4.3 Article

The demise of Darwin's fishes: evidence of fishing down and illegal shark finning in the Galapagos Islands

Journal

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/aqc.2458

Keywords

archipelago; biodiversity; marine reserve; fish; invertebrates; fishing

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The fauna of the Galapagos Island chain is characterized by high biodiversity and endemism. Thus, the conservation of its terrestrial and marine wildlife, including the sustainable management of local fisheries, is of paramount importance. Although the commercial exploitation of fish in the Galapagos did not intensify until the mid-1900s, issues of overexploitation and mismanagement are already of serious concern. However, to date, research on Galapagos fisheries has been largely species or island specific, and no long-term cumulative catch statistics exist. In this study, total landings associated with the industrial and artisanal fisheries of the Galapagos Islands were compiled and analysed in an effort to assess accurately the amount of seafood that has been extracted from this region over the last six decades. The total catch for all sectors from 1950-2010 was 797 000t, of which industrially caught tuna made up 80%. The results also show a high degree of fishing down within the in-shore ecosystem catch, whereby planktivorous mullets have replaced high trophic level groupers within the past three decades. This shift has coincided with the spatial expansion of the Galapagos fishing fleet to areas further off-shore, where predatory species are not yet depleted. In addition to legally caught and exported seafood, Galapagos waters are also prone to illegal fishing. Of primary concern are shark finning practices that have escalated in intensity since the 1980s. Despite attempts at mitigation, this ecologically destructive and wasteful practice continues to occur in the Galapagos Marine Reserve. Copyright (c) 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available