great white numbers , another guess
fun piece below on the way stats can be used or misread when it suits the political agenda
In other words, we could be witnessing a huge explosion in shark numbers from the high estimations of juveniles in the east coast genetic testing.
Juvenile great whites are often found closer to shore than adults and have been involved in a big number of “curiosity” attacks when they interact with humans.
We would be silly to be lulled into a false sense of security that there are only 1460 great whites off the WA southern and western coast when there actually may well be 10,000 or more.
Research by the University of NSW on juvenile great whites found their jaws did not develop power until they mature, meaning they existed on fish until about 3m, then moved on to mammals. “This study also explains why many shark attacks off NSW by great whites are aborted after a single bite, as those involved are usually juveniles who may sustain jaw injury if they persevere with the attack,” study co-author Dr Vic Peddemors told Australian Geographic in 2011.
But such a bite from a 3m shark can be catastrophic for a human. Juvenile great whites may not intend to be people killers — but they are.
And they are off our beaches in very big numbers.
This new CSIRO research is not the good news that the shark huggers are suggesting.
https://thewest.com.au/opinion/paul-murray/paul-murray-big-bite-in-juvenile-shark-data-ng-b88743318z
OFW 11
evil flourishes when good men do nothing
davewillo
Posts: 2437
Date Joined: 08/09/16
I love his observation that
I love his observation that juvenile GW's are not like "labrador puppies that don't attack humans in the water"!
One thing I don't get with this whole debate is the argument that there is no evidence that numbers have increased since whites were protected. Besides the fact that numbers back then were completely unknown, if they haven't increased then why were they protected in the first place? Surely the purpose of that was to increase their numbers? Take away their number 1 threat and of course you will end up with more.
This debate and the position of Dave Kelly is really starting to piss me off. Subsidising shark shields is a good idea but it's not a solution, just a band aid. If they bothered to talk to serious ocean users over many years they will all tell you the same story - there are heaps more sharks and a lot more whites in coastal waters.
Looks like a status quo until things eventually get worse.
PGFC member and lure tragic
scotto
Posts: 2471
Date Joined: 21/04/08
green left wing
simple maths: remove the primary threat to anything, and its numbers will increase.
as mentioned in the article, if they are only "officially" finding out about these numbers now, how the fuck did they conclude that they were "under threat of becoming endangered" in 1999??
I have only just found out too, that Labour's rebate scheme on the shark shield, does NOT apply to the surfers model!! it only applies to the 2 diving variants (scuba and freedom 7).
I think the solution is simple: take them off the protected list. I can sort them out from there...
Daneox
Posts: 68
Date Joined: 07/11/10
I volunteer
I volunteer as decky if the protected status changes Scotto! Good points as always.
resurgence
Posts: 578
Date Joined: 23/04/14
A few flaws
hezzy
Posts: 1521
Date Joined: 27/11/09
you would have to logically
you would have to logically assume paul murphys extrapolation of the numbers based on the eastern states stats will be closer to the mark than not ...[ Second, the research did not "suggest" any total population numbers in that region, because presumably they didn't have the data. That was Paul Murphy's suggestion by applying the ratios of one population to the othe]
sort of like if a 100 head piggery in vic can breed 900 piglets a year ...then it would be safe to assume a wa piggery with a 100 pigs of same variety and environment would or should be similar in breeding 900 piglets ..may be some local differences , but not much imo especially given wa does not have drum lines or nets etc
given the gov wishes to play down the total no and not shock or scare the wa public , it is also fair to assume they did not ''suggest ''any total population nos as murray has done as it might just do exactly that SCARE or ALARM people here somewhat me thinks lol
hezzy
OFW 11
evil flourishes when good men do nothing
meglodon
Posts: 5981
Date Joined: 17/06/10
The nanny state and it's inhabitants.
Grow a bit of self responsibility and backbone people and do things of your own initiate to protect yourself.
Enter the water at your own risk and stop wanting everybody to do something for you, your days of entitlement are over.
meglodon
Posts: 5981
Date Joined: 17/06/10
The nanny state and it's inhabitants.
Grow a bit of self responsibility and backbone people and do things of your own initiate to protect yourself.
Enter the water at your own risk and stop wanting everybody to do something for you, your days of entitlement are over.
pelagicyachts
Posts: 1322
Date Joined: 23/02/11
yeah I get that - and
yeah I get that - and understand where you are coming from - to a point -
but what about tourists? - should we be selling/renting shark shields to them at the beach? - welcome to Perth- just clip one of these shields to your leg for a small fee and go and have a refreshing dip! -
Being known as the shark attack capital of the world has not done much for the tourist dollar.....
petermac
Posts: 2946
Date Joined: 03/03/10
meg
agree carry a smokie up your wetty sleve , personaly i think divers are at more risk from tiger sharks than GWS
Jsmolly
Posts: 187
Date Joined: 10/04/12
Meg get in the real world
Meg get in the real world your posts are normally smarter than that.
I'll throw up the same old argument that no one ever seems to debate- we are APEX, land and sea (END), a dog bites a kid, good bye dog, a magpie swoops a kid, good bye tweetie. I am a greenie from way back but enoughs enough. I dont wish it one anyone but my fear is until a young kid is taken nothing will change. I thought the young girl surfing in Esperance could be the tipping point but unfort not.
A person rapes anopther person, jail! Your analogy Meg is like saying because a girl wears a short skirt she is asking for bad things to happen.
I can keep ranting if you like
Curndog
Posts: 449
Date Joined: 21/11/16
Couldn’t agree more
couldnt agree more js. Unfortunately so true about waiting for a young kid to be taken before anything is done about it
Marineboy
Posts: 845
Date Joined: 14/03/14
Real world
gotta say jsm I’m with meg here, the media has beaten up the shark so badly that every one is shit scared to go in the water (maybe not everyone). You’re argument about a dog killing a person and the dog gets put down is a little tainted caus what if there a 100 dogs in the park and nobody knew which dog killed said person ! Would they kill all 100 dogs ? I doubt it. If they could pin down the shark that killed said person then they would deal with I would think. Google up deaths from snake bites in Australia I think you will be shocked at the amount per year (2-3) but they hardly get a mention and nobody seems to want to have a massive cull on snakes.
damn media.
Jmo
cherrs
mark
My spots are so secret even the fish don't know about them !
Jackfrost80
Posts: 8152
Date Joined: 07/05/12
If it were 100 wild dogs
If it were 100 wild dogs living in Kings Park and they started killing people as they walked along the various trails there we'd be in there shooting them indiscriminately as soon as it started happening.
Officially off the Pies bandwagon
Faulkner Family
Posts: 18060
Date Joined: 11/03/08
plus 2 for Megladon. you
plus 2 for Megladon.
you enter the water knowing there is sharks out there and big ones too.
more people get killed in the world by falling coconuts landing on heads than being taken by a shark.
no its not good to hear about people being attacked by sharks, have a look around the world at how many people get taken by wild animals.
nothing wrong with taking a shark for food but just for the sake of killing one im against it.
i have always beleived there should be a couple of shark fishing licences issued for catching for food .
RUSS and SANDY. A family that fishes together stays together
clayd
Posts: 128
Date Joined: 07/12/15
This whole great white thing
This whole great white thing is starting to wear thin. Researchers are licking their lips at being able to continually access funding to perform crap research with flaws you can drive a Mack truck through. Continually ignore anecdotal evidence from people who have spent their lives either professionally or recreationally in or on the water. Greenies won't accept anyone's word accept that coming from the researchers. The whole thing is a shamozzle.
Others talk about enter at your own risk yet live a life totally controlled by risk mitigation. Why not allow people to drive unlicensed, no speed limits,no jail time for serial killers. We put laws and punishments in place to manage the risk. We mitigate environmental risks all the time.
I'm all for managing numbers at a sustainable level and would never support anything that would threaten the existence of a species. However, there's enough annectdotal evidence to suggest numbers are increasing and that numbers can bounce back if they are thinned out a bit.
little johnny
Posts: 5363
Date Joined: 04/12/11
What sharks
There rare :)
axey45
Posts: 1758
Date Joined: 26/11/13
davewillo
Posts: 2437
Date Joined: 08/09/16
Just an observation on the
Just an observation on the tourism side.
I just came back from 5 weeks in Canada and the US and a surprising number of people had heard of Perth (compared to when I was last there in 1999). They were very aware of the shark attack reputation and were again surprisingly well-informed.
Tourism is certainly not the be all and end all but there is no doubt this wont help us attract people to WA.
As for mitigating the risk to yourself - I've done that by not surfing really any more, except maybe in summer in crowded metro locations!
PGFC member and lure tragic
davewillo
Posts: 2437
Date Joined: 08/09/16
Sorry double post
Just an observation on the tourism side.
I just came back from 5 weeks in Canada and the US and a surprising number of people had heard of Perth (compared to when I was last there in 1999). They were very aware of the shark attack reputation and were again surprisingly well-informed.
Tourism is certainly not the be all and end all but there is no doubt this wont help us attract people to WA.
As for mitigating the risk to yourself - I've done that by not surfing really any more, except maybe in summer in crowded metro locations!
PGFC member and lure tragic
squalis
Posts: 117
Date Joined: 23/11/14
whites
Great white populations that are being monintered by marine biologists all over the world report steadily increasing numbers in thier research areas except in W.A, the nanny state where our experts claim there is no evidence to substanciate any increase in our G.W population. Just who do these people think they are fooling . This mob refuse to accept any report by anyone who is not in thier clique. Great for the W.A gov which refuses to spend any money except for the pathetic limited rebate on a shark shield ,to mitigate the threat posed by this growth. However the money trough is open for the greenies to close off more areas for public access. What an absolute farce. If a dog attacks a human they have no hesitation in executing the dog. But with sharks its a different story. Bring back shark fishing and drum lines.
Willlo
Posts: 1490
Date Joined: 07/10/11
By all reports the smart
By all reports the smart drum line technology is having a win on the east coast , so it baffles me why the WA govt wont entertain even giving it a go . I suppose green and keyboard warrior votes have more sway than people getting eaten .
Call Sign - BZ785
Haynes Hunter Prowler CC
Jsmolly
Posts: 187
Date Joined: 10/04/12
Spot on Willo. Minority have
Spot on Willo. Minority have the loudest voice.
timboon
Posts: 2961
Date Joined: 14/11/10
Merman... Being the true
Merman...
Being the true WATERMAN that you are i'll fire this your way...
So lets say that there is a large increase in GW numbers. Well obviously attacks are also going to continue to increase ( like they have been )....
What is your solution.
Lets say we go from around 1 fatality a year to 3 a year then 5 then 10.... Sure that might not be in the next few years but it might be in 10 years. Right about the time my two boys will be venturing out surfing diving and hopefully enjoying the ocean as much as i have.
You'll still be entering the water chest pumped like the true waterman that you are or will your tail be starting to droop a little between your legs?
I'm not afraid to say that the thought of the beasts scare the fuck out of me.
So what is your solution?
I want YOU to state here how to sort the problem, lets think way way outside the box and even say there is a 100 fatalities a year ( i'm only saying this crap because at some point even the heros of the ocean will re think their position ) so come on what is the solution.
I'm all about a healthy balanced ocean in our backyard.