Shark attacks man in surf off Byron Bay
A man has been bitten on the leg by a shark near Byron Bay, on the New South Wales north coast.
The attack happened at a beach between Suffolk Park and Broken Head, just to the south of Cape Byron.
A witness to the attack, Geoffrey Knapp, said the victim was part of a group of surfers in the area.
There were dolphins around that morning as well, Mr Knapp said.
"Just to the north of me I saw the two surfers start to paddle very quickly towards the beach and I thought 'that's a bit strange, maybe they were spooked by the dolphins and they'd mistaken them for a shark,'" Mr Knapp said.
"My friend had waved at me and he also headed to the beach so I knew something was wrong."
"So all four of us headed to the beach."
Mr Knapp said they used the first aid kit from his car to attend to the victim's three puncture wounds on his thigh.
Emergency services also attended the scene, and the man went to Byron Bay hospital.
Sirens have been used to clear the water and the beach has been closed, but some people have reportedly ignored the warnings.
The surfer suffered puncture wounds in the attack (Instagram: Geoffrey Knapp)
Yesterday, hundreds of people gathered on the north coast to protest the planned installation of shark nets in the area.
Last month, 17-year-old Cooper Allen was bitten on the upper thigh while surfing at Lighthouse Beach at Ballina on the NSW north coast.
Cooper was helped back to shore by a friend he was surfing with and his injuries were not life threatening.
Mayor still opposes shark nets
The Byron Shire Mayor, Councillor Simon Richardson, said the New South Wales Government continued to ignore calls for funding shark safety measures in his shire.
He wants financial support for a number of measures the council has been taking to protect swimmers and surfers.
"The council recently paid for, itself, with no state government support, a shark-spotting program," Cr Richardson said.
"It was highly successful, we've asked again for support to trial beaches including Broken Head, we've asked for support for a year-and-a-half to use gyrocopters.
"So I think the community is getting a little bit frustrated that what independent research commissioned by the State Government has said — and that the Byron Council is doing — is being ignored."
He is standing firm on his position opposing shark nets, but will be guided by the community.
"I don't think [shark nets are] for Byron, but we can all wait and see if there's a huge community outcry for it," he said.
"I think it's important that we look to solve the problem rather than just emotionally respond to it."
Labor wants shark nets installed tomorrow
The Labor Party's NSW north coast spokesperson, Walt Secord, is in favour of shark nets and wants them installed immediately.
"I think they should be in as early as tomorrow," Mr Secord said.
"The State Government promised months and months ago, they held a shark summit a year ago, they said they were going to write to the Prime Minister about a month ago.
"It is time they stopped making excuses and got those nets up."
© Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
Comments
Another one! Bloody hell. Waves are pumping this morning too.
Hi Ben,
The NSW DPI is running an online survey until 6 November so people can have their say. Given that surfers are the main stakeholders at risk of unprovoked shark bite, it would be good if you could post the link on your site:
http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fishing/sharks/shark-management/faq
The survey link is near the bottom of the page.
Cheers,
Andrew
Another attack, lets get these damn nets in and protect people while alternatives are trialled elsewhere. Summers coming, surely the time to act is now before thousands of people begin summer holidays and enjoy them somewhere else!!
This is BS, get the nets, drumlines and pro fishermen involved now, how many attacks before the message is driven home. Stuff the greens they can take a hike on this issue as they offer nothing.
I respect the Greens and Sea Shepherd is the only group/charity I actually give $, but on this issue I agree - they have nothing to offer.
The 'you're in their element' argument is all very well when all the sharks around are small and well fed, but not when they are 8'+ and likely to kill a person. And when this is up and down the beaches on the East Coast where heaps of people love the sea it just becomes either don't go in, or accept you might get eaten.
Maybe paddle surfing Seal Rocks or body boarding Neptune Islands - you deserve what you get, but a before school wave at Suffolk Park ....
.
Time for the dumb drum line trial.
To those that organised the anti-net rent-a-crowd, need to keep out of this one. Get the nets in asap. Tagging maybe a suitable long term process to get more information. But information gathering is not what is needed now.
There goes the dolphin theory.
You can't talk sense with the anti-net crowd.
Get the nets in first and save lives. Then start studying and looking at other solutions.
It really is an interesting situation that the far North Coast is faced with at the moment, but fucking with peoples lives whilst guessing at reasoning is not the solution.
Yellow surfboard.
Well spotted!
"What can be done to prevent the next encounter: stripes in, yummy yellow out"
https://www.swellnet.com/news/surfpolitik/2015/07/20/what-can-be-done-pr...
What we can do
"In WA's south-west and other places where frequent attacks have happened, surfers have taken to...
#1.colouring the bottom of their boards black and white. The rationale is similar to
#2.SAMS wetsuit technology: the contrasting colours aren't registered well by sharks"Bens link above ....July 2015
#3Magnetic shark repellents: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_shark_repellent
#4.Electropositive shark repellent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electropositive_shark_repellent
#5.Ride a quality modern mal (esp. when the whales are passing through)
#6Read the facts eg. Choice (to go into the ocean); https://www.choice.com.au/health-and-body/diet-and-fitness/surfing-and-s...
The World Wildlife Fund research "found that the world marine vertebrate population declined by 49 percent between 1970 and 2012. ... Populations of some commercial fish stocks, such as a group including tuna, mackerel and bonito, had fallen by almost 75 percent, according to the study."http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/cetaceans/threats/fis...
#7. Encourage fishermen (near coastal communities); not to burley &
#8.trawler boats to stop throwing out 'bycatch' trail back to port;
#9. stop burying whales on beaches (Fisheries can get funding to take them out to the shelf).
Thanks for the great surf reports and comments.
bbbird
not the Phil myers channel bottom that Freeride picked up the other day??
Exactly what I was thinking. I hope whoever copped the bite is going alright, but yeah it's all a bit closer, or more trippy maybe, if it's one of the swellnet crew.
Don't think so
Pretty sure his is a 5 plugger
No, I've just waxed it up ready for it's maiden voyage. waves look really fun.
Looks like another juvey white in the surf zone having a crack.
I wasn't too far away from the guy but didn't see anything but the four guys on the beach waving everyone else in. The dolphins did act a bit agitated about 5 minutes beforehand. The guy helping with first aid was wearing a modem shark leash and a striped radiator wetsuit. He Took control of the situation pretty quickly but the guy who got bitten was very calm considering the possible consequences. I have noticed heaps of guys up here with black stripes on their boards too. First surf on family holiday today. I think I'll be looking for a crowd next time I go out. Then back to safer waters in Vicco
Byron beaches closed for 24hrs but a couple of tow surfers still having a go on the same beach as the attack.
In the last couple of attacks the surfers have gotten away with “minor” physical trauma and the shark has bitten around the side fin each time (this time the side bite on a single), maybe the pain to the shark of the side fin digging into the bottom of their mouths has prevented a full strength bite? I’m no expert, just an observation, and I don’t know how this could help people in the future either? Mind you I was in New Zealand 24 years ago and got to see a medium shark have a go at the motor on a clubby rubber ducky (had a guard in place), so maybe they have no pain sensors in their mouths?
Just for the record.
At the time of attack.
Full sunshine, light W to WSW winds, barometer steady on 1019 HPa.
Low tide 9.50 am.
Low solunar fish activity. First day after first quarter Moon Phase and hence neap tides with low tidal coefficients.
No baitballs sighted between Byron and Ballina.
Very good water visibility.
Light showers over the weekend with 5-10mm of rain over the two days. No visible rain runoff. No lagoons open to the ocean.
Clarkes beach VR4G listening station set off by tagged white shark on Sat night.
Sharpes receiver set off by tagged white on Sun.
When does it become acceptable for a small coastal holiday town to display the supposedly irrational fear that was displayed in the small coastal holiday town in the jaws movie?
Looking at the record above and records that time would be about now
lol
Poor fella.
These attacks are bringing out the worst in surfers/people (or maybe just bringing out the 'worst' people).
There seems to be quite a vocal lynch mob on this site (and a number of other sites/locations)....nets, culling, drums etc.
Apparently, it seems the notion that we should not try to control the natural ocean environment for the sake of recreation is obscene. It appears people believe that not only is human life more worthy than animal life, but human enjoyment is also more worthy. I can't shake this one - the fact, as a civilised society, we're advocates for harming and killing innocent animals to protect our freedom of ENJOYMENT only.
What's also classic is the concerns some forum users are showing for tourism/business/families etc....I mean, no one wishes misfortune on anyone, but the amount of times I've seen surfers complain about their local being overrun by tourist, or clubbies or whatever....or how 'insert iconic surf break' used to be better in the old days before business/population move in - it just shows how arrogant and misguided the surfing population really is.
I respect your views, Stok, but you should try to steer clear of insults and addressing 'surfers' as a single entity if you want to have an actual discussion and not merely be inflammatory.
Do you believe human life is more worthy than animal life? It's unclear from your post.
I wholeheartedly believe that human life is more worthy than animal life on the basis of utility. Humans simply have a far broader and richer range of experience, thought, emotion, interaction, communal bonding, etc than any animal. A human's existence is deeper. A human is capable of reaching out to and affecting many more other humans than any animal is.
Is human enjoyment of more value than animal life? This is a pretty difficult argument for the negative case to prosecute without being hypocritical. Unless you're a vegan and refuse to enjoy any non-essential products or services which in any way negatively impact any animal lives, then how can you say it's not? You'd have to rigidly adhere to a very uncommon way of life in order for this kind of moral posturing to make any sense.
I'm sure you don;t mean to be a sanctimonious, hypocritical, insensitive arsehole Stok.
http://www.northernstar.com.au/news/shark-victims-horror-injuries-reveal...
No, not at all. I really do feel sorry for the recent attacks.
I also feel sorry to see the demands for extreme action - I just wanted to put forward my views.
So what is your view Stok?
Do nothing and accept the current rates of attack?
I'd be thinking put choppers in the air doing laps of the coast to spot sharks, coupled with increase tagging (along with smarter GPS alerts) would be a good start.
But, more so, I'm not 100% a believer that shark numbers have increased, and the actual rate of shark attacks per swimmer/surfer has increased. i.e. is the rate of attacks going up at a greater rate than the growth rate of swimmers/surfers?
I firmly believe the amount of swimmers/surfers have increased, and probably the amount of swimmers/surfers at anytime in the water has also increased. I'd also say there's more fisho's out in the water too.
Finally, I'd say that all forms of media are ready to pounce as soon as the word 'shark' is mentioned, and the general public knows this. Who's to say 50 years ago the amount of encounters per surfer/swimmer/fisho was the same as it is now, but because of the way news operated back then people just told their mates only and that was that. These days the media can and will find out, through you or your mates, and it will likely go viral. This obviously is extremely powerful and can quite quickly create a sense that shark attacks are getting out of control.
I'm not saying the above is definitely the case - but I believe we need to know for sure before we decide on actions.
Stok - I agree :) but maybe I'm from Vic and it isn't an issue, so that is effecting my judgement.
I do wonder why 'surfers' are all of a sudden wanting nets, lines etc. goes against the natural surfing thing ?
So, in other words, just the standard ill-informed emotional reaction from urban people outside the area who can't be bothered doing their own research.
Here's a clue though, Chief Shark Scientist for the DPI Dr Vic Pedemoors has called the current spate of attacks, "Unprecedented".
You do realise we've had almost constant chopper surveillance since July last year?
Not ill informed - we are all urban - yes from outside the area. One out of Three aint bad :)
Unprecedented could also be used to describe the growth in population of the areas, or the growth in surfer/swimmer numbers, or the spike in clickbait style media coverage of shark encounters/attacks. Sorry if I missed it, but It doesn't necessarily mean that the rate of shark attacks are increasing because there are more sharks, does it? It just means that the current spate is, well, unprecedented.
And no I didn't know about the chopper.
So have you heard about the tagging program?
And the 60 or so whites they managed to tag within 5 miles of Ballina?
Surfer numbers are way down due to the attacks and white numbers are way up.
Now what do you think is causing the attacks?
More people in the water or the fact that there are shiteloads of whites in the area?
It's hard to be polite here because we've been through this so many times before and the ignorant and ill-informed voices from outside the area keep throwing their two cents in. Meanwhile, the attacks keep piling up.
You think surfers calling for proven shark mitigation strategies to be implemented is the "worst" thing.
I think urban vegan/animal rights activists who can't muster basic human empathy is twice as bad.
But at the least educate yourself about what is really happening here. Surveillance and tagging programs have shown an abundance of juvenile/sub-adult white sharks. Estimates by local boardbuilders are that surfer numbers are down by 70% and that fits in with my own observations.
So, less people in the water and more attacks.
Please lets take the growth in population = growth in attacks theory down the back paddock and put a bullet between it's eyes.
Well, what is really happening there FR? Why are there more sharks there, and for how long is this event going to occur?
Is this the first time in history that increased shark numbers have been noted in certain area?
Is it better for people to just surf/swim less while this is occurring, or to try to shape the environment to suit our recreational desires (and set a precedent for how this should be dealt with in the future)?
Disappointing to see your attitude towards people of differing views to yours, cityfolk, animal activists, vegans. We all have empathy and compassion mate.
I grew up surfing around South Oz...and for me it always felt sharky. I never would surf solo and would always feel some areas/reefs as sketchy no matter the time of day or crowd. I have a healthy respect for sharky spots, and for me that's what they'll always be, sharky spots. But perhaps these spots change over time, as is the case for your stretch of coast?
FR has it anything to do with the warmer than usual water temp? I thought I read somewhere that it has been warmer than usual up there as it has been off the coast of Indo. There has to be a reason why the numbers have risen. Are they chasing schools of something which is in big numbers because of something?
Well I'm one surfer who's not in the water on this stretch of coast Stok.
This is outta control. As others have commented, these attacks are happening very close to shore, and in fairly shallow water and it may not be a surfer next time - it easily could be a swimmer in a flagged Ballina/Byron beach this summer. I'll tell ya, if a kid gets taken in a flagged area, all hell is going to break loose. Coastal civil war? Maybe? and I know whose gonna win, and it won't be the Greenies and animal rights groups.
We need at least a temporary solution because the trend line here is alarmingly clear, and it's unprecedented. No action is not an option. Feeling sorry too is OK, but it ain't an answer or solution.
btw I'm not swimming on this stretch of coast either.
Which one of the shark lovers is happy to see their child bitten in half ? Oh so they wont be going in the ocean ! Only the Gold Coast and Sydney beaches so they will be safe. Well you know what i have lived in Byron for over 30 years, got kids, and grand kids, and want my kids to be able to enjoy their home beaches and ocean. Everyone deserves to be protected just like Sydney beaches and Queensland beaches, otherwise Byron Council and Ballina start putting the signs up at every beach access, DO NOT ENTER WATER-HEAVY FINES. We want nets and drumlines and we want them asap NOW ! We are a major tourist destination in Australia and attacks will keep happening. Will the next one be a child who has fallen in love with the thrill of catching a wave ? And he/she deserves to die for that ? Enough of the crap the greens and tree hugging squirells have been dishing out with their bullshit stats and university professor experts. This is about protecting human lives you idiots.
Canetoad - really? Bullshit stats and university professor experts? Forget them, let's just act on a whim because you've been there for 30 years.
So everyone deserves to be protected just like Sydney and Queensland...what about West coast of South Oz, or SW WA? Do they deserve to be protected too? Should be put nets up around Elliston?
Also, no one's going to be getting fined for entering the water mate, that's just crazy. Unless, if they do put nets up, then maybe if you decided to surf outside of the nets, you'd be doing so at you own risk, and could risk a fine?
Hey Stok,
Your words are insulting to the victims and their families. Believe it or not we are a tight surfing community here and we have had enough of outsiders telling us how it is. You don't surf here, you probably haven't got kids that surf either and i would go as far as saying you have never attended an attack. Obviously you are not a business owner that relies on tourists to pay the mortgage and feed the kids either.
Choppers have a 20% success rate, start at 9am and finish about 5pm. Outcome = Ineffective
Drones have a lower success rate and they can't fly in high winds. Outcome = ineffective
Shark spotters, we have one hill thats Lennox. Outcome = ineffective
Smart drum lines are burley they bring more in. Outcome = awesome if your a scientist ineffective for protection.
4G Listening Buoys, Outcome = awesome if your a scientist ineffective for protection.
Shark Shield, waste of money our kids won't use them continual electric shocks, they don't stop charging Great Whites and its argued that they actually attract Sharks as they omit electric fields. = ineffective
I suggest you attend some forums and speak to the DPI directly. They have protected an apex predator in 1995 and continued with commercial fishing. There has been hardly any monitoring program and they can't tell us if there is an imbalance in the overall marine ecology on the East Coast. I call this irresponsible and bordering incompetent.
All we are asking is nets for a short term until we can understand what is happening. We have an obligation to protect our children and community and economy from dying. We also have a right to expect the same protection other towns have in NSW.
If you feel so passionate about the marine life write or protest against the NSW State government to take their nets down, i have.
I guarantee you haven't.
Most of the victims we know and we miss Tadashi's smiling face in the line up, so be nice and show some empathy about the macro situation that our town has been experiencing for the last 3 years.
Dave - I was not intending to insult, and I apologise if it was taken that way. A lot of your assumptions about me are right (although I am a business owner, relying on tourists and locals alike - not in NSW though).
I can agree with most points you raise entirely, but I think that our efforts to control the environment inevitably create further issues down the track. I can't find it justifiable to do this for the sake of recreation and beach related tourism only.
Hi stok, I saw you were interested in numbers. The CSIRO scientists are reporting and increase of east coast white pointer population from 700 in 2012 to 6000 in 2016. That is a 800% increase in 4 years. They will continue to increase in rapid numbers as they are now a larger population and they are protected. We continue to commercial fish everything else in the ocean whilst breeding them, 2 questions 1) at what number are they no longer "endangered" 2) what kind of balance are we creating for marine life? The final statement, why have we created such a large risk for our children. So you know- today there were three incidents - attack at broken, attack at lennox point (nocked off board and dragged down by a 3m white), and surfers circled by a 4m white at flat rock.. all in one day.
Geeze everyone must be on High Alert? Must not be much fun surfing around Byron / Lennox /Ballina stretch . Plenty of incidents.
Stay safe up there .
nets or no nets, if you have yellow bottom board. sell it! ... ask fanning
Stok, it seems that have not understood the whole issue and trials and tribulations of the shark issue around Ballina. The science discussion has been had and noted. And if you did happen to note what the head advisor did propose then again you have ignored the obvious. Whether this issue is similar to WA is not the point.
Anyway, finally it has been advised that nets are not off the agenda and that is what is being implemented.
Should of been a cull a few years ago..pretty fucken simple hand out 30tags get them filled see what happens..but hey dont let common sense and logic get in the way of your new eco friendly bamboo lifestyle
A degree of culpability on the NSW DPI can be considered here , the ability to tag 16 (?) or more GW's also meant the ability to cull them quickly, effectively and very selectively ,without drum lines , nets (bullshit l rekon!) , eco barriers !!!!! ha ha ha too funny that. The killing of these few GW,s would not of stopped the earlier attacks , (sorry to all those involved )but l bet 16 less localized top line predators would have resulted in at least one or more less incidents and a good chance of one less in the future. Sorry green alliance but you fukers have no idea , the shark monitoring buoy here between Lovers and the Clarence river wall is turning out to be a great place for us commercial fishers to catch our live bait , and the things that swim around there make us laugh they are not being monitored and 200 meters from the surf club flags, but no one is being whacked here so no action needs to be taken , but the situation that has developed for people(yes that's the word PEOPLE!) up north something has to be done, good luck to all .
Apparently one of the old local stalwarts was bumped and then had a shark tangled in his leggie this afternoon.
AndyM , where at ?
the point
Kept the crowd down but I wasn't game to piss.
Close call with 4m beast at flatrock today also.
You personally Udo?
These discussions are quickly becoming a if you aren't with us your against us and are happy to see little kids die type of shit.
People are allowed to have opposing views believe it all not and green groups are always a great leveller against certain interest groups whether its developers, 4 wheel drive users in the bush or even surfers now focused on one thing and their supposed right to partake in activities.
People need to accept the risk in going surfing with the large amount of Sharks supposedly close to shore accept it if you choose to get in the water instead of blaming others for the actions of a natural predator.
WJ, I think "supposedly' has left the building.
Agreed Andy poor choice of word.
NSWDPI shark biologist has confirmed shark which attacked a 36yr old man at Broken Head today, as a white shark measuring approx 2.8m
How many people are surfing with stripes on their boards or trying the wetsuits from WA?
So do the sharks have to accept that if they choose to continue attacking people then they will be destroyed ?
Natural predators need to be aware that their prey will naturally defend itself.
The pointers bite once then hang back to avoid risk of injury.
Might be time they learned one bite is one too many
Most preys protection against a predator is to avoid confrontation, camouflage or even to make itself undesirable towards predators via scent or taste.
Maybe I should piss out in the water anyway but only after eating asparagus?
Scented wetsuits could help.
Or develop spines, aggression, spikes, horns, hoofs to kick etc etc etc.
Not an animal that has ever existed that has not sought to protect itself against predation, not a human culture on earth since early Hominids in the Paleolithic period learnt to co-operate and become hunter instead of prey , that has allowed itself to be preyed upon.
Apparently in our brave new urban world where very much the vast majority of people live in cities cocooned from nature , if shark numbers increase we are merely expected to meekly accept it.
That seems curiously and queerly anti-human and against everything nature shows us, especially when there are methods available to reduce the risk.
The big difference is necessary defence for survival. Whats an acceptable measure of defence that doesn't impact adversely on the environment? Fence of a few selected breaks?
The thing is the urban world isn't new and the sprawl is spreading to coastal areas. Believe it or not Ballina and Byron are hardly remote areas rarely visited by city dwellers. City dwellers who are not naive to nature and are able to form opinions without having to identify themselves as a local upstart who's opinion and those who agree are the only opinions that count. For the record I don't live in a city and never have.
Human life should take precedence over an animal but only when theres an imminent threat. The threat of Shark attack isn't imminent and it's impossible to tell when it is until it's too late. We still are aware theres a risk and it is definitely heightened in Nth NSW.
For the record, I want to hear your opinion and others.
There's just so much misinformation and ignorance being perpetrated by people mostly who have zero actual exposure to what is happening and little motivation to properly find out. And it's those people who"s opinion adds to the white noise.
You think the threat of shark attack isn't imminent? You don't think three attacks in as many weeks, numerous incidents and encounters classifies as an imminent threat?
At what point would it be an imminent threat? An attack every day?
No I don't Free, how many people surf on that coastline every day?
Theres an increased possibility but hardly an imminent threat. If the threat was imminent people shouldn't be surfing.
As for Mitigation measures for sharks nets are one I feel is more sensible than a cull so long as the impact on the marine environment isn't catastrophic.
Wharfejunkie, you should Google "DPI shark net annual report" and read about what they do to minimise the bycatch. The nets that have been in place in NSW and Queensland for 79 years and 50 years respectively have not had an adverse effect on the environment. Shark numbers are increasing. The species survival is not threatened by shark nets.
Your suggestion about defending only against imminent attacks is a classic Catch-22.
There a lot of "you must accept the risks if you go into the ocean" comments being made.
And, while I agree with them to a certain extent, there is absolutely nothing wrong with minimising those risks.
When we drive, we drive within rules and speed limits (most do anyway) and drive cars with crumple zones and airbags to improve our chances of not having accidents and survivng them if we do.
In Croc prone areas there are catch and move programs (well in Darwin there is anyway) and I think occasional culls (could be wrong on that?)
At the moment the Northern Rivers area of NSW needs some risk mitigation strategies and surely nets should be a part of that until other methods are proven to work.
Yes, some marine life will unfortunately die but not in big numbers and surely humans are more important even if we are "just" surfing.
Interesting that the numbers supporting action now outweigh shark-huggers on this website. It was only 12 mths ago that sharkboy, mikehunt and others were 'the experts' on this topic, abusing and deriding people who place a premium on the value of human life. Happily such wankers are now nowhere to be seen.
Thats exactly right @theween..when w.a put drum lines out all the greeny or east coasters kicked up a stink....lots of quotes saying ..'well its their backyard..' but now they realise their backyard is also our backyard..nice of them to hang shit but now they are the ones getting munched and considering a cull..lets face it the cull fuckn works..not funny colored wetsuits, surfboards , shark shields..not even metal cages ....your gov. Could clear this up within 3-6months easy..but they wont have the balls
as a WAfugee over east I was stunned at the 'save the shark' rallies - but they just didn't have that same interaction and attack experience at that time. Considered organising a 'Save the Pink Snapper' rally of my own, sponsored by Hypocrisy...
Some of the paddles over here too, I just wouldn't do in WA.
Freeride ………..who makes up the 'mob' that are protesting against the nets? Seems really unfounded. Shouldn't they focus their energy towards commercial fishing and their by-catch?
I live on the Tweed Coast and the shock waves are felt up here, everyone is talking about the situation, I can't imagine what it must be like in Ballina.
I used to think the premise of more people = more encounters, and this may be a very minor part of the whole picture but as FR has mentioned surfers between byron-ballina are really lower at present………..
Take a place like D-Bah: Not netted, next to a dirty great river, plenty of trawlers in and out every morning (just like Nth Wall) and not usually less than 100 people out most mornings. You'd think that would be a prime set up for shark encounters…….but it isn't
As mentioned before its 'unprecedented' ………..maybe we'll never know why its happening. I feel for you lot around Ballina. Stay safe, look out for each other.
nets and drumlines at Snapper, just around the corner from D-Bah.
that may be enough mitigation to make D-bah much safer than N. Wall.
yeah maybe…….they're a good 500+m or so away, with D-bah facing diff direction and no nets south until newcastle. You might be right though, sharks might just stay away from area.
Nets, drum lines, a cull. All will do something of course. Whether it's a meaningful something is not known (except maybe a total extinction but that ain't gonna happen).
So the most important question for everyone, not just the ballina locals but all of us, is why. Why ballina this year? Why not the tweed? Why not yamba and angers? Why not noosa? Everyone's got their own view and we've seen em all written here. But really we have no concrete idea. So while nets etc might help this particular situation right now (and something like that obviously needs to be done), not knowing what is causing this means we're flying blind really and know nothing relevant for the next time something like this flairs again.
So yeah, push hard for nets etc in ballina but we (as in surfers all over oz) should be pushing hard for more research so we can figure out what is causing this (or at least what is most likely causing it) so we can make better plans for as many places and times as possible. I know that's the barrow I push but shit, if we don't know what is happening or why this is happening we can't reduce the risk with any confidence.
I guess I'm making a political point here, which I usually try to avoid, but man, hassle your pollies to fund research (to run a range of projects drawing on the expertise of many (surfers, fishers, biologists etc) as well as funding ongoing data collection) because that's the only way we can figure this out with any confidence for the long term. And this matters to all of us.
One of the projects that could make a difference is interviews of ocean users, both data point kind of stuff and their recollections of change, or even better if they keep journals or logs of catches, locations over time.
For the data points, a record of where fished/dived, description of what was seen, season, tide, time etc. There was a great study done on the Barrier reef that used this kind of info since 1982 (iirc) that determined that species distribution and times of year was changing.
For the recollections, interviews to gain anecdotal evidence, such as the diver/fisho on this forum once who mentioned that one of his spots was now infested with juvenile GWS where beforehand they were rare.
This kind of work could employ history and social sciences grads (something has to do it). Fishos might be reluctant to tell me stuff, but if the interviewer was 23, attractive, female... lol
Maybe we should pursue the train of thought the Japanese employ with their whale research.
How is it that older surfers with upwards of 35 years experience can almost universally answer this question the same? and that is, how many times have you been in the water surfing and you've become aware that there's a shark 'in the vicinity' of the break or further out in the bay? For me, it's been no more than about 6 times, up until the last few years when shark activity has simply exploded on the north coast of NSW, with numerous fatalities and serious injury, along with shark sightings in close proximity to the beach becoming a weekly (daily?) occurrence in the Ballina/Byron area.
So what's going on? Personally, I can't explain that, but there's supposed to be paid government employees and other 'advisers/experts/academics' who are supposed to know, and be keeping politicians duly in front of the game here, and the pollies are supposed to be taking appropriate measures to enable the community to live with reasonable safety. This is no different to all other facets of modern life, like driving on the roads etc.
Until we find out answers to these questions, the public are playing russian roulette by going for a surf or taking a dip in the water. That's why there has to at least have some netting in place in the short-term to provide more safety than what currently exists. I know it's not the full answer, and it has it's downsides, but I suspect there's a tsunami of litigation waiting for lawmakers and others (DPI?) for being incompetent, negligent and failing in their duty of care to the community who look to them to lead, manage and decide on such matters.
I made the point earlier, if the next fatality is a swimmer(s) in the flags, all hell is gonna break loose. Watch the broader community go berserk. The fallout will be far-reaching, and will be massive.
Freddieffer, if the govt doesn't fund the research those academics etc can't do the work to figure out what is happening, unless they are expected to work for free. And in the past decade, funding for this kind of work (across the unis, csiro and state govt departments like dpi) has crashed. Unless there's potential for some research to make some coin there's been no appetite to fund research.
Specifically there's been little money for public good research (in my field, which isn't marine, if I can't show a major direct economic benefit from my work I might as well not apply). It's clear the tourism economy of ballina will benefit from a solution here but that pales in the economic benefit of some kind of mining research that could net billions.
I'll get off my soap box now, sorry.
Agreed Benski, but the waste of millions (or is that billions) of research dollars on trendy, PC issues or causes that often are the 'pet' subjects (sorry 'bout that pun) of the powers that be; or as you say, only get up if they have a provable (as in large) dollar generation as a research outcome. The public would be horrified at what does/doesn't get the research nod that is taxpayers money.
I know I'm on my soapbox, but the ineptitude and smokescreen that perpetually masks this really pisses me off (as a profession) when there are many genuine issues that need new scientific knowledge to set the foundation stones for the hard decisions that have to be made, as distinct from repeatedly making decisions not based on solid scientific fact and historically just result in more pillage and plunder by the human hand.
There was another attack today out lennox point, the same thing that happend to Mick fanning. There was also a group of 5 surfers circled by a 4m white at flat rock, today. The CSIRO scientist have said the east coast white pointer population has increased from 700 to 6000 in 4 years - that's 800% in 4 years. They will continue to grow expentually as they are protected. Meanwhile we commercial fish and pollute the ocean killing their food source. It's it going to get progressively worse, what kind of balance are we creating in the ocean? What risk have we created for our children? At what point are they no longer classified as endangered?
Wow, do you have a link for the 700 to 6000 in 4 years?
Velocity - yep, easiest way to find the stats is to listen to Vic Peddemors "the head of the shark research section of the NSW department of primary fisheries" (the head of shark research in NSW, he works with the CSIRO). Speak on nick carroll's shark discussion on coastal watch. He states "CSIRO calculated 700 whites in 2012 and the research about to be released is around 6000 for 2016". it is a good talk - he is the head shark scientist in NSW.
Thanks I will look for the research about to be released. If 6000 is the number, then it's a very important report, with significant implications.
That's 71% per annum.
They got that right???
Have to agree there must be a point where they can be taken off the endangered list. TIgers are probably a lot rarer.
Slightly off topic tootr, when Europeans first came to Australia, kanguru were very rare. A combination of firestick farming creating wide open hunting areas, and high hunting pressure, made them so. Today we have the result of the removal of large hunting pressure. Same for crocs, if we are to compare with post-European croc hunting, and preservation.
In certain areas in QLD, "story areas" existed, where people were not allowed to go, or not allowed to hunt certain animals. Usually at the top of a mountain/mountain range. This allowed the animal to replenish.
Getting back to sharks, it would be reasonable to hypothesise that if one species (Tigers or Whites) is protected, over time the distribution in numbers between the two would change. And thus the relative number of each of the species is chosen by man, through hunting pressure or a lack thereof.
We should get Kent Stannard onto this as he tags them for a living.
Benski I take your point and agree with it in the general sense but in this particular case it's my understanding that white shark research has expanded greatly in the last 20 years, and here in the last 12 months there is an enormous and ongoing research effort led by the tagging program.
Unlike others I see this as a sign of a healthy ecosystem: you simply can't sustain this population of predators without abundant food sources. It's not biologically possible.
2 factors on their own are quite compelling pieces of evidence and that is the massive reduction in the inshore commercial fishing effort and the establishment of marine parks.
I and others would love to know what these sharks are sustaining themselves on. The data is very, very clear that these are juvenile/sub-adult sharks and the evidence is strong that these sharks are moving from teleost (fish) to mammalian prey. The only inshore mammalian prey that exists in abundance is dolphins. Dolphins spend a lot of time in the surf zone and if these whites are developing a search image to hunt dolphins then that would explain why these sharks are becoming so fond of hitting surfers. Dolphins also have to spend time at the surface breathing air.....and we are roughly the same size as a dolphin. A white shark cruising the surf zone, as surveillance and tagging has shown they do, presented with a surfer at the surface then has a compelling biological reason to go in for a closer look and perhaps make an investigative bite or bumping.
Unlike, say, the juvenile white shark populations of Stockton beach.....who might still be fixated on fish eating and hence leave surfers alone.
As a matter of correlation to that theory there are large semi-permanent pods of dolphins at North Wall and Sharpes/Flat Rock. If sharks were seeking out dolphin prey that would explain why those 2 spots seem particularly prone to attack.
I would like to see some stomach content analysis of these whites to see what it is they are eating. That would almost certainly begin to answer the question "why here?".
Glad to hear they're doing more than just tagging and monitoring, I didn't realise they were doing more already. I agree gut contents would be great. So would fatty acid and stable isotope analyses of their tissues. Hopefully they're taking fin clips etc.
But I don't see how the evidence is strong that these animals are moving to feeding on dolphins in any unusual way. I know they're in proximity, and it's probably a dietary source, but without analysing their guts we can't say for sure at all. Unless dolphins have been seen being taken like in Newcastle a couple of years back. The diet study I found a few weeks ago had all ages of shark (up to 4m) in all parts of oz (including the east coast) eating all types of food (mammal, teleost and elasmobranch) with no specialisation. I guess I'm quibbling to say for sure they're probably eating dolphins but maybe not as exclusively as you suggest and defo open em up to see.
No offence benski, but we seem to be paralysed by the scientific method. What you are proposing won't come to fruition for another twenty or thirty years. Are we supposed to wait around for convincing empirical evidence - categorising what is bloody obvious to non scientists - as anomalies, waiting for some pattern to emerge?
I don't know how scientific or studious Tobias above is, but his numbers sure seem more convincing than the 'scientists' last week on RN saying shark numbers have not increased over recent times. Both are quoting 'science' but the stories don't add up. Clearly some numbers are more scientific than others, and clearly, despite supposed scientific objectivity, people have different stories to tell.
I'm not one of those anti science nut jobs, but conflicting stories and agendas just feeds into this disillusionment with institutions we seem to be experiencing at the moment across the board within western countries. Maybe the 'scientific method' has run it's course, has grown out of it's usefulness, and has become a self-serving self preserving entity like many other institutions, both government and private, geez look at FIFA or IOC etc,, can anyone believe the perspectives of theses bodies anymore? Same for the IPA, and whatever institution the Labor party manufactured for itself. Science seems to be heading down the same path.
Whooaah!, now I'm on the soapbox. But back on topc, science and it's method is seriously lacking in explaining intelligence and success, but that doesn't stop us having a go at designing an education system. We get a totally fraught one, and a totally politicised one, but we don't put the whole school system thing on hold, waiting for conclusive science to design the system. I agree there seems to have been a lot of money stripped from science of late, but your lack of funding argument seems thin considering some of the ridiculous phd's that do get funding. Maybe give some money to that tweed fishing old timer guy in the other thread, he seems more observant, more productive, well he has more knowledge anyway, and I'll take his word over some bright young upstart any day (mainly because experience trumps theory any day, and scientists have been conditioned to think a certain way).
Yep we need more research, but if we listen to the boffins in any given field, they will all tell you the same thing, every time... more research, more funding is needed, frankly it all just comes across as a self serving money grab. The modern system is addicted to, and unduly influenced by, research. We don't have answers to every question, but some questions need interim solutions, that's the nature of the world.
Give the fishos the cash... until the scientists sort their shit out
No offense taken mate but I think you're not clear on what can be done. We could figure out what they're eating in a matter of months. We could potentially figure out where they've come from in the same time (tagging tells us where they're going not where they've been). A fair few decent surveys and we could get sufficient samples to estimate population size within 1-2 years.
And I know it's an easy hit to say, they always ask for more money for more research. But surely you understand that part of the scientific method is identifying what we don't know as much as what we do. It only looks bad if you fail to read what they tell you they do know. And from my experience in these forums (climate change and int he Mike Baird nets forum) very few here have read what the scientists do know. I say that respectfully, because reading science papers is dull and sometimes hard to find, but the information is out often there but untapped in preference for people having a whinge and putting forth their own ideas.
And also, I did say several times we have to do something like nets and drum lines now (no matter how effective or ineffective they might be) but I recognise that knowing more will help find better solutions. But of course we have to act with whatever knowledge we have. I didn't argue otherwise.
Haha, I second that motion sypkan. I am an academic of a university, and I am appalled at the levels of bullshit, spin, lies and deception that makes up a helleva lot of the circus I'm unfortunately immersed in. The energy and money expended to make certain (ladder-climbing) people or their causes look good or are blatantly embellished never ceases to amaze me; and make me sick.
Cynical I know, and sure there are some good guys in there, but the model is deeply flawed and incredibly corrupted.
I'll get off my soapbox now.
(Hope my VC doesn't tune in to Swellnet!)
Hey Benski definitely not saying they are preying on dolphins exclusively....just that as a food source and search image that would explain the anomaly between the Port Stephens/Stockton juvenile whites not attacking people and the Ballina juvenile/sub-adult whites propensity to attack surfers.
Also pers comm from Dr Vic Pedemmors of whites preying on local dolphins, as well as the helicopter pilot observing same.
Gotcha.
Sorry benski , I started with you but moved on, I know you didn't argue otherwise.
But some scientific type people seemed to argue that whales killing sharks at Neptune island didn't lead to the sharks disappearing. And now many are saying shark nets do nothing. For the casual observer it seems patently obvious that if you kill some sharks in a certain area it seems to reduce the greater numbers in that area. Whether that's by cull or nets, killing a small number seems to make a larger number move on. But this is unpalatable to the hiippyocritical idealist types in the area.
Someone suggested dragging carcasses from the goldy to send a bit of a signal. Seems like a bloody good idea, one worth testing, scientifically and stuff, but probably will never happen because.... well it's not real clear why not....dare I say possibly because our narrative has to be too PC, or the scientists too professional?
There was another story about the possibility of people already taking matters into their own hands on SA west coast. Did it work? Who knows, maybe, maybe not, something seems to have changed, probably will never will know though, because it seems we all live in parallel universes now, with very different ideals and rules only ever interacting on the internet. This is what is frustrating.
Where's the rogue scientists of yesteryear who didn't need public funding? Where's the common sense of funding fishos who are already experienced and out there? Shit don't happen anymore because the system is debilitating. This is what people get frustrated with.
Not having a go at you, just the system, which seems to be losing all functionality
Was yesterdays bump and tangle at Lennox on Asher Pacey ?
For those that are in the Ballina region, you can help by attending a meeting on Thursday (27th oct) at the Ballina Council. A motion will be put forward by Councillor Sharon cadwallader to get nets in. She needs your support. There is a problem of support to get some action in. It seems most on this web site agree 'let's get some nets'. You may notice the mayor is against nets and also there needs to be more Councillors to support this idea. The DPI want surfers to just take the punt or get a shark repellent devices. In other words, they don't give a diddly squat about surfers. God help if a bather gets chomped.
Hopefully a targeted cull via drumlines is on the table?
Before you write poor old scientists off entirely (I'm one) the scientific method has merit and will hopefully assist in addressing this issue in the future. I deal will over-abundant kangaroo populations and there are situations where a cull is the only management option, and is considered in the best interest of animal welfare (that should raise a few eyebrows), to reduce a population to 'sustainable' levels. However, this is only ever considered as one of several management options. So if considering a cull of whites, how many? You need data to understand what you are dealing with. Government agencies deal with managing overabundant native or pest animal populations all over the country (rabbits, crocs, deer and even koalas). Are whites overabundant in the Ballina area? It would appear so, however, the NSW gov needs to pull their finger out, adequately survey the area, and seriously consider culling as a management option.
Totally agree hockey pokey, but there are issues like freddieffer points out
We are all influenced by our environments, social circles, and the hand that feeds us. I think science needs to acknowledge that objectivity is more of a goal than an absolute.
This is the same for social institutions who also adopt the scientific method. Every person in these institutions have studied the method and the problem of bias, but appear to think they are better at overcoming bias than anybody else as they present one sided arguments
Total collapse of public faith is the result
Hence our anti science epoch we seem to be entering now
All good sypkan.
Typically though, fishos don't want to talk about what they see because it's commercially valuable. Putting on the public record where they went and what they saw out there reveals a lot about their fishing habits and that's worth cash to them. I can't imagine you'd tell me much about a secret spot you'd been surfing for years, even if I said it was "for science". Fishers' livelihoods rely on them exploiting an area in given conditions better than anyone else. They typically aren't willing to share hints about that and fair enough. If they were though, scientists are willing and keen to integrate that knowledge into their research.
If you read the doc that CSIRO produced for the listing of white sharks in 1999, they describe how they surveyed the science literature, analysed data and put a call out to fishers and other experts. The response rate from the fishos was minimal. Fair enough too.
The collapse of faith you mentioned above is real but in many ways it's the fault of the public as much as anything. Read the science literature for the science (and the lay summaries of it), where the data is presented and summarised. Don't bother with the public utterings filtered through the media (where you don't know what part of the quote the journo didn't include so as to generate more online clicks). We've all got to do our bit but the newspapers etc aren't good sources of info of what we know.
Yeh, I can appreciate fishos aren't the easiest crew to work with
But there's a couple on these forums that seem to know their shit
Just gotta find fishos that surf! Exploit the vested interests
Note from my daughters high school.
Dear Parents and Caregivers,
I am writing to the parents and caregivers of all students at Byron Bay High School who take part in ocean based sports in term 4, 2016.
The school is increasingly worried about the heightened risks associated with ocean based sports due to increased shark activity on the North Coast. In our opinion there is currently an unacceptable risk associated with these sports for our students and we have taken the decision to cancel these sports for the remainder of this term.
We have not taken this decision lightly since we understand the passion our students have for these activities. It is our hope that by the start of term 1, 2017 we will be able to offer these sports again in a safe environment.
Our school will offer alternative activities for your child for the rest of this term. These activities will be outlined by PDHPE staff in the next few days. As always we appreciate your understanding and strong support of the school.
Yours sincerely,
Mr Peter King
Principal
This will be the first of many such decisions based on 'risk assessment'
It would be an interesting exercise to look at the process of risk assessment the school went through that is associated with their sport/excursion policy. They've crunched the numbers from a OH&S perspective and ocean based sports obviously exceed the threshold to be considered 'safe'.
If they didn't take this decision, and any type of serious injury or death occurred, then the Principal and a few others (eg in the Dept) would almost certainly lose their jobs as well as get their arses sued off.
Local and state political leaders take note!
freeride 76 re your dolphin theory i was speaking to an abalone diver last week who recounted seeing a GW eat a baby dolphin whole in the port stephens area. he also said after the attack the dolphins went completely berserk doing things like almost beaching themselves on the rocks etc to avoid the GW. also had the chance to speak to a heli pilot recently who was based out of williamtown for a while and she said theres no way she would get in the water in that whole area as she just saw way too many sharks when flying.
When the one came at me for the drive by, I too went completely beserk beaching myself and paddling directly up on the rocks
Dolphins, I feel ya
just had a surf at the Point, like everyone else there was ummning and aahhhing, but I've barely surfed in the last month and it was 6ft and glassy....
of course evry convo on the Point was about sharks and there was just about a fist fight as someone walking past interjected into one.
this situation has transformed the surfing experience around here....maybe for good.
gotta admit, jumping off, paddling through the whitewater and then the long paddle out the back didn't feel very safe. Eventually relaxed and got a couple.
it feels like russian roulette at the moment.
"Velocity - yep, easiest way to find the stats is to listen to Vic Peddemors "the head of the shark research section of the NSW department of primary fisheries" (the head of shark research in NSW, he works with the CSIRO). Speak on nick carroll's shark discussion on coastal watch. He states "CSIRO calculated 700 whites in 2012 and the research about to be released is around 6000 for 2016". it is a good talk - he is the head shark scientist in NSW."
Just wanted to put it on a new page mate, so people get to read it.
At the July community meeting here at Lennox where the DPI gave an update of it's programs Vic Pedemmors gave a figure of around 1500 white sharks on the east coast, which is the figure Barry Bruce came up with.
That updated estimate of 6000 is a major increase in the size of the population. I'll be very interested to see that research.
If so, it'll be increasingly difficult for those using science to guide public policy to argue that a major increase in the white shark population isn't the main driver in the increase in attacks.
Hi free ride - well said. Vic implied the published paper should be available soon - it's all quite clearly stated on the talk on coastal watch, I invite everyone to watch it.
My hope is we can say "the protection worked" great! They don't need to be protected. Let's focus our efforts on other endangered species: stellar sea lions, Hawaiian monk seals and Fraser's dolphins.. which ironically are species great whites eat. I think we should be having a sensible conversation about what constitutes a balance.
Hey Freeride I'm greatly appreciative of the time and balanced point of view you're putting in to not only trawling research but making it plain and simple for folks not directly affected by the situation. It's hard sometimes to understand why something we do so selfishly should warrant protection from the taxpayer but your observations 'on the ground' as it were, are valuable in understanding the local mindset.
As for self mitigation I can fully understand the limitations with most personal protection devices on the market at the moment but has eveyone overlooked probably the most simple solution (save staying dry)... riding a longboard? 100% sure that if I'm down your way and not in a crowd I will be riding something bigger or equal to the juvenials that seem to be biting.
2 1/2 - 3ft of extra foam and glass ? Maybe ?
I rode my 7'6" desert storm today for that very reason.......didn't really need it but wanted more board underneath me in case anything investigated me, or worse case, hit me.
btw, spoke to a bloke who bought the sharkshield surf bundle. He said it lasted about 3 months before the unit failed intermittently and then finally. it wasn;t a ringing endorsement.
But I'm definitely looking into it.
btw, just another snippet which illustrates the decline in commercial fishing effort in NSW.
"The number of current fishing licences in NSW is just a quarter of what it was during the industry’s peak in the 1970s and ‘80s."
Post doctoral research fellow MIchelle Voyer at U of Woolongong.
This from the greens candidate on FB today - non lethal is that a promise to humans?
Justin Field
he plans to remove nets from all NSW beaches !
·
Today I launched the Greens Non-Lethal Response to Shark Management in NSW plan. The Greens are committed to a science based approach to keep people as safe as possible whilst respecting our wild oceans and the creatures that live it it, including sharks. Shark nets are an outdated technology and we can do better.
"Shark nets are an outdated technology and we can do better."
...what, jump off our boards when we see them and swim over for a hug and a cuddle before dinner time?
...ask if they'd like a side dish as well or what sauce they like me to put on my chest before they eat me?
f..king hilarious those jokesters.
Freeride, 75% decline is a lot but the relevant metric is not the number of licenses or vessels, rather it's the relative fishing power of those currently fishing. There is a general trend of increasing fishing power (and subsequently standardised fishing effort) as new tech and fishing gear improves a skipper's ability to find and catch fish (or prawns as the case may be). That can offset declines in numbers of vessels. You can bet a night of fishing today yields, on average, greater catch than a night in 1970.
To get a complete picture, we should ask Michele Voyer what the change in fishing power has been over that period and if standardised effort is also greatly reduced. I doubt it will have offset the 75% decline completely but when considered in proper terms like that, the decline won't be as stark as that number suggests.
I disagree completely there with respect to prawn trawling.
Spent a lot of time on prawn trawlers and apart from bycatch reduction/turtle excluders very little has changed in the last 40 years.
Also, most of the commercial fishing licences in NSW are small, family owned businesses and not the mega commercial enterprises found elsewhere. Yes, certain tech has improved but I'm extremely confident the data will show a very big overall gross reduction in commercial fishing effort in NSW. Mostly inshore.
I dig man and I'm no prawn fisherman but it's an effect incorporated into all decent fisheries management. This is out of date now but work done on the prawn fishery in QLD suggested between 5-40% increase in fishing power depending on the species. Actually they estimated a 40% increase in kings.
https://www.daf.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/73932/StockAssess...
There's a ton of data presented in the report but Figure 5.8 shows a relatively stable level of fishing effort for king prawns in NSW between 89-03 in standardised vessel days. That's the most digestible thing I could find quickly. It's no doubt open to scrutiny but if we're going to accept the work of scientists (who did engage with the fishers in question for this work) then it can't be dismissed summarily.
The little bit of work I did on the NPF was focused on this very issue and vessel improvements they tried to model included increases in engine power, double to quad gear (though from memory in the NPF quad gear wasn't allowed up there as part of the effort control), as well as better sonar and the introduction of GPS.
Honestly I have no doubt the fishing effort will have declined overall with a 75% decline in licenses but just not to that extent.
Pretty sure most of the reduction in the north coast prawn trawling fleet has occurred after 2003.
But I'm going to find out for sure.
GPS was an improvement in gear but seriously, most prawn skippers already knew the ground.
It hasn't changed much, set out the try gear.....and see what comes up.
If it's worthy, shoot the gear away.
Not a sounder out there that can detect prawns on the bottom.
not detracting from the seriousness of this issue but heh, Sharks aren’t so bad. If a stranger came into my house wearing a speedo, I would probably attack him too.
"FR has it anything to do with the warmer than usual water temp? I thought I read somewhere that it has been warmer than usual up there as it has been off the coast of Indo. There has to be a reason why the numbers have risen. Are they chasing schools of something which is in big numbers because of something?"
Just putting this here Memla so it's not such a bitch backtrawling through the comments.
To be honest, it seems really hard to make a link with SST.
Tadashi was taken in Feb at the annual max of inshore SST's.
Matt was in July.
Paul Cox and others are now in Sep/Oct, the annual minimum of SST's here.
Looking at the EAC and the currents warm water is definitely on the move now and the whites are still here. Ie they were here when it was at it's warmest, coldest and now when it is warming again.
You would hypothesize that a temperate species like the white shark might not appreciate the increase in SST's and would expand it's range southwards, not northwards.
These animals seem to tolerate a wide range of SST's so I'm very unconvinced that water temp is any kind of strong factor.
What are they chasing? See posts above. A wide range of teleost species and probably some mammalian ones.
My pet theory is the abundant dolphin populations are one reason they are so strongly attracted to the inshore zone.
But that is just a theory with some observation, anecdotal evidence and inference behind it.
Wondering if there are specific season(s) where dolphins give birth or whenever?
doesn't seem like it.
Bottlenose dolphins can live for up to 50 years. They reach sexual maturity at around 10 years of age, and mate all year round.
then again maybe so.
Bottlenose dolphins may breed throughout the year. However, certain breeding seasons have been observed and vary with location. Breeding seasons generally coincide with calving seasons.
From Freeride
At the time of attack.
Full sunshine, light W to WSW winds, barometer steady on 1019 HPa.
Low tide 9.50 am.
Low solunar fish activity. First day after first quarter Moon Phase and hence neap tides with low tidal coefficients.
No baitballs sighted between Byron and Ballina.
Very good water visibility.
Light showers over the weekend with 5-10mm of rain over the two days. No visible rain runoff. No lagoons open to the ocean.
AND 21 degrees water ... again.
I'm afraid I just don't believe all the hypocritical, self righteous indignation coming from the anti cull brigade. The main thrust of your argument is always that you think it quite appropriate for us humans to risk attack for the sake of "protecting the environment". I bet you all get together at your fave Cafe drinking un-pronounceable beverages in your personalised green coffee mugs whilst reciting an environmental warrior haka before you take to the internet to put all us red necks in our place.
Right, so where is your adherence to protecting the environment when you jump in your car to do a surf trip or onto a jet to head to Bali or wherever, or put on your boardshorts because "life's better in boardies" or eat some vegies or meat or bread, or drink some milk or booze, or turn on your lights and fire up the computer to pontificate to retards like me. Have you forgotten about the native vegetation, wildlife and sealife that were cleared off/wiped out or killed just to create the oil rigs, mines, paddocks and roads that now produce the electricity, steel, fuel, & aluminium, and grow the cotton, vegies, cattle, wheat etc. and transport you to your next surf. Even the surfboards you sit on and most of the accessories associated with it are made of the most toxic petro chemical substances available.
You mob are a whole lot selective in who you think should bear the pain of "environmental protection".
Or maybe it's that you have guilty consciences over the above environmental cost of your affluent modern lifestyles and you believe you can be cleansed by standing up for a couple of rouge sharks.
Hate to tell you this, but your contribution to the environmental degradation of the planet can't be repaid by your hypocritical rantings not to kill a couple of big fish.
Let reasonable people get on with doing reasonable things and butt out with the "protecting the environment" bullshit.
GM, we're personally not responsible for what has happened in the past, if you live in this society you're a problem to the environment.
The choice humans now have, is do we continue on the same course, create more damage, do more harm and change our environment for the worst - or do we try to turn it the other way, and make things better.
Fair question.
Can we mitigate against shark attack and still improve our environment at a local, regional and national level?
Is there a balance that can be struck?
Actually, thats a mute question, because every human being alive is striking some kind of balance, whether we like it or not.
I believe we can mitigate the risk, it's just as you said, finding the balance. We shouldn't be going backwards though, in terms of our policies, actions or even attitude towards the environment.
To me - this discussion is setting us back a bit, a lot of emotion is coming out and people are calling for actions which I believe would tip the balance unfavourably for the environment (the emotion is understandable). We don't know how long this phenomenon will last, or if it's a common occurrence.
Good morning stok:). The CSIRO are reporting an 800% increase in white pointer population on the East Coast, in the last 4 years. The current situation is unequivocally the result of a growth in white pointers population, and while they remain" protected" thier population will continue to grow whilst other marine life continues to decrease. There are other variables, but this is the most poignant fact.
Morning Tobias!
Why is the growth so localised - is it a new breeding ground? I thought (correct me if I'm wrong) whites were fairly nomadic creatures, do they congregate in certain areas to breed for certain periods?
But really, how can a marine predatory species grow in population if other marine life continues to decrease (from a long term perspective)?
My personal views (although quite off topic here), if that we shouldn't be fishing commercially - we're too disruptive to the ecosystem.
Good questions 1) they are nomadic, but do have certain areas they breed and congregate - eg Stockton, Forster, ballina. 2) they are increasing over the last 4years on the east coast at a rate of 800% - CSIRO fact. We can speculate as to why, we brought in white pointer protection 20years ago which would mean a massive influx of juveniles, now. Which we can assume will continue to increase in population, the most current reasearch indicates there were 15000 whites on the east coast prior to white settlement, we are currently at 6000 - so we could expect another doubling of the population. The problem is that we are killing thousands of tiger sharks, reef sharks and tuna whilst leaving protections on great whites. The question is "what kind of balance are we creating in the ocean"? How will this effect endangered species like settler sea lion,hawaiin monk seal, Frasers dolphin and hammer head sharks. These are all the food of white pointers.
1) the population of whites over the last 4 years is increasing on average at 71% per year (fact) 2) they will continue to increase in population (fact) 3) other species are decreasing in population.
My hope is people start having a sensible discussion about what population size would mean they are "not endangered", keeping in mind the impact on other marine life as well as the safety of children. As their numbers will continue to increase whilst "protected".
Thanks for hearing me out:) hope you're having a good Wednesday.
Good questions 1) they are nomadic, but do have certain areas they breed and congregate - eg Stockton, Forster, ballina. 2) they are increasing over the last 4years on the east coast at a rate of 800% - CSIRO fact. We can speculate as to why, we brought in white pointer protection 20years ago which would mean a massive influx of juveniles, now. Which we can assume will continue to increase in population, the most current reasearch indicates there were 15000 whites on the east coast prior to white settlement, we are currently at 6000 - so we could expect another doubling of the population. The problem is that we are killing thousands of tiger sharks, reef sharks and tuna whilst leaving protections on great whites. The question is "what kind of balance are we creating in the ocean"? How will this effect endangered species like settler sea lion,hawaiin monk seal, Frasers dolphin and hammer head sharks. These are all the food of white pointers.
1) the population of whites over the last 4 years is increasing on average at 71% per year (fact) 2) they will continue to increase in population (fact) 3) other species are decreasing in population.
My hope is people start having a sensible discussion about what population size would mean they are "not endangered", keeping in mind the impact on other marine life as well as the safety of children. As their numbers will continue to increase whilst "protected".
Thanks for hearing me out:) hope you're having a good Wednesday.
Thanks for the reply - but again, how can a top predator increase in population (so dramatically), when they're food is becoming endangered or reduced in numbers (by us)?
Howdy, I agree about commercial fishing.
It's a good question and again we can speculate about the statistical facts, the white population has increased 800% in 4 years.. to speculate as to how they can increase with reduced food sources. Although, other species are decreasing it appears it is still enough to feed the increasing population of whites. If your question is - at what point will the food sources get too small to encourage further white pointer population growth, I don't know of anyone who is qualified to speculate on that. And if we do breed enough whites that there becomes very limited supply of the species they eat.. we will have created a lot of damage to what is now a very fragile ecosystem. Personally I think it is a good to start having a conversation about sustainable growth of whites, at what number are they no longer a protected species?
The above is speculation about maybe why their population is growing at such a rate, that's all it is "speculation". The fact is that it has grown at 800% over 4 years and will continue to grow whilst we maintain protections on them.
I hope that helped answer some of your questions, I don't have all the answers but happy to give any facts. It's a good conversation to be having, interms of the marine ecosystem and children's safety.
Stok, I think the underlying tone in this discussion has actually been quite positive. No-one wants sharks slaughtered for the sake of it. I think most, if not all surfers have quite strong environmental principles.
However, I think too that most here are wanting some pragmatic action that is not a knee-jerk reaction nor a continuation of old mind-sets that essentially stood on the ground of pillage and plunder, ie use human force to simply bull-doze the current problem in our environment out of the way.
The community also wants it's traditional liberties of being able to swim or surf in the ocean without the current much higher risk of not coming back home because you were breakfast for a GW.
So 'balance' has been a good word used here, as is the word 'reasonable'. The above has to be balanced in the most reasonable way that it can. If we don't get this right quite soon (and there's another attack), then both fringes of the debate will get triggered more and more, and then it all gets much harder to pull back to the more sensible and 'more palatable to all' middle ground.
Interesting times, but the authorities sitting on their hands or endlessly pontificating about the issues is not an option. A short-term plan has to be implemented. The coastal communities are already economically on the back foot because of the dramatic rise in shark attacks, and this can't continue as this impact will increasingly create more collatoral damage in these communities. This is where far-reaching political fall-out will kick in - locally and further afar.
freddieffer - unfortunately I have seen a number of less positive comments (probably mostly from trolls), complaining about greenies or scientists mor whatever - but there has been a lot of positive talk.
The thing is, trying to manage nature like this is hard, like really hard. It's near impossible to get it right, and very easy to get it wrong. A short term solution sounds great, but to come up with that, make it effective and not create long lasting problems is the challenge.
Whilst it's painful to see the local economy suffer - the truth is, economies suffer all over the world for natural or social reasons outside of our control. Whilst you couldn't call this event a natural disaster, it probably has a similar effect, i.e. natural disasters can destroy business and economies - perhaps looking to compensate losses is a better alternative in the short term.
It's also sad to see the local surfing attitude change - but the truth is surfing is a dangerous activity - ask most people who know nothing about it and there's a fair chance they say 'aren't you scared of sharks?'. Surfers and swimmers have developed a way around this fear, by simply reminding themselves of the low risk - but that risk is always there. The problem here is what is the level of risk that is acceptable? Or is it more of a perception thing? Really, the only true way to remove that risk is to not go in the water (which is a totally acceptable, and rational thing to do if the risk is too high).
remember we have to "manage" the risk of shark attacks.....its imperative to our survival!!!!!
sorry son, no beach for you...but instead why dont you go and enjoy a good ride at dreamworld. its sooooo much safer. in fact your chances of dying this year on a ride are twice that of a shark. so run along now
http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/10/25/15/48/reports-of-at-least-on...
How has the activity / sitings in water been like around the Yamba / Evans region?
Plenty of claimed sighting around Fingal, Casuarina, Cabarita, Hastings Point, Black Rock………one bump at Casuarina a couple of months back.
Surf has been so poor for the last couple of months (surfer numbers have been down a bit). But overall I'm not sure much more than any other year? Certainly nothing like Ballina region.
I am starting to wonder if surfing as we knew it has turned a corner and its going to be something talked about in past tense.I used to love surfing at first light and plenty of times paddling out in the dark,always looking for waves with no one around but iv'e got to say i'm turning into a wimp,looking for a peak with at least someone to split the chance with of an attack .Fuk haven't felt comfortable in the surf since Tadash'is death,looking for shadows and not paying attention to the waves like i used to and most guys i talk too say similar things.So what happens in the near future when it becomes too risky to surf,a whole life built around surfing over?Cant believe its come to this and i cant see it getting any better if nothing is done about it.
Simba - take up fishing.
For large fish.
Kill two birds with one stone.
Used to be a black guy at Lennox who fished for sharks along the beach when the mullet were running,always pulling in whalers and bullsharks..........never worried anyone then....but whites are another kettle of fish.
I saw elsewhere that Kent and Whitetag have and are crowd funding .
Perhaps this is a cause that all the non realists in this medium could get behind .
The population has exploded on a Juvenile level . Simba is right , and I had the exact same argument with Brutus over a year or two ago . The Seventies and Eightees were surfing's golden era , where the oceans were safest .
I think now that numbers are probably getting closer to accurate in that higher number that was quoted from Barry Bruce in what is yet to be released publically .
Much has been spoken of Stockton , and local fisheries declines in pursuant and the no take laws introduced in the last 20-25 years .
I thnk the single most important thing that has triggered all this population increase off , is the breeding grounds and complete sanctuary that was setup East of Wilsons Prom
( VIC ) in the early part of this century. Since then , this higher breeding numbers have only been further helped along by the seemingly higher growth in migratory whale numbers . Add to this Dolphins , seals etc .
If people think this is going to stop in a hurry then think again .
It's going to take a long time for the wrongs of well meaning humans to find equilibrium to healthily return balance .
If not pray for a pod of preying Orca's holidaying up your way soon .
Stay safe everyone .
And put your money where your mouth is if you want to champion conservation .
"It's going to take a long time for the wrongs of well meaning humans to find equilibrium to healthily return balance ."
Nice take Southey. I can't get aboard the hate train displayed by some in the wider debate. Policies that were implented in the past may have been ignorant, but they weren't malicious. "Well meaning" humans are constantly learning.
the Ballina and Byron Mayor were on the local news last night
I cannot believe they went on record saying ....that the decision by local schools to cancell surfing as a school sport is an over reaction
Might take a local greens campaigners to task outside the Tweed polling booths this weekend
there's going to be a lot of political fall-out from this ongoing phenomena.
I really hope so
I for one have had enough of the feeble reasoning of extreme green
A lot of ex-green voters?
Love to see a link for this reported 800% increase in 4 years. Sounds fanciful. Unless there's been a sudden influx from the South African population, the females must have been pumping out young at a biologically implausible rate.
Either that or the population hasn't actually increased at that rate, but rather the previous population estimates were massively under and it's an 800% increase on the previous due to better information.
Morning benski:). The easiest access to the data is in the hyperlink below. Vic Peddemors (Shark research section of NSW department of primary industries who also works with the CSIRO) clearly states that the CSIRO detected 700 sharks in 2012 (in published papers) and the new published paper coming out for 2016 is around 6000. Like you I was also shocked by this increase, but upon contemplation it is congruent with the anicdotal evidence. The below link is quite a good discussion with a diverse panel. I invite anyone that is interested to watch. Hope you're all having a good Wednesday only a couple of days to go to the weekend:).
http://www.coastalwatch.com/environment/20580/coastalwatch-shark-discuss...
I read what you're talking about Tobias, and although there's a couple of quick facts thrown around during the talk, there's nothing explicitly said about an 800% increase in population.
Actually if you read the report from the CSIRO (specifically the section on 'Abundance', you'll see that they're quoting an overall decline in GWS: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recov...
Also this, straight from the CSIRO website about white shark population: http://www.csiro.au/en/Research/Environment/Oceans-and-coasts/Sharks/Whi...
This particular sentence is quite interesting, and could also be another theory as to why Ballina/Byron are experiencing increased encounters:
"...increases in numbers of white sharks in areas where human activity is also high may indicate periods where shark populations are also most at risk from interactions, rather than indicating a recovery
of the (shark) population." (From the aforementioned CSIRO report).
"...increases in numbers of white sharks in areas where human activity is also high may indicate periods where shark populations are also most at risk from interactions, rather than indicating a recovery
of the (shark) population." (From the aforementioned CSIRO report).
I would defy anyone with an IQ over single digits to say that with a straight face with respect to the current spate of attacks in this region.
Quite clearly the white sharks here are at no risk from the current interactions with human beings. Apart from getting a sore mouth and getting dragged out to sea a K they are happy as larry here.
"...increases in numbers of white sharks in areas where human activity is also high may indicate periods where shark populations are also most at risk from interactions, rather than indicating a recovery
of the (shark) population." There I,ve said it an I know your okoy with eet, cause i sead it, Im no tasmanion with dooble gidgets
The first half of that paragraph:
"There is still no reliable estimate of the total size of the Australian white shark population and no adequate 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. Understanding the relationship between the numbers of sharks sighted at any one site and overall population size or trend is a critical issue. At least some changes (both increases and decreases in observed numbers) are likely to be a function of temporal changes in distribution, rather than population size...."
Have to disagree with you there Freeride. I'd be interested to know how many sightings of GWS have been recorded elsewhere during the last couple of years, it seems attacks have been quite low in other states. Distribution is surely a factor.
I'm not exactly sure what your disagreeing with Stok.
I've never said distribution wasn't a factor.
As I said, I'll be gobsmacked if the latest CSIRO research points to a pop estimate of 6000.
But if it does or even if it is a much smaller estimate it still fits with the data here of a rebuilding population. I gave you scientific evidence that populations of prey items are increasing and thus the conditions for pop increase for white sharks are present.
There are anomalies : such as why the large populations of juvenile white sharks on the Hunter Coast don't seem to show any interest in human interactions. Whereas the juv/sub-adults here do. My theory is they are learning to attack new prey - actually that's not my theory that the standard accepted science- and we just happen to be roughly the same size and in the same area that prey items are in.
That to me, also explains why nets are effective. It disrupts that cruising/hunting movement in the inshore zone. Sharks are often caught on the shoreward side of the net, which opponents claim as proof that nets are ineffective. I say it proves the opposite: that the nets are stopping or entangling those sharks cruising that nearshore surf zone, and that may be the chief factor in their effectiveness.
Freeride surfing isn't the only activity where interaction with sharks occur mate.
true, but it's still a very strange statement to make, seeing as white sharks are totally protected in Australian waters.
What do you think they mean by it?
My take on the comment was human interaction could include recreational fishing, commercial trawlers /longlines, tuna pens, shark nets as well as surfing.
Wouldn't know what impact all fishing activities would have on white shark populations but the report would have been taking accidental captures into account. Commercial fisherman must have some sort of legal obligation to report accidental captures but I can't see that happening if it effects their fishing activities somehow.
Russhook and Fitzroy whats the deal with commercial fishers and reporting accidential captures ?
Freeride - I was trying to keep things short, and should've cited the whole paragraph. My point wasn't that sharks need to be scared of surfers (although judging by the amount of surfers calling for a cull, one could also disagree on that). But instead what I was quoting in the report is that 'distribution' could potentially play a large part in the situation in Ballina/Byron. Are we seeing a definitive explosion in white shark population - or are there other factors at play?
I've never had my IQ tested, and wouldn't be surprised if it hovered around the single digit mark, (never did like maths and my german teacher was a bit of a wanker). I also think whatever's going on around Ballina/Byron is wild - that's a lot of bites in a short amount of time.
But it also doesn't take much of an IQ to know that surfers don't know much more about GWS than Joe Blow walking down the street who watched shark-week last year. We've got our heads in air, our eyes on the waves, and most of time wouldn't know if a white swam right passed us...
On a more novel note, this is my mate's home break in Cali - wouldn't have seen this 10 years ago...
http://www.surfline.com/surf-news/cam-rewind-shows-unknowing-dawn-patrol...
On the road - Thanks for reading it legend.
You must have missed the point where -
Vic Peddemors "the head of the shark research section of the NSW department of primary fisheries" (the head of shark research in NSW, he works with the CSIRO). states - CSIRO calculated 700 whites in 2012 and the research about to be released is around 6000 for 2016.
Thats is very clearly stated and that is an 800% increase in 4 years.
Thanks for sharing the other links I will have a read - the more facts the better :)
Thanks for reading it legend.
You must have missed the point where -
Vic Peddemors "the head of the shark research section of the NSW department of primary fisheries" (the head of shark research in NSW, he works with the CSIRO). states - CSIRO calculated 700 whites in 2012 and the research about to be released is around 6000 for 2016.
Thats is very clearly stated and that is an 800% increase in 4 years.
Thanks for sharing the other links I will have a read - the more facts the better :)
Hey Tobias I did read those stats and I can totally see where you're coming from, but an 800% pop increase conflicts with everything the CSIRO has formally released. It also doesn't take into account that the studies were done with differing methods from different institutions and the whole underlying premise (given by B. Brown etc) is that it is incredibly difficult to estimate population size due to distributions, migrations, identification etc etc. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I am hesitant to put 2 & 2 together to make 5. If the report is released and they quote an 800% population increase in 4 years - i'll quite happily eat my words...
Also, take into account exactly what he prefaces any statistics with, and it seems clear that their not sure if there has been a huge overall population increase (although obviously Ballina's had an influx), and that there's other factors at play:
"So it’s been surprising. Are we looking more so we’re seeing more? Is there a population boom, which we’ll cover later I guess? Social media - in the old days you’d talk about it with your mates at the pub and that’s as far as it’d go. But now you post it on Facebook and the whole world sees it. So to me that’s one of the trickiest issues that we’re trying to grapple with — how “real” is this influx of white sharks? Have they always been here and we just didn’t know about them? Local knowledge suggests that’s not the case, local knowledge suggests that it is a recent situation, and I guess our job as scientists is to work out why. What are they doing here? What’s causing them to pitch up? What’s so good about Ballina for them?"
Hi On The Road, good points. I am just repeating what Vic Peddemors said (so I am not emotionally attached to it, at all). "He is the the head of the shark research section of the NSW department of primary fisheries . He states - CSIRO calculated 700 whites in 2012 and the research about to be released is around 6000 for 2016"
I personally think it would be very odd for a head scientist to openly lie on record, but cynicism is a helpful part of the scientific process as long as we are open to the facts when they are published.
We can continue to speculate about causal links to White Pointer behaviour - I had a look at the Marine Park after reading Free Rides statement about Marine Parks having 957% more bio mass. Every hot spot on the East Cast is a Marine Park - Lennox, Coffs, Port, Forster and Stockton.
That seems to make sense an 800% increase in population in 4 years (according to Vic Peddemors) and the White Pointers are hanging around Marine Parks due to them having 957% more bio mass. Speculative links, but interesting. If this is the case we could hypothesis that we may expect more sightings / interaction with Whites on the South Coast marine parks (the only large section of marine Park that has yet to report a significant increase in Whites).. All speculative, but interesting none the less.
Thanks again for reading what I have to say - its nice to just chat about facts and speculate a little with open minded folks:)
Hi On The Road, good points. I am just repeating what Vic Peddemors said (so I am not emotionally attached to it, at all). "He is the the head of the shark research section of the NSW department of primary fisheries . He states - CSIRO calculated 700 whites in 2012 and the research about to be released is around 6000 for 2016"
I personally think it would be very odd for a head scientist to openly lie on record, but cynicism is a helpful part of the scientific process as long as we are open to the facts when they are published.
We can continue to speculate about causal links to White Pointer behaviour - I had a look at the Marine Park after reading Free Rides statement about Marine Parks having 957% more bio mass. Every hot spot on the East Cast is a Marine Park - Lennox, Coffs, Port, Forster and Stockton.
That seems to make sense an 800% increase in population in 4 years (according to Vic Peddemors) and the White Pointers are hanging around Marine Parks due to them having 957% more bio mass. Speculative links, but interesting. If this is the case we could hypothesis that we may expect more sightings / interaction with Whites on the South Coast marine parks (the only large section of marine Park that has yet to report a significant increase in Whites).. All speculative, but interesting none the less.
Thanks again for reading what I have to say - its nice to just chat about facts and speculate a little with open minded folks:)
I'd like to see that link too. The growth in numbers sounds massive, but doing a five minute search shows, GWS have 2 -10 pups, every 12-18 months, and that is best guess. 17 pups have been recorded.
On the back of the envelope, Assuming 300 breeding females , 5 pups every 2 years, and 20 % mortality, gives us 3600 new sharks after 5 years. If they breed once a year then we can get close to the numbers Tobias has provided.
Take that out to 20 years plus of protection, the numbers are huge.
... and so it will be with human fatalities - swimmers and surfers
Nonsensical and irrational.
Its not lineal .
Think in generational increase , we are currently at the Second maybe third generation of recovery .
Its exponential from here on out ....
Until something changes that is .
( ie plague proportions - where they start having detrimental effects on their own population ) [ ironically much like Humans ] ,
OR
We reverse the balance shift and intervene .?!
Regarding the ''17 pups have been recorded''.
I came across this info.
There is a cannibalism phenomenon which occurs in the womb. Yes, you read that right. The larger “pups” actually kill and feed on the underdeveloped ones. Even in the womb they are hunting!
So that story of the fisherman who cut open a great white female and found 22 pups probably just means that they had not yet expressed their brotherly and sisterly love toward each other.
Given that there is a move by the DPI to put in nets, will this be sufficient in the immediate term. Although the local mayor is now favouring nets, there are plenty of external movements going against the nets. The question is if surfers are still being 'nudged', 'chomped' or worse then what next. Culling, drum lines to kill and not just monitor. At this stage, a cull is warranted plus bleeding. Do as the Orcas would. Then review after 12 months or so. In reality, a cull would have minimal impact on the numbers at large.
Thats one thing that concerns me is the nets will possibly only shift the problem.
"Thanks for the reply - but again, how can a top predator increase in population (so dramatically), when they're food is becoming endangered or reduced in numbers (by us)?"
Hey Stok. This is a common question but the facts are that food sources for white sharks are on the increase and this has been noted by many scientific papers.
Including this summation from Daryl McPhee.
Australian waters have concurrently seen a steady and signifi-
cant rise in previously depleted megafauna populations that are
known to be preferred prey items of large sharks, such as white
sharks and tiger sharks. Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae)
populations on Australia's east coast have shown one of the highest
growth rates for any mammalian population (Bruce et al., 2014)
with an annual rate of increase of 10.6% from 1987 to 2004 (Noad,
2011), and New Zealand fur seal (Arctocephalus forsteri) populations
have increased at a rate of 10e15% over the past 20 years (Campbell
et al., 2014). These populations have recovered from previous
overexploitation to a point where they are now thought to be
reaching their theoretical reproductive limit and maximum carrying
capacities (Bruce et al., 2014; Campbell et al., 2014).
Also the establishment of Marine Parks and the reduction in inshore commercial fishing effort has seen a big rebound in inshore biomass.
The common misconception is that we are fishing our waters out and thus the sharks are coming in search of food. Whilst over-fishing is a global fact, particularly in open ocean pelagic fisheries, Australia's commonwealth marine resources are very well managed and there is plenty of inshore biomass for predators.
That is in addition to the large increases in megafauna noted in the scientific paper quoted above.
That's really interesting - thanks free ride :)
Well said FR
In a recent article Noad put the figure of East Coast Migratory Humpbacks at 27,000
This is up from an estimate of only 300 in the early sixties after whaling along the East Coast in the 1950's and illegal soviet whaling in the Antarctic in the early 1960's.
He also says that their original sustainable number before whaling was thought to be 30,000.
On another note...for all those playing the "overfished" card...how about some evidence that shows declining numbers for the species that the Noahs are supposedly substituting people for...Oh...and by the way..."everyone knows" is not evidence.
After reading this I had a look at the region of Marine Parks (as i believe you previously stated they had 957% more bio mass) . Every hot spot on the East Cast is a Marine Park - Lennox, Coffs, Port, Forster and Stockton.
That seems to make sense an 800% increase in population in 4 years (according to Vic Peddemors) and the White Pointers are hanging around Marine Parks due to them having 957% more bio mass. Speculative links, but interesting. If this is the case we could hypothesis that we may expect more sightings / interaction with Whites on the South Coast marine parks (the only large section of marine Park that has yet to report a significant increase in Whites).. All speculative, but interesting none the less.
Thanks again for the facts free ride - have a ripping day... almost Friday!:)
You can play with numbers till the cows come home, but let's run off the low end of what's out there in the studies.
Using 250 breeding females, increasing that by 5% p/a, each dropping 5 pups every 2 years, with 50% mortality, still give us better than 2070 newbies after 5 years.
May well be the protection program has been an outstanding success, notwithstanding ecological balance as many have mentioned.
I can't see how killing a few dozen that are hanging in close can have much impact on the species.
Next person that parrots the nonsensical line about the environment being fragile is required to drop to the ground and perform twenty push ups.
No fuck it.
Stay down there and keep doing them till you've got arms like Arnold and you realise the only way to truly and finally suppress the creation , evolution and furthered success of life on this planet is to reduce the entire joint to fine particles of dust.
Even then you'd probably get green shoots a week later.
It's very hard to get accurate assessments of biomass increase since the introduction of Solitary Islands (Coffs region) and Cape Byron Marine parks because to my knowledge there was never any baseline scientific data to begin with.
This broad statement about biomass rebound is probably a vast over-estimation but the point is biomass is increasing as a result of Marine Parks.
“To reduce
the effect of poor fisheries management on the study,
Fairweather et al. (2009) examined a subset of the Lester et al.
(2009) dataset that came from countries with temperate waters
and efficient fisheries management of the kind found in New
Zealand, Canada and Australia”. It is then concluded that “the
researchers found an even stronger effect than Lester et al.
(2009) with a mean biomass increase of 975% in sanctuaries.
In the Yamba area there have been a few sightings but not the type of numbers in the Ballina region. A week or two ago a tagged White was detected at the Main Beach reciever but it has been tagged Bull sharks being detected most of the time. I don't think we get the same sort of aerial patrol around here. I spotted a large shark of over 4m over 6 months ago, possibly a Tiger or White.
Plenty of dolphins along our stretch of coast on a daily basis and plenty of whales cruising by. Some whales come in just beyond the wave zone and plenty cruise very closely around the headlands and hug the coastline on their journey. Haven't seen much in the way of baitfish lately, but did have a big fever of stingrays hanging around me when surfing recently. Plenty of marine life around, I'd be interested to see what would be found hanging around with some consistent aerial patrols.
Q1. Was there a history of Orcas on the North Coastof NSW? Q2. If there was has the Orca population bounced back? Is this the apex predator that is missing?
Agree with earlier comments regarding good intentions - the road to hell is paved with them...
Not sure on that Drodders.
My understanding is that they are an infrequent visitor here. But that could be wrong.
I've had two confirmed sightings, both off Lennox Point and there have been others, but they aren't common. Whether they were before, I don;t know.
Interesting thing to consider about the Orca's (l haven't) , l saw a pod of Orca's smash a school of Dolphins off Illuka Bluff in the early 80's while decking on a prawn trawler and since then only had the pleasure maybe 6 times at the most. Be interesting to know their population numbers back in the day , the south coast was obviously fairly prolific with them, Old Tom and the killers of Two Fold bay are part of fishing and whaling folklore.Bet the old GW's gave Eden a wide birth when they were there.
Henlye Perkins -Surfboards Gumtree Byron Bay- What is this fruitcake up to...Taming GWS with love at dawn at the pass !
Fascinating David Attenborough show on sharks now.
Let's provide the whole population of nsw with one of these... said no rational thinking person ever
"800% increase in 4 years"
!
Let me be the first to welcome our new sharp toothed overlords.
Fong I have taken to smoothing all the reefs with a concrete grinder on low tide where I surf so its not as harsh on the feet getting in and out of the surf.
Rocks are way scarier than sharks. They have bitten me for sure.
When I was a kid I was freaked out by the shadows I surfed over. Thought they were monsters.
Then I worked on a prawn trawler. I saw the monsters. There are lots of them.
Its a good idea not to go near them.
"I've never had my IQ tested, and wouldn't be surprised if it hovered around the single digit mark, (never did like maths and my german teacher was a bit of a wanker). I also think whatever's going on around Ballina/Byron is wild - that's a lot of bites in a short amount of time.
But it also doesn't take much of an IQ to know that surfers don't know much more about GWS than Joe Blow walking down the street who watched shark-week last year. We've got our heads in air, our eyes on the waves, and most of time wouldn't know if a white swam right passed us..."
Not trying to insinuate you're a dummy on the road but in the context of what has been happening here on the North Coast that sentence ("...increases in numbers of white sharks in areas where human activity is also high may indicate periods where shark populations are also most at risk from interactions, rather than indicating a recovery
of the (shark) population.") sounds cuckoo clock crazy.
It's a queer, unscientific statement as well, presented without evidence and the reverse could just as easily be true.
IE it could just as easily indicate recovering shark populations as opposed to shark populations most at risk.
It's a value judgement and it's speculation.
There's an inherent conflict here between marine science with it's clear conservation focus and shark management/mitigation and I'm sympathetic to it but some of the statements and positions being put out there by our marine science experts are just bizarre.
Dr Danny Bucher from the SCU here has moved from total denial there is any problem to now dispensing advice on hand to hand combat with a white shark in the local paper.
Following the spike in shark attacks in the past two years, Dr Bucher said it was important to be mentally prepared for the possibility of an attack.
Southern Cross University marine biologist Daniel Bucher said the majority of sharks encountered on local beaches had been sub-adult or juvenile white sharks transitioning from feeding on fish to feeding on larger animals.
He said in recent times most sharks had preyed on unsuspecting surfers from behind. The initial lunge at the surfer has been preceded by the animal circling for a distance to gauge whether or not to attack.
"If you see it coming, and that's a big if, then offence can be the best defence, they are still in that unsure state of mind and if you can do anything to convince them to leave you alone then that's the way to go," Dr Bucher said.
"You're telling the shark 'hey, I am not just some injured animal lolling on the surface, I am very much alive and I am potentially dangerous myself'."
Punching and kicking a shark in its head, Dr Bucher, said might cause it to recoil during an attack due to sensory organisms on their heads.
"We aren't sure how much a punch on the nose would feel to them but certainly I think it is just that aggression you can bring to the situation to make it think twice and give yourself an opportunity to get out of that danger zone," Dr Bucher said.
Then he follows it up with another classically wrong piece of advice.
The time of day doesn't play a major role in determining when a shark will strike, according to Dr Bucher, who said attacks mostly depended on the mood of the shark.
"If you look at the statistics of shark attacks in New South Wales, the peak time is actually from about noon to 6pm. It's actually when most people are in the water rather than when most sharks are active," he said.
The attacks here are mostly happening in the morning.
Stu spoke about not understanding the hate for science here .....but when we've got nitwits like Bucher as our so-called experts, who can't even seem to get the most basic grasp of the simple facts of the issue it's no wonder surfers around here are becoming increasingly frustrated.
FR appreciate all your comments on these threads. The quote (not yours)
"...increases in numbers of white sharks in areas where human activity is also high may indicate periods where shark populations are also most at risk from interactions, rather than indicating a recovery
of the (shark) population."
When you get a quote like this it's often a strategy of the complete 180 degree switch, and serves to direct conversation away from a point by introducing the exact opposite view.
So instead of people being at risk (and they are, there is evidence and actual measurable attacks) the conversation steers to risk being potentially to the shark population (currently being tagged and released, not killed so numbers not affected by human action). Complete 180.
control the language, control the discourse
Any statistician keen to do an analysis of the chances of a marine animal dying in a shark net located at Ballina as a corrolary to the accepted wisdom of the miniscule chance of a human being attacked by a shark ?
" All you turtles have nothing to fear but fear itself. Your likelihood of dying in a shark net at Ballina are much less than death by bee sting "
Got to include ALL sea life including molluscs and bivalves , Red Sea jellyfish and Beluga whales that inhabit sub arctic waters to get a true representation to equate with the stats referring to ALL humans probability of death by shark attack.
yeah,,,,,
anyway Ballina Council voted this morning 7 to 2 in favour of a 6 month net trial....I think N.Wall first with others maybe up to Lennox. Don't quote me on the specifics. I'm only just finding out. Others here may know more.
fas as I know, the state govt, has fed govt approval.