DOCSLIB.ORG

1 Introduction and Summary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 Introduction and Summary 1 Introduction and summary 1.1 This submission has been prepared by Greenpeace Australia Pacific Ltd (“GPAP”) with assistance from Sam Flynn, Shirin Sethna and Peter Seidel of Arnold Bloch Leibler, Lawyers and Advisers (“ABL”), in response to the Parliamentary “Inquiry into the Register of Environmental Organisations” conducted by the House of Representatives Standing Committee on the Environment (the “Inquiry” and the “Committee”). 1.2 GPAP recognises that the Committee may be minded to make recommendations that impact on the Australian not-for-profit sector and therefore welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the Inquiry by way of this submission. 1.3 For the reasons explained in this submission, GPAP, with ABL’s full support, recommends that the Committee rejects any proposal to alter: (a) the definition of ‘environmental organisation’; (b) the requirements to be met by an organisation to be listed on the Register of Environmental Organisations (the “Register”) and to maintain its listing; and (c) the activities permitted to be undertaken by organisations listed on the Register. 1.4 Importantly, the Inquiry is focused on organisations listed on the Register. The Register enables eligible organisations to be endorsed as deductible gift recipients (“DGR”) by the Australian Taxation Office. We reasonably assume the Committee will ensure that the Terms of Reference are analysed only to the extent that they apply to the DGR status of organisations. It is obviously beyond the scope of the Inquiry to apply its findings to the charitable status of environmental organisations. 1.5 The Inquiry is mandated to have particular regard to the following Term of Reference (“TOR”), amongst others ‘activities undertaken by organisations currently listed on the Register and the extent to which these activities involve on-ground environmental works.’ 1.6 We respectfully urge the Committee to only have regard to the activities undertaken by organisations to the extent that such activities are conducted with tax-deductible funds. To the extent the Committee proposes to make any findings beyond such matters these would clearly be acting beyond the TOR. 1.7 This submission highlights the importance of the work carried out by environmental organisations, with particular regard to the work undertaken by GPAP. This submission also addresses: (a) the contributions that environmental organisations make to the protection and enhancement of the environment by engaging in advocacy work; (b) the current status of the law in Australia in relation to organisations that engage in advocacy (sometimes referred to as ‘political’) work; and (c) the expectations that the community holds in relation to expenditure by environmental organisations. 1 2 Background 2.1 Section 30-265(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (Cth), which governs the Register, requires that an environmental organisation’s principal purpose must be: (a) the protection and enhancement of the natural environment or of a significant aspect of the natural environment; or (b) the provision of information or education, or the carrying on of research, about the natural environment or a significant aspect of the natural environment. 2.2 Endorsement on the Register enables environmental organisations to receive DGR status. DGR status recognises the value of members of the public making donations to environmental organisations endorsed on the Register. DGR status obviously benefits members of the public who choose to donate to the DGR endorsed organisation, as well as benefitting the DGR endorsed entity. 2.3 Donations comprise an essential part of the funding for many environmental organisations endorsed on the Register. Without DGR status, many environmental organisations may immediately lose much of the financial support that they currently receive from an informed and supportive public, and will struggle to fulfil their objectives to protect, enhance and provide information about the natural environment. 2.4 Of the environmental organisations currently listed on the Register, the extent to which organisations undertake different kinds of work to protect the natural environment varies. It is well recognised that the ‘protection and enhancement of the natural environment’ extends beyond immediate ‘on -ground’ activities (such as planting trees or engaging in native animal rescue) and almost invariably requires that environmental groups publically advocate on behalf of the environment. Indeed as this submission sets out, it is ultimately not possible to effectively protect the environment without engaging in work outside of ‘on ground’ activities, including advocacy. 2.5 Advocacy may sometimes involve critiquing (or supporting) government policy and agitating for legislative change (or maintenance of the status quo). On- ground work and advocacy work complement each other and are both absolutely essential components in meeting the objectives of the Register. 2.6 In 2010, the High Court of Australia held that political activities are consistent with charitable purposes. The High Court reasoned that: (a) the generation of public debate is a purpose that is beneficial to the community; and (b) political communication is essential for maintaining our system of responsible and representative government. That is, political purposes serve to uphold the Australian Constitution. 2.7 It is universally accepted as an Australian democratic right and an enshrined legal principle of Australian law that political activities should not preclude an organisation from gaining and maintaining charitable status. Given the obvious connections between DGR issues and charitable status, the same principles are to be similarly applied to DGR endorsement on the Register. Any 2 inconsistency of treatment of an organisation in respect of its charitable and DGR status would render the whole tax concession system completely out of alignment. 3 Greenpeace Australia Pacific Ltd Greenpeace Australia Pacific purpose and values 3.1 GPAP consists of over 500,000 people, including board members, staff, activists, volunteers and supporters who care deeply about protecting the environment in our beautiful home: our precious climate, soaring forests and wide wild oceans. GPAP stands for positive change through action. We investigate, expose and confront environmental abuse in Australia and around the world. We champion environmentally responsible and socially just solutions, including scientific and technological innovation. 3.2 GPAP is a charity registered with the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC) and has been registered as a DGR on the Register of Environmental Organisations since 1994. 3.3 In Australia, the first activity under a Greenpeace banner was to protest against the last whaling station in the English speaking world at Albany in Western Australia on August 28, 1977. Just over a year later, Australia harpooned its last whale and a proud tradition of effective Greenpeace campaigning in Australia was born. In 1983, Greenpeace Australia (NSW) Limited was incorporated. It merged with other states over time, starting with South Australia in 1986. Later, Greenpeace Australia merged with Greenpeace Pacific to form the single Greenpeace Australia Pacific Limited entity in 1998. 3.4 GPAP’s core values are reflected in all of our work. We: (a) ‘bear witness’ to environmental destruction in a peaceful, non-violent manner; (b) use creative non-violent confrontation to expose problems and promote accountability; (c) have no permanent allies or adversaries in exposing threats to the environment and finding solutions; (d) ensure our financial independence from political or commercial interests by accepting no money from government, business or political parties; and (e) seek solutions for, and promote open, informed debate about society’s environmental choices. Importance of DGR status 3.5 GPAP‘s independence is key to achieving our aims. As we do not accept funding from governments or corporations, last calendar year 95% of GPAP funding came from over 65,000 members of the public. Our DGR status means these donors are recognised for their contribution to protecting the environment and creating a robust civil society. We rely on their generosity and good will to continue our vital work. Environment work 3 3.6 Organisations on the Register are involved in a wide range of work ranging from: (a) direct conservation work such as nurturing injured native animals and bush regeneration; (b) educating the community, business and governments about the environment; (c) advocating at a local, state, national and international governmental level for policy change; and (d) representing the views of supporters to Australian and international business. 3.7 Our environment is affected by a myriad of anthropogenic factors. Among the most significant are business and government policies. While ‘on the ground activities’ by environmental organisations are essential, they can be rendered largely ineffective if they not complemented by policy change. For example, ‘on the ground’ conservation of intact ecosystems or biodiversity will be ineffective in the long run unless there is effective policy action on climate change. Similarly, it is hard to see how any large-scale ‘on the ground’ conservation can work in the context of the marine environment without an appropriate policy framework regulating fishing and other activities. 3.8 Since 1983, Greenpeace supporters in Australia have been involved in a range of activities with both
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Australian Shark Cull and the Convention on Migratory Species by Arie Trouwborst*
    Aussie Jaws and International Laws: The Australian Shark Cull and the Convention on Migratory Species by Arie Trouwborst* I. Introduction The debate concerning Western Australia’s controversial shark culling program is raging unabated.1 In order to protect swimmers and surfers, a plan to hook and kill large sharks—particularly Tiger sharks (Galeocerdo cuvier), Bull sharks (Carcharhinas leucas) and Great white sharks (Carcharodon carcharias) over 3 meters in size—has been expressly authorized by the Australian central government.2 Recently, the Cornell International Law Journal Online published a piece that examined the national and international legal dimensions of the contested shark- culling program.3 This post builds on the previous piece by taking a closer look at the Bonn Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), the international legal instrument that is most on point regarding the culling program.4 In particular, it explores the merits of one of the allegations commonly voiced by conservationists, that the shark- culling program is at odds with Australia's obligations under the CMS.5 If this conservationist allegation is in fact true, then it would put quite a different perspective on the importance that the Australian government has traditionally placed on other states’ compliance with international marine megafauna protection requirements. If the Australian government is actually avoiding its obligations arising under the CMS, this would evidently affect its credibility when confronting * Arie Trouwborst (LL.M., Ph.D.) is an associate professor of environmental law at Tilburg Law School in the Netherlands. 1 See, e.g., Brendan Foster, WA Government Did Not Seek Advice from EPA over Shark Cull, Greens Say, THE GUARDIAN (March 14, 2014), http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/14/wa-government- did-not-seek-advice-from-epa-over-shark-cull-greens-say.
    [Show full text]
  • Pua Ka Wiliwili, Nanahu Ka Manō: Understanding Sharks in Pua Ka
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Digital Commons@Wayne State University Wayne State University Human Biology Open Access Pre-Prints WSU Press 7-1-2020 Pua ka Wiliwili, Nanahu ka Manō: Understanding Sharks in Hawaiian Culture Noelani Puniwai University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/humbiol_preprints Recommended Citation Puniwai, Noelani, "Pua ka Wiliwili, Nanahu ka Manō: Understanding Sharks in Hawaiian Culture" (2020). Human Biology Open Access Pre-Prints. 174. https://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/humbiol_preprints/174 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the WSU Press at DigitalCommons@WayneState. It has been accepted for inclusion in Human Biology Open Access Pre-Prints by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@WayneState. Pua ka Wiliwili, Nanahu ka Manō: Understanding Sharks in Hawaiian Culture Noelani Puniwai1* 1Kamakakūokalani Center for Hawaiian Studies, University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa, Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, USA. *Correspondence to: Noelani Puniwai, Kamakakūokalani Center for Hawaiian Studies, University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa, 2645 Dole Street, Room 209BB, Honolulu, HI 96822 USA. E- mail: [email protected]. Short Title: Understanding Sharks in Hawaiian Culture KEY WORDS: SHARKS, WORLDVIEW, CLASSIFICATION, HAWAI’I, LANGUAGE. Abstract Kanaka maoli (Indigenous Hawaiians) are blessed with a written literature that documents observations and relationships with our environment in the form of chants, stories, and genealogies passed down orally for centuries. These literatures connect us to our ancestral knowledge and highlight species, places, and processes of importance. Sayings, such as this one from the Kumulipo (our creation story) Pua ka wiliwili, nanahu ka manō, is an example of the place of nature, man, and a specific creature the shark in ecological phenology.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Genetic Pro Ling for Improved Management of Shark Attacks on Humans
    Hunting the hunter: using genetic proling for improved management of shark attacks on humans CLUA ( [email protected] ) Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7629-2685 MEYER University of HAwaii LINNELL Norvegian Institute for NAture Research BAKSAY CRIOBE VIGNAUD CRIOBE VELY Direction Agriculture Aménagement et Forêt PLANES Centre NAtional Recherche Scientique Research Article Keywords: human–wildlife conict, problem individuals, barcoding, ngerprinting, eco-responsible management, selective removal Posted Date: May 25th, 2021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-549718/v1 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License 1 Short communication 2 3 Title (max 15 words – n=14) 4 Hunting the hunter: using genetic profiling for improved management of shark attacks 5 on humans 6 7 Eric E. G. Clua1,2*, Carl Meyer3, John D. C. Linnell4,5, Sandra Baksay,1,2 Michel Vely6,7, Thomas Vignaud1,2, 8 Serge Planes1,2 9 10 1 PSL Université Paris: EPHE-UPVD-CNRS, USR 3278 CRIOBE, Université de Perpignan, Perpignan, France, 2 Laboratoire 11 d’Excellence “CORAIL,” Perpignan, France, 3 Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology,University of Hawaii at Manoa, P. O. Box, 1346, 12 Kaneohe, Hawaii, USA, 4 Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, PO Box 5685 Torgard, NO-7485 Trondheim, Norway, 5 13 Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, NO-2480 Koppang, Norway 6 Ministère de l’Agriculture, Direction de 14 l’Alimentation, de l’Agriculture et de la Forêt (DAAF), 21 rue de Spring, 97150 St-Martin, France 7 Megaptera association, 23 15 Rue Alexandre Dumas, 75011 Paris, France.
    [Show full text]
  • Anthrozoology and Sharks, Looking at How Human-Shark Interactions Have Shaped Human Life Over Time
    Anthrozoology and Public Perception: Humans and Great White Sharks (Carchardon carcharias) on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA Jessica O’Toole A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Marine Affairs University of Washington 2020 Committee: Marc L. Miller, Chair Vincent F. Gallucci Program Authorized to Offer Degree School of Marine and Environmental Affairs © Copywrite 2020 Jessica O’Toole 2 University of Washington Abstract Anthrozoology and Public Perception: Humans and Great White Sharks (Carchardon carcharias) on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA Jessica O’Toole Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Dr. Marc L. Miller School of Marine and Environmental Affairs Anthrozoology is a relatively new field of study in the world of academia. This discipline, which includes researchers ranging from social studies to natural sciences, examines human-animal interactions. Understanding what affect these interactions have on a person’s perception of a species could be used to create better conservation strategies and policies. This thesis uses a mixed qualitative methodology to examine the public perception of great white sharks on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. While the area has a history of shark interactions, a shark related death in 2018 forced many people to re-evaluate how they view sharks. Not only did people express both positive and negative perceptions of the animals but they also discussed how the attack caused them to change their behavior in and around the ocean. Residents also acknowledged that the sharks were not the only problem living in the ocean. They often blame seals for the shark attacks, while also claiming they are a threat to the fishing industry.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Welfare in Australia: Politics and Policy, Published by Sydney University Press
    This document is an extract from Animal Welfare in Australia: Politics and Policy, published by Sydney University Press. ISBN: 9781743324738 (paperback) 9781743324745 (ebook: epub) 9781743325025 (ebook: PDF) All requests for reproduction or communication should be made to Sydney University Press at the address below: Sydney University Press Fisher Library F03 University of Sydney NSW 2006 AUSTRALIA [email protected] sydney.edu.au/sup Parts of this work are available on the University of Sydney eScholarship Repository at hdl.handle.net/2123/15349. Please cite the full work as: Chen, Peter John (2016). Animal Welfare in Australia: Politics and Policy. Sydney: Sydney University Press. The book may be purchased from Sydney University Press at the following link: http://purl.library.usyd.edu.au/sup/animalwelfareinaus. Animal welfare in Australia ANIMAL PUBLICS Melissa Boyde & Fiona Probyn-Rapsey, Series Editors Other titles in the series: Animal death Ed. Jay Johnston & Fiona Probyn-Rapsey Animals in the Anthropocene: critical perspectives on non-human futures Ed. The Human Animal Research Network Editorial Collective Cane toads: a tale of sugar, politics and flawed science Nigel Turvey Engaging with animals: interpretations of a shared existence Ed. Georgette Leah Burns & Mandy Paterson Fighting nature: travelling menageries, animal acts and war shows Peta Tait Animal welfare in Australia Policy and politics Peter John Chen First published by Sydney University Press © Peter John Chen 2016 © Sydney University Press 2016 Reproduction and Communication for other purposes Except as permitted under the Act, no part of this edition may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or communicated in any form or by any means without prior written permission.
    [Show full text]
  • Bilancio 2018
    SEA SHEPHERD ITALIA ONLUS BILANCIO SOCIALE 2018 DIFENDERE CONSERVARE PROTEGGERE “Se gli oceani muoiono moriamo anche noi” Capitano Paul Watson SEA SHEPHERD ITALIA ONLUS 2 BILANCIO SOCIALE 2018 INDICE LA NOSTRA MISSION ...................................... 6 LA NOSTRA STORIA ......................................... 9 LA FLOTTA DI NETTUNO ............................... 56 CAMPAGNE GLOBALI ..................................... 60 SEA SHEPHERD DIVE .................................... 71 RACCOLTA FONDI ............................................. 72 SEA SHEPHERD GLOBAL ............................. 74 SEA SHEPHERD ITALIA.................................. 76 CAMPAGNE ITALIANE .................................... 84 ATTIVITÀ DI SSIO ............................................... 96 MEDIA communication .......................... 108 BILANCIO SOCIALE .......................................... 112 FONTI DI FINANZIAMENTO ......................... 119 SEA SHEPHERD ITALIA ONLUS 4 BILANCIO SOCIALE 2018 AAIU TENERET INA MARECI LE NAVI SOSTENENENDO SEA SHEPHERD, PUOI AIUTARCI A TENERE IN MARE LE NAVI E GLI EQUIPAGGI DI VOLONTARI, CHE OGNI GIORNO DIFENDONO LA VITA NEI NOSTRI OCEANI. economico necessario: • Donazione mensile (DAC) • Donazione tramite PayPal • 5x1000 • Versamento postale • Sea Shepherd Italia Onlus Via Rosso di San Secondo, 7 - 20134 Milano [email protected] http://www.seashepherd.it/aiutaci/ Codice Fiscale: 97560620151 LA NOSTRA MISSION SEA SHEPHERD ITALIA ONLUS 6 BILANCIO SOCIALE 2018 CHI SIAMO IL NOSTRO APPROCCIO Costituita
    [Show full text]
  • ANZSOG Case Program Off the Hook: Western Australia’S Shark Cull (A) 2015-171.1
    ANZSOG Case Program Off the hook: Western Australia’s shark cull (A) 2015-171.1 For Bryn Martin 10 October 2011 began, like most other days, in the sparkling waters of Cottesloe. The sixty-four year old swam out to a pylon about 400 metres from shore, just as he had done for more than a decade. In one direction, the Indian Ocean stretched uninterrupted to the horizon; in the other, locals and visitors were busy enjoying Perth’s most popular beach. Amongst those on shore were Martin’s wife and family. When he failed to arrive for breakfast as planned, they immediately suspected something was amiss. After more than an hour scanning the area, his wife reported him missing to emergency services. No trace of Bryn Martin could be found, save for a pair of slashed swimming trunks. Witnesses recalled seeing some splashing and a large shadowy shape near where he disappeared. The Western Australian coroner later heard that the damage to his bathing suit was consistent with a shark attack, most likely, a great white. The incident left local residents and the wider community shaken. Cottesloe was where Ken Crew bled to death on the sand after being attacked by a shark in waist-deep water. Onlookers likened the 2000 incident to a scene from the film Jaws and the government issued an immediate but unsuccessful catch-and-kill order.1 Meanwhile, less than a month prior to Martin’s disappearance, twenty-one year old Kyle Burden was attacked by a shark whilst body-boarding in the Margaret River region.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Ecotourism and Citizen Science
    ARTICLE IN PRESS The Economy of Shark Conservation in the Northeast Pacific: The Role of Ecotourism and Citizen Science Peter A. Mieras*,1, Chris Harvey-Clark†, Michael Bear‡, Gina Hodgin§, Boone Hodgin§ *Rendezvous Dive Adventures, Port Alberni, BC, Canada †Dalhousie University Faculty of Agriculture, Truro, NS, Canada ‡Ocean Sanctuaries, San Diego, CA, United States § Ravencroft Lodge, Valdez, AK, United States 1Corresponding author: e-mail address: [email protected] First Nation image of a six gill shark. Courtesy: Artist: Kelly Foxcroft-poirier. Contents 1. Introduction 78 2. Development of Shark-Based Ecotourism in the NEP 82 2.1 Recreational Fisheries for Sharks 83 2.2 Shark Encounters 85 2.3 Citizen Science 98 2.4 Case Studies 100 3. Conclusion 107 References 108 Abstract Historically sharks have been seen either as a source of income through harvesting, or as a nuisance and danger. The economic value of sharks has traditionally been measured as the total value of sharks caught for liver oil, fins, or meat for consumption. Sharks have also been killed to near extinction in cases where they were seen as a threat to fisheries # Advances in Marine Biology 2017 Elsevier Ltd 77 ISSN 0065-2881 All rights reserved. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.amb.2017.08.003 ARTICLE IN PRESS 78 Peter A. Mieras et al. on other species. This is illustrated by the mass extermination of Basking Sharks (Cetorhinus maximus) in British Columbia. They were seen as a nuisance to fishermen as they got entangled in gill nets during the salmon fishing season. However with the development of the SCUBA diving industry, and ecotourism in general, increased awareness of the role sharks play in marine ecosystems has resulted in changes in how they are perceived and utilized.
    [Show full text]
  • RESISTANCE in DYSTOPIAN FICTION a Thesis in Fulfilment Of
    RESISTANCE IN DYSTOPIAN FICTION A Thesis in Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Creative Arts by Darren Dillman March 2020 Western Sydney University 1 Statement of Authentication The work presented in this thesis is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, original except as acknowledged in the text. I hereby declare that I have not submitted this material, either in full or in part, for a degree at this or any other institution. (signature) 2 Abstract This thesis attempts to answer the fundamental question, "How does resistance function in dystopian fiction?" and considers the value of memory and technology within this context. It also articulates the themes of the research within a creative work, a dystopian novel titled The Department of Retribution. With the rising popularity of dystopian fiction, the findings of this project attempt to provide timely insight into why resistance is essential to the genre and how it can be employed via memory and technology. Within the scope of authoritarian structures and their ideological origins, this thesis examines the methods protagonists of dystopian fiction use to push back against oppressive means of control. It discusses memory and its value to characters who resist the state's official narrative of the past, and it examines the ways in which the pitfalls of humanity's reliance on technology are portrayed in dystopian works. The Department of Retribution takes place in a future United States where hard drugs such as methamphetamine have been legalized, fatal combat sports dominate television, and a fourth branch of government, the Corporate Council, wields dominant power.
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to the Senate Inquiry Into Shark Mitigation and Deterrent Measures
    Submission to the Senate Inquiry into Shark mitigation and deterrent measures Duncan Leadbitter March 2017 Overview The submission puts forward information to support the following claims and conclusions: 1. The beach meshing programs are culls designed to reduce shark numbers to an unspecified low level on regional scales of several hundreds of kilometres. 2. The recent growth in the number of culling programs carries the potential for cumulative impacts on targeted sharks and, in particular, the Great White Shark. 3. There is no publicly available assessment of the potential, cumulative impacts of the culls on the Great White Shark, which is listed under the EPBC Act. There is no estimate of what level of (non natural) mortality the shark population on the East Coast can withstand. 4. There is no evidence that culling has any measurable influence on the number of shark attacks and thus the culling may be putting sharks at risk for no benefit. 5. The Recovery Plan for the Great White Shark contains little more than a series of commitments to research and information gathering. Unlike the sorts of rigorous, accountable plans put in place to manage commercial fisheries, this vulnerable species is not protected from depletion to levels that may hinder reproductive capacity. 6. The Minister administering the EPBC Act may not be implementing Australia’s commitment to implement the Law of the Sea. Recommendations 1. Population models for the targeted species and in particular the Great White Shark should be prepared by independent scientists and used to evaluate the potential impacts of the growing number of culls; 2.
    [Show full text]
  • HB-553 Submitted On: 2/16/2021 10:57:21 AM Testimony for WAL on 2/18/2021 8:30:00 AM
    HB-553 Submitted on: 2/16/2021 10:57:21 AM Testimony for WAL on 2/18/2021 8:30:00 AM Testifier Present at Submitted By Organization Position Hearing Friends of Hanauma Lisa Bishop Support No Bay Comments: To: Committees on Water and Land (WAL) Representative David Tarnas, Chair Representative Patrick Branco, Vice Chair Re: HB553 RELATING TO THE PROTECTION OF SHARKS Position: STRONG SUPPORT Hearing Date: Thursday, February 18, 2021 8:30 a.m. House Conference Rooms 430 Via Videoconference Aloha Chair Chair Tarnas, Vice Chair Branco, and Water and Land Committee Members, Friends of Hanauma Bay strongly supports HB553 providing much needed protection for sharks in Hawaiian waters. Sharks, or “mano”, are deeply valued figures in Hawaiian culture. Further, protecting these magnificent apex ocean predators ultimately means healthier, more resilient oceans and reefs that are better able to withstand other pressures on the ocean ecosystem from climate change and pollution. We strongly urge you to pass HB553, and thank you for the opportunity to testify about this important bill. Respectfully, Lisa Bishop President Friends of Hanauma Bay ʻŌlelo Hōʻike ʻAha Kau Kānāwai HB553 RELATING TO THE PROTECTION OF SHARKS Ke Kōmike Hale o ka Wai a me ka ʻĀina Pepeluali 18, 2021 8:30 a.m. Lumi 430 The Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) SUPPORTS HB553, which would establish a new misdemeanor offense for knowingly killing, capturing, or harming a shark in state waters, and provide for fines and penalties for such offense. OHA supports strong protections for manō which are culturally important and which serve critical ecological functions.
    [Show full text]
  • NSWYL Animal Law Committee | Inquiry Into the Efficacy and Regulation of Shark Mitigation and Deterrent Measures | March 2017 2
    Inquiry into the efficacy and regulation of shark mitigation and deterrent measures 14 March 2017 Submission by the New South Wales Young Lawyers Animal Law Committee Committee Secretary Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications PO Box 6100, Parliament House, Canberra ACT 2600 [email protected] Contact: Emily Ryan President, NSW Young Lawyers Tara Clarke Chair, NSW Young Lawyers Animal Law Committee Contributors: Ashley Avci Tara Clarke The NSW Young Lawyers Animal Law Committee (the Committee) is grateful for the opportunity to make a submission to the Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications (Standing Committee) in relation to its inquiry into the efficacy and regulation of shark mitigation and deterrent measures (the Inquiry). The Committee commends the Federal Senate for recognising that the efficacy and regulation of shark mitigation and deterrent measures is an issue worthy of review and careful consideration in light of the importance of ensuring public safety while also giving appropriate weight to Australia's obligations under domestic and international environmental protection laws. NSW Young Lawyers NSW Young Lawyers is a division of The Law Society of New South Wales. NSW Young Lawyers supports practitioners in their professional and career development in numerous ways, including by encouraging active participation in its 16 separate committees, each dedicated to particular areas of practice. Membership is automatic for all NSW lawyers (solicitors and barristers) under 36 years and/or in their first five years of practice, as well as law students. NSW Young Lawyers currently has over 15,000 members. The Committee comprises a group of over 400 members interested in animal welfare and laws regulating the treatment of animals.
    [Show full text]