2012/06: Should there be a shark cull along the Western Australian coast?
What they said...
'To put things in perspective, on average there are two to three deaths per year from bee stings in Australia; yet we don't see people suggesting there should be a cull of bees'
Ryan Kempster, marine neuroecologist at the University of Western Australia
'How many more fatal shark attacks will it take for someone in authority to acknowledge the damage, socially and economically, of leaving that area unprotected?'
Liam Bartlett, a reporter with 60 Minutes on Channel 9
The issue at a glance
On March 31, 2012, a 33-year-old Western Australian man was fatally mauled by a shark about 1.6 kilometres off Stratham Beach, 230 kilometres south of Perth. The death brought to four the number of fatal shark attacks in Western Australian waters since September 2011.
Representatives of the local tourism industry and others have called for a cull.
The Western Australian premier, Colin Barnett, has said that a shoot to kill order was unlikely to be issued, because that would only happen if the shark was lurking around swimmers. Mr Barnett stated, 'Each situation is considered on its merit at the time.'
Mr Barnett has said culling sharks was not the answer but he believed restrictions on fishermen catching sharks should be reviewed.
There was substantial opposition from the conservation and scientific communities when a shark cull was mooted at the end of 2011.
Background
Male white pointer (or White Death, Great White) sharks are believed to grow to a length of seven metres, while the female can attain a length of five metres. The larger white pointers can weigh in excess of 3000 kilograms. Marine scientists have studied the sharks for many years, yet information is still sketchy. For instance, it is not known whether the animals are territorial or nomadic, as some tagged fish have been seen to travel 1400 kilometres, while others have shown preference for one particular area.
White pointers do not reproduce each year, but, when the female shark does give birth, it can be to ten pups at a time. Most newborn sharks weigh more than thirty kilograms. The juveniles begin to hunt fish, squid, stingrays and smaller sharks from the day they are born. Great whites are warm-blooded animals, having a body temperature of up to 27 degrees Celsius. In this they differ from other sharks, which are cold-blooded.
White sharks are listed as vulnerable on Schedule 1 of the Australian Endangered Species Protection Act 1992. They were included on the schedule in 1997. A federal government permit is required to hunt them. In South Australia, the shark is also protected by state legislation, the Fisheries Act, and anyone killing a white pointer in South Australian waters can be fined $4000,00 for the first offence and $8000,00 for the second. The species is protected in all states under fisheries legislation, while Tasmania and Victoria are considering additional listings under State Threatened Species Acts.
The decline of white shark numbers has been recognised by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, which has also listed white sharks as vulnerable. The Australian Society of Fish Biology lists white sharks in the 'Uncertain Status' category. They are fully protected in South Africa, Namibia, Maldives, Malta, Florida and California. Threats to the recovery of white shark populations include commercial fishing, recreational fishing, shark control activities and ecotourism.
The white shark is found throughout the world in temperate and subtropical oceans, though it prefers temperate waters. They are normally found in inshore waters in the vicinity of rocky reefs and islands, and often near seal colonies. The white shark is an apex predator and their diet consists mainly of finfish, marine mammals, other sharks and rays.
The white shark is most frequently encountered off South Africa, southern Australia, northern California and the northeastern United States. In Australia, its range extends primarily from Moreton Bay in Southern Queensland, around the southern coastline to the North West Cape of Western Australia.
Internet sources
On March 2, 2010, The Sydney Morning Herald ran a news report indicating that international studies suggest that the number of shark attacks in Australia are increasing. The piece is titled 'Shark attacks on the rise in Australia: study' and can be accessed at http://www.smh.com.au/environment/shark-attacks-on-the-rise-in-australia-study-20100302-pdwj.html
On September 5, 2011, Australian Geographic published a background piece titled, 'Are humans to blame for shark attacks'. The piece looks at claims that human behaviour, such as over-fishing, may be response for some shark attacks. The full text of this piece can be found at http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/journal/are-humans-to-blame-for-shark-attacks.htm
On October 15, 2011, Perth Now carried a news report titled 'Shark culls urged at busy WA beaches' which explains that dozens of Western Australian surfers have lobbied government ministers for shark culling in the wake of a spate of sightings and two fatal attacks in Western Australian waters.
The full text of the report can be found at http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western-australia/shark-culls-urged-at-busy-wa-beaches/story-e6frg15c-1226167439450
On October 22, 2011, Perth Now published an opinion piece by Liam Bartlett titled 'Time to cull these killers'. The piece gives Bartlett's view that a shark cull is the most appropriate reaction to the recent spate of shark fatalities in Western Australian waters. The full text of this comment can be found at http://www.perthnow.com.au/time-to-cull-these-killers/story-fn6cmyjj-1226173903033
On October 24, 2011, 2UE broadcast an interview between Stuart Bocking and marine expert Paul Burt. Bocking notes, 'In the aftermath of an attack by a shark on a diver or swimmer, the reaction is often to hunt down and kill the culprit.' The interview suggests hunting down the shark is an inappropriate reaction. The full interview can be accessed at http://www.2ue.com.au/blogs/2ue-blog/should-sharks-be-culled-after-killing/20111024-1mflp.html
On October 24, 2011, The Conversation published an opinion piece by Ryan Kempster, marine neuroecologist at the University of Western Australia titled, 'Cull or be killed: is this really the solution to stop shark attacks?' Kempster argues that the threat posed by Great White sharks has been exaggerated and that a cull would be inappropriate. The full text of this comment can be found at http://theconversation.edu.au/cull-or-be-killed-is-this-really-the-solution-to-stop-shark-attacks-3961
On October 24, 2012, the International Fund for Animal Welfare posted a comment by Matt Collis on its Internet site. Matt Collis is a member of the International Fund for Animal Welfare's Oceania office. The piece is titled 'Despite tragic losses, shark culling is not the answer'. The full text can be accessed at http://www.ifaw.org/us/node/7145
On October 24, 2011, easydestination.net published a background piece by Mayank Gupta titled 'Shark attack could hurt Western Australia tourism'. The full text of this report can be found at http://www.easydestination.net/blog/?itemid=2390
On October 24, 2011, The West Australian published a background piece by Gareth Parker and Bethany Hiatt titled, 'Fears latest fatality could hit tourism'.
The full text of the report can be found at http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/10788448/fears-latest-fatality-could-hit-tourism/
On October 24, 2011, Coastal Watch published an analysis by Dan Wyer titled 'What's going on with the shark attacks in Western Australia?' The piece gives an overview of the shark's conservation status, the recent attacks and a range of views on how to reduce the likelihood of such attacks in the future. Its ultimate conclusion is that responsibility rests with individual beachgoers to act responsibly.
The full text of the article can be found at http://www.coastalwatch.com/news/article.aspx?articleId=9660
On October 25, 2011, Australian Geographic carried a news report on conservationists' negative reaction to the Western Australian Government's proposal to allow Great White shark culls. The full text of this article can be found at http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/journal/outrage-over-plans-to-cull-sharks-in-western-australia.htm
On October 26, 2011, Cosmos magazine ran a news report referring to the one hundred academics and professionals in the shark and stingray field who have signed a letter of petition against the government of Western Australia's proposal to cull great white sharks.
The piece is titled 'Outrage over plans to cull sharks in WA'.
The full text of this report can be found at http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/4892/shark-experts-petition-cull-great-white-sharks
A copy of Care2's petition against the culling of Western Australian Great White sharks can be found at http://www.thepetitionsite.com/4/stop-the-shark-cull/
On November 1, 2011, The Sydney Morning Herald published an opinion piece written by Sea Shepherd's Australian director, Jeff Hansen. The piece titled 'Sea Shepherd opposes call for shark cull' can be accessed at http://www.smh.com.au/environment/conservation/sea-shepherd-opposes-call-for-shark-cull-20111031-1mrw0.html
On April 1, 2012, the ABC ran a news report titled 'WA rules out shark cull after fatal attack'. The report explains that the Western Australia premier, Colin Barnett, has ruled out a shark cull following a fatal attack on March 31, but the premier has said that the shark responsible should probably be destroyed.
The full text of this report can be accessed at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-01/calls-to-cull-sharks-after-attack/3925356
On April 2, 2012, News Limited released a news report titled, 'WA's southwest coast becomes world's deadliest for shark attacks' The piece gives a range of opinions and an overview of the fatalities since September, 2011.
The full text of the report can be accessed at http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/was-southwest-coast-becomes-worlds-deadliest-for-shark-attacks/story-e6frfq80-1226316076267
Arguments against a shark cull along the Western Australian coast
1. The extent of the threat of shark attack is generally exaggerated
According to the Australian Shark Attack File (ASAF), sharks have killed 52 people in the past 50 years (1.04 per year) in Australian waters. Figures range from zero to three in a year. Though acknowledging that any death is an individual tragedy, marine neuroecologist, Ryan Kempster, of the University of Western Australia has gone on to claim, 'the number of attacks is negligible when you consider the vast and increasing number of swimmers entering our coastal waters every year'.
The current level of shark attacks is outside the norm. In reference to two fatal shark attacks in 2004-05, Dr. Rory McAuley, shark research scientist with the Western Australian Department of Fisheries, noted that it is not unprecedented to have a sudden rise in attacks, however, he claimed, 'Those isolated incidents don't represent a trend'.
Ryan Kempster has further stated, 'To put things in perspective, on average there are two to three deaths per year from bee stings in Australia; yet we don't see people suggesting there should be a cull of bees.'
A similar point was made in a background piece published in Australian Geographic on September 5, 2011. The piece stated, 'compared to deaths from smoking, road accidents, lightning strikes or even other animal attacks, the risk is minute...'
Agathe Lefranc, a scientist with a French group, the Association for the Study and Conservation of Salachians (APECS), a family of species that includes sharks and rays has stated, 'The attention from shark attacks is completely overblown.'
Matt Collis, of the International Fund for Animal Welfare Oceania office has stated, 'Each year thousands of swimmers take to our beaches, with this number increasing every year as population and tourism increases. But there is no evidence to suggest shark attacks are increasing; we simply see yearly variation in the number of attacks.'
The same point has also been made Professor Shaun Collin from the University of Western Australia who has claimed, 'There is no data to suggest that shark numbers are increasing off WA's coastline and shark attacks in Australia have remained relatively constant over time, occurring at a rate of approximately one per year for the last 50 years.'
2. An apparent increase in shark attacks is actually the result of changed human behaviour
It has been claimed that the apparent increase in shark attacks is not the result of an increase in the number of sharks so much as a change in the way humans are using the oceans.
John West, the co-ordinator of the Australian Shark Attack File at the Taronga Conservation Society Australia, has stated that since 2001 there have been an average of 15 shark attacks a year, with fatalities averaging 1.4 a year. Last year, there were 12 shark attacks and four deaths.
West has analysed the statistics to determine trends in unprovoked shark attacks since 1900, particularly over the past two decades. He claims the most significant variable been the change in the way people use the ocean.
John West has stated, 'The rise in Australian shark attacks, from an average of 6.5 incidents per year from 1990 to 2000 to 15 incidents per year over the past decade, coincides with an increasing human population, more people visiting beaches, a rise in the popularity of water-based fitness and recreational activities and people accessing previously isolated coastal areas.'
It has been stated that relative to the increasing number of people swimming and otherwise using the waters off the Western Australian coast, there has in fact been a relative decline in the number of attacks.
Marine neuroecologist, Ryan Kempster, of the University of Western Australia has stated, 'Thousands more swimmers take to our beaches every year as the Western Australian population and tourism continue to rise. We might expect a corresponding rise in shark attacks. However, numbers of fatal shark attacks remain relatively constant and within the expected yearly variation. Therefore, the number of fatal attacks in Western Australia, per capita, is actually declining.'
3. The Great White is a vulnerable species
The number of Great White sharks has been in decline and the species has been officially classified as 'vulnerable'. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has stated, 'Despite the high profile media attention the Great White Shark (Carcharodon carcharias) receives, relatively little is known about its biology. It appears to be fairly uncommon compared to other widely distributed species, being most frequently reported from South Africa, Australia, California and the northeast United States.'
The IUCN has further stated, 'Nowhere is the Great White Shark abundant and productive enough to sustain long-term directed fisheries; the majority of annual captures worldwide being made incidentally through commercial fisheries operating longlines, setlines, gillnets, trawls, fish-traps and other gear.' The Union also notes, 'This species is unquestionably vulnerable to directed exploitation such as sports fisheries, the curio trade, the oriental shark-fin trade and even the public aquarium trade. The overall, long-term impact of these causes of mortality upon regional populations, coupled to those caused through indirect fishery captures or protective beach meshing, is probably detrimental.' Data from beach meshing programmes in New South Wales and Queensland show a gradual and irregular decline in shark numbers since the 1960s.
The Great White Shark is currently protected in the Australian exclusive economic zone and Australian state waters. It is also protected in South Africa, Namibia, Israel, Malta and the United States (California and Florida states, with directed fisheries prohibited off all coasts). Protective laws are strict, but loopholes and inadequate enforcement cause problems.
Conservationists stress that were Great Whites to disappear from the oceans' ecosystems this would be likely to have a detrimental effect on marine ecology.
Marine neuroecologist, Ryan Kempster, of the University of Western Australia has stated, 'Most sharks serve as top predators of the marine food pyramid, playing a critical role in our ocean ecosystems. Directly or indirectly, they regulate the natural balance of these ecosystems, and are an integral part of them.
Removing sharks from our ocean ecosystems is very likely to be ecologically and economically devastating.'
4. Shark attacks are sensationalised by the media
The International Union for the Conservation of Nature has noted, 'The Great White Shark has long been a focus for negative media attention, generated by its sometimes lethal interactions with humans. As a consequence of this typically exaggerated threat to human safety and an almost legendary 'Big Fish' status, the species is targeted as a source for sports-fishing, commercial drumline trophy-hunting (for jaws, teeth and even entire specimens preserved), sporadic human consumption or merely as the piscine whipping-boy of individuals pandering to shark attack paranoia.'
Conservationists have further noted that 'shark attack paranoia' has greatly increased since the 'JAWS' media phenomenon of the mid 1970s, following the Peter Benchley novel and the release of the Steven Spielberg film. This has not only been to the detriment of the Great White Shark, but also has encouraged the targeting of other, less high-profile species.
Christopher Neff, a PhD candidate at the University of Sydney, who is conducting the first doctoral study of policy responses following shark-bite incidents in Australia, South Africa and the United States claims that exaggerated Hollywood representations of shark behaviour have fuelled public fear.
Neff claims the 'rogue shark' theory began with a British Medical Journal article in 1899, which addressed a series of unexplained shark bites. The article caught the attention of the shark researcher and Sydney surgeon Victor Coppleson, who developed the rogue shark theory in the 1940s and 50s.
Although discredited by science the theory has found its way into the popular consciousness, having been dramatically propelled by Peter Benchley's novel and Spielberg's original film and its sequels.
Marine neuroecologist, Ryan Kempster, of the University of Western Australia has stated, 'Sharks are constantly misrepresented in the media as vengeful, deliberate predators of humans. It is, of course, nonsense. We must not allow this negative fictional image to form the basis of state or national policy.'
A similar point was made by Graham Lloyd, the environmental editor for The Australian in an opinion piece published on January 20, 2012. Lloyd wrote, 'The truth is the predatory behaviour of the ocean's most feared creatures is the subject more of half-truths and conjecture than scientific understanding.
Less uncertain is the public appetite for tales of danger from the deep. And a run of shark attacks over Christmas has made this summer of fear no exception.'
5. It is possible to reduce the risk of shark attack without culling
The Australian Shark Attack File recommends a range of swimmer behaviours which should reduce the risk of shark attack. These are: Swim at beaches that are patrolled by surf life savers. Do not swim, dive or surf where dangerous sharks are known to congregate. Always swim, dive or surf with other people. Do not swim in dirty or turbid water. Avoid swimming well offshore, near deep channels, at river mouths or along drop-offs to deeper water. If schooling fish start to behave erratically or congregate in large numbers, leave the water. Do not swim with pets and domestic animals. Look carefully before jumping into the water from a boat or wharf. Do not swim at dusk or at night. Do not swim near people fishing or spear fishing. If a shark is sighted in the area leave the water as quickly and calmly as possible.
Matt Collis of the International Fund for Animal Welfare Oceania office has stated, 'If you are concerned about the risk of shark attacks then follow the precautions recommended by the ASAF. Most attacks occur under very specific conditions related to when and where you swim and what activities you are undertaking whilst in the water. Simply being aware of these conditions and acting appropriately will dramatically reduce the already very small risk of being attacked.'
Mr Collis has further noted, 'The focus should be on encouraging the use of non-lethal shark protection measures such as spotter planes and patrol boats.'
Professor Shaun Collin from the University of Western Australia has also called for non-lethal shark protection measures such as spotter planes and patrol boats to improve coastal authorities' ability to identify large sharks so the marine animals could be avoided. In response to such requests, the Western Australian premier has said the government was looking at extending summertime aerial shark patrols around Rottnest Island and to other parts of the state's southwest.
Arguments in favour of a shark cull along the Western Australian coast
1. Sharks appear to represent a growing threat to human life in Australian waters
There have been four fatal shark attacks in Western Australian waters in the seven months between September 2011 and March 31, 2012. There have also been regular sightings of large sharks only metres from popular surfing and swimming beaches. Western Australian beaches, including Mullaloo and Cottesloe in Perth and Gracetown, Bunker Bay and Prevally, have all seen frequent closures, while surfers and beachgoers on Rottnest Island were kept out of the water after a recent fatal attack.
McAuley, a senior shark research scientist with Western Australian Fisheries has said that the most recent death was the latest in an 'unprecedented' number of fatal shark attacks off Western Australia in the past two years.
Mr McAuley has stated, 'I'm not aware of any series of fatal shark attacks of this number, in such a short period of time, anywhere in the world. We really can't tell what's behind that.'
Last year a large proportion of the global shark fatalities occurred in Western Australia. So last year was particularly bad - this year has already started very tragically.'
Critics of what they perceive as government inaction have argued that the current spate of deaths is so extraordinary that it is no longer possible to regard it as merely a spike in the normal cycle of shark fatalities off the Western Australian coast.
In 2009, the number of shark attacks worldwide stayed about the same, with 61 events compared with 60 in 2008. The number of attacks in the United States declined between 2007 and 2009, though George Burgess, curator of the International Shark Attack File at the University of Florida, has said it was too soon to tell if that reflected a long-term trend.
Shark attacks in Australia appear to be following a different trajectory. Shark attacks in Australian waters appear to have been trending up over the last four years. Florida University Shark Attack File statistics show Australia had 20 attacks in 2009, compared with 12 in 2008 and 13 in 2007.
2. It is not always possible for human beings to avoid the risk of shark attack
Supporters of a shark cull argue that it should be put into effect in marine areas where there is high human usage, because these are areas which, by definition, it is not reasonable to ask people to avoid.
This point was made by Liam Bartlett, in an opinion piece published in Perth Now on October 22, 2011. Bartlett noted of some of the recent shark attacks in Western Australian waters, 'Problem is, we're not talking about a deep-sea ocean sanctuary somewhere west of the Abrolhos. This is one of the main tourist destinations for a capital city... The main beach at Cottesloe is as much a part of our urban environment as Kings Park...make no mistake, if nothing is done at Cottesloe or a number of other high-usage metropolitan beaches, Ken Crew and Bryn Martin will not be the last to meet a grisly death.'
It has also been suggested that a number of the risk management behaviours promoted by the Australian Shark Attack File are not likely to be effective.
CSIRO shark expert Barry Bruce has noted that there are some commonsense measures that people can take, such as not swimming with big schools of bait fish. However, he is sceptical about the theory that the risk of attack increases at dawn and dusk.
Bruce has stated, 'People talk about not swimming at dawn and dusk, but from a pragmatic point of view the morning and evening are generally the times that people have available to them to go swimming.
If you actually have a look at the shark attack statistics on a time-of-day basis there is a peak in mid-morning and a peak in mid-afternoon and a dip in the middle of the day and a low level of shark attack at dawn and dusk, believe it or not.
But that doesn't tell us anything about what sharks are doing. It reflects what people are doing. That's the times that people are in the water and the reason there is a dip in the middle of the day is that is the time that people get out for lunch.'
What Bruce's argument suggests is that sharks attack people when people are in the water. If this is the case, then it would appear to make avoidance very difficult.
It has also been claimed that Barry Bruce's research is suggesting that sharks are 'philopatric', that is, they belong to a group of animals that return to the same area on a regular basis. Again, if this should turn out to be the case, it means that areas such as Cottesloe are likely to be an area where certain sharks return to feed from one season to the next. Those who support culling sharks argue that this is a key reason for doing so, especially with those that feed in a marine area regularly frequented by people.
3. The fear of shark attack is depressing tourism in some areas
In April, 2012, Ian Stubbs, the City of Busselton president, called for a cull soon after the most recent fatal shark attack, saying such depredations would damage tourism in the popular region. Mr Stubbs has stated, 'I think there should be a culling program because it's gone too crazy. How many more of these tragic deaths can we continue to have? It's far too many...If they have attacked humans, they should be destroyed.'
Western Australia's popular South-West tourist region is, of April 2012, officially the deadliest place in the world for shark attacks, after a fourth death in less than seven months.
The state's Fisheries Department confirmed on April 1, 2012, that it had called off the search for the shark that has recently taken a 33-year-old local diver, but beaches between Bunbury and Busselton, about 200km south of Perth, would remain closed. Meanwhile beaches closed because of Saturday's fatal shark attack reopened this morning, the Department of Fisheries confirmed. Local traders relying on tourism are concerned that fear of shark attack will depress the number of tourists prepared to come to the area.
Terr Howson, the director of Rockingham Wild Encounters, has expressed his concern that hype surrounding shark sightings and attacks was crippling Australia's tourism industry and urgent action was needed.
Mr Howson has written to the Tourism Council of Western Australia urging the peak body to lobby the State Government. He says there is no point promoting the state's pristine beaches if people are too scared to swim. Mr Howson said Australia was being portrayed 'as an unsafe destination' to the rest of the world.
Manny Papadoulis, a board member of the Tourism Council of Western Australia has said he feared the tourism industry would take a hit in the next six months because of recent shark attacks and sightings.
Evan Hall, the chief executive of the Tourism Council of Western Australia has said that though Western Australia was marketed and perceived as a 'wild' and 'raw' destination, the shark attacks had the potential to tip that perception to 'unsafe'.
Mr Hall has stated, 'Without a doubt it could potentially have an impact on our image as a safe destination. Image can be everything, particularly in a tight market like tourism. So we've got to do everything to reinforce that we are a safe destination and that is well understood.'
Mr Hall has called on the State Government to seriously consider whether its approach to managing sharks was appropriate. He has said, 'We want the Government to take this seriously, look at all the options available and make sure they do a scientific response. We have to look at netting the beaches, we need to look at culling sharks if that is reasonable.'
4. Other animals that pose a risk to public safety are culled or otherwise managed
It has been claimed that far from having an exaggerated fear of Great White sharks, many conservationists and those making public policy show them an unusual tolerance, allowing them to pose a risk that would not be accepted from many other animal species.
Liam Bartlett, a reporter with Channel 9's 60 Minutes, has stated, 'If a rogue magpie was swooping and pecking the heads of picnickers, the rangers would be called to dispatch or relocate it in the blink of an eye... A great white, however, is treated very differently.'
Bartlett went on to claim, 'Despite numerous attacks and deaths in the past few years from Margaret River to Perth, not once has the opportunity been taken for the suspected killer to be culled. Again, it flies in the face of how we treat other animals that exhibit dangerous behaviour.
I am sure if the children of any of those fisheries officers were badly mauled by a stray dog, they would think nothing of seeing the dog put down. Indeed, we see an all-too-regular occurrence of dogs being put down because of anti-social actions that cause injury to children in particular.
So what about great whites? For some reason we have become prisoners of a feel-good mentality that dictates great whites should be treated like Free Willy no matter what mayhem they have caused.'
It has been noted that when a dingo attack resulted in the death of a young boy visiting Fraser Island in 2001, a cull was immediately instituted and other measures were put in place. Over 120 dingoes were killed by rangers as a result of the incident. After the 2001 attack, four dedicated rangers were allocated dingo management roles and ranger patrols were increased. There are fines for feeding dingoes or leaving food and rubbish out which may attract them.
Culls have also been used against animals that merely present a nuisance value, rather than, like Great White sharks, threaten human life. In 2001 there was a three-month cull of grey headed flying foxes in Melbourne's Royal Botanic
Gardens. The cull began after the gardens' bat population hit 20,000. Gardens management complained that the creatures were damaging its collection of rare
Plants and a limited cull was needed to ease their destructive impact.
5. Non-lethal means of controlling sharks are either ineffective or not feasible
It has been claimed that many of the supposed 'non-lethal' measures that might be taken against sharks are either ineffective or prohibitively expensive.
Tina Thorne, Western Australian Fisheries manager of strategic compliance has
said there were no plans to install shark nets along the Western Australian coast, because they were just as likely to attract sharks as keep them away from popular beaches.
Ms Thorne has stated, 'The government did an assessment of it last year and decided that shark nets probably weren't appropriate for Western Australia. It's a large, long coastline and contrary to popular opinion, the nets don't actually enclose the beach off. Once they've got (fish and marine mammals) caught in them, they actually do attract sharks.'
Liam Bartlett, a report with Channel 9's 60 Minutes has been highly critical of aerial beach patrols. Mr Bartlett has stated, 'As for the much-hyped aerial patrols, there is not enough money in the kitty to do it properly, anyway. Surf Life Saving WA is waiting for a new helicopter and when it does arrive, the oily rag will only last for weekend patrols. Mid-week fly-bys don't start until mid-December, a long time after the coastal migration of whales and all the shark-inducing, lactating milk that follows behind them.'
Further implications
Though there is no clear consensus as to what is occurring along the Western Australian coast that might account for the recent 'unprecedented' number of fatal shark attacks, they appear to be at least in part the consequence of altered human behaviour; that is, increasing numbers of people are using these beaches and coastal waters.
Conservationists argue that with Great White shark numbers being problematic and the death of even small numbers of these sharks potentially able to have a significant impact on the species' survival, culling is an unacceptable 'solution' to the problem.
Shaun Collin, a Western Australian Premiers Research fellow from the School of Animal Biology and University of Western Australia's Oceans Institute in Perth.
Collin has stated, 'The culling of any species of sharks is not the solution. Not only will this be indiscriminate killing of a protected Australian species (under both the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and state legislation), there is no way of being sure the sharks caught will be those responsible for the attacks.'
It has equally been argued that non-lethal means of protecting beaches are unlikely to secure them for the safe use of beach goers. Western Australia has an enormous coastline facing the Indian and Southern Oceans. Experts have acknowledged that nets are impracticable, while for aerial spotting to be effective over such an expanse is likely to prove prohibitively expensive.
The general level of conservation-awareness is such that any culling program which sort to hunt Great White sharks to the point of extinction is unlikely to be acceptable to many Australians or to the world community at large. Internationally Australia is already looked on with disfavour for its commercial culling of kangaroos, while there is seen to be a degree of hypocrisy in Australian opposition to Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean.
Western Australian premier, Colin Barnett, appears to be treading a very fine line when he suggests that fishing for sharks might be acceptable where culling is not.
The premier has stated, 'I am not advocating culling at all but I think there may be some scope, depending on the results of research, to allow increased fishing of shark, which used to happen and has been restricted for various reasons.' Barnett's tentative proposal looks very like culling under another name.
The difficulty facing Western Australia is that of just how much risk it is prepared to accept in the name of the conservation of a species. While conservationists argue that swimmers need to recognise they are intruding into the realm of the Great White shark and that there will always be a degree of danger in so doing, the state's economic self-interest argues that safe use of its coastal waters is an important commodity. It currently does not seem possible genuinely to reconcile these two points of view.
Newspaper items used in the compilation of this issue outline
The Australian: September 7, 2011, page 3, news item (photo) by Nicolas Perpitch, `Mum hails courage of shark victim's mates'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/mum-hails-courage-of-shark-victims-mates/story-e6frg6nf-1226130931245
The Australian: September 6, 2011, page 3, news item (photo) by Nicolas Perpitch, `Shark attack victim died quickly'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/shark-attack-victim-died-quickly-say-police/story-e6frg6nf-1226130051855
The Australian: September 5, 2011, page 3, news item (ref to southern WA attack death, at Bunker Bay) by Nicolas Perpitch, `Young bodyboarder killed by shark in conditions "perfect for an attack"'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/young-bodyboarder-killed-by-shark-in-conditions-perfect-for-an-attack/story-e6frg6nf-1226129300949
The Australian: October 13, 2011, page 8, news item by O'Brien and Aikman, `Experts pan shark nets as a waste of money'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/shark-pan-nets-as-a-waste-of-money/story-e6frg8y6-1226165301618
The Australian: October 12, 2011, page 3, news item (photos) by Taylor and O'Brien, `Nets ruled out as the shark toll keeps rising'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/nets-ruled-out-as-the-shark-toll-keeps-rising/story-e6frg6nf-1226164299195
The Australian: October 11, 2011, page 5, news item (ref to Perth's Cottesloe Beach swimmer Bryn Martin) by Paige Taylor, `Shark believed to have taken lost swimmer'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/shark-believed-to-have-taken-lost-swimmer/story-e6frg6nf-1226163428632
Herald-Sun: October 24, 2011, page 15, news item, `Hunt for killer shark'.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/hunt-launched-for-killer-shark/story-fn7x8me2-1226174509705
The Australian: October 24, 2011, page 3, news item (photo) by Debbie Guest, `Shark ordered killed after third fatality'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/shark-ordered-killed-after-third-fatality/story-e6frg6nf-1226174562591
The Australian: November 16, 2011, page 3, news item by Nicolas Perpitch, `No shark cull as state sets up research unit'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/no-shark-cull-as-state-sets-up-research-unit/story-e6frg8y6-1226196063425
The Australian: January 20, 2012, page 9, analysis (photos) by G Lloyd, `Half-truths and great white lies' (with statistics).
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/half-truths-and-great-white-lies/story-e6frg6z6-1226248782020
The Age: January 5, 2012, page 4, news item by Deborah Smith, `Rogue sharks "a movie myth"'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/rogue-sharks-a-movie-myth-20120104-1pl65.html
The Australian: April 02, 2012, page 3, news item (photo of WA victim Peter Kurmann) by Debbie Guest, `Shark victim laughed off risk of attack'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/friend-says-weekend-shark-victim-laughed-off-risk-of-attack/story-e6frg6nf-1226315901299
The Australian: April 7, 2012, page 3, news item by Nicolas Perpitch, `Body on beach thought to be shark attack victim'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/body-on-beach-thought-to-be-shark-attack-victim/story-e6frg6nf-1226320753160