Welcome to ScubaBoard, an online scuba diving forum community where you can join over 205,000 divers from around the world discussing all things related to Scuba Diving. To gain full access to ScubaBoard (and make this large box go away) you must register for a free account. As a registered member you will be able to:
Participate in over 500 dive topic forums and browse from over 5,500,000 posts.
Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
Post your own photos or view from well over 100,000 user submitted images.
Gain access to our free classifieds marketplace to buy, sell and trade gear, travel and services.
Use the calendar to organize your events and enroll in other members' events.
All this and much more is available to you absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact the ScubaBoard Support Team.
As the internet grows, so does it's power. What once would have been written by a reporter and printed into a news paper the following day is now posted immediately by someone on a cell phone at the scene. In other words we now have more information available from the internet. Plus in more and more "remote" places too.
As the internet grows, so does it's power. What once would have been written by a reporter and printed into a news paper the following day is now posted immediately by someone on a cell phone at the scene. In other words we now have more information available from the internet. Plus in more and more "remote" places too.
Your point is clearly true - we have more and instant reporting these days, no doubt about it.
Yet on my trip to the red sea in '09 the Austrian guide who has worked the same place for 12 years said she'd never seen the sharks behave the way they were that year. She was getting bumped by the longimanus a LOT. Anecdotal? For sure. Worth discounting? I'm less sure. It's hardly a secret that we're screwing our seas and oceans. I'd not be particularly surprised with any side effect.
So yes definitely improved reporting is increasing our awareness. But I for one am keeping an open mind on whether its just that.
Actually the cause has practical implications. If it turns out to be fish stock depletion, that could have a bearing on shark conservation efforts, since increasing predator numbers without increasing the prey base could have an impact on human attacks.
Some time back in an older thread on using shark nets to protect beaches, arguments were raised that the shark nets don't keep out all potentially dangerous sharks and do kill scads of creatures, sharks and otherwise. The argument was put forth that shark populations are so depleted that the nets are unnecessary (people argued about the definition of 'necessary,' of course). A counter argument was that if not for the nets, yes, shark populations might rebound to some extent, but that could in theory increase attacks. Which leads off into the 'how many sharks is a human life worth' debate, which seldom if ever leads to closure.
My point is, if it turns out attacks are on the rise, and that trend holds up over time, it would be useful to know what's causing it. But if you do a line graph following the incidence of rare events, the line will jump up and down, as even a couple of 'extra' shark attacks can create a short term peak in your data.