How many fatal shark attacks to stop you diving

[Wingy]

The more I have to do with sharks the less I think they are capable of logical thought processes....i caught the same one using three different methods three different times on wednesday night in those man eating shark infested waters we supposedly have here in perth. Pain/aversion therapy didnt seem to make him go away..i gave up and moved the boat.

In other news

Foxfish can now start another poll as our beaches have just become ten times more deadly because.......we have a man eating elephant shark on the beaches now. Ever seen what they do to divers???

Elephant Seal Attacks Divers - YouTube

Im afraid id put up with one elephant seal attack a month and still keep diving.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

This is what I don't understand. Polar bears hunt on land and the sea. That's ok. But when we do it, we're invading. We're a smart mammal who made tools and can catch fish with them. We're just too greedy to manage it better. But so are all other animals.

... but it appears that polar bears are better at maintaining their populations than we are ... and they don't kill their prey by the tens of millions. I doubt any species other than humans have ever been responsible for the complete extinction of another species ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

---------- Post added February 23rd, 2014 at 06:54 AM ----------

True, but other species in nature adapt very slowly over time, for the most part, and their prey species have time to adapt in turn. The technological innovation of humans, such as the development of the spear gun, enables huge gains in functional efficiency in very brief time frames, which native species cannot adjust to in a reasonable time.

Put another way, inland in ponds, lakes and rivers. 100+ Years ago our great grandfathers fished for bass, crappie, catfish and blue gill. Cut to the modern day. The equipment we have, bass boats, depth finders, fish finders, advances in rod & reels, bait, etc..., is much better. But bass, crappie, catfish and blue gill haven't advanced. In colonial days, a man shot at deer with a black powder firearm. Single shot, accuracy probably not the best. Today, you can nail one with a high-powered rifle that's much more accurate to begin with, and add a scope for further advantage.

In fact, today there are special hunting seasons for bows and muzzle loaders to offset the technological advantages.

The problem is not that killing & eating an animal is wrong; the problem is that there are so many of us and we are way too good at it!

Richard.

P.S.: Discussions about the prospects of native prey species & potential predators adapting to lion fish bring out similar concerns.

Killing for food is one thing. Extinguishing an entire population out of an irrational fear is something else entirely. The latter often has unintended consequences ... and can change the nature of an entire ecosystem.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

---------- Post added February 23rd, 2014 at 07:01 AM ----------

Incidentally, I've said it before and will say it again. This thread is not intended to be a discussion about methods used to mitigate the risk of a shark attack or air your views on the rights and wrongs of those methods. That kind of discussion is clearly not appropriate for the Basic forum.

I disagree. Discussions about our (human) impact on the environment we're entering as divers is a fundamental part of the Open Water curriculum. This specific topic is just another part of that overall picture ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

---------- Post added February 23rd, 2014 at 07:05 AM ----------

The more I have to do with sharks the less I think they are capable of logical thought processes....i caught the same one using three different methods three different times on wednesday night in those man eating shark infested waters we supposedly have here in perth. Pain/aversion therapy didnt seem to make him go away..i gave up and moved the boat.

I can cite numerous examples of that behavior in humans ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Ste Wart]

Post #3 of this thread

Just one, mine.

Should have ended the thread

 

[Nemrod]

This thread is among the worst ever.

N

 

[pasley]

Have a look at the videos below. Of those who claim that they 'don't care' about the risk of a fatal shark attack and would dive regardless, how many would enter the water without the cage or any protection?

For those who can't be bothered watching the videos they show people cage diving with white pointers and the sharks attacking the cages.

Cage Diving with a Great White Shark goes wrong ! - YouTube

Cage Diving with a Great White Shark goes wrong ! - YouTube

Caught on Tape: Newlyweds' Terrifying Close Encounter With Shark - YouTube

Great White Shark chomping on my cage off Guadalupe Mexico - YouTube

Uh, huh....and how many gallons of blood and guts did they dump into the water to attract the sharks? Not saying that any animal in the ocean could not pose a risk at any time. Stingray can kill you as a well known television personality found out. Just saying that the chances are very remote. Most professional films of sharks are done with the following agenda:
1. Take a video of sharks.
2. Get the job done in a short time and on budget. Film crews and boats cost money. So you darn well better make sure there are sharks to film. How do you do that? You chum the water sometimes for days with blood and fish guts and anything else that may attract a shark. (Not attorneys do not work as the sharks exhibit professional courtesy).
3. Get film that will attract interest. Sharks swimming calmly in their normal habitat and manner are....well boring. Get a near attack on film or film a shark leaping out of the water to feed on what ever you are dangling.

Counter point to the videos posted of "attacks" on shark dives. Shark dives sell trips based on ACUTALLY SEEING SHARKS. So they often chum. This again elicits unnatural behavior. Some shark dives hold up food for the sharks, this imprints human=food. For this reason feeding sharks has been outlawed in some places.

Take this video of a great white dive adventure. The diver is clearly not afraid nor endangered by the shark.
OCEAN RAMSEY GREAT WHITE SHARKS, OCEAN RAMSEY FREEDIVING WITH SHARKS, SWIMMING WITH GREAT WHITES - YouTube

I note you have added more choices to the poll. I vote, don't care, and yes hunting a creature for only its fins is wrong. We are removing a necessary predator from the ocean faster than they can reproduce.
Freediver hitches a ride on the great white.

 

[SailNaked]

It would take at least 5 fatal shark attacks for me to want to dive the site. Any less than that and you cant be sure to swim with them.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

 

[KevWind]

I don't have to. So far you have not provided a shred of evidence that this thread is anything more than an attempt to gauge how divers assess an acceptable risk of a fatal shark attack or that I've promoted anything on this thread to suggest otherwise.
.

He doesn't have to present any evidence because the original thread and poll are self evident, as being an obvious (as someone pointed out ) "push" type poll. Designed intentionally or not, ... to infer a number of negative issues under the guise of "gathering information" Where by design of restriction and offering only choices of number of fatal attacks by inference assumes things like, "There will be fatal attacks and you going to have to choose a number . Not at all unlike the prototypical car salesman's question "Which one do you like the red one or the yellow one ?". Or for example in the political arena

Many push polls are negative attacks on other candidates. These attacks often contain suggestions not stated as facts.They ask questions such as "If you knew that Candidate Smith was being investigated for corruption, would you be more likely to vote for him, or less likely?" The question does not state that any investigation has taken place, so it is not a lie, but it puts in the respondent's mind the idea that Candidate Smith may be corrupt.

The OP and the poll were intended to gauge how divers perceive the risk of attack from sharks. As explained before, the range of options provided were more than adequate to cover level headed responses.

No it isn't the original options only allow for for specifically directed responses , it cant possibly gauge "how divers perceive the the risk" because it pre supposes that there is already a serious risk of fatality to be considered.

'I don't care', suggests you'd be willing to jump into shark infested water regardless of the consequences. I don't accept that as a valid or rational respons

No it doesn't. What iit clearly shows is over 40% of respondents do not care how many fatalities there are they are still against culling.

The statement that 'shark culling or finning is morally wrong' has nothing to do with the topic of the poll and OP.
.

If thats true then neither does the "I don't care" part, its not a two part question. Seizing upon and obsessing over part of it and injecting a ridiculous conclusion looks silly at best.

Clearly I was being overly optimistic.

Yes you were way overly optimistic or ignorant of the fact that an obvious skewed push type poll, would not be quickly recognized as such and that it could possibly give you any accurate information as to how divers rate the actual risk of shark attack

If nothing else the thread to date serves to highlight how difficult it is to have a sensible, level headed conversation on the topic.

Actually so far it only shows that you are consistently willing to ignore or dismiss any sensible and level headed responses that disagree with you And simply resort to constantly shifting the goal posts.

[

Thanks folks for your comments and responses to date. Wouldn't have expected it to turn out this way but the poll certainly forced your hand on the matter.

Not surprising you might attempt to couch it this way or attempt to dismiss the overwhelming number of responses given +70% responded to the added questions or take it and draw ridiculous conclusions In stead of perhaps realizing that what 70% of respondents are actually telling you, is your original questions were inadequate to address "How divers perceive the risk of shark attack" Did you forget that the second highest number, find the poll "hopelessly flawed" ?


To which you respond

I think the responses and poll demonstrate the difficulties that many divers have in properly assessing the risk of shark attack. "It also shows how peer pressure can be used to manipulate divers into accepting that higher tolerance to risk"

So your saying If they do not agree with you they have "difficulty properly assessing" or easily succumb to peer pressure ? Does that strike you as possibly being a bit arrogant condescending ?


.

I believe it is safe to say the selection of the 'Don't care' option on the poll in all cases is false.

No but it might be safe to say you are not willing to accept the actual meaning of whole question while ignoring the "hopelessly flawed" question altogether

For many both of these factors are driven by a desire to protect sharks even at the expense of people's safety

. Here I'll fix this so as to make it accurate. "Many are driven by a desire to protect sharks even when people voluntarily place themselves at risk and suffer the consequences.

So far on this thread the only ones saying anything about culling are the people on your side of the debate. It has nothing to do with the OP or the poll. It is 'off topic'. You have been one of the most vocal on the topic.

Except of course for when you say something about culling

So far we've got a bunch of suicidal divers champing at the bit to jump into an ocean teaming with man-eating sharks. Last week seven people got killed in shark attacks and I'm the government official charged with sorting out the mess. I've got an office full of grieving family members furious about the governments lack of action. Culling would be a very attractive option.

 

[Hank49]

This thread is among the worst ever.

N

But it can be an interesting discussion.
Maybe it comes down to the primal instinct of protecting our young? There is no more powerful motivating force to make us go crazy…and do crazy things.. than the threat of someone….or thing possibly harming our kids.

Why to orcas kill them? How often does it happen? Do orcas know that whites might eat their young so …..they don't take any chances?

I'm speaking only of justification for killing very large tiger or white sharks, not culling of any sharks in the area or the wholesale slaughter of any species for their fins.

 

[Scared Silly]

[h=2]How many fatal shark attacks to stop you diving?[/h]
One - as in the one that kills me. Otherwise the pool is open.

 

[ferris213]

Foxfish, how often have you had encounters with the sharks that are targeted in the cull? Have you ever been really threatened? Bumped? Has anyone you know ever been bitten?