LOL,wonder if they have an epirb ? sounds like they will need it.When its time for them to get rescued they should pay out of there own pockets.

 I appreciate everyone is entitled to their own opinion but the amount of people I know and in particular one south oz tackle shop that are hating on anyone who is pro cull is really starting to shit me considering most of them don't go in the water of even live in wa so should be minding their own business

my opinion not enough research but something has to happen and other methods are proven to have more by catch.  We changed the ecosystem when we protected big sharks and that includes whalers plus we regulated demersals gill netting and shark netting

I agree Rig, the tree huggers really get me going too. The argument that we are enter their backyard, to me is flawed, as I believe inshore (opposed to offshore) waters are humans domain also.
Ok, we all understand the risk when entering the ocean, however, over the last decade or so WA has experienced unprecedented fatal shark attacks. I believe sharks are a majestic animal but will always choose a humans life over a sharks. Therefore, until research can provide more answers drum lines are our best defence.

 Well said. We clear thousands of acres of land every day destroying the ecosystem for whatever lives there. These tree hugging hippies have no problem living in there new house in a freshly cleared estate. The fact is we are top of the food chain and we have a problem with the increased numbers of man eating sharks on our coast. Something has to be done. The percentage of people who are against this are the people that don't use the ocean for recreation or sport as we do. So they don't give a shit if we are safe or not in it. Do they really think this problem is going to fix itself or just go away. Research is a croc of shit as far as I'm concerned it's not going to fix the problem. You can't monitor every inch of coast line. Wait til someone's child gets taken then watch all the back peddling.

if they really want to save the sharks from the drum line , then surely the only way is for them is to form a human barrier around the the baited hooks .this would give them first hand experience as to sharks preferd food.

 Ssv,s what a service they could provide

Did you see what the man on the news clip had on his shirt, full time shit stirrer, previous anti gas hub activist, being a great diver he needs scuba gear to take the baits off the hooks. It would be great if a whitey turned up while he was doing this, he could hug whitey and then get bitten, would make great t.v. How about the tool who went to Barnetts office for the window job , what a mature way to attract people to your cause.

 Yeah they're all pathetic people, truth be known he probably lives on government hand outs and contributing to the real problems of state/country/world. If only these fuck wits would standup to real issues and start acting like the alpha species of the planet.

They sure are,the front page pic on the local rag down here was a real winner,could have passed as a whale herself,they all went down to the waters edge and bowed to the ocean ,didnt go in it tho.

 The organiser  of the protest is an avid diver but afraid to dive because of sharks 

http://mobile.news.com.au/national/western-australia/conservationists-project-more-images-onto-parliament-house/story-fnii5thn-1226796753781

Bang on there Tapout this whole thing is shitting me they are all hypocrites, and the oxygen theives on TV and the muppet in the paper are the poster boys for the cause!! Thumb tie yourself to my boat if they want i will take ya for a tow :)

 Shark cull is a shit idea. The only reason there has being more fatal shark attacks over the last 10 years is the fact WA's population has also increased dramaticlly. More people that swim the more that get eaten! 

 Do you think swimming in the ocean is a new concept to West Aussies? You're a muppet if you do. I can remember swimming at packed beaches when I was 10 years old, I was raised well south of Perth also. In fact their was article in the west a few weeks back with a picture of a jam packed Cottesloe beach in the 70's. Now think of something else West Aussies where doing in our ocean up until the late 1970's that we don't do now. Thinking?

Cot 1972

http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/12611947?q=%28%28The+Beach+at+Cottesloe+WA%29+OR+%28Cottesloe+WA%29%29+NOT+%28id%3A11774856%29&c=picture

get the pros out cull those bronzies ruining my fun, its definetly a problem.

I want to join the protest, my point is that there are not enough drum bait lines being established I want more over a wider area, some metro beaches are not enough. Further more I would issue free fire arms to all recreational fisher people with free target shooting lessons to hone their visual target skills. Of course these fire arms would be tightly controlled, with all recipients promising that the fire arm would only be used to cull sharks and definitely not greenies, do I have any supporters, as I would not want such measures to be introduced without a broad base of support. All I need is 3500 supporters as this represents overwhelming support for the measures after all if the shark hugging convention at Cottesloe last Saturday was such a blistering success then surely we can match this massive roll out.

More seals equals more sharks in the surrounding areas, they will not decrease shark attacks if the seals are there. With the swimming population argument at cott being less now is 1 point but the attacks are divided between other ocean users also which comes back to the  surfing attacks,

20 years ago on the surf breaks down south you could be at a break with 3 people now there is an average of 15 people at each break that to me indicates more surfers using the water now than back then and they are surfing in the seals habitat where the sharks will be looking for there feed to survive.

Down at smiths beach there was a surfing lesson for the kids and there was seals playing in the waves near the lession, 1 of the mothers I talked to thought it was great to see and then the seals took off in a hurry and they thought nothing of it until I explained that seals were shark s favorite food and the seals MIGHT have taken off cause a shark was in the area, then the seals were a concern for her and not just great to see, the surf school also thought nothing of it.

It is hard to understand that they dont equate seals to sharks

Also how is a drum line set out 1 km going to be effective when most sharks spotted along the coast are less than 500mt from shore

I am against the cull and not a tree hugging hippie, I have lived in the southwest for 40 years and saw more sharks 20 years ago than I do now

I have to agree with coastaljoy. Maybe the beaches are less frequented by beachgoers due to knowledge of sun damgage etc, however the shark attacks are not coming predominately from people playing in the surf if at all. As a very wealthy state generally, the access to other watersports be it surfing, jet skis, kite surfing, diving etc has dramatically increased since the 70's therefore it is inevitable that shark attacks will increase. With the whales being protected & numbers increasing, again more sharks are following the migrations.
I am not too sure what the answer is but I do not think the drum lines are the answer & more research is needed.

 Why does everyone keep picking on the Muppets? I used to love that show. Seriously though it's a no win for either side of the debate. The gov is only going to do half the job and what they do do isn't targetting where most of the attacks are taking place. Shitting drum lines that could catch any typeof bloody shark. My opinion is you need to target fish them actively if you want to make an impact. Appeasing the masses typical gov beaurocracy.

I thought it was pretty funny on Christmass evening they had the movie JAWS on Tv. Not quite appropriate for chissy hols viewing esspecially when you spend your chrissy holiday break in the water most days. Anyways just thought it was humorous.

Do you remember the sharks killed and dumped on 80 mile beach a couple of years ago and the Fisheries Dept. were all over the fisherman responsible claiming what a waste of a resource so what are they doing now "wasting a resource" by shooting and dumping sharks out deep. Bloody hypocrites.

There was a nice little propaganda (save the shark) doco on a week or so ago. Very one sided. It actually referenced Jaws as to the reason for our insecurities. I disagree...my insecurities come from the fact that there are some bloody big sharks lurking just in the surf zone.
Not worried about tigers or bronzies, but the big whities do put the wind up me.
Again, I'm not pro or against...just making observations.

This is the thing that really pisses me off.  

While im reluctant to draw references to land animals I have been thinking of Elephants in Africa.  While simplified it is close to our own interaction with whites.

Elephants roam Africa relatively free from harm for millenia, white humans enter the picture and begin hunting elephants, a few hundred years later given the advent of the firearm and better transport elephant nearly hunted to extinction. Humans get concerned, now have to protect elephants to stop species extinction, sanctuaries/game parks are established, population begins to flourish, parks arent big enough to support new numbers. Elephants cant just go running around eating crops and entering populated areas, elephants have to be culled.  

When elephants are culled, they garnish every profit from the carcass, ivory, meat, hide, etc and pump it back into conservation. More parks more elephants, but still the numbers need to be controlled.  I guess the difference is we hunted the elephant and previously we hunted the whales as the target.  Whales like elephants, were hunted to near extinction, then requiring protection. The GWS is as if the elephant had a natural predator whose population blossomed from the increased protection of the elephant.

GW Shark jaws go for many thousands of dollars, everyone is crying out for research, but what will we learn if the carcasses are dumped offshore.  If we kill them, then at least lets study the 5, 10, 20, 50 or however many it ends out being and make money off of it to increase our understanding and pump the money back into better conservation/protection strategies.  If only to keep it from costing us all a fortune it seems such a waste to dump them at sea.  I believe the cosmetic/skin care industry has a lot of uses for shark products from the liver and offal, also there was a fish leather maker in Esperance for a while.  Maybe someone could wear a GWS Grey coat and snappy belt and shoes!?

we are surrounded by ocean, it is our play ground,and our source of food comes from the ocean,  i dont think being munched on by a great white or large shark is anyones preferred way to go

 the gov. is in a no win situation  they need to be seen to be doing something and they have a duty to the general public ,further! culling is nothing new in this country ie:rabbits, donkeys,horses,feral goats , kangaroos  etc.  & and now 3m.plus sharks ,its all to do with maintaing a manageable level .

reminds me of the  tree hugger { pinichuck?} up a white gum tree  for around a month  in thornlie ran up a bill of 30,000 plus also save the trees along manning rd . GET A JOB !GET A LIFE !

for what it's worth, Mr Barnett has a knee jerk reaction to this subject. Condolences to the families whole have lost loved ones to shark attacks, but how about all the other families affected by car accidents, drug overdoses, murders, plane crashes etc. I don't see the government wanting to go out and cull hoon/drunk/drugged drivers, drug dealers, murderers/rapists/peadophiles, pilots etc. I think this government has got it's priorities screwed up completely. Australia has become a pussy country where everyone has joined the U.S.A. in looking for someone or some thing to blame for their own stupid actions. We need to take responsibility for what we do and not look for a scape goat. What happened to the good old days when you tripped on a footpath, got up, brushed yourself off and got mum to put some Betadine on the scratch. Now you trip on the footpath, you blame the councils, get lawyers involved, sue for every penny you can get, then wonder why insurance premiums go up as well as taxes. The way I see it we are entering the sharks domain when we get in the water, it's at our own risk...when sharks start coming out of the water and walking up to people in shopping malls and chomping their heads off, then I think we should have a cull, until then leave the sharks be. just my thoughts.

The decision has been made like it or not the hooks will go out,get over it.If ya dont like it vote for someone else,its about the only thing this govt has done so far that i agree with.

thats a bit harsh willo ,LO if not for Barney  doubt we would be able to wet a line .

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DUdkODTiM780&h=uAQF-Ma1y

Bloody sharks!!!!

Lets not turn this thread into another "Pro cull vs Anti Cull". It has been done a hundred times and we don't need another debate.

Like Willo above me said, agree or not but the law has been made and if you don't like it then vote different next time. I dont like speed cameras but that does not give me the moral right to go and sabotage all cameras.

These fools who are planning on going out there in a sub standard vessel to go and sabotage the nets are idiots and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. The state of their vessel alone does nothing for their cause as it shows the true intelligence of these people.

Just because you dont believe in something does not give anyone the right to take the law into their own hands and start sabotaging equipment.

And before anyone pipes up saying that the government is breaking the law by killing protected species, Challenge them in court then. If you are so convinced it is illegal than you will have no problems winning in court.

When someone see a shark and takes a pic of it, the first thing they do is send it off to the media who replay the thing about 40.000 times in the first day and 20.000 each day for the next fortnight till another bit comes along.

Nothing is more terrifying than the though of someone being eaten alive and the media play it to the hilt. No mention of someone getting stung by a bee and dying, small mention in todays paper of a boy getting bitten by a dugite but think back a week or two when the last sighting was made. Everyone carries a phone with a camera in it or has a camera on his boat and if something pops its ugly head up they see it as their 2 minutes of fame by sending it in to the media, so that makes us as guilty as them.

I am against it because I was taught as a youngster that if you can't eat it or have a legitimate use for it don't kill it, its life is precious to it as well.

I'm waiting for the new Fisheries minister Ken Baston to stamp his brand on what is done with the sharks. I think this whole plan has still a way to go before the final decisions and contracts are allocated.

As far as I am concerned , leave them alone. the sharks that is not the do gooder greenies.
before anyone says anything yes I have swam with sharks in their environment and I believe its their domane and if anything happens its my fault for being there , not the sharks because they are only doing what comes naturally.

 According to "Libra's Odd Spot" - makers of tampons or box plugs etc. You are more likely to get attacked by a cow than a shark. Just a bit of BLOODY trivia!