Well yeah its still going on and I think its fairly safe bet to assume much of the momentum has been due to Social Media. Social Media is a new phenomena even if FaceBook is 10 years old. The uprising in Egypt is said to have been sparked and fuelled by Social Media and the humble phone text messaging.
Of course, the killing of a beautiful animal plugs into the receptors of many a person and there's actually nothing wrong with that.
Sadly though, Social Media provides the soapbox for idiots on both sides of every debate and a great disservice is done to pretty every side of every debate. Sad, but that's the way it is. Not everyone is going behave well and be an avid reader of Edward DeBono books, but there you have it.
I was a little surprised at there being a rally held today (as I type) against the Shark Cull here in Albany. Now reason I thought this a little odd, is there are no baited drum lines here in Albany, in fact you got to go 4 hours drive away to even get close to them. Now its not a negative thing that people are passionate about an issue, especially as there's definitely been more than a few people (of whatever age) who belong to the "Whatever" generation, generally disinterested in anything more pressing than the next meal or more serious than the weather. Its not a negative that there are people who for or against the Shark Cull but it is a little disappointing from a number of angles.
Firstly it is a cull, not a eradication programme. This is about reducing numbers of certain types and sizes of sharks in a particular area. Now how effective that aim is, well that's a very worthwhile discussion but its seems to not be closely looked at, but it isn't the wholesale slaughter of an entire species with impending ecological ramifications for the planet. Its not putting us on the brink of planet death as a few suggested. I saw another line that sharks help soak up radiation from the Japanese nuclear power plant disaster and therefore should be left alone. I don't think it matters which side of the debate you lay your hat, that sort of argument doesn't do anyone any favours. It is odd, odd and very odd.
Personal view, well if it is there territory and we should just accept the risk, then we must instruct all life savers to save people who are drowning or in distress but not intervene during a shark incident because people should know and accept the risk. Onus is on the swimmer/surfer and life savers should stick to their knitting and just prevent drownings. Whilst I draw that long illogical bow (yep I'm trying to be odd) all bushwalkers on the Bibbulmun Track must accept the risk of snake bite. They should not kill snakes, accept they can and possible might be bitten. They are not to dispatch the animal. I must not kill one if it gets into my house either. Oddly the snake should know the risk of entering my habitat and accept I may kill it as a part of nature.
I'm not sure how accurate or efficient the baited drum lines are, its probably very hard to work out if its going to save lives. But if we have (in Perth at least) aerial patrols, do we halt them because people should know and accept the risk or should we (instead of drum lines) send out a team to kill a big menacing shark that is too close to land?
The only alternative to baited drum lines I have seen mentioned so far is do nothing, let nature be.
Again I'm not a fan of Colin Barnett but I think he's pretty well hog tied on the issue now. Drum lines are in, there's precedence over on the eastern seaboard going back many years, I think despite the siege, the policy is set for now. The all new Fiona Stanley Hospital is now suffering a major cost blow out and massive delay to the opening date. I'm not sure if it will even add any extra beds to the health system in Perth. I think the fact that Treasury was only given 2 weeks to go over the financials and give a verdict is a huge worry and we may see a crack in the door which is beginning to show things reminiscent to the bad old days of WA Inc.
If ever there was an issue to poke and prod as a political distraction, this Social Media fuelled Shark Cull Debate is an absolutely God send for the Government and Cabinet. With ramping effect of Social Media, a few rallies hitting the news its a perfect smokescreen to take some of the sting out of the uncomfortable facts in other areas.
Sorry, but the Government has bigger fish to fry and the Anti-Cull Shark group are going to help keep peering eyes off some serious political hand grenades that already have the pin pulled.
I remember some years ago the interview on the radio with an adventurer who was flying a helicopter around Australia to raise money for charity. When asked what was the most incredible sight he'd seen so far he mentioned Broome. He said to be up high and see all the people on the beach swimming whilst not all that far away were literally thousands of sharks was a jaw dropping eye opener. Now why was that even possible? I think its fairly simple (yet unproven) fish numbers are there are greater than they are off Perth. The sharks food sources are in abundance up there compared to the Bunbury to Hillarys stretch. Is this a variable, are some sharks learning that meat is more plentiful closer to shore? If so, and I really don't know, I'd assume such sharks will be the bigger ones. I had heard of the shark that has a track it seemed to follow from Mandurah to Hillarys. Been a number of close calls, Kayaks bumped, outboards bitten. I imagine sharks biting outboard motors isn't new, but we do seem to hear more about it today than say in the 1970s.
I've not heard whether the sharks behaviour or food sources have changed over the decades. If it has, it changes the risk a great deal. But while we're all watching that, see if the private security firm Cerco issue, Fiona Stanley Hospital issue and rising unemployment numbers generate less rage in the community due to people's attention being diluted by big predatory fish.
Magician's illusion is afoot.
Friday 14 February 2014
Sunday 9 February 2014
Shark Cull Protest - Live Animal Export.
I reckon some folk will have their "I call Strawman" defence ready after merely reading the title, however there is some parallels and points from both topics worth slowing down and looking at in context.
I heard some interesting comments on talk back media and online chatter and was pretty stunned about a few of the arguments against the drum lines to catch and kill sharks. One particular one popped up several times. That being that sharks were vital for healthy seas and without healthy seas we would have no oxygen and we would all die. Now that is the line of thinking distilled down to its barest bones and in that particular state we can see a good deal of invalidity. So when Great White Pointers hit low numbers decades ago and were made a protected species, we were actually looking down the barrel of climatic planet apocalypse? I don't recall that argument back then and I think immediately of the destruction of bee numbers in a number of overseas countries that has got so bad, native and domestic bee species are being exported to foreign countries to help pollination in crop production alone. Now bees and big sharks are 2 completely different issues, two completely different and unrelated problems, but think its wrong to say that bees are less important than the shark threat to us or the threat we pose to sharks. The bee calamity is not new and if you google "threats to bees" I think you'll find enough reading material to get you through till the next Christmas period. Urban sprawl and the loss of habitat, increase in pesticide use (some illegal) and then there's a raft of diseases and parasites knocking bees off in serious numbers. Its affecting native flora and fauna in a number of overseas countries and it is already affecting the viability of agriculture.
Its serious. So too a number of other even more pressing issues.
Sharks...well the drum lines are to manage numbers, not got the latest numbers but last I heard one shark died before it could be released, one was shot and dumped further out to sea and one was released. I suspect the numbers will rise significantly in short time. It is however not the eradication of a species, its population control, its managing the numbers to decrease the risk to swimmers and lessen the hazard. Now lets not bring up strawman...ahh what the heck, bring him in. Is it a strawman to say that life on earth, due to oxygen depletion, due to the impending falling shark numbers? Well it sure is odd...
The emotion running at a Perth beach where its said 6000 people rolled up to protest the cull programme raised a number of big questions and before I draw a potential tenuous link to Live Export I think its helpful to pour the sunlight on the Shark Cull issue.
2 issues popped up on talk back radio, Perth based ABC 720AM radio featured a horrendous story on child molestation in an eastern wheatbelt town, where a serial offender ended up in a small town, whilst on bail for 10 offences and committed more offences. The local population were unaware of the threat that had arrived in town, or to highlight a worse fact, local police were not made aware. The father of a victim spoke and it was heart breaking. The inefficiencies of the system in WA helped leave small children unprotected and allowed them to be attacked.
The talkback host Geoff Hutchinson made a salient point. 6000 people rally on the coast over one of nature's apex predators that has attacked 7 people in 3 years, yet how many of those shark defenders will march over the horrible injustice of child molestation in the eastern wheatbelt?
I'm not linking child abuse to sharks but it is actually a fair question from the helicopter vantage point above.
How is it that people can rally in such big numbers on a beach, about an issue that happens on their very loved beach but they cannot rally anywhere about a heinous crime against the most vulnerable in our community, those that should be well protected so they can grow and age unhindered by sexual predators? I think it could actually be part of the 1st World Country problems we see hit by so regularly.
Depression is lower in impoverished 3rd world countries than say Australia. 3rd world countries tend to not be passionate about the frivolous nor tend to have gravity apportioned via celebrities and social media. I don't think 3rd world nations and communities, who can be closer to lower life expectancy or work harder to survive let alone hope to thrive tend to get up in arms about oxygen depletion due to a shark cull.
It seems an oddity of this 1st world country that social media is a driver of the quick group think on Social Media. Its worth mentioning that Egyptian Arab Spring type uprising was very much fuelled and orchestrated via social media. In Cuba, where things still aren't going swimmingly for the people, no such social media groundswell is possible. Smartphones don't work in Cuba, the internet connections they do have cost roughly a dollar a minute placing it well above the affordability of most of their nation. Now when I hear of the Animal Activists using the emotion soaked guilt card "we're advocates for the speechless" I think of Cuba, North Korea and a number of other countries where free speech is outlawed and all other public speech is fully controlled by the authorities. When I see the comments "We speak for those who cannot speak for themselves" I have to remind myself they're not thinking, worrying or speaking for Cubans, Koreans or anyone else...they're talking about animals raised in food production.
It is worth mentioning, the TV Programme "River Monsters" showed the host catching large and aggressive sharks in a South African River. A river with a large number of large sharks. They caught a shark or two, tagged it with a tracer tag and kept fishing whilst the authorities began collecting tracking data. Odd part was, within days it was soon showing the clever and aggressive bull sharks have adapted or learned to sit underneath boats that were fishing. Not to attack a human who might jump overboard, but to steal the catch of a large fish on a line. Fish were not depleted, or at least not down to dire low levels, however the Apex Predator has learned where the smart easy catch is. We have no way of knowing, but I do wonder if this is the case with larger sharks off the W.A. coast?
I don't think with all sides citing science, citing the other side has none can put aside the possibility that the sharp rise in attacks isn't a part of sharks coming in closer and chasing easier targets.
Colin Barnett was damned either way and I don't think he handled the media properly in regard to the course he's chosen. Had he done nothing as the 6000 had pushed for and a swimmer been taken not long after I think his political career would be compromised greatly. Politically I don't think he had any choice, he had to approve the drums lines. Its something the eastern states has had in some places up to 40 years. I think he under estimated the Social Media response which does have the ability of enraging and mobilising large numbers of people in very short time without a great deal of proper detail.
Its a shark cull but only in the areas of highly (human) populated beaches. It is not shark eradication or species extinction policy in action. Its about catching sharks and destroying certain types and sizes...however there will be unintentional kills but numbers are monitored and constantly assessed. Its a management tool, it is not setting sea mines by the millions and attaching shark attractants to them.
I just wonder about the lack of species loyalty.
I just wonder was the huge mobilisation a result of fast working social media working with less than the full facts and preying on emotion.
I just wonder had an anti-child abuse rally pencilled in on the same day, say one kilometre from the shark rally on the beach, would numbers be any different at the beach.
I just wonder whether there is a worldview hiding amongst the crowds that's helping to shift the masses a particular way in regards our role and connection with other species. A worldview that claims moral high ground, whilst being very ethically challenged at its core.
I just wonder do people of that worldview run amongst those who oppose Live Export yet have very little personal experience or knowledge about it.
I wonder, I really do wonder.
I heard some interesting comments on talk back media and online chatter and was pretty stunned about a few of the arguments against the drum lines to catch and kill sharks. One particular one popped up several times. That being that sharks were vital for healthy seas and without healthy seas we would have no oxygen and we would all die. Now that is the line of thinking distilled down to its barest bones and in that particular state we can see a good deal of invalidity. So when Great White Pointers hit low numbers decades ago and were made a protected species, we were actually looking down the barrel of climatic planet apocalypse? I don't recall that argument back then and I think immediately of the destruction of bee numbers in a number of overseas countries that has got so bad, native and domestic bee species are being exported to foreign countries to help pollination in crop production alone. Now bees and big sharks are 2 completely different issues, two completely different and unrelated problems, but think its wrong to say that bees are less important than the shark threat to us or the threat we pose to sharks. The bee calamity is not new and if you google "threats to bees" I think you'll find enough reading material to get you through till the next Christmas period. Urban sprawl and the loss of habitat, increase in pesticide use (some illegal) and then there's a raft of diseases and parasites knocking bees off in serious numbers. Its affecting native flora and fauna in a number of overseas countries and it is already affecting the viability of agriculture.
Its serious. So too a number of other even more pressing issues.
Sharks...well the drum lines are to manage numbers, not got the latest numbers but last I heard one shark died before it could be released, one was shot and dumped further out to sea and one was released. I suspect the numbers will rise significantly in short time. It is however not the eradication of a species, its population control, its managing the numbers to decrease the risk to swimmers and lessen the hazard. Now lets not bring up strawman...ahh what the heck, bring him in. Is it a strawman to say that life on earth, due to oxygen depletion, due to the impending falling shark numbers? Well it sure is odd...
The emotion running at a Perth beach where its said 6000 people rolled up to protest the cull programme raised a number of big questions and before I draw a potential tenuous link to Live Export I think its helpful to pour the sunlight on the Shark Cull issue.
2 issues popped up on talk back radio, Perth based ABC 720AM radio featured a horrendous story on child molestation in an eastern wheatbelt town, where a serial offender ended up in a small town, whilst on bail for 10 offences and committed more offences. The local population were unaware of the threat that had arrived in town, or to highlight a worse fact, local police were not made aware. The father of a victim spoke and it was heart breaking. The inefficiencies of the system in WA helped leave small children unprotected and allowed them to be attacked.
The talkback host Geoff Hutchinson made a salient point. 6000 people rally on the coast over one of nature's apex predators that has attacked 7 people in 3 years, yet how many of those shark defenders will march over the horrible injustice of child molestation in the eastern wheatbelt?
I'm not linking child abuse to sharks but it is actually a fair question from the helicopter vantage point above.
How is it that people can rally in such big numbers on a beach, about an issue that happens on their very loved beach but they cannot rally anywhere about a heinous crime against the most vulnerable in our community, those that should be well protected so they can grow and age unhindered by sexual predators? I think it could actually be part of the 1st World Country problems we see hit by so regularly.
Depression is lower in impoverished 3rd world countries than say Australia. 3rd world countries tend to not be passionate about the frivolous nor tend to have gravity apportioned via celebrities and social media. I don't think 3rd world nations and communities, who can be closer to lower life expectancy or work harder to survive let alone hope to thrive tend to get up in arms about oxygen depletion due to a shark cull.
It seems an oddity of this 1st world country that social media is a driver of the quick group think on Social Media. Its worth mentioning that Egyptian Arab Spring type uprising was very much fuelled and orchestrated via social media. In Cuba, where things still aren't going swimmingly for the people, no such social media groundswell is possible. Smartphones don't work in Cuba, the internet connections they do have cost roughly a dollar a minute placing it well above the affordability of most of their nation. Now when I hear of the Animal Activists using the emotion soaked guilt card "we're advocates for the speechless" I think of Cuba, North Korea and a number of other countries where free speech is outlawed and all other public speech is fully controlled by the authorities. When I see the comments "We speak for those who cannot speak for themselves" I have to remind myself they're not thinking, worrying or speaking for Cubans, Koreans or anyone else...they're talking about animals raised in food production.
It is worth mentioning, the TV Programme "River Monsters" showed the host catching large and aggressive sharks in a South African River. A river with a large number of large sharks. They caught a shark or two, tagged it with a tracer tag and kept fishing whilst the authorities began collecting tracking data. Odd part was, within days it was soon showing the clever and aggressive bull sharks have adapted or learned to sit underneath boats that were fishing. Not to attack a human who might jump overboard, but to steal the catch of a large fish on a line. Fish were not depleted, or at least not down to dire low levels, however the Apex Predator has learned where the smart easy catch is. We have no way of knowing, but I do wonder if this is the case with larger sharks off the W.A. coast?
I don't think with all sides citing science, citing the other side has none can put aside the possibility that the sharp rise in attacks isn't a part of sharks coming in closer and chasing easier targets.
Colin Barnett was damned either way and I don't think he handled the media properly in regard to the course he's chosen. Had he done nothing as the 6000 had pushed for and a swimmer been taken not long after I think his political career would be compromised greatly. Politically I don't think he had any choice, he had to approve the drums lines. Its something the eastern states has had in some places up to 40 years. I think he under estimated the Social Media response which does have the ability of enraging and mobilising large numbers of people in very short time without a great deal of proper detail.
Its a shark cull but only in the areas of highly (human) populated beaches. It is not shark eradication or species extinction policy in action. Its about catching sharks and destroying certain types and sizes...however there will be unintentional kills but numbers are monitored and constantly assessed. Its a management tool, it is not setting sea mines by the millions and attaching shark attractants to them.
I just wonder about the lack of species loyalty.
I just wonder was the huge mobilisation a result of fast working social media working with less than the full facts and preying on emotion.
I just wonder had an anti-child abuse rally pencilled in on the same day, say one kilometre from the shark rally on the beach, would numbers be any different at the beach.
I just wonder whether there is a worldview hiding amongst the crowds that's helping to shift the masses a particular way in regards our role and connection with other species. A worldview that claims moral high ground, whilst being very ethically challenged at its core.
I just wonder do people of that worldview run amongst those who oppose Live Export yet have very little personal experience or knowledge about it.
I wonder, I really do wonder.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)