Slashdot Mirror
Tracking Great Whites By Satellite
e-gold points to this article about tracking Great White sharks by satellite, writing: "Interesting, I'm glad the impulse isn't just to kill them anymore, it's nice to see something is out there that still considers people as nothing more than a small meal, IMO it puts things into perspective. Besides, life isn't a risk-free proposition, even if they track some of the sharks they're unlikely to track them all." In fact, the article says that Australian law carries fines and jail time for killing Great Whites -- even in self-defense.
The article would give someone the impression that the sharks would be adequately tracked to allow warnings in various coastal areas.
. html As yet, no one really knows for sure why the number of attacks are up so sharply. There are numerous, very plausible, theories. But, nobody's really sure.
Similar past research has already shown that these sharks often cover very large geographic areas in short periods of time. A positions report, placing the shark 500 miles away from a beach is useless after a day or two.
By time the shark surfaces for the next position report he will be munching on someone. Even worse, that next position report will come in at the point where he grabs the poor person.
I admit that this is a small step toward some better form of protection but, anyone relying on this for their shark warnings is likely to get bitten.
Shark attacks are up not only in Australia but, worldwide. There has been a sharp increase in the number of attacks in Florida and California as well as Australia in the past year. One of the most recent attacks can be found here http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/07/08/shark.bite/index
Hmmm... that's a tough one: I get attacked by a shark and I get to choose between two years in jail with my cellmate Bubba or being eaten alive.
[sarcasm]I love my choices![/sarcasm] That doesn't seem fair at all. I mean, I don't know about Austrailian law so mabye someone can tell me but if you're attacked on the street by someone, you can defend yourself with equal force and not face legal problems right? What's the difference between that and me killing an animal intending to make me a before dinner snack?
Stupid word. Let's see..buoy, bouey, bouy, buoey, beeoooie, bweeooeey, byoohee, bwheehooee, buheee, bweee, beuooie, bweehooohee. I do believe it's buoy now. Byoy, byoie, buhoie, boo-hee, or byooie
Never mind, coffee appears to be finished.
"How about putting fake humans with electric shock devices into the water all around the area. Soon the sharks will assosicate humans with electric shocks and start looking elsewhere for lunch!"
Lamarck also thought that giraffes 'grew' their necks becuase they needed to reach the leaves on the higher branches. Darwin was more correct in that he postulated the giraffes with necks not long enough would die out, and those with the longer necks survived. Lamarck's views on this were "learned behavior from the parents" translated to hereditary traits, while Darwin's were hereditary, through natural selection.
You seem to take Lamarck's view. It won't work, and not for just the reasons I've outlined here.
The whole point of the project is to determine not just the location of the sharks but a _pattern_ of movement. Infinitely valuable data, IMO.
Ammendment:
Please note the use of _caught_ in our last advertisement. Looking for single person or close knit operations with own boat. Due to a limited supply of transmitters we encourage the potential employee to use their initative in solving this problem.
timothy, you've got this thirst for stories about man's ability to conquer nature of late huh? So what do we have lately:
Alright, think about this, how come no one in the article talks about how this will affect the Shark in any way. A shark gets pulled from the ocean, and some alien beings ( us ) can implant a satelitte beacon in a tail fin. Then we dump him/her back in the frothy sea. Just like magic, we've made the sea safe! Thanks guys. Why? Anyone think this may be a little invasive?
Oh and wait, the cost of 2000 pounds is being put up by corporate sponsors. ALRIGHT ENOUGH, is this a hoax, five fatal shark attacks in Australia LET US IMPLANT SENSORS IN THE SHARKS. Why not just STOP PLAYING ON THE DANGEROUS BEACHES? Seriously, this article doesn't talk about curious scientists wanting to learn the migratory habits of the shark, it talks about corporate sponsors tracking the sea killers to make beaches safer.
Why not spend money on real problems instead of manufacturing cybersharks? ( Oh, sorry, it's cool, let's do it because it's cool. )
Did I mention, "DON'T MESS WITH RAIN"
------ Tim O'Brien
a) The sharks can surface once every two days.
b) When they surface they are tracked.
c) Sharks live around Port Lincoln, whose waters are the natural home of the great white.
Hmm, I guess this means there will be no more swimming around Port Lincoln then! Doesn't this make the whole project a bit daft?
Us humans, we take away all the predators food, stuff up the areas where they live and then get a bit tetsy when they start eating us.
How about putting fake humans with electric shock devices into the water all around the area. Soon the sharks will assosicate humans with electric shocks and start looking elsewhere for lunch!
More to the point start swimming in Port Lincoln with an anti shark device.
A Great White is kind of like a grizzly bear. You pretty much have to kill it before it catches you, if not you are not likely to win.
In it's own environment it is the superior creature. You arn't.
Of course, any sane person would try to avoid the grizzly bear in the first place.
A knife isn't going to kill it, more likely just turn a mistaken identity (you for food) into a revenge kill.
You have to be packing some serious weaponry to even have a hope of killing one, and then if you do carry this (a simple exploding head spear, won't stop it in time) you're looking for trouble.
You wont be prosecuted if you killed a Great White that was attacking you AND you had a great liklihood it getting to you (ie. shooting it from your large boat isn't self defence). That's more in terms of not being able to go kill one that's taken someone. Not that it's likely you'd kill it if it was swimming next to you. As for 'don't play on dangerous beaches', pretty much any beach could be a dangerous beach. Eg. Cottesloe, Perth, Western Australia had a fatal attack this year. It's one of the most popular beaches in WA, and rightly so. There's an attack of some description once every five years or so. Simarlarly, Port Lincon is an excellent beach that gets a lot of use. With a beach culture like Australia, you can't just say: don't swim here, sharks are around. Fact is, sharks will come around now and then, habits aside. Not that many people get taken, but it does happen.
Of course, any sane person would try to avoid the grizzly bear in the first place. not this guy: http://www.outsidemag.com/magazine/0597/0597grizzl ies.html
Although, I don't think I'd call him sane now that I think about it.
WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
That aside, though, I think the judge will probably be lenient if you show up in court sans leg (or leg in hand). I imagine they'll let you off if it is a first offense. You're right, the law isn't meant to punish justifiable killings, but if you do happen to kill one you had damn well better use every small bit of it (shark skin boots, jacket, ear muffs, gloves, underwear, and socks).
IANAL, but I play one on
They should be tracking dead Nietzsches instead of white sharks. Dead Nietzsches are much more dangerous for little children.
Tired of the boring same-old same-old? Looking for some excitement? Well look no more, we've got the job for you!
I guess my point is that this might be the only way to completely discourage the killing of great whites. If you think hard about it, the only person really capable of killing one of these guys is someone who is going out there to specifically do just that. If you are out surfing, swimming, or SCUBA diving you probably aren't going to be able to adequately defend yourself with deadly force against one of those tough bastards. If they really want to kill you, they will. If they don't want to kill you but just taste you, then you should only be able to defend yourself with equal force (bite their fins off).
IANAL, but I play one on