Editorial: Will David Crisafulli move on shark control in Qld?

Six years ago, David Crisafulli called for action on sharks. Voters will be interested to see what he’s going to do now he’s in charge, writes the editor.

There has been a recent spate of shark attacks in Queensland.

Sharks – real ones rather than the human variety – have emerged more of less out of the blue as the latest test of Premier David Crisafulli’s leadership skills.

A recent spate of shark attacks in Queensland – including a fatal one at Bribie Island – has reignited public debate about what do.

Six years ago, a string of attacks in the Whitsundays, including one fatal, sparked a similar discussion. Mr Crisafulli was the Opposition’s tourism spokesman at the time and called for immediate action on shark management, without offering any details.

Well now, he has the perfect opportunity to walk the talk. By coincidence the Queensland’s current five-year shark control program expires this year. Consultants KPMG have reviewed the program and have apparently already handed their report over to the Fisheries Department.

Despite Mr Crisafulli’s call for immediate action when he was in Opposition, his LNP – now that it’s in government – is not rushing into action. Primary Industries Minister Tony Perrett has declined to offer any updates on review of the soon-to-expire current program, and has also refused to provide any detail about a possible shark cull – which we understand the government is actively considering.

The problem it faces is that successful shark control requires a delicate and politically challenging balancing act between protecting both human lives and marine species. Successive Queensland governments have struggled with the dilemma since the introduction of the state’s first shark-control program in 1962 following two shark attack fatalities.

We’re still using the basic elements of that initial program – drum lines and nets. But it’s an approach that is increasingly being questioned, not only for its efficacy but also for the impact it has on other sea life (just think of the number of news reports each year of the struggle to release whale calves caught in nets.)

Modern technology is being brought to bear – from drones to hi-tech drum lines – but much of it is still in the trial phase, and it all costs money. Last year the Greens unveiled a plan to replace “lethal” shark nets and drumlines with a scheme involving “shark shield personal deterrent devices, shark spotter programs, eco-shark barriers, and increased public education” – all at a presumably back-of-the envelope cost of $60m.

Technology might well provide more solutions over time, but the challenge is pressing. This recent spate of shark attacks might be just a statistical blip but Queensland’s population keeps growing – and even if the chance of being attacked by a shark is still minute, the chance of sharks and human running into each other is, as a result, growing.

Whatever the solutions, Minister Perrett has said “the Crisafulli’s government’s focus will always be the safety of Queenslanders”.

It is hard to disagree with that thought but the government still has the challenge of recognising the potential non-intentional damage to endangered species.

Non-government environmental organisations have become increasingly sophisticated in their often successful challenging of government policies they deem to be dangerous to sea and wildlife.

In 2019, the Palaszczuk government was forced to remove drum lines from the Great Barrier Reef after losing an appeal against a decision to prohibit shark culling in the area following an initial legal challenge brought by the Humane Society International.

That means that if the Crisafulli government is considering a cull as a suitable and politically attractive response to the most recent shark attacks, then it can count on some legal opposition. There would be another challenge too, because the federal government effectively controls two-thirds of Queensland’s waters through its oversight of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park – meaning it would have to agree.

But, if nothing else, this a chance for Mr Crisafulli to show his stuff. Six years ago, he called for action. Voters will be interested to see what he’s going to do now he’s in charge.

STICK TO FACTS IN DEBATE

Gold Coast Mayor Tom Tate is due a round of applause for his clever attempts to make the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games more about his city than the host.

But his claims yesterday that having the swimming events in a drop-in pool at a new inner city Brisbane Arena would add $700m to the costs deserve to be called out.

Mr Tate claimed that having the structure built to have a temporary pool would mean “an unnecessary, overbuilt foundation” for just the couple of weeks of swimming. It is another reason he says the events should be moved to the Gold Coast aquatic centre that was built for the 2018 Commonwealth Games.

But the truth is that a 3m-deep pool filled with water has a weight factor of three tonnes per square metre across the footprint of the pool, when the accepted standard for international arenas is actually more – at five tonnes. That is an engineering fact that means there is no need for any additional design loads for a multipurpose venue when a drop-in pool is installed.

Mr Tate should fight for his city. But he should also stick to the facts.

Responsibility for election comment is taken by Chris Jones, corner of Mayne Rd & Campbell St, Bowen Hills, Qld 4006. Printed and published by NEWSQUEENSLAND (ACN 009 661 778). Contact details here