Should the Shark Nets stay?

[Theunis]

Good post - agree 100% w/ all your points

I agree!!

 

[Theunis]

Shark nets are used here in Sydney during the summer months. The nets are randomly moved around from beach to beach. The netting program was introduced in 1937, and as far as I know, in that time, there has only been 1 attack on a netted beach in Sydney, and that occurred a few weeks ago at Bondi Beach. Prior to 1937 there were many attacks. Its pretty hard to argue against statistics like that as far as the effectiveness of the nets are concerned.

Taking all that into account, I would hate to think of the amount of by-catch that has been killed in that time. I know for a fact that dugongs, whales, turtles, rays and dolphins have been caught.I, personally came across an Eagle Ray trapped in a shark net. I untangled it and set it free. I hope it survived.

I would like to see the netting program here abolished. I really can not see it happening though. We had a number of shark related incidents this summer. It would take a very brave government to stop the netting program because if there did happen to be a fatal incident, I'm sure a lot of people would place the blame at the feet of that particular government.
Parso

Hi Parso, it's a very debatable issue with many pro's and con's though.

I remember a time in the 1970's going on holiday with the family to Margate, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa and watched in awe when the boats from the sharks board beached with their dead sharks on-board. I also remember the shark nets proudly displayed on the beach for repairs close at the lagoon. My twin brother and I were eagerly waiting everyday for the shark boats to arrive to have a closer look at these "deadly man-eating monsters"?

Herewith a short history of shark nets in South Africa.

According to records 2 shark attacks on humans took place in the 1930's in the KwaZulu-Natal. Between 1940 and 1952 there were 32 shark attacks, 7 of those were fatal. People were in a state of shock and panic. In 1952 seven gill nets were installed off the Durban beaches. These nets were each 130 meters long and things improved for a few years as thousands of sharks were captured and killed.

Then came Black December of 1957-1958 where 5 deaths occurred over a 107 day period. Holiday makers flocked home in horror of the carnage.

It was during this time that the Navy started depth-charging sharks. Can you imagine this? War was declared on the sharks. Cage-like barriers were also installed but abandoned due to the fact that they couldn't withstand the high impact surf. As from 1962 modern shark nets were installed.

How do the nets work, you may ask? Most of the nets are 214 meters long, 6 meters deep and have a stretch mesh of 51 centimeters. They are secured at each end by two 35 kilograms anchors.
The nets are laid in two parallel rows approximately 400 m offshore and in water depths of 10-14 meters.

As from 1964 nets were also installed at several other large holiday resorts. According to my records there are at present 40 kilometers of netting installed at 37 towns and holiday resorts along a 325 kilometer stretch of coastline.

Shark nets were very effective and have been working very well, so well in fact that according to statistics the chances of getting eaten by a shark are about zero percent. Keep in mind that shark netting works by reducing the shark population and NOT by preventing access of sharks to the beaches.

Shark nets are not barriers, sharks can move freely in and out of the nets. They can also see the nets a lot of time, and avoid them. They can move between the nets, under the nets, around the nets and in from the sides without even coming near the nets. People are often shocked to realize this, but it's no secret. Have you ever heard the story that more sharks are caught in the nets on their way back to sea (beach side of the net)?!!

It is said that if all shark nets were to be removed you will not be at risk of shark attacks due to the reduced shark numbers. It can be argued that you are safer swimming on a weekend, when the nets are not checked, at a non netted beach adjacent to a netted beach due to the fact that all sharks, dolphins, sea tortoises, other fish species, etc,etc,etc, caught during a weekend are basically chumming the water at the netted beach!!

Today shark populations are in a very bad state. Whale and dolphin carcasses are floating ashore almost untouched after spending weeks floating in the ocean. Human corpses from drowning are discovered days later untouched. Where are all the sharks, you may ask? Well they are not there anymore and they are in dire need of conservation.

I agree with you, the shark nets should go, but I can't see it happening!

 

[Jupiter31]

"Shark nets are not barriers, sharks can move freely in and out of the nets. They can also see the nets a lot of time, and avoid them. They can move between the nets, under the nets, around the nets and in from the sides without even coming near the nets. People are often shocked to realize this, but it's no secret. Have you ever heard the story that more sharks are caught in the nets on their way back to sea (beach side of the net)?!!"

I was unaware of this - interesting......

Assuming more than just you (and now me) know this, then why bother with nets in the first place - is it solely the phicologicalicological (LOL) effect?

And did they not drop the rate of attacks when they were first introduced?

 

[Theunis]

Shark nets are not barriers, sharks can move freely in and out of the nets. They can also see the nets a lot of time, and avoid them. They can move between the nets, under the nets, around the nets and in from the sides without even coming near the nets. People are often shocked to realize this, but it's no secret. Have you ever heard the story that more sharks are caught in the nets on their way back to sea (beach side of the net)?!!

I was unaware of this - interesting......

Assuming more than just you (and now me) know this, then why bother with nets in the first place - is it solely the phicologicalicological (LOL) effect?

And did they not drop the rate of attacks when they were first introduced?

Thanks for the response Jupiter31!

Yes, shark nets did drop the rate of attacks after they were introduced. The main reason for that was that the shark nets have reduced the shark population.

I did a bit of investigation regarding South Africa's shark population and the initial reason for our shark population explosion in the 1900's.

A whaling industry started in Durban, South Africa in 1907 by the Norwegians.

It is rather clear that the catching of whales was easy without the need to sail much more than 150 miles from Durban. Whales were killed by shooting them with a 165 pound metal harpoon loaded with explosives. The whales were then pumped full of air to make them buoyant and towed back to Durban.

In 1912 there were 13 whaling companies registered with only 6 ever operational.

During 1975 the whaling operations in Durban ended. One reason was fact that the conservation movement was gaining momentum with growing pressures to ban whaling.

Not many people are aware of the fact that the whaling industry in Durban had a huge influence on sharks as well. The whaling stations created an abnormal large population of abnormally large sharks. The sharks had a royal time following these whale ships and feeding of the towed carcasses. Many whales were lost as the sharks would bite through the whales blubber and sink them en-route to the whaling station.

The whaling stations in Durban have created a "smorgasbord" of shark bait up and down from the Bluff, moving in the current and arriving at the northern beaches of Durban all the way down to the beaches of Amanzimtoti in the south. This oily and bloody slick of bait secured the presence of sharks at these beaches where most shark attacks took place during the peak of the whaling industry.

As from 1975, when the whaling industry came to an end, the shark numbers normalized ending the period of the super-shark? The problem at that time was that most people were incited against sharks and the nets stayed.

Due to the whaling industry creating our huge shark population there was no other option and shark nets did their job, but the shark population is down for many years now.

Nowadays, baited hooks suspended from an anchored buoy and referred to as drum lines are also used. The drum lines are nothing more than a feeding and killing station for sharks. The drum lines have one advantage...they don't indiscriminately catch harmless species, such as dolphins, skates, rays, whales and whale sharks.

 

[Sherky]

I was in SA and made a documentary on Tiger Sharks near the Aliwal Shoal, near to the Kwazulu Natal Shark nets. It saddens me that the ones we dived an filmed with could end up in these nets.

I visited the Natal Sharks Board and filmed and witnessed a Tiger Shark and Hammerhead being dissected. I also met with 1 or 2 people when making my movies. According to the information they gave me, the NSB are capable of installing electric current nets, like PODS that emit a signal that can repel Sharks. they should put these in. Forget the finance, it is profitiable in the long run by far to put these nets in.

I think people should be writing to the net organisations and sending petitions for these electric 'nets' to be made. ANyone got any thoughts?

 

[Theunis]

Hi Sherky

The NSB have tested magnetic field barriers at the Margate beach, South Coast, KwaZulu-Natal, SA years ago. The power of nature was the problem with the cables been destroyed and spat out by the tides and waves. The NSB then gave it up.

Two weeks ago I did a few shark dives on the Protea Banks, KwaZulu-Natal. On our way back to the shore we inspected the Sharks Board’s drum-lines and nets off St Micheal's beach. These nets and drum-lines are approximately 300 to 400 meters offshore.

A drum-line consists of a large, anchored float (buoy) from which a baited hook is suspended. The quantity of gear varies but most beaches are “protected” by 2 nets or 1 net and 4 drum-lines.

The main reason for the drum-lines is the fact that many dolphins, whales, sea tortoises and other fish species are caught in the shark-nets and I think the reasoning was that the nets should be replaced by baited drum-lines to protect such other species. But it seems that this is not the case…nets are still in use and drum-lines were simply added!

Many conservationists, who are against nets and drum-lines, argue that the baited drum-lines are actually luring sharks to beaches. As I have said before, it can also be argued that you are safer swimming on a weekend, when the nets and drum-lines are not checked, at a non netted and non baited beach adjacent to a netted and baited beach due to the fact that all sharks, dolphins, sea tortoises, and other fish species, etc,etc,etc, caught during a weekend are basically chumming the water at the netted and baited beach!!

Something needs to be done by this killing nets and baiting drum-lines. I think that the killing should stop, sharks are not that plentiful anymore and to keep on culling or butchering is just not on anymore. The truth of the matter is that beaches are NOT “protected” from sharks. Sharks are lured in and culled!

I have taken a few photos of these drum-lines:

The drum-line with the beach visible in the background:

The buoy and baited hook:

 

[Sherky]

Heh Theunis, Yeah I heard about the cables the NSB were trying to do, though my info was vague. I heard they cancelled this attempt. I think with a POD style 'fence' which may just be floating or submerged POD style devices lined along the coast replacing the nets, this might have potential, as it doesn't use cables as such but emits an invisible field. Don't know if this is affordable or economical enough.

As for the drum lines, that is just cruel and targets the Sharks. Didn't know that they weren't replacing the nets but just adding to them.

Those pics shine some light on what those guys are actually doing. The whole thing is just sick. Hopefully it will all end soon.

 

[drrich2]

I imagine the 'other side' of the debate would ask, regardless of how the nets reduce attacks, if they reduce them (even via population reduction), are they not 'saving human lives?'

If the nets go, will some additional people be killed over the years as shark populations rebound?

Roughly how many people per year are we willing to lose to shark attack to restore shark populations to what extent?

This is a valid question. We know that once in awhile grizzly bears kill somebody. We could drive grizzlies into extinction, yet choose not to. So the idea of 'how many sharks = 1 human in value' type question comes us. Or how many humans is it worth losing to keep one shark species on the planet.

Richard.

 

[sailingk8]

The nets are barbaric and need to go. In my opinion there should be signs warning of shark and the people should stay out. Yes I know this is a pipe dream but I've been to the beach as a kid and been told by a sign not to swim because of Great Whites and I thought it was very cool. You play in the sand and think wow there are giant shark out there swiming around, how freaking awesome!

There should be safe areas for people to swim (rock pools built, etc.) and the area where the sharks are should be for the sharks. Why do people think they have to rule every flippin inch of this planet, why can't we appreciate the diversity we share it with.

@ Richard: More people die from Bees than shark, should we shroud off all of them too to save a few humans? I'm not trying to be argumentative just trying to make the case, at what point do we stop?
These nets are very damaging to many creatures already in peril. Why can't humans make some allowances and avoid contact.

 

[drrich2]

I'm not trying to be argumentative just trying to make the case, at what point do we stop?

Same here; I don't know where the line is, or how to place it. The popular appeal of the animal in question is a big factor; there are a LOT of people in the rural south who'd like venomous snakes driven into extinction, although the annual U.S. death rate from snake bite is quite low.

Richard.