Come on everyone, give sharks a fair deal!

Why is it that every time a surfer, body-boarder, swimmer, even wader, is injured or killed by a shark the media screams “attack?”

Really?

What does “attack” truly mean?

Amazingly a widely-read information source list shows: Attack (fencing), the attack (band), 1960s, attack records, label, offensive (military); charge (warfare); attack (computing); attack (music), the prefix or initial phase of a sound. Strange, no mention (correctly, I am convinced) of attacks by animals or fish.

Mankind has three serious, seemingly uncorrectable, faults – of many common traits – stupidity, arrogance and greed.

Let us look at the first of the three. One accepted condition of stupidity is indicating a lack of care or reason and when it comes to wildlife of any type in any area and for any reason, nothing could be more accurate.

“Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain,” wrote German philosopher and writer Friedrich Schiller, (Die Jungfrau von Orleans); how true!

Direct in-the-water contact between predatory fish and human leads almost exclusively to a near-fatal or fatal one-sided conclusion, but why do sensation-seeking newspapers, whose journalists are taught to give both sides of a story, always pillory the fish?

I was thinking (yes, even I do!) as I drove to my university where I lecture to South Africa’s emerging intelligentsia, why do people insist on taking a risk entering waters where danger is not only known to lurk, but where history indicates how much of a risk?

Let’s take an imaginary advertisement scenario:

“Free one-week holiday: Tent, bedding, food/water/beer/wine, lighting, fire materials, mosquito repellent, maps, cell, sunscreen, reading material provided. Transport to and (maybe?) from Kruger National Park bush (any of three areas) more than 30km from nearest habitation, for family of two adults and two children (aged more than six years).”

Of those to apply, 70% will not read the advert thoroughly, or don’t care; another 10% will wonder why so much trouble for only a week (laugh out loud) and 20% of applicants might ask a variety of questions; few, however, will realise the implications.

Such is mankind; remember stupidity, arrogance and greed?

If and when a family does find itself dumped in an area more dangerous than a minefield, what would the media do? I wager some newspaper of TV station would install itself nearby in a reinforced camper, have a professional hunter riding shotgun and report what happened.

Shouldn’t take more than an hour or so for the locals to sniff the wind and pass on the good news about dinner and dessert … lion or hyena Human Tartare and vulture Entrails Pudding are menu certainties.

But did the park’s residents actually attack?

I say no. The stupid humans invaded a high risk area, therefore, must accept their fate; newspapers have no right to print “attack;” the risk factor was probably too high for even an actuarial calculation.

So let’s go back to the sea.

Sharks are one of the deep’s denizens. Superior intelligence affords humans decision options; should unprotected sea or river (crocodiles, alligators, piranha etc) sport lovers take the risk?

Of course not; by all means where there are nets or barriers, but otherwise …?

So if the brighter among us would not think of squatting in the bush, unprotected from wild animals who seek only to feed and/or protect territories in their home, why should sharks be considered any differently?

Some fiction and facts about sharks and perceived “attacks” make interesting reading:

• Sharks attack in order to feed. The image of the insatiable shark that swallows everything it encounters in order to assuage a hunger that is never satisfied is one of the most false.

• 354 species of shark are listed ranging from 15 cm to 15m.

• 35 species have “attacked” at least once; a dozen habitually.

• The biggest Great White ever caught was a female of 6.4m, which was caught off Cuba in 1945. It weighed 3 312kg and its girth reached 4.5m. A 10m specimen is reputed to have been captured; female sharks are largest.

• The power of a shark’s jaw is phenomenal; the highest recorded with a specially designed apparatus was 3.75 tons/cm for a shark of 3m.

• The fastest shark is the Mako, which can reach 50km/hr (the fastest of all fish is the sail fish. at 113 km /h, followed by the swordfish at 95 km/h). Man’s speed in the water is farcical, even compared with the slowest-swimming fish.

• The growth rate of sharks varies according to species, age, and maturity: from 33mm a year to 30cm.

• The record for attacks in a single place is at Durban (South Africa), in 1957, with seven incidents (five deaths) within 107 days.

• In August, 1960, a boat capsized at the mouth of the Komati, on the coast of Mozambique and sharks mutilated 46 out of 49 people.

• The speed of a tooth replacement in a flesh-eating shark is of the order of 7-8 days for the smallest species and from 6 to 12 months for the largest.

• The shark can smell in dilutions of the order of 1 part to 500 million parts of water, and extracts of flesh of the grouper fish of the order of 1 part to 10,000 million.

While the families of victims have cause for grief and all of us are so sorry for the tragedies, sharks, if they could talk to humans, might also put up advertisements, how about

“Come in folks; the water’s warm!”

More likely, however, the monsters of Table and False Bays might venture even more into warnings … “Trespassers will be eaten,” but then mankind is too stupid, arrogant and greedy … remember?

• Thanks to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shark; http://www.sharks.org.za/