wave knave said..

kiterboy said..

Stop making sense, jb prefers emotionally charged arguements, not logic and analysis.

irony

Haha, I was waiting for that.
Guilty as charged.

What I really meant to say was that he prefers baseless numbers, not logically derived numbers.

^^^ I wouldn't take the numbers sighted around coastlines and then extrapolate that across the entire ocean. Large swathes of the ocean are a desert.

It's like saying we counted n people along the Australian coastline, so if we multiply that by the size of the continent...

There are a few reasons that sharks are more prevalent around WA these days and a lack of food isn't one of them. I think the first thing to look at is whales and their migration past Perth from the north west to the south west. Back in the day when we used to hunt whales, the whales would stay miles off the coast to try and get past the whalers with out getting hunted. As of 1978 we stopped hunting whales and their numbers grew and they started to get closer and closer to the coast. To the point that I have seen them 100m off shore last year, something that I have never seen before at local beaches (Perth). The second thing is that we haven't hunted Great White Sharks for the last ten years adding to their numbers by more than we know. With more whales means more sharks as the sharks hang with whale pods for an easy feed, so with whales coming closer so are the sharks. I may be wrong but this winter has been the coldest as far as water temp in a while and we all know that GWS like colder water, and yes they are found in warmer waters but they prefer colder water. Also seal populations have gotten larger so food for the GWS isn't a problem, and over fishing imo isn't the problem at all. The rogue shark theory is not really an option as the sheer number of sharks spotted tells us this cant be fact. If you don't hunt them they will come and in numbers. The tagged sharks prove this beyond all doubt so this theory can be put to bed. The answer? Well tbh there isn't one that we can throw out there and fix the problem tomorrow, and I don't think that there will be one in the near future that is sustainable. Part of the solution is to try and stop it before it happens and more tech thrown at shark shield type devices the better and these are not a solution but a piece of mind but they will have to work much better than they do now. As far as culling them goes killing ten even twenty of them might help for a while but for how long? A month, maybe two? Some of these sharks come from as far away as South Africa so culling unless you were to kill twenty a month isn't going to work and is not sustainable.

This thread is a good indication of how things will turn out in actually achieving something useful in fixing the problem.
Lots of discussion, a few ideas, all of them blocked by disagreement from others, and in the end when everyone is tired of talking about it, the matter will be dropped,... until the next attack is spread all over the news with the usual shock and horror and condolences.

One fact can't be argued with, and that is, if we keep doing what we have previously done, people will keep getting eaten.
And so far, officially it looks like we are going to keep doing what we have always done. Nothing.

Bon appetit Sid.

^ I'm not doing nothing. I'm getting me a shark shield!

^^ Thats a great point OF, I would have never thought that.

wave knave said..

oceanfire said..

What if in these cases, the person has had some sort of underlying illness, whether they know about it or not?
What if, the shark, acting in it's ocean clean up role, can detect that something is not right with the individual and picked them specifically.

fine theory.. but it isn't just kiters getting attacked.

I wasn't being specific about any type of water user, just using the group surfer situation as an example.
I don't think any kiters have been chomped by GWs.

oceanfire said..

wave knave said..

oceanfire said..

What if in these cases, the person has had some sort of underlying illness, whether they know about it or not?
What if, the shark, acting in it's ocean clean up role, can detect that something is not right with the individual and picked them specifically.

fine theory.. but it isn't just kiters getting attacked.

I wasn't being specific about any type of water user, just using the group surfer situation as an example.
I don't think any kiters have been chomped by GWs.

oops. i forgot the..

Someone needs to take a chill pill^^^^^^. I think Pweedas was agreeing with Oceanfire

WA71 said..

oz surf said..

Someone needs to take a chill pill^^^^^^. I think Pweedas was agreeing with Oceanfire

If it was the only thread he did it in I wouldnt even written that. Have you anything constructive to say on the matter or are you just trolling?

I have no scientific facts or evidence but i believe culling them would be the best option for all water users. To me a persons life is more important
than a shark.

*Hillbilly music continues to play*

oz surf said..

WA71 said..

oz surf said..

Someone needs to take a chill pill^^^^^^. I think Pweedas was agreeing with Oceanfire

If it was the only thread he did it in I wouldnt even written that. Have you anything constructive to say on the matter or are you just trolling?

I have no scientific facts or evidence but i believe culling them would be the best option for all water users. To me a persons life is more important
than a shark.

Knee jerk reaction imo.

SirJman said..

Woodo said..

SirJman said...

*Hillbilly music continues to play*

What's the old saying??? Truth hurts???

Not at all. If certain people like you're suggesting are willing to risk thousands of dollars and potentially jail time to kill a protected animal then they are as stupid as your culling arguments are.

From what Ive been told its happened already

pweedas said..

That's interesting.
Specially seeing as how they sometimes investigate one person and then go and attack someone else.

They say dogs can detect when someone is sick.
There have ben cases in old folks homes when the resident dog has gone and sat with the next person to die.
Hmmm,. more work needs to be done to test it.
Any volunteers?

Now if we were in a communist country, or maybe one of those middle eastern countries which are less than democratic, we could hop over to the local prison and get half a dozen 'volunteers', one of whom is sick, drop them all in the water in a known GW hot spot, and see who lasts the day.

Good points, I forgot about the dogs and cats that do that.

LOL, have to say I wondered how it could be verified and I did think about the chucking in some sick and healthy people test, but thought better of posting it

SirJman said..

Why can't certain people understand the fact that we live our lives with an element of risk. I would rather die doing something I loved than by a painful battle with cancer or killed by a driver who was too busy texting to see the red light.

This article is good for a read...

www.sbs.com.au/news/comment-how-to-prevent-shark-attacks

We take a calculated risk whenever we enter the ocean, but the risk is quite small when compared to other daily activities. For example, new research shows that rip currents are the cause of an average 21 confirmed human fatalities per year in Australia, compared with 7.5 for cyclones, 5.9 for bushfires, 4.3 for floods, and 1 for sharks.

hohum, another person posting numbers without context.
means nothing.