Fodor's Travel Talk Forums - Recent shark attack update

Fodor's Travel Talk Forums (https://www.fodors.com/community/)

- United States (https://www.fodors.com/community/united-states/)

- - Recent shark attack update (https://www.fodors.com/community/united-states/recent-shark-attack-update-178650/)

Oh yes, and how could we forget--tailgating a couple of city trucks under the Crosstown Expwy overpass!!

Garth, Just a few questions....Do you go to a reputable Doctor or just any old quack, and do you check your surgeon's qualifications? Do you go out joyriding between midnight and 6 am on New Year's Day? Do you fly in ramshackle airplanes? Do you eat raw pork or sushi? Do you eat in restaurants that are known to flunk their health inspections frequently? They are called "precautions." The new precaution I will be taking next month on my beach trip will be no waist-deep fishing in the ocean after dusk - which I have done in years past. To all the fodorites who helped to inform me - THANKS. To Garth, there is no need to be such a jerk!!!!

I have an interesting question I'd like to ask anyone who is in the "I'm staying out of the water around Florida" camp: any of you buy a owerball ticket for the $200 million jackpot? I'm genuinely curious.

and, of course, that would be the Powerball, not the "owerball" (although there are some nice puns which might unite the shark attack theme and "ow"erball, I suppose).

Garth, No, but it has nothing to do with odds. So are you coming down? :> Sal, I drive that bridge 4 times a week, minimum, yet just discovered last night in reading an article on the SUV that rolled over the side, that it is Howard Frankland, not Franklin!! Having seen some articles in the paper before indicating that some of their reporters *might* possibly be..lacking, (an article a few weeks ago talked about a set of twins being identical...only problem with that was one was male and one female, pretty basic stuff :<) I had to go find a map and check it out. True, Frankland! So, it's over the Howard Frankland we go, Garth, in a SUV--you first, I'll follow in my own car. :>

OO, LOL--I'll wait in a boat over the side in case he takes you with him!

You can only discuss stats when they are from the same source? Are the stats for prior to 2000 for the whole year or through mid-August? If for the whole year, let's take another look at the situation after the end of the year. If the numbers given here are correct, seems like an increase, but I think next year will tell us more. I am a marketing research analyst, and I don't believe in coming to conclusions unless I see either a huge swing away from the average or a long-term trend. Then again, there could be spikes due to particulars of a given year (more tourists for whatever reason, murkier waters, fish feeding pattern change, etc.). As far as odds go, that only matters to the individual. The increase in attacks (per capita increase or not) should alarm the state of Florida a bit.

soorryy...aven't b een able to write b ack to y'alll baddd accidn t right armm reattchd after shark encontr yourrr soo rightt guess poetic justice ??? more laterrr

Dan...Buh?? You lost me somewhere in there. The statistics on attacks/year 1990-2000 are from the same source, yes, the International Shark Attack File. They are for the full year, each year, yes. I don't know how many there have been so far 2001. Who knows, maybe it'll end up a slow year, but not if it continues at this pace. The issue is, what caused the difference in the number of attacks from 1993 and prior when there were no restrictions on shark fishing, compared to the number of attacks from 1994 forward when restrictions were in place? We've gone from an average of 11 per year, to an average of 25 per year, pre and post-restrictions. Population wasn't stabile at one level until 94, suddenly jump, then hold steady again at another level. That's how the attack statistics have behaved. There has not been a slow incremental rise which is what population growth has been. You have one event and two sets of distinctly different numbers before and after that event. It's worth a longer look. Of course this also may have been promoted by the shark fishermen who want restrictions lifted. There is a group now saying that because this winter's count of manatees showed a large increase in their population over previous years, they should be removed from the endangered list (there-by lifting some of the restrictions on boating in manatee habitats). Two guesses who is blowing that horn?? In actuality, when the count took place this winter, waters were particularly clear *and* more manatees had gathered in shallower waters for warmth during this particularly cold winter, making them far more visible. As someone else said, you can twist these numbers any which way if you limit the additional background information that goes along with them. In any case, there does appear to be an increase and it seems prudent to look beyond the "population increase" explanation we've been getting.

Several of the news reports I saw and read regarding the Smyrna Beach attacks mentioned that, due to a surfing competition, surfers were swimming past the sharks to get out to the waves. Well, Duh! After they ride that wave in, where are they going to be? Among the sharks they just swam past. No wonder they got bitten. You can't fix stupid.

Sorry, Olive. My mistake. I misread the '00 with 33 attacks as '01. I guess if it is up in the 30's again this year, that would be somewhat of a trend. I do think you may be on to something with the fishing change. Any continuing change in a historical level sounds the alarm for me. I heard on some shark show on the tube last week the number for how many sharks are killed by humans each year (it was an amazingly high number), so if the sharks had knowledge of stats they might keep their distance. That or seek revenge.

Look, chaps, that shark chat is becoming squalid. It's time people struck back. More t-shirts are the answer .., what we need is a new attitde when we're in the water. I suggested a "BITE ME" t-shirt a day or so ago, but that brought no one to the surface. What about "SHARK ... THE OTHER WHITE MEAT" .., or the old standby ... "TASTES LIKE CHICKEN" ... yah, just the thing for being chummy with the doll-eyed critters. That finishes me, :>>. Lets lighten it up ... I'm hitting the beach next week ... I hadn't planned on company in the Gulf. Ciao

On Discovery Channel, they just had "Shark Week," so I learned the following: in Florida, you can go on a shark feeding tour. You take a boat out, suit up in scuba gear, go to the bottom with a guide, and the guide has bait and feeds the sharks while the tourists watch. Apparently, as soon as the boat cuts its engine, the sharks swarm -- even before any divers or food hit the water. This suggests the sharks have been conditioned to associate the cutting of the engine with dinner. So the fear is that we are conditioning these top tier predators not to fear humans anymore. This theory makes sense to me, because the thing that keeps certain top predators from eating people is that they are naturally fearful of us. And when they lose that fear, watch out. I wonder if Florida ban these shark feeding tours. As for me, I'll continue to go to the Delaware beaches. You can see dolphins swimming from the beach, and the water is, um, bracing.

Cindy, Your theory has validity. That's why I detest those so called "eco tours" that include swimming with the manatees. Thanks to tour operators hoping to make a buck, so many of these wonderful creatures are so accustomed to boats and people, they no longer know friend from foe. OO, you are correct that there has been a great deal of conversation about removing them from the endangered list. Let's hope that doesn't happen as there are too many variables that can quickly deplete the population, as has been demonstrated several times in the last five years. If that ever happens, the limited number of facilities available to care for sick and injured manatees (9 or 10 nationally)will have to turn them away. There are already too few "beds" to meet the demands.