PDA

View Full Version : Diver Killed by Shark



Sarah
02-25-2008, 07:12 PM
By Andrew Ba Tran | Sun-Sentinel.com
1:41 PM EST, February 25, 2008

A man bitten by a shark while diving over the weekend has died, the U.S. Coast Guard in Miami announced on Monday.

The 50-year-old man "passed away from his injuries sustained by a shark bite," said Coast Guard spokeswoman Petty Officer Jennifer Johnson.

Authorities have not identified the man or where he was bitten pending family notification.

The victim was diving about 50 miles east of Fort Lauderdale on Sunday at about 10 a.m. when a shark bit him, according to officials.

The service dispatched a rescue helicopter, and its crew hoisted the man off the boat and flew him to Jackson Memorial Hospital in Miami.

A crewmember aboard the 70-foot Shear Water had contacted the Coast Guard. The blue commercial diving vessel is registered to Jim Abernathy's Scuba Adventures from Riviera Beach.

The company offers shark trips to the Bahamas for enthusiasts and photographers hoping to interact with hammerhead and tiger sharks, according to its Web site.

Operators for the company stir in fish and fish parts to "chum" the water and attract the sharks, reads the itinerary. "Please be aware that these are not 'cage' dives; they are open water experiences," states the Web site.

Abernathy had been told by the Bahamas Diving Association to exercise caution with more aggressive sharks such as mako, lemon, tiger and hammerhead sharks.

The association, a group of 36 charter businesses that operate in the Bahamas, sent a letter to Abernathy and other boat owners in the past year recommending a cease and desists to conducting "open-water non-cage Shark Diving experiences with known species of potentially dangerous Sharks," said Neal Watson, the association president.

Abernathy did not return phone calls.

"Most operators do a safe dive behind cages. But Abernathy, for whatever reason, simply refused to comply with the safe diving practices in violation of our standards in the Bahamas," said Watson, who operates a diving company out of Fort Lauderdale.

It is tempting to offer a cageless option to customers: both the photographs and personal experience would be enhanced. But the risks are too great, Watson said.

"Him working with tiger sharks and bull sharks uncaged is totally irresponsible and dangerous," he said. "It wasn't a matter of 'if,' it was a matter of 'when.'"

Papa Bear
02-26-2008, 06:24 AM
He may have died from DCS after being rushed to the surface after being bitten in the calf! ???? Time will tell and adventure has its cost!

Papa Bear
02-26-2008, 06:28 AM
Feb 25, 5:33 PM EST

Man Dies After Being Bitten by Shark During Dive Off Florida's Atlantic Coast

By BRIAN SKOLOFF
Associated Press Writer
Advertisement
Buy AP Photo Reprints

Your Questions Answered
AP Answers Your Questions on the News, From Superdelegates to Noisy Newsroom Bells

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) -- An Austrian tourist died Monday after being bitten by a shark while diving near the Bahamas in waters that had been baited with bloody fish parts to attract the predators.

Markus Groh, 49, a Vienna lawyer and diving enthusiast, was on a commercial dive trip Sunday when he was bitten about 50 miles off the coast of Fort Lauderdale, said Karlick Arthur, Austrian counsel general in Miami.

The crew aboard the Shear Water, of Riviera Beach-based Scuba Adventures, immediately called the U.S. Coast Guard, which received a mayday from the vessel, said Petty Officer 3rd Class Nick Ameen.

Groh was airlifted to a hospital, where he died. Groh was bitten on the leg, Ameen said, but he could not be more specific about the extent of his injuries.

It was unclear what type of shark was involved in the attack. The shark got away before anyone could identify the species.

The Miami-Dade Medical Examiner's Office declined to comment, citing an ongoing investigation by the Miami-Dade Police Department. A telephone message left for police was not immediately returned.

A woman who answered the telephone at Scuba Adventures on Monday said the company had no comment.

The company's Web site says it offers the opportunity to get "face to face" with sharks. The site explains that its hammerhead and tiger shark expeditions in the Bahamas are "unique shark trips ... run exclusively for shark enthusiasts and photographers."

To ensure "the best results we will be 'chumming' the water with fish and fish parts," the Web site explains. "Consequently, there will be food in the water at the same time as the divers. Please be aware that these are not 'cage' dives, they are open water experiences."

© 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

We have to wait till all the facts are in! I have done many and even been charged! But you have to know what you are in for and make your own call!

Conrad
02-26-2008, 05:22 PM
When are people going to use common sense?

Although I did not know people would pay for that experience, Maybe I will start a tour here... After they pay me... I will cover them in bacon fat and take them to see the Grizzly bears.

Papa Bear
02-26-2008, 06:04 PM
As long as they know before hand I don't see the problem? If you don't want to go then don't! We need not to be so judgmental, the sport you judge today maybe yours tomorrow! More kids are killed on the football field every year than by shark bites, if that is what it was caused by, the facts are not in!

Conrad
02-26-2008, 06:17 PM
Sorry, Did not mean to come off with that tone.

I understand that people have a choice, I am not condeming that. I also know people die everyday doing things they are passionate about. Thier choice. As some one who has done alot of the riskier stuff. I understand completely. What I ment to say, I feel bad for his family but he put himself in that situation.. his choice. I see it all the time here with bears, People just don't seem to understand Predators are predators it's what they do. I love going hiking and seeing, black and Grizzly bears. And I am really looking forward to seeing sharks in there natural habitat. But it just not make sense to me, that someone would put a predator in feeding mode, to get a closer look. Without somekind of protection.

Papa Bear
02-26-2008, 06:53 PM
I understand, being eaten is a primordial fear, but education can over come such fears! The man may have died from DCS being rushed to the surface too fast? We just don't know yet!

The only way to see Apex predictors in an ocean environment is by feeding them! They are eating machines and the best way to not be food in their environment is don't look or act like food! Accidents happen, and I have been on many Shark Dives around the world, and I feel they do more good than harm by a factor of 1000! Shark Feed (http://twotankedproductions.com/traveltripinformation/fiji2007.html)

When you do this you understand the risk! But I feel it is worth it to see an apex predictor up close in its home!

Sarah
02-27-2008, 12:05 AM
I understand, being eaten is a primordial fear, but education can over come such fears!

You mean there are people who show no fear while being eaten by a wild animal?!

;)

Papa Bear
02-27-2008, 02:15 AM
You mean there are people who show no fear while being eaten by a wild animal?!

;)

Depends on who's doing the eating!:rolleyes: :eek: :D

bottlefish
02-27-2008, 11:35 AM
IThe only way to see Apex predictors in an ocean environment is by feeding them!
Sorry Papa, but I disagree. I have had numerous shark encounters, from a wide variety of sharks, without having had to chum the water or tempt them with bait. It's quite possible to see Apex predators without having to resort to this practice, however you would need to accept that you will be treated to an encounter as and when they decide to come by and say hi, there's no gaurantees.

On the whole, people aren't prepared to risk their siting to chance, and so buy the right to see what they want to see by adding in a bit of manipulation. Good business for the dive centres and the customer gets what they want. Sadly in this case they got a little more then expected.

I've been on a couple of shark feeding dives, the type of behaviour I saw was completely different from that experienced when just allowing sharks to do their own thing. On the first dive, sharks came looking for food as soon as we hit the water, on both dives the sharks were attracted in by the masses of chum with minimal food behind to satisfy them. You could see they were getting frustrated! All in all, the experiences felt false, manufactured, give me a natural fly by any day, I certainly wont be repeating the experience.

Wether or not the pros of shark feeding outway the cons is an ongoing debate, a number of countries and areas are introducing restrictions or total due to concerns the negative effects on the environment, and about safety.

My own personal view point, it's wrong of us to expect to be able to manipulate nature to perform on demand, it affects the natural order of things and can produce unpredictable results.

Nature's secrets are not a comodity to be sold and paid for, if she decides to expose a little more of herself to you, then accept it as a gift and respect it as that. However if you choose to force your way in and take what's not given, don't be surprised if she rewards you with a sharp reminder of who's really the boss.

Papa Bear
02-27-2008, 03:27 PM
Really this holier than thou stuff needs to end! Now your a shark expert? Hummm? Well the shark does not know it is chum! It knows it's an opportunity to feed! Is it different than when there is no food? Yes, but we all understand that! Whats the different if you spend months at sea and find a whale carcase and watch the sharks feed? None! If you knew anything about sharks you would not be here telling people how they should not deal with them in a feed! I would rather feed them than fin them! So point your efforts someplace worth while!

If you don't want to go then don't but don't sit behind your computer and tell others how to do something! You have stated they are stopping them for the sake of the environment and that is my point! It's non of your business! Fisherman chum all the time! You know what chum is but the shark doesn't! The world is suffering now it alls that want to control everything! Are you one? There is no evidence that chumming has any adverse effect! Another "Feel Good" deal! "I don't like it" so it must be bad! Please, we threw your tea in the harbor a long time ago and if I want to throw fish heads into the water I will!

The fish die in the ocean! They defaecate and urinate in it to! So where did the chum come from? It came from the ocean and it is being returned! This idea that anything man does is not natural is defecation! We are a part of nature! What about all the fish guts from fish markets along the coast that have been put back for a thousand years?

So I knew some politicians backed by knuckle heads would stop something else in the name of the environment! When are we going to wake up when those same knuckle heads say SCUBA is not natural and we have to stop it?

Take up Cricket will you!

BTW this is not a personal attack, but it is an attack on your misplaced ideas of how to feel good about the environment! Shark encounters do more good to promote understanding than any harm that you think might come from this activity!

bottlefish
02-27-2008, 04:17 PM
If by "holier then thou", you mean having a different opinion from you then I think you need to get over yourself. You obviously come from one side of the fence on this matter, and I the other, we've both stated our opinion and we are both entitled to it. I didn't say yours was wrong, I simply stated my own personal viewpoint. Jeez, the one time I did disagree with you, I apolgised first!

As for your claim of not making a personal attack? I think perhaps you should reread what you wrote, any more aggressive and directed, I'd expect to see you charging through my front door weilding a machete!

BamaCaveDiver
02-27-2008, 05:58 PM
Do I think it's stupid to get into chummed water with critters such as Tiger, Bull, and other large shark varieties known for aggressive behaviors? Hell yes! Do I think my opinion matters enough that such practices should be banned? Hell no!

I have been a long time member of ABATE, so I hate it when folks try to protect others by imposing laws and bans that tell you how to be safe. If the operator explained all the inherent dangers of what was going on down below (including the expected species known to inhabit the waters and their typical behaviors), then the diver made a personal decision to accept the risk and place his life in jeopardy by participating.

If the diver went into this dive without doing a bit of research on his own as to what species to expect and what their normal habits are thought to be, then he was barnyard stupid in my book, but that does not mean I think he did not have the right to go for it if he wanted.

bottlefish
02-27-2008, 07:21 PM
Absolutely, people should be allowed to make their own (hopefully informed) choices and decide what risks to take, there's way too much molly coddling and nanny laws in the world! I didn't say shark feeding should be banned, I'm not informed enough of the true impact, promoting shark awareness for and potential environmental impact against to make that sort of statement.

I was making the same point as yourself Bama, that if we start to shove our oars into the lives of wild creatures, manipulate their actvities to get our kicks, don't be surprised if it back fires.

I also get irked with the popular opinion that we should be able to see what we want when we want, that everything in life is a commodity. Again, I'm not suggesting a ban on shark feeding, I'm just wish people would embrace the idea of being a silent spectator, take what comes to them, instead of trying to generate a false scenario to get their kicks. As I said before, seeing natural, normal shark action is, to me, a far more positive experience, and I would suggest leaves a better impression on divers meeting sharks for the first time. However, relying on chance for those sightings isn't as profitable, gauranteeing a shark experience by throwing in a load of chum or fish brings in the money.

As a foot note, this was posted on a UK forum earlier today:

Austrian Diver Killed by Bull Shark - Divernet Forums (http://www.divernet.com/forumvb/showthread.php?p=32296#post32296)

Lots of similar discussion, the post that interested me was the long one posted by ChristianG at 16:25 today, worth a read.

hbh2oguard
02-28-2008, 02:22 AM
I just opened up yahoo and here's a related link that was one of the top stories.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20080227/sc_livescience/sharksdeclinebutattacksrise

Bill22
02-28-2008, 03:24 PM
My own previous encounters would fall into the "natural" category. Nurse sharks and sand sharks spotted during dives at West Palm Beach, Florida. A small nurse shark here in Japan. Thresher Sharks at Monad Shoal near Malapascua Island in the Philippines. White Tip Reef Sharks at Gato Island also in the Philippines. I thoroughly enjoyed these encounters.

Having said that though, I've been looking forward to making a trip where chumming was used to get a look at other sharks that are more difficult to see otherwise. I think there is a place for both and I think both points of view have validity.

Now can we all just get along ;)

Bill22
02-28-2008, 03:34 PM
Another interesting post here from someone who actually attended one of these shark expeditions with Abernathy.

http://www.divernet.com/forumvb/showthread.php?t=5043&page=3

seasnake
03-04-2008, 04:00 PM
The Discovery Channel show "Daily Planet" aired a segment about this last night. They interviewed a guy named George Burgess from the University of Florida who made one comment I thought was interesting. He pointed out that many shark feeding operations are on shallower reefs and the sharks they attract are reef sharks. The same sharks show up all the time and they are conditioned as to how the whole thing works. His contention was that the operation in question was in deeper water, meant to attract larger sharks that are known to be responsible for biting humans like whites and tigers and bull sharks. Since these animals don't get the regular exposure to the feeding operation like the reef operation might, and they are predators that feed on larger mammals something the size of humans, this fella from the university felt that people getting bit and killed is inevitable.
I personally think it's a little crazy to do. We have a plethora of fish called perch in our waters around here. You can feed them too and the result looks like a shark feed in miniature: the fish swarm the bait and attack it ravenously in a huge feeding frenzied ball. And you get bit repeatedly while doing it. Fortunately perch are about 6" long or smaller for the most part, so they just nip at your gloves and suit and hoses, although I have been bit on the ears, hands and face by the little buggers (when not feeding them, it was completely unprovoked! lol) I think the bear analogy is accurate and I use it myself alot. If you went in the woods and started feeding wild bears you'd be in for a world of hurt. I have been much more interested to see sharks swimming along doing their thing. Although I have only seen reef sharks like that I didn't find them to be aggressive or intimidating at all.

seasnake
03-04-2008, 04:12 PM
Another thought I just had ... I remember maybe three years ago seeing a device called a "Shark Shield" being advertised, and I did a little research then and there were few similar devices on the market. It was an electronic transmitter that put out a frequency or something that the sharks didn't like. It only projected like maybe six feet away from the wearer, so you would still get to see lots of sharks ... but I remember seeing one video where a diver wearing one was positioned under the carcass of a cow on a hook and sharks were swooping in for a bite but each time they would veer off when they got within a few feet.

Yeh, here it is, check out http://www.sharkshield.com

BamaCaveDiver
03-04-2008, 06:29 PM
I don't know if I would use the differences in the targeted animals as a means of justifying one scenario over the other. Condition animals to acquaint food with humans and you remove their natural fears/inhibitions towards our species. Nurse sharks are normally docile, but they have been know to bite (and they usually do not let go once they set their teeth.) I have also seen the Perch snake mentions (as well as other carnivorous species) and it is a good example why it is barnyard stupid (my opinion) to feed large critters and think nothing bad can come of it.

As stated before, I am against regulations as they usually just make those who are interested more determined (prohibition and drug laws always pop to mind whenever I think about this sort of thing.) It also drives up profits making those who offer it more willing to take chances in order to grab their share of those profits. I see this more as a common sense issue. If you want to feed large predatory critters such as sharks and bears, go right ahead; just don't attempt to shift blame when you get bit or eaten.

I will give this operation credit for targeting animals away from more frequented dive/swim locations, in that they are minimizing the risks to others by not conditioning animals that are always in close proximity to sane humans.

rubber chicken
03-04-2008, 11:35 PM
Snake,
Sharkshields are fairly common over here in Oz. I know a few people who have them. Oddly, a lot of folks buy them, do a few dives with them and then don't bother with them again. The units just sit in the garage or are advertised for sale.
One reported problem seems to be, unwanted shocks from the cable, especially when kneeling on the bottom or ferreting around in a cave. There also seems to be a bit of, "I never see any sharks anyway so why am I carrying this bit of extra kit ?".
The manufacturers site seems to contain some quite impressive footage of the units working as advertised, (But, then, I wouldn't expect to see anything else on a manufacturers website! :) ), but I have never heard of anybody actually using one 'in anger'.
Of course, they do say that the shark you need to fear is the one you can't see!:D

Papa Bear
03-05-2008, 02:49 AM
It's not about "Shark Shields" or Cages! It is about personal choice and responsibility! If you don't want to do it then don't, but if you do you should be able to!

The sharks doesn't know it is being chummed, whether from fisherman cleaning their catch or a fishing boat, they just know there is new opportunity! Sharks associate food from behavior, if you act like food then they will test to see if you are!

littleleemur
03-05-2008, 01:38 PM
Sharks associate food from behavior, if you act like food then they will test to see if you are!

Portly old ladies wearing flowery swim-bonnets & elaborately sequined swimsuits swim daily at 5am & at sunset in a bay in Hong Kong's NE. Every few years or so one of them gets picked-off by something (a Shark?) and a media frenzy begins. The government officials are pressured into hiring some Australian Shark "Hunter" who catches nothing for 3-months and then eats some street food, gets sick and is sent back home.

Here in the Sound, flyfishermen are out at dawn and dusk too, standing in their waders or floating in a tube in these murky waters. I wouldn't say they are being too smart either.

http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/product/standard-item.jsp?id=0001334313789a&navCount=2&podId=0001334&parentId=cat360010&masterpathid=&navAction=jump&cmCat=MainCatcat20431-cat360010&catalogCode=IJ&rid=&parentType=index&indexId=cat360010&hasJS=true

seasnake
03-05-2008, 02:08 PM
Yeh, I must admit I don't know if I would like that dangly thing hanging from my leg either, but I suppose it must be necessary for the device to work. Although I guess some would see it as a way to tempt fate and do shark feeding dives and poke at great whites with sticks and not get hurt, I got the impression the device is more for those unexpected nibbles that people get. So surfers or swimmers or divers could wear them as extra insurance that even if they are mistaken for food, the shark won't approach. Interesting that you say people end up leaving them in their garage (guess that means you could get 'em cheap on e-bay ;) ). I guess it's like car insurance though. Some people pay for it their entire lives and never use it. I don't think you would ever need one around our waters here, either. Sightings of sharks while diving are extremely rare.


Snake,
Sharkshields are fairly common over here in Oz. I know a few people who have them. Oddly, a lot of folks buy them, do a few dives with them and then don't bother with them again. The units just sit in the garage or are advertised for sale.
One reported problem seems to be, unwanted shocks from the cable, especially when kneeling on the bottom or ferreting around in a cave. There also seems to be a bit of, "I never see any sharks anyway so why am I carrying this bit of extra kit ?".
The manufacturers site seems to contain some quite impressive footage of the units working as advertised, (But, then, I wouldn't expect to see anything else on a manufacturers website! :) ), but I have never heard of anybody actually using one 'in anger'.
Of course, they do say that the shark you need to fear is the one you can't see!:D

bottlefish
03-05-2008, 05:04 PM
The government officials are pressured into hiring some Australian Shark "Hunter" who catches nothing for 3-months and then eats some street food, gets sick and is sent back home.

That would be Vic Hislop, self acclaimed shark hunter extrodinaire and protector of the water inclined amongst us. He's a classic character, has a "museum" of shark exhibits just off Arlie Beach in Oz, displaying teeth and info from his kills and some what one sided "facts" about why all sharks should should be destroyed.

Conrad
03-06-2008, 03:44 AM
sorry, have not logged in for awhile

IF Anyone is on Facebook, Join the "save the sharks" cause and spread the word. The world would miss these appex predators. The forum has some interesting points of view on this topic.

I am not saying that people should not do it, It's a personal choice. I am not slamming anyone that wants to or thinks they want to try this. I'm just stating my opinion ( same as you )

I do believe that seeing sharks in the wild is inspiring, although all I've managed so far is nurse sharks.

I do believe that chumming gives you a chance to get close to an apex preditor. I liken this to charging tourists to cover them in bacon fat and going to see the bears. ( a little homour ) I would rather see a shark by chance doing his thing by chance.

However
I believe that every one is entitled to live thier life, and take the risks they deem right for them.

Do I agree with chumming .... NO
Do I think it should be banned .... NO
Would I do it ...... NO

My condolences to his family

Papa Bear
03-06-2008, 04:53 AM
Conrad, I really can't understand what is the big deal with chumming in the Ocean? Food is a natural thing! The Shark doesn't know what chum is and has no concept of the difference between a whale dying and being consumed than a guy with a bucket of chum? We have to stop putting our values onto the Sharks! The are Apex eating machines and thats what millions of years of finding dead, dying, and hurt things in the ocean has created! The are not bears! Their Brains a tinny in comparison and work more off stimulation as a lower animal! Bears are very intelligent and can solve complex problems, where sharks are reactionary and stimulated by the need to feed until the food is gone! It doesn't know or care where it is coming from, they only know it is food! I can't understand why introducing food into the environment will do anything other than trigger a natural and automatic response which makes it very natural, because it is what they do! They don't judge the source they just eat the result!

BamaCaveDiver
03-06-2008, 05:25 AM
I can see both sides of the argument, so like most all I attempt to offer is my personal opinion (and we all know what has been said many time regarding personal opinions.) I am no biologist, so I have no idea how the brain mass compares, but I have seen conditioning happen with smaller fish species as snake alluded to and I'm living proof that the improbable can and does happen from time to time. My biggest concern from all of this is the bad rep that sharks end up getting; they really are beautiful creatures (and they taste pretty good grilled after being marinated in my secret sauce.)

I'll keep riding motorcycles sans a helmet and those who want to dive in chummed waters should be allowed the same freedoms to make their own choice in the matter.

bottlefish
03-06-2008, 09:44 AM
Although chumming is done with a natural food source, I still can't think of it as being natural.

IMHO, we're taking their natural food stuff and utilising it in an unnatural way. The scent path isn't coming from a dead carcass, it's coming from a bucket on the back of a boat. We're doing this to manipulate their actions so as we can get what we want from them, we use the chum to get them to perform on demand. So yes, whilst the food stuff we're using is natural, as is their reaction to it, the event itself is completely human generated to satisfy human wishes.

I spent a few months diving in French Polynesia, in both the tuamotous and society islands. Shark populations there are high, shark sightings happened on pretty much every dive. We encountered plenty of black reef tip and white tip reefs, along with black tips and greys and a scattering of others. Sharks would tend to be inquisitive but stand off'ish, ie. they'd check you out but keep a respectful distance. I then did a dive in Morea where sharks were regularly fed by dive centres (I say were, I believe the practice has now been banned in the Society Islands), the minute the boat stopped the sharks, black tip reef, white tips reef and black tips were there circling, we almost hit them as we got in the water, they were bugging us the whole way down. The same species of shark, displaying completely different characeteristics. Interestingly, when we dropped in the water away from the regular feeding site the sharks didn't pay us too much attention. Only one experience to base my viewpoint on, however it would imply that those sharks in the feeding area were showing a conditioned response.

Again, to make it clear, I'm not saying shark feeding should be banned, it is just not something I will support, either by going on one myself or by recommending it anyone else who cares to ask for my opinion.

Just as a foot note, I've been in the water with a wide variety of sharks and never felt threatened. However if I saw a dead whale carcass with sharks having a good munch, I think I would develop a very dibilatating case of hydrophobia :)

Conrad
03-06-2008, 02:29 PM
The difference with chumming and "natural chum" i.e whale carcass is that there is actually a food source at the end of the trail. And yes bears are smarter. When they find a food sent with no food at the end of it they do not waste anymore of their energy ( important to all wild creatures) trying to find what is not there.

And even though an animal has a small brain it can still be conditioned. There are records of fishermen conditioning barracuda to herd fish.

exactly like what happens at a reef where the fish are fed by snorkleing groups. You get in the water and there are fish all at the surface, knowing what is coming next.

I am not saying your opinion is wrong or condemimg it, just stating mine.

Papa Bear
03-06-2008, 02:50 PM
I too have been in the water with many many sharks around the world! But if you read what you have posted you have put human qualities to the shark! The shark doesn't know its "Provided by man" they may associate the boats to the food in response, but not the man, the men get in the water when the boat shows up! In a simple brain function I am not sure there would be a indirect connection..... Are they less afraid of a man in the environment? probably, but is it the food or the constant interaction that posses no threat?

When the USS INDIANAPOLIS went down the sharks started out shy, as they do, and became bolder as time went on! That is their natural behavior! I am glade YOU don't want to control shark feeding, but too many want to control every aspect of our lives! I just cation people not to over react! It looks like the guy died from an embolism and as always panic killed him not the shark!

My contention is that the shark follows a behavior pattern and it is driven by instinct and not by mans actions! If it were they would be so many caught and killed, because they would have learned to stay away from nets etc! But they are creatures of habit and opportunity! We use that opportunity to get closer under safer conditions to a wild animal!

We just need to understand that people will use our own words against us pointing the finger of blame! We need to take responsibility for or own actions!

seasnake
03-06-2008, 03:12 PM
This is an interesting discussion. I guess I never thought of it this way, but if I am understanding it right there are really two issues those against shark feeding dives are raising. 1) Chumming is not natural and it produces unnatural behaviour, even conditioning the sharks to unnatural behaviour. 2) Putting sharks in feeding mode and then putting tasty divers next to them is increasing the danger to unacceptable levels.
Is that an accurate summation?
I thought Papa Bear made an interesting point about the shark not knowing the difference between the food source, but when you add in the conditioning factor would you say it still holds? The only way then you could compare chumming and eating carrion (is it still called carrion in the ocean?) is if whales always went and died in the same place. Then again, now that I think of it there are really two types of feeding dive operations, aren't there? Chumming in the open water and also hooking a bait ball or chumsicle to a fixed point on the ocean floor. I wonder, does the response from the sharks differ in these two instances?
With those perch I mentioned before, they are so conditioned to being fed by divers, if you hold still for a moment, they literally line up in front of you, pec fin to pec fin, and wait for the hand out. Very annoying when you are trying to take a picture. These are small fishies, I think their brains may even be smaller than my own. lol ..

Conrad
03-06-2008, 03:34 PM
If the shark is going actually get something out of it. Then it could be considered a Symbiotic relationship. The shark would get food and the diver would get his picture. Then it just a matter of personal choice on the part of the diver. There is a matter of risk to the diver but most things worth while come with a price.

The problem I see with chumming is there is not alot of actual food in the chum, it's more of an lure then a food source. The shark basically wasting his time and energy. Which he should be spending surviving.

BamaCaveDiver
03-06-2008, 05:09 PM
I've seen Bluegill ponds where all you had to do was walk out to the end of the dock (where their feed container was) and they would immediately begin schooling around in large numbers expecting someone topside to start throwing food to them. I've seen the attack Perch at various ow sites that seasnake mentioned. A number of years back I heard stories about a guy who ran a fish camp on Tiger Lake (one of the many in the chain of lakes formed by the Kissimmee river as it cuts through central and south FL) who had trained a rather large bass to leap out of the water and take food from his hand. I really though that was total BS until I went down one day, saw the photos on the wall and the scars on the guy's arm. Dumb animals, regardless of brain capacity can learn; that is the whole basis for evolution as I understand it.

I agree that this has been a very good discussion. Hearing both sides of an argument is a great aide in forming an informed opinion. While I may disagree with some of what I have read, I have yet to read anything that I would consider wrong. I'll always favor common sense over enforced regulation.

bottlefish
03-07-2008, 09:18 AM
We just need to understand that people will use our own words against us pointing the finger of blame! We need to take responsibility for or own actions!
Papa, if I have intepreted what you are saying correctly, then I think you have misinterpretted me!

My issue with my belief that shark feeding is not natural has nothing to do with safety concerns. It has to do with the fact that we are trying to control nature, it abhors me as much as the continued attempt to control humans seems to abhor you. IMHO it's another indicator of the total disrespect we have for nature.

In terms of safety, of course, jumping in with a bunch of excited and hungry sharks is going to have an additional risk, but if the diver is aware of the risk and happy to do it, then go ahead. I did the sardine run last year, much the same scenario, except the water was chummed naturally through the debris of the sardines... absolutely fantastic, if a bit hectic :)

Papa Bear
03-07-2008, 02:08 PM
Man is an animal and therefore a part of nature! The fish don't know natural from unnatural! They have no standards! I really disagree that we have no respect for nature! We spend billions protecting it, we are giving up freedoms daily for it, we will trash governments who don't put it first! We have made it a religion! And that is just wrong! We are the masters of our domain and are charged with its care, but no where is it written we should give all, for "Our Mother earth!" Some day this earth will die! The Sun will vaporize it and the moon will pulled from orbit, so we move or die! Simple nothing last forever, not even sharks!

littleleemur
03-07-2008, 05:03 PM
That would be Vic Hislop, self acclaimed shark hunter extrodinaire and protector of the water inclined amongst us. He's a classic character, has a "museum" of shark exhibits just off Arlie Beach in Oz, displaying teeth and info from his kills and some what one sided "facts" about why all sharks should should be destroyed.

He's failed to catch even a red snapper every one of the 3-4 times in the past 10 years! Why they keep bringing him back is a mystery. What is also a mystery is why he keeps on eating suspect street food from illegal hawkers. I heard that he ended up on an IV in the ER the last time.

Papa Bear
03-07-2008, 10:52 PM
The media works that way! They find the people who talk their talk, one sided YES! I have also heard that a competitor is using this to try and shut down competition! All Bahama shark dive boats now have to carry cages! What a waste!
Who could be afraid of this cuddly little dude?
http://www.scubamagazine.net/photo/data/500/medium/P5100012-Genaric_Shark_cut_out_AC_05.jpg

bottlefish
03-08-2008, 07:41 AM
We are the masters of our domain and are charged with its care, but no where is it written we should give all, for "Our Mother earth!" Some day this earth will die! The Sun will vaporize it and the moon will pulled from orbit, so we move or die! Simple nothing last forever, not even sharks!
Think I'm going to back outof this conversation now, you and I have completely different beliefs and ideals, no more chance of us agreeing then Geroge Bush conversting to Islam.

Papa Bear
03-08-2008, 01:58 PM
Couldn't agree more! :D To me government is the problem not the cure!

BamaCaveDiver
03-08-2008, 07:07 PM
To me government is the problem not the cure!
Now there's a statement I can whole heartedly agree with :p

Quero
03-09-2008, 04:35 AM
Sorry Papa, but I disagree. I have had numerous shark encounters, from a wide variety of sharks, without having had to chum the water or tempt them with bait. It's quite possible to see Apex predators without having to resort to this practice, however you would need to accept that you will be treated to an encounter as and when they decide to come by and say hi, there's no gaurantees.

<snip>

Nature's secrets are not a comodity to be sold and paid for, if she decides to expose a little more of herself to you, then accept it as a gift and respect it as that. However if you choose to force your way in and take what's not given, don't be surprised if she rewards you with a sharp reminder of who's really the boss.

Excellent post, bottlefish!

Quero
03-09-2008, 04:45 AM
I too have experienced "shark attract" dives as well as seen sharks just cruising by in the daytime or hunting by night. I much prefer to see them without any manipulation. It's the same for the famous manta night dive on the big island of Hawaii. What a disappointment the experience of sitting around on the sand holding huge lights up to attract the plankton so that the mantas will come when I compare it to waiting on the ridge at Koh Bon island here in Thailand and seeing them come in to feed without any particular manipulation of the environment.

Papa Bear
03-09-2008, 04:52 AM
Sorry but it was ridiculous statement! Dive operators utilize the environment and exploit nature in oder to make a profit all the time! "Come see our beautiful reef" I have heard you say it! So hypocrisy is alive and well I see! Parks do it, countries do it, operators do it, and I see nothing wrong with any of it! Maybe we should all stay home and watch it on TV? Yes that too would be exploiting it for profit! If you don't make a profit how will you show it to anyone? Please!

Ya! Great post!!

Quero
03-09-2008, 05:36 AM
Sorry but it was ridiculous statement! Dive operators utilize the environment and exploit nature in oder to make a profit all the time! "Come see our beautiful reef" I have heard you say it! So hypocrisy is alive and well I see! Parks do it, countries do it, operators do it, and I see nothing wrong with any of it! Maybe we should all stay home and watch it on TV? Yes that too would be exploiting it for profit! If you don't make a profit how will you show it to anyone? Please!

Ya! Great post!!

I don't believe you are sorry. You very commonly use the same tactics in your postings that any troll worth his salt makes use of: statements meant to belittle others, negatively charged language (see for example, your use of "ridiculous" and "hypocrisy" in your reply to me), antagonism and intimidation, and twisting people's words (the word I used, "manipulte" emphatically does not equate to "Come see our beautiful reef"). Nobody questions your right to hold the opinion you hold, yet you question the right of any who disagree with you to believe their opinion is equally valid. I can see (and should have known) that having a civil exchange of viewpoints is impossible in this thread.

Papa Bear
03-09-2008, 02:45 PM
That's the nature of hypocrisy you use it to put others down, look at your own post involving me, and yet don't see that they engage in the same activity! To clam that you don't exploit nature and charge for it is just plan either hypocrisy or a lie! You chose! Your a dive professional, why do you think people want to dive? Could it be to see the fish, the Reef, or just to get wet? I can SCUBA in a pool, but guess what, there is no nature to see in your pool, you want to see nature close up and personal! Speaking of calling someone a "Troll" is a little inflammatory wouldn't you say? This is a discussion board and if you can take the discussion try using smoke signals, your eyes will water but your feelings wont be hurt!

Stop and think about what you do before casting stones at others that do the same thing! If you had the chance to better your life by showing people your natural wonders and didn't I would worry about you as a man!

BTW in some peoples minds using a motor and boat is manipulation! To some entering the water is changing the "Natural" environment! Food in the ocean is not natural? Hummmm? You should checkout the other things fish do in the ocean! If you can't see they are the same, just a matter of degree!

bottlefish
03-10-2008, 09:42 AM
Sorry but it was ridiculous statement! Dive operators utilize the environment and exploit nature in oder to make a profit all the time! "Come see our beautiful reef" I have heard you say it! So hypocrisy is alive and well I see! Parks do it, countries do it, operators do it, and I see nothing wrong with any of it! Maybe we should all stay home and watch it on TV? Yes that too would be exploiting it for profit! If you don't make a profit how will you show it to anyone? Please!

Ya! Great post!!
Again, you've misinterpretted what I've said (or twisted it around to make your point?)... perhaps the way I chose to wrote it was a little bit too subtle for you? If so, let me know and I'll try and rephrase it a little simpler so as you can understand.

Papa Bear
03-10-2008, 02:52 PM
If you think I have misrepresented any position you have stated please feel free to state it any way you want it! "You and I have completely different beliefs and ideas" kind of makes it clear to me where your at? But maybe you don't understand where I am and are therefore confused as to witch way end the shark food goes in? Sharks being the "Scavengers of the Sea" putting automobile license plates in the water could be considered "unnatural feeding behavior", but then again we are talking about sharks!

bottlefish
03-10-2008, 03:27 PM
But maybe you don't understand where I am and are therefore confused as to witch way end the shark food goes in?
Ah, more ridicule and abuse. Quero is right, there is a bit of a trend. Not quite sure how my ability to undertstand your thought process would be intrinsically linked with understanding the mechanics of a shark, still you obviously though it was a valid point to make, I'm sure there's some sense somewhere.

I haven't mentioned exploitation, Quero didn't either. For now, try and forget that word.

Instead, think of manipulation. That is, how we influence or manage events for our own personal gain.

Driving a boat around, jumping in the water, etc etc, may certainly alter the behaviour of the aquatic life, however this isn't manipulation, this is a resultant effect of our actions.

Swimming along a reef, watching aquatic life going about it's daily business isn't manipulation either. Exploitation perhaps, yes, but IMHO not necessarily to an unethical or immoral level.

Throwing chum off the back of a boat to attract sharks in so as we can jump in and see what we want to is manipulation. We are influencing and managing events for our own benefit.

Hope that clarifies the point I was trying to make - and please, don't come back with a post about what you believe is natural, what you believe is exploitation or how pathetic you think my thoughts are as valid reasons for why you believe what I've said here is wrong.

Manipulation, that's what we're discussing.

Papa Bear
03-10-2008, 04:33 PM
It maybe to you, but it's food for the shark! They don't know the differences! So what difference does it make! That's my point! It changes nothing! Does food demonstrations at the market change your behavior? I hope not, but then again I guess you could end up with people going for market to market putting together a meal?!!!!

The whole point is we need to stop putting our values on this type of activity! I get you don't like it, but so what? Don't go! Don't support it, but so what? Let the market and people decide! In the meantime it is a legitimate save activity that is less dangerous than the drive to the boat! It doesn't hurt the animal (Shark) and again the guy died of panic not the shark bite!

I am drawing attention to the fact that one persons opinion of an activity is just that your opinion! I don't see any problem "Manipulating" or "Exploiting" nature for profit is it is a symbiotic relationship! I would rather see a village make a living showing a reef than harvesting its bounty! Shark trips are the same! I would rather chum, feed, and Manipulate shark behavior than fin them!

bottlefish
03-10-2008, 04:57 PM
The whole point is we need to stop putting our values on this type of activity! I get you don't like it, but so what? Don't go! Don't support it, but so what? Let the market and people decide! In the meantime it is a legitimate save activity that is less dangerous than the drive to the boat! It doesn't hurt the animal (Shark) and again the guy died of panic not the shark bite!

I am drawing attention to the fact that one persons opinion of an activity is just that your opinion!
Why do I need to stop putting my values on this activity? You have formed your very strong opinion, why do you think I'm not allowed to have one as well?

You need to apply your sense of logic to yourself, your opinion is also just your opinion. You are not an authority that can decide which opinions are right, which are wrong, which can be voiced in public and which should be kept private.

You don't see any problem with this activity, I do. You promote the activity, I talk against it. You and I have now (well and truly by this stage!) shown two very opposing viewpoints on this subject, both are viewpoints have an equal place on this forum. Other people will read what we've said and continue with, change or perhaps form their own opinion, make their choice.

I'm certainly not trying to make decisions for them, force them down a line, any more then you are... however you do seem to be trying to govern what I am saying, trying to force your own sense of right and wrong on me and tell me what I am and am not allowed to do?

Papa Bear
03-10-2008, 06:28 PM
It is simple! My values fall on the side of freedom, personal choice, natural assurance, no regulation, less government, and it's the right side of the issue! :D ;) :rolleyes:

You see, the people who take freedoms away from others "Just want to help" or figure the rest of us are to stupid to take care of ourselves and for one I am feed up and will meet those objections head on every time least we loss more freedom to you do gooders! "The pathway to hell is paved with good intentions!"

I do road work!

bottlefish
03-10-2008, 06:52 PM
So you're reasoning is basically that in your opinion, your values are right and justified where as mine are not and therefore have no place in the world.

I'm afraid I'm not convinced, or swayed, to bow to your demands would infringe on my own freedom. So, you'll still hear my opinion when I feel fit to give it, I don't care how much it raises your blood pressure. This is what forums are for, to share ideas. If you don't like it, then I suggest you find another way to while away the hours.

Papa Bear
03-10-2008, 06:52 PM
A quote from Quero "There is hope, but only when the demand for these goods disappears. And that will happen not by force, but by informed choice." About cultural differences and Shark finning! On a thread on this board.....I couldn't agree more with you! But consistency counts! The diver in this case had "Informed Choice" as do all shark divers on shark dives! No one stands on the back of the boat and throws divers in with the chum!

Papa Bear
03-10-2008, 06:55 PM
So you're reasoning is basically that in your opinion, your values are right and justified where as mine are not and therefore have no place in the world.

I'm afraid I'm not convinced, or swayed, to bow to your demands would infringe on my own freedom. So, you'll still hear my opinion when I feel fit to give it, I don't care how much it raises your blood pressure. This is what forums are for, to share ideas. If you don't like it, then I suggest you find another way to while away the hours.

Your freedom to do what? Not dive? Stay on the boat! No one is talking about limiting anything but your misplaced concern and wrong ideas! You have a right to them as much as my right to point out how wrong they are if your talking about limiting, regulating, taxing, or in anyway controlling these activities!

Papa Bear
03-10-2008, 11:25 PM
Reposted from MySpace:

please sign this petition and pass along!

http://www.sharksavers.org/content/view/171/93/


Fellow divers please help by reposting this on your sites (facebook, myspace, divevillage etc)



From SaveTheSharks



reposted from Save The Sharks myspace bulletin

Posted By Christopher Chin on 7 March 2008

"Something terrible happened the weekend before last.... a man named Markus Groh died.
News of his death has appeared in newspapers and on television screens around the world. There has been a great deal of press coverage on the matter, but the vast majority of these articles and reports seem to confuse facts, exaggerate occurrences, and generally demonize sharks.

The media's response to this tragedy has been horrific. It is one thing for a reporter to cut and paste misinformation gleaned from another article... but seeing the blatant fabrication of "facts," reports, and quotations in some stories has made me ashamed to have ever called myself a journalist. Physicians take the Hippocratic Oath when they enter practice... perhaps there should be a similar mantra for members of the media, to help guide them as they provide "truth" for the hungry eyes and ears of the world.

Truth... let's revisit that, and start from scratch.

On Sunday, February 24th, Markus Groh, an attorney visiting from Austria, was participating in an organized shark dive aboard the M/V Shear Water in the Bahamas, when he was accidentally bitten by a bull shark.

Groh was evacuated by Coast Guard helicopter to a hospital in Miami, where he later died, apparently due to blood loss from the laceration on his leg (flesh was not removed by the bite).

This man's death has sparked an amazing amount of debate. Some of those discussions have been germane, but most have been filled with misinformation, fear, and purposeful agenda.

This was a terrible and tragic accident. However, it was just that - an accident. The shark was biting at a crate of bait, when it accidentally bit Markus Groh on the calf. Realizing it had made a mistake, the shark released Mr. Groh's leg, and moved on. His leg was cut, but no flesh was removed. If the shark was desirous of human flesh, or was intent on attacking any of the people involved in this dive, it could have easily finished the job, rather than releasing Groh's leg and moving on.

Why one newspaper claimed that Groh was bitten on the thigh, I cannot understand. I will give the reporter the benefit of the doubt and presume he was not intentionally trying to make the injury seem more substantial than it was. However, when this single, mistaken bite on the calf transforms into a report that "his leg was nearly torn off," as reported in another article, the intent of sensationalizing the story is apparent. The reporting gets absolutely ridiculous when we see this same single bite and release translated into, as one large network put it, Mr. Groh being "mauled to death."

Early reports stated that the shark "got away before anyone was able to identify it." This is completely untrue -- we know it was a bull shark. Some reports have referred to tiger sharks, in an apparent attempt to stir greater fear. However, to claim the shark "got away," suggests that it was fleeing the scene of a crime, and now has some people concerned that a killer shark is on the loose.

Adding to the media frenzy are quotations and interviews from critics and competitors of Jim Abernethy, the owner and operator of the M/V Shear Water. Abernethy's customer list reads like the Who's Who of underwater imaging, and his supporters and customers all insist that he is one of safest and most knowledgeable operators on the planet. However, the quotations that find their way into the media tend to be those laying blame for the accident, and those that call Jim irresponsible or unsafe.

It is human nature to seek a scapegoat and attempt to find someone to blame when bad things happen. However, the ultimate loser here is the shark. While the various industries involved bicker over who is right and what is safe, we are allowing the media to continue to present the public with an inappropriate view of these magnificent creatures.

Whether you are a colleague or fan of Jim Abernethy or are critical of the event, this is inarguably a time when many negative stereotypes and misconceptions about sharks come to the forefront... and into the public eye.

Whether you believe in cageless diving or oppose it...
whether or not you believe in baited diving, in chumming, or even in feed dives (there is a big difference between the three), the truth of the matter still remains: Sharks do not eat people, and sharks do not target people.

I'll repeat that: SHARKS DO NOT EAT PEOPLE .

This event was a terrible, but freak accident. Roughly 40 people die each year in parachuting accidents in the US alone. An equal number die in skiing accidents, again, just in the US. In 2007, there was only ONE shark related fatality... worldwide. Yet, we managed to kill more than 100 million of them. =(

In the news, scary and sexy sells, but manipulating this tragedy to present sharks as mindless killing machines, and striking fear into the public about diving or swimming with sharks, or reporting on misguided allegations, is completely irresponsible and inexcusable... especially at a time when many sharks are at the brink of extinction.

To my scuba and film colleagues, and to all my fellow shark geeks: Please, let us put aside any differences, at least temporarily. Let us offer our condolences, and then unite under the common goal of sharing a new and accurate view of sharks - one that allows people to see that they are beautiful, important, and endangered creatures. This is critical to the survival of sharks, to the health of the oceans, and to our planet.

To my media colleagues: Please join me in a commitment to responsible journalism: to source validation, to accurate research and fact-finding, and to presenting truth without sensationalism. ... and please join me in being the vehicle for this new view of sharks. Not only do they desperately need our help, but the world deserves to know.

To all you faithful readers: If you hear people talking about this event, or about sharks in a negative manner, please interject and help enlighten them to the truth about sharks. If you help convince even ONE person that the media hype is undeserved or sensationalized, you will have made a difference."

bottlefish
03-11-2008, 09:27 AM
Your freedom to do what? Not dive? Stay on the boat! No one is talking about limiting anything but your misplaced concern and wrong ideas! You have a right to them as much as my right to point out how wrong they are if your talking about limiting, regulating, taxing, or in anyway controlling these activities!
Man, this is like pulling teeth! Are you deliberately misinterpretting what I'm saying to get a rise, or are you just not all that bright? Please, read the post before you reply, don't try and fill in any blanks, there are none.

My freedom to have and speak my opinion. You, personally, even now, are talking about limiting my "misplaced concerns" and "wrong ideas". You have less right to govern my thought and speech then an authority or government has to limit actions.

And you are still harping on about me, personally, trying to regulate activities? Find me one post, one quote where I have stated that shark feeding should be banned or limited? How many times I have said I believe in the right to choose? But just in case you didn't understand, let me say it again for you.

I do not believe in regulation in this instance, I believe in a persons right to choose.

Any once again for luck.

I do not believe in regulation in this instance, I believe in a persons right to choose.

If people adopt a similar opinion and stance to me, that is there choice. Follow your own creed, give people the right to listen to all sides of an argument and trust them to make an intelligent decision.

You and I are both equal, you are not an authority any more then I am, you are certainly no better then me, you have no right or power to judge or censor what I say. Get over yourself, and stop trying to lord it over me. By all means, and of course, feel free to give a different opinion to one that I may voice, that's what a forum is for, to share ideas. But don't presume to tell me what I can and cannot say, which of my values or beliefs are worthy of sharing and which should be kept quiet.

Anyway, I'm now thoroughly bored of these ever decreasing circles you've steered this conversation through, judging by the lack of input from everyone else, I'm guessing they are as well. I think I've made my point thoroughly clear by now, and you've amply shown how adapt you are at making personal attacks, misinterpretting points and twisting reason. So, job done, over to you to rant further if you wish.