Salmon Holes Name Change - Response From DPaW
Just in case anyone is interested, I received this email from the Department of Parks And Wildlife in response to the name change suggestion. My response back to them is copied below.
Hi Paul
Thank you for your email regarding the Salmon Holes. The weekend’s events were both tragic and also exasperating given the level of work undertaken by Parks & Wildlife in conjunction with Recfish West, the Albany Sea Rescue group and others to warn of the dangers of rock fishing at this site. Over the Easter period there was a major collaborative operation to manage the site, with particular emphasis on safety, but despite this one person did end up in the water and was fortunately was rescued. It was also noted that while a small number of fishers tied themselves on to the rock anchors very few people accepted the offer of a free loan of life vests.
Following the death of one of the fishermen and the presumed loss of the second last weekend there are a number of suggestions as to what further actions could be taken to prevent such tragedies, including yours of renaming the site. This has been considered in the past by Parks & Wildlife and others but it is not thought that a name change will have a major positive influence on people’s behavior. It would be great if it were as simple as that. One of the strategies employed over Easter at the Salmon Holes was to provide maps of other beach fishing locations around Albany where salmon could be caught to try and direct people to safer locations and reduce any belief that the Salmon Holes was the only place these fish could be caught.
With the assistance of UWA a survey of fishers was conducted over the Easter weekend to assist in improving the understanding of their fishing experience, knowledge and awareness of the ocean and risks, swimming ability, understanding of the risk signage and use of safety devices – the results of this survey are yet to be finalised but they may give an insight into what further can be done at the Salmon Holes to ensure visitor safety.
The risk warning signs at the Salmon Holes are in the English language but carry both pictograms and the international danger symbol – while it could be claimed that the level of public awareness and signage is not effective at the end of the day it is people’s own decisions, actions and responsibility for their behavior which will dictate the level of risk that they will place themselves in. The Salmon Holes can be fished quite safely – from the beach.
Your email and concern for the dangers at the Salmon Holes is appreciated.
Regards
Greg
Greg Mair AFSM | Regional Manager – South Coast Region|Department of Parks and Wildlife
120 Albany Highway, Albany|ph: 98424500|fax: 98 417105
Hi Greg, I hear everything you are saying but I still think the point is being missed. I have spoken to a legal firm today who specialize in public liability claims and they also feel there is a potential issue here.
It’s a contradiction to put warning signs up all over the place but to give the location a name that clearly suggests the fishing is good.
Despite the warning signs, a visitor unfamiliar with the area (especially overseas visitors) might quite understandably draw the conclusion that it can’t be THAT dangerous if it’s called the Salmon Holes. It’s practically an invitation to go and fish there.
“It is not thought a name change would have a major positive influence on people’s behaviour” – Really? , whose opinion was that? I think you’ll find there is plenty of anecdotal evidence that the name of a place or product will have a significant influence on people’s behaviour in relation to it. In fact, there is an entire, multi-billion dollar industry that specializes in just this – it’s called marketing.
Besides which, have you got any better ideas? At this point it seems not.
I’m not suggesting a name change will offer a 100% guaranteed solution. I, and plenty of others, are of the opinion that when it comes to saving a life, it’s worth a try.
Anyway, as is so often the case, money often calls the shots in cases like this.
With that in mind, you will be interested to know that the legal firm I spoke with suggested the family of a drowning victim could be allowed to pursue a liability case on the grounds that the name of the location encouraged the victim to engage in an activity that was known not to be safe. These are their words, not mine.
As they pointed out, it’s a bit like having a road down to a cliff with a sheer edge. There are warning signs all the way along it telling people not to go near the edge but the place has been named “Wonderful View”.
I think they were using an extreme example to try and get the point across but I assume you can see how the principle applies to “Salmon Holes”.
Anyway, I’ll leave this with you.
Regards,
Paul.
Fathom
Posts: 619
Date Joined: 18/04/08
Shit happens
Lets change the name from "Indian Ocean' to "Great White's Dinner Table". Humans die mostly from being stupid, that's why we have the Darwin awards....I feel sorry for friends and family of the deceased
sea-kem
Posts: 15044
Date Joined: 30/11/09
Good effort Paul, how do you
Good effort Paul, how do you actually access the place? Maybe a gate at the end of the path with a enter at your own risk with a skull and cross bones. I'm serious how do you stop clowns from committing stupidity. My condolences but really they took a stupid risk, the swell was up all along the coast and I've always taken the watch it for ten 15mins to see what's happening approach. But then there's always the potential of that one king wave.
Love the West!
lachieH
Posts: 1126
Date Joined: 02/03/13
Well at the top there is a
Well at the top there is a big sign saying how to catch the salmon on lures or bait, then you walk down a track for about 50-100 metres then your on the beach, if a monster wave comes up the beach on a bad day. There is no where to run, you will be in the drink if you aren't tied down
Fishing the swan for bream, it's just an obsession
Mongoose
Posts: 20
Date Joined: 05/04/09
Good on you for caring but
Good on you for caring but my take on it would be that the victims were well aware of the risks as it has been reported they were tied off to the rocks.
I'm not in favour of limiting access, too much of a Nanny State response and where would they stop, ban fishing from every rock platform on the coast ?
its a tough one, but I think best left alone, rock fishing is a dangerous sport, but so is skydiving, motor racing and a whole heap of others that people still participate in, maybe the risk is the attraction.
saltatrix
Posts: 1081
Date Joined: 30/03/08
Maybe some white crosses at
Maybe some white crosses at the top? One for each dead?
Angling tourism is worth $10 billion to the Australian economy - 90000 jobs; more than any sport; spread the word
Moking
Posts: 1252
Date Joined: 30/05/12
The crosses is exactly what
The crosses is exactly what happened at Airs Rock( Uluru). I still remember walking up that part of the Rock,and seeing the crosses. It makes you think twice,and realise that people had died on that section of the walk.
And that section of the Rock was named " Chicken Rock"
My Dad taught me how to Fish-Thanks Dad.(RIP)
trymyluck
Posts: 908
Date Joined: 06/05/12
Good on you for following
Good on you for following through with this Paul, I still believe name change will help, but not solve the problem.
Auslobster
Posts: 1901
Date Joined: 03/05/08
The story I heard...
...was that they were tied to EACH OTHER. That's a big difference to being tied to the rocks.
I work on a site where we constantly have one of those annoying safety officers pulling us up on even the most trivial of issues...I sometimes think it would be a better use of resources to have a similar sort of person at the access points to these spots, at the most popular times, to assist people with doing the right thing.
End of the day, however, you cannot fully guard against"stupid".
z00m
Posts: 1086
Date Joined: 10/05/14
You would imagine the
You would imagine the council wouldn't support a name change to something so negative when tourism is probably a big part of the attraction to the area. I think your point about a name change is a good one, but you might need to suggest something more positive for the new name.
I'll start the suggestions:
'Never saw a fish here rock'
'Seaspray Cove'
'Hard to climb out of ledge'
sarcasm0
Posts: 1396
Date Joined: 25/06/09
Spoke to a legal firm?!
Who 'suggested the family of a drowning victim could be allowed to pursue a liability case on the grounds that the name of the location encouraged the victim to engage in an activity that was known not to be safe.' Get out of town, a legal firm who said there could be a case to be prosecuted? Let me remember this for next time I feel like swimming around shark bay with whale blubber stapled to me plums and I get my leg eaten by a tigershark ill just say 'The name of the location encouraged me - the victim - to engage in an activity that was known not to be safe'
Welcome to America!
Look its sad people have died here but for crying out loud People need to take responsibility for their own actions. How many signs, in how many languages? Do they need signs in Polish, Urdu, Sindebele, Russian, Mandarin, Cantonese, Greek, Italian, Arabic, Turkish etc because one day someone might go there for a fish to tell them what should be blatantly obvious? I reckon flashing lights and a siren for when the swell gets to a preset point, similar to shark alarms at beaches around the world, if you must do something.
Either that or close the place down when it gets big and we the taxpayer can pay a rangers wage to stand around handing out fines for non compliance, yeah great more nanny state bullshit.
Swompa
Posts: 3913
Date Joined: 14/10/12
Remember those two whom
Remember those two whom drowned walking across to penguin island and then proceeded to sue after their partners drowned?
Unfortunately, no matter how many rules you put in, you cant help stupid.
paulsmez
Posts: 99
Date Joined: 14/08/12
Err, I'm sorry, are you accusing me of lying?
I looked up a legal firm on the internet who advertised that they specialize in public liability claims. I sent them an email outlining the issues and asked if they could provide an opinion. Someone from the firm called me back the next day and we had a discussion about it. What I said above is an accurate account of what I was told. I mentioned that I'd contacted the papers and various other bodies and the firm asked that I did not name their company as the advice was off the record and they had not been engaged to act. Whether you like it or not, we do indeed live in a nanny state and liability cases like this are taking place all the time. As an example, I have just bought a small plot of recreational woodland back in the UK. Even if I fence it off and put Do Not Enter signs up everywhere I still have to take out public liability insurance in case a trespasser injures themselves on my land. This is fact, as is the information I provided regarding the conversation I had with the legal firm in Perth.
sarcasm0
Posts: 1396
Date Joined: 25/06/09
Not accusing you of lying - I just thinks it is a bad idea
Do you know the people who died/were rescued? Why are you taking it on yourself to bring in lawyers in something that doesn't really involve you? You want to burden Dpaw/the shire/state government with a legal case over this shit because people were too stupid to look after themselves?
Btw, this is not the U.K and people who trespass and injure themselves deserve no more protection than these idiots who risk their lives and others when it is simply not safe. The government has spent $300,000 installing 'angel points' to tie off on and heaps of other community groups funded free pfd loans but it did not help people who refuse to help themselves!
Tell me more about your petitioning of road safety and engagement of legal firms to deal with these issues which kill many more people each year!
Time for a reality check I reckon.
If you want a name change how about '11 dead morons fishing spot' or '~0.34375 people die here a year'
P.s my local fishing store has 'Sw caught salmon for $6.75 a kilo' atm which has sat in the ice bin for 3 days now, same 4 fish in the box...
paulsmez
Posts: 99
Date Joined: 14/08/12
Mate..
you need to read things more carefully before you jump in with both feet. I never said I actually tried involve a legal firm in suing the DP&W. I simply wanted to get their opinion on what the theoretical potential implications might be if somebody did.
Subaquatic
Posts: 514
Date Joined: 23/04/11
Lawyer Up
"I have spoken to a legal firm today who specialize in public liability claims and they also feel there is a potential issue here"
Once this kind of crap starts, its just a downward spiral.
Good on you for trying to do something, but this is a path I really hope we don't go down......
buschy
Posts: 626
Date Joined: 27/11/09
Well done
Mate - good on you for trying to make a positive difference. It's good you are having an honest and open dialogue with them - and while it's not about personal gain it is obviously something you are passionate about so if they take the name change seriously it will be a feather under the cap and may make a difference to those who frequent the location.
My only advice - it's WA GOV. Having spent many years in the public service, I know how long it takes for anything to change. Don't get too frustrated by the resistance you get along the journey...it's easy for you to end up bitter/angry/depressed because somebody somewhere won't take your views on boards.
Can I suggest a call out for support - start an online petition....the voice of many contituents is much harder to ignore than a single person and will get the attention of the relevant Minister and parliament. It's also worth writing directly to the Minister - this way you know that the Minister and all Senior Managers in the relevant area will have heard your view.
Good luck.
crasny1
Posts: 7006
Date Joined: 16/10/08
As far as I can see it is not about locking it out
its about a change in name to "not make it so attractive' to inexperienced fishing folk.
I dont know the death toll there and at the Gap but it has to add up to a lot.
"I would like to die on Mars. Just not on impact!!" _ Elon Musk
C.P
Posts: 345
Date Joined: 04/01/12
Good on you
Good on you for caring and for taking action rather than just talking about it. I hope it doesnt become a legal thing though. With all the existing maps showing the Salmon Holes location, i suppose its no easy thing to just decide to change the name, but I hope something positive comes from your effort.
paulsmez
Posts: 99
Date Joined: 14/08/12
Death Toll
According to the ABC this is the 11th death at the Salmon Holes in 32 years.
I think people are getting a bit too wound up about this rename suggestion and are missing the point I'm trying to make.
I'm not naïve enough to think a name change will eradicate the problem and I also believe that no matter what steps are taken there will always be some people who ignore everything and put their lives at risk.
However, what I do believe is that there is a CHANCE (however small) that a name change MIGHT make a difference to the decisions that someone makes, at some point.
It is impossible to prove that it would NOT make a difference, therefore it is a fact that it MIGHT make a difference (ie save a life at some point). Sorry if this is getting a bit deep!
If the powers that be can't be bothered to at least try a name change, that's up to them. I hope they sleep easy the next time someone drowns. And we all know there will be a next time.
paulsmez
Posts: 99
Date Joined: 14/08/12
Actually...
I've just thought of a way to illustrate the inappropriate naming of this place.
Let's imagine it has no name at all at the moment and the DPaW have to think of one for it. What is known is that it is one of the most dangerous places to fish in WA, multiple drownings have occurred there over the years and at Easter in particular large crowds of naïve and inexperienced tourist fishermen descend on Albany looking for somewhere to catch a Salmon.
How many votes do you think "Salmon Holes" would get for the new name? Point made I think.
scotto
Posts: 2472
Date Joined: 21/04/08
yeah,
You beat that chest...
I like what you are trying to do, but i dont like how you included lawyers into the debate. You are inviting dickheads to compensation they dont morally deserve.
These days the law doesnt protect the innocent, it protects the fucken retarded, and lawyers everywhere are reaping the benefits of how retarded society has become. Lawyers will fight for any reason, given the price is right.
paulsmez
Posts: 99
Date Joined: 14/08/12
I wasn't trying to suggest
I wasn't trying to suggest the families should actually try to sue, and neither am I personally suggesting they would be morally justified in doing so. I happen to agree with you that common sense should prevail.
The legal firm I spoke to did not say or imply that the case was winnable, they just said it probably had enough merit to be heard. In other words, a court may agree to hear the cast rather than refuse to let it be bought in front of them.
I happen to believe a name change has a small chance of improving the situation and I merely wanted to point out to DPaW that they were, so I was told by the legal firm, at some risk of having a case bought against them if they choose to leave it as it is.
I'm not saying they should take action out of fear of the legal consequences of not doing so, I'm saying they have a professional and moral obligation to do EVERYTHING they possibly can within reason to prevent someone else drowning. There is no practical reason why a name change shouldn't be implemented, other than the fact people apparently can't be bothered to do it.
Subaquatic
Posts: 514
Date Joined: 23/04/11
"There is no practical reason
"There is no practical reason why a name change shouldn't be implemented, other than the fact people apparently can't be bothered to do it."
There could be a cost vs benefit argument. As previously mentioned, the cost to change the name may be significant, and as a Govt agency, there would need to be a thorough analysis completed first...all time and money my friend!
Subaquatic
Posts: 514
Date Joined: 23/04/11
"There is no practical reason
Also the risk of litigation from tourism agencies. Imagine if you just spent $'s on marketing literature, and the name got changed.
(not trying to be arguementative, just throwing out some thoughts
)
sea-kem
Posts: 15044
Date Joined: 30/11/09
Tell me about that one mate
Tell me about that one mate :/
Love the West!
Subaquatic
Posts: 514
Date Joined: 23/04/11
"According to the ABC this is
"According to the ABC this is the 11th death at the Salmon Holes in 32 years"
According to the WA Police, there has been 203 fatalities on WA roads this last 4 years, many of whom were completely innocent....I reckon we might have bigger issues to sort out first.
barneyboy
Posts: 1392
Date Joined: 08/01/09
thanks for trying mate
but at the end of the day, common sense should prevail and fishing a 7 metre sea off the rocks is pretty stupid. I don,t think that peoples family's should be compensated for them making that decision. It is something that you do knowing the risks and consequences before you do it
FEEEISH ONNN!!!
Jackfrost80
Posts: 8156
Date Joined: 07/05/12
How do you feel about
How do you feel about changing the name of Lefthanders to Human Buffet Point or the name of the Albany Highway to Fatigue Death Road?
Officially off the Pies bandwagon
chris raff
Posts: 3257
Date Joined: 09/02/10
Intentions are good , and
Intentions are good , and worthy of discussion but angling to hold them to ransom with liability issues is most probably not the best way to go as they’ll end up closing it indefinitely with lawyers involved . It’s not our backyard .. it’s pretty well up to the locals to determine the best course of action if any and they have been pro active in their attempt to resolve it .. it’s akin to the same people (majority being blow ins ) who drown taking abalone along our coast . They just ignore the warnings to their own detriment .
“Intelligence is like a four-wheel drive. It only allows you to get stuck in more remote places.”
Straight Veggie Oil
Posts: 8
Date Joined: 19/10/09
I also applaud you for your
I also applaud you for your concerns, but calling a lawyer isn't going to help anyone imo. You would be better off using your time going to all the local schools and conducting rock safety clinics to the next generation of rock fisherman. That way they will have a good idea of the dangers , plus means of combating those dangers when they start to fish. And in a lot of cases they can teach their parents about rock safety. In regards to the latest tragedies, using the excuse they couldn't read english is just that, an excuse, because one of the group had a license to drive so had have known how to read english. What more can the authorities do.The place is fully signed which they obviously didn't read,there are free life jackets , which they didn't take up the offer and there are properly installed and tested safety rock anchors there , that they didn't use. So when are people going to learn that rock safety is their responsibility, and that the authorities can only do so much and the rest is up to you.
Cheers SVO.
Straight Veggie Oil
Posts: 8
Date Joined: 19/10/09
I also applaud you for your
I also applaud you for your concerns, but calling a lawyer isn't going to help anyone imo. You would be better off using your time going to all the local schools and conducting rock safety clinics to the next generation of rock fisherman. That way they will have a good idea of the dangers , plus means of combating those dangers when they start to fish. And in a lot of cases they can teach their parents about rock safety. In regards to the latest tragedies, using the excuse they couldn't read english is just that, an excuse, because one of the group had a license to drive so had have known how to read english. What more can the authorities do.The place is fully signed which they obviously didn't read,there are free life jackets , which they didn't take up the offer and there are properly installed and tested safety rock anchors there , that they didn't use. So when are people going to learn that rock safety is their responsibility, and that the authorities can only do so much and the rest is up to you.
Cheers SVO.
hezzy
Posts: 1521
Date Joined: 27/11/09
agree ,with poppy above it
agree ,with poppy above it is harsh maybe , but the language is no excuse for not using common sense even more so in a foreign country if your/they where a visitor & are not sure or don't know ,
lots of places they could have stopped and asked for info etc
it is nearly impossible to legislate and regulate laws etc for every possible scenario ,no matter who or where you are , lawyers are not needed to drink the blood of anyone imo
people must take some responsibility for themselves or accept the end result , feel sorry for them and their families , but it is needless , reckless loss of life that their own actions caused imo
changing names wont stop people making bad choices , rock safety education might however over the long term
hezzy
OFW 11
evil flourishes when good men do nothing
paulsmez
Posts: 99
Date Joined: 14/08/12
The latest response I got
The latest response I got from the DP&W states that:
"As the agencies and community organisations review the events of last weekend and work through what more can be done at this site the matter of the name will no doubt be discussed and I am sure have a range of views as there is with other suggested strategies such as closing the site completely, closing it on ‘high swell’ days, making the rock a prohibited area and fencing off the rocks."
Just one final point for the record. Contrary to the misguided views being expressed by a number of people who have obviously misunderstood my intentions, motivations and actions, I did not actually try to involve a legal firm in taking action against the DP&W. I just asked for a qualified opinion on a theoretical situation.
I let the DP&W know the response I got because I thought it was something they would be interested in, not to "hold them for ransom". If a family did successfully sue them for negligence ultimately that money would come out of the tax/rate payers pockets so it's in all of our interests that DP&W take steps to stop it from happening, if they accept that it is a possibility.
As for the blissfully ignorant people who are up in arms at the notion of Australia ever becoming as tied up in legal red tape as America or the UK, I've got news for you - it already is. Don't believe me? Look up the Civil Liability Act online and have a read of it. You'd all better start checking your back yards to make sure there are no safety hazards for thieves and trespassers.
Don't shoot the messenger, I'm just letting you know the facts!
Rob H
Posts: 5819
Date Joined: 18/01/12
I had a browse thru that
I had a browse thru that Civil Liability Act, and cannot see anywhere that you are liable for the safety of someone who unlawfully enters your property to commit a crime EXCEPT if you were to set a mantrap in which case it would be criminal not civil.
I may have misread it, if so (and you seem knowledgable on this) can you please cut and paste the relevant section as Im very curious about this.
I believe the UK has very different rules regarding access, trespass etc
Give a man a mask, and he'll show you his true face...
The older you get the more you realize that no one has a f++king clue what they're doing.
Everyone's just winging it.
sarcasm0
Posts: 1396
Date Joined: 25/06/09
My final word on this
'It’s a contradiction to put warning signs up all over the place but to give the location a name that clearly suggests the fishing is good.'
'Despite the warning signs, a visitor unfamiliar with the area (especially overseas visitors) might quite understandably draw the conclusion that it can’t be THAT dangerous if it’s called the Salmon Holes. It’s practically an invitation to go and fish there.'
Its called Salmon Holes, not Guarenteed bucket of Salmon. Being called Penguin Island does not mean I can go there and BBQ a penguin. How about the Bay of Plenty in NZ? Is it ok to go there neck 30 tonnes of snapper/paua/ytks just because the name says there are plenty?
'I’m not suggesting a name change will offer a 100% guaranteed solution. I, and plenty of others, are of the opinion that when it comes to saving a life, it’s worth a try.'
'I'm not naïve enough to think a name change will eradicate the problem and I also believe that no matter what steps are taken there will always be some people who ignore everything and put their lives at risk.'
'There will always be some people who ignore everything and put their lives at risk.'
This says it all - put up a fence and some moron will climb the fence and die, put up a sign - someone wont read it/walk into it and will injure or kill themselves, change the name to 'WARNING DEADLY FISHING SPOT FOR SALMON' someone will go there and fish and die. So what will any of these measures actually achieve except to cost more money? If they arent reading the signs I cant see how changing the name will matter as they probably arent likely to read that either! How did they read the name Salmon holes on the map if they cannot speak or read english if that is the excuse for not reading the sign?
'I'm not saying they should take action out of fear of the legal consequences of not doing so, I'm saying they have a professional and moral obligation to do EVERYTHING they possibly can within reason to prevent someone else drowning. There is no practical reason why a name change shouldn't be implemented, other than the fact people apparently can't be bothered to do it.'
The professional and moral obligation to do everything was the installation of tie off points, horseshoe floats, an emergency reporting system, free pfd loans etc. Changing the name of something for the sake of it shits me. Every time a govt department changes name (CALM, D.E.C, DPAW etc) all letterheads, email signatures, stationary, marketing, signs on vehicles/locations/buildings all have to change - who do you think pays for that? The taxpayer. The only people who benefit are signwriters and printing companies. If you change the name of Salmon Holes then all the warning signs have to be updated, road signs, entrance signs, maps, charts all have to be rebranded.
' If a family did successfully sue them for negligence ultimately that money would come out of the tax/rate payers pockets so it's in all of our interests that DP&W take steps to stop it from happening, if they accept that it is a possibility.'
I think you are missing the point in that none of us should have to take responsibility or pay the costs for other peoples stupid actions, nor should the government. Saying its in all of our interests to make more changes as you have said above is an absolute fallacy as 'There will always be some people who ignore everything and put their lives at risk.'
'Whether you like it or not, we do indeed live in a nanny state and liability cases like this are taking place all the time.'
Why do you think this is? Is it possibly because people refuse to take responsibility for their own actions, people pestering government with name changes for locations because 'It is practically an invitation to fish there', overzealous safety measures(don't even get me started on traffic calming devices) Like the RAC and cycling bodies pushing for 30km p/h speed limits, Threatening to call in the lawyers at every turn if they dont get their own way?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fwoTWlrfYg Homer's Odyssey for a light hearted take on safety
And https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Nd4RTcK0Y4 Bill Hicks - Revelations 'I just felt the world get lighter, A moron got off'
hezzy
Posts: 1521
Date Joined: 27/11/09
sarcasmo , top post mate,
sarcasmo ,
top post mate, agree 100%
OFW 11
evil flourishes when good men do nothing