Select to expand quotesubasurf said..
Those docos are great for a visual feast but awful at their information delivery. Really awful.
I need to pop into the marine research center up near trigg later today. If I get a chance I'll TRY and get a scan of the research paper that was released at the start of the year that breaks down in the detail the sensory processes involved in White Shark predation. The research was intended to help prevent attacks on surfers. I don't think it's available online yet, but I could be wrong.
Sounds good, looking forward to reading it if it goes into a similar level of detail like here;
www.elasmo-research.org/education/white_shark/sensory_bio.htm
Select to expand quotesouthace said..
Nkiterboy said..southace said...
It's ok blame me it's my fault sorry!
Too close to the truth huh?
Your calls for conservation and you're one of the exploiters and pillagers.
No wrong I did tucker trips done it all cause I love the ocean! I can share my experience with anyone in the industry what do you do? Boat people wipe there ass?
You do realise that you can fish commercially, but there are restrictions in place for operators to follow. If those limits are adhered to then Hopefully we should be good. We need the ocean for a food source, its that simple, but what we don't need is companies like Mitsubishi who say that the ocean is a limited resource, and we should catch as much of it as we can to profit, before its all gone
Select to expand quoteCtngoodvibes said..
There is a few bordering on racist remarks you have made about asylum seekers southace. Best to keep that stuff out of the forum.
Mate i agree a tiny bit but can see were he is coming from. Southace is simply arguing on Kiteboys junior level so he can understand. I honestly can say i don't think i've meet a more immature approach to any argument on line ever than the way Kiteboy goes about his posting. Southace has obviously some real time experience involved with great white sharks. WHo else on line can claim to have that experience? Razzonator has some realtime marine experience as well and for that i give him the curtsey of having a bit more credit, but Kiteboy who won't even say what he does for a living (really we now very little about him at all except to say he is rather childish) expects us to all listen to him..?
I like how i refer to marine biologists and that info has to be crap, but then he use's info obtained from the net, from marine biologists?
The sad thing in all this is that with in a few weeks this thread will be long gone. No one will really give any suggestion or ideas and certainly won't be trying to work on any form of solution. Not until the next fatality will most of you stick your two bobs worth back in. But the people who do won't change, that are looking for REAL answers you'll just discount their opinion, because its not the same as yours
On a side not i will say yesterday i got my response from Parliament (and as i had privately said to a few my worst fears were realised). My question was watered down to ask just how many "Sharks had been tagged" Not " How many great white sharks have been tagged" . It still seems that no one wants the answer out their
Anyway it didn't stop me, i then spent about an hour talking to possibly one of Australia's most credible Great white specialists. Very interesting.. Possibly a friend of yours Southace.. I did invite him into here and i linked him the thread directly but he laughed for nearly 5 minutes when i mentioned forums..SO i won't hold my breathe
Select to expand quoteCtngoodvibes said..
I am relieved Suba is back to add to JBs insightful and intelligent comments 
Tbh capt, suba has forgotten more than you know about the subject. Maybe listen and learn than shoot down.
Select to expand quoterbl said..
I Like suba too, he helps with my spelling. He knows a lot about spelling
I find it slightly humorous that some of you say this is such a serous issue, yet trivialise someone just to try and win an argument or discredit someone with a different opinion then yours
Select to expand quotejbshack said..Ctngoodvibes said..
There is a few bordering on racist remarks you have made about asylum seekers southace. Best to keep that stuff out of the forum.
Mate i agree a tiny bit but can see were he is coming from. Southace is simply arguing on Kiteboys junior level so he can understand. I honestly can say i don't think i've meet a more immature approach to any argument on line ever than the way Kiteboy goes about his posting. Southace has obviously some real time experience involved with great white sharks. WHo else on line can claim to have that experience? Razzonator has some realtime marine experience as well and for that i give him the curtsey of having a bit more credit, but Kiteboy who won't even say what he does for a living (really we now very little about him at all except to say he is rather childish) expects us to all listen to him..?
I like how i refer to marine biologists and that info has to be crap, but then he use's info obtained from the net, from marine biologists?
The sad thing in all this is that with in a few weeks this thread will be long gone. No one will really give any suggestion or ideas and certainly won't be trying to work on any form of solution. Not until the next fatality will most of you stick your two bobs worth back in. But the people who do won't change, that are looking for REAL answers you'll just discount their opinion, because its not the same as yours
On a side not i will say yesterday i got my response from Parliament (and as i had privately said to a few my worst fears were realised). My question was watered down to ask just how many "Sharks had been tagged" Not " How many great white sharks have been tagged" . It still seems that no one wants the answer out their Anyway it didn't stop me, i then spent about an hour talking to possibly one of Australia's most credible Great white specialists. Very interesting.. Possibly a friend of yours Southace.. I did invite him into here and i linked him the thread directly but he laughed for nearly 5 minutes when i mentioned forums..SO i won't hold my breathe
Get over yourself mate.
I'm childish and immature cause I disagree with you?
You're full of your own self importance buddy.
Are you upset cause I proved your colour blind thing wrong?
You post wildy varying numbers of GWs left as if they are fact, and insist that there hasn't been an increase of numbers even though they have been protected for how many years now?
At least I'm willing to admit that there is no hard evidence for or against the numbers either way, but you, you have your opinion and anyone who disagrees is childish, wah wah.
I challenge you to show where I stated that the marine biologist info you posted was crap.
I disputed a couple of opinions due to insufficient evidence.
The sad thing about this thread and subject is that it will die off cause people like you argue your opinion to the death and don't take an open minded view, cause your knowledge is infallible and better than anyone else.
And that you discount people with real knowledge like the spearos, people like that fear to post due to your and southace's narrow minded pigheaded views, this is especially evident the way you kept harping on about the unfounded premise that people wanted to wipe out the GWs completely, even though you wer told time and again that wasn't true.
There's more than one way to explore this issue, but you just can't see that; keep looking to the pollies, that always works out well.
Select to expand quotejbshack said..rbl said..
I Like suba too, he helps with my spelling. He knows a lot about spelling
I find it slightly humorous that some of you say this is such a serous issue, yet trivialise someone just to try and win an argument or discredit someone with a different opinion then yours
Irony at it's best.
Select to expand quoterbl said..
I Like suba too, he helps with my spelling. He knows a lot about spelling
And thats about as helpfull as a fart in an elevator, its funny how you only come out when suba posts, in fact not funny just strange 
Select to expand quoterbl said..
pretty sure i post when JB posts too.
You seem to have so much to offer 
I believe it has been said a few times that Suba is nothing more than a undergrad doing a uni degree. He talks like he has plenty of experience when clearly he doesn't.
That being said he seems to have moderated himself just a little bit and stopped acting like a twat when someone has a different opinion. He must have learnt how to do that at uni.
Select to expand quoteCtngoodvibes said..
I believe it has been said a few times that Suba is nothing more than a undergrad doing a uni degree. He talks like he has plenty of experience when clearly he doesn't.
That being said he seems to have moderated himself just a little bit and stopped acting like a twat when someone has a different opinion. He must have learnt how to do that at uni.
So rather than have a valid opinion you attack him, bravo sir 
I am not attacking him am I? Although he was very good at doing that himself in the past. To the point where people got so pissed they created his own thread so he could talk to himself.
Select to expand quoteCtngoodvibes said..
I am not attacking him am I? Although he was very good at doing that himself in the past. To the point where people got so pissed they created his own thread so he could talk to himself.
How about staying on topic? The thread is about sharks not suba. Maybe slander then, attack is much to harsh.
Is this thread still going?
I thought everything had been said by the 7th page.
Going by the posts on this page it looks like it is way past done.
We're now down to the personal character assessments of the various contributors.
So, as a final parting word, my summary is,..
The government wont do anything officially because the GW is a protected species.
To remove the protected species listing on it by federal decree will ruin the high ground we take when sledging other countries for their taking of wales, or the clubbing of dolphins, or whatever else we take the moral high ground on. etc, so that's NOT going to happen.
Great Whites will remain a protected species and are unlikely to be subject to a general cull.
The only other option is to remove individual sharks which are asessed to be a threat to human life, at the time of each attack, or in the cases where an attack is seen to be imminent.
That is supposedly what we already have but doesn't seem to be used.
This can only be done by state government decree when each situation arises.
This is probably sufficient to solve the problem to the point of making attacks rare, so long as permission is given immediately and without the two day delay that is more often the case.
The other outcome is, some people will not take kindly to the inactivitey and will do what needs to be done without reporting it.
I don't have any problem with that, and I hope they are successful.
I have a feeling they already have been, so thanks for that.
To maintain the appearance that the government is doing everything it can, while achieving little, more money will be spent on more studies and research which wont actually do anything to stop the problem except prove that GW's sometimes eat people.
Select to expand quotepweedas said..
Is this thread still going?
I thought everything had been said by the 7th page.
Going by the posts on this page it looks like it is way past done.
We're now down to the personal character assessments of the various contributors.
So, as a final parting word, my summary is,..
The government wont do anything officially because the GW is a protected species.
To remove the protected species listing on it by federal decree will ruin the high ground we take when sledging other countries for their taking of wales, or the clubbing of dolphins, ot whatever else we take the moral high ground on. etc, so that's NOT going to happen.
Great Whites will remain a protected species.
The only other option is to remove individual sharks which are asessed to be a threat to human life, at the time of each attack, or in the cases where an attack is seen to be imminent.
This can only be done by state government decree when each situation arises.
This is probably sufficient to solve the problem to the point of making attacks rare, so long as permission is given immediately and without the two day delay that is more often the case.
The other outcome is, some people will not take kindly to the inactivitey and will do what needs to be done without reporting it.
I don't have any problem with that, and I hope they are successful.
I have a feeling they already have been, so thanks for that.
To maintain the appearance that the government is doing everything it can, while achieving little, more money will be spent on more studies and research which wont actually do anything to stop the problem except prove that GW's sometimes eat people.
Few things that I saw last night that suprised me.
GWS are not always hungry and are far from the eating machine portrayed.
Shark towers are useless, but spotter planes in conjustion with boats work very well as well as and with acoustic tags.
They are more often in the water when you are and you just dont know.
They dont always attack from the bottom.
Even small ones have huge amounts of mercury in them 1.5m - 2.5m.
Females can give birth to up to 4 pups in one hit and gestation is around 12 months and bread every two years.
Anyway so as i said my question of State Parliament as to shark tagging.
As i said it was changed and the question asked was ACTUALLY how many sharks have been tagged. They also asked how much money was spent.
They replied that WA had tagged 152 sharks.. (I'll post the rep lie) but here is a CSIRO report, dated 6th of June 2013 that says WA has tagged 6 since the year 2000
My rep lie also shows moneys spent on direct tagging in WA over the last three years.
EDIT
Here is the CSIRO report saying WA have tagged 6http://www.csiro.au/en/Outcomes/Oceans/Marine-Life/Sharks-index-page/White-shark-facts-index/white-shark-fact-7_number-tagged.aspx
I can't get my Question to post as its a PDF and unless anyone wants to tell me how i can't figure it out.
But they say
Since 2011
WA tagged 152 sharks
SA tagged 180 sharks
and South Africa has tagged 50 sharks.
They say these are all part of their Current monitoring program.
As for moneys they say they have spent
$608,286 first year
$847 453 second
$292030 final year.
So if thats the case our state government has spent around $1.75 million for three years. Thats about $11500 per tag. That would be good. (its my understanding that the average tag is around $40000) BUT if they have tagged less, more like the number of 14 then thats more like $125000 per tag
Select to expand quoteWA71 said..
Few things that I saw last night that suprised me.
GWS are not always hungry and are far from the eating machine portrayed.
Sharks don't eat everything they come across. And that includes GW's.
You could be swimming around with one underneath you and in all probability you would not be touched.
That's exactly what happened in the year Ken Crew got eaten.
During the preceding week, it swam under a few others between Cott and North Cott and it did not touch any of them.
But by the end of the week it decided to have a taste, and that resulted in a fatality.
That's the problem. An inquisitive or playful bite is often fatal.
The view that every GW shark is out to eat someone is incorrect, but that's not much consolation to the person who finally gets eaten.
Select to expand quote
Shark towers are useless, but spotter planes in conjunction with boats work very well as well as and with acoustic tags.
That's true. But all that provides no protection for anyone outside the area of patrols, and that's where many of the attacks are.
It also provides no protection outside the hours of the patrols, and that's also where manuy of the attacks happen, including in Perth metro beaches. Select to expand quoteThey are more often in the water when you are and you just dont know.
They dont always attack from the bottom.
That's right. That has always been the case.
Non of that eases the pain when they bite you. It's little consolation to say "Well, at least the others didn't bite me." Select to expand quoteEven small ones have huge amounts of mercury in them 1.5m - 2.5m.
Anything at the top of the food chain accumulates heavy metals because they take in all the toxic materials that were eaten by the lower species they eat.
Some toxic materials, particularly heavy metals, are not able to be expelled by the usual biological processes which we use to get rid of most other toxic substances.
People are in exactly the same situation which is why we have strict food standards.Select to expand quoteFemales can give birth to up to 4 pups in one hit and gestation is around 12 months and bread every two years.
The number of births is not an indication of survival rate.
Whatever the birth rate is, maybe only one will survive in any year.
Tiger snakes give birth to around 12 to 15 each year. Most don't survive, thankfully.
I'm at the fisheries office now with the dodgiest wifi connection imaginable so I'm heading home to work instead.
I'll try and follow up on this thread later if people actually want to have a rational discussion.
Oh an jb, I got your message and I'll try and see what can be done. Busy days as I'm out on the water more than I'm at home these days.
Select to expand quotepweedas said..WA71 said..
Few things that I saw last night that suprised me.
GWS are not always hungry and are far from the eating machine portrayed.
Sharks don't eat everything they come across. And that includes GW's.
You could be swimming around with one underneath you and in all probability you would not be touched.
That's exactly what happened in the year Ken Crew got eaten.
During the preceding week, it swam under a few others between Cott and North Cott and it did not touch any of them.
But by the end of the week it decided to have a taste, and that resulted in a fatality.
That's the problem. An inquisitive or playful bite is often fatal.
The view that every GW shark is out to eat someone is incorrect, but that's not much consolation to the person who finally gets eaten.
Shark towers are useless, but spotter planes in conjunction with boats work very well as well as and with acoustic tags.
That's true. But all that provides no protection for anyone outside the area of patrols, and that's where many of the attacks are.
It also provides no protection outside the hours of the patrols, and that's also where manuy of the attacks happen, including in Perth metro beaches. They are more often in the water when you are and you just dont know.
They dont always attack from the bottom.
That's right. That has always been the case.
Non of that eases the pain when they bite you. It's little consolation to say "Well, at least the others didn't bite me." Even small ones have huge amounts of mercury in them 1.5m - 2.5m.
Anything at the top of the food chain accumulates heavy metals because they take in all the toxic materials that were eaten by the lower species they eat.
Some toxic materials, particularly heavy metals, are not able to be expelled by the usual biological processes which we use to get rid of most other toxic substances.
People are in exactly the same situation which is why we have strict food standards.Females can give birth to up to 4 pups in one hit and gestation is around 12 months and bread every two years.
The number of births is not an indication of survival rate.
Whatever the birth rate is, maybe only one will survive in any year.
Tiger snakes give birth to around 12 to 15 each year. Most don't survive, thankfully.
sometimes
Select to expand quotepweedas said..WA71 said..
Few things that I saw last night that suprised me.
GWS are not always hungry and are far from the eating machine portrayed.
Sharks don't eat everything they come across. And that includes GW's.
You could be swimming around with one underneath you and in all probability you would not be touched.
That's exactly what happened in the year Ken Crew got eaten.
During the preceding week, it swam under a few others between Cott and North Cott and it did not touch any of them.
But by the end of the week it decided to have a taste, and that resulted in a fatality.
That's the problem. An inquisitive or playful bite is often fatal.
The view that every GW shark is out to eat someone is incorrect, but that's not much consolation to the person who finally gets eaten.
Shark towers are useless, but spotter planes in conjunction with boats work very well as well as and with acoustic tags.
That's true. But all that provides no protection for anyone outside the area of patrols, and that's where many of the attacks are.
It also provides no protection outside the hours of the patrols, and that's also where manuy of the attacks happen, including in Perth metro beaches. They are more often in the water when you are and you just dont know.
They dont always attack from the bottom.
That's right. That has always been the case.
Non of that eases the pain when they bite you. It's little consolation to say "Well, at least the others didn't bite me." Even small ones have huge amounts of mercury in them 1.5m - 2.5m.
Anything at the top of the food chain accumulates heavy metals because they take in all the toxic materials that were eaten by the lower species they eat.
Some toxic materials, particularly heavy metals, are not able to be expelled by the usual biological processes which we use to get rid of most other toxic substances.
People are in exactly the same situation which is why we have strict food standards.Females can give birth to up to 4 pups in one hit and gestation is around 12 months and bread every two years.
The number of births is not an indication of survival rate.
Whatever the birth rate is, maybe only one will survive in any year.
Tiger snakes give birth to around 12 to 15 each year. Most don't survive, thankfully.
Oh yea you are a windsurfer, so you are not in the water unless you fall off. So very limited time actually exposed to any sort of attack, unless a mast breaks etc. Where as I sit in the water up to my chest, for up to two hours at a time.
I think I/surfers have much more to worry about than you pweets
At the end of the day, most people would like to avoid more attacks if possible, how are we going to achieve this?
Here's my attempt at a summary of options, feel free to add to it;
- Tagging - methods/techniques/technology = various
Purpose - early warning of sharks' locations to allow us to 'get out of their way'
Effectiveness - only as good as the number of sharks tagged and the system used to detect tagged sharks, not 100% effective.
- Stay out of the water completely
Purpose - take the fun out of life ;)
Effectiveness - 100%
- Deterrents - methods based on = visual, smell, taste, vibration, hearing, electroreception.
Purpose - avoid attacks completely by making us unappealing
Currently developed - shark shield type devices (electroreception), camouflaged wetsuits (visual)
Effectiveness of existing methods still in question, but hope exists for a 100% effective method to be developed.
- Culling (Selective slaughter) - methods = shooting, catching, shark nets, drumlines etc
Purpose - thin the numbers and or remove individual sharks perceived as a threat by proximity to an attack, identified as the culprit of an attack, or as a 'preventative' measure ie seen as posing an immediate threat.
Effectiveness - only 100% effective if all sharks are killed.
What say you guys?
Select to expand quoteWA71 said..
Oh yea you are a windsurfer, so you are not in the water unless you fall off. So very limited time actually exposed to any sort of attack, unless a mast breaks etc. Where as I sit in the water up to my chest, for up to two hours at a time.
I think I/surfers have much more to worry about than you pweets
Actually, I still body surf over reefs for many more hours each year than I windsurf. The exact same reef that someone was previously eaten on.
It felt real strange for some years, but at least it cleared the reef. It used to be quite crowded.
I might say, that the reef has never really been back in high demand from others since.
However, because I'm old and are only risking the ****ty years I keep at it.
I also ocasionally ride surfboards, but less and less these days. Too crowded on Perth beaches and too much agro over such crappy little waves.
I still surf up north each year but not at all well. Too old. 
I'm not really arguing this matter for my own benefit.
I'm arguing it on the basis of common sense for the benefit of those in the general population who will have to live with the results of the silly "hands off" decisions which are being made now.
I like that fact some people are actualy learning from this thread even the fact that some are googling there facts from places such as Christmas Island...etc....it's showing a real turn around from the cull cull approach as its possible people are realising that's not going to be a option in the near future.
The fact is that the sharks are in the sea and we enter there domain. Like I said from the start technology and education is the only way in the short term we can live together.
Ironic shark week is running docos on GWS and it seems they are all about tagging with Accustic and pop off tags which is all to do with pole tagging and fairly basic technology using satellite transmissions....this is not real time tracking as real time tracking needs a personal GPS bolted to the the animal.
Diving company's are closing down and beach uses seem to have a bit of paranoia going on so I belive the stranded attacks will actually decrease now over the next few years Until a good option of alarming people if sharks are in the area and people feel safe again. from the start of this thread I gave this option ...technology, education and warning alarms but it seemed most where to angry at the time to understand this is our options.
I still think 1 death is unfortunate but from 2.5 million in WA over a 12 month period seems the odds are still on our side not the GWS.
P.S if you watching Shark week I'm on the occasional doco with tagging in Australia.
