Shark Shield subsidy
Submitted by paulbazza on Mon, 2014-02-17 09:21
I see Mark McGowan wants to offer a subsidy on the purchase of shark shields.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/21500029/shark-shields-safer-than-drum-lines-labor/
I wouldnt mind a subsidy on my epirb, life jackets, flares, marine radio.........
They should place signs along the entire coast "use at own risk!"
Bodie
Posts: 3758
Date Joined: 05/11/07
someone getting a kick back
someone getting a kick back from the manufacturers?
Rob H
Posts: 5745
Date Joined: 18/01/12
what often seems to happen
what often seems to happen (similar to other gov subsidised industries?) is the subsidy "disappears" in price increases.
Subsidy comes off later, doom and gloom-but strangely the price stays much the same-how can this be?
Give a man a mask, and he'll show you his true face...
The older you get the more you realize that no one has a f++king clue what they're doing.
Everyone's just winging it.
dumper
Posts: 1026
Date Joined: 03/04/08
Looks like Elyse frankcom is
Looks like Elyse frankcom is weighing In on the shark debate.
Im not sure if she's getting paid by shark shield, but she certainly plugs them considering she was wearing a shark shield when she got taken.
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
The Elyse scenario brings
The Elyse scenario brings good weight to the SS debate. Its well known that they never had them on during the tours, but when she activated it, the shark pissed off.
Dunno if thats conclusive, but it is worth considering.
(and McGowen is an idiot if he thinks we should subsidise them)
Doooma
Posts: 791
Date Joined: 05/12/09
Just for interest
Just for interest sake....
Just before all these attacks... Shark Shield Freedom 7's were selling for $570.
spinksy
Posts: 266
Date Joined: 06/10/10
Elyse must be getting a kick back
And she is entitled to her opinion. Dunno if the sheilds are conclusive didnt Peter Clarkson have two when he got taken but they definatly have an effect.
sarcasm0
Posts: 1396
Date Joined: 25/06/09
Peter Clarkson Coroners Report
NOT SAFE FOR CHILDREN:
http://www.courts.sa.gov.au/CoronersFindings/Lists/Coroners%20Findings/Attachments/555/CLARKSON%20Peter%20Stephen.pdf
Apparently he always wore one.. according to Howard Rodd.
No indication if he was that day or if it was effectively working, also it was a belt mounted unit.. Dunno if the newer 7 series foot mounted are more effective.
Not really keen to cast aspersions on character, but read the full report and see what you think at the end of the conduct of those involved.
Rob H
Posts: 5745
Date Joined: 18/01/12
wow-read right through that,
wow-read right through that, the Coroner sounded somewhat unhappy with how it panned out.
It would seem that other witnesses in similar situations with less seagoing experience have managed to keep it together long enough to get help.
Give a man a mask, and he'll show you his true face...
The older you get the more you realize that no one has a f++king clue what they're doing.
Everyone's just winging it.
southcity104
Posts: 1659
Date Joined: 27/01/09
100% marketing
id bet every second of that broadcast was paid for!
"Its a life style job"
meglodon
Posts: 5981
Date Joined: 17/06/10
Safety equipment
I think that there should be no tax on all safety equipment, costly yes, but what is the cost of searching for someone
petermac
Posts: 2946
Date Joined: 03/03/10
your on the money
yes I dive and the reason they announced the proposed shark shield subsidy is because it will never happen ,but they need an alternative to the drum lines . If any thing needs a subsidy its the epirbs even if its only for pensioners
dumper
Posts: 1026
Date Joined: 03/04/08
http://youtu.be/HIToDM5niKQ
http://youtu.be/HIToDM5niKQ
Extra bits from the 60 min program last night
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
pffft...one mans opinion ;-)
pffft...one mans opinion ;-)
sarcasm0
Posts: 1396
Date Joined: 25/06/09
All the hate....
Ive been talking with mates about this for a while, subsidising shark shields IMHO should have been the first piece of shark mitigation policy the govt should have done. I think it is a great idea, like a seatbelt, you probably dont need it everyday nut you wish you had it on the day you needed it. Personally I have done nearly 60 dives with a shark shield, many with one on the boat on a weighted line at 5mt and at least one diver with one leg attached. Yes, I have had some funny stings, but would far prefer the mild discomfort and the knowledge it is working than have it playing on my mind. My relatives and fiancee also care, im getting married in a month and my parents got me a shark shield freedom 7 with all the fruit for my 33rd birthday also in a month, 3 months early as they "did not want me eaten before the wedding".
I dunno how uncomfortable/practical they are for surfers but for divers/kayakers/small dingys I reckon way better to have one than not and if there was a subsidy I would definately purchase another to hang at 5 mts for safety stop while diving.... I reckon most scuba divers would be with me on not being so worried while on the bottom, but when in the water column during safety stop....
Not to be morbid, but coroners reports from South Australia have recommended their use for commercial purposes and I reckon at the cost of a new dive kit another $600-700 isnt really that much. I have been waiting for the coroners reports from the WA deaths not due to sick fascination, but a self preservation stance. I want to know if anyone was wearing a shark shield, I want to know if George Wainwright at rotto was spearfishing(as popular rumour suggests...) or if he was just recovering the stuck anchor. If he was retrieving the anchor on scuba, I believe it is the first fatal attack on a scuba diver in a non extractive activity recorded? I feel and have so much empathy for the families and friends of the departed, but my self preservation wishes the information would be released so those interested could read and take what they will..
DISCLAIMER: I am in no way whatsoever associated with Shark Shield nor sell them privately or for a living. Please feel free to tell me if I am wrong in terms of Scuba diving, I admit I am no surfer or have ever read of anyone being killed/attacked while wearing a shark shield aside from the SA abalone diver Paul Buckland WARNING: NOT SAFE FOR CHILDREN http://www.courts.sa.gov.au/CoronersFindings/Lists/Coroners%20Findings/Attachments/230/BUCKLAND%20Paul%20William.docx who unfortunately seemed to misuse an older shark shield unit and diminish its effectiveness.
Flame away!
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
I have never seen anyone
I have never seen anyone attacked by a shark, yet I have seen 2 people almost fataly wounded by a shark shield wrapping around the ladder of a boat whilst live boating. By that reasoning, shark shileds should be banned, not subsidised.
Why should we, the taxpayers, fund a device that is still not proven to be effective?
D_d_001
Posts: 1522
Date Joined: 09/03/13
almost ?
almost ?
any recorded deaths from a shark shield ? legit question
BTW: I've never actually seen anyone killed in a car crash but apparently it does happen.
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
Almost, yep.Nope, none
Almost, yep.
Nope, none yet.
Its known as risk assesment.
D_d_001
Posts: 1522
Date Joined: 09/03/13
so what actually happened
so what actually happened ?
have of course heard of getting a zap while surfing ....how does the boat change things ?
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
Situation 1: Whilst Diving
Situation 1: Whilst Diving the Sanko Harvest, A diver was climbing up the ladder after a dive, in surgy conditions, whilst the boat was running. Halfway up the ladder, the Shark Shield tail got caught on the bottom rung of the ladder, and the diver fell backwards, inverted and unable to recover. Skipper was backing up to a reef, and needed to engage props, but was unable, due to the situation at the transom. Another Diver ripped off the sharkshield, saving the diver.
Situation 2: Similar situation at Rottnest, where the diver fell backwards after a Tail got caught up on the transom. Diver already removed reg from mouth, and had mild panic attack when tangled, inverted and struggling in surgy conditions.
D_d_001
Posts: 1522
Date Joined: 09/03/13
I see your point but to me
I see your point but to me these incidents seem more like:
lets not ban the shark shield
lets learn that a SS can be wrapped around a boat ladder and appropriately train ppl in correct use when using boat ladders etc.
there is a lot of dangerous equipment out there. even safety equipment can be dangerous but saves lives in the long run with ...lessons learned etc.
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
Dont get me wrong, my point
Dont get me wrong, my point was purely tongue in cheek.
Your dead right, the issue is the manner in which they are used. On my boat, I always ensure all tails are watched carefully, and have never had a problem since that Sanko incident.
My issue is only with subsidies, and I don’t think the taxpayer should fund a voluntary recreational activity that already costs thousands of dollars to the consumer.
D_d_001
Posts: 1522
Date Joined: 09/03/13
yeah on the issue of subsidy
yeah on the issue of subsidy I probably agree. until the SS becomes mandatory (and even then) I think (as OP states)that there are other bits of equipment that should be up for subsidy "consideration" (or at least tax relief) like epirb ...flares etc b4 a SS.
I do believe Mark McGowen is just putting up a publicity opposition to the drum lines.
Who knows the cost but tax exempting all safety gear may actually safe money .... and lives.
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
Considering the factual
Considering the factual proof, and solid evidence from EPIRB initiated rescues, I reckon they should be tax exempt for sure.
Lastchance
Posts: 1272
Date Joined: 02/02/09
Looks like some bullet proof
Looks like some bullet proof justification right there. Seems like ladders should go as well.
sarcasm0
Posts: 1396
Date Joined: 25/06/09
Almost fatally wounded?
Please elaborate on the situation...
I think everyone is of the belief that a sharkshield in operation while a 6mt great white rushes you in full effect from the bottom in 20mts is probably not going to save you, but at least it hopefully discourages the curious ones from exploratory bites or mouthing which from a GW are generally fatal. With any luck this may give you the time to get back to the boat/shore etc before it all goes pear shaped.
'Why should we, the taxpayers, fund a device that is still not proven to be effective?' Mate you are already funding drum lines, bubble curtains, exclusion zones, chemical deterrants, aerial shark patrols, funky wetsuits, tagging etc. Its another branch of the whole shark mitigation strategy, there will be no 'silver bullet' more a combination of approaches used together.
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
See above. "Mate you are
See above.
"Mate you are already funding drum lines, bubble curtains, exclusion zones, chemical deterrants, aerial shark patrols, funky wetsuits, tagging etc."
and I dont agree with any of that either! ;-)
fishy fingers
Posts: 1719
Date Joined: 28/04/07
sorry in advance
but that is just shit and you know it!
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
Whats shit?
Whats shit?
fishy fingers
Posts: 1719
Date Joined: 28/04/07
Whats shit?
the fact you blame the shark shield for an almost fatality when if truth be known it was the divers clumsyness and the skippers fault as the diver could as easily caught up on his guages or catch bag, yes it may have been a bit of a panic for the divers involved but to blame the shark shield and saying they should be banned is crap, its like saying a few drivers have had near accidents in cars when a child or animal runs out in front of them and they lose control of the car so the car should be banned.
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
Wrong
No, read it again, what I said was "By that reasoning, shark shileds should be banned, not subsidised". That is not saying I think they should be banned. Nowhere did I say I blamed the shark shield. In fact, I went on to say.... "Dont get me wrong, my point was purely tongue in cheek. Your dead right, the issue is the manner in which they are used" Perhaps a little more comprehension is needed here ;-) :-)
petermac
Posts: 2946
Date Joined: 03/03/10
what are you on about
takes a minimum of .25 of an amp to kill some one , In case you hadn't noticed to you need a load to draw a current eg a amp being shark shields are dc I cant see it happenening , yep I know a few mates that have zapped them self with their shark shields but its just dc voltage (same as getting zapped by a megger) and no current
D_d_001
Posts: 1522
Date Joined: 09/03/13
no Peter,if you read the
no Peter,
if you read the rest of the conversation the danger was the "tail" of the SS getting caught around the ladder....compounded by being near the prop...etc.
not the fact of getting a boot (shock) by itself.
like he said it was a "more of a tongue in cheek" comment to ban it. but an interesting point though.
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
Quote from another forum,
Quote from another forum, posted by Amanda, Managing Director of Shark Shield....
"We do warn against using the device if you have any certain medical conditions that would increase your sensitivity to electrical fields, such as heart disease, a history of heart attack, peripheral vascular disease, stroke, a history of fainting or epilepsy, lung disease, or if the user is on any prescription drugs that are administered for these conditions. People who have pacemakers or are pregnant must not use the Shark Shield and should also avoid swimming near any other person using the Shark Shield"
lastcast
Posts: 215
Date Joined: 04/04/13
link doesn't work for me sarc
can you check it pleaze, ta
sarcasm0
Posts: 1396
Date Joined: 25/06/09
Paul Buckland?
When I open the link it downloads a word doco? If you google search 'sa coroner shark death paul buckland' its the first link.
spinksy
Posts: 266
Date Joined: 06/10/10
Wasnt the guy
On scuba down in Bunbury attacked assending the anchor line at 5 meters.Peter Kurman.. ?
sarcasm0
Posts: 1396
Date Joined: 25/06/09
Apparently descending
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/friend-says-weekend-shark-victim-laughed-off-risk-of-attack/story-e6frg6nf-1226315901299
But George Wainwright was previous to that, and unfortunately these blokes sound like they might have dropped anchor right where the shark was at the time.
hooty
Posts: 198
Date Joined: 25/05/10
I have three shark shields
I have three shark shields and have been using them for over ten years. Whilst not scientifically proven to 100% stop a shark attack on the user there is some good anectdotal evidence to say they may prevent attack. There is also some good data for the units provided by a recent small study done with the CSRIO in South Australia. Shark shields are suited to snorklers, divers and may be surfers.
The question for Mark McGowan is whats the answer for the population in his electorate, Rockingham advertised as the aquatic playground. Cockburn and Warnbro sounds both hold multiple numbers of white sharks at certain times of the year. ( Sept to Dec ) With deep water all the way to within 25m from the beach, how is he going to protect for example, the kids jumping of the platforms (like seals of rocks). Its common scence that if you have more human interactions with white sharks you will have more deaths. Being on the water a lot and seeing whites in places like mangles bay and palm beach jetty, I have changed the way my family and I use the ocean. No more diving with the kids for crabs . Is he that ill informed that he thinks the kids or any other beach users will or can wear shark shields? His other option was to build giant groins to protect swimmers on the northern beaches. What a pleasant experience that would be. With these types of options Ill probably put a pool in the back yard.
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
Many of us have been stung by
Many of us have been stung by Shark Shields, and know all too well how much it hurts.
I wonder how much research has been done into the effects of the magnetic field, and the damage that the electric shock's can do.
We so often see studies on mobile phones, radio towers, wind farms etc etc, however the field around a shark shield is rather significant. What studies have been conducted on the medical effects of Shark Shields?
Do you really want your kids subjected to electric shocks, and pulses so significant that they can deter a 5 metre great white shark?
Can Mr McGowen prove with 100% certaintly that there are no ill effects?
uncle
Posts: 9351
Date Joined: 10/02/07
a subsity should be on all safety equipment
not just for someone who wants to dive is my view
all aggressive fish love bigjohnsjigs
Swompa
Posts: 3783
Date Joined: 14/10/12
I have often wondered about
I have often wondered about shark shields in the sense that if someone is constantly poking you will you go away from them or make them stop?
Alan James
Posts: 2206
Date Joined: 30/06/09
I'm a little surprised
that the tree huggers agenda hasn't yet made a claim that shark shields are inhumane as they send an electrical impulse which distresses the shark. Waiting, waiting ..... I'm sure it will come.
Bodie
Posts: 3758
Date Joined: 05/11/07
On the topic of shark
On the topic of shark shields, have been thinking of getting one for the up coming Exmouth trip. We plan on getting in the water for some free diving / spearing.
What would peoples recommendations be for up there? Worth the investment? Are they more harm than good for free diving (Number of zaps etc). With 6 or 8 people in the water, I've heard shark shields attract sharks to some degree, so would it be putting others in more danger?
Cheers
fishy fingers
Posts: 1719
Date Joined: 28/04/07
it dosent hurt!
it just surprises you a bit ive had it in the head and groin on number of occasions and is just like someone tapping on your head with a small hammer! no they dont attract sharks and yes they are worth it question is how much you value your life...or a limb are they worth more than $600?
petermac
Posts: 2946
Date Joined: 03/03/10
woulldnt bother
I wouldn't bother with a shark shield up there the noahs are to well fed they will just be cheecky buggers and try and steal your speared fish
hooty
Posts: 198
Date Joined: 25/05/10
If you wear full wetty
If you wear full wetty including boots and hood the likelyhood or strength of the boot is minimal or nil. Areas of bare skin make big difference. Free divers should have enough space between them that it shouldnt effect each other. The group will soon learn how far away they need to be from each other if they dont. Leave it turned on when you get into the boat especially alluminium and everyone will know about it. Good practice reduces the chance of being belted. As for attracting sharks, there is no science or evidence to support that. Quite a bit on the net about their effectiveness, google the csrio video where they tow rubber seals with shark sheilds and make your own mind up.
axey45
Posts: 1758
Date Joined: 26/11/13
That was the reason why
That was the reason why elyse didn't have her shield on, the other guide was opp side of punters and punters would get a boot if she had hers on. so was said when first happened.
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
All Dolphin Guides tuckup the
All Dolphin Guides tuck the tails up and switched them off for several reasons. Minimal risk of spooking Dolphins, Reduce risk of Shock to tourists, Reduce risk of entanglement.
At that point, Dolphin Tours were using Apollo AV DPV's to tow the tourists out from the boat. Then "Dolphin Girl" would tease a few Dolphins up to the group, before towing them all back to the boat. Typically 4-6 people, all towed in a line. An active sharkshield would have been a nightmare had it been turned on.
Proceedures have changed since then, but I cant comment on how/why.
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
"google the csrio video where
"google the csrio video where they tow rubber seals with shark sheilds and make your own mind up"
Is that the one where the GWS ate the Shark Shield?
catch.fish
Posts: 150
Date Joined: 12/10/11
SS breach vid
He's probably talking about the video & report showing clear scientific evidence the SS had a solid effect on stopping breach attacks and delaying set bait attacks in burleyed waters by up to several minutes (potentially the difference between making it out of the water or not).
Hopefully he's not talking about the misguided (but often quoted as truth) rumour surrounding the GWS eating the shark shield during testing.
That rumour was nothing but a sensationalized media headline. It came about during testing antennae types for surfers. They put a float on the SS tail to see if it still worked on the surface in choppy conditions with only one electrode in the water (exploring potential design flaws for surfing use) obviously it was never going to work properly without both electrodes underwater but the test still needed to be conducted to be sure of that so they could then look at refining surf specific models.
The bottom line is they most definitely work but are far from full proof. Much like wearing a seat belt in a car. Its everyones personal choice to weigh up the risk of shark attack vs the price and discomfort of diving with one. I've used one for years now, seen it work with my own eyes on a very large tiger shark and after a while you do learn how to dive with it without getting zapped. So if you're avoiding using one cause your mates second cousins brother Pauly said they dont work and they attract sharks bro... well you might want to do some more research!
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
See video below.....no
See video below.....no floats. Just Sharks eating fake seals and tuna with Shark Shields attached.
(note: at least thats how I viewed it...and Ive been wrong many times before ;-) )
hooty
Posts: 198
Date Joined: 25/05/10
That would be the
That would be the initial trialing the surf model. Apparantely it was on the move when the tail was not fully exposed to water, thats the explanation given anyway.
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
Not sayings its evidence
Not sayings its evidence either way, make up your own mind....but looks fairly well under the surface to me!
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/damning-video-shows-failure-of-electronic-shark-deterrent/story-fndo471r-1226492350934#ooid=RxcWc0NjoS3MHg73-K9P2pDD7nomVWRZ
hooty
Posts: 198
Date Joined: 25/05/10
Thats the csrio research. In
Thats the csrio research. In a nutshell the sharks took twice as long to bite the static tuna baits with the sheild turned on compared to baits with the sharkshield turned off. I think without shark sheilds it took 1 minute and with, it took two minutes. The other trial they did was the towing of seal decoys over a certain period of time. Without the shield they got several bite / breeches with the shark sheild on they got 0 bites/breeches. A bit of footage of large sharks pulling out of a attack when withinh sheild range when turned on. As everyone has said, not conclusive by any means.
Subaquatic
Posts: 515
Date Joined: 23/04/11
I kinda have a giggle when I
I kinda have a giggle when I see the comments about deterants not necessarily able to stop a shark in full blown predatory strike mode, but they do deter the inquisitive sharks......This may sound obvious, but its only the full blown predatory strike mode shark that scares the crap outta me, and thats what I want a shark shield for!....I can live with the inquisitive sharks! lol ;-)
Seriously though, I guess a 1% reduction in strike rates is better than nothing!
PS, I think it was SARDI research.
hooty
Posts: 198
Date Joined: 25/05/10
I stand corrected SARDI was
I stand corrected SARDI was the research unit.
Cheers Subaquatic.
scubafish
Posts: 949
Date Joined: 15/08/12
EPERB
Getting a bit sick of this shark shit!
Play on the road get hit by a bus !
play in the water get eaten by a shark !
What's the difference ?
I want a bloody subsidy for my EPERB $290.
http://img.gg/BQ91Sys