Hon Jess Beckerling questions the Minister for the Environment regarding the removal of a data line from a Murujuga rock art monitoring report figure, seeking clarification on who made the decision and the reasoning behind it. The Minister's answer clarifies the drafting process and simplification rationale.

AnsweredQoN 247Legislative Assembly
Asked
27 May 2025
Portfolio
the Environment

QuestionView source ↗

Murujuga rock art—Monitoring
program
247. Hon Jess Beckerling to the Minister for the
Environment:
I refer to the Murujuga Rock Art Monitoring Program: Research Summary:
Year 2 and the Murujuga Rock Art Monitoring
Program: Interim Environmental Quality Criteria .
(1) Who made the decision to remove the interim
guideline EQC field data dashed line shown in figure 7 of the interim
environmental quality criteria from corresponding figure 5a in the summary
document?
(2) If the decision to remove the interim
guideline was made by the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation or
another government agency or authority, who gave the direction and why?

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the member
for some notice of the question.
(1)–(2) The research summary document was
drafted by the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation with input from
Curtin University and Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation. The graph in the summary
document was simplified to focus on the interim guideline EQC that was
recommended by Curtin in its interim EQC report, table 1.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more