North Coast shark activity: A new theory

Nick Brennan
Surfpolitik

I am going to put myself out there to offer an explanation as to why I think we have seen recent attacks and an increase in shark activity of late in the Ballina Region, that is not simply "The Great White Shark is protected and thus there is more of them and therefore more attacks".

I think a lot of you would agree there is more at play than just a potential increase in shark numbers when you have so many negative interactions close together in time and location. I welcome your opinions and discussion. 

But in short: my advice is to be extremely cautious on your choice to surf in Northern NSW right now.

We are approaching new moon on the 15th and I would advise to avoid surfing around the full moon on the 30th altogether. Here is a picture I made of the moon phase on days of negative human/shark interactions over the last 10 months around Ballina.

My explanation for what has been happening around Ballina is based around the “hungry shark” theory.

The recent shark attacks at Ballina are focused around the two lunar cycles after the first whales have made their migration. White sharks are not feeding constantly. Their liver is like a battery and allows them to go weeks and months without eating. White sharks are regarded as opportunistic on their feeding habits with whales, preying on sick and injured whales as well as calves.

This year we are in the midst of full blown El Nino and the humpback whales made their migration up the coast later than what could be considered usual. My belief is the whales being late and potentially more clustered together has resulted in less feeding opportunities for a portion of the white shark population at a key time. My thoughts are that a portion of the population hasn’t fulfilled their need for calories and thus are heading close to shore to feed on schooling fish like the Australian salmon.

As to why the attacks on the full moon, I present two reasons. A long standing saying by fisherman and more recently adopted by divers is “No run - No fun”.

During the full moon there are larger tides and ocean currents also increase in intensity. When the current increases, eddies and stands of water create feeding opportunities for marine wildlife. Wildlife activity increases and aggregates on the full moon and this results in an opportune time to hunt.

The other reason has to do with hunting strategy. On this, sharks have been documented leaving shallow water on the full moon and returning on the new moon. This is something which I myself have recorded with my team in an exercise book during 4.5 years working as a diver at the southern tip of the Great Barrier Reef.

The idea is that because sharks use a lot of different senses to hunt their food, low light (new moon - darkness after sunset) and poor visibility allows sharks a competitive advantage to catch their prey. It is also suggested that these sharks do this avoid predation (I believe the attack in January on the new moon not to be the work of a white, but a bull or tiger - the timing would agree too).

White sharks however have extremely good eye sight and use it to identify and hunt their prey. As the full moon approaches there is light after sunset and white sharks are perhaps approaching a time where they are peaked up to get their calories.

As to Ballina? Living, surfing and studying at Ballina, I can say this region from Evans Head to Byron Bay has always been a very sharky area. It is located at the extreme eastern point of Australia, literally a corner in the coastline meaning wildlife tends to bottleneck through there: this is the reason Byron Bay is such a great place to watch whales.

It is also the place where the vibrant - although periodically majorly disturbed - Richmond River breaks the coastline, which plays a role as a nursery for fish and sharks. There are also multiple coves perfect for schooling fish to stop in and reef systems for fish to aggregate just offshore. Right now it is also a place of convergence for a lot of marine wildlife.

In short my belief is that because the whales were late it created less feeding opportunities for the white shark at a key time for them, therefore a small amount of hungry sharks have been getting desperate and peaked up to feed on the full moon. This has resulted in more negative shark encounters in the Ballina region. 

The good news is I don’t believe this will last. Stay safe people. //NICK BRENNAN

Comments

thermalben's picture
thermalben's picture
thermalben Tuesday, 11 Aug 2015 at 9:27pm

Fascinating stuff Nick. Hopefully this recent clustering of attacks will ease up soon so things can return to quasi-normality.

longboarder420's picture
longboarder420's picture
longboarder420 Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 12:56pm

I Dont think anything needs to or should be done to help reduce shark attacks and sightings,
shark attacks are still are very rare thing to die from , Many studies have shown sharks a mistaking people for other marine life... And I think as surfers its our responsability to get to know the local sharks in our area , Theres a big boy named Bruce down here on a tuesday ... Keeps the tourists away ... Stick your head under give him a smile and a wave and your all good,
Paddle around like a kook and your shark bait

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Tuesday, 11 Aug 2015 at 9:42pm

Interesting theory.
What was the attack in January you referred to that you think was a bull or tiger?

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 9:56am

A girl at wategos who got bumped off her board.

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 10:13am

Cheers. Didn't hear about that one.
I've definitely being opting for the longboard during solo surfs up here recently. Feel much safer on that.

Dave Drinkwater's picture
Dave Drinkwater's picture
Dave Drinkwater Tuesday, 11 Aug 2015 at 10:13pm

Thats good detective work Nick. Have you researched the WA attacks and do they show similar results? I live in East Ballina on Shelly and my observations have been that the water has been relatively warm for the last 2 years. Less rain, so the water has been exceptionally clear, the whales get closer/increase in numbers every year, bait fish have been prolific with the absence of tailor in big schools. What do you think is a long term decision so that we can co exist and reduce the risk of attacks in the future? As you can imagine the last 12 months has rattled the community and everybody has a theory to solve the problem, some a little more extreme then others.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 10:29am

They aren't around the full moon but they are around a similar phase of the moon. This again is not an attempt to justify all attacks ever but offer an explanation as to the recent attacks in ballina. I am totally unfamiliar with the west coast and the marine system there. There are obviously multiple mechanisms for attack- tiger sharks and bull sharks for instance are completely different altogether. Interestingly the poor kid in Coffs that got bit and died happened almost directly on the new moon. This is In keeping with the book i kept of tigers we spotted on the GBR returning to shallow water over the new moon. I agree that water temp was mild last year, it usually dips to 19 were i work on the gbr and it never got below 21, and this year was warm until particularly late and I have been informed by colleagues still up there that there was a sudden cold snap recently. El Nino suggests we are seeing a net cooler body of water on our side of the pacific. Long term solutions- community initiatives like Ballina Shark Alert page on FB are a good start and Kent Stannards who is contracted to the CSIRO gives some good insites on the Ballina Shark Discussion fb page. Again appreciated discussion. Just want people to get talking about what they are observing and thinking.

trotty77's picture
trotty77's picture
trotty77 Tuesday, 11 Aug 2015 at 10:26pm

Makes sense the high tides are around 8.30 in the morning and night on those moon phases as well. when people are keen to go for a wave
.lack of injured whales could be to do with a lack of killer whales on the east coast. they kill whales but only eat the tongue and lips leaving the rest for the sharks to feed on.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 8:19am

A more robust whale population for whatever reason is certainly plausible too. The main food source for whites under 3m is fish and beyond that it becomes marine mammals. The sharks around Ballina have been large and hence why I think it is strange they are in close looking for fish.
Full tide tends to see currents slacken or moderate with peak current intensity between tides and therefore more "fun". I was more referring to white sharks potentially being peaked up on these days.

trotty77's picture
trotty77's picture
trotty77 Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 9:06pm

Could the sharks be there on a breeding mision of their own.I cant see them leaving the seal colinies in the south for any reason but to give birth.If the juveniles cant feed on mammals until they are over 3 metres then mum would have to drop them somewhere fishy and warmer.then return south following the whales and new calves.if they are pregnant and hungry it would make sense that they scavenging in closer out of stronger ocean currents to conserve energy . Unfortunately for us surfers we look like injured seals.i say injured because as the shark moves closer we make no a tempt to get a way like a healthy seal would.

Agate's picture
Agate's picture
Agate Tuesday, 11 Aug 2015 at 11:37pm

Totally agree Nick. All true and valid points, importantly stay safe If there was numerous hit and run car accidents on local streets we would all be very careful crossing the road. Still do it but look twice and go with gut instinct.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 8:33am

Cheers. Agreed. You can further reduce your risk by joining the Ballina Shark Alerts facebook page to check for sightings and reporting your own sightings.

Gazman's picture
Gazman's picture
Gazman Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 6:21am

Have been saying this exactly Nick , and with the increasing numbers of whales now means an increased food supply which would make for an increase in the White Shark numbers to survive.cheers

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 8:25am

I actually think it has not much to do with population size. If the population of whites was small and were presented with the same situation it might mean 2 or 3 sharks doing the same thing and there would still be problems for surfers. The amount of interactions makes this an unusual event.
On another note the reason they are protected is that if the population gets too small then their may not be enough genetic diversity for the population to be robust enough against a change in living conditions. Genetic information suggests white shark populations on the east coast to contain as few as 1500 breeding individuals.
regards

AndyCarroll's picture
AndyCarroll's picture
AndyCarroll Tuesday, 8 Sep 2015 at 11:31am

I do not believe it is a result of an increase in population size per say. I believe it is more tlikely o do with water temperatures and increased prey e.g.. bait fish hanging around inshore for longer this year.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 7:03am

Nick I really appreciate you putting forth this detailed theory.

As a lifetime fisherman, both commercially and recreationally, there's absolutely no doubt that moon phase plays a critical role in biological activity in the ocean. That is well documented.

While you're theory has some utility in identifying riskier times to be in the ocean it doesn't have any answers to the main question of interest to local surfers. Which is, why are these whites hanging around so long and in such shallow water?

That is the 64 dollar question right now.

Also, couple of nitpickings. You mentioned Aus salmon , which are indeed a favourite food source for whites. Only problem is we haven't had any salmon schools this winter, or last for that matter. So there isn't that source of larger finfish schools to hold them here.
Also, you mentioned a January attack? If you mean Tadashi, that was February and has been confirmed by DPI as a white shark.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 8:12am

I think my piece explains why they are still there. They are hungry. They have missed an opportunity and therefore they are getting creative with their feeding to make up for a defecit. Its well documented that white sharks will stay in an area if there is food. I think they will move on when the bulk of the whales come back down the coast in a few months. I am not based in Ballina anymore, just from friends and pictures I have seen how many schooling fish are in the water. Has anyone actually swum out with a mask on to see what they are I am interested to know. The incident I was referring to in January was at Wategos where a girl was bumped off her board. Regards.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 9:00am

Most of the inshore bait balls have been frogmouth pilchards.
Some slimey mackerel but these tend to stay a bit wider.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 10:31am

yeah frog mouth pilchard are bloody tiny-not white
food. You sure there are not bigger fish smashing them atm? Thanks for the insight.

Lanky Dean's picture
Lanky Dean's picture
Lanky Dean Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 2:24pm

The whales most probably would be tasting the pilchards though. Enticing the whites to hang around and have a sniff for calves or dolphins, so to speak.
Thanks for writing the article. very Interesting, yet sad read. cheers Nick

Lanky Dean's picture
Lanky Dean's picture
Lanky Dean Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 2:03pm

@freeride76

What has been on the bite lately, you been fishing off the beach, break walls or boat?

Did you commercially fish out of byron/Ballina region?

If so did you keep Data/ log books ?

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 7:13am

Morning all. I appreciate the interest firstly this is just my speculation not a conclusive answer. I wrote the piece to bring about discussion because I was frustrated with how black and white the argument had become. It seemed no one could get past the population size of sharks as being the answer when these exact sharks have been past multiple population centres previously without incident. What is often forgotten is that white sharks are dictated by their surrounds and biology and are in a struggle for survival like the rest of us. What is happening at Ballina I believe is an unusual and extraordinary event. So my piece is a guess to offer an idea as to why this is happening in Ballina. Information that came out at the lennox meeting is that there are as few as 7 individual sharks that haven't moved on from the waters around Ballina. This lends validation to my idea, so whilst it is a guess, I am thinking its not a bad guess. Today unfortunately is not a wet day but a work day for me, I'd like to reply to you all it just may take a little bit. Regards

davetherave's picture
davetherave's picture
davetherave Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 7:52am

thanks nick, of course there are lots of variables and the lunar cycles have to be considered. But it also must be noted about the intra communication species in animals.
it only took under a year since one crow worked out how to open the tin foil lids on milk bottles and than all crows all over the world started doing it.
it only took less than 6 six months from one monkey washing a special nut in the ocean to clean it before the whole island chain copied the same behaviour.
White sharks have only been attacking people- not eating all of them- maybe species communication has evolved to humans now being once again on the menu for the whites
their numbers are increasing whilst their food supply is dwindling and humans are easy prey.
Karma- we took all their main food sources, now they are taking us- nature finds a balance sooner or later. maybe the moon's cycle is the best time for them to hunt and if no fish, well, a human just might do.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 8:12am

"Information that came out at the lennox meeting is that there are as few as 7 individual sharks that haven't moved on from the waters around Ballina. This lends validation to my idea, so whilst it is a guess, I am thinking its not a bad guess."

With respect Nick, your theory doesn't address this issue at all.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 8:27am

I am not suggesting all white sharks have had a bad year. Just some. Hope that clears it up.

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 8:47am

Great read Nick and certainly some valid points.
I don't have any theories however will offer a few points that may or may not have any relation to the Ballina situation.

You referenced El Nino and warm water causing the whales to be late, perfectly fine scenario. However I do not believe that this is the reasoning for the sharks to be in the area. The GWS like the whales, also move because of water temperature, they follow or "should" follow the whales as they move up and down the coast each migration, preying on the weak, young or dead whales. I highly doubt that a large number of GWS are going to set up camp off Lennox or Ballina in well before whale season in VERY warm water and 'just wait' for the whales to come through 5-6 months later. Yes the whites enjoy a bit of warm water but to be set up camp at the end of the cool spring time water, through summer and into the warmest water of the year, something is out of wack.

The theory or 'baitfish' is all true, however it is no different in this stretch of coastline as say Yamba, Coffs, Nambucca, Foster, Seals or Tomaree. All super fishy locations and have a feed of nutrients from estuary or bays. If anything I'd say Ballina river is a less healthy ecosystem due to acid sulphate soils and fish kills caused by all the drainage channels across the farm/cane paddocks. All these locations above have had exactly the same number of baitfish schools, just a few weeks or couple of months earlier as the warmer waters slowly moved north up the coast. The theory of salmon I would also question as my mates are still/were catching mackies off Coffs so highly doubt there would be schools of salmon up Ballina way, happy to be wrong, water just too warm for them. More likely tailor, bonito and small mack tuna/long tails.
This blows the warm water theory out the window in my opinion as the water gets warm every single year with the EAC at some stage during the season and the salmon do not always arrive, but for some reason, the sharks are still there this year with normal supply of fish stocks as to what we would see any other year with baitfish, tailor and tuna.

Full moon - yep, may be a theory but also consider smoother surface conditions a few days either side of a full moon, no idea why it happens but when a family friend pro fisher with 40 years experience, plus his old mans additional 50 years for jew, pearls, trag and snapper on handlines says that the weather is generally calmer in the lead up and few days after a full moon, I would be listening. Calmer surface conditions = lighter winds = better surfing conditions = more people in the water around a full moon maybe as opposed to more shark numbers. Plus the associated big spring high tides around sunrise/set during this period may also have a play in the matter.
As much as we would all like to say "warm water and baitfish" is the cause, this scenario happens every year and this year is no different so there must be another explanation.

Is it as simple as the whales are late? don't believe so. Is it as easy to say that the numbers or juvenile sharks during protection have matured, quite possible, or it as complex as to say that the whales have arrive late (regardless of water temps) due to other extremes. Whale populations has bounced back massively, maybe, and just maybe there is massive competition for their food source down in Antarctica, and due to mankind intervention over the years global warming, pollution etc, that the food source is just not there as it once was for the increased population of whales and they are having to stay down in Antarctica for longer to beef up their fat supplies before heading north. Left field but who knows

With lack of satellite tagging and such an increase in encounters/attacks, the current situation in Australia in general over the past 6-7 years since the WA cycle of attacks has really left authorities with shit over their faces as they/we have simply no great detail available to numbers of sharks actually out there, migration movements and what they do during migration, cruising coastlines or 'set up camp', why do they do this, what triggers movements is all simply educated guess work at the moment due to lack of data which will take +10 years of studies to cover the shortfall, hooking and tagging sharks to close the gap. But only if they start now, seems to be little if none activity from NSW Fisheries to be attempting to tag any of these 'resident' sharks. Unfortunately that leaves people entering the water the next 10 years to make calculated risks when using the ocean.
Certainly a very unusual event going on up the north coast, is it a one off or just a way of the future? No one knows the answer but for the water uses of the north coast I hope that it is a one off situation and everything goes back to sleep and never seen again. It would be such a shame for the beautiful nooks and crannies hiding overnight or secret banks to be on permanent shark watch.
Hopefully someone or mother nature has an answer and everyone can get back in the water for those perfect clean water winter days or sleep easy when your kids jump on their pushy and go for a surf before or after school.
Stay safe folks

trotty77's picture
trotty77's picture
trotty77 Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 9:01am

Just heard on the radio people want a shark cull. Mabee a solution would be to kill a couple of whales off the coast. prob wouldnt be very popular but it might remove the sharks from inshore waters to feed on the carcass. That was my point earlier about the killer whales as this proccess would be occuring naturaly . Also if people were food for sharks they wouldn't move from places like bondi .conditions are probably good around balina at the moment for the sharks at the moment and gives a good opportunity for some research knowing tey are there

wingnut2443's picture
wingnut2443's picture
wingnut2443 Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 9:28am

Tin foil hat warning ...

Nick, or anyone else, have you looked at any correlation with Sunspot Activity? It seems from my quick analysis that each recent attack links to a peak on the sunspot activity. With a decreasing cycle of sunspot activity, could it be that this is influencing the hunting and other habits (i.e. proximity to shore, grouping in an area, interaction with no humans, etc.) of the sharks.

Sunspot activity graph here: http://www.solen.info/solar/

Lunar activity is a well known influence on the ocean. Sunspot activity may too?

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 3:40pm

Very interesting man... Have you ever heard of Milankovitch cycles? Thanks for that

Brad Pollock's picture
Brad Pollock's picture
Brad Pollock Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 9:25am

My granddad knew every stick and tree of the far north coast area and always had another theory about the local shark behaviour which he insisted has always been prevalent.
Years ago, before surfing gained popularity there used to be an abattoir /meat works that used to just dump all its refuse straight into the ocean near Tallows I think - you can imagine the sharks were pretty happy about this cozy arrangement to the point that it became a natural feeding ground to them.
Now many animals have territorial instinct which builds itself into their DNA ..... it passes on to future generations and doesn't just die with any individual creature. I'm no shark expert but my granddads theory that sharks always came back to this area as an instinctive feeding ground makes a hell of a lot of sense to me because he also used to breed pigeons about 60 years ago and their descendants through many generations still sit on the roof of his old house.
Just counted 42 pigeons and passing on the wisdom of one of the smartest old guys you could ever meet .....

Lanky Dean's picture
Lanky Dean's picture
Lanky Dean Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 2:17pm

*"We used to dread surfing off the meat works. They would wash the floor ,the blood, hair and offal would drift past the jetty. Sharks would hang around tantalized."_ Bob McTavish

pulled from The Surfers Journal vol 17 no 5 Byron Bay article written by DC Green .

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 11:04pm

Moon phase, water temps/currants, whales, more people in the water etc etc etc.
Everyone has a theory/guess but we need more data and less greenie propaganda.
My local fact is I've never seen individual sharks hang around for weeks like they were on the NSW South Coast this summer.
That shorline marine reserves are there to increase the numbers of the fish that sharks may feed on and that shark protection is there to protect shark numbers are not theories. 1+1=2
The politics goes like this - most people agree with the environmentalist angle until enough people get attacked then sentiment shifts toward favouring culling options.
Bad luck for the guy that got ate.
We need a lot more analysis like this article to build up an informed picture then a strategy that protects people first and sharks second. See Reunion island and Western Oz
There is a legitimate risk in surfing but I can't stomach all the lame arguments that invariably imply that sharks are more important than people.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 10:10am

See discussion on Ballina Shark Discussion fb page re: Kent Stannard who works with CSIRO for solutions. Interesting observation about south coast. Were there many shark interactions do you know?

jimbrown's picture
jimbrown's picture
jimbrown Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 11:49am

Blob, why are humans more important than sharks? Many seem to take this as self-evident, but please justify it, as you see it.

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 11:08pm

Thanks for proving my point
.... I wonder, do you eat fish?

jimbrown's picture
jimbrown's picture
jimbrown Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 11:34am

I haven't stated my position at all, how did I prove any point of yours? I wonder where you're coming from when you assume a human life is automatically superior to a shark's but haven't said why. I can make myself even more clear if you want

tim foilat's picture
tim foilat's picture
tim foilat Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 11:43am

Don't take the comment seriously jimbo, blob has difficulty forming a rational argument, his ecology reference was written a couple thousand years ago. Perhaps a little out of date but it clearly places humans at the pinnicle of supernatural design and therefore above any other animal or organism on the planet, some people just think like that.

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 7:58pm

Oh just let it go Timmy. I know you got your fingers burnt but you need to just build that bridge

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 10:09pm

Well, you know, being a human myself I am kinda like every other species that prioritises my safety over other species that want to eat me. Is that self evident enough for you?

tim foilat's picture
tim foilat's picture
tim foilat Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:49pm

Awesome :)

jimbrown's picture
jimbrown's picture
jimbrown Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 9:54am

Cool mate, well said. So taking that logic further, surely other species interested in self-preservation - which as you say, is every other one of them - would tend to stay away from those environments that present a greater risk of being eaten, only venturing there out of pure necessity (i.e. no other food sources available at all)

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 9:49pm

What are you saying exactly?

jimbrown's picture
jimbrown's picture
jimbrown Thursday, 10 Sep 2015 at 11:39am

I'm saying that you're coming across as a deadshit. You have recognised that you're as much a part of the Natural order of things as every other living thing on this planet - " I am kinda like every other species that prioritises my safety over other species that want to eat me" - and then you're baulking at the logical conclusion to these Natural laws: that is, if you want to prioritise your safety, don't go somewhere dangerous, unless it's absolutely necessary. Let me spell it out for you, because you seem to be struggling: if you don't go in the water, it is not going to kill you

tonybarber's picture
tonybarber's picture
tonybarber Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 10:45am

Interesting points … but I can't any reference to increased human usage of the waters in question. However, is there a preferred method to handle the situation in the short term ? Maybe netting ? Sea patrols from the air ?

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 10:47am

A new theory???
Clarkes Beach? 2014? full moon sept 9?????
Free ride? Simba?
The "10 point plan"? Remember that?
By memory, Ben had to shut the thread down due to abuse...... Where is that thread, Ben? The search engine doesn't work.....
Nick, as an old fisheman with decades of ocean experience, perhaps Ben, Craig, or stu could direct you to this thread I speak of, where I was lambasted for discussing the correlation of moon phases, tides, seasonal bait runs, rain, and shark attack...
Cheers...

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 11:51am

Hi Sheepdog, this is actually a copy of a facebook post i put on a small forum. I was approached to share it on this page and was not responsible for the title and agree these are most definitely not new concepts. I appreciate that everybody has kept civil on this page. Spear fishing was a big part of my life and some of the most detailed and knowledgable people I have ever met are spear fisherman because they are putting themselves in a position where they are actively part of the system. You appreciate where things are and when and often wonder why things are so. Would love to hear more from you. Regards

thebreaks's picture
thebreaks's picture
thebreaks Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 11:57am

okay, so i am officially razzed out since i have surfed very recently at both boulders and suffolk park - the latter out there on my lonesome a few mornings. *but* i just wonder (being a surfer, not a fisherman) what is the background number of white shark sightings by those out there all the time. part of my brain is still arguing that a bunch of white sharks are roaming out there all the time and we are just looking really hard for them at the moment (i know that doesn't explain the recent encounters, but hey i still want to relax and surf okay).

AndyCarroll's picture
AndyCarroll's picture
AndyCarroll Tuesday, 8 Sep 2015 at 11:35am

I surf both spots regularly and the past winter have had 2 sightings of what I belive where Whites but also numerous times I've got out as spooked by baitfish running and general shark feeling. True they are there all the time but feels more threatening this winter poss. due to increased attacks and media reports etc.

oiley's picture
oiley's picture
oiley Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 12:11pm

the government needs to commit serious money like $100 million to conduct proper research and tagging on white shark migration, only then will we get conclusive answers

Clivus Multrum's picture
Clivus Multrum's picture
Clivus Multrum Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 12:15pm

You took the words out of my mouth, Oiley. Good contribution to the general discussion too, Nick Brennan.

Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 12:21pm

Especially when tourism dollars are at stake.

redsands's picture
redsands's picture
redsands Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 12:53pm

Agree with Blob.
From 1986-2010 I saw one shark.
Since 2010 I've seen four.

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 11:35pm

I surfed Seal Rocks to Forster on many trips as a kid - no shark issues.
Recent trip I had locals telling me about so many shark interactions....first surf at Number One the two surfers who paddled out before me were already coming in ....2 sharks a bit close......next day I surfed One Mile and a 6 footer went directly under my board in 5 foot of water.
The great white hanging around Warilla/Shellharbour again this summer has been given a name - Bruce. Werri had resident 8' bronzie(s) for weeks. Never seen that before.
This is only anecdotal I know, but jeez!.
I'm pretty fatalistic but some lates are looking more iffy these days.

calmbutnot's picture
calmbutnot's picture
calmbutnot Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 1:26pm

has anyone looked at the shark/fish/whale activity from the last el nino ?

Montygoesbananas's picture
Montygoesbananas's picture
Montygoesbananas Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 1:31pm

Interesting theory Nick, seems like a lot of the old how to avoid shark attack adages like avoiding dusk and dawn etc. are being revisited with the recent spate of activity. For what it is worth, I have done a fair bit of fresh water fishing mostly targeting native species like Murray Cod and Golden Perch, but also trout. Definitely two keys to a good session for inland fishing are a full moon, and also a rising barometer. This has also applied to my ocean fishing but perhaps to a lesser extent. Not saying that this applies the same to GWS, I guess just making the point that I believe the feeding patterns around full moon for inland fish are clearly not tide related, there is some kind of biological response to the phase of the moon and also barometric pressure. It could well be that it is the impact this has on hatching of insect/aquatic life that the fish are tuned in to as opposed to being hardwired to only eat on a full moon, whatever the reason it is really complicated and as you point out there are most likely a number of things within the ecosystem that are creating a trigger rather than one single thing.

Clivus Multrum's picture
Clivus Multrum's picture
Clivus Multrum Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 3:41pm

This may be the first time a Monty has made a worthwhile contribution to a Swellnet forum.

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 1:37pm

Craig... No.. Not the one... but thanks for trying.... Nick, the thread was around the time of the englishman being fatally attacked at Byron in Sept 2014... It was right on the full moon, on the higher side of mid tide, directly in front of a rainwater creek spilling murky water into Clarkes beach.... I simply gave a list, a more more you tick that list, the more you increase the chance, slim it may be... By memory something like this;
within a few days of a full/new moon.
Rain from previous days creating less that ideal water quality
dawn/dusk
surfing on mid tide or above
seasonal bait/migration
deep drop offs
reefs/points /roc
by yourself
pissing in your wetsuit
jingly jewellery..

Again, by memory, sept attack at clarkes beach - highish tide, bait and whale migration, full moon, nutrient rich fresh water running into ocean directly at attack location, wetsuit worn but understandable that practice of urinating in wetsuit can't be verified... That's a possible 5 out of ten off that list...

Feb 9/2015 attack Ballina - heavy rain followed by consistent rainfall for at least 8 days previous;
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/201502/html/IDCJDW2022.201502.shtml
Mid incoming to a very high tide..
http://tides.willyweather.com.au/nsw/far-north-coast/richmond-river--bal...
Moon phases;
http://museumvictoria.com.au/planetarium/discoverycentre/moon-phases/moo...
Do not know if he was wearing a wettie... Do know some crazy warm currents with migrating fish were occurring late last summer... By memory they were catching coral trout off Bermagui... I think Craig had a really interesting article on that...

July attack Byron....july 2 I think...
Massive rainfalls just before attack
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/201506/html/IDCJDW2022.201506.shtml
Moon phase;
http://museumvictoria.com.au/planetarium/discoverycentre/moon-phases/moo...
Within 90 minutes of high tide...
http://tides.willyweather.com.au/nsw/far-north-coast/richmond-river--bal...
Wetsuit worn..... Winter baitfish....

Now I know that in this modern world, it is totally impossible to only surf on a low tide on a sunny day,right on a 1/4 moon at 11am, to leave the surf to have a piss, and to scan the water for any batifish.... Yeah I get that.... All I am saying is that the more you tick the list, the more wary you should be.... That's all..
For example, it's dawn, 1/2 hour before high tide, it's been raining, the water is murky, but your favorite deep water reef is pumping, AND you've got it to yourself.... As you paddle out amongst the scattering bait fish, your bladder waked up.... The colder that average water thanks to the heavy rain triggers it, so you piss in your wettie, and enjoy the warmth...You marvel at the whales 500m out..... You adjust your jangly braclets and necklace, and wait for a wave.......... Idiot..... lol ;)

longboarder420's picture
longboarder420's picture
longboarder420 Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 2:45pm

SHEEPDOG, Your list is wrong, althought many of those things can increase your chance's of getting attacked, (WELL WE THINK IT DOES)I Still believe shark attacks are a random think with nothing to do with the weather or time of day, Me and my freinds have always surfed before and on first light, rain hail or shine by ourselfs most mornings, Am i Dead , no ? Some times At a reef break just to the right an around the corner of NEWCASTLE HARBOUR with a huge drop off , you just gotta be unlucky i guess.. people get hit by cars more then sharks, lets lock that down abit more lol......... Also peeing in your wettie as been proven that it doesent effect sharks at all , same with the yummy yellow theroy

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 2:48pm

I too surf at dawn.... But you seemed to have glossed over the post... I wrote;
" I simply gave a list, a more more you tick that list, the more you increase the chance, SLIM IT MAY BE"....

thermalben's picture
thermalben's picture
thermalben Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 2:48pm
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 3:50pm

No, Ben, but thanks..... I'm sure it was around the time of the Clarkes beach attack in Byron, sept 2014, where you guys published aerial shots of a GWS not long after the attack.... This was the event..
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-09/man-killed-by-shark-at-byron-bay/5...

The discussion got quite "hectic", with emotions running high, understandably so in the shadow of a fatality... Free ride and I had a bit of a heated debate (as we sometimes do lol)... But there were some fairly good points in that discussion.... Things then got out of hand when some bloggers who I wont name started playing the man and not the ball.... So i think you shut it down..... The only reference google search will give me is a fun jibe I gave simba in a forecast thread some months later;

"Sheepdog commented Tuesday, 27 Jan 2015 at 5:37pm
Yes...... It does...... He knighted me for my 10 point plan to avoid shark attack, Simba............. ;)

edit reply
simba's picture
simba commented Tuesday, 27 Jan 2015 at 5:39pm
hahaa"

I'm just glad this discussion about shark habits is being brought up again.... As I said, the more boxes you tick, the bigger chance of attack , SLIM IT MAY BE.......

fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21 Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 1:44pm

As a long time commercial and occasion charter line fishing skipper on and around the GBR, the moon phase has always played an important part in the oceans ecosystem. As you mentioned, no run – no fun. My observations, backed up by catch records and log book entries, have consistently shown that for line fishing, the 4 days leading into, and to a certain degree, 2 days leading out of a new moon has seen significant catch rate increases. Not just with the likes of reef fin fish, but with pelagics (mackerel, tunas etc) also.
Sheepdog may be able give more insight with the prawns, but my understanding is that the full moon is not as productive.
So it would make some sense that shark activity would work in correlation with these phases.
I’ve got to mention that I have never seen so many whales around the Bunker Group than I have this season. They are everywhere. But to date this season, I have only seen one medium sized GW, which was late last week.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 8:05pm

I lived in the Bunker group for 4years (best not to mention where) so we may well have met-we may have even shared waves together out there (it gets pretty lonely sometimes lol).. I'm very interested in your catch data, we still saw lots of activity on fhe full moon but we were under the water. The strong currents associated with the large tides of the full moon creating big swirling eddys and this put the plankton in one spot and then the rest of the wildlife sort of follows . I'm interested- were your peak days fishing after dark on the new moon or during the day also. It would make sense a lot of those big predatory fish would respond to the new moon similar to a lot of sharks utilising it for hunting. My mates that are still there also can't believe the whale activity this year. We have only ever seen one white whilst diving and prompted us to close the beaches for two days however listening stations that receive a barcode from acoustically tagged animals suggest they go through their quite often. How often are you seeing them there?

fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21 Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 8:29pm

Hi Nick, very good chance we have shared waves in the area. It can get crowded at times, but if you're onto it, like you said, quite lonely too sitting in the line up all alone. Knowing when and where to go generally reaps the rewards. I've been based here in the area for about 15 years now.
Mostly fishing days, but on still nights would venture wide onto the shelf drop off. If the sharks would become a problem (as they did when fishing well) would just move a mile or two. It didn't bother me too much as it stopped you parking up at a spot for too long. A type of farming so to speak, keep the stocks healthy.
Last year I think it was 3 or 4 white,s mostly average size, with on particularly large one at about 5M. Previous years were similar or less. Mostly feeding on a carcass or surprising me by just showing up, having a cursory look, and then moving on. I'm not always around this area, depending on the fishing, I can end up around the Straits.
Big Tigers and whalers/bulls are the more prevalent species as I'm sure you have witnessed underwater. I don't really recall any time where there would be more or less around. Pretty healthy stocks. But I have just noticed more than usual numbers of whales. It's actually great, they come right up to the boat and there shear size is mesmerizing. they are constantly jumping and tail/fin slapping everywhere.
Catch data should be available to anyone if you contacted fisheries, that's who keeps track of all our data, providing the fisher accurately fills in the log correctly.

roachdog's picture
roachdog's picture
roachdog Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 3:41pm

Interesting you mention the water is currently warmer than normal in Ballina. I live in South West WA and when we had the run of attacks over a couple of years, the water (especially in & around summer) was warmer than I ever remember. The Leeuwin current was swinging all the way down to Denmark and all sorts of strange fish were being caught in the wrong places. We didn't even get the usual Easter salmon run for a couple of years. I know GWS's are meant to like cold water, but those couple of summers of surfing in boardies were when there a GWS sighting almost every 2nd day without exaggeration. We have had normal currents the past couple of years & incidents/sightings seem to be nothing like those years with the warm currents. Just saying!!!!

Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 4:09pm

And that was a result of a strong La Nina, with the Leeuwin Current strengthened pushing that warm water south and then around towards SA.

saltyone's picture
saltyone's picture
saltyone Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 4:08pm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Niño.
the el nino affects different parts of australia.. mainly the east coast. effect has huge impact on migration of whales and fish. .. . and this in turn effects sharks feeding habits. the el nino pattern is only temporary.

woohcs's picture
woohcs's picture
woohcs Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 4:55pm

All this shark talk is bringing out the war stories from phillip island too. Got talking to a few ol boys on the weekend, and they said, a few decades ago the was only one BIG shark around the island. Apparently curious, and loved to pop up and say g'day, but never caused any grief. Then along came some TV famous fisherman(can't remember the name) that caught -and displayed to great media attention this curious but otherwise passive shark. Apparently the next few years the waters around the island were a bit dicey, with guys getting nudged, bumped, and prodded by a range of slightly smaller newcomers...
Do sharks keep seasonal territories like alpha male gorillas, bears etc?
Has an alpha been taken from the waters around Balling in the recent past?
Should I take these stories with a grain of salt as simply co-incidental anecdotes from old guys, and keep my 2 cents to myself?

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 5:17pm

I think I know the exact shark you are talking about because I grew up with the story too... Did you call it "the bus". We used to joke about catching the bus back in on the long swim back from big left at flinders...

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 5:30pm

Is that the one Vic Hislop caught in he 80s and displayed it around?

prothero's picture
prothero's picture
prothero Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 9:02pm

the smaller ones do give the bigger ones a wide berth....a non aggressive apex predator can only be a plus

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 5:29pm

Sounds like the one Hislop caught .
Phillip Island Historical facebook page has pics of the beast.

simba's picture
simba's picture
simba Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 5:45pm

Im pretty sure the one big Vic Hislop caught and displayed was caught in Morteon bay and was 19ft long if my memory is correct.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 6:29pm

I fish and surf every day in this area and have done for 20 years.

This year has seemed bog standard normal in terms of most parameters.
EAC flowed normally most of the summer with average numbers of pelagics, bit down from last year. Average summer rainfall.
Minor/moderate flood in the Richmond early May which led to a normal mullet run.
Average tailor/jew season with normal concentrations of bait, tending to heavy during the later winter as normal.
Winter rainfall has been average, showing a slight deficit as we move through July into August. Not as dry as one would assume from a developing El nino. Water clarity has been good most of the winter after the May flood cleared up mid-late May.

The only thing that is standing out as different is the lower observed numbers of inshore dolphins. Whites greater than 3m need more than bait schools to feed on. They are mammalian predators at that size or transitioning towards that.
The only educated guess I can make as to what they are feeding on is dolphins. They sure as shitt aren't out wide feeding on whales. They are in close.

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 6:50pm

This is my first year in the area FR; are there really lower numbers of dolphins this year?
Surfing north wall and Shelley's throughout the year, I reckon I see dolphins 9/10 times during a surf there. Sometimes heaps of them.
Don't see that many in Lennox though, maybe 2-3/10 times and in smaller groups.

And Simba, Vic definitely caught a huge GWS at PI and photos with a crowd on the beach.

simba's picture
simba's picture
simba Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 7:00pm

yeah not saying he didnt ,seems to have been around more than i thought the old Vic.

simba's picture
simba's picture
simba Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 6:59pm

I think freeride is on the money here, dolphins would be good chewing to a great white, lots of soft meat and fat and they do hang close to the beach a lot along with jewfish at times so could explain the attacks on surfers boards which would be around the same size as a dolphin or big jewfish [very big] same white under bellies.Dosent mean that there are not plenty of whites further out tracking the whales as well.

blindboy's picture
blindboy's picture
blindboy Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 7:13pm

The problem with the various hypotheses about shark attacks is that they are very difficult to back up with valid evidence. Attacks occur with such a low frequency that it is impossible to distinguish between a cluster of attacks that occur as a result of an environmental factor and those that just represent a natural fluctuation in the random distribution of the events. In that way they are even more difficult to analyse than cancer clusters. That said I would follow Nick's advice for the time being!

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 7:32pm

LD, that seems to be what is being observed, not just by me but by long term ocean people like Chris Brock and Greenough, who spend every day in the ocean.
I can't think what else would hold a large predator like a white shark in one area for so long. It's the only thing in enough abundance that could sustain them.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 7:50pm

This is great discussion and I love how it hasn't just resorted to a battle of rhetoric. The thing I have learnt most from this is that people don't want to have a cull rammed down their throat in these forums, they are genuinely curious as to what is going on. Regards guys will tune into these forums more often.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 7:52pm

Long as no-one mentions the war we're pretty safe Nick.

Dfactor's picture
Dfactor's picture
Dfactor Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 8:33pm

I surfed northwall pretty much daily from May to august 2014 and noticed a lot of dolphins each surf mainly riding waves. Pretty standard to have dolphins jump out of a wave.
However the most dolphins I saw was directly after the bodyboarder attack july. the next weekend I walked around to Shelleys standing on the look out I would have been 40 dolphins probably the most I have ever seen in one spot. They appeared to be feeding on bait fish and were not very active ie not much jumping just feeding. I have noticed after that weekend though that there numbers have reduced pretty rapidly. Havent been seeing many when up the lookout recently. Definitely plausable sharks have been going for them
Last year I cant recall seeing many whales. This year standing at shelleys look out could easy see 15 to 20 in an hour space. Close to shore too

Definitely I think huge whale numbers are attracting sharks.
I also feel the water is a couple degrees warmer than last year. Was wearing steamers last year and only short arms this year. Not sure how the warm water effects whale migration

prothero's picture
prothero's picture
prothero Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 8:35pm

interesting read, thanks...White Pointers (i read somewhere) prefer cooler waters and your likely hood of attack by a white increases the further off shore you go ( into cooler waters) In SW WA when we had a large number of fatalities (2011) we had unprecedented warm ocean temperatures. The Leeuwin current ( warm water current from the north) was very strong in 2011. One theory about the coincidence of the highest recorded ocean temps here and our highest amount fatalities in the said year was cos the warm ocean temp from the north 'trapped' the sharks closer to shore....

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:17am

The CSIRO released a paper quite recently showing tagged sharks going about as high as Rockhampton suggesing they have a subtropical distribution just as much as a cool/ temperate distribution. Interesting idea though.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:41am

could easily have moved food into a more well defined location.... you may have something

peterb's picture
peterb's picture
peterb Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 10:28pm

I was talking to a bloke who went to the Lennox meeting the other night, he said that the pod of between six to eight great whites so close to shore between Evans head and the Bay, and over such a long period of time was unprecedented ... nobody argued that point.
We are going to be in an decline up here, surfing-wise, for quite sometime.

Stevepalace's picture
Stevepalace's picture
Stevepalace Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 10:29pm

it seems like everyone has an opinion on this matter and a little piece of evidence to back up their theory. BUT no body has any concrete evidence to provide a solution to this problem, if we can call it one... I think that this is going to take some time (maybe years) to understand. Researchers are going to need time to collect data and test theories and hopefully come up with some solutions on how to avoid shark attacks. Until we better understand the oceans that surround us the best thing to do would be be more aware of your surroundings and realise that every time you paddle out you are in their territory (the sharks) and you must respect that. Help us all if we start culling sharks because we think they are murderous killing machines.

trotty77's picture
trotty77's picture
trotty77 Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 10:37pm

Lots of good ideas floating around all make sense.what doesn't make sense is us still going in the water while they are around.or wanting them killed so we can still feel safe surfing.If sharks are being spotted at your break the risks are way higher than normal.you wouldnt swim in a crocodile river.

Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive Wednesday, 12 Aug 2015 at 10:38pm

Thanks for putting forward the hypothesis Nick. I would agree in part that attack clusters like off Ballina (and perhaps south west WA) may reflect some local factors but suggest that their intensity is a signal of increasing white shark abundance.
My view is that white shark numbers are recovering strongly due to protection, a reduction in gillnet fishing effort off southern Australia over the last 20 years and strong increases in fur seal and humpback whale populations.
Perhaps a properly designed aerial survey might be the best way of establishing a time series dataset on the big ones at least?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 6:08am

Trotty, with respect , these are ocean tourism based communities.

And the crocodile analogy is apt but not in the way you mean. If a croc becomes a problem it is culled in the NT and removed and relocated in QLD.

Telling people to stop using the ocean is just not a solution. The aboriginal evidence for ocean use in this area goes back to the last Ice Age. Like it or not, the ocean especially the inshore zone is as much human territory as it is sharks. That can be easily observed on any day on any coastline around the world.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 6:27am

btw, just with respect to the limited culling of crocodiles, another top order predator with which the shark is often compared.
That has done nothing to stop the recovery of crocodile populations across Northern Australia.
So any suggestion that taking out a few sharks that might be causing problems in one area will cause their demise or the collapse of the food chain is fanciful.

It's pretty instructive looking at the situation with the saltwater crocodile in Australia. Hunted to near extinction, with an estimate of 3-4thousand animals left in the NT in 1970, that population rebounded to 30-40000 in 1984 and then 70-75000 in 94. Current Aus pop is estimated to be between 100-200000. Areas like Darwin Harbour are intensively managed for crocs.

It's likely that with the continuing protection of whites we are seeing the first stages of this population increases impacting on human populations and we are at the start of the same road that Northern Aus is on with the croc.
Some areas intensively managed, some limited culling or removal and a lot of accomodation to living with increasing numbers of a top order predator that can take humans out if they stray into their lair.
Certainly, I can't remember the last hue and cry caused by some latte sipper the last time a croc was shot because it ate a kid. It's now just an accepted part of the Northern Australia situation.

It's worth looking at the NT croc management plan and seeing what the state of play there is with respect to croc-human co-existence.
http://lrm.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/7350/crocodile_manageme...

trotty77's picture
trotty77's picture
trotty77 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:32am

Yeah i guess my view is more a personal choice than a solution for everyone.we had a 4 meter tiger shark that kept our beach closed most of this summer.knowing he was there from aerial patrols,it wasn't that big a deal to go another beach.

The Gull's picture
The Gull's picture
The Gull Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:25am

The current 6 or 7 large GWS consistently around Byron/Ballina bares a resemblance to the 3 or 4 large Whites/Tigers hanging around Newcastle over summer and it was documented (and graphically photographed) that they were feeding on dolphin close to shore.

blindboy's picture
blindboy's picture
blindboy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:43am

The situation on the north coast is concerning but it needs to be considered against the overall incidence of shark attack in Australia. There is a clear trend to more attacks but the rate of increase is well below the rate of increase of people in the water so the chance of any individual being attacked during any session has actually decreased. This is not a reason to ignore the presence of sharks but it does suggest that the north coast attacks may simply be a random cluster rather than being driven by the kind of environmental factors being suggested. Sorry I don't have a link to the data on hand right now. I will try to post it later in the day.

blindboy's picture
blindboy's picture
blindboy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:43am

The situation on the north coast is concerning but it needs to be considered against the overall incidence of shark attack in Australia. There is a clear trend to more attacks but the rate of increase is well below the rate of increase of people in the water so the chance of any individual being attacked during any session has actually decreased. This is not a reason to ignore the presence of sharks but it does suggest that the north coast attacks may simply be a random cluster rather than being driven by the kind of environmental factors being suggested. Sorry I don't have a link to the data on hand right now. I will try to post it later in the day.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:08am

I don't think the data I've seen supports that conclusion BB.

Attacks increased markedly through the first two decades of the 20th century as Aussies embraced the surf, then decreased as shark control measures were introduced and shark populations were actively reduced by fishing effort.
Attack rates stayed very low even as populations using the ocean increased.

In the last 15 years they have increased markedly.

The data doesn't support the increasing population theory.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 10:50am

We were hunting the species to extinction. This doesn't mean kill every shark it means sustain their populations low enough for long enough that the breeding individuals left do not have the genetic diveristy to be robust to survive a change in living conditions. Genetic information suggests as few as 1500 breeding whites on the east coast

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 10:13am

Could you link to the scientific information that gives that estimate please Nick.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 10:22am

At work but heres what a quick google search turned up. An article quoting CSIRO dated Aug 2 2015. Even less than I said. http://m.themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/secrets-of-the-great-white-star... Can look later for the actual report.

blindboy's picture
blindboy's picture
blindboy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 11:25am

Changing patterns of shark attacks in Australian waters

John G. West

Coordinator, Australian Shark Attack File, Taronga Conservation Society Australia, PO Box 20, Mosman, NSW 2088, Australia. Email: [email protected]

Marine and Freshwater Research 62(6) 744-754 http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/MF10181
Submitted: 2 July 2010 Accepted: 7 March 2011 Published: 24 June 2011

Abstract
Although infrequent, shark attacks attract a high level of public and media interest, and often have serious consequences for those attacked. Data from the Australian Shark Attack File were examined to determine trends in unprovoked shark attacks since 1900, particularly over the past two decades. The way people use the ocean has changed over time. The rise in Australian shark attacks, from an average of 6.5 incidents per year in 1990–2000, to 15 incidents per year over the past decade, coincides with an increasing human population, more people visiting beaches, a rise in the popularity of water-based fitness and recreational activities and people accessing previously isolated coastal areas. There is no evidence of increasing shark numbers that would influence the rise of attacks in Australian waters. The risk of a fatality from shark attack in Australia remains low, with an average of 1.1 fatalities year–1 over the past 20 years. The increase in shark attacks over the past two decades is consistent with international statistics of shark attacks increasing annually because of the greater numbers of people in the water.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 11:39am

Yes, I've read the paper and disagree with the abstract and conclusions.

Their own graphs don't support the hypothesis.

It's bad science.

Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 11:50am

See my comment below, science is correct.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 10:14am

This is the only data I've seen with shark attacks and population growth plotted BB.
https://taronga.org.au/sites/default/files/downloads/changing_patterns_o...

It clearly disproves that theory.

Attacks rise sharply up until the 30's, then drop off quickly after shark control measures are introduced. They stay low, basically flat before rapidly rising again in the 2000's. This despite a constantly growing population.

If attacks were linked to population we would see a steady increase in attacks , especially in the post-war years when beach use exploded. Instead we see flat rates of attacks despite increasing population up until the 2000's.

I think that theory needs to be gently put to sleep.

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 10:20am

Also, huge decline in numbers in the water since Feb 8 attack -> Still big increase in "human interactions".

I know BB is saying the area may be an outlier to an overall trend but something is going on.

Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 11:39am

"If attacks were linked to population we would see a steady increase in attacks , especially in the post-war years when beach use exploded. Instead we see flat rates of attacks despite increasing population up until the 2000's."

The graph is showing attacks per million people, so trend is flat, as it should be with increasing population from the 40's through late 90's

There is a slight upwards trend the past 15 years but only from 3/million to 5/million.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 12:14pm

Craig, the trend line of attacks per million doesn't correlate with the increasing population trend line.

Can you see that?

Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 12:21pm

Population is just that, a simple line showing its increase over time.

The attacks per million isn't so, it's filtering out the increase in attacks due to the increasing population to show clearly that the number of attacks are increasing in correlation with the increasing population.

Ie more people at the beach =  more attacks, but no more considerable increase in risk to 80 years ago.

There is also the bar graph showing the attacks increasing without the filter, and that is climbing in line (or ahead last decade or so) of the population increase. Hence the increase from 3-5/million.

So the risk has increased from 0.000003% to 0.000005%

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 12:28pm

"The attacks per million isn't so, it's filtering out the increase in attacks due to the increasing population to show clearly that the number of attacks are increasing in correlation with the increasing population."

Doesn't show that. It dips sharply after '39 and dips again in the 70's. Even as Population increases.

Can you see that?

Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 12:33pm

Of course, but since the 30's it's been pretty stable between 2-4 per million.

If you were running stats on this the correlation between increasing population and increasing attacks it'd be very strong.

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:28pm

Of course shark population are numbers you don't have on the graph. From what the old guys say the coast held a lot more sea life in past decades.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 12:57pm

which is probably inside standard deviation. Nice Craig.

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 10:40am

http://www.northernstar.com.au/news/no-shark-culls-for-north-coast-beach...

State government say no to cull, but interested in Shark repellants.

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 11:58am
lostdoggy wrote:

http://www.northernstar.com.au/news/no-shark-culls-for-north-coast-beach...

State government say no to cull, but interested in Shark repellants.

I wonder if Mr Niall Blair would be fair and a good sport to have his children take part in what he sees as a solution to the problem, to be sprayed with these 'repellents' and placed 600m off the back of Sharpies or a few hundred yards off the Plank as part of the trial.......
Standard Government no f@cken idea!!
One more attack and the whole of surf tourism and income to small coastal towns can be kissed good bye
Anyone for a surf holiday to Reunion island.........nah don't reckon

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 5:15pm

Free ride.... Just for something completely different, Re' population growth "put to bed", I think I disagree :o) lol
Mate, I'm sure we went through all of this in the "10 point plan" thread last sept....
Here's my take on those graphs.....
Up until the 1930s, the surf life saving movement in Australia was in it's infancy... In fact it wasn't until 1935 that the red and yellow flag system was introduced... The vast majority of attacks pre 1939 were actually in estuaries/rivers/protected waters where , you guessed it, the largest human populations were at the time were...
Of the 73 documented attacks between 1791 and 1938, 47 of those were in harbours/rivers/estuaries, where most people at the time bathed.... 7 attacks were "out to sea", as in boating/man overboard.... So 54 of the 73 documented attacks were not in the surf, 47 of which were in populated flat waters....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_shark_attacks_in_Australia

Now back to the surf.... In 1935, the red and yellow flag system was introduced by lifesavers.... Beach swimming became more popular, as it seemed safer than swimming in sharky harbours.... But WW2 arrived, and many beaches were barricaded, men went to war.... This reflects on the graph you provided....
After the war, the graph you provided seems very steady until the late 1980s/ early 1990s..... This correlates with the "seachange" phenomenon which really gathered pace with the explosion in ironman, surfing and the whole "home and away bullshit scene"..... Home and away btw started in 1988.... Haven't missed an episode........ hahahahaha..... Just jokes...... Iron man nutrigrain starts 1986, Professional surfing exploding, 1980s beachside development....
So I wouldn't put the population theory to sleep just yet, steve.....

prothero's picture
prothero's picture
prothero Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 4:44pm

good blurb sheepdog....do you mean 'wouldnt' put the population theory to sleep ?

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 5:14pm

Yeah.... Sorry, headmaster prothero.... I'll go back and edit..... I suppose I don't get black jelly bean now..... :/

batfink's picture
batfink's picture
batfink Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 11:31am

As others have mentioned (cancer clusters comments and others) using statistics for these sorts of relatively rare events is fraught, and easily leads to misinterpretations.

I'm a Business Analyst, so I use stats all the time. Rare events will always throw up random clusters, and human brains always look for patterns in those clusters that aren't there. Daniel Kahnemann wrote a clever book on it, and won a nobel prize studying it.

I don't like the idea of killing sharks so we can enjoy beaches, but fuck that. It's certainly the worst period for attacks I can recall, and in a concentrated area. If there are 7 or 8 seem to be patrolling the area, and have been for months, then I think it's reasonable to cull just that group. Darwin's theories can be put to use, kill off the ones that hang around close to those beaches, those that don't survive to reproduce. We don't know enough even to say whether they 'get a taste' for humans when none previously existed.

Animal behaviour is way beyond my ken. Culling those individuals will hardly endanger the species, even if there are only 1500 breeding adults. Unless they are all brothers and sisters, those 1500 would provide substantial genetic diversity.

I won't be condemning the state government or local councils if they go off on a fishing trip for this occurrence.

batfink's picture
batfink's picture
batfink Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 11:33am

BTW, the comments about stats and patterns was not meant to denounce or in any way retract from the learned comments about fish, tides, water temps. lunar phases, whale migrations and other genuinely observed phenomena that are almost certainly factors in why those sharks are there.

jimbrown's picture
jimbrown's picture
jimbrown Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 12:44pm

Any decision to cull must be made in the context of a changing global, and regional climates.

To play the Devil's Advocate, any cull may inadvertently place a greater strain on the ability of sharks to play their ecological role and contribute to a functional and productive ecosystem, due to stresses imposed by changing ocean temperatures, parameters, etc. caused by changing climates. The stakeholders have to recognise that they are only going off historical facts and trends and these may have go out the window as environmental conditions change.

Something must be done in the short term, but a measure as radical as taking out slow reproducing keystone species is not the one to be rushed in to

tonybarber's picture
tonybarber's picture
tonybarber Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 12:04pm

batfink…I gather you noticed that few, if any, mentioned the significant increase in human activity in the waters in question. Also as anyone suggested any moved to try to 'move' this men non grey onto other pastures (excuse the pun). Once the bait balls have run, it is fair to assume that these creatures would move on. Fishies would have some good input here, I would have thought.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 12:25pm

Its fair to think that even if the baitballs stay the white sharks will move on- because they have to. White sharks below 3m main food source fish .Over 3m marine mammals. By all accounts these are very large sharks. My guess is they will leave when the bulk of the whales come back down.

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 12:12pm

Best solution for the short term - catch them, pull onto boat, hose in mouth and run them 25 miles out to sea and release with satellite tags attached
Greenies and latte sippers happy
or if funds are tight...........I'll just leave that at the catching part

goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 12:21pm
uncle_leroy wrote:

Best solution for the short term - catch them, pull onto boat, hose in mouth and run them 25 miles out to sea and release with satellite tags attached
Greenies and latte sippers happy
or if funds are tight...........I'll just leave that at the catching part

Great idea

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 12:15pm

Jesus christ uncle leroy...... A plan that shuts everyone up...... And scientific data as a bonus.... And politicians with photo opportunities... Fuck me........ ;)

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 12:26pm

lol

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 12:24pm

The increasing attack/increasing population hypothesis also fails on account of it not being fine grained enough to account for the day to day possibility of encounter.

IE, does a single white shark now swimming between Ballina-Byron have a greater or lesser chance of encountering a human being in the water now, on any given day in Aug2015, than say on any given day in say Aug 1974?

There would have likely been surfers out at North Wall, Flat Rock, Boulders, Lennox Point on any given day in 1974 vs 2015 so the chance of it encountering or not encountering a human and thus some kind of interaction is not necessarily increased now with respect to then.
This coast has been constantly surfed since at least the late 60's.

If the attack/population theory were plausible we'd expect to see more encounters/attacks where there were more people in the water. IE the Gold Coast, Sydney etc etc.
That is not the case.

I think we need a more fine grained, regional hypothesis than the clumsy total increasing population one.

MickyFanny's picture
MickyFanny's picture
MickyFanny Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 1:06pm

Nick without requesting to see the research, what you have touched on makes a lot of sense. Are you in the process of publishing something?

If so, may I suggest it be called: 'Sharks and the Moon. The Cosmic Ballet Goes On'

Clivus Multrum's picture
Clivus Multrum's picture
Clivus Multrum Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 1:43pm

One man's account of pelagic pirouettes by predators from ocean depths

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 1:33pm

"IE, does a single white shark now swimming between Ballina-Byron have a greater or lesser chance of encountering a human being in the water now, on any given day in Aug2015, than say on any given day in say Aug 1974?"

It has a greater chance....
The whole of Byron shire had a total population in 1971 of 7831...
http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/free.nsf/0/C62D3918BCA99584CA257...$File/1971%20Census%20-%20Bulletin%20No%206%20-%20Population%20and%20Dwellings%20in%20LGA%20-%20Part%201%20NSW.pdf

The 2011 census has Byron shire with a population of 29208... At a guess, you'd have to say it'd be in the low 30000s now.....
http://www.byron.nsw.gov.au/byron-shire

That's a quadrupling of the population... And take into acount the improved roads from S.E Qld for weekend visitors...
There's nothing "clumsy" in these numbers, fr..... But if you can show to me that there were just as many people in the water, from monday to sunday, dawn to dusk, back in 1970, as compared to now, I'll take it into account...

Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 1:37pm

Exactly SD.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 2:45pm

Sorry, you've misunderstood me SD.

I mean on any given day in '74 there would have been surfers at most of the local breaks Byron-Ballina.
The Pass was well and truly crowded by then.

When Tadashi was taken there were 6 people surfing between North Wall and Shelly.
When Matt was bitten there were 4 people surfing North Wall.

You see what I'm saying? On that day to day level there's not a way of establishing significant increases in encounter risk compared to more people in the water.

So in '74 there were 15-20 guys at the Point, now there are 40-50. That's still human beings it is encountering. There's no evidence that increased numbers at any one break is a risk factor.

It might in fact, go the other way, you might be at more risk with less people in the water.
There are far less people surfing this winter than normal and the encounters keep piling up.

Dan K's picture
Dan K's picture
Dan K Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 2:12pm

I've grown up and lived in Forster for nearly 30 years.
In 2007 a few mates and I went shark fishing and hooked up and caught a juvenile white off the beach. We were trying to catch a shark, but to catch a white you could imagine our surprise and shock.....what the hell was a white shark doing in little old Forster? After a few pics we cut the trace and it swam away.
A couple of weeks later I bumped into a guy who told me that a local pilot who flew a microlight from a hanger on Wallis Island in Forster had seen and documented regular numbers of white sharks between Seals and Janie's Corner. I found the guy, and was lucky enough to go on a number of flights with him. On the first flight over Seven Mile Beach we observed three sharks a few hundred metres from Bulls Paddock. They were roughly 50-100m apart from one another with two being at a guess juvenile 8ft and one a bit bigger. They were just behind the break in about 10feet of water. The other two flights were a couple of weeks later and sure enough both flights we spotted a juvenile white but only one this time, hanging the same distance off shore around Elim where 10 surfers were oblivious to the situation in crystal clear water. These flights and sightings were done over the months of July/August. It should be noted that on two of the three flights salmon schools the size of half a football field were on the same stretch of beach. A photographer mate who also went up on a flight with the same operator captured photos of a white in feeding mode on these schools.
The next year almost exactly 12 months later in July I went for another flight in the microlight and sure enough an 8-10ft white was spotted swimming same distance off shore behind the break just south of Elim where again surfers were enjoying a mid Saturday surf in crazy clear water. This time no salmon along the stretch of beach.
6 months later Smiths Lake international photographer Dave Sparkes is knocked off his board by what was later confirmed as a white shark and a month after that a man on holidays is also knocked off his board. this time both at Celito Beach just down the road, however Sparkesy was surfing the river mouth which had only just been reopened.
Since then it has to be said that yes there seems to be a larger number of sightings and encounters down here on the Mid North Coast with no fatalities, touch wood. We may have more conclusive reasons as to why Forster/Seals has more shark activity as I went to a talk by CSIRO Barry Bruce who came to Forster for a public seminar. It was mentioned that there is a white shark nursery around the port Stephens area where hundreds of juvenile whites call home, which makes sense with its regular sightings at Stockton not far south and also makes sense of the more frequent sightings to the north at Forster due to the competition these juveniles face....relocation. Sorry it's long winded but trying to establish a few connections from what I've read above. If they are territorial to specific areas then maybe specific parts of the North Coast are now the new proposed "nursery" for a bunch of these sharks?
The fact that we had huge numbers of salmon during the flights when numerous sharks were spotted within close proximity to one another......sure Ballina aren't seeing salmon, but it's bait balls nonetheless and small baitfish usually attracts larger fish and so forth......could the whites be waiting for the bigger predator schools up there? But then a year later almost to the day we see another white from the air but no bait fish.......simply swimming through the area or is it migratory and visiting/staying at its local haunt from the year before regardless of fish schools or not?
Then the invent of air surveillance. The flight where we spotted the single shark a year later was in crystal clear water just cruising the beach with no bait schools but just a bunch of keen surfers 150m away. Yet no attack or encounter. I can't dismiss it as a fluke that 12 months apart that a white shark can by chance be not just at the same beach but almost the same part of the beach. That's no coincidence. Can the same be said about Ballina? Could it just be that these spate of attacks in such close timing are unfortunate tragic events where person and shark just got too close and shark was inquisitive or hungry? I mean i saw a drone video go online yesterday where it followed a white around Lennox and there was a surfer oblivious to its presence pretty darn close. If that drones not there that surfer is still surfing and that shark is still swimming right by. This surely happens all the time unnoticed right? I think the moon and whale season could definitely have an impact for sure. North Coast is Known for its good fishing for a number of reasons but a big part is the fact that it is so close to the continental shelf. In Forster it's about 30km to the shelf and on the northern migration the whales tend to straight line it up the coast rarely coming close to the beaches. On their southern migration its a whole different story as their calves are coming back and theres non stop breaching, resting etc at the bottom of some headlands. This in itself makes it such a super busy time on the North Coast as the whales are close to the coast both northbound and southbound so maybe that works in the sharks favour.......pick a spot where it's non stop traffic of food?
Sorry for the novel, just thought I'd lend some of the occurrences from down this way.

The Gull's picture
The Gull's picture
The Gull Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 3:26pm

That's unsettling. I surf the Elim/ 7 mile stretch almost every week. I have never seen one myself, but have been called out of the water many times, and had a friend knocked off his board at "Tables and Chairs" about two years back.

Dan K's picture
Dan K's picture
Dan K Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 4:54pm

After seeing them from the air where I'd surfed 100s of times on quite a popular open stretch it was like "wow this is nuts!". But if I weren't there "looking" for them I'd be none the wiser. It's unsettling to think about but it's clearly the norm on a regular basis. It would be a costly exercise but it would be interesting to know over a 30day period just how regular sharks were sighted from the air on a particular area of beaches eg Byron/Ballina stretch. I wouldn't be surprised if they were there in the shallows almost every day. Encounters then are inevitable but if it were done prior to an encounter being publicized all over the media maybe it would prove just what "normal" interaction we are dealing with.

the_b's picture
the_b's picture
the_b Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 5:14pm

I used to fish the rocks around foz when the tuna were running. No problems with sharks 15yrs ago but got progressively worse as this style of fishing got more popular. Gave up fishing certain spots as sharks were chomping 8 out of 10 fish hooked. Mainly bulls and whalers but mates saw the odd white. Those sharks cruising around 7 mile probably waiting for a hookup and free feed

Dan K's picture
Dan K's picture
Dan K Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 5:49pm

Being a keen LBG angler myself I think I know the couple of spots near each other you are talking about. Its too crowded there now for the reasons you mentioned about LBG being so popular. And you're right, every day of the Tuna run theres word of guys losing fish to the Bulls out on the sand or the Nurses if you get your fish in close enough to the rocks.

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:53pm

Super interesting info. I had the same thoughts re Port Stephens/Stockton and juvenile displacement. Drones are hopefully going to tell us a lot more over time.
.... And what a place to ride a microlight. Niice!

blindboy's picture
blindboy's picture
blindboy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 2:26pm

"At the same time as the increase in population, there has been
a dramatic increase in the popularity of water-based activities
for leisure or fitness. Given this, it would be expected that the
risk of a person encountering a shark would also increase
because they are spending longer periods in the water. There
has been a large increase in beach visitations, indicated by
figures from Surf Life Saving Australia (SLSA 2010), of
,100 million beach visitations in 2009, an increase of 20% on
the previous year’s estimate of 80 million. This increased beach
use is also reflected in the SLSA data (SLSA, pers. comm.)
which indicate that there has been a 29% increase in the number
of beach rescues over the past decade (from 10 226 in the 1999–
2000 season to 13 185 in the 2008–2009 season) and an 1100%
increase in the number of preventative actions taken by surf life
savers (from 55 212 in 1990 to 662 955 in the 2009 season). The
popularity of surfing in current-day Australia was highlighted
in a survey administered in 2005–2006, which estimated that
,12% of the adult population of Australian cities participated in
the sport of surfing, resulting in ,1.68 million recreational
surfers in Australia (www.surfersvillage.com, 10 June 2009).
Applying a 20% increase, similar to the percentage increase
recorded for beach visitations, it is conservatively estimated that
there were ,2.061 million recreational surfers in Australia in
2009."

https://taronga.org.au/sites/default/files/downloads/changing_patterns_o...

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 2:38pm

"Applying a 20% increase, similar to the percentage increase
recorded for beach visitations, it is conservatively estimated that
there were ,2.061 million recreational surfers in Australia in
2009."

Those numbers are highly contentious BB.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 2:48pm

Also, you'd need to take those numbers way further back for them to have any pertinence to the point at hand.
IE if beach visitations increased in the post war to 1990's period, which would seem a no-brainer and attacks stayed flat or decreased then the theory is shot out of the water.

tonybarber's picture
tonybarber's picture
tonybarber Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 2:52pm

Some good points stated above. I suggest if you were to use population increase then I would not use the SLSA figures. One, most surfers (those attacked at least) do not generally belong to SLSA clubs. Two, they invariably away from the structured SLSA flag zones. Maybe ask the board rider clubs themselves for membership numbers over say the ten years. The shire population numbers are more representative.
uncle_leroy suggestion above seems plausible - why not.

simba's picture
simba's picture
simba Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 4:01pm

From personal experience spending a LOT of time in and around the water in the Ballina area from woody head up to the Tweed 9 mile back around the mid 70s to the early 90s spearfishing,surfing and pro fishing we only ever saw one white off the Julian rocks and a possible at the 9 mile off the Tweed.Now ive lost count at the interactions with sharks and some times you couldnt count how many sharks there were specially off Lennox when the mackeral were running but they were mainly different types of whalers,which are bad enough but no whites.Even diving for crays in winter you would think you would have seen the odd one with the amount of time spent diving but only once at Byron,big shark too and scared the shit out of us.Occasionally the guys shark fishing would catch one out wide but they were very rare back in those days which correlates to the above graph attack wise and how now they are on the increase ,surfers and divers are seeing them frequently.

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:06pm

Which is why I get annoyed when shark attack story after story in the media have to tell us how sharks are in decline and need protecting ....oh, and how the ocean is their home not ours

tim foilat's picture
tim foilat's picture
tim foilat Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:21pm

'I get annoyed when...the media have to tell us...how the ocean is their home not ours'

Awesome :)

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 10:30pm

Trolls are funny

tim foilat's picture
tim foilat's picture
tim foilat Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 10:48pm

Are you writing from your home in the ocean :)

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 9:26am

Like every surfer I spend time both on land and in the water. But of course you know that.
If you have some deep seated problem with me then just spit it out Tim....or keep playing games if it makes you happy.

tim foilat's picture
tim foilat's picture
tim foilat Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 11:48am

So the ocean is not your home?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 4:17pm

Everyone I've spoken to who has spent significant amounts of time in or on the water reports the same thing Simba.
Whalers were reasonably common, especially during mullet run time but whites were very, very rarely seen.
Now , whites are very common.

lolo's picture
lolo's picture
lolo Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 4:32pm

I'm with Freeride - I don't buy the more people in the water = more attacks line at all.

If a shark swims into North Wall looking for something to bite, it wouldn't matter if there are 4 guys in the water or 40. It's still gonna track one of them down and have a chomp. Any correlation or lack of is just mostly random noise.

Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 4:48pm

As I've stated elsewhere I just think it's just natural variance and all the activity is currently focussed on the North Coast, as it was in WA a couple of years ago and SA during the 2000's

trotty77's picture
trotty77's picture
trotty77 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 5:02pm

Wow so much cool info and local knowledge being passed around this is what will save lives in the long run.have things settled down in west oz now?they tried a shark cull and never caught a gws

seal's picture
seal's picture
seal Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 5:05pm

If you look at the graph there is a small spike 1990-1999 then a large spike 2000-2009 and when did the Whites become protected? Do you think that they've had time to breed up to numbers that correlate with the increase in attacks in that decade or still think it's in relation to the population increase?
I also have been surfing FNC and Sth East QLD for about 40 years having spent a lot of time in Ballina and Lennox back in 70s-90s and during the time of easy to get dole payments there used to be heaps surfing both areas anytime there was waves. No attacks of significance I can remember. Then the 2 attacks at Byron of a diver and surfer with nothing much until now.
This spike is very unusual and I'm with Freeride on this, It's related to the GWS population increase not human increase.

blindboy's picture
blindboy's picture
blindboy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 5:19pm

The most likely explanation is what Craig suggests with perhaps a couple of provisions. As the eastern tip of the continent, the Byron area is likely to see more migrating sea life, including big sharks, than other parts of the coast which creates of itself a higher risk of shark attack. It is also an area in which the population has increased rapidly and amongst that population increase is a larger proportion of surfers than would normally be found. The surfing population is further increased by backpackers and day trippers from the Gold Coast, Tweed and Brisbane. In these circumstances it has to be expected that over time, the proportion of the total Australian attacks occurring in the area would increase. Throw in some randomness and that's it. This is not to say that some of the environmental factors are irrelevant, only that given the rarity of attacks and the number of possible factors, they are impossible to identify with any certainty. The science can tell us a lot but it can also be worth listening to the kind of very specific local knowledge that has been on show here. Finally, if you really want to avoid getting attacked, go in or stay in when sharks are sighted. Maybe it was " just a dolphin" as we all like to think, but if it's big and doesn't show horizontal tail flukes or typical dolphin behaviour, it just isn't worth the risk.

trotty77's picture
trotty77's picture
trotty77 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 5:36pm

Agree blindboy the more knowledge the better putting yourself into a shark hot spot dosnt make a lot of sense to me . Mabee websites like swellnet will be able to do shark reports as well as surf forecasts alerting people of shark activity

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 5:28pm

Help is on its way says Ballina mayor - ABC online.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 5:41pm

That is interesting , Baird saying no cull but being prepared to look at netting.

That must be the Plan B if there is another attack.

Only thing is , nets are a cull and an indiscriminate one at that.

African sharkbait's picture
African sharkbait's picture
African sharkbait Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 5:50pm

As a GWS attack survivor from Cape Town I would like to add:
White sharks are protected in isolation whilst other shark species are being fished, white sharks eat a lot of shark. White sharks are protected whilst there is also general marine bio-mass depletion. So white sharks need to be managed, as in tagged counted, movement mapping.
If there were millions of white sharks after a hundred years of protection a rational decision would be made to cull them.
In other words the situation is artificial, humans have intervened by protecting one species and in time they may have to take difficult decisions like culling or not.

The shark that got me(while diving so I got a great visual) was a very old, badly bitten, parasite covered dude. He probably didn't have it in him to chase a seal.

The debate about culling needs to happen, the scientific community in South Africa are very closed minded about this. You are not going to see a "problem" shark if you are not looking.
At least you lot don't have folk baiting, teasing and feeding white sharks close to busy surf spots!

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 6:00pm

African sharkbait, could you tell us all about your attack ..in a new thread ?

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 11:02pm
African sharkbait wrote:

The shark that got me(while diving so I got a great visual) was a very old, badly bitten, parasite covered dude. He probably didn't have it in him to chase a seal.

Sounds about right mate
It would be like a 80yr old bloke, smoker all his life trying to keep up with a 1st grade football code/union player, no chance
However one thing different in the Ballina case is that they are not all full adult size specimens, majority in the mid-life size range at a guess, 4m seems to be the familiar number

X 2 would love to hear your story mate

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 5:52pm

Seal, if you look at the population growth from 1990 to 1999, you'll see an average spike... Then if you look at 2000 to 2009, which includes that ridiculous housing boom from 2001 through to 2007 (the GFC), it matches up perfectly......
But another thing people have to take into account on the east coast is the protection and increased population of whales.... Whales stocks were decimated... Over the past 3 to 4 decades, their numbers have increased dramatically..... Now the most eastern point of our continent is the "turning point" for migrating whales as they head up to Hervey Bay..... They pass this spot twice a year..
So we have more people in the water.... Over a larger space of time....
We have an increased food source swimming by (whales)... Do we have a whale cull? Do we thin out the food source? Because the larger the whale population gets, the more whites and big tigers will follow.... I'm just asking... it's not what I'd do....
And FR.... You and I are old enough to remember "the good old days"..... This may sound very patronizing to the under 30 brigade, but I don't mean it to be...

The old timers who I learnt off were "ocean men"... It was an era before .COM forecasts... An era when you could score 4 foot Burleigh cove with a few mates mid week..... Back then, you'd hear "hmm looks a bit sharky today"..... And because the crowds were lot thinner back then, surfers were a bit more discerning with wave quality..... For example, in 1974, a murky 3 foot but ok Shelly beach on a cold wet september day would've been scoffed at..... Home for leaf and tip scoobs and a jam....

You'd only see alot of the "bearded folk" come out of the mountains when the pass was pumping.... So yeah, fr, you'd only see 20 odd blokes at the pass.... When it's on...... The pass has to just dribble now, and there's 100..... Shelly just needs an onshore rip bowl, and the sms snapchat crew are onto it.... What I am saying is that back in the old days, "sharky rainy king tide full moon mornings" were often given a miss, unless it was cranking cyclone swell..... And I can't remember the last attack when The pass was 6 foot and pumping.....
So more people, over more time, over more spots, with less ocean knowledge + more whales and therefore more predators..... It aint rocket science....

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 6:03pm

Problem is Tadashi got taken mid morning on a gorgeous sunny morning with 2ft of swell.
Matt was bitten same time on a bluebird day with offshore winds and 3-4ft of surf.
Wasn't anything sharky about both those days.
Only reason there wasn't more people surfing North Wall that day was because the whole coast was super fun.

I agree with you about the whales.

Thing is though, these whites have been hanging in here, in close while the whales are mostly steam-training it up to Hervey.
It's on the way back in Sep that they really hang out and lolly-gag in close with the bubs.
Now that, is going to be an interesting time around here.

I sure as shitt won't be surfing spring 1-2ft nor-east slop with whales hanging in close

At the moment wave quality is getting me out there. Was coming back from a pre-dawn fishing session off the back of the Point last week and met the first guy in the water every day at Lennox Point on the way out. Still half and hour or more before sunrise. I asked him if he was rattled and he said he was but the passion over-rode the fear.

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 6:36pm

Tadahashi was bitten on the first day with no rain for over a week...
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/201502/html/IDCJDW2022.201502.shtml

On a mid to incoming tide.... I saw the footage... yes, a lovely day.... But you wouldn't give water quality an "A", would you....

I'll have a dig on Matt.... Cheers, fr

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 6:50pm

Matts attack, July 2, 2015

Full moon - July 2
High tide at Richmond River Ballina July 2 - 8.30am

Ballina rainfall
26/6/2015 - 37.2mm
27/6/2015 - 33.8mm
28/6/2015 - 14.8mm
29/6/2015 - 2.2mm
30/6/2015 - 5.2mm
1/7/2015 - 0.2mm
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/201506/html/IDCJDW2006.201506.shtml

I can't see the water clearing up that quick, fr..... Ad this to the full moon and high tide.... Well......

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:17pm

I surfed North Wall that morning, before the attack.
The water was very clear. If you parked at Shelley lookout you could see the brown trail out to sea (was diagonally moving NE), but it was super clear at all the beaches.
There was heaps of dolphins and I saw some whales way out.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:45pm

One of my friends runs fishing charters in the nerang and tweed river- been in the game a very long time and has become very involved with national marine science centre (nmsc) in coffs of late. Would love to use his name but won't. He explained it like this to me. When you get extreme rainfall little creatres like jelly prawn and small bait fish get washed out of small but numerous tributeries. If there hasnt been rain for a long time then the effect is exacerbated. When this happens it obviously stimulates the rest of the system as many fish see it as a time to feed. A lot of fish however can't tolerate the fresh water- or they can but just can't tolerate the change in that shorter period of time. So they come out of the river. The fresh water sits on top and the salt water sneaks in underneath- called a salt water wedge. Predatory fish sit in this wedge to snack on food getting washed out of the river. Deep holes also stay filled with saltier water and these fish are here too. If you have fish spawning up the river you can guess how much food is getting washed out and condensed in a small area

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:50pm

Wouldn't take much for a peaked up shark to swim a few hundred metres into North Wall. Interestingly he said the bull sharks don't like it much either suddenly being inundated with fresh water and if they are up there doing there business out they come too for an opportunistic feed. This is why it is never a good idea to surf around fresh water output

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 10:22pm

Sounds great in theory mate but once again, people have been surfing river mouths the whole east coast for 30 years and not getting munched, 4 or 5 big freshes plus an annual flood in a river system every year, something still doesn't add up
I use to paddle from the coastguard to southwall for 8 years,when I was living there late 90's early 2000's, quite often in the dark heading over or heading home in the dark many times around the full end of the break walls, full moon, high tide, low tide, flood, fresh, clear water, baitfish, no baitfish, mullet run, whale run
Would I be doing that now? Bloody doubt it
Yes, a good reason for a shark to be there, but why nothing for years and years, and then suddenly they are everywhere
Reasons far beyond a bit of a fresh from the river is causing this

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 7:10am

I think your looking for a hard and fast rule where there most likely isn't one- like another poster said previously. Just relatively higher risk and relatively lower risk. For sure its not all that was probably happening, just adding to speculation about that day.

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 8:18am

True, I just think that there is more to it than just the so called risk factors we all once associated with shark attacks. Full moons and dirty river water has been going on for years and years and years with people surfing the same locations with no GWS in any numbers
The sudden boom in GWS is occurring due to some ecosystem glitch far beyond a bit of a fresh flowing out of the river
Some locals had not seen a GWS or sighted one in the last 20 years, then suddenly they have had 2 close calls and a dozen 'get out of the water' moments in the last 12 months doing exactly the same thing they have done for 20 years prior, seems to be a pretty good indication that there has been a localised population surge in GWS
What is causing that is the million dollar question but I can guarantee that it is not water flowing out of the river, otherwise the whole east coast of NSW would be on shark alert
cheers

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 8:20am
Nick Brennan wrote:

just adding to speculation about that day.

sorry, I was referencing the whole picture, not just the individual day factors

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:55pm

Yep, I agree with all of that and that it would be considered a sharky time. Just noting my observation of water clarity close to the beach.
The ocean did feel very alive that morning.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:03pm

All the action could have been condensed at the bottom of that wedge. I have had times when I couldn't find a turtle on the island I worked at (v unusual) only to go to the other side and for an unknown reason they are all there. Not the same but my point is it depends where your observing from.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:14pm

On a mid and incoming tide too! "No run no fun"- peak current is mid tide. Shark bloody heaven.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:27pm

Anyway thats my opinion

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:38pm

Cpl weeks later, 14th July really had a sharky feel to it. I just felt something bad would happen that day. There was so much going on in the ocean; whales, birds feasting like crazy (everywhere), a lot of dolphins. Surf was pumping with plethora of guys out at the point and people surfing every nook between there and Angels. All the reefs were going off.
Nothing though.
Still that element of randomness.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:45pm

Agreed lost doggy still random just a relatively higher or lower risk- that day- 14th July-would be close to new moon too

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 10:04pm

Lost doggy another thing I have often felt is the feeling of sharky... a feeling like all the hair pricking up on your neck. This is one of my more far flung theories that I have discussed with friends, but being on the planet as apes or ape like creatures for however many million years and with sharks like the white being in a similar form to now 63 million years ago surely we have interacted with them countless times and natural selection has played its part. It wouldn't surprise me at all if we do have primal instincts that kick in when the water is shitty, low light, moons, signs of particular wildlife etc and this is what we are feeling. A sense of 'get out of there' that often we choose to ignore. That was what came out of Mick Fannings interview with 60 minutes the most for me- him not being the most articulate person he said just the right thing imo- firstly "we are in their domain," and "watch for signs and trust your gut. You don't have to be the hero." I felt like they were the perfect words

grovey's picture
grovey's picture
grovey Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 9:09am
Nick Brennan wrote:

Lost doggy another thing I have often felt is the feeling of sharky... a feeling like all the hair pricking up on your neck. This is one of my more far flung theories that I have discussed with friends, but being on the planet as apes or ape like creatures for however many million years and with sharks like the white being in a similar form to now 63 million years ago surely we have interacted with them countless times and natural selection has played its part. It wouldn't surprise me at all if we do have primal instincts that kick in when the water is shitty, low light, moons, signs of particular wildlife etc and this is what we are feeling. A sense of 'get out of there' that often we choose to ignore. That was what came out of Mick Fannings interview with 60 minutes the most for me- him not being the most articulate person he said just the right thing imo- firstly "we are in their domain," and "watch for signs and trust your gut. You don't have to be the hero." I felt like they were the perfect words

posted by accident, being a goon, not being computer literate, sorry!

grovey's picture
grovey's picture
grovey Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 9:05am

Thats spot on NB!
A 6th sense does still excist in us!
I was travelling in the N NSW area in the early 2000s, n surfed the byron/ballina area for 6 months, everyday, twice a day.
I never felt uneasy, till one morning at Tallows.
Solo session, sun just coming up n some nice head high wedges in the corner.
Out of nowhere it was as if a group of people had turned up around me. the feeling of being near something really big was overwhelming.
Got out quick smart, n left it at that.
i heard a few days later a large shape had spooked a few people out of the suffolk stretch.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 7:18pm

Tadashi was bitten on the incoming, Matt on the outgoing.
Water quality was pretty good both days....not immaculate, but very far from dirty.
In Tadashis case the summer EAC was running hard so there was blue water in close. I fished for pelagics that morning.

There was discoloured water running out of the river for Matts attack but it was clean inshore along the beach. There's usually discoloured water coming out of the Richmond on the outgoing tide. It's a big river.

Anyway, it seems whites very much prefer clear water. But deffo agree on the moon phase being a factor.

Anyway speaking of moon phases I'm off to throw plastics for a jewie.

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 11:17pm
freeride76 wrote:

Anyway speaking of moon phases I'm off to throw plastics for a jewie.

Plastics are cheating FR, haha
Give me the slow roll, bump......bump........CRUNCH of a hardbody any day, yeww
August was my most productive month with quite often the biggest fish coming first week September, coinciding with the last winter swell before the NE'rs truly kicked in
Go to placcy back then was a white atomic 6" with 1oz head, out fished the storm shads 2:1

Dfactor's picture
Dfactor's picture
Dfactor Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 7:17pm

I dont buy into the increase in population either. North wall has been very uncrowded since Feb much less than recent years. what about the dredging of the rivers? Did this maybe flush out a scent which attracted sharks?

wingnut2443's picture
wingnut2443's picture
wingnut2443 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 7:32pm

FR said: "Thing is though, these whites have been hanging in here, in close while the whales are mostly steam-training it up to Hervey."

Isn't that the point someone made way ^^ there, somewhere ... GWS would "normally" be in to feed on the salmon, and a few of the straggling whales? Running on instinct they are "hanging around" waiting ... I think Steve, you said the Salmon are thin this year and last? Prior to that ... ?? Whales more in number, bigger pods for the 'weak and frail' to hide amongst, so both food sources for the whites unusually low? So, "maybe" the whites are getting hungry, looking at what is around and having a bite to see if it's any good ... soft flesh and bones of surfer no resistance to the power of the jaws of a white, even if just a "feel" or "nibble"

Point made, again ^^^ there by someone - why are whites protected ahead of other shark specie? Is human influence changing the mix?

Fuck knows, but, lots of talk about why? ... Not a lot of solution, well except uncle's ... and well, that one makes sense, hey? Any other "solutions" if not, fuck off the talk fest and lets all get behind a petition to implement uncle's idea. It seems win win win for all involved.

velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:06pm

Thank you for the article Nick, very thought provoking. Also thanks to FR for information on the ground, and fishing info as well.

Are there any scientific studies of what happens to an apex predator (crocs in NT for example) when hunting/control of them is removed? Would such studies be applicable to GWS numbers, and would then a prediction be able to made of the % increase in population size since protection?

seal's picture
seal's picture
seal Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:11pm

A good friend of mine was at Tadashi's attack and the water was good visibility. The shark swam under one to get him. Matt Lees attack was good visibility also. The bloke knocked off his board at the Point, good to very good visibility and I was at the Grom comp at the time, so please don't tell me the water quality was the the reason.
As I've said I spent a lot of time in the 70s -90s surfing the area (most days) and sure, we had the the odd shark make an appearance, but apart from a bloke getting snapped at in about 76, we never had second thoughts except in the Mullet runs with dirty water. Marty Ford got attacked at Tallows on a day I remember surfing Lennox Point that was a murky, overcast mullet running day and we even remarked it was a sharky day but these recent ones have been different. Mates I know that used to dive off Lennox, Byron , Black Head, Evans etc rarely saw a White but shitloads of Bronzies and tigers but now are shitting about going over the side of boat as they say they see Whites half the time they dive now. That can be anytime of year also. So the increase of whales, the depletion of fish stocks and the breeding up of the Whites is what has to be one of the main reasons not population increases of humans IMHO.
Vic Hislop, who many might not regard too well, did say when the protection of White sharks has had a few years it'll come back and bite us on the arse and I think he's pretty well spot on.

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:52pm

SAsharkbait makes the point that whites are both protected and predate other sharks...sharks that are not protected. Is this accurate? Man made imbalance?

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 8:39pm

A photo from just after the light house attack.... Note the discoloured water in the background, flushing out from the richmond river.... Nutrient rich... A clash of 2 waters.... Any serious ocean man knows this is a shark attractant.... But hey..... Sometimes, even with facts, data, and now photos', some people just wont believe.....

And even the morning after the Shelly attack, remembering that there was no rain on the attack day, the water still isn't "clear" after the previous weeks rain.... Sorry, Seal.... But a picture paints a thousand mates words.... Cheers, man..

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:50pm

The water was perfectly clear when I had my north wall moment

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:00pm

Doggie your photographic evidence is pretty unconvincing.
Grainy as camera phone shot which shows , yes discoloured water coming out of the river but the water in close is ....well, you can't really see it from that photo.
I'll take my and other's eyewitness versions over your grainy photo thanks.

Second shot? How do we know what day that photo is taken? Beach closed signs have been up there for days and days this year.

No court in the world would take that as evidence.

Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:07pm

Also sceptical about the attack versus population growth correlation. A ratio is a two way construct. If as suggested the rate of attacks bears a meaningful relationship with our population then this infers that the population of dangerous sharks has been relatively stable over time. This seems at odds with intervening government decisions to introduce beach meshing (to reduce shark numbers) and more recently to list whites and other sharks species as protected species.

seal's picture
seal's picture
seal Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:16pm

Nice photos man. Which actually show three parts of f@#K all. Photo 1 .River water going out to sea as always and very often dirty but 100 meters away can be clear depending on the currents,tides at the time. Photo 2 The distance from the surf and the lighting shows us that there is actually water and a SLSC vehicle with a beach closed sign. Slightly more in focus than the first shot but how anybody can see what the water clarity is like in either has got me stuffed. Oh I'm sorry if friends and myself that were actually there in the area at the times of some of the attacks might be mistaken by what we deem as good visibility ( at what point did I say CLEAR ?) and the fact that you've got some rather nice photos from the DAY AFTER an attack ,yes I find it a little hard to believe unless you were actually there yourself to take said photos. Does water clarity change day to day, tide to tide, sun out sun behind clouds? But I suppose even eye witness accounts can't be believed if you've got photos. Cheers, man.

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Thursday, 13 Aug 2015 at 9:37pm

What were the weeks before that like. Fisherman was anything spawning upriver or in your opinion about to spawn?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 5:30am

For February or July?

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 7:10am

February thanks Freehold

Distracted's picture
Distracted's picture
Distracted Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 6:38am

NB, didn't you say that >3.5m GWS don't eat fish, just mammals? I agree that the run out tide after rain is a fishy time, but what would the GWS be looking for then ? Dolphins? As someone said there were whales out the back, why weren't the big sharks out following them?

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 7:04am

Main food source is marine mammals, not doesn't eat fish. They must require it to meet their energy demands. I'm not talking about the runout tide either I'm talking about a salt water wedge in the case of February. See my post above. No reason why a big white wouldn't stop to check out all the activity for sure...

ACB__'s picture
ACB__'s picture
ACB__ Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 9:44am

The NSW government is set to announce new measures to reduce the number of shark attacks on the state’s beaches.

The $250,000 campaign comes as a response to community concerns in northern NSW that the shark population has increased in the area, following a spate of attacks in recent months.

Researchers will begin tagging and monitoring problem sharks on Monday as part of the public awareness campaign.

-AAP

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 10:54am

Bloody hell, FR..... Here is the same photo in the abcs report...
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-09/man-killed-in-shark-attack-in-nort...

Does it stand up "in court" now? lol
Probably stands up better than the heresay from seal... Cos I know a chick that was dating this guy whose son was at the beach on the day of the attack, and she reckons the water was off colour cos there was the best part of 80mm of rain in the previous week.... Cheers, Seal.... ;)
ps - seal - I also supplied the BOM observations of rainfall for the previous days, if you'd care to check them..... So there's no need to get catty like you did above, bro.... And you know, I have been a waterman for 40 years of my life... I don't really have to be there "on the day", do I?... I have seen the footage and photos and utube etc.. It's a bit like showing doctor an xray... Don't have to be present for the xray.....
pps - chance of shark attack is very small.... It's just my opinion that after rain, on a full moon or new moon, when more water is on the banks or reefs, the chance rises.... I dunno what the actual stats are.... So I'll just pick some numbers - lets say the chance of shark attack on a crystal clear dead low tide 1/4 moon morning is 3 million to one, then on a full moon off colour mid / high tide day is 2 million to one.... That's all I'm saying.... You are more than likely not gonna get munched... But the odds , as low as they may be, do tend be more risky on the days that I have mentioned....

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 12:34pm

Your 10 point theory definitely has merit SD and agree its just raising or lowering the risk from an inprobably small number to a slightly higher improbably small number. How do you post a picture on this I have the most amazing image of local hydrology atm in keeping with warm water being a decisive factor. Danny B was actually my mentor for a thesis I wrote at uni- which had nothing to do with sharks lol

thermalben's picture
thermalben's picture
thermalben Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 12:27pm

We highly recommend 'imgur' for image hosting (http://imgur.com/). You don't even need to register with them (although if you do, it'll help you find previously uploaded files).

Simply upload a photo via the 'Computer' link on the RH column, follow the instructions and then copy the URL provided under 'Direct Link (email & IM)'.

Then in a forum thread, wrap the image URL with image tags, ie [img] and [/img].

For example, [img]http://_______[/img]

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 12:42pm

Thanks Ben, here is a thermal image of the coast

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 11:17am

Are they large schools of baitfish near surfers that I can see on the Byron cam.

How many years has Emiliano been the balloon pilot at Byron ,interested to hear from him on the shark numbers.....he flys daily I think ?

fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21 Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 1:03pm

Has anyone thought, or has it already been mentioned, that perhaps all these bumps/knockoffs/attacks are perhaps “naughty teenagers” in the phase between juveniles and adults, where there diet is phasing from fish to mammal and we are part of that inquisitive nature that a few are testing?
As has been pointed out previous, they have always been there, we are generally oblivious to them aside from the air or elevated platform and now that the numbers are increasing and they are growing up, we are encountering them in greater numbers.

longboarder420's picture
longboarder420's picture
longboarder420 Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 1:23pm

I heard on the radioe today the newest thing is to have a pipe running along the bottom about 100m of the back of a beaches break and have bubbles pumping out to make a wall because sharks wont swim threw

ACB__'s picture
ACB__'s picture
ACB__ Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 1:33pm

I've heard it's the same with sea kelp

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 3:37pm

Now Nth NSW is called "The Fatal Coast"

The Fatal Coast: Vimeo

seal's picture
seal's picture
seal Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 4:48pm

Sorry Sheepdog I didn't realise you were a waterman so I've booked myself in for an eye examination. Ha Ha.
The fact still remains the same, the recent attacks have all happened on relatively good visibility days, with either no cloud cover or broken cloud. Yes we've had rain but also the North South current was running for Tadashi's attack keeping the dirty water from hitting the beaches.
I know what you are saying but the days in question were not what anybody would have said are classic sharky type days and that's what has got people concerned and confused. That attacks could be happening when the water clarity is quite good. I still can't see how posting a photo and not being actually able to see much from it gives you the right to make me out to be a fool because I disagree and actually was present. If photos are better than eye witness accounts then we really never need to look at stuff again for ourselves just get it up on the internet.
I have been a user of the ocean for 50 odd years and lived between Ballina and Lennox for 30 of them so don't you think I'd have a fair understanding of the local conditions, currents etc and maybe my long term local friends that were present for the other attacks would too. As I said I was back down at Lennox the day the fellow got knocked of his board at the Point, looked at the surf there and spent the rest of the day at the Grom comp. At no time did the water, or day, look a classic sharky day.
And yes we have a small chance of being attacked by a shark at normal times but things aren't normal here the past while.
No -body has the answers to why this is happening here, and maybe some studies might shed some light on the subject but I'm sure that if someone else gets attacked in the area all the studies in the world won't stop the local population from Evans to Byron calling for more drastic measures. Personally I'd like to find some way to co-exist with the Whites that would not come to drastic measures but it needs to be sooner not later plus reliable in all weather and conditions. These are similar thoughts that most in the area are having and discussing about the matter. Cheers.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 6:44pm

Second all of that Seal.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 7:21pm

This extended interview with chief DPI shark scientist Vic Peddemors is mandatory listening.

https://soundcloud.com/abcnsw/senior-shark-scientist-with-dpi-vic-peddem...

simba's picture
simba's picture
simba Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 9:45pm

well worth a listen.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Friday, 14 Aug 2015 at 10:46pm

Yeah no such thing as a "sharky day" anymore. Maybe there never was. Several of the fatal attacks in WA happened on bluebird days when the water was so crystal clear it was a sight to behold.

Great contribution Nick. Thanks for sharing......

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 8:49am

all you blokes wanting to cull all the sharks , grow a pair and just go surfing , or those like Derek Hynd can just go surfing without any other surfers.

Lets make the Byron Bay Ballina area the safest place from sharks on the planet,then we will have meetings about why there are so many are people surfing , and what surf rage is.

Its simple theres more and more people using the ocean , especially in winter , and the sharks are adapting to their new food source .

mk1's picture
mk1's picture
mk1 Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 5:06pm

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong"

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 8:52am

Pic in the Ballina advocate of the jaws from that tiger shark that was caught off the north coast.

Dfactor's picture
Dfactor's picture
Dfactor Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 10:55am

Noticed a few whales spurting this morning off ballina. Thought they would have passed by now on their way north? This usual?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 2:40pm

Still some stragglers heading north, seen a few heading south now as well.

I'll be very interested to see what happens with respect to white shark activity once the mums and bubs start hanging right in close and lolly-gagging like they do.

simba's picture
simba's picture
simba Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 1:06pm

yes its pretty normal,return time is usually when the ne kick in around oct and the east coast current picks up,its all down hill then.

lolo's picture
lolo's picture
lolo Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 1:33pm

Well we just pulled the pin on our near-annual family trip to Byron in the September holidays. Not sure I want my boys spending 4-6 hrs in the water everyday up there at this point in time. Be interesting to see how the tourist numbers go in Ballina/Byron this holiday. Just hope that everyone makes it through the next couple of months OK, regardless of moon phase, tides and water quality.

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 1:34pm

Ummm, Seal.... Go back to your patronizing post on 13/8/15 9.16pm... Better still;
"Nice photos man. Which actually show three parts of f@#K all." That post , seal.... At no stage have I made you out to be a "fool", man, but this condescending stuff on your behalf should be toned down... At least I am contributing something... be a bit more respectful to those putting in the time to supply links and BOM stats.... And I said there was a combination of water quality, tides, moons.... Not just water quality.... So don't be misleading...

Now onto the next point I have with you....
13/8/15, 8.11 pm - "A good friend of mine was at Tadashi's attack and the water was good visibility"......
Ok, a a good friend was there.....

But wait.... 13/8/15 9.16 pm - "Oh I'm sorry if friends and myself that were actually there in the area at the times of some of the attacks"...

But there's more.... 14/8/15, 4.48 pm;
" I still can't see how posting a photo and not being actually able to see much from it gives you the right to make me out to be a fool because I disagree and actually was present."

Ok..... So in less than 24 hours, we've gone from,,,, one of your friends being present ,,,,, to you being present on the day of the photos.....

So tell, me man...... Was it your friend that was present on the day of the photo's like you stated on thursday (tadahashis attack), or was it you that was present on the day of the photos, as you stated on friday?

Nick.... Best I bail now..... It was this sort of "stuff" back in the thread in sept 2014.... As you said, it would be very easy for a "wired up shark" to swim the mere few hundred metres from the river where waters are mixing, to the beach.... And people want to hone in on just one point (water quality), instead of looking at the whole picture I have painted of rain, tides. moon, extra whales etc........ Good luck with it, Nick....

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 3:31pm

Here is something very interesting.... My friend, the same one operating in the tweed and Nerang river said that in February they had the best Sea Bream fishing in over 10 years. He thinks that they were all flushed out of the rivers further south when they were spawning and re entered the Tweed. Can anyone testify to this?

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 5:41pm

fish on top of fish there was so many

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 8:02am

sea bream?????
One school of bream has not contributed to the population boom of GWS in the region

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 8:17am

I think you are thinking of yellowfin bream... check out sea bream

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 8:50am

Sea bream is kind of a meaningless, generic term Nick. It's used in fish markets for a variety of species. But most bream caught in this area is yellowfin bream.
https://www.daf.qld.gov.au/fisheries/species-identification/inshore-estu...

Bream school up and spawn in winter here. I certainly noticed no evidence of any kind of increased bream activity of any kind while fishing during Jan/Feb. When bream are in abundance I usually get them as bycatch fishing small plastics for jew. I caught not one bream of any description during Jan/Feb.
Could you ask your mate on tweed what actual species he is referring to as seabream? Some small emperors are sometimes called seabream, as are other species. We'd need more information.

Just on the saltwater wedge theory. Summer rainfall in Ballina/Byron was just above average. Jan figure was a bit above the mean, mostly due to monsoonal coastal showers in the deep mean tradewind flows. You can easily see by Lismore rainfall figures that that rain didn't extend very far inland into the Richmond river catchment. Thus, the river was running clean on incoming tides through Jan and most of Feb with a bit of discoloured water on the outgoing tides. I very much doubt the salinity gradient would have been steep enough to form the saltwater wedge you are speculating on.
That wedge would definitely have been there during the May period after the early May flood event. But during that period we saw no attacks/encounters.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 8:51am

`

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 8:53am

What are these sea bream you talk about???????????????? care to provide a link?
There is no such thing as a sea bream in NSW..........
You have Yellowfin bream, Tarwhine and Black Bream on the south coast, no 'sea bream' as your claiming
The only other species referred to as sea bream is a deep water species, Yellowback sea bream which I've caught a few before but these are out in 120-200m of water, sort of like a snapper hybrid bream cross, in 35 years I've never seen or heard of one of the yellowback's ever being caught in an estuary system

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 1:18pm

il come back to this uncle. I am waiting a response back. Wouls be a stitch up if he meant tarwhine but I doubt it

seal's picture
seal's picture
seal Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 3:52pm

Sheepdog, I may have misinterpreted you first comments with the photos saying things like "even with fact figures and now photos some people won't believe" and a picture paints a thousand words, cheers man." as condescending towards me but when you started the "know a chick who dates a guy who's son was at the beach" and here say from seal etc that was the part making me out as a fool.
Now for the facts at hand.
Friend was witness to Tadashi's attack at Shelly Beach
I was at Lennox the day the bloke was knocked off his board at Point. Witness first hand to conditions.
Same day I was talking to the Inspector of Police for Northern Rivers( has a large part to do with Le-ba and Skullcandy Grom Open,and who is investigating all the attacks) He told me about Matts attack( which was 2 days before the conversation) and details of water quality ect. If he's not a credible witness who is?
Maybe due to my lack of edumacation, at times my writing skills might not make 100% of sense but it still doesn't detract from the fact the water quality was not dirty or discoloured with these attacks in mind. Also that having the knowledge and witness accounts that I have of the events surely it is more believable than some photos from the internet.
Hopefully this has cleared up my position to you and we can move on. Cheers

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 8:25pm

"Nick.... Best I bail now..... It was this sort of "stuff" back in the thread in sept 2014.... As you said, it would be very easy for a "wired up shark" to swim the mere few hundred metres from the river where waters are mixing, to the beach.... And people want to hone in on just one point (water quality), instead of looking at the whole picture I have painted of rain, tides. moon, extra whales etc........ Good luck with it, Nick...." Sheepdog

Sheepdog, bit of an overreaction mate. People, including myself, where only mentioning "water quality" in response to the pics you posted, not "honing" in on it as a be all & end all reason for fatal shark attack. Also it's a bit condescending that you refer to some of us as writing "this stuff" as you put it. Sorry if we don't meet your standards. This topic is about "theory". If you think you have all the answers then your just kidding yourself, even given your vast ocean experience.

Mate, the Sheepdogs I've met in the past have had pretty thick coats. Pretty sure yours is too, but bailing isn't really the solution. Your call tho :-)

goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 7:23am

Sheepdogs never wrong

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 1:21pm

Mate, I'm not bailing from sn.... Just this thread.... Note goofy and norchocks inane petty posts.... It's bile inducing..... I'll stick to what i believe.... They can stick to what they believe re' moon/tides /recent rainfall.... Ohhh.. Hang on what do they believe in lol....I am undecided to whether their should be a cull..... I am just putting links and facts across..
Through reading seals, posts, he is pretty well decided on a cull..... Good luck with that I say...
As for goofy and norchocks bullshit, well there are two types of people here... people like me, who publicly congratulate people here for fantastic ideas (page 3 - uncle leroy - 13/8 - 12.15 pm)....
The other type of person here are the goofyfoots and norchocks, who in 5 pages of really interesting stuff, have not said ONE FUCKING THING about the situatIon, but are more content sniping someone contributing.....

goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 1:36pm

For a man who thinks he's the king of the discussion board, and who is so anal about listing times, dates, numbers, and all the other bullshit, im a bit upset you missed my complement to uncle Leroy about his idea to Sheepdog. Especially as it was one comment above yours! So actually you were wrong about not having said ONE FUCKING THING!!!! WHY THE CAPITALS? ARE YOU YELLING AT YOUR COMPUTER?!?!

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 1:45pm

Being deceitful yet again, goofyfoot.... Nothing new there... i posted at 12.15pm..... You posted at 12.21pm... So this "above" bullshit is just that.... Bullshit.... I post as an individual post... you posted as a "reply", the only reason it is above mine..... Now I'd like you to point out wherever or whenever you have been wrong on SN.... cos' I take it you are always right too, my man.....

goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 2:34pm

Hahahah there you go again with your specific times!
I said my comment is above yours, and you just admitted it! I didn't mention anything about my comment being earlier than yours.
who gives a fuck who wrote something 6 minutes before someone else... Fuck me you're like the swellnet lawyer! Would that stand up in court?!

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 6:49pm

More, semantics , ya clown? ...." I didn't mention anything about my comment being earlier than yours". .... Ohhhh for real??? pmsl.... More like you are always right, hey bro..... You fucked up.... it's ok... i told Floyd he might be right and me wrong on Shorten.... I told blowin I shouldn't have mentioned the girl in the Iraq analogy... I come clean when i make a mistake... Be good if you could...
Now should there be a cull or not, goofball?.. What's your opinion on the moon phases, which Nick and I are in agreement on? Does water quality make a difference? Or do you want to continue this crap?
Do you think nearly 100mm of rain in 6 days being flushed out of the richmond river had any influence? I'm not making these numbers up, goofball... Check BOM....

I am ethically against a cull.... This is why I like Leroys idea.... But if people keep getting munched, something is gonna give.... However, more will come..... With the whales........ It's called "the ocean"......

goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 8:28pm

I fucked up?
What you on about dog? You on the piss mate?

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 3:12pm

Yeah ,I thought you meant just this thread. All good Sherpdog, just felt I needed to clairify. I find the whole shark discussion fascinating & it's great to hear from all & sundry, as long it's kept clean. I personally think tagging & monitoring would be of great benefit long term, but I completely understand the serious issue of GWS "hanging around" in one place for extended periods in the short term, especially when people are being killed. The thing with culling one or all of these GWS in question is that of course we don't know what the consequence of that will be. Less attacks?? Will they just be replaced?? What then?? That said, if we do nothing, that will also have its own set of unknown consequences. It's still a mysterious place the ocean & that includes all of it inhabitants. May the learning continue :-)

rule303's picture
rule303's picture
rule303 Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 8:33pm

Original poster your post is based on nothing please provide backing evidence and than i will bow down before you for the social media likes you require . Or have a look at this from the uni
http://www.coffscoastadvocate.com.au/news/shark-cull-dismissed-by-expert...

this makes more sense than all the crap posted El nino super elnino?

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 8:49pm

Is this a typo?
8m GWS not uncommon in NNSW says shark expert?

"Adult great whites can grow up to 8m and sharks of that size are not uncommon in this area," he said.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 10:04am
rule303 wrote:

Original poster your post is based on nothing please provide backing evidence and than i will bow down before you for the social media likes you require . Or have a look at this from the uni
http://www.coffscoastadvocate.com.au/news/shark-cull-dismissed-by-expert...

this makes more sense than all the crap posted El nino super elnino?

303 you are making a lot of sense and it seems like all the conjecture /theories have been answered in the CoffsCoast quote.

If you add there has been probably more than a 1000 % increase in ocean users in the area in the last 50 years coupled with warm water and bait fish inshore , and as surfers have only been attacked not eaten , the GWS debate is explainable , so what actions next?

Culling which has been proven to be ineffective , stop surfing , ot take a risk and go surfing,seem pretty simple to me.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 10:51am

Seriously, this Bucher cat who they keep wheeling out as the local shark expert doesn't know his arse from his elbow.
His credibility is nil amongst local ocean users.

He spent months denying there was any kind of aggregation of white sharks happening in this area despite evidence to the contrary.

Now that reality has made that position untenable he is attributing this aggregation of whites to upwelling and nutrient concentrations. Upwelling occurs in spring when Ekman transport from the nor-easters brings cold, nutrient rich waters up from the shelf.
At the moment we have quite warm, clear water in close and no upwelling events.
Bucher needs to get out of his office in Lismore and actually see what is going on.
At the moment, his analysis is laughably wide of the mark.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 1:28pm

widely off the mark , a bit like those cullers from the N coast , as they really know whats going on and have a plan to cull the sharks , based on their incredible local knowledge and decades of scientific research?

rule303's picture
rule303's picture
rule303 Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 8:51pm

WHO IS Nick Brennan
"But in short: my advice is to be extremely cautious on your choice to surf in Northern NSW right now.
We are approaching new moon on the 15th and I would advise to avoid surfing around the full moon on the 30th altogether."

WOW the power of the internet everyone is an expert

"My explanation for what has been happening around Ballina is based around the “hungry shark” theory."

I googled it and it doesnt exist

Nick i read your post and was going to respond further but gave up as its not worth it why debunk easily debunk able views

rule303's picture
rule303's picture
rule303 Saturday, 15 Aug 2015 at 9:04pm

"In short my belief is that because the whales were late it created less feeding opportunities for the white shark at a key time for them, therefore a small amount of hungry sharks have been getting desperate and peaked up to feed on the full moon. This has resulted in more negative shark encounters in the Ballina region.

The good news is I don’t believe this will last. Stay safe people. //NICK BRENNAN"

Couldnt help my self,
thank you nick the negative shark encounters in the Ballina region will not last......days weeks months tell us nick brennan so we can stay safe

Wow white sharks feed on a full moon thanks nick contact universities around the world so you can share your data

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 12:07pm

Hi Rule I appreciate your skepticism. You probably missed the posts at the start explaining how this short piece came about. I posted this on a small forum in Ballina Shark Discussion page- which at the time had about 400 followers of mainly people pro shark cull.
If you look at my first posts I never pretend this to be conclusive, I put piece up to create discussion away from the "more whites more bites" which offers no explanation on what is happening in Ballina atm. People were forgetting white sharks are an animal dictated by their biology and surrounds and are in a struggle just like any other.
A day after I made my post the lennox meeting happened and the helicopter doing aerial patrols reported there had been 7 white sharks that were not leaving Ballina and surrounds. This lends validation to my theory, so whilst its a guess I feel it is not a bad one. My post went viral and I was approached to have this published on the site.
The response to this post says to me that people don't want a cull forced down their throats, they are curious to know what is happening. It has been mission accomplished for me.
My facination with sharks began on a beautiful sunny Melbourne cup day when I was 16 when my friend and I received a fright from a white shark in the flat water paddling on the way out to "big left" in Flinders, Victoria. It was not an incident like the one with Mick Fanning with contact, we only noticed it when it was directly in front of us and set us into full blown panic where we came straight back to shore then watched it disappear on the surface in the distance. It could have eaten us and didn't. This provoked me to want to learn more.
I graduated a Marine Science and Coastal Management double degree with good grades in 2009 after studying 4 years at SCU lismore and Coffs Harbour. On beginning the degree prospects for careers looked good, however towards the end of the degree changes of government and a change of direction for Aus led to a decrease in opportunities in the marine research. Like most people in my year at the time, needing money a lot of us found work in toursim.
I was lucky the place I got work at was an eco resort with a focus on marine interactions as well as recording our own data and located in one of the most vibrant systems on the planet on the gbr (having travelled extensively I still believe to be) known for interactions with Manta Rays, humpback whales, turtles and ofcourse sharks of which we see about 25 species routinely.
A man in the resorts history named Mark started an exercise book recording data on Manta Rays. Simple data anyone can observe on when and where we were seeing the Mantas. Then a remarkable man named Kym who we nickname "Kympanzee" based on his appearance came and took control of the dive shop. He didn't start the records but he saw the value in it and religiously recorded data and encouraged other dive workers like myself over the next 5 years to do the same.
The island is fortunate in that it has lots of small research teams coming through which have become very good contacts of mine. A group of researchers that we became particularly close to, eventually found out Kym had been recording this information and couldn't believe their good fortunes.
Two doctorettes based around this information and about half a dozen research papers blew the doors off what we know about Mantas on a global scale and more papers are still coming. This was a creature that had never been studied until 2008.
Peaking our curiousities further and now seeing the power of this information we began recording sightings of sharks as well as Mantas in an exercise book and started a more extensive turtle research program in conjunction with Mon Repos.
Whilst our data records are only 4 years old and provide limited resolution there are already trends emerging consistent with existing research etc regarding moon phases seasonality etc which AIMS in townsville has since become very interested in.
I travelled for awhile then worked as a dive instructor at Coffs Harbour in the solitary islands then further north on the GBR out of Hamilton Island before returning back to the island on the southern gbr driving dive boats and diving again. I left the island and became based in Sydney as of April to support loved ones, where I drive boats for a living and work casually at a local dive shop. I would love to get into research full time but there has honestly never been a worse time in Australia than under this government.

My hope is that there are others like Kympanzee out there who have taken a curiosity and have kept records. I know there are more because I have met them- fisherman keep incredible records look at Fitzroy in earlier posts- there is a huge body of knowledge right there.
As to the full moon. No the full moon doesn't cause bites. It is not as simple as that. There are obviously multiple mechanisms for a bite. Read earlier posts for discussion.
The full moon does however play a massive role in the movements of marine life. The strong currents associated with large tides on the peaks of the lunar cycles also play an important role in concentrating food in well defined areas.
As to "I don't believe it will last." It won't because it can't and white shark researchers recently supported this. White sharks below 3m primary food source is fish and above is marine mammals. Fish will eventually not be enough for them. My guess is when the bulk of the whales come down the white sharks will move on too.

My theory again is based on wide reading, available observations and again pure speculation. All the information is out there and available for you to piece together. This page has been great and full of well thought out information and I am overwhelmed by the response. There are a lot of clever people out there. Feel free to offer your thoughts and observations.
Regards

norchock's picture
norchock's picture
norchock Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 8:13am

Seems sheepdog is copping abit of flack of late.now I have said before that sheepdog knows everything...and the rest of us should just keep our opinions to ourselves cause we know fuck all.from politcs to swell forecasting to surfboard design to shark theories this bloke knows and will tell ya.oh yeah he's a waterman too? You know shane dorian,laird,darrick ,jamie mitchell etc.....and sheepdog from is it the sunny coast?why not have your own site? Magicsheepline.net

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 1:04pm

Yep..... Just what I expected..... Feel better now, norchock?

freddieffer's picture
freddieffer's picture
freddieffer Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 8:35am

The discussion on here about sharks etc has been fantastic and illuminating.
Just disappointing that a few people can't help themselves and needle others' views with cyncism and sarcasm, or straight out personal attack.
It's a 'discussion forum' boys and girls..... it's a pity to make a contribution that starts ramming your views down anyone else's neck. Keep it light. Play the ball, not the person, and everyone benefits. cheers, Fred.

tonybarber's picture
tonybarber's picture
tonybarber Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 10:05am

For those on the north coast - what is actually being done right now to manage the boys in grey suits ? There was an interview with a government personnel on the ABC and it seemed very little if nothing is being in the immediate term. I would have thought aerial flights, skis, duckies etc would be out there ?? Are the locals back out there ?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 10:47am

TB, Ballina shire council has been funding aerial surveillance , although that is due to cease at some point in the near future. When large whites are spotted near surfers people have been cleared out of the water and beaches closed.
We've now got a team of shark scientists led by Dr Vic Pedemmors up here funded by a $250000 grant from the NSW state govt and they are intending to catch and tag sharks to try and understand more about what they are doing here and if they are the same sharks.
Lot of people not surfing.
Lennox Point yesterday morning, sunny saturday with head high sets. Five guys out.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 11:00am

freeride76 , what happened to the culling push from the Locals??

Have they decided to just surf less , and wait for the results of more study and tagging?

You must have a had a great surf with only 5 guys out ?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 11:09am

I think people now are waiting to see what, if any, the results of the tagging show.

Did you listen to the Vic Peddemor interview?

Been lots of uncrowded surf this winter.

tonybarber's picture
tonybarber's picture
tonybarber Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 1:12pm

Yes, listened to the Dr on ABC - seemed like he had no immediate plan. He was dismissive of aerial surveillance. He essentially 'more research' .... Yeah but...I think most were expecting some immediate action.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 11:18am

Freeride ,were any of the 5 surfers wearing a sharkshield or similar ?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 11:36am

not that I saw.
seen heaps of crew now with black and white stripes on the bottom of their boards.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 11:42am

Black and white stripes on bottom of boards and on legs of steamers but haven't seen any Orca belly patterns on bottom of boards yet ?

tonybarber's picture
tonybarber's picture
tonybarber Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 11:57am

Is Brockie out there on his mat ?

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 1:11pm

Black and white stripes on Boards , is that part of the Locals culling program ?

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 3:25pm

Kill the largest pointer and anchor it's body in the vicinity.

Other people have suggested it , I can't see anyone's problem with killing a single shark.

Pretty sure that won't lead to the Armageddon that those hysterics concerned about ecological balance fret over so hard.

seal's picture
seal's picture
seal Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 5:12pm

I can't say that I am in favour of a cull, Sheepdog, as first line of action. I'm in favour of someone smarter than most of us coming up with a plan that will stop attacks and save the sharks, that have taken up residence in the area, having to be eliminated.
If they happen to attack again in the near future, maybe the only course of action in the short term is to remove the likely culprits. But we can kiss goodbye to the tourism industry in the area for quite sometime if that scenario pans out. Because people won't go there if they are a chance of being attacked or the anti cull people won't go due to boycotting the area.

Somebody stands to make a lot of money if they can come up with a shield/barrier that is 100% effective.
Personally I think something that attaches to your board or body and is easily interchangeable between boards or wetsuits that creates a shield for the user is definitely the way to go. Lot easier said than done of course, but would be a more portable and cheaper option overall than bubble makers, sonar buoys, fake seaweed, aerial patrols etc. and would give the user a lot more piece of mind. Also would be a user pay arrangement thereby saving government agencies a ton of money.
To invent, test and implement these inventions is the hurdle at the moment that nobody so far has been able to get over. Plenty trying and some good ideas, so hopefully it's not too far off.

Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 5:00pm

I'm not sure $250,000 spent on tagging is going to add additional certainty on the white shark issue in the short term. Tagging is usually undertaken to address specific shortcomings in our understanding of stocks and the level of fishing mortality which can then be fed into a population model. We already have CSIRO tagging data but we don't have much historic data which compromises our ability to construct a model. Also ask the fishos on here how much it costs to charter a decent boat for a day.

Hopefully the mathematicians are having some input before the biologists start spending the money. I suspect they could already provide some estimates of the likely rate of population increase in white sharks based on existing knowledge of their biology and 'fishing mortality' (bycatch and the odd ones killed in shark control programs).

Hard to see any culling getting a nod without some expert consensus that the population is on the mend.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 5:11pm

Does it need to be the carcass of a GWS to be anchored in the area to repel others or would a rotting Bull shark carcass do ? if a bullys o.k. fuck there a dime a dozen in rivers and estuarys on the Nth coast......cull a dozen of them and tow them from Evans to Byron.

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 5:27pm

No idea Udo.

I'd imagine a pointer would be needed to let the others know they're not welcome.

Seems to have worked at Neptune Islands and I read of a similar situation I the Fallaron Islands in the States.

Why is this not a consideration ?

I didn't realise that science was so blinkered to reject a possible proposition such as this.

It's not like science , or humanity full stop , has never injured or killed an animal in the pursuit of knowledge.

Let alone knowledge that could prevent further loss of human life .

I don't see anyone crying rivers when entire civilisations of ants and termites are subject to genocide whenever a house is to be built if the defence is that it's the animals existing environment.

Kill a single shark.

Might even work.

mk1's picture
mk1's picture
mk1 Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 9:49pm

Hey you can't go culling ALL the sharks in the whole universe just because you don't want to die in the surf! GWS are beautiful majestic creatures spawned from rainbows and beamed down to bring joy to the sick children of the world. Only a human, completely disconnected from the great spirit mother, could ever be so heartless as to suggest killing something as a solution.

Now, where's my flake and chips, I got the munchies!

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Wednesday, 19 Aug 2015 at 8:28am

Hahaha!
Sadly the loonies have taken over the asylum

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 9:49pm

Hear hear Blowin!!

I fully support your idea but unfortunately all the shark huggers out there would rather see humans attacked, permanently disfigured and (possibly) killed than risk any harm being done to a poor defenceless GWS.

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 10:25pm

All we've got to do is place a scuba tank in the head shark's jaws then explode it with a well placed shot from a rifle.

How hard could it be ?

braudulio's picture
braudulio's picture
braudulio Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 10:17am
Blowin wrote:

All we've got to do is place a scuba tank in the head shark's jaws then explode it with a well placed shot from a rifle.

How hard could it be ?

Depends on how big ya boat is!

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Sunday, 16 Aug 2015 at 10:24pm

Given the recent findings in relation to the Orca v GWS incedent at Neptune Is, sounds like if we learnt more about the Orcas we might in turn learn more about a potential GWS deterant.

Nick, any thoughts on Udo's/Blowin's suggestions stated above?? After all, science is all about research, trial & error, findings & learnings......

Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan's picture
Nick Brennan Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 10:55am

Hi Rabbit, again I'm no expert on the matter I would prefer to try to figure out why, but will offer my opinion. The idea of a "solution" is a human one, we might be searching for something which doesn't exist. Using a dead white shark to send a warning to other sharks sounds dangerously close to human emotions to me, not shark emotions, very witch doctory but it may work so I won't suggest otherwise. If we are going down the path of "solution" then Imo "repeling" a shark seems a whole lot harder than attracting them- we may be thinking about it the wrong way. From my experience its very easy to attract sharks. We could do it without burleying using low frquency sounds made from household items (I will refrain from saying exactly how in case some poor bugger gets his arm bitten off trying it- I couldn't live with it on my conscience but if you do want to know its not hard to find that information). CSIRO put a report out saying burleying in the neptunes has created a change in their behaviour, we might be better trying to steer them around population centres? Maybe a trail of strategicaly placed fish aggregation devices ("FADS" which if people don't know what they are are just big structures) away or out to sea around population centres? This would have the added benefit of creating industry on the North Coast too. Would probably take quite awhile to influence their patterns but could work. We know they follow sea mounts too using their electical organ to pick up on magnetic fields.. these ridges of sea mounts are often refered to as 'shark paths'.. Could just dump heaps of mining overburden out to sea? Look its probably totally unfeasible and its just off the top of my head but I think we might be required to think differently about the situation

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 11:21am

Hi Nick, thanks for your considered reply. Really interesting concept you suggest in regards to "attracting" rather than "deterring". Cheers.

trotty77's picture
trotty77's picture
trotty77 Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 4:04pm

I watched a docco on orcas and how playing recorded orca sounds can disrupt the gws as they are their only predators. Also how the orcas kill whales which in turn provide the carcasses the gws munch on.

davetherave's picture
davetherave's picture
davetherave Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 2:27am

they are looking for food.
humans look a bit different to their regular food source so they take a bite to see what it is.
bad news for humans but because not all were eaten it shows the sharks thought fuck, this aint a fish/seal/whale etc and left it.
but the really big ones dont care, they just eat whatever.
start
up fish farming in or near all coastal estuaries, sell some and restock rivers and oceans with others.
that way we rebalance food chain in ocean plus also have new industries in local communities. big money, fishing number 1 recreational sport.

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 8:22am

Valerie Taylor - "If circumstances were different, I could have gotten in the water and hand fed the GWS............."
What circumstances, if it didn't have teeth!!!!!!

&feature=youtu.be

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 8:52am

Uncle , shows what having no fear is, amazing how hysterical people on the Nth Coast are , checkout the link below and see a beautiful model swimming with a really big GWS , ah that fear stuff!

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 9:30am

Hysterical......or just concerned about an explosion in GWS numbers, the unprecedented environmental change that is occurring (30+ years of change in a <6 month period), its future impact on the environment, tourism based economy, impacts on friends and family's that have been killed or bitten by GWS
I'd say more concerned and cautious over hysterical.
Are you a resident of the area sharkman, if you live in the area it would be interesting for your view of what has been occurring and how/if any it has affected your ocean use ?
Personally don't find her attractive but each to their own
Fill them up with tuna first, then ready for a swim
All about risk, not fear, 10 sec swim for individual pleasure v's consequence if things were to go pear shape
It's one of those things that I'm personally look forward to seeing a GWS underwater whilst spearfishing (hopefully it comes in from front on!), but if I don't see one for the rest of my life I will still be content with my experiences in the underwater world
Risk away

tonybarber's picture
tonybarber's picture
tonybarber Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 9:38am

@uncle…what are 'the explosion in GWS numbers, the unprecedented environmental change that is occurring (30+ years of change in a <6 month period)'.
are we talking about the bait balls, mullet runs, bream, tuna ??

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 10:19am

Sorry Tony, was referencing into not 'environmental' change, more the change that for 30 years people have surfed, spearfish and dive in the area with minimal interaction, then in the last 6 months things have gone berko
There has been no change in bream, mullet, baitfish etc or extra/less water running out of the river
But there must be some crazy change that we as humans cannot see for the past 6 months to be occurring.
Maybe the sharks have always been there, just the interaction count that is going up in numbers and dramatically in the past 6 months, what is causing them to taste test people when historically they have been well fed and just swim on by un-noticed?
Maybe the shark numbers have increase rapidly or they have relocated from different areas?
How many GWS were in the area 10 years ago, 5 years ago, 6 months ago, 6 weeks ago......
Lots of unanswered questions as we don't have the research to validate any answers

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 10:55am

She's a goner.
Only 339 GWS left over there .......shit we have 250 juveniles wallowing at Stockton right now .

monkeyonboard's picture
monkeyonboard's picture
monkeyonboard Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 9:44am

Maybe a sharky day could be a different sort of day depending on the species of shark e.g. a murky, overcast day could be a sharky day for the Bull shark, as they rely more on their other senses, rather than eyesight. whereas a crystal clear day could be more sharky for the Whites, as they have better eyesight than the bulls.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 9:48am

I say hysterical to all those who claim culling as an answer .

The debate so far for culling is one born out of fear and lack of understanding that we , humans , have changed the environment of the sharks , and they seem to be evolving towards more inshore prowling.

It seems pretty obvious to me that the shark attacks up there on the Nth Coast , seem to be sharks having a curious nibble , not tearing someone apart then eating the remains .

There are so many more ocean users now , especially in winter , so as this the new "norm" , get used to it.

In my area lots of GWS , seen them , get out of the water , sometimes its just a feeling in your gut , but, you still get out , been brought up with them , seem to just cruise around being inquisitive.

Risk to me means pushing your limits of fear.

When you actually see them close up , they are amazing . look like a Submarine ,very majestic .

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Wednesday, 19 Aug 2015 at 8:45am

"Culling" can mean different things.
A guy whose best mate was killed in WA told me the shark responsible was known to be extremely aggressive (attacking buoys etc) and that fishos and surfers had asked for something to be done about it.
No "hysterical" action was taken and his mate was chomped soon after.
Just a story people tell you...

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 10:51am

Unfortunately a curious nibble results in horrific injuries and sometimes death.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 11:11am

so whats the answer UDO?

Culling ?

Its incredible how the stats paint a different picture of whats going on in our oceans.

The biggest killer in our oceans is drowning , 300 pa , 10 people die pa from European bee stings , 20 people die a year from falling off horses , 1 per year from crocodiles, 2 pa from shark attacks , sharks are just out there being inquisitive as they are not eating the humans they attack.

a bit of peripheral damage and thatr 4 letter word comes out , CULL!

Blob's picture
Blob's picture
Blob Wednesday, 19 Aug 2015 at 8:48am

Do you favour culling European bees?
Don't go all hysterical on me now.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 19 Aug 2015 at 1:07pm

Culling of ferals is a very good point Blob.

Cats /dogs/ cane toads / birds and then the cows/sheep etc you might have a point , but as there seems to be a world wide shortage of bees , culling Eurobees , would have to get in line with the rest!

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 11:33am

Only inquisitive........close to a quarter of the attacks although not recently have been full consumption...no body recovered.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 11:57am

Udo , got any stats on "full consumption?"

not so sure all the sharks up there on the Nth Coast have completely eaten the body?

are you a culler?

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 12:14pm

No stats on full consumption ....was referring to Aust wide attacks, can recall 10 where humans got fully eaten ..last I remember was Ben Linden W.A.
Not a full culler....but lets knock the Ballina 5 , or at least one of them and tow it Evans to Byron and back .....for repellant research ?

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 12:20pm

Udo , how would you feel if you killed a great white and let it decompose outside a surf area , and more sharks came?

woud you be comfortable surfing knowing there is a GWS corpse decomposing near a surf break , maybe the Tigers and the Bulls would fire up?

I was just continuing the conversation along with the full consumption issue , by pointing out , so far, the sharks up on the Nth Coast don't seem that interested in human meat?

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 12:25pm

.

Lanky Dean's picture
Lanky Dean's picture
Lanky Dean Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 3:38pm

Really feel for the local surf community.
Having been born and raised on the mid north coast NSW .
Sharks have always been around, thirty plus years of surfing. The consequences have always been there, although the current spotings,encounters, attacks and fatalities sadly highlight the actual risks we take as recreational surfers.
I feel I must highlight some rules that elder surfers and fishermen passed on
- NEVER SURF ALONE, ESPECIALLY ON ISOLATED BEACHES.
- REFRAIN FROM SURFING WHEN FLOCKS OF BIRDS ARE DIVING INTO WATER IN SPECIFIC AREAS.
- NOTIFY OTHER SURFERS IN THE WATER IF YOU HAVE BEEN INJURED WHILST SURFING AND ARE BLEEDING.
- IF YOU HAVE BEEN INJURED REMOVE YOURSELF FROM WATER AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
-DO NOT SURF IF SOMEONE IS LETTING THEIR DOG PLAY IN THE WATER.
- CARRY A FIRST AID KIT IN YOUR VEHICLE, OR BACKPACK/ TAKE A FIRST AID COURSE.
-ALWAYS WEAR A WETSUIT/ PUT A BARRIER BETWEEN YOURSELF AND THE SHARK.
-BE CALCULATED /INFORM PERSONS OF YOUR LOCATION(JUST NOT ON SOCIAL MEDIA)
- DON'T BE A KOOK, IF YOU SEE A LARGE SHARK. NOTIFY PEERS THEN AUTHORITIES.

One of the largest sharks I ever seen was at the little beach directly next to the Nambucca river. We spotted it from the breakwall,whilst fishing on dusk. The shark( which was giant, approximately sixteen feet) was two meters from the shore in a gully looking for dinner. I pointed It out to my grandfather as we were fishing at the time. The thing was giant, sleek and mysterious. Let me reiterate it was two meters from the shore.

goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 3:26pm
Lanky Dean wrote:

Really feel for the local surf community.
Having been born and raised on the mid north coast NSW .
Sharks have always been around, thirty plus years of surfing. The consequences have always been there, although the current spotings,encounters, attacks and fatalities sadly highlight the actual risks we take as recreational surfers.
I feel I must highlight some rules that elder surfers and fishermen passed on
- NEVER SURF ALONE, ESPECIALLY ON ISOLATED BEACHES.
- REFRAIN FROM SURFING WHEN FLOCKS OF BIRDS ARE DIVING INTO WATER IN SPECIFIC AREAS.
- NOTIFY OTHER SURFERS IN THE WATER IF YOU HAVE BEEN INJURED WHILST SURFING AND ARE BLEEDING.
- IF YOU HAVE BEEN INJURED REMOVE YOURSELF FROM WATER AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
-DO NOT SURF IF SOMEONE IS LETTING THEIR DOG PLAY IN THE WATER.
- CARRY A FIRST AID KIT IN YOUR VEHICLE, OR BACKPACK/ TAKE A FIRST AID COURSE.
-ALWAYS WEAR A WETSUIT/ PUT A BARRIER BETWEEN YOURSELF AND THE SHARK.
-BE CALCULATED /INFORM PERSONS OF YOUR LOCATION(JUST NOT ON SOCIAL MEDIA)
- DON'T BE A KOOK, IF YOU SEE A LARGE SHARK. NOTIFY PEERS THEN AUTHORITIES.

One of the largest sharks I ever seen was at the little beach directly next to the Nambucca river. We spotted it standing on the breakwall,whilst fishing on dusk. The shark( which was giant, approximately sixteen feet) was two meters from the shore in a gully looking for dinner. I pointed It out to my grandfather as we were fishing at the time. The thing was giant, sleek and mysterious. Let me reiterate it was two meters from the shore.

Sorry to be a stick in the mud LD but number 1 on your list is the best thing about surfing. The sessions I have by myself sitting in the water watching the sun go down are the ones you remember the most.
I agree about doing the first aid course though. That's a great idea.

ACB__'s picture
ACB__'s picture
ACB__ Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 4:48pm

@Udo.

I agree with how it's ridiculous that people aren't even willing to try the dead GWS carcass theory.

It's clearly documented by a cage diving team that following the attack on the shark by the Orcas in early Feb 2015 shark sightings went from 7 per trip to none for over 2 months. http://www.sharkcagediving.com.au/shark-tours/shark-sightings-2/

I think that's got enough basis to build a theory to then conduct a proper experiment surely. Kill and tie up a GWS to an anchor on the ocean floor and then conduct aerial patrols of the area (which are currently being done anyway) to conclude whether or not it is an effective deterrent.

It may not be proven to be true, but at least its a start.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 5:11pm

Don't know how to access the daily /weekly catch log for the Sydney or Gold Coast shark nets or how many Pointers they catch per year , its about time ones that are caught are put in the freezer for this sort of testing ? fuckers are dead anyway

Speaking to a trawler operator out of Ballina recently and I asked what do they do if they catch a GWS in there nets........skipper pointed out to sea and said it goes out there a couple of miles and gets dumped......the authorities don't want to know anything about it. Fitzroy whats the proper procedure for this ?

fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21 Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 8:26pm

I don't trawl Udo, have worked on friends trawlers on the odd occasion to help out, and I know of no such a "procedure". I have friends that are trawler-men and they tell me that they have never caught a large shark, let alone a GW, in their nets. Most of them try to release any non-productive (prawns etc) sea life alive. With all the BRD's and TED's (by-catch reduction devices and turtle excluder devices) on EC (qld) commercial boats, it is rare to see any large animals in the cod end.

I am actually very skeptical about using a dead GW to scare others away to be honest. In the old days we used to use live small sharks (whalers) as bait for the giants. Admittedly they are small sharks, but large sharks prey on easy meals. I have seen footage of a large tiger catching and eating a smaller shark in the wild, no hooks or set-up. I'm not discounting it wouldn't work, probably needs to be properly trialed. Happy to be proven wrong.

goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 8:35pm
udo wrote:

Don't know how to access the daily /weekly catch log for the Sydney or Gold Coast shark nets or how many Pointers they catch per year , its about time ones that are caught are put in the freezer for this sort of testing ? fuckers are dead anyway

Speaking to a trawler operator out of Ballina recently and I asked what do they do if they catch a GWS in there nets........skipper pointed out to sea and said it goes out there a couple of miles and gets dumped......the authorities don't want to know anything about it. Fitzroy whats the proper procedure for this ?

Didn't a 3m white that was hooked on a drum line off straddy get eaten by a 6m white? Or bitten in half at least? This was in the news about a year or two ago

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 8:58pm

I remember seeing the pics of that don't know how legit they were.

goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 9:00pm

Yeah it must have been a bloody big shark.

Adrian Bartlett's picture
Adrian Bartlett's picture
Adrian Bartlett Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 6:20pm

Everyone just needs to start ordering more fish and chips!

velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 6:33pm

Here's the story of crocodiles in the NT to present the situation of an apex predator that gets protected:

Protected in 1971, estimated 3000 remain after over-hunting. By 1984, estimation of 30-40,000. By 1994, estimation of 70-75,000.
http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxo...

It is estimated there are over 100,000 in the NT as of this publication:
http://lrm.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/7351/crocodile_populati...

Here the base population was estimated at around 5,000 in 1971 and grew to 30,000 by 1979-80:
http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/consultations/229bce33-342a-4...

Compared to human population growth, this is exponentially faster!

Now, there will be differences in the rate at which a protected apex GWS will repopulate when one compares to crocodiles. But to use anecdotal evidence, it is repopulating. And the data Nick mentioned as being the cornerstone of scientific studies as compiled by Kimpanzee (referenced in a previous post) was a collection of anecdotes as well; each one forms a data point and references a sighting at a point in time and in a place.

Back to crocodiles:
http://www.ntnews.com.au/news/northern-territory/record-year-for-fatal-c...

With the human population growing in NT at 0.4% per year:
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/3101.0
and the crodile population estimated at growing at 1.6% per year*
the populations collide.

And you have the calls for culling, and all the politics. What is clear is the crocodile population grew faster than the human population, and increased interaction has been reported.

*very rough calc: 1994 75,000, 2014 100,000+; 25,000/20=1250 per year, /75,000 = 0.01667. If I take it from 3000 in 1971 to 2014 I see average of 75% per year! 1971 3,000, 2014 100,000+; 97,000/43 =2255 per year, /3000 = 0.75!

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Monday, 17 Aug 2015 at 7:10pm

I think the comparison with crocs is very instructive VJ, I posted something like that up before but no-one seemed interested.

At some point as GWS numbers increase there'll be a limit to how many human fatalities the general population will cope with.

velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 1:07pm

Yes FR, from all of it I am more concerned that "expanding distribution" might occur as in the 2nd link; and that ecosystems become out of balance compared with what we know, ie, anecdotal evidence from lifelong divers of many more juvie whites where before it was bronzies/nurses (think: Reunion for a parallel), fisherman pulling up juvie whites in NSW lakes. Perhaps they are more fecund than we know?

Maybe the science is correct though and fish stocks are repleting across the ecosystem - at least inshore from factory fishing off the continental shelves, and many whites in close was the norm in ages past. Point being, that this is a disrupted ecosystem in itself for in our actions we "pick winners" and the GWS is most certainly a winner.

Actually, there are terrifying stories from Aboriginal days / early settlement of a plesiosaur like creature on the Fraser coast threatening coastal communities, and able to walk on land! Now that would be an ecosystem worthy of fear! (Now this is the internet, so instantly disbelieve this until you can measure it...)

Oh yeah, my annunal growth rates, I should have used an exponential model, silly me, no statistician.

Good luck up that way, hope you are all safe. I surfed similar times in WA.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 11:01am

freeride76 , with the surfers numbers way down , and no real sign that GWS 's like feeding on humans , yet , there might not be anymore fatal shark attacks ?

most people don't really care about shark fatalities as they are so rare compared to how many people use the oceans , and deaths from drowning , car accidents , bomb blasts.

We live in a world where its about emotional , sensationalist headlines and the reporting there after of mans way of dealing with the issues...more hysteria , better headlines!

a

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 11:35am

Sharky, I can assure you every single person in this community cares about shark attacks . Very much.
Where do you live?

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 11:49am

your community is not , " the general population" is my point .

your community has called for culling , which seems a knee jerk emotional response to a couple of attacks , which seem to be just inquisitive sharks doing some R&D , with no-one being eaten but nibbled......

WA for what its worth....

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 3:14pm

Sharkman you're living in lalaland if you think this isn't a real live issue at front and centre of peoples minds everywhere at the moment.

From surfers who live here to the average work-a-daddy living in Butt fuck nowhereseville.

Funnily enough just about everyone I'm speaking too is heavily in favour of the tagging program with a limited partial cull the final resort if another attack happens or the encounters continue at the present rate.
Middle aged lady in Bunnings at Ballina, someone who looks like they haven't set foot in the ocean for twenty years is the only person I've spoken too in person who came out strongly against anything that would harm a hair on a sharks head.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 19 Aug 2015 at 10:45am
freeride76 wrote:

Sharkman you're living in lalaland if you think this isn't a real live issue at front and centre of peoples minds everywhere at the moment.

From surfers who live here to the average work-a-daddy living in Butt fuck nowhereseville.

Funnily enough just about everyone I'm speaking too is heavily in favour of the tagging program with a limited partial cull the final resort if another attack happens or the encounters continue at the present rate.
Middle aged lady in Bunnings at Ballina, someone who looks like they haven't set foot in the ocean for twenty years is the only person I've spoken too in person who came out strongly against anything that would harm a hair on a sharks head.

Freeride 76 On the Coast where you live , its in peoples minds , but not the general populous as you claimed , as all the Stats say there's not much to worry about.

To say its an issue at the front and centre of peoples minds everywhere at the moment is a big stretch and misleading.

But yes you seem to have a problem up in your area and I like the whole tagging idea is the best , and educating yourselves on your local issues.

the problem with everything about the cull , is there is no real way to determine which sharks are more aggressive than not and which ones die.

It is the indiscriminate killing , as here in WA showed , fixed nothing , caught all the wrong sharks , not one GWS , the drum lines were based on a knee jerk emotional reaction which drew an emotional political knee jerk solution , which took us nowhere !

velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 1:18pm

This is a point too, sharkman. In times of old, if a local community had a problem with sharks, the local fishos would simply go out and quietly fix it.

Today, we are so connected by virtual media and politically, that if an area has a problem with sharks the matter gets lobbied in a distant capital city, the politicians ask for advice, the scientists are tasked to study it and get funding. Then social media backlashes against the local community, drowning their voice in weight of numbers - and people who have no interaction with the ocean can rally and form an online campaign and nullify the local people whose loved ones are at risk. Columnists use online media to influence views, despite living far away. And the result is the problem is not addressed in any meaningful way for the locals who are suffering it.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 3:02pm
velocityjohnno wrote:

This is a point too, sharkman. In times of old, if a local community had a problem with sharks, the local fishos would simply go out and quietly fix it.

Today, we are so connected by virtual media and politically, that if an area has a problem with sharks the matter gets lobbied in a distant capital city, the politicians ask for advice, the scientists are tasked to study it and get funding. Then social media backlashes against the local community, drowning their voice in weight of numbers - and people who have no interaction with the ocean can rally and form an online campaign and nullify the local people whose loved ones are at risk. Columnists use online media to influence views, despite living far away. And the result is the problem is not addressed in any meaningful way for the locals who are suffering it.

Vj , not sure if you know ,but in the old days there were not too many problems with sharks as there was hardly anybody in the water.

I grew up in a fishing village , and spent most of my life in the same area , lots of GWS , no real problems except someone gets attacked every now and then , nothing alarming and if your loved ones are at risk , it is a choice , to surf/snorkel/swim , but the man in the grey suit is always there.

seal's picture
seal's picture
seal Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 2:12pm

VJ, couldn't have put it better myself.
I'd like to know how much will actually get done for the $250,000 that NSW Government is spending. AS in how many snouts in the trough before something is actually achieved?

arnie's picture
arnie's picture
arnie Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 2:43pm

I am interested to know what the surfer numbers are like around Byron at the moment. Are there still large crowds at the pass and tallows?

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 2:50pm

The pass, yes. Check out the 0.5-1ft inconsistent sets on the cam now for instance. Tallows has a few, but numbers are down.
6.45am today, 3ft and beautiful Lennox point where you'd expect 20-30 minimum - only 4 guys.
A few more headed out for the mid morning session however.
Hardly anyone at the non point break spots though.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 3:06pm

great uncrowded surf now there's a win for the 4 surfers!

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 3:14pm

I have definitely got my wave count up.
Can't say I haven't been thinking about sharks a fair bit out there though.

Turned my nose at empty North Wall a few times too.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 4:10pm

Australias deadliest shark coast by science documentary tv : YouTube - 45 mins long but a must watch.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 9:10pm
udo wrote:

Australias deadliest shark coast by science documentary tv : YouTube - 45 mins long but a must watch.

Interesting doco Udo. The commentary was a bit hyper but the content was bloody interesting. How's that footage of those lads free diving!! Heavy escape!!

What's clear so far IMO is that any "potential deterrents" are going to have be really quite specific to the ocean pursuit, be it surfing or diving etc etc etc. Don't think its going to be a case of one size fits all...........

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 3:13pm

I thought WA was the deadliest shark coast , or , maybe that was last year , and now its the ?

bondisteve's picture
bondisteve's picture
bondisteve Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 3:16pm
Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 6:21pm

Thanks velocity
It's interesting how many crocodiles the NT ecosystem can support . Being cold blooded means they don't have to eat as much as an equivalent sized mammalian predator. Probably similar with white sharks (although they do have a mechanism for increasing their body temp).

My read on this is that this low energy approach means they can hang around likely feeding spots waiting for opportunities. It's obvious that the current density of crocs means swimming in rivers up there is really risky.

Whites are essentially a coastal species (hardly ever caught on tuna longlines) so it's not as if all the extras are going to head out into the deep water and leave us alone.

wet-feet's picture
wet-feet's picture
wet-feet Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 8:54pm

I have another theory for all the shark activity in the Ballina area.

checked angas a couple of times earlier this arvo and watched something white drifting in from the north. some bloke reckoned it was an over turned catamaran drifting down from the tweed.

but ive just been fishing the back beach and on the way back passed a large hunk of dead whale washed up that wasn't there when I went out.
shit it stank.

it came in from the north so I guess its been floating around for a while up there . could be why all the sharks have been hanging around.

funny cos a lot of guys have been coming down this way to get away from all the sightings and beach closures .lol

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 9:02pm

You're just trying to get a few empty Angas sessions out of this aren't ya? ;)

wet-feet's picture
wet-feet's picture
wet-feet Tuesday, 18 Aug 2015 at 9:36pm

usually yep.

but I think I may head up Ballina way for a surf until the local council move this carcass off the back beach.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 19 Aug 2015 at 5:23am

thats a good piece of knowledge, cheers wetfeet.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Wednesday, 19 Aug 2015 at 10:57am

In shallow water by the looks , Freeze it @ 16 secs ...one lucky seal.

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Wednesday, 19 Aug 2015 at 10:58am

Has the Ballina shark reports FB page been taken down?

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Wednesday, 19 Aug 2015 at 11:11am

AIR T+G facebook - chopper surveillance, daily pics.
Sheepy ,one pic shows dirty/murky water.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 19 Aug 2015 at 1:12pm

amazing to hear the story of a big chunk of whale floating around , one think we know is GWS 's love whale meet , jury's still out on how yummy we taste , but, back to a story.

About 15 years ago a dead whale washed up at Umbies in WA , the authorities buried it on the beach , shark sighting became the norm , and there was an attack at lefties in that year,

I wonder what meat the GWS's like best whale /seal/ dolphin , at least we can say it looks like GWS's don't eat all the human body!

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Saturday, 22 Aug 2015 at 6:12pm

And we have another attack at Pt Macquarie !

Ballina Helicopters spotted a 4-5 mtr shark on the southern side of Broken Head this morning,

mightymouse's picture
mightymouse's picture
mightymouse Saturday, 22 Aug 2015 at 6:58pm

Yep Port Macquarie this afternoon.
http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/shark-a ... 7494544237

Waxing Crescent
47% full
Not sure there is a trend other than sharks wanting to eat whatever is on the menu

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Saturday, 22 Aug 2015 at 7:42pm

yeah, waxing crescent would have been seen as one of the safe times according to moon phase theory

Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog's picture
Sheepdog Sunday, 23 Aug 2015 at 4:44pm

I agree, fr... But I wouldn't just go on "moon theory"... I'll stick to the 10 points, moons being one of the 10 points..... I see he was attacked at 5.20pm..... Right around sunset... I read there was high baitfish activity, and knowing Lighthouse beach, it a pretty deep drop off with reef/rocks.... I'd assume he was wearing a wettie, and also assume he pissed in it, like most of us.....So there's 4 out of the 10 straight off the bat.....

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Saturday, 22 Aug 2015 at 8:02pm

All of you shark huggers are now on notice - you have blood on your hands - the next attack is because you are putting shark welfare ahead of human welfare. Hope you sleep well at night.

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Saturday, 22 Aug 2015 at 8:33pm

As a a certified shark hugger I've gotta let you know that I put human welfare way ahead of shark welfare. With that in mind I've considered for your own welfare that you should stay well clear of the ocean, please for your own safety and as I imagine you are concerned for the welfare of ya mates could you pass this advice on to them, particularly if youre around the Newcastle area.

monkeyonboard's picture
monkeyonboard's picture
monkeyonboard Sunday, 23 Aug 2015 at 7:18pm

How come just the newy area?

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Sunday, 23 Aug 2015 at 9:22pm

That's where I live

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Saturday, 22 Aug 2015 at 11:57pm

Life is all about risk theween. Have you assessed the risks you took to get to the beach today? Or are you in denial of all those risks & simply focusing on the risk of shark attack? Best stay out of the ocean mate until you get your 100% safety guarantee :-)

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Sunday, 23 Aug 2015 at 8:28pm

I assume you are taking the piss Rab. Either that or you are one of the seriously deluded who compare driving to the beach with a shark attack. We all know the risks of entering the water but we have the capacity to minimise (or at least reduce) those risks by taking out SOME of the rogue sharks in the Northern NSW area. I will continue to surf in my Victorian waters comfortable in the knowledge that there hasn't been a serious shark attack here in living memory. This is clearly not the case for surfers up north who must shit bricks every time they go out for a wave.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Sunday, 23 Aug 2015 at 9:32pm

All good theween. No delusion here in SW WA. Your right though, there's no point comparing road fatalities with shark attack fatalities. If we did no one would drive & everyone would surf, if you valued your life from a risk point of view. Mate I hope you never have to deal with shark attack issues in your local waters. Just remember though, there were places in SW WA that had never had shark attack issues, until they did.......

mightymouse's picture
mightymouse's picture
mightymouse Saturday, 22 Aug 2015 at 8:06pm

Yep we can try to find trends in moons but really it in nothing more that a correlation based on speculation. Grasping at straws. Still not sure I support a shark cull but now that it is at my local the mind starts to reassess.

I suspect that the east coast is a few years behind west coast in regards to shark numbers on the rise...but I'd hate to speculate!

simba's picture
simba's picture
simba Saturday, 22 Aug 2015 at 9:26pm

a few days ago in the telegraph for those that havent seen it
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/ballina-south-wall-a-close-up-...

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 23 Aug 2015 at 10:19am
simba wrote:

a few days ago in the telegraph for those that havent seen it
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/ballina-south-wall-a-close-up-...

Interesting to hear a local fisherman has conceded that with above average water temps, bait fish everywhere , the whole ocean Eco system around the Nth Coast seems to be in overdrive and alive with unprecedented levels of bait balls.

Pretty simple , its just an anomaly , it will all be gone soon and the crowds will be back with a vengeance , could be a good chance to try out some of those drone Sub-sharks!

wingnut2443's picture
wingnut2443's picture
wingnut2443 Sunday, 23 Aug 2015 at 6:16am

Sorry, wrong spot I know (assuming this comment posts), but I can't start a new thread in the website forum and none exist like it either... Issue is I'm getting a weird message when trying to login.

"too many failed attempts from your IP address"

Anyone else had, or getting this?

Someone trying to hack my account? Or, Swellnet, do you guys have a tech issue?

thermalben's picture
thermalben's picture
thermalben Sunday, 23 Aug 2015 at 8:09am

Yeah we've got tech issues. Sorry for the hassle. Trying to get it fixed ASAP.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Sunday, 23 Aug 2015 at 2:46pm

My Shark Radar - click latest sightings for Nth NSW .

silver-surfer's picture
silver-surfer's picture
silver-surfer Sunday, 23 Aug 2015 at 7:27pm

Cull them.
take out box jelly fish, crocs, prickly pear and cane toads too.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 24 Aug 2015 at 10:26am

SS , yes take them all out , if you fear it , cull it !

Just realized I am scared of people from the SS , cull the SS?

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 24 Aug 2015 at 11:37am

here's a couple of those really really dangerous 15'+ GWS's , but over here they can be seen all the time if you look!
https://au.news.yahoo.com/video/watch/29330093/close-encounter-with-mass...

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Monday, 24 Aug 2015 at 1:00pm

Pleasing to hear that the dpi has managed to obtain 6, yes 6 satellite tags to begin their already announced tagging program to protect ocean users on the north coast.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/conservation/three-great-white-sharks-...

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Monday, 24 Aug 2015 at 4:53pm

D.P.I. report that Pt Macquarie attack "most likely " from a juvenile GWS approx. 2.7mts long.

ACB__'s picture
ACB__'s picture
ACB__ Monday, 24 Aug 2015 at 5:00pm

That would give reason to believe it was not one of the famous north-coast 5. As from all reports they we're all 3.5 meter plus?

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Monday, 24 Aug 2015 at 5:27pm

Just wondering - is there a legal case for those attacked in NSW to sue the DPI/State govt for negligence? IMHO there would be as the 3 elements of the tort appear to exist in that -
1. the DPI/State govt owes a duty of care to protect those in NSW from foreseeable actions (or inaction) which could cause harm,
2. the DPI/State govt has, by failing to act to protect beach users, breached that duty of care, and
3. shark attack victims (at least since the threat became more obvious ) have suffered injury as a result of that inaction.
Although the defence of contributory negligence would apply, this should not be sufficient for such a lawsuit to fail.

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Monday, 24 Aug 2015 at 5:38pm

There was a group in Newcastle trying to get the local council to install shark warning signs in parts of lake maquarie where people/kids swim and there has been several sightings. Lenny67 might jniw about this? You would think if something happened in a case like this surely there would be grounds

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 26 Aug 2015 at 2:53pm
theween wrote:

Just wondering - is there a legal case for those attacked in NSW to sue the DPI/State govt for negligence? IMHO there would be as the 3 elements of the tort appear to exist in that -
1. the DPI/State govt owes a duty of care to protect those in NSW from foreseeable actions (or inaction) which could cause harm,
2. the DPI/State govt has, by failing to act to protect beach users, breached that duty of care, and
3. shark attack victims (at least since the threat became more obvious ) have suffered injury as a result of that inaction.
Although the defence of contributory negligence would apply, this should not be sufficient for such a lawsuit to fail.

If there was a potential for litigation against the DPI/State Govt , we would already have it.

Be careful what you want as then if a Govt official was performing duty of care, the beaches would be closed everytime a shadow was seen on your beach!

Sorrento's picture
Sorrento's picture
Sorrento Monday, 24 Aug 2015 at 7:03pm

I am just a teenager from Victoria but was just interested in an answer from Nick or any of other people commenting on this forum to tell me why Victoria is much less shark prevalent ( touch wood ) compared to the NSW coast especially it's seems at the moment around the Ballina area. Is because there are less whales ? Colder waters ? Less fish ? I no there are places like flinders and Phillip Island that do have great whites because of the nobby's ( seal colonies) and I guess everywhere around Victoria has great whites but they don't seem very interested in humans down here in Victoria ( in the Phillip Island point I assume because they are well fed because of the seals). An answer would be greatly appreciated by anyone as I find this a very interesting subject.
Cheers

velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno Saturday, 29 Aug 2015 at 5:43pm

Hi Sorrento, I'm just a guy who posts here, and will have a shot at answering your question, I'm in Vic now as well.

Vicco at present seems to be in a safety bubble of sorts. I grew up in WA, and I'm continually surprised at the size of paddle offshore crew will do without thinking about it too much. Back in WA, it'd be sketchy these days. We noticed more and more sightings and 'drive by's' in the late 90's, then from 2000 onward there were fatal attacks in WA. Could it be after a period of curiousity the animals became more brazen?

There are pointers in Vic. For sure. In times of old it had the reputation as having really big sharks. White tag informs us that they do occur around Philip Island, and have been tracked bee-lining to Cape Otway, then hugging the coast. Are there pupping grounds in Gippsland to the border? They do go further south from there, and are encountered on the Tassie East coast and presumably the islands in between. Australia apparently has two populations of GWS - an east coast one and a West Coast one. The West coast mob's range is from SA through to Exmouth. The East Coast from Barrier Reef down to Tassie. Now Victoria is in a gap between these. You will get residents at PI and apparently out Portland way as well, but whether it's the East Coast whites or not we see, I cannot say. Have these sharks become familiar with humans after seeing those cage-diving experiences?

Other factors, some time ago one of the fisho posters here mentioned that Western SA's gillnets were moving to the Straight, I wonder if this is still in effect? Also, this time of year (like WA) sees schools of snapper congregate in the bay and Westernport to spawn, out of reach of the NW winds. Juvenile whites follow these and back in WA we knew these months as 'shark season'. So read the fishing columns in your local paper, work out what the fish are doing as well. Vic gets the Southern Right whales in winter, I think, but do we get humpbacks that the GWS follow north?

On our coast you'll get times in the summer when a shark will come in close, be reported up and down the coast. I've heard stories of big ones sticking their heads out of the water to check crew out, the whole curiousity aspect of it all. I have a son pretty close in age to you and we had one session where a 5m beastie was within about 70m of us for an hour before we were told to get out of the water - was it birthing, breeding or just resting? Don't know. It wasn't interested, luckily for us. I thought it's pectoral fins were a cormorant flapping around out the back, silly me!

Animal behaviour sees animals return to places where they have been successful in grazing or hunting. It is not too much of a hurdle to assume a white that has attacked a human will remember the encounter and act with that knowledge. In saying this I am almost at the 'rogue shark' theory.

Also, we have heard anecdotal evidence for a long time now of their numbers increasing. Makes sense as they have been protected for over 20 years. In that time, those sharks will be maturing and reaching a size (>3.5m) where they switch their diets from fish to mammals. Food for thought. The question is can we quantify this/any increase, and can we measure their natural food sources, are these increasing or decreasing?

Lastly, warm water anomaly, or stages of the moon, or seasons - these could all contribute.

So enjoy your time in the ocean, consider this and some of the excellent advise by Sheepdog and others about when to surf/where to surf to increase your chances of staying safe.

Sorrento's picture
Sorrento's picture
Sorrento Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 11:35am

Thanks velocityjohnno for the response very interesting stuff

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Tuesday, 25 Aug 2015 at 12:01am

Toes up in the Tuncurry area, dolphin on the menu - http://www.manningrivertimes.com.au/story/3300529/dolphin-mangled-by-sha...

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Wednesday, 26 Aug 2015 at 1:44pm

11.57am - DPI have captured and tagged there first 3.5 mtr [GWS ?] shark at Ballina and will be released further out to sea.
: My Shark Radar

ACB__'s picture
ACB__'s picture
ACB__ Wednesday, 26 Aug 2015 at 3:14pm

https://instagram.com/p/61TCBAszfh/?taken-by=mattwilko8

fuck me those bait balls really are in close. They make the whales look small!

Distracted's picture
Distracted's picture
Distracted Thursday, 27 Aug 2015 at 1:59pm

Good to see the DPI is making a start with the tagging, pity is they're only catching the small ones so far. Based on WA's experience catching the big ones is not so easy.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-27/nsw-shark-tagging-begins-on-north-...
Curious to know the bait/technique they're using. Best bait would have to be a good whale fillet on a set of anchor sized gangs, so the next dead whale that floats up on a beach, the DPI should make sure they are there quick smarts to take a few strips off and throw in the bait freezer.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 27 Aug 2015 at 2:27pm

they got 2 eh?

On the first day. Thats not bad. Not that they had to look too hard, they only got out of the rivermouth and they had their first one. Which any local surfer could have told them.
Unfortunately, they only have funding for 2 weeks and the nearest listening station for the acoustic tags is Coffs harbour.
They need a 6 month tagging program with listening stations at Evans, Ballina, Byron at the least to get a picture detailed enough to make any meaningful conclusions.
Also, stomach analysis would be extremely helpful to know what food source is holding these sharks in this area for so long.

simba's picture
simba's picture
simba Thursday, 27 Aug 2015 at 3:39pm

Makes you wonder if any of the sharks previously tagged down around Stockton beach are up around the north coast and if they are why hasnt any thing been reported about them.

seal's picture
seal's picture
seal Thursday, 27 Aug 2015 at 5:15pm

I hope the two they caught, they let go out to sea a bit , say around NZ!!

Hopefully by being caught ,they'll tell their mates is not such a good place to hang out anymore and they'll all fuck off out to sea a good distance.

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Friday, 28 Aug 2015 at 11:20am

And if the tagged GWS then attack someone? Hence my legal question.
Better to kill the buggers than tag them!

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Saturday, 29 Aug 2015 at 11:25am

ABC online : Craig Ison Evans head victim ...FARK

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Saturday, 29 Aug 2015 at 11:56am
udo wrote:

ABC online : Craig Ison Evans head victim ...FARK

Scary shit!! One very lucky but also very unlucky man.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Saturday, 29 Aug 2015 at 3:58pm

Any shark huggers out there think this attack was a case of mistaken identity?

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Saturday, 29 Aug 2015 at 5:07pm
udo wrote:

Any shark huggers out there think this attack was a case of mistaken identity?

Clearly you don't :-)

How long is a piece of string??????

Sorrento's picture
Sorrento's picture
Sorrento Saturday, 29 Aug 2015 at 4:28pm

I am guessing you are for killing great whites since you are calling people who support keeping great whites alive "shark huggers" UDO ?

Sorrento's picture
Sorrento's picture
Sorrento Saturday, 29 Aug 2015 at 4:33pm

By just reading your comments previously I guess you are for culling sharks it seems

velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno Saturday, 29 Aug 2015 at 5:22pm

"The 'marine heat wave' off Western Australia during the summer of 2010-11,"

http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/Documents/research_reports/frr222.pdf

Haven't read it all yet, but could we see co-incidence in the warm water anomalies?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 8:06am

Another white tagged off Sharps beach yesterday.
Surfed up near Broken, I counted 5 bait balls within a kilometre stretch.
Ditched the board and grabbed a rod after one of the big bait balls took a liking to the peak I was on.

Lanky Dean's picture
Lanky Dean's picture
Lanky Dean Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 2:41pm

@ freeride,

Wise decision. When to surf ? when to catch food? good work on keeping the people informed !

" In psychology, decision-making is regarded as the cognitive process resulting in the selection of a belief or a course of action among several alternative possibilities. Every decision-making process produces a final choice that may or may not prompt action. Decision-making is the process of identifying and choosing alternatives based on the values and preferences of the decision maker."

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 9:58am

yeah udo , you a culler?

seems like the GWS are just following anomalies in the water temp and in turn the bait balls.

seems to be a lot of boogy boarders attacked, back to the turtle theory , and try and surf when there are BB riders in the water.

If there was a legal case to be mounted against the govt for legal , lack of "duty of care", the Govt might just close ALL beaches , which would kill off tourism and bring the authorities into controlling when you surf or not , but reading some of the fear and emotional driven arguments for culling,maybe that's what you are really asking , that the govt takes the responsibility for surfers wellbeing in the surf , FR76 could be the sherriff?

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 11:27am

Sharkman - do you honestly believe the mistaken identity / turtle theory ?

Come on mate, have you ever been diving ? Being underwater doesn't immediately render shapes indiscernible.

If I have no trouble recognising and differentiating animals underwater , then why would a superbly equipped shark with its impressive array of senses that has spent literally an entire lifetime in the ocean , have any difficulty ?

Do you mistake horses for cows in a paddock ?

Dogs for sheep ?

These fish have big eyes meaning good eyesight . Most attacks happen in clear water.

I understand you appreciate these animals.

So you can at least give them some credit.

It doesn't make them evil , malicious or vengeful just because they feel like snacking on a human.

It doesn't necessarily diminish your stance that they should be protected to admit this is so either.

You don't have to wilfully misinterpret facts to back your opinions.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 11:36am
Blowin wrote:

Sharkman - do you honestly believe the mistaken identity / turtle theory ?

Come on mate, have you ever been diving ? Being underwater doesn't immediately render shapes indiscernible.

If I have no trouble recognising and differentiating animals underwater , then why would a superbly equipped shark with its impressive array of senses that has spent literally an entire lifetime in the ocean , have any difficulty ?

Do you mistake horses for cows in a paddock ?

Dogs for sheep ?

These fish have big eyes meaning good eyesight . Most attacks happen in clear water.

I understand you appreciate these animals.

So you can at least give them some credit.

It doesn't make them evil , malicious or vengeful just because they feel like snacking on a human.

It doesn't necessarily diminish your stance that they should be protected to admit this is so either.

You don't have to wilfully misinterpret facts to back your opinions.

Hey Blowin, why do GWS bite outboard motors & surf skis. Plenty of examples. If that's not mistaken identity then what would be the nutritional value? :-)

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 12:13pm

I reckon curiosity Rabbits.

I'm pretty certain they're not mistaking a 16' Quintrex runabout with a 50hp Yamaha outboard for a turtle.

But....don't think that I mean that all attacks on humans are curiosity .

I reckon some ski bites are attacks.

Why not ?

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 3:17pm

I agree. A combination of attacks & curiosity re boats/ski etc....

The issue with curiosity where humans are involved (if it's indeed curiosity) usually results in horrific injuries or death. For me it gets back to the fact that you, me & even the "shark experts" don't know if mistaken identity is real or not. It just sounded like you believe that mistaken identity is bullshit. Some proof would be handy if that's the case. Cheers....

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 11:38am

there was a spate of shark attacks in Hawaii/Oahu , all big tigers , there was only boogy boarders attacked , and the theory was they look like big turtles , actually saw a program where they tested the theory and yeah big Tigers love to attack and eat turtles.

they also showed that the shark attacks come from the bottom and came up underneath the turtle and just crushed it with a bite. that's a fact

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 11:54am

So the facts are - Tigersharks like eating turtles ( who'd have thought ).

- boogie boarders were attacked by Tigersharks .

That explains it then. All doubt removed.

I guess the Tigersharks must also mistake all those number plates, garbage bin lids, seabirds , fish , dogs and squid for turtles too then.

Stupid Tigersharks.

Or maybe all the sharks have cataracts.

And no sense of smell.

And their ampullae of lorenzeni are uncalibrated .

Or maybe they just eat whatever the fuck they want to eat irrespective of how uncomfortable that information may be to the humans that wish to paint sharks as animals that have strict dietary guidelines that prohibit the eating of homosapiens .

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 12:11pm
Blowin wrote:

So the facts are - Tigersharks like eating turtles ( who'd have thought ).

- boogie boarders were attacked by Tigersharks .

That explains it then. All doubt removed.

blowin no such thing as no doubt in anything , but , its just a theory , like all the other info we have on sharks. I find it amazing that there has been a very high percentage of attacks on the Nth coast on boogy boarders , is there a lot more surfers than boogers??

the GWS seem to be not consuming the bodies after the attack , seems to be just an anomaly with warm water and lots of bait fish....

I guess the Tigersharks must also mistake all those number plates, garbage bin lids, seabirds , fish , dogs and squid for turtles too then.

Stupid Tigersharks.

Or maybe all the sharks have cataracts.

And no sense of smell.

And their ampullae of lorenzeni are uncalibrated .

Or maybe they just eat whatever the fuck they want to eat irrespective of how uncomfortable that information may be to the humans that wish to paint sharks as animals that have strict dietary guidelines that prohibit the eating of homosapiens .

Sorrento's picture
Sorrento's picture
Sorrento Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 11:51am

Just in response to udo's comments and many other people's views on the issue at hand surly you believe there are better ways to stop sharks from attacking humans then just culling them. It's a quick and easy solution that actually doesn't benefit anyone. Sure all the Sharks that are hanging around will be gone but what about this summer and next winter what are we supposed to just kill every shark that comes near Beach's?. We are in sharks habitat when we enter the water we go into there territory knowing the risks involved but we still go in the water because we know the chances of getting attacked are very slim ( touch wood). There have been many good suggestions that have been made that are much better than just culling sharks. blowin are you for culling aswell?

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 12:00pm

I was for culling Sorrento, but after fishing all morning for the death of a mere handful of voracious man eaters I'm starting to rethink my position.

That Pointer blood is a pain in the arse to get out of the shag carpet covering the floor of my tinny for a start.

And don't get me started on trying to get hold of a regular supply of homeless people as bait.

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 12:07pm

No Sorrento , I'm not for killing all the sharks.

But you've got to admit, it would be difficult to get eaten by a pointer if there wasn't any left.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 12:12pm

well you could always get eaten by a Tiger or a bull shark , or are you partial to GWS's?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 12:16pm

The whole mistaken identity thing is a total red herring with respect to the danger posed by sharks to humans.

All we know is that sharks are opportunistic, ambush predators and they'll have a go at just about anything. Most of that is probably investigative bite behaviour but that is really irrelevant because an investigative bite from a white will cause severe injury or death.
All this touchy-feely nonsense that sharks aren't really interested in humans should be taken down the back paddock and put to sleep.
We also know that shark management programs are effective but kill alot of other wildlife. If shark numbers continue to rise and people keep getting killed or maimed then that will be the next step , as MIke Baird has indicated.
Personally, if it comes to that point, in terms of ethics and ecology I'd much rather see a targeted management program than one that kills other wildlife indiscriminately.

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 12:23pm

Sharkman, do you spend much time at the beach ?

If you do then surely by now you've come across dead animals - Whales, dolphins, turtles, fish - that have bites out of them.

Often just a single bite.

I reckon that sometimes sharks just take a single bite in an attempt to fatally wound an animal then they wait till the animal dies before they can come back and consume it without fear of being injured by the panicked, dying animal.

Sometimes these animals get away.

Sometimes they have mates that help drag them to shore and apply
Life saving first aid.

I can't really understand your reluctance to entertain the idea that a fish would eat a human.

It seems to have an ideological rather than an evidence based foundation.

Maybe you need to start doing a bit of fishing or diving to get a better understanding of how life in the ocean works.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 1:23pm

blowie , have fished and surfed since the sixties , in waters that have always have had big whites and Tigers.

In Hawaii ,Tigers are considered man eaters , but here in WA I have seen tigers most of my life , especially up in the NW , but never been an attack.

The stats do not show people being devoured as food , but rather the GWS's come in for a test tasting .

your personal theory about the shark attacking a food source , and then because its scared waits until its prey dies .

you must be taking the piss , I think you need to go out an educate yourself , try reading !

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 1:57pm

Yeah I was going to read my shark book this morning to educate myself on their behaviour, but i wound up going fishing instead.

Spaniards must look a lot like turtles as well as they kept getting nailed by Noah's .

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 12:28pm

There's plenty of evidence of white sharks consuming or partially consuming humans.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 1:15pm

would be interested to read your stats on bodies being consumed , as I can't find any stats anywhere?

I did find a couple of anomalies though .

In 1957 in Durban Sth Africa , there was 7 attacks in 107 days with 5 people being killed but not devoured , was really warm inshore waters.

Also there was this The Great White Shark - Facts, Stats, & Cool Info...

http://www.sharksider.com/great-white-shark/Cached

as I have previously mentioned , the north coast shark population and attacks looks like an anomaly ..

chin's picture
chin's picture
chin Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 1:44pm
sharkman wrote:

would be interested to read your stats on bodies being consumed , as I can't find any stats anywhere?

I reckon they would if they could. How big would the stomach be on a 4 or 5 metre shark anyway? Long bones in arms and legs of a human. maybe they could consume 100kgs of fish or whale meat, but it would take a much bigger shark to consume a 100Kg human.

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 1:56pm

Google " Fatal shark attacks in Australia. " Wikipedia. Just check out the WA section .

Plenty eaten .

Plenty eaten by Tigers.

That's just the reported cases.

I particularly liked the whole ships crew eaten by Noah's.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 1:34pm

Based on what?
Water temps have been slightly but not significantly higher. It's all been pretty bog standard as far as environmental factors are concerned.

I didn't say stats I said evidence. White shark wouldn't relinquish the body of the JBay swimmer. Guy bitten in half surfing at Moreton Island was towed around by white shark for an hour. They didn't get much of him back.
Tadashi had both legs bitten off.
If you read the case histories there is ample evidence of consumption or partial consumption. It's not the majority of cases but it does happen.

btw, that link you provided is dead.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 1:44pm

List of fatal shark attacks wiki page - pretty much have search further online after picking attack to find out if bodies were recovered

At a guess around 60% of attacks in Aust waters were classed as full consumption
Sharkman - 5 out of the last 12 in your waters were full consumption ..I think

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 1:47pm

Udo , I think , is not really a stat , but will keep searching as most of the attacks seem to have been a bite!

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 1:56pm

18 off the top of my head where no body recovered......let us know how many come up in your searches

gromfull's picture
gromfull's picture
gromfull Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 1:44pm

You don't look too hard then, sharkman, Julian rocks, diver, yes a diver, husband and wife, wife witnessed husband being bitten in half, remains never found, that what I remember of that attack.
If we could separate the oceans, one ocean where all you shark hungers can allow these sharks to populate and go uncontrolled that's where you surf, and one where controlled measures are taken, culling a few, maybe killing one big one every year and leaving it's carcass to rot, that's the ocean I'm surfing in

surfer1971's picture
surfer1971's picture
surfer1971 Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 5:25pm

Actually Ron Boggis from Byron Bay caught the GWS with a 3000 pound trace and the shark regurgitated the body of the male when it was next to his boat in the middle of the Bay. Ron said that it was bigger than his boat which at that time was 22ft. They did shoot it but to no effect. Apparently the local Police SGT put in a couple of rounds to the head. Agree that we need them to be culled. Shapers like Ghunter Rohn and Wayne Webster have had there orders vastly reduced as no surfers are surfing the Ballina area. Tourism is worth a lot more than a few sharks.

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 2:06pm

Repeat after me Sharkman -

" Sharks, whilst not evil , have been known to occasionally dine on man flesh. "

Just say it mate, you will feel liberated.

This denial is too great a burden to bear.

tassitails's picture
tassitails's picture
tassitails Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 4:34pm

full moon at the moment !!!!!!!!! ..... a dozen surfers chased in by 15ft shark coupla hours ago, at break on east coast tasmania, not far from fatal attack a month ago

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 4:48pm

Tassi, can you put all your info up on - My shark Radar.

maddogmorley's picture
maddogmorley's picture
maddogmorley Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 5:34pm

Now they're down at Victor Harbor.!The whole Day st stretch ordered out the water by clubbies due to sighting. Never had that in 20 yrs + down there.

tassitails's picture
tassitails's picture
tassitails Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 5:51pm

done !!!!!! @ udo

gromfull's picture
gromfull's picture
gromfull Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 8:32pm

That's right 71 I remember that now, bloody gruesome stuff,

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 8:51pm

If you google Ron Boggis that storys there. Killer tales from dangerous depths.

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 9:17pm

Holy shit ,that makes for riveting reading Udo.

Just goes to show how much wilful denial occurs within the scientific community.

Despite repeated eyewitness accounts from as far ago as you'd care to venture it has only just been accepted, and doubtfully ,that Pointers would hunt as a team or that they consume human flesh.

Ridiculous notions that still get spewed to this very day.

Some idiots need to see Karl Stephonovic verbally drilling a Pointer into admitting culpability on Sunrise before they'll accept the truth.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 9:27pm

What are you saying Blowin? What is this truth you speak of?

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 9:30pm

That sharks do eat people.

You wouldn't think it was a controversial notion , but apparently to our mate Sharkman ,it is.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Sunday, 30 Aug 2015 at 10:53pm

Yeah it's a hard pill to swallow for some. Cheers....

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 9:29am

yes sharks do eat people Blowin , but humans are not a priority in the food chain , as are seals and dead whales , so to think that the GWS's are out there specifically hunting for human flesh is not true.

http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/news/2010/09/shark-attack-survivo...

fear is a terrible thing when fed inordinate amounts of false theories and speculation over a short period of time.

there seems to be no record anywhere of sharks having a preference for human flesh.

apex predators are a necessary part of the eco-system , and with more than 50 million sharks killed a year maybe we are seeing the result of humans messing with the eco-system .

Its amazing when you start reading all the info about sharks and the surfers here on the forum look like a bunch of hysterical school girls calling for culling so that they can go surf . Even at the expense of destroying the eco-system that provides us with a large part of our food and recreational past times , grow a pair will you and accept that if you surf , there is a small risk of shark attack , or maybe we should rubberize all the coral reefs so we won't get hurt!

mk1's picture
mk1's picture
mk1 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 1:37pm

its a logical fallacy to think that a sharks intentions make any difference to the outcome.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 2:05pm

Mki, the question is , "have humans become part of the food chain for sharks or is it sharks just testing a new food source?"

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 2:29pm

Meaningless question.
A bad question begets a bad answer.

We already know that sharks are biting humans we can't , nor do we need to know, what the sharks motivation for this is.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 3:00pm
freeride76 wrote:

Meaningless question.
A bad question begets a bad answer.

We already know that sharks are biting humans we can't , nor do we need to know, what the sharks motivation for this is.

FR76 I would of thought learning the "motivation" would go someway to putting together potentially safer guidelines when it comes to surfing & sharks & possibly assist in the creation of a potential deterrent.....

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 3:26pm

education = meaningless , now that's deep , bad question?

Free 76 do you think that trying to workout if sharks are biting out of hunger or biting out of curiosity , maybe in your world, education and understanding don't matter ?

I would love to know if sharks are making a mistake , or are actually developing a taste for human flesh , and this needs to be done scientifically , not knee jerk ignorance that simply calls for culling.

http://www.animaldanger.com/most-dangerous-animals.php

hey Free76 do you think we should cull elephants /Hippos / buffalos/lions/jellyfish/tigers as they kill a lot more people than sharks?

mk1's picture
mk1's picture
mk1 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 5:49pm

"hey Free76 do you think we should cull elephants /Hippos / buffalos/lions/jellyfish/tigers as they kill a lot more people than sharks?"

Many of those are culled after they kill someone and a lot of them are actively managed locally to reduce such issues, but that isn't relevant to FNNSW anyway, its just a bunch of hyperbole.

Actually following that dangerous animals link to Australia comes up with a whole pile of whacky BS. No GWS deaths, 500 saltwater crocodile deaths, 10-20 brown snake deaths a year?? seriously who put that site together??

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 10:28am

MkI , try reading the whole article as it puts GWS deaths at between 10 + pa !

mk1's picture
mk1's picture
mk1 Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 12:11pm

Follow the link to Australia like I said. Nothing.

mk1's picture
mk1's picture
mk1 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 5:27pm

Understanding sharks attacking motivation is a great long term study that will be fraught with conjecture and assumptions. Get a huge grant and we will see you in 5 years for a response that may or may not be conclusive. Most likely shark repellents will have successfully nullified the imperative for this question by the time you know.

The question is "how do we significantly reduce the likelihood of sharks biting people right now?"

Shark deterrents are the mid term answer, we must be less than 2-3 years away from them being proven successful and put into widespread use.

Whats the bridging answer from here to there? Stay out of the water and/or deal with it (great idea! not).

There's plenty of anecdotal evidence to suggest that sharks leave an area where one of their kind has been killed. It'd be great to do a scientific study on that while we have such an opportunity as this. In this case I see the culling of a small number of GWS as an environmental non-event, and I am very green focused (but try to be pragmatic about our influence).

But then I tend to think that GWS are not critically endangered in the area and that humans regularly do far more damage than the culling of a few GWS would inflict without anyone raising the merest of concern. If you really want to give a shit about the natural environment become a vegetarian, get your energy from green sources, offset your carbon, avoid all plastics, cancel your holiday and your new surfboards, clean your local beach, put your dog/cat down, get some beehives, become a wildlife rescue officer, and then feel free to give a shit about 1 or 2 sharks.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 6:48pm
mk1 wrote:

Understanding sharks attacking motivation is a great long term study that will be fraught with conjecture and assumptions. Get a huge grant and we will see you in 5 years for a response that may or may not be conclusive. Most likely shark repellents will have successfully nullified the imperative for this question by the time you know.

The question is "how do we significantly reduce the likelihood of sharks biting people right now?"

Shark deterrents are the mid term answer, we must be less than 2-3 years away from them being proven successful and put into widespread use.

Whats the bridging answer from here to there? Stay out of the water and/or deal with it (great idea! not).

There's plenty of anecdotal evidence to suggest that sharks leave an area where one of their kind has been killed. It'd be great to do a scientific study on that while we have such an opportunity as this. In this case I see the culling of a small number of GWS as an environmental non-event, and I am very green focused (but try to be pragmatic about our influence).

But then I tend to think that GWS are not critically endangered in the area and that humans regularly do far more damage than the culling of a few GWS would inflict without anyone raising the merest of concern. If you really want to give a shit about the natural environment become a vegetarian, get your energy from green sources, offset your carbon, avoid all plastics, cancel your holiday and your new surfboards, clean your local beach, put your dog/cat down, get some beehives, become a wildlife rescue officer, and then feel free to give a shit about 1 or 2 sharks.

You are taking the piss aren't you?? How fucking mighty of you to suggest that there is a solution that will be guaranteed to work within the next few years. How do you know that killing one or hundred GWS will have any effect on human fatalities. Talk about misplaced fear. Yes research will take time, that's the nature of quality research. Yes we could trial new ideas in the meantime, but to suggest that you have "the answer" is based purely on fear & ignorance in the extreme. It's the ocean, it's wild & untamed for the most part. How about in the meantime you learn to live with it.......

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 6:54pm

Rabbits, you're projecting, try reading the words he said.

He didn't say guaranteed to work, he said there is plenty of anecdotal evidence and that a scientific study now on that option would be opportune.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 7:03pm

He said, and you agreed, that killing some GWS now & into the next few years will essentially solve the problem. I'm open minded on the subject but anyone making assumptions that "any actions" taken will result in definite outcomes is in dreamland. Some prior proof would be lovely.......

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 7:18pm

With respect Rabbit's, I can't see those words at all in what he said.

He didn't say it would solve the problem, or result in any definite outcomes.

He said there was anecdotal evidence it might keep other whites away and that now was an opportune time to test it scientifically.

Thats a very different thing to what you are saying.

mk1's picture
mk1's picture
mk1 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 7:32pm

haha oh jesus!

Rabbit, I really intended as FR has put forward.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 7:48pm

With all due respect to yourself & FR76, your tone did not match your intentions in your post IMO. What I'm not hearing from people in favor of a cull, is that it simply may not have any effect what so ever. That said, there's only one way to find out, I agree. But even after a cull we will have to wait for a period of time, one month, ones year, 10 years, to learn anything from it, if anything at all. It's a big unknown all this shark attack stuff.......hence my interest in research......

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 5:40pm

x a million

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 6:21pm

Mk1 - you've hit the nail on the head!

Sharkman - I suggest that you should be culled for shamefully trivialising the deaths and injuries to north coast surfers, in particular, over recent months.
Culling some GWS should help restore some balance to our ecosystem and is the 'Blind Freddy' solution to our current problem.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 9:10am
theween wrote:

Mk1 - you've hit the nail on the head!

Sharkman - I suggest that you should be culled for shamefully trivialising the deaths and injuries to north coast surfers, in particular, over recent months.
Culling some GWS should help restore some balance to our ecosystem and is the 'Blind Freddy' solution to our current problem.

thweeny, good solution , make up that I trivialized deaths and injuries, and the if you don't like my opinion cull me , then you talk about restoring balance to the eco system by culling the apex predator , as you don't know which ones actually attacked , just cull a few and you will fee alright , as its all about you and yourself!

Sorrento's picture
Sorrento's picture
Sorrento Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 7:43pm

Theween I think a point I would like to make is that sharks have the same amount of rights if no more right to be in the ocean as they were here long before us. Although these attacks are of course tragedys that does mean that we need to cull these beautiful creatures. This is where they live they can't live out of the ocean which gives them the right to be able to be in the ocean without being culled. Every surfer and swimmer goes into the water knowing the risks involved by entering the water but we still go to the beach because we know that the chance of getting bitten is very slim. Instead of culling we should research and discover ways to reduce this risk without just simply just killing the animals as this is a quick and easy solution which has been actually proven to not actually lessen the risk of being bitten by a shark.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 7:57pm

Thats nothing but anthropomorphic opinion Sorrento, you can no more bestow rights on shark or any other animal in nature than you can on yourself.
You call them beautiful, others see them as cold and hostile. It's purely subjective.

What next, you bestow rights on a wildebeest not to be predated on by a lion?

btw, at the moment, when wild dingo attacks a person or becomes a problem it is culled, crocs are culled in the NT and relocated in QLD.
Whats your opinion on the death of beautiful creatures like the swordfish or the tuna?

We are a part of nature and nature is red in tooth and claw. Animals kill each other, we kill animals. Animals kill us. We try and defend ourselves from being killed by animals.
It's been that way since amoeba started dividing in the protoplasmic soup.
You get an infection from a bacteria you hammer it with antibiotics, maybe the microbiologist sees that bacteria as a beautiful creature, but to you it's a threat to your life.

Unlike a shark humans have a consciousness, we have a memory and an ability to love. That enables us to have relationships and experiences on a higher plane to a shark. That makes our fellow humans, our friends and loved ones, more special to us than a shark. That justifies a killing when those lives are threatened. As we justify any killing in self defence or to lower the risk of a fatal attack.
Thats why we have shark management programs in QLD, NSW, South Africa: because people decided that, yes, people are more important to us than a shark. That is purely subjective to, but seeing as we have the ability to communicate and a shark does not I have to assume that that is so.

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 8:43pm

There is nothing in that post that is anthropomorphic perhaps you meant anthropocentric?

Yes you can bestow rights on animals in nature and ourselves, we do it all the time. This is not anthropomorphic.

No nature is not red in tooth and claw,

Sharks do have a consciousness.

Sharks do communicate.

Very anthropocentric post but you make some good points.

flow's picture
flow's picture
flow Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 7:59pm

I agree with mk!. I wouldn't lose any sleep in culling one GWS.

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 8:03pm

Beautifully put Freeride , although poor young Sorrento might be reaching for the thesaurus as we write!

Sorrento's picture
Sorrento's picture
Sorrento Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 8:13pm

I don't think many people would loose much sleep killing a great white shark either flow I am more speaking on a broader sense- some people are suggesting culling not just 1 but much more which I think is quite extreme as culling has never actually been proven effective. I wouldn't loose sleep over the killing of a GWS but I think there are better ways of adressing the issue than just culling sharks as in Western Australia it did not even reduce the chance of getting attacked and they often didn't even catch the right type of shark ( what's the point of doing something if it doesn't actually do anything about the problem it just helps in the short term not in years to come- it's pointless).

Sorrento's picture
Sorrento's picture
Sorrento Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 8:16pm

Sure they could try killing one GWS and see if deters them away but if you start culling them in mass numbers That's when it's just not right ( I will admit theween anthropomorphic got me had to search that up )

gromfull's picture
gromfull's picture
gromfull Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 8:19pm

What mk1 said, here here

mk1's picture
mk1's picture
mk1 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 8:22pm

I haven't read all the comments but I don't see anyone calling for a widespread cull Sorrento. Most of us are referencing the targeted killing of 1 or possibly 2 GWS to test if that will deter other GWS, this is different to the outcome of shark netting / drumlines in terms of the risk abatement.

I'd say the big risk here is that no solution is found, the local economy suffers and the local council looks to drastic measures to fix.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 8:30pm

1 or 2 as a test yep....no huge cull
shit a longliner might catch 2 or 3 juveniles tonight ?

mk1's picture
mk1's picture
mk1 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 8:35pm

How many in the GC nets just up the coast?

Netting of course being the preferred solution of councils with a protracted shark problem...

gromfull's picture
gromfull's picture
gromfull Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 8:23pm

And I'll have to agree with free as well,

Sorrento's picture
Sorrento's picture
Sorrento Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 8:40pm

Freeride are you sure crocodiles are culled in Northern Territory as you stated above " Crocs are culled in NT" but I believe they are a protected species and cannot be killed in Australia correct me if I am wrong. To answer some of your questions I think it depends on the animal. To use your example of tuna I think that the numbers of tuna in the world are very high and that because they are used so humans can eat I think it's fine that they are killed and eaten but GWS are different we don't eat them, they are not huge numbers of them left I believe they are on the endangered species list, and the risk of getting attacked by one is very slim, so I think they don't need to be killed. To refer to dingoes fair enough if they have attacked someone or a causing problem I don't see a problem with killing them they are introduced species which we don't need. There are a pest which kills life stock so who cares about dingoes nobody needs them. Basically it depends on the animal, animals like the dingo and tuna I think are fine to kill for the reason ps I have stated above, but Great whites are different they are endangered and are crucial to the ecosystem and have had hardly any negative effects on humans compared to other animals in Australia so I don't think they should be culled.
That's just my view though

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 8:56pm

Mate dingoes are pretty much considered native, speculated to have arrived about 3500-4000 years ago they have assimilated into the local ecosystem to the point where by most definitions they are considered native. They are not a pest and do not cause the same damage as feral species or indeed introduced domestic species - sheep, cattle etc.

velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 9:47pm

Sorrento when it comes to tuna stocks, I'd urge you to research into the matter. I have read Australia's southern ocean tuna stock got down to 2% of its original estimated size (since recovering? - or being diverted into farming pens?). With industrial fishing knowing no international boundary and being voracious in nature, I'd think that international levels are a shadow of what they once were. Then there's the N Pacific tuna testing positive for radionucleides... Looking at the history of Cod stocks we see both a total decimation in numbers in the oldest fisheries of the North Atlantic (size going from 6' to 18" in the last 500 years - this is called time dwarfism) and numbers being so prolific you couldn't put an oar in the water in the Grand Banks without hitting one, to the fishery collapsing and closing in the 1970s.

In West Aussie fisheries, we have seen similar time dwarfism in Pink Snapper, and reduction in numbers. Yes, the stories of Grandad's monster catch are probably true for a reason. My bro is an aquculture grad, former fisheries officer, and one of the smartest guys I know when it comes to understanding what's going on in that Western aquatic ecosystem. We've talked at length and we believe it's out of balance - inputting seasons' worth of anecdotes, catches, sightings, and more recently shark activity. What we believe is the whites are increasing in number since protection, while the middle layers of our aquatic food web are still open to 'culling' (ie, recreational and commercial fishing) and so we see a food pyramid that looks a bit more like an 'apple core'. This in turn creates extra hazard for people whose lives are based in and around the ocean. Now we could be completely wrong on this assertion with regard to the middle of the food web, but hopefully some solid science will refute us and this science will agree with what the fisho's are seeing in their work.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 8:53pm

A dingo is an introduced species which we don't need ?

velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 9:35pm

Yep, it is. Ask the mainland Thylacines how they liked the dingos being introduced. Or the mainland devils which were still here as of 600 years ago.

Sorrento's picture
Sorrento's picture
Sorrento Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 8:53pm

Mk1 I think killing 1 or 2 GWS to test if it deters others isn't that bad an idea all I was saying is that we shouldn't for example cull all the great whites hanging around Ballina as that is extreme as it actually doesn't reduce the risk of being attacked but I think testing that theory out about 1 or 2 could work and would effect the population especially if can save lives. I also believe that ideas like netting and drum lines are ineffective and do more harm than good and there are many more effective ways to stop this problem like I read a person suggest orca sounds which is far better than netting which impacts on other species and drumlines have been proven ineffective when trialed in W.A
"Following a spate of fatal shark attacks in the state, in January the WA Government introduced a 13-week trial where baited drum lines were set off Perth and South West beaches.

During the trial, which cost the Government $1.3 million, 68 sharks were caught and shot, although none of them were great white sharks." This shows that not only doesn't catch great whites but it also kills other species which is pointless

mk1's picture
mk1's picture
mk1 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 9:04pm

Yes, I know Sorrento. My point was that no one I see here is calling for a cull of all the whites hanging around Ballina.

I notice people getting worked up about the word "cull" and assuming it means widespread indiscriminate slaughter when the person has clearly called for a very targeted killing of a small/select group of sharks, done with a specific purpose.

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 9:07pm

Netting has been effective Sorrento, an easy way to observe this is to look at the attacks on netted vs un netted beaches. Orca sounds on the other hand have not shown to be effective in any way yet, it simply hasn't been tested properly.

mk1's picture
mk1's picture
mk1 Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 9:14pm

Agreed manbat, you can't argue with netting being effective if not efficient.

Damothediver's picture
Damothediver's picture
Damothediver Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 4:49am

"cull all the great whites hanging around Ballina as that is extreme as it actually doesn't reduce the risk of being attacked"

Removing a few sharks hanging around a particular area would reduce the chances of one of those sharks attacking someone.......

If you remove 5 drink drivers from the roads....you are five times less likely to get killed by a drink driver, who we know are dangerous killers..........

Sorrento's picture
Sorrento's picture
Sorrento Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 8:54pm

Yes udo a dingo is a introduced species

sluggoes's picture
sluggoes's picture
sluggoes Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 9:24pm

Head for your dictionaries or search engine and also look up “extreme green misanthropy”.

No one is advocating willful Anthropocene extinction of GWS, just finding ways to minimise them coming into our territory. Our territory extends about 500 metres from the shore. “We” have been locals there for millennia.

Unless you are a breatharian, you are killing things every day so you and your progeny will survive. I’m not sure if breatharians apologise to all the microbes they kill though, and their houses, cars, computers, planes and medicine also kill things.

For some objective science, track down: “SCIENTIFIC SHARK PROTECTION SUMMIT 10 APRIL, 2006”, Hosted by the NSW Department of Primary Industries And Sydney Aquarium.

Their conclusions were: “The Summit was generally supportive of the Government’s beach-meshing program due to its very impressive historical record.”

The bycatch of cute and cuddlies is much lower than the misanthropic propaganda would have you believe. For those of us not from the lunar right, who are trying to reconcile humanism with environmentalism, the bycatch is regrettable - we should try to minimise it and develop non-lethal deterrents in the long run.

The Sydney, Queensland and Natal programs have been very effective at saving human lives, but were implemented in simpler political times/climates. That is the technology we presently have to save human lives reliably.

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 9:37pm

Some bold claims there, can you fill us in with some numbers you've omitted please. What are the bycatch numbers claimed by the misanthropic propaganda? What are the actual numbers?

Sorrento's picture
Sorrento's picture
Sorrento Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 10:40pm

Firstly just to clear up dingoes are actully an introduced species and Manbat i would just like to put forward some evidence that questions your comment.

"The DPI’s 2009 review provided a contemporary view of shark nets. Then Environment Minister Ian Macdonald called the nets “highly successful.” Yet the report of shark bite incidents from 1937-2008 showed that of the 38 shark attacks recorded in the state, 24 of them (63%) took place at netted beaches, with 14 injuries. The Minister and Department correctly point out that there has been only one fatality at a netted beach (1951) under this program. "

Sure there has only been 1 fatality on the New South Wales coast where shark nets are but there is still shark attacks and the amount of bycatch that is caught is very worrying. Here is some evidence

the shark meshing program in NSW had negative impacts on a number of threatened species including:
• Grey nurse shark;
• Loggerhead turtle;
• Dugong;
• Great white shark;
• Green turtle;
• Leatherback turtle;
• Humpback whale; and,
• Australian fur-seals.
This study was done by Bond university.

These are the figures

Table 2 Catch Information for the NSW Shark Meshing Program from 1990/91 to 2007/08 (From Green et al. 2009)
Species (Common Name)
Number
ELASMOBRANCHS
Hammerheads
1292
Stingrays
1269
Whalers
536
Angel sharks
259
Port Jackson sharks
107
Great white shark
100
Sevengill shark
92
Tiger shark
49
Thresher shark
40
Shortfin mako
31
Grey nurse shark
15
OTHER ANIMALS
Dolphins
52
Turtles
47
Finfish
43
Whales*
6
Seal
4
Penguin
1
Dugong
1

This shows that they are just simply more effective ways that don't impact on other animals in the ecosystem

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Monday, 31 Aug 2015 at 11:17pm

Thanks Sorrento, its good to have these stats in this thread they have been mentioned several other times in shark threads here over the last couple of years but like I said it's good to have them in this discussion as well.

So what do we have? One fatality in 70 years on netted beaches, now that's an impressive stat, one single fatality on a netted beach in 70 years. Your evidence doesn't seem to go a long way to questioning my comment, instead you have validated it. So let me ask you a question, how many fatalities have occurred during that time on unnetted beaches? With that we can make a reasonable comparison and theorise as to the effectiveness of netting.

Bycatch is an unfortunate expense and should be minimised perhaps by design or positioning but are the numbers of bycatch actually having negative impacts on any of these endangers species, I'd be interested to see any research. 1 dugong in 20 years doesn't seem too outrageous to me.

"This shows that they are simply more effective ways that don't impact on other animals in the ecosystem", no it doesn't show that at all, it describes numbers and types of specimen caught in nets as bycatch. Can you tell me what are the," more effective ways", I'm not sure that any real alternatives have been tried.

Yes I agreed dingoes were introduced, I thought it important to point out that they, after 3-4 thousand years have assimilated into the local ecosystem, very different to cats or dogs or cane toads etc which have a significantly negative impact on the local ecosystem. They are not a pest, dingoes have adapted a niche and are no longer displacing compeditors or creating some other type of destruction.

Sorrento's picture
Sorrento's picture
Sorrento Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 12:36am

You said before "Netting has been effective Sorrento, an easy way to observe this is to look at the attacks on netted vs un netted beaches." You stated attacks not deaths so I was pointing one out that "from 1937-2008 showed that of the 38 shark attacks recorded in the state, 24 of them (63%) took place at netted beaches, with 14 injuries." So more than 60% of the attacks recorded in 70 years took place at netted beaches so when your Say attacks your actually wrong they are ineffective. I think what your meaning was deaths I am not sure but yes they are effective in stoping death but not attacks they still happen with shark nets.

Obviously a dugong is not the only animal that is being caught by the net and the endangered species that are being caught are stated above where you have pointed out the weakest one the dugong. Some animals include 100 great white sharks have been caught 47 turtles 15 grey nurse sharks ( which are critically endangered) and this is just one part of the coast. And then there's all the other animals that aren't endangered but are still getting caught even though this is just supposed to stop big sharks, stats are above .

I think that it's pretty obvious that Because of the bycatch which is huge negative that there are more effective ways sadly ( none that are conclusive or have been tried yet but should be tried as anything is better than by catch) - yes it describes the numbers and types of specimen caught in the nets but shows that because of these figures that by catch is a negative of these nets

An interesting stat :
Of the official count of 3944 creatures trapped, about 60 per cent were sharks and less than 4 per cent were considered ''target'' species (or those particularly harmful to humans) - that is, 100 great whites and 49 tiger sharks.

So basically you have shark nets that have only had 1 fatal attack since being introduced but over 60% of the attacks in that state have been at shark netted beaches and just to top only 4% of the animals caught in the nets are considered " target species ".

Some alternatives include-
Sonar Systems:
There are many sonar systems that will detect a shark before it gets close to the shore. Once the shark is detected, boats and helicopters are sent out to herd the shark further away from the shore or lifeguards are notified to evacuate the beach.

Shark Shield:
Shark shield emits an electrical wave that reaches up to 8 metres from the device. This wave is picked up by the ‘Ampullae of Lorenzini’ (gel-filled sacks on the sharks snout), and creates discomfort for the shark. The closer the shark comes to the device, the more unpleasant the experience is, therefore, deterring the shark. Once the shark is out of range, there are no lingering or harmful after affects.

Eco Shark Barrier is a fantastic new concept which provides a fully secure and safe swimming enclosure to protect and give peace of mind to beach goers and protects marine life in their natural habbitat. - See more at: http://www.ecosharkbarrier.com.au/#sthash.G9isKQfa.dpuf

These are just some ideas which if proven effective will be much more benifical as they stop sharks but also protect the environment

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 11:02am

Your right Sorrento, I should have worded my response better or read the post better, my bad.

Now to repeat myself, netting is effective, the numbers you have provided for attacks in nsw is incomplete and the raw data does not represent the conclusions you have come to, take the time to read the report where you have drawn the data from and it might clear the picture up for you.

Just a brief overview 200 recorded attacks in NSW from 1900-2009 only 23 of those on netted beaches. Netting is effective, don't take my word for it read the report youre quoting from, here is what the dpi say about the data

"figures suggest that the rate of fatal attacks at Sydney’s ocean beaches has been reduced from approximately 1 every 4 years before the SMP
began, to effectively zero since the SMP began. The rate of all attacks at ocean beaches has reduced from 1
every 2 years to 1 every 3.7 years since the SMP began....the rate of fatal shark attacks at the Hunter’s ocean beaches has been
reduced from approximately 1 every 7 years before the SMP began, to 1 every 60 years since the SMP
began. The rate of all attacks at the Hunter’s ocean beaches has reduced from 1 every 3.6 years to 1 every 5
years since the SMP began."

The bycatch issue I stand by, I just don't think that those numbers are that significant, or more importantly as I tried to point out in my last post, that the numbers of bycatch would pose any real threat to any of the species listed. I chose dugong because they are vulnerable but use whatever example, turtles? 15 in twenty years, I would think that there are human activities which case a substantially higher risk to each of these species. You make a good point to note that these stats are for nsw, combined with qld where nets are used differently numbers will be higher but that's it, there are no nets anywhere else in aus.

The solutions you listed are pretty ordinary, sonar not a viable option ATM, sharkshield there is some evidence to support its effectiveness but very limited and seems like the area needs to be developed. The 'eco' barrier (eco as in putting huge amounts of plastic in the ocean) maybe for small protected areas but barriers haven't been used in large scale in aus for a reason (read about it in the dpi report) too expensive, still possibility of bycatch, can't use in high energy areas.

You neglect to mention current solutions being touted and/or used tagging/monitoring, fly over patrols. Most interesting for me is the dead shark odor, I've seen some research on this which show enormous promise.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 9:45am

Thats nothing but anthropomorphic opinion Sorrento, you can no more bestow rights on shark or any other animal in nature than you can on yourself.
You call them beautiful, others see them as cold and hostile. It's purely subjective.

What next, you bestow rights on a wildebeest not to be predated on by a lion?

btw, at the moment, when wild dingo attacks a person or becomes a problem it is culled, crocs are culled in the NT and relocated in QLD.
Whats your opinion on the death of beautiful creatures like the swordfish or the tuna?

We are a part of nature and nature is red in tooth and claw. Animals kill each other, we kill animals. Animals kill us. We try and defend ourselves from being killed by animals.
It's been that way since amoeba started dividing in the protoplasmic soup.
You get an infection from a bacteria you hammer it with antibiotics, maybe the microbiologist sees that bacteria as a beautiful creature, but to you it's a threat to your life.

Unlike a shark humans have a consciousness, we have a memory and an ability to love. That enables us to have relationships and experiences on a higher plane to a shark. That makes our fellow humans, our friends and loved ones, more special to us than a shark. That justifies a killing when those lives are threatened. As we justify any killing in self defence or to lower the risk of a fatal attack.
Thats why we have shark management programs in QLD, NSW, South Africa: because people decided that, yes, people are more important to us than a shark. That is purely subjective to, but seeing as we have the ability to communicate and a shark does not I have to assume that that is so.

reply
quote

free76,is the above your philosophy of life , as it looks like you are an elitist ?

one moment you are saying , "you can no more bestow right on shark or any other animal in nature than you can your self." Then you dribble on about ,"because humans have a consciousness, a memory and an ability to love on a higher plane to a shark", this statement is the justification that as we are superior , and feel threatened we have the right to self defence if we feel threatened , even to killing whatever the threat may be right or wrong man, is a dominant superior species , might is right!

So free76 as you see yourself superior and not part of nature and that you even have the right to kill nature if it threatens you.

As for the success of netting , yeah 4% seems to justify the killing , but as it seems like you have a penchant for culling/netting of sharks indiscriminately , because you believe that as sharks don't have memories, , a consciousness , can't love , can't communicate , what a load of inaccurate blah blah

as elephants kill more humans than sharks pa , should we also be saving man a killing all the animals that kill humans globally....according to your twisted philosophy , yes!

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 2:42pm

Sharkman, try some basic comprehension mate then come back in.

You're repeating back what is in your head, not what I said.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 2:47pm

well what have I said that you didn't?

You seem pretty easy to comprehend , but please show me where I have misconstrued your comments??

I notice that you seem to do this a lot , when confronted with your statements , you seem to say you have been misunderstood.

If you answered some of the questions put to you , you might be able to be understood, eg do you agree that Elephants should be culled as they kill 50 people a year?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 2:51pm

Everything you said in the last post starting with the first sentence to the last was a fabrication.

Should elephants be culled? No idea, depends on the circumstances. There you go.

Just for the record, I am part of nature, I don't consider myself superior to it, and I'm not calling for an indiscriminate uncontrolled culling of sharks.

Make sense?

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 3:15pm

free76 , fabrication?

I was just trying to interpret your post. It seems with not much success.

your statement on sharks having no memory/love/communication etc was for ?

If you are part of Nature as you claim , well a sharks are part of nature too ,you would recognize their place in the eco-system .

how do you cull sharks , without targeting sharks that are no danger?

with the elephant example , its about people living near elephants natural environment and when humans take their environment , well humans should be able to kill elephants , as they threaten human life and are only animals?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 3:24pm

Do you understand what that means: To be part of nature?
Did you study biology? You say you grew up in a fishing town.

You know what big fish do? They eat little fish.
Little fish try and avoid getting eaten by big fish.
Some have spines, teeth, camoflauge. They do whatever they can to defend themselves from predation. Thats what nature is, that's what it does. It's what drives and has driven evolution.
We are no different or separate from that, despite most of us now living lives very separate from the reality of predation.

If we are threatened by predation we try and defend ourselves. Your kid is about to get ripped into by a wild dog.....you're telling me you're not going to try and defend her? Take that animals life if need be?

As for the question of targeting sharks that are no danger, that is a very important practical question. I'm not sure of the answer to that. But with all the surveillance at the moment, it would seem reasonably straightforwards to only target a few select whites, if that is what it comes to.
Personally, I'd much rather that than nets, which kill indiscriminately.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 5:10pm
freeride76 wrote:

Do you understand what that means: To be part of nature?
Did you study biology? You say you grew up in a fishing town.

You know what big fish do? They eat little fish.
Little fish try and avoid getting eaten by big fish.
Some have spines, teeth, camoflauge. They do whatever they can to defend themselves from predation. Thats what nature is, that's what it does. It's what drives and has driven evolution.
We are no different or separate from that, despite most of us now living lives very separate from the reality of predation.

If we are threatened by predation we try and defend ourselves. Your kid is about to get ripped into by a wild dog.....you're telling me you're not going to try and defend her? Take that animals life if need be?

As for the question of targeting sharks that are no danger, that is a very important practical question. I'm not sure of the answer to that. But with all the surveillance at the moment, it would seem reasonably straightforwards to only target a few select whites, if that is what it comes to.
Personally, I'd much rather that than nets, which kill indiscriminately.

To be part of nature , yes I understand , but not sure what being brought up with in a fishing town has to do with biology and or my lack of biology?

Its interesting how threatened you seem to be by sharks , but your example mentions, defending your right to existence by killing anything that is threatening to you or your family.

This sort of doesn't seem applicable to surfing , as we enter into the predators habitat and are not defending our families etc from sharks , we are just splashing around enjoying our leisure time .

yes the practical question of how to target killer GWS's is very pertinent , as so far I have not read of one logical way of targeting/culling sharks.

the way forward is shark protection ,whether it be by sonar warnings or ?

sluggoes's picture
sluggoes's picture
sluggoes Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 10:20am

If you want to be properly informed on meshing in NSW in 2015, don’t quote out of date statistics, read:

Shark Meshing (Bather Protection) Program 2014-15 Annual Performance Report
Prepared in accordance with the Joint Management Agreements and associated Management Plan
First published and submitted to the Scientific Committee and Fisheries Scientific Committee in July 2015
ISSN 1839-0900

Some factoids:
No reportable human-shark incidents in meshed areas for 2014-2015
18 reportable human-shark incidents in unmeshed areas for 2014-2015
Change to 70 kHz pingers to better deter dolphins

Bycatch is recorded and has trigger level targets
Green turtles and common dolphin were the only bycatch in 2014-2015 which exceeded the trigger levels.
10 year average bycatch of Dugongs is 0.2 per year. Trigger level is 0.4 per year
10 year average bycatch of Bottlenose dolphin is 0.9 per year. Trigger level is 1.8 per year
10 year average bycatch of Common dolphin is 1.1 per year. Trigger level is 2.2 per year
There were three whale entanglements in the past decade, but none in 2014-2015

The program has multiple, competing objectives and performance measures.
Welcome to government.

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 11:07am

"If you want to be properly informed on meshing in NSW in 2015, don’t quote out of date statistics" …....huh? That doesn't make sense, you can't be better informed with less iinformation.

donweather's picture
donweather's picture
donweather Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 1:30pm

If one really wants a true, accurate statistical probability of a shark attack in netted versus un-netted areas, then the stats above need to be correlated with both the length of coastline around Australia that is netted versus un-netted and probably include the relative population of swimmers/surfers in netted versus un-netted areas.

I do have a question. Netting usually only extends for a very small length of the coastline at each location.....say 300m. So are the stats above for netted areas only for that exact 300m length of netted area? ie, if a person 50m outside this exact netted area was attacked is that classed as an attack in a netted or un-netted area?

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 3:02pm

Yeah I agree d/w there are more variables that needs to be included to get an accurate picture including what you've suggested and also taking into the analysis attack reports relative to when the nets are actually deployed which for nsw is not all year round. It would be a complex mission but I think that if you look at the raw data and compare attacks on netted eaches before and after 1937 and attacks on no netted beaches before and after there is a strong correlation in support of the effectiveness of the program.

Average net length is 150m and the data records only attacks on netted beaches vs attacks on other beaches, estuaries and deep water. So yes, if someone is attacked outside the netted area on a netted beach its recorded as an attack on a netted beach.

flow's picture
flow's picture
flow Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 8:07pm

Sharkman. I think freeride believes that the ocean is also our habitat. Therefore as surfers we have rights too. In a perfect world we would have no culling but the killing of one or two targeted GWSs is a an option and is not an indiscriminate killing.

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 8:36pm

Flow, Freeride, Mk1 et al we are wasting our breath on the likes of Sharkman and Rabbits.
They have such a blinkered view of the real world that no amount of rational argument will change their minds.
I suggest we ignore them rather than give them further cause to espouse their distorted philosophies.
Signing off.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 11:05pm
theween wrote:

Flow, Freeride, Mk1 et al we are wasting our breath on the likes of Sharkman and Rabbits.
They have such a blinkered view of the real world that no amount of rational argument will change their minds.
I suggest we ignore them rather than give them further cause to espouse their distorted philosophies.
Signing off.

Ouch!! I admit it tho, I took your bait :-) Mate for what it's worth, if your remotely interested, I have grown up surfing the SW WA (Cape to Cape) before any fatal shark attacks that I'm aware of, thru the spate of fatalities, to the present. By about the 3rd fatality it started to freak me out a bit no doubt & I can honestly say that my view on the issue has shifted. As I have said on numerous occasions, tagging & research is the best outcome for the issue in my opinion. We need to learn more about the movements of these GWS. Yes I agree for people like yourself & others that share your views, this option isn't instant enough to address your immediate concerns/fears. Theween, what you need to grasp IMO, is that a cull of one or several GWS in any particular location may or may not make a scrap of difference. How will you measure the success of a cull? When will this measure be a success in your opinion? One more fatality? No fatalities? You see, no ones been taken in SW WA for some time now (thank God/touch wood, whatever your preference is) Why is that? No cull, not even one GWS? If a cull provides a psychological benefit for you & others (tourists etc) then I suppose, as humans that can make this call, then it's an option. But you need to provide some follow up measures in regards to whats next after a cull. Another fatality, another cull? And so on.........maybe....

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 10:25am

Hey Theween, did you happen to see the interview this morning with Craig Ison, the bloke who survived the recent Evans Head attack?? His opinion was that nets are old school & not once made mention of a cull. He was keen on a modern technology approach. Now, yes he is just one voice, but would you refer to him as having a blinkered view of the world & having distorted philosophies in relation to shark attacks??

The world needs people like you Theween, to help balance out people like me with our blinkered view of the world & distorted philosophies. Keep it up champ.....

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 10:58am

Hey rabs, look I don't think you guys have a distorted view of the issue neither do I think the guys advocating some form of culling action. The fact is there is not much difference in your stances. Most guys commenting aren't on the extreme end of this debate ie all out culls vs not a single animal harmed.

Both camps might disagree on a few points of shark behaviour etc but most people arguing do want a solution and realize that taking out a few sharks might be a nessescary part of the solution. Anyone denouncing culling at this stage should be firmly protesting netting as well and if thats the case would that person happily see the nets be taken out of service and the implications that may come with that. Conversely most here pro cull understand the ecological risks and would agree that mitigating any of these risks, bycatch, indiscriminant killing is preferable.

Perhaps we can move beyond the back and forthing on fairly moot points and start keying in on the best way forward. The debate has shifted imo with this recent spate. The last time it was at really hysterical levels was with the wa drumlining program, there was a huge outcry and the far green really had a lot of traction, that's changed and the debate has swung in favour of the other side as I see it. That says to me if a reasonable solution isn't reached before we see more cases there is a risk of stupidity like the wa fiasco.

Your right he is only one voice, being a victim of an attack doesn't mean you have the solutions, just ask lenny67 there's no way he would agree with what Craig ison is saying.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 11:45am

Hey Manbat, I agree with a lot of what youve just stated. Keeping an open mind on the issue is the key I believe.

My point in relation the Craig Ison was that he came across during the interview in a very calm considered manner. Another worthy point of view. With all due respect to Lenny67, he has been quoted many times as referring to the "dumb sharks" etc etc. And there you have two survivors with different takes on the outcome of their horrific experiences.

Let's keep the dialogue open for sure.....,

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 11:53am

Yeah that was my point two very different points of view by guys the have been through similarly horrific experiences. I tend to agree with you Craig ison certainly gave a considered response and the thing that really struck me was that while he was so stoic he made no heroic gestures that you often hear, he was quite resolved that he wouldn't surf again.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 12:02pm

Agree 100%. Total respect for all survivors regardless. Hopefully the rest of us never have to experience an attack and these potential options currently being discussed can be rationally thought thru & put into action. Cheers

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 8:56pm

It would appear that most near shore fatalities are caused by pointers.

Maybe the death of 100 pointers over twenty years in nets served as a deterrent to other pointers frequenting the area ?

rees0's picture
rees0's picture
rees0 Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 7:37am

My thoughts exactly, have been buzzed by one 4m+ White in qld however this was at least 20 k from the nearest drumline at rainbow beach. Know of one big white caught on the drumline there sure theres been more given its proximity to fraser and d.i.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 9:57am

flow commented Tuesday, 1 Sep 2015 at 8:07pm

Sharkman. I think freeride believes that the ocean is also our habitat. Therefore as surfers we have rights too. In a perfect world we would have no culling but the killing of one or two targeted GWSs is a an option and is not an indiscriminate killing.

Freeride 7 6 ,is very hard to understand , some of those big words he uses seem to confuse him and me haha.

he even admits that after all the debate and thoughts on culling , there is no real answer to how you can possibly just randomly target a couple of GWS's and hope shark attacks will stop , and his thoughts on being part of nature ,seem a bit hypocritical , when in actual fact he argues his point from a position that humans are the Apex predator , everywhere on this planet. he even could not answer , that as Elephants kill 500+ people a year we should kill the elephants as we are part of nature and they are?

the thought of killing a GWS and let it rot near a surfbreak so as to scare GWS away ,seems pretty crazy also ,as what happens if the bulls and the tigers move in or it doesn't work . who actually has to be attacked to prove this theory, that's what rabbits is on about , the WA drumlines didn't work at all.

Its great to hear all the different angles but when you get people saying rabbits and I's philosophies are distorted , he has not yet , offered any real solutions , just emotional blah blah , whereas we have presented a lot of facts that show there is a very big chance that these attacks are an anomaly , because of warmer waters , more bait fish , more sharks , more people , we have changed the eco-system , and don't like what we now have to live in ,rather ironic!

mk1's picture
mk1's picture
mk1 Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 1:16pm

Sharkman, couple of points so we can put this to rest. In my humble opinion a targeted cull of a couple of GWS would be straightforward considering the spotter planes and the fishing vessels working in the area (I think you could find a couple of commercial fisherman willing to see this through without too much hassle). The targeted animal can then be constrained in an area such as ballina-evans stretch and the spotter planes can then measure for any sudden and pronounced change in the shark numbers. Perhaps a control could be to measure the numbers in nearby waters as well such as the ballina - byron stretch or the tweed stretch. A positive outcome could then justify a secondary test for confirmation, a negative and the hypothesis could be abandoned. Impact on other shark species could also be tested. Heading into the southerly whale migration could be great timing for this.

As for elephants, etc. They are of course actively managed if they are a risk to people and many even endangered animals are put down when they are a risk to human life. Particularly if relocation is not viable or the animal has already taken a life. Not saying that is the option here but it is the answer to your specific question.

Ok, moving on!

Manbat - Rabbits, appreciate the positive discussion.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 1:28pm

Likewise mk1. Apologies for my fired up rant in response to your post previously, I was out of line. Cheers

mk1's picture
mk1's picture
mk1 Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 1:40pm

All good! :)

sluggoes's picture
sluggoes's picture
sluggoes Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 1:29pm

As a qualification, I NEVER read the Daily Terrorgaffe. I’m a progressive ABC type, and heard of the following in the newspaper headlines on Radio National as I was preparing for a morning surf.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/sharks-manly-council-reverses-...

I think all moderates support less lethal methods for reducing attacks when they are proven. There are massive ethical issues and political risk with implementing unproven technology though. Until reliable alternatives are developed, the only two proven methods for minimising attacks are:

1. Stay out of the water
2. Netting

sluggoes's picture
sluggoes's picture
sluggoes Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 1:56pm

Sorry, but the Terrorgaffe link above was free to access when I looked this morn.
Since they have probably now been swamped by green left, bisexual, RN, ecowarrior web site hits, they have now triggered a paywall.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 2:19pm

hey mkI, I guess my point with the culling is that with elephants , they are recognizable and called rogues and can be easily targeted and culled.

the problem I see with culling GWS's is which ones do you choose now , or must you cull ALL the GWS that are near the coast ?

I think the easiest way is take your chances as we all do in everyday life , or stop using the beach until the current anomaly finishes.

I think your ideas are good , and I think also that we need to more research and come up with ways on how we can co-habit with GWS's.....

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 3:14pm

Sharkman, there's already been a very clear idea posited that by taking out a couple of the inshore sharks it might deter the rest. So, we're not talking about a mass indiscriminate cull. Comprende?
I'd also like to see intense biological research carried out on any culled sharks, most importantly, stomach content analysis, because that would be an incredibly vital piece of answering the question at to why these sharks have been hanging around here for so long.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 4:02pm

free76 , are you seriously suggesting scaring the sharks away by killing a couple ?

Or are you spruiking killing a couple and leave their dead bodies to deter them??

Not sure if you have read some of the links I have posted about anomalies , as when you say a long time , is this 6 mths , a year a decade,time is relative

crankitupto11's picture
crankitupto11's picture
crankitupto11 Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 2:36pm

Great article Nick. I went for a surf this morning at Kingscliff. Incredibly sharky vibes and and only two of us out.. we almost lost our breakfast when a large dolphin swam through a wave. All we saw was a large, dark, finned object. For now, I'm not going to surf unless there's plenty of people out and it's good. Just not worth the risk at the moment. Especially since a large shark was sighted at Cabarita beach just a couple of km south from where we were surfing..

Btw.. wouldn't it be a good idea to have automated drones hovering around popular beaches and surf spots with shark identification and warning systems? I'm thinking an audible siren for people in the water as well as automatically sending an alert to a website+facebook page + app kind of deal for people in the area.

Seems there already trying it out in the States, although they are manually piloted.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/shark-deterrent-technologies-shark-expert-think...

Definitely need more research in to why there's so much activity and incidences, but we also need some more warning and protection right now.. not in 15 years!

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 5:00pm

Drones are ideal for sure. If I was on the north coast ATM I reckon I'd insist on one of my mates sitting on the beach with a drone.

It's not 100% but surely teams of drones are a simple, cheap way of sighting and early warning.

crankitupto11's picture
crankitupto11's picture
crankitupto11 Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 5:08pm

And to add to that idea, wouldn't it be sweet if you could buy inexpensive (say under $200) drones for personal use at isolated surf spots that will last 6 or so hours hovering around where you are surfing watching for and alerting via siren you of any large marine life? Surely with drone technology becoming so common and cheap it would be possible for some boffin programmer to create one that works like this?

In fact, I'm going to send an email to a buddy of mine in Perth right now who is a software developer, entrepreneur and also builds his own drones and ask him if he can cook something up for me... We need it here in NNSW!

manbat's picture
manbat's picture
manbat Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 5:16pm

Awesome, be real keen to see how that develops!

crankitupto11's picture
crankitupto11's picture
crankitupto11 Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 5:24pm

Literally just emailed him the proposal. If anyone else wants to give the idea a crack they are welcome. I don't care who... I just want some peace of mind when I go for a paddle.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 6:22pm

A monster GWS cruising Sydney waters- longreef this morn ,captured on gopro.

omnia's picture
omnia's picture
omnia Wednesday, 2 Sep 2015 at 6:23pm

1. Nick is on the right track with providing data for predictive analysis.
2. Shark hugging is not a viable option for most of us.

What we need asap:
1. Reliable indications of peak risk periods.
2. Real time sharing of sightings and close encounters.
3. Tagging, tracking and early warning systems.
4. Personal detection and repellant devices.
5. Targetted elimination of repeat offenders.

so, who do we lobby for support and funding, private and public?

Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Friday, 4 Sep 2015 at 12:07pm
Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Friday, 4 Sep 2015 at 12:17pm

Guy might be lucky, reports are injuries only superficial.

mightymouse's picture
mightymouse's picture
mightymouse Friday, 4 Sep 2015 at 1:24pm

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/3327580/man-hurt-in-forster-shark-attack/
Waning Gibbous
60% full _ New on 13th
" sharks have been documented leaving shallow water on the full moon and returning on the new moon." I think the only correlations we can draw is that the ocean is a very big place and many individual sharks probably have their own patterns of behaviour. Maybe there are no theories that hold firm across such geographic distances. Numbers locally have been way down in the surf and I already hear the perceptions in community of people not wanting to swim or surf. Or maybe it is just that the banks locally have been stuffed all winter. Damn persistent southerly swells.

donweather's picture
donweather's picture
donweather Friday, 4 Sep 2015 at 1:39pm

I presume again this was in the middle of the day again. Throws the early/late day theory right out the window.

kbomb's picture
kbomb's picture
kbomb Friday, 4 Sep 2015 at 2:09pm

I agree mightymouse, a lot less people are in the water and I'm one of them. I agree the banks aren't good but from what I hear it's the fear of sharks keeping a lot of people out of the water. Be interesting to see how it all pans out. People are pretty worried about it around town. As there has been two attacks so close to home I really think something needs to be done.

simba's picture
simba's picture
simba Friday, 4 Sep 2015 at 2:39pm

Saw this young guy ride past my place with a board and wettie at 5.45 last night on his way for a surf,drove down and watched him paddle over the gutter out to the bank,by this time its starting to get dark.He caught a couple of 2fters and i left him to it and drove back with the headlights on,didnt want to be there if he got chomped.Ive done the same thing over the years but not now with so much going on,too risky but maybe your better off when its dark seeing as how most attacks are late morning.

ACB__'s picture
ACB__'s picture
ACB__ Friday, 4 Sep 2015 at 5:17pm

"The victim, 65-year-old local man David Quinliven, told police he was on a surf ski when he was hit by the shark."

Bloody hell. That's not a case of mistaken identity.... that's full blown attacking a surf ski!

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Friday, 4 Sep 2015 at 5:33pm

2 bodies washed up on Stockton beach today ...intact I wonder ?

silver-surfer's picture
silver-surfer's picture
silver-surfer Friday, 4 Sep 2015 at 5:51pm

Cull them! Anyway you keyboard warriors want - drones, nets, selective, indiscriminate, mass. I don't give a fuck how, just start culling them now - because they're heading south!

Sorrento's picture
Sorrento's picture
Sorrento Friday, 4 Sep 2015 at 6:03pm

Really good Imput silver-surfer, yep true keyboard warriors really great stuff you spud,
You honestly seem like a genuine potato, like a potato could give a better response than that.

You can't just cull them all wow

andrew-pitt's picture
andrew-pitt's picture
andrew-pitt Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 7:53am

Too many attacks.

kbomb's picture
kbomb's picture
kbomb Friday, 4 Sep 2015 at 10:21pm

I agree too Andrew.

southey's picture
southey's picture
southey Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 12:23am

Hey Sorrento ,
Maybe when there's an attack at your local ie :- St Kilda Beach , Merri Creek ?!?!? ,
Then maybe you will have a vested interest .
Until then your not going to make a lot of friends here .

I for one would like to see the WA govt start there capture trials now .
Baiting after Nov. is too late !
Udo can you find the thread where myself and Kent Stannard were worried that the East Coast was next in the shark interaction escalation . He pretty much warned everyone near on a few years ago . !?

davetherave's picture
davetherave's picture
davetherave Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 7:42am

it's obvious that the new wiring in sharks brain evolution is that humans are connected to food. this has been shown to be the case in many species, if one group of a species gets a new skillset, then that species all over the world acquires that new skillset. resonance-electromagnetic connection must activate the potential.
combine this with protection of great whites, and of whales, plus we have overfished most areas and not restocked, it has thrown the natural balance out of the ocean cycle.
two bodies wash up on stocko untouched?????
must be movement that is attracting the biters.
summer coming, will be interesting to see what happens.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 9:48am

2 bodies wash up untouched , don't know why you would even post this here , as a 70 and 71 year old have been missing off a yacht , and it looks like these were the 2 men missing , nothing to do with sharks.

An attack on a surf ski , where the guy's ankle was nibbled , oops tastes bad!

as for andrew pitt and Klomb , guys you sound like hysterical girls , cull , cull , 95% of locals want culling ! You don't know how it can be done , but need something to be done to calm your fears.

I have spoken to quite a few friends on the N Coast and they are loving the uncrowded surf this winter , there is a silver lining to all of this , good uncrowded surf , and it will pass .

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 1:14pm

2 bodies washed up untouched, don't know why you would post that here......
twas for your benefit mate.....2 bodies can wash up untouched on a beach where scientists estimate there are at times up to 200 juvenile pointers.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 1:19pm

So that's good news Udo , the GWS or any other shark left the bodies alone , as they see humans as no very appetizing.

Imagine if you left 2 big chunks of whale meet or seals in the same position as the 2 bodies?

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 1:24pm

Or 2 big chunks of GWS in the same position ?

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 1:37pm

Udo we know what sharks do to dead whale and seal , are you proposing to kill GWS's and leave the bodies in the water , so we can see what happens??

would you be prepared personally to go and test this theory , say put a couple of dead whites out the back of Lennox and go for a surf to see what happens??

I think you guys up the N coast somehow overlooked the councils burying whales on the beaches , and create a burley line through the surf breaks.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 3:39pm

Bingo......yes kill one and tow it from Evans Head To Byron ...in the name of research..
no need for me to personally test this theory theres a daily helicopter and drones that would help with the results.

I 100% agree that leaving a whale carcass on any beach near civilization is fucking ridiculous especially when 99% of dead whales are sighted well offshore .....and could be towed further offshore ....10 miies or more..and let nature do its thing out there.

Tadashi was mauled and killed in February.............As far as I know nowhere near a dead whale carcass.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 4:08pm

hey Udo , this article is from Feb 17th, which means the whale was already in trouble and would be a shark magnet , which could explain a lot of the shark nibbles!

A RARE Gray's beaked whale littered with shark bites was found washed up on Seven Mile Beach just metres from where a surfer was bitten by a shark a week ago.

Byron Bay surfer Jebez Reitman, 35, had a large chunk of flesh ripped from his back when he was bitten about dawn on February 8.

National Parks and Wildlife Service spokesman Lawrence Orel said initial reports were that two whales found beached, but alive, on Saturday were pushed back into the ocean by the public.

Mr Orel said he believed it was coincidental the whale was found where Mr Reitman was attacked by a shark.

He wasn't surprised the whale was found stranded and dead on Sunday.

"Often when you have a stranded animal like this if they are pushed back to sea it is very likely that they will re-strand," he said.

the article goes onto say that the authorities believe that the whales wouldn't attract sharks , yeah in your dreams , will be interested to hear what some of the cullees think about whales burley!

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 1:16pm

Hey Sharkman, why did you call yourself that?
Do you work with sharks or have some special relationship with them?

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 1:22pm

free76 , I am trying to see if I can scare you guys .

the special relationship I have with them is , that they are part on nature as am I , I have grown up with them , and I do not see them as man eaters and do not fear them.

I respect them , and when I see them , like last week , I get out of the water .

tootr's picture
tootr's picture
tootr Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 1:00pm

Not been thru the whole thread but has it been posed that councils burying whale carcasses on beaches are likely to be creating a burley slick that may spread for many km's and last for god knows how long?
Could be a reason GWS are getting in very close, not finding a feed and having a go at any old thing?

Whale buried at 7 mile Feb 2015;
http://www.northernstar.com.au/news/rare-whale-found-dead-on-beach/25457...

Whale buried at Coffs July 2015;
http://www.coffscoastadvocate.com.au/news/whale-causes-a-stink-for-park-...

Lanky Dean's picture
Lanky Dean's picture
Lanky Dean Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 3:09pm

Blind leading the blind. Great detective work tootr. Here is another interesting article

http://www.northernstar.com.au/news/sharks-eat-into-profits/2549804/

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 1:32pm

toot , unbelievable , that councils would bury dead whales on the beach knowing that the scent of dead whale meat attracts sharks.

this actually answers a lot of questions why there are sharks close in and nibbling ocean users , the same happened in WA when authorities buried a whale on the beach at Umbies , then there was a shark attack.

So Ballina has a buried whale on the beach , which will decompose for another 12 mths , creating a burley trail .

Guys don't be angry with the sharks , be angry with the idiots who buried whales on the beach to decompose!

Lanky Dean's picture
Lanky Dean's picture
Lanky Dean Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 3:21pm

Sharkman,

This has been your best post yet. Congratulations.
Informative ,correct and true.
There is someone or people, in the shire office building treading very lightly and being very quiet about their "smart decision".
I found it baffling when i saw the link to the buried whale carcass............go figure.

omnia's picture
omnia's picture
omnia Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 5:40pm

Almost unbelievable but not quite...

This appears to be gold, but how factual is the info regarding recently buried whale carcasses on beaches near to recent shark attack sites?

If factual, it rates on a par with my own observations of mud gutted fishos diposing of bin loads of fish scraps near breaks and booze frenzied fish comp boaties burlying day and night near breaks.

Burying whale carcasses, dumping biological waste or burlying near breaks seems criminally negligent, reckless or downright intentful, we should name and shame at the very least; attracting sharks to breaks in those ways should be outlawed.

tootr's picture
tootr's picture
tootr Saturday, 5 Sep 2015 at 6:06pm

Dunno how it could be proven without multiple site water testing for whale oil/bits. I would assume tiny specs of whale oil will float and go as far as the currents will take them. That's a long way. The shark noses do the rest.
Apart from the Ballina/Lennox situation, wrt Coffs, the whale was buried in July at Sapphire. During mid August a lidding contest was cancelled due to multiple sightings, and a light aircraft pilot spotted a large GWS at Gallows last week.

Here's another one;
http://www.coffscoastadvocate.com.au/news/buried-whale-may-put-surfers-a...

Maybe it's just the water temp, whales or moon phases, but the act of burying a dead whale at a beach seem pretty bloody silly to me. That's being polite to the councils and NPWS.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 6 Sep 2015 at 10:15am

Tootr , you have discovered the motherlode of a real reason why , with warmer waters , more bait fish ballnear the beach and us humans have been creating a burley line on the Nth coast by burying whales on the beaches.

http://www.coffscoastadvocate.com.au/news/buried-whale-may-put-surfers-a...

Now I wonder what happens if the media start questioning and search for more examples of whale carcasses attracting sharks , because we have a quote from the authorities that there is no correlation between whales and sharks!!

Nothing could be further from the truth lets see if there is a big enough of an outcry , not to cull sharks , but to dig up those whales and remove the burley , even take the carcasses out to see blow them up and then tag the sharks that come to feed.

There should be real outrage at the Councils and will there now be a cover up , as there actually might be a legal case , that the Council showed no duty of care and actually , significantly increased the risk of shark attack , and looks like the carcasses will take up to 18 mths to decompose , which means sharks will stay !

the obvious downturn in business , means that if Councils are found responsible , there could be a legal case against them,which means millions of $'s in damages.

So dear Local cullees , do some research into whalegate / burley , the answer as to why there is an anomaly in the amount of sharks on the N Coast might be buried on your beaches!

kbomb's picture
kbomb's picture
kbomb Sunday, 6 Sep 2015 at 4:37pm

Are these the only times whales have been buried on beaches? If not was there an increase in shark numbers in the past? It's an interesting theory sharkman but as southy said eaileir there was a thread or article in the past about shark numbers on the east coast increasing and that's well before the burried whales.

southey's picture
southey's picture
southey Monday, 7 Sep 2015 at 12:02am

Yeah Udo has kindly searched it up . I think if you read back through it you will hear many facts and theories .
BTW , a ( 25-30M ) Pygmy blue whale was buried at Rottnest islands west end in 2006 . In the dunes not beach . Anyway perhaps it took years for the oil to leach out , but an American diver was taken 5-7 years later . Long bow .... Maybe you guys should have read of it . ( wa sharks :- where to from here ) .

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 7 Sep 2015 at 9:10am

will be speaking to a GWS expert today , as yesterday had a discussion with journalist , I presented the "whalegate" evidence of councils burying whales on the beach , which create's a burley line which must attract sharks.

In the conversation , another fact came up which also has an enormous affect on the current conditions on the N Coast. the Whale population has radically increased on the East Coast of Australia since the ban on whaling in 1978.

In 2000 , 294 whales went past Sydney , last year it has been estimated between 3000 to 20000 , which shows an amazing population explosion , which also means the chance of an increase in dead whales which is one of the favoured foods for sharks especially GWS.

I don't think there has been anybody here that disagrees with Whale meat is high on a GWS's menu , and with the report of a dead whale in the ocean at Ballina a couple of weeks before Tadashi was killed , and , the council buried the whale on the beach just before the attack, now there are a lot of shark sightings in the Ballina and I imagine for at least a couple of years until the carcass decomposes completely, scientists please how long for a whale to decompose?

When you add up , most whales we have seen in our lifetimes ,and an ever increasing population , warmer waters more bait fish , more people using the ocean than ever , then you go and put a GWS lure for the N coast , called whale burley , seems like there's a logical answer to the current problem.

Distracted's picture
Distracted's picture
Distracted Monday, 7 Sep 2015 at 4:29pm

Sharkman,

This is the point a few people have been making. Significant increase in the east coast whale population has resulted in a change in the great white population and behaviour. Previously when the whale population was reduced the juvenile great whites from Stockton may have headed south to the seal colonies to get their protein fix. As the whale population has increased there is more food available for the great whites to follow up the coast and they are now here in higher numbers. Subsequently some enviro factor has resulted in a concentration in the Ballina / Byron area. The question is, has this been a one -off or will it be an annual event and if it does continue to occur how do we manage it?

The buried whale idea is interesting. It's pretty amazing to see how far a few drops of tuna oil can spread on the sea surface and what it does to promote feeding behaviour, so a large whale mass could potentially generate a lot of scent. There can be practical issues with removing whales from the beach, I remember as a kid when they tried to tow a sperm whale off Soldiers Beach by the tail and it just snapped off. Getting in early before any dead whale ends up on the beach would be the way to go. Otherwise if it gets stuck on the beach, cutting it into pieces for disposal at the tip might be needed...bags not that job.

m-c-surfboards's picture
m-c-surfboards's picture
m-c-surfboards Monday, 7 Sep 2015 at 5:02pm

.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 7 Sep 2015 at 5:25pm
Distracted wrote:
Sharkman,

This is the point a few people have been making. Significant increase in the east coast whale population has resulted in a change in the great white population and behaviour. Previously when the whale population was reduced the juvenile great whites from Stockton may have headed south to the seal colonies to get their protein fix. As the whale population has increased there is more food available for the great whites to follow up the coast and they are now here in higher numbers. Subsequently some enviro factor has resulted in a concentration in the Ballina / Byron area. The question is, has this been a one -off or will it be an annual event and if it does continue to occur how do we manage it?

The buried whale idea is interesting. It's pretty amazing to see how far a few drops of tuna oil can spread on the sea surface and what it does to promote feeding behaviour, so a large whale mass could potentially generate a lot of scent. There can be practical issues with removing whales from the beach, I remember as a kid when they tried to tow a sperm whale off Soldiers Beach by the tail and it just snapped off. Getting in early before any dead whale ends up on the beach would be the way to go. Otherwise if it gets stuck on the beach, cutting it into pieces for disposal at the tip might be needed...bags not that job.[/quote

100 times more whales, warm water , heaps of bait balls , way more ocean users, which means ,all means more sharks .

add trying to attract sharks by having chum lines coming off the beach for years on end and that's why we have the current problem on the N Coast.

Cut up any whale carcasses and get them off the beach or more of what you have now.

trippergreenfeet's picture
trippergreenfeet's picture
trippergreenfeet Monday, 7 Sep 2015 at 10:21am

Certainly not a definitive answer but best I've found yet from someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject.

e wrote:

Re: How long does it take for a whale to decompose?

Date: Mon Jul 31 07:23:16 2006
Posted By: Rob Campbell, Postdoctoral researcher, Biological Oceanography
Area of science: Environment
ID: 1154122237.En
Message:
Hi Isabella:

I had a look around, and found a few instances where whales were buried to allow them to decompose (in order to collect the skeleton later, as one often sees suspended from the ceilings of museums). In many cases, the whales were cut up first, or buried on land (in manure, in many cases). Here's a few examples:

two years (In Dominica, so a pretty warm environment where decomposition might be faster).
two years (Washington State)
one year (California, a pretty small one, see the photo).
So my semi-educated guess would be something like two to four years, depending on the size of the whale. While a long time period will probably prevent any "unpleasant surprises", some additional cleaning will probably need to be done on your part.

Unfortunately, there isn't anything like a "bone detectors" you can go out and buy. Metal detectors use magnetic fields, and require the target to be electrically conductive, and bone is not a good conductor. So you might have to do quite a bit of digging to find it!

Best of luck,
Rob Campbell, MAD Scientist

http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2006-08/1154472620.En.r.html

trippergreenfeet's picture
trippergreenfeet's picture
trippergreenfeet Monday, 7 Sep 2015 at 10:29am

And this article about cleaning up a Blue Whale skeleton for museum display...whatever the answer on full decomposition it is years, with accompanying residuals lasting even longer.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2014/10/19/worlds_most_famous_dead_blue_whale_gets_buried_in_manure.html

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 7 Sep 2015 at 10:35am

TripperG , sounds like if you take the maximum decomposition time at 4 years , there is a real possibility that a lot of the attacks and sightings are because of the burley / food depots we put next to the surf .

the next question is , how many whales have been buried on the N coast beaches in the last few years?

trippergreenfeet's picture
trippergreenfeet's picture
trippergreenfeet Monday, 7 Sep 2015 at 11:12am

I remember when the whale was buried at Cott how the old fisherman talked of the madness of that action and how it would create a big burley trail for the whites during whale and salmon seasons.

Their memories went back to a time before white populations had been decimated and talked of how many whites would frequent inshore, following the deep gutter than ran from outside of Rotto all the way to Cott...a white highway on the smell of tasty delights...then the Cott council bury the whale right at the end of the highway.

m-c-surfboards's picture
m-c-surfboards's picture
m-c-surfboards Monday, 7 Sep 2015 at 5:01pm

.

mk1's picture
mk1's picture
mk1 Monday, 7 Sep 2015 at 6:32pm

I remember hearing of speculation around buried whale carcasses in WA a couple of summers ago. Definitely an interesting avenue for investigation.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Tuesday, 8 Sep 2015 at 8:21am

Another one...Central coast..non fatal,hand lacerations.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 8 Sep 2015 at 10:18am

stu , it would be interesting to get Nick to comment on some of the info re: buried whale carcasses , as there is a potential Pandora's box to be opened with council/Govt being responsible for the buryings .

As these carcasses will take many years to decompose , the current shark problem will possibly last for many years to come unless something is done.

I am amazed that some of the people on this forum , who have been calling for culling , have not weighed into the "whale burley " discussion , and started their own investigations into Councils policy of burying dead whales on the beach, and also how many whales have been buried on beaches on the N Coast in the last 5 years!

batfink's picture
batfink's picture
batfink Tuesday, 8 Sep 2015 at 10:35pm

"and with more than 50 million sharks killed a year "

OK, I'm just calling bullshit on that, right here, right now. 50 million!

Start counting now, by ones, and when I have been in my grave for 20 or 30 years you will reach 50 million. Utter fucking bullshit, so many assumptions built into that it just isn't funny. Fark I hate statistics that are just pulled out of people's arses. No way that anyone can verify those numbers. Not possible, our systems of recording catches just aren't that good.

Yes, I deal with statistics all day.

Even it if it were true, the only relevance is statistics around the actual shark populations specific to the area, and largely we are talking about an unprecedented run of shark attacks on the east coast.

It is hardly credible that the killing of half a dozen or a dozen large GWS across the east coast will have the slightest farking difference to population levels. Even the most credible scientists will admit that we know very little to not much at all about the GWS population.

But given that there have been statistically significant numbers of shark attacks across the entire east coast, in numbers way beyond any 'cluster' variant, it is reasonable and scientific to assume that their numbers are getting pretty freaking high by historical standards.

They aren't beautiful animals, they're just sharks. Steve nailed it with the anthropomorphism comment.

And as for whether there is a moral dimension to this, I'll happily go vegetarian (again) to make up for the karma of killing a small number of sharks, and happily take the positive karma of all those beautiful dolphins and tuna and salmon that don't meet a grisly death at the hands of the sharks that get killed.

Something ultra weird is going on at the moment, and it is a question of whether I can surf or whether a batch of man eaters live, I choose surfing.

Fark that, I haven't got a lot to look forward to in life, take surfing away and I'm contemplating my options.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 9:25am

here Batfink , try reading this , as it shows shark deaths at between 70 million to 200 million,
http://www.livescience.com/27575-100-million-sharks-killed-annually.html

you say there is something super weird going on on the N coast with all the sightings and attacks , there are plenty of antidotes on this forum dissecting the weirdness , and as you can see ,some of the weirdness is an explosion in the whale population and ocean users , water is warmer , more bait fish and it looks like the councils have added to the weirdness by having a policy of burying whales on beaches , which attracts sharks.
add all of the above , mix it all up and you have the current situation on the N coast , and looks like it will stay that way for probably 5 years plus , so get used to it.
BF , sounds like you want to cull , what about culling all the whales?
We could cull all the whales , so the sharks would not come in following their pesky carcasses , or are whales too cute in your opinion compared to whales.

Or change surf locations , your mate steve has not been sighted since all this info has been put up , journalists on SN not interested in asking councils why they have a policy of burying whales on beaches , how many have they buried and why?

sounds like you might be one less surfer up there!

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 9:47am

The buried whale theory isn't new Sharkman, and there might well be something in it. Trying to find out where they buried it. If well up behind the dunes then I don't think it's much of a theory.
But there was a humpback washed up on Belongil 2008 I think and following that we started to see more regular sightings of whites, followed by encounters, bumpings and then attacks.
Warmer water? There was an antarctic leopard seal on the beach at Shellys on the weekend.http://www.northernstar.com.au/photos/antarctic-leopard-seal-shelly-beac...

More people in the water? Nope, there's far less and the sharks are still there. Still being sighted daily. 3m white tagged off S. Wall yesterday. More sighted at Lennox.

So, yes, the presence of buried whales might be an attractor, but we're still left with the problem of how to deal with the increased numbers of whites.

That problem is only going to increase as their food sources continue to increase.

The deaths of other shark species in other parts of the worlds oceans is irrelevant to the problem of increased white interactions on the east coast.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 10:41am

free76 , were you aware that the whales were buried on the beach at ballina and Coffs , in Feb and July respectively?

free76 were you aware that in 2000 there were 250 whales reported migrating nth , today there has been a 100 fold increase ?

yes there is less people now using the ocean , but in the last 15 years , as whale numbers increases , more carcasses , more sharks , and then councils create burley bubbles on the beach , pretty simple to me.

This is possibly the eco-system being re-established , which means ever present whites , you should make a call to the councils and ask where,when and why is there a policy of burying whales on the beach?

So maybe this not an increase in GWS's but them coming back to their ecosystem?

as I have said before , fear is an interesting emotion, some people can surf huge waves ,some people can't because of their fear , same as surfing , when its big there are less people in the water , and now surfers have a choice , surf and be part of the food chain or stop ,or move somewhere else!

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 11:23am

That's a false dichotomy because there is a clear third choice: shark management strategies.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 11:33am

free76 , are you prepared to wait a couple of years for information to be gathered , so a management plan can be put in place , based on science and not fear/emotion?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 12:34pm

I don't think I've got much choice, unless god forbid, another attack happens here before the end of the year, in which case there'll be nets in place by Xmas.

But I haven't got a great deal of faith in the current science and thats despite having a degree in science majoring in marine biology.
There's as much emotion on the anti-cull/no management side as there is on the cull side, if not more; because that side of the debate has to pander politically to the inner city greens movement who have hoisted the White shark into a sort of quasi-religious cult.

omnia's picture
omnia's picture
omnia Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 12:50pm

spot-on freeride76, there needs to be a management strategy in this case, and it need not take forever to get something in place, sooner the better, analysis paralysis to be avoided. it's not simply a matter of either hugging all sharks and resigning our fate in the water entirely to chance or indiscriminately culling sharks on the other hand. neither of those two options are viable in this day and age. we already have at hand the insight and the technology to facilitate safer and more enjoyable surf conditions whilst keeping shark populations healthy and relatively free, though I would like to see anyone responsible for any measure of shark attracting behaviour hung, drawn and quartered then burnt to cinders, promptly.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 12:53pm

Free76 , the only way a management plan can be implemented , is by the scientists and relevant authorities agreeing on facts and having them produce a management plan that mirrors the knowledge collected.

I think the anti-cull movement are, yes ,what you call city greens , but they at least have a scientific basis to their claims , not like the knee jerk reaction of the people calling for a cull.

will have a lot more info coming on whales being buried on the beach up your way, question free76, which way do the coastal currnets run in winter N or S?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 1:00pm

Depends on the season, but at the least currents slacken in winter or run uphill, especially if we have an active winter of surf from the S/SE.

Seems to me though the EAC has been more active in winter over the last few years, although that maybe purely an observational bias.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 1:16pm

free76 , just wondering if all the south swells and winds in winter might be carrying the scent of dead whale all the way up to Byron , which could mean the whole coast is awash in dead whale scent??

Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 3:52pm

My main objection to Nick's original hypothesis and to some degree to the buried whale hypothesis is that they seem to bypass the most obvious explanation (Occam's razor) for the recent spate of white shark attacks both in NSW and off WA that being a rebound in white shark numbers.

Don't forget we had whaling stations operating at Tangalooma until 1962 and at Albany until 1978 and as far as I'm aware we didn't have attack hotspots associated with these obvious sources of berley. I am aware that large white sharks were regularly attracted to the Albany station.

Trying to link attacks with recent cases of whales washing ashore lacks objectivity as presumably they have also washed ashore in spots where no recent attacks have occurred . It also seems unlikely that products from truly putrefying whales would continue to attract white sharks.

As someone with a similar background to Freeride I remain cautious about more research unless it informs the maths around the status of the white shark population.

Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 4:13pm

Excuse further harping but Sharkman's suggested that whites were somewhere else until the humpbacks starting washing shore. Where?
While they do make oceanic trips evidence from longline fleets indicate they are a very infrequent bycatch on longlines set in oceanic waters (even with wire traces). More likely is that like other overfished stocks they tend to recede to core habitat i.e. the GAB and any expansion back into their pre-exploitation habitat is correlated with signals that stocks are rebuilding. Southern Bluefin Tuna becoming more common off NSW recently is perhaps a loose parallel.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 4:24pm

nige not harping , just contributing , sounds good to me.

I think GWS numbers have increased , as the amount of juveniles , seems to be a big part of the attacks.

There has always been stories of big whites at Byron /tallows , especially in the old days , but there were very few whales , there has been a huge increase in whales , why not GWS's ?

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 8:36pm

Yet there was also shit loads of whales 12 months ago, yet no sharks taste testing people or cruising through 1ft line ups

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Thursday, 10 Sep 2015 at 12:22pm

how many dead whales

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 9:41am

You didn't ask for dead whales, just whales!
Quote "There has always been stories of big whites at Byron /tallows , especially in the old days , but there were very few whales , there has been a huge increase in whales , why not GWS's ?"

Very few whales because we stabbed them with harpoons and killed them all. Then chucked all their guts into the ocean, plus added all the abattoir run off into the ocean as well. That's why the sharks were there, not because a lack of whales!!!

How many dead whales ?
calf mortality rate of 0.875%
population growth of 10.6%
26,100 whales along the east coast in 2008
2014 population of 47,771, of these 5063 new calves born, gives you a number of 44 dead baby humpback whales
There was only 268 whales in 1968 and they live for 77 years, so we can't expect to see a population die off until the year 2045
Say the 268 whales were born prior to 1968, you have 3.48 mature whales dying each year as an approximate
So 44 dead baby humpbacks and 3.48 dead mature whales this year
Note: this does not take into account natural mortality before reaching 77 years of age

And further note, every journal or paper is quoting different numbers on the actual population of whales

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 10:08am
uncle_leroy wrote:

You didn't ask for dead whales, just whales!
Quote "There has always been stories of big whites at Byron /tallows , especially in the old days , but there were very few whales , there has been a huge increase in whales , why not GWS's ?"

Very few whales because we stabbed them with harpoons and killed them all. Then chucked all their guts into the ocean, plus added all the abattoir run off into the ocean as well. That's why the sharks were there, not because a lack of whales!!!

How many dead whales ?
calf mortality rate of 0.875%
population growth of 10.6%
26,100 whales along the east coast in 2008
2014 population of 47,771, of these 5063 new calves born, gives you a number of 44 dead baby humpback whales
There was only 268 whales in 1968 and they live for 77 years, so we can't expect to see a population die off until the year 2045
Say the 268 whales were born prior to 1968, you have 3.48 mature whales dying each year as an approximate
So 44 dead baby humpbacks and 3.48 dead mature whales this year
Note: this does not take into account natural mortality before reaching 77 years of age

And further note, every journal or paper is quoting different numbers on the actual population of whales

yeah uncle , interesting when you extrapolate the numbers of whales and their mortality rates , which shows there is a lot more whale meat floating around , and more sharks.

Do you think as whale populations keep on increasing , that the GWS problem will increase?

Do you think that a solution is burying the dead whales on the beach??

seems like there has been a population explosion of whales,whites and ocean users , something is out of whack!

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 4:19pm

nige , interesting points you make about the GWS population simply growing.

Not sure you can say ,using the examples of Albany and Tangalooma , that because there were no hotspots the theory falls over . there were so few people using the oceans in those days compared to now , and as sharks are scavengers ,putrefying whales are on the top of the menu , more to come on what the so called shark expert say .

But your idea about increasing numbers has a lot of merit , more whales , more sharks, more people using the sharks habitat equals a recipe for more attacks!

fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21 Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 4:44pm

Sharkman........ swellnets new expert on sharks.............6 pages of repettitive hypothesis.

Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 6:08pm

As a visiting surfer I can remember big crowds at Byron in the late 1970s as well as unfriendly advice from locals.

The Russians fished humpbacks to near extinction in the early 1960s, it takes a while for relatively slow breeding species to recover but they are now going great guns.
White sharks were not protected until the 1990s so I think it's just a case of lag. Reiterating an earlier post I suggest that continuing additional mortality due to recreational fishing, bather protection programs and bycatch in gillnets hindered their recovery. Rationalisation of shark gillnet fisheries have reduced effort and probably bycatch mortality an I understand that shark control program now release whites.

That's my 20 c worth.

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 7:52pm

For those who missed my earlier post -

'Flow, Freeride, Mk1 et al we are wasting our breath on the likes of Sharkman and Rabbits.
They have such a blinkered view of the real world that no amount of rational argument will change their minds.
I suggest we ignore them rather than give them further cause to espouse their distorted philosophies.
Signing off.'

Fer chrissake, don't feed this dickhead's (sharkman's) ego any longer! We all know the answer to the problem so best we shut up and hope he goes away.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Thursday, 10 Sep 2015 at 8:58am

thween , its people like you that are the problem, in one breath you say, 'we all know the answer to the problem" ,please enlighten us instead of playing the man , and put forth your culling argument !

As for ego , I have actually learnt a lot on this forum researching and talking to GWS specialists and why their could be so many sharks on the N coast. This your problem not mine , do you even surf?

fitzroy-21 commented Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 4:44pm

Sharkman........ swellnets new expert on sharks.............6 pages of repettitive hypothesis.

and what the fuck have you contributed Fitzy , a week ago it was posted that councils have been burying whales on the beaches on the N coast , a week ago number were put up that show an explosion in the whale population , so that's been this week . I am not an expert as you try to cynically claim , but sure enjoy talking to them and researching some of the claims being made here.

Fitzy and thween fuck off back to your sea of ignorance , why even bother posting?

fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21 Thursday, 10 Sep 2015 at 11:22am

Hahahaha, took the bait and ran.

You obviously haven't read through the entire thread and are only interested to your own mantra.

I'm no expert but 40 odd years living and breathing the ocean allows me some pretty close observations.

Eat a dick sharkman.

EDIT: and working in conjuction with JCU in the capture ands research of many sharks for years, ie they were struggling to capture the very large sharks and requested my assistance.

Whilst I agree with part of you hypothesis, I don't believe it is a major contribrution.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Thursday, 10 Sep 2015 at 11:40am

eat a dick fitzy , are you offering yours , seems you might have an infatuation with me and getting your dick sucked by a man,ah well that says a lot about you as a person, and if you are gay ,I have no problem with that either

I have read the whole thread and have questioned some of the cull ramblings , and also just because you have been on the ocean for 40 years so have I , and have had a fair bit of contact with GWS's ,Fisherman etc,so just like you fitzy , where have you been in that 40 years , don't you come from up north somewhere.?

tootr's picture
tootr's picture
tootr Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 8:02pm

May I ask a question of the shark experts?

If there was never any handle on GWS numbers in days gone past , nor in the recent past, how is it determined they are endangered/threatened?

To quote the Dpmt of Environment Issue paper from 2013;
"About this document

This issues paper has been developed to support the new recovery plan and includes information on the biology and ecology of the white shark, the species' current conservation status, a description of the key threats endangering the species' survival in Australian waters and recommendations for future research. Some of the key findings of this paper are:
•There is currently no reliable estimate of the total size of the Australian white shark population and therefore no robust measure of population trends or status. This lack of information makes it difficult to assess the effectiveness of any actions undertaken to conserve the species.
•Fishing pressure from the recreational and commercial sectors represents an ongoing, but largely unquantified, threat to the white shark in Australian waters. Mortalities as a result of the state government administered bather protection programs are also a potential threat.
•The need remains to identify habitats, migratory paths and specific locations that are used to meet essential life cycle requirements of white sharks, such as mating, pupping, temporary residence sites during migration and feeding, and to minimise threats at these localities.

Despite significant advances in the knowledge base concerning the white shark in Australian waters over the past decade, continuation of research into their ecology and biology, as well as into causes of anthropogenic mortality, will assist in developing programs to aid the long-term recovery of this species.

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recov...

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 9:50pm
tootr wrote:

May I ask a question of the shark experts?

If there was never any handle on GWS numbers in days gone past , nor in the recent past, how is it determined they are endangered/threatened?

To quote the Dpmt of Environment Issue paper from 2013;
"About this document

This issues paper has been developed to support the new recovery plan and includes information on the biology and ecology of the white shark, the species' current conservation status, a description of the key threats endangering the species' survival in Australian waters and recommendations for future research. Some of the key findings of this paper are:
•There is currently no reliable estimate of the total size of the Australian white shark population and therefore no robust measure of population trends or status. This lack of information makes it difficult to assess the effectiveness of any actions undertaken to conserve the species.
•Fishing pressure from the recreational and commercial sectors represents an ongoing, but largely unquantified, threat to the white shark in Australian waters. Mortalities as a result of the state government administered bather protection programs are also a potential threat.
•The need remains to identify habitats, migratory paths and specific locations that are used to meet essential life cycle requirements of white sharks, such as mating, pupping, temporary residence sites during migration and feeding, and to minimise threats at these localities.

Despite significant advances in the knowledge base concerning the white shark in Australian waters over the past decade, continuation of research into their ecology and biology, as well as into causes of anthropogenic mortality, will assist in developing programs to aid the long-term recovery of this species.

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recov...

Hey Tootr, I'm no shark expert & I don't have the answer to your question but that info you posted made for some interesting reading, thanks. In the short term if a cull of one or several GWS is required to "satisfy/ease the fear/make it safe"etc for those in favour, so be it, however I reckon there's no doubt that the following paragraph sums up the medium/long term solution IMO:

"The need remains to identify habitats, migratory paths and specific locations that are used to meet essential life cycle requirements of white sharks, such as mating, pupping, temporary residence sites during migration and feeding, and to minimise threats at these localities."

bigkiwisi's picture
bigkiwisi's picture
bigkiwisi Wednesday, 9 Sep 2015 at 8:25pm

I'd like to know how many whale carcasses have been buried, when and where exactly they are? Where would records of these events be found and are the 'authorities' getting this data together I'm wondering?....

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Thursday, 10 Sep 2015 at 11:51am

tootr , you are right with your post about knowing how many GWS's are there really are and why were they put on the endangered species list.

the link to CSIRO , shows that there is a lot work going on currently in establishing the GWS numbers , and learning about where and how they breed ,and how and what they will feed on,
http://www.csiro.au/en/Research/Environment/Oceans-and-coasts/Sharks

Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Thursday, 10 Sep 2015 at 12:11pm

Interestingly the sharks off the Neptunes looked to have gone missing again..

http://www.sharkcagediving.com.au/shark-tours/shark-sightings-2/

littlewillie's picture
littlewillie's picture
littlewillie Thursday, 10 Sep 2015 at 11:42pm

I missed Q&A this week but heard that Geoffrey Robertson twice asked Mike Baird what he was going to do to stop the shark attacks in NSW and got little response. Someone please respond to this if they saw the show.
I"m guessing that he can see that by sitting on it's hands and hoping the sharks will go away the government is leaving itself wide open to litigation from the victims and rightly so in my opinion.
There has been many theories put forward on this forum about why the sharks are hanging around tides, moon phases, time of day, water temp whales etc but as far as I can see every theory has been blown out the water by the statistics surrounding the attacks.
A shark is just a dangerous fish and should be treated no differently to a dangerous dog or a crocodile in my opinion. Closing a beach for a day or so after a shark attack then reopening it is negligent in the extreme in my opinion.

I have it on good authority that a litigation case is being prepared by a victim in another state and I find it bloody distressing that it has come to this . Just wondering how many more human lives will be lost or ruined before something is done. Unfortunately the human cost of this is being ignored by the sharkhuggers.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 8:45am

LW , at least the Govt has committed $250 K dollars to tagging and finding out how many sharks are up on the N coast.

As for the litigation aspect , not sure how you could prove negligence by a Govt , unless it was proved that Councils acted outside current process's and policy's .

one way to avoid any danger is close the beaches , but would surfers abide by this, would local economies survive the beaches being closed for long periods of time?

how long would you suggest after a shark attack , that the beaches be closed?

as for shark huggers , yeah we are the guys calling for more research , a more understanding to try and work out is there a way to manage the sharks and understand why they behave as they do.

the human cost is not being ignored by shark huggers , just a more logical approach in finding long term solutions and not emotional knee jerk short term feel good solutions , like just kill them all!

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 5:08am

Litigation - The Kyle Burden attack ?

littlewillie's picture
littlewillie's picture
littlewillie Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 8:01am
udo wrote:

Litigation - The Kyle Burden attack ?

No. A survivor who is now unable to look after himself.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 10:38am

So someone makes a conscious choice to go for a surf, suffers the highly unlikely/horrific event of a shark attack, then feels the need to blame/litigate against the council/government because the location they choose to surf proved to be "unsafe"?!? Imagine that, the ocean being an unsafe environment. Hard to believe.

Wow. What next? What is the difference between someone suffering injury or drowning at a surf location as supposed to a shark attack? We don't close surf locations from a liability point of view after a surfing related injury or death. Why not?

I'm not suggesting that a cull is or isn't the answer short term, my point is that we all make the concious decision to enter an environment that is out of our control, it's wild. If someone is not aware of that before entering then that is ignorance is the highest order & not grounds for legal defense IMO.

Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive's picture
Nigel Nosedive Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 10:54am

In response to Rabbits68, you may be misinterpreting the paragraph below you cited from the Dept of Environment paper:

"The need remains to identify habitats, migratory paths and specific locations that are used to meet essential life cycle requirements of white sharks, such as mating, pupping, temporary residence sites during migration and feeding, and to minimise threats at these localities."

The minimising threat bit is about protecting white sharks not people!

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 11:09am

Thanks Nige. Understood. My general take from that paragraph was the need to establish more knowledge of these GWS movements. Then we might take some of the guess work out the issue that's currently bubbling away......

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 11:05am

A shame that sharkman and rabbit can't recall previous posts (24 Aug) like -

' Just wondering - is there a legal case for those attacked in NSW to sue the DPI/State govt for negligence? IMHO there would be as the 3 elements of the tort appear to exist in that -
1. the DPI/State govt owes a duty of care to protect those in NSW from foreseeable actions (or inaction) which could cause harm,
2. the DPI/State govt has, by failing to act to protect beach users, breached that duty of care, and
3. shark attack victims (at least since the threat became more obvious ) have suffered injury as a result of that inaction.
Although the defence of contributory negligence would apply, this should not be sufficient for such a lawsuit to fail.'

PS Sharkman, you have now proven to us that you really are an ignorant peanut of the highest order ( 'kill them all') - please go away

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 11:21am

Hey Theween, not sure what your point is above? So in your opinion you believe people should have the right to litigate against shark attack? That's your opinion fair enough. I simply don't think it's anyone else's responsibility other than the person that makes the choice to enter the ocean. It' ok to disagree....

Putting me & Sharkman or anyone else down with your rhetoric isn't really adding anything to the discussion. To Sharkmans credit he has remained pretty clear & consistent & has contributed positively to the discussion with his opinions.

Sorry we won't go away for your benefit. You never know Theween, if you hang around, you may just learn something, unless you've closed your mind on the issue already.......

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 11:19am

Flake.......tastes nice .

uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy's picture
uncle_leroy Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 11:57am

Flake and seared baby whale steak burgers out of a caravan kiosk in the top carpark
see, 2 wrongs do make a right!!

Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 11:32am

Totally with Rabbits, litigation against who and what?

It's your choice to go surfing, it's a raw and wild environment with many dangers including sharks.

To go down this path isn't good at all.

50young's picture
50young's picture
50young Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 11:36am

Agree with Rabbits and Craig, to go down this path, will next mean registration of surf craft, insurance who pays for the increases in council and Government insurances? Us as the tax payer. We as surfers make our choice to go in the ocean

omnia's picture
omnia's picture
omnia Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 11:41am

would be handy if someone (sharkman?) was formatting the info being posted here in a readily digestible manner.

would also be handy to define a few terms too:

"white pointer" - dangerous predator
"surfer" - junk food
"shark hugger" - numbskull
"shark culler" - redneck
"local government" - handbrake
"local government worker" - snoozer
"science" - alchemy
"ignorance" - bliss
"conscious decision" - bullshit

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 11:47am

I went to go surf the Point and it was junky with a bait ball the size of a footy field hovering on the bank. Plenty of shapes swimming into it.
Pass.

omnia's picture
omnia's picture
omnia Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 11:50am

if anyone is looking for a sound intro to history of human interactions with white pointers, try "White Pointer South" by Chris Black. it is a hefty coffee table tome with lots of facts and piccies and well worth a read.

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 11:53am

Good call FR76. Nature in progress, steer clear.....

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 12:45pm

Yeah, I'm going to Fiji tomorrow and I want all my limbs with me.

fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21 Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 3:17pm

Enjoy Steve, hope you score and have a great time. Love the place.

Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 3:32pm

Yeah, looking fun!

indo-dreaming's picture
indo-dreaming's picture
indo-dreaming Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 3:44pm

Interesting read….Ive bee expecting it will be our turn for an attack down here in Vic but hopefully with all the seals and penguins down here in Vic our sharks won't get hungry.

goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 4:02pm
indo-dreaming wrote:

Interesting read….Ive bee expecting it will be our turn for an attack down here in Vic but hopefully with all the seals and penguins down here in Vic our sharks won't get hungry.

Indo I've been wondering the same thing for quiet a long time now. Fingers crossed nothing's going to happen but it's only a matter of time surely..

groundswell85's picture
groundswell85's picture
groundswell85 Friday, 11 Sep 2015 at 4:54pm

One thing which has been over looked by a lot of people is the effects El Niño & La Niña events have on GWS distribution and behavior in Australian waters. Is it possible the strengthening El Niño is contributing to the increase in whites on the north coast. From my observation I would say yes. The 2006/2007 El Niño years although not overly strong, whites were prolific, hanging around well in to early summer.
There's plenty of old news articles out there from the incidents and near misses during this time. Check out the links below.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/miracle-shark-escape/2007/10/15/1192...

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/great-whites-caught-at-popular-surfi...

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Saturday, 12 Sep 2015 at 9:33am

more great info GS, so there were multiple sightings of 15+ and juveniles at Evanshead,in 2006 , attacks at Byron in 2007 with multiple sightings , will be great to see what the scientists can come up with all the info they are getting now.

It seems to me that the GWS's have always been there, their numbers have increased , the whales have increased a 100 fold, ocean users even more , warmer waters , mre bait fish , and then there are whales carcasses buried on beaches , and a lot more dead whales out to sea , add all this up and we might be watching a quantum shift back in the eco-system , but more knowledge is more power in coming up with managed solutions.

velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno Saturday, 12 Sep 2015 at 7:31pm

Tootr very well mentioned on the burying of whale carcases being long term burley reservoirs - that is one action/policy that could be a case of future litigation. And something the ol' timers knew very well of. Surfing in oily film of incoming whale carcass.... ewww, been there & done that. Oily film of craypot bait, ewww.
Sharkman good posts of late, I don't think we will go back to that ecosystem of old as of the industrial scale fishing offshore, this was never there before and is a tremendous imbalance.

southey's picture
southey's picture
southey Sunday, 13 Sep 2015 at 12:38am

Rabbits applauded Sharkman for his balanced posts .....
Yeah and he shut down Fitzy without realising that Fitz knows his stuff , and that again he seems to not have read through this thread or more importantly the other threads previous where people like freeride , Fitz and other old salts have given incredible feedback that has and is being used by experts .

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 13 Sep 2015 at 9:21am

Southey funny how some of you guys who have been posting for years , the moment you disagree or put up a different hypothesis , you go and get personal , as did Fitzy asking me to eat his dick.

when you guys get personal , it shows that rather than contribute , you'd rather shoot the messenger , and get personal.

All I am doing is researching , listening , reading and asking questions with the goal of possibly eliminating shark myths and getting a better understanding of the eco-system we all use!

I spoke to a copuple of shark experts the last week , and they are actually now investigating why authorities bury whales on beaches as both said that even if you bury the whale up in the sand dune it will leach into the water table and go out to sea , to be continued

fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21's picture
fitzroy-21 Sunday, 13 Sep 2015 at 2:26pm

And this is where you don't get it sharkman, you read and see what you want to hear. Re-read my post. I said "eat a dick", not mine, you're the one with an infatuation..................and I couldn't be assed replying to your earlier shit as you are too one eyed to have a logical discussion with. Bye.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 13 Sep 2015 at 2:50pm

oh so you want me to eat someone elses dick , sorry , your writing skills seem to be a bit random as is my comprehension.

So because in your opinion I am too one eyed to have a logical discussion with , you want me to eat someone elses dick but yours , OK I bite ( pardon the pun) , who?

try contributing something , unless of course you know it all, already?

Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68's picture
Rabbits68 Sunday, 13 Sep 2015 at 4:22pm

Thanks for putting your ignorance on display for all to see Southey. Clearly you haven't been following thread & instead just chose to launch a personal attack with no input to the topic, unlike your salty expert mates. Maybe you should spend less time stalking & more time reading.

Thank God you & your salty mates are onboard because the rest of us wouldn't have a clue what where talking about, let alone have any experience on the topic. You epitomize perfection Southey. Your a legend mate. Thanks for everything....

littlewillie's picture
littlewillie's picture
littlewillie Sunday, 13 Sep 2015 at 10:09am

The fact is none of these so-called experts have a clue what is going on , so until they figure it out, which won't be next week, but could be never, a limited cull should happen to at least possibly reduce the risk of another attack. Better than doing nothing .

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 13 Sep 2015 at 2:51pm

check out the whale carcass being eaten at sea , and then on the beach...

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/whale-watch/closeup-footage-shows-shar...

velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno Sunday, 13 Sep 2015 at 3:51pm

A quick question, today's surf was mostly offshore where we were, the east in the wind bringing small sideshore collections of bumps into the faces. But picture offshore, small waves.

What appeared to be a narrow, windless 'slick' was winding out to sea from the centre of the back beach area, beginning just past the break. Grom asked me what it was & I couldn't answer to be honest. It wasn't a windshift, and it didn't appear to be spume or foam made by set waves on a headland. Was it a rip? Anyone have an answer?

Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Sunday, 13 Sep 2015 at 5:04pm

Just a wind streak seen usually when winds are fresh offshore or stronger.

I don't know how they develop and am intrigued as well. They kind of resist the wind, ie stay glassy when other areas of ocean are wind effected.

Probably just a quieter zone between gusts and developing from shadowing of the wind from the land feature it's blowing off?

velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno Sunday, 25 Oct 2015 at 7:33pm

Thanks Craig.

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Sunday, 13 Sep 2015 at 5:23pm

Might have been spawn , or residual slick from a school of fish that sheltered in a gutter overnight.

Might have been a kill or a conflux of currents or even an extremely localised thermal differential .

Could have been a sperm slick from a merman circle jerk.

The latter being extremely unlikely.

Merman being notoriously shy sexually .

simba's picture
simba's picture
simba Sunday, 13 Sep 2015 at 6:06pm

More than likely a current line.

thermalben's picture
thermalben's picture
thermalben Tuesday, 13 Oct 2015 at 8:47am

"The man in charge of a shark tagging operation on the far north coast believes most of the great whites that have haunted the area are now elsewhere."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-13/shark-tagging-resume/6848950

50young's picture
50young's picture
50young Tuesday, 13 Oct 2015 at 12:05pm
thermalben wrote:

"The man in charge of a shark tagging operation on the far north coast believes most of the great whites that have haunted the area are now elsewhere."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-13/shark-tagging-resume/6848950

Shark reports FB have just reported 4 Great whites, Lighthouse Beach, South Ballina and Sharpes Beach Ballina. So much for his theory

thermalben's picture
thermalben's picture
thermalben Tuesday, 13 Oct 2015 at 12:19pm

He was referencing the tagged sharks; they had moved on. From the article:

"Two sharks went all the way up to Queensland," he said.

"One is still there off the Rainbow Beach area."

"One shark is already down at the nursery grounds at Hawks Nest, two other animals look like they're on their way to the nursery grounds."

Mr Peddimores said others had tended to stay south of Evans Head, where a surfer was mauled by a shark in July.

"[They have moved] between Evans Head and Yamba but quite a long way offshore," he said.

50young's picture
50young's picture
50young Tuesday, 13 Oct 2015 at 8:50am

The Shark report FB page reported a 4m White sighting 20m of Currumbin Beach on Sunday

50young's picture
50young's picture
50young Tuesday, 13 Oct 2015 at 12:33pm

Ben, the headlining statement to the article states "The head of a shark-tagging operation on the New South Wales far north coast says he believes most of the great white sharks that have haunted the area are now elsewhere." he states about the whereabouts of the tag sharks and comments at the end that "So I wouldn't be at all surprised if I do my first flight and I find only one or two sharks in the entire stretch between Evans Head and Byron."

They are obviously still around

thermalben's picture
thermalben's picture
thermalben Tuesday, 13 Oct 2015 at 12:38pm

Of course there are still some sharks around, I'm not terribly surprised. The interesting point from the ABC article is how much they're moving around.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Tuesday, 13 Oct 2015 at 2:24pm

Tagging has started again.

SHARK REPORT FLAT ROCK NSW
Fisheries NSW

Tuesday 13 October

1250

White shark - 2.9 m female tagged and released.

Caught Nth end of Sharpes Beach, Ballina and released 700m off Flat Rock.

Took my daughter surfing at Sharpes this morning...gulp.

goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot Tuesday, 13 Oct 2015 at 3:01pm

Is there still many sightings and encounters happening Freeride?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Tuesday, 13 Oct 2015 at 3:12pm

There was a close encounter at Boulders less than two weeks ago.
http://www.northernstar.com.au/news/great-white-shark-spotted-close-enou...
tbh I thought we might have been seeing a decrease in shark activity.

But Day One of the new tagging programm and three whites were spotted, including the one tagged off sharps.
That indicates to me there are still significant numbers of whites in the area and contradicts Pedamoors claim.
http://www.northernstar.com.au/news/white-shark-tagging-continues-ballin...

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Tuesday, 13 Oct 2015 at 5:26pm

SHARK SIGHTINGS - MULTIPLE - BALLINA NSW REGION
The Fisheries helicopter has sighted 4 sharks today in the Ballina area.
Lighthouse Beach . 11.15 am. White shark moving offshore.
South Ballina beach - 10.30 am. Two white sharks moving offshore.
Sharps Beach - 11.30 am. White shark moving offshore.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 14 Oct 2015 at 1:59pm

SHARK REPORT SOUTH BALLINA BEACH
Fisheries NSW
Wednesday 14 October
1045 am
White shark - 2.45m male tagged and released.
Caught and released 3.8 km south of Ballina break-wall along south Ballina beach.
Many thanks to the DPI for letting us know
The Shark Reports Team

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Wednesday, 14 Oct 2015 at 7:27pm

This is news the shark-huggers don't wish to know about, they'd rather pretend it's not an issue. Unfortunately it will be a major issue for the next poor bastard attacked (only a matter of time).
At least we can all sleep soundly knowing that our endangered friends are not threatened in any way.

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 14 Oct 2015 at 8:03pm

Can we really say these things are endangered?

I think all the evidence points to them being at least locally common.

This region is crawling with juvenile/young adult whites.

nochaser's picture
nochaser's picture
nochaser Wednesday, 14 Oct 2015 at 8:21pm

Freeride have you seen the data of where they are hanging straight off Evans Head http://www.northernstar.com.au/news/six-tagged-great-whites-sharks-loite... as per my previous comments

Nick.F's picture
Nick.F's picture
Nick.F Wednesday, 14 Oct 2015 at 8:32pm

Theween,
Don't think you can call someone a shark hugger just because they don't believe in culling or because someone wants to protect sharks. Everyone should have there own opinion on issues around sharks without being called a shark hugger even if you disagree with it.

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Wednesday, 14 Oct 2015 at 10:24pm

Hi Nick
I don't think 'shark hugger' is too harsh given that the attitude of these people is responsible for on-going disfigurement and deaths to beach users in Northern NSW. It's a bit rich to be offended by this label when clearly such people condone shark attacks on surfers.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 25 Oct 2015 at 7:24pm

are you saying because people say that sharks shouldn't be culled , we are responsible for the injuries from sharks? you are a fucken Moron!!!

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Monday, 26 Oct 2015 at 9:49am

Well, sharkboy, what other conclusion can be drawn? If you don't support reducing/eliminating the threat then you must be advocating the rights of sharks to attack surfers.
BTW 'Moron' is a derogatory term used by bigots.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 26 Oct 2015 at 10:15am

are you for real moron , is just an opinion on your mental capacities and small intellect , that you think because most people don't see the solution of killing all sharks because there are a few attacks . You seem to blame the logic and reason of the scientists who study the sharks , on the deaths and attacks.

you seem to be suggesting that people who are shark Huggers , are guilty of the attacks , would you suggest manslaughter charges?

I am not sure that you know that there are more people killed by elephants , 500 pa, and maybe 10 world wide by sharks .

Culling didn't work in WA , maybe look at why we bury whales on beaches , where the shark attacks have occurred such as Ballina!

sharkshit's picture
sharkshit's picture
sharkshit Monday, 26 Oct 2015 at 12:00pm

Burying whales on beaches?

Really??

Thats the first time we've heard of that.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 26 Oct 2015 at 4:12pm

been on some of the other posts, 10 whales have been buried on beaches in NSW in the last 2 years. One was buried on the beach at Ballina a week before Tadashi was killed .A whale was also buried on the beach a couple of K's from gracetown before all the attacks there. So far no-one seems to have really investigatd this , even though its well known that sharks love whale meat .

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Thursday, 15 Oct 2015 at 4:51pm

SHARK REPORT LIGHTHOUSE BEACH BALLINA NSW
Fisheries NSW
Thursday 15 October
1530 pm
White shark - 2.85 female. Tagged and released.
Released offshore from Lighthouse Headland, Ballina
The Shark Reports Team

seal's picture
seal's picture
seal Thursday, 15 Oct 2015 at 5:03pm

I wonder if the ones that were tagged off Ballina did the runner because they didn't think it was such a nice place to hang out anymore?
Think of it like this; somebody throws out a bait , you latch on to it and the next thing you know you've got a dirty big hook stuck in your mouth! Then they skull drag you to a boat where they drag you on board, do all sorts of nasty tests on you then stick a tag in you before letting you go miles from where you were caught!
I know I'd soon get the hell out of there .
So maybe tagging sharks might scare them away from Ballina but certainly won't give true indications of what and where they would normally be doing.
To see 4 on the first day of resumption of tagging certainly suggests that there is a lot more out there than the "experts" would lead us to believe.

Thanks for the info Freeride and so they are still hanging where the attacks were so surf Ballina with caution fellas !

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Sunday, 18 Oct 2015 at 10:55am

The Pass closed , 2 juvenile GWS lurking ...numerous sighting yesterday also
Air T@G Ballina.

Blowin's picture
Blowin's picture
Blowin Friday, 23 Oct 2015 at 9:12pm

Here's a video worth watching on Beach grit - it's about communicating with Great White sharks , those misunderstood divine beings, by a lady called Anna Breytanbach .

A few delicious contradictions in there.

I'll let you discover them for yourself.

I especially enjoyed where she apologised for getting " weird and hippy " by saying that energy flows.

Whilst I'm extremely open minded regarding the unknown qualities of life on this beautiful planet, I'm still at a loss as to how she can maintain a straight face throughout.

Pure talent.

nochaser's picture
nochaser's picture
nochaser Saturday, 24 Oct 2015 at 1:36pm

Maybe she been sampling goods from around a few to many of Byron's cow pats.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Sunday, 25 Oct 2015 at 7:21pm

shark cluster I Nth California 10 -18 footers , lots of juveniles , not normal , maybe all those Nth coast sharks went for a holiday to Nth Cal!

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Monday, 26 Oct 2015 at 2:46pm

Sharkboy, you continue to astound with your amazing intellect. I always thought 'culling' did not mean 'killing all sharks' but obviously you know better. I also thank-you for educating me on the behaviour of the elephant. Maybe you could start your own wildlife series? Suggest you look at bee-stings or magpie-swooping in your next instalment.

silver-surfer's picture
silver-surfer's picture
silver-surfer Saturday, 12 Dec 2015 at 9:58pm

Here is a theory that came out of the Mens Shed the other night - that Orca's are the largest carnivorous mammal in the ocean, and the apex killer. The talk in the shed reckons Orca's are missing from the equation on the north coast, that Orca's would sort these pesty little sharks out and run 'em out of dodge.
Further - that govt $$ budget should be allocated to train a select team of Orca's to run lifeguard duty. Bring the balance back. Get Willie on the team.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Friday, 29 Jul 2016 at 3:21pm

Mark mono Stewart reckons its cull time.

goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot Friday, 29 Jul 2016 at 3:29pm

Who's he? And why is his opinion worthy of a comment?

crg's picture
crg's picture
crg Saturday, 30 Jul 2016 at 7:14am

Mono is a local Byron surfer...Mono as he has one leg and he just recently won world title in adaptive surfing champs...also does all the sprays on MR's boards...and no he didn't lose his leg to a shark (bone cancer).
Don't even know if that's his opinion or why it's up here??

lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy's picture
lostdoggy Saturday, 30 Jul 2016 at 8:46am

Article in northern star I think.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Saturday, 30 Jul 2016 at 8:46am

Mono comments in Ballina Advocate story : GWS census could justify cull.

no-eye-deer's picture
no-eye-deer's picture
no-eye-deer Friday, 29 Jul 2016 at 5:23pm

More activity around Evans Head this week, from the Dorsal Shark Reports facebook page:

"Public Shark Report: NSW - EVANS HEAD. 11:27, 29 Jul 16, 2.86m, Great White, Receiver Tag, BEACH CLOSURE - MAIN BEACH EVANS HEAD
Due to 22 shark detections from the DPI Buoy since Sunday, and a visual sighting yesterday the Main Beach at Evans Head is CLOSED UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE.
Since Sunday Shark # 15 a 2.35 metre female Great White, and Shark #26 a 2.86 metre female Great White have been detected hanging around the area.
Authorities believe they are feeding in large schools of bait fish.
An evaluation of the situation will be made this afternoon."

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Saturday, 30 Jul 2016 at 9:05am

Interesting to see this old post dragged up , again , and still calling for culling because , now you are just seeing sharks . how many shatk attacks has there been on the North Coast in the last 18 mths ?

roondog's picture
roondog's picture
roondog Sunday, 31 Jul 2016 at 9:43pm

good read, had a enough of the cull / protect points of view that don't offer any insight, wonder if this may apply to "situation's" over here in WA, again good read.

bah_flie's picture
bah_flie's picture
bah_flie Monday, 1 Aug 2016 at 11:18am

I'm going to put this out there just because I haven't heard anyone talking about it yet. Could the recent increase in shark attacks have anything to do with an increasing amount of shark shields being worn in the waves? My understanding of how these gadgets work is that an electric field is created by the shark shield that from a distance would seem the same as an animal in distress or exerting itself. Then it's not until the shark is close enough to the shark shield that the electric field becomes uncomfortably strong and the shark is driven away. If this is how the gadgets work, one could imply that sharks (especially large predatory species ie. GWS, that hunt other large marine animals) from near and far are being attracted toward the surf zones by the shark shield, then being driven away from the person wearing the shield, leaving a shark that has been excited into a hunting state, looking for food, close to shore, possibly around any number of people who haven't acquired a shark shield yet.
If one person wears a shield, do we all need to have one? or should the person(s) wearing them be ejected from the waves?

stunet's picture
stunet's picture
stunet Monday, 1 Aug 2016 at 11:57am

Don't think you're being ignored Bah Flie, just that this question has been asked a great many times before and has even received a few answers. See Shark Shield articles for starters.

Paraphrasing some of those answers: there's very little chance of attracting sharks because the charge travels such a short distance in water. Sharks cant even detect it more than a couple of metres away (at the very most). Actual distances and numbers were quoted in some of those articles.

meremortal1255's picture
meremortal1255's picture
meremortal1255 Monday, 1 Aug 2016 at 12:16pm

why waste so much money and effort on such silly things oiley? there's a life out there!!

if people are worried about sharx when they surf they shouldn't be in the water - particularly people like brett hardy in margaret river who thinks they should be culled.

we created the environment that has caused this problem but i won't go into that here (if you get a copy of the local margaret river times from when the first of the most recent attacks took place you can read from my letter why sharx are coming closer to our fair shores. it is not the sharx problem but yours if you get a nip. its all called karma - which teaches us to be good in this life for our next lives.

as for the original comment on sharks, i have a similar theory in the south west of australia as nearly all our attacks were made when the new swell arrives (or just before) confirming my theory in my letter to the editor regarding why sharx are being pushed into the shore and can't find they food they normally would eat.

if you've lived and surft in indo you will understand that new and full moons brings swells...... its this beautiful natural (nature) environment we live in but all westerners are destructing....

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Monday, 1 Aug 2016 at 3:40pm

MM, I've read some rubbish on this thread but yours takes the cake:
'if people are worried about sharx when they surf they shouldn't be in the water - particularly people like brett hardy in margaret river who thinks they should be culled.'
The majority of surfers are worried (to various degrees)about sharks and would like the threat of attack reduced. If you surf an area where attacks frequently occur (like Margarets), culling makes perfect sense.
We also have a very unspoilt marine environment (by international standards) hence the thriving shark population. I expect Indo has bugger-all attacks for the exact opposite reason.

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Monday, 1 Aug 2016 at 3:40pm

MM, I've read some rubbish on this thread but yours takes the cake:
'if people are worried about sharx when they surf they shouldn't be in the water - particularly people like brett hardy in margaret river who thinks they should be culled.'
The majority of surfers are worried (to various degrees)about sharks and would like the threat of attack reduced. If you surf an area where attacks frequently occur (like Margarets), culling makes perfect sense.
We also have a very unspoilt marine environment (by international standards) hence the thriving shark population. I expect Indo has bugger-all attacks for the exact opposite reason.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 1 Aug 2016 at 4:13pm

wonder where you were with more great insight, if it scares you kill it!
For more than 5o years Aussie surfers have been surfing with sharks , and some of us are just not as terrified as you and your culling mates.
The threat will be reduced for you if you surf less, easy!

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Monday, 1 Aug 2016 at 4:13pm

wonder where you were with more great insight, if it scares you kill it!
For more than 5o years Aussie surfers have been surfing with sharks , and some of us are just not as terrified as you and your culling mates.
The threat will be reduced for you if you surf less, easy!

theween's picture
theween's picture
theween Monday, 1 Aug 2016 at 5:02pm

Apologies MM, you've been surpassed in the fruit-loop stakes by our fearless sharkboy - no shark is big enough or hungry enough to put even a glimmer of trepidation into his ice cool persona. If only we trembling nancy boys were so lucky.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 2 Aug 2016 at 8:38am

ah nancy boy Thween ,has a nice ring to it , and actually is a rather good description of people who , when confronted with one of natures apex predators , go hysterical with fear , and in a need for control , kill and cull nancy boys!

Dan K's picture
Dan K's picture
Dan K Tuesday, 2 Aug 2016 at 8:49am

theween/sharkman,
Just want to confirm you two are grown men?
Once upon a time two people could have differing opinions without going to town on each other on an internet forum. If one doesn't agree, who cares?
Unless someone has hard evidence, proof or an in depth extended knowledge on the topic what right do you have to rip into someone elses view?
Not even a right.....I don't know how you could even be bothered.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 2 Aug 2016 at 9:32am

So Dan, nice to see you have taken the time to ah, criticize Thween and myself , who have different views as a lot of people do here.
So you comment on us , how about commenting on the subject matter?

Dan K's picture
Dan K's picture
Dan K Tuesday, 2 Aug 2016 at 10:17am

But I have commented on this thread in the past, a number of times? It interests me and I like seeing other people's views and hearing their ideas....but I really couldn't be assed now if it means that someone, like youself, may disagree with me and then get all personal and off topic. I come here for the shared knowledge, not the personal banter

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Tuesday, 2 Aug 2016 at 10:25am

Dan , but what do you think of the shark cullers , or as some of us are called shark huggers?

Dan K's picture
Dan K's picture
Dan K Tuesday, 2 Aug 2016 at 11:16am

I'm anti-cull, not because I'm a shark hugger, I just don't see a benefit in killing sharks which are spotted in close to the shoreline when sharks are not on a leash. We've got a similar issue as Ballina now with juvenile white sharks down here (Forster).......DPI flew over everyday during the school holidays and every single day they confirmed a minimum of one white shark at Tuncurry Beach (via the Dorsal Shark FB page) with sometimes three sharks at any time. At least two of those days they sounded their horn and loud speaker to clear the water. We also had a listening station (destroyed in the June swells).
But back to my 'similar issue' comment above.......is it even an issue? So many people on the Dorsal FB page commenting "gee these sharks are really hanging around now"........hanging around more than the millions of years that they have already? One of the day's the DPI chopper cleared us from the water everybody stood on the shore thinking "now what"? And the chopper flew away and everyone just went back out......no attack. I can understand the chopper highlighting an imminent threat, but unless you're at the beach for the five minutes that the chopper is there then you know none the wiser and surf still anyway.....which leads me to question the $$$ spent on the aerial surveillance. Is the beach then closed until further notice, for an hour, the day, the week?
There's a real grey area as to what is expected next in my opinion.....but hey, they are just all my personal opinions

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Tuesday, 2 Aug 2016 at 11:40am

I think any reasonable person is asking the same questions DanK.

As far as the installation of the shark barrier is concerned it's been put on hold due to "heavy" swell.
Can't seen anything happening next week either.

They tried for 2 weeks in March under what was probably the smallest North Wall gets.
It's an incredibly high energy beach, especially during winter with it's exposure to S swells.
Their window of installation is supposed to finish mid-august. Can't see that happening.

Dan K's picture
Dan K's picture
Dan K Tuesday, 2 Aug 2016 at 12:29pm

Will be interesting to see the results when it has been deployed. So how exactly does the shark barrier work? Is it sea-floor to surface installation, and if so, how will it cope in heavy seas? I'm assuming to be effective it won't be located too far out off the sand banks of surf zones as generally most of the whites sighted are between shore and the breakers.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 3 Aug 2016 at 9:08am

Dan , the shark barriers sound good , but I wonder does that mean that where there are barriers there would be masses of surfers like the goldy , trying to surf inside the barrier?
It will be interesting in the next few mths to see if the DPI will dig up that decomposing whale on the beach ,as they have now a policy of removing whales from the beaches and not burying them . Which is great when you consider that the whales numbers have radically increased from 100's of whales migrating north , to now more than 20K, which means a lot more whales carcasses , and more GWS's.
So it looks like a lot more sharks in the future , but when you consider the averages ,chances are minute in getting bitten by a GWS.

Dan K's picture
Dan K's picture
Dan K Wednesday, 3 Aug 2016 at 9:29am

I suppose if you use the mindset of "swim between the flags" then it's a real possibility. People will feel comfortable knowing that the added protection is there, and sure it could get busy. It personally wouldn't make a difference to me, not because I'm some hero, but because Im comfortable making my own judgement call on when/where I surf and assessing the risk.
My main reason for this is purely based on the DPI aerial surveillance I mentioned above. I surf Tuncurry Beach all the time and have done for many years. The DPI flew over every day of the recent school holidays and spotted white(s) daily along that beach. Now the holidays are over, the DPI aren't spotting……….you'd have to be a little crazy in the head to think that just because a helicopter isn't there that the sharks aren't as well. You don't just go from having zero sightings before the holidays, to aerial sightings everyday, back to zero sightings at conclusion of holidays. For me thats enough evidence to suggest that if you put eyes in the sky all time, you're going to get a different outcome, and one that creates a negative hysteria.

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 3 Aug 2016 at 1:04pm

there are always sharks around , and that's what the aerial surveilence does , proves we are and have always surfed with sharks. It's not about being a hero, but understanding there has always been and will always be a risk surfing in the ocean from sharks , you can even get hit in the head by your own or someone elses board , or die getting to the surf in a car accident , so we all live lives with risk , and for those who want zero risk in life , could join a monastery , or??
I think the negative hysteria is a very valid point , and all those aerial DPI flights are there to give a false sense of security and that our Govt;s are doing something!

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Tuesday, 2 Aug 2016 at 12:50pm

how will it cope?

no one knows. They have to get it in first.

udo's picture
udo's picture
udo Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 9:34am

30/5 Catch and release Evans Head - 3.9 Mtr female GWS

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 9:39am

2.7m white tagged and released North Wall the day they pulled the nets.

Official #SharkReport: NSW - NORTHERN NSW - BALLINA (LIGHTHOUSE BEACH). 12:58, 30 May 17, 2.7m, Great White, Tag and Release

Also white cruising off Sharpes this morning.
Official #SharkReport: NSW - NORTHERN NSW - SHARPES BEACH RECEIVER ‒ BALLINA. 07:06, 31 May 17, White, Receiver Tag.

Surely it must be getting harder and harder to keep putting forth the theory that white sharks are a threatened species .

sharkman's picture
sharkman's picture
sharkman Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 12:39pm

ah threatened species , maybe surfers are?

freeride76's picture
freeride76's picture
freeride76 Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 9:43am

In short my belief is that because the whales were late it created less feeding opportunities for the white shark at a key time for them, therefore a small amount of hungry sharks have been getting desperate and peaked up to feed on the full moon. This has resulted in more negative shark encounters in the Ballina region.

The good news is I don’t believe this will last. Stay safe people. //NICK BRENNAN

I think it's safe to take this theory down the back paddock now and put it out of it's misery.

tonybarber's picture
tonybarber's picture
tonybarber Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 10:44am

Get the nets back in. If they happen to snag a whale then desnag.
Get data on the impact of the nets on the whales. One thing we do know, is that the nets are working on keeping the blokes in grey suits out.

kaiser's picture
kaiser's picture
kaiser Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 10:46am

Check this link (if you haven't already) - http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fishing/sharks/management/smart-drumlines

My layman's obs (FWIW):
1. Smart Drumlines seem to be measurably more effective in capturing Whites
2. There's a shitload more Whites getting around the surfzone (or just behind) than Tigers and Bulls (the two other most recognised dangerous sharks)
3.The Whites really love near shore areas in the Ballina to Lennox stretch
4. There's a hell of a lot of Whites out there. Arguably a population imbalance?
5. They're still hanging around long after the whales have left town

tootr's picture
tootr's picture
tootr Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 1:05pm

And from the satellite tagging a bunch are moving north from summering around eastern vic.