by rhygin » Thu Jun 05, 2008 6:47 pm
all my life i was tought that one does not feed a wild animal. i was told it makes animals dependant on humans and disrupts the existing ecological system. other than creating a dependency the animals also start to associate food with humans. as it is animals we are talking about this is driven purely by instinct which, by the looks of it, is a totally cause-and-effect driven thing. now, if you are not stupid or uber-greedy the logical assumption to make is that shark-chumming is breaking down the mutual barrier between sharks and humans. to expect instinct-driven animals to not cross this broken barrier is a blind assumption (possibly they are blinded by the look of crispy tourist $$$). the recent rise in shark-related activities can therefore be linked directly with chumming (which essentially also only started a few years ago.)...or am i making a blind assumption? we created this problem, its not the sharks. stop calling it a shark problem, the problem is chumming and other "shark-tourism". we dont feed the lions in kruger as they will probably bite our arms off, why are we feeding the sharks?