‘Manipulative': Expert slams states on sluggish shark net stance
A Sydney shark expert has gone to town on the NSW and Queensland governments, accusing them of manipulating public perception in an effort to drum up support for shark nets and saying none of the available scientific evidence points to them being effective.
Shark nets across NSW beaches are taken in annually from mid-autumn to mid-spring, however the NSW government is conducting a review to determine shark mitigation measures for the 2025-26 summer, including support from local councils on the continued use of shark nets.
Speaking to NewsWire, The University of Sydney associate professor and shark behaviour expert Christopher Pepin-Neff said he believed two simple premises lay at the heart of the issue; firstly, that shark nets catch fish (Sutherland Shire council reported a 13 times differential between non-target animals caught in nets compared with the targeted eight species of sharks), and secondly, that in getting caught, those fish struggle and die and attract sharks.
'Shark nets attract sharks,' he said. 'There is no way that science exists everywhere in the ocean except on netted beaches in NSW or Queensland.
'That the vibrations that struggling fish make attract sharks everywhere in the ocean except when they get caught in a net at a netted beach in Australia.
'If science still applies, then we have to conclude that shark nets attract sharks to local beaches.'
The decision to use shark nets is left to the state government, and during the 2024-25 season, 51 beaches between Newcastle and Wollongong used shark nets.
Professor Pepin-Neff said his principal objection to shark nets was that 'they are used by politicians when it is convenient for them to protect themselves by providing a false sense of security to the public'.
'Politicians know that the public has an idea that shark nets work and they are manipulating that public perception for their own benefit,' he said.
'It's a disgrace that in 2025, politicians have not come clean about the fact that shark nets and a lot of beach safety measures are mythical.
'For me, this is not an environmental issue; it is an issue of integrity in the policy process and respect for local constituents across Australia.'
The office of NSW Agriculture Minister Tara Moriarty declined to respond to NewsWire's request for comment; however Professor Pepin-Neff, received a letter from the Department of Primary Industries (DPIE) saying 'in 2024/25 the DPIE consulted the 25 coastal councils about their preferences for shark mitigation at beaches within their local government area'.
'The NSW government is currently considering the feedback from the councils as well as the evidence from the technologies used over the 2024/25 summer period to help inform the upcoming season,' the DPIE continued.
The Sutherland Shire in Sydney was one of the last councils in NSW to oppose the use of shark nets on its beaches. When the state government surveyed local councils in late 2024, councillors were presented with options and evidence for the various shark mitigation technologies.
Sutherland Shire councillor Kal Glaznig voted against the use of shark nets and speaking to NewsWire said 'just based on the evidence that was presented it was pretty clear that they're not the most effective tools to keep people safe'.
'I feel like it's a big education piece for beachgoers. The thing around shark nets and why there's a bit of hesitancy to take them out is this perceived safety, which from what I saw scientifically, there's no argument for,' he said.
'People in our community aren't getting in the ocean or not getting in the ocean because they feel like they're being saved with nets.'
Mr Glaznig said he couldn't speak for everyone, but during the council deliberation he didn't have a single constituent reaching out to say 'keep the nets in' but was instead inundated with community members who spent large amounts of time in the ocean saying they didn't believe the nets should be in.
'A lot of the evidence for me is around the fact that these nets have been here since 1937,' Mr Glaznig said. 'And I feel like if we just relied on existing measures for everything in life from nearly 100 years ago, we would be so backwards and behind.
'The ocean is such an unknown and you're never going to be able to control the elements, but you can definitely use better technologies and fuller solutions.' 

'My take for the state government is for them to hopefully listen to what the councils who are on the ground with the community are saying because ultimately we are more accessible than state ministers in getting the response and the feel from the community.
'And our community in the Sutherland shire is telling us that they don't want shark nets and the experts that presented made it super clear that shark nets were not the most effective way to keep people safe.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
2 hours ago
- ABC News
Can the US Air Force bust Matt's studio bunker?
The United States has dropped some very large bombs on Iran, inserting itself into what we are currently calling the Israel-Iran War, despite Donald Trump saying just days earlier that he was going to spend two weeks thinking about it. The bombs they dropped managed to destroy or at least severely damage a nuclear facility buried 90 metres underground. Which kind of makes Matt's studio basement bunker superfluous. So what's next? Matt is joined by Emma Shortis, Director of the Australia Institute's International and Security Affairs Program and host of podcast and book After America to chat about what this means for the Middle East, and whether Australia will get pulled into the conflict. Follow If You're Listening on the ABC Listen app.
ABC News
6 hours ago
- ABC News
Did Australia provide support for the US strikes on Iran?
The Prime Minister today confirmed Australia supports Donald Trump's decision to bomb Iran's nuclear sites. But he wasn't weighing in on the debate over whether this US action is in breach of international law. Nor would he confirm whether Australia provided any support for this mission - only saying it w a unilateral action by the United States. Mike Pezzullo is the former Secretary of Home Affairs and a former Deputy Secretary of the Defence Department, and author of the 2009 defence white paper. He spoke to David Speers.
West Australian
6 hours ago
- West Australian
Editorial: Wishy-washy Anthony Albanese puts Australia on the outer
Close to 24 hours after the United States bombed key Iranian nuclear facilities, Anthony Albanese finally stood to address the nation. This was a pivotal point in history: Australia's closest military and strategic ally had made a bold strike against one of the world's most tyrannical and dangerous regimes. Australians want to know what it all means, and what was likely to come next. They got a Prime Minister who looked like he'd rather be anywhere else. It was clear from Mr Albanese's curt manner at his Monday morning press conference that he didn't want any part of US President Donald Trump's surprise attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. He said what he had to: that Iran could not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons and that Australia was in support of actions to prevent that nightmare scenario. But Mr Albanese also stressed that Australia was not involved in this conflict. Five times, the Prime Minister said that this had been a 'unilateral action' by the US. And when asked directly, repeatedly, whether Australia was given any heads-up an action would occur prior to the bombs falling, Mr Albanese skirted the question. What he did say was that he had not spoken to Mr Trump since before last week's G7 summit, which the President left a day early, causing the planned sit-down between the two leaders to be abandoned. Australia-US relations have never been at a lower ebb. Mr Trump is a challenging character. And Mr Albanese isn't alone in his distaste for him. Successive polls have found Australians are among the world's biggest critics of him, finding him dangerous and untrustworthy. But this isn't about Donald Trump the man. This is about the fact that the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran is an intolerable one. Iran's regime is the antithesis to liberal democracy, obsessed with the destruction of Israel and of Western values. The decision by the US to join Israel in doing what needed to be done — despite Mr Trump's clear personal preference not to get involved in matters beyond his borders — was the right one. Contrast Mr Albanese's non-existent relationship with Mr Trump's administration with that of British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, who did get a heads-up about the US' intentions in Iran. Mr Albanese and Mr Starmer are ideological kin, sharing a leftist world view. Yet where Mr Albanese wears his repugnance towards Mr Trump on his sleeve, Mr Starmer makes it work. The result is a UK which is firmly within the Western alliance, and an Australia increasingly on its outer. Mr Albanese must make it his priority to repair Australia's deteriorating relationship with the US. That means we need an effective ambassador in Washington. While this is not intended as a Kevin Rudd-bashing exercise, it is apparent he is not that person. Shifting him out and finding the right person to serve Australia's interests in the Trump era is one step along the road to restoring our alliance. Responsibility for the editorial comment is taken by Editor-in-Chief Christopher Dore.
