Forums > Surfing Shortboards

Rpela

Reply
Created by katana 3 months ago, 11 Dec 2018
katana
WA, 621 posts
11 Dec 2018 12:27PM
Thumbs Up

hi Guys
just an update ive finally finished all the R&D for RPELA shark deterrent .
Im proud to release the latest independent scientific report after 6.5 years and over $600 000 ive my own money and put everything on the line to save surfers in this state and around the globe ,Ive tested RPELA with thousands of sharks in most hotspots .Thanks to all the crew on seabreeze that have supported this PROUDLY WA MADE product ,it has been the biggest challenge I have ever taken on with mountains of redtape and been finically crippling . I am hoping the WA government will add this to the Rebate for deterrents reducing it to $240.
Shark Deterrents are not for everyone but im stoked to protect my friends and family with this product .
for more info just PM me as I don't get much time to get on here ?
here is the link to the research

www.rpela.com/rpela-v2-scientific-report-1/

Cheers Dave

Ricardo1709
NSW, 1091 posts
11 Dec 2018 5:06PM
Thumbs Up

That would be great, hope the government lets you jump on board after all the investment of time and money huge effort mate good on ya

Ctngoodvibes
WA, 1220 posts
11 Dec 2018 5:22PM
Thumbs Up

It's always been a winner from a usuability perspective Dave. Glad all the hard work and testing gaining you some good results.

Razzonater
1800 posts
11 Dec 2018 6:18PM
Thumbs Up

Thank you for your contribution to the surf community Dave.

mocha1
WA, 779 posts
11 Dec 2018 9:46PM
Thumbs Up

Now for the Government to look after you, just a little bit, mate.
thanks

IFocus
WA, 360 posts
12 Dec 2018 7:17AM
Thumbs Up

Hey Dave great news congratulation to you and family its been a long road hope the government pull their finger out and add the Repla to the rebate list ASAP

DARTH
WA, 2903 posts
12 Dec 2018 11:18AM
Thumbs Up

Good news

What's the total cost to retro fit?

cheers

MickPC
6673 posts
12 Dec 2018 6:32PM
Thumbs Up

For anyone who hasn't had the pleasure to meet Dave yet, the man is an absolute top shelf legend.

I will be very dissapointed if the labour government does not seriously consider backing the Rpela now it has been officially tested.

It appears they have plenty of money to pat themselves on the back during prime time telly to effectivly say we're backing one other product, put a chopper in the air for a leisurely cruise up the coast (would love to get in on that action), continue to throw money at greeny/ecowarrior marine biology that caused the problem in the first place and a sharkwatch websight/app that is only good for culling the numbers of surfers considering its based on tagging farkall of the sharks out there & people likely to call report every shark they see as a great white.

We need our tax money to be spent more effectively. I'm a firm believer that they (the sharks) are always out there & its the one you don't see that might get you. Most of the money they spent trying to prevent shark attack is a waste, its products like Daves that are likely to be far more effective.

Extra tracking stations announced for the SW "great....oh but wait, they only track tagged sharks right? Oh so pretty farking useless considering how many sharks have been tagged?....Yep...but some catch & release plans for the least likely period to see GW's starting sometime in Jan running until when, let me guess. About March after the Eco Bogan its their environment parade gets too much & you pack up as planned, declaring it wasn't worth it. We didn't see any sharks of concern...as planned due to the time the operation is likely to run.

Keeping the summer kooks & tourists happy...its all good...no one has been killed within our election years...yet. Otherwise don't worry. we can always try & go hard to push through on building one of those wave pools or net off a swimmers beach...yay!

Coz the ecology was so bad before we protected great white sharks...or was it? NO...but hey, here's an idea & I'm all for it. Its pretty similar to the government allowing a much greater crayfishing limit per year. Only the extra licenses are only available to the government fishing fleets. I mean to say we could have these epic new seafood franchises selling teh Guvners crayfish, Fish (sharks) & chips. I'm sure they could take over some land to sell some potatoes. How about all those farking useless shire offices all over West Oz that should have been closed down years ago with the advent of computers automating the work for them. They could grow the potatoes on them, decrease the shark population & hey maybe fish & chip prices could get back to pre Good Ship Tampa prices (IE GST).

But anyway, I digress...now that the Rpela has been offiically tested, if it is not added to the rebate scheme for West Australia it will be a travesty of justice given the money that has been thrown at far less shark mitigation measures we've spent so much money on over the years.

Ctngoodvibes
WA, 1220 posts
12 Dec 2018 8:52PM
Thumbs Up

Mick i hereby award you the JBshack award for outstanding achievement in the field of excellence for that rant

jayet
WA, 35 posts
12 Dec 2018 9:04PM
Thumbs Up

Congrats Dave. Hope it all works out for you, we're all going to benefit from your hard work mate. C u in the lineup

MickPC
6673 posts
13 Dec 2018 7:13AM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
Ctngoodvibes said..
Mick i hereby award you the JBshack award for outstanding achievement in the field of excellence for that rant


LOL I vaguely remember writing that last night...and I graciously accept BTW along with offering a rebate for the Rpela. The money they put towards shark research should help test Australian made products like Daves....and they should also be more proficient at removing whale carcasses off the beach...ok now I'm done

jbshack
WA, 6779 posts
13 Dec 2018 9:44PM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
MickPC said..

Ctngoodvibes said..
Mick i hereby award you the JBshack award for outstanding achievement in the field of excellence for that rant



LOL I vaguely remember writing that last night...and I graciously accept BTW along with offering a rebate for the Rpela. The money they put towards shark research should help test Australian made products like Daves....and they should also be more proficient at removing whale carcasses off the beach...ok now I'm done


Yep and lets not forget Dave's competitor to date has had a little over $900000 worth of Taxpayers financial support.

Dave Kelly has on many occasions said he would add the product to the subsidy list as soon as he has any independent scientific research. The inclusion for the rebate is a simple value add to the political party so yep, let's hope they hurry up, it would be the perfect gift for xmas..

Possibly a email or two asking for it wouldn't go astray..

Grevas
123 posts
14 Dec 2018 11:25AM
Thumbs Up

Good on ya Dave, hope it all works out for you.

jefster
WA, 15 posts
14 Dec 2018 12:46PM
Thumbs Up

Good stuff Dave.
You have certainly put in the hard yards,hopefully the government will come to the party.
I've got the old surf safe and rpela units and they definitely give me peace of mind when I'm in the water.

Legion
WA, 2187 posts
14 Dec 2018 6:19PM
Thumbs Up

Good on you for responding to the earlier testing and improving it.

I'd like to see independent testing comparing it to the surf+, a repeat of Huveneers 2018 but with V2.

JESUSGUS
WA, 85 posts
16 Dec 2018 7:15AM
Thumbs Up

Thanks for all your time and effort Dave. Your product provides a safety net for us and our kids. I have many devices in my boards and have tried several other products over the years and yours are by far the best. I sent my boy over to rot to for a day trip last week. He always takes an old "6 8" over there. It has an original rpela in it from years ago. Charged it up and of he went.

Bara
WA, 426 posts
20 Dec 2018 9:55AM
Thumbs Up

Echo the comments thanking Dave for the effort etc and yeah hope it gets picked up in the subsidy scheme as at least its WA product based on an attempt to help surfers deal with the growing threat rather than the competition that has become an asx listed company set up to milk the taxpayer of all it can. Theres now no end of hair brained schemes in its pipeline with an eye to the growing taxpayers dollars on offer.

Not standing for the killing of even an odd shark or 2 is sure gonna end up being expensive for us all and quite profitable for the rent seekers

My beef is that as Mick says this will potentially end up being the only partially effective mitigation effort this govt end up taking and at around the effectiveness of a toss of a coin chance for 15 minutes thats just not gonna be enough.

Aerial surveys are 12% effective at spotting decoy sharks let alone moving real life ones.

The shiny new shark alert towers are pretty much pointless since WA only managed to tag half a dozen gws this year

They were dragged kicking and screaming to the smart drum line trial and will look for the first chance to ditch it

Whale numbers are on the rise and with them large GWS numbers per the csiro report.

Its only gonna get worse.

That said its interesting that changing the frequency and upping the voltage seems to have given a similar result to the shark shield now so maybe more research on this will get us better than 50% protection for 15 minutes one day.

But only of there is rigour applied to these studies and theres some pretty big grains of salt in this one as it was only tested on 7 actual sharks and they were all male when previous studies have shown its the large females that tend to go straight through these fields. Its hardly a definitive study.

Would love to see some research into all the anecdotal evidence that these devices actually attract sharks from further away before repelling at 1m or less. Now that they are being actively encouraged for use by the govt its a public safety issue that this be looked at scientifically but it wont as that just muddies the water. Might make an interesting law suit one day.

Jesusgus i have to laugh mate you do know the version you sent your kid off to rotto with has been shown to have no effect on GWS at all right?

Thats why theres a version 2.


jbshack
WA, 6779 posts
20 Dec 2018 11:10AM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
Bara said..
Echo the comments thanking Dave for the effort etc and yeah hope it gets picked up in the subsidy scheme as at least its WA product based on an attempt to help surfers deal with the growing threat rather than the competition that has become an asx listed company set up to milk the taxpayer of all it can. Theres now no end of hair brained schemes in its pipeline with an eye to the growing taxpayers dollars on offer.

Not standing for the killing of even an odd shark or 2 is sure gonna end up being expensive for us all and quite profitable for the rent seekers

My beef is that as Mick says this will potentially end up being the only partially effective mitigation effort this govt end up taking and at around the effectiveness of a toss of a coin chance for 15 minutes thats just not gonna be enough.

Aerial surveys are 12% effective at spotting decoy sharks let alone moving real life ones.

The shiny new shark alert towers are pretty much pointless since WA only managed to tag half a dozen gws this year

They were dragged kicking and screaming to the smart drum line trial and will look for the first chance to ditch it

Whale numbers are on the rise and with them large GWS numbers per the csiro report.

Its only gonna get worse.

That said its interesting that changing the frequency and upping the voltage seems to have given a similar result to the shark shield now so maybe more research on this will get us better than 50% protection for 15 minutes one day.

But only of there is rigour applied to these studies and theres some pretty big grains of salt in this one as it was only tested on 7 actual sharks and they were all male when previous studies have shown its the large females that tend to go straight through these fields. Its hardly a definitive study.

Would love to see some research into all the anecdotal evidence that these devices actually attract sharks from further away before repelling at 1m or less. Now that they are being actively encouraged for use by the govt its a public safety issue that this be looked at scientifically but it wont as that just muddies the water. Might make an interesting law suit one day.

Jesusgus i have to laugh mate you do know the version you sent your kid off to rotto with has been shown to have no effect on GWS at all right?

Thats why theres a version 2.





AN interesting post and i agree that the government need to do what they are doing better. For so many on here have taken the opposite approach to me but in reality all i've ever called for is "Better" Better use of our state funds, better effort into finding answers. Not just the political issue that sharks has become.
The points of interest as i still see them is
1) why are dead whales still being left on beaches, to rot.
2) why are the aerial patrols (even though as said above only have a 18% accuracy from chopper) not at least doing their job. Twice now i have had them hover over me, alert of a shark larger than 2.5m and they did not sound their alarm. Their are better cheaper options. Even a fixed wing has around 23% accuracy. But why not multi spec cameras?
3) why cant we get better signage. Beaches down south have been closed by rangers, and they didn't even bother to warn water users in the water to get out.
4) lets get the BEN beach numbering system going yesterday.
5) if we are going to run with barriers (safe swimming nets if you like) why are they allowing the operators who continue to break not replace or repair even. The system in Quinns is out and will be till next year. The Eco Barrier at Sorrento was repaired and fully operational with in 3 weeks of its damage, yet nothing from the Quinns net, and the Albany net is constantly broken.

These are rather simple issues.

Now why isn't the Rpela yet been added to the Subsidy list. That would bring the price to within a few hundred dollars.

Bara as for your comments, well the Version 1 does work, Dave has completed so much research over the time and lets also not forget their has been three times surfers have been charged whilst wearing one, only to have the shark repelled. The tweak to the V2 is small and actually from memory i think Dave once explained their is a slight difference between frequency and effectiveness against Bulls, Vs Great whites. (im not 100% on that one, is was some time ago,) But again id suggest anyone wanting those answers ring him directly.

Bara im curious as to a statement you made "previous studies have shown its the large females that tend to go straight through these fields". Can you give us some idea were you found that information? I've questioned a few people in this field and they had no idea of that statement or how it can be clarified?

Also just to clarify, the report talks about 7 sharks. It was actually undertaken over 2 separate trips, to a location that is wild and out their. Again There's a lot more info they have, this was the Report that was released as per the request of the state as the paper will actually be a few more months of at least.

Note

(There's a lot of background politics going on in relation to sharks, and devices are certainly not immune. Dave has hang his proverbial nuts out there and produced the goods and still gets knocked. He is being hunted down by overseas countries governments chasing the product and is now starting to have a supply issue. If our State wants to play politics and stay in the dark, if surfers want to take advice from social media then that's up to them i guess. ) I have zero financial interest. I've always paid for all my products, except Dave did me a great deal on changing my son's board from the old system to the new one a few years back to the removable unit.

A few more points of interest now im ranting. The SDL trial down south, that was told to myself and a group of 50 or so, by the Fisheries minister himself (Dave Kelly) its a band aid to shut up a few noisy locals and the Fed lib party. But what he hasn't shared with the state is that NSW still have not released any info from their SDL trial. Actually it turns out that only around 40% of any tagging programs Australia wide (including one on turtles), have ever had any data or research ever released because the information gained is so unreliable no research scientist will put their name to it. So why are we risking hanging bait so close to surfers this time, for votes?

A contractor i have befriended from the SDL trial in NSW has confirmed that most of the sharks caught stayed in the local area, many were actually caught again. Leading them to believe they may have been more territorial than thought. But that info is not public friendly, so was kept quiet. Actually in the early days of their trial, they would tweet photos of their catches daily, until one day they stopped and all previous tweets were deleted. Many of those photos show the previous damage from the hook.

One last point is, id like to see any marine biologist, research team who ever that draws any sort of reasonable income from a product, be forced to declare it. Too often these days im finding people aligned rather heavy, working to promote something, even to the point of trying to discredit a competitor when it turns out they are simply on the payroll..

WA has gained zero ground on sharks in the last 5 years, in fact id say we are today in a worse spot. People like Dave who have done the hard yards selfishly need all the help and praise they can get from us, the general public. So please if you have any real questions ring, him, have a chat to him and get the answers straight, if you dislike it then feel free to discredit, but for uneducated comments to be shared, is criminal IMHO..

Bara
WA, 426 posts
21 Dec 2018 11:03AM
Thumbs Up

JB I hope your not saying im being criminally misleading just cos i have a different opinion to you?

If so Ill take your anecdotal evidence of a couple of charges being stopped by the version 1 rpela and raise you the dozens of tuna divers in SA who are convinced the shark shield ATTRACTS sharks to them from a distance and then repels at close range for a short while.

If the divers are correct its a bit of a public safety issue unless absolutely everyone starts using electro mag defences of whichever brand dont you think? What about the guy that gets bit in the line up by a shark that was initially attracted by another surfers device???

Certainly warranted being included in a study before the subsidies started as that takes it from a personal decision to a public one which requires greater accountability.

Like ive said all along and been proven right in this years study the rpela v1 didnt have the size or strength of field to stop a great white. Even this latest study talks about an effective field of 1 meter and previous studies have shown the more effective shark shield diver version is ineffective at 2 to 3m which is where these charges are supposed to have been stopped so yeah im dubious at best....

The study showing the large females were less affected and even attracted to the fields was from around 2008 and on the shark shield diver version but dont have it to hand so going off memory. if i come across it ill post it.

The gist of it was of the 30 odd sharks in that study there was a considerable dispersion of behaviour between individuals with some repelled by the SS and others immune or even attracted to it. So 7 sharks in a study all male and none particularly large means more work should ideally be done before claims can be made with real credibility. Thats basically the conclusion in the study funnily enough.

Like i said I back daves efforts and its great that the V2 is seemingly now pretty similar to the shark shield surfboard version in effect but neither are as effective as the diver version due to size of field. its just the physics of electrode distances. I dont think the tweaks are that small either as its resulted in a doubling of the voltage although still not that huge at 1.75v. While i would have some confidence in the v2 from this study I continue to have zero in the V1 and its 0.9v.

This along with your religious zeal to not kill a single shark is where we disagree. Its not any more or less educated an opinion than yours and sure not criminal.

Personally i couldnt give a toss if a few sharks get sore mouths after being on an SDL. I dont care if a few die or alot for that matter. They arent rare anymore so why treat them any differently to any fish we catch. They arent special. I reckon a marlin is pretty sore after being tagged for example. they reckon off exmouth about 30 to 40% of sailfish tagged are eaten by sharks while recovering from the fight.

I reckon theres far far less moral justification for a fish with a sore mouth from game fishing than from one with a sore mouth from attempting to protect human lives.

At least we agree the govt response has been a shmozzle at best. At worst theres an agenda on the left that effectively puts a fishes life ahead of a humans and thats where things get pretty sinister.

We also agree that the political sensitivity on this issue has resulted in cover ups of facts like the data from NSW SDLs and the potential territoriality of some GWS. That is criminal as well as a shame. We need all the info we can get to tackle this problem not just cover ups so as to not upset a vocal minority of irrelevant greenies living in inner city suburbs that maybe dip their toes in the ocean once a year. yeah basically politics sucks on this issue.



jbshack
WA, 6779 posts
21 Dec 2018 2:19PM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
Bara said..
JB I hope your not saying im being criminally misleading just cos i have a different opinion to you?

If so Ill take your anecdotal evidence of a couple of charges being stopped by the version 1 rpela and raise you the dozens of tuna divers in SA who are convinced the shark shield ATTRACTS sharks to them from a distance and then repels at close range for a short while.

If the divers are correct its a bit of a public safety issue unless absolutely everyone starts using electro mag defences of whichever brand dont you think? What about the guy that gets bit in the line up by a shark that was initially attracted by another surfers device???

Certainly warranted being included in a study before the subsidies started as that takes it from a personal decision to a public one which requires greater accountability.

Like ive said all along and been proven right in this years study the rpela v1 didnt have the size or strength of field to stop a great white. Even this latest study talks about an effective field of 1 meter and previous studies have shown the more effective shark shield diver version is ineffective at 2 to 3m which is where these charges are supposed to have been stopped so yeah im dubious at best....

The study showing the large females were less affected and even attracted to the fields was from around 2008 and on the shark shield diver version but dont have it to hand so going off memory. if i come across it ill post it.

The gist of it was of the 30 odd sharks in that study there was a considerable dispersion of behaviour between individuals with some repelled by the SS and others immune or even attracted to it. So 7 sharks in a study all male and none particularly large means more work should ideally be done before claims can be made with real credibility. Thats basically the conclusion in the study funnily enough.

Like i said I back daves efforts and its great that the V2 is seemingly now pretty similar to the shark shield surfboard version in effect but neither are as effective as the diver version due to size of field. its just the physics of electrode distances. I dont think the tweaks are that small either as its resulted in a doubling of the voltage although still not that huge at 1.75v. While i would have some confidence in the v2 from this study I continue to have zero in the V1 and its 0.9v.

This along with your religious zeal to not kill a single shark is where we disagree. Its not any more or less educated an opinion than yours and sure not criminal.

Personally i couldnt give a toss if a few sharks get sore mouths after being on an SDL. I dont care if a few die or alot for that matter. They arent rare anymore so why treat them any differently to any fish we catch. They arent special. I reckon a marlin is pretty sore after being tagged for example. they reckon off exmouth about 30 to 40% of sailfish tagged are eaten by sharks while recovering from the fight.

I reckon theres far far less moral justification for a fish with a sore mouth from game fishing than from one with a sore mouth from attempting to protect human lives.

At least we agree the govt response has been a shmozzle at best. At worst theres an agenda on the left that effectively puts a fishes life ahead of a humans and thats where things get pretty sinister.

We also agree that the political sensitivity on this issue has resulted in cover ups of facts like the data from NSW SDLs and the potential territoriality of some GWS. That is criminal as well as a shame. We need all the info we can get to tackle this problem not just cover ups so as to not upset a vocal minority of irrelevant greenies living in inner city suburbs that maybe dip their toes in the ocean once a year. yeah basically politics sucks on this issue.






My post was a general one in relation to people educating themselves directly. The only point i made of you was to clarify your comment about female sharks not being effected and swimming straight through all electrical devices. Id be keen to see which report and what testing that was?

Bara Your obviously curious on these devices. Give Dave a call and ask him how the first report at Neptunes was derived and get the info straight from the horse's mouth.

For me i personally see it as a massive conflict when one product is tested alongside 4 others. Especially when you get paid $12500 for each of those 4 and the final product you get paid $50000.00..

Kinda like having a drunk test. Give a bloke three beers of one brand. No effect, Then three beers of another brand, finally giving him three more beers from a third brand , now we start to see some slight effects, is it then fair to derive that the third beer brand was way stronger than the first two brands?

Unfortunately it seems testing can be very selective these days sadly, again there's limited transparency.

As for sharks being not particularly large. I get your point and again to understand how difficult testing is but have a look at these babies for size. This was Daves recent trip to Guadalupe. He has shared it on his social media also.




mocha1
WA, 779 posts
21 Dec 2018 2:19PM
Thumbs Up

I reckon the sharks were probably large enough


23ft boat....that's Dave on the front looking at a bigger shark on the other side!!

Ctngoodvibes
WA, 1220 posts
21 Dec 2018 4:44PM
Thumbs Up

www.instagram.com/p/Brg95dHDZNZ/
This one looks tiny

Ricardo1709
NSW, 1091 posts
21 Dec 2018 7:59PM
Thumbs Up

Shi# I was going to go to Mexico next year- Daaaave I need a Rpela or 2 !!! ,both for the one board

MDSXR6T
WA, 969 posts
21 Dec 2018 11:43PM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
jbshack said.
As for sharks being not particularly large. I get your point and again to understand how difficult testing is but have a look at these babies for size.


Actually, testing seems like it couldn't be easier in a situation like this when their are 2 sharks the size of a truck in the water and camera gear to capture them?

We know from all of these repeated studies that these deterrents will stop a 5-6m white shark from eating a human so whats the issue with jumping off the boat and carrying on like a seal and filming yourself to prove that?

Either way you'll never need to work another day of your life

Legion
WA, 2187 posts
23 Dec 2018 7:40AM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
bjshack said..
AN interesting post and i agree that the government need to do what they are doing better. For so many on here have taken the opposite approach to me but in reality all i've ever called for is "Better" Better use of our state funds, better effort into finding answers. Not just the political issue that sharks has become.

You have a pig-headed support of Dave's product while ignoring the proven better product. How is that calling for "better"?

Select to expand quote
bjshack said..2) why are the aerial patrols (even though as said above only have a 18% accuracy from chopper) not at least doing their job. Twice now i have had them hover over me, alert of a shark larger than 2.5m and they did not sound their alarm.

They probably thought they'd spotted a whale.

Select to expand quote
bjshack said..5) if we are going to run with barriers (safe swimming nets if you like) why are they allowing the operators who continue to break not replace or repair even. The system in Quinns is out and will be till next year. The Eco Barrier at Sorrento was repaired and fully operational with in 3 weeks of its damage, yet nothing from the Quinns net, and the Albany net is constantly broken.

How do barriers help surfing? They do the opposite. Go post about nets on a swimming forum.

Select to expand quote
bjshack said..Now why isn't the Rpela yet been added to the Subsidy list.

Because the earlier comparative study showed they didn't work.

jbshack
WA, 6779 posts
23 Dec 2018 10:48AM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
Legion said..

bjshack said..
AN interesting post and i agree that the government need to do what they are doing better. For so many on here have taken the opposite approach to me but in reality all i've ever called for is "Better" Better use of our state funds, better effort into finding answers. Not just the political issue that sharks has become.





SO do you not think it a massive conflict of interest in testing could occur when one company pays 4 times more than the competitors product

Either way, time will tell

jbshack
WA, 6779 posts
23 Dec 2018 10:49AM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote


Should also be on CH 7 tonight..

Legion
WA, 2187 posts
23 Dec 2018 11:28AM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
bjshack said..
SO do you not think it a massive conflict of interest in testing could occur when one company pays 4 times more than the competitors product

Either way, time will tell


So do you not think it is a massive conflict of interest in testing could occur when one company pays to only have their product tested?

Either way, time will tell

bjshack, destroying public relations since 2011

brownie49
NSW, 99 posts
23 Dec 2018 4:06PM
Thumbs Up

Great news Dave, I hope everything comes good for you now

Ctngoodvibes
WA, 1220 posts
23 Dec 2018 3:09PM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
Legion said..

bjshack said..
AN interesting post and i agree that the government need to do what they are doing better. For so many on here have taken the opposite approach to me but in reality all i've ever called for is "Better" Better use of our state funds, better effort into finding answers. Not just the political issue that sharks has become.


You have a pig-headed support of Dave's product while ignoring the proven better product. How is that calling for "better"?


bjshack said..2) why are the aerial patrols (even though as said above only have a 18% accuracy from chopper) not at least doing their job. Twice now i have had them hover over me, alert of a shark larger than 2.5m and they did not sound their alarm.


They probably thought they'd spotted a whale.


bjshack said..5) if we are going to run with barriers (safe swimming nets if you like) why are they allowing the operators who continue to break not replace or repair even. The system in Quinns is out and will be till next year. The Eco Barrier at Sorrento was repaired and fully operational with in 3 weeks of its damage, yet nothing from the Quinns net, and the Albany net is constantly broken.


How do barriers help surfing? They do the opposite. Go post about nets on a swimming forum.


bjshack said..Now why isn't the Rpela yet been added to the Subsidy list.


Because the earlier comparative study showed they didn't work.


The other "proven" product makes you look like a complete noob with its sticker and flashing lights plus enormous tail kicker. Even made tommy carrol look like a plonka in the water. I'd rather get eaten. At least rpela not noticeable.



Subscribe
Reply

Forums > Surfing Shortboards


"Rpela" started by katana