❓ A parliamentary question regarding the prioritisation of shark-proof enclosures at WA beaches, specifically Cottesloe, and the government's rationale for its decisions. The answer details the criteria used and existing shark mitigation strategies at Cottesloe.
AnsweredQoN 848Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
SHARK DRUM LINE PROGRAM — COTTESLOE
848. Hon LYNN MacLAREN to the
Leader of the House representing the Premier:
I refer to the Premier's reported comments in The West Australian newspaper on Monday,
17 August that ''there are other destinations you would pick first''
over Cottesloe for installing a shark-proof enclosure.
(1) What are the government's criteria for
determining which beaches are a priority for these enclosures?
(2) Does
Cottesloe have significantly more wave action than Sorrento Beach or Middleton
Beach in Albany?
(3) If yes to (2), please provide evidence.
(4) Last year,
the Department of Premier and Cabinet's public environmental review
document, which sought approval for a three-year shark drum lining program,
singled out Cottesloe Beach in arguing there were ''socioeconomic and
cultural considerations'' that the drum lines should be allowed. Is
shark hazard management at Cottesloe Beach only a priority if it involves
killing sharks?
848. Hon LYNN MacLAREN to the
Leader of the House representing the Premier:
I refer to the Premier's reported comments in The West Australian newspaper on Monday,
17 August that ''there are other destinations you would pick first''
over Cottesloe for installing a shark-proof enclosure.
(1) What are the government's criteria for
determining which beaches are a priority for these enclosures?
(2) Does
Cottesloe have significantly more wave action than Sorrento Beach or Middleton
Beach in Albany?
(3) If yes to (2), please provide evidence.
(4) Last year,
the Department of Premier and Cabinet's public environmental review
document, which sought approval for a three-year shark drum lining program,
singled out Cottesloe Beach in arguing there were ''socioeconomic and
cultural considerations'' that the drum lines should be allowed. Is
shark hazard management at Cottesloe Beach only a priority if it involves
killing sharks?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this
question.
(1) Decisions
on the locations of enclosures were made by considering the geographical spread
of beach enclosures, the findings of the hydrobiology report, beach usage, and
following discussions with Surf Life Saving WA and the local government
authorities for Joondalup and Albany.
(2)–(3) The
hydrobiology report found that an enclosure could only be deployed for a
limited time, over the summer months—December to February—due
to the wave action at Cottesloe Beach. Hydrodynamics of beaches are only one
criteria used to assess the suitability of a location for a beach enclosure and
the report also identified the potential for stakeholder conflict with the
Cottesloe Surf Life Saving Club and the need to deploy watercraft in the
vicinity of the groyne. Cottesloe Beach already benefits from a range of
government-funded shark hazard mitigation strategies—land-based
patrols, aerial patrols, jet skis, watch towers and acoustic receivers—more
so than other metropolitan beaches. A government-funded enclosure at another
location is therefore considered more equitable at this point.
(4) Please see
response to (2) above. As part of the government's commitment of more
than $28 million to a range of shark hazard mitigation strategies, Cottesloe
Beach already has in place land-based patrols, aerial patrols, jet skis, watch
towers and acoustic receivers. Given this level of service, it was considered
more appropriate for the 2015–16 beach enclosure funding to be
allocated elsewhere.
What a
comprehensive answer!
question.
(1) Decisions
on the locations of enclosures were made by considering the geographical spread
of beach enclosures, the findings of the hydrobiology report, beach usage, and
following discussions with Surf Life Saving WA and the local government
authorities for Joondalup and Albany.
(2)–(3) The
hydrobiology report found that an enclosure could only be deployed for a
limited time, over the summer months—December to February—due
to the wave action at Cottesloe Beach. Hydrodynamics of beaches are only one
criteria used to assess the suitability of a location for a beach enclosure and
the report also identified the potential for stakeholder conflict with the
Cottesloe Surf Life Saving Club and the need to deploy watercraft in the
vicinity of the groyne. Cottesloe Beach already benefits from a range of
government-funded shark hazard mitigation strategies—land-based
patrols, aerial patrols, jet skis, watch towers and acoustic receivers—more
so than other metropolitan beaches. A government-funded enclosure at another
location is therefore considered more equitable at this point.
(4) Please see
response to (2) above. As part of the government's commitment of more
than $28 million to a range of shark hazard mitigation strategies, Cottesloe
Beach already has in place land-based patrols, aerial patrols, jet skis, watch
towers and acoustic receivers. Given this level of service, it was considered
more appropriate for the 2015–16 beach enclosure funding to be
allocated elsewhere.
What a
comprehensive answer!
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.