Death in Cocos from shark attack

[Wingy]

@JohnnyQuest - your assumption that someone not being American meaning they "probably would not have DAN" has me a bit baffled.....DAN Asia Pacific does a good job of covering we non American divers this side of the world.

 

[Kay Dee]

@JohnnyQuest - your assumption that someone not being American meaning they "probably would not have DAN" has me a bit baffled.....DAN Asia Pacific does a good job of covering we non American divers this side of the world.

Yeah, I was just about to ask the same thing.

Be that as it may, maybe more whales are needed at Cocos?
Whale 'saves' biologist from shark

 

[HalcyonDaze]

I’m not sure the rogue shark theory has been totally debunked even if it is a rarity. In Egypt at Sharm in 2010 there were seven attacks in short order. They did a minor cull and blamed one attack on a Mako but the rest on a single female longimanus. I have no way of verifying this apart from the support of the theory by the leading longimanus marine biologist guide out there. It seemed this particular shark did get a taste for humans (or was very hungry or was set off by the sheep carcasses dropped by a passing cargo ship). In any event it’s rare but I’d not rule it out 100%.

Sounds like you got your info from the typically craptastic Shark Week "documentary" piece on those - 2010 Sharm El Sheikh shark attacks - Wikipedia

Three swimmers were attacked on the same day, and then a fourth four days later - not "seven." To my knowledge, the attacks were never tied to individual sharks, although one oceanic whitetip and one mako were caught after the first three attacks. The fourth attack happened after those animals were caught and the day after the beaches were reopened for swimming. The claim was made that those were the "rogue" animals, but it seems that was something put out by local officials (like Discworld's C.M.O.T. Dibbler, it seems Mayor Vaughan of Amity has counterparts all over the world) rather than a positive ID by researchers.

@JohnnyQuest - your assumption that someone not being American meaning they "probably would not have DAN" has me a bit baffled.....DAN Asia Pacific does a good job of covering we non American divers this side of the world.

I was a little baffled by that as well - as I understand, DAN will tell you where the nearest chamber is and handle the insurance bills for a dive accident. If you have someone over 340 miles out to sea who is bleeding out on your boat, "calling DAN" is so far down the priority list it's laughable.

 

[Wingy]

In the case of Bleeding out...well yeah calling superman isn't going to help. I have seen DAN do a lot more than just tell you where the nearest chamber is. I was diving in FP when there was an incident - the diver was not DAN covered but for ten hours they liased with the local island nursing post directing staff there on what to do and monitoring the divers condition while they made a decision to send out a chopper for medivac to the nearest chamber - approx 2.5 hour round trip away. The kicker was - because the diver was not insured with DAN they could not guarantee the chopper would be sitting waiting and available without a $10K USD "bond" to ensure it would be available.

That diver was not American either - DAN did a great job that day in my book.

 

[Hoag]

@JohnnyQuest - your assumption that someone not being American meaning they "probably would not have DAN" has me a bit baffled.....DAN Asia Pacific does a good job of covering we non American divers this side of the world.

@JohnnyQuest the same here in Ontario Canada. It is hard to find a dive shop that does not have a DAN "bumper sticker" stuck to their front counter and DAN pamphlets available for anyone interested. I have been a member of DAN since 2004.

 

[outofofficebrb]

The one thing that I haven't read is why DAN didn't send a plane or helicopter to immediately evacuate her. I can't imagine that she wasn't a DAN member. Most liveaboards require it now, and she was an experienced diver. 300+ miles is a long was by boat, but pretty close by air. If the water was too rough to send a plane, I'd think a chopper would have worked.

This is from the DAN policy:
Emergency Evacuation means that, due to Medical Necessity,
the Member or Covered Family Member requires immediate
transportation from the place where such person has a
medical emergency to the nearest appropriate medical facility
where appropriate medical treatment can be obtained.

Medical Necessity includes any situation where it
is judged medically appropriate to move the Member
to another location either for treatment or for a
higher level of medical care. DAN TravelAssist will arrange
details of the emergency evacuation, using the
means best suited to do so, based on the seriousness
of the Member’s condition, and these means may include air
ambulance, surface ambulance, regular airplane, railroad or
other appropriate means. All decisions as to the means of
Transportation and final destination will be based solely
upon medical factors.
Transportation means any land, water or air conveyance
required to transport the Member or Covered Family
Member during an emergency evacuation or repatriation.
Expenses for special transportation must be
recommended by the attending Physician in conjunction
with DAN TravelAssist or required by the standard
regulation of the conveyance transporting the Member or Covered
Family Member. Special transportation includes, but is
not limited to, an air ambulance, land ambulance, and private
motor vehicle. Expenses for medical supplies and services
must be recommended by both the attending Physician and
DAN TravelAssist.

I mentioned this earlier in the thread...i attended a DAN seminar that talked about Cocos and Galapagos accidents specifically. While 300 miles isn’t far by plane, there is nowhere to land there so you’d have to go by helicopter. That range, round trip by helicopter, is too far. Best case scenario is the liveaboard hauls back to mainland Costa Rica and the helicopter meets them once they are within range. That passage takes a really long time even then.

 

[InTheDrink]

Sounds like you got your info from the typically craptastic Shark Week "documentary" piece on those - 2010 Sharm El Sheikh shark attacks - Wikipedia

Three swimmers were attacked on the same day, and then a fourth four days later - not "seven." To my knowledge, the attacks were never tied to individual sharks, although one oceanic whitetip and one mako were caught after the first three attacks. The fourth attack happened after those animals were caught and the day after the beaches were reopened for swimming. The claim was made that those were the "rogue" animals, but it seems that was something put out by local officials (like Discworld's C.M.O.T. Dibbler, it seems Mayor Vaughan of Amity has counterparts all over the world) rather than a positive ID by researchers.



I was a little baffled by that as well - as I understand, DAN will tell you where the nearest chamber is and handle the insurance bills for a dive accident. If you have someone over 340 miles out to sea who is bleeding out on your boat, "calling DAN" is so far down the priority list it's laughable.

No, I got my information from the world’s leading expert on OWT. I got to this location for about 4 weeks a year and have a reasonable understanding of their behavior. This one seemed like she got a taste or was very hungry. They matched the marks on victims so it was the same shark (the OWT). The mako was very skinny so don’t know anything about that really just it seems an OWT was responsible for several hits. That said, they rarely come close to shore which is where the hits happened but they are a bit bitey with things on the surface. But it does seem like was same shark that bit. As I said, very rare but the same shark’s posture can change from passive to inquisitive to aggressive and back down again pretty quickly and I don’t understand why that is. No baiting, no spear fishing, no swimming or snorkeling. Their behaviour can just change.

 

[HalcyonDaze]

First, correction to my earlier post - the victim total was five, not four. I was reading an article quickly and was thrown off because the victims were subdivided by nationality. Four were injured on Dec. 1 and a fifth was killed on Dec. 5 after the beaches reopened.

No, I got my information from the world’s leading expert on OWT. I got to this location for about 4 weeks a year and have a reasonable understanding of their behavior. This one seemed like she got a taste or was very hungry. They matched the marks on victims so it was the same shark (the OWT). The mako was very skinny so don’t know anything about that really just it seems an OWT was responsible for several hits. That said, they rarely come close to shore which is where the hits happened but they are a bit bitey with things on the surface. But it does seem like was same shark that bit. As I said, very rare but the same shark’s posture can change from passive to inquisitive to aggressive and back down again pretty quickly and I don’t understand why that is. No baiting, no spear fishing, no swimming or snorkeling. Their behaviour can just change.

I presume that the "world's leading expert on OWT" would be Dr. Elke Bojanowski?

Same shark linked to three attacks in Egypt

About Red Sea Sharks

Seems like she has an extensive photo ID project (881 identified individuals from 2004 to present) going on OWTs in the Red Sea, and from talking to a researcher who was at the International Shark Attack File at the time the belief was that one OWT was responsible for at least two of the attacks due to a distinctive cut on the dorsal seen in video footage of the attacks. Said shark however was not believed to be the OWT caught after the initial attacks; neither it nor the mako contained human remains (tissue was removed from at least two of the first four victims, although whether it was ingested is an open question).

As far as OWT behavior, the impression I've gotten is that given their environment (open ocean with limited feeding opportunities), they don't pass up meals. I don't buy the "developing a taste for humans" trope; applying that to this instance would be concluding that two is a trend.

Overall, the Sharm El Sheikh attacks are really hard to pin down even seven years later; at the time there seems to have been a lot of BS flying around and an authoritarian government dependent on tourism can't exactly be counted on to provide an unbiased account of the matter.

 

[Doc Harry]

Looks like the widower is now blaming the dive op.

Apparently the dive op did not supply anyone in the dive group with the proper equipment to defend against those "fish."

 

[KevinNM]

He's being human, it's what people do.