AB 376
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 22, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE
Jared Huffman, Chair
AB 376 (Fong and Huffman) – As Amended: March 14, 2011
SUBJECT: Shark Fins
SUMMARY: Makes it unlawful for any person to possess, sell or trade a shark fin.
Specifically, this bill:
1) Makes it unlawful for any person to possess, sell, offer for sale, trade or distribute a shark fin.
2) Provides an exception to the prohibition on possession of shark fins for any person who holds
a permit to possess a shark fin for scientific purposes, and for any person who holds a license
or permit to take sharks for recreational or commercial purposes and possesses a shark fin
consistent with that license or permit.
3) Defines a shark fin as a raw, dried or otherwise processed detached fin or tail of a shark.
4) Makes legislative findings and declarations regarding the importance of sharks for the ocean
ecosystem, and the impacts of the practice and market demand for shark finning.
EXISTING LAW:
1) Makes it unlawful to sell, purchase, deliver for commercial purposes, or possess on any
commercial fishing vessel any shark fin or shark tail or portion thereof that has been removed
from the carcass, with the exception of thresher shark tails and fins whose original shape
remains unaltered, which may be possessed on a registered commercial fishing vessel if the
corresponding carcass is in possession for each fin and tail (Fish and Game Code § 7704).
2) Authorizes certain species of sharks to be taken or landed with a recreational or commercial
fishing license, subject to specified take limits and gear restrictions. The taking of any white
shark for recreational or commercial purposes is prohibited.
3) Prohibits the deterioration or waste of fish taken in state waters.
4) Federal law also bans the practice of shark finning in federal waters.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
Background: Sharks, of which there are some 400 species worldwide, are top marine predators
and live in oceans around the world. The critical importance of sharks to the health, balance and
biodiversity of the ocean ecosystem is well recognized in the scientific literature. According to
NOAA Fisheries, most sharks are vulnerable to overfishing because they are long-lived, take
many years to mature, and only have a few young at a time. Consequently, recovery from
overfishing can take years or decades for many shark species. NOAA indicates that since the
AB 376
Page 2
mid-1980s, a number of shark populations in the United States have declined, primarily due to
overfishing. According to officials at the Monterey Bay Aquarium, over a third of shark species
worldwide are currently threatened with extinction.
Findings from a few of the more recently published and peer reviewed scientific studies on
sharks include the following:
A 2003 study of sharks in the Northwest Atlantic showed rapid declines in large coastal and
oceanic shark populations, with hammerhead, white and thresher sharks estimated to have
declined by 79-89% in just 8 to 15 years, and all recorded species except one by more than 50%.
The study noted that despite their vulnerability to overfishing, sharks have been increasingly
exploited in recent decades. The authors conclude that the magnitude of the declines suggests
several sharks may now be at risk of large-scale extirpation, and that these trends may be
reflective of a common global phenomenon. Collapse and Conservation of Shark Populations in
the Northwest Atlantic, by Julia Baum and Ransom A. Myers, et al., Science, 2003.
Scientists recently completed the first ever census of white sharks off the coast of Central
California, published in January 2011. The study estimated only 219 animals, significantly
below expected numbers and substantially smaller than populations of other large marine
predators. The authors note the susceptibility of shark populations across ocean basins and their
role as top predators in ecosystems has resulted in considerable concern about the conservation
status of many populations. White sharks in particular are highly susceptible to overexploitation
and are listed on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) red list of most
threatened species. The authors emphasized the critical need to protect and monitor great white
sharks, especially given genetic data indicating discrete population structure and the importance
of sharks for the health of marine systems. A first estimate of white shark, Carcharodon
carcharias, abundance off Central California, by Taylor Chapple, et al., Royal Society Biology
Letters, 2011.
A 2004 study of sharks in the Gulf of Mexico, conducted several years prior to the gulf oil spill,
estimated that oceanic whitetip and silky sharks, formerly the most commonly caught shark
species, had declined by 99% and 90% respectively. The authors concluded that oceanic
whitetips are ecologically extinct in the Gulf. They stressed that these precipitous declines may
be reflective of a general phenomenon for oceanic sharks, and that such significant altering of
entire assemblages of large predators may have a considerable impact on the pelagic ecosystem.
Shifting Baselines and the Decline of Pelagic Sharks in the Gulf of Mexico, by Julia Baum and
Ransom Myers, Ecology Letters, 2004.
Another 2003 study estimated that large predatory fish biomass, including sharks, in the oceans
today is only about 10% of pre-industrial levels. The authors concluded that declines in large
predators in coastal regions have extended throughout the global ocean, with potentially serious
consequences for ecosystems. Rapid Worldwide Depletion of Predatory Fish Communities, by
Ransom Myers and Boris Worm, Nature, 2003.
Finally, a 2006 study that examined shark biomass in the shark fin trade concluded there is
significant underreporting of shark fin harvest, as the shark biomass in the fin trade was three to
four times higher than reported shark catch figures. The study focused primarily on blue sharks.
While the authors indicated further research was needed before the findings of the study could be
used to draw conclusions about other shark species, they emphasized that the large difference
AB 376
Page 3
between trade-derived estimates of exploitation and the catch estimates reported added to
growing concerns about the overexploitation of sharks.
Demand for shark fin is largely believed to be the primary driver behind overfishing of sharks
and recent shark population declines. According to an article in the New York Times, every year
up to 73 million sharks are killed for their fins, primarily to make shark fin soup.
Support Arguments: Supporters note that sharks are critical to the health and balance of the
ocean ecosystem and their extinction would be devastating to the biodiversity of the oceans of
the world. Demand for shark fin drives overfishing of sharks and has contributed significantly to
recent shark population declines. Some species have been depleted by as much as 90% and over
a third of shark species are threatened with extinction. Supporters assert that currently there are
no recognized sustainable shark fisheries, and note that sharks are particularly susceptible to
overfishing due to low reproductive rates and their role as top predators in the marine food chain.
Supporters also assert that current state and federal laws have been ineffective in curbing the
practice of shark finning as long as trade in fins is allowed to continue in response to market
demand. While recognizing that shark finning has been important to Chinese culture for
centuries, supporters assert collapse of ocean ecosystems must take precedence over cultural
culinary heritage, noting also that many governments and businesses in the Pacific region have
recognized the urgency to save sharks and implemented progressive protection measures.
Recreational fishing organizations assert that shark finning is inconsistent with sustainable
fishing practices. Some supporters also emphasize the cruelty of shark finning, which often
involves cutting off the fins and tails of sharks and throwing the fish back in the ocean alive
where they are likely to die a slow death. Finally, some supporters note the high level of
mercury in shark meat makes them unhealthy to eat.
Opposition Arguments: Although the committee has not received any formal opposition letters
to this bill, news articles have quoted some individuals and businesses within the Chinese
American community who assert that banning the possession or sale of shark fins will deprive
Chinese Americans of the ability to enjoy the long valued cultural tradition and heritage of shark
fin soup. According to the Los Angeles Times, shark fin soup was a luxury item in traditional
Chinese culture, once reserved for emperors and kings, with a bowl of soup today costing as
much as $100. The Times indicates the growing middle class in China has created new market
demand for the soup which is also popular among Chinese Americans. According to the San
Francisco Chronicle, shark fin soup has been a traditional Chinese dish going back to the Han
Dynasty some 1,800 years ago. The Chronicle reports that dried shark fin in San Francisco's
Chinatown today sells for $178 to $500 a pound, and shark fin soup typically costs $250 to $500
for ten people.
It should be noted that legislation to ban shark finning has recently been proposed in China by a
member of the Chinese parliament. Legislation banning shark finning has also been enacted in
the state of Hawaii and is pending before the state legislatures of Oregon and Washington.
Some opponents of this bill have also suggested that shark finning should be regulated through
greater enforcement rather than by banning trade of shark fins. Supporters of this bill note in
rebuttal to that argument that current state and federal laws have proven ineffective in stemming
the overfishing of sharks which is driven by the market demand and lucrative trade in shark fins.
Most shark fins in California are imported from other countries where California has little or no
ability to police or control finning practices and no way of knowing whether shark fins in those
AB 376
Page 4
countries are sustainably harvested. Supporters also assert a ban on importation of listed species
would likely be unenforceable due to the difficulty in determining with accuracy the species of
the shark after the fins have been dried and processed. Finally, even for species that are not yet
listed as threatened or endangered, supporters assert maintaining a sustainable shark fishery is
extremely difficult if not impossible due to the life history of sharks as apex predators with low
reproductive rates that make them particularly susceptible to overfishing and rapid depletion.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Action for Animals
Animal Place
Aquarium of the Bay
Asian Americans for Community Involvement
Asian Pacific American Ocean Harmony Alliance
Body Glove International
California Academy of Sciences
California Association of Zoos and Aquariums
California Coastal Commission
California Coastkeeper Alliance
California League of Conservation Voters
COARE
Coastside Fishing Club
Defenders of Wildlife
Environment California
Heal the Bay
Monterey Bay Aquarium
Natural Resources Defense Council
Oceana
Pacific Environment
Reef Check California
San Francisco Baykeeper
Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors
Sea Stewards
Shark Savers
The Bay Institute
The Humane Society of the United States
The Sierra Club
The Sportfishing Conservancy
United Anglers of Southern California
Wild Coast/Costasalvaje
WildAid
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by:
Diane Colborn / W., P. & W. / (916) 319-2096