Thursday, June 3, 2010

Maldives government to initiate fund for shark fishermen

Once again showing global leadership towards the ongoing shark fin crisis, the Maldives has initiated funding for shark fishermen in tandem with NGO's and shark tourism efforts.

We covered the need for new conservation ideas for the global shark fin trade last week.

Press Release

The government has decided to inaugurate a fund on June 8 to encourage families depended on shark fishing find alternative livelihoods.

In a press release, Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture said experts had advised the government that the population of sharks might decrease in Maldivian waters as shark species have slow growth, late maturity, and low fecundity. Research has also shown that shark fishing has negative impacts on tourism and fishery, the two main economic activities in the Maldives, the press statement added.

Fisheries Ministry stressed that the cabinet, on March 25, decided to impose a total ban on trade and export of sharks and shark products within the Maldives industrial zone.

“This ministry is continuously working to facilitate alternative livelihoods to those who were depended on shark fishing. In this regard, it has been decided to inaugurate a fund on this year’s World Oceans Day in collaboration with the parties involved in tourism sector and NGOs, to assist shark fishermen,” the statement read.

NOAA's "Non de Plume"

British Petroleum's CEO Tony Hayward, when not stuffing size 12 Gucci loafers into his mouth at every press opportunity, says there are no sub surface oil plumes.

His latest statement contradicts teams from the University of South Florida, the University of Georgia, Southern Mississippi University who say there are.

In the middle of this "debate" is NOAA, a government agency tasked with all things ocean.

Jane Lubchenco, head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, called media reports of large underwater oil plumes "premature," adding that research conducted by an academic ocean institute was inconclusive.

Are you kidding me?

Sub surface oil plumes are part of BP's ongoing strategy, we covered this many weeks ago. Anyone except NOAA it seems, can understand why BP would prefer oil to remain suspended at depth. It is also the reason why BP is ignoring EPA directives to stop using COREXIT, their dispersant of choice in the region.

With a disaster of this magnitude you have to wonder why NOAA is ignoring respected Gulf researchers, working the media cycle in tandem with BP, and basically making a laughing stock of the agency?