❓ Question regarding the botanical aspects of the Pilbara Region Biological Survey, including costs, publication status, and impact on threatened species listings. The answer provides details on costs, staff involvement, publications, and new ecological community listings.
AnsweredQoN 1144Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I
refer to the Pilbara Region Biological Survey (2002–2013), which according to
the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions’ website, cost
$14.15m ($12.4 State funds, $1.5m Commonwealth funding and $250,000 from
industry) and sampled the diversity of plant and animal life across 800 sites
across the region but unlike the fauna components of the Survey, the native
plants (excluding weeds) aspects of the project has failed to be fully written
up, including being published as scientific peer-reviewed papers or in a
scientific journal, and I ask: (a) what
was the total cost of the botanical aspects (terrestrial and wetland plants) of
the Pilbara Region Biological Survey project; (b) if no to (a), why not; (c) how
many people were involved the botanical aspect of the survey; (d) if no to (c), why not; (e) why
have the botanical aspects of the project – terrestrial and wetland plants
(excluding weeds) not been fully written-up, similar to the fauna aspects of
vertebrate and invertebrate animals where data was analysed, and made public; (f) if no to (e), why not; (g) why
have no scientific peer-reviewed papers, similar to the fauna aspects of the
project, been published on terrestrial flora (excluding weeds) from the survey; (h) if
peer-reviewed papers of terrestrial flora (excluding weeds) have been
published, can you provide a copy of the paper(s); (i) if
no to (h), why not; (j) why
have no scientific peer-reviewed papers, similar to the fauna aspects of the
project, been published for wetland flora (excluding weeds); (k) if
peer-reviewed papers of wetland flora (excluding weeds) have been published,
can you provide a copy of the paper(s); (l) if
no to (k), why not; (m) how
many new listings of ecological communities - threatened and priority - have
resulted from the new information or knowledge from the Pilbara Region
Biological Survey; (n) can
you provide a description of the new ecological communities listed as threatened and priority, respectively, for the Pilbara Bio-region since 2013; (o) if
no to (n), why not; (p) how
many amendments to listings of ecological communities - threatened and priority - have resulted from the new information or knowledge from the Pilbara
Region Biological Survey; (q) can
you provide a description of new taxa listed as threatened and priority ecological communities, respectively, for the Pilbara Bioregion since 2013; (r) if
no to (q), why not; (s) how
many new listings of taxa threatened and priority, respectively, have resulted from the
new information or knowledge from the Pilbara Region Biological Survey; (t) can
you provide a description of new ecological communities listed as threatened and priority, respectively, for the Pilbara Bioregion since 2013; (u) if
no to (t), why not; (v) how
many amendments to listings of taxa threatened and priority, respectively, have
resulted from the new information or knowledge from the Pilbara Region
Biological Survey; (w) can
you provide a description of new taxa listed as threatened and priority, respectively, for the Pilbara Bioregion since 2013; and (x) if
no to (x), why not?
refer to the Pilbara Region Biological Survey (2002–2013), which according to
the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions’ website, cost
$14.15m ($12.4 State funds, $1.5m Commonwealth funding and $250,000 from
industry) and sampled the diversity of plant and animal life across 800 sites
across the region but unlike the fauna components of the Survey, the native
plants (excluding weeds) aspects of the project has failed to be fully written
up, including being published as scientific peer-reviewed papers or in a
scientific journal, and I ask: (a) what
was the total cost of the botanical aspects (terrestrial and wetland plants) of
the Pilbara Region Biological Survey project; (b) if no to (a), why not; (c) how
many people were involved the botanical aspect of the survey; (d) if no to (c), why not; (e) why
have the botanical aspects of the project – terrestrial and wetland plants
(excluding weeds) not been fully written-up, similar to the fauna aspects of
vertebrate and invertebrate animals where data was analysed, and made public; (f) if no to (e), why not; (g) why
have no scientific peer-reviewed papers, similar to the fauna aspects of the
project, been published on terrestrial flora (excluding weeds) from the survey; (h) if
peer-reviewed papers of terrestrial flora (excluding weeds) have been
published, can you provide a copy of the paper(s); (i) if
no to (h), why not; (j) why
have no scientific peer-reviewed papers, similar to the fauna aspects of the
project, been published for wetland flora (excluding weeds); (k) if
peer-reviewed papers of wetland flora (excluding weeds) have been published,
can you provide a copy of the paper(s); (l) if
no to (k), why not; (m) how
many new listings of ecological communities - threatened and priority - have
resulted from the new information or knowledge from the Pilbara Region
Biological Survey; (n) can
you provide a description of the new ecological communities listed as threatened and priority, respectively, for the Pilbara Bio-region since 2013; (o) if
no to (n), why not; (p) how
many amendments to listings of ecological communities - threatened and priority - have resulted from the new information or knowledge from the Pilbara
Region Biological Survey; (q) can
you provide a description of new taxa listed as threatened and priority ecological communities, respectively, for the Pilbara Bioregion since 2013; (r) if
no to (q), why not; (s) how
many new listings of taxa threatened and priority, respectively, have resulted from the
new information or knowledge from the Pilbara Region Biological Survey; (t) can
you provide a description of new ecological communities listed as threatened and priority, respectively, for the Pilbara Bioregion since 2013; (u) if
no to (t), why not; (v) how
many amendments to listings of taxa threatened and priority, respectively, have
resulted from the new information or knowledge from the Pilbara Region
Biological Survey; (w) can
you provide a description of new taxa listed as threatened and priority, respectively, for the Pilbara Bioregion since 2013; and (x) if
no to (x), why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
14 February 2023
Responded by
Minister for Emergency Services representing the Minister for Environment
Response time
1 days
(a) Costs for the field component for the botanical aspects of the Pilbara Region Biological Survey were $2,338,641.
(b) N/A
(c) 34 staff and external collaborators.
(d) N/A
(e) Five peer reviewed papers on wetland plants have been published. Terrestrial plant specimens have been lodged with the Western Australian Herbarium and are publicly available, so this information is accessible to inform decision making.
(f) N/A
(g) There were a large number of flora specimens collected that took a long time to identify and curate. Terrestrial flora specimens have been lodged with the Western Australian Herbarium and are publicly available, so this information is accessible to inform decision making.
(h) N/A
(i) N/A
(j) Two scientific peer-reviewed papers have been published on the wetland flora of the Pilbara and three peer-reviewed papers have been published on new species identified from the survey data and specimens.
(k) Yes, see Tabled papers # .
(l) N/A
(m) 13 new priority ecological communities have been informed by knowledge gained from the Pilbara Region Survey.
(n) Yes, see tabled paper # .
(o) N/A
(p) The description of one priority ecological community has been amended as a result new information or knowledge from the Pilbara Region Survey - Roebourne Plains coastal grasslands with gilgai microrelief on cracking clays (Roebourne Plains gilgai grasslands).
(q) Yes, descriptions of priority ecological communities are provided in (n).
(r) N/A
(s) One new listing of Threatened and 62 priority flora species have been listed in the DBCA Pilbara Region since 1 January 2013.
(t) Please refer to (n)
(u) N/A
(v) None.
(w) Yes, see tabled paper # .
(x) N/A
(b) N/A
(c) 34 staff and external collaborators.
(d) N/A
(e) Five peer reviewed papers on wetland plants have been published. Terrestrial plant specimens have been lodged with the Western Australian Herbarium and are publicly available, so this information is accessible to inform decision making.
(f) N/A
(g) There were a large number of flora specimens collected that took a long time to identify and curate. Terrestrial flora specimens have been lodged with the Western Australian Herbarium and are publicly available, so this information is accessible to inform decision making.
(h) N/A
(i) N/A
(j) Two scientific peer-reviewed papers have been published on the wetland flora of the Pilbara and three peer-reviewed papers have been published on new species identified from the survey data and specimens.
(k) Yes, see Tabled papers # .
(l) N/A
(m) 13 new priority ecological communities have been informed by knowledge gained from the Pilbara Region Survey.
(n) Yes, see tabled paper # .
(o) N/A
(p) The description of one priority ecological community has been amended as a result new information or knowledge from the Pilbara Region Survey - Roebourne Plains coastal grasslands with gilgai microrelief on cracking clays (Roebourne Plains gilgai grasslands).
(q) Yes, descriptions of priority ecological communities are provided in (n).
(r) N/A
(s) One new listing of Threatened and 62 priority flora species have been listed in the DBCA Pilbara Region since 1 January 2013.
(t) Please refer to (n)
(u) N/A
(v) None.
(w) Yes, see tabled paper # .
(x) N/A
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.