The shark cull campaign in Western Australia is so ludicrous that I wonder how the entire community (rather than just a portion of it) is not outraged. Does the hype of adding the word "shark" blur the facts of what is happening? Let's remove the word shark and replace it with lamp just to experiment.
The contractor in the south alone was paid six thousand dollars A DAY to cull lamps. Seven days a week, for approximately four months. This time period will double in the next cull campaign. The contractor told me, to my face, that his expenses were between $500 and $1000 a day. That's a $5,000 dollar a day PROFIT for sitting in a harbor and checking lamp hooks ONCE in the morning and ONCE in the afternoon. That level of wasted tax payer money should outrage everyone, even lamp haters.
Evidence shows that the WA Government had an agenda that was going to move forward no matter what. Consider the following evidence:
Not a single white lamp was captured in the cull, yet the cull was declared a success. On the other hand, if white lamps had been captured, the cull would have been declared a success in that scenario as well. Translation - the cull was going to proceed no matter what.
Minister Hunt stated in his exception letter that any breaches of the conditions set forth in the exemption would result in a suspension of this exemption. Dozens of breaches were documented during the lamp cull yet not a single suspension took place nor were any of these breaches addressed. Translation - the cull was going to continue no matter what and Hunt's letter was nothing more than smoke and mirrors while he provided a political favor.
No human fatalities occurred during the lamp cull, therefore it was a declared a success in beach safety. However, if a fatality had occurred during this time the government would have leveraged this as a need for more drum lines rather than acknowledging that the drum lines were either ineffective or even an source of addition risk to swimmers. Translation - the cull was going to continue no matter what.
The WA government rejected the data of all research groups who advised against the cull, including rejecting the very document that the WA government requested from CSIRO (the results of that document also advised against the cull.) The Western Australian Government sought out organizations currently implementing shark cull methods and chose to take their advice instead, basically seeking the results they wanted while dismissing all others. Translation - the cull was going to continue no matter what.
WA claimed they would be pursuing the most humane lamp mitigation methods available. In reality, not only did Western Australia fail to use existing and available humane methods already tried and tested elsewhere, they actually managed to add new levels of suffering to their method of choice which is known to be lethal.
Even if you hate sharks, this level of incompetence and dishonesty is intolerable.
Supporters are now helping to
Corruption boils down to money so perhaps money is the way to fight corruption as well. With unsubstantiated claims that the presence of sharks is and will hurt Western Australia's economy the Minister of the Environment granted an exemption in the name of "National Interest" to allow the systematic and targeted slaughter of protected species of sharks (which inevitably also made any and all…
Inspired 4 pledges
Viewed 222 times