❓ Minister Chance acknowledges cyclone damage to pastoral stations but lacks precise cost estimates due to ongoing flooding and inaccessibility. He expresses hope that livestock losses are minimised and highlights the end of the drought as a positive outcome.
AnsweredQoN 141Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
PASTORAL STATIONS - CYCLONE DAMAGE
Has the minister been advised of the damage to pastoral stations and loss of stock following recent cyclones, and the approximate cost of rehabilitation and stock replacement? Hon KIM CHANCE
Has the minister been advised of the damage to pastoral stations and loss of stock following recent cyclones, and the approximate cost of rehabilitation and stock replacement? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank Hon Bruce Donaldson for the question. In answer to the first part of the question, yes, I have been advised of the extent of the damage. In answer to the second part of the question, I must say no, not with any great precision. The reason for saying that is that we have a view about the costs of the damage that is known to have occurred; however, the stations themselves in many cases have not been able to fully detail the extent of stock losses in particular, and losses to infrastructure are also still somewhat vague as a result of the existing flood damage. Some of those areas are still under water; others are no longer under water but remain inaccessible to vehicles. Therefore, the pastoralists have not been able to accurately determine that damage. It will take some time for that information to filter its way through to the Department of Agriculture, which will then ultimately let me know. Early indications are that infrastructure damage has been pretty severe, although possibly not as severe as was first thought. We remain hopeful that livestock losses have not been as severe as they might have been, partly because of the warning that pastoralists had that the water was coming down. I remain hopeful on that front. In any major flood event such as this there are losses, and some of them are quite iconic losses. The damage done to some of the station homesteads, particularly those that are historic, is very regrettable. However, overall, it is excellent to see that the long drought in the Murchison and Gascoyne regions has finally been well and truly broken.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Bruce Donaldson for the question. In answer to the first part of the question, yes, I have been advised of the extent of the damage. In answer to the second part of the question, I must say no, not with any great precision. The reason for saying that is that we have a view about the costs of the damage that is known to have occurred; however, the stations themselves in many cases have not been able to fully detail the extent of stock losses in particular, and losses to infrastructure are also still somewhat vague as a result of the existing flood damage. Some of those areas are still under water; others are no longer under water but remain inaccessible to vehicles. Therefore, the pastoralists have not been able to accurately determine that damage. It will take some time for that information to filter its way through to the Department of Agriculture, which will then ultimately let me know. Early indications are that infrastructure damage has been pretty severe, although possibly not as severe as was first thought. We remain hopeful that livestock losses have not been as severe as they might have been, partly because of the warning that pastoralists had that the water was coming down. I remain hopeful on that front. In any major flood event such as this there are losses, and some of them are quite iconic losses. The damage done to some of the station homesteads, particularly those that are historic, is very regrettable. However, overall, it is excellent to see that the long drought in the Murchison and Gascoyne regions has finally been well and truly broken.
I thank Hon Bruce Donaldson for the question. In answer to the first part of the question, yes, I have been advised of the extent of the damage. In answer to the second part of the question, I must say no, not with any great precision. The reason for saying that is that we have a view about the costs of the damage that is known to have occurred; however, the stations themselves in many cases have not been able to fully detail the extent of stock losses in particular, and losses to infrastructure are also still somewhat vague as a result of the existing flood damage. Some of those areas are still under water; others are no longer under water but remain inaccessible to vehicles. Therefore, the pastoralists have not been able to accurately determine that damage. It will take some time for that information to filter its way through to the Department of Agriculture, which will then ultimately let me know. Early indications are that infrastructure damage has been pretty severe, although possibly not as severe as was first thought. We remain hopeful that livestock losses have not been as severe as they might have been, partly because of the warning that pastoralists had that the water was coming down. I remain hopeful on that front. In any major flood event such as this there are losses, and some of them are quite iconic losses. The damage done to some of the station homesteads, particularly those that are historic, is very regrettable. However, overall, it is excellent to see that the long drought in the Murchison and Gascoyne regions has finally been well and truly broken.
In answer to the first part of the question, yes, I have been advised of the extent of the damage. In answer to the second part of the question, I must say no, not with any great precision. The reason for saying that is that we have a view about the costs of the damage that is known to have occurred; however, the stations themselves in many cases have not been able to fully detail the extent of stock losses in particular, and losses to infrastructure are also still somewhat vague as a result of the existing flood damage. Some of those areas are still under water; others are no longer under water but remain inaccessible to vehicles. Therefore, the pastoralists have not been able to accurately determine that damage. It will take some time for that information to filter its way through to the Department of Agriculture, which will then ultimately let me know. Early indications are that infrastructure damage has been pretty severe, although possibly not as severe as was first thought. We remain hopeful that livestock losses have not been as severe as they might have been, partly because of the warning that pastoralists had that the water was coming down. I remain hopeful on that front. In any major flood event such as this there are losses, and some of them are quite iconic losses. The damage done to some of the station homesteads, particularly those that are historic, is very regrettable. However, overall, it is excellent to see that the long drought in the Murchison and Gascoyne regions has finally been well and truly broken.
Early indications are that infrastructure damage has been pretty severe, although possibly not as severe as was first thought. We remain hopeful that livestock losses have not been as severe as they might have been, partly because of the warning that pastoralists had that the water was coming down. I remain hopeful on that front. In any major flood event such as this there are losses, and some of them are quite iconic losses. The damage done to some of the station homesteads, particularly those that are historic, is very regrettable. However, overall, it is excellent to see that the long drought in the Murchison and Gascoyne regions has finally been well and truly broken.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Bruce Donaldson for the question. In answer to the first part of the question, yes, I have been advised of the extent of the damage. In answer to the second part of the question, I must say no, not with any great precision. The reason for saying that is that we have a view about the costs of the damage that is known to have occurred; however, the stations themselves in many cases have not been able to fully detail the extent of stock losses in particular, and losses to infrastructure are also still somewhat vague as a result of the existing flood damage. Some of those areas are still under water; others are no longer under water but remain inaccessible to vehicles. Therefore, the pastoralists have not been able to accurately determine that damage. It will take some time for that information to filter its way through to the Department of Agriculture, which will then ultimately let me know. Early indications are that infrastructure damage has been pretty severe, although possibly not as severe as was first thought. We remain hopeful that livestock losses have not been as severe as they might have been, partly because of the warning that pastoralists had that the water was coming down. I remain hopeful on that front. In any major flood event such as this there are losses, and some of them are quite iconic losses. The damage done to some of the station homesteads, particularly those that are historic, is very regrettable. However, overall, it is excellent to see that the long drought in the Murchison and Gascoyne regions has finally been well and truly broken.
I thank Hon Bruce Donaldson for the question. In answer to the first part of the question, yes, I have been advised of the extent of the damage. In answer to the second part of the question, I must say no, not with any great precision. The reason for saying that is that we have a view about the costs of the damage that is known to have occurred; however, the stations themselves in many cases have not been able to fully detail the extent of stock losses in particular, and losses to infrastructure are also still somewhat vague as a result of the existing flood damage. Some of those areas are still under water; others are no longer under water but remain inaccessible to vehicles. Therefore, the pastoralists have not been able to accurately determine that damage. It will take some time for that information to filter its way through to the Department of Agriculture, which will then ultimately let me know. Early indications are that infrastructure damage has been pretty severe, although possibly not as severe as was first thought. We remain hopeful that livestock losses have not been as severe as they might have been, partly because of the warning that pastoralists had that the water was coming down. I remain hopeful on that front. In any major flood event such as this there are losses, and some of them are quite iconic losses. The damage done to some of the station homesteads, particularly those that are historic, is very regrettable. However, overall, it is excellent to see that the long drought in the Murchison and Gascoyne regions has finally been well and truly broken.
In answer to the first part of the question, yes, I have been advised of the extent of the damage. In answer to the second part of the question, I must say no, not with any great precision. The reason for saying that is that we have a view about the costs of the damage that is known to have occurred; however, the stations themselves in many cases have not been able to fully detail the extent of stock losses in particular, and losses to infrastructure are also still somewhat vague as a result of the existing flood damage. Some of those areas are still under water; others are no longer under water but remain inaccessible to vehicles. Therefore, the pastoralists have not been able to accurately determine that damage. It will take some time for that information to filter its way through to the Department of Agriculture, which will then ultimately let me know. Early indications are that infrastructure damage has been pretty severe, although possibly not as severe as was first thought. We remain hopeful that livestock losses have not been as severe as they might have been, partly because of the warning that pastoralists had that the water was coming down. I remain hopeful on that front. In any major flood event such as this there are losses, and some of them are quite iconic losses. The damage done to some of the station homesteads, particularly those that are historic, is very regrettable. However, overall, it is excellent to see that the long drought in the Murchison and Gascoyne regions has finally been well and truly broken.
Early indications are that infrastructure damage has been pretty severe, although possibly not as severe as was first thought. We remain hopeful that livestock losses have not been as severe as they might have been, partly because of the warning that pastoralists had that the water was coming down. I remain hopeful on that front. In any major flood event such as this there are losses, and some of them are quite iconic losses. The damage done to some of the station homesteads, particularly those that are historic, is very regrettable. However, overall, it is excellent to see that the long drought in the Murchison and Gascoyne regions has finally been well and truly broken.
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.