❓ Hon Robin Chapple questions the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) regarding surveys and identification of the Roebourne Plains Gilgai grasslands Priority Ecological Community (PEC) in relation to the Gap Ridge Industrial Estate development. The DEC's response clarifies survey responsibilities, exemptions, and the location of the PEC.
AnsweredQoN 2786Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
With reference to answers to question without notice No. 1742 of Tuesday, 7 September 2010, the Roebourne Plains Gilgai grasslands, and Priority Ecological Communities (PEC’s), I ask -
(1) Was the Gap Ridge Industrial Estate surveyed on the ground by a botanist with experience in recognizing this particular PEC?
(2) If yes to (1), when was the area surveyed?
(3) If no to (2), why not?
(4) Have the Roebourne Plains Gilgai grasslands been primarily dormant in the Karratha area for the last twelve months?
(5) Is it correct that Department of Environment and Conservation’s (DEC) record of PEC’s are limited to what is reported as it is found in the field?
(6) Is it correct that the original Biodiversity Audit that identified this PEC (Kendrick and Stanley 2001) specifically list the vicinity of Seven Mile Creek (the area of the Gap Ridge Industrial Estate) as an area where it occurs?
(7) Did Woodside Pluto’s botanist describe the Gap Ridge accommodation site as very degraded with a significant amount of Buffel grass being present?
(8) If yes to (7), why?
(9) Did the botanist mistake Roebourne Plains Gilgai grasses as Buffel grass?
(10) Given that the original Biodiversity Audit that identified this PEC (Kendrick and Stanley 2001) as specifically being in the vicinity of Seven Mile Creek (the area of the Gap Ridge Industrial Estate), why did DEC not ask for the area to be rechecked by the botanist and Woodside Pluto?
(11) Did Woodside Pluto advise DEC of its botanical mistake in respect of the area of the Gap Ridge Industrial Estate?
(12) If yes to (11), what processes will DEC put in place to insure mistakes like this do not occur again?
(1) Was the Gap Ridge Industrial Estate surveyed on the ground by a botanist with experience in recognizing this particular PEC?
(2) If yes to (1), when was the area surveyed?
(3) If no to (2), why not?
(4) Have the Roebourne Plains Gilgai grasslands been primarily dormant in the Karratha area for the last twelve months?
(5) Is it correct that Department of Environment and Conservation’s (DEC) record of PEC’s are limited to what is reported as it is found in the field?
(6) Is it correct that the original Biodiversity Audit that identified this PEC (Kendrick and Stanley 2001) specifically list the vicinity of Seven Mile Creek (the area of the Gap Ridge Industrial Estate) as an area where it occurs?
(7) Did Woodside Pluto’s botanist describe the Gap Ridge accommodation site as very degraded with a significant amount of Buffel grass being present?
(8) If yes to (7), why?
(9) Did the botanist mistake Roebourne Plains Gilgai grasses as Buffel grass?
(10) Given that the original Biodiversity Audit that identified this PEC (Kendrick and Stanley 2001) as specifically being in the vicinity of Seven Mile Creek (the area of the Gap Ridge Industrial Estate), why did DEC not ask for the area to be rechecked by the botanist and Woodside Pluto?
(11) Did Woodside Pluto advise DEC of its botanical mistake in respect of the area of the Gap Ridge Industrial Estate?
(12) If yes to (11), what processes will DEC put in place to insure mistakes like this do not occur again?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
19 October 2010
Responded by
Minister for Environment
Response time
35 days
(1)-(2) The Department of Environment and Conservation is not aware of that level of detail in respect of surveys undertaken in relation to applications to clear native vegetation in this area.
(3) The development of the Gap Ridge Industrial Estate was exempt from the requirement for a native vegetation clearing permit, pursuant to Schedule 6 Clause 9 of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
,as thesubdivision was approved under the
Planning and Development Act 2005.
(4) Yes.
(5) Priority ecological community data are limited to information that is made available to the Department of Environment and Conservation through either its own survey efforts or efforts of other organisations or individuals that are brought to the department's attention.
(6) Yes.
(7) The executive summary of a report commissioned by Woodside Energy Ltd for the Gap Ridge Accommodation Village (2007) stated in part 'In general, vegetation at the Gap Ridge survey site was considered to be in poor condition due to the presence of serious infestations of Buffel Grass.'
(8)-(9) This is a matter for Woodside Energy Ltd.
(10) The priority ecological community identified in the Biodiversity Audit as the Roebourne Plains coastal grasslands (Kendrick and Stanley, 2001) is located to the west and north of Seven Mile Creek, and not to the east and south. The area defined by Kendrick and Stanley (2001) therefore includes LandCorp's Gap Ridge Industrial Estate, but not Woodside Energy Ltd's (separate) Gap Ridge Accommodation Village.
(11) The area known as the Gap Ridge Industrial Estate is a LandCorp development and therefore not subject to a botanical survey by Woodside Energy Ltd.
(12) Not applicable.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
(3) The development of the Gap Ridge Industrial Estate was exempt from the requirement for a native vegetation clearing permit, pursuant to Schedule 6 Clause 9 of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
,as thesubdivision was approved under the
Planning and Development Act 2005.
(4) Yes.
(5) Priority ecological community data are limited to information that is made available to the Department of Environment and Conservation through either its own survey efforts or efforts of other organisations or individuals that are brought to the department's attention.
(6) Yes.
(7) The executive summary of a report commissioned by Woodside Energy Ltd for the Gap Ridge Accommodation Village (2007) stated in part 'In general, vegetation at the Gap Ridge survey site was considered to be in poor condition due to the presence of serious infestations of Buffel Grass.'
(8)-(9) This is a matter for Woodside Energy Ltd.
(10) The priority ecological community identified in the Biodiversity Audit as the Roebourne Plains coastal grasslands (Kendrick and Stanley, 2001) is located to the west and north of Seven Mile Creek, and not to the east and south. The area defined by Kendrick and Stanley (2001) therefore includes LandCorp's Gap Ridge Industrial Estate, but not Woodside Energy Ltd's (separate) Gap Ridge Accommodation Village.
(11) The area known as the Gap Ridge Industrial Estate is a LandCorp development and therefore not subject to a botanical survey by Woodside Energy Ltd.
(12) Not applicable.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
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.