The trial had been criticised by some conservation groups from the outset, because even though the lines were not lethal, they involved baiting the animals with large hooks.Mr Payne was contracted to operate the trial and said he was regularly criticised about it personally, in ways he deemed "below the belt"."I think probably the [comment on social media] that hurt me the most was [one that joked] about sharks coming down and targeting my children," he said.
But Mr Payne did not believe he was targeted because of a perceived conflict of interest — he believed it was simply because he was working with sharks. Mr Payne said he raised concerns with conservation groups and believes the then WA fisheries minister would have been made aware of them.The current WA fisheries minister declined to comment.
"We do not encourage or support actions that create division between stakeholders or groups, as this rarely leads to durable conservation outcomes."'I regret I'd made that comment' While he initially said he was not aware of any further online harassment or surveillance "at all", he went on to say that in fact, it may have happened.
He also said conservation group supporters may have taken photos of Mr Payne, although he was not aware of specific cases.
Bit weird the way the article casually flicks between Payne and Pearson, as if going for a surf and operating an industrial animal cruelty scheme are remotely similar actions.
Kind of glossed over how shark attack survivors want these beauties culled because they interfere with 'their' human lives. Maybe that's the level of cognitive dissonance which spurned trolling, wrong though it is
People are just awful. People who think they are fighting a just cause are even worse.
That sucks. Really the hysterical media should be the target. If you get in the water there is always a risk.
Good luck and a long life, mate.