by Jackie Curtis
After being trapped for a gruelling 16 hours, a humpback whale calf entangled in shark mitigation nets at Noosa’s main beach was finally attended to by Queensland's Department of Fisheries. Cut from the nets early on Friday morning, the little ones' mother was there and thankfully they have now both fled to deeper water. This is of course great news, however we may never know if the calf ultimately sustained any fatal injuries. Hopefully not.
In 1962 the Queensland government commenced its shark mitigation program, installing the now infamous shark nets along the coastline (see image below). This technology, now 59 years old has proven to be devastating for wild life due to the high level of by-catch-such as whales, dolphins, turtles, dugong and non-targeted shark species. With the evolution of technology, there are now far better alternatives available; ones that place value on human lives, as well as marine life.
Despite the evidence of poor environmental impact, technological advances, expert and public opinion, the Queensland government refuses to update its shark mitigation program or remove the outdated nets - even during the whale migration season. There have been alternative trials and as a result some newer technologies will be introduced in some areas in addition to the nets, but will not replace them along the east coast of Australia. I understand that back in the 60’s the nets appeared to be the answer to shark vs. human interactions, however there are other factors to consider as well.
Commercial whaling in Queensland ended in 1962 after decimating humpback whale populations. The east coast migration saw approximately 40,000 - 60,000 whales originally, which by 1962, had reduced to an estimation of only a couple of hundred whales.
In that same year the nets were introduced. In the last decade populations have been increasing at a rate of 10 -11% annually and are now seeing numbers reaching levels nearing pre-whaling along the 'humpback highway.' We are also experiencing more shark vs human interactions again-with larger predators such as sharks and orca along our coastline following the young humpback whales further north.
I question if this is just a coincidence?
Could our governments have misguidedly credited the decrease in shark/human interaction success on the shark nets? Have they created a dependency on the nets, providing a sense of value that may be far less effective than what we are led to believe? Is this dependency more like a placebo for the people?
We should be moving to replace the nets with more modern, proven alternatives, that monitor the sharks entering the waters off our beaches along our coastline. At a minimum shouldn't we remove the shark nets during the whales migration, when the colder months reduce the popularity of ocean swimming naturally anyway? 🐋
Disclaimer
Advocating Wild receives no funding and do not collect donations. Our blogs are opinion pieces unless otherwise stated and the views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the author(s), and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of mentioned organisations. All information we provide is accurate and true to the best of our knowledge, however there may be omissions, errors or mistakes. Our blogs are for informational and awareness raising purposes only and we are not professional marine mammal experts. Advocating Wild reserves the right to change the focus or content of our blogs at any time. All images contained in this blog where stated have been used or created with permission.This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorised by the copyright owner. Credit is given to the author of quotes, photos and other related materials. We source these materials from various public internet sites, in an effort to advance understanding of animal welfare issues. We believe the use of materials on this site constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material and is distributed on this site without profit. If you wish to use any copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain express permission from the copyright owner. If you are the owner of any copyrighted material and believe the use of any such material does not constitute “fair use,” please contact us immediately, so we can make proper corrections, and ultimately, take it off the post if requested and or if proven necessary. The owner of this page, its administrators and authorised representatives will not be held personally responsible, nor liable for any damages, actual or consequential, for any posts by third parties which may violate any law. All quotes obtained directly or through our sources and provided for our use.