White Shark cull, Western Australia: Someone make a film about this please

[Trevor Emmerson]

No baits on hooks 2nd morning running, someone out there doing good work. Fisho who shot the Tiger Shark though he had a Bull Shark, can't even tell the difference. Also possibly shark was under 3m.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wes...rumline-sabotage/story-fnhocxo3-1226811976376

 

[paulherrin]

Paul the WA government fund both the development of those suits and shark shield. I'm not sure if you can buy the suits yet but the shark shield surfers mostly refuse to use because they don't like the trailing line. They just got given a heap of coin to miniaturise the tech so it'll fit to a board without the need of a trailing electrode.

https://radiator.net/sams/

The shark shield is an old one. My reference to electric fields on suites is for much small electric fields that would probably be an attractant rather than a repellent. See, certain creatures, the platapus being the classic example, can hunt by sensing minute electric currents of their preys bodies. Out brains actual give off something like a six foot feels, but as that is something I remember Fri. the 80's I can't be sure. It could extend much further.

"Shark Shield emits a protective electrical field via its antenna. The unique wave form elliptical field only affects free swimming sharks and to a minor degree rays and skates. The field generated by the Shark Shield is detected by the shark through its sensory receptors known as Ampullae of Lorenzini, situated on the snout of all predatory sharks. The unique and unfamiliar pulsing sensation emitted by the Shark Shield does not replicate that given off by a fish and does not attract sharks to an area. Shark Shield allows you to hunt, photograph or just swim with all other marine animals roaming freely in their ocean settings."
http://www.sharkshield.com/

 

[Trevor Emmerson]

Cheers for the link, I was curious whether you could buy one of those suits yet. Personally I have no need for one, I'm happy to swim where I swim. Like most people who actually go into the ocean over here instead of sitting in their lounge room complaining about sharks I am happy to accept that entering a wild environment comes with a certain element of risk. I wouldn't have it any other way. I think its an extremely healthy thing that nature has something out there bigger and badder than us, kind of crucial to the experience for me to have no choice but to respect.

 

[paulherrin]

exactly...

glad to hear the lines are being de-baited, btw. hopefully this leads to debate among authorities and/or an environmental impact study before this causes a lot of ecological damage. and plus, sharks are people, too...

i wish i could get over there to help. as a matter of interest for international activists, are us citizens held to the same penalties? would they be thrown in prison or just asked to leave/deported?

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Wayne this cull has started and will be over [2015] before anything I or anyone else starting today could get to final cut. 2 years is probably pushing it to make a feature length pic featuring GWS. One of the hardest animals on earth to film i'd imagine. 90 minutes of content, mammoth task.

Trevor, you should look at the top old documentaries (not the ones I suggested but the Taylor ones). If you were prepared (setup done the research, scheduled the interviews). you could film (principle filming) a simple interview based facts doco in two weeks, fleece it out with ready made charts, illustrations and animations the scientific and educational community in two weeks, only resorting last to the best conservationist t footage due to emotive bias, and put voice over with a good sounding voice, and the hosts if you use them,and their is bound to be some good sounding well liked actors on the books of the conservation movement who might like to donate, even women too.. If they are really for shark research a lot if them might want to contribute time and footage. You then can fleece out the rest with with mostly donated footage. With the guys you have here, and the crews they are from, you have the contacts to get great footage and content donation, interview sources and team together. That's only the quick version, in 6 months, but you have something to show to change minds in the next place it happens around the world, or to stop it happening again in WA or Australia. You present opportunities of different ways to think about sharks and my preference, mitigate risks, and present the probable ecological and economic losses for people to weigh up what us going on. Shark tourism would not be so economically big in a region if it was also done everywhere else, do don't depend on it. Once everybody does it for awhile, it will not be enough visitors to individual operators.

Now you can step up and do a better version and film what you can, but still be reasonably timely. You can spend a year or ten just filming a naturalistic disco version. But after you finish the doco 'info' commercial version, you could go along and do a second naturalistic sequel (which you already are starting yo film on the quicker version) sourcing information footage and even interview bits (a bit complex that one due to people realising it is recycled interview, but you can always double take on the day with different theme of questions and style). You need to learn how to reach not just emotional people with emotional propaganda, which a section of people will reject, but learn how to reach non emotional people. Once you have both sides swayed you have a chance.

Has nothing to do with giving up, as I said there are more effective measures at hand to stop whats happening today than making a film about it.

It is giving up on what you cane to di, that can be done, and even if not before it is finished, you would want to stop the next one and strike while it would s still raw in proles mind. Those activists are going to rat bag and Fi what they are going to do, but what can you do, make a good film people are going to watch for the next 30 years about how to think differently about sharks. Even if great a film now, in thirty years most naturalistic films are just another price of history rarely used attention to, portraying little message the more naturalistic and less info they are.

At the end of the day this is not even an outcome resulting from lack of public education.

That is what a info film is about. I would even book an interview with the premier and show him the alternatives, actually discuss it with him. ask him what he thinks, and see what he replies on camera. No need to be a fly up his nose about it, these people will just jack up and be more resistant, that is what will happen with direct action, but what an info film changes with proper argument. You might even see a little change of approach by the end of making the doco. There are a lot of wankers out there that think that because a play in Amsterdam or somewhere I forget which, caused a revolution hundreds if years ago, their play will, or because there was an uprising in the Arab spring, they are going to succeed in their activism. but all these were the result of large public sentiment, so winning over more public support rather than alienating non conservationists in the way to go. As a level headed educational film maker, you can do that, if their is an actual overwhelming case to be made (and maybe if their is a case at all). I deal with small shrewd people that are small minded, that us why they are small. They are the sort that might support the culling, and small deviations get their backs up let alone activism/civil disobedience. They are unlikely to support disobedience even through tolerance, unless there is a good case for it. Changing their minds swings the political basis for this.

It was a decision made by one man, backed by another who have both heard every argument there is from all sides

I doubt it, the priority of potential for change of mind of an argument depends on how the argument is put and by whom. Also selection of arguments put plays a part, the emperors new cloths, people will present what they want the emperor to here, or what they think the emperor or other parties, want to hear. Now I'm not correlating the Premier with the pretentious story of the emperor where a fool convinces the emperor that he has cloths he does not, making the emperor a fool, but instead like the story people will go along with things not presenting the truth fully or truthfully, known as group think too. Now the presenter of the information, how trust worthy the presenter is affects acceptance, how the presenter presents affects acceptance of that information and trust. This builds trust and trust worthiness as an interviewer. Demanding, being short, being impertinent, curt, less than respectful are all foolish traps for people not to be listened to by fools, for we mostly all get foolish, but interviewing softly, politely, courteously/respectfully even graciously, in all rationality, is the way to win people over. Decades back psychological research, and still psychiatry, had a very poor record of research, but then it started to change. One if the first changes I read in the New Scientist found that if women spoke aggressively to a man his back would get up and he would not want to listen. but if the woman spoke gently he would listen a lot more. So obvious it was incredible they missed it before. Why feminists (and conservationists) had so much trouble being head for so long. See only friends and superiors, reluctantly mind you, get to talk to men like that otherwise it was fighting time, often physical fighting times. It is often foolish to talk like that, and to react like that to. For such an emotional bunch conservationists don't understand emotions so well, conservatives see emotions and understand they don't matter as much except in context.

When asked by The West Australian what he thought about people in opposition to the cull Collin Barnet simply said "People are entitled to their opinion." Ergo, peoples opinions aren't a factor capable of saving a shark, ergo a film focused on steering opinion one way or another is mute.

What he is politely saying is that people are entitled to their opinion, but he thinks this particular opinion is wrong. So correct opinion does matter, as long as you are not offensive. It will take a long time once offended for things to calm down and for him to listen to the offender. But if you approach the interview calmly and politely as I said, you are, hopefully, a new person with no negative track record apart from. your association with the movement causing offense. He might be annoyed from all the other things that has happened before at first but you should be able to win him over unless you get his back up. But don't challenge him with offensive things or with opinions of people that have directly offended him, that would be offensive, its call "tact" his to bring up those subjects as inoffensively as possible. Be prepared to rationally compromise your opinion as well with what he says, he might prove sine valid points. By the end of it if you are ready to compromise and not be guard nosed, you can both come out if it rationally changed men to done extent.

And they are the better people to tell those stories.

But there is only you and your team Trevor. You can go out find the better people and give them a chance to speak, interview them, get a better production team together. Your team has the contacts to draw upon a much getter story then the news will usually present. Just remember stomping on peoples ties is often not the best way to win them over, wouldn't you agree?

Wherever you do a half an hour or a 90 minute+ documentary, do it with heart, integrity, honesty, quality and rationality, and you will have made your mark as a documentary maker, even with Collin Barnett.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Yes, the trailing antenna was the reason I did not mention it, years ago it was very long, and haven't heard of it for a while. Maybe I did hear of those wet suits before.

The wet suits, they could make normal anti UV swimmers like that too for everybody, not as bulky as a wet suit and fits in a hand bag if thin enough, but still offering a few hours of low risk exposure.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Still they should put a second pigment for search and rescue, even invisible frequencies needing filter glasses.

 

[Trevor Emmerson]

"I would even book an interview with the premier and show him the alternatives, actually discuss it with him. ask him what he thinks, and see what he replies on camera."

Not in a million years would he agree to that.

Wayne I appreciate what you are saying its just not something I have time for, or money for, or to be honest a belief it will make a difference. For a start I live 7 hours drive from Perth and I have a job to go to everyday. Additionally, I sold all my production equipment 2 years ago and consider myself at this point in time purely a writer. My artistic bent is feature film, pure fiction, not documentary. Last friday before this thread was a twinkle in my eye I was cruising into the weekend on the back of a solid week preparing myself to dive into a first draft for a freakin comedy.

I've been tempted into passion projects before, as I said earlier in the thread I know from personal experience its something more likely to end up turning you bankrupt than getting your message out there in a meaningful way. I have passion for the topic at hand, but once bitten twice shy as they say. I'm teetering on the edge of putting some serious time I don't have into this, if I do I'll want to do something unique to me. The approach you suggest I believe is more than likely already being undertaken by a well established Perth based production team, we probably just haven't heard about it yet.

 

[paulherrin]

do what you do, trevor...

they do say comedy is the best medicine

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Balls, it takes balls, and if you are the right person he might. He is looking to be heard, and to hear some rational stuff, not to be grilled, as simple as that. It is a skill, but a lot of the press they wouldn't trust for the long story/interview. It is purely about being trust worthy with integrity.

This is a very big passion project that can easily attract lots of funding at the moment, and through the network of contacts here, to cover you. A year after its finished probably not. You can get that big Perth production company on board and their resources, and negotiate a paid roll (I'm talking a lit of interest at the moment which means a lot of funding). Maybe just as a recognised producer that did not do much but get the ball rolling. So most of the work can be shared around and you might nit land up doing much after the team comes together, or you might want to be a camera man, are you a director? So. it doesn't have to be a negative, see who outs up their hand and negotiate what you want to do. If you want your part small, just keep it small, as long as others put their hands up for bigger roles you are fine.

Passion will let you down, already you are backing down size wise with the passion, make something of it instead, even if it is ten minutes, of will always be your ten minutes, hopefully of fame, on your resume. You are all is lost leave it yo the front line troops, but what happens next time somebody wants to do a shark cull around the world. If you do a great job the first thing the activists can do is drag out your documentary to show the public across venues. Maybe it is mostly surfers driving it, and the locals haven't seen those wet suits before, and say hey we like those, why don't we try wearing them instead. The locals might say something else, it might be a beautiful African region and they say we should have shark tourism as well to give us a spurt to our tourism efforts. It could actually work as simple as that at times. One thing is certain, if nobody ever gets people together to do a film like that less will get done. I respect your choice not to get swallowed up by this, but also respect your passion and intention. You never know, maybe it will turn out that white sharks are the greatest predators of bull pups or something like that and we would be overrun without them.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Comedy, G'day. I'm also intending to do comedy writing, film and acting, great stuff. Let me know when you have something complete you want to share. I had some strange comedy and idea about sharks rising up yesterday, can't remember it. Even now something else, "Shark Terminator". give James Cameron something to laugh about.

re-edit:

I should clarify, this Shark Terminator is a metal shark that walks the street etc, not a terminator of sharks. Over the top comedy.

 

[Trevor Emmerson]

as a matter of interest for international activists, are us citizens held to the same penalties? would they be thrown in prison or just asked to leave/deported?

I could be wrong but i'd assume no matter what country you are in if you break the law you are going to also face the consequences. 25k fine and/or 12 months I think they are talking for tampering with the lines. It would be nice I guess if you could come over and break the law and just be asked to leave, but it that was the case we'd be importing foreign nationals to do all our dirty work.

 

[Robert Hart]

If our national security apparatus becomes involved, you could be disappeared for up to seven days with no rights of communication with anyone and stiff penalties for refusing to answer questions. Whether there are covenants between the US and Australia relating to natives of either country I do not know. My guess is that the US has a bigger stick to hold over Australia than the other way around. We have conservative parties in power in this state and in Canberra. These are analagous to your Republicans. "This cannot be happening to me. I am an American" as a strident protest shouted from the holding cell might work for you. Then again it might not. I would seriously recommend that if you contemplate environmental activism here on a tourist visa, be prepared to budget for up to a six month period out of work on holiday in custody or on bail whilst our justice system does its thing.

 

[paulherrin]

wasn't personally considering it, just curious... better for anybody to handle their own internal affairs without us policing everywhere, there's plenty of the same stupidity in just a mile or few radius for me to deal with

 

[Tom Hamilton]

http://www.southernfriedscience.com/?p=16496

https://www.greenpeace.org.au/action/?cid=60&src=SHFB1

 

[paulherrin]

let my people go!

 

[Brian Merlen]

I once saw a shark special that said sharks could smell if another one was killed by like dolphins, or killer whales and that they had evolved to avoid where other sharks had recently succumbed to violet ends. Perhaps such a scent could be used to human means to repel sharks from beaches or users without the need for actual shark deaths? Or perhaps the smell could be used by the shark supporters to keep sharks away from the lines? I don't know how they'd synthesize it, but perhaps it would be a better option to let Monsanto figure it out then wipe out a species so we can make the Ocean into a safe pool, which is a bad concept

 

[Joe D'Arcy]

This is a great suggestion Brian. Do you have any further info on this?

 

[Trevor Emmerson]

I once saw a shark special that said sharks could smell if another one was killed by like dolphins, or killer whales and that they had evolved to avoid where other sharks had recently succumbed to violet ends.

There has been research on this and it works, scientists have been able to extract a compound [from dead lemon sharks I think it was] but they did conclude that it was unlikely to work permanently, that if constantly present the sharks would soon get used to it and move back in the area.

And yes it was Killer Whale's killing a White Shark and eating its liver where this was observed, its on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbQ5qCJEEwc

I think it has happened before also at Guadalupe when scientists have been there studying the GWS congregation, Killers Whales ate one of the sharks and they all immediately left the area for the rest of the season.

 

[Robert Hart]

Sadly, this plays right into the State Premier's hands because really, this sort of intimidation is un-Australian and can only generate public antipathy towards the protest. The front office staff and the owner of the rental property are the victims in this.

http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/w...urity-after-shark-threats-20140129-31mix.html

Here is another side to the story. One would hope this incident has not been a so-called "false flag" device to manipulate public opinion.

http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/vandal-who-smashed-premier-colin-barnetts-office-gave-staff-safety-glasses-20140121-316cc.html