPA (2 0 0 3 ). A c tio n P la n f o r th e
Conservation o f Cartilaginous Fishes (Chondrichthyans)
in the M editerranean Sea. Ed. Regional Activity Centre
for Secially Protected Areas, Tunis. 56pp.
WWF (2005). EU bid to evade driftnet ban. At: h ttp ://
photos.panda.org/about_w w f/w here_w e_w ork/africa/
w here/tunisia/index.cfm ?uN ew sID = 21291. A ccessed
30 May 2006.
UNEP RAC/SPA (2 0 0 2 ). T h e M e d ite rra n e a n
C h o n d ric h th y a n F ishes (S harks, Rays, Skates an d
C im aeras): Status an d P rio ritie s fo r C o n serv a tio n .
UNEP(DEC)/MED/WG2.11 /in f.3. Septem ber 2002. 20pp.
United Nations Environment Regional Activity Centre for
Specially Protected Areas, Tunis.
Zenetos, A., Sioku-Frangou, I., Gotsis-Skretas, O. and
Groom, S. (2002). The M editerranean Sea. In: E urope’s
b io d iv e r s ity - b io g e o g ra p h ic a l reg io n s a n d seas.
E u ro p e a n E n v iro n m e n t A gency. At: h t t p : / /
reports, eea. europa. eu/report_2002_0524_154909/en/
MediterSea.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2006.
UNEP (2005). United Nations Environment Programme,
Regional Sea Program m e: M editerranean. At: h ttp ://
32
Appendix 1. Checklist of
chondrichthyan fishes in the
Mediterranean Sea
This checklist of Mediterranean chondrichthyan fauna was
co m p iled from Leonard C om pagno’s (2005) G lobal
Checklist o f Living C hondrichthyan Fishes. This list is
the standard used by the SSG to ensure consistency across
assessments, although there is some contention w ithin
the chondrichthyan scientific community over the naming
and classification of some species and this checklist does
not necessarily represent the views o f all systematists
w ithin the IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group network.
Fabrizio Serena’s Field Guide to the Sharks a n d Rays o f
the M ed iterranean a n d B lack Seas (2005) was also
referred to in the preparation of the list.
Class: C H O N D R IC H TH Y E S
Fam ily
Scientific nam e
C om m on nam e
R a b b itfis h
Subclass
H o lo c e p h a li
O rd er
C H IM A E R IF O R M E S
C H IM A E R ID A E
M o d e rn C h im a e ra s
S h o rtn o s e
Chim aera
C h im a e ra s
m onstrosa
Subclass
E la s m o b ra n c h ii
O rd er
H E X A N C H IF O R M E S
H E X A N C H ID A E
C ow and
S ix a n d
F rille d s h a rk s
S e v e n g ill s h a rk s
H eptranchias p e rlo
S h a rp n o s e
s e v e n g ill s h a rk
Hexanchus griseus
B lu n tn o s e s ix g ill s h a rk
H exanchus
B ig e y e s ix g ill s h a rk
nakam urai
O rd er
S Q U A L IF O R M E S
E C H IN O R H IN ID A E
D o g fis h s h a rk s
B ra m b le s h a rk s
Echinorhinus b ru cu s
B ra m b le s h a rk
Squalus acanthias
S p in y d o g fis h
Squalus m egalops
S h o rtn o s e s p u rd o g
S Q U A L ID A E
D o g fis h s h a rk s
O c c u rre n c e o f th is s p e c ie s in th e
M e d ite rra n e a n S e a is u n c e rta in
* Illu stra tio n s are n o t to scale.
33
Class: CHONDRICHTHYES
Family
Scientific name
Common name
C entrophorus
G u ip e r s h a rk
O rder
S Q U A L IF O R M E S
C E N T R O P H O R ID A E
D o g fis h s h a rk s
G u ip e r s h a rk s
granulosus
c o n t’d
S O M N IO S ID A E
S le e p e r s h a rk s
C entroscym nus
P o rtu g u e s e d o g fis h
coelolepis
Som niosus
L ittle s le e p e r s h a rk
rostratus
O X Y N O T ID A E
R o u g h s h a rk s
O xynotus centrina
A n g u la r ro u g h s h a rk
Dalatias licha
K ite fin s h a rk
Squatina aculeata
S a w b a c k a n g e ls h a rk
Squatina oculata
S m o o th b a c k a n g e ls h a rk
Squatina squatina
A n g e ls h a rk
Pristis p e ctin a ta
S m a llto o th s a w fis h
Pristis p ris tis
C o m m o n s a w fis h
D A LA TIID A E
K ite fin s h a rk s
O rd er
S Q U A T IN IF O R M E S
S Q U A T IN ID A E
A n g e l s h a rk s
A n g e l s h a rk s
O rd er
R A JIF O R M E S
B a to id s
Suborder
P R ISTO ID E I
P R IS T ID A E
S a w fis h e s
M o d e rn s a w fis h e s
* Illu stra tio n s are n o t to scale.
34
Class: C H O N D R IC H TH Y E S
Fam ily
Scientific nam e
C om m on nam e
R hinobatos
B la c k c h in g u ita rfis h
Suborder
R H IN O B A T O ID E I
R H IN O B A T ID A E
G u ita rfis h e s
G u ita rfis h e s
cem iculus
R hinobatos
C o m m o n g u ita rfis h
rhino b a to s
Suborder
T O R P E D IN O ID E I
TO R P E D IN ID A E
E le c tric rays
T o rp e d o ra ys
Torpedo
S p o tte d to r p e d o ra y
m arm orata
T orpedo nobiliana
G re a t to r p e d o ray
Torpedo
M a rb le d e le c tric ra y
sin u sp e rsici
M e d ite rra n e a n S e a is u n c e rta in
Torpedo to rpedo
O c e lla te to r p e d o ray
D ipturus batis
C o m m o n s k a te
D ipturus
S h a rp n o s e s k a te
Suborder
R A JO ID EI
R A JID A E
S k a te s
S k a te s
O c c u rre n c e o f th is s p e c ie s in th e
oxyrhynchus
Leucoraja circularis
S a n d y s k a te
Leucoraja fullonica
S h a g re e n s k a te
' Illu stra tio n s are n o t to scale.
35
Class: C H O N D R IC H TH Y E S
Fam ily
Scientific nam e
C om m on nam e
Suborder
-
R A JO ID E I
S k a te s
Leucoraja m elitensis
1
to
M a lte s e s k a te
*
c o n t’d
Leucoraja naevus
C u c k o o s k a te
*
—
—
#
Raja asterias
A tla n tic s ta rry s k a te
Raja brachyura
B lo n d e s k a te
Raja clavata
T h o rn b a c k s k a te
Raja m iraletus
T w in e y e s k a te
i" \r
'
: j O
\
J
\
'
Raja m o n ta g u i
S p o tte d s k a te
Raja p o lystig m a
S p e c k le d s k a te
Raja radula
R o u g h s k a te
Illu stra tio n s are n o t to scale.
36
ML/
Class: C H O N D R IC H TH Y E S
Fam ily
Scientific nam e
C om m on nam e
Raja undulata
U n d u la te s k a te
Rostroraja alba
W h ite s k a te
Dasyatis centroura
R o u g h ta il s tin g ra y
Dasyatis chrysonota
B lu e s tin g ra y
Dasyatis pastin aca
C o m m o n s tin g ra y
H im antura uarnak
H o n e y c o m b w h ip ra y
P teroplatytrygon
P e la g ic s tin g ra y
Suborder
R A JO ID E I
S k a te s
c o n t’d
Subo rd er
M Y L IO B A T O ID E I
D A S Y A T ID A E
S tin g ra y s
W h ip ta il S tin g ra y s
violacea
Taeniura grabata
R o u n d fa n ta il s tin g ra y
* Illu stra tio n s are n o t to scale.
37
Class: CHONDRICHTHYES
Family
Scientific name
Common name
G ym nura altavela
S p in y b u tte rfly ray
M ylio b a tis aquila
C o m m o n e a g le ray
Pterom ylaeus
B u llra y
Suborder
M Y L IO B A T O ID E I
G Y M N U R ID A E
S tin g ra y s
B u tte rfly ra ys
c o n t’d
M Y L IO B A T ID A E
E agle ra y s
bovinus
M e d ite rra n e a n S e a is u n c e rta in
R H IN O P T E R ID A E
C o w n o s e ra ys
R hinoptera
L u s ita n ia n c o w n o s e ray
m arginata
M O B U L ID A E
D evil rays
M ob u la m o b u la r
G ia n t d e v il ray
Carcharias taurus
S a n d tig e r s h a rk
O dontaspis fe ro x
S m a llto o th s a n d tig e r
A lo p ia s
B ig e y e th re s h e r
Suborder
L A M N IF O R M E S
O D O N T A S P ID ID A E
M a c k e re l s h a rk s
S a n d tig e r s h a rk s
A L O P IID A E
T h re s h e r s h a rk s
O c c u rre n c e o f th is s p e c ie s in th e
superciliosus
A lo p ia s vulpinus
T h re s h e r s h a rk
' Illu stra tio n s are n o t to scale.
38
Class: CHONDRICHTHYES
Family
Scientific name
Common name
C etorhinus m axim us
B a s k in g s h a rk
Carcharodon
G re a t w h ite s h a rk
Suborder
L A M N IF O R M E S
C E T O R H IN ID A E
M a c k e re l s h a rk s
B a s k in g s h a rk s
c o n t’d
L A M N ID A E
M a c k e re l s h a rk s
carcharias
Isurus o xyrinchus
S h o rtfin m a k o
Isurus p a u cus
L o n g fin m a ko
Lam na nasus
P o rb e a g le s h a rk
Galeus atlanticus
A tla n tic c a ts h a rk
Galeus m elastom us
B la c k m o u th c a ts h a rk
S cyliorhinus
S m a lls p o tte d c a ts h a rk
O rder
C A R C H A R H IN IF O R M E S
S C Y L IO R H IN ID A E
G ro u n d s h a rk s
C a ts h a rk s
canicula
S cyliorhinus stellaris
N u rs e h o u n d
G aleorhinus galeus
T o p e s h a rk
M uste lu s asterias
S ta rry s m o o th h o u n d
T R IA K ID A E
H o u n d s h a rk s
' Illu stra tio n s are n o t to scale.
39
Class: C H O N D R IC H TH Y E S
_________________________ Fam ily
Scientific name
Common name
M uste lu s m ustelus
S m o o th h o u n d
M ustelus
B la c k s p o t s m o o th h o u n d
O rder
C A R C H A R H IN IFO R M ES
G ro u n d s h a rk s
c o n t’d
p u n ctu la tu s
Carcharhinus
B ig n o s e s h a rk
altim us
C archarhinus
B ro n z e w h a le r s h a rk
brachyurus
Carcharhinus
S p in n e r s h a rk
brevipinna
Carcharhinus
S ilk y s h a rk
fa lcifo rm is
Carcharhinus
B la c k tlp s h a rk
lim batus
Carcharhinus
B la c k tip re e f s h a rk
m elanopterus
Carcharhinus
D u s k y s h a rk
ob scu ru s
Carcharhinus
S a n d b a r s h a rk
p lu m b e u s
* Illu stra tio n s are n o t to scale.
40
Class: C H O N D R IC H TH Y E S
Fam ily
Scientific nam e
C om m on nam e
P rionace glauca
B lu e s h a rk
R hizo p rion o d o n
M ilk s h a rk
O rder
C A R C H A R H IN IFO R M ES
G ro u n d s h a rk s
c o n t’d
acutus
S P H Y R N ID A E
H a m m e rh e a d
Sphyrna le w in i
S c a llo p e d h a m m e rh e a d
Sphyrna m okarran
G re a t h a m m e rh e a d
Sphyrna zygaena
S m o o th h a m m e rh e a d
s h a rk s
* Illustrations are n o t to scale. All illustrations by Alejandro Sancho Rafel.
41
Appendix 2. Summary of the lUCN’s Red
List Categories and Criteria Version 3.1
These five criteria (A-E) are used to evaluate whether a species belongs in a category
of threat (Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable)
Use any of the criteria A-E
C ritically E ndangered
E ndangered
V ulnerable
A. P op u lation red u ctio n
Declines m easured over the longer of 10 years or 3 generations
AÍ
> 90%
> 70%
> 50%
A2, A3 & A4
> 80%
> 50%
> 30%
AÍ. Population reduction observed, estim ated, inferred, or suspected in the past w here the causes of the reduction are
clearly reversible AND understood AND have ceased, based on and specifying any of the following:
(a ) direct observation
(b ) an index of abundance appropriate to the taxon
(c ) a decline in area of occurrence, ex ten t of occurrence, and/or habitat quality
(d ) actual or potential levels of exploitation
(e ) effects of introduced taxa, hybridisation, pathogens, pollutants, com petitors or parasites.
A2. Population reduction observed, estim ated, inferred, or suspected in the past w here the causes of reduction may n ot
have ceased OR m ay n o t be understood OR m ay n o t be reversible, based on (a) to (e) u n d er AÍ.
A3. Population reduction projected or suspected to be m et in the future (up to a m axim um of 100 years) based on (b) to
(e) u nder AÍ.
A4. An observed, estim ated, inferred, projected or suspected p opulation reduction (up to a m axim um of 100 years) w here
the tim e period m ust include b o th the past and the future, and w here the causes of reduction may n o t have ceased OR
may n o t b e understood OR m ay n o t be reversible, based on (a) to (e) u n d er AÍ.
B. G eograp hic ran ge in th e fo rm o f eith er BÍ (e x te n t o f o ccu rren ce) AND/OR B2 (area o f o ccu p a n cy )
B Í. Extent of o ccurrence
< 100 km 2
< 5,000 km 2
< 20,000 km 2
B2. Area of occupancy
< 10 km 2
< 500 km 2
< 2,000 km 2
AND at least tw o o f th e follow in g:
(a ) Severely fragm ented, OR
=1
<5
<10
N um ber of locations
(b ) Continuing decline in any of: (i) extent of occurrence; (ii) area of occupancy; (iii) area, ex ten t and/or quality of
habitat; (iv ) num ber of locations or subpopulations; (v ) num ber of m ature individuals.
(c ) Extreme fluctuations in any of: ( i) ex ten t of occurrence; (ii) area of occupancy; (iii) n um ber of locations or
subpopulations; (iv ) num ber of m ature individuals.
C. Sm all p o p u la tio n siz e an d d eclin e
N um ber of m ature individuals
< 250
AND eith er C l or C2:
C l. An estim ated continuing
25% in 3 years
decline of at least:
or 1 generation
(up to a max. of 100 years in future).
C2. A continuing decline AND (a) and/or (b):
(a ) (i) No. of m ature individuals in
< 50
each subpopulation.
(a ) (ii) or % individuals in one
90%
subpopulation at least.
(b ) extrem e fluctuations in the num ber of m ature individuals.
D. V ery sm a ll or restricted p o p u la tio n
Either (1) num ber of m ature individuals
OR (2) restricted area of occupancy
E. Q uantitative A nalysis
Indicating the probability of
extinction in the wild to be at least:
< 2,500
< 10,000
20% in 5 years or
2 generations
10% in 10 years
or 3 generations
< 250
< 1,000
95%
100 %
< 250
< 50
< 1,000
Area of occurrence
< 20 km 2 or
< 5 locations
> 50% in 10 years or
3 generations
(100 years max)
> 20% in 20 years or
5 generations
(100 years max)
> 10% in 100 years
Source: IUCN Standards and Petitions W orking Group 2006; http://intranet.iucn.org/w ebfiles/doc/SSC /R edList/
RedListGuidelines.pdf
42
IUCN
T h « W o r ld C o n t o r v o b o n U n io n
IU C N - T h e S p e c i e s S u rv iv a l C o m m is s io n
T h e S p e c i e s S u rv iv a l C o m m is s io n ( S S C ) is t h e l a r g e s t o f lU C N 's s ix v o lu n te e r c o m m is s io n s w ith a g lo b a l
m e m b e r s h i p o f 8 . 0 0 0 e x p e r t s . S S C a d v i s e s IU C N a n d its m e m b e r s o n th e w id e r a n g e o f te c h n ic a l a n d
sc ie n tific a s p e c t s o f s p e c i e s c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d i s d e d i c a t e d t o s e c u r i n g a f u tu r e fo r b io d iv e rsity . S S C h a s
s ig n if ic a n t in p u t in to t h e in te r n a tio n a l a g r e e m e n t s d e a lin g w ith b io d iv e rs ity c o n s e r v a tio n .
w w w .iu c n .o r g /th e m e s /s s c
IU C N - S h a r k S p e c i a l i s t G r o u p
T h e IU C N S S C S h a r k S p e c ia lis t G r o u p ( S S G ) w a s e s t a b l i s h e d in 1 9 9 1 . in r e s p o n s e t o g ro w in g
a w a r e n e s s a n d c o n c e r n o f t h e s e v e r e im p a c t o f f i s h e r i e s o n p o p u la tio n s o f c a r tila g in o u s f i s h e s a r o u n d
t h e w o rld . It p r o m o t e s t h e s u s t a i n a b l e u s e , w i s e m a n a g e m e n t a n d c o n s e r v a tio n o f a ll s h a r k s , s k a t e s ,
r a y s a n d c h i m a e r a s ( ~ 1 .2 0 0 s p e c i e s w o rld w id e ). T h e S S G h a s a g lo b a l v o lu n te e r n e tw o r k o f o v e r 2 0 0
e x p e r t m e m b e r s a c r o s s e l e v e n o c e a n r e g io n s . I ts w o r k p r o g r a m m e is d i r e c t e d b y tw o C o - C h a ir s a n d a n
E x e c u tiv e C o m m i t t e e a n d s u p p o r t e d b y tw o fu lltim e s ta f f m e m b e r s - a P r o g r a m m e O ffic er a n d a R e d List
O fficer.
w w w .f lm n h .u f l.e d u /f is h /O r g a n iz a tio n s /S S G /S S G .h tm t
IU C N - C e n t r e fo r M e d i t e r r a n e a n C o o p e r a t i o n
T h e C e n t r e w a s o p e n e d in O c t o b e r 2 0 0 1 a n d is lo c a te d in t h e o f fic e s o f th e P a r q u e T e c n o ló g ic o d e
A n d a lu c ía n e a r M a la g a . IU C N h a s o v e r 1 7 2 m e m b e r s in t h e M e d ite r r a n e a n re g io n , in c lu d in g 1 5
g o v e r n m e n t s . I ts m is s io n i s t o in f lu e n c e , e n c o u r a g e a n d a s s i s t M e d ite r r a n e a n s o c i e t i e s to c o n s e r v e a n d
u s e s u s t a i n a b l y t h e n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s o f th e r e g io n a n d w o r k w ith IU C N m e m b e r s a n d c o o p e r a t e w ith all
o th e r a g e n c i e s t h a t s h a r e t h e o b je c tiv e s o f th e IU C N .
w w w .u ic n m e d .o r g
R u e M au v e rn e y 2 8
C h-1 1 9 6 G land
S w itzerland
Tel «41 2 2 9 9 9 0 0 0 0
F a x * 4 1 2 2 9 9 9 0 0 02
Em ail m ail@ hq.iucn.org
w w w .i u c n .o r g
W orld H e ad q u arters
lo C o iab cra'.> o n
F iw n c ù » S u p p o rt
MAVA
m
S tiftu n g f ü r N a tu r s c h u tz
F o n d a tio n p o u r l a P r o te c tio n d « la N a tu re
C o r e t u p p e r i lo
lU C N C e n tr e f e r M e d ite rra n e a n
C o o p é ra lie n m p r c v d e d b )
É
JtlflftOCI
>l«l*