"We need to reject the deification of nature."
A team of scientists predicts that 1800 people will be hit by
sharks in Australia over the next 45 years.
To stem the flow of blood, they want to equip everyone who goes
in the water with a personal shark deterrent device in the hope of
saving, perhaps, a thousand people. (The most effective shark
deterrent, the Shark Shield, reduces the risk of attack by about
60%.)
Thing is, apart from the forty percent failure rate, the user
has to tolerate the occasional electric shock, these painful random
jolts.
Initially, it seemed ridiculous but y’get used to it. I figured
it was a small price to pay for peace of mind.
Ironically, using the device actually increased the risk of my
being attacked, because I surfed more than twice as often. Around
Ballina, you tend to find other things to do if the waves are not
so good, especially if you are on your own. But, I felt invincible
with my Shark
Shield and would paddle out in anything.
So, my exposure to the risk eventually cancelled out the benefit
of using the device.
There are various other problems, which might be solvable, since
they concern the design of the product. But, the problem of
electric shocks is unavoidable since the user needs to be
positioned within the electric field and the current has to be
strong enough to cause a shark to pull away.
While most adults would get used to it, I think children would
refuse to use the device.
Children are actually more vulnerable to shark attack, despite
offering less in the way of sustenance, because
sharks tend to bite the smaller of two objects presented to
them. While most surfers feel safer in a group, because it
reduces the odds of being taken, children remain vulnerable on
account of being smaller than everyone else.
As winter approaches, surfers on Australia’s east coast look
forward to regular south swells. But, the arrival of whales soon
brings to mind the inevitable influx of Great White shark
accompanying the migration.
How many people’s lives will be ruined this year?
Eventually, shark attacks will become so frequent that the
government will have little choice but to deploy lethal methods of
shark mitigation.
It is already beyond a joke.
How bad does it have to get?
I engaged in the
shark debate at all levels over the past six years and came to
the conclusion that the technocrats at the NSW Department of
Primary Industries are more concerned about sharks than people, and
that government ministers are powerless to defy them.
So, I don’t think we stand a chance unless we can expose the
root problem which is the anti-human agenda of environmentalism. We
have been trained for decades to cherish the natural environment
and so it is hard not to think that environmentalism is good.
However, there is a genetic defect in their philosophy, which
ironically stems from our success as a species.
Environmentalism provides a convenient distraction from the
challenges of being human and looking inward must seem petty
compared to controlling society for the benefit of nature.
Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore echoes this sentiment,
suggesting that
fear of catastrophic destruction, such as climate change, might
actually be fear of death, projected onto the natural world.
Eco-warriors identify with a stable ecosystem, as if it mirrors
their own psychological stability.
That is why they can’t compromise.
They view the occasional human tragedy as a necessary
sacrifice.
The sea might even be symbolic of the subconscious mind, making
it especially sacrosanct.
I am afraid this is where the battle needs to be fought.
We need to reject the deification of nature.
