When you think about it shark attacks are becoming more prevalent of late and more so in Australia. Many reasons are being put forward as to the whys and wherefores of this incredibly scary issue. Now as I am not a scientist nor have I studied anything as it relates to this issue, it can be said that these thoughts are just coming from the perspective of an average woman in the street.

When it comes to the actual reasoning as to why these shark attacks appear to be occurring more often; it has been observed that we of the human species are invading the oceanic space of the fish species; and that on this basis we deserve what we get when the fish decide to fight back.

Indeed sometimes one wonders when we are swimming around in their pot so to speak, whether it is sometimes a case of mistaken identity. In fact some reports suggest that a surf board when viewed from below and through the eyes of a hungry shark could be seen as the belly of a turtle, while the deep sea diver in his black and shiny wet suit takes on the texture and shape of a seal. Manna or food through the eyes of the marine beholder or in this case the hungry would-be feaster!

But another emerging theory (possibly to be enunciated with tongue-firmly-in-cheek) is that with precious ocean stocks going down and the fish not being given enough time to breed and grow, indeed replenish and restock; the marine life who obviously need to eat to survive, are looking for food replacement, and it would seem that carelessly or even inadvertently we have strategically placed ourselves somewhere on the piscean food chain as a food supplement for the shark.

A dreadful thought, but if fish life has been so severely disrupted and their reproductive cycle slowed i.e. the fish eat fish cycle; then a fight for survival erupts, and the need for new food heightened. So enter from right of stage - the Human. Readily available, in oceanic territory and, edible. Life goes on!

Who would be the culprits in this world wide problem/environmental issue - All Of Us Who Eat Fish, all we citizens of the world who freely avail ourselves of the piscean delights from the sea - I personally love to eat fish so there is no finger pointing here at the average man in the street who eats and enjoys his fish meal maybe once a week. But I do wonder and worry about those nations such as Japan, who really should get over their delight in killing whales under the banner/ the cover of investigating them for "scientific purposes" - one would think that after so many years of such scientific investigation they would have their answers to whatever questions they are asking the whale to provide. The length of time being taken for these investigations just doesn't wash anymore and the killing should stop or the killers be held reponsible by all the nations of the world. Or maybe it is the diners in the large Japanese restaurants who should be held accountable for their ongoing desire to eat hugely of these great creatures of the sea; despite their dwindling numbers and the upset that is being caused to the oceanic eco. systems.

If the number of attacks by shark are indicative of a survival fight back then maybe ALL nations should put a moratorium on the numbers of fish to be caught and sold, until such time it is judged that the oceans are replenished and able to cope with both their own survival and the supply of man's needs.

I was reading just this morning that there are certain commonsensical steps would-be ocean swimmers should observe to make their personal sea-going recreation more safe and enjoyable. In fact desirably, people should be able leave the water as indeed they went in! With limbs intactus...

Some commonsense advice...

"The risk of shark attack can be lessened by not swimming at dawn or dusk, avoiding waters with known effluents or sewage and areas that are used by recreational or commercial fishers, as well as not swimming in areas with signs of baitfish or fish feeding activity." from http://www.news.com.au

This is commonsense and most people would be aware of the possible side effects of swimming near for example jettys where recreational fishermen are catching their fish, gutting them and then throwing the extraneous bits back into the ocean.

and from http://www.smh.com.au "everyone needs to exercise care when in the ocean common sense is the best defence against shark attack [and] swim on a netted beach, swim between the flags, don't go into the water at night,'' he said. "We have warned people repeatedly not to swim at dawn or at dusk ... both these attacks have happened at these times, when the water was murky and the likelihood of attack greater." Daniel Lewis and Erik Jense, February 13, 2009.

Murky water is often cited as being somewhat scary as the shark can swim incredibly quickly and unseen to take it's prey.

And another commonsense fact could be women who are menstruating should should seriously, albeit temporarily, consider forgoing the pleasure of swimming in the ocean by accepting the possiblity of being the subject a shark attack. There is no empirical evidence for (due to a distinct lack of volunteers) supporting this suggestion except to say that because of the unlikelihood of an empirical study ever being conducted on the possiblity of a shark attack occurring to a menstruating versus a non-menstruating woman, it is hard to assess whether the emission of blood plays a part in the overall cause and effect process.

But what is known, is that the carnivorous shark can routinely recoqnise one part blood to 100 million parts water. So should the shark for example be hungry this recoqnition factor could indeed be much higher particularly as it's nostrils are so sensitive, not only can the shark smell the blood it can also actually tell from which direction the smell is coming from i.e which nostril the smell is closest to. Why risk it!

Another problem that has come to my notice is the shark netting issue - sometimes people swim in areas, and while observing the beach rules of swimming between the flags in their innocence think that because there are say a line of three or four stanchions and buoys further out to sea that this means the area is netted. Not always so. These stanchions could simply be for tying up boats and while it may intimate that "yes" there is shark netting by the same reasoning it may also mean there is "no" shark netting. I say this because I have known people to make these assumptions while swimming with their families right next to a white pointer breeding ground. Not a good look really and I believe quite irresponsible of the Council involved. One would think that the shark netted areas would proudly boast their status via the use of a signage board. One would also think that beaches would install signage to state whether the beach is or is not netted. And this is quite apart from the fact that netting doesn't always stetch across the waters but is moved about periodically by the powers that be. If in doubt about the provision of netting ask the life guards or someone in the area - a local - who is in the know about such issues.

The following piece of information I gleaned from The Nature Conservation of NSW website on their adverse reactiion to shark netting and some of their reasons.-

"It is a common misconception that shark nets physically prevent sharks from approaching Sydney beaches. In reality, the nets are set on the bottom, do not reach the surface and are open at both ends, so sharks can swim over and around them". and also from the same website "What do dugongs, sea turtles, juvenile humpback whales, dolphins, rays and grey nurse sharks have in common apart from living in the ocean? They are all victims of shark nets."

But on this website, in amongst the basic safety issues of the human versus the safety of the creatures of the deep, is some possible good news

"NCC also wants the NSW Government to develop non-lethal alternatives to shark nets."

Now wouldn't it be fantastic if someone could develop such a product that ensures both the safety of the human plus all the affected marine life. People who love the ocean but fear the shark could enjoy their activities without fear nor favour while the dugong, the turtles, the grey nurse shark et-al would not get caught in the nets and be drowned.

So while I think from a human point of view shark netting should be installed everywhere right across Australia I also think from the marine life point of view we should be endeavouring to do all we can to preserve their lives. It sure is a hard question but if a solution can be found by some enterprising individual to ensure safety to all, what a bonus that would be.

I do hope that this "shark attack" hub on some of the issues surrounding the "whys" of these attacks has helped people to understand a little better the dangers of swimming outside normal hours, under the influence of e.g. alchohol, outside the flags etc. It is also my hope that the use of commonsense combined with a little safety knowledge may also help with the prevention of more attacks in the future.

copyright: a.a.gallagher Februery 2009

Sources / Bibliography.

http://www.news.com.au

http://www.smh.com.au Daniel Lewis and Erik Jense, February 13, 2009.

The Nature Conservation of NSW website