...the vast majority of people who enter the ocean do so RECREATIONALLY. Probably less than one percent of the world's working population actually HAVE to risk shark attack in order to earn a living (commercial/military divers, some aspects of commercial fishing, pro surfers, etc).

Apex predators kill to ensure the survival of their species, and by doing so benefit the overall ecology/food chain by removing sick/injured/old or otherwise genetically inferior prey, thereby making THAT species stronger as a whole. They DON'T kill in order to "nail a hide to a wall". That's how nature works.Culling sharks just so we can have our weekend fun in the water is NOT natural.

As a recreational fisherman, whether fishing for a feed or for sport, I torture, abuse and sometimes kill fish. So yes, my above comments make me look like a hypocrite. But we ARE the world's top predator...not because of speed, power, size, teeth or claws...but because of our ability to reason. And it's not reasonable to thin out the shark numbers for essentially our own enjoyment.

Auslobster said

My point is Auslobster that we do kill any  predators on land that threaten us near our areas of habitation so why not do so in the ocean.......

On any nice day their are thousands of surfers swimmers and divers in the ocean along our coastline....Its a big ocean....large sharks can have room like lions and tigers do on land I  just suggest  not near humans.

I enjoy diving, surfing, fishing and swimming......I dont think I would enjoy being torn to shreds by a shark. I will continue to participate in all my water based activities but i have excersized more and more discretion as to

where and when I do so as the shark population increases......I have been in the water for over 40+ years doing what I love and I have no doubt that the White Pointer numbers have grown considerably since my early days.

Even in the 80s their were plenty of surfers around and a lot less were being terrorized by sharks 

What a crock of shit mate honestly.... Do you see us going in the Savanah and killing lions so that we can take a gentle stroll?...... No.... we put measures in place to ensure we stay safe but dont kill the animal.

Im a diver and like many divers I know that when I jump into the water I take full responsibility of anything that happens to me in there as it was MY CHOICE to jump in the water.

As for Shark numbers yes I think they are excessive but dont agree with a mass kill... Maybe change the fishing laws removing the restrictions around certain species, sizes and bag limits would assist in reducing shark numbers and making the local fish and chip shop cheaper!

Cheers

 So what constitutes a "mass" not an easy solution. Culling seems to infer wiping out with no limit. I would support removing large sharks from waters within 5 kilometers of the shore one end of the state to the next. Used to dive for 40 years, one close encounter was enough got out of the water after the Warnbro fatality. Used to tow my kids around the sound on a board, no way will I do that with the grand kids.

Back in the metro area and the problem will go away.

 ....is it a human's god-given right to use the ocean for recreation, over a shark which uses it for survival?

 For the ensuing Great Shark Debate can we at least do it under a more appropriate Topic Header .. I’m having issues with “ if a giant animal / monster was eating people on land “ . 

 From what i can remember these big sharks used to travel between Esperance and Ceduna  chasing Salmon and quiet a few of them had trackers on them.

This year we have seen greater numbers along our coast which maybe part of the reason we are seeing more sharks.

The sharks have always been there but the numbers have increased on our coast weather they are following salmon or snapper we have them.

Great whites like cold water and i thought our waters were warming up.

 Barnett wants to market the brand Perth as a tourist destination well here is his chance to showcase our magnificent waters off Perth. Good luck with that. Either issue permits for dozens of cage diving locations or clean up our waters.

 Just letting u all know, since 2000 there have been 14 fatal shark attacks in WA. For those of u who are too stupid/stubborn to realise, that is less than 1 death a year.

Get over your self, i am, like the rest of us on this site, an avid recreational fisher and absolutely love free diving. But each time i get into the water i accept the risk that i am taking. when we get into the water we are no longer the apex predator, the shark is 

accept it and enjoy ur time in the water, or shut up and stop complaining 

 If humans were the apex predators of the planet then shit would not run /swim /crawl around fucking us up so much humans like to think they are at the top of the food chain but really we r just part of it . If u dont want to get eaten by tigers dont go in the jungle . Same with sharks i used to dive a lot i choose not too now i stay in the boat lol.

14 deaths in the last 16 years?
How many in the last 100 years before 2000?

It's been said in many of the posts that there is a belief that the numbers of great whites has increased significantly and they need to be culled to get the numbers under control.

Hmmm to me the only people who have the resources available to give an accurate statement on numbers of great whites along the coast line of Australia (as against just WA) is the CSIRO or the state fisheries. These are the bodies which are telling us that the numbers of great whites has not increased significantly and we should believe them, they have done the research we haven't, we have opinions based on our own sightings and not much more.

Whilst it is true (I believe so any way) that more great whites are being seen I also are of the view this is because of a number of reasons. One being the availability of a plentiful supply of food.

I look at the increase in sightings in this manner,

The farmer says there are millions of roos around, he says he saw big mobs of them in his crop and they must have bread up to uncontrollable numbers, they need culling big time.

A team from the what ever department goes up to his farm and does a survey in the area of 100 square miles around his crop they count may be 10 roos. So where are these big numbers, they are all in his crop because that is where the food is. Spread the number of roos over the area surveyed and the numbers are very low for the area.

Back to the ocean, at the moment we are experiencing a very good salmon season there every where, what eats salmon sharks eat salmon. We have had a good snapper aggregation what eats snapper sharks. So at various times we have an abundance of food for these large predators and it has attracted them in quite large numbers which leads us to believe that there are thousands and thousands of them all waiting to attack us at the first opportunity. Not so I believe.

If the number of great whites is dissipated around the entire coast of the country it is quite possible that the numbers are very low for the size of the area surveyed. Namely the entire Australian coast line out to what ever depth.

If it is allowed that we can cull the great white shark right left and centre because we don't understand what has caused the numbers to increase of our coast then in all likely hood we could easily repeat the slaughter of the thylacines all over again, and if we do that we have learnt nothing from history. The great white numbers will be reduced to such a level the species will disappear from this earth. and please lets not have some short sighted types saying so who cares.

I like going for a swim in the ocean, I don't surf now (to old an frail)but I do understand the adrenalin rush it gives people and the great passion it brings about in them.

The answer to the present situation, more study into what has brought about the increase in numbers locally and and, people taking all due care when going about their beloved activity in the ocean and accepting the responsibility for their choice in going into the water. Do a bit of study on what can cause and increase of an encountering a shark (of any species) and avoid those situations which have been shown to put your health at greater risk than normal.

To the family and friends of the lady taken at Mindarie I offer my most sincere sympathy.

 Just stop protecting them for a while and not just great whites. Reduce the numbers its not a big deal. Or hire a pod of killer whales. 

 Wtf??!! We don't even shoot rapists who cause more destruction to people's lives than these f*** sharks! And they live on the land!

Pretty sure fisheries caught and killed a shark after Bens death (RIP). That didn't stop this one off mindarie

Sharks are sharks they're not teddy bears, they hunt and they kill so if you go in the water that's the risk you take. If your not comfortable with that risk then don't go in the water. Simple as that. 

(Just my opinion)

 Well if we are going to kill all the great whites can we please kill all the green eye/spur dogs as well? They are giving me the whoops!

ok , lots of posts about this topic ...

thing is to go back to the start of why GW were put on the endangered list ?/

the science behind that decision many years ago is highly disputed and still not based on a lot of actual fact , More like calculated guess work , due to the very little that is known about GW

one of the ''facts ''used back then to demonstrate their supposed reduction in numbers was the game fishing clubs records , there records showed a gradual slow down in fishing club catches of great whites over several years ......... no weight was given to the fact that clubs largely stopped targeting great whites in the same time period and shifted to different fishing techniques as other ''sports ''species where targeted

so the logic imo behind the placing them on the endangered list is largely flawed

a cull if one was to be had is a targeted reduction in their numbers , up to a certain limit ......that would be difficult as the gov & all its various dept have really no good idea of how many GW are out there ... also their nomadic wanderers ..so they are constantly in a state of flux around our coast and the worlds oceans ...

how would you target that if it where to be allowed ?? well common sense might indicate to set baited lines or nets in areas quickly after sightings within the close proximity of the coast or multiple passes via the sonar bouys when there pinged by tagged GW

given the spike in sightings , attacks and fatalities around our coastline over the last say 10-15 years only a very skeptical unread person would think GW are not increasing in significant numbers ...how many where there to begin with ?? well they don't know ...how many are there now ?? well the gov doesn't know that either really ..again its a calculated guess on that , depending on their attitude to protection or a limited cull & if your the gov or sea shepherd etc

there needs to be more tagging of these bigger GW , more sonar beacons set in place and a much easier method of advising the public about the sightings and movements of them , or at least the ones we have tagged and can track or ''ping''

imo the GOV and its depts. are deeply concerned about the effect of actually making this GW shark information or education bigger to the public as it will affect our states tourism etc if they aknowledge its a potentially bigger issue than they are at present & an issue they are unsure of how to control or react to

id like to see the federal gov ban all shark cage diving in Australia .... yeh I know shoot me ...but I really think these GW are capable of ''learning and associating ''boats /humans /chuming with an easy potential feed , and with there nomadic movements they then take this learning & use it elsewhere ..with certain type noises learned from those encounters now being an added call to investigate anywhere on their travels

their is plenty of food in our local waters to attract them and their nomadic travels around the worlds oceans are part of a mapped route that they use to feed & breed imo , their time here locally may be vary due to food , age /size , sex and hunting skill etc

we don't know yet ....but it would seem there are more of them in our water snow that ever before and they are possibly staying longer once they are here on our coast

this is a problem that needs a long term solution and management as imo its not going to go away anytime soon , it will in all probabilities increase into the next decade or two

us humans need to not only accept the risk if we enter the water , but also consider the impact on our families etc

as we all know the impacts are tragic & shattering when it hits close to home

I used to dive , but stopped the deeper stuff several years before this started to become an issue like It is now for medical reasons , but ill continue to get abs in the shallows even in the danger zones around down south

but my dad used to warn us back in the day about being in the water too early or too late in the day .or on sharkey days when vis is not good ..iv stuck to that mostly over the years as it did make sense to me then and now

for the guys who do still enter the water to surf etc , maybe a designated spotter up high out of the water might be a new norm to keep an eye out for mr GW same as they do in SA

sorry for the long post , just some of my thoughts

hezzy

 ...there were fewer whales. And fewer sharks. Now the whaling has stopped, so more whales, more sharks, more people in the water.Bada Bing, more attacks. And because most of us want to believe that we're living in a Disney movie, the mean nasty evil shark has to be dealt with, rather than the cute cuddly whale.

 With the talk of white shark numbers on the rise....

Is not the big arse sharks doing all the chomping?  How long do they take to grow to big arse  chomoing size?

I would of thought with the rise in numbers..... smaller sharks  would be more prevalent  along the coast ?

Just curious to know why 

 Great thread. Great post hezzy /meglodon and piggy, always enjoy reading whatvyou have to say.

So we really need to do more scientific studies to know the number of shark and why there is an increase in attack.

Given we know the data being human we probably will make most decision emotionally. Ie lets kill them it will appease the masses Hence these news make  the front page even though drug and crime kill and harm alot more people. 

Finally NO to auslobster question.

when someone you love loses a leg, or your brother or mother is killed by a massive white pointer, I BET no one will be sitting there saying, well, its OK, because he was in the water, no worries, nothing to see here, move along.

the other perspective

Anyone in the water diving or surfing, being circled by a big white, would be thinking "jesus I wish someone would knock that fucker on the head NOW".
Anyone reckon they WOULDNT be thinking that if they were in that situation?

Agree totally Rob, I would be looking for a smokie.....

But that is totally different to "Gee wiz, I would love to go for a swim, how about we knock ALL THOSE fuckers on the head NOW so I can enjoy my frolic in the sea".

The world would be a shitty place if we all thought the same.....just as long as we have these disagreements with a smile on our faces and a cold beer, and hopefully not a dirty big toothy circling us, its all good.

 Diver's at least should be able to carry a smokie for self protection at least until the authorities come up with something else.

I absolutely agree with the "being circled.....knock it on the head situation as well." and FWIW I think that with a licence.....(quite often I'm against more bloody licences but firearms are bit different) a smokie should be able to be carried.

don't think there are any on here who care much about a killed individual shark especially in self defence.

I'm not against a cull.....Im against a cull that is motivated by emotions....or POLITICS rather than intelligent thought and science.

I think probably some are right here that they have rebounded since the 70's but there is certainly some doubt in me that says ...."what could be another reason for more sightings and attacks?" has a lot of the oceans life been fished out ....tuna etc etc ?
are these sharks ....concentrating around the large areas of biomass still remaining and actually fighting for their own survival?

I have no idea that's why generally I like to be the devils advocate.

Is one life worth a species? Although emotion says yes. logic has to say no.

 Y'know, if a group of people who _kill fish_ disagree so widely about _killing a fish_, we're in for trouble folks.  Twice in North America (Alaska and the Okanagan) I've had US and Canadian citizens screaming shrilly at me as I attempted to land salmon:  "Let it go!  You're hurting it! You're KILLING it!!", etc. *

Twice.  And in both cases, I hadn't yet even _landed_ the fish.  As far as these Greenies(?) 'knew', this wasn't a catch-and-release situation... (and it wasn't, even though I _did_ release one of those catches, undersize).

My point? I won't be surprised if one day in the near future, 1.) angling is _banned_; 2.) the RSPCA charges recreational fishermen with _cruelty_; 3.) Our extensive coastline becomes a no-fishing zone.

The GWs that killed two West Aussies are fish.  We _kill_ fish.   Most of those we kill are 'innocent'.  They're swimmin' around in their habitat, doing what fish do... and we _kill_ them.

For CS, let's reserve our anger for more serious issues than authorised personnel setting lines in the area of an attack.  

* A third incident: Could hardly believe it when a woman appeared and kicked a kid's bait bucket into a Canadian lake.  Think this kind of crap can't happen here?  Already we have _recreational fishermen_ objecting to the killing of a fish!~

Good post HH..this country is most definitely fucked. After 7yrs of the worst government this country has ever seen..apparently we are thinking of giving then and their greenie mates another go. FFS. We are rapidly racing to the left which will mean the end to a lot of things we take for granted today. The left with their media friends will get their way and anyone whom slightly leans that way with them will pay the price.

Yes, I do believe their are giant animals / monster eating people on land.
Annually in Australia, approx. 300 people are murdered, 1200 die in Motor Vehicle accidents, 2,000 die from Drug overdose, 2,800 die from Suicide, 18,000 die from drug related illness and there are over 50,000 cases of sexual assault. Some pretty big Monsters there.

My deepest sympathy to the relatives and friends of the recent shark attack victims here on our shores, this is a real tragedy that hopefully better management and education might prevent in the future.

When the dust settles and the politicians stop trying to score some political millage, hopefully the focus can be shifted back to the real monsters in our society.

 Totally different scenarios, luckily i have been affected by only a couple of yr examples. I have been chased to shore by a big noah on a couple of occasions tho reason why i don't surf anymore. The subject is relevant and will continue to be if something isn't done it will only get worse.   Not saying kill them all just thin out a few             ps tell me how you would feel if yr kids were stranded on a rock 100 mtrs from shore at meelup with one of them swimming around true story happened last year. 

 I’d like to cull these nuisance telemarketers 3 of the pricks so far this morning get heaps from multiple numbers starting with 02 they’re hardcore fuggars . Maybe we could use them on the drumlines and if they happen to be reading this in Mumbai I have this message .. 

in the recent wake of this last weeks attacks and deaths there have been some who are calling for the renewed start up of commercial shark netting /fishing in the metro area to reduce shark numbers and supposedly reduce big shark nos,

THIS WOULD BE A NONSENSE APPROACH imo & is clearly only a feel good quick fix for public consumption for the following reasons

1 the people who are initiating this call have a vested interest in monetary gain for its re opening in the metro
2 the largest % of sharks taken by commercial netters are small sharks and are not GW

3 the area outside of the metro shark netting ban also has a large commercial fleet of shark fishers/netter and fatalitys and attacks have occured there with about the same frequency as in the metro closed area

4 it would again put at risk the key stock biomass rebuild of demersals that has occured since it was removed in 2008 if i remember correctly , namely ,snapper , dhuies , mulloway etc

if the gov decides a reduction inthe larger over 3 metre GW is needed then they need to figure out the ''best ''way to do that and achive a positive result ,

shark netting and random drum lines isnt it imo

hezzy

catch them and relocate them to a coast line of a country we don't like, similar to what they do with rouge crocks 

Great thread and a topic that will never die!! It amazes me how so many sheep jump on news articles on social media and go on and on about how "it's their territory", "you go in the water you should know the risks", "gee killing the one at falcon didn't teach the others a lesson wow big surprise" and on and on and on it goes. Give me a break!! So many useless opinions of people who have nothing to contribute to the topic other than emotion based opinion which unfortunately due to social media, when all these opinions are added together, become a strong force and one of the highest considerations for government policy. To me this is one of the biggest blights on modern society - a voice to one and all!! Most of which should never be heard. Don't worry the irony is not lost on me that I am using a form of social media to rant with an opinion about the opinions on social media.

For me it is beyond doubt that the local numbers of GWS's have increased to levels that now pose a serious risk for anyone who surfs, swims, dives etc in the ocean. If a local population of any predatory species gets to the point of capacity, all opportunities for a meal must be taken. With GWS's this translates into a significantly higher risk for humans because now we are well and truly on the menu!! In the past an attack may have been out of curiosity, or perhaps a case of mistaken identity, but now I believe we have become more than that and to a degree somewhat of a desirable target. If nothing is done to control numbers on the west coast I believe we will see more and more attacks purely because a meal is there and there for the taking.

These are just my observations and I'm the first to admit I have very little practical experience with sharks and may very well be wrong but I think a reduction of 10-15 GWS's would be a very good thing for our local waters. While they are at it getting rid or a few thousand bronzies up the coast would be a great idea too!!

[In the past an attack may have been out of curiosity, or perhaps a case of mistaken identity, but now I believe we have become more than that and to a degree somewhat of a desirable target. If nothing is done to control numbers on the west coast I ]

imo , we have always been on the menu

white sharks according to the science once born as pups eat mostly fish , when they reach 2.7-3 meters in length they then swap over to a much higher % of a mammal based diet , which includes seals , whales ,etc

humans being mammals, then logicaly we have always been on the menu for them once they reach a size big enough to attack us successfully & that is around the 3 metre + mark

with the growing numbers of humans entering the water over the last 3 decades why would white sharks not adapt to our increased availability to them and see us as a natural food source within their enviroment ?? & easier to catch than say a seal ??

hezzy

The logical step would be to let the Pro Cray fishermen set surface sharklines on designated pots, in elected fishing zones at certain times of the year.

Reintroducing shark nets will decimate the Demersals and set the recreational sector back years.

Professional shark lines can be attached to any one of the 50,000 pots that are soaking right at this moment.They won't kill the shark until humane destruction is decided upon according to fisheries departments criteria.

It would also be an excellent unit of measure to understand just how big the GW biomass has grown too.

Coupled with shark shield and sonic nets at popular beaches, we should be capable of mitigating the risk.

By targeting where the set lines are allocated, it won't remove all of the sharks, but will prevent access to the zones where people use the water. Yes,yes, i know, the sharks will be attracted to the bait....They already are because the pots are already set.

I'm not against protecting this iconic species and fully understand both sides of the argument. The situation is getting beyond control and measures need to be taken in the interests of our State. Left unchecked, what will the scenario be in 20 years time??

 Agree Hezzy if they use big hooks they will catch big sharks increase hook size and fish for them at the correct time of year. Catch 15 to 20 a year and see what happens. 

 Human life above all.  Race colour religion doesn't matter .there is to many sharks.  I have said for long time ( will it take a child to get taken). And what will greens say, parents fault for letting them swim.if it's an adult .they know the risks.  No dought these people have no cars . Def don't use toilet paper. Def don't wash ect ect . Load of crap. And if your are fisherman ( tag and release) herring whiting Dhue pink. Your a hypocrite also . Doesn't matter if it's a whiting to shark no different. Life is life . Anyway that's my bi-ch for night :):):) . Happy thoughts .

 I'm not directly against culling however I was taught from a young age that culling mindlessly will lead to a gap in that species' numbers which, naturally, will be countered by a rapidly increased rate of production to close this gap as fast as possible.

In the short run culling may seem effective however the increased amount of sharks around at the moment could be the result of this reaction to the large cull a few decades ago. Should we cull more sharks now, who knows how many more we will see in 20 years time?