Researchers take issue with Florida shark attack terminology

[BVickery]

Here is the Article from the Tampa Bay Times.
[h=1]Researchers take issue with Florida shark attack terminology[/h]
Thoughts on this? I do think it would be in the right direction since to try and help protect Sharks we will need to educate the public that sharks are not dangerous (I keep the line from Men in Black in mind when talking about telling the world about aliens: "Humans are smart, people are stupid")

The Four Classifications would be:

• Shark sightings: Sightings of sharks in the water in proximity to people with no physical contact.

• Shark encounters: No bite takes place and no humans are injured, but physical contact occurs with a person or an inanimate object holding a person, such as a surfboard or boat. A shark might also bump a swimmer and its rough skin might cause a minor abrasion.
• Shark bites: Bites by small or large sharks that result in minor to moderate injuries.
• Fatal shark bites: One or more bites causing fatal injuries. Hueter and Neff cautioned against using the term "shark attack" unless the motivation and intent of the shark are clearly established by experts, which is rarely possible.

Again, I am for something like this since people usually assume Shark Attack = swimmer with a missing limb, chunk out of him etc. I see it as a way to try and de-demonize the Shark.

 

[Arubandi07]

Even though I've not had any 'close' encounters or interaction with sharks, your perspective on this is right on point, IMO. A Shark does what it does, so to me, 'judgement' of a Shark's reaction(and ensuing consequences) should be based on it's perception of my actions.

But of course, that doesn't jive too well with 'stupid people's' notion that we have a right to be in the ocean and those evil Sharks just need to disappear ...

 

[supergaijin]

I'm sure people in South Africa and Western Australia will sleep easier knowing that Florida is the

"Shark Attack Capital of the World".

 

[kelemvor]

Great idea, I'm all for it! Unfortunately it will never work. News agencies use whatever wording will sell best. People love drama. "Shark Bite" just doesn't have that newspaper selling ring to it.

 

[AfterDark]

Here is the Article from the Tampa Bay Times.
Researchers take issue with Florida shark attack terminology


Thoughts on this? I do think it would be in the right direction since to try and help protect Sharks we will need to educate the public that sharks are not dangerous (I keep the line from Men in Black in mind when talking about telling the world about aliens: "Humans are smart, people are stupid")

The Four Classifications would be:



Again, I am for something like this since people usually assume Shark Attack = swimmer with a missing limb, chunk out of him etc. I see it as a way to try and de-demonize the Shark.

Right, sharks don't attack seals, they feed on them. What is the difference? If the sharks mistakes a swimmer for a seal it is not an attack? Is that not how they feed? They are often called ambush predators by the experts. What is an ambush if not an attack? Sounds like BS to me. Describing the attack accurately would be more helpful. An encounter is an encounter never an attack. I encounter sharks every time I dive in NC. I have never been attacked.

 

[fisheater]

While we're at it, let's get rid of "shark infested"!

It's THEIR home, not ours. If anything, the waters are "human infested."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

[AfterDark]

While we're at it, let's get rid of "shark infested"!

It's THEIR home, not ours. If anything, the waters are "human infested."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

Now that I can agree with! I've never used that term as an adult anyway as a kid probably did.