protect people by culling sharks?

THE BIG DEBATE: Is it right to protect people by culling sharks? opinion When there are more effective measures to protect both surfers and marine life, politicians must stop reverting to ineffective culling programs, which are dangerous for both beach safety and ecosystems. Nicola Beynon of the Humane Society

DILEMMA: IS IT RIGHT TO PROTECT PEOPLE BY CULLING SHARKS? THE DILEMMA Friday 19 May 2017 Sharks and their relationship with humans have been in the news lately after a number of recent attacks. In April, a 17-year-old Australian girl was killed by a shark off the coast of Western Australia (WA), while a British woman was attacked by a shark while snorkeling near an island in the South Atlantic. The Australian incident was the third deadly shark attack in WA in the past 12 months. And of the 24 known deaths caused by sharks in WA in the past century, 14 have been since 2004. Every time a human is attacked by a shark, there is a big public outcry about beach safety, and many people expect politicians to take steps to protect their safety. So after the tragic death of the 17-year-old girl, Australia s Environment Minister, Josh Frydenberg, said he will consider all proposals including culling in order to protect swimmers, surfers and divers. But the WA state government, which has the final say on these things, has said it will not put a cull in place. Three years ago, WA introduced a cull to try and reduce the population of great white sharks, which is the type of shark that most commonly attacks people off the Australian coast. The cull was very unpopular with many people at the time, and in the end it was stopped by an environmental regulator. More than 170 sharks were caught but none of them was a great white. These recent news stories raise many questions about the relationship between humans and the animals we share the planet with. Is it right to catch and kill wild animals that pose a threat to humans? Is human safety the most important thing? Or should we respect the sharks right to live in their natural environment? CULLING A cull reduces the numbers of an animal population by killing some of its members. Culling is the process of killing these animals. Protestors in Australia in 2014

how a cull works The cull that was put into place in WA in 2014 involved over 70 hooks with bait on them placed on drum lines 1km off the shores of eight popular beaches. These lines were patrolled by local fishermen, and any caught shark that was more than three metres long was shot dead. The cull was stopped after the organisation that monitors the environment in WA banned the scheme after deciding it could become a threat to the survival of the great white shark. The great white is classified by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) as vulnerable, which is one step before endangered. The effectiveness of the baited drum lines that the local government installed off Australian beaches was questioned even before the cull was stopped. Data collected by a South African shark protection agency shows that the drums actually trap far more bycatch than sharks. Various species of sea life are caught in the bycatch, including small whales, dolphins and marine turtles. In fact, there is five times more bycatch than catch caught by the drum lines so how effective a solution are they? did you know? The creature that causes the most human deaths every year (more than 1 million) isn t the shark, or the lion, or the rat. It s the mosquito. The little flying insect carries and spreads various diseases including malaria and yellow fever, which can be fatal if not treated quickly. DRUM LINES Floating drums or barrels with two lines attached to them: one line anchors the drum to the seabed, while the other holds a large, baited hook to attract and catch sharks. BYCATCH Fish and other sealife caught accidentally while people try to catch other species. For example, when trying to catch sharks, several fish end up being caught and killed.

DILEMMA: IS IT RIGHT TO PROTECT PEOPLE BY CULLING SHARKS? SHARK ATTACK Friday 19 May 2017 Sharks are carnivores, which means they eat other animals they even consume other sharks. They are considered to be one of the most efficient predators on the planet, thanks to their very sophisticated sense of smell, hearing and sight, which enables them to detect their prey in the water from very far away. Sharks also have highly sensitive eyes that enable them to see clearly even in the dim light of the deep ocean. A shark attack on a human can be extremely traumatic and can cause serious injury, but it rarely results in death. The majority of shark attacks involve a quick bite, after which the shark swims away. This usually gives the victim time to swim back to shore or to call for help. The most harmful sharks to humans are the great white, the tiger and the bull. GREAT WHITE SHARK This is probably the most famous type of shark, and it is the star of Steven Spielberg s classic film Jaws, in which a shark terrorises an American seaside resort. The great white has 3,000 teeth and can eat between nine and 14 kilograms of flesh with just one bite and no chewing yet it has been linked with fewer than 100 human deaths since records began. The great white is classified as vulnerable, which means it faces a high risk of extinction. TIGER SHARK BULL SHARK The tiger shark can live up to 50 years and has a reputation for swallowing up virtually anything it comes across that s why its nickname is the wastebasket of the sea. Tiger sharks have exceptionally sharp teeth and powerful jaws that allow them to crack the shells of sea turtles. Tiger sharks are near threatened, which is one step below vulnerable. This aggressive type of shark has been responsible for over 120 attacks on humans, but fewer than 50 deaths. It lives in both saltwater and fresh water, and has been spotted lurking far from the sea inside rivers including the Amazon. Bull sharks are fond of shallow waters, and are currently not an endangered species.

HUMANS VS. SHARKS WHICH PROVIDES THE BIGGER THREAT: SHARK ATTACKS ON HUMANS, OR HUMAN ATTACKS ON SHARKS? Although a shark attack can be terrifying and potentially fatal, far more sharks are attacked by humans than humans are attacked by sharks. Shark finning the process of catching and killing a shark to remove its fin kills an estimated 100 million or more sharks globally every year. Shark fins are used for traditional Chinese medicine, despite there being no scientific evidence whatsoever that they can heal any medical conditions. The fin is also used in shark fin soup, a popular dish in China. Sharks cannot breed quickly, so their numbers are reduced very easily by finning, and also by getting caught in bycatch. To make matters worse for the sharks, many marine habitats have been damaged by pollution and development. There are thought to be less than 3,500 great white sharks left in existence. Humans, on the other hand, have no danger of immediate extinction: there are 7 billion of us and the figure is rising every second! Shark fin soup is a popular dish in China. Shark fins collected by fishermen in Hong Kong where finning is legal.

ALTERNATIVES TO CULLING REPEL SHARKS WITH SOUNDS AND LIGHT The Shark Shield, which deters sharks with electric pulses There are other, more scientific methods to protect citizens that would also protect the shark population. One of these is repelling the sharks with shark shields, noises and lights. Professor Nathan Hart of the University of Western Australia s School of Animal Biology believes research into shark habits will prove far more beneficial than attracting them with bait and killing them. He led a major research project looking at what causes shark attacks, with the hope of developing devices that send out signals to put sharks off. Professor Hart investigated bright flashing lights and loud underwater sounds including the calls of killer whales as a means of keeping sharks away from areas packed with people. These devices would be built into surfboards, protecting surfers who often stray out into shark waters. Hart has also worked with an Australian company to develop camouflaged wetsuits for divers. SharkShield.com SHARK NETS This system is already in place in some areas, where nets are placed in the water around popular beaches in order to entangle the sharks. They have been used in the Australian region of New South Wales (NSW) since the 1930s. But unfortunately they also catch a lot of other animals, and around half of all creatures caught in them die. The most recent report on NSW shark nets showed 748 marine animals became entangled in the nets in 2015-16. About 86% of those animals were threatened, protected, or species not intended to be targeted by the shark net scheme. The nets killed five threatened grey nurse sharks, 21 white sharks, a great hammerhead shark, 11 green turtles, five hawksbill turtles, four loggerhead turtles, two leatherback turtles, four common dolphins and nine bottlenose dolphins. SOCIAL MEDIA Another cull alternative that helps protect the public is the WA government s use of Twitter. Transmitters have been attached to 320 large sharks, with tweets automatically sent whenever the sharks approach the shore. The tweets let beach users know the exact location, type and size of the shark. The problem with this method is that not everybody will be close to a smartphone, tablet or computer when they are about to go in the water, so they may not receive the alerts in time.

YES, IT S RIGHT TO PROTECT PEOPLE BY CULLING SHARKS NO, IT S WRONG TO PROTECT PEOPLE BY CULLING SHARKS 1. A small risk is still a risk Even if the chances of being attacked by a shark are low, public safety is essential. Every death of a child or adult caused by a shark is a tragedy for the person s family and friends. 2. People s safety comes before animals safety Humans are the dominant species on Earth and we have a right to protect ourselves from attack. Wild animals don t think twice about attacking predators, so why should we? 3. Culling sharks encourages people to go to the beach There are likely thousands of people who avoid beaches, and therefore physical activity such as swimming and surfing, because they are scared of sharks. A cull is a decisive action that will reassure people and reduce their fears. 1. The chances of a shark attack are small A surfer or swimmer is very unlikely to be attacked by a shark. They are far more likely to die from drowning or being struck in the head by a surfboard (and even that is unlikely). There is no point killing sharks as the threat from them is so small. 2. It s wrong to kill animals to protect humans Just because we can, it doesn t mean we should. Sharks have as much of a right to swim in the ocean as humans do. We shouldn t feel superior to other animals on Earth. 3. There are other, better ways to prevent shark attacks Science and technology have come up with many other methods, such as social media alerts and repellant noises, that can better protect people.

discussion questions Why do you think some politicians are keen on introducing shark culls around busy beaches? Should we protect humans by killing potentially deadly animals such as sharks and snakes, even if the risk is small? Is it up to humans to decide which animals should be killed for our safety? Which animals are you frightened of? Why do you think we are so frightened of animals that actually do us little harm? Would any alternatives to a cull be better? Why? Before reading this debate, were you more scared of a mosquito or a shark? Do human lives matter more than animal lives?