kill or let live?
now that most of the hoo-har over last months great white attack is dying down, what are peoples thoughts on great white sharks, and the frequency of attack in WA and australia over the last decade?
my theory is this - since GW's have become a protected species, their numbers and sizes have definately increased, and something you can associate with larger, older animals, is that they're quite a bit smarter than usual, and they have a fair amount of inteligence, and wisdom from experiences.
sightings are becoming more frequent, especially in metro, and usually around this time of year they seem to be venturing closer and closer to some pretty popular areas, and divers were reporting increased activity last year, all over the ocean. i feel its a pretty safe bet that they return to the same areas each year to feed, especially if they know where to find easy food, or competition is forcing them to explore grounds they havent had to go to for years.
i also feel that its about time that their numbers and sizes were thinned out a bit, and its time for a bit of a culling. i know it sounds brutal, but they have done similar things with crocs before, and i beleive it can quite simply save lives. i dont think the idea of tagging them with locators, etc is a very smart idea, as it would be near on impossible or cost effective to tag every dangerous white, but if there is an attack, or confirmed sighting of a shark large enough to be considered a threat, it should be disposed of as quickly as possible. I am not saying we should wipe them out, but rather a timely thinning of larger, more dangerous animals, or ones which are susceptible to returning to certain areas.
also, dont for a second think that their presence is going to keep me out of the water, or make me feel uncomfortable about doing the things i love. i havent seen a GW, but i have dived with, and had situations with some pretty big noahs of all sorts including big tigers, bulls, and very large bronzies, and i do realise that there is a real chance i could come face to face with one of these great whites, but i also feel experienced enough to handle the situation accordingly, and decide with confidence on what to do - either trying to make a stealthy retreat, or dealing with the shark. unfortunately, i dont think my missus, family, or most of my friends could deal with the same situation, and they are the ones that i'm thinking about.
Timmo
Posts: 258
Date Joined: 01/03/10
let live!
dont know how culling sharks are gonna make any difference? Since 1791 (213yr period) there have been only 190 deaths australia wide. roughly 1 per year. your more likely to get killed crossing the road to catch the bus (ive even hit someone running across the road for a bus, wasnt my fault and the guy didnt die thank god). so should we take all the cars off the road? most shark attacks occur through curiosity or if they feel threatened and usully once they attack they know its not there cup of tea and swim off. Personllay i think tracking sharks is a great way to see where they feed and where they travel on certain times of the year. It would give us insight as to where and when more attacks could occur. JMO!
dd83wa
Posts: 169
Date Joined: 01/10/08
Come on...
Lets first look at this 'problem' comparatively.
During the period 1969-2000, in NSW alone, 218 rock fisherman were swept off the rocks and drowned. In the same period 40 shark encounters were recorded and only 2 deaths. (Beachsafe)
During the period 1945-1987 - 292 people were killed in diving related deaths. (Diving Accident Management, 1988)
There are consistently 2-3 deaths per year in Australia from bee stings. (ABS)
On average there is one person killed by sharks, per year calculated over a 218 year period.
Are we to control bee numbers? Should we ban SCUBA or atleast impose more regulations as shark detahs pale in comparioson to diving related deaths?
Should we ban rockfishing? Maybe impose a licence system??
While it may be hard to argue that their numbers are not on the rise, increased presence on the water from the general public and more advanced forms of networking, reporting and communication account for a number of these sightings.
I feel for the people and their relatives who are taken but I think it's about time we became a little less self absorbed and realised that these occurences are part and parcel of entering the water.
In my opinion, to enter the water and kill these magnificent creatures is nothign short of barbaric, selfish and short-sighted.
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
Agreed! Good post.
Agreed! Good post.
Man Overboard
Posts: 957
Date Joined: 16/01/10
So, even though you have
So, even though you have never seen a GW whilst diving or swimming, you still want to cull them .
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
yes.
yes.
slam
Posts: 168
Date Joined: 09/09/09
I agree
I think it would be terrible to start culling GW's. If you go swimming in their territory then reap the consequences. As mentioned, we risk our lives on the road every day & yet we allow more cars on the road.
It's a great shame for the families of victims but they took their choices & unfortunately paid the ultimate fee.
We now have shark spotting planes all summer long so its obvious that more sharks are recorded, however it doesn't mean there are more out there!!
Dicey
Posts: 912
Date Joined: 23/07/10
better off culling, pesky
better off culling, pesky stuff like sea gulls,seals and other stuff i cant think of atm i know there is alot, why did i say this, overpopulation is our greatest killer and will be the death of us all, same goes for animal kingdom, overpopulation of seals for example they eat all the baitfish but no many things eat them, sharks, killer whales? who eats seagulls and also crocodiles? have a think about it got to be abit harsher if we are gonna live on earth for longer.
dd83wa
Posts: 169
Date Joined: 01/10/08
Mate, we should be culling
Mate, we should be culling humans if we're concerned about living on earth for the coming centuries. Not animals.
Nothing eats crocodiles, they're apex predators.
Things like seagulls are in plague proportions because of humans waste. Again, a problem void if remove ourselves.
Seals eat all the baitfish......??
Dicey
Posts: 912
Date Joined: 23/07/10
hahah well not all but alot
hahah well not all but alot of them if they overpopulate the sea, penguins etc yes unfortunately we are the the ones who should be culled lol but that is never gonna happen, unless a major chaos breaks out.
flangies
Posts: 2557
Date Joined: 11/05/08
Canadians eat seals
Canadians eat seals
Dicey
Posts: 912
Date Joined: 23/07/10
lol so do eskimos, well
lol so do eskimos, well since clubbing seals was banned in most places theres more seals now, we have a canetoad,camel,crocodile problem in australia,
Likc
Posts: 363
Date Joined: 09/08/09
At the same time, we are
At the same time, we are building safer cars and hopefully safer roads… So we are trying to prevent things. And is probably thanks to the shark patrols that just so few people are killed even there is more of them in the water. So some kind of policy regarding big sharks in metro waters would do it for me. Like the case when the guy was killed in Safety Bay two years ago and the patrol boat was right above the shark. (Assuming it was the animal, which killed. What are the chances of 2 GWs on the same spot at the same time?) That shark should have been killed in my opinion, before it comes back again for some human flesh.
Buz
Posts: 1555
Date Joined: 28/08/07
There is some chances of 2
There is some chances of 2 great whites being in the same location :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVbu5wKcJow
Bodie
Posts: 3758
Date Joined: 05/11/07
not inf avour of culling,
not inf avour of culling, however am in favour of tagging larger GW's
it will atleast give an idea of the great whites movements, and feeding patterns.
If a great white is known to be in an area a shark attack happens, it can be followed to see if it will re-visit the same area.
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
then what bodie?
see if it re-visits the same area and then what? figure out how it plotted its course? or wait until it visits the same area and attacks again?
Bodie
Posts: 3758
Date Joined: 05/11/07
then assess what to do from
then assess what to do from there.
as stated previuosly, most shark attacks are out of curiosity.... hence the reason most attacks the person isnt eaten completely.
Once great whites start to use humans as a regular food source, then something may need to be done.
like inventing some sort of large shark shield device with a greater protection distance than 8 foot. something that may be able to cover a whole beach.
People die from snake bites, and spider bites, do we go around killing them just because we can?
everything has a place on the food chain, whats to say killing off GW's wont interrupt this process somehow?
Dicey
Posts: 912
Date Joined: 23/07/10
not argueing with ya but its
not argueing with ya but its easier to kill then save, its more expensive to track the shark and use gps equipment, when humans was born the food chain changed in a major way, we have come a long way when it comes to morale etc but sometimes we have to play abit of god and try balance things out in the food chain.
flangies
Posts: 2557
Date Joined: 11/05/08
Thats why we have a cane
Thats why we have a cane toad problem...
dd83wa
Posts: 169
Date Joined: 01/10/08
You mentioned earlier a cane
You mentioned earlier a cane toad and camel problem??
Cane toads specifically is a problem caused by people 'playing god'. As are, to a lesser extent, camels.
"When humans was born" the food chain remained perfect, until we became more industrialised, our population grew and we began to make a significant impact.
Removing sharks is not balancing things out in the food chain at all.
Humans have never been factored in as a significant and natural part of the food chain. We have entered the food chain and f*cked it.
Dicey
Posts: 912
Date Joined: 23/07/10
greedy humans and desperate
greedy humans and desperate measures caused those factors , yes humans was never meant to be a part of the natural food chain, Native Tribes know this and try their best to preserve this and nature even though they were not part of the food source.
dd83wa
Posts: 169
Date Joined: 01/10/08
Agreed 100%
Agreed 100% with Body
MattMiller
Posts: 4171
Date Joined: 15/06/09
Culling
Totally agree with dd83Wa. There the kings of the ocean and who are we to cull them coz we think we own the world.
Dicey, what do you want to do, cull everything other than humans? Alot of people would argue that humans are a far bigger problem then any animal will ever be.
And Likc, can you please tell me when a GW has attacked multiple humans?
Dicey
Posts: 912
Date Joined: 23/07/10
culling things to a
culling things to a sustainable level isnt the same as wiping out the species, take crocodiles for example nothings gonna eat them, and their food source will run out eventually and they will move closer to civilisation and someone will get attacked or killed at a higher rate, americans turned the alligator problem into a money making business selling skin and meats they also breed their own too so there are positives to it.
JakeB
Posts: 262
Date Joined: 12/12/09
So you want to take
So you want to take something that is already endangered and ''Cull'' it to a sustainable level? Just so you can feel safer entering it's home.... People know the risks associated with swimming/ surfing and diving in areas where these sharks are known to frequent so they should be prepared for the worst case scenario, if i went bush walking i would know theres a chance a snake may bite me. Should we cull snakes now? pfffft, what a load of crap!
Dicey
Posts: 912
Date Joined: 23/07/10
never said i was supporting
never said i was supporting culling great whites if you read correctly my problem is always with overpopulation of a certain problematic animals, humans included, but morale dilema always usually wins. so whats the point of talking about it, i share the same view about being in their territory be prepared for the worse, dont judge what i say since i take no sides until i make up the ultimate decision.
Likc
Posts: 363
Date Joined: 09/08/09
Well, there is no guarantee
Well, there is no guarantee either way that it has or hasn’t, is there?
Dicey
Posts: 912
Date Joined: 23/07/10
no of course not, our error
no of course not, our error was always always jump ahead and not do reserach into the matter and go on a stubborn one sided view, you got to take in the other sided view into the factor to make the decision if its a stalemate then $$$ come out and it goes into research, can tell you now someone isnt gonna be happy forking millions into just counting heads of an animal.
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
USA
what do the americans, canadians, etc do if there is a problematic bear, or bear attack?
they destroy it.
Man Overboard
Posts: 957
Date Joined: 16/01/10
I don't remember a Great
I don't remember a Great White going through the rubbish bins ..
Or hitting up a camp site
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
well derr,
thats because they dont have legs.....
MattMiller
Posts: 4171
Date Joined: 15/06/09
Bears are different, there
Bears are different, there terrestrial creatures like us. Humans live in the same environment therefore there wil more be conflict. And i'm sure there are a shitload more Human-Bear interations around the world per year.
7739ian
Posts: 948
Date Joined: 25/06/08
No evidence
at all that Sharks of any variety develop a taste for humans - i suppose if we schooled in our thousands offshore WE WOULD become a known food source but we don't. And as far as i can tell the only shark ever to make multiple human kills was in JAWS. Leave the buggers be and if i fall overboard off the Capes this weekend and get scoffed, fair enough, you can all say i told you so.
Indiana
Posts: 307
Date Joined: 15/12/09
Like any animal cull the problems
Catch the GW's in less than 50m of water tag and relocate out in the trench.
If they are recaught in the shallows .....cull (kiwi for kill ) them .
If and once we have the technology .....tag them with a device that will give them a shock or something ( electric fence ) when they cross in waters less than 50 metres.
" IF YOUR NOT GOING TO EAT IT ......PUT IT BACK WHERE YOU CAUGHT IT"
carnarvonite
Posts: 8701
Date Joined: 24/07/07
Culling
If they were going to cull them, what number would you get rid of and how many do you leave?
Tracking them gives us a little bit of knowledge about them but doesn't tel us how many are or not out there.
Then comes the other side of the story, who can say it was definitely a white pointer that did the killing? Could have been a tiger, dusky whaler, bronze whaler, hammerhead, bull, mako, oceanic blue.....the list goes on and is getting longer now that the pros cannot take any big sharks any more. They are protecting the breeding stock as a big tiger or hammer can have up to 60 pups around a metre long while a small one around a metre will only produce 8-10 pups 20cm in length.
As said previously, more people die of bee stings each year yet we never hear of it and there isn't a call sent out to cull every bee we see.
They are out there all the time its just that we never see them and usually for the victim its too late to do anything about it. We cannot be protected from everything let alone ourselves 24/7
darth
Posts: 27
Date Joined: 20/06/09
targeted
I agree to some extent Scotto. I think it is possible that it is a small number of large sharks responsible for fatal attacks over the past five years of so. If a single shark can be identified with reasonable accuracy directly after an attack, why not cull it...in case it is a learned behaviour. Realistically these sharks (Great Whites for example) are not endangered to any point where culling a few problem individuals will make any difference. As a society we commonly kill animals considered a threat to human safety (e.g. dangerous dogs) and also vast numbers of other animals for food, for preservation of crops or pasture, etc. I dont see a big difference personally.
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
C'mon, do you really think
C'mon, do you really think humans are so tasty that a shark will plot out when it can eat another one?
Shark attacks are about a year apart, and rarely in the exact same location. How many meals do you think a great white would have in that time? I would expect at least once a week? There are studies (or at least suggestions from scientists) that humans arent really a good or tasty food source for sharks (too many bones).
So, would a shark really plot its next human meal over a year in advance, eating heaps of meals of seals, whales, fish, birds, whatever in the mean time, all while thinking about a very small amount of human it once had?
Great whites are reasonably intelligent as far as sharks go, but they arent that intelligent, and they arent vindictive. Nearly all human attacks have been great whites being curious. The only tactile part of their body (something they can use to feel something) is their mouth, so if they're curious about something and want to find out more about it, they'll take a test bite. They'll then usually decide 'blerghhh' and be disinterested. Unfortunately for the person involved, even a small bite will be seriously life threatening due to blood loss. Nearly all fatalities are from blood losses, not being devoured.
If human flesh was so tasty to great whites that they would hunt them down after many other meals, why dont they go into a frenzy and try to eat the human straight away after taking a test bite?
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
thanks for proving my point professor hlokk
yeah, you're right. it would be silly to think a shark would be smart enough to know where to return to get easy feeds. gracetown.
it would be stupid to think that species of fish and sharks could actually follow current movements at certain times of the year, and end up at the same location it did the year before.
damn right most human attacks are from whites being curious, and "test biting" their target. what i have been saying the whole time is you would be less likely to be attacked if there were less sharks, or more likely to survive a test bite from a 3m white, rather than a 6m.
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
Easy feed? Do you know how
Easy feed? Do you know how many kilos of meat a great white requires to survive? Do you know how much they would get from a bite on a human?
Sharks just arent plotting when they can get their next feed of human
. I think you've been watching too many repeats of Jaws.
Sharks do follow current movements and seasonal movements (e.g. whales) and they may end up in the same location as last year. That doesnt mean they are hunting humans.
And yes, research and the statistics show that the majority of great white bites are 'test bites'. If you actually bother to read any research you wouldnt be making the claims you are, but why let facts get in the way when you have a sensationalist irrational fear? Much easier to just ignore reality and appeal to fear right?
Bodie
Posts: 3758
Date Joined: 05/11/07
Hear what your saying Matt,
Hear what your saying Matt, but this analgy might be weird, but remember back to when you first started drinking beer...it tasted like crap, but if you drank it anough you became used to it, and eventually liked it.
Could this be to far fetched to believe a great white could do the same thing?
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
Well, I think that analogy
Well, I think that analogy is apt. I havent drunken much beer cause it tastes like crap. When I have tried it it was out of curiosity and I could only stomach a sip or two, and it'll usually be over a year or more before i'd be curious again :p.
As for sharks getting used to it: If it was only ever one shark, that one shark would still be getting hundreds of meals inbetween human testings (and small bites, not a nourishing, filling meal). Though its statistically unlikely that it is just one shark picking off approx one human a year all around Australia, so even then, a shark would have to go a couple of years before testing it. So to eat enough humans would take the shark decades and decades at the rate they're sampling it.
Maybe if we had a shark attack each week, they might start to develop a taste (but even then, we probably taste like crap, not being marine animals and being way too bony), but its a long stretch to say they'd ever like us for the taste (or that they would even hunt out very specific food based on taste!), and a much much longer stretch for any shark to ever taste enough to build up a liking for humans. So the idea is too far fetched for any realistic scenarios. If we wildly adjust the scenario, maybe, but well, that wont actually happen.
Mick
Posts: 501
Date Joined: 28/08/06
So now GW's now want our
So now GW's now want our beer tooo. Ahhhh whats this world coming to.
KILL THEM KILL THEM ALL
Jeez this thread makes me laugh - all we need is input from "1992" to validate the lack of logic thrown around and we are all on to a winner
If the lord did not mean for us to eat fish and game, he wouldn't have made them outta meat
The speed of light is faster than the speed of sound. That's why so many people appear bright...until they speak.
Jody
Posts: 1578
Date Joined: 19/04/07
PMSL
what a crack up
TWiZTED
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
some good feed back, but
there are a few people missing the pont of this post.
i'm not on a car crash statistics site, or a bee forum, or the like. my point is about the increased numbers of shark attacks, sightings, and their increasing sizes and inteligence. they do similar things with other problematic animals like bears, crocs, lions, etc, and i feel more should be done about what is obviously an increasing shark attack problem.
dd83wa
Posts: 169
Date Joined: 01/10/08
Scott. Interested how you
Scott. Interested how you conclude attacks are increasing and how sharks are "becoming more intelligent"??
Good to hear both sides but I like well founded arguments
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
i'm 30 years old.
in the last 10 years of my life, there have been more attacks and sightings than the previous 20 years.
the older you get, the more life experiences you have, the wiser and more inteligent you become.
ddwa, i also like well founded arguments, thats why i put this up. we're up to 40 replies already. i'm not arguing with you, just sayin my bit.
Bodie
Posts: 3758
Date Joined: 05/11/07
Do you think there has been
Do you think there has been more shark attacks because there is now more people entering the water?
dd83wa
Posts: 169
Date Joined: 01/10/08
Scotto As for references to
Scotto
As for references to statistics and other cases like bees it is clearly relevant to refer as you and others have done referring to bears and the like.
It is precedent and it is opinions formed by comparing the situation to others that are Relevant.
If our illustrious leader, Gillard said tonight that she was increasing income tax for people in your wage bracket by 15% and leaving others as they were you'd cry blue murder. "Why should the pricks on million dollar salaries get off" you'd say.
You'd be making comparisons and it would be relevant.
So. In referring to bees and diving related deaths I'm really saying shouldn't we first concentrate on reducing the far greater amount of deaths here before going on a shark hunt? After all the argument is surely based on preserving human life.
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
Is it really obviously
Is it really obviously increasing? By what percentage is it increasing? What do the scientific studies show? Or are you just claiming things without actually looking into it?
Just because there are more sightings does not mean there are more sharks. If people are looking more, guess what, you'll see more sharks. Is there any data to show that you are more likely now than say 10-20 years ago to be the victim of a shark attack (remember there is more people now than then ;) )
And if you're saying people are missing the point, then you are missing their point: that there are plenty of other much more dangerous things out there and even you would agree 'culling' them is absurd. Or do you think we should cull bees and cars?
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
there are
agreed there are more dangerous things out there, but i am not talking about those. you could die from over-exposure from your computer screen.....
what i am saying is, i feel that since sharks have become protected, and have no more predators (us), they are having longer lives, and thus growing to a larger size, gaining more experiences, and having the opportunity to lurk in more places.
carnarvonite
Posts: 8701
Date Joined: 24/07/07
Pros
Just because the pros cannot target big sharks it doesn't mean that they are not still catching them. If they are still alive then they let them go, if its dead then its measured, sampled and let sink to the bottom for the lice to eat. They are still using the same size mesh nets so because its protected doesn't mean its not going to get tangled in it.
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
But why single out great
But why single out great whites for vengance killings? Because they're scary with big pointy teeth?
And note your wording. "feel that". Just because thats what you feel doesnt make it true. Theres nothing at all to suggest that sharks are growing big and evil and plotting their attacks on humans. Having more experiences doesnt mean they are using them to hunt humans. Its a little egotistical to assume that sharks have some great reverence of humans as some above-all-else delicacy. In reality, most sharks wouldnt know what the hell a human was. They arent plotting to eat us.
Also, theres scant evidence to suggest theres a huge amount more great whites. The data shows that attacks arent getting more common (certainly not in a statistical difference on a per capita or per water hour basis). What that means is that the data doesnt show great whites getting more likely to attack humans.
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
no you twit,
near on every single shark has "big pointy teeth". perhaps if they scare you hlokk, you should take up knitting or dress making.
great whites are responsible for majority of attacks, and very nearly all fatalities in wa. that is why i am singleing them out.
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
You missed the 'point'
You missed the 'point'
You're the one that feels you need to vengance kill them. You havent proposed vengance killing for bees, or cars, or anything else which clearly kill many more west australians.
Why? Because you are scared of great whites with big pointy teeth.
I'm not the one so afraid of sharks that I feel we should just go out and kill a lot of them cause they might bite me. I'm not the one proposing killing them so I feel a little bit safer when I go diving or surfing.
Bees dont have pointy teeth, so they dont illicit your caveman response (which is evidently getting a good work out lately).
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
you are a deadset flogger.
go back, READ my original post.
I dont give a flying f**k what happens to me. i clearly stated that i am not at all concerned about my safety when it comes to these sharks. i know the risks involved in doing my chosen activities. i am not afraid of these sharks.
however, i would be completly pissed off, if my missus, family, friend, etc got taken by one of these sharks by swimming off the back of my boat, or at the local beach.
go back, knit yourself a nice pink sweater, go sit in your little boat and catch squid, and then write a 4 page article on it. preach your bee sting death toll on www.ilovebees.com. dont tell me what i am or aren't scared of.
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
Getting a little flustered
Getting a little flustered now are we?
So if you arent worried/afraid/scared of sharks or them doing something to someone you know, why are you advocating killing them even though there is no evidence to suggest there are any more attacks, or even an increased great white population? Though, I guess logic, evidence and sound reasoning dont really sway certain people....
skrewloose
Posts: 335
Date Joined: 27/08/09
the sightings are more
the sightings are more common not the attacks them selves
lox ambassador
Tony Halliday
Posts: 2500
Date Joined: 14/06/07
cull the surfers, they
cull the surfers, they attract all the sharks!
my view is simple, you playing in their water, so you take your chances....
We don't kill off all the snakes, bees and spiders do we???
So why the sharks, more people die each eyar from Box jellfish than sharks, maybe we need a horror movie called
"killer box jellyfish" to get the attnetion away from poor old jaws.
Then again, can we cull hoon drivers, as they kill more than sharks too????
Tony Halliday: ~Meals on Reels ~
It takes a strong fish to swim against the current. Even a dead one can float with it
"It is always in season for old men to learn." Aeschylus (525-456 BC)
"In a mad world only the mad are sane." Akira Kurosawa (1910-1998)
MattMiller
Posts: 4171
Date Joined: 15/06/09
OK,
Scotto, there arn't more sightings, there's more people/ resources looking for them. There arn't any more attacks just more media. There not increasing in size, cmon do you really think that??? And increasing in intelligence, hahaha sharkschool!
I agree with what you say about other animals and in most cases i think it's more than justified but the ocean is a different medium. Humans havn't populated the ocean. Sharks arn't a direct threat to lives. The rate off attacks is so minimal that it's barely worth worry.
If you or someone else is attacked then your time was up. just happened to be a shark that did it rather than some dickhead on the road on your way to the ramp or the million other ways you could die.
Likc
Posts: 363
Date Joined: 09/08/09
So we are all happy to bag a
So we are all happy to bag a nice Dhu or Snapper (well I would if I’ve ever caught one), which makes no harm to anyone or other species of sharks, but for some reason people go off about GW. No difference to me if it’s a herring of GW or any other fish, when comes to killing. I don’t think the fish sees the difference either. We are talking about easing the status of protection of GW, same with other species when the stock recovers. (Not going out there and just kill.) Why GW should get a deferent treatment? Because they can kill human? So some people can go around with the propaganda about ocean being their territory and so? We kill animals in general for food and survival, which is how we were made I think. So it’s bit hypocritical to say that it’s ok to kill this animal but not the other for moral reasons.
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
Great whites were put on the
Great whites were put on the protection list by the Australian government. Have you read the reasons why and disagree with them, or just havent read them?
Likc
Posts: 363
Date Joined: 09/08/09
I don’t agree with
I don’t agree with treading GW differently than any other endangered species just because people’s weird amusement of their killing abilities. If the general consensus based on true fact is, that they need protection, fair enough.
But don’t take it to extremes and excuse the individual “man eating” sharks, because it’s “sexy”.
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
I'm not saying they should
I'm not saying they should be treated differently. If you had some endangered seal being a nusiance, you wouldnt kill it either. Whether sharks are dangerous is irrelevant (to me at least). To compare with say snapper or dhuies, if they needed a total protection ban, well, then ok, but i think most of us agree that they dont need a total ban on them (even if management is required). If great whites were populous enough that a bag limit/size limit would be sufficient, then i dont really have a problem with it. They are in a way king of the sharks which gives them some well, awe factor, but at the end of the day, i'll side with data/evidence/science. I dont just oppose it in the way a lot of greenies oppose stuff because it gives them a smug warm fuzziness.
As for excusing the individual sharks. Just because a shark was curious and happened to pick the wrong target does not mean you now see to reign thy vengance down upon it. There is no evidence of the silly notion that sharks aquire a taste for blood and hunt out humans, do why kill the shark to satisfy your bloodlust for vengence?
Ok, sure, if the shark was now a maneater, and it would kill again, then ok, kill it. However, this is reality, not hollywood. It needs to be likely before you kill it with no benefit.
Also, with the comparion of killing snapper vs killing a great white. Remember the great white will be left to rot, not be eaten. I doubt anyone here would get annoyed if they got spiked by a pinkie they were about to release, then slit its throat and chucked it back over the side
Its not a fair comparison. If a shark is not protected and you are going to eat it and you can legally keep it, then go ahead (regardless of the species).
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
precisely
my point likc.
Markie
Posts: 2168
Date Joined: 06/08/10
cull the blow fish :P
cull the blow fish :P
Dicey
Posts: 912
Date Joined: 23/07/10
if cast netting was allowed
if cast netting was allowed in the river to catch blowies i would be doing it for fun, but a ranger busted some guy fishing for blowies and putting it on the jetty and said he will fine him if he dont throw it back in.
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
double
that!!
DieHard
Posts: 1823
Date Joined: 06/10/08
yes mate spot on! CULL
yes mate spot on!
CULL THE BLOWIES!!!
DieHard – The Official “Ray & Shark” Chaser!
Seaquest
Posts: 1142
Date Joined: 22/10/09
I don't think that shark
I don't think that shark numbers or attacks have increased of late, it is more the media makes such a big deal out of any sighting these days. When the whaling station was running in Albany great whites were seen on a weekly bases, but you never heard of any shark attacks in the area.
IMO sharks that attack humans should be killed as soon as possible if they can be identified as the attacker. No one is sure that these problem sharks don't come back to the same areas in following years looking for another feed. I would rather be safe than sorry. Killing a problem shark is not going to make the species extinct but guarantees they never attact again. Any other animal that threatens human life is dealt with straight away. How is a dog that attacks any different to a shark that attacks. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying we sould kill alll sharks but I can see more benifits to killing one problem shark than letting it swim free.
roberta
Posts: 2773
Date Joined: 08/07/08
Regardless
what everybody is saying, bees, box jelly fish etc, you swim in the GW's swimming pool, as far as I'm concerned you take the risk of being nibbled or bitten by one. Guestie (old farts old mate that was taken by a GW) lived life and always said "If you are in their domain, if I get taken by one, thats life." He enjoyed the water, loved his fishing, diving, he respected the ocean, knew his chances of being taken by a GW or even drowning, which unfortunately he was, all they found was a piece of his wet-suit. All you can do is take the appropraite precautions when diving, cross your fingers, enjoy your time in or under the water.
We as humans are killing or endangering more species every day then a GW could or would.
Ginger Tablets Rock
MattMiller
Posts: 4171
Date Joined: 15/06/09
Well on the subject of dogs
Well on the subject of dogs i think the owners should be held more accountable than just loosing a pet.
Mick
Posts: 501
Date Joined: 28/08/06
Can anyone else hear
Can anyone else hear banjo's? For gods sake, one fatality a year over a period of 200 old years - pretty good odds if you ask me
If the lord did not mean for us to eat fish and game, he wouldn't have made them outta meat
The speed of light is faster than the speed of sound. That's why so many people appear bright...until they speak.
dodgy
Posts: 4588
Date Joined: 01/02/10
Sure seems to be more sharks
Sure seems to be more sharks in the North since the Indos and shark fishermen stopped fishing for them.
Lost half a dozen Queenies to sharks yesterday.
Does anyone know where the love of god goes, when the waves turn the minutes to hours?
Brooky
Posts: 74
Date Joined: 25/04/10
NO Cull
There is no way we should be able to cull them they are in their world and im just a guest, im an avid surfer myself and i know the risk everytime i go in the water 'THEY EAT STUFF' I agree with the electronic tagging to plot their migrations as a safety precaution, you cant just kill something because it scares you.
Think of it this way if you went into some other blokes house and he reacted by kicking the living crap out of you would you then tell the government that his whole family needs to be culled????
Just get me back on the water
Buz
Posts: 1555
Date Joined: 28/08/07
Depends if that family is
Depends if that family is from Rocko, bahahahahaha
Buz
Posts: 1555
Date Joined: 28/08/07
I guess another side to
I guess another side to consider is the people directly affected by shark attacks. Whether being attacked, or losing someone to a shark.
Cant say i know of every shark attack incident ever but from the few i have heard about not once have i heard of the person to be attacked or the family left behind, calling for the shark to be killed. I know my Grandparents didnt call for the Great White that bit my second cousin in half off Hopetoun to be found and killed. But if it was the case maybe if the shark can be found the victim or the victims family should say whether or not it is to be killed. Because we all know revenge helps the grieveing process.
Well for some it may.
:)
sea-kem
Posts: 15228
Date Joined: 30/11/09
Hey Scotto are you realated
Hey Scotto are you realated to that lunatic Vic Hislop? I love the ocean and what's in it in all it's raw glory. I suppose with your thinking we should cull lions in Africa so we can enter their territory safely ? NO CULL!!!!!
Love the West!
fords_rule85
Posts: 116
Date Joined: 05/03/09
Against culling GW's
If you dont want be attacked by a lion then you dont walk through the African Savanna, If your that worried about getting bitten by a GW then stay out of the water, the water is their home and killing and eating prey is how they survive just like any other animal including us. We have no right to play god and decide when we think theyre are too many for our own good.
Paul G
Posts: 5215
Date Joined: 12/12/07
Cull or not? I think not.
Cull or not? I think not.
Active Gyp-Rok solutions ,Residential and commercial ceilings and walls
Jody
Posts: 1578
Date Joined: 19/04/07
What about the whales
There's that many of them out there, they are becoming a shipping hazard.
We could sell them to the Japs
TWiZTED
Davy_G
Posts: 525
Date Joined: 17/03/09
well, if their
well, if they're rogues...............
Paul G
Posts: 5215
Date Joined: 12/12/07
I think as a rec diver I
I think as a rec diver I would not like to see them culled.I dive with Jesse my son and we both know that the next dive may be the one that we come face to face with a GW.The thought is not a good one as I would do all in My power to protect Jesse and if that meant getting eaten or biten then that is how it is.I have more chance of stuffin up while under the water and drownding .We get hours of fun and enjoyment from the ocean and it creatures big and small .By killing all the gw sharks or culling them would not make our diving any better or any less dangerous as there are still plenty of other things more likely to happen on any of our dives.
Active Gyp-Rok solutions ,Residential and commercial ceilings and walls
kane
Posts: 1752
Date Joined: 07/12/08
i just skimmed through this thread
as itd take me too long to read this post fully but it seems to me scotto is the only one in favour of culling them...
im with the mob, we go into their environment, we know the risks involved.
leave the things alone
Gooooone Fishin!
Shorty
Posts: 1549
Date Joined: 10/05/08
Electronic tag them and let
Electronic tag them and let us know where they are each day, either on a shark watch site or tell us at the same time we are watching the weather and boating report,,
Just the ones that pose a threat IE Tagged GW No.78 is in Warnbro sound heading North etc,,
BTW > Once young children get taken more folks will push for culling, its only because adults get taken folks just say bad luck,,
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
I hope for both the childs
I hope for both the childs and sharks sake that that doesn't happen.
spearfisher
Posts: 82
Date Joined: 20/09/08
We should be alowed to fish
We should be alowed to fish for them , all the cage diving done around the world is only teaching them one thing humans come in a can. open them up and eat , and yes im guilty of going for a cage dive in south africa ..
kane
Posts: 1752
Date Joined: 07/12/08
"humans come in a can"
so they wont eat us unless we are in a cage???? simply suggesting cage diving is the cause of sharks eating people is obsurd.
i guess on that line of thinking there must have never been any shark attacks prior to the invention of shark cages.
and since the introduction of them the attack rate must have sky rocketed????
Gooooone Fishin!
MattMiller
Posts: 4171
Date Joined: 15/06/09
Rediculous
Ok then, how many cage divers have been eaten???
dumper
Posts: 1027
Date Joined: 03/04/08
None, but interacting with
None, but interacting with whites like that by baiting the water means sharks will associate humans with an easy meal.
ody
Posts: 581
Date Joined: 30/12/06
Hi Ya, Simple probability
Hi Ya,
Simple probability and statistics really.
Fact - statistically, any one individual person swimming in the ocean was more likely to be attacked by a great white 40 years ago than now. Why? Because there were more great whites 40 years ago. It is only of recent years that they have dwindled in numbers (usually because of knee-jerk reactions resulting in the killing everything that moved in response to attacks) to the point where the government has protected them (meaning there are fewer great whites now to actually attack).
Fact - the actual number of attacks has reduced of recent years when you measure it in the number of attacks per 1000 people in the ocean. There are many thousands more people in the ocean now that 40 years ago yet the actual number of attacks has not increased proportionally.
Fact - with so many more people in the ocean, the probability of any one person being attacked is considerably less.
Given the size of the brain of a GW, I'd seriously doubt they are getting more intelligent.
Just my 2 bobs worth.
Cheers.
darth
Posts: 27
Date Joined: 20/06/09
Fact or opinion??
Seems like a lot of people confusing fact with personal opinion. If you want to quote it as fact....show some evidence I say. Still, the thread has generated a lot of good opinion.