Personal Assumptions & Views

Personally, I definitely think chumming is the cause of more sharks arriving at our bay. There is enough observations and evidence by knowledgeable people saying that it is the reason for this. As said earlier in my essay, a dog would react in the same way as a shark if you teased it with a piece of meat – giving it to them and then tearing it out of their mouths. Any animal would get aggravated by this action it is understandable and cruel.  Surely with their great power and mysterious nature, people would not want to aggravate such an animal? And then be so unsure about what it might do next.

We know so little about these creatures that studying and documenting them is crucial in order for us to not be so afraid. But chumming doesn’t seem to be the answer to doing so. It just causes the sharks reputation of being a human eater to become bigger and therefore we are not diminishing the stereotype by finding out more, but increasing it in uneducated peoples minds. Once people see an animal as a threat they will not treat it kindly or with respect and this is when it becomes aggressive. It is just a vicious circle amongst humans and the shark species.

So initially, studying the animal should be done in a different way. Not one to endanger peoples lives. Referring to a statement earlier, people aren’t allowed to feed baboons specifically because it messes with their eating schedules. It causes them to approach people for food, not find their own and when not receiving food from the humans they will become aggressive and attack. This is clearly a similarity with the sharks. So why are we permitted to feed the sharks and not the baboons? It is because sharks can’t approach on land, but we aren’t constantly on land, we are often in their territory so it should be expected that we should be attacked once aggravating them.

Maybe if chumming was modified and the regulations were stricter it would be acceptable but at this current time it only has negative impacts for everyone and should not be a technique used to attract sea life for any reason. You are asking for trouble, messing with a powerful predators lifestyle and habitat.

National Ocean Service, 2011, [image online] Available at: http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/sharkseat.html [accessed 21 April 2012]

Claims Making

A lot of claims making concerning chumming has been done lately. This has arisen as a popular new topic because of the recent shark attack on a young body boarder in our waters. This occurred “coincidentally” during the time of a National Geographic research project fro the TV series, Shark Men. The shark men crew previously warned locals of the 5 tons of chum that would be released in the water daily, while they were researching and documenting our great white sharks. And they admitted to the 30l of chum put into the sea the day of the fatal attack. Communication Department, City of Cape Town, 2012. Report and Review of Events at Kogel Bay “Caves” After Great White Shark Attack. [online] Available at: http://www.capetown.gov.za/en/MediaReleases/Pages/ReportandReviewofEventsatKogelBayCavesAfterGreatWhiteSharkAttack.aspx [accessed 21 April 2012]

The current claims being made are whether the National Geographic, Shark Men team is to be blamed for the incident, referring to the amount of chum being used during the time of the attack. The media clearly ignited this flame by immediately letting the public know that the chumming permit had been withdrawn from the Shark Men crew.

This little piece of information that had been set off by the media created a very suspicious view on the situation and therefore, people would feel more strongly against the Shark Men team, blaming them for the incident.

This happens to be the constructed part in the news of these natural disasters. This obvious when we realize that chumming issues have been around for years now but no one had really taken much notice of them. Fisherman and tourist boats not obeying the regulations, making more evidence and reason to blame the action our local shark scares on the chumming.

The most recent attack has had a huge uproar about the chumming; when it is has been a problem for quite a while now. The only reason people are making so many claims is because a foreign group of people has infested our shores with chum. Getting the issue more media coverage, appearing more in the newspaper than any other shark attack. When our local fisherman or tourist boats do it very little people are aware of it. This is because the media’s attention is not on it, leaving it to be an issue smaller than another environmental disaster.

If there hadn’t been an international TV series crew chumming our waters, no one would have made claims stating that it was the fisherman or shark cage diving boats. But this particular incident ranked high and got a lot of media attention.

The main people making these claims are the ocean environmental groups in cape town, the local surf community, the Shark Men crew and the companies that run the shark cage diving boats.

The groups gathering their income are claiming that it isn’t scientifically proven, while the local surfers and environmental groups protecting the ocean claim that losing a life would be enough proof against chumming the waters, each competing for legitimacy and support behind their cause.

Even though there are people defending the Shark Men team, no one can really argue with a life being lost and therefore the Shark Men team seemed to be the ones who were framed. 

Increase in Shark Sightings

People are being frequently attacked on our shores. Shouldn’t the increase in shark sightings and attacks ne sufficient evidence in order to create stricter chumming regulations. For instance, far away in an enclosed area, not in wind of any popular surf spots or beaches.

The officials shouldn’t need scientific proof to regulate chumming. Losing lives is bad enough and this case study is plainly stating that the boat operators are over-chumming; it’s just the scientific proof that’s missing from the equation.

People aren’t allowed to feed local wildlife like baboons because of the danger they pose after being encouraged close by food. Why should sharks be an exception when they’re even more powerful and dangerous than baboons? It is not permitted to feed baboons and they aren’t even capable of taking a persons life in one bite. While it is permitted for a shark to be fed, a creature, which has many razorblade sharp teeth and huge amounts of strength and can take your limb off in one bite.

Additionally, if you had to go to national park, environmentalists would cause uproar if they were notified that food was put down to attract the animals. This just causes them to be more familiar with a person, which defeats the purpose of seeing them in a wild park where they are meant to live naturally. The sea shouldn’t be any different. Often you visit a game park and see nothing, the ocean should be treated in the same respect. Food shouldn’t be put out to attract animals and interfere with their natural hunting activities. This is when trouble happens involving humans. Humans shouldn’t involve themselves in the natural way of the animal’s environment.

This really needs to be taken into consideration since there is no logic in these regulations. If baboons can endanger people’s lives so can sharks.

Fear Beneath, 2009. Great White Shark near Brixby Ranch CA [image online] Available at: http://www.fearbeneath.com/2009/12/perth-great-white-sharks-tagged-and-monitored/ [accessed 21 April 2012]

Shark Spotter's Case Study

The local shark spotter’s case study states that there is no scientific evidence that chumming is the cause for the increased amount of sharks on Cape Town shores.

According to the shark spotters case study they have been researching the relation between shark behavior and chumming since 1998 and still there is no official evidence that chumming is affecting our local sea life in reference to the shark attacks near the shores. Although the case study does state, “some degree of conditioning may occur between white sharks and chumming when operators do not comply with the regulations and allow sharks to feed on their bait.” With this being said, surely if there is even a slight notice that it might be connected, they cant rule it out completely that it might be a possibility. Shark Spotters, 2012. Shark-based tourism and encounters. [online] Available at: http://sharkspotters.org.za/information/shark–based-toursim-encounters [accessed: 21 April 2012]

OWUSS North America, 2010. Vivian, a spotter for Shark Spotters. [image online] Available at: http://owussnorthamerica.org/?p=238 [accessed 21 April 2012]

By receiving the bait on the other end of the hook, sharks perceive this as an easy meal and then are attracted to the boats, which is positive for the shark cage diving, so the boats continue to do so. This is against regulations though and therefore if regulated initially it should mean that it originally caused problems when it wasn’t regulated.

The case study states again that operators of boats tend to ignore the regulations, “some operators not complying with the permit regulations and repeatedly feeding sharks…” so this proves that there is excess chum in the ocean.  Shark Spotters, 2012. Shark-based tourism and encounters. [online] Available at: http://sharkspotters.org.za/information/shark–based-toursim-encounters [accessed: 21 April 2012]

It seems as though this case study is considering the tourism side to things, rather than the people at risk of the excess chumming, making it biased.

This affects the social environment around it negatively as it is giving a one sided view on chumming, leaving the shark attacks unexplained and not providing any evidence that chumming isn’t the cause.

Adventure4Ever.com, 2000. Great White Shark Gansbaai [image online] Available at: http://adventure4ever.photoshelter.com/image/I0000R.s_8zNSi.0 [accessed 21 April 2012]

Profit Gainers

As said before, the people who are gaining all the profit from shark cage diving are not aware that later on it will backfire on them and they will lose as much profit as they gain when they realise they have chased away most of the people in that area. Stores on the beach front will lose business, as well as the hotels and guesthouses where the shark cage diving companies will get most of their income and customers from.

So in the end, who is the shark cage diving benefitting anyway. It is an unhealthy business that will be eventually shut down when more people start to realize this. This campaign is the start of it, fighting for the well being of our sharks. People need to come to terms with the fact that even though sharks appear dangerous and aggressive, this is mostly because they are aggravated to be this way. Not to say they aren’t predators, but they wouldn’t harm as many people if we didn’t harm them in the first place. Removing aggravating experiences like cage diving and chumming would surely decrease the amount of attacks.

Studying the animal is logical and understandable since they are so mysterious and so little is known about them, but surely a safer, more considerate way can be resolved where we don’t have to bother the animals. If we are able to free dive with them then a cage shouldn’t be necessary, it should be banned all together.

Corbis, 2011. Great White Shark. [image online] Available at: http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/06/06/heavy-metal-under-the-sea-sharks-act-calmer-when-listening-to-acdc/ [accessed 21 April 2012]

Surfers Against Shark Cage Diving Campaign

Surfers for responsible shark cage diving, 2011. Surfers against shark cage diving. [image online] Available at: http://www.stopsharkcagediving.com/antisharkcagediving_blog.htm [accessed at 21 april 2012]

A campaign has recently been brought out called Surfers Against Shark Cage Diving. This campaign is currently printing t-shirts and making sure that their logo is getting out there and is frequently seen so that they can raise awareness about the issue.

It is run by a group of local surfers who understand that sharks aren’t to blame for the attacks on their community, but are almost 100 % sure that it is the chumming which comes with cage diving that is the problem. The surfers wish to surf, swim, and basically co-exist with these creatures peacefully without aggravating the sharks and causing them to be aggressive.  Shark Diver, 2011. Stop Shark Cage Diving – target S.A. [online] Available at: http://www.sharkdiver.com/blog/45-shark-diver-industry-blog/6108. [accessed 21 April 2012]

When in the sea, it is common knowledge that this is a place of much larger predators territory and respect is needed to share the ocean peacefully with these animals. When the ocean and sea life are not respected and given the space they need, this is when the ocean retaliates and shark attacks happen, leaving them with a reputation of aggression and terror.

Studies have proven that a dozen out of 300 different species of sharks have been involved in human attacks. Sharks don’t instinctively go after humans as prey. Humans are not part of their diet.

According to the campaign on sharkdiver.com, “Sharks evolved millions of years before humans existed and therefore humans are not part of their normal diets.” This is enough scientific proof for anyone to gather that we are not the sharks’ primary source of protein and there is something else to blame for leading them to our shores. Shark Diver, 2011. Stop Shark Cage Diving – target S.A. [online] Available at: http://www.sharkdiver.com/blog/45-shark-diver-industry-blog/6108. [accessed 21 April 2012]

Sharks diet is based on smaller fish and seals, the only reason why they would attack a human would be because they are curious of the unusual object and its movements. It is clear that these surfers understand this saying, “we are vehemently against the cage and the taunting of these great creatures with bait.”

They have immense respect for the ocean it seems, stating “most people wouldn't even treat a large dog like that, taunting it repeatedly with food until it snaps. The only people who seem to support it are those who make a fat profit. Remember, us surfers and spear fishermen are the ones who remain in the waters daily, without a cage, and any change in behavior is going to affect us, not you.” Shark Diver, 2011. Stop Shark Cage Diving – target S.A. [online] Available at: http://www.sharkdiver.com/blog/45-shark-diver-industry-blog/6108. [accessed 21 April 2012]

These people are knowledgeable about the sharks; they have done their research and are supported strongly by this while they fight the cause. They are positive that there is another way of attracting sharks besides using chum, this is what they’ve discovered through research, : “The only way for the local Shark Cage Dive operators to get a shark close enough to see underwater is with chum. No chum, no shark? But wait a minute! Chum- free Eco friendly Great White Shark Cage Diving is happening in Australia, using audio sound vibrations to attract the world’s largest predatory fish, with ACDC being the Great Whites favorite music!! The benefits of using the sound vibration is that it is Omni directional and instantaneous and completely eco friendly.”  JustinOtherSurfa. Sascd receives support from Anti- Chum operator down under. Surfers for responsible shark cage diving – we’re on the same wave!. [blog] 2 August 2011. Available at: http://www.stopsharkcagediving.com/antisharkcagediving_blog.htm [accessed 21 April 2012]

Who needs Scientific Evidence?

Overall chumming is the reason for this negativity towards the species, even though it is not scientifically proven, the amount for attacks that occur around times when chumming, create quite obvious evidence. …. Says. “Scientific evidence? Plain simple mathematics says, you chum; they come, therefore resulting in increased shark activity. However, once again, I opt to sit on the fence a little bit here. We humans are depleting the ocean of its spoils, interfering with eco-systems and it’s cycle of life. When will we stop? When there is nothing left for sharks to hunt and the risk of an attack is 100% each time you swim/surf/dive/body board?” 20summing, 2012. Shark Attacks and Chumming, whose to blame? [online] Available at: http://www.20summing.co.za/?m=6&idkey=948 [accessed 21 April 2012].

 It is not necessary to endanger more people before stopping the chumming. If the chumming was handled carefully and cautiously, away from popular beaches and surf spots- like they do at the Neptune islands in Australia – it wouldn’t be so widely blamed for the increased number of sharks near our shores.

Other negative effects of chumming

Another negative effect of chumming is that it poisons the water. Norman Bartlett, a charter boat captain has requested that things change to protect the sea life in Chesapeake Bay, Washington.

Chesapeake Bay is known as a national treasure, but is also known to be polluted. Chumming seems to be the answer to the problem, once again. Dumping the old bloody meat into the ocean effects the oxygen levels in the water for the animals and can cause them to die and this will lessen certain species that are specific to this bay. Meaning fishing will be out of the question all together since the species will become endangered and fishing permits will be taken away. So all in all, fisherman that chum are going to have negative results on their own business.

Informing them of this might lessen the amount of chumming but it will not stop it all together. Norman Bartlett speaks on the matter saying, “iv seen as many as 30 (chumming boats) – all of them dumping ladle after ladle of (chum) into the water while the fisherman cast baited hooks into the midst of the spreading chum slick.”  Washington Times, 2012. Chumming Days may be Ending. [online] Available at: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/feb/11/20070211-121605-5861r/?page=all [access 21 April 2012]

Wikimedia Commons, 2010. Chesapeake Bay Bride - Tunnel, Virginia Beach Area. [image online] Available at: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chesapeake_Bay_Bridge-Tunnel,_Virginia_Beach_Area.jpg [accessed 21 April 2012]

Is chumming to blame for recent shark sightings?

It is constantly argued whether chumming affects our sea life’s behavior or not.

Although, seeing the evidence from past and recent shark attacks and sightings, it seems obvious that chumming is too blame since it always seems to happen near by or close to the time of the attacks. There is still no complete evidence that this is causing the increasing amount of shark visits but this is hard to decipher since we know so little about the creatures.

This brings up the argument relative to the recent shark attack in Kogels Bay. National Geographic show, Shark Men brought their crew and equipment to False Bay to study Cape Town’s population of sharks.

While doing this they emitted 30l of bloody fish meat into the ocean to attract the sharks. There was a westerly wind blowing which could’ve pushed the chum onto shore and been the reason why the shark was hovering in that area. Communication Department, City of Cape Town, 2012. Report and Review of Events at Kogel Bay “Caves” After Great White Shark Attack. [online] Available at: http://www.capetown.gov.za/en/MediaReleases/Pages/ReportandReviewofEventsatKogelBayCavesAfterGreatWhiteSharkAttack.aspx [accessed 21 April 2012]

The argument is, is it necessary to release chum into the ocean in order to study these creatures? When it is proven that sharks are prominent in the specific area and don’t necessarily need to be attracted with chum because they will be present without it. Chumming just seems to be an extra danger to the locals.

Although there were warnings to all local bathers and surfers of the area previous to the study of the shark study, it was still a very risky measure to take and ended up endangering people’s lives. Surely there is another root to take to attracting the predators.

It is proven and stated many a time that attracting a shark with a piece of meat on the end of a hook aggravates the shark because it is unable to get it. The Washington Post states this clearly about another experiment with sharks and chumming, “Chum inspired intense frustration among the sharks because they cant easily get at the dead fish...”. This results in it becoming aggressive and leaves it to swim away in this state searching for other food vigorously. So being observers of sharks behavior and knowing so much about them, surely the crew of shark men would know this would happen. Juliet Eilperin, 2012. Using ‘chum cams,’ scientists find protected areas benefit sharks. [online] Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/using-chum-cams-scientists-find-protected-areas-benefit-sharks/2012/03/06/gIQAIM3mzR_story.html  [accessed 21 April 2012]

Marissa, 2011. The Apex Predator of the Sea [image online] Available at: http://dontbeafraidoftheshark.blogspot.com/2011/08/what-not-to-do-in-ocean.html [accessed 21 April 2012]

Many of the people believe that chumming is the cause of the more frequent shark sightings along shores. While others debate that it is the fisherman’s doing since they’re consuming majority of the sharks food, this turning them to search for food closer to the shores. Mark Bond says in an article in Washington Post that in the Caribbean, and experiment was done in the areas where fishing is banned and these are the areas where there is a bigger populations of sharks. This is proven to be untrue, because fully grown, hunting sharks are known to hunt seals and not fish. Sharks can also pick up the scent of blood less than a quarter of a mile away and will smell a single drop of blood in 100l of water.

So which situation seems more likely to be the cause of bringing the sharks to our shores? It seems as though there is more evidence against chumming then any other reason for the situation. Juliet Eilperin, 2012. Using ‘chum cams,’ scientists find protected areas benefit sharks. [online] Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/using-chum-cams-scientists-find-protected-areas-benefit-sharks/2012/03/06/gIQAIM3mzR_story.html [accessed 21 April 2012]

Global Perception of Chumming is Negative

It is globally identified as a negative activity, some areas in the world like Alabama, people are fined for chumming. David Rainer writes an article about shark baiting regulations in Alabama and says “It’s one of those situations where if people use common sense there shouldn’t be a problem. If you see people swimming it doesn’t make sense to throw chum out there. A lot of people don’t realize that the chum will drift down on someone else and potentially get someone hurt.”. David Rainer, 2008. Shark Baiting Regulation Effect. [online] Available at: http://www.outdooralabama.com/oaonline/sharkbait08.cfm (accessed 21 April 2012)

It is not banned in all countries. In fact its permitted in more countries than it is banned. It seems as though very few places have realized the impact it has on our environment or the fact that people generally don’t use their common sense about it and over indulge in the technique of attracting sea animals, leaving damage. 

The places in the world where it is used sensibly without harming any people or sea life, are using it in far away areas which are secluded from popular beaches.  Australia is another country which has beautiful beaches which are constantly full with people swimming, surfing, snorkeling etc. They also have is great white inhabitants, and according to the South Australia Conservation Council, “90% of Australians live on the coast.” But clearly they are handling their chumming problem more sensibly than we have. South Australia Conservation Council, 2012. Coast and Marine in a Changing Climate. [online] Available at: http://www.conservationsa.org.au/coast-and-marine-in-a-changing-climate/402-coast-and-marine-in-a-changing-climate.html (accessed 21 April 2012)

 Hank Van der Wisgaart a fisherman of the Neptune Islands of Australia says, “Neptune Islands are very remote. Chumming is far form popular beaches and there is little shark activity. The area is restricted and you cant get there without a large boat and travelling a far way.” ABC News, 2007. Shark Feeding Frenzy may become thing of the Past. [video online] Available at http://www.zigzag.co.za/features/exclusives/8127/Australian-experts-suggest-chumming-does-change-great-white-behaviour. [accessed 21 April 2012]

 If it is necessary to use chumming at all, this is how it should be done. Far away from popular beaches and shores, not causing any harm to the environment around.

Travel Pod, 2012. Sea Lions at Neptune Islands. [image online] Available at: http://blog.travelpod.com/travel-photo/bryanbastian/1/1258180054/sea-lions-at-neptune-island.jpg/tpod.html [accessed 21 April 2012]

Satellite View of Neptune Islands, 2012. [image online] Available at: http://www.tageo.com/index-e-as-v-05-d-m2252538.htm [accessed 21 April 2012]

Introduction to Shark Chumming

Chumming has always been an issue in Cape Town that has been enlightened by the constant shark cage diving that takes place nears our shores. The companies use chum to lure sharks in for customers to view and this affects the shark activities near our bays. The sharks become disorientated and aggressive searching for the scent of the blood coming from the chum. Once they’re on this track they lose sense of reality and only have one thing in mind and that is to find where the scent is coming from. 

Shark Diver Magazine, 2007. Mako Shark Pictures [image online] Available at: http://www.sharkdivermag.com/mako-shark-pictures.html [accessed 21 April 2012]

Chumming is used anywhere in the world where there is potential sea life to attract. Whether it is used for fishing, attracting animals for tourist viewing or to document and learn about the mysterious marine animals that live so differently to land dwelling animals.