So.. Shark Mauls Surfer On Remote Australian Beach ... time to kill the sharks!!!

reply to post by the2010apprentice


I didn't mean you. Unless you were the one who called surfers "meat heads". I forget who said it. But many of these posts are ignorant.

Yes, I love Point Break. I've done the night surfing like they did. Soooo much fun! Again, we were aware of the danger and night surfed at our own risk. The movie is inspiring for me since big wave surfing scares me to hell. Big wave surfing is a different sport all together.

reply to post by the2010apprentice


Stay out of the effing water then.

there are millions of sharks killed every year for soup. There are about 4 humans. Who is the real predator?

reply to post by randomname


That is why they invented pools.

reply to post by randomname


Actualy, sharks are the pinnacle of the food chain. REmove the sharks, you remove the chain, no seafood.

And then how many families will starve to death?

one human life is worth more than all the sharks in the world

What an incredible demonstration of your lack of understanding.

Originally posted by poloblack

Originally posted by randomname
its ok for a shark to maul and kill humans, but when humans try to defend themselves and clear an area for the safety of their families, kids and loved ones, people start harping on the poor and defenceless sharks.

go tell that to the families who are never going to see their loved ones on earth again.

the ocean is a massive place, they have all of it to hunt, swim and breed in.

its not unreasonable to clear a few miles of beach to avoid accidents and deaths of swimmers.

one human life is worth more than all the sharks in the world.

Give me a break. Surfing in the middle of an ocean is a RISK, you're in THEIR habitat. No reason to go killing off a species because some meathead wants to ''hang ten''. They know the risk going in. As far as safety for families, kids, and loved ones, they're not usually out in the middle of the ocean swimming, so that was lame to post in the first place. And what do you mean by clear an area for safety? Did you even think before you posted?

O.K. the2010apprentice, here is the surfer bashing I was refering to. The post by randomname is ignorant, the reply by poloblack is surfer bashing (also ignorant) then you say you couldn't agree more. So it turns out I was talking to you.

To randomname: Sharks do not "have all of it to hunt, swim and breed in" They have certain oceanic ecosystems they need to live in. Many need the reefs and shallow waters near shore. Yes these may be massive areas, but moving to unpopulated areas would mean death and is not an option for most sharks. As far as your quote "One human life is worth all the sharks in the world." .....wow...Kill off the sharks and we have no future. Ya know, food chain...basic science stuff.

To poloblack: Nobody surfs "out in the middle of the ocean." You have to be near the shore for the waves to break.

reply to post by nixie_nox


Why would i stay out the effing water?? i was having a joke in my last post!!

Bear in mind...i started this thread and i am clearly one of many in favour of the sharks, and i made it clear i want to go surfing in australia, and i also made it clear .... sharks are what keep the world oceans eco systems in check!! and i made a large post about the massive problems cuased by shark hunting for soup.

Iknow that humans are the real predators thanks very much, thanks for stating the obvious.

Next time. please read the whole forums thread before making silly comments... as that would be appreciated

thanks and good day to you

reply to post by Juggernog


All those pictures look photoshopped except for # 4 & 3

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by randomname

 

Actualy, sharks are the pinnacle of the food chain. REmove the sharks, you remove the chain, no seafood.

And then how many families will starve to death?

Don't also forget that Chinese will no longer enjoy their shark fin soup!

[spelling error caught: it is spelled Actually ]

Some people are so short sighted...
A couple of days ago a dutch super trawler arrived in Australian waters. They have a quota to take 18,000 tonnes of baitfish from Australia's southern fisheries, that doesn't include marine life killed in the nets before being thrown back. And people have the audacity to post about how human only want a few kms of coast!

I love to surf because your at the mercy of nature. Having nothing but deep blue sea below you, knowing that an apex predator could make a meal of you at anytime, and still be perfectly content, just another link in a great chain. To me those who wouldn't risk their life to experience such a thing are the ignorant ones... But that's just like, my opinion.

The easiest way to reduce shark attacks it to make sure they don't go hungry. Unfortunately those who are calling for sharks to be culled are often the ones who put financial gain above public safety.
If Australian that want to make a difference, save our marine Life!

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by randomname

 

Actualy, sharks are the pinnacle of the food chain. REmove the sharks, you remove the chain, no seafood.

And then how many families will starve to death?

Actually you have your story wrong. The sharks are at the top of the food chain, but... if you removed the sharks from the food chain there would be all kinds of seafood and no one would be starving to death unless they ate sharks only.

As for your statements that only about 4 people a year die from shark attacks, that number is incorrect also. In 2011 there were 17 people recorded as being killed by sharks.

en.wikipedia.org...

There are many people killed by sharks that go unrecorded because no one was there to state what happened to those people that never came back.

Wiki states that there were confirmed around 1,333 recorded unprovoked shark attacks that lead to peoples deaths from 1580-2011. Of course those figures aren't telling the truth either. Lots of times when a ship or boat goes down at sea, the shark takes care of the crew and these deaths aren't recorded. So.... don't think that sharks only attack a few people on the beaches every year, because there are lots of boats that go down every year without survivors.

USS Indianapolis, July 30th, 1945 - approximately 600 killed by sharks
Cape San Juan, November 12th, 1943 - 695 killed by sharks
Nova Scotia, November 28th, 1942 - approximately 200 killed by sharks
Dona Paz, December 20th, 1987 - 4,375 fatalities with over 300 bodies recovered covered in shark bites
HMS Berkenhead, February 26th, 1852 - of approximately 630 people, 193 survived, the rest were taken by sharks within 3 miles of shore
Principessa Muldafa, October 25, 1927 - out of 1,265, approximately 295 died from shark attacks
La Seyne, November 14th 1909 - 101 people died from sharks attacking
HMS Valerian, 1926 - approximately 88 died from sharks attacking

That is only a list from 8 ships that went down, there are many others, and of course many boats go down every year of which no one returns. Life preservers kept many of these people afloat only to be eaten alive.

Many of you told people to stay away from the beaches because the beaches were the sharks domain; now I expect you'll be telling everyone to not take boat rides because the boats are in the sharks domain.

Originally posted by randomname
its ok for a shark to maul and kill humans, but when humans try to defend themselves and clear an area for the safety of their families, kids and loved ones, people start harping on the poor and defenceless sharks.

go tell that to the families who are never going to see their loved ones on earth again.

the ocean is a massive place, they have all of it to hunt, swim and breed in.

its not unreasonable to clear a few miles of beach to avoid accidents and deaths of swimmers.

one human life is worth more than all the sharks in the world.

O how wrong you are.... if we killed all the sharks in the world we would be burrying a hatchet in our own heads for christ sake. Sharks are there to keep a limit and control on EVERYTHING in the ocean. making sure that one species doesnt wipe out an entire ecosystem which would evntuall lead to mass depopulation in the ocean(and the loss of a huge food source for lots of people). Once you deflate your head a little you might star to realize that everything lives in a balance, and the elimination of sharks would decimate that balance, and lead to the loss of more human lives than sharks have ever caused. Think of the bigger picture here and not just aboout your recreation...

reply to post by randomname


So, it's perfectly ok to you to disrupt or even destroy the habitat of an animal just to ensure that 5 more people are allowed to live every year?

I don't think so.

Nature doesn't care what man thinks. It is man who is accountable to nature.

they're good eatin' if you cook em right....i guess they think the same of us.... minus the cooking part of course..

Its simple stay out there water! Sharks are one of the oldest animals left on this rock, thery are also the ultimate predator of the sea, the same title that us Monkeys hold on land. Would you not be pritty pissed off if the started attempting mass genocide toward our species???

The lack of respect for these beautiful creatures by a few people here is staggering. It's interesting to note that 70% of the world's oxygen comes from phytoplankton. Sharks (an apex predator) feed on many of these plankton eating fish. If you kill all of the sharks, the ocean's ecosystem would be thrown into chaos. The plankton eating fish would be allowed to thrive in numbers far greater than the ocean could support which would greatly reduce the amount of plankton. You really want to mess with the source of 70% of the oxygen all of us breathe?

It's funny how a few people here watch JAWS a couple of times and think of themselves as shark experts. The rogue shark theory was put to rest years ago. If a surfer gets attacked by a shark, you could search the area hours later and you MIGHT come across a shark. If you do, the chances of it being THE shark that attacked the surfer are so slim that it makes the initial effort to find the shark absolutely worthless.

The simple fact of the matter is that when we choose to enter the ocean, we are voluntarily lowering ourselves on the food chain. I know it's hard for some people to accept. After all, we humans must be the masters of everything! Sharks have been around for millions of years and they are still here for a reason. Humble yourselves and leave them alone.

(btw, I'm a vegetarian)

I surf and spend a stack of time on and in the ocean. The men in the grey suit are there way more often than we think. A mate of mine was there surfing when that bloke got attacked at Streaky Bay back beach.
The lads involved in the rescue made a pact to go surfing the next day.
Only a surfer knows the feeling!

Originally posted by RussianScientists

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by randomname

 

Actualy, sharks are the pinnacle of the food chain. REmove the sharks, you remove the chain, no seafood.

And then how many families will starve to death?

Actually you have your story wrong. The sharks are at the top of the food chain, but... if you removed the sharks from the food chain there would be all kinds of seafood and no one would be starving to death unless they ate sharks only.

As for your statements that only about 4 people a year die from shark attacks, that number is incorrect also. In 2011 there were 17 people recorded as being killed by sharks.

en.wikipedia.org...

There are many people killed by sharks that go unrecorded because no one was there to state what happened to those people that never came back.

Wiki states that there were confirmed around 1,333 recorded unprovoked shark attacks that lead to peoples deaths from 1580-2011. Of course those figures aren't telling the truth either. Lots of times when a ship or boat goes down at sea, the shark takes care of the crew and these deaths aren't recorded. So.... don't think that sharks only attack a few people on the beaches every year, because there are lots of boats that go down every year without survivors.

USS Indianapolis, July 30th, 1945 - approximately 600 killed by sharks
Cape San Juan, November 12th, 1943 - 695 killed by sharks
Nova Scotia, November 28th, 1942 - approximately 200 killed by sharks
Dona Paz, December 20th, 1987 - 4,375 fatalities with over 300 bodies recovered covered in shark bites
HMS Berkenhead, February 26th, 1852 - of approximately 630 people, 193 survived, the rest were taken by sharks within 3 miles of shore
Principessa Muldafa, October 25, 1927 - out of 1,265, approximately 295 died from shark attacks
La Seyne, November 14th 1909 - 101 people died from sharks attacking
HMS Valerian, 1926 - approximately 88 died from sharks attacking

That is only a list from 8 ships that went down, there are many others, and of course many boats go down every year of which no one returns. Life preservers kept many of these people afloat only to be eaten alive.

Many of you told people to stay away from the beaches because the beaches were the sharks domain; now I expect you'll be telling everyone to not take boat rides because the boats are in the sharks domain.

edit on 31-8-2012 by RussianScientists because: (no reason given)

Actually YOU are wrong Mr. Scientists. The explosion in the smaller fishs' population is only temporary. When sharks are extinct, the next top predator's numbers will rise. Therefore they will kill off too much of wharever they eat most. That affects the next animal or plant, the cycle repeats, and soon the whole ecosystem colapses.

reply to post by Chi-and-Me


Get real dude.

Sharks will never become extinct as you state unless the oceans dry up, so your whole food chain collapsing philosophy is boringly worthless.

The Megalodon shark is supposedly extinct, but the whole food chain didn't collapse when this King of the Oceans food chain shark became extinct, now did it? That shot your whole theory right out the window.

There is no intention for people to hunt any variety of shark to the edge of extinction, because people like sharks even though they are dangerous.

They are beautiful creatures.

reply to post by RussianScientists


Oh I keeps it real son!

Nice try. You sir, not me, said "if you remove sharks from the food chain". So if not extinct, what do you mean? Removed how? Were they all put in a giant pool? Alien abduction? What? It's your theory not mine. Don't get hung up on my interpretation of your statement. Replace extinct with "removed" if you like. My science is sound.


The Megalodon was just one species of many that went extinct. It was not all sharks. So that's a little different. However, the megalodon extinction along with others did lead to a food chain/ecosystem collapse. And like so many other times in history, a new one took over.


Yes, my "philosophy" may be "boringly worthless" but this is not philosophy, this is science.