I must say that I'm impressed.
Following the tragic Shark strikes in North Carolina, Michael Domeier is warning Californians about the growing population of GWS on their coast. So far this is good news as it means that protection measures are having the desired effect. And so far, those are juveniles and small subadults, and thus rather harmless - but one day those Sharks will reach an age where they will gradually switch to larger prey, meaning that the risk of predatory attacks on humans will undoubtedly increase.
This is of course totally in line with the recent statements by Burgess - and once again bravo to Michael for having the guts to tell it like it is!
And yes, I've, gasp, deliberately used the dreaded A word!
This is a Shark attack.
It is provoked and retaliatory.
And like I would do in the case of a Cat, or Lion, or Croc, I call it an attack because there is definitely no confusion and there is definitely intent - which in this specific situation is both totally understandable and perfectly fine!
The strikes in North Carolina?
Dunno and that's why I call them strikes - but by the same token, what makes Mr. Barrington state that the assumed Bull Sharks more than likely mistook those kids for Fish? Does he really believe that a Bull Shark is too dumb to discern the difference between snapping at a Fish and severing a human limb - or may this possibly be yet another misguided attempt at PR rehabilitation a la Neff and Hueter?
Seriously, could we please stop with the stupid whitewashing?
Can we please let Sharks be Sharks, meaning that we got to accept that some species are large predators that will from time to time both target and unless disturbed, consume a human? And that many of them will intentionally bite when molested? This makes them neither bad nor good but simply describes what they are = large predators that have every bloody right to predate, and complex animals with a broad array of behaviors among which aggression!
We don't blink an eye about properly describing the equally rare predatory attacks by the Big Cats, Bears and Reptiles - so why this obsession of trying to exculpate Sharks by coming up with lame excuses and trying to introduce politically correct lingo?
Which brings me to this further comment by Michael.
Spot on! Read the testimony, and read this further account, and even the most rabid Shark hugging apologist should clearly discern that this was most definitely a predatory attack - curiosity and testing with their mouth because they got no hands, yada yada, my ass!
Same old same old - especially the pronouncements by the increasingly irritating Neff! This nonsense fatally reminds me of someone else - and we all know how that one ended!
Anyway, having asked, Doc replies
In an article I write way back in the eighties, for Naval Research Reviews entitled why do sharks bite humans, I made it perfectly clear that some sharks actually consider humans as legitimate prey. We all know which ones these are.
I say, the serial breathy couch farting and ultracrepidarianism are bad enough - but misrepresenting Doc is just simply unacceptable!
But enough of that.
Good to see that some within the research community are finally speaking up against the creeping Dolphinization of Sharks. They are certainly not monsters - but by the same token, some of them can be extremely dangerous and need to be treated with the utmost respect and circumspection.
Nothing to do with those recent tragic events mind you - when humans and Sharks share the same space, these things are unfortunately bound to happen. But if we ever want to succeed in mitigating the consequences of this increasingly uneasy cohabitation, we must address all sides of the issue: ever more people encroaching into Shark habitat but also, in some places, more Sharks - some of which will sometimes regard people as food!