Isn’t the removal of nets to see what happens is gambling with human lives?
02 May 2009
14 "dangerous" tiger sharks just like this one were killed in two net installations during 4 months this year.
Australia has already proven this isn’t the case. Removing the nets in certain locations, or during certain times of the year is a very viable option towards net elimination.
The nets are removed for two months of the year already, to account for the Sardine Run, and the vast amounts of animals they catch – both intended and unintended. Beach users are warned accordingly, but not a single death has occurred as a result of the net removals during this time period. As well, there are situations in which not every shark net is set off every netted beach every day. Finally, in 1989, more than double the amount of shark nets were installed in KwaZulu-Natal than are today, and once again, the statistics of shark incidents have not changed.
If one uses Australia as a guide, the shark netting procedure has changed a number of times in the past with positive results. For more than three years from January 1943 to March 1946 during World War II, shark nets were completely removed due to the lack of boating resources. During this period there were no shark attacks of any kind on Sydney area surf beaches. And, they started removing the nets completely during the months of June and July starting in 1983 and May and August starting in 1989. No increase in the very low incidence of shark attacks has occurred since those four months were declared net-free. One can draw an easy conclusion that a reduction in shark nets does not result in an increased risk to shark attack or a gamble with human lives.
Will the removal of nets eventually result in an incident? And would that incident have occurred if nets were still installed? No one can know for sure. Ultimately, it comes down to education and awareness and a campaign needs to be kicked off immediately. The public must accept the risk that comes with swimming in the oceans – whether a beach is netted or not. A shark attack is a potential danger that must be acknowledged by anyone that frequents the oceans, but again, it should be kept in rational perspective. Is the minor risk worth jeopardizing the long-term health of local and worldwide ecosystems? Should we all be left quivering at the shore fearful of a shark attack? Science, reason and understanding all prove otherwise.
Submitting Comment, Give me a second...
October 17, 2009
Whether we all like or want to acknowledge the fact that human existence is dependant on the sharks survival or not the fact still remains we are. The sharks control the plankton eating species in the oceans. The plankton supply 70% of the oxygen that sustains our precious earth. If the plankton eating species population is not controlled by the sharks eating them then how are the plankton to survive. Unfortunately the plankton cannot and if the plankton cannot flourish then the amount of oxygen produced by these small simple creatures is reduced. In this day and age we humans cannot afford to tip the scales in the wrong direction any more than we already have. With no air the earth and all that live on this planet cannot survive, this wonderful planet will become as extinct as the dinosaurs. How can we not be responsible for the effects of what we do and the consequences that arrive from our actions and behaviors. It is funny that we tell our children that they are responsible for their actions and the consequences that come from their deeds. Why is it that when we become adults we tend to ignore this rule or at least become selective about it. Humans need to start practicing what we preach and do the right thing especially when it come to our beloved Earth. Please stop killing our sharks, we need them to exist.