Giant Shark scare in the UK

In another stellar piece of journalism (sharkasm) intended, the Daily Star writes “Jaws attack: Terror after GIANT SHARKS spotted circling the coast of England”

Wow, someone got attacked by a giant shark! Did they survive? What kind of a shark was it?
The article states: “HOLIDAYMAKERS have been placed on alert as huge sharks hit British shores thanks to the recent hot weather.

Still, no mention of what happened. So what the heck is going on?

OK, we are getting somewhere. Here is what happened: “The basking sharks, which can grow up to 26ft long, have been spotted off beaches in many of the country’s holiday hotspots.
As if that wasn’t terrifying enough – thousands of jellyfish have also been spotted in the waves.”

The caption for the picture below read: HORROR: The terrifying sharks – which can grow up to 26ft – have started circling shallow water around the UK [AK Wildlife Cruises]”
 

source


Wait, did I miss something? Where is the attack? What is terrifying about a basking shark?
The article goes on to say: “Ross Wheeler of AK Wildlife Cruises in Falmouth, Cornwall, captured incredible footage of the first sighting of a shark in UK waters.”We had two basking sharks – our first for the season – thousands of barrel jellyfish, 11 common dolphin and five harbour porpoise” he said.”

Ah, I see. They are describing some people going on a wildlife cruise and encountering a completely harmless basking shark. The “reporter” mistakenly wrote the wrong headline. He really meant to say: “Tourists are excited about encountering gentle giant” or “Lucky tourists encounter gentle giant and friendly dolphins off the UK coast”. Easy mistake to make (sharkasm) intended.

Later on the article correctly mentions: “But the sighting isn’t likely to mean a repeat of horrific scenes from 1975 thriller Jaws – the basking sharks are harmless but have been lured to the Cornish coastline earlier than normal.
They swim around with their gaping jaws open to swallow tiny plankton, their main food source.”

So the reporter actually knew that there was no attack and the sharks are harmless plankton eaters, which of course didn’t stop him from making up a completely fictitious and sensationalistic headline. It’s not like the sharks don’t have it hard enough already, with overfishing and being killed for their fins. I really wish the media would stop making it worse by portraying even the most harmless sharks as terrifying monsters.

Cheers,
Martin Graf
CEO Shark Diver 

 
About Shark Diver. As a global leader in commercial shark diving and conservation initiatives Shark Diver has spent the past decade engaged for sharks around the world. Our blog highlights all aspects of both of these dynamic and shifting worlds. You can reach us directly at staff@sharkdiver.com.

Shark Attacks And The Media

“Shark Attacks Are So Unlikely, But So Fascinating” is the title of an article in Popular Science.

Wow, a non sensationalistic headline dealing with shark attacks. Good job! 

George Burgess, a shark researcher and curator of the International Shark Attack File (ISAF) writes a good article on how and why the media covers shark attacks. I don’t always agree with him, but think this article gives some good insights into the psychology of shark attacks and how they get covered.

“Sharks are incredibly unlikely to bite you. They’re even less likely to kill you. However, we remain fascinated with their ability–and occasional proclivity–to do just that. With so many things more likely to harm us, why do we pay such rapt attention when sharks make headlines?

People need to understand more fully that when we enter the sea, it’s a wilderness experience. We’re eco-tourists and are not owed the right to be 100% safe. That’s what fascinates us about sharks: There’s an innate concern in our psyches about not wanting to get eaten. Almost every other animal on earth has to worry about getting eaten night and day. As humans, we rarely have that concern. People hold sharks in awe as one of the rare species that reminds us we’re still potentially part of a food chain.

You’re much more likely to be injured or die during your evening run than in a shark attack, but don’t expect to turn on the Discovery Channel and see Sneaker Week. For better or worse, we’re hard-wired to pay attention to creatures that can eat us–even if they rarely do.”

I think he hit the nail on the head. In addition to what he mentions, I also believe that for humans to go into the ocean is innately uncomfortable. We are not in our natural environment. There are so many perceived dangers, real or not. We are fascinated by what we may encounter, but also weary of the unknown.

Most people are probably overestimating the chances of getting killed by a shark and who can blame them, with the way we are bombarded with sensationalistic coverage of anything shark related. In 2014, there were zero fatal shark attacks in the entire US!

“There wasn’t a single fatality in the entire country last year and only three worldwide.” source

We always talk about what kills more people than sharks, but have you ever thought about what kills fewer? What kills humans, but at a rate of fewer than  10-12, or as last year, fewer than 3 annually in the entire world? There may be something, but I haven’t come up with an answer yet.

A lot of people will argue, that there are more fatalities on land, because the number of  people who go  into the ocean is far lower than the number of people who stay on land and even the people who are going into the water, spend much more time on land as well. 

OK, so let’s look at the risks of going into the ocean and what you have to be aware of. 

According to the CDC “From 2005-2009, there were an average of 3,533 fatal unintentional drownings (non-boating related) annually in the United States — about ten deaths per day. An additional 347 people died each year from drowning in boating-related incidents.2”

Gerry Burgess puts this in perspective. To put that into perspective, more people die from drowning every day in this country than were killed by sharks in ten years.

I hope the government of Western Australia is paying attention to this. Their budget for shark mitigation is $22 million. source  If they would spend that much money on additional lifeguards and life saving equipment instead, they could probably save a lot more lives than with that ill advised shark cull program.


Burgess goes on to explain why the number of annual fatalities has gone up slightly, but the actual rate has gone down.

When you think of how much time we spend in the water, it’s amazing how innocuous shark and human interaction is. When the ISAF began in the 1950s, scientists were concerned primarily with shark attacks after ships and aircraft went down at sea.

A lot has changed since then. There are a lot more of us on earth today than there were back then and there will be even more tomorrow. Aquatic recreation has never been more popular. More people are kayaking, surfing, diving and paddleboarding.


More time in the water means more time to interface with sharks.

It’s partly a generational change. When my parents took a young me to the beach, my mother would lie on the sand and work on her suntan, never going in the water. My dad might have gone in once a day to cool off. Nowadays, if I’m at the beach, I might be boogie boarding or skin diving. Most of us are spending a lot more hours in the water than did our parents and our activities are inadvertently provocative. That creates ample opportunities for sharks and humans to get together.

This article in Popular Science should be mandatory reading for any journalist covering shark related stories. But of course, like Burgess points out, who would watch “Sneaker week”. Unfortunately the news is a business and headlines are designed to catch our attention. Like it or not, we are all guilty of it. Like we wrote about here. What headline are you going to pay attention to. “Shark trying to bite through steel cage!” or “Shark bumps into cage”?

Enjoy your time in the ocean this summer and remember to watch out for rip currents and swim near a lifeguard. If you happen to see a shark, consider yourself lucky.

Cheers,
Martin Graf
CEO Shark Diver

About Shark Diver. As a global leader in commercial shark diving and conservation initiatives Shark Diver has spent the past decade engaged for sharks around the world. Our blog highlights all aspects of both of these dynamic and shifting worlds. You can reach us directly at staff@sharkdiver.com.

Do sharks really mistake humans for seals?

Do sharks really mistake humans for seals? that is the headline of a report in “The Sydney Morning Herald”. The article says that Researchers test ‘mistaken identity’ theory  by conducting some studies on sharks in a pool.Photo: Taronga …

Deadly shark attacks in California?

Today NBC 4 in Los Angeles had the following headline on their website. “Maps: Deadly Shark Attacks Off California Coast”.There was only a very short 2 paragraph article and a map that are both shown below.The map below shows locations where fatal shar…

Shark Attack in Australia? What really happened.

Shark Attack in Australia? Part 2 Yesterday we talked about the teenager who got “attacked” by a shark hereToday he admits that it wasn’t really the sharks fault. Watch the video below.Sam Smith now says that the shark would have ignored him, had he le…

Shark Attack in Australia?

Sky news reports that a teenager was attacked by a shark off Australia’s east coast. The article states that Sam Smith was spearfishing off Mollymook beach, 140 miles (230km) south of Sydney, when a shark bit his hand. The 17-year-old’s friend Luke Sis…

Really Western Australia!? Again?

The department of fisheries for western Australia made the following announcement today.

“Following a series of tagged shark detections of a white shark at the Warnbro receiver a decision has been made to deploy capture gear to take a white shark that has been assessed as posing a serious threat to public safety.”
 

source


So what has this shark done to pose this serious threat to public safety? Did it attack a surfer? Did it try to bite a swimmer?…… actually no. According to their press release, “The Department of Fisheries sent vessels to investigate and it became apparent the same shark has been within one kilometre of the shore over consecutive days.” …. ah, …. well,….. hmm,….. I really don’t know what to say. A shark is swimming in the water within a kilometer (.62 miles) over consecutive days! I guess that is reason enough to go out, capture and kill a protected species. I mean really, it is our Ocean and not the sharks! (sharkasm intended, just to make sure)

After stating that “The initial pattern of detections of this tagged shark combined with the mitigation strategies did not warrant further action”.  They went on to say. “However there has been an increase in the number of day-time detections on consecutive during the lead up to Christmas, and school holidays combined with warm and sunny weather, people are more likely to be in the water using the beaches, fishing and diving.” … So it’s not really the shark that is the problem, it’s the people who want to go where they know a shark is swimming. I mean really, it would just be ridiculous to think that the strategies in already place right now “Measures required to negate serious threat to the public have been put in place, including beach closures, notifications to the community, and alerts / detections posted on Twitter and the department’s SharkSmart website, however, given the likely increase in water users and increased detections of this shark, more direct action has now been taken to address public safety concerns.” would prevent a possible attack. No, of course not. They need to go out and kill this protected shark. Anything else would just not be right!
 
The fisheries department justifies their action this way “The decision to remove the shark has been made under the State Government’s guidelines for the take of a shark posing a serious threat to public safety,”…. pssst, don’t tell anyone, but how is a shark in the water a serious threat to a person on land? If the required action includes closing the beach and alerting the community, how exactly does this shark pose a serious threat?

I guess we now know, what the government had in mind, when they stopped their challenge to the decision to remove the drumlines. Just make up a hypothetical threat and go out to kill a protected species….. Well done!

Anyway, you can read their entire press release here.

Remember that Western Australia does this to supposedly protect the public and help tourism. We can all choose to not visit Western Australia and show them that way, what we think of their actions.

Cheers,
Martin Graf
CEO Shark Diver
 

About Shark Diver. As a global leader in commercial shark diving and conservation initiatives Shark Diver has spent the past decade engaged for sharks around the world. Our blog highlights all aspects of both of these dynamic and shifting worlds. You can reach us directly at staff@sharkdiver.com.

Shark attack, surfer kicking for his life?

Today’s headlines of a few Australian newspapers scream “Shark Attack In Australia Had Pro Surfer Ryan Hunt Kicking For His Life”“Top surfer who survives shark attack after kicking it in the head
and Surfer undergoes surgery after shark attack near Old Bar, NSW. 

So what happened? Another surfer attacked by a great white shark? 

The reports are stating things like “A surfer survived a shark attack after kicking it in the head as he rode a wave. Ozzie Ryan Hunt, 20, was attacked by a shark while surfing at Wallabi Point in New South Wales. The beast went for his foot repeatedly during the terrifying incident at around 5.30pm, biting through the board.”
and “A shark attack in Australia had a young professional surfer named Ryan Hunt kicking for his life when the shark kept coming back for him in the waves.”

Wow, sounds like this guy was lucky and barely escaped with his life! Of course, after reading the reports a little more carefully, you get the real story. After writing the headline “Shark Attack in Australia Had Pro Surfer Ryan Hunt Kicking for his Life” the “Inquisitr” states  “The 20-year-old surfer says the shark attack occurred while he was surfing small waves at dusk. According to Hunt, he was “pretty unlucky to stand on the shark’s head” while at Wallabi Point, which is on the coast of New South Wales, Australia. Needless to say, the shark was not exactly pleased to have a human standing on its noggin.”

So the guy actually stepped on the sharks head, OK, still, pretty lucky to get away with his life after being bit by this “beast”.  How big was that beast?  Well, lets see what they say about the size. “I tried to kick it off and it bit down again and then it swam up between my legs. I had my hands trying to push down its head, it was about 10 inches wide.”

Wow, the head was 10 inches wide!!! Imagine a 10 inch wide shark coming at you, ……. well, never mind. Another typical hyped up headline. 

And how about the injuries sustained in this “terrifying” “attack”?

     
source

 
Granted, that’s a pretty good gash, but by reading the headlines, you’d expect much worse. As to calling this a shark attack, seems to me that the shark was just reacting to being stepped on the head.

Surfer attacks shark, would have been a more appropriate headline.

Cheers,
Martin Graf
CEO Shark Diver





About Shark Diver. As a global leader in commercial shark diving and conservation initiatives Shark Diver has spent the past decade engaged for sharks around the world. Our blog highlights all aspects of both of these dynamic and shifting worlds. You can reach us directly at staff@sharkdiver.com.