Shark nets: are they worth it?

They are a throwback to an age when we killed what we were scared of. Even their guardians admit they are full of holes. So, why do we persist with them? Nigel Benson attacks shark nets.

---

What would we think if the Dunedin City Council paid $36,000 a year to protect us from lightning bolts? We'd think the council was mad, surely?

Yet, the DCC is the only local authority in New Zealand to maintain shark nets.

Never mind that there has not been a shark attack in Dunedin waters for nearly 40 years.

And never mind that marine experts, environmentalists and even council staff who oversee the programme say it is nonsensical.

The last confirmed fatal shark attack in New Zealand waters was in 1976 and just 10 people have been killed by sharks since record-keeping began in 1852.

Cats have probably caused more human deaths since 1852 than sharks. Yet the council continues to budget $35,904 every year to maintain three pairs of 100m-long nets at St Clair, St Kilda and Brighton beaches from December 1 to the end of February.

In 2004 and 2007, the DCC considered canning the nets, but hysteria prevailed.

''It's an area we know no-one wants us to look at, but it's ratepayers' money we spend on putting what appears to be a placebo effect in place,'' community and recreation services manager Mick Reece said.

''There's not a scrap of evidence so far that they are good value for money.''

A report prepared for the community development committee in 2006 by council parks and reserves team leader Martin Thompson was equally damning.

''It is difficult to determine if the nets actually prevent attacks, however they do provide a perception of security for beach users.''

Any policy change would have to be ratified by council, Mr Thompson said.

''The council has a shark net setting policy and any decision to discontinue the nets would have to go through them.''

Deputy Mayor Chris Staynes yesterday said a public submission would prompt the council to reassess the nets.

''You raising this may make us reconsider our position. I think, really, they just make people feel safer,'' he said.

''If they aren't effective, and I suspect they're probably not, then we'd certainly re-evaluate them.''

The nets have killed about 700 sharks since records started being kept in 1977.

The contractor since 1996 has been Taieri Mouth commercial fisherman Graeme Fraser, who is required to set the nets and regularly check them ''to ensure that the beaches are protected from shark attack''.

''The contractor is also required to inspect the nets 12 times per month [three times per week] during the three-month period, with no fewer than two inspections in any one week, weather permitting,'' Mr Thompson said.

''The contractor is also required to keep catch data sheets, which are to be supplied to DCC and MAF. With the new wildlife Act, we are also required to inform Doc of any catches of protected wildlife, for example, white pointers. Part of this permit also means we have to supply research institutions with any carcasses they require.''

In 2006, great white sharks became protected under the Wildlife and Fisheries Acts, making it illegal to kill the sharks under penalty of a fine up to $250,000 or up to six months in prison.

The DCC obtained an exemption permit so it could keep its nets.

University of Otago Marine Science department Associate Prof Mike Barker said the nets ''do nothing except provide swimmers with an illusion of safety''.