Official GWS Thread

Got to tell you this thread is interesting but lets face it...
Sharks are here and allways will be. Even if we took 10 harvested each year there would be 10 more that find those hunting grounds free and we happen to be in the same hunting grounds with great whites.
I went surfing friday for the 1st time in 2 years because of fear of the GWS. Yeah in my kayak I really dont worry too much but there is allways the chance it might be my time.
I would rather die out in the ocean doing something I love to do than never do it and die behind the wheel of my car.,
By the way I surfed Linda Mar and there were around 100+ surfers in the water on friday so I figured I had good odds of not getting chomped.
 

Try surfing scott's creek reefbreak or one of the spots near there with nobody else out.  .
Or heck even ross cove. or flatrock. or private idaho's. list goes on.

then let's see how you feel.

lindamar is barely surfing. it's the equivlent of kayak fishing in a pool!

Of course it's more risky than driving, there'a a lot of things that can get ya.  However you drive every day, but only get in the ocean a few times/month, so you might still be more likely to die in the car than the water - just because of much greater exposure.

I surf, so I also feel comparitively safe in a kayak.

it was interesting that they computed the diving to be more risky
than driving (and that's just the shark factor).

Try surfing scott's creek reefbreak or one of the spots near there with nobody else out.  .
Or heck even ross cove. or flatrock. or private idaho's. list goes on.

then let's see how you feel.

lindamar is barely surfing. it's the equivlent of kayak fishing in a pool!

Learned at salmon Creek in Sonoma County.Surfed there for 2 years....Hope thats hardcore enough for you... .
LindaMar was nice to get back into the game....

I'm just teasing mr. matt, once I went to ocean beach SF and it was too big, went down
to lindamar, and it was big closeouts after I got out, I couldn't wait to get in.  .

every spot gets its day and any place can seem sharky, spooky and dangerous.

regarding the 10 sharks, well that's 40,000 lbs of less shark, I think it woud indeed affect the balance
of power, these things are not that common to start with.  pick whatever number you want that
might make a difference but would not push them to extinction.

blue, I don't think the license thing will happen either, not on its own, but suppose there are
10 attacks this year. They will probably declare the ocean powerboat only or something. Whenever
there's a law, it's always too much too late, wild pendulum swinging. So I wanted to float this one
because when and if the attacks start to increase, somebody somewhere might have a similar idea
and if it gets pushed to the front before the crazy ideas like "outlaw any craft that a shark might chomp"
maybe it'll have a chance. If it has a flaw, it's just an idea too far ahead of its time.

John.
You have good points. Just hate to see us (humans) kill off another species of life for our own personal gain.
Of course I dont want to die to prove my point but also would love to have my children be able to see the ULTIMATE predator of the sea.....

Yeah, there's not really a great choice in this one. Either you cede the ocean to the GWS,
or you fight back, or something in the middle. It's really a case of lesser evils.

Critters know when they're safe or not, it's like ESP.  If the GWS were a gamefish in some fashion, they'd learn a propper fear and respect for people.  The other day I was walking in a park and a red fox was running around only 50 feet from my son and I (wife ran away..) no way that fox would've hung around a human in a place where there were hunters.  Similarly, fish in reserves are less cautious of divers, ect.  IMO, the last thing we need is laws that make GWS view humans as harmless things of questionable edibility.  Even C&R fishing would teach them to run like hell from boats and people.   It'd be good to put them in their place and let them know that they live only by our active consent.

Protected animals are more bold than ones that aren't, with regards to people at least.  If people never hurt them or threaten them, they become less cautious and interact with people more.  Such as the 'problem bears' at yellowstone.  It's safer for dangerous animals to be un-nerved by people than indifferent/curious, both for them and us.  Even something legal, like sharkshield, may be good for this.  When they see a diver they might think 'sometimes those buggers shock the shit out of me...' and do a 180.

I have to agree with the spark. A few harpoons tossed @ GWS and maybe they would not be so eager to hang around boats.
On the other hand, they were chomping people and even boats just fine before they were protected, not sure they'd
get the idea real well, but some probably would.

This could be a side effect of the international limited kill permit idea. (BTW, they would not be "harvesting" GWS, they
would be killing them for trophies, like a tarpon, I don't think anybody is going to eat these things,
it's a cave-man bragging-rights thing plain and simple).

Now, there's always that one shark that's never seen a single item of man-kind and also just plain old isn't afraid of anything,
but on balance I think the limited kill permit idea would help keep them away from boats a little.

As much as the bible-literal attitude that the earth is there for humans to do what they want does turn my stomach
(because implicit in that POV is a general disrespect and disregard of the wild kingdom), 
it's also pretty much just a statement of fact in today's world, if not christ's world of 2000 years ago.
We choose whether they live or die and we choose whether a few surfers, divers, and maybe kayakers
do too. Right now GWS are cool, everybody wants them around. It'll stay that way unless they wear out
their welcome with a few too many attacks and then the pendulum might swing, and swing hard.

Here's something cool,
Did you guys know that the first shark attack in the 1900's came off the oakland airport in 1926 on a boy and his dog both?
yep, I got "the book" and that's the first attack listed,  . maybe it was just a very mean sturgeon? 
It goes on to say that GWS did come into the bay in days gone by. There was a fish processing plant there then tho.
Maybe they'll return now that they are protected?

Also on the McAllister thing, some new stuff comes to mind:
If the wind was blowing hard, which apparently it was, it came up after they launched, and they got hit from the bottom
(which is the photo-supported theory) and ejected, they would not have been able to get back to their kayaks,
the kayaks would have blown away as Blue has discovered first hand. Once separated from
their kayaks, the shark could have returned and chowed them down in a leisurely fashion. The book shows the holes in
the white kayak, it could be a white shark impact, but there are no teeth marks, just two star-shaped impact holes
about a mouth-full apart. But it could also be the damage they'd get from behind run over by a boat. Engineer said
something in excess of 2000 lbs going at least 17 knots. shark or boat both fit that one.
Further the notes about an attack on pinnepeds near the bouy they typically paddled to (makes me think of that dux bouy),
make it possible that they were attacked because they got close to shark feeding.

so I'm thinking:

1. got too close to shark feeding right near bouy they liked to paddle to,
2. attacked, ejected under windy conditions
3. kayaks blow away faster than they can swim to them.
4. stuck out there, no kayak, shark in the water.
5. They find tamara, floating dead from blood loss via femoral artery cut (as stated by coroner)
6. her friend, roy stoddard never found.
7. kayaks are found upside down, many miles to the south, still tied together.

just call me columbo,  .

Guys, Ralph Collier gave me permission to post an excerpt from his book:


the following is a synopsis from my book "Shark Attacks of the Twentieth Century: from the Pacific Coast of North America."

On Thursday, 26 January 1989, Roy J. Stoddard, 24, and Tamara McAllister, 24, were kayaking off Latigo Point/Paradise Cove, west of Malibu, Los Angeles County, California (about 34°01.2'N; 118°46.5'W). The couple were training for an upcoming triathlon and, to prepare, kayaked and swam almost daily.  The 5-to-6-km round trip from Latigo Point [Photograph-Latigo-scan-403-413] to Paradise Cove was a frequent and enjoyable experience for the young couple. The last time anyone would remember seeing McAllister and Stoddard was about 0930 hrs, when they were observed launching their kayaks and paddling around Latigo Point as they headed north toward Paradise Cove.   

          At about 1015 hrs, a resident of Paradise Cove observed “a heavy boiling and thrashing in the water out past the kelp beds.”  The water commotion was west and south of the USCG buoy. They reported; “a lot of splashing water and a churning of the ocean, like a whirlpool, maybe 15 to 20 feet [5 to 6 m] across.  It lasted about 5 to 10 minutes, then stopped, with all going quiet in the water.” Pinnipeds frequent the area of the buoy and were observed “trying to crawl up on top of it. They were very agitated when the water was being churned up”

Friday, 27 January, the two kayaks were found lashed together, upside down, 6 km off nearby Zuma Beach in Los Angeles County.  They were towed to Channel Islands Harbor in Oxnard, Ventura County, and were subsequently turned over to the Ventura County Sheriffs Department on 30 January (Photograph).  At 1630 hrs on Saturday, 28 January, Tamara McAllister’s body was found 10 km from Channel Islands Harbor (34°05.0'N; 119°18.0'W) on a heading of 220° true.  She was wearing a bathing suit and a zippered, blue and black windbreaker jacket. The USCG began a search-and-rescue operation for Stoddard.  The extensive search for him was called off after a week.  He was never found.

I invested several weeks interviewing local residents, business owners, and others known to be in the area the day McAllister and Stoddard disappeared.  No one could remember seeing the couple following their departure at Latigo Point. There are probably countless scenarios for this tragic event. The following is one possibility out of many and is based on circumstantial evidence.

          After launching their kayaks from Latigo Point, the couple usually paddled out until they were 50 to 100 m offshore, just inside the kelp canopies, before turning north to Paradise Cove.  Once they had arrived at their destination they would swim, talk, and sometimes have a snack before returning to Latigo Point. According to friends familiar with their routines, this trip usually took McAllister and Stoddard 45 to 60 minutes.  They could have arrived only minutes after the commotion reported near the buoy.  This commotion may have been a white shark feeding on one of the pinnipeds that had been on or near the buoy.   

          McAllister was found wearing her windbreaker jacket, making it reasonable to assume that she was not swimming at the time of the accident. The kayaks had been found lashed together, suggesting that they were stationary in the water.  However, I propose that they might have been trying to return to Latigo Point in heavy seas, with headwinds gusting 30 to 50 knots. McAllister’s kayak had a small crack in the skin of its hull, causing it to take on water. With her slight build, it might have been difficult for McAllister to maneuver her kayak in the stiff headwinds and choppy seas.  The kayaks might have been lashed together by the couple in an attempt to combat these rough conditions. Stoddard would have been in the lead kayak, McAllister the following.  With both paddling together, Stoddard would have been able to cut a wake, thereby reducing McAllister’s effort.

          A hole was discovered in the bow of the white kayak’s underbelly (Photograph).  Also present were fractures to either side of the hull. They appear to be stress fractures, caused when the kayak was struck from below.  An engineer familiar with the construction and material used in today's kayaks suggested that the observed damage would require the hull to be struck by an object with a mass in excess of 900 kg, traveling at least 17 knots, to cause the damage sustained.  Several kayak manufacturers said that a kayak’s construction actually causes it to recoil from an object when struck.  This flexible construction could have caused the kayak to be lifted into the air when struck from below with sufficient force.

         With McAllister’s kayak being towed behind Stoddard’s, she would have been thrown backwards, possibly striking her head and/or hand on the kayak’s surface.  In contrast, Stoddard would have been violently thrown forward and could have struck his head on his kayak’s hatchcover, a piece of plywood 25 mm in thickness. Several small, rounded indentations on the surface of the plywood hatchcover were found and examined.  Forensic investigation found no hair, tissue or linen fibers.  The source of these indentations could not be determined.

          Ventura County Coroner Warren Lovell, with the assistance of investigators Jim Wingate and Mitch Breese, determined the following: “Tamara McAllister died from exsanguination, the result of massive tissue loss to the upper left thigh and a traumatic wound to the upper right thigh that severed the femoral artery and vein.  Measurement of the left thigh injury exceeded 34 centimeters in diameter.”  Bruises to the right hand and back of her head where also reported. The dimensions of Tamara McAllister’s injury suggest that a White Shark about 5 m in length was responsible for this unfortunate tragedy.

Even C&R fishing would teach them to run like hell from boats and people.

I guess it will have to be circle hooks only...

more like C&E, Catch and get Eaten.   .

There's two stories of guys in little skiffs in "the book" hooking and
then having altercations with a GWS, once in la jolla and once @ shelter cove.

you hook a GWS on a kayak and you better be ready for one hell of a sleigh ride or maybe just the shortsest ride you ever had 

I would recommend a long length of cable though, just in case he decides to dive, could get real wet.