Shark strikes prompt lethal hunt, even as some call for conservation

In a statement, West Australian Fisheries Minister Norman Moore told The Washington Post that the multiple attacks were “an unprecedented circumstance which required an unprecedented response,” noting that his task was complicated because many people approach the waters of Rottnest Island from boats and might not see beach signs or patrols. He added, “There is no order to cull sharks — there is an exemption under the [law] that has always been there to take an endangered species if or when it poses an imminent threat to human life.”

Several experts, including Burgess, questioned whether targeting an individual shark would enhance human safety. More than 100 marine biologists wrote to Moore, as well as other state and local authorities, urging them to “realize that a shark cull would be disastrous not only to our marine environment but also Australia’s reputation as a world leader in marine conservation.”

Personal Post

A 1994 scientific study of shark-control efforts that Hawaii undertook between 1959 and 1976 found the measures killed “4,668 sharks at an average cost of $182 per shark.” But the authors concluded that they did little to affect tiger sharks, which were most likely to attack humans.

“Shark hunts are an example of a political effort to reduce the public perception of risk rather than real risk reduction,” Neff wrote in an e-mail. He added that governments would be better off investing in warning flags, message boards and announcements that “allow beach goers to see the ocean in a more complete way.”

Chuck Anderson, who lost his right arm to a bull shark in 2000 off Gulf Shores, Ala., urged his friends not to hunt down the shark he encountered. “What right do we have — even having my right arm ripped off — to start advocating to kill sharks, just to make us feel safer?” he asked.

Environmentalists have won a series of new protections for sharks this year, arguing that the predators have been decimated by indiscriminate industrial fishing and fishing for their fins, which are used in shark’s fin soup, an Asian delicacy. Between 26 million and 73 million sharks a year are targeted for their fins, scientists say, and roughly a third of all shark species face some threat of extinction.

California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed a shark fin ban this month, joining Washington, Oregon and Hawaii. Groups such as the National Aquarium are pushing for Maryland to become the first state on the East Coast to enact such a ban. Toronto, Canada’s largest city, enacted a similar ban Tuesday.

Andy Dehart, the National Aquarium’s director of fishes, said the group is pushing for legislation because after tagging sharks in Delaware Bay and maintaining them in captivity for 30 years, he and others are convinced that “they’re not well-suited for the pressure of a fishery that the shark fin trade is doing to them.”

In Florida, the state’s Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission is poised to vote Nov. 16 to ban the harvest of tiger sharks and scalloped, smooth and great hammerhead sharks in state waters. Academics, such as University of Miami Rosenstiel School professor Neil Hammerschlag, who studies sharks off the Keys, have pushed for the measure.

But to people like George Wainwright, who lives in Panama City, Fla., protecting sharks seems like an anathema in the wake of his son’s recent death. “I can only say I wish I was there,” he said in a phone interview. “There has to be somewhere where you see people as more important than this shark.”