❓ A parliamentary question regarding the removal of a historic oak tree in Guildford Meadow, focusing on the reasons, authorisation, risk assessment, community consultation, and plans for other trees in the area. The response details the rationale behind the removal, citing toxicity to livestock and lack of heritage listing.
AnsweredQoN 805Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
GUILDFORD MEADOW — REMOVAL OF OAK TREE
I refer to the removal of a historic oak tree in Guildford Meadow last week. (1) On what grounds was this tree removed? (2) Who authorised the removal? (3) Has a formal risk assessment been undertaken to determine the need to remove the tree? (4) At what level was the local community consulted about the removal of this tree? (5) What are the plans for the other historic oak trees in the area? Hon PETER COLLIER
I refer to the removal of a historic oak tree in Guildford Meadow last week. (1) On what grounds was this tree removed? (2) Who authorised the removal? (3) Has a formal risk assessment been undertaken to determine the need to remove the tree? (4) At what level was the local community consulted about the removal of this tree? (5) What are the plans for the other historic oak trees in the area? Hon PETER COLLIER
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(1) On what grounds was this tree removed? (2) Who authorised the removal? (3) Has a formal risk assessment been undertaken to determine the need to remove the tree? (4) At what level was the local community consulted about the removal of this tree? (5) What are the plans for the other historic oak trees in the area? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(2) Who authorised the removal? (3) Has a formal risk assessment been undertaken to determine the need to remove the tree? (4) At what level was the local community consulted about the removal of this tree? (5) What are the plans for the other historic oak trees in the area? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(3) Has a formal risk assessment been undertaken to determine the need to remove the tree? (4) At what level was the local community consulted about the removal of this tree? (5) What are the plans for the other historic oak trees in the area? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(4) At what level was the local community consulted about the removal of this tree? (5) What are the plans for the other historic oak trees in the area? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(5) What are the plans for the other historic oak trees in the area? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(1) On what grounds was this tree removed? (2) Who authorised the removal? (3) Has a formal risk assessment been undertaken to determine the need to remove the tree? (4) At what level was the local community consulted about the removal of this tree? (5) What are the plans for the other historic oak trees in the area? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(2) Who authorised the removal? (3) Has a formal risk assessment been undertaken to determine the need to remove the tree? (4) At what level was the local community consulted about the removal of this tree? (5) What are the plans for the other historic oak trees in the area? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(3) Has a formal risk assessment been undertaken to determine the need to remove the tree? (4) At what level was the local community consulted about the removal of this tree? (5) What are the plans for the other historic oak trees in the area? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(4) At what level was the local community consulted about the removal of this tree? (5) What are the plans for the other historic oak trees in the area? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(5) What are the plans for the other historic oak trees in the area? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
I thank the member for some notice of the question, which I answer on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. (1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(1) The decision to remove oak trees from an area in Whiteman Park known as Guildford Meadow was based on expert advice from the Murdoch University Veterinary School that oaks are toxic to the area’s livestock. Whiteman Park maintains a herd of some 120 cows to reduce flash fuels in parts of the park that had been previously cleared for agriculture. This is done as a fire precaution measure. The advice was sought by Whiteman Park management following recent deaths in the herd. (2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(2) Removal was authorised by park management. (3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(3) The trees pose no risk as such to persons or property, the risk assessment was based on the expert advice that the oaks were the likely cause of the poisoning and that deaths could be expected in the future if action was not taken. (4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(4) As the area is subject to park management, the community at large is not required to be formally consulted on operational matters. Park management did, however, investigate whether the trees were listed on any significant tree register or had heritage listing. No records could be found about the trees or that identified them as having any cultural or historical significance. (5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
(5) The remaining two trees will be retained and cared for and investigations for alternative arrangements for the cattle made. Park management will actively seek a workable solution that meets best practice in the park’s operation, the ultimate safety of park visitors and the desires of the wider community.
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.