Killing Sharks: cultures and politics of encounter and the sea

Gibbs, Leah Maree; Warren, Andrew

doi:10.1080/00049182.2014.899023

Cited by 41 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, intensive reporting of shark sightings, encounters and human injury generates a heightened emotional response among some groups of the public (Neff, 2014). During the period of this study, media reports and images of sharks were regular features on television and print media, and these frequently portrayed sharks as indiscriminate killers (Gibbs and Warren, 2014;Neff, 2014). Second, in generating an apparent crisis of ocean safety, public expectation grew around the WA government instituting an appropriate response.…”

Section: Ocean-users and Shark Hazard Mitigation Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Transforming shark hazard policy: Learning from ocean-users and shark encounter in Western Australia

Gibbs

Warren

2015

Marine Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Killing sharks is a popular strategy for reducing risk for beach-goers and ocean-users. But the effectiveness of kill-based strategies is debated and the ecological and economic costs are high. In Western Australia the state government introduced new policy in 2012 in response to shark-related fatalities, to track, catch and destroy sharks deemed to pose an 'imminent threat' to beach-goers. This paper reports on a survey of Western Australia-based ocean-users, and pursues two aims: to develop an understanding of the experiences of oceanusers in encountering sharks; and to learn about the attitudes of ocean-users towards shark hazard management. The research finds that people encounter sharks often, without harm, and that most ocean-users adapt their practices in order to reduce personal risk. The majority of ocean-users oppose the kill-based elements of the new policy, and kill-based shark hazard management strategies more broadly. Rather, oceanusers strongly support further research and education focusing on shark behaviour and shark deterrents, and approaches that enable people to understand and accept risks associated with ocean use. These findings present opportunity to refocus debates about shark hazard management on non-lethal strategies in concert with better educating publics so they can make informed decisions about their ocean-based activities. This paper reports on a survey of Western Australia-based ocean-users, and pursues two aims: to develop an understanding of the experiences of ocean-users in encountering sharks; and to learn about the attitudes of ocean-users towards shark hazard management. The research finds that people encounter sharks often, without harm, and that most ocean-users adapt their practices in order to reduce personal risk. The majority of ocean-users oppose the kill-based elements of the new policy, and kill-based shark hazard management strategies more broadly. Rather, ocean-users strongly support further research and education focusing on shark behaviour and shark deterrents, and approaches that enable people to understand and accept risks associated with ocean use. These findings present opportunity to refocus debates about shark hazard management on non-lethal strategies in concert with better educating publics so they can make informed decisions about their ocean-based activities.

show abstract

Section: Ocean-users and Shark Hazard Mitigation Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Transforming shark hazard policy: Learning from ocean-users and shark encounter in Western Australia

Gibbs

Warren

2015

Marine Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…d Carson (); United Nations (n.d.); World Commission on Environment and Development (). e Gibbs and Warren (, ); McPhee (); Meeuwig and Ferreira (); Pepin‐Neff and Wynter (); Simpfendorfer et al (). f Department of Primary Industries (n.d.‐b); Hazin and Afonso (); Huveneers et al (); McPhee and Blount (); O'Connell, Stroud, et al ()).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Scientific research is demonstrating unprecedented pressures on marine and coastal environments (Dulvy et al, ; IPCC, ; United Nations, ), and public awareness and sentiment has increased substantially in recent decades (Carson, ; United Nations n.d.; World Commission on Environment & Development, ). Concern for well‐being of species and individual animals of non‐target and target species has grown substantially since the Program's introduction 80 years ago, reducing public support for lethal strategies (Gibbs & Warren, , ; Gray & Gray, ; Pepin‐Neff & Wynter, ). Critiques of negative effects, effectiveness and appropriateness of lethal strategies are becoming more widespread (e.g.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Critiques of negative effects, effectiveness and appropriateness of lethal strategies are becoming more widespread (e.g. Gibbs & Warren, , ; McPhee, ; Meeuwig & Ferreira, ; Pepin‐Neff & Wynter, ; Simpfendorfer, Heupel, White, & Dulvy, ). Concurrently, related concerns are driving innovation and investment in non‐lethal techniques, including personal electrical and visual deterrents, underwater barriers and deterrents using light, sound, air and magnet technologies, and underwater and aerial surveillance (Department of Primary Industries n.d.‐b; Hazin & Afonso, ; Huveneers et al, ; McPhee & Blount, ; O'Connell, Stroud, & He, ; see Figure ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects and effectiveness of lethal shark hazard management: The Shark Meshing (Bather Protection) Program, NSW, Australia

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

‘Shark attack’ presents a considerable social‐environmental challenge. Each year a small number of people are injured or killed by shark bite. Concurrently, sharks and other marine life are subject to unprecedented anthropogenic pressures. Shark hazard management varies globally, but lethal strategies are common, with negative consequences for species and environments. Of particular concern are the effects for threatened species. Lethal strategies have recently come under criticism, based on the negative effects for marine life, effectiveness for human safety and inconsistency with contemporary values. Moves to improve both safety and conservation can be hindered by polarized debate. We present a case study of the world's longest‐running lethal shark hazard management program, the Shark Meshing (Bather Protection) Program, New South Wales, Australia. We take an interdisciplinary approach to bring into conversation factors that contribute to safety and conservation outcomes. To date, most research focuses on one or other of these areas. We seek to synthesize the factors that are not previously considered in relation to each other. Our aims were to: (a) identify and critique the diverse factors that determine the outcomes of the program; (b) assess the negative effects of the program for sharks and other marine life; and (c) assess the effectiveness of the program for reducing threat of shark interactions. We find that: (a) multiple social and environmental factors contribute to program outcomes; (b) total shark numbers and populations of key target species – white shark (Carcharodon carcharias), tiger shark (Galeocerdo cuvier) and bull shark (Carcharhinus leucas) – have declined over the program's 80 years, as have a number of non‐target species; (c) incidence of shark bite has declined since the program's introduction, but two external points warrant attention. First, key factors influencing the shark bite incidence are frequently overlooked, namely changing cultures of beach‐ and ocean‐use, advances in beach patrol, and emergency and medical response. Second, the proportion of bites leading to fatality has decreased significantly in recent decades. Beach patrol and emergency response contribute to human safety and well‐being without the negative consequences of lethal strategies. As such, they offer a focus for future shark hazard management and research. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

show abstract

“…37 While such dangerous encounters do have transformative potential, they more often prompt revenge and further killing, and a desire to re-assert human exceptionalism and supremacy. 38 Although a "visceral" sense of security, that of "not being eaten by big and ferocious wild animals," is powerful, humans are of course killed far more frequently by microbial, parasitic and viral others. 39 As "evolutionary success" stories, mosquitoes and parasites have killed more humans than any other animal for millennia.…”

Section: Killingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flourishing with Awkward Creatures: Togetherness, Vulnerability, Killing

Ginn

Beisel²,

Barua³

2014

Environmental Humanities

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Giant isopods are one of the star attractions in the Toba Aquarium, Japan. Under normal circumstances these crustaceans live at depth on the cold, dark ocean floor, scavenging flesh from dead fish and whales. Their alien appearance, as well as the strangeness of their lives, instills a combination of fascination, fear, and disgust in the aquarium visitor. In 2007, one specimen-29 centimetres long and weighing just over a kilogram-was plucked from waters off the Mexican coast and sent to the aquarium. He was named Giant Isopod No.1. No.1 refused to eat for the first year at the aquarium. In 2008 he took two small bites of fish, and again in 2009, but stopped eating completely thereafter. 1 For five years he refused all food, and every attempt to coax the creature into eating failed. Then, one morning his caretaker, Takeya Moritaki, found Giant Isopod No.1 lying listless on the bottom of its tank. By 5pm No. 1 was dead. 2 No.1's captivity and death captures the themes addressed by this special section: the awkwardness of being together in multispecies entanglements; the differential vulnerability that both precedes and is reshaped by being drawn together; the way killing and death circulate alongside care and life. This special section aims to enrich our understanding of the ethics of living with nonhuman others. We are interested in creatures that bite, or sting, or-like giant isopods-fascinate but repulse us, and in creatures that must die so that others may live: awkward creatures, in other words, which tend not to fit off-the-shelf ethics. 1 Toba Aquarium, "ダイオウグソクムシについてのお知らせ" (News about the Giant Isopod). Accessed 29 April 2014, http://www.aquarium.co.jp/topics/index.php?id=250.

show abstract

Killing Sharks: cultures and politics of encounter and the sea

Cited by 41 publications

References 9 publications

Transforming shark hazard policy: Learning from ocean-users and shark encounter in Western Australia

Transforming shark hazard policy: Learning from ocean-users and shark encounter in Western Australia

Effects and effectiveness of lethal shark hazard management: The Shark Meshing (Bather Protection) Program, NSW, Australia

Flourishing with Awkward Creatures: Togetherness, Vulnerability, Killing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About