When 'Want" is Confused with "Need" the Supposed Beneficiary Becomes the Victim.
We MUST obtain this data
We NEED to display this animal in captivity
I MUST preserve my culture
We MUST make our beaches safe
We MUST understand these animals to protect them
We NEED this data to protect them
Each of the above are choices rather than needs or musts. When choices are misconstrued as needs these choices become excuses to do what we want, not what we need to do. Let's see if I can defend this notion and for fun I'm going to do it from two perspectives; scientific and extremist.
Public Safety: Let's start with politicians who state that we MUST take preventative action against shark attacks, whether this is referring to shark culls, beach nets, gill nets etc.
Science: We NEED to understand these animals. We NEED to see them give birth. We MUST tag them to protect them. We MUST know its complete life-cycle, solve their puzzle, etc., etc., blah, blah, blah.
In response to the announced cull on December 9th, 2013, concerns regarding the competence of officials is raised anew. These posts are copied from Erik Brush, Ross Weir, and Senator Rachel Siewert
Dear Prime Minister Gillard,
My name is Erik Brush. I represent International Conservation groups who have been asked by citizens of Western Australia and the WASC (Western Australians for Shark Conservation) to assist in compiling and delivering this report to key members of the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia. The report has serious implications and will expose criminal acts that were endorsed by listed officials in the state of Western Australia. Acts that not only violate several long standing international accords, treaties, and conventions, but also violates many of Australia's National policies where specific conservation legislation has been drafted and signed into law or policy.
A report has been submitted outlining the issues, mentioning the members involved, (specifically Minister of Fisheries for Western Australia Norman Moore, and State Premiere for Western Australia Colin Barnett)in drafting legislation and putting it into action which violates and conflicts with several laws and foreign interests in the name of generating greater tourism for the state of WA.
The report will show clearly that the draftsman of this cull order (Mr. Barnett) and the person to approve and put it into action (Mr. Moore) are not only guilty of the actions listed in the report, they also do so at risk to human life. You must forgive me if I refuse to use the title of "The Honorable" before either man's name as there is nothing indicated in their actions to merit my inclusion of that title in either the attached report or within the body of this correspondence.
Further the Government of Australia has allowed these men to foolishly jeopardize not only the well being and health of endangered species in Australia, but endangered tourists and locals alike by creating a deadly situation whereby the very thing that they are allegedly trying to prevent increases in likelihood dramatically. This has been done by perverting a loophole in the EPBC Act which was promulgated by members of Parliament enacting an exception in the protection status of white sharks in the event of a bite incident involving a human or human fatality. The report will show that no one in your administration, in any cabinet, office, or indeed even in the Nation of Australia is qualified to make a determination of what has been deemed "imminent threat" where these animals are concerned (As per the justification for the WA Cull order) nor does the hunting down and killing of an animal involved in a bite incident do anything to prevent future incidents. It is the most knee-jerk ineffective way to respond to an incident where a shark bite is involved (whether lethal or not). Most of the time the animal responsible is not the one Government and local sources destroy and this has been shown to be the case in ALL countries where such attempts are made.And given the lack of repeated offenses after such an incident occurs, this is further proof that such bite incidents are not a habituated predation behavior for a White shark (or any other species) accidentally biting a human.
You are asked to take action once you have read, reviewed, and shared the report among members of Parliament. You are asked to immediately repeal the Cull order, currently in affect in Western Australia. Also to reconsider and remove the ineffective loophole in the EPBC Act that allows for the provision of destroying animals involved in bite incidents with humans. We are also asking that Mr. Norman Moore and Mr. Colin Barnett be held accountable for public endangerment and various counts of violations of the International Laws and National Laws and accords of the Commonwealth of Australia as any other citizen would be were they guilty of such offenses.
International Press packages are being prepared by all of the organizations involved in this action and we will be asking our global affiliates and NGOs as well as private parties to distribute these along with those press releases already set up to be distributed to global and national media. We feel that with elections on the horizon the results of this material being disclosed to the citizens of Australia could have strong implications for involved officials. Not only those responsible for the cull order, but all members with whom a copy of this report was shared.
Thank you very much for your time and consideration in this critical issue. We are very grateful for your indulgence and efforts to help resolve this in a manner that saves human lives as well as the lives of hard pressed species.
Founder/Director of SHARKS FOR LIFE!
Here's the paper:
Mr. Moore and by association and empowerment the state of Western Australia (and thus the Nation of Australia as a whole) is in violation of Section 3 Article 21 of the United Nations World Charter for Nature.
21. States and, to the extent they are able, other public authorities, international organizations, individuals,
groups and corporations shall:
(a) Co-operate in the task of conserving nature through common activities and other relevant actions,
including information exchange and consultations;
(b) Establish standards for products and manufacturing processes that may have adverse effects on nature,
as well as agreed methodologies for assessing these effects;
(c) Implement the applicable international legal provisions for the conservation of nature and the protection
of the environment;
(d) Ensure that activities within their jurisdictions or control do not cause damage to the natural
systems located within other States or in the areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction; (keep reading)