Select to expand quotejbshack said..
ThinkaBowtit said..
I'm not saying I don't think they should have had the shark to autopsy. Maybe Fisheries are just sick of all the crap and didn't want to give the UWA anti-cull lobby what they wanted. Just for the badness of it. I don't know. Neither do you.
How many sharks have been autopsied for research? Plenty I imagine in South Africa, after watching the expertise taking place dissecting that one in your video - that operator knew exactly how to make sure that liver dropped perfectly into the tub.Practice makes perfect, you can tell. And what did they say at the end. "Blood samples MAY shine a light on why that shark died" or words to that effect. Which is similar to what Fisheries came up with hey? The white MAY have choked on a seal. I'd say it probably did, given the seal was in its throat, not in its gut.
Maybe the seal had a spear in it and they didn't want to even go there...
So out of spite you think fisheries didn't pass on the body, to a group that actually supports them? UWA are very much on fisheries side because they get so much funding. Your right over seas many people have obviously cut up sharks, but we don't listen to any of the over seas scientists so why would we then let them do all the work
The seal parts in the sharks throat is MOST LIKELY there due to the shark purging its stomach once near death. I even learnt today that a Great White can purge its annus..
Hell Barnet wants to kill great whites, he tried and didn't manage it so maybe he should have at least found out what killed this one, if he is that serous he could have learnt something 
No, I don't think that's what happened, the out of spite bit in your first line. For god's sake don't start a vicious rumour based on a spanner I tossed in.
So were there seal parts in the shark's throat, or was there a whole seal? And yes, purging out one's "annus" is pretty routine, isn't it?
Frankly, I don't think Barnett could care less if a white washes up on the beach with a deadly fur-ball. If there's a lesson to be learned there, it is probably that it's best to peel your seal if you're making it a meal.
Another conspiracy brewing where there probably isn't one. It gets tiring.
i was on the beach at the time it was swimming around clearly in distress, it sure as **** didn't have a seal tail hanging out its mouth, nor did the the first photos of the carcass on the beach, that's a pretty good indicator that they had to do some sort of autopsy on it. I'm sure fisheries have their own scientists that have taken samples for analysis. I also know fisheries were contacted the first afternoon it was swimming around and it was reported at the time the small tag in its side was visible. If fisheries were looking to cover something up they would have been quicker to get up there and see what was going on.
And how how did a juvenile GWS choke on a seal? Have you not ever shoved something in your gob that you thought you could chew and swallow in one bite?
Well a shark is not a human and they didn't evolve over millions of years to choke of food
www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-shark-chokes-on-sea-lion-20140717-htmlstory.html
Ok so the shark can't 'choke' on a seal the same way you or I would choke on a chicken bone. But it did have a seal lodged in its throat and it looks to have died trying to dislodge it. Oxford Concise Dictionary aside, that sounds like choking to me.
Select to expand quotejbshack said..
Well a shark is not a human and they didn't evolve over millions of years to choke of food
That assumes the evolutionary process is perfect.
It isn't.
If it was, you could also claim that that after millions of years of evolution, cows would never die in calving because the calves would always come out the right way around. That belief would also be wrong.
They mostly come out right but common with all things relying on a natural process, things don't always happen the way they should, and in the same way that calves get stuck during the birth process and kill both cow and calf, anything can get something stuck somewhere and die from the result.
Without going into details, it can and does happen.
Select to expand quotejbshack said..
Oh hang on, I've got it wrong, then.. Just so you can explain to me then what the drum lines are for If there not to kill sharks
Yes, you do have it wrong. I'm glad you recognise that fact at least. 
The intention is only to kill sharks that pose some danger to the public. It is not an all out indiscriminate cull.
And it's not being done because someone 'wants' to.
It's being done because we need to.
Actually, there's a whole thread topic on just this point.
It's quite long and has covered all points about ten times over.
You might like to have a look, just to remind yourself.
www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/General-Discussion/Heavy-Weather/Only-Surfers/?page=43
interesting.
just spoke to a couple of guys who got chased in by presumably the same shark surfing just north of there a couple of days before it met an untimely end.
Sounds like he had been hanging around for a while.
W
Select to expand quoteChris6791 said..
Ok so the shark can't 'choke' on a seal the same way you or I would choke on a chicken bone. But it did have a seal lodged in its throat and it looks to have died trying to dislodge it. Oxford Concise Dictionary aside, that sounds like choking to me.
I guess thats part of the main point. Is there was no sign of a object in its throat large enough to choke it. The beach care taker said it had a piece of seal skin come from its mouth when it was dragged down the beach.. No photos, no video footage. Now the world is saying McAullays "Possible" death is laughable..
Still diverts as to why would they not at least cut it up themselves Im not sure why fisheries ask for fish frames, if they aren't even interesting in opening up and testing a Great White
But the again the fact they disposed of the body so fast, well that tells another story IMHO
Select to expand quotepweedas said..jbshack said..
Oh hang on, I've got it wrong, then.. Just so you can explain to me then what the drum lines are for If there not to kill sharks
Yes, you do have it wrong. I'm glad you recognise that fact at least.
The intention is only to kill sharks that pose some danger to the public. It is not an all out indiscriminate cull.
And it's not being done because someone 'wants' to.
It's being done because we need to.
Actually, there's a whole thread topic on just this point.
It's quite long and has covered all points about ten times over.
You might like to have a look, just to remind yourself.
www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/General-Discussion/Heavy-Weather/Only-Surfers/?page=43
Now I'm confused, so you say the drum lines are not to kill sharks, but then you say it is designed to kill sharks, specific ones? How is that not killing sharks then Oh and especially when they have not managed to kill the most important one
Its no wonder you are hard to argue against. You don't seem to understand logic..
Im happy to leave it at that..
Select to expand quotejbshack said..
Now I'm confused, so you say the drum lines are not to kill sharks, but then you say it is designed to kill sharks, specific ones? How is that not killing sharks then Oh and especially when they have not managed to kill the most important one
Its no wonder you are hard to argue against. You don't seem to understand logic..
Im happy to leave it at that..
Your original statement was that Barnett WANTED to kill sharks.
It's that statement we are talking about.
It would be the same error as saying a parent wanted to carry out discipline on his children.
They don't like doing it; it's just necessary.
And I'm happy to leave it at that.
Now don't forget, you said you were happy to leave it at that. 
Select to expand quotejbshack said..
...there was no sign of a object in its throat large enough to choke it.
Really, did you see footage of the shark with its gob open so that you could look down its throat? Or maybe you drove five hours and witnessed it in person? Or maybe you just have superpowers the rest of us could only hope for?
Select to expand quotejbshack said..
...Im not sure why fisheries ask for fish frames, if they aren't even interesting in opening up and testing a Great White
I'm not sure why they ask for frames either, they could just head down to Kailis and have access to truckloads of them every few days, along with their own departmental paper trail providing details of where and when they were caught and by who, on what gear, along with what other species in the same area and in what quantities. But that's not relevant to this discussion.
Anyway, I counted 15 whales in half an hour today, 'tis the season to be ohmmmmmming up a big protective bubble out in the water. Thar she blows!
what we should leave it at is that this was a very unique event captured on film. I for one never thought a whitey could die like this it is almost a Darwin award plus the fact it for some reason tried to beach itself is a bit of a mindfark, is it true that people tried to swim it back out? Anyway back to JBay, could be a Parko v Mick final!!
Where in South Australia was it ACTUALLY tagged
Can some one post the tracking link or the actual movements of this shark from SA great in January ...... to Geraldton WA coronation beach ........tar
Ps Baksey there was some footage I blinked and saw 2 or 3 or 4 people on either side of it {looked hairy for shore}, re directing it out , I herd it swam around in a large ark / circle and came back in ..........been trying to come across that footage to ......if you find it post it ........tar
Has this shark been given a name are they named when they are tagged Seally
no really
Was tagged at Neptune Island. CSIRO and fisheries will have all the info. Doubt we will ever see it though
It was just a spaghetti tag going by the footage not a tracking, acoustic or pop off device. Just a ID for the shark and a name.
The shark would have been tagged at GWS cage diving location at Neptune islands by one of the two baiting and tagging boats there.
Found some more footage of the shark rescue / death for yas
www.gwn7.com.au/news/
You can't choke on a seal for three days. Ten minutes yes, over 10 hours sure but for three days no no you can't. I ate a jatz once and it started choking me the whole experience lasted maybe ten seconds. Not on once during that ten seconds did I attempt to beach myself nor thrash around in the shallows with people trying to swim me out. Actually no one came to my assistance at all. It has been said I was a very difficult child. I can't hold any grudges
^^^ clever - I didn't know sharks could use a computer let alone post on the net.
Also if its so clear, why did not any of the people's commentary not mention a seal hanging out of its mouth
No Rodney, you dribble BS, not call it. Although I must apologise as it was the second vid posted not the first, this one.
www.gwn7.com.au/news/
The remains of the seal are in plain view at 6, 49 & 1:23 seconds and in the still shots with the front end loader. And the commentary specifically states that it was thought that the shark had choked.
As I said, it ain't rocket surgery.
As reported by a Bystander. If its a piece of skin from the seal that choked on the shark, then would you really expect the piece if skin to have come from a seal obstructing its mouth that much to choke it I wouldn't. In fact it would point it even further from a choking scenario.. So how is that evidence it choked on the seal If a person is poisoned and in his last breathe vomits, and in that vomit there is carrot, would you then say thats evidence he choked on a carrot
What do you reckon that piece of seal skin is attached to Wodney?
Maybe the big bit of seal that's stuck in old mates throat?
I maybe wrong but in the first vid I saw I could see what looked like a bit of seal ( looked like a flipper) hanging out from the shard right side gills.
