Jump to content

Shark capture - Media beat up Reloaded


Recommended Posts

  • 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

MMMMM Documented by a memeber of somerton surf lifesaving club so must have been close to there, documented caught before 9 pm , obviously using wire trace, YEP he broke te LAW !!! no time for these people, Before anyone responds, I too used to chase sharks and dont condone this form of fishing. I am also an active member of a close by surf life saving club and my daughter is in the water all year round traing and competing in the nippers. This really concerns me this incedent. Our lifesavers protect us on the local beaches and need the younger nippers to be confident in the water so they can progress to beach patrol to protect our community. This does far from help this community cause, they help to protect lives, this incedent endangers them. Comply with the laws and I dont have a problem, break them , then I angry. My 2 cents only, have not posted this to start a war as per some previous threads, just making my personal view only with a statement and no reply Regards Blighty

Link to post
Share on other sites

That could well be the case ausea,but as a "responsible fisho" (I'm assuming he is),it is your duty to be up with the rules and regulations..........he doesn't seem to be a "casual angler" looking at his gear,he know's what it's all about :) Ignorance is no excuse.When was the last time a police officer let you off a speeding fine,because you "didn't know" the speed limit?

Link to post
Share on other sites

this incedent endangers them.

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'd argue that the 100+ years of shark fishing history off the Adelaide metro coastline entirely negates any concerns of apparent danger.If it is as dangerous as people claim then why have we seen zero shark attacks which are directly attributable to people fishing for sharks?? In 100+ years? I've struggled to even find one incident in any state in Australia. This should put to rest any fears anyone has about fishing related shark attacks in Australia. Reading this shows that almost every attack is related to either surfing' date=' diving or snorkelling and usually well away from non-surf beaches and beaches lacking reef structure. I also note that we haven't banned any of those activities.I hardly think a Bronzie with a hook in his mouth is in any position to think about what's he's having for lunch. Since most sharks are opportunistic feeders, it stands to reason that they would take a fresh dead bait presented by an angler [i']before[/i] taking a human as it represents a much easier feed for a shark.The simple realities of the situation are that the sharks are already in the water with the swimmers. Fishing for them does not attract them nor make them more likely to attack a person. History has proven this to be the case beyond all reasonable doubt.Yes it does happen to be the law now but from my point of view it's a law which is not backed by any evidence or science and it has been put in place simply because of the perceived danger, which is not really good enough IMO. There's a perceived danger that I might get attacked by a dog on the way home, but we haven't banned all dog ownership. Maybe we should, considering there were 6000 dog attacks between 2001 - 2003 alone which required hospitalization. More than seven times the total amount of shark attacks ever recorded in Australia.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Love it how adelaidenow link to the mako pictures for the 'Gallery' on that story. shark showing lots of teeth' date=' good for the scaremongering.[/quote']Wether the guy has broken any regs or not (and lets hope he hasnt ) it's obviously yet another lot of media hype and hoohaaa drumming up business via shock value :whistle: :angry: The wording of it's just plain ridiculous to me :blink: Media credibilitys taken another huge nosedive I think !
Link to post
Share on other sites

The main problem here is seeing someone hooked onto a shark that size with people and kids in the water who have no idea this guy is fighting this huge shark. This shark will drag line from one side to the other.Not really the ideal setting with 50-80 people in the immediate area.No wonder they put a ban on it during peak use times.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If illegal gear was used, 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 technically 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?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Agree with nearly everything you said U4L ' date=' Any law imposed to reduce a risk in anything I will normally agree to. This one is close to my heartthough and my opinion only Do remember Dogs are required to be on a leash at certain times and places to reduce risk to the community ( council by law though ) Blighty[/quote']That's very true. I have no issues with time restrictions on shark fishing provided they're sensible. Like, I would be opposed to people fishing for sharks at 5pm on a hot, busy Saturday at Semaphore. That's not a realistic situation. 8pm on a Tuesday night though, sounds fine to me.
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.[/quote']Yep agreed. Ignorance is not an excuse for breaking the law.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats cool U4L , I think we agreed on majority of points to this topic. The only thing is during summer hot nights with still some light at 8 pm there are still some nippers in the water training at these times let alone the average Joe Blo Public, so the only thing I disagree with you is I think the 9 pm time is fair and equitable for all parties IMO only mate Cheers Mate Blighty

Link to post
Share on other sites

This shark will drag line from one side to the other.Not really the ideal setting with 50-80 people in the immediate area..

I can see your point there Aus if fishing from a beach. I wouldnt want 20-50lb mono or braid being dragged across me as I waded/swam, by 2 metres of unhappy Bronzy ! Thats gonna hurt ! :ohmy: Probably a diferent scenario froma Jetty tho.
Link to post
Share on other sites
This shark will drag line from one side to the other.Not really the ideal setting with 50-80 people in the immediate area..
I can see your point there Aus if fishing from a beach. I wouldnt want 20-50lb mono or braid being dragged across me as I waded/swam' date=' by 2 metres of unhappy Bronzy ! Thats gonna hurt ! :ohmy: Probably a diferent scenario froma Jetty tho.[/quote']What's the difference between a bronzie or a big snapper or a big mully, if that's all we're worried about? Not talking about this guy in particular, but you're gonna get that same scenario fishing for heaps of different species other than sharks.
Link to post
Share on other sites
This shark will drag line from one side to the other.Not really the ideal setting with 50-80 people in the immediate area..
I can see your point there Aus if fishing from a beach. I wouldnt want 20-50lb mono or braid being dragged across me as I waded/swam' date=' by 2 metres of unhappy Bronzy ! Thats gonna hurt ! :ohmy: Probably a diferent scenario froma Jetty tho.[/quote']What's the difference between a bronzie or a big snapper or a big mully' date=' if that's all we're worried about? Not talking about this guy in particular, but you're gonna get that same scenario fishing for heaps of different species other than sharks.[/quote']None maybe UG, but lets face it, the sharks are the ones that get all the attention, plus very few people would be fishing for mullies /reds off local beaches.I guess I had that response coming ug4 :whistle: and dont get me wrong, Im all for our right to fish etc, but I understand Ausseas point, and it's something that never occured to me b4 too !
Link to post
Share on other sites

We've now sadly got to face the facts that a STUPID Law was implemented.It IS quite possible that this person only fishes for sharks in Summer, does not frequent any fishing sites or forums such as ours, and has not heard about the rules. He or she could even have moved here from interstate and have ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE, that you can't catch sharks off our METRO BEACHES during daylight ours.I think its classic and HIGHLIGHT's how poor the ruling is. Now youve got PIRSA having to investigate something that has been done for the past 100 odd years with no incidents. what a silly waste of tax payers money.I totally agree with Uglies post and people acting with emotion regarding their family should assess the real truthes about shark attacks and the facts relating to previous shark attacks.For me its not poor SHARK - but poor kid, especially if the kid had no idea, and is an occasional shark fisho.(Becayse lets face it just because he has a wire trace and an overhead reel, doesn't make him an expert on catching sharks - it just means he knows the principles of catching a shark and he could of been supplied this gear at a tackle shop years ago before the rules were introduced) knowing how to drive doesn't make you race driver.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess I had that response coming ug4 :whistle: and dont get me wrong' date=' Im all for our right to fish etc, but I understand Ausseas point, and it's something that never occured to me b4 too ![/quote']lol, not having a go at you or anyone else aff. Apologies if it sounded like I was. I just see the rule as a over reaction to something that's been happening for 100 years without any issues. Silly over regulation that has no basis in fact, IMO.It's the same as the recent change in rules on selling flares for tackle shops. One day, we can sell them, no problems. Never had a fire, explosion etc etc. Next day, with a stroke of a pen, we suddenly need a licence and all this other BS. All because of something that might happen.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks like its shark season starting all over again :clap::clap::clap:
With all the hype over shark fishing' date=' even if he is doing everything legal' date=' if this bloke is pulling in sharks when there are swimmers around, he's not playing with a full deck.[/quote'']Unless he was there first :unsure:;)
Bad luck for him, he should move.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess I had that response coming ug4 :whistle: and dont get me wrong' date=' Im all for our right to fish etc' date=' but I understand Ausseas point, and it's something that never occured to me b4 too ![/quote'']lol, not having a go at you or anyone else aff. Apologies if it sounded like I was. I just see the rule as a over reaction to something that's been happening for 100 years without any issues. Silly over regulation that has no basis in fact, IMO.It's the same as the recent change in rules on selling flares for tackle shops. One day, we can sell them, no problems. Never had a fire, explosion etc etc. Next day, with a stroke of a pen, we suddenly need a licence and all this other BS. All because of something that might happen.
No probs Nick :) Agreed. Its all about risk and social engineering by "them" nowadays; whoever "they " are :whistle: If risk assessment wasnt such a big thing today, people could walk under glenelg jetty and bump their heads on the new pipeline for all they liked !Theyd have a sore head but there'd be no eye sore :huh::lol::lol::lol:
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wont go into this at much other than this law is complete rubbish.You can technically still shark fish during the day as you can use hooks upto 4/0 or 6/0? and highest pound mono possible. So your legally still able to shark fish during the day at any time, whats the difference between taking a bait out on wire and taking a bait out on mono 200m? where this laws reason behind it is your bring in sharks close to shore yet you can still fish mono and still have a chance of catching it on mono anyway, wheres the logic in that? 1 fish out in the middle of a massive coastline. Your aloud to shark fish anywhere else i.e yorks what about the people about the people you put in "danger" shark fishing over there, there's still people swimming? logic?I could talk about this all day, but i wont because I'm wasting my time.Its just sad that they can make a law like that to take away someones freedom of right to fish the sea, everyone has the exact same right to use the sea and banning something that has been around for 1000's of years is sad, hate to see where we are at in the next 50years. Big middle finger to the people that contributed destroying our rights.Kiss shark fishing goodbye the end of this year unless we can make a stand for our rights.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Again I say where is the proof this picture is taken where they are saying it was takenIf I was a person genuinely concerned about such things and wanted to make a point I would be making sure that there were swimmers in the background or one of the jetties and probably both when taking the pictureAnd why is there no comments section on Adelaide now for this story? Something smells a little fishy about this oneThat pic could have been taken anywhere

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly its just a refelction of society these days where too many people won't respect others enough to let them go about their business in peace.Shark fishing banned off metro beaches during daylight hours is just one of many examples. Another example is live music being banned at many venues due to noise.Shark fishing off metro beaches has never directed resulted in an attack and never will.Unfortuantely those opposed to it don't have enough respect for other people to let them fish in peace.They make up all this cock n bull stories of the dangers....basically they'll say anything to get their own way.Driving to a metro beach is far more dangerous than actually swimming there....sharks or no sharks.The only facet of shark fishing that should be banned (and is) is berleying. The actual fishing is harmless and is just catching a predator that's already there.Beaches are no safer now than they were before the ban.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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, 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 people were hospitalised for a total of 673 days, and 71 hours in intensive care.Sigh.

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...