"It's a story as old as time itself."
(Editor’s note: This a nine-part fictional story about a little surf town that is forced to confront the real world effects of shark protection, the removal of shark nets and the obfuscation of public servants wildly out of their depth. It’s based on the experience of Ballina, if y’hadn’t worked that out yet. Read part one here. Part two here. Part three here. Part four here. Part five here. Parts six and seven here. Part eight here.)
Two days later, by the time news teams from around the world had arrived in Australia to document the chaos, the Australian Defence Force (ADF) had locked down Freeport.
The influx of gun-toting Hillbillies was too much for the Federal Government, which overruled Mayor Maddison’s orders for the local constabulary to only arrest the local Hillbillies, while letting the invading rioters continue to riot.
Jesse Flinders from Fox News Los Angeles knew the story he wanted and wasn’t going to let anything or anyone get in his way. Jesse was well acquainted with his audience and aware of the affectionate, albeit comical, attitude Los Angeleans had toward “Ossies”.
He told his producer, Mal Henderson, that he wanted to get some “Crocodile Dundee shit” and suggested they be prepared to pay for it.
Disappointed that the fracas had been subdued by the time they got to Freeport, Jesse and Mal started offering large sums of money to locals to perform outrageous stunts.
“We can give you two thousand US dollars, strictly to supply refreshments, including alcohol, if you guys can organise and perform one of those surfer paddle-out wake ritual thing-a-me-jigs,” Mal told a group of surfers on the breakwall, to no avail.
“We can pay to have that Ossie ‘Shark Whisperer Girl’, what’shername? The one who swims with Great Whites? We can fly her in, and we’ll put her up in a five-star hotel, if they’ve got one here, and get some footage of her swimming underwater with sharks.” Mal assured Jesse.
When both of these plans failed, they hired the ‘Big River Jazz Steam Boat’, and despite being warned not to take it out of the rivemouth, loaded it up with lots of willing tourists who were plied with alcohol and taken on a trip around Frier’s Island.
Unfortunately, they didn’t see any sharks. Fortunately, there was no swell, so apart from some fights Jess revved up between a few drunken revellers, the boat trip was mostly uneventful.
Desperate for some action to film, Mal made contact with Pinko, from the Berry Manksters, and asked him if his group of activists would like to go out on one of the glass-bottom boats onto the estuary to view the sharks from above. What he didn’t tell Pinko was that he also organized the other glass-bottom boat for a group of Hillbillies, who were still hanging around, dressed in camos, but at least not carrying weapons anymore.
The disaster that followed was no fault of either the Hillbillies or the Berry Manksters. Frantic to get some aerial footage of “Crazy Ossies fighting amongst themselves”, Mal hired a helicopter and pilot from Mountain View Airport to film the potential water-based battle from above.
Someone at Mountain View let slip to someone in the media that the Americans were hiring a helicopter, and a French news team hired the only other helicopter and pilot in the valley. Had the Americans and French not become so frantic when witnessing the many swirling dark whirlpools in the estuary as the tide changed and water sucked out of the bay, and not screamed at their pilots so aggressively, the helicopters probably would not have crashed into each other.
The footage Graham got of the mid-air collision was extraordinary, and thankfully, while both helicopters successfully landed in the waist-deep muddy water, no one was injured. After this madness, it was reported that lots of sharks had been seen down the coast, and the whole mad media circus packed up and headed south, in the hope of some more action.
THE FINAL CHAPTER
By the time all of the media, Hillbillies, and Berry Manksters had left, schoolboy Benny Wilson was the only one left asking questions about the shark situation.
Benny had been working hard on his year 12 end-of-year science assignment, ‘Shark Mitigation’, but no-one seemed interested in helping him. They all seem more interested in allotting blame and seeking retribution.
Fortunately, Benny received from his science teacher the contact details for a local school teacher and surfer, Brian Daniels, who had been researching this very topic for ten years.
“Thanks so much for meeting with me, Mr Daniels.” Benny met him in the Freeport library.
“It’s so nice to meet you, Benny.”
“I thought you’d be too busy to talk to a school student, you know, what with the media all wanting to find out what you knew about shark mitigation techniques.”
“The opposite is the case; I’ve not been able to get anyone interested in what my research has uncovered.”
“Why not?”
“I don’t think anyone’s interested in anything that doesn’t fit in with the narrative they’re peddling.”
“Is that all?”
“Well, that and the fact that facts aren’t that sexy. It’s sexy that sells. They’re more interested in heat than light. I warn you, Benny, this might seem a bit boring, but at least it’s the truth.”
“Do you mind if I use my iPhone to record you?”
“No, be my guest. Before I describe the different shark mitigation measures, it is interesting to note how the typical eco warrior responds. For example, they’ll say things like ‘Why should sharks die just so you can go surfing?’ This is a straw man argument, because it conveniently ignores the crux of the matter, which is the horror of shark attacks. The actual purpose of killing sharks is to reduce the rate of shark attacks, not just so that we can go surfing. The other issue is the way they insinuate that it is so that ‘I’ can go surfing. I explain to them that I surfed right through the spate of shark attacks in South Australia a few years ago, and that I am more concerned about the safety of younger generations.
“The other very common argument they use is an analogy with the road toll, which they say is much worse than it is for shark attacks. I point out that while it is appropriate for policymakers to make those sorts of calculations to ensure that taxpayers get value for money, we ought not ration our conscience on the basis of shark attacks being rare. If someone presents to a hospital with a rare disease, they are not sent home because there are more common diseases to be treated. On the other hand, the government might not spend as much money developing a cure for a rare disease, compared to a common disease.
“They ridicule me saying that killing sharks would be like randomly taking cars off the road. I respond by refining the car analogy, pointing out that the government does a lot to ensure safety on the roads, like ensuring that cars are roadworthy, the roads are safe, people don’t drink drive, etc.
“Okay, now on to the efficacy of non-lethal shark mitigation measures. They love to say that drones are the solution, but drones are only really suitable for public occasions like contests and when lifesavers are on duty. There are technical problems, like not being able to discern the shape of a shark against a reef, because of the dark background. Also the conditions are not always favourable, due to water clarity, especially near rivermouths where bull sharks are common.
“One of the scientists, who’s written papers on the use of drones, told me that he was concerned that people were not receiving adequate training. I also think it is a hell of a responsibility having to study a screen for hours, to potentially save someone’s life.
But, the biggest problem is the cost of paying people to monitor every surf break from dawn till dusk. There are 550 recognised surf breaks in NSW, not including the many beach breaks, which probably doubles the length of coastline where surfers are exposed.
“Cost is also a factor with personal electrical devices, like Shark Shield and Repella. I used both, but gave up after two and a half years, because they were not reliable, possibly due to corrosion. I also doubt that children can tolerate the occasional jolt of electricity. I enjoyed using a Shark Shield, despite the electric shocks, because it made you feel invincible, even though it only reduces the risk by 60%, according to independent scientific research. It’s not going to stop a shark approaching at 30 km/hr. But, an electrical device would deter a curious shark just sniffing around.
“One problem with feeling invincible is that I ended up surfing longer, more often, and sometimes in turbid conditions that are considered risky. So, the extra exposure probably cancelled out any reduction in risk gained from using the device.
“The SMART drumline program is nowhere near as effective as they claim. There are two parts of the program. When a shark is hooked, a signal is sent to a team ready to race out to tag the shark before releasing it further out to sea. The tag then sends out a signal, which can be detected by a shark listening station. There are currently 37 shark listening stations, each capable of detecting a tagged shark when it swims within 500 metres of a detection buoy.
“In poor conditions this distance falls to maybe 350 metres. The idea is that local authorities can then decide whether to alert the public to the danger. But, it is actually not such a good idea to alert people every time a shark is detected, because the public will become blasé about the risk, if they hear it a couple of times a week. The data shows that sharks are passing by most surf breaks every day.
“The other part of the SMART drumline program is the relocation of the shark some distance out to sea. I think it is about a kilometre. Satellite tracking of 22 relocated sharks revealed that most remained offshore for three days before slowly returning, five of them returning within a week, and one within a day of being tagged.
“So, the length of time these sharks stayed offshore is insignificant compared to all the time spent by sharks in similar proximity to surfers. Moreover, fewer than half the state’s 500 plus surf breaks are currently protected by SMART drumlines, since the arrays need to be situated near waterways to provide timely access by boat.
“I did a case study of the data collected from the SMART drumlines and listening stations between Ballina and Lennox Head. For every shark that was relocated, there were two tagged sharks detected in the same area. We don’t know how many sharks have not been tagged, but if half the population has not been tagged, then there could be two untagged sharks in the area, as well as the two tagged sharks.
“Of course, it is also possible for tagged sharks to pass through the area undetected, since the listening stations only span 20% of the coastline. So, the relocation of sharks probably only reduces the risk, based on the number of sharks in the area, to about 20%.
“I also present a somewhat obscure argument that some of the relocated sharks might have been leaving the area anyway, in which case their relocation achieves nothing. So, the reduction in risk falls by half to about 10%. Then, if you add the fact, noted above, that only half the state’s surfing locations are near SMART drumlines, the reduction in the rate of shark attacks for the entire state becomes a negligible 5%.”
“Wow, you’ve really done your homework!”
“Thanks for showing interest. I wish someone else would listen. Is there anything else you’d like to know?”
”What do you think are the best shark mitigation strategies?”
“Clearly, the pre-existing nets that served us so well for so long in the past.”
“Why do you suppose they banned them?”
“I suppose they have an agenda. If you look at the fruits of their labour, all they really seem to achieve is terrifying the public and turning everyone against each other. They talk endlessly about problems only they can fix. Or, with the media, they just want something scary for views and clicks.”
“Is that all? I mean, surely it can’t be that simple?”
“As far as I can see, that’s exactly what’s happening. It’s a story as old as time itself.”
“What do you mean?”