International Community Abandons Marine Life

by Stephanie Feldstein · 2010-03-29 15:00:00 UTC
Topics:

What do several species of sharks, coral, and the Atlantic bluefin tuna all have in common? They had the unfortunate distinction of being marine life hoping for protection from the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna. The CITES conference ended last week, and it didn't end well for marine animals. In fact, every single proposal to protect marine species was shot down.

Despite evidence that the bluefin tuna are on their way to extinction and some shark populations have declined as much as 80 percent in the last decade, Japanese commercial interests trumped conservation. Not surprisingly, countries like China and Indonesia, who are big consumers of shark fin soup, sided with Japan.

Hisashi Endo, the director of the Ecosystem and Conservation Office in the Fisheries Agency of Japan, said: "CITES is not a good place for the conservation of marine resources. We are already making progress on conserving marine species." Sure, if progress is defined as making money off fishing animals to extinction. The countries who opposed trade protections say the focus should be on fisheries enforcement of existing restrictions. Enforcement does need more attention, but considering how badly it has failed to protect species when there's a commercial interest, a trade ban would have added a much-needed safety net.

Polar bears — the poster children of the climate change crisis — were also left out of trade protections, but overall, land animals fared better than marine life at the CITES conference. Endangered iguanas, tree frogs, salamanders, and several species of exotic birds gained protection. After much debate and lobbying, the proposal from Tanzania and Zambia for a one-off ivory sale was rejected. Anti-poaching efforts are being stepped up for rhinos and tigers, too.

Despite these victories, the betrayal of marine life cast a shadow over the conference. Other countries accused Japan of buying votes and pressuring delegates. Japan campaigned aggressively for months, and when the conference rolled around, they funded the attendance of smaller countries and served bluefin tuna the night before the vote. These tactics left a bad taste in the mouth of those trying to pass the trade bans, and many couldn't help wondering if this was the end of CITES as a conservation effort and the start of another game of international politics.

As Azzedine Downes of the International Fund for Animal Welfare said, "The real story here at CITES is not so much about the animals and plants but the back-room deals and short-term greed that is destroying the planet."

Photo credit: hyku

Stephanie Feldstein is a Change.org Editor who has been part of the animal welfare and rescue community for over a decade, and most recently worked for an environmental organization.
PREVIOUS STORY:
Sioux City and the Pit Bull Double Standard
NEXT STORY:
Super Bowl Countdown: 5 Actions in 5 Days to Protest Skechers' Dog Racing Ad

COMMENTS (2)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.