Great whites are at the heart of the debate. Photo: Unsplash
This month, the Queensland government announced an $A88 million (USD $57 million) investment in its Shark Control Program over the next four years. It was, by a large margin, the largest cash injection in the scheme’s history.
The Aussie dollars will be spent on shark nets, drumlines, drone surveillance and whale-deterrent programs at Queensland beaches. Now, it’s worth remembering, that this is just for Queensland. Last year the neighboring state of New South Wales set aside $85.6 million for its 2022-2026 Shark Management Program. West Oz, Victoria, and South Australia all have their state-funded programs.
“Today’s announcement is big and bold. It puts swimmer safety first,” said the QLD Minister for Primary Industries Tony Perrett. A lot of the technologies developed aim to minimize shark attacks by reducing shark numbers. And it’s the investment in shark nets that has caused the most debate.
The issue, like others in the culture wars, has become polarized. Beachgrit, which has a strange fixation with sharks, and shark attacks, recently posted an article by Dan Webber with the headline “Australia’s shark crisis and the anti-human underpinnings of radical green policies.” In Webber’s piece, the conclusion states that the prevailing view is that “the preservation of nature has priority over human flourishing.” Which will be surprising news to all those species currently taking part in the 6th mass extinction.
Sharks, their attacks, and their destruction and protection, however, is a far more emotive issue and one that clearly drives clicks. Especially in Australia. Halfway through this year, of the seven global shark attack fatalities, three have been in Australia. This is above the Australian average of 2.7 fatal shark attacks annually (2014-2023), which had risen from 1.8 the previous decade.
Empirically the numbers, we know, are tiny, but the attacks’ effects ripple through the small surf and coastal communities for decades. The lazy stats comparing shark attacks to people who died from bee stings aren’t that useful when talking about Charlize Zmuda, the 17-year-old who died swimming off an island near Brisbane, or Lance Appleby, a 28-year-old eaten whilst surfing Granites in South Oz.
Yet the largest-ever survey of NSW surfers, published in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, found that while half of surfers in NSW are worried about sharks while surfing, only a very small proportion (16 percent) are supportive of additional funding for shark detection and management programs.
Anecdotally, while surfers have no issues with added drone surveillance, increased shark-specific medical kits and new warning and tracking technology, that number would drop when it comes to nets. The QLD government’s decision to invest heavily in the nets comes in the face of issues on their effectiveness and the bycatch.
According to data obtained by Humane Society International under the NSW’s information access laws, more than 90 percent of marine animals caught last summer in NSW shark nets were not sharks. More than half of the 208 non-target species caught – such as turtles, dolphins, and smaller sharks – were killed.
It was based on such evidence that the NSW government pulled in their nets one month early this past summer, citing, “the low risk to humans and high risk to marine life.” Instead, they have pivoted to non-lethal barriers along short sections of coastline, drones, and more public education.
One non-lethal barrier being tested in South Africa is the SharkSafe Barrier. It is made of staggered rows of vertical, flexible plastic pipes designed to mimic a kelp forest. These also house ceramic magnets to form a double barrier. The goal is to stop sharks from swimming through it, but not other fish and marine life.
That technology though is a long way off from commercial viability. The current status quo is a suspended wall of nylon gill nets, that sharks can still swim around, above, or below. With the science clearly showing the negative effects of bycatch on endangered species, and the jury out on the ability to reduce the devastating effects of shark attacks, shark nets may be an outdated, expensive and ineffective solution.
And yet, the QLD government has backed the technology, to the tune of 88 million bucks for the next four years. Will the investment save lives, and stop marine life from being killed? Or is that a circle that can’t be squared? Well, that’s the 88-million-dollar question.
