Hon James Hayward questions the Minister for Forestry regarding the Forest Products Commission's (FPC) management of category 3 weeds on government lands, particularly in relation to obligations under the Biosecurity and Agriculture Management Act 2007. The Minister defends the FPC's actions, stating they monitor and control weeds where necessary for tree crop management and that the BAM Act applies to both public and private landholders.

AnsweredQoN 554Legislative Council
Asked
17 May 2023
Portfolio
Forestry

QuestionView source ↗

AGRICULTURE — DECLARED WEEDS
554. Hon JAMES HAYWARD to the Minister for Forestry:
I refer to the answer provided to
question without notice 378 relating to the management of declared weeds on
government lands.
(1) Can the minister
confirm that the Forest Products Commission does not actively monitor or
control category 3 weeds on lands under its control?
(2) Is the FPC considered a landholder in the context
of the Biosecurity and Agriculture Management Act 2007?
(3) If yes to
(2), why is the FPC not meeting its obligations under the BAM act to control
category 3 weeds on lands it controls?
(4) Why does the Department of Primary Industries and
Regional Development require the active management of category 3 weeds
on private lands but not on government-held lands?

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the member for some notice
of the question.
(1) Category 3
weeds are widespread and established in Western Australia, and control
activities are focused on minimising the impact of these weeds. The FPC
monitors and, where appropriate, undertakes control measures for category 3
weeds where this is required for tree crop management.
(2) Yes, where the FPC is listed as
the registered owner.
(3) I reject the premise of the
question.
(4) The BAM act
requires both private and public landholders to manage C3 declared pests on
their lands to minimise impact.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more