Three proposals - one goal: How the government is going after sharks
The shark conservation and advocacy community has been paying attention to several concerning campaigns underway that address shark-related concerns by fishers in one way or another. What these campaigns have in common is that they affect shark conservation; they all focus on the assumption that the presence of sharks and shark behavior are a problem, and they all seem to be promoted by fisheries interests from Florida, heavily supported by Fisheries management authorities in Florida, with bill sponsors and co-sponsors, you guessed it, almost exclusively from Florida. We are not going to attempt to spin theories, but offer a perspective. You be the judge on whether there is apparent overlap and connection.
S.2314 - SHARKED Act of 2025
~THE HYPE: “There are now too many sharks, and they are stealing our fish”
THE SAD TRUTH: More fishermen, fewer healthy reefs, fewer fish. Scarcity creates competition and makes fishermen paranoid about sharks, rather than seeing the real problem caused by their own community - OVERFISHING
~THE HYPE: “Shark numbers have exploded. There are too many sharks”
THE SAD TRUTH: All scientific data from the past decades shows a decline in populations. The fear mongering is given equal weight to scientific evidence.
THE RESULT:
Repeating patterns that have never resulted in a good outcome; going after predators that are perceived as a threat simply because a sector of the industry doesn’t want to curb its appetite for fishing.
The majority of experienced fishermen respect sharks and accept them as an important part of the sensitive ecosystems they fish in. And they do not see them as competition. But unfortunately, those voices are not involved. The loudest complaints are coming from those who want to reduce shark numbers for their own personal benefit.
This bill was introduced as a reaction to the outcry from a subset of the commercial and sport fishing community to address “the critical needs with respect to shark depredation” (Shark Depredation is the partial or complete removal of a hooked fish directly from a fishing line before the line is retrieved).
OUR PERSPECTIVE:
We question the assumption that this is a “critical” need, as many fishermen don’t have a problem with sharks. This is a small subset of fishers that complain about sharks and would like the government to make their lives easier
We assert that the true conflict is due to the competition between two predators - humans and sharks. This is nothing new. What is new is that the space they compete in is now extremely limited due to overfishing. Sharks and fishermen seek out areas where there is Marine Abundance, aka food. Those areas are shrinking by the year, while shark fishing licenses have exponentially increased along with the population numbers. From the 1960s to now, the number of fishing boats in Florida has quadrupled. Overall, there are over 1 million registered recreational vessels in the state and about 2.4 million saltwater anglers. And all of them have to share shrinking fish populations.
We are of the opinion that depredation is not the problem that it is made out to be, and a bill was an overreaction to a complaint that should have been handled by Fish and Wildlife agencies that know the scientific facts. As this is now being considered a real issue, despite the facts, the establishment of a task force, as proposed, seems reasonable. But the bias is built into the solution - as the task force is made up of a long list of Fisheries representatives and only three shark researchers (which could easily be hand-picked from those researchers who are supportive of shark fishing or dependent on NOAA funding). No mention of the tourism industry, NGOs, or any other stakeholders representing the public.
Once again, this proves the point that sharks are seen as the exclusive domain of the fishing industry and that any other public interest can be ignored.
H.R.3831 - Florida Safe Seas Act of 2025
Going after Sharktours in Florida
Don’t let the title of this bill fool you. This bill is not about ocean safety. It is a condescending wink to the conservation community; a blatant attempt to use a fancy wrapper that sounds good to policy-makers. Just as fisheries lobbying groups have argued their push to cull shark populations is “shark conservation by creating balance in the ocean”, so is this bill dressed up to hide the true purpose.
Whether you agree or disagree with how shark tours are conducted, the fact that this bill is essentially an attempt to pull a fast one - making sweeping changes with the insertion of a few words in the federal Fisheries Act (MSA) and calling it non-controversial.
The same thing happened in Hawaii years ago. They slipped in a change in the language while no one was paying attention. And nearly killed the shark diving industry in the process.
The double standard of favoring shark fishing over shark viewing, in the name of safety, is a manipulation tactic. People who like to see sharks are a thorn in the side of the fishing industry, who want to take back the exclusive right to do as they please in the ocean. Sharks, and people who want to protect them, stand in the way of that goal.
NOAA FISHERIES is now, more than ever, ruled by the fisheries lobby
NOAA Fisheries recently issued a temporary rule allowing for increased commercial shark fishing opportunities in the Atlantic by adjusting base annual quotas to account for underharvests from the previous fishing year. The agency is also considering a broader set of rule revisions that propose relaxing size and retention limits.
This push to loosen these restrictions relies on a combination of administrative directives and grassroots pressure from the fishing community.
Executive Directive: The overarching regulatory changes fall under the “Restoring American Seafood Competitiveness” executive order, which directs federal agencies to reduce regulatory barriers facing U.S. fishermen.
Regional Management Councils: The initiative heavily incorporates input from the nation’s eight regional fishery management councils, which explicitly requested support to overcome barriers and prevent closures.
Commercial and Sport Fishermen: The ultimate groundswell came from fishermen who heavily petitioned NOAA and their regional councils, arguing that booming shark populations are causing excessive catch depredation and harming their livelihoods.
NOAA's recent regulatory steps:
2026 Commercial Quota Adjustments: A temporary rule for the 2026 commercial fishing year enables fishermen to harvest optimum yield from Atlantic fisheries using underharvest carryovers from 2025. This rule is effective through December 31, 2026.
Proposed Revisions: NOAA proposed an omnibus amendment seeking to modify commercial retention limits for Atlantic blacknose sharks and revise minimum size and retention limits for recreational shark fisheries.
Monument Waters Reopening: Following a recent presidential proclamation, NOAA rescinded regulations that previously restricted commercial fishing within the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument
The agency will have a justification for all of these decisions, but clearly, this is a complete move towards favoring extractive industries over conservation or the long-term sustainability of ocean ecosystems.
Get more fish now, because greed rules. Get it now because they are told to do so from above.