1. THE SHARK GROUP 1- A brief summary of the results achieved during the Data Preparatory Meeting, during the Data Preparatory Meeting, Punta del Este, Uruguay, July 21 to 25; Punta del Este, Uruguay, July 21 to 25; 2- Workplan for 2008; 3- Recommendations to the Commission (from the Executive Summary); (from the Executive Summary); EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR SHARKS

2. THE SHARK GROUP 1- Data Preparatory Meeting, Punta del Este, Uruguay, Punta del Este, Uruguay, July 21 to 25; July 21 to 25;

3. THE SHARK CROWD Punta del Este, Uruguay, July 2007

4. SHARKS

5. SHARKS

6. SHARKS

7. SHARKS

8. SHARKS

9. SHARKS

10. SHARKS Yearly CPUE (fish per 1,000 hooks), for the blue shark, from Brazilian longliners operating from Natal (1986 to 2005) and from five tuna longliners operating in the Southwestern Equatorial Atlantic Ocean from May 1958 to September 1962.

11. THE SHARK GROUP 2- Workplan for 2008 Blue and mako sharks: Full assessment Blue and mako sharks: Full assessment 1- Longfin mako, Isurus paucus 2- Bigeye thresher, Alopias superciliosus 3- Common thresher, Alopias vulpinus 4- Oceanic whitetip, Carcharhinus longimanus 5- Silky shark, Carcharhinus falciformis 6- Porbeagle, Lamna nasus 7- Scalloped hammerhead, Sphyrna lewini 8- Smooth hammerhead, Sphyrna zygaena 9- Crocodile shark, Pseudocarcharias kamoharai 10- Pelagic stingray, Pteroplatytrygon violacea Rapid assessment of relative vulnerability to overfishing, Rapid assessment of relative vulnerability to overfishing, based on demographic data and risk analyses, based on demographic data and risk analyses, and evaluation of their susceptibility to the fisheries and evaluation of their susceptibility to the fisheries

12. THE SHARK GROUP 2- Workplan for 2008 Blue and mako sharks: Full assessment Blue and mako sharks: Full assessment Assessment methods to be used: a) demographic model; b) bayesian surplus production (BSP) model; c) age-structured production model (ASPM) incorporating catch data; d) “catch-free” age structured production model; and e) “tagging model”: an attempt will be made to use the available tagging data and the historical longline effort data to provide an independent estimate of fishing mortality rates (and associated variances) over time (Aires-da-Silva et al., 2005). (These estimates could then be used as priors for the BSP and ASPM models)

13. THE SHARK GROUP 3- Management Recommendations (from the Executive Summary) (from the Executive Summary) b) For an effective implementation of Rec. 04-10, the fin to body weight ratio needs to be better defined in terms of the kind of fins considered in the ratio as well as the kind of processing of both fins and body. Conversion factors between fins and body weights need to be implemented on a species and/ or fleet- specific basis. a) Before the results of the next assessment become available next year, on the basis of which new management recommendations might become advisable, the Commission should ensure the effective implementation of Recs. 04-10 and 05-05. Of particular concern is the very low level of compliance with the obligation of CPCs to provide Task I and II data for sharks caught by their vessels, greatly hampering, when not completely impeding, the assessment of the status of the exploited shark stocks.

14. THE SHARK GROUP The bottom line: What is the great chalenge for the 2008 assessment ? Getting updated series of catch and effort data, and standardized CPUE series from the main fisheries !!

15. THE SHARK GROUP What are the possible consequences ? [Rec. 05-09] As a consequence of these data deficiencies, increasingly conservative management measures might be needed to be implemented by the Commission, in order to limit the risk of fishery and shark stocks collapse In the lack of data, the Commission will need to be precautionarily more pessimistic !!

16. A H K R S S T N