Why Are they Shooting Sharks in Australia ?

[Wand]

Originally Posted by Katiusha

Did the victims actually get eaten? Or just bitten?

South African sharks affectionados say that most attacks are just sharks being curious about what's in front of them. They have very poor vision, so they "touch" with their teeth - sort of like babies when learning. It's just that their touch is slightly stronger than babies'. South African guys say that most victims who die, die from blood loss and not actual bites...

Sometimes sharks do nip and spit - but that usually means that it's not a great white that's tasting you.

People do survive great white attacks, but it's not the norm. And the survivors usually are left at least one limb short of a full set.

And the great white likes to eat its human prey. After the last attack of a suburban beach here, there were no remains. A young lad was being towed on an inflatable ski ring just a little offshore and, as is the usual pattern, the shark came flashing from the deep for its feed.

Similarly, an attack on a woman spearfishing off a rural coast a few years back left no human remains. There are plenty of other examples.

So if you're gonna get bitten, best to arrange for a bronze whaler - you mightn't survive, but you can be comforted by the fact that at least your odds were better...

[Coops]

Anjou was giving her point of view, without any snide remarks or ridiculous comparisons. Agree or disagree with her. But belittling her, or where she comes from, adds nothing to the discussion at all.

Coops.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Coops

Anjou was giving her point of view, without any snide remarks or ridiculous comparisons. Agree or disagree with her. But belittling her, or where she comes from, adds nothing to the discussion at all.

Coops.

+1

[Dulcesuenos]

I did not read the entire thread, but a few things come to mind. One is population control, In Florida we hunted the Gators till they were endangered, now they are back in full force and hunting season is once again happening to help control the populations as there is no real natural predators other then man, or other gators.
Not sure if GWS are in the same category but is it possible that being the Apex predator they out grow their food source?

The other kind of reminds me of that idiot , The grizzly bear man" who went and lived with on Grizzly island and eventualy got himself and his girlfriend killed and eaten by a bear. They killed the bear that did it. I wouldnt blame the bear and think it was doing what bears do. If more people went there and more people got killed would they keep killing more bears? They would most likely tell people not to go there. If We keep entering the environment of predators, well, they have to eat too,,,,

Yet its justifiable if its an invasive species such as lionfish that we can easily dispatch and kill every chance we get....

[dirkdig]

I think the biggest problem is the continued rape and pillage of the fish stocks.
In a lot of countries it is unregulated and massive ships haul 500 tonnes of juvenile tuna at a time and other species are harvested with no mercy.
Maybe the great whites are rightfully getting a bit hungry?

[Factor]

Originally Posted by At sea

But the inconvenient fact is that the Great White - the shark most referred to - is a protected species in Australia. To put it simply, it is illegal to catch or destroy the great white.

Reference?

[SimonV]

Originally Posted by Factor

Reference?

This species is now protected in all Australian states and territorial waters. The White Shark is also protected in many places around the world. South Africa was the first to protect this species in 1992, followed by Namibia, the Maldives, Florida and California and Australia. New Zealand gave the White Shark protected species status In 2007.

White Shark, Carcharodon carcharias (Linnaeus, 1758) - Australian Museum

http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts...ite/index.html

[Factor]

Originally Posted by SimonV

This species is now protected in all Australian states and territorial waters.

Again reference. As in legislative reference

[SimonV]

Originally Posted by Factor

Again reference. As in legislative reference

I added it to the last but here it is again

Great White Shark (Carcharodon carcharias) - Marine Species Conservation in Australia


Australian and State/Territory Government Legal Status


The current conservation status of the Great White Shark, Carcharodon carcharias, under Australian and State government legislation and under international agreements, is as follows:
National: Listed as Vulnerable and Migratory under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
New South Wales: Listed as Vulnerable under Section 5, Part 1, Fisheries Management Act 1994.
Queensland: Protected under Schedule 78 (1), Fisheries Act 1994.
South Australia: Protected under Schedule 42, Fisheries Act 1982.
Tasmania: Protected under Schedule 135(2), Threatened Species Protection Act 1995, Section 135(2), Living Marine Resources Management Act 1995 and declared vulnerable under the Fisheries (General and Fees) Regulations 1996.
Victoria: Protected under Schedule 71, Fisheries Act 1995.
Western Australia: Listed as rare or likely to become extinct under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 and protected under Schedule 46 of the Fisheries Resources Management Act 1994.
International: Listed under Appendix II of CITES, listed under Appendices I and II of CMS and listed as Vulnerable under the 2010 International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List.

[dirkdig]

Go get yourself a great White take plenty of pics of you killing it and you will find out the reference to the legislation as you are standing up in court!

[Factor]

Originally Posted by SimonV

I added it to the last but here it is again

Ta

I was aware of the CITES issues but had not been up to speed on the State /Territory legislation.

[Dreaming Yachtsman]

Originally Posted by At sea

I guess dreaming yachtsman was trying to be helpful by answering Anjou's query on my behalf. It's just a pity he was way off the mark

To a prior post by Anjou, I had responded: "I think this post can be safely filed away as: "The view from Malvernshire, on the sunny side of the hill".

I thought my comment was straightforward and easily understood, but seems I was wrong. I was alluding merely to the simple notion that how one sees things depends on where one is viewing things from. A simple concept, which millions before me have noted - nothing ground-breaking there.

The fact is that England is a benign place - any wild and dangerous beasts have been eliminated long ago through eons of human occupation. Between the sunny side of the hill in Malvernshire and the river on which Anjou keeps her canal boat, there are no brown snakes or saltwater crocodiles and there are surely no great whites in the river.such circumstance makes it easy to be holy.

. . . ..

At Sea, my humblest apologies for preemting your reply to Anjou, and then getting it wrong. Being American, I did not grasp the geographical implication in your comment so when I tried to assuage Anjou's feelings, which appeared to me to be somewhat hurt, I was off base. Again, sorry for interjecting my incorrect interpretation.

I am still waiting for a marine biologist with specialty in shark behavior to chime in and set us all straight.

[anjou]

[QUOTE=At sea;924669]The fact is that England is a benign place - any wild and dangerous beasts have been eliminated long ago through eons of human occupation.
QUOTE]


You better believe it. Back in the 18th Century, we dealt with our wild and dangerous beasts not by killing them as you suggest, but by humanely 'exporting' them to Australia.

Maybe it was a mistake in your case, the first option makes more sense.

[Blue Crab]

[QUOTE=... I am still waiting for a marine biologist with specialty in shark behavior to chime in and set us all straight.[/QUOTE]


Here's all one needs to know and you already know it. We are killing everything. I know a lot of ex-commercial fisherpersons, including old small timer me, who have been regulated out of business. But it's way too late. The big foreign trawlers are the finishing touch scraping the bottoms of all oceans.

Aquaculture may still provide fish protein but we won't be enjoying the wonderful taste as we have in the past because farm-raised, to me, doesn't taste as good. Color added to salmon? No thanks. Shrimp raised in human soil? Ditto. Tilapia fed on dogfood? Seen it with my own blue eyes.

The point raised earlier that the Whites are eating us now because the food chain is broken makes sense to me. Still, eradication is plain old wrong. I've surfed and dived my entire life. When I started out, a diver had been killed in La Jolla, Calif by a GW. This is like in 1950 something and 80 miles south. We all knew and assumed the risks to the extent anyone can actually assume a risk like that. But kill all the big predators left so bathers can feel safe at the beach? Not on my watch.

Hell, I'm the last blue crab.

[Blue Crab]

I meant to add that these charter operators with the cages and the bloody chumming up business... wtf?

I admire the entrepreneurial spirit but they have to be endangering the rest of us.