❓ MP Murray questions a logging operation in Wellington National Park. The Minister clarifies it was a Shire of Dardanup road upgrade, not commercial logging, with necessary approvals and dieback surveys. Missing logs belonged to the Shire, and further upgrades are planned.
AnsweredQoN 5834Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer
to a commercial logging operation that took place on King Tree Rd in the
Wellington National Park, April to July 2016, and I ask: (a) is the Minister aware that this operation took place; (b) why
was a commercial logging operation allowed to take place in the Wellington
National Park; (c) is it legal or illegal to allow commercial logging to
take place in a national park; (d) was a licence required to carry out this commercial logging operation, and if yes: (i) who was the applicant of that licence; (ii) what date did the applicant apply for that licence; (iii) how many hectares of land was the
applicant allowed to log under that licence; (iv) how many tonnes of timber was the
applicant allowed to log under the licence; (v) what species of trees (i.e. jarrah, marri or blackbutt) was the applicant allowed to log under the licence; (vi) by what type of method was the
applicant allowed to log the trees (i.e. logging machine, bulldozer or chainsaw
by a tree feller) under the licence; and (vii) for what purpose were the logs to be used under the licence (i.e.
firewood, char logs, fence-posts, structural timber, railway sleepers or
wood chips etc.); (e) was a flora and fauna survey carried out before the logging operation commenced, and if yes: (i) by which entity; and (ii) where can a copy of that survey be found; (f) was a dieback interpretation survey carried out before the logging operation commenced, and if yes: (i) by which entity; and (ii) where can a copy of that survey be found; (g) were any of the logs from the logging operation sold or auctioned, and if yes: (i) to whom were they sold or auctioned; and (ii) who was the recipient of monies made from sale or auction of the logs; (h) was the Department of Parks and Wildlife responsible for the logging operation, and if no: (i) which entity or individual supervised or was responsible for the operation; (i) is the minister aware that a large number of the trees
that were logged were stolen, and: (i) were the stolen logs the property of the Department of Parks and Wildlife, and if not, to whom or which entity did they belong; (j) was the operation carried out in a designated Disease Risk Area
(DRA), and if yes: (i) were there any breaches of DRA hygiene regulations
during the operation, and if yes: (A) who or which entity was responsible for those breaches; and (B) will the Minister be taking any action against those responsible, including making them foot the bill for the environmental damage caused; and (k) are there any more road upgrades or commercial logging
planned for King Tree Rd in the Wellington National Park in the foreseeable
future, and if yes: (i) when and by which entity?
to a commercial logging operation that took place on King Tree Rd in the
Wellington National Park, April to July 2016, and I ask: (a) is the Minister aware that this operation took place; (b) why
was a commercial logging operation allowed to take place in the Wellington
National Park; (c) is it legal or illegal to allow commercial logging to
take place in a national park; (d) was a licence required to carry out this commercial logging operation, and if yes: (i) who was the applicant of that licence; (ii) what date did the applicant apply for that licence; (iii) how many hectares of land was the
applicant allowed to log under that licence; (iv) how many tonnes of timber was the
applicant allowed to log under the licence; (v) what species of trees (i.e. jarrah, marri or blackbutt) was the applicant allowed to log under the licence; (vi) by what type of method was the
applicant allowed to log the trees (i.e. logging machine, bulldozer or chainsaw
by a tree feller) under the licence; and (vii) for what purpose were the logs to be used under the licence (i.e.
firewood, char logs, fence-posts, structural timber, railway sleepers or
wood chips etc.); (e) was a flora and fauna survey carried out before the logging operation commenced, and if yes: (i) by which entity; and (ii) where can a copy of that survey be found; (f) was a dieback interpretation survey carried out before the logging operation commenced, and if yes: (i) by which entity; and (ii) where can a copy of that survey be found; (g) were any of the logs from the logging operation sold or auctioned, and if yes: (i) to whom were they sold or auctioned; and (ii) who was the recipient of monies made from sale or auction of the logs; (h) was the Department of Parks and Wildlife responsible for the logging operation, and if no: (i) which entity or individual supervised or was responsible for the operation; (i) is the minister aware that a large number of the trees
that were logged were stolen, and: (i) were the stolen logs the property of the Department of Parks and Wildlife, and if not, to whom or which entity did they belong; (j) was the operation carried out in a designated Disease Risk Area
(DRA), and if yes: (i) were there any breaches of DRA hygiene regulations
during the operation, and if yes: (A) who or which entity was responsible for those breaches; and (B) will the Minister be taking any action against those responsible, including making them foot the bill for the environmental damage caused; and (k) are there any more road upgrades or commercial logging
planned for King Tree Rd in the Wellington National Park in the foreseeable
future, and if yes: (i) when and by which entity?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
11 October 2016
Responded by
Minister for Environment
Response time
33 days
(a) I am aware that the Shire of Dardanup conducted roadworks on King Tree Road.
(b) The operation was not a commercial logging operation in Wellington National Park; it was a safety driven upgrade of King Tree Road undertaken and managed by the Shire of Dardanup on linear road reserve managed by the Shire. The Shire gained all relevant approvals including clearing permits from the Department of Environment Regulation prior to conducting works.
(c) Commercial timber harvesting in national parks is not permitted.
(d)-(e) See answer to question (b).
(f) Yes. A dieback interpretation was carried out prior to the road upgrade.
(i) Registered dieback interpreters from the Department of Parks and Wildlife as requested by the Shire of Dardanup.
(ii) At the Shire of Dardanup office and the Parks and Wildlife Bunbury office.
(g) The Shire of Dardanup was intending to mulch all timber removed from the road reserve as part of the road upgrade. Parks and Wildlife offered to utilise the saleable timber, and the Shire agreed this was the best outcome for both parties.
(i) Parks and Wildlife subsequently sold the timber to the harvesting contractor that was conducting works in the Wellington Discovery Forest nearby.
(ii) Parks and Wildlife received royalties from the contractor. These funds have been placed in a specific purpose trust account and will be used to improve the visitor facilities in the Wellington National Park.
(h) See answer to question (b).
(i) Yes.
(i) The logs that went missing were the property of the Shire of Dardanup (as described in question (b)).
(j) No. The road is not considered to be in a disease risk area.
(k) Further safety driven upgrades to King Tree Road are planned.
(i) In 2016-17 by the Shire of Dardanup.
(b) The operation was not a commercial logging operation in Wellington National Park; it was a safety driven upgrade of King Tree Road undertaken and managed by the Shire of Dardanup on linear road reserve managed by the Shire. The Shire gained all relevant approvals including clearing permits from the Department of Environment Regulation prior to conducting works.
(c) Commercial timber harvesting in national parks is not permitted.
(d)-(e) See answer to question (b).
(f) Yes. A dieback interpretation was carried out prior to the road upgrade.
(i) Registered dieback interpreters from the Department of Parks and Wildlife as requested by the Shire of Dardanup.
(ii) At the Shire of Dardanup office and the Parks and Wildlife Bunbury office.
(g) The Shire of Dardanup was intending to mulch all timber removed from the road reserve as part of the road upgrade. Parks and Wildlife offered to utilise the saleable timber, and the Shire agreed this was the best outcome for both parties.
(i) Parks and Wildlife subsequently sold the timber to the harvesting contractor that was conducting works in the Wellington Discovery Forest nearby.
(ii) Parks and Wildlife received royalties from the contractor. These funds have been placed in a specific purpose trust account and will be used to improve the visitor facilities in the Wellington National Park.
(h) See answer to question (b).
(i) Yes.
(i) The logs that went missing were the property of the Shire of Dardanup (as described in question (b)).
(j) No. The road is not considered to be in a disease risk area.
(k) Further safety driven upgrades to King Tree Road are planned.
(i) In 2016-17 by the Shire of Dardanup.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.