LOGIN | REGISTER

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 45
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    South Jersey
    Posts
    405
    Quote Originally Posted by shark-hunter View Post
    Well this is what happens when people care more about "conservation" than people. Again, great white shark fishing should be increased(contrary to propoganda the gwshark is not endangered at all) and seal numbers need to be kept in check. They already tag them. Why not just fix the seals while their at it.
    conservation is just as important.. I don't want my kids living in a metal world.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by idsmashh View Post
    conservation is just as important.. I don't want my kids living in a metal world.
    I like conservation for humans.(ie preserving woodlands for walking and the beautiful scenery) Keeping oceans and drinking water clean ect. I could really care less if every shark that was dangerous to humans was extirpicated.(only 3 of over 100 different species of shark...tiger/gw/bull). An no the ocean would not fall apart if a few sharks went missing. Nature is a little more resiliant than that.
    Last edited by shark-hunter; Jul 10, 2012 at 01:48 AM.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Carolina Beach , NC
    Posts
    96
    Quote Originally Posted by shark-hunter View Post
    I like conservation for humans.(ie preserving woodlands for walking and the beautiful scenery) Keeping oceans and drinking water clean ect. I could really care less if every shark that was dangerous to humans was extirpicated.(only 3 of over 100 different species of shark...tiger/gw/bull). An no the ocean would not fall apart if a few sharks went missing. Nature is a little more resiliant than that.
    I would like to inform you that part of the conservation of humans, is also taking care of our world, which no matter what anyone has said, the ocean plays a huge role in our lives as a species. Everything is connected, more so than we may instantly think about or realize. I tell you this, if the Great white were to be wiped out, we would eventually see the effects. As nature is quite resiliant, as shark-hunter has said, only to a certain point. Look at places where shark species are overfished and almost wiped out that have coral reefs. Without the sharks in some of these areas, the coral reefs are no longer thriving colorful beautiful reefs, but over run by algae and the like. No matter what your stance is, and everyone is entitled to their own, everything is interconnected, and does affect everything else, especially it being an apex predator and keystone species. Because we are the ones that have the beautiful minds, it is our responsibilities to act responsibly and to think before we do, say, or react.

    -------------------Great white sharks are without a doubt one of the most successful predators on the planet, but one of nature’s most triumphant designs did not factor in the negative impacts that humans, in the role of a dominant species, can have on them. As apex predators, sharks sit atop the food chain and with no natural enemies, shark numbers are designed to be low. Ironically, given their rule over the sea, this means they are particularly vulnerable to the way human’s fish and sometimes over-fish. Sharks are designed to mature slowly (taking up to 15 years), and produce few successful young (every two to three years). In areas where their populations have been depleted they are slow to recover to natural numbers.

    The great white is fully protected in seven countries, including South Africa.

    Due to evidence of declining white shark populations around the world, these sharks are afforded some of the highest protections of any fish in the sea. Today, the great white is fully protected in seven countries, including South Africa. International conventions also protect the great white, with listings on Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), in the Convention of Migratory Species (CMS), and in the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The authority on which species face the most likely path to extinction, the World Conservation Union’s (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species, identifies white sharks as globally “Vulnerable”. The message from the international community is great white sharks are at risk of extinction.
    Why do we need great whites at all?

    Great whites keep the ocean balanced.

    Great whites keep the ocean balanced. They feed on a variety of animals including numerous species of fish (in Cape Town those include yellowtail, steenbras and cob), other sharks (smooth hounds and guitar sharks), marine mammals (seals) and they even scavenge on dead whales. Furthermore, great whites are often the primary, and sometimes only, predators of some of the larger prey animals like seals. This means that there is a cascading effect in the ocean between the way sharks keep a balance of their prey and the hundreds of different species that are impacted (ecological dominoes if you will), and thus play vital roles in ecosystem function and biodiversity. Furthermore, studies around the world are increasingly highlighting the important role that sharks play. Without sharks, economically important fisheries have closed and there are losses to eco-tourism ventures, particularly important in countries dependent on tourism. Moreover, great white sharks are now celebrated as one of our “Big Seven”. They are an iconic species and a feature of our local and natural heritage, which we have a duty to preserve.

  4. #14
    lol...typical proganda. It's just politics that keep them "protected" in some countries. It's like black bears in New Jersey. Lots of black bears are hunted in Maine and the population is perfectly healthy. Great sharks could be fished like any other fish without being wiped out. It's all a matter of a bag limit like any other game animal. Conservation and fishing can co-exist.

    You think sharks are cool and shouldn't be "murdered". It's as simple as that

    As far as the other point. Natures finds a new balance if an apex predator is wiped out.
    Last edited by shark-hunter; Jul 10, 2012 at 02:22 AM.

  5. #15
    Oh and great white sharks are absolutely NO THREAT of becoming extinct. What a complete load of horse manure! LIES! Period. And most of your post is just rambling eco politics that' spoon fed to the masses by the likes of discovery channel who like to manipulate and lie to try to program people to their point of view.
    Last edited by shark-hunter; Jul 10, 2012 at 02:24 AM.

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by shark-hunter View Post
    lol...typical proganda. It's just politics that keep them "protected" in some countries. It's like black bears in New Jersey. Lots of black bears are hunted in Maine and the population is perfectly healthy. Great sharks could be fished like any other fish without being wiped out. It's all a matter of a bag limit like any other game animal. Conservation and fishing can co-exist.

    You think sharks are cool and shouldn't be "murdered". It's as simple as that

    As far as the other point. Natures finds a new balance if an apex predator is wiped out.
    I don't think it would be as simple as nature making a new balance... The seal population would grow and those little bastards would probably over eat fish that we like.. Then we'd kill the seals off and the fish they over eat would population explode screwing something else up.... Buuuuuut that being said, I think the gw shark population could use some culling...

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by MFitz73 View Post
    I don't think it would be as simple as nature making a new balance... The seal population would grow and those little bastards would probably over eat fish that we like.. Then we'd kill the seals off and the fish they over eat would population explode screwing something else up.... Buuuuuut that being said, I think the gw shark population could use some culling...
    What people don't understand is that the "discovery channel coalition/eco political nutcases" thinks that humans shouldn't be allowed to touch nature...period. No fishing. No animal management. No human interference. It's a political ideology and has nothing to do with making sure a fish doesn't go extinct or animal rights/peta. It's about hating humans and not interfering. Ban on all fishing/wildlife intereference. We are overfishing certain commercial fish's for sure though. But that's a numbers problem.
    Last edited by shark-hunter; Jul 10, 2012 at 02:36 AM.

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by MFitz73 View Post
    I don't think it would be as simple as nature making a new balance... The seal population would grow and those little bastards would probably over eat fish that we like.. Then we'd kill the seals off and the fish they over eat would population explode screwing something else up.... Buuuuuut that being said, I think the gw shark population could use some culling...
    Welcome to nature. That's what usually happens anyway. Famine or feast. You see this in bobcat and hare populations. Nature is cruel

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by shark-hunter View Post
    I like conservation for humans.(ie preserving woodlands for walking and the beautiful scenery) Keeping oceans and drinking water clean ect. I could really care less if every shark that was dangerous to humans was extirpicated.(only 3 of over 100 different species of shark...tiger/gw/bull). An no the ocean would not fall apart if a few sharks went missing. Nature is a little more resiliant than that.
    I respect your opinion, but I just don't see it that way. Its been said over and over again, because it makes perfect sense: The sharks have been there for millions of years, we take the risk doing whatever it is we want to do in the marine environment. If you don't want that risk then you don't have to do it.

  10. #20
    I'm pretty sure even most shark attack victims would disagree with you on this one sharkhunter. Any chance you're in support of getting rid of the Muslims in this country for fear of terrorist attack as well?