Teen killed in shark attack at Wooli
A teenage boy is dead after being bitten by a shark off of NSW's mid-north coast.
The 15-year-old was surfing at Wilsons Headland at Wooli Beach, near Grafton and north of Coffs Harbour, just before 2:30pm when he was attacked.
The shark attack left him with severe injuries to his legs.
Several surfers came to the aid of the teen and helped him to shore for medical attention.
Despite CPR efforts to revive him, he died at the scene.
Beaches in the area including Wooli, Diggers Camp and Minnie Water were closed after the attack.
NSW Police said they would liaise with the Department of Primary Industries to investigate the circumstances surrounding the death.
A report will be prepared for the coroner.
Thoughts go out to the family, friends and first responders.
Comments
Another Shark Attack at Wooli - holy shit..
R.I.P. young fella
Damn! RIP. Condolences to the family
Sad news.
RIP.
Rest In Peace. Way too young for life to be over. Thoughts are with his friends and family.
Somewhere in the comments beneath the article on the Casuarina shark attack last month, I recall someone saying that there was a ‘spate’ of attacks a couple of years ago which instigated significant (relatively) funding toward research on sharks and attack mitigation strategies (drones, smart drum lines etc).
With four fatal attacks on the east coast of Australia since April (Great Barrier Reef, Casuarina, Fraser Island, Wooli), I expect there might be some more movement in this space.
Would love to know if any of this research involves the " attraction" of a white bottomed surfboard that could resemble the carcass of a dead ( or alive) whale. As everyone knows both species are protected ( no problem there) but boardrider attacks seem to outnumber swimmer attacks disproportionately. On heaps of beaches every day you may see swimmers exercising by swimming the length of the beach ( I see it every day at Manly beach), yet the only attacks I can remember was one at Byron Bay and another off a Perth beach from memory! Could be wrong there, but my point is they are shark bait waiting to be attacked, so could it back up the dead whale theory! Five fatal attacks this year is scarey. Maybe more research into surfboard distraction is needed as one thing will continue, that is great whites will always follow the whale migration.
Surfers outnumber ocean swimmers by a multiple greater than 20 most days here in Perth specifically in the impact zone or beyond. Simple stats would seem to account for the variation in attack frequency between the two.
I've always been a live and let live kinda guy with the biteys, but it's reached a point now where there has to be some real measures but in place to mitigate this stuff happening.
Surfers in water said a really big Great White and after first bite came in again for another go.
Sounds eerily familiar to the casuarina attack.
RIP young fella. Thoughts go out to the family & all involved. Very sad.
thats a real shame. Fifteen year old local kid.
whole life in front if him.
RIP.
condolences to the family and hope the brave souls who rallied to get him out of the water and tried to save his life are OK.
Very sad. Way too young. RIP young fella
Very Sad news,RIP young man,Thinking of his family and friends
Heart breaking.
Here's Emma's Update
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-11/teenager-killed-in-shark-attack-i...
Emma has just revealed that the teen was even younger
Mani Hart -Deville was only 15 years old {RIP}
https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/d33f97c20d8afd9848d01e9f716b3062?wid...
Recently spearfishers had seen Great Whites in the same area.
Spearfishers had dived there earlier today.
*
Just after 2pm ( Being the back off the High Tide)
A 2.5m GWS struck from beneath taking a bite from teen's leg..the youth screamed.
The Shark came back & struck again ...by now both the teens legs were mauled.
The back left tail of his board was missing & fin was also gone.
Another nearby surfer came to fight off the shark .
It seems the crew tried to stop the bleeding at or near the site before heading in.
Then all assisting the Teen ashore...calling for help & administering 1st aid.
Again we hear of heroic surfers fending off Shark & completing rescues
The youth was brought ashore couldn't be revived with CPR.
Police had taken his board to determine the species of Shark.
It seems the Surfers (Gromz) were all close & Adults knew some kids
Quite possibly some were the local grom crew out for a session.
Some heartbreaking scenes...
https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/news/wooli-beach-teen-dies-in-s...
Naturally Beaches in the Area are closed & NSW SLS will send drones to scout shark.
* Sentence removed by request! Apologies to Shark Victims. (re: tbb below!)
With all these links you post TBB, can you link to any evidence for the claim that “an hour on the back of tide brings fish to the surface”? There’s lots of wild anecdotal claims flying around about what cause shark attacks but no one ever seems to be able to back these up with scientific evidence. Old mate’s tales aren’t helpful at this time and also show a great deal of disrespect to the victims who were just doing what we all do, every day around Australia.
How ‘bout finding a link with scientific proof that ‘sharks actually don’t like humans, and all bites are mistaken identity’. Surely we can put that to bed now. The poor soul should have been afforded more protection based on what we have seen happen in recent years. It may not have guaranteed his safety, but it also may have. Thoughts are with you, young man. I feel like you have been failed, and I fear you won’t be the last
Good luck finding scientific proof for that kaiser. Maybe mistaken identity is a long shot, but if they truly had a "taste for humans" as some hysterical people claim, no attack victims would ever make it to shore. It's pretty indisputable that if they really wanted to eat someone, they could and would. There's a smorgasbord of humans in the water around the coast of Aus every day to choose from. If they really "liked humans" they'd be feasting on us daily. You claim "more protection" is required but what does this mean? Killing millions of other animals every year through indiscriminate shark nets or do you just want to fish all GWS out of existence? More research, understanding and confirmation of the anecdotes/observations that tbb has proffered would be far more beneficial to us, them and the oceans in general.
scottishsponger it's referenced quite a lot by fishermen.
tbb & crew dedicate this research to young Mani Hart-Deville
All coastlines have their versions but this NZ passage explains it best...
https://www.nzfishingworld.co.nz/posts/understanding-the-tides
NZ Fishing "Understanding the tides" (Tidal Bait)
" A classic example of this occurs most days at the entrance to most estuaries and bays. With the run-out tide, bait starts to stack up as it is forced out. The predators know this and congregate to take advantage of the situation. Salmon to Sharks and Kingfish all take advantage of this tide - induced feeding frenzy. This scenario that is repeated right around the country.
Offshore the upcoming tide change sees massive bait shoals rise up from the depths towards the surface. While the bait isn't the primary target, it certainly draws up predators with it so the tide directly affects the bait, which in turn influences the target species. Why the bait rises up is still something no one can answer."
On the back of the Tide the Baitfish bundle (Obviously more volume back of a high). When the tide is dead-slack (Mid) the bait schools disperse & so to the Salmon.
One reason is the upwelling allows the colder protected schools of fish a window of opportunity to rise to the surface to grab some warmth. This can happen on back of a high or (1hr back of low > Last weekends Tragedy). Fishermen are advised to hit the days with dual High Tide Changes for best reward.
Another thing is Tides rush tightly into seaways but lazily bellow out for longer & wider along beachfronts. This allows the shark to cruise outside & herd the bait close inshore for longer (1 hour off the back of tide). Simply shapes the bait by gating high tide gutters. Imagine the shark being near the river mouth 0 - 30m outgoing High tide. Shark slowly shapes the Tidal Bait fish (Sunning) along beaches for 1hr or 500m along or more. Once the Shark can't trap the bait in the Gutters due to outgoing tide...it's free to go! 1.5 hrs after high matches the time the Shark is Feeding in the Backbreak. This is just the natural flow of events & we surfers see or feel this better than any.
Meaning most sharks can be "seen" cruising inshore 1hr back of high. tbb is not saying that's the Shark schools gathering point...rather it's one or more sharks force of habit. Only the shark knows which day his nutritious snack swims by.
Google Picture search will reveal all a lot faster...Type [sharks swim near beaches]. Or Type whatever you like to get images of Sharks near any beach and then examine the Tide line...Sharks venturing near shorelines all show a wet sand line reflecting 1-2hrs back of a high tide. tbb has quoted in not seeing other than this. If you find an odd one, that's fine, be sure to mention how many of said peak hour shots ya waded thru. This Shark's presence to tide line measures back from creek / river like sand in an hour glass, changing only with bait traits & sand banks.
https://www.google.com/search?q=sharks+swim+near++beaches&tbm=isch&ved=2...
Sure at first! It's kinda freaky & tbb may have uncovered this or that, but as said, it just backs up that the Bait story of back of a high is rock solid for inshore Shark Hour. Back of High tide is Slab time but it's also the Surfing Sharks feeding time!
Even if we know the truth! Who's gonna walk out on the Slabs?
tbb has no way of knowing what % of sharks share this behaviour. Only that it's perfectly natural for the next many shark sightings or 'incidents' to follow this time & tide pattern. Tbb can only only verify that Nth NSW follows said tidal pattern & has posted such many times. How that helps may seem obvious to many here, but tbb is mostly here to unravel common overlooked traits just as this one here, then share the research freely & widely...there's plenty more hopefully valued Shark discoveries shared on other swellnet Shark site.
These papers were recently dedicated to Rob Pedretti.
https://www.swellnet.com/news/swellnet-dispatch/2018/02/27/factfile-fact...
tbb joins crew in passing on condolences to family and friends.
Great research TBB. Thanks.
Far out TBB, you’ve explained that beautifully.
Thanks heaps for sharing.
good info Thanks tbb
Well done
Reasonable comment Scottish, but you should absolve yourself of this idea that anything isn’t established until ‘scientific evidence’ is established.
I’ve just finished 22 years work at a university. In these and so many fields of observational data the anecdotal evidence is about 10 years ahead of the ‘scientific evidence’. That’s the way academia works. I understand there’s a scientific paper coming out soon that establishes that it is always lighter between the hours of sunrise and sunset, but it hasn’t been approved for publication yet.
Get over this ‘scientifically established’ road block where people working in the field have much better observational data. They are WAY ahead of the science. If the long term fishos are saying something, based on observational data, they are almost always going to be confirmed by science, a decade later.
It is very unlikely the GWS are a ‘threatened species’ based on the last 5 years of data on attacks on surfers and the burgeoning and scientifically established rise in whale numbers off east coast Australia, and the observational data of people working in the field for the last 5 decades.
I’m all for scientific evaluation, but you have to understand its limitations, which are significant > peer review > publication > agreement with others in the field > acceptance as received wisdom until the next best theory comes along.
Asking for references is sometimes the dumbest thing, but knowing when and in what circumstances is quite critical. Perhaps an arts degree would be useful.
Condolences to those close to the young fella. Sounds horrific. Hats off to those who assisted him to the beach. Hope I have that level of courage if my turn comes.
I very much doubt it, but I’m getting older now, and maybe I will find the courage to sacrifice my life for a young fella. I hope I could live up to their example.
I agree with a lot of what you say. Science is very slow, and sometimes you need to act before all the facts are in, or in the presence of a lot of uncertainty or what ever. But you still can, and should, consider all the available information. Observational data from fishos should definitely factor into the science, as well as drumline stats, previous research etc. In fact, the challenge is on the scientist to explain the observations, not the other way around.
But I don't understand some of your other statements.
"based on observational data, they are almost always going to be confirmed by science, a decade later."
History is rife with observational data/common sense that was later shown to be false. In my field (neuroscience) anecdotal observation rarely pan out, and I find that my intuitions usually do not hold up in proper experiments. Are you saying that the policy should be based on this observational data without scientific assessment? isn't that just a peoples court?
"It is very unlikely the GWS are a ‘threatened species’ based on the last 5 years of data on attacks on surfers and the burgeoning and scientifically established rise in whale numbers off east coast Australia, and the observational data of people working in the field for the last 5 decades."
I agree that something seems odd here (based on my limited knowledge in this area), but I think you are being a bit careless when you say "very unlikely the GWS are a ‘threatened species’ ". Or perhaps I missed your reasoning on that?
This is so upsetting. I must admit I was a bit spooked surfing my local down here in Vic. and kept the surf shorter. Surf was crap anyway.
Those locals who helped bring this boy in deserve some sort of bravery recognition. Would have been so easy to just high tail it to the beach.
Sorry to hear this. RIP little mate.
Terrific effort by the crew to get him to shore, can't imagine how full-on that must be.
So heavy. Very hard to hear about this.
Thoughts to all his family and friends.
RIP to the young fella who did nothing other than enjoy his routine morning surf..at what stage is a cull in the northern NSW area required? or has that been dropped off the radar?
This has been building up for a few years now..tagging, nets, drones, its beginning to look a lot like renioun island..northern NSW with has been discovered a a shark nursery is now the local hotspot..deepest respect to the lad and the family
So heavy and sad.. RIP Mani, thoughts to his family and friends :(
I recently had a close encounter with a juvenile white pointer(2 m+) after kicking out of a small wave very close to a shoreline gutter . I was still standing on my board as the shark cruised past me within a meter. If I had fallen off I would have probably landed on it! I immediately went in & sat on the beach after warning other surfers about it's presence(no one came in). About 5 mins later a small school of mullet ran along the same inshore gutter, which obviously the shark was stalking. The white pointer numbers are increasing as are humans in the water. Every surfer takes a chance every time they paddle out into their realm. Is there a solution to this scenario? The only real solution is to not surf & for me that is not an option as surfing is my passion in so many ways (only a surfer knows the feeling)! However I have changed my routine, no dawn patrols, no late surfs & I try not to paddle out by myself anymore. Does this reduce the risks involved in going for a surf ? My condolences to the young mans family & friends, R.I.P. Mani.
I can't recall any attacks being early morning or late afternoon, 10-2 seems to be more common (just my sense of it, i have not looked at any data).
Edit just read comments below mine after i posted, coincidental that the 10-2 timeframe is repeated.
Craig Ison Evans Head - Jabez REitman 7 mile beach both early A.M.
Greg Williams dont worry about dawn patrols and dusk surfs.
The fatalities this year have been 10am and 2pm. Most of them in bright sunshine.
And don't worry about surfing on your own. Sharks don't seem overly put off by surfer numbers in the water. The risk with solo surfing is more if you injure yourself and need assistance.
Very sad news..
Condolences and thoughts for family and friends.
Such a tragedy. RIP Mani.
Another attack! Another human life lost. Condolences to the Mani’s family, it’s a shame there’s people out there that still try to protect these creatures regardless of the human lives it cost. Blood is on there hands. Hope they sleep well at night.
its time to start killing sharks and recycle them into fish and chips
yep I miss my flake.. bring back vic Hislop and his bunch of merry men.... very sad news.. thoughts with family and friends
DPI setting drum lines in the attack area.
Absolute tragedy.
But some of the comments are misplaced. It is very difficult to establish what, if anything, is the cause of the increased number of attacks. As far as I can tell there I is no evidence of increased great white numbers or change of behavior (there is A LOT of evidence for the demise of sharks and rays more generally).
Many have commented about the increased number of people in the water due to covid. All things being equal, if (for example) twice as many people go to the beach there would be twice as many attacks.
Again, absolute tragedy. Condolences to the family and friends. But we need to respond, not just react.
Demise of non-protected shark species yes but not the protected great white, they are flourishing.
References?
Hi mate, I was recently checking the catch stats in nets off Cronulla area. Couldn't see past 2018, but i recall 2015 they got 45 odd dangerous sharks and in 18 it was almost triple in the 140odd region. Not sure if there were more nets or otherwise but might be evidence of increasing numbers.
"All things being equal, if (for example) twice as many people go to the beach there would be twice as many attacks"
mmm.?. be interested to hear the logic behind that
yeah, thats total BS.
crowds are protective.
most attacks happen when surfers are in small groups.
I am not sure why that seems weird. More people in the water more chance of something going wrong. E.g. more cars on the road more accidents. Shark attacks increase with population numbers.
The reference https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0211049
And the relevant paragraph:
"While shark populations are poorly defined, shark-human interactions in the form of unprovoked attacks have been increasing in raw numbers for more than a century and in increasingly diverse places [12]. The increase in attacks—particularly in the United States, Australia, and South Africa—have been attributed to increases in human population and the subsequent increase in water-based recreational activities. In fact, although the claim of increasing shark attacks is often made in popular media, when adjusting for population growth the true risk may actually be declining in some places [14]."
Of course there are many caveats to that (and every other) paper.
That argument is particularly poor science.
If that were true you'd see the biggest increase in attacks in areas where coastal population has increased the fastest, like Sydney and the Gold Coast.
Also, increasing numbers of people in the water are most likely protective.
Attacks happen in small groups, not large crowds.
That old chestnut is not science, just poorly disguised advocacy.
I asked for a evidence to support my statement and I provided it. It seems to me like your mind is already made up.
I could say the same about you.
I provided logical reasons why that theory was bunkum (there are others, which I haven't detailed).
You failed to acknowledge them.
You played the man instead.
"Shark attacks increase with human (sic) population numbers" - this is true up to the point of the first person getting in the water in the vicinity of a hungry shark. If there is no-one in the water then totally agree there will be less shark attacks.
In my opinion an analogy with accidents is misplaced. If there is 1 pie in the oven or 10, doesn't matter, I'm still getting a pie.
If there are 100 pies, I might start getting worried the pies will eat me!
RIP little man.
A cull needs to be on the cards. It happens with other species where the balance is out.
Quokka the Swellnet resident "Shark Expert" returns to the forums! hallalujah
So many experts out there hey mike
A total tragedy, yes. Such a horrible thing to happen to anyone, let alone a young person with his whole life ahead of him.
Killing sharks as the answer however, no!
If you look at the stats it’s overwhelming clear that the odds are in every surfers favour when paddling out.
Going on deaths per year from the US 1 person on average dies from shark attacks. Then comparing that to others such as dog attacks (30 per year), bicycle accidents (700 a year), car accidents (30,000) and the biggest one, heart disease (600,000 per year).
If we took the same mentality of killing or destroying things that can kill us then we probably should cull most things....
As humans we are entering the sharks domain and we have to accept the minuscule risk that we could get bitten.
Ahh we live in Oz
Well Vijay going off Aussie stats we’ve had 3 deaths in 4 weeks. As for dog attacks, car & bicycle deaths & heart disease the government invest millions a year into preventive measures to limit if not hopefully put an end to these issues so why should sharks be any different. If a dog killed someone it’s highly unlikely they would allow it keep wandering the streets. It’d be lights out.
Saw an insta post from a mate this morning that a very big shark buzzed the crew at Speedies (Ballina, I think) this morning.....
Took a call from a mate earlier this week who said a very large shark spooked crew around that area. Was in sunshine around mid morning.
RIP Mani. Like a broken record, we see the same comments every attack - 'don't know the numbers', 'they're endangered', 'we're in their territory', 'more chance of being struck by a car/lightning' etc etc. It's obvious that the only way to reduce attacks is to decrease GWS numbers but the shark-huggers won't have a bar of it.
I’ve always been totally against culling but now I’m not so sure where I stand.
So horrible for a young guy to lose his life when it’s just starting. It’s a tough one...
Like a broken record we see the same comments "too many whites", "hippies are to blame", "culling the only answer"...
we could start by taking the GWS off the protected specie list
Pretty obvious now that they are not endangered and should no longer be treated as such.
[Disclaimer]
Fellow swellnetonian 'may' feature in this Article.
tbb respects name association Rules
NSW News Article addresses this tragedy!
RIP Mani. Condolences to family and friends and thoughts with the crew on site at the time.
"Cull White Sharks or Don't surf"... seriously are either of these things gonna be OK with everybody? Ambassador Carroll,are you out there? Anywhere??
More investment into mitigation like drum lines or something better?
More use of rpela or shark shield or investment in a device that's real user friendly?
All the reassuring statistics mean nothing if you are paddling out near Ballina or on Renion Island.
15 years old. To young, far to young. My deepest and sincere condolences to Mani’s family. RIP.
A little factoid. Over the smart drumlines program GWS have outnumbered all other shark species caught, that’s 12 others, by nearly 3:1.
Not endangered, not even rare.
That’s a crazy stat hey
certainly not rare up here.
common, even seasonally abundant species.
The last count was done by CSIRO using genetic material and gave a 2015 population estimate based on data collected in 2013.
That estimate contained very large margins of error and 7 years later is likely to be so wrong as to be meaningless compared to other forms of data like smart drum line captures, aerial surveillance, attack rates, incident rates etc etc.
You mean this?
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-20593-w
I disagree about your statement re the margin of error. They report 95 conf interval and distribution is not super heavy tailed. Even absolute maximum estimate of total population is ~20k(figure 2b). All and all reasonable estimates.
You will also know that great whites take a long time for sexual maturity, so an explosion of population between now and then is unlikely.
I don't have an explanation for the increased number of attacks this year (except for more ppl in water this year due to covid). But "seasonally abundant"? Give me a break
Yes, tooold, you're spot on. Only difference is that your oft-repeated arguments mean lives keep being lost while my oft-repeated arguments would mean lives are saved. Feel vindicated now? PS Blaming shark attacks on covid...really? FFS.
My arguments is about approaching this scientifically to the best of our ability. I would 100% support any culling strategy that is *scientifically* based.
PS surely you could not seriously interpret what I said as covid->shark attacks.
Condolences to all young mates family and friends it's too sad, The question of culling ,netting,drumlining or protecting is asked again and again after every one of these tragic attacks, I've got no answer but after 40 years commercial offshore line fishing out of the Clarence l reckon it will be a stinky ocean if they started popping all those fuckers , shark numbers are huge {not only white's} and growing , yeh i can hear it already 'where are your figures", "where are your scientific study spreadsheets and graphs", well fucken bad luck, got none ! Only have eyes and ears and sadly we have the news to keep telling us these attacks have happened again. l believe killing a shark in an attack vacinity surely must be justifiable and if there is collateral casualties shit happens. Talking to the drumline contractors at Evanshead is an eyeopener , the numbers of sharks{not just whites} and incidents they deal with is mad and l think more people should hear for themselves ,but my last chat 2 weeks ago with Cap'n Duck a prawn trawling legend and gentleman here out of the Clarence has stayed with me for the wrong reason's he said the shark numbers are insane and he has never seen so many behind the boat in a lifetime at sea{ over 5 decades} ' but the look on his face as he looked over his coffee and said " but mate so many of them are big fucken whites" has more validity and truth about shark populations that a lot of people in the "endangered shark lobby" dont want to hear l feel. Maybe some of need to go out for a run one night and have a look for themselves ! he he he ! I get to see whites but i just move as soon as a shark cleans me up best thing to do. In 5 years time l cant imagine population numbers, let alone 10 years time if nothing changes , someone needs to come up with something , effective ,electronic deterrents, drumlines? dunno .thousands of drumlines they will need alot of boats to tow the all fuckers out to 5mile and let em go , drones up , drones everywhere ?impossible. culling?? in this politcal climate wont happenl l Dont pray much but after this tragedy im hoping someone comes up with an effective solution quick! Stay safe everyone
Depends how far off they are on the original estimate.
Which was based on 100 sharks, pretty fucking tiny sample size.
Also questions over basic biology remain.
Study says litters of 5-6 pups, possibly every second year.
Shark fisherman here will tell you they have seen pregnant whites with 20 pups inside.
small errors can compound easily when it comes to to such small samples and variance in reproductive rates.
possibly even growth rates might be off in food rich sub-tropical areas.
Even if pop estimates are in the ballpark then if there are seasonal aggregations as the paper alludes to (some age classes congregate seasonally along the coast of the state of New South Wales), then it's fair to say along the North Coast white sharks are seasonally abundant, no?
I know the emotions run high on this, but out of respect for the grom and the family I don't think this is the place for a debate about the pros and cons of shark population assessment or control methods. Definitely needs further discussion, but this is not the place. I shouldn't have mentioned the sighting here, either, in hindsight.
If not the place then where is? That’s just an easy pc comment to make everyone feel guilty when in fact we are all uniting in the same high emotion against what happened. This shit needs high emotion so something, anything is done.
Gold Coast has nets, Nth NSW doesn't. Nth NSW has shark attacks, Gold Coast doesn't. Does that not prove nets work?
Hmmmm.... Dubbo has no shark attacks. Neither does Broken Hill. Proof you dont need nets,drum lines or a cull to avoid shark attack....
@wax on. From what I've heard, sharks swim parallel to the shoreline a lot of the time, shark nets also run parallel to the shoreline, meaning that any efficacy of the nets in shark control is largely psychological. I think it's been said on here somewhere before that northern NSW has an upwelling zone around Byron, which has a positive bottom-up effect on biodiversity in the area, I don't think this reaches SEQ though.
If parallel is the case I would think it stops them from swimming into the beach. Don’t really know any of the science behind it but since they have had nets the only fatal attacks on the Goldy have been bull sharks in estuaries and that is since the 1950s. Head to Fingal head 1 km south and there has been multiple attacks all the way to Sydney where nets start again.
80% of the sharks pulled out of the nets are on the beach side of the net. There is 1km of nets for 20kms of coast on the Goldie. They go down 3 meters in 10 meters of water. Still feeling safe Wax On? Its not the nets, the Goldie is a big shallow (fished out) bay. Very different to south of the border. RIP Mani.
I don't surf on the goldy I surf where the sharks are. But I reckon it is bullshit when people sat nets don't do anything. Bondi has had the most attacks in Oz, then miraculously they stopped when nets were put in.
Gold Coast spearfishers don't put up with aggressive sharks - they use a shot gun shell in a practice called "power-heading". not legal. Protects ocean users...
The Goldy is a shallow bay compared to the more exposed North Coast.
I'm seeing alot of hysteria for the increased numbers of whites on the E coast of oz, but zero mention of the complete disappearance of whites from the Southern tip of Africa. https://www.surfer.com/features/great-whites-are-disappearing-in-cape-to...
I really think this is a must read for everybody with an opinion on sharks.
We already know these big dogs traverse oceans. Could it be any coincidence the exploding populations of whites of the E coast of the US and the E coast of oz are in some way related to the fact the whites of Sth Africa moved on due to lack of food? Also is it possible the dramatic increase of white pointers in WA 2-3 years ago was that same population moving across the oceans looking for food. Whilst culling may be a brute strength solution, it might be worth looking at the bigger picture. Maybe they have been protected by people who actually do know more than us for a reason. And in saying this, i'm not saying it doesn't make my blood boil knowing a species we protect attacked an innocent grom on one of our favourite parts of the oz playground. My first primal instinct is also kill the bastards, however, there is also the part of me as a human that is reasoned and has the ability to consider the much broader picture of the living ocean, which incidentally, is much much larger than the land we inhabit. I agree with above comments re anecdotal evidence too, but in an age when we have phone cameras on every single device, it would be great to start having this anecdotal evidence recorded, dated, and collated into some kinda data for future reference.
Condolences to family of young man.
Some (not up to date) numbers off the DPI website.
Sharks tagged to December 2019.
GWS. 404
Tiger. 83
Bull. 11
Non target * 212
GWS comprises 56% of the total of all species caught. Appears to be a pretty strong correlation with whale season.
* grey nurse, blacktip, whalers, mako etc. (10 other species)
RIP Mani.
There was a little article in the paper last week for WA. 54 GWS tagged in the last 4 years, bringing the total to 115 tagged GWS's in WA. Most are from targeted tagging. Only 2 were tagged from the first 12mths smart drum line trials between the capes.
They are using a different (wrong) bait in WA. Not sure if it is intended self sabotage or wtf.
And yet another one on the back of the Kingscliff attack. RIP young fella and condolences to family and friends. A special mention to those in the water who helped him in and attempts to save him on the beach. How many more lives and injuries will it take before some action is taken, and this does not mean more tagging and phone apps. To start with, how about rolling out the nearby Qld shark mitigation measures for the northern NSW coastline and monitor the results. This should be in place now during the annual whale feast when large numbers of white sharks get together along the east coast. Secondly, remove white shark protection laws and just let it be as it was before humans interfered. Ocean users should be afforded some reduced risk to enjoy the beaches (and which is mainly confined to the coastline) without being the target of a submerged predator doing what it's wired to do, that has clear advantage and strikes without warning. Its an unfair playing field.
Interesting comments on nets and Goldy.
Just saying - Cronulla is far from a barren waistland in terms of fish/bait etc. We have whales very close to shore and even have a close by observatory which I understand sites as many or more whales as Byron. We have nets and not one attack since they have been in place.
The nets also catch a lot of GW's so they are around.
I also understand that catch rates of dangerous sharks in the nets has more than tripled in recent years.
Could argue many things but there are some obvious conclusions you could potentially draw without thinking too hard - i.e. numbers are increasing and nets might actually work.
Not saying they are the answer or enviro friendly and not wanting to detract from others opinions and feelings. I actually think the fact we can all debate this is great. I used to have a heavily sided take them out attitude but that has changed a bit.
If shark shield could halve the size of the battery in the tailpad, or if rpela could make retrofit and fitting in a new board a bit easier and cheaper we could have a way of cutting down risk. It's a catch 22 - there is not enough take up to justify the investment for these company's in improving the product but people won't take it up unless they do.
Nets work. It was like flicking a switch at places like Bondi, Durban and the Gold Coast from regular attacks (even with many fewer swimmers around in those days) to almost none for a long long period. Sydney catches on a few beaches in the early days went from 600 sharks a year in the first year to a fifth of that soon after that.
Debates on the merits of alternatives, by catch, who is more important, the challenge of covering hundreds of beaches etc are valid but the debate on effectiveness of netting for targetted areas should be put to bed.
The usual comment against nets is not proof but rather is along these lines:
"The main evidence that suggests that shark nets are not effective in preventing bites on humans is that around 40 per cent of sharks are caught on ‘wrong side’, or beach side of nets."
Which ignores logical factors at work such as:
- reduced numbers of large confident sharks frequenting the areas as part of their patterns of travel
- creating fewer territorial sharks in the area
- behavioural changes - shark wariness from seeing and smelling death in an area
Interestingly the article the above quote came from finishes with:
"The technology available for lessening the risk of shark bites to humans has come a long way since the 1930s, and there are far better options."
But then fails to say what these "far better options" are.
Yep, that debate is not scientific anymore, it's become an area of contention for advocates who abhor the by-catch.
But there should be no debate about their effectiveness. Nets work.
I think drum lines are a better alternative, especially effective on white sharks.
Not in WA it hasn't been for some reason. Possibly just much greater numbers over East, but hard to believe that.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-27/few-great-white-sharks-caught-by-...
Wrong bait used in WA
Not being argumentative FR, but do you think smart drum lines work? As opposed to the archaic QLD version? It seems the smart drum lines in NNSW have reduced attacks... for a while... but it doesn’t seem like it’s working any more? Maybe it is totally localised? Ie it’s done in Ballina and has only really helped Ballina?
yeah I do.
and maybe it is that localised or maybe there are just that many juvenile sub-adult sharks that there are enough un-tagged sharks that aren't "cautious".
I think it's a bit more than an opinion but a theory with limited evidence.
Yeah don’t get me wrong... I think it’s better than doing nothing. And as others have pointed out, every encounter a GWS has with the human race needs to be negative to enforce the desired behaviour (looking at you, cage divers) but if the numbers are such that a cull may provide benefit, then attrition from standard drum lines may not be out of place.
Nets may work but they are not an option in low population areas such as Wooli. Plus the bycatch is way too high.
Do nets work because GWS will avoid areas their ‘friends’ have bought it. (See orca stories, see Qld.)
An an experiment, should a few GWS be strung up near the most ‘pinged’ tag receivers? If said receivers don’t get pinged for a while, that might be useful data? Other than DPI people doing all sorts of papers on the taxpayers dime.
Fair point Norm.
Forster, Evans are pinged every second day. An answer would be quick.
@norm. Do you mean like, shark gibbets or the like? I don't think sharks are cognitively equipped with causal reasoning, orcas on the other hand, different story (Anyone from Eden or nearby who has heard the stories of "Old Tom" and his pod knows how smart they can be). Sharks are definitely equipped with some degree of associative learning, but causal reasoning is a much higher cognitive faculty. I wouldn't be surprised if upon encountering a dead conspecific, a shark would just simply scavenge it.
Off an island off San Francisco a large population of GWS disappeared for a whole season within a day of a pack of Orcas killing a large GW (witnessed by scientists). The researchers were perplexed at how the message got around the whole population. Smell of death? Body language? Follow big GW mumma?
Who knows how the word gets around. But death of a few has a najor impact on the behaviour of many.
Here's the paper frog:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1748-7692.1999.tb00822.x
They hypothesize a case of competitive exclusion. I'm also guessing that there's probably a long-running predator-prey relationship between sharks and orcas (likey evolved over thousands of years). Many other species also know that when orcas arrive that it's time to go. Again, I don't think that if a shark encountered a dead conspecific on some man-made apparatus that it would be capable of inferring firstly, the cause of death (humans) and second, that if it continues to swim toward the coastline where this apparatus is located that it may have an imapct on it's own well-being. Personally, I think that the avenue of basic negative association due to some immediate negative stimulus (immediate is very important) and at the scale of the individual could be a way forward. If social learning is present in the species then that might also help to speed the training process.
Brave to discount the experiment as being worthless and be so confident about an animal that humans clearly know bugger all about.
As you mention social learning, you agree that all their decisions can't be based on immediate stimulus. I wonder what they're thinking when they decide to traverse an ocean? Perhaps nothing. Instinct, genetic knowledge, whatever it might be, is beyond our reasoning but surely could still be used if we experiment.
Sorry dawn, I'll need you to direct me to where I stated that the study was worthless. Observational study btw, and nothing wrong with that (I've been a part of many), experiment implies that a treatment was applied. I agree that humans do know bugger all about the species, and this gap doesn't help in guiding appropriate management strategies. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's been established for a while that they have comparatively small brains. A relatively unchanged species for a long time. The presence/absence of the capacity for social learning in the species also remains to be determined doesn't it? Again, at present, causal reasoning is a cognitive faculty only recognised in the higher primates, some corvids and some other mammals. It has been a few years since I was in the animal cognition literature so possibly described in a few more now.
not referring to a study, rather the possible dead conspecific experiment that was being discussed and you raised your hand on the nay
Great time to plug https://www.sharkeyesglobal.com/ (I'm not affiliated at all)
Not sure why they are not mentioned more in these debates as they are smart, logical and used religously by some very experienced water people.
I would say the best value deterent on the market and with whats going on locally I'm getting a set on every board for the wife and grom.
Any proof they work?
Commercial fisherman and recreational are seing more sharks ..More big Sharks not just a few more 4 to 5 times more than we used to see 10 yrs ago daily not now and again ..We are seing packs of bull sharks as far north as townsville ..theres more sharks and theres more attacks ...its not going to go away ...what you do about it i dont know ...it seems poeple who have no real idea want to argue that ...
So heavy .
RIP.
We all new it was but is has been confirmed by DPI it was GWS.
If you’re an Australian born after 1970 you’ve got more chance of being killed by a shark than you have dying from Covid 19.
After the fatal Kingscliff attack I did some thinking about first aid and then purchased a 'field torniquet' which I now wear around my gut when I surf and do my 4k ocean training swims. I figure that many attacks are lower limb (e.g. today's in N Qld) and blood loss is often the killer. These field tourniquets were developed in Iraq for IED bomb victims and the survival stats for quick application of a tourniquet are very good. It cost me 40 bucks. https://tacmedaustralia.com.au/collections/supplies/products/sof-tactica... Other and cheaper sites exist although for life and death I would prefer to pay for a good one and not risk a 10 buck one from Wish. You are meant to be able to operate it one handed so hopefully in a worst case scenario I can do that for me or a fellow surfer. I am still trialling it, but wouldn't it be good if every 2nd or 3rd surfer had one just in case . . . ? Gotta be a heap better than an improvised leggie torniquet.
Firstly my condolences to the family and friends of the young man. My sincerest thoughts are with you all
Anyone else paddling out with the above or their tourniquet leggies?
Any of the WA lot?
We got them overseas and when we went out on patrol, everyone had one in their pocket with a morphine injector, this weird stuff you're meant to put in a gut wound and gauze. Never had to use one luckily or even saw one used in a real life situation, but they do work and would work way, way, way better then a leg rope tourniquet would. You can train with it yourself, just don't leave it on or you'll lose a limb!
With all this Shark stuff, I've been thinking about my own first aid and what I would do to provide aid in that situation. Good work for thinking about it though, better to have it and not need it!
The issue I've been thinking about is that bites seem to be around the arse and upper thigh and in that situation I think you would have to get the person to the beach ASAP, stuff it with towels to stop the bleeding, get help ASAP and hope for the best.
EDIT: I'm no expert but I remember that the human body has 3L of blood or so. We got told to visualise emptying 3L of milk on the ground. It's a lot. So if any of us are in that terrible situation, don't freak out when you see rivers of blood. We can lose a lot and survive. The important thing is to stop the bleeding ASAP. If you've hit a massive artery though and couldn't stop the bleeding quickly, that would be curtains I would think.
Shit. Now I think I should do a first aid refresher.
I think 40 seconds until bleed out if the femoral is severed.
With femoral bleeding,
Remember that, unless you have a commercial tourniquet, the most effective thing you can do is inguinal compression. That’s getting your hand and pushing in the groin where the main artery supplies the leg, Studies have shown this can stop up to 90% of blood loss and it’s something anyone can do. It’s much, much more effective than trying to use a standard legrope as a tourniquet.
Horrible. RIP Mani and condolences to his family.
On first aid, an obvious one is to place the victim according to the slope of the beach with their head below their feet to slow the blood supply to the legs - usually that means the head should be closest to the water and the feet pointing to the land.
Ben, Stu, Craig, what about an article on these emergency first aide solutions? Surely there's a few 'experts' you can interview to get some knowledge out to the wider surf community?
The last stream of comments on here seem way more productive than the previous ones arguing about scientific vs observational evidence re shark attacks.
Freeride, did you have data of all the attacks with TOD, moon phase, Tide, barometric pressure etc? How do these last two (kingy, wooli) incidents correlate?
Thoughts with the young fellas family and friends, and those who tried to help him. It's easy for us to all move on and forget, but all these people will still be impacted in so many ways for quite a while. Hope they are all going OK.
Here’s a 5 minute video that’s a “The Step-By-Step Guide On Shark Bite First Aid”.
It’s on facebook, but you shouldn’t need to log on. If a log on box pops up, just click “Not Now”.
https://www.facebook.com/terraaustralisWA/videos/1083667501731469/
That's a great simple summary watch, Wally.
Hope everyone takes 5 mins to watch it.
Very sad , our kids won’t be able to surf in 5-10 years time because of this crazy white imbalance that is even sadder , there needs to be a cull bottom line
Dorsalwatch report of GWS swimming aggresively towards a spearfisher at Wilsons in 1.5 - 2m of water - left Diver with no option but to shoot the shark with his speargun..
Farrrrk that
Shark attack this morning at Shelly Beach, Port Macquarie. Apparently a girl was bitten on leg and picked up by rescue chopper. Fingers crossed she is ok.
Near bottom of the tide, small clean surf and clear water. What is it about mid morning attacks in clear conditions.
Whilst this a tragedy, before people go out and start slaughtering animals bear in mind that those involved choose to play in the ocean. It is merely leisure and one can chose not to do it. Or if you are scared, do something else for health and fitness. There are plenty of options. But some things, surfing included, come with a risk for which the people involved should take a responsibility. Look at it this way. How many bicycle riders are killed every year in Australia? On average 42. How many surfers? On average 16. Maybe it's all about relativity
2-3 mt GWS... surfing companion punched it repeatedly until it let go