Haydn24 said..


The 18 yr old that died 11 days ago at Coffs Harbour??

Do you really think fisherman will be at every beach people surf at 24/7 to kill sharks? How many sharks chase bait into a beach then harmlessly swim back out to sea? Probably hundreds every day. Do they deserve to die because you want to feel safer in an already statistically safe environment? My answer is no.

Do you wear copious amounts of sunscreen when you go outdoors? Probably not but your chance of dying of cancer is so much higher than getting chomped by a shark, "muppet".

Monkers said..

Although I am a kitesurfer I have been surfing in WA water for 30 years and finally in the last 2 years I have stopped and have limited my surfing to Indo. Which is a real shame because nothing makes me happier than surfing in WA and enjoying the WA coastline..I'm glad they are doing something about it ( besides research )... I just hope it works...

pearl said..
Queeensland has been doing this for years.....

burnsy11 said..



Hahaha enough said - some pimply faced kid with his head stuck on his laptop/ipad all day.
And if your going to paste some half assed table of figures - at least show that its from some type of reputable source.

Haydn24 said..



Do you speak to everyone like this? No i'm not a 14 year old, technology dependent pimply kid, I'm an accomplished 20 year old with aspirations and a bright future, obviously something you never had the chance to experience.

You think I made up those stats for the sake of a stupid argument with someone who has no idea what he's talking about? no.

sharkattackfile.info

It's a US based website but accurately accounts for all shark attack occurrences from 1960's on wards.

burnsy11 said..



Take a deep breath from your puffer Haydn....its called humour...fair enough you have high aspirations & bright future ahead - i think most have experienced this when they are younger. The table that you posted is actually occurrences from 1788 onwards....

ChiroTrev said..

I agree with Burnsy, a great victory for WA..... this makes me sad

I also agree we should've tagged sharks years ago, and this could help us better understand them.... yes

Nonetheless, the ocean is in a state of anarchy. We do not let murderers and rapists do what they want and "leave them be in the ecosystem" and advise everyone who steps outside to "face the risk" of being raped or murdered. Instead, we create places for the undesirable people where they do not harm. In some countries they have the death penalty. - you are applying human traits such as malicious intent to animals now...

So murderers have their place in jail, and sharks have their place deep in the ocean--> not along our shores where innocent people (including children) are encouraged to play, be healthy, and enjoy the outdoors. - lost for words.

Don't start whinging about vending machines and bee's unless you are a total idiot. - i will respect your wishes.

We are protecting people in the ocean as we've been protecting people on the land since the dawn of civilisation. Our ecosystem on land is protected by jails, our beaches are now being protected by baited drum lines. - is "we" referring to humans" ? or aus civilisation only ? either way, you could argue protectivism has not been a strong point during and since colonisation, especially iof you are an indigenous person

No animal should be killed in vein and the meat should definitely be put to use. - google "heavy metal build up in large pelagic animals"

Kangaroo's are culled every day for the benefit of farmers and drivers and they are our national animal. It's not because we hate them but because we ARE managing our ecosystem. - and the meat is lean and tasty if cooked right.

Finally the shark to fish ratio can be improved and our beaches can be protected for us and for future generations. - protecting beaches... or creating an atmosphere of safety for people?

Haydn24 said..


20 mate

Haydn24 said..








Couldn't find previous 20 yrs but its still FAR higher over ALL of the states as you requested. Looks like we have for more to worry about than you, add in crocs, snakes and stingers....

rphi6876 said...



Your table is wrong. From the FAQ of your website "In most scavenged bodies incidents there is no way to prove if the person was or wasn't alive at the time" - so we just include any carcass found in the water with some bite marks. ie. fishermen who died from hypothermia and eventually a shark finds the carcass will be considered as a fatal shark attack.

Here are more realistic figures:
taronga.org.au/conservation-and-science/australian-shark-attack-file