Question regarding the enforcement of infrastructure maintenance (specifically fencing) on pastoral leases, and the danger posed by straying livestock on major highways. The answer refers to another question, indicating a possible consolidation of information.

AnsweredQoN 1720Legislative Council
Asked
14 October 2014
Portfolio
Attorney General

QuestionView source ↗

I refer to questions on notice Nos 700 and 709, and more generally the danger to motor vehicle operators and passengers from straying livestock on our major haulage roads and highways, and I ask: (a) how many times has the Pastoral Lands Board issued default notices for failure to maintain infrastructure, including fences, during the past ten years: (i) how many pastoralists were issued with these notices; (b) of the default notices issued in (a): (i) what was the average time allowed for pastoral lessees to comply; (ii) how many times were the pastoral lessees liable for payment of the $50,000 penalty and/or the daily penalty of $1,000 for failure to comply; and (iii) how many of the breaches resulted in forfeiture of the pastoral leases; (c) how much time were pastoral lessees given to rectify outstanding compliance issues; (d) what follow-up will occur, and by whom, to ensure pastoral lessees comply with orders to maintain fences and other infrastructure prior to their pastoral leases being renewed; and (e) how many pastoral properties along the Great Northern Highway and North West Coastal Highway are unfenced: (i) how many head of cattle do each of these unfenced properties have?

AnswerView source ↗

Answered
21 October 2014
Response time
7 days
Please refer to LC QON 1722.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more