Shark nets kill whale in KZN

2011-10-11 12:44

Durban - Shark nets were responsible for the untimely death of a seven-metre long humpback whale in Umhlanga on Monday.

Natal Sharks Board spokesperson Michael Anderson-Reade confirmed the incident, saying that it was unfortunate.

“We towed the adolescent whale back out to sea with ski-boats … but it sadly died once we got into the deep.”

He said it wasn’t a frequent incident and that from time to time, big mammals are caught in the nets.

“The nets are there for our protection, but the reality is that other species are entangled every so often.” said over the last three decades more than 33 000 sharks have been killed in Natal Sharks Board shark nets.

A further 2 000 turtles, 8 000 rays, and 2 000 dolphins were also ensnared and killed.

  • anon - 2011-10-11 12:50

    OH NO, not 2?000 turtles! Proof reading, try it some time.

      anon - 2011-10-11 13:49

      I hope one of those thumbs down is the author, who has subsequently fixed the question marks that he didn't bother to proof read out. I was pointing out one of the many typo's - I too do not like the needless death of sea animals as a result of us not being able to cohabit the ocean.

  • Natand - 2011-10-11 13:03

    Down with shark nets, we know the risks when we enter the sea!

      charley - 2011-10-11 13:22

      Have to agree.

      Future Human - 2011-10-11 13:49

      Yea, we need to bring our population down :)

      Bokke - 2011-10-12 16:28

      In your dreams man!!!!!

  • Reezy - 2011-10-11 13:04

    3 sharks killed everyday in Natal Sharks Board shark nets.

      Gungets Tuft - 2011-10-11 16:59

      Nonsense. Fewer than 2 a day over 300km of coastline. Fishermen kill more than that from the beach and commercial fishing kills 23 million a year. Don't over-react

  • Ben - 2011-10-11 13:08

    Nets do more harm than good...

  • DW - 2011-10-11 13:25

    Notice how the whale was washed up on a beach which has shark nets. Just goes to show that the shark nets dont stop these large animals from getting through. It just traps many animals and kills them, but many do manage to get through. Despite this, when last was there a shark attack along Durban's beaches? Most sharks are trapped on the INSIDE of the nets trying to get back out to sea. They are just killng equipment, nothing less.

  • Travis Vermaak - 2011-10-11 13:41

    Get rid of the nets!!! The lives of a couple humans are not worth the deaths of so many animals!! Enter at your own risk!!!

  • Paul69 - 2011-10-11 13:43

    And how many people were killed by shark nets, and how many were saved because of the shark nets?

      Lanfear - 2011-10-11 14:42

      Ag please! Keep out of the sea, it is not human terrirtory. If you swim in the sea, be aware of the possible risk of danger. Simple as that. You won't walk into the lions' den, so to speak, when on safari will you? Shark nets must come down. Not only do they needlessly kill sharks, the way in which it kills sharks is terrible, they actually suffocate while kept stationary by the nets. If humans are then so arrogantly stupid that they insist on swimming in the sea, then there must be a better way than nets which do nothing but kill wild animals needlessly, who are only in their own territory after all.

      Gungets Tuft - 2011-10-11 17:03

      Lanfear - you have a fence around your house, you have eradicated wildlife from our cities. Be consistent - let lions run free in our suburbs, elephants in our parks. They were here first, it is their environment. Please, think before you talk.

  • zackie - 2011-10-11 14:54

    this numbers are way to high ...take down the nets people dont belong in the sea

  • AquaticApe - 2011-10-11 20:50

    The really large sharks and most of the shark attacks along the Durban beachfront occurred when whaling ships brought bloody whales to the whaling station at the Bluff. The current 'shark' nets do not stop sharks entering the bathing areas, they work by killing as many sharks in the area as possible. The shark's fins are sold to the despicable orientals for their consumption. The whole netting business is sick and the nets must go.

      Gungets Tuft - 2011-10-12 06:29

      Shark fins are sold .... HAHAHHAHHAAHAAAA .... what a load of absolute CR#P. What planet are you from. Please do some research, or at least go to the Sharks Board and see what really happens, and what the stats really are.

      1SavageMiss - 2011-10-12 09:59

      Gungets Tuft - Perhaps you are the one who needs to do some research instead of believing what the Sharks Board tells you...

      Gungets Tuft - 2011-10-12 11:16

      Miss Apple - join me for a visit at the Sharks Board. I will get their head of research to take you through exactly what happens. At 500 sharks a year over 300km of coastline it is not as if the Japs and Chinese are lining up for the sheer bulk of shark fins, much less the complete lack of a predictable supply. Seriously, the fishing industry kills at LEAST 23 million sharks a year, quite possibly 50 million, yet we are all having a frothy because nets kill 500 a year. The tourism (you should know, you qualified in Tourism!!) brings in a lot of money, and the people who earn that money have a massive vested interest in conservation. Kill that and a lot more sharks are going to die because nobody cares about the ocean. I don't like the killing of sharks but there is a balance that has to be maintained between sustainable use of natural resources (like leisure use of the ocean) and lunatic fringe conservation. I will listen to people like AquaApe just as soon as I see him joining Greenpeace and protesting industrial shark fishing - remember the number 23 million sharks. It is all too easy to just throw insignificant comment on the internet, a lot harder to actually be involved.

  • martin.mostert - 2011-10-11 22:33

    I was there from the beginning and got some photos. I thought it was a fishing trawler net....

  • martin.mostert - 2011-10-11 23:23

    A short movie on youtube showing what happened that day.

  • Caramel85 - 2011-10-12 10:40

    A few years ago I went to the sharks board as part of a school trip, as part of their demonstration they dissected a small shark, less than 1 metre long, which they said had been caught in their nets. I wondered whether bathers need to be protected from sharks less than a metre in length? I personally feel that the nets cover an unnecessarily large length of coastline, resulting in the needless death of sharks and other species, amongst which, this poor baby whale. Surely a better plan could be made to protect bathers and marine life? I would like to suggest something like a rigid grid made out of something that won't corrode in sea water (stainless steel or tough plastic?) secured between the piers along durban beach front. No sharks could get through and no other creatures would get tangled up. And that would be more than enough space for bathers and surfers to swim safely. Could that work??

      Gungets Tuft - 2011-10-12 12:02

      Caramel - it has been tried, many, many years ago, but the ocean is way too powerful and unpredictable. We have sudden ocean surges that no engineer can design for. Solid structures also cause tide and current disruption that will decimate the beaches and shallow ocean channels that are the habitat of a lot of ocean life. Either you protect with nets, or you don't protect at all. Honestly, I am not a big fan of the nets. I paddle, I am a volunteer lifesaver (so spend many, many hours in the ocean) and I do not see many sharks north of the harbour. But Durban and KZN coastal regions rely on tourism, take out the nets and that will suffer. The loss of money means less incentive to conserve, the degradation of our coast will make 3 sharks a day look like a sunday school picnic. We really have to be careful of the unintended consequence of removing the nets, no matter how well intentioned.

      Gungets Tuft - 2011-10-12 12:13

      Some history. --- Stats - not pretty, but accurate and add perspective. ----

      Caramel85 - 2011-10-12 15:31

      hi Gungets, I was thinking of something more like a net in appearance, but more rigid - just so that creatures can't get tangled in it. Nothing solid enough to disrupt the tidal flow, and only for specific swimming beaches. I've never quite understood why such large stretches of the coast must be netted when designated swimming areas are very small. I don't like the nets either, I was just making a suggestion.

  • pages:
  • 1