How many fatal shark attacks to stop you diving

[highdesert]

I note you are from Canada. You have an excuse for your ignorance.

... and this from an Aussie. Ha!

 

[shoredivr]

Why anybody would conflate surfing, swimming and wading with diving continues to amaze me. Divers are below the surface. The others are on top. Repeating fearmongering in an endless loop just makes the OP appear ridiculous, disingenuous or trollish, take your pick.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

You just don't get it, Foxfish. You keep posting about non-divers getting attacked in a site for SCUBA divers. I agree that there are places where I wouldn't not surface swim, surf, kayak or paddleboard but would dive. And there are a few places (but relatively few) where I might not SCUBA Dive either.

The reaction of the surfer (Nativel) in the last Reunion quote is appalling. If one ventures into the water to pursue an activity, one should acknowledge the risks. What are we supposed to do? Remove every apex predator (and probably poisonous critters) from every ecosystem in the world? What an ecological mess that would leave.

I'm beginning to think he is not a real person. Just an endless loop of dreck from some wacked out mad scientist type loaded into a robot that can type. It's obvious that whoever programmed it is deathly afraid of sharks for some reason. Cannot look at them in a rational manner and see that they are just doing what comes naturally.

Again I will say that just because we are humans does not make us better than the White's other prey. Just because we have a written language (or languages), can express emotion, feel love, feel empathy for others, and believe in a being greater than ourselves.

We can also slaughter much of the species on this planet for sport and money, slaughter each other in the name of tribal loyalty, nationality, religion, and just for the hell of it. We can rape and abuse our own kind in ways that would sicken even an animal were it capable of feeling that emotion.

We can go to war over the stupidest things and our leaders stay in the background sucking up money and power while they send our sons and daughters to die. Keeping their little basturds safe in some university studying basket weaving or some garbage.

So tell me again fox old boy, what the hell is wrong with a white taking some of us out? I just wish Congress met in water. So we could chum it and toss in a few tigers and great white's to deal with them.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

... sharks won't eat politicians ... professional courtesy ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[KevWind]

... sharks won't eat politicians ... professional courtesy ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

And talk about a bad taste in the old Jaws heweee even caked in pepper spray probably intolerable, not to mention the toughest skin on the planet

 

[RTee]

Well considering the number of car accidents and I am still driving, number of airplane crashes and I am still flying, etc, my answer would be a hell of a lot more occurences.

 

[AaronRiot]

I'd suggest this post sums up the sentiments of many who have posted on this thread. The last part "It's the shark's ocean -- NOT YOURS" is typical Greeny ideology. It captures the idea that the sharks have some kind of territorial claim to the ocean and that human life is of no greater value than that of a shark. In fact I've heard many Greenies argue that the life of the shark is of greater value.

They offer little sensible justification for their arguments apart from vague generalisations and appeals to Greenie dogma. The thread provides many examples of how these misguided 'believers' gain their support. Most are content just sit on the sidelines and ridicule any one who challenges their beliefs. Others offer skewed statistics or twisted arguments to justify their position and sadly believe their own deception. The more fanatical ones resort to bullying and threats.

This is a US based forum. The incidents of a fatal shark attack is relatively low. It would be interesting to hear from Aaronriot how many fatal shark attacks have occurred within 300 km of where he typically dives. Apparently he lives about 500 km from the coast.

Making these kinds of claims sitting behind a keyboard in these circumstances is easy. The matter is brought into sharp focus when people travel and dive near some of the hot spots for fatal shark attacks around the world. Most people on the poll have indicated they'd dive regardless of the risk of a fatal attack which is plain stupidity but it serves to highlight the kind of fatalism that naturally follows from Greeny ideology.

GREENY!?

Holy hell.

1. Just because you are human does not make you special and above/better than/more important than other life forms. That's not me being "green" that's me understanding the big picture. It's not a belief either - it's a fact. Get out of that little room inside your head where everything is ME ME ME ME ME and maybe you'll notice the rest of the world and the beauty in it that has nothing to do with your enjoyment, safety, or anything you-related. You could use a slice or six of humble pie.

2. What humans have done to this world and in this case specifically sharks is disgusting. Point in case - shark fin soup. Hell, at least they use the (tasteless) fins. That again is not me being a "greeny" that is a fact. The idea of a supposedly educated population (Australia) allowing more of this for no legitimate reason is sad. Why not put the effort in to making people aware of the risks and perhaps new shark deterrent technology rather than being a freaking caveman with a club. Use your brain. I know for some that's a stretch.

3. WHERE I LIVE. Well, your comments on this are pretty close-minded. I in fact lived many years in California near the beach and the red triangle. We knew even as kids that there were white sharks in the ocean. Now, I live up north, and every summer I spend a few weeks in Grizzly Bear country. To be honest, I'm much more weary of a large bear than a large shark. I have seen maybe 2 dozen and have been frighteningly close to 3. I know the risk of camping in those areas. I know that if I am attacked I'm bear-dinner. So, I simply make sure that I don't do stupid things like keeping food near the tents or gutting fish anywhere near a campsite. Kinda like I'd not spearfish where the big sharks hang out. Or do anything that makes me look like food ...like say turning my back to a wolf. Kinda like I don't let other people mess with my SCUBA gear. Risk management without affecting the outside world. If you don't like the risk, don't take part in the activity.

4 Your last point. There is very little risk of a shark attack while diving. As many here have told your closed, holier than thou ears. So your comment makes no sense. For one thing White sharks attack at the surface from below. They know to get the seal when it's head is out of the water.

5. You want to talk FATALISM?!?! Says the guy who wants to play God with the ecosystem. Big picture time. Open your eyes and think beyond yourself and your tiny lifespan.

6. In many cases yes, I would put the life of a threatened species over that of a human who has no respect for the world around them. Like you with your preferred method of problem-solving being that of the wooden club. Not because I am an animal lover or whatever the hell you called me but because I fear what pin-headed assholes like yourself will do to the world that my great grand kids and so on will be born into.



Some people's freaking kids.





Well! Looks like I'll be diving your waters. Literally just won a sweepstakes trip to Aus. Hope I see the sharks before they're all culled.

 

[Mike.D]

Shark are worth more than a human life. Case in point:
Humans kill sharks->ecosystem falls apart->more fish die->species become extinct->less food for said human->human relying on fish for food source dies.
So yes they are more important

Foxfish is most likely a non-seafood eater with a huge dislike for sharks and perhaps recurring jaws nightmares?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bowlofpetunias]

You just don't get it, Foxfish. You keep posting about non-divers getting attacked in a site for SCUBA divers. I agree that there are places where I wouldn't not surface swim, surf, kayak or paddleboard but would dive. And there are a few places (but relatively few) where I might not SCUBA Dive either.

The reaction of the surfer (Nativel) in the last Reunion quote is appalling. If one ventures into the water to pursue an activity, one should acknowledge the risks. What are we supposed to do? Remove every apex predator (and probably poisonous critters) from every ecosystem in the world? What an ecological mess that would leave.

Wellllll.. more people Drown in the ocean than are taken by sharks (including swimmers, surfers, divers, snorklers, fishermen, boaters). That means the most dangerous thing in the ocean is the WATER! Perhaps we should bypass all the middlemen like sharks and remove all the WATER from the ocean.

By the way please folks don't put all of us Aussies in the same category .. some of us know better!

 

[Foxfish]

You just don't get it, Foxfish. You keep posting about non-divers getting attacked in a site for SCUBA divers.

I said the following when discussing the Recife shark attacks:

These attacks were not on scuba divers, but the example serves to highlight that when there is a serious risk of a shark attack, people and communities take steps to mitigate the risk, even if those steps are ineffective.

and didn't think I'd need to repeat the same again.

While the statistic doesn't include attacks on divers, it does provide another data point indicating the threshold at which people consider the risk of an attack unacceptably high.

Having said that, one of the articles did note that divers who entered the region where a surfer was recently taken feared for their lives because of the presence of sharks. A simple explanation for the lack of attacks on divers would be that there were far fewer divers than surfers and few divers entered the surf break where most of the attacks occurred.

It is common sense that an increase in the number of man-eating sharks in an area and attacks on surfers would mean a corresponding increase in risk to any other people entering the water in the region including divers.

We've had a similar experience in Western Australia. Since 1997 when the white pointer was protected the number of fatal attacks has increased dramatically and exponentially as shown in the statistics I previously provided. It was only a few years ago that divers vigorously denied that was the case. That all changed after a string of five fatal attacks within twelve months starting in 2011. This included two fatal attacks on scuba divers. The Shark Attack File SAS statistics show that as the number of attacks in our region have increased so has the corresponding risk to scuba divers.

I agree that there are places where I wouldn't not surface swim, surf, kayak or paddleboard but would dive. And there are a few places (but relatively few) where I might not SCUBA Dive either.

How about at Reunion at the time of these attacks. Would you have considered it too dangerous to swim or surf in the area. If not, how many fatal attacks on surfers and swimmers would need to occur before you'd consider the risk unacceptably high.

The reaction of the surfer (Nativel) in the last Reunion quote is appalling. If one ventures into the water to pursue an activity, one should acknowledge the risks. What are we supposed to do? Remove every apex predator (and probably poisonous critters) from every ecosystem in the world? What an ecological mess that would leave.

I'm avoiding getting involved in debates on culling and other ways to mitigate the risk on this thread. The intent here was simply to note that the local community had reached the limit of what they accepted to be an acceptable level of risk and took steps to mitigate the risk. In this case the statistics were five fatalities in the period from the start of 2011 to July 2013 and thirteen attacks for the corresponding period.