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.
poddyfish
Posts: 986
Date Joined: 01/05/07
risks
its the risk you take by entering the water... i think everyone who dives or spears ect expects to come face to face with a big shark sooner or later... if your worried about being a snack then why do it? why not buy a shark shield or something if you think that may help? i personally do not want to come face to face with one underwater but ive seen one in the boat and they are a magnificent creature! and just because i dont want to meet one in its enviroment dosnt mean i want them culled! if it happens then im the one whos layed my cards on the table and thats the hand ive been dealt! how it plays out depends on many things.... i think everyone hopes for everyone elses sake that your the winner on the given day... thats my POV
Fear The Spear............!
brg
Posts: 666
Date Joined: 31/12/09
i dont think killing them is
i dont think killing them is a good thing but if there is one that has bitten a human and is constantly coming in and scaring people i would want that shark dead id rather a shark dead over a human but i dont like killing anything.brg
Magic
Posts: 28
Date Joined: 27/10/08
Also Disagree
I also disgaree with culling them. After all its their lunchbox we are playing in and as others have correctly stated - we know the associated risks.
spearfisher
Posts: 82
Date Joined: 20/09/08
use your brain not cage
use your brain not cage divers getting eatern , but when you keep chum up gw day after day year after year and all they keep seeing is this person floating around around moving about then one day they see some person in the ocean some where on there travels some thing in there brain triggers a memory about food , they have good memorys and no where to get food what time of year where they should head for a feed ..
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
i get what your saying mate,
i get what your saying mate, classical conditioning. a person in the water ends up becoming the conditioned stimulus to elicit hunger or feeding behaviour. seems to make sense, hadnt thought about it that way before.
NO WAY we should even be considering culling them!! but yea the cage diving thing, especially when chumming could be a potential problem.... I dont know much about the sharks brain though so I wouldnt say for sure
darth
Posts: 27
Date Joined: 20/06/09
Pavlov's dog
ie. the scientific theory of Pavlov's dog....where behavioural conditioning eventually produces a physiological response or trigger in an animal.
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
exactly.... seems to make
exactly.... seems to make sense hey?
Suprised no one has looked at this more closely
MattMiller
Posts: 4171
Date Joined: 15/06/09
The point is valid
brg, but how on earth do you know which shark is which??? I havn't heard any reports of sharks ' constantly coming in and scaring people' either? Being scared isn't fatal either.
Unless there's someone right there on the spot either with a rifle or following it in a boat untill someone gets there to destroy it it's just not feaseable.
Bodie
Posts: 3758
Date Joined: 05/11/07
speak to the life guard
speak to the life guard stations on the Perth metro beaches and ask how many sharks are spotted :)
fishintruckie
Posts: 198
Date Joined: 22/07/08
Leave them be. I would look
Leave them be. I would look at culling croc's long before sharks. It wont be long before croc's make their way further south and start showing up in places like Shark Bay.
DieHard
Posts: 1823
Date Joined: 06/10/08
LET THEM SURVIVE!!!! CULLING
LET THEM SURVIVE!!!!
CULLING THEM IS WRONG, STAY OUT THE WATER IF YOU DONT WANT TO BE EATEN!!!!!!!!!!
DieHard – The Official “Ray & Shark” Chaser!
Feral
Posts: 1508
Date Joined: 01/11/06
oh my ... aint this a
oh my ... aint this a friendly discussion
from someone that fishes, dives and surfs down south im going to put my 2 bobs worth in ...
if you are going to spearfish , surf or dive around seal colonies and known shark "highways" then your a bloody fool .. add to that doing it around dawn and dusk on an overcast day .. oh my ..
and scotto .. im guessing you have never been to exxy or places north mate . there are thousands of big tigers and hammers up that way willing to eat anything you catch . but charter boys are willing to throw jap tourists off to look at whale sharks every day of the week .. if there was a real danger do you think the goverment would let em ??
do you know why noone gets bitten .. id say its because they dont look like a natural food source and visibility is so much better that the shark can actually so what you are. if you actually tased nice im sure ppl like gully would have been long gone :) .. sorry to use your name gully but your a mad fool when it comes to taking wikid photos :)
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
jeezarz feral,
F M feral, i have been more times north, than you have had hot dinners, and dived with more sharks than you have had deep breaths. the real reason no one gets bitten up there, is there is that many fish in the warm northern waters, that sharks dont have to even consider taking a human. there is far more tasty fish to grab first.
This also applies to not just you, but go back and read my original post. i'm not talking about the big tigers, hammers, etc, but great whites in particular. last time i checked, they are the the only shark that is COMPLETELY protected, that primarily feeds on mammals. us included.
dd83wa
Posts: 169
Date Joined: 01/10/08
People do get bitten up
People do get bitten up there, there was a death in the Abrolhos group attributed to a great white. No lack of fish there. Who says that's the real reason anyway??
And while they feed on mammlas, you're crazy if you can think they 'feed' on us. 99% of the time it's an exploratory bite as has been stated and proven several times previously. Thye are not interested in feeding on us. Clearly.
You've seen the way whites hang around a floating whale carcass for days on the news. Thats feeding. Not a bloody love bite. That is not feeding
Jody
Posts: 1578
Date Joined: 19/04/07
Interesting
Interesting comment Carnarvonite........
"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."
If this is the case then they are still being culled to a certain extent. It would be interesting to see some statistics
But I do agree with fishintruckie, we should just kill the crocks and whales. Less chance of mercury poisoning that way
TWiZTED
till
Posts: 9358
Date Joined: 21/02/08
Great Whites ARE an
Great Whites ARE an endangered species.
They have only been protected since 99 federally (96' in NSW).
How the f**k is shark that becomes mature 18yrs (females), and 10yrs (male), breeds only once every 2-3yrs supposed to be staging a breeding recovery?
Sure there are more around, but I'm sure there were a hell of a lot more in the 50s than there are now.
If people start snuffing them again, when are they supposed to get a population recovery in?
out wide
Posts: 1535
Date Joined: 30/12/08
I'm with you scotto
Cull the lot of them. Useless predator they are.
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
ha ha ha
a bit of overkill!!
a good "thinning" is what im proposing.
Lastchance
Posts: 1275
Date Joined: 02/02/09
GW's
Im with you Scotto, we should be allowed to take enough for a feed and leave the rest on the beach!
DhuBoi
Posts: 896
Date Joined: 25/05/09
statistically speaking when
statistically speaking when 73 million sharks are getting taken from the worlds waters each year on average id say let them live !!
living is fishing
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
73 million
bet you out of 73 million sharks, there isnt one great white taken anymore.
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
Oh really? No illegal
Oh really? No illegal takings at all?
http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=64470#threats
http://www.springerlink.com/content/p6669knj84813882/
http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/publications/gwshark-plan/pubs/greatwhiteshark.pdf
http://www.whitesharktrust.org/pages/illegal.html
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/outposts/2009/10/great-white-shark-1.html
http://www.27east.com/story_detail.cfm?id=285051
So, a bit more than one taken ;) What do I win?
dd83wa
Posts: 169
Date Joined: 01/10/08
Someone needs to
Someone needs to think/research before they post me thinks....
kane
Posts: 1752
Date Joined: 07/12/08
a good mate of mine is a diver on the tuna tows in south aus
its his job to get in the nets and either release or kill sharks that get in the nets and eat the tuna, im not gonna state numbers as i dont want anyone getting in the $hit but if culling pointers is what you want its already being done.
thats just one industry, im sure combined with longliners, net fishing etc theres even more killed than you or me are aware of.
Gooooone Fishin!
DhuBoi
Posts: 896
Date Joined: 25/05/09
many of you obviously have
many of you obviously have no idea about shark populations in the world and how they significantly effect the oceans and balance the food chain. Animals on earth are not the problem humans are . we are to account ofr everything wrong with this planet.
living is fishing
Jacko
Posts: 72
Date Joined: 15/10/08
Whats the weather doing this
Whats the weather doing this weekend?
If you can read this thank a teacher. If you can read it in English thank a Soldier.
mitch
Posts: 1285
Date Joined: 14/08/05
kill em alllll
kill em alllll aarrrrgggghhhhhh.specialy feel like this when i pull a red emp head or big trout head from the depths with no fillets ...yep SLAY EM
Daisy
Posts: 789
Date Joined: 24/01/08
Doubt Whites are stealing
Doubt Whites are stealing yer reds Mitch, certainly had days where I'd like to see a bit prosharking in my area to thin out the Black and Dusky Whalers. Culling usually applies to the control of a population species thats out of control numbers wise or vermin, I don't reckon Whites fall into either of these categories. More people in the drink along with the Whites being protected means that we're going to cross paths more regularly. If your swimming in White territory then you take your chances, the chute doesn't open every time and the bike doesn't always land on it's wheels.
The view expressed in this post is that of a self opinionated bullshitter and does not reflect that of this website, it's owners, mediators, other members or anyone else for that matter :-P
dd83wa
Posts: 169
Date Joined: 01/10/08
Ugh...
Amazingly well-informed and considerate post there Mitch ........
uncle
Posts: 9641
Date Joined: 10/02/07
electronic tags
shorty, I thought this program was under way to warn fisheries where they are
all aggressive fish love bigjohnsjigs
MattMiller
Posts: 4171
Date Joined: 15/06/09
GW
eating Reds, i've heard it all now.
Might as well just revert back to cavemen????
Tony Halliday
Posts: 2500
Date Joined: 14/06/07
ok look at the real facts.
ok look at the real facts.
places like False Bay in Cape Town have the highest number of GW per km2 than any where in the world.
Every weekend in summer about 400,000 go to the beaches in the area, yet they still only get about 1 attack per year.
That has been the average for the last 100 yrs or so. with less than one fatality per 10 yrs.
Even Fish Hoek, my old home town that has three resident GW that cruise the area all the time and had a fatal attack this year again, is averaging less than 4 attacks in 30 years! compared to 4 to 5 people per weekend dead in the same area from car accidents.
GW are just hyped up because of the scare factor, they need protection and you more worried about the one in a million chance of shark attack, than the 1 in 50 chance of being killed by a drunk driver??
if you don't like sharks, stay out the water mate.
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)
Jody
Posts: 1578
Date Joined: 19/04/07
Detection Bouys
There's some odd looking yellow bouys with solar panels kicking around that, I believe, are for tracking the tagged sharks.
Could be wrong but
TWiZTED
Indiana
Posts: 307
Date Joined: 15/12/09
Jody
yes ....they are detection buoys .
They will be able to identify which shark it was that bites you in half .....real handy !
" IF YOUR NOT GOING TO EAT IT ......PUT IT BACK WHERE YOU CAUGHT IT"
Jody
Posts: 1578
Date Joined: 19/04/07
No way
Mate, not going to happen!!
There is no way I'm getting in the water with those nasty bastards.
http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/sec/env/sharks/SharkMonitoring.php?0102
TWiZTED
Mick
Posts: 501
Date Joined: 28/08/06
They actually use pop up
They actually use pop up satelite tags as explained here http://www.cmar.csiro.au/tagging/whitesharks/heather/index.htm
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.
Mick
Posts: 501
Date Joined: 28/08/06
Here is another -
Here is another - http://www.whitesharktrust.org/migration.html
I wonder how many people where scared, injured or killed during its tour of duty. And to those who think there is no GW in northern waters - think again. I've even seen a pod of killer whales within 800m off the coast at the three mile camp in Gnaraloo a couple of years back. Much rather get hit by a GW than an orca
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.
Buz
Posts: 1555
Date Joined: 28/08/07
Yep Whites definitly do move
Yep Whites definitly do move North. My mate who used to do Rowleys Dive Trips once saw one on the outside of Clerke Reef. Not to metion that they have been sighted all through the Indo archipelago. Even in the Northern Hemisphere they cruise the mediterranean.
And on the Orca's i'm glad that in the wild there has never been a recorded fatality as i have seen my bosses footage of what they did to a baby humpback of Exmouth. These things even PREY on great whites!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SS6NjdGLVZs&feature=related
Maybe thats the solution train up pods of Orca's to partol our beaches in summer! :)
MattMiller
Posts: 4171
Date Joined: 15/06/09
What size/age
So Scotto, considering that female GW arn't sexually mature till 12-15yrs of age and a size of 4-4.5m (13-15ft) is this the size you will start culling?
Indiana
Posts: 307
Date Joined: 15/12/09
Shark attacks in WA
Any evidence to support or discount the increase in attacks appears to be difficult to obtain .
Attacks from 2000 on _
Nov 2000 Cottesloe Beach Ken Crew killed.
March 2005 Abrolhos islands Geoffrey Brazier killed no remains recovered
Dec 2008 Pt Kennedy Brian Guest killed no remains recovered
Aug 2010 Gracetown
I know there have been a abalone diver taken at hopetoun and two surfers taken
at gracetown ..............feel free to add anymore that you can think of .
" IF YOUR NOT GOING TO EAT IT ......PUT IT BACK WHERE YOU CAUGHT IT"
Buz
Posts: 1555
Date Joined: 28/08/07
David Weir was the Abalone
David Weir was the Abalone diver from Hopetoun. But that was in 1995.
biggerfish
Posts: 671
Date Joined: 02/03/09
Not. Unless proven that it
Not. Unless proven that it has attacked or killed a human ie portkennedy shark should of been killed IMO
Play hard fish harder
Tony Halliday
Posts: 2500
Date Joined: 14/06/07
so for four or five
so for four or five fatalities in 10 years we must wipe a species out.
And Yes Brian was a close friend of mine, we had actualy discussed on a Sambo charter the year before shark attack. And he said " if it happens, it happens cause I'm in their world" and he is the second person I know who has been taken by a shark, the first being a granny from Fish Hoek in Cape Town and her family also agreed she swam every day and knew the risks.
We will loose more than 5 kids in the next few weeks to crack & cocaine OD's, don't see any of you putting up your hands to cull a few drug dealers now?
I grew up in shark waters, we surfed in shark waters and we took the chances we knew and risks we accepted.
Don't like it, then stay out of the water.
take up jogging or cycling and take your chances with the roadtrains and ferrel idiots on the piss!
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)
dumper
Posts: 1027
Date Joined: 03/04/08
a good friend of yours tony?
a good friend of yours tony?
Indiana
Posts: 307
Date Joined: 15/12/09
Wiping Out ?
Tony , I think you have totally missed the mark .
Scotto post mentions the word cull ,so correct me if I'm wrong but when I hear the work cull .....I think of identifying problem animals and culling them.
Coming from the land of lots of man eating predators ......how many lions , tigers ,hippo's etc are still roaming through the streets there ?
My guess is that any animal in africa that stays too close or becomes a problem to the human population is either relocated or culled ?
biggerfish ,your right that shark should have been culled , it wasn't just after a taste test ........it devoured the poor guy and then returned a week later to monster a couple crabbing in a dingy.
All you people that knowing except the risk ......thats your business.
Trouble is it is only a matter of time that some mother will be at the beach with her kids and have to watch on as her child is taken........ try expaining to her that she excepted the risk !
" IF YOUR NOT GOING TO EAT IT ......PUT IT BACK WHERE YOU CAUGHT IT"
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
No, he was talking about
No, he was talking about 'thinning them out' without any mention of it only being from ones that have attacked humans.
And I dont think there have been any great white attacks within 100m or so of the shoreline. Quite close, yes, but not right on the beach/in the waves where any kids would be playing.
Paul_86
Posts: 1449
Date Joined: 27/03/09
I think the gentleman who
I think the gentleman who was taken at cottesloe mite have been quite close to shore and in shallowish water???
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
Yes, was close and shallow,
Yes, was close and shallow, but he was still out further than where kids would be swimming.
As for Brian Guest. I had a quick check, and said it was 30m offshore. Pretty damn close, but still, not really in an area where kids would be swimming most of the time.
mussels
Posts: 65
Date Joined: 06/10/08
kids swim there
every day in summer mate
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
ol' crewy
"No, he was talking about 'thinning them out' without any mention of it only being from ones that have attacked humans." christ hlokk, how many times do you have to be told - GO BACK AND READ MY ORIGINAL POST.
ken crew was taken less than 20m from the shoreline. his mate was also bitten on the hand that day by the same shark.
i and some mates went down there a few hours later that day, and the shark was within pissing distance of the groyne, and shoreline.
brian guest was also taken far less than 100m from the shoreline.
the surfer that died in gracetown last month, was hit behind the brekers at huzzas. less than 100m from the shoreline.
mussels
Posts: 65
Date Joined: 06/10/08
scotto
great post mate, i have experienced three mates killed by whites and two which have been pushed to the surface by them. have also seen them in fishing grounds which i have fished for many years , turn up on the same day year after year. they do have a memory as far as i am concerned just like any fish which migrates from one area to the next. i do think there numbers are growing, and if not they are coming closer to shore to find a feed. it would be interesting how this post would of gone if people had real encounters with these creatures, and just not out of a statistics book
Shorty
Posts: 1549
Date Joined: 10/05/08
Brian Guest was a few meters
Brian Guest was a few meters from Shore snorklelling for crabs, its been reported he has seen them before along that stretch.
They have great white shark shark detection beacons in the water North and South in the Metro area but apparently its just research to find out the migration patterns,,would it be to much to ask for someone to pick up the phone and let the local surf lifesaving club or someone in authorithy that a beacon has just been triggered by a Great White,,
Would it be to much to ask to have a beacon at Gracetown,Margret river and other places that are popular for water sports ?
Maybe a siren go be sounded or something .
People say they are endangered,,the South ozzys have tagged 100-150 ? to my understanding,,they can't be to many more,,
Not a fool proof system but might save lives,,
Paul_86
Posts: 1449
Date Joined: 27/03/09
Another thing to think about
Another thing to think about is that a great white doesnt attack every time it see's a person. There has been 200 attacks in the last 200 years, but i bet there has been atleast 10 times that many great white encounters where the shark hasnt attacked and probly a load more where the swimmer/diver/surfer hasnt even seen the shark coz its come for a look but then just cruised off undetected. As a surfer i know i see more then 1 shark a year, probly not great whites but its hard to tell when its a shadow glideing through a swell line.
MattMiller
Posts: 4171
Date Joined: 15/06/09
Ken Crew?
At Nth Cott, Sorry hlokk but you may have forgotten about him, Pretty sure he was attacked in waist deep water.
10yrs ago and no repeat attacks there???
Indiana
Posts: 307
Date Joined: 15/12/09
Ken Crew
Hlokk , Ken Crew was taken in waiste deep water at Cottesloe .
" IF YOUR NOT GOING TO EAT IT ......PUT IT BACK WHERE YOU CAUGHT IT"
Tony Halliday
Posts: 2500
Date Joined: 14/06/07
no lions don't roam the
no lions don't roam the streets, no matter what the americans think...lol
but lions are not endangered, so they are culled and can be legaly hunted. You can't cull an endangered species, even if it killed someone in RSA, without major paper work and agreement.
three GW's in Fish Hoek bay are still there today, even though one of them most likey took the last person this year and definately took the old lady back a few years.
Why, cause it's their waters and we choose to swim in them.
more sharks does not mean more shark attacks. It only takes one shark on the wrong day and you breakfast. so what do you do??? kill them all???
I think not. !!!
JMO
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)
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
It was my understanding the
It was my understanding the Ken Crew was at leasts 10's of meters past Cottesloe groyne, not a few m from the shoreline.
Happy to be proven wrong though.
Dicey
Posts: 912
Date Joined: 23/07/10
some person got bit in 1
some person got bit in 1 foot of water long ago and died from bleeding think was from a reef shark.
Indiana
Posts: 307
Date Joined: 15/12/09
Proof ?
http://sharkattacksurvivors.com/shark_attack/viewtopic.php?t=1163
" IF YOUR NOT GOING TO EAT IT ......PUT IT BACK WHERE YOU CAUGHT IT"
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
Ah, well, there you go, has
Ah, well, there you go, has been some in shallower water. I must have been getting confused with another incident (or perhaps an inaccurate news report at the time).
Shorty
Posts: 1549
Date Joined: 10/05/08
I thought he was on a surf
I thought he was on a surf ski ?
I must be confused,,
Shorty
Posts: 1549
Date Joined: 10/05/08
So has anybody got any
So has anybody got any better ideas except stay out of the water ?
unusual advice for members who enjoy snorkelling, scuba diving, fishing etc,,
MattMiller
Posts: 4171
Date Joined: 15/06/09
Surf ski,
the bloke on the surf ski was Brian Sierakowski and that was in 1997. He didn't sustain any injuries either
Shorty
Posts: 1549
Date Joined: 10/05/08
No worrys, all us kayak
No worrys, all us kayak fishos had dinner at Circellos last year, i looked up at the roof and saw a chewed up surf ski i think it was,,
I told nobody else at the dinner table what i saw,lol
Might have been that guys ski ?
dumper
Posts: 1027
Date Joined: 03/04/08
Yeah thats sirras ski. Whos
Yeah thats sirras ski.
Whos to say that if sirras shark was destroyed then and there, ken crew would be alive today.
Regarding the brian guest attack. When the crabbers in the dhingy were harassed the week later by a large shark, fisheries "experts" said it was probably not the same shark that attacked guesty. If thats the case how can they be on the verge of extinction if we have several of them only a cpl of meters from popular swimming spots.
If the rumours are true and there was a 5 m white doing laps of garden and penguin island a couple of weeks previous of brian guests death. Then authorities should have taken action to prevent this tragedy.
sea-kem
Posts: 15228
Date Joined: 30/11/09
C'mon guys your getting into
C'mon guys your getting into pedantics. 2m 10m 100m offshore it doesn't matter. Once again this is their domain. What arrogant human right have we got in culling the top of the food chain mighty beast? But being slightly hipocritical (and realistic) if it was proven that a certain shark was menacing a particular swimming area on an ongoing basis then shoot the bloody thing. But saying cull just because they're there is a reason is crap! The shark is probably natures way of culling a few humans.....
Love the West!
sleepswithfishes
Posts: 61
Date Joined: 14/12/09
well if your going to go
well if your going to go swimming or surfing near a regular seal area on an over cast day where there are salmon schools swimming around in a known shark area your asking for it to happen imo. they are the apex predator in the water . we are the apex predator on land shall we start culling humans because of over population ?
MattMiller
Posts: 4171
Date Joined: 15/06/09
???
What are you refferring to?
dumper
Posts: 1027
Date Joined: 03/04/08
Australian Broadcasting
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
TV PROGRAM TRANSCRIPT
LOCATION: http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2004/s1152301.htm
Broadcast: 12/07/2004
Shark attack reignites debate over the future of these predatorsReporter: Mick O'Donnell
MAXINE McKEW: The death of surfer Brad Smith, mauled by a shark in the south-west of Western Australia, has many asking should sharks be now killed to protect swimmers?
The 29-year old surfer was killed in the water at Gracetown, in the famed Margaret River surfing district.
It's the state's second fatal shark attack in four years and has reignited the debate over the future of these predators of the deep.
Mick O'Donnell reports.
BRIAN SIERAKOWSKI: Forget what all the do-gooders have to say about it - if there is a shark coming back to this beach which is a similar shark, and it's territorial, and it's probably a rogue shark that's sick, it's going to re-attack again, and you've got to get rid of it.
MICK O'DONNELL: When he was attacked by a shark off a Perth beach in 2000, Brian Sierakowski had no doubt - the shark should be shot.
But today, even as a Fisheries boat searched in vain for the weekend's killer sharks, debate raged over whether they should be killed in return.
MIKE ROENNFELDT, FISHING WRITER: If there's one there and it's a threat, in close, you know, near swimmers or a popular swimming beach, then you really should do something about it.
MICK O'DONNELL: Veteran fishing writer Mike Roennfeldt believes sharks should be killed if they're near swimmers, even before an actual attack.
MIKE ROENNFELDT: I don't think you can always wait until it's attacked someone.
But if it's in a threatening situation, to me that's enough.
MICK O'DONNELL: But the WA Fisheries Department is reluctant to act against species it sees as under threat already.
DR ROD LENANTON, WA FISHERIES: You're asking me whether if a shark swims onto a beach, we ought to kill it - I don't believe we should.
MICK O'DONNELL: None of this will bring back Brad Smith, the 29-year-old surfer who lost his battle with one, possibly two sharks, here at Gracetown on WA's famous south-west surf coast on Saturday.
UNIDENTIFIED YOUNG MALE WITNESS: I looked over and there was two sharks just, like, thrashing around.
MICK O'DONNELL: Confusion about just what kind of shark killed Brad Smith continued today.
Some witnesses describing a white pointer, others adamant it was a bronze whaler - the unique possibility of two species involved in the one attack.
DR ROD LENANTON: It seems like certainly a bronze whaler was present and might have initiated the attack, and possibly a larger shark, possibly a white shark, might have also been involved.
MICK O'DONNELL: The Fisheries experts investigating the attack for the coroner today confirmed they'd found the marks of different species' teeth marks in Brad Smith's board.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (COTTESLOE, 2000): Turned around and looked out to the water and then there's this huge amount of blood in the water.
MICK O'DONNELL: West Australian swimmers are highly sensitised to the risk of shark attack since the previous death at the state's most famous beach four years ago.
Ken Crew, a daily swimmer at Cottesloe, died in shallow water when a white pointer attacked.
Despite having the shark within view after the attack, just off a metropolitan beach, Fisheries failed to act.
MIKE ROENNFELDT: Damn it, you know, they had the shark right there - THE shark - and they should have just killed it.
DR ROD LENANTON: Yeah, well, they're totally protected and the decision on that day was, yeah, not to take that shark.
MICK O'DONNELL: Brian Sierakowski surfs or swims daily in the breaks south of Cottesloe.
One day in 2000, before Ken Crew's death, he too met a white pointer.
BRIAN SIERAKOWSKI: I have a belief that the particular shark that was involved in Ken's attack was the same shark that attacked me.
MICK O'DONNELL: Like many at the time of Ken Crew's attack, he was angry when Fisheries refused to kill the shark.
DR ROD LENANTON: That's been around for a while - the rogue shark theory - I think, but there's certainly no evidence that I'm aware of that that's the case.
MICK O'DONNELL: In March this year a diver was attacked by a bronze whaler off Rockingham, south of Perth, adding to a public perception that there are more sharks around.
But is there really an increase?
DR ROD LENANTON: No, there isn't.
We're very concerned, for example, about the status of dusky whalers sharks at the moment.
Great white sharks have been depleted worldwide and they're totally protected for that reason.
So I think generally, no, there aren't more sharks around than there used to be.
MICK O'DONNELL: Other recent encounters have added to the impression of more sharks in what we've come to see as our waters.
DR ROD LENANTON: There's a lot more people out there using the water - a lot more recreational users of the water, surfers, fishermen, divers etc.
A lot more pairs of eyes out there able to observe things than there ever was.
People are much more aware that they're sharing the environment with sharks.
MICK O'DONNELL: One suspect for changing shark behaviour is the crayfish industry.
This year, surfers and other locals in the Gracetown district complained of cray fishermen working too close to surf breaks and dumping waste where sharks would be lured to recreational waters.
STEVEN GILL, WESTERN ROCK LOBSTER COUNCIL: Some of the guys were coming quite close to the surfbreaks and we believe we've addressed that through the code of conduct, where fishermen stay outside of 100m away from the surfbreaks.
MICK O'DONNELL: But the cray season finished two weeks ago, leaving experts doubtful that the cray boats had brought the sharks.
STEVEN GILL: I don't think it is real.
I think it may be a coincidence that the good crayfish catches have coincided with some other increases -- increased numbers of whales, increased numbers of salmon in the Capes region, a rebuilding in the pilchard fishery, more seals around.
All of these things possibly have contributed to the increased numbers of sharks.
MICK O'DONNELL: Whatever the cause, today in WA's two recent shark death zones, Gracetown and Cottesloe, surfers were out enjoying the winter swells, even as Fisheries continued to hunt the killers.
MIKE ROENNFELDT: If there's a big shark of a species that's known to attack people in close, probably should do something about it.
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
well,
it seems all the non beleivers of my theory could have a small hiccup...
channel nine news just had a report of a great white attacking a double kayak in albany TODAY. it knocked a bloke and his dad off the kayak, and left some pretty big bite scars on the kayak. they had to wave another boat over for help.
MattMiller
Posts: 4171
Date Joined: 15/06/09
Settle,
he was just having a look. No harm in that, probably swam off laughing at the poo trail coming out of the wierd looking seal things?
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
Scotto, if you think that
Scotto, if you think that proves your theory, you have no idea how theorys actually work. Unless theres a systematic, verifyable increase in shark numbers your 'theory' doesnt hold water. As mentioned before, great whites have dwindled in population from a few decades ago, and they are so slow to reproduce you just cant get huge population increases since they were put as protected. Killing of great whites hasnt stopped now either if you bothered to look at the links i supplied before (i suspect not, surprise surprise).
Theres always shark encounters, no one is denying that, but a few encounters dont prove your theory (because they're expexted anyways) and its a huge stretch (one unsupported by evidence) to say that great whites are exploding in population and need to be culled...
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
so then captain statistico,
are you then saying, that since great whites have been protected, that their numbers have decreased?? do you think that now they have a better chance to live longer, they dont breed as much?? do you think that sightings and encounters have dropped in numbers, since it is now illegal to kill or injure these sharks?? do you honestly think, that they were put on a protected list, so that they could shrink in size and population??
wake up hlokk, mr "its unsupported by evidence". in the past 24 hours on this website alone, people have reported;
a bloke and his dad had their kayak attacked and harassed by a GW in albany,
there have been not one, but 2 TWO reports of GW's inside cockburn sound,
and someone posted up some really nice pics of a GW just behind the reef at hillaries from last week.
have you actually done anything for yourself in your life hlokk?? have you actually sat down and said "hmm i wonder why that is", and theorised your own conclusions, based on what you have seen and know? or do you just go read someone else write up and conclude that "someone has written it, therefore it must be true". again, GO BACK, (and for the love of god) READ MY ORIGINAL POST. I always said it was MY theory. not the queen's, or ronald mcdonald's, or brad pitt's. MY theory. These sharks have been put on a list, to deliberately increse their population. mathematically (i hope you can follow me with this one), more sharks = more chance of shark attack.
if you cant agree with that, then there is a position available on my site. its only cleaning toilets, but at least it doesnt require a hell of a lot of thinking.
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
Have I sat down and thought
Have I sat down and thought about it? Yes. Perhaps you should do the same? Clearly, no-one agrees with your idea in your orignal post to cull great whites to thin them out. Seems its solely your theory.
Claiming that I am the one who hasnt thought about it is a bit rich when a very quick search shows that there is no data at all that supports your ideas. Clearly the people who study it for a living (or even the people who have a vague understanding of other factors) dont agree with you. But I guess you know better than hundreds of scientists who study animals for a living, right? Your reasoning does not take into account any facts about great whites, so its a bit rich for you to claim that I am the one who has not thought about it.
There has been no explosion of great white numbers. To claim so shows your ignorance of the situation and your lack of understanding of great white reproduction. The data doesnt support it and the logic doesnt support it.
Great whites have only been protected for a decade. The population of great whites is relatively slow, they are very slow to reproduce, they reproduce infrequently and they produce very few pups at a time. In a decade you cannot just have have a massive population explosion. From decades before they were protected until they were protected, populations dwindled. The recovery in 10 years will not match how much they dwindled over decades before.
Now, assuming that recreational and commercial fishermen were the sole reason for the great white population declining, and that since 1999 there has been a perfectly 0 great whites killed, then yes, the population would slowly increase. However, both these statements are wrong. The decline was not solely due to fishing pressure, and there are still large numbers of great whites killed now. If you bothered to read the links, then perhaps you would know this. But I guess its just easier to claim someone who has actually looked into the facts doesnt know anywhere near as much as someone who just forumlated something in their head based of poor reasoning and a lack of understanding?
Even if great white numbers have plateaued or increased since 1999, the very best they can do is very slowly increase. Great whites arent rabbits, it is just simply impossible for a small population of infrequently breeding, slow maturing, low fecundity animals to have a population explosion. If you think they can suddendly increase in population by a large amount, then you're dreaming. Could they increase in population? Yes. Are they? Most probably. Is it a large change? No. Will a very small increase in population mean a large increase in attacks? No.
If the protection made shark numbers go from declining at several percent a year, to increasing at two fifths of fuck all after, that program is a sucess. It stopped the decline in shark numbers. However, at what rate is the shark population increasing? Thats right, two fifths of fuck all.
Basically, in order to cull them, their population increase would have to be so mind-bogglingly and magically fast that scientists all over the world would be absolutely stunned. If great white populations were capable of such a fast population explosion, dont you think they woulda taken it into account when they were put on the protection list?
Reports of great whites dont prove your 'theory' at all. You'll always get sightings, it doesnt prove anything. In fact, they are still expected, even if populations remain constant. If shark populations are roughly constant, but there is a increased levels of people looking, what would you expect to note sitings wise. Think about it.
Can sightings increase even if there is a constant population? If I spend more time looking for sharks that havent increased in population, do you think I would see the same number of sharks if I looked less or more?
Do you even know how statistics work or what they mean? Isolated cases do not prove anything. You need to look at things over time. Have there been more sightings this year than previous years? Has there been an increased effort of sighting them? If there are two incidents in one month, but the same number in the whole year, why does that mean its increasing?
What percentage increase is there in shark sightings? Go on, tell me. How many sharks should we cull to 'thin out' the numbers to the right level. What is the right level. Can you tell me how many sharks that is? Surely if you thought about it you should know the answers to this right? After all you're sure they're increasing noticeably in popluation, so how much?
Also, in the last 10 years, how many more people were there in Australia? How many more boats were bought? How often were beaches monitored for sharks this year and 10 years ago? How many hours did they spend looking for sharks this year compared to a year 10 years ago?
Have you thought about all this when formulating your theory?
Because I did when I came up with my replies. Perhaps you are the one that need to actually think about things, and actually look at reality?
And no thanks on that toilet cleaning position. I'm sure dealing with your shit is more than a one man job
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
whoa,
sorry about that, i was reading your post (i was up to chapter 67...), and unexpectedly just fell asleep. not sure why that was....
so i gather from all that that you just wrote, that you are actually trying to agree with me, but just can't quite bring yourself to come out with it sharpely?
"Could they increase in population? Yes. Are they? Most probably."
not a bad way to bounce around some pretty easy questions....
whats actually pretty amusing is, you based that entire post, on "an explosion of great white numbers", a term which YOU have CONJURRED, and vastly different to the phrase i have been using the whole time - "an INCREASE in numbers". i'm thinking the only "explosion" here, is the one you get in your pants when you hear statistical data. thats probably something you picked up whilst playing warcraft, or internet chess.
please answer this with either a simple yes or no -
do you think that in the last 10 years, since GW's have been completely protected, the numbers of great white sharks has decreased??
its that easy. yes or no. if your answer is anything but yes, then you need to go get your obsessive compulsive replying disorder seen to. please dont waste anymore of everyones time with a 400 page reply, that not only doesnt answer the question, but completely goes around it.
p.s. damn straight it takes more than one man to handle my shit. thats because its a beer drinking, fish eating, shark killing, non-penis-loving man-shit, that has developed from real life experiences not found on the internet.
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
Thanks for demonstrating
Thanks for demonstrating your intellectual laziness to us Scotto (and your just plain-ol-laziness in not reading links which rebut your points). Perhaps when I said you should think about it, I should have been clearer and specified just which part of the brain you should be using (i'll give you a hint, its not the amygdala) ;)
If you think i'm agreeing with your 'theory', then you are incapable of understanding the flaws in it.
Oh well, I guess its my fault for thinking that reasoning would work with you. Whats that commonly used quote on internet forums that ends with "...down to his level and beat you with experience"
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
thanks
thanks hlokk. i knew you would come around sooner or later.
i'll organize you a pitchfork for the kill.
boom.
dd83wa
Posts: 169
Date Joined: 01/10/08
Another piece of literary
Another piece of literary genius from Scotto.
I'm nominating you for a Booker prize.
"Boom"
scotto
Posts: 2474
Date Joined: 21/04/08
?
BOOM.
that just happened.
gone fishin
Posts: 95
Date Joined: 09/02/10
what a load of crap, do we
what a load of crap, do we cull drink drivers or thieves, no!!!!!!
so y would you even think that would be a good idea, these are amazing creatures and awsome preditors, so my theory is if you get in the water you put your life in the sharks fins. i think all of those ppl that think a native animal should be culled, should be culled them selves. These animals are here for a reason take them out of the equation then there food will thrive, ie seals. This means that the seals population will then need more food, ie FISH. now im pretty sure this is a website dedicated to the awsome sport and recreation FISHING. So do all you ppl that think culling the Great White is such a good idea now.
Shorty
Posts: 1549
Date Joined: 10/05/08
There will be more deaths
There will be more deaths this year i reckon in W.A, at gracetown last week the surfers were lucky when they were harassed by a large shark, its possible its the same one that was responsible for the death last month and theres todays kayak fishing incident,,
At the end of the day there will be no culling,,the greenys and tree huggers will put up a big stink, so we have to look at the alternitives (electronic monitoring etc)
ody
Posts: 581
Date Joined: 30/12/06
Hi Ya, Yep, and there will
Hi Ya,
Yep, and there will be more sightings at Gracetown and more harassments. But has anybody stopped to wonder why and come up with a conclusion other than there are surfers there who might be good to eat?
I wonder how much it has to do with the fact there is a seal population there.
Has anybody stopped to ask about the sensibility of surfing in a seal population? Probably not. For heaven's sake, you woulldn't enter the cage of a hungry lion (or any other carnivore for that matter) and lie down amongst the pile of food, so why surf in the feeding pen of GWs.
Has anybody stopped to ask Mr GW if he can distinguish easily between the silhouette of a surfer and that of a seal? Probably not.
So I ask another question. If the surfers choose to deliberately swin/surf in a known seal population, why, in all that is logical, would we blame the shark for the attack and wish to cull their numbers. Surely, if any action is to be taken at all to protect surfers, close the area to surfers.
And as I said before, the number of 'attacks' will increase irrespective of the number of sharks BECAUSE there is a massive increase in targets - people.
Cheers.
Indiana
Posts: 307
Date Joined: 15/12/09
Links /Data / Figures
If anybody has any data / reports that are not 5 to 10 years old to support the decline in white pointer numbers ......I'd like to read it.
If there's nothing available , I'll stay with the basic common sense approach.
Number of sightings / attack's plus the biggest factor to support there increased numbers and size and thats the protection of their two favourite foods whales and seals.
" IF YOUR NOT GOING TO EAT IT ......PUT IT BACK WHERE YOU CAUGHT IT"
Timmo
Posts: 258
Date Joined: 01/03/10
maybe
maybe its just ONE GW that roams everywhere and kills a human when its hungry, a real life JAWS!!! how did this get more postings than 1992 lol
byrnedog
Posts: 41
Date Joined: 03/12/08
I'm all for culling great
I'm all for culling great whites when they start attacking humans on our turf. First sign of them going after kids in the playground or stalking punters in the bunnings carpark I say kill em all. Until that happens, the ocean is their territory, respect that fact and know the risks when you go in.
81macca
Posts: 270
Date Joined: 02/07/09
I just read all that crap
I just read all that crap and my opinion is that hlokk needs to leave his computer and his dungeons and dragons and learn to drink beer like all other straight men.
I actually fish.
Jody
Posts: 1578
Date Joined: 19/04/07
Straight up
Funniest thread I've read for friggin' ages
My thanks to all of ya, especially Scotto
TWiZTED
Dicey
Posts: 912
Date Joined: 23/07/10
cull some paedophiles nuff
cull some paedophiles nuff said
Samo76
Posts: 63
Date Joined: 17/08/08
Hlokk
Seriously mate your prob so defensive of the whites coz you never enter the water, i would imagine if you pryed yourself away from the computer screen, your pasty white skin would burn as soon as you took your shirt off to jump in!
Here I am...and there you are.
hlokk
Posts: 4293
Date Joined: 04/04/08
I do dive and surf just so
I do dive and surf just so you know