Three-month Trial Of Alternate Shark Mitigation Measures During Southern Whale Migration

Frank Wilkie60:09

Okay we're back in cairngotham everyone. We are now up to item 9 of the agenda. There are no Mayoral minutes. Item 10 we have two notified motions which were included in the agenda. 10.1 three-month trial of alternate shark mitigation measures during southern whale migration. Councillor Lorentson would you like to move the motion?

Amelia Lorentson61:43

It is. That's been authorised by the Chief Executive Officer of Noosa Council. Appreciate it. Thank you, Mayor. That Council write to the State requesting that during the 20.2026 whale migration period, the Queensland government consider a three-month trial replacing traditional shark nets with shark drumlines or other contemporary non-lethal mitigation technologies. That allow for the safe passage of migrating whales with Noosa Main Beach proposed as the trial location. This trial should apply specifically to the southern migration period when whales, including vulnerable calves, are travelling south and where the majority of entanglements are known to occur. Thank you. May we have a seconder, please? I have a second. Thank you, Councillor Phillips. Councillor Lorentson. This is one of the most significant natural events for our region. It is central to our identity, our visitor economy, and our community's deep connection to the ocean. As a UNESCO vice. Biosphere reserve we also carry an internationally recognised responsibility to lead in environmental stewardship and to champion approaches that protect both people and nature. This motion reflects that responsibility. Every year traditional shark nets pose a known and preventable entanglement risk to whales, especially during the southern migration when mothers and calves travel closest to shore and when the majority of entanglements occur. These incidents are distressing for the animals and traumatic for the community members, volunteers and responders who witness or participate in rescue efforts. They also create a paradoxical safety issue. A distressed whale can attract sharks potentially. Increasing risk to beachgoers rather than reducing it. Nets do not create a barrier. They do not stop sharks from entering swimming areas and when a whale is caught in a net, the thrashing, the blood and distress signals can draw sharks closer to the shore. Human life is our highest priority and recent events in New South Wales have reminded us why this conversation matters now more than ever. In the past week alone, New South Wales has recorded multiple shark attacks, a stark reminder that outdated technologies are not keeping pace with modern owe coastal risk. We it to our community to ensure that the tools used to protect them are the most effective available. Modern technologies such as shark drumlines are more targeted, enable rapid response and significantly reduce bycatch while still focusing sharp on the species most associated with serious incidents. They are contemporary, evidence-based tools used increasingly across Australia because they provide better protection for beach goers than passive nets. The Cardno Report formally titled Queensland Shark Control Program review of alternative approaches and commissioned by the Queensland government in 2019 reinforces this. It remains the most comprehensive, independent, scientific of shark control equipment used in Queensland. Importantly for Noosa, the report found that replacing the two shark nets at Noosa with additional drumlines "could potentially maintain catches of the three most dangerous target shark species while reducing catches of other sharks and by bycatch by approximately 97%" in other words equal or better safety outcomes for people with dramatically less harm to marine life. Council has already shown leadership on this issue. Last year the local government association of Queensland endorsed the investigation of alternative updated shark mitigation technologies with overwhelming support from 77 councils across the State. This motion reflects that the voting position and aligns with best practice in coastal management and also with our obligations as a biosphere reserve to model innovative, sustainable solutions. When I the LGAQ motion to this Council I faced resistance but I stood my ground because I knew how important it was to our community. That motion went on to receive overwhelming statewide support and I'm taking that same principled approach today. I've not withdrawn this motion in this motion out of fear that it may somehow jeopardise our relationship with the State on other advocacy matters because it won't. Respectful clear and constructive advocacy strengthens relationships it doesn't damage them that is precisely why I prepared and will now table sample letter with this motion to show fellow Councillors exactly how we should intend to approach the minister respectfully constructively and with a refined simple request it makes clear if you read the letter that this is collaboration not confrontation you may hear after I sit that we shouldn't raise this again because the minister has previously declined a full-season trial but this is not the same request it is materially different in scope different in timing and different intent. We're not asking for a six-month trial we're not asking for a removal of nets we're not asking for a full migration season trial we're asking for a short targeted three-month southern migration trial and some community members councils are you happy for Councillors to continue thank you so sorry want to note that some community members who originally do not support the earlier proposal have already indicated that they're open to this more refined approach have even suggested even a two-month window that we should be throwing to the State that is what finding middle ground looks like and this approach has never been put forward to the minister. Advocacy is not about asking once or twice and walking away. It's about listening, refining and evolving our position and that is exactly this motion does. Relationships with estates are not damaged by respectful dialogue. They are built through it. Strong relationships are formed when councils show they are willing to adjust, to collaborate, and to keep the conversation open. Not when they fall silent on issues matter. That deeply to their communities. There's a quote that I love using, "If we do nothing, changes." And in five months, the whales are going to begin their migration. If there is an entanglement, and history tells us there likely will be, I want to know that we as a Council did everything we could to prevent it. This motion is not about conflict, it's about responsibility. It's about protecting human life. It's about protecting life and protecting the mothers and calves that passed our coastline every year. It's about standing up for those without a voice. It's about living up to our role as a UNESCO biosphere where innovation, environmental protection and community well-being must go hand in The worst case scenario is that the minister is going to say no, but what if he says yes? The risk of momentarily upsetting a minister can never, outweigh the risk of another whale or calf becoming entangled off our shores. This is a reasonable, respectful, evidence-based request. It reflects community expectations, it aligns with emerging best practice, and demonstrates leadership. And it also aligns with both the State and Noosa Council's priority of protecting human life. Again, Councillors, if we do nothing, changes. I hope you support the motion in front of us.

Frank Wilkie70:23

Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. I'd like to move an amendment. All right, I'll just read this. It says that we note the attached correspondence, which is four pieces of correspondence, to and from the State government on Noosa Council's request to trial the removal of shark nets during whale migration season in of non-lethal mitigation methods, including shark drumlines and aerial drone surveillance. And b formulate a range of advocacy strategies, not limited to letter writing, to achieve the objective of a trial for shark net removal during whale migration season. These strategies are to advocacy for a three-month trial during the southern migration period when whales, including vulnerable calves, travel south when the majority of entanglements are known to occur. May I have a second?

Frank Wilkie94:13

These methods instead of strategies i'm sorry I'll just leave, yeah, just say these are to include, leave it as is. These are to include advocacy for a three-month trial during the southern migration period in the whales, including involving the cars that travel to the south when the majority of the contactments are bound to occur. May I have a second effort to test this amendment, to make it work. Please? Thank you, Councillor Wegener. Councillors, the is idea is good, context is important. That's why I would like to attach the correspondence to and from the State government about our request to have shark nets removed during the migration season. On every occasion, we have written in a respectful, clear and collaborative way. The State government has made it clear it will not be removing the shark nets for any amount of time during the winter season or all at One letter carried the full endorsement of 77 Queensland Councillors as a result of an LGAQ motion. And the State government again indicated that its reasons for not removing nets for any amount of time. There is a very well known wise saying that advice is against doing the same thing over and getting a different result. Continuing to write on essentially the same topic and the same method was weakening the weight given to Noosa Council's advocacy on state issues. I think we should continue to advocate on this. It's too important. But it's important that advocacy be effective. It will take some time. If we're genuine about successfully achieving the goal of net removal, we must think more carefully about the range of advocacy methods. This is why the amendment proposes we discuss a more strategic approach to advocacy. Not limited to led by. It can include that. To achieve the goal. This amendment offers that we have a chat in the Council discussion forum about methods that are more strategic than relying on the ad hoc practice of having a notice of motion every time we have a new idea. We need to have a process that's seamless, can result in Council conversation, and it can just happen. This involves consideration of use, we can talk about use of delegations, working with the community, face-to meetings, careful consideration of the timing of the advocacy as well, for instance, to coincide with-up to the next state election, when policy positions are known to shift, for example, this amendment is brought in good faith as a means of Noosa Council being successful in achieving a position we and many groups in the community are seeking to achieve and this does not negate gate, a letter being part of that. And I'm suggesting we have a chat about other things, ways we can achieve the same end, including ways of delivering a message about the three-month trial. For example, through the Council amends, face-to meetings. With there's an opportunity coming up in a couple of weeks where that can occur. I'm just saying we don't give up, but we don't keep doing the same thing over and expecting a different result. Publicly with signifying. A notified motion, it's likely to make the minister give in deeper. But respectful, clear communication has been the hallmark of all communication. To date, we all just need to think a bit more strategically now.