Large Shark catch and kill order WA.

Opsi, you really are fabricating some crap to suit your argument there.


What makes you think that no one is against shark finning? Just because it hasn't been raised in outrage here?

I'd happily bet my magical third testicle that 99.9% of people on this website would be against shark finning.



As a matter of fact, haven't we even been through this before and you just continue to throw it out there regardless?
 
al_ said:
It is an unhelpful generalisation. I don't think many of those against shark culls are in favour of shark fishing. Regardless, the particularly at-risk shark species are protected - something the WA government has disregarded as their policy kills anything 3m+.

And shark finning is an absolutely abhorrent practice that fortunately looks like it is starting to decline.

Ultimately government sanctioned killing of endangered species is a totally seperate issue to illegal finning or regulated recreational fishing. Can you seriously not see the difference?
Click to expand...
^^What I meant, but wasn't able to say well....
 
Mattydv said:
when it's been raised in conversation,
Click to expand...

johnny said:
I'd happily bet my magical third testicle that 99.9% of people on this website would be against shark finning.
Click to expand...

Otherwise it's out of sight out of mind. I'd bet that the majority of people on this forum wouldn't be able to say (without using google) which cities have banned the sale of shark fin and which airlines have banned shark fin from their cargo.

I'm sorry but I just don't get how people can have an opinion on a couple of sharks being killed here when they only have an opinion on millions of sharks being killed when asked about it. It's like jumping up and down that someone pissed in the Murray and only caring that nuclear waste is being dumped in the Amazon when asked about it.
 
I can't believe you are all arguing over such trivial issues when there is still mass murder being carried out in Syria, North Korea slips further into the depths of a dictator's madness and Geoffrey and Brynne Edelsten are splitting up!
 
0psi said:
I'm sorry but I just don't get how people can have an opinion on a couple of sharks being killed here when they only have an opinion on millions of sharks being killed when asked about it. It's like jumping up and down that someone pissed in the Murray and only caring that nuclear waste is being dumped in the Amazon when asked about it.
Click to expand...
What I can't fathom, is your passion about one issue, yet complacency, ignorance and acceptance (I can only assume), about millions of others. If you're a breatharian, I withdraw my comment.
 
0psi said:
Otherwise it's out of sight out of mind. I'd bet that the majority of people on this forum wouldn't be able to say (without using google) which cities have banned the sale of shark fin and which airlines have banned shark fin from their cargo.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that to be against something you have to be able to name every single aspect of the situation if you want to be credible? If that is your premise, can you name all the relevant laws regarding child abuse, how they differ from state to state and what cooperation Australia has with neighbouring countries in order to stamp out sex tourism? If I'm following your premise correctly - that if you can't discuss an issue in detail then your opinion is not serious - then you should be able to discuss these issues regarding child abuse or we can assume that you're not seriously in opposition to the behaviour.

I'd bet that you are 100% against child abuse but you cannot accurately discuss Australia's international cooperation on the matter. I don't think your probable lack of knowledge on the issue means that you are not seriously against it, just as I don't think that my lack of knowledge on airline policy means that I am not against the practice of shark finning.

I'm sorry but I just don't get how people can have an opinion on a couple of sharks being killed here when they only have an opinion on millions of sharks being killed when asked about it. It's like jumping up and down that someone pissed in the Murray and only caring that nuclear waste is being dumped in the Amazon when asked about it.
Click to expand...

So your premise is that your opinion is only valid if you are pro-active in starting conversations on the matter? If that is the case, how often do you start conversations regarding the horror of child abuse? If we follow your probable premise on shark finning then if you don't regularly tell other people your opinions against child abuse we must assume that when asked about it, whatever your response is, it is not to be taken seriously.

Again, I'd reckon you are genuinely against the act of child abuse, just as most people are genuinely against the act of shark finning. And I DO NOT see a comparison between the two acts at all. I am not comparing them, I'm simply using your own premise on another issue, that 'if you don't initiate arguments against something then you are not genuine or credible'.


And none of us here are jumping up and down about shit, mate. don't over-dramatise what's taking place in order to belittle it. We are having a conversation about something that is prominent in the media and saying how it makes us feel. This should not be over-exagerated in order to then compare it with other issues in a way that reduces the legitimacy of people's responses as that is an unrealistic depiction of what is occurring.
 
Last edited:
0psi said:
Otherwise it's out of sight out of mind. I'd bet that the majority of people on this forum wouldn't be able to say (without using google) which cities have banned the sale of shark fin and which airlines have banned shark fin from their cargo.

I'm sorry but I just don't get how people can have an opinion on a couple of sharks being killed here when they only have an opinion on millions of sharks being killed when asked about it. It's like jumping up and down that someone pissed in the Murray and only caring that nuclear waste is being dumped in the Amazon when asked about it.
Click to expand...

On one level I understand your frustration, but ultimately you are talking about very different things. People aren't debating the other issues right now because they are long-standing and geographically distant. This policy is new and being introduced by people that burners have voted for - plus it is happening in our backyard.

It is also a terrible policy, which preys on misguided insecurities for political gain. I think we would all agree that we deserve better than that. The reality is that we have a level of control over this policy too. A strong public campaign against it might achieve something. It probably won't knowing the WA gov, but all of these factors distinguish it from the international problems that are currently sit outside the news cycle.

It is fundamentally wrong for our government to kill protected and endangered species purely because of irrational fears. No among of harm occurring elsewhere changes that.
 
johnny said:
So your premise is that your opinion is only valid if you are pro-active in starting conversations on the matter?.
Click to expand...

I personally start these very conversations constantly... I am a media/comms manager representing 100+ child protection agencies! My job is to help people understand the issues and build opinions, which ultimately assist with the development of policy.

I'm not working today, but my other window has a facebook group discussing income testing for access to benefits for foster carers! I love people expressing opinions on any area of this work, as it shows they care which ultimately helps our cause. I try to do the same for other issues I care about, which includes the environment - particularly our oceans.

Dismissing opinions because of a perceived heirarchy of priorities doesn't help anybody. Every little bit helps, particularly when the fights are winnable and we hold our local policy makers to account.
 
I have found a bigger boat and I am making my way to WA. The plan is to cruise up and down the coast hunting down these dangerous sharks. Errrr for the good and safety of the people. I expect to spend most of my time in isolated areas bumping up my tally of sharks so will require the companionship of a deckhand with good local knowledge of shark habitats in the west.

So if you can:
- sling a bucket of pig blood
- wield a gaff
- loop a tail rope
- trace a large and aggressive shark or fish
- use a finning knife
- "dispose" of bi-catch discretely (turtles, sea birds like wandering albatross, sun fish)
- and most importantly keep your mouth shut
You might be the person for the job. Let me know and I'll arrange an interview.

Ability to swim while covered in tuna oil will be of great advantage in this role.

A renumeration package appropriate to linning my pockets is on offer.
 
pink poodle said:
I have found a bigger boat and I am making my way to WA. The plan is to cruise up and down the coast hunting down these dangerous sharks. Errrr for the good and safety of the people. I expect to spend most of my time in isolated areas bumping up my tally of sharks so will require the companionship of a deckhand with good local knowledge of shark habitats in the west.

So if you can:

- trace a large and aggressive shark or fish
Click to expand...

How in the hell are you suppose to do that without getting the paper all soggy!?
 
PINT of Stella said:
How in the hell are you suppose to do that without getting the paper all soggy!?
Click to expand...

Wax paper.

Looks like I have me a good candidate here...I'll even let you drink on the job! And let's face it, for some of the tasks I think you'll want a few pints of courage...
 
We will be national heros, and I will be rich. No doubt we will be mobbed by women when our mission is completed. If we survive.
 
So moving on a little bit, for those opposed to a cull, what would you suggest be done instead?

Not trying to stir things up, just genuinely curious as to what people think is a better option than targeted culling?
 
0psi said:
So moving on a little bit, for those opposed to a cull, what would you suggest be done instead?

Not trying to stir things up, just genuinely curious as to what people think is a better option than targeted culling?
Click to expand...
Don't swim/surf. I'm not fan of the beach, and I don't see why anyone else should be.

I would approach it the same way as any other potentially dangerous activity (however unlikely the risk of death/injury). Go into it knowing the risks and take any precautions necessary (there are time and conditions statistically more risky)......or just not do it, if you're that worried about it.
For 'us', its a lifestyle choice. For the shark, its just life. I know which I think has the priority.:wave:
 
What Moorey said is spot on.


The ridiculous thing is that the culling program will do NOTHING to reduce the danger, and the people in charge of the program know that. It is just about politicians being seen to be tough, and being seen to be doing something. It is not about reducing what is already a negligible risk.


Mountain biking is inherently risky, and some people will die from hitting trees. Very rare, but it happens. We could demand the authorities cut down every tree within 10m of an MTB trail, or we could accept a degree of risk is part of our sport, and minimise it by riding within our abilities, wearing a helmet etc etc.
 
0psi said:
So moving on a little bit, for those opposed to a cull, what would you suggest be done instead?

Not trying to stir things up, just genuinely curious as to what people think is a better option than targeted culling?
Click to expand...

My first stop would be to see what non-lethal options are available, if any.

There's a lot of people from all ends of the spectrum who have an interest here, from commercial (fishing, diving, tourism) to scientific to conservation. Canvas these communities as much as you can for research, R&D, suggestions, etc. and go from there.

I know it's impossible but I'd also like to see politics removed from the equation. I'd also like to see people pull back from "we must do something now, now, now - won't some one please think of the children - panic" mindset. It's a long-term issue that will require well considered and implemented solutions. Until these solutions are found, well we have to suck it up. All people, industries and interests have to deal with unforeseen circumstances that alter their operating environments, fact of life and your planning should have taken such circumstances in to consideration. If you didn't then it's your fault and your problem.
 
Plug in pest free.


Put up some nets with really big buoys on the surface so people know they are there. Nets are pretty useless, but make people feel safe.

Then hold a huge triathalon to celebrate and on the back of my success at keeping the sharks away, hosting a successful event, and the tourism/sponsorship dollars it brings in I'd call an early election.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top