Forums > Surfing Shortboards

Possible shark attack Cottesloe

Reply
Created by Ados > 9 months ago, 10 Oct 2011
subasurf
WA, 2154 posts
11 Oct 2011 10:36PM
Thumbs Up

Anecdotal evidence suggests there may be a specific 'rouge' (I hate that term) white pointer that travels around within that triangle you've pointed out. But it's just that, anecdotal. To the untrained, every white shark looks more or less the same.

I'd love to see the tracking data for Perth but for some reason the data is no longer available from IMOS.

As for the reef system, forget google-earth . If you want some real neat bathymetry data of our waters have a look at this site. Some real neat stuff.
portal.aodn.org.au

Ados
WA, 421 posts
11 Oct 2011 11:47PM
Thumbs Up

WestAussie said...

I have a theory. The vast majority of shark attacks in Perth have occurred in a marine area that forms a triangular shape between Rockingham, Garden Island, Rottnest Island and Cottesloe. If you have a look at Google Earth you can see a vast reef network that covers this entire area. It appears that this area is a white pointer feeding ground as all of the recent attacks at Cottesloe, Rockingham and Garden Island have occurred within this reef network area.

The moral of the story is that you are dramatically increasing your chances of being attacked if you enter the ocean within or near these areas. In saying that it could happen anywhere but it just seems odd that we've had 6 attacks in the same exact geographic location since 1997.

Food for thought.


I don't come from a marine biologist background, but I wonder if that pattern you identified has more to do with the fact that these areas are quite popular for marine based recreational activities.

I think, rather, that the moral of the story is that you more likely to increase your chances of dying by hopping into your car on the way to the beach.

We feel smug in our dominion over nature and when it doesn't play by our rules, we run around like pork chops.

robb70
WA, 52 posts
12 Oct 2011 8:56AM
Thumbs Up

Is there a chance that the Sharks are following the Fishing boats into Freo?
Use to surf a break off a seaway around Mooloolaba in QLD reguraly. Talking to guy who use to dive around there & told me if you had seen down there what i use to see you probably would not surf there.

Kaz1983
306 posts
12 Oct 2011 10:51AM
Thumbs Up

robb70 said...

Is there a chance that the Sharks are following the Fishing boats into Freo?
Use to surf a break off a seaway around Mooloolaba in QLD reguraly. Talking to guy who use to dive around there & told me if you had seen down there what i use to see you probably would not surf there.


When I use to live on the Gold Coast, I use to quite often paddle across to Stradbroke Island and often saw sharks following the fishing boats heading back in... so there is something to what your saying.......................................

mazdon
1197 posts
12 Oct 2011 11:52AM
Thumbs Up

subasurf said...

Anecdotal evidence suggests there may be a specific 'rouge' (I hate that term) white pointer that travels around within that triangle you've pointed out. But it's just that, anecdotal. To the untrained, every white shark looks more or less the same.

I'd love to see the tracking data for Perth but for some reason the data is no longer available from IMOS.

As for the reef system, forget google-earth . If you want some real neat bathymetry data of our waters have a look at this site. Some real neat stuff.
portal.aodn.org.au


take it up a notch and check out the LIDAR bathymetry that has been done these days for all the nearshore waters from north of perth down to around cape nat if you ever get the chance
if studying, you can sometimes get access to it if it is not for commercial gain as well...

subasurf
WA, 2154 posts
12 Oct 2011 12:20PM
Thumbs Up

Legend!
I've got a murdoch ID so chances are I can access it. Or I'll try my Dad's credentials haha.

Thanks mate.

rscaife
WA, 96 posts
12 Oct 2011 12:40PM
Thumbs Up

From the White Shark Trust Home Page (www.WhiteSharkTrust.org): White Sharks have been protected in several key regions around the world. These conservation plans were not based on scientific evidence about the White Shark population, but mostly on the observed decline in the number of large sharks caught by fishermen.

jbshack
WA, 6913 posts
12 Oct 2011 12:40PM
Thumbs Up

I think sharks are more likely around fishy areas. Like the reefs of Cott, or reefs of Hillary's, reefs of Rottnest or Garden island. Sharks swim around eating most of the time so they will tend to go were the fish are. Were they have some form of cover. Could you imagine how much a shark would stick out on a sandy stretch like Scarb to Trigg.

I feel if sharks wanted to eat humans they would.

I agree about cage diving. We are bring sharks into and environment and teaching these sharks to recognise humans with baited water. Maybe we should be reconsidering just what we are doing.

jbshack
WA, 6913 posts
12 Oct 2011 1:30PM
Thumbs Up

Change of plan. Now they've clossed my local break so i say cull them. Cull them all..

On a serious point i will say that the amount of weed around, that coupled with the Surf club getting told of many seals and turtles being sited in the beach area it doesn't surprise me at all..

Maybe I'll have to buy a SUP and can stay out of the water

WestAussie
11 posts
12 Oct 2011 2:48PM
Thumbs Up

If what you're saying is true then one would expect more attacks at Triggs and Scarborough because they are the most popular area for marine activities.

Ados said...

WestAussie said...

I have a theory. The vast majority of shark attacks in Perth have occurred in a marine area that forms a triangular shape between Rockingham, Garden Island, Rottnest Island and Cottesloe. If you have a look at Google Earth you can see a vast reef network that covers this entire area. It appears that this area is a white pointer feeding ground as all of the recent attacks at Cottesloe, Rockingham and Garden Island have occurred within this reef network area.

The moral of the story is that you are dramatically increasing your chances of being attacked if you enter the ocean within or near these areas. In saying that it could happen anywhere but it just seems odd that we've had 6 attacks in the same exact geographic location since 1997.

Food for thought.


I don't come from a marine biologist background, but I wonder if that pattern you identified has more to do with the fact that these areas are quite popular for marine based recreational activities.

I think, rather, that the moral of the story is that you more likely to increase your chances of dying by hopping into your car on the way to the beach.

We feel smug in our dominion over nature and when it doesn't play by our rules, we run around like pork chops.


doggie
WA, 15849 posts
12 Oct 2011 2:58PM
Thumbs Up

I dont think it has anything to do with what we do in the water.

I think that whale migration is one reason.

I dont think over fishing is, bag limits have gotten smaller over time.

I do think that because they are protected their numbers are up on 10-20 years ago.

I dont think culling is the answer.

I think, this year more than most there have been more dead whales than I can ever remember.

Rotto last year.




Ados
WA, 421 posts
12 Oct 2011 4:24PM
Thumbs Up

WestAussie said...

If what you're saying is true then one would expect more attacks at Triggs and Scarborough because they are the most popular area for marine activities.

Ados said...

WestAussie said...

I have a theory. The vast majority of shark attacks in Perth have occurred in a marine area that forms a triangular shape between Rockingham, Garden Island, Rottnest Island and Cottesloe. If you have a look at Google Earth you can see a vast reef network that covers this entire area. It appears that this area is a white pointer feeding ground as all of the recent attacks at Cottesloe, Rockingham and Garden Island have occurred within this reef network area.

The moral of the story is that you are dramatically increasing your chances of being attacked if you enter the ocean within or near these areas. In saying that it could happen anywhere but it just seems odd that we've had 6 attacks in the same exact geographic location since 1997.

Food for thought.


I don't come from a marine biologist background, but I wonder if that pattern you identified has more to do with the fact that these areas are quite popular for marine based recreational activities.

I think, rather, that the moral of the story is that you more likely to increase your chances of dying by hopping into your car on the way to the beach.

We feel smug in our dominion over nature and when it doesn't play by our rules, we run around like pork chops.





That is a good point....still, the fact remains that shark attacks are pretty rare.


Ados
WA, 421 posts
12 Oct 2011 4:25PM
Thumbs Up

doggie said...

I dont think it has anything to do with what we do in the water.

I think that whale migration is one reason.

I dont think over fishing is, bag limits have gotten smaller over time.

I do think that because they are protected their numbers are up on 10-20 years ago.

I dont think culling is the answer.

I think, this year more than most there have been more dead whales than I can ever remember.

Rotto last year.







JESUS....that is one big fish.....

Woodo
WA, 792 posts
12 Oct 2011 4:26PM
Thumbs Up

Just heard another white has been spotted off mullaloo today...

doggie
WA, 15849 posts
12 Oct 2011 4:41PM
Thumbs Up

Far out, its a plague!!

Ados
WA, 421 posts
12 Oct 2011 4:41PM
Thumbs Up

Run for the hills

Kaz1983
306 posts
12 Oct 2011 4:48PM
Thumbs Up

Is it wrong to say, great Rotto pictures there?

Woodo
WA, 792 posts
12 Oct 2011 4:54PM
Thumbs Up

There as thick as Herring!

singlefin
WA, 46 posts
12 Oct 2011 6:08PM
Thumbs Up

I likem more if they were battered and severed with chips

coreyb
WA, 463 posts
12 Oct 2011 6:12PM
Thumbs Up

Shouldn't dead whales mean the sharks are full of whale? Why would they come close to shore to snack on us?

Kaz1983
306 posts
12 Oct 2011 6:17PM
Thumbs Up

coreyb said...

Shouldn't dead whales mean the sharks are full of whale? Why would they come close to shore to snack on us?


Maybe the sharks had a few cones, he had the munchies?

*WARNING IT WAS A JOKE*

jbshack
WA, 6913 posts
12 Oct 2011 6:23PM
Thumbs Up

Kaz1983 said...

coreyb said...

Shouldn't dead whales mean the sharks are full of whale? Why would they come close to shore to snack on us?


Maybe the sharks had a few cones, he had the munchies?

*WARNING IT WAS A JOKE*



Sharks don't do cones. No thumbs geez

Woodo
WA, 792 posts
12 Oct 2011 7:25PM
Thumbs Up

^^^ Hahahaha!

Kaz1983
306 posts
12 Oct 2011 7:47PM
Thumbs Up

True. :D

subasurf
WA, 2154 posts
12 Oct 2011 9:24PM
Thumbs Up

coreyb said...
Why would they come close to shore to snack on us?


They rarely ever do. I only know of a couple of instances where someone has actually been eaten by a great white in WA.

Kaz1983
306 posts
12 Oct 2011 9:39PM
Thumbs Up

subasurf said...

coreyb said...
Why would they come close to shore to snack on us?


They rarely ever do. I only know of a couple of instances where someone has actually been eaten by a great white in WA.


Is it really true that great white sharks could if they wanted to eat humans in one sitting sort of thing, I mean are we really seen as a 'meal' to them? I ask as though I've always doubted that whole 'sharks are man eaters' label -even if they are great whites...

subasurf
WA, 2154 posts
12 Oct 2011 10:04PM
Thumbs Up

Basically, the best way to understand most shark attacks is to think of the shark as a baby or a puppy dog.

As I'm sitting here typing away, I have the ability to pick up an object I am interested in and inspect it. Babies on the other hand, pick up the object and stick it in their mouth; which is the most sensitive part of their body. This is how the inspect it.

Puppy dogs do the same thing. The chew on things, even your hand, because they are curious....not because they are aggressive; there are exceptions of course.

Sharks are the same. They are curious animals that have no hands...just fins and a mouth. They see something in the water, they bite it to try and figure out what it is. You see them biting shark cages, outboards on boats, rubbish or any other junk floating in the water. Then they see a surfer. To them you look familiar but they're not convinced. So she swims over to you, takes out a chunk, decides you're not tasty and swims off...meanwhile you're missing half a leg and bleed to death. It's a tragic thing and highly unfortunate.

This is pretty much 99% of how shark attacks occur. People are really ever actually eaten. Most deaths are due to bleeding from missing/damaged limbs. A puppy nibbles on your hand out of curiosity and it's cute. A shark does the same thing and it's disastrous.

Sad but true

I think it is safe to say, if all the big sharks out there saw us as food then most of us going in the water would get attacked. The numbers of sharks and the small numbers of attacks supports this, in my eyes.

Sham1984
VIC, 415 posts
13 Oct 2011 1:11AM
Thumbs Up

100% agreed suba

Dazza65
QLD, 389 posts
13 Oct 2011 8:20AM
Thumbs Up

Spot on Suba.
Remember reading that if you went to the aid of a shark attack victim you have a 90% + chance of not getting attacked. Shark obviously has had a taste said yuk and goes off. The instances where a rescuer is attacked is probably where there a multiple sharks around.

doggie
WA, 15849 posts
13 Oct 2011 8:48AM
Thumbs Up

Dazza65 said...

Spot on Suba.
Remember reading that if you went to the aid of a shark attack victim you have a 90% + chance of not getting attacked. Shark obviously has had a taste said yuk and goes off. The instances where a rescuer is attacked is probably where there a multiple sharks around.


I agree too, thats why this attack is different. No body at all, I know it could have been broken up by other animals but there generally is some body part left in the water.



Subscribe
Reply

Forums > Surfing Shortboards


"Possible shark attack Cottesloe" started by Ados