Can you tell which parts of the shark culling news is real and which is fake? Sadly, reality and parody are not that far from each other in terms of ridiculousness when it comes to proposed methods of "shark mitigation".
Yes, Western Australia really does refer to a 15-month time span as a "trial", thus I jokingly called my non-existent 2-year study a trial. Does calling something a trial help placate the public who are concerned? "Oh, well, it's just a trial..." Yes, a trial that lasts well over a year.
Yes, a contractor paid to check shark cull gear in Queensland died, presumably via entanglement and subsequent drowning. That puts this year's stats in Queensland at:
1 person killed by anti-shark safety gear
0 people killed by sharks
Yes, smart drum lines still use baited hooks, which, so far, are catching non-target animals. Damage induced by being caught on these hooks simply can't be avoided, but it's not always as obvious as when the hook goes right out the skull of the animal. Animals that aren't dead upon discovery often die from their wounds later. These animals are listed as "released alive"...
Although my example of "pointing feet to the left at a beach" is a silly example, it is nevertheless comparable to real-world statistics. Across the world, beaches enjoy zero shark-induced fatalities, whether there are shark nets or not. No one pays attention to the success rate of humans entering the ocean without being hurt, we only look at the rare incidents when something goes wrong...then act as though we know how to make a number go from "once in a blue moon" to never.
#sharkcull #sharkstatistics #sharkbitestatistics #nosharkcull #trial #drumline #sharknet #capecod #westernaustralia