Walter Brenes: From the Sea to the Forest, Defending Sharks and the Black-Headed Bushmaster in Costa Rica.
- Cristian Porras Ramírez
- Nov 4
- 8 min read
Costa Rica is globally renowned for its biodiversity and environmental policies. However, in recent years, a major controversy has emerged around the protection of sharks in Costa Rican waters. While international organizations classify sharks as threatened wildlife, in Costa Rica they have been legally treated as commercial or “artisanal” species, allowing their fishing and export. Behind this unusual classification lie political decisions, economic interests — including foreign influence — and an intense legal battle led by environmentalists such as lawyer Walter Brenes. Below, we explore why sharks were excluded from wildlife protection, how external factors such as relations with China have influenced fishing policies, and how committed individuals are fighting in court to reverse the situation.
Sharks in Costa Rica: Wildlife or Fishery Resource?
In 2017, the Government of Costa Rica issued an executive decree reclassifying sharks: they were no longer considered wildlife, but instead managed strictly as commercial fishing resources. This drastic change meant that the Ministry of Environment (MINAE) lost authority over threatened shark species, and the Wildlife Conservation Law no longer applied to them. All control shifted to the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture (Incopesca), under the Fisheries Law, which is focused more on economic use than on preservation.
The consequences were serious: the door was opened to shark overfishing, including the capture of critically endangered species such as the scalloped hammerhead (Sphyrna lewini). The decree — imposed by executive order without Legislative Assembly approval — was heavily criticized for being illegal, as it effectively modified a law through regulation. Conservation organizations and scientists launched a legal battle that lasted years. Finally, after an eight-year process, in 2023 the First Chamber of the Supreme Court annulled the 2017 decree, ruling that “sharks are wildlife, and declaring them commercial species was illegal.” The ruling ordered Incopesca and SINAC (National System of Conservation Areas) to comply strictly with the Wildlife Law in regard to sharks.
However, the government did not immediately comply. In fact, even after the ruling, authorities continued to allow the fishing and trade of threatened sharks. In February 2023 — just months before the Supreme Court decision — the administration issued another decree (No. 43900-MAG-MINAE) authorizing incidental shark fishing, including endangered species. Environmentalists denounced this decree as violating previous judicial resolutions (including Constitutional Court rulings). Walter Brenes, already known as “the shark lawyer” in Costa Rica, filed legal action in December 2023 demanding enforcement of the Supreme Court ruling and suspension of the executive decree that still allowed hammerhead shark fishing. Brenes emphasized that the hammerhead is in “critical condition, only one step away from extinction,” and that authorities have failed to take necessary steps to protect it. The Supreme Court even ordered that the three hammerhead species (Sphyrna lewini, S. mokarran, and S. zygaena) be added to the national endangered species list — something that still had not been implemented at the time of the lawsuit.
In response, environmental groups insist that protecting sharks ultimately benefits artisanal fisheries and coastal communities in the long term, by maintaining healthy marine ecosystems.
The China Factor: Donations and Fishing Licenses
Why would a country known for conservation weaken protection for endangered species? One piece of the puzzle points to diplomatic and commercial relations with China. Since Costa Rica established ties with the People’s Republic of China in 2007 (cutting relations with Taiwan), it has received generous economic support from the Asian giant. The most visible example was the construction of the National Stadium in San José — a $100 million “gift” following the diplomatic shift. China also bought hundreds of millions in Costa Rican bonds and made other donations in later years.
These gestures strengthened relations, but also raised concerns among environmentalists and parts of the public.
In the marine context, it has been suggested that Costa Rica’s lenient stance on shark fin exports may be influenced by these ties, since China is the main destination for fins. For example, large shipments of shark fins were allowed to pass through Costa Rica under the label of “re-exportation,” coming from neighboring countries — in apparent violation of CITES rules. Between 2023 and 2024, a CREMA investigation revealed that 12.6 tons of shark fins passed through Costa Rica on their way to Hong Kong, representing the death of about 15,000 sharks. Nearly 10 tons did not come from Nicaragua as declared, but likely from local catches disguised as re-exports. This violation of international regulations was reported to CITES, accusing Costa Rica of “tolerating” or facilitating trade in protected species despite its legal obligations.
While there is no direct proof of a “donations-for-fishing-rights” deal, the timing between intensified shark fishing and multimillion-dollar Chinese aid alarms many observers. Chinese authorities deny that their contributions are tied to fishing permits, but the political and economic influence of China is undeniable. This places Costa Rica in a complex position: on the one hand, a global leader in conservation (it was instrumental in listing the hammerhead shark under CITES in 2013), and on the other, reluctant to enforce those same protections domestically — possibly to protect fin exporters and maintain good commercial relations.
Walter Brenes: The Shark Lawyer
Amid this panorama, Walter Brenes Soto has emerged as a key figure in the legal defense of sharks and other species. This young environmental lawyer (founder of Energy Law Firm) has earned the nickname “the shark lawyer” for his persistence in the courts. Brenes has filed multiple legal actions to close loopholes that enable unsustainable exploitation of marine species. His strategy combines national law with Costa Rica’s international commitments, seeking to force the State to honor conservation treaties.
One of his first victories was the 2023 Supreme Court ruling declaring the three hammerhead species endangered and overturning their classification as commercial fish. When authorities failed to comply, Brenes continued pressuring: in December 2023 he filed a lawsuit before the Administrative Court to enforce the ruling and stop hammerhead fishing. He also requested suspension of the executive decree that still allowed incidental capture of protected sharks. These efforts aim to block exceptions and loopholes used to continue catching threatened sharks under the guise of “artisanal” or incidental fishing.
Recent Victory: Ban on Exporting Five Shark Species
The work of Brenes and other activists is beginning to show tangible results. In September 2025, a Costa Rican Administrative Court ordered the suspension of exports of five shark species listed as threatened or endangered. The precautionary measure — issued on September 18, 2025 — prohibits the State, Incopesca, and SINAC from authorizing exports of products (fins, meat) derived from those species. The lawsuit behind this order was filed by Walter Brenes, arguing that Costa Rica was violating both national and international regulations by allowing the trade.
The shark species now banned from export are: the pelagic thresher, common thresher, big-eye thresher (all in the thresher shark family), the silky shark (Carcharhinus falciformis), and the grey reef shark (Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos). All face heavy fishing pressure. The silky and thresher sharks are listed under CITES Appendix II due to drastic population declines. The court order means Costa Rica must abstain from issuing export permits for these sharks while the main lawsuit is decided.
Reactions were mixed. Environmentalists celebrated the ruling as a milestone: “Costa Rica can no longer export silky shark products or three thresher shark species,” announced CREMA. Brenes called the ruling a necessary protection for species on the brink of collapse, and criticized the Ministry of Agriculture (MAG) for “justifying environmental crimes” by opposing the measure. The MAG and Incopesca argued that the ruling harms the livelihoods of more than 8,000 people involved in shark fishing and claimed Costa Rica complies with CITES for “responsible” export. Conservationists responded that without sharks, there is no healthy marine ecosystem — and that truly sustainable fisheries must exclude species on the verge of extinction. The court, at least temporarily, has sided with conservation over commercial exploitation.
Beyond Sharks: The Case of the Black-Headed Bushmaster
The fight led by Walter Brenes and other defenders is not limited to marine species. On land, another emblematic endangered animal has gained attention thanks to an unprecedented legal battle: the black-headed bushmaster snake. Scientifically known as Lachesis melanocephala, this viper is one of the rarest and most venomous snakes in Central America, endemic to southern Costa Rica. It is estimated that only a few individuals remain in the wild; in the past 20 years, only 35 confirmed sightings have been recorded. Its critical conservation status motivated the creation of the “Melanocephala Project” to study its behavior and support its survival.
In 2021, the ecotourism company CR Wild obtained permits to study three bushmasters in the Osa Peninsula, implanting them with radio transmitters to monitor their movements and reproductive biology. However, a conflict with authorities arose: in late 2022, the Osa Conservation Area of SINAC ordered the capture of the three snakes and removal of their transmitters. The order was issued after SINAC refused to renew the research permit citing an administrative issue, jeopardizing both the study and the snakes’ lives. Veterinary experts warned that subjecting the snakes to a second surgery so soon would pose high risks of infection and even death.
Researchers turned to the courts to protect the snakes. Walter Brenes also took a legal role in the case through the Melanocephala Project. In July 2023, a judge granted precautionary measures in favor of the snakes, suspending SINAC’s capture order. In ruling No. 395-2023, Judge Alana Fonseca highlighted the species’ endemic and extremely rare nature, and acknowledged the scientific value of the ongoing research. She agreed with veterinary experts that operating again on the snakes would be reckless and harmful to a species on the brink of extinction. The ruling was a major victory, allowing the snakes to remain free under monitored conditions rather than undergoing a second surgery. SINAC appealed, but in October 2023 the Appellate Court rejected the appeal, consolidating protection of the snakes and backing CR Wild’s scientific project.
The bushmaster case sets a precedent for how civil society and the courts can intervene to protect lesser-known yet ecologically vital wildlife. While sharks often dominate headlines, this viper shows that every endangered species deserves legal protection. The combination of science and law proved crucial: thanks to scientific data and timely legal action, the loss of breeding individuals of a critically endangered species was likely prevented.
Conclusions
The story of sharks in Costa Rica — and that of the black-headed bushmaster — reflects the ongoing tension between conservation and exploitation. Classifying endangered animals as “artisanal species” or commercial resources is a step backward, driven more by economic pressure than scientific reality. Fortunately, it also highlights the role of committed citizens and courageous lawyers who use legal tools to reverse harmful decisions.
Costa Rica now stands at a crossroads: will it maintain its reputation as a green leader in nature protection, or will it yield to short-term interests? Recent legal victories — such as the suspension of silky and thresher shark exports, and protection of the bushmaster — offer hope for a shift toward policy consistency. It is clear that sharks are wildlife and deserve the same legal protections, despite claims from influential economic sectors. Likewise, every endangered endemic species, no matter how little known, is an irreplaceable part of Costa Rica’s natural heritage.
Ultimately, protecting sharks and the black-headed bushmaster is not just about saving animals — it is about safeguarding the integrity of Costa Rica’s marine and terrestrial ecosystems. As a nation that values pura vida, it must ensure that this pure life — in the ocean and in the forest — endures for future generations. Strong civic action and strict law enforcement will be essential to achieve this.
Sources
Brenes, W. (2023, diciembre). Abogado pide suspender pesca de tiburón martillo. La Nación.
Brenes, W. (2025, septiembre). Tribunal prohíbe exportación de cinco especies de tiburón. La Nación.
CREMA. (2025, septiembre). Tribunal ordena a Costa Rica detener exportaciones de tiburón sedoso y zorro. Centro de Rescate de Especies Marinas Amenazadas.
La Nación. (2023, agosto). Sala I: Tiburones son vida silvestre, no especies comerciales.
Mongabay Latam. (2024, marzo). Costa Rica incumple regulaciones de CITES al permitir tránsito de aletas de tiburón.
Diario Extra. (2024, abril). Costa Rica bajo lupa internacional por reexportación de aletas.
La Nación. (2011, marzo). Estadio Nacional: regalo de China a Costa Rica.
La Nación. (2023, julio). Jueza protege tres serpientes Plato Negro de orden de captura del SINAC.
Onda UNED. (2023, agosto). Tribunal concede medida cautelar para proteger serpientes Plato Negro.
Repretel Noticias. (2023, octubre). Tribunal rechaza apelación del SINAC: serpientes Plato Negro seguirán libres.