Anyone besides me wondering why the national news is reporting on a great white shark off the NY coast?
As pointed out on the ABC Evening News, a lot of people are heading to the beach in that area this weekend. I know that there were some shark attacks and a fatality on the east coast last year. However, I guess I wonder why a shark in that area is newsworthy. Plenty of people out west camp in grizzly bear habitat all the time - and last year there was a much publicized and discussed fatality.
Is a great white shark inherently more dangerous that a grizzly? I'd say "no", and suppose that a great white possibly swimming in an area where people recreate is just more sensational than Grizzlies out west. I guess the fact that a lot of the behavior tourists display around animals in National Parks like Yellowstone must be because those same tourists must believe that the animals are tame because they're in a park. I can't really envision someone yelling "SHARK!" and people running into the ocean to try and get closer to it or take selfies with it.
Anyway, all this recent discussion of the attempts to reintroduce species like wolves and Grizzlies to states like Colorado make me wonder how it could ever be seen as a prudent move. A lot of people would say that reintroducing wolves and Grizzlies is going to lead to human fatalities... who knows? I do know that shark numbers world wide are dwindling. Imagine if a conservation group proposed transplanting sharks in areas where their numbers are low; but those same areas are where humans recreate and use commercially. If the national news is covering one single shark this week and discussing the precautions beach cities are taking because of it - I can only imagine the uproar from people if there was an effort to release sharks.
As pointed out on the ABC Evening News, a lot of people are heading to the beach in that area this weekend. I know that there were some shark attacks and a fatality on the east coast last year. However, I guess I wonder why a shark in that area is newsworthy. Plenty of people out west camp in grizzly bear habitat all the time - and last year there was a much publicized and discussed fatality.
Is a great white shark inherently more dangerous that a grizzly? I'd say "no", and suppose that a great white possibly swimming in an area where people recreate is just more sensational than Grizzlies out west. I guess the fact that a lot of the behavior tourists display around animals in National Parks like Yellowstone must be because those same tourists must believe that the animals are tame because they're in a park. I can't really envision someone yelling "SHARK!" and people running into the ocean to try and get closer to it or take selfies with it.
Anyway, all this recent discussion of the attempts to reintroduce species like wolves and Grizzlies to states like Colorado make me wonder how it could ever be seen as a prudent move. A lot of people would say that reintroducing wolves and Grizzlies is going to lead to human fatalities... who knows? I do know that shark numbers world wide are dwindling. Imagine if a conservation group proposed transplanting sharks in areas where their numbers are low; but those same areas are where humans recreate and use commercially. If the national news is covering one single shark this week and discussing the precautions beach cities are taking because of it - I can only imagine the uproar from people if there was an effort to release sharks.