J Bay

Wouldn't the first place to start to have an actual adult conversation.

Guess people would have to act like adults for that to occur.

No issue has more dumb as **** armchair experts...
Quote me another bee statistic( I can spell potato)
If you are going to quote numbers and stats actually understand what they mean.


And as a side q
JB you said they are culled? How many whites were culled last year?

JB I love your passion it just isn't delivered well and you attack anyone that doesn't agree with you like they are an enemy about to steal your kids..

So how many were culled, you said hundreds of thousands. What is the actual number?

And old mate has done actual research so In my opinion his balanced and researched article is more interesting then reading some armchair experts Facebook guide to sharks..

You seem to think it is my opinion, as I said the other day. I didn't write it.. I posted it for discussion in a forum.
And the article has nothing to do with lost at see. You focus on that and miss the actual detail on attacks and numbers.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion but that doesn't mean the number of dumb ****s is decreasing or that actual "experts" opinions are less valuable then they used to be.

People have spent their lives researching this and living around the ocean.
Then someone with access to google thinks their an expert.... Please... Give me a break..

I'm 100% failing to see your connection between trees at a ski resort and sharks in the ocean.

Trees dont creep up behind you and sink their teeth into you.
When your skiing downhill you can visually see the trees infront of you and its your total responsibility to move out of their way, its not like they jump in front of you.

I understand your theory but the relevance between these 2 doesn't match at all.

Maybe if you were mtb riding in Canada on designated trails where Bears live and were attacking people, then a cull of bears or some sort of bear management system would be a bit more relevent to your argument.

The thing about surfing and is uniqueness, is there aint many other leisure activities that people do that throws in a man eating animal as one of the health risks.

Much better analogy, bjshack. Except bears are culled. And you tried to use the false dilemma fallacy.

Select to expand quote

SP said..
JB I love your passion it just isn't delivered well and you attack anyone that doesn't agree with you like they are an enemy about to steal your kids..

So how many were culled, you said hundreds of thousands. What is the actual number?

And old mate has done actual research so In my opinion his balanced and researched article is more interesting then reading some armchair experts Facebook guide to sharks..

You seem to think it is my opinion, as I said the other day. I didn't write it.. I posted it for discussion in a forum.
And the article has nothing to do with lost at see. You focus on that and miss the actual detail on attacks and numbers.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion but that doesn't mean the number of dumb ****s is decreasing or that actual "experts" opinions are less valuable then they used to be.

People have spent their lives researching this and living around the ocean.
Then someone with access to google thinks their an expert.... Please... Give me a break..

SP ill answer this but firstly really, you say i attack peoples attitudes have you not ever read any attacks towards me first? I guess from your side of the fence thats how you see it, for me its rather different.

I missed your question at the bottom of your first post. By culling i was referring to the fact that around 70 to 100 million "sharks" are killed/culled annually world wide Thats rather high number wouldn't you agree But on a local level if you want to look at your area alone i think over the last year around 9 GW's have been killed on the East of Aus. Have you seen any less attacks this year

The solution is not that simple to say just cull them. You can't make the ocean a safe place to visit unless you use options like barriers, even then sharks have been known to end up in pools so i guess its almost impossible.

Im not just a google expert, in fact i honestly never use goggle to look up any fact. I normally will talk and ask questions from people with qualifications to answer me. Im not about believing a Journo trying to sell a headline, which is were this new witch hunt is going

The science all points to one thing, one common argument, but sadly people don't want to accept their opinions or their advice.

In the mean while, millions get spent and waisted and nothing changes.

The truth is for me i really couldn't care, but for my kids to be able to surf, with some level of normality when they are my age, that would be nice..

An article i know, but it explains the link better than i obviously can..

theconversation.com/white-shark-populations-are-growing-heres-why-thats-good-news-44872

Who is SP, and why does he have more than 7000 posts ?

Select to expand quote

trevor1 said...
Who is SP, and why does he have more than 7000 posts ?

And your point Trev???

Select to expand quote

SP said..

jbshack said...

trevor1 said..
See JB.

We were all on topic, having a nice little chat about what happened to Fanning, what happened after with the media, etc, etc, and then you have to turn it back to the great shark cull debate.

If you are still looking for somewhere to go on your ticket, perhaps we can all chip in for an international fare, and maybe you can holiday in the Eastern Cape region of SA !

I think it slightly amusing that SP says i attack people, yet the only reason a few will even post, much like yourself Trevor is to jump and reply to my comments

Stalker much,..

Trevor how about contributing something worth while, go post in Legions surf post about your last surf

You do.
Others do the same .

Fair call, so to be clear, why is it not okay for me to reply in the same then

Select to expand quote

SP said..

jbshack said...

SP said..

jbshack said...

trevor1 said..
See JB.

We were all on topic, having a nice little chat about what happened to Fanning, what happened after with the media, etc, etc, and then you have to turn it back to the great shark cull debate.

If you are still looking for somewhere to go on your ticket, perhaps we can all chip in for an international fare, and maybe you can holiday in the Eastern Cape region of SA !

I think it slightly amusing that SP says i attack people, yet the only reason a few will even post, much like yourself Trevor is to jump and reply to my comments

Stalker much,..

Trevor how about contributing something worth while, go post in Legions surf post about your last surf

You do.
Others do the same .

Fair call, so to be clear, why is it not okay for me to reply in the same then

When did I attack you?

You attacked me yesterday when I posted this article as if it was my own opinion.
You couldn't even be bothered to read it all and started your post with why do you?

And then made some silly points about being lost at sea.

As I said not my opinions just something I read by a respected surf journo that actually was researched.

If it doesn't confirm your bias it doesn't mean it is wrong. Half your problem is you use all info to confirm your view without looking at it objectively. Your post above with the "solution" is evidence of that. Dismissing everyone as wrong and assuming your opinion is right is not a discussion.

Anyway.. I'm out.
I don't have a made up opinion so can't be ****ed having a pisssing competition.
I'd rather learn more of respected sources..

Which is why I posted the article...

that started this waste of time...

I didn't say you attacked me so not sure what your upset at this time , my point is that you said others attack also, i agree so why shouldn't i be able to reply the same

I clicked on your story the very first time. TBH it won't let me read it unless join there web page so no i didn't bother going further.
If the first paragraph is not a good indication of the story and the basses, than maybe could you copy and past the entire article

BUT ill say it again, Just because someone is lost at sea, does not mean a shark ate them.. As i pointed out in my previous post in another thread (were you said you didn't care for my response) was that in vertically the same spot as Martyn Tann disappeared, we just had the same situation. Sadly though this time his body was eventually found and he had simply drowned. No shark attack..

Select to expand quote

<div class="story-intro">Great white sharks have been ­protected in all Australian waters since 1998. The first male great whites born into that protection reached maturity eight to 10 years ago, and their female counterparts started maturing in 2010. In the meantime, the surviving juveniles born before 1998 presumably also mated.

The consequences of this ­protection arguably are being felt in human casualties, which are increasing dramatically.There have been 15 fatalities in Australia since August 2010 (and 51 injuries since 2012), which is more than ­triple the average for the past 50 years, according to the Australian Shark Attack File kept by the Taronga Conservation Society.

Unoffici­ally, there may be more. When people go missing at sea — as 25-year-old Martyn Tann did off Mullaloo Beach, Perth, in 2013 — their fate is not always recorded as shark-related, even if the missing person is known to be a good swimmer.Of the known fatal attacks, at least five were, or were suspected to be, perpetrated by great whites.

You don’t need to be a statistician to suspect a correlation. Some are asking if it is time to lift the great white’s protected status. Have great whites — and, for that matter, tigers and bulls, which make up some of the other fatal attackers — reached numbers that may require more diligent management?
<div class="gallery-container embed limit-10 visible">
<div class="gallery-content-wrapper">
<div class="gallery-content">
<div class="module gallery-image gallery-image-1 loaded active">
<div class="module-content">
<div class="image-caption">
<div class="caption">Australian surfer Mick Fanning was pursued by a shark, in Jeffrey’s Bay, South Africa during the JBay Open, before punching the shark and escaping without injuries. See the full story and video here. Picture: World Surf League/ AP

<div class="module gallery-image gallery-image-2 loaded">
<div class="module-content">
<div class="image-frame">

<div class="image-caption">
<div class="caption">Julian Wilson, who was surfing in the final with Fanning, had grave fears for the three-time world champion. “I saw him get knocked off his board and then a wave popped up and I thought, ‘He’s gone’”. Read Will Swanton’s analysis about why we love to watch sport as an escape from reality here. Picture: Kirstin Scholtz / World Surf League

<div class="gallery-controls">
<div class="controls">

Wading into dangerous waters, Inquirer put this to two leading researchers this week.The first, Barry Bruce of the CSIRO, didn’t reply to my emails. The other, Ryan Kempster, a shark biologist and founder of Support Our Sharks, an advocacy group he operates from the University of Western Australia, ­initially engaged.In response to my impertinent question about whether he used the ocean himself, he said: “I have absolutely no problem entering the ocean for swimming, diving and surfing, and I do so regularly.” He added a link to SOS’s helpful safety advice page.On a more serious note, he said there was “no documented evidence that these species (tigers, bulls and whites) are increasing in abundance”.Anecdotally, surfers and fishermen across the country have been reporting that the size and abundance of large sharks are ­noticeably higher than they’ve been, in some places, for 30 years.Newcastle Westpac Rescue Helicopter Service chairman Cliff Marsh said in January there had been an “explosion” in the population of great whites in his area.

So why don’t researchers have documented evidence of this?I ask Kempster, but he declines to reply. A scan of the SOS website suggests why. The group is predominantly concerned with protecting the shark’s environment from people.“Almost all shark experts feel that the danger presented by sharks has been exaggerated,” the website says.“Even the creator of the Jaws phenomenon, the late Peter Benchley, attempted to dispel the perception of sharks as being man-eating monsters in the years before his death.”(Read: Steven Spielberg’s Jaws recalled by Valerie Taylor as film turns 40.)The CSIRO’s website is even more sympathetic. When Newcastle beaches were closed for 10 days in January, the CSIRO’s website described the media’s ­response as a “frenzy”.“While no attacks on humans have yet been recorded, the sharks have become national celebrities,” the nation’s top science organisation said. “So what’s the deal here? Are we seeing the real-life return of Jaws? Has a curse been struck down upon the town of Newcastle by Poseidon himself? Is a Sharknado next?“While this is a natural spectacle that should be enjoyed, it is advisable to do so from a distance — and on land. In time it will run its course, and we can all return to the water.”Three weeks later, 600km up the coast at Ballina, Japanese surfer and father Tadashi Nakahara was fatally attacked by a great white.Has admiration of large sharks gone too far? Yes, they play a role in maintaining ecological “balance” in the ocean. But these days we see them commonly described as beautiful, mysterious and ­majestic.


Interviewed on the Today show during the Newcastle beach ­closures in January, the CSIRO’s Bruce said people should treat great whites with respect.Great whites, among others, have “proportionally larger brains than many of the so-called higher mammals”, Australian natural historian David Owen says in his comprehensive and affectionate book Shark: In Peril in the Sea (2009). “The more research is conducted on them (sharks), the more questions remain to be answered.”One is tempted to ask: if research is not reducing the number of unanswered questions about sharks, what the hell is it doing?Surfers, too, have become big supporters of sharks. When father of two Chris Boyd was taken by a pair of great whites at Cowaramup, Western Australia, in 2013, South African big-wave surfer Grant “Twiggy” Baker dived into a debate on a surf website: “There’s 5 billion humans and only 5000 great white sharks on earth,” he said. “So what species is more important to protect?

A few less humans won’t affect the balance of nature on the planet but a few less sharks will, a great deal. I surf in some of the sharkiest places on the planet in South Africa and personally couldn’t think of a better way to go then (sic) at the ‘hand’ of nature’s most magnificent creature.”When Inquirer contacted Baker this week to confirm these comments, we engaged in an amusing email debate about the relative value of people and animals. “We honestly believe that we are more important than other living things on this planet,” he wrote. “Until we wake up and ­realise this is not the case we are doomed.”Baker is one of the best and bravest surfers alive, with a swag of awards (including two Mavericks titles, a few XXL Big Wave awards and last year’s Big Wave World Tour title). Like most of the eccentric extremists in the big-wave ­fraternity, he is a likable guy. That he thinks so ill of his own species is dispiriting but not that uncommon.Two arguments are routinely put forward whenever a person is killed or injured by a large shark: first, the victim entered the shark’s territory; second, the statistics of an attack are almost invisibly low compared with, say, a fatal attack by a malaria-bearing mosquito, which kills more than a million people a year. These two responses are more connected than they seem. Large sharks are described as “apex predators”, a jargonistic term that means they sit at the top of the food chain.This was not ­always true. Until a mere 2.6 million years ago, 20m-long megalodons ate great whites for breakfast. Neither is it true today. Since the demise of the megalodon, another species has developed tools that significantly reduce the odds in its favour.


These tools are available at most fishing and diving shops.But humans are not considered part of the natural world. Wherever they live, they manage the environment to suit themselves, for comfort or survival, but never as part of the natural order of things.Part of that environmental management includes killing mosquitoes. Here, current technology is inadequate. Malaria is unstoppable in many places and dengue is on the rise. In 2003, evolutionary biologist Olivia Judson made a startling proposal: specicide of the anopheles (Greek for “useless”) mosquito, which spreads malaria.Her rationale was persuasive: “There’s nothing sinister about extinction; species go extinct all the time. The disappearance of a few species, while a pity, does not bring a whole ecosystem crashing down: we’re not left with a wasteland every time a species vanishes.


Removing one species sometimes causes shifts in the populations of other species — but different need not mean worse.”Mosquitoes are not perceived as awesome, beautiful or majestic, so Judson was able to make her proposal without being vilified.While no one is proposing specicide, is it worth considering an extension of Judson’s logic to managing large sharks?Despite the ethos that underlies most scientific research and popular sentiment towards nature, not all change is for the worse. Nature itself is constantly changing. And people who wish to manage their own environment — even for recreational purposes such as swimming, surfing and diving — are not automatically on the wrong side. If you oppose culling, that’s fine. Knock yourself out.

Go swimming with them if you like. But spare me the faux sympathy next time someone is killed. These deaths are not necessary.Fred Pawle is The Australian’s surfing writer.

Select to expand quote

jbshack said..

trevor1 said..
See JB.

We were all on topic, having a nice little chat about what happened to Fanning, what happened after with the media, etc, etc, and then you have to turn it back to the great shark cull debate.

If you are still looking for somewhere to go on your ticket, perhaps we can all chip in for an international fare, and maybe you can holiday in the Eastern Cape region of SA !

I think it slightly amusing that SP says i attack people, yet the only reason a few will even post, much like yourself Trevor is to jump and reply to my comments

Stalker much,..

Trevor how about contributing something worth while, go post in Legions surf post about your last surf

I haven't entered the shark cull debate on this occasion. I was just commenting on the fact that you hi-jacked this thread to push your own anti-cull agenda and open yourself up to further "debate".

My last surf was Rotto on Saturday just gone. It was quite fun until a boat with 12 guys rocked up who were celebrating a birthday. Thanks for asking.

Unfortunately, the only surfing I get to do during the week is on here, given work and family commitments.

Thanks for posting.

Okay i had read that previously, it was posted (or big parts were ) on one of the surf journo type pages. I even replied their on that page.

It was hard to read but is he saying its okay to wipe out Great Whites To a point of extinction.

Kill of one species another will become a issue, just as big or possibly even worse, i agree with Grant Baker. Also WHY would you want to wipe out an entire species of animal just for enjoyment Imagine if we decided today that "You know what, elephants attack people so lets just wipe them out, kill them all".

If i miss read it please enlighten me what they are really saying

In Aus we want to kill Great Whites. Wipe them out and then what? What do wipe out next

Reunion just had their 18th attack in 4 years. Bull sharks are the problem their but they have been culling for years. They are still culling, mostly killing Tiger sharks sadly so most will argue only making the current imbalance even worse. Kinda like throwing petrol on the fire to try put it out
Maybe they need to think outside the square, like stop pumping untreated human waist directly into the ocean daily. Listen to the scientific community who are saying "stop, put down the petrol can" (metaphorically speaking)

The East coast of Australia has seen a rise in attacks on the recent history. Yet they have been culling for over 50 years thanks to drum lines and shark nets. Surely that screams that its not working..

Heres a link to a radio talk back show with Vic Hislop

http://www.2ue.com.au/news/must-listen-shark-hunter-vic-hislop-hangs-up-on-justin-smith-20150723-giiu5j.html

Select to expand quote

jbshack said..

thomas11 said..

jbshack said..

thomas11 said..
I'm 100% failing to see your connection between trees at a ski resort and sharks in the ocean.

Trees dont creep up behind you and sink their teeth into you.
When your skiing downhill you can visually see the trees infront of you and its your total responsibility to move out of their way, its not like they jump in front of you.

I understand your theory but the relevance between these 2 doesn't match at all.

Maybe if you were mtb riding in Canada on designated trails where Bears live and were attacking people, then a cull of bears or some sort of bear management system would be a bit more relevent to your argument.

The thing about surfing and is uniqueness, is there aint many other leisure activities that people do that throws in a man eating animal as one of the health risks.

Okay Thomas maybe i didn't explain it how i would have like to. How about this one Thomas.

People like to camp and hike in the National Parks in America but Bears frequent those park and occasionally Bears attack and kill people. SO should we kill all the bears to make it safe? y point is you can either do two things, kill them all or kill none. Because say you kill half, but then one day your walking down a path and bear stares you down, how has the previous cull of bears helped you at the particular moment

Makes more sense, but you kind of copied my example

I agree my Bear analogy is similar. How about this then, people mountain biking in Canada were the bears used to live, keep running into trees on there bikes getting killed. SO to make the situation safe we now should remove all those trees. Not just a few, because lets face it people will always do silly things like go out of boundaries so to save lives, lets take out all the trees. After all peoples safety is priority, even if we are talking a meniscal amount of deaths. For me that would kinda ruin the idea of riding my bike through the wilderness, as its now been made human proof..

Its the same as people calling for the Oceans to be changed, just to save a few lives.. So you see Trees, Sharks..Same same..

Well in my mind anyway and I'm not surprised if i haven't explained myself properly. Its seems a little obvious to me though..

Nope, I don't like the tree analogy at all. Trees don't move so Its the riders responsibility to move out of their way.
Its not like a guy sitting at the top of the track waiting before his run down is in risk of a tree stalking up behind him and killing him in some sort of a way.

Maybe the magic wand needs waving and everything not on topic can go to irrelevant post heavan.

Apparently layne beachley is in the know. She said on the Tele this morning that Mick wasnt lucky because it was a baby shark just having a look. Big finned baby not sure if layne has seen the footage. Looked like a big bugger to me. I never knew they culled bears. Might have to let Katana know. Maybe he can change the frequency and get rid of the bear problem. Ski safe or bear off.