Shark Cull

[Rosy]

Not at all, but let's have some balanced reporting. A shark attack is an horrific event. Here's one factual account that popped up at random.

http://www.sharkattackfile.net/spreadsheets/pdf_directory/1980.01.05-Miranda.pdf

I believe encouraging people to think shark attacks are only ever a case of mistaken identity and that they can peacefully share the same space is pulling the wool over their eyes.

Of course it's an horrific event. I doubt too many would think otherwise. The victim rolled the dice and lost unfortunately. His family's response is almost identical to what you flippantly suggested we do. It mentioned a respect for sharks and a knowledge he wouldn't want the shark which killed him, or any other shark, culled.

Who has suggested shark attacks are "only ever a case of mistaken identity"? There was nothing in the article I referred to that mentioned that. Are you suggesting an article quoting the victim's family's statement was unbalanced reporting?

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Of course it's an horrific event. I doubt too many would think otherwise. The victim rolled the dice and lost unfortunately. His family's response is almost identical to what you flippantly suggested we do. It mentioned a respect for sharks and a knowledge he wouldn't want the shark which killed him, or any other shark, culled.

Who has suggested shark attacks are "only ever a case of mistaken identity"? There was nothing in the article I referred to that mentioned that. Are you suggesting an article quoting the victim's family's statement was unbalanced reporting?

Attempts to locate and identify the killer after the event have historically been doomed to fail.

Not suggested in the reports of this particular case, but it's a recurring theme of the modern spin which seduces many to put the lives of sharks above people. Of course the family's free to express their opinion; whatever helps them to cope. If there are enough attacks then people will stop using the water anyway, with or without government intervention. It's how netting kicked off in Sydney.

 

[Rosy]

.....
Not suggested in the reports of this particular case, but it's a recurring theme of the modern spin which seduces many to put the lives of sharks above people. ...

Not thinking sharks should be culled isn't necessarily putting the lives of sharks above people. There's a big difference in killing a shark that was hanging around eating people to luring and culling sharks that never have and probably never would kill people. I've never heard anyone claim shark attacks are only ever a case of mistaken identity.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Not thinking sharks should be culled isn't necessarily putting the lives of sharks above people. There's a big difference in killing a shark that was hanging around eating people to luring and culling sharks that never have and probably never would kill people. I've never heard anyone claim shark attacks are only ever a case of mistaken identity.

According to some we are mistaken for seals, or bites are "test" bites and the shark unwittingly inflicts catastrophic damage due to its size and power, or they simply don't like the taste of us. No doubt this is true in some cases, but in the attack I linked to, the shark proved impossible to deter and pursued the diver's remains after the fatal bite with such intent that it beached itself in the shallows.

More theories have been put forward about shark behaviour than perhaps any other creature, but there are exceptions to all of them. Sharks are unpredictable.

 

[Rosy]

According to some ...

Yep there are many theories and scenarios. According to some doesn't equate to only ever a case of mistaken identity though.

 

[tigergollywog]

Obviously they enter coastal waters, but definitely classed as pelagic.

http://www.pelagic.org/montereybay/pelagic/greatwhiteshark.html

L2R2R2, maybe your right and maybe im wrong, I dont want to enter a semantics battle for pages.

HOWEVER, posting random links that supports your point annoys me. Its what the climate sceptics do all the time. The key to using data effectively is to have a critical look at where it comes from.

The llnk you posted was to a private shark institute in california with 5 research assistants (euphemism for 'student' in the research game) and a 'logistics engineer' (euphemism for heavens knows what in the shark tagging caper). It also mentions they have tagged very few whites (predominately blue and maco) They are, by any measure, pretty light weight. maybe they punch above their weight and do great work, but you just cant assume that when your posting links across the world.

I was quoting off the CSIRO page

http://www.csiro.au/Outcomes/Oceans/Marine-Life/Sharks-index-page/White-shark-facts-index/white-shark-fact-3_movements.aspx

These blokes are 1. government funded 2. have a massive staff of blokes with published CV's and unambiguous titles (DR. Prof) and 3. publish their finding in peer reviewed documents

if you look at their map on this link, it shows that white sharks tagged inshore in aussie waters tend to stay inshore (one does take a little vacation to NZ, probably want to see what maori taste like). Its quite possible that ocean dwelling ones dont get tagged and studied. But it seems pretty clear they breed inshore and hang out there for long periods.

MY MAIN POINT is this.

Theres research and theres research (it doesnt bother me much in this instance, but drives me NUTS in the climate debate when someone posts a link to the Coal Industry Climate Research Guild in Emerald, Qld 'research'), and the strength of your position is directly related to the calibre/independence of the organisation who supports your or my veiw.

Being a very capable and generous footy stats man, I hope you accept this criticism in the spirit it is intended.

 

[tigergollywog]

A shark attack is an horrific event.

so is lung cancer. they never hunted Phillip Morris or Peter Stuyvesant down and shot them in the head a couple of times.

 

[Rosy]

I read this morning about a tiger that's eating people in India. They've identified the creature and are hunting it. Not sure what their intentions are for it but it made me think of shark culling. Luring and culling all tigers in the area probably wouldn't help the situation whatsoever if they didn't get the culprit. It could drastically impact on the future of a species at threat though. I feel the same way about knee-jerk, kill the lot mentality when there's a shark attack.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Being a very capable and generous footy stats man, I hope you accept this criticism in the spirit it is intended.

OK golly I'll drop it there, it's a trivial detail.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

I read this morning about a tiger that's eating people in India. They've identified the creature and are hunting it. Not sure what their intentions are for it but it made me think of shark culling. Luring and culling all tigers in the area probably wouldn't help the situation whatsoever if they didn't get the culprit. It could drastically impact on the future of a species at threat though. I feel the same way about knee-jerk, kill the lot mentality when there's a shark attack.

They'll be able to identify it because it's the only one outside the national park.

"...only three of the six hunters hired for the job showed up for work..."

I'll back the tiger.

 

[AngryAnt]

It was a poorly executed joke. I doctored your quote to make a dumb irish joke. Ahem

All good, but lift your game son! :hihi

 

[tigergollywog]

I'll back the tiger.

fingers crossed

All good, but lift your game son! :hihi

yep

 

[K3]

And so it begins, as it was always going to...


Fisherman ordered to pay $18k for bashing great white shark to death at Sussex Inlet on NSW south coast
Updated 7 minutes ago

Great white shark killed at Sussex Inlet

A man has been ordered to pay nearly $20,000 over the death of a juvenile great white shark on the south coast of New South Wales.

Justin Adam Clark was prosecuted by the state's Department of Primary Industries (DPI) over the shark's death at Sussex Inlet in January 2012.

He was found guilty of harming a threatened species in Wollongong Local Court.

Great white sharks are protected throughout Australian waters, though the Federal Government has granted an exemption for the Western Australian Government to cull large sharks.

Witnesses told DPI officials the 40-year-old man, from Glenbrook in Sydney's west, pursued the shark in his boat after it was seen in the area.

He herded the animal into shallow water, deliberately using his boat to hit the shark several times.

DPI says the main injuries to the shark were caused by the boat's propeller.

A rope was tied to the shark's tail and it was towed back to a boat ramp with help from a second boat.

The department says the shark was then bludgeoned to death with a metal pole.

The magistrate ordered Clark to pay a fine of $8,000, plus costs of $10,103.

The man in charge of the second boat that helped drag the shark to shore also pleaded guilty to harming a threatened species and was put on a six-month good behaviour bond.

The DPI's director of fisheries compliance, Glenn Tritton, says ignorance is no excuse for harming a protected species.

"This conviction sends a strong message that harming of our threatened species will not be tolerated," he said.

"The low population numbers following historical exploitation, plus their low reproductive rate, long gestation and late age at sexual maturity lead to slow recovery of the great white shark population and demonstrate the need for its protection."

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

And so it begins, as it was always going to...

Not to condone the gratuitous killing of a protected species, even one that can't feel pain, but it happened more than two years ago. This was recent.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/21445586/online-threats-for-shark-victims-partner/

Remembering Norman Clark, aged 18, killed at Brighton pier in Port Phillip Bay on this day, Saturday February 15. Hundreds of onlookers, including Clark's brother and fiancée, watched in horror as he struggled vainly for two minutes in the grip of the shark's jaws. Women fainted and men rushed for their boats before the perpetrator, believed at the time to be a grey nurse but probably a great white, swirled the victim beneath the surface a final time and vanished forever.

 

[Rosy]

Lee2 I struggle to follow your posting on this thread. I'm not sure why you posted that link to an article based on a 60 Minutes interview. The hate mail is an emotional aspect that reflects on the abusers rather than the sharks. Of course the girlfriend would be traumatised. It's an awful situation. I'm surprised she's already back out surfing again herself. We know sharks kill people. There's no question the attacks are horrific and brutal. Do you advocate mass culling of sharks just in case they might attack someone?

 

[glantone]

Don't worry about him, Rosy. He doesn't know what his talking about.
A lot more people drown per year than die from shark attack. A lot more.
I suggest draining the entire Australian coastline of its waters – 2 birds 1 stone - despite the possibility that some may construe this as nothing more than an elaborate anti boat people ruse.
.... make that 3 birds!

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Lee2 I struggle to follow your posting on this thread.

The point is that public discussion of shark attacks is dominated by the green lobby; strawmen such as "more people are killed by such and such" are a case in point. Stehr might have a vested interest but his comments proved chillingly accurate, and chances are you shark-huggers didn't even hear the warning.

It was an accident, it was a test bite, the shark thought he was a seal, sharks don't like the taste of us etc aren't washing. We are on the *smile*ing menu. Time for some worthwhile education so that people can make an informed choice about entering the water. Or supporting a cull.

I've never agreed with this woman before, but she is on the money here.

http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/mirandadevine/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/a_tasty_dish_for_a_very_big_fish_and_its_all_our_fault/

 

[bullus_hit]

The point is that public discussion of shark attacks is dominated by the green lobby; strawmen such as "more people are killed by such and such" are a case in point.

Ah, now we're getting to the point. Anti-green sentiments seem to be at the core of many of your arguments.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Ah, now we're getting to the point. Anti-green sentiments seem to be at the core of many of your arguments.

Put it this way, I have time for conservationists but none for greenies.

 

[Rosy]

The point is that public discussion of shark attacks is dominated by the green lobby; strawmen such as "more people are killed by such and such" are a case in point. Stehr might have a vested interest but his comments proved chillingly accurate, and chances are you shark-huggers didn't even hear the warning.

It was an accident, it was a test bite, the shark thought he was a seal, sharks don't like the taste of us etc aren't washing. We are on the *smile*ing menu. Time for some worthwhile education so that people can make an informed choice about entering the water. Or supporting a cull.

I've never agreed with this woman before, but she is on the money here.

http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/mirandadevine/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/a_tasty_dish_for_a_very_big_fish_and_its_all_our_fault/

"Shark huggers"? :blah

Not reading the links. You quoted me before and gave a link. It wasn't related to my comment you quoted, Antman pointed out and you admitted you hadn't studied it, and in fact it recommended the opposite of what you seem to be advocating.

Then a link to an interview based on an upcoming 60 minutes program where even the partner of a recent shark victim admits she's back out surfing. There couldn't possibly be a more horrifying education than being nearby as your partner became shark food yet this girl, whose interview you linked to, is still willing to chance the odds.

So much for the "worthwhile education so that people can make an informed choice about entering the water" you advocate. I am sure most people going in the sea know there is a chance a shark might be there, especially surfers. The recent victim in SA chose to surf in an area where there had been shark sightings all week.

The many people are killed by such and such comments are just illustrating a point about the futility of culling a species that is listed as threatened and likely to become extinct in the area. Do you think glanton is seriously suggesting we drain the sea? Actually on thinking more about it.... :hihi

Yet again I don't get the relevance of one of your comments. Does a possible" inability to feel pain" have bearing on the culling of a species?

Put it this way, I have time for conservationists but none for greenies.

Conversationalist...a person who advocates or acts for the protection and preservation of the environment and wildlife. People against culling of a threatened, likely to become extinct species would come under that banner. Do you support luring and culling great white sharks in WA?