New Global Rules Reshape Shark and Ray Trade Practices

At the 20th Conference of the Parties (CoP20) to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), global governments took a rare unified stance to overhaul trade rules affecting sharks and rays. Held in Samarkand, Uzbekistan, the summit drew participation from 185 countries and more than 3,000 delegates. What set this year’s meeting apart was the scale of agreement: every shark and ray proposal put forward passed—covering over 70 species and signaling the most comprehensive regulatory shift of its kind in the treaty’s history.

The newly adopted measures introduce a layered set of trade restrictions. Some species, such as whale sharks, oceanic whitetips, and manta and devil rays, are now under a full commercial trade ban (Appendix I). Others, like gulper sharks, smoothhound species, and tope sharks, were listed under Appendix II—meaning trade is permitted only with proof that it won't harm wild populations. For wedgefish and giant guitarfish, zero export quotas have been established for wild-caught individuals.

What’s significant here is less about isolated listings and more about structural change. Trade that was previously patchy or enabled by regulatory gaps will now be subject to stricter oversight across the board. With shark and ray populations declining at alarming rates—some pelagic species have dropped by more than 70% in recent decades—the changes are intended to close loopholes that have undermined previous conservation efforts.

The level of coordination behind these decisions is also notable. More than 50 sponsoring governments from across the Pacific, Latin America, Asia, and Africa aligned in support of the proposals, citing both ecological urgency and economic rationale. The Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), an active policy participant, stressed that the votes mark a turning point but warned that the follow-through will determine their impact.

Industry Takeaways: Compliance Pressure Rises for Global Seafood Trade

The ripple effects for industry will be significant. For businesses involved in international seafood trade—particularly those dealing in fins, gill plates, and other derivatives—compliance frameworks will need to adapt quickly.

Species now listed under Appendix I cannot be traded commercially across borders, meaning immediate cessation of international trade for those products. For species under Appendix II, countries must now demonstrate through scientific assessments (non-detriment findings) that their exports are not depleting wild populations. That adds new procedural burdens for fisheries, exporters, and importers, including permit requirements, documentation, and traceability upgrades.

Supply chain disruptions may be short-term, but the long-term trend points toward tighter control and growing demand for verified sustainable sourcing. In this context, certification schemes, investment in digital traceability, and policy alignment across jurisdictions will likely shape competitive advantage. Industry analysts also suggest that reduced pressure on overfished populations could create more stable sourcing conditions in the future.

National-level implementation is now the critical next step. Governments must update legislation, train enforcement agencies, and build capacity for monitoring and reporting. Private sector players operating in high-risk regions or dealing with affected species will need to reassess sourcing strategies and ensure regulatory compliance.

While some see the decisions as a challenge, others view them as an overdue shift toward long-term viability in marine product markets. The move could ultimately support fisheries aiming to operate legally and sustainably, especially as consumer and investor pressure around biodiversity protection grows.