shark mitigation reports dec 2017
for anyone interested here is the latest gov report essentially saying shark numbers are not increasing ,
while it is true there are more boats, phones , videos, drones or helicopters/people and more ways to capture shark info for the media in all forms nowdays , its a blindly obvious fact imo that numbers of large migratory sharks and sharks in general numbers have increased since the 1990s
i believe it is only a matter of time that somewhere in the future the state gov is again going to be under pressure to ''DO SOMETHING 'about shark numbers of our coast
when that will be is not known , but imo it is inevitiable that it will happen no matter which gov is in office
what sort of shark mitigation strategy/tactics they would want to introduce is most likly not going to be something that will work effectivly to reduce the large sharks out there , its highly probable it will be something that meets the publics emotional agenda , but is expensive though not effective
tourism to wa has been dropping , the gov and its agencies have noted this , again im sure the ''shark '' issue in wa is being talked about behind closed doors , but not publicy as an isuse by the gov yet ...
be prepared to see this issue grow if shark sightings and attacks continue as they have in the last decade and at present i cant see any reason why that wont happen
hezzy
NO EVIDENCE OF SHARK NUMBER INCREASE:
A Senate inquiry looking into shark mitigation and deterrent measures says there's no evidence that shark numbers have increased over the last few years.
The inquiry had 18 recommendations - and its chair Greens Senator Peter Whish-Wilson said it was mostly calling on the Federal Government to take more leadership around shark conservation and enhancing public safety.
Senator Whish-Wilson said as part of the inquiry they investigated the myth that shark numbers are on the rise- but experts said there was no proof of that. "So what we're actually seeing is a larger number of people reporting what they see and they are looking harder. So there's no evidence from the scientific community- in fact they say it's essentially a physical impossibility for Great White Shark population to explode, " he said.
He also called for a national standardised approach for signage at beaches with history of shark attacks and recommended that drum lines be replaced with Smart Drum Lines.
Mr Whish-Wilson explains how the smart lines work: "The rope and the hook are on a disc so if you catch a shark...or another protected creature they essentially swim around in circles. They also set off an alarm so the authorities know when they have caught something."
You can read the full report here: http://bit.ly/2l1IQq6
OFW 11
evil flourishes when good men do nothing
woody
Posts: 615
Date Joined: 27/02/08
I'm not sure the abalone
I'm not sure the abalone divers and pro fishereman down here in Esperance would agree.
Granted the population may not have exploded but GWs are being sighted by them more often....they may be moving in closer for reasons unknown etc
Walfootrot
Posts: 1386
Date Joined: 23/07/12
I call bullshit, shark
I call bullshit, shark numbers not increasing, that's a joke right there.
More drum lines, kill the bloody sharks!
Swompa
Posts: 3781
Date Joined: 14/10/12
"in fact they say it's
"in fact they say it's essentially a physical impossibility for Great White Shark population to explode"
Big girls can have up to 17 pups. Males take 10 years to be sexually mature.
I did a bit of research on it a few years back and all the pups born when they became totally protected are the 3m long sharks and are of breading now, following the salmon up the coast, following the ever increasing snapper schools in ect.
Are people looking for them more now, or are there more to see? The latter in my opinion.
DTrain
Posts: 486
Date Joined: 10/02/12
How can the numbers of great
How can the numbers of great whites still be the same now that they are protected, compared to back in the days when they were allowed to be hunted and killed?
Are the scientists claiming that the protection of great whites has had absolutely no impact on their numbers?
Tom M
Posts: 662
Date Joined: 22/09/15
Spot on sounds like crap
Spot on sounds like crap
Tom M
triharder
Posts: 8
Date Joined: 16/04/15
Sharks
How do you know that they aren't being hunted and killed, no one will admit to it openly and it is a very hard thing to police, lot of ocean out there and it's very easy to coax them to come in close to a boat.
Jsmolly
Posts: 176
Date Joined: 10/04/12
Key words are "haven't
Key words are "haven't increased in last few years"........... What about the 30 years pre that since they been protected?!
Without wishing it on anyone, as has been said lots of times, nothing will happen until a young child is taken.
Imbiciles in their glass houses and yes I know risks of entering water blah blah blah. But magpie takes out childs eye- BANG gone, a dog bites a person- BANG gone.
Jackfrost80
Posts: 8048
Date Joined: 07/05/12
Just take a look at who the
Officially off the Pies bandwagon
stricko
Posts: 222
Date Joined: 10/05/10
I wouldn't put the word
I wouldn't put the word research in the same sentence as meeuwigs name
stricko
Posts: 222
Date Joined: 10/05/10
I wouldn't put the word
I wouldn't put the word research in the same sentence as meeuwigs name
woody
Posts: 615
Date Joined: 27/02/08
When that dead whale washed
When that dead whale washed up out at Alexander bay, east of Esperance, a month ago, Fisheries tagged 12 GWs in 2 weeks. Then just on the weekend we had 2 other untagged GWs rock up at the main surf beach, one was over 5 meters long.
Like blowies down here
carnarvonite
Posts: 8627
Date Joined: 24/07/07
Whales and seal colonies
One only has to look at the huge increase of whales and sea colonies up and down the coast to find an excuse for the whites to work out what time of the year and where the easiest feed comes from and remember when to return each year.
As Woody has said in previous comment that a whale carcass had washed up and whites were attracted to it, one only has to watch the news most weeks to hear of more whale carcasses washing up from Exmouth right down to the SA border to realise the attractive food source available to them and why they get in the habit of staying around longer each time they visit
Alan James
Posts: 2206
Date Joined: 30/06/09
Shark mitigation and deterrent measures report
What an absolute waste of tax payers money that was. 224 pages of 'he said, she said' followed by 20 recommendations made by a committee of senators who between them possess no particular knowledge or expertise that relate to the subject matter. Unbelievable.
This pretty much sums it up for me:
"... 1.23 Many submitters noted that accurate information about the population of shark species is limited. As noted by CSIRO, there 'are no current reliable estimates of population size in Australian waters for white, bull or tiger sharks'. CSIRO explained that these species have not been the primary focus of commercial fisheries, and the conventional data required to produce reliable estimates 'such as detailed catch records over suitable time periods, is limited, unreliable or non-existent'.
1.24 CSIRO added:
White sharks have been protected in Australian waters since the late 1990s, but data on their historical and contemporary catch has been poorly recorded and is inadequate for estimating population size or trend..."
meglodon
Posts: 5981
Date Joined: 17/06/10
Enough said
You need accurate up to date scientific data if you are going to make a game changing decision about sharks, to me I think a few dollars should be spent on making all required resources available to get up to date and reliable info on just what and how many (as best can be judged) large sharks are about.
It will take a lot of money that can't be denied but it will be money well spent.
resurgence
Posts: 573
Date Joined: 23/04/14
Need credible data
The problem the scientists have is that they need to base their findings on credible and reliable data. Casual observations, even from experienced commercial fishermen, are not detailed and reliable enough to use as scientific data.
Let’s say Joe Bloggs reports he’s seen five sharks in the last week. A scientist will quite reasonably ask “how do you know it wasn’t the same shark five times?” Without careful notes about each sighting it’s impossible to make that distinction, other than to note it as anecdotal evidence.
With highly migratory species like white sharks it becomes even more problematic. How do we know that the shark sighted at Carnac Island on a Monday isn’t the same one seen at Mandurah on Friday?
What might be useful is a coordinated program with commercial guys where they are trained in observation, and are required to record specific information about each sighting - lat/long, time, date, species, estimated size etc. Again this wouldn’t be sufficient to make specific conclusions, but with a controlled group in the same areas over multiple years they could build a baseline and possibly see trends in sightings.
Alan James
Posts: 2206
Date Joined: 30/06/09
...
I agree 100% with the need to have access to credible data. The question that comes to mind however is that on the basis of there being no credible data available now then what credible data was available 20 years ago when the decision was made to list GWs as an endangered species?
resurgence
Posts: 573
Date Joined: 23/04/14
Good question
I don’t know the answer, other than to say that we are much more at ease with a decision that aims to conserve a species than one that allows more hunting/fishing.
hezzy
Posts: 1519
Date Joined: 27/11/09
that above alan is the
that above alan is the question that has been asked many times
the data used was pretty much flawed back then to bring in the initial ban imo
the game fishing boat clubs from the 1950s through to the 1980s etc showed a strong decline in great white catches ......over that time period ...so the ''scientists '' drew from that their numbers where on the decline .. along with other ''facts ''to prove they where declining ...thing is none of them thought to ask the game clubs why their catches declined ??
which is mostly due to the changing of fishing tactics and C&R becoming more into vogue , big game fishing gantry type pics became bad media through the time period of the70s 80s 90s etc so less big whites where targetted and caught , marlin where much more popular etc
the whole thing is a quandry of miss information
they need to be tagging as many GW as possible to get a handle on theri numbers and migrations around the coast as quick as imo
anything less is just more guessing
hezzy
OFW 11
evil flourishes when good men do nothing
OOH YEH
Posts: 384
Date Joined: 16/06/15
Not to change the
subject but this is the same as the crocs in the territory..... when I was there in the 80s there was a lot in the remote areas and now they have increase ...... good way to protect our boarders ....... GW and CROCS
Notorious
Posts: 914
Date Joined: 23/02/12
International ban on GWS
So we have unchecked GWS numbers, an over abundance of food, but no, logic would not indicate there may be more GWS's around than ever before.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/174055815943047/?fref=nf