-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Shark Cull
- Thread starter bullus_hit
- Start date
antman said:
Shark-huggers are invited to resume their wailing in a month when the water cools and the white pointers start biting.
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
None that you've been told about at least. Zero white sharks culled is about the same number as people in the area who've been bitten by them since the cull was introduced. Fingers crossed the numbers stay the same. A successful campaign for man and creature.
Still don't see a point to the question you asked me just the same.
rosy23 said:
You and others have been complaining about at-risk species being killed. WA Fisheries stated two days ago that no whites have been destroyed, or even hooked.
You and others have been complaining about at-risk species being killed.
I accept shark-huggers have a valid perspective, albeit a narrow one that they are unwilling to expand and hence perceive the shark problem that WA is experiencing.
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
Do you believe everything the Government tell you?
I haven't complained about at-risk species actually being killed have I? I'd appreciate a link please so I can check my comments if I have done so. I do have concerns about luring and culling them and don't approve of the tactics or see them as anything but a knee jerk reaction not necessarily aimed at saving lives. Why stoop to name calling or pigeon holing people as "shark huggers"?
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
If your gonna have a culling program, you gotta cull something dont you? :don't know
rosy23 said:
I assumed it was the motivation behind this.
http://puntroadend.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=49334.msg1680961#msg1680961
Not much of a "stoop". Almost a term of endearment, really.
antman said:
It's not proof of anything, other than the cull not being likely to have an immediate effect on weeding out the specific sharks most likely to eat people. The government probably figures the protesters will have moved onto something else by the time they start hooking whites.
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
Not much substance there to make assumptions about me. I didn't even offer any personal opinions or add any comments of my own whatsoever in that post you quoted. I haven't complained about white sharks being killed. I wouldn't know if they've been caught or killed or not. I have offered my opinion on culling or "weeding out" a protected species listed as rare and likely to become extinct.
Shark shields better than drum lines: ALP
FEBRUARY 16, 2014 6:17PM
SHARK shields used by the navy and police divers can reduce attacks without harming the animals and are safer than the West Australian government's controversial drum line approach, the opposition says.
Labor says up to 30,000 shields, which emit an electric field that repel but do not harm sharks, are sold globally every year and there is no record of anyone wearing one being killed by a shark.
Shark shields can cost up to $600 each, but opposition leader Mark McGowan said they were more effective than drum lines, which he said created hysteria, killed smaller sharks and cost millions of dollars.
"They're like a seatbelt in a car. They don't absolutely make you safe, but they make the situation better," he told reporters on Sunday.
Mr McGowan said grants could be offered for surf life saving clubs to lease shark shields and subsidies could be provided to surfers, divers and others at risk to purchase shark shields.
Tour guide Elyse Frankcom, who was attacked by a 3.5m great white shark in 2010 while snorkelling among dolphins with tourists, believes a shark shield saved her life.
The shark bit her legs, but she activated the device before passing out as a tourist helped her.
"Despite blood being in the water, despite an attack already, the shark was not seen once the shark shield was on," she said.
"I do definitely believe that this shield saved my life."
Fisheries Minister Ken Baston agreed shark shields had shown promise, which was why more than $220,000 had been given to the Oceans Institute at UWA to test and improve existing shark deterrents, like the shield.
WA company Shark Shield has also been awarded $300,000 over two years to develop new surfboard fins with an in-built electronic shark deterrent.
"It is intended to develop a deterrent device that can be retro-fitted to all modern surfboards," Mr Baston said.
He said they were part of a $22 million strategy including aerial patrols, jet skis, tagging, research and drum lines.
Currently, bull, tiger and great white sharks longer than three metres that are caught on drum lines within one kilometre of parts of the WA coast are being shot dead and discarded at sea.
There has been no official report yet into how many sharks have been caught, but it is thought to be more than 50, with seven killed*.
* I wonder how many of those became shark bait due to being injured or died from swallowing a giant hook.
FEBRUARY 16, 2014 6:17PM
SHARK shields used by the navy and police divers can reduce attacks without harming the animals and are safer than the West Australian government's controversial drum line approach, the opposition says.
Labor says up to 30,000 shields, which emit an electric field that repel but do not harm sharks, are sold globally every year and there is no record of anyone wearing one being killed by a shark.
Shark shields can cost up to $600 each, but opposition leader Mark McGowan said they were more effective than drum lines, which he said created hysteria, killed smaller sharks and cost millions of dollars.
"They're like a seatbelt in a car. They don't absolutely make you safe, but they make the situation better," he told reporters on Sunday.
Mr McGowan said grants could be offered for surf life saving clubs to lease shark shields and subsidies could be provided to surfers, divers and others at risk to purchase shark shields.
Tour guide Elyse Frankcom, who was attacked by a 3.5m great white shark in 2010 while snorkelling among dolphins with tourists, believes a shark shield saved her life.
The shark bit her legs, but she activated the device before passing out as a tourist helped her.
"Despite blood being in the water, despite an attack already, the shark was not seen once the shark shield was on," she said.
"I do definitely believe that this shield saved my life."
Fisheries Minister Ken Baston agreed shark shields had shown promise, which was why more than $220,000 had been given to the Oceans Institute at UWA to test and improve existing shark deterrents, like the shield.
WA company Shark Shield has also been awarded $300,000 over two years to develop new surfboard fins with an in-built electronic shark deterrent.
"It is intended to develop a deterrent device that can be retro-fitted to all modern surfboards," Mr Baston said.
He said they were part of a $22 million strategy including aerial patrols, jet skis, tagging, research and drum lines.
Currently, bull, tiger and great white sharks longer than three metres that are caught on drum lines within one kilometre of parts of the WA coast are being shot dead and discarded at sea.
There has been no official report yet into how many sharks have been caught, but it is thought to be more than 50, with seven killed*.
* I wonder how many of those became shark bait due to being injured or died from swallowing a giant hook.
rosy23 said:
An outright lie. Google "Paul Buckland".
But they are worthy of further development/investment.
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
There seem to be questions in the article on whether the thing was activated to repel sharks in the way it was intended to be used or just turned on in last moment desperation when the shark was there. It's a big call to claim it's an outright lie when it could be crossed wires, poor research, bad choice of words or misinformation.
Interesting debate on here, appears to me that the WA Govt is putting plans into place to protect people during, as antman so eloquently put it, shark bitey season.
And so far zero sharks have been culled, not indiscriminately slaughtered into extinction. Please correct me if I misinterpreted that.
I acknowledge that the oceans of the world are sharks natural habitat but I also see them as creatures who haven't evolved since prehistoric times & exist purely as eating machines, again not a shark expert at all but that's how I see them. Blame Jaws if you will.
The upshot of all that is that I gotta say my affinity lies with humans on this one.
And so far zero sharks have been culled, not indiscriminately slaughtered into extinction. Please correct me if I misinterpreted that.
I acknowledge that the oceans of the world are sharks natural habitat but I also see them as creatures who haven't evolved since prehistoric times & exist purely as eating machines, again not a shark expert at all but that's how I see them. Blame Jaws if you will.
The upshot of all that is that I gotta say my affinity lies with humans on this one.
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
Ah! "White Sharks". So other types 1, 2, 3 or 10, 20, 30 or 100, 200, 300?
<
Re: Adam Goodes
|
Feminism
>
