Jump to content

Shark capture - Media beat up Reloaded


Recommended Posts

This is what makes the politically driven shark fishing tackle decision arising from lobbying by vested interest groups so ridiculous - also from today`s AdelaideNow page :dry: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/hospital-admissions-soar-after-serious-dog-attack-numbers-rise/story-e6frea83-1226507857237The figures' date=' released by the Dog and Cat Management Board, rely on hospital statistics showing 63 of the attacks, or 27.4 per cent, involved children younger than nine and [b']people were hospitalised for a total of 673 days, and 71 hours in intensive care[/b].Sigh.

An astute observation by an AN reader in the comments.Rabbit Posted at 11:22 PM October 31, 2012 "There are 290000 registered dogs in SA (dog and Cat Management board figures). Presuming the dog attacks were all by different registered dogs, the attack rate is 0.0007%. Imagine the rate if there is 50 or 60000 unregistered dogs (there is 10000 in Playford apparently). Sounds like the Vet association want to make more money from the puppy schools they run by bringing fear into the equation."
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I don't really want to start a 'war' by posting either but I've gotta put my opinion on the table on this topic as well.I understand the community concerns that it can be perceived as dangerous but I'

negrukyThis is a grey area at the moment and, by inference, subject to enforcement discretion depending on whether they think you are full of BS or not.And it is exactly why Item #2 of Restriction Hou

This is where the politically driven decisions of PIRSA`s masters will come back to haunt them.A brilliant manifestation of political knee-jerk stupid rule outcomes generating, ahem, unintended conseq

Posted Images

If illegal gear was used' date=' then I have no sympathy for the people involved. Does look more like wire than mono I must say.If, on the other hand, the gear utilised was kosher then he/they [i']technically[/i] did nothing illegal.NOTE - There is not a ban on shark fishing per se but a restriction on type of tackle that may be used.And there is a reason for that - from the FAQs on PIRSA`s site;Why wasn’t a complete ban on shark fishing in metropolitan water introduced?Banning targeted fishing activity for a specific species can be problematic. The general nature of fishing makes regulating the taking or targeting of a particular species difficult, as the use of certain fishing gear can catch a range of species. For this reason, recreational fisheries management uses a combination of spatial or seasonal closures, fishing gear restrictions and bag, boat and size limits to control fishing activities.Don`t know about the 8pm thing though, must be a camera with brilliant light-gathering performance if that shot was taken at 8pm on Tue night...and the sun(?) reflection in the water...?Any photography gurus with thoughts on this, just for my education?

I had my doubts too, here's why. The pic source is credited as AN not the gentleman named? Strange. A quick phone call to the SLSC in question could clear up a few things if one was so inclined.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, Cleaver!The Source Attribution directly under the photo has been amended on the site - it now just says "Source: adelaidenow", the "Colm Mooney via" I saw this morning has been removed...The HeraldSun version still had the attribution though, well, until just before 3pm...double checked their site just before posting this, and guess whathttp://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/catch-of-day-could-land-anglers-in-hot-water/story-fndo471r-1226507857924they have also just a little while ago removed any mention of NewsForce and Colm Mooney from immediately below the photo!What is going on here? If he was the specifically named person who, it is stated, "captured the catch on camera", and AdelaideNow presumably put his photo up under the story headerCapture_2012-11-01.JPGthen why are the "airbrushing" text amendments necessary?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I notice at the bottom of the article they're happy to leave in:

Somerton Park Surf Life Saving club member Colm Mooney captured the catch on camera.He said his children were swimming nearby when "the rod went off".

Only slightly insinuating that it must be the above picture, now that they've removed the actual attribution.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Should've heard the drivel about it on ABC radio.As usual the shark fisherman were portrayed as devils who are putting the lives of kids in extreme danger.Made me sick...just about vommitted it was that bad.The bloke from PIRSA was too scared to say how stupid the ban is for fear of losing his job.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Adelaide Land Based Sharkers" or I think it was "SA land based fishing" had a very similar looking shark posted up on their facebook page just days ago (but with a bunch of guys sporting dredlocks posing with the shark, pretty sure at least one is a member here) but it has since been taken down. The picture was a lot darker ;)My guess is same shark, could be wrong (probably am, don't recall a shirtless tattooed guy in the pic).ALBS care to comment further?

Link to post
Share on other sites

People are so stupid! These sharks are here and in this close all the time this is where they drop their pups, they are there regardless if people are fishing for them or not! The ban is a crock of .......... These blokes are just putting baits in their path of where they swim! It's probly safer that the shark is eating a dead bait rather than a person foot anyway! Not that bronzies really attack people! Then the shark is scared shitless that it's just been caught and piss bolts away from the beach and swimmers so therefore it's probably safer they are being caught dnd realesed !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should've heard the drivel about it on ABC radio.As usual the shark fisherman were portrayed as devils who are putting the lives of kids in extreme danger.Made me sick...just about vommitted it was that bad.The bloke from PIRSA was too scared to say how stupid the ban is for fear of losing his job.

I found Peter from PIRSA to be quite fair with rec fishers re itterating that the vast majority do the right thing even when an emotioal "Clive" called in.Gary Flack spoke sense as always and the other callers said pretty much what we all feel about it ie the sharks are already there. Sonya asked "Trevor from Magill" if fishing should be banned from beaches (not just shark fishing) and he replied "what gives swimmers greater rights than fishers?"
Link to post
Share on other sites
"Adelaide Land Based Sharkers" or I think it was "SA land based fishing" had a very similar looking shark posted up on their facebook page just days ago (but with a bunch of guys sporting dredlocks posing with the shark' date=' pretty sure at least one is a member here) but it has since been taken down. The picture was a lot darker ;)My guess is same shark, could be wrong (probably am, don't recall a shirtless tattooed guy in the pic).ALBS care to comment further?[/quote']If someone knows of either Colm Mooney from the SP SLSC or the angler in question, could they verify if the pic is legitimate in relation to the story on AN. ie time, date, location.No need to indentify the angler.My call was returned and i will make contact with the reporter of the story to ask some simple questions and to see if i can obtain the full pic as submitted.Cheers,Greg.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This sure is turning into an interesting one :evil: Sensationalism unmasked :whistle: :evil: Whoever said " Dont let the truth get in the way of a good story " must be an Adelaide Journo :pinch: :blink:

Call made to AN' date=' awaiting return call.Holy smokes, they've just ammended it again after i raised with a subordinate.[/quote']They probably cant call back Cleaver as theyre too busy running for cover/ speaking to their legal team to do so :whistle:
Link to post
Share on other sites
This sure is turning into an interesting one :evil: Sensationalism unmasked :whistle: :evil:
Call made to AN' date=' awaiting return call.Holy smokes' date=' they've just ammended it again after i raised with a subordinate.[/quote'']They probably cant call back Cleaver as theyre too busy running for cover/ speaking to their legal team to do so :whistle:
My call was returned and i will make contact with the reporter of the story to ask some simple questions and to see if i can obtain the full pic as submitted.Cheers,Greg.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Should've heard the drivel about it on ABC radio.As usual the shark fisherman were portrayed as devils who are putting the lives of kids in extreme danger.Made me sick...just about vommitted it was that bad.The bloke from PIRSA was too scared to say how stupid the ban is for fear of losing his job.

I found Peter from PIRSA to be quite fair with rec fishers re itterating that the vast majority do the right thing even when an emotioal "Clive" called in.Gary Flack spoke sense as always and the other callers said pretty much what we all feel about it ie the sharks are already there. Sonya asked "Trevor from Magill" if fishing should be banned from beaches (not just shark fishing) and he replied "what gives swimmers greater rights than fishers?"
I know they were just doing their jobs by adhering to the law but i would guarantee if someone spoke to them privately and asked what do you think of the shark fishing ban, they would laugh and tell them how completely stupid it is.Public servants can't speak up though because they'll be repercussions from above.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Not the best evening for a beach fish' date=' but if anyone is out and about 8pm-ish tonight - a shot of the beach waterline facing west could be an interesting exercise?[/quote']Expecting a sh1t storm? :whistle:
While the shot may well have been touched up, it definiteley has an early-morning-light look to me :huh:I wonder why the face is pixilated ?To hide the potentially " guilty " angler or so the shot isnt as easily recognised :unsure::huh: :dry: :evil:
Link to post
Share on other sites

little bit small but... (I erased the faces, pixelated anyway).shark.jpgI was obviously focused on the shark and not the shirtless guys... coz there's three of them in the picture lol and its not as dark as I remember.But there it is, from facebook (nothing you upload is ever truely gone).So no, the lighting was not fudged.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that the surf club member had his children swimming in the ocean at 8PM when "the rod went off"I have been taking my kids down the beach for donkeys years and there is no way I would have them in the water at sunset and especially on a school nightLike I said earlier there is something fishy about this story, Methinks "Myth Busted"I might send the links to media watch and see if they'll pick it up

Link to post
Share on other sites
little bit small but... (I erased the faces' date=' pixelated anyway).I was obviously focused on the shark and not the shirtless guys... coz there's two of them in the picture lol and its not as dark as I remember.But there it is, from facebook (nothing you upload is ever truely gone).So no, the lighting was not fudged.[/quote']Definitely the same shark too... or at least that rod and reel outfit is the same as the one in the Adelaide now pic. Any idea when it was taken?
Link to post
Share on other sites

little bit small but... (I erased the faces' date=' pixelated anyway).[attachment=12750']shark.jpg[/attachment]I was obviously focused on the shark and not the shirtless guys... coz there's two of them in the picture lol and its not as dark as I remember.But there it is, from facebook (nothing you upload is ever truely gone).So no, the lighting was not fudged.

So what are you saying from this info Kingsley? Whats the goss on the capture and where & when it was?Happy to eat humble pie if I'm wrong
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guy on the left is definitely the guy on the adelaidenow pic (look at his shorts, plus yellow line on overhead).The adelaidenow pic is on a different angle, looks to be taken on a phone (bit blurry) and my guess from standing height. Like by a passer-by...Picture was put on facebook yesterday. No exif data to confirm date taken etc.No mention of location on the facebook page. This pic was the profile pic of someone who is a member here, he's not responding on facebook, but I've directed him here if he wants to share any info etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was speaking to a guy in a local tackle store today and he asked me if I had seen the pic of the shark his mate caught yesterday.When I asked if he meant the one that was obviously caught with a wire trace during banned hours he got caggy and changed the story to friend of a friend.I think this was definitely caught by some one doing the wrong thing in regards to the new laws.Don't get me wrong I think the new rules are :c but they are there and if people keep breaking them and flaunt it it will only make things worse for everyonePictures like that one just give the idiot do gooders more ammo

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pictures like that one just give the idiot do gooders more ammo
Agree entirely keenfisho' date=' That's why we need to be sure the story on AN matches the pic[/quote']Firstly, nice work Kingsley. Thankyou.Purnong, that for me is the core issue here. Sadly i have no faith in AN/The Advertiser and they have previous form here.I don't know if the guy in the AN pic was doing the right thing or not but with unseen forces working against rec fishing we should be a vigilant as possible.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I am seeing a lot of clothing, rod, lighting and beach surface similarities between the two photos.If the beastie was captured metro on naughty gear, I find it hard to believe that all of those present were unaware of the tackle restrictions. :whistle: After 7.30 as I post, the photos could certainly have been taken around this time a couple of days ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that the surf club member had his children swimming in the ocean at 8PM when "the rod went off"I have been taking my kids down the beach for donkeys years and there is no way I would have them in the water at sunset and especially on a school night

You'd like to think that if anyone was aware of when sharks like to feed it would be a surf lifesaver , right ?So if this guys carrying on about the perceived danger posed by rec fishers, by allowing his kids in the ater at that time, he would seem to have some credibility problems imo :whistle: Isnt this the same SLSC person that's been anti shark fishing for quite some time too ?
Link to post
Share on other sites
No mention of location on the facebook page. This pic was the profile pic of someone who is a member here' date=' he's not responding on facebook, but I've directed him here if he wants to share any info etc.[/quote']Even if he has flouted the law, some might be happy to turn the other cheek for his angle on whats going on :fishing: Id rather see AN get it in the neck than 1 angler :evil: :whistle: :laugh:
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...