Shaun Tomson: In the shadow of sharks
The popular notion of shark attacks is that they’re completely random events. It’s a perception that leads to thinking that shark behaviour is indiscriminate and beyond our understanding. In recent years, however, observers have paid greater attention to shark attack clusters.
A recent cluster occurred off Florida’s east coast where a spate of attacks occurred, similarly Reunion Island surfers were ordered to stay out of the water following a sharp rise in attacks. At home, South Australia and Western Australia have experienced clusters in the past, whereas northern NSW is currently undergoing one now.
Clusters hint at a pattern of behaviour, yet the underlying cause is unknown. Despite this they’re often chalked up as the result of increasing ocean use by humans or a chain reaction caused by overfishing. Because of this, shark attack clusters are perceived as a modern phenomenon.
Statistics, however, debunk this myth, particularly those stats found in the Global Shark Attack File, a database of every known attack.
Of interest to those studying clusters is a spate of attacks that occurred not this decade, not last decade, but sixty years ago, in Durban, South Africa. Between 1943 and 1952 there were 22 shark attacks along the Durban beachfront, seven of them fatal.
For comparison’s sake, in the half century leading up to 1943 there’d been just 14 incidents in Durban - roughly one every three-and-a-half years - but in the nine years following 1943 there was approximately 2.5 attacks every year.
However, the Durban incidents weren’t evenly spaced, the attacks occurred in fits and starts, and when charted on a timeline some appeared as clusters within a cluster.
The period that we’re going to concentrate on straddled the months of January and February 1946. It involved four attacks in four weeks. The first three happened at Battery Beach in late January and early February, while the last incident occurred at South Beach on 16th February 1946.
The victim of that attack was Ernie Tomson, father of 1977 World Champion Shaun Tomson. The incident was arguably the first known attack on a surfer and his matter-of-fact description makes for fascinating reading.
“It was an ideal day for surfing,” wrote Tomson in an article published in Durban’s Daily News, “the tide was running full and a bunch of us were about a hundred yards out, waiting for slides.”
“A beauty came and I caught it with my surfboard. The others missed and I came in alone right through the surf to the water’s edge. It was getting late, but I decided to go in again for one more slide.”
“Suddenly, I felt something come shooting underneath me. For a moment I thought it was a friend trying to catch my leg.”
“And then I felt my shoulder in a vicious grip. The terrific speed at which the shark was travelling lifted me bodily from the water. My right arm was flung out and it seemed as if it had been torn from its socket. The surfboard was hurled some yards away.”
“Then I saw the shark leap out of the water. It was about the size of a man.”
“At first I was absolutely panic stricken. I started shouting madly and kicked my legs. I was worried it would attack again.”
“By this time my wound had left a long trail of blood which I thought would attract my attacker or other sharks in the vicinity, of which I am sure there were quite a few. I resigned myself to my fate.”
“The two swimmers behind me were swimming furiously to the shore and a terrible feeling of loneliness came over me. I turned over on my back put up my left arm and started kicking back for the shore. It seemed miles away.”
Tomson reached shore with the help of a swimmer and a lifesaver, and ten minutes later he was in hospital getting blood transfusions. His right bicep was severely lacerated and he’d lost a lot of blood. Suffice to say Ernie Tomson survived, though the muscle loss caused his right hand to tighten into a fist. Twenty years later when it was his son garnering media attention, Ernie was sometimes photographed with Shaun, his right hand always clenched.
“My Dad's attack caused me some anxiety,” says Shaun about his father’s story. “I knew that if it happened to him it could happen to me too.”
Despite his trepidation, the chances of Shaun being attacked at Durban were extremely unlikely. Reason being, six years after Ernie’s attack, and another eleven subsequent attacks later, the Durban authorities decided to address the shark problem. They looked to Australia, particularly Sydney which had experienced its own shark attack cluster in the 1930s, but seemingly solved it with shark nets.
So in 1952 seven gill nets, each 130 metres long, were laid along the Durban beachfront. Following their installation the shark attacks stopped, a fact borne out by statistics. According to the Global Shark Attack File, there hasn’t been a single fatality on a Durban beach since 1952 nor any incidents resulting in serious injury.
The newspaper clippings of Ernie Tomson’s attack reveal the public sentiment in Durban 1946. ‘Chemicals to repel sharks’ says one headline reporting on a hopeful new shark deterrent, while another states ‘Some anglers opposed to shark hunt’. Sharks then, as they do now, polarised the community.
Shaun Tomson recently attended a conference in Australia and was dispirited by what he heard while here. “A numbers of Dads said to me that they are no longer encouraging their children to go surfing and that’s sad to hear. Those attacks are starting to affect the bonds between families and the sea which is the very fabric of Aussie life as I have known it.”
Sixty years after the Durban cluster scientists still don’t have a handle on exactly why sharks attack. They do, however, know that nets are the best way to prevent them even if they are a contentious solution. When the opposition to shark nets is raised Shaun draws on their efficacy in Durban and Sydney. “Every person that raises their hands against nets will have future deaths on them. I have been an environmentalist since I could spell the word but the calculus is simple: Which is worth more, a human life, or a shark, a dolphin, or a turtle?”
Comments
Well the moral calculus is a bit more complex than that since numerous marine mammals may die in nets and the human lives saved are only a statistical notion. Ultimately though it is a technological problem. How do we design a net that stops sharks entering an area but does not entangle and kill them or other marine species? I can't believe that this is in the too hard basket, but until someone solves it, given that I surf mainly netted areas, it would be hypocritical to deny that protection to others.
I've never understood the anti-shark net argument. Sydney is exactly the same. The year before they were installed was the last fatal attack. The nets aren't there all the time. They don't cover the whole beach etc etc. But they stop people dying. Simple as that.
Sure a turtle or two and a few dolphins get caught but it's not like the bycatch is catastrophic. Probably pales into comparison to the bycatch pulled in by any of the trawlers out there?
And BB this was from your old drop in mate the Bounty Chewer.
Why not put electronic deterrent devices on the nets? Assuming it doesn't affect dolphin and whale sonar etc.
……simple comparison…. a day at the zoo you think well glad the lions are in an enclosure they could potentially take off my arm so I won't stand to close…. compared to…. a day on the beach well I'm glad the sharks are not terrestrial they could potentially take of my arm so I won't go in and go to the local pools instead or surf early morning or late arvo or where there has been many attacks…. that would drastically reduce my chances…. easy solution
Simo, most recent attack haven't been early or late.
I understand the argument against nets based on the abhorrence of bycatch but surely there can be no argument about the effectiveness of nets in reducing attacks.....yet that is exactly the argument Danny Bucher and others are making, that the nets don't work.
Do they think we are fucking stupid and can't access the stats?
Or see how the attacks are happening at non-netted beaches and not at netted or drum-lined one?
""""I have been an environmentalist since I could spell the word but the calculus is simple: Which is worth more, a human life, or a shark, a dolphin, or a turtle?”""
"worthiness". reflect on that word for a moment or two. what does it mean?
and then ask yourself the question.
You tell me Happyass.
What do you value more ?
A turtle or your son ?
Taking into account that tens of intelligent pigs are raised in hellacious conditions for their entire lives so that you can eat ham.
Well said Blowin.
a choice between the two? ill answer that. but first ill put a similar question back at you blowin.....
you enter a room. there are two doors. behind the left door is your family dog. behind the right is a serial murder/rapist whom you have never met. if you open the left door your dog lives but the rapist dies. if you open the right door the rapist lives but your dog dies.
if you were to choose to open the left door I wouldn't think any less of you. that would be your subjective opinion that your dogs life was worth more than a human whom youd never met.
as to your question about my son or a turtle? well if it was a choice between two doors, which it is not, and hence your dilemma is false, my son would be the answer.
the larger point i am making is that "value" and "worth" are very subjective statements. what i value at an emotional level and what i value at an intellectual level are not necessarily the same.
save the dawg every day of the week brah
You said it yourself Happyass.
And your intellectual level has been compromised and corrupted by years of detachment from the harsh reality of nature.
Maybe you should employ your intellect to realise that the choice between the turtle and the son is anything but a false dichotomy.
Nets kill turtles - fact.
Nets help prevent fatal attacks on people - fact.
it is a false dichotomy as allowing my son to surf is not a death sentence in itself, which is kinda why I asked you the theoretical 2 doors question. of course you will never be presented with that decision because its absurd. but also the son in the surf "death sentence" vs a turtle in the net is equally absurd as im not presented with that exact decision to make. so moving beyond dichotomy's id ask you a larger question....
on an intellectual level, on what basis do you favour human life over that of an animal.
if you dont know, thats ok, neither do I. for that reason i dont judge people any longer about this matter. but still hold my own opinion.
Intellect doesn't get a look in.
It's called preservation of my species.
And that's from someone that's basically misanthropic if there's more than a dozen people involved in any event that's not unambiguously positive in nature.
"And that's from someone that's basically misanthropic..."
Got a chuckle out of me.
oh, dont tell me. you chose the right door blowin. ;)
well, you've appealed to my sense of humour, so all is forgiven.
"....2.5 attacks every year." Can someone explain a half of a shark attack? I'm a bit slow.
The average Australian family has two-and-a-half kids, so half a shark attack is when the half a kid gets taken.
Makes complete sense.
Does anyone think over fishing increases the likelihood of shark attacks as expressed by Bethany Hamilton on Triple J's Hack?
Thanks Swellnet and Tomson family for insightful overview.
Ongoing science targeting local sharks allows our wildlife a little room for comfort.
Gold Coast for most part is pulling up nets and replacing with baits.
GC locals can now choose 'Enviro- Net free beaches' - (northward from border)-
Duranbah,Froggys,Snapper Rocks,Rainbow Bay,Greenmount,Tugun,Currumbin Alley,Palm Beach,Burleigh Point,North Burleigh,Broadbeach,Northcilff,The Spit and South Straddie
(Wolf in Sheeps clothing) vs (Trojan Horse)
Animals of all sort won't shut up squeaking and talking.Speaking in their defence.
Not only mimic sound,look,shape of friend or foe but even each others sex.
Communicate with you or I ... using soundwaves or vocal intent.Sound warnings to whole neighbourhood of unknown danger lurking ahead.Camouflage,stalk around or simply just play dead.
Defend their newborn,whole family or any adopted.Snap! Another horrid trap,howl in pain and cry just like we would too.When life comes to an end,lay beside grieving as loving families do.
Soon enough they bury their dead even that of the thoughtless victim too.Many years go by just like yesterday they return to the grave so true.
Not long ago there was only ever us..
Dolphins bring fish to our hand to their mouth we feed.
Turtles hatchlings line full length of Golden Shore...none ridden round here no more.
Dugong wiped-out from Surf Reserve too slow for modern pace.
Hide quick they did from ever hungry human face.
Govt warns never surf with sharks nor ever mans best friend.
Now Dogz hangin' 5 in surf reserve, what a way to end.
National Park...the Marine and World Surfing Reserve.
Dare question that...toss in hat! Sheer bloody nerve!
(Shark Control Program) SCP 24/7 Hotline 1800 806 891(Qld freecall)
That u 2Pac?
You would kill the rapist then kill the turtle feed your son and let the dog lick the shell..
Then hunt a GW...
just dribbling again..
Daniel Bucher is often referred to in the press as a shark expert. However the SCU's website states "Dr Bucher is a marine ecologist with particular interests in the biodiversity of subtidal habitats such as reefs and sediment. Another area of interest is the ageing and growth studies of marine species including fish, worms and molluscs."
It also says that most of his research grants are for assignments around mangroves and inland rivers and focus on fish larvae, fish and seagrasses.
It mentions nothing about studies or research about sharks. He doesn't appear to be qualified as a scientist to make informed comments about shark behaviour and his remarks about the effectiveness of shark nets are at odds with the views expressed by scientists that specialise in shark research.
You can only conclude that his interest in conservation clouds his ability to be objective as a scientist when commenting on the data about shark attacks before and after nets are deployed. He lacks credibility.
When it comes to seeking advice on sharks or nets, he should be last in line to be consulted. But if you want to know about worms in the mangroves, molluscs in the rock pools or bass in the Snowy River he's your man.
Here he is on a river near the mangroves pulling marine life out of the water and posing for the camera, for research purposes of course.
http://scu.edu.au/marine-ecology/index.php/28
The term "in denial" was used in the past to describe the emotional state of people traumatised or confused about a sudden event that affected their lives. The first time I can recall it being used differently was the so-called Year 2000 crisis. In 1999 people who didn't go along with the panic that doom was imminent when the clock struck 12.00 on New Year's Day were called deniers. Of course it is used nowadays as an insult to anyone who doesn't accept the dire warnings of looming disasters that will be occur due to climate change.
I can understand the doubt by people who are yet to be convinced, and it isn't helped by predictions that fail to eventuate (Flannery's empty dams) or false claims that isolated weather events are directly attributable to climate change (Bob Brown claiming the Queensland floods in 2010 were caused by climate change when the flood of 1890 reached a greater height). I can understand the doubt because the topic is predictions and forecasts about the future.
But when you're looking back at the past and have recorded data on the frequency of shark attacks across 3 areas of coastline, Sydney, Gold Coast and part of South Africa, and the reduction in frequency after nets were introduced is so significant in every case, and then you to try to argue against the evidence, you would surely deserve the tag of a true denier.
By the way, I'm not stating that I'm a denier of climate change. I accept what the scientists and the IPCC say. But I take what unqualified experts say with a grain of salt. Just like Daniel Bucher.
Nice article Coaster, Bucher is a fraud and the media love him because he always has something controversial to say. I,m surprised the Uni let him comment as his statements are unfounded and he has nothing to back his claims.
.
I bow to your post Coaster.
Nicely done.
Bucher....shut your lips you ignorant pest.
I'm with you buddy, well said ( or typed in this case )
Fair comment Coaster. You can also Add Chris Neff from Sydney Uni when he recently made is comments re the Ballina shark events. He is a political scientist yet he 'knows' all about the shark events.
To be fair your last statement may explain why there are many people who may not accept the IPCC statements. Yes, it is not helped when you get the likes of Flannery etc. espousing doom and gloom.
Rally at Manly which has had shark meshing since .....1937?, and no attacks for many, many years.....against the use of shark nets in Ballina.
Do these people not realise the totally counter-productive nature of such hypocrisy in terms of alienating people from the broader environmental movement?
Fair comment on all. The hypocrisy of sydneysiders at a netted beach protesting nets 900km away is disgraceful. So, similairly, is Dr Buchers continuing to pass judgement in areas where he has limited experience-effectively saying the Science isn't in on sharks while then going straight ahead and providing his opinion as a Scientist. (well, we dont know, but what I can tell you....) Majorly un-Sciency...
However, play the ball not the man- His continual use as a talking head on the issue is largely the result of lazy journalism- the local Northern Star calls him up, sydney papers google what they have done and follow suit and voila, you have the media anointed 'Shark Expert' who, it must be noted, must rue ever opening his mouth on the topic. He has been put in a situation where he is consistently appearing foolish. I've had him as a lecturer and he really knows his stuff. It's just not sharks.
It's not really hypocrisy as the idiots have been trying for years to get the nets removed in Sydney too. They tried to hit me up to sign a petition on Sunday morning and the girl seemed genuinely dumbfounded when I laughed and declined.
It is if theyre protesting ballinas nets at manly.
Once again nets prove their worth. Durban ! In Byron we live in fear every day we enter the water. Surfing was never like that as i remember. As we fight to protect peoples lives who still crave to enjoy our beautiful ocean, Mums, Dads, small kids, teenagers, aunties, uncles, these lives must be protected. Yet in Byron the green tree huggers, Byron Council, and Sea Shephard are doing everything they can to stop Byron from having proper shark protection, ie nets and drum lines. Seashepard should stick to ramming other countries boats. Will never get one cent from me !
FYI, there is now funding to study the 'buried whale' theory, for a couple of SCU researchers.
http://www.coffscoastadvocate.com.au/news/shark-investigations/3120933/
Please note Dr Bucher is previously on record as suggesting it would have no impact. He's also an expert on hydrocarbon migration dont you know.
http://www.coffscoastadvocate.com.au/news/whale-has-little-impact-on-sha...
Dr Burcher ,"imagines," that the a whale breaking down on a beach would be filtered by the sand , what hope have we got with peanuts like him , so called Dr , no proof just his imagination.
really simple , if sand filters the decomposing whale , how much sand per Kg of rotting whale? Ever heard of filters getting saturated??
Why doesn't dr B , just go and get samples of the sand and ocean near the whale??
Drop 20lt of dye into the carcass..the same harmless dye used to show ocean rips let it mix with the oils
sit back and observe.
or you could just get a water sample , near the Carcass , and see if there is any whale burley oozing out from the burial site !
It's actually quite alarming that this is a cheap easy way of scientifically looking at the problem , so where is the science??
I wrote about this recently and posted a pic if anyone remembers? The whale that I posted the pic of washed up here about 10 minutes up the road. They buried it where it lay. This was about 6 months ago.
Anyway, a few weeks ago, about 5 k's from this spot north the crew were buzzed out of the water by a couple of big sharks, one guy got bumped while another apparently had one crusie just past him eyeing him off. They were over 10ft they reckon and consequently the line-up was cleared for a few days. It was the talk of the carpark for ages.
Not only is this unusual but it's unprecedented, nobody in this area has been attacked by a shark, not that anyone can remember and people have been surfing and swimming here for at least 50 years. I can't even remember if anyone had ever even seen a shark around here.
It could be a coincidence that the shark 'encounter' coincided with the annual salmon run but my money is on the lovely, whaley oil slick that's probably nice and ripe having been buried under the hot sand for 6 months now.
Few more years of oil leaching yet, some of the biggest GWS ever caught have been up your way zen and in Taiwan....where they went straight to the fish market.
Thanks Udo, that's very reassuring:)
I swat flies and feed them to my gold fish they love it!
Fuk 6 whites tagged today Lennox evans area
NSWDPI shark team advise 2.59m female White Shark tagged and released off Evans Head Main Beach using SMART Drumline technology. Shark #73
Time for a cull dick heads! There getting bigger! Or just make Jaws the Reality! When babies get Munched!
It ok to Kill White Pointers cause they don't have any feelings!
Vic Hislop time to shine! Let him out there! Get em Vic!
There eating every thing from baby dolphins not to mention the baby seals oh my! What about the Penguins poor little things! Cull or your Child's arms or legs will be next!
It all starts when when Maria and Ivo have a few beers at The Lennox Pub and get Friscy!
Ivo says let's go for a swim Maria! Anyway they go for a Swim next thing Maria has no legs! Thanks for coming!!!!!!!!!!
Well after the sightings , net captures and tag and release from the drum lines in the last few days ,its pretty obvious theres plenty of whites that have replaced the tagged ones that may have moved south or wherever they went .Reality is that they are here all year round .Anyone for a body bash out the back at Suffolk or Sharpes ?
Ash Gibb got a nudge by Large White Pointer today! I personally think their a spectacular creature but there are thousands of them out there! We need to control them! Or unfortunately more people will get Chomped!! Good Luck!!!!!
Some drone footage of Orcas eating a shark on dorsalwatch
I heard there has been Orcas off Forster recently. Hopefully they tell their buddies to travel up a little further north for a Christmas feast.