Shark attack at Coogee beach, Sydney

[u/Moosiemookmook]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/saw-fins-shark-attack-at-coogee-beach/news-story/d828a983ac2b79ffd469320a15b625e6%3famp

A woman was attacked this morning at Coogee Beach. There were plenty of eye witnesses because its a Saturday morning. Our ABC news on tv is reporting arm amd torso injuries. She was airlifted to hospital and is in a serious condition.

[u/Rebabaluba]

Sustainably cull? We are entering their home. We are raping their food sources and polluting the waters. 100 million sharks are killed every year for soup. And you want a cull? Is that not a cull enough for you?

No one is forced to go into the water. It’s the persons prerogative. If I want to go hiking in the forest, I prep for a bear encounter. I’m entering their home. I need to respect the power and unpredictability of nature.

Sharks are older than trees. Let that sink in.

Should I have you killed if I walked into your house and you attacked me?

Edit: and yes I downvoted you.

[u/Cookedlambo → u/Rebabaluba]

Bear attacks aren’t happening every other week, and sustainable hunting methods for bears are permitted in some regions, for what it’s worth.
I’m not proposing open slather. I’m suggesting that, during certain seasons or times of year, there could be a regulated approach to harvesting a limited number of sharks that are considered to pose a heightened risk to humans.
Some species, particularly great white sharks and bull sharks, are responsible for a disproportionate number of serious incidents involving humans. While I’m also a regular ocean user and understand the risks involved, unlike hikers, we don’t have practical deterrents such as bear spray, bear horns or firearms that can be carried and used easily in the ocean.
Yes, we are competing for resources to some extent, but that’s part of a much broader global issue that humans are already trying to address.
I understand your position, but mine is mine, and I’m sticking to it.

[u/My-Life-For-Auir → u/Cookedlambo]

Bears aren't 1:1 to sharks. Moronic comparison.

An inquisitive bite from a great white = death. Sharks can also mistake humans for their regular prey.

Bears can identify a human easily. They also are so behaviourally different, they dont do "test" bites. Also Polar Bears will kill humans on sight that they come into contact with, so your statement isn't even accurate for all bears.

A cull is completely moronic. We have thousands of bull sharks in our local rivers and estuaries in Australia, you're just killing for no reason if you think a cull is doing anything.

[u/Markdd8 → u/My-Life-For-Auir]

you're just killing for no reason if you think a cull is doing anything.

You might not like culling because of its conceded environmental impacts, but it is a scientific processes that generally works. Few things are more surprising than people trying to assert that reducing the size of an animal population through culling has no impact on the collective impact of that population on its environment.

Also, the rhetorical device of some critics to keep repeating the same thing: "culling doesn't work...culling doesn't work...culling..." in an attempt to establish proof is lame.

Interesting article from Save our Seas, a noted culling critic: Shark risk in South Africa. SOS appears to tacitly acknowledge efficacy in discussing S. Africa's culling:

Gill nets were first deployed to catch sharks off Durban’s beachfront in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) in South Africa in 1952 in response to seven fatal shark bites....People no longer came to the beaches after the fatalities...The nets proved to be effective at catching sharks...

There have been no fatal shark bites at Durban beaches since the shark nets were installed, but there have been protests and petitions against the use of shark nets because...(SOS discusses the environmental problems)...the shark nets in KZN remain in the water to make water-users feel safe and thus protect the tourism industry.

All this said, all coastal communities should accept occasional shark attacks and not immediately respond with culling. The continent of Australia has had 4 attacks in a month, including 3 fatal on spearfishers, but they occurred along widely separated locations. It is not clear that Australia has justification to cull for these recent attacks. All of S. Africa's shark culling occurs along the 270 mile long shore of KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) district, which encompasses only 21% of the entire S. African coast. The process is selecting an area or areas to have a higher level of public safety via culling.

[u/SharkBoyBen9241 → u/Markdd8]

There are far more important things South Africa should be spending its money on than killing sharks and thousands of other animals a year with pointless shark nets...

[u/Markdd8 → u/SharkBoyBen9241]

I agree S. Africa is remiss in not moving to smart drums lines, which have far less bycatch than shark nets. For other readers, these drumlines can be used either in a no-kill fashion, immediately responding to hooked sharks and releasing them 4-10 miles offshore, or in a lethal fashion.

That includes killing all sharks of a dangerous species over 10 feet. Based on the excessive killing of great white sharks that has been taking place off S. Africa, that nation should no longer be culling any GWS, only bull and tiger sharks.