should sharks be culled follow the link
voting is open until tomorrow.http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/cloud/polls/popup/b246a7b3-e385-398f-99bc-99b45580e2a8/
Um let me think for a nano second, should stupid people be smacked in the face?
YES!!
Should fat people be culled because they breath my oxygen, YES
What a stupid reply
The above poll is not exactly binary, but I think it fits the description below....
thingsboganslike.com/2011/03/23/219-online-binary-polls/
We clear the sea of fish, but sharks have been protected for 20 years. We have an overpopulation of hungry sharks who appear more inclined to have a go a anything. Either we need to cull the sharks or stop fishing!!!
Why thank you I have never been referred to as Jesus
although not really the type of guy to take one for the team.
What happens when we deplete world resource's cull humans?
The term if you you don't like the heat in the kitchen - get out, comes to mind.
You certainly don't burn it down... you live with it.
Unfortunately the govt and the dept of fisheries seem to have no idea of what to do either. they made the decision to destroy sharks which are an imminent danger and though we have a tagged GW setting off beacons all over the metropolitan swimming beaches, they do nothing.
I hope the next victims'( and there will be one ) family will take legal action as it is quite obvious we have a serios problem and yet our authorities still do nothing.
Sue over a shark attack?
Grow a brain.
With all the media attention you know the risk.
A human life is always greater than a shark, but you can't live in a risk free world, stop being f@&king panzies.
It's not the governments problem.
Too scared, too fearful, worried you might get nibbled? There is a 100% preventable way not to die.
STAY ON THE BEACH.
Entering the ocean is not a God given privilege.
Rant over. Red thumb away panzies.
I just want to make the observation of the logical argument some people put forward being;
"If you don't want to be eaten, don't go in the ocean"
The converse logic of course being that anyone who does go in the ocean WANTS to be eaten.
Discussion is good.
haha, I wasn't having a go at anyone in particular, it's just that I've heard that phrase bandied around every time a shark discussion comes up, here and on news sites etc, that I had to make an observation to see if anyone else realized that was pretty much the logic being implied.
Yeah, definitely an increased chance by going in the ocean no matter how small, but it's definitely not a desire to be eaten if you/we do.
What I find amusing is that most people don't speak up about fishing for dhu fish, snapper, herring, squid whatever upsetting the balance of nature but the thought of killing a GWS brings them out in force.
I don't really know what the answer is and I definetly dont support mass culling.
I do know that I have surfed all of my life and hardly gave sharks a thought until the last year or so because it does seem like there is a lot more sharks along the West coast of Australia than there has been for most of my life and I am not just going by reported sighting on sites like Shark Alarm because we obviously didn't have those sort of Internet sites in the past.
I am going off what I have heard longtime professional and amateur fishermen saying and of course by the increase in attacks.
More research is required into their behavior and why this is so but if we are cathching and killing most other species in the ocean then bumping off the odd one that is hanging around populated areas (especially one that is in the vicinity after an attack) should not be out of the question IMO.
Great post ^
It seems that not everyone is leaving the water in droves.
WA Surflife Saving where saying the other day nippers numbers have been increasing at 5% pa over the past couple of years.
Heres a crazy idea ... if we could hunt as many GWS (sharks) along the WA coast line that is causing most of the grief at the moment - but far from taking them out maybe some mad ass could attach a GPS tracker to each and then let them go ? I know it would cost a motza as a program but think of the benefits.
If the majority of big sharks were GPS's and their location was posted on a web site then there would be 2 benefits - ie which beaches to avoid today because eg # 666 is in your neighbourhood ! and science would be getting a heap of data around what these amazing sharks do with their time.
Its not fool proof as I'm sure there will be 'visiting' sharks etc and yes the batteries in a gps sender go flat - but an interesting idea???
I know that if # 666 or another mother fu##er is about my beach then i can make a decision to take that wave or awesome wind session.
just my 2CW
Surely there is enough mOney to be made to encourage someone To develop an effective shark screen for individuals or even one to work on popular coastal areas.
Can sort of see why the question is asked, if they aren't endangered any more etc why they still untouchable, and I can also see the fact that if we are able to fish the seas of the shark food meaning more hungry sharks lOoking for an easy feed, it may cause some issues, having said that I guess the theory is they will starve and numbers will balance out somewhere.
Don't think the answer is pussys stay out of wate, or kill all the moth'a fu@=^}s. It will probably balance out but I'd n
Surely there is enough mOney to be made to encourage someone To develop an effective shark screen for individuals or even one to work on popular coastal areas.
Can sort of see why the question is asked, if they aren't endangered any more etc why they still untouchable, and I can also see the fact that if we are able to fish the seas of the shark food meaning more hungry sharks lOoking for an easy feed, it may cause some issues, having said that I guess the theory is they will starve and numbers will balance out somewhere.
Don't think the answer is pussys stay out of water or kill all the moth'a fu@=^}s. It will probably balance out but I'd nOt like to be the easy meal in the mean time, so come on scientists and entrepreneur types, hop to it!!
Ps not a issue in tassie yet so will still be pinching waves, but when people start getting pinched of my locals I'll reconsider my options.
Dont swim in the rivers either as there are Bull sharks in there too.
Dont cull sharks...not all of them are bad...just cull the man eaters..
Ohh there is always the ( save the scorpion,funnel web, piranha or shark ) lobby.
BUT I SAY KILL THE BAST ARDS
Mind you it does make me giggle when some poor surfer gets chomped (not that part)
and then there is a mad search for the offending shark .....how do you know you have the right shark? Does it confess?
Anyway to sum up ..shark fin soup sounds delicious...
culled, cull·ing, culls
1. To pick out from others; select.
2. To gather; collect.
3. To remove rejected members or parts from (a herd, for example).
^ not exterminate... IMO i was always against killing sharks etc but the increase in fatalities and attacks in WA is a bit nerve wrecking at the moment and like everyone has said, why can we plunder all other marine life but not the dangerous ones? I'm sure if a croc ate someone it would be killed would it not? and how would you prove which one did it exactly prior to the kill?
I just think that if there are repeat offenders constantly loitering around popular areas there is no significant harm in killing a handful to make a mass population safer, human safety > animal safety.
I dont like sharks, I dont think they are majestic or beautiful with their cold dead little eyes and they tiny brains which produce two single solitary thoughts of swim and eat.
Did you know Great white shark's young devour the weaker siblings in the womb? they are truly terrifying mindless killing machines from before they are even born.
That being said I dont think the culling program will work, they are sharks not tourists, its not like they have a bi-annual meeting to discuss where to travel to and will put WA on a black list. I read somewhere that there are sharks here that have travelled from as far away as Cape Town and vice versa.
So killing sharks that travel HUGE distances in the immediate area is going to be as useful as trying to catch a fart in a gazebo with a tennis racquet.
I think creating some sort of exclusion zone in and around populated areas using nets or something similar and researching non invasive technology like the shart sheild (got to be some potential there) and more patrols.
or a third option... Genetically modified sharks with no teeth. BAM problem solved
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.
