❓ Hon. Barry House inquires about the future land use of Nelson locations 12889 and 12890, specifically regarding their potential for agriculture if included in a forest conservation area. Hon. Tom Stephens clarifies that agriculture is not permitted in state forests.
AnsweredQoN 1085Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
(1) Will Nelson locations 12889 and 12890 be included in the Hilliger National Park or a forest conservation area? (2) If the two lots are placed in a forest conservation area, can they be used for agriculture in the future? (3) If so, what is the process that must be followed, and the time frame involved, to make them available for agriculture if they are placed in the conservation estate? (4) If not, why not? Hon TOM STEPHENS
AnswerView source ↗
(1) Nelson location 12889 and parts of location 12890 are proposed to be set aside as state forest and classified as a forest conservation area. (2) No. (3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
(2) If the two lots are placed in a forest conservation area, can they be used for agriculture in the future? (3) If so, what is the process that must be followed, and the time frame involved, to make them available for agriculture if they are placed in the conservation estate? (4) If not, why not? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) Nelson location 12889 and parts of location 12890 are proposed to be set aside as state forest and classified as a forest conservation area. (2) No. (3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
(3) If so, what is the process that must be followed, and the time frame involved, to make them available for agriculture if they are placed in the conservation estate? (4) If not, why not? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) Nelson location 12889 and parts of location 12890 are proposed to be set aside as state forest and classified as a forest conservation area. (2) No. (3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
(4) If not, why not? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) Nelson location 12889 and parts of location 12890 are proposed to be set aside as state forest and classified as a forest conservation area. (2) No. (3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) Nelson location 12889 and parts of location 12890 are proposed to be set aside as state forest and classified as a forest conservation area. (2) No. (3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
(1) Nelson location 12889 and parts of location 12890 are proposed to be set aside as state forest and classified as a forest conservation area. (2) No. (3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
(2) No. (3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
(3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
(4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
(2) If the two lots are placed in a forest conservation area, can they be used for agriculture in the future? (3) If so, what is the process that must be followed, and the time frame involved, to make them available for agriculture if they are placed in the conservation estate? (4) If not, why not? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) Nelson location 12889 and parts of location 12890 are proposed to be set aside as state forest and classified as a forest conservation area. (2) No. (3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
(3) If so, what is the process that must be followed, and the time frame involved, to make them available for agriculture if they are placed in the conservation estate? (4) If not, why not? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) Nelson location 12889 and parts of location 12890 are proposed to be set aside as state forest and classified as a forest conservation area. (2) No. (3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
(4) If not, why not? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) Nelson location 12889 and parts of location 12890 are proposed to be set aside as state forest and classified as a forest conservation area. (2) No. (3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) Nelson location 12889 and parts of location 12890 are proposed to be set aside as state forest and classified as a forest conservation area. (2) No. (3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
(1) Nelson location 12889 and parts of location 12890 are proposed to be set aside as state forest and classified as a forest conservation area. (2) No. (3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
(2) No. (3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
(3) Not applicable. (4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
(4) Agriculture is not a purpose applicable to state forest.
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.