Select to expand quote

laceys lane said..
phew.

as it stands ted the fed gov are sitting on their hands. to scared to do anything except more research and tagging


perhaps they fear the greenies more than life its self

Great post Ted i wish i could have ever said it that eloquently.

Lacey this post of yours i agree with so much. The government is doing very little for the level of investment. $20 plus Million in WA now $16 plus million in NSW. My argument has always been the same. Cull aside why can't surfers like ourselves unite and have a voice to make the governments responsible for their spending? Years ago i got upset when Half a million was used to by a hand full of jet skies. People on this page said she cares, well with that much money i could have brought nearly 50

The government don't fear the greenies, they simply don't have the answers..

www.northernstar.com.au/news/ballinas-eco-shark-barrier-to-be-australias-longes/2840188/?ref=hs

Can someone tell me (As i don't know the area) will this barrier installed from 800 metres from North Wall to Lighthouse Point is that in the surf zone

Thanks for answering before SP about the time of day.

Select to expand quote

MickPC said..

jbshack said..

MickPC said..

Just cull a few of the big buggers hanging around & hopefully the death scent will send the others away. Surely trialling this would make far more sense, cost far less money & have far greater coverage than just a few select beaches.

Mick its not the big ones doing the damage in Northern NSW though

Firstly JB, just for the record I didn't red thumb you, I reply with words if I disagree with something if I care enough...

You've selected a small portion of what I wrote to focus on, I find this typical of those against "THE CULL". I suspect your beliefs are wearing down & your close to waking the fark up from the absolute stupidity that has been cr@pped on into your mind. I'm not just talking about Northern NSW mate. The protection of great whites is a national/global problem that needs to be addressed. For far too long people have been listening to those who benefit financially from the study of great whites who have been recommending more study ie more money for them over doing something when people are farking dieing & being seriously injured.....think about that for a moment...

I don't care about red thumbs, i could offer up free $100 cash and people would still red thumb me, I'm special

I did focus on that single point as it simply was wrong. Thats all. I pointed out that if you killed a heap of large sharks as you suggested, for Northern NSW it would have made very little difference to their season of attacks so far.

I don't need to change my mind about sharks, i researched it long and hard, i have made a choice from talking with people who are in the know, hell from Barry Bruce down in Australia, i have spoken with people from all over the world and i think I've chosen the right path. Im not going to be swayed by a forum of people with ideas like shooting fish from a plane..

Kill the great whites, then what, you'll have to kill the explosion of Bull sharks, then what, maybe that imbalance may bring in box jelly fish in the millions, i don't know what will happen, no one does, but at least i can see the natural balance needs to be maintained. Sharks have ruled/formed the ocean as an apex predator for hundreds of millions of years, some say around 450 million years. Man in the last century has nearly wiped them out. We need to be smart about these things. You mentioned before fracking for gas. Well some say "hell year lets do it everywhere" Well those people are not thinking long term. Killing of sharks for a simple inconvenience so you can go surfing is rather selfish IMHO. Especially when products are available to help protect you in the water.

As for your last comment of people listening to people who benefit financially from studying something. Does that mean if you get diagnosed with Cancer you'll ignore the advice given by the Scientific research into the study of cancer and how to best treat it Because its the same argument you've presented..

Sharks are injuring people, killing people all over the world, the scientific teams who are working on understanding and solutions are not making millions of dollars like you'd think. Just because what they are currently saying is the "current state of affairs" is inconvenient to our life style, doesn't make it wrong

Select to expand quote

Loz79 said..
My thoughts are that government and council at least need to be doing something.. You are not going to stop all attacks but at least be pro active in some way... Its almost like gov n councils are just hoping the problem will go away... Same thing happened in my town with floods.. 2 record floods in 2 years splitting the town in half and costing hundreds of people their homes, big promises made by gov and council re flood mitigation, well guess what??, 4 years later they are still trying to decide what to do!!...hoping people forget maybe???

Yes 100% that is what they are hoping will happen. Instead of coming clean and admiring they don't have answers, they are posturing and spending money to no avail..
What i find so interesting is that NSW is now working with companies on devices from WA that our state government refused to work with.. Why can't our Governments work together for a better solution..

That is what the original Rally in Cottesloe was about. 6500 people saying no culling is noted answer, but lets look for serous solutions that will help.

We all know these attacks/ deaths have occurred in a small area.

I know there are a lot of locals who won't surf there again or until some action is put in place,they are driving up the coast to surf,vies verser we are not travelling down the area to surf.

The attacks near the Ballina wall area,some of those sharks have been hanging around like a bad smell,these sharks should be culled.Net and bait hook the place to get things back in balance,there is a overload of sharks in this area,for whatever reason hunting food I don't know.

You either cull,net and bait line the place or simply ban all people from using this ocean area,sorry to say this again but its going to happen again.
All the BS about research is rubbish time and money wasting,just use a study case that has been done elsewhere ,stop the talk and take some action.
If the government was in the private sector they would have gone belly up years ago.

I don't claim to be an expert and the expert would probably laugh at this post but sitting around talking is nuts.
A dog attacks a person,its gets shot,a croc attacks or kills a human,it gets removed or shot,so whats the difference with sharks.

Its not rocket science.
If a shark is a serial pest kill it.

If a shark attacks and is properly identified kill it.

Done and dusted.

The rest is bull sh1t that can and will go on for years.

Select to expand quote

jbshack said..


I don't care about red thumbs, i could offer up free $100 cash and people would still red thumb me, I'm special

Select to expand quote

jbshack said..

MickPC said..

jbshack said..

MickPC said..

Just cull a few of the big buggers hanging around & hopefully the death scent will send the others away. Surely trialling this would make far more sense, cost far less money & have far greater coverage than just a few select beaches.

Mick its not the big ones doing the damage in Northern NSW though

Firstly JB, just for the record I didn't red thumb you, I reply with words if I disagree with something if I care enough...

You've selected a small portion of what I wrote to focus on, I find this typical of those against "THE CULL". I suspect your beliefs are wearing down & your close to waking the fark up from the absolute stupidity that has been cr@pped on into your mind. I'm not just talking about Northern NSW mate. The protection of great whites is a national/global problem that needs to be addressed. For far too long people have been listening to those who benefit financially from the study of great whites who have been recommending more study ie more money for them over doing something when people are farking dieing & being seriously injured.....think about that for a moment...

I don't care about red thumbs, i could offer up free $100 cash and people would still red thumb me, I'm special

I did focus on that single point as it simply was wrong. Thats all. I pointed out that if you killed a heap of large sharks as you suggested, for Northern NSW it would have made very little difference to their season of attacks so far.

I don't need to change my mind about sharks, i researched it long and hard, i have made a choice from talking with people who are in the know, hell from Barry Bruce down in Australia, i have spoken with people from all over the world and i think I've chosen the right path. Im not going to be swayed by a forum of people with ideas like shooting fish from a plane..

Kill the great whites, then what, you'll have to kill the explosion of Bull sharks, then what, maybe that imbalance may bring in box jelly fish in the millions, i don't know what will happen, no one does, but at least i can see the natural balance needs to be maintained. Sharks have ruled/formed the ocean as an apex predator for hundreds of millions of years, some say around 450 million years. Man in the last century has nearly wiped them out. We need to be smart about these things. You mentioned before fracking for gas. Well some say "hell year lets do it everywhere" Well those people are not thinking long term. Killing of sharks for a simple inconvenience so you can go surfing is rather selfish IMHO. Especially when products are available to help protect you in the water.

As for your last comment of people listening to people who benefit financially from studying something. Does that mean if you get diagnosed with Cancer you'll ignore the advice given by the Scientific research into the study of cancer and how to best treat it Because its the same argument you've presented..

Sharks are injuring people, killing people all over the world, the scientific teams who are working on understanding and solutions are not making millions of dollars like you'd think. Just because what they are currently saying is the "current state of affairs" is inconvenient to our life style, doesn't make it wrong

That point you disagree with, that point you believe to be wrong, I believe to be right...you've fallen for the BS of the migratory shark theory & possibly not given thought to stats. Oh how the Anti Cull brigade love BS stats. Keeping it simple, less sharks = less chance of shark attacks. Especially when your removing the ones that have been hanging around & are deemed as a life threatening size, like one nibble & you've lost a limb. Trying to escape the shark, then trying not to die from blood loss.

I have stated I would like to see a lift on the protection of great white sharks, as I do not believe they are endangered. No one knows how many are out there. The oceans great white sharks inhabit are huge & vastly void of people. They were originally thought to be endangered because fisherman were not seeing them as often. Well up until the 90's a lot of HC fisherman carried guns in their boats & they shot sharks that were hanging around their boats. Sharks soon learned to get the fark away from boats. Then the buggers were protected & gun laws were tightened in the same decade. Now look, fisherman getting circled, pulling up 1/2 a bloody fish most of the time, props chewed. That was not the norm before, sharks are not as stupid as people think they are. All these people burley'ing up the water to "study" them have also helped to associate human activity with food.

Allowing great whites & other sharks deemed to be threatening due to their behavior to be removed will absolutely no doubt be beneficial to reducing the incidence of shark attack.

My response in regard to your analogy on cancer treatment would surprise you given I am a health professional. I'm not going to get into that...

I don't beleive I'm selfish for having very strong opinions in regard to what I think should be done to prevent severe injury & fatalities. I want effective changes because I think it would benefit everyone who frequents the ocean. I believe great whites have made a huge recovery since the very last whaling station in Albany closed down in the late 90's. There was a period where sharks had learned to keep away from people, so shark kept away from people for a couple of decades & then the frequency started gaining momentum with aforementioned points on Eco tours = burley up the water, cash in on the tourist dollar. Woohoo we're studying sharks - burley up the water, cash in on the government grants. Ultimately adding to the problem.

You wanna know who's really selfish here, all the people who think its ok for people to be killed & maimed as a result of all this BS. All coz they reckon its scored them some kinda cool Eco badge. At the end of the day, its unnatural to protect an "Apex" predator & not other fish. That does not create a balanced ecology.....

Mick that post is right on the money.

I so want to post, but I'm not that keen at the moment. I want a fun night tonight

Sorry mate I reckon he's full of own shizz

Select to expand quote

chrispy said..
Mick that post is right on the money.

I so want to post, but I'm not that keen at the moment. I want a fun night tonight

haha I know where your coming from, I didn't mind coz JB is cool about mass-debating & doesn't take sh1t to heart

Time to put the needle on the record bro, have a good one

Select to expand quote

MickPC said..

chrispy said..
Mick that post is right on the money.

I so want to post, but I'm not that keen at the moment. I want a fun night tonight

haha I know where your coming from, I didn't mind coz JB is cool about mass-debating & doesn't take sh1t to heart

Time to put the needle on the record bro, have a good one

I don't know why people take my responses so personally and get all agro TBH

My point of view is different thats all.

Mick i will respectfully with draw once again from the conversation as my stance is not appreciated but i will leave with this, i will take my education on the subject from the educated, scientific backed professionals instead of a people on a surfing forum..

question for the educated, the grant backed educated etc. the professionals with no answers


how many people have to die or have their lives ruin


before the educated think something real has to be done.

by that I mean putting down the shark responsible like they do with crocs. dogs etc etc



100 attacks a year


200 attacks


500 attacks


or still never.


trying to get a handle on their thinking

Select to expand quote

laceys lane said..
question for the educated, the grant backed educated etc. the professionals with no answers


how many people have to die or have their lives ruin


before the educated think something real has to be done.

by that I mean putting down the shark responsible like they do with crocs. dogs etc etc



100 attacks a year


200 attacks


500 attacks


or still never.


trying to get a handle on their thinking

I would suggest eventually it could get bad enough that surfing will be banned, as it was in Reunion..

I would hope if numbers got that high, people will be taking responsibility for their own actions and protecting themselves with devices, paying more attention to the conditions.

One last point is Lacey you say you feel safer surfing in QLD because they use nets and drum lines, well i feel safer surfing in Northern Perth than i would surfing in the South West of Australia. Thats not to say i don't, i spend a fair amount of time in Albany and the surrounding areas. But down their i really pay careful atten to my surrounds and the conditions..Surfing the capes i wouldn't be caught out their with out a device..

Oops one last point, I'm not saying nothing needs to be done, in fact I'm saying the same as you, something needs to be done Yesterday, but it needs to be something that will work..

Devices are not proven.....I don't want fake seals being dragged around for a conclusive study.

The study with flesh ended up way different didn't it jb.

Plus if you have a heart problem could be a big issue...

Unless you listen to jb and just blow it off with...... Sorry I forget what what you said jb,care to remind us

Oh I do.believe some device in the future will.work....and I hope Dave is the one doing it....and then I hope when Dave is loaded and reading this he can flow me some gear

Select to expand quote

jbshack said..

laceys lane said..
question for the educated, the grant backed educated etc. the professionals with no answers


how many people have to die or have their lives ruin


before the educated think something real has to be done.

by that I mean putting down the shark responsible like they do with crocs. dogs etc etc



100 attacks a year


200 attacks


500 attacks


or still never.


trying to get a handle on their thinking

I would suggest eventually it could get bad enough that surfing will be banned, as it was in Reunion..

I would hope if numbers got that high, people will be taking responsibility for their own actions and protecting themselves with devices, paying more attention to the conditions.

One last point is Lacey you say you feel safer surfing in QLD because they use nets and drum lines, well i feel safer surfing in Northern Perth than i would surfing in the South West of Australia. Thats not to say i don't, i spend a fair amount of time in Albany and the surrounding areas. But down their i really pay careful atten to my surrounds and the conditions..Surfing the capes i wouldn't be caught out their with out a device..

you go a long way about it, like a politician, but your not for any killing of any sharks even if they have killed someone is the answer I see.

thankyou.


the line about taking responsibility for their actions and protect themselves with devices leaves me with the conclusion your off with pixes to be honest.

devices aren't proven by a long shot.


your in fact saying 'their responsible for the sharks killing them'





anyway I think there isn't much point to going on so im done.

have your say if you want

cheers

Geez I thought, oh no when I saw this thread bump back...good to see its not another shark related incident *touch wood*.......

"While euthanasia is a last resort ... the animal posed a significant risk to anyone in its vicinity."

If only they applied the same procedure for sharks, things would be much better...

Select to expand quote

MickPC said..
Geez I thought, oh no when I saw this thread bump back...good to see its not another shark related incident *touch wood*.......

"While euthanasia is a last resort ... the animal posed a significant risk to anyone in its vicinity."

If only they applied the same procedure for sharks, things would be much better...

Sorry mate I didn't want to make people jump.

I put it up for debate only,we have handled this thread in a mature way so far.

No worries man, I think it throws in an interesting comparable situation & how it was handled into the mix

On the one hand you have a bloke with what it probably a nasty bite on his arm & the offending creature is killed. On the other hand you have people being killed, having their limbs torn off & some nasty bites. The offending creatures are given protection & sympathetic understanding. People stating it is their territory, when crocs are highly territorial & sharks are not.

A clear demonstration of double standards.

Select to expand quote

MickPC said..
Geez I thought, oh no when I saw this thread bump back...good to see its not another shark related incident *touch wood*.......

"While euthanasia is a last resort ... the animal posed a significant risk to anyone in its vicinity."

If only they applied the same procedure for sharks, things would be much better...

If they could find the shark after the attack that would be a great idea.....

Select to expand quote

DARTH said..

MickPC said..
Geez I thought, oh no when I saw this thread bump back...good to see its not another shark related incident *touch wood*.......

"While euthanasia is a last resort ... the animal posed a significant risk to anyone in its vicinity."

If only they applied the same procedure for sharks, things would be much better...

If they could find the shark after the attack that would be a great idea.....

Absolutely...I would like...if they could remove sharks posing a significant risk to anyone in its vicinity prior to an accident occurring. Based upon the sharks, size & hanging around stalking the shallows of heavily populated areas for significant amounts of time.

Select to expand quote

MickPC said..

DARTH said..

MickPC said..
Geez I thought, oh no when I saw this thread bump back...good to see its not another shark related incident *touch wood*.......

"While euthanasia is a last resort ... the animal posed a significant risk to anyone in its vicinity."

If only they applied the same procedure for sharks, things would be much better...

If they could find the shark after the attack that would be a great idea.....

Absolutely...I would like...if they could remove sharks posing a significant risk to anyone in its vicinity prior to an accident occurring. Based upon the sharks, size & hanging around stalking the shallows of heavily populated areas for significant amounts of time.

Cool...... how do you know you are getting the right one?

Eg any attack that has happened down south WA by the time the 'shooter' gets there the shark is long gone.

They had an opportunity to kill the Ken Crew shark and didnt. They followed it half way to Rotto!!

Im all for lifting the endangered listing.

Select to expand quote

DARTH said..

MickPC said..

DARTH said..

MickPC said..
Geez I thought, oh no when I saw this thread bump back...good to see its not another shark related incident *touch wood*.......

"While euthanasia is a last resort ... the animal posed a significant risk to anyone in its vicinity."

If only they applied the same procedure for sharks, things would be much better...

If they could find the shark after the attack that would be a great idea.....

Absolutely...I would like...if they could remove sharks posing a significant risk to anyone in its vicinity prior to an accident occurring. Based upon the sharks, size & hanging around stalking the shallows of heavily populated areas for significant amounts of time.

Cool...... how do you know you are getting the right one?

Eg any attack that has happened down south WA by the time the 'shooter' gets there the shark is long gone.

They had an opportunity to kill the Ken Crew shark and didnt. They followed it half way to Rotto!!

Im all for lifting the endangered listing.

Yeah same mate...thats part of the problem, slow reactions & even when opportunities present themselves they feel unable to do anything. What a waste of hellicopter petrol money if they couldn't take effective action other than stating. Oh that big shark is gone now, but be careful coz it could be back tomorrow or the next day or some time after that...besides that, I'm happy to have pest sharks removed prior to incidents occuring. Would prefer it even.

Select to expand quote

MickPC said..

DARTH said..

MickPC said..

DARTH said..

MickPC said..
Geez I thought, oh no when I saw this thread bump back...good to see its not another shark related incident *touch wood*.......

"While euthanasia is a last resort ... the animal posed a significant risk to anyone in its vicinity."

If only they applied the same procedure for sharks, things would be much better...

If they could find the shark after the attack that would be a great idea.....

Absolutely...I would like...if they could remove sharks posing a significant risk to anyone in its vicinity prior to an accident occurring. Based upon the sharks, size & hanging around stalking the shallows of heavily populated areas for significant amounts of time.

Cool...... how do you know you are getting the right one?

Eg any attack that has happened down south WA by the time the 'shooter' gets there the shark is long gone.

They had an opportunity to kill the Ken Crew shark and didnt. They followed it half way to Rotto!!

Im all for lifting the endangered listing.

Yeah same mate...thats part of the problem, slow reactions & even when opportunities present themselves they feel unable to do anything. What a waste of hellicopter petrol money if they couldn't take effective action other than stating. Oh that big shark is gone now, but be careful coz it could be back tomorrow or the next day or some time after that...besides that, I'm happy to have pest sharks removed prior to incidents occurring. Would prefer it even.

But isn't that culling? How many sharks have been hanging around your local? None at mine.

I was very careful paddling out at wedge Wednesday as I was first to paddle out, but didn't think about it after as I have never seen one at the spot where we were and none have been reported there that I know of. Great day tho.

In fact I've only ever seen one and I wasn't in the water at the time.

The chosen term of definition does not concern me, peoples lives do...we had a number sharks in my local line up between August & October. But it has been a very good year, much better than the previous 3. But that is for WA, N'thern NSW has obviously had a bad time. Do you not think its at least a little bit suss that WA has had a good year & NSW has had a bad year.

WA had, lets use the "cull" word & then suddenly after a number of years of incidences in WA. Nothing happens in WA & the problem shifts to the East. I believe the WA "cull" had a positive effect of releasing chemicals into our waters that relocated the problem sharks stalking our coast to the East which warrants further study & in turn, further "culls" Australia wide. I am positive this action would be highly beneficial in reducing the chance of shark attack across our great nation.

Select to expand quote

MickPC said..
The chosen term of definition does not concern me, peoples lives do...we had a number sharks in my local line up between August & October. But it has been a very good year, much better than the previous 3. But that is for WA, N'thern NSW has obviously had a bad time. Do you not think its at least a little bit suss that WA has had a good year & NSW has had a bad year.

WA had, lets use the "cull" word & then suddenly after a number of years of incidences in WA. Nothing happens in WA & the problem shifts to the East. I believe the WA "cull" had a positive effect of releasing chemicals into our waters that relocated the problem sharks stalking our coast to the East which warrants further study & in turn, further "culls" Australia wide. I am positive this action would be highly beneficial in reducing the chance of shark attack across our great nation.

Mick we have seen as many sharks in WA over the last year, they have not been scared of by the scent of dead sharks, its just that they are not attacking like the previous few year period. The water temps is the key to the attacking and in Northern NSW they currently are having the same issue with water temps almost the same as what happened in WA. The key now is to find out what the difference is wether its the sharks changed or the sharks food source changes. Either way the issue is still to find a way to maintain our safety in the water using devices.

Also as for comparing crocs and sharks in regards to breeding would like comparing a elephant's breeding cycle to that of a rabbit.. Sharks especially Great Whites don't have the ability to reproduce at the pace people think.. Bull sharks though will breed up and fill a void quickly, look at Reunion.

Select to expand quote

DARTH said..

MickPC said..

DARTH said..

MickPC said..
Geez I thought, oh no when I saw this thread bump back...good to see its not another shark related incident *touch wood*.......

"While euthanasia is a last resort ... the animal posed a significant risk to anyone in its vicinity."

If only they applied the same procedure for sharks, things would be much better...

If they could find the shark after the attack that would be a great idea.....

Absolutely...I would like...if they could remove sharks posing a significant risk to anyone in its vicinity prior to an accident occurring. Based upon the sharks, size & hanging around stalking the shallows of heavily populated areas for significant amounts of time.

Cool...... how do you know you are getting the right one?

Eg any attack that has happened down south WA by the time the 'shooter' gets there the shark is long gone.

They had an opportunity to kill the Ken Crew shark and didnt. They followed it half way to Rotto!!

Im all for lifting the endangered listing.

They are listed as endangered because their numbers are just that, critically low, they won't be removed from the ICUN list simply to allow them to be killed. A decision needs to be made by people who are pro cull, if its okay to wipe them out? If your happy with that then stand on that don't pretend they are not endangered simply because its convent to support an argument..

The fact that more are seen is not proof of a population increase, its just a increase/build up in particular spots, like all the animals of the savannah hanging around the last remaining water hole, that is not an indicator of a population explosion, its maybe just that your seeing the last of the numbers..

who says they are critically low. they could be running rife. there may just be bucket loads of them with no where else to go because of low fish stocks.


hard to know what to believe when those peoples living comes from researching endangered sharks. its a give me


no longer endangered the research industry goes down the tubes .



if a shark kills or attacks some one its got to go. cant have that shark running around with a free for all new learnt behaviour. call it a cull if you must



don't come back with the' its your fault you should have has a surf safe' caper