❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice regarding environmental protection and planning, specifically concerning wetlands, endangered species, weed management, river protection, and coastal development in the Moore River and Swan-Canning River systems. The response details actions taken and planned by the government.
AnsweredQoN 2668Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(b) prepare rectification plans for wetlands where ecological values are being eroded; (c) ensure the application of ESD indicators in the assessment of all land use activities which may affect wetlands; (d) conclude the Western Swamp Tortoise EPP as a priority; (e) finalise the Swan Coastal Plain Wetlands EPP; (f) continue the process of nominating significant wetlands for inclusion on the Ramsar Convention’s List of Wetlands of International Importance; (g) initiate a coordinated inter-agency response to the State Weed Strategy to ensure a comprehensive implementation of the necessary measures to address the environmental and economic threat; (h) ensure the protection of wild and scenic rivers; (i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(c) ensure the application of ESD indicators in the assessment of all land use activities which may affect wetlands; (d) conclude the Western Swamp Tortoise EPP as a priority; (e) finalise the Swan Coastal Plain Wetlands EPP; (f) continue the process of nominating significant wetlands for inclusion on the Ramsar Convention’s List of Wetlands of International Importance; (g) initiate a coordinated inter-agency response to the State Weed Strategy to ensure a comprehensive implementation of the necessary measures to address the environmental and economic threat; (h) ensure the protection of wild and scenic rivers; (i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(d) conclude the Western Swamp Tortoise EPP as a priority; (e) finalise the Swan Coastal Plain Wetlands EPP; (f) continue the process of nominating significant wetlands for inclusion on the Ramsar Convention’s List of Wetlands of International Importance; (g) initiate a coordinated inter-agency response to the State Weed Strategy to ensure a comprehensive implementation of the necessary measures to address the environmental and economic threat; (h) ensure the protection of wild and scenic rivers; (i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(e) finalise the Swan Coastal Plain Wetlands EPP; (f) continue the process of nominating significant wetlands for inclusion on the Ramsar Convention’s List of Wetlands of International Importance; (g) initiate a coordinated inter-agency response to the State Weed Strategy to ensure a comprehensive implementation of the necessary measures to address the environmental and economic threat; (h) ensure the protection of wild and scenic rivers; (i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(f) continue the process of nominating significant wetlands for inclusion on the Ramsar Convention’s List of Wetlands of International Importance; (g) initiate a coordinated inter-agency response to the State Weed Strategy to ensure a comprehensive implementation of the necessary measures to address the environmental and economic threat; (h) ensure the protection of wild and scenic rivers; (i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(g) initiate a coordinated inter-agency response to the State Weed Strategy to ensure a comprehensive implementation of the necessary measures to address the environmental and economic threat; (h) ensure the protection of wild and scenic rivers; (i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(h) ensure the protection of wild and scenic rivers; (i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(b) introduce an MOU between all Government agencies and statutory authorities to ensure the conservation of Bushplan sites under Government control; (c) monitor the effectiveness of the MOU and make any necessary changes to ensure the conservation of Bushplan sites; (d) implement land swaps where appropriate in order to conserve Bushplan sites held by Government agencies and Statutory Authorities; (e) require formal assessment by the EPA for developments proposed for Bushplan sites and include comprehensive community consultation as a part of the process; (f) implement a Statement of Planning Policy to cover Bushplan sites; (g) implement interim protection measures to ensure that Bushplan sites are protected prior to purchase (by means of special control areas under the MRS); (h) introduce Conservation zones as a new zoning category for Town Planning Schemes to recognise bushland as a legitimate land use and to provide necessary protection; and (i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(c) monitor the effectiveness of the MOU and make any necessary changes to ensure the conservation of Bushplan sites; (d) implement land swaps where appropriate in order to conserve Bushplan sites held by Government agencies and Statutory Authorities; (e) require formal assessment by the EPA for developments proposed for Bushplan sites and include comprehensive community consultation as a part of the process; (f) implement a Statement of Planning Policy to cover Bushplan sites; (g) implement interim protection measures to ensure that Bushplan sites are protected prior to purchase (by means of special control areas under the MRS); (h) introduce Conservation zones as a new zoning category for Town Planning Schemes to recognise bushland as a legitimate land use and to provide necessary protection; and (i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(d) implement land swaps where appropriate in order to conserve Bushplan sites held by Government agencies and Statutory Authorities; (e) require formal assessment by the EPA for developments proposed for Bushplan sites and include comprehensive community consultation as a part of the process; (f) implement a Statement of Planning Policy to cover Bushplan sites; (g) implement interim protection measures to ensure that Bushplan sites are protected prior to purchase (by means of special control areas under the MRS); (h) introduce Conservation zones as a new zoning category for Town Planning Schemes to recognise bushland as a legitimate land use and to provide necessary protection; and (i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(e) require formal assessment by the EPA for developments proposed for Bushplan sites and include comprehensive community consultation as a part of the process; (f) implement a Statement of Planning Policy to cover Bushplan sites; (g) implement interim protection measures to ensure that Bushplan sites are protected prior to purchase (by means of special control areas under the MRS); (h) introduce Conservation zones as a new zoning category for Town Planning Schemes to recognise bushland as a legitimate land use and to provide necessary protection; and (i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(f) implement a Statement of Planning Policy to cover Bushplan sites; (g) implement interim protection measures to ensure that Bushplan sites are protected prior to purchase (by means of special control areas under the MRS); (h) introduce Conservation zones as a new zoning category for Town Planning Schemes to recognise bushland as a legitimate land use and to provide necessary protection; and (i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(g) implement interim protection measures to ensure that Bushplan sites are protected prior to purchase (by means of special control areas under the MRS); (h) introduce Conservation zones as a new zoning category for Town Planning Schemes to recognise bushland as a legitimate land use and to provide necessary protection; and (i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(h) introduce Conservation zones as a new zoning category for Town Planning Schemes to recognise bushland as a legitimate land use and to provide necessary protection; and (i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(b) Work is progressing on developing a wetland manual to assist all stakeholders (government agencies, landowners & community groups) to prepare wetland management plans. (c) The Conservation Commission, in assessing land use applications involving wetlands, applies ESD principles in its decision-making process. (d) The Environmental Protection (Western Swamp Tortoise Habitat) Policy was gazetted on 18 February 2003. (e) I remitted the Environmental Protection Policy (EPP) to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in October 2003 for further advice. I understand the EPA is preparing a draft EPP, which will be released shortly for public comment. Following the analysis of submissions on the EPP, the EPA would prepare a revised draft EPP and report, and transmit these to me under Section 28 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 . (f) The priority areas identified in the policy commitment were added to the list of Wetlands of International Importance in January 2001. Priorities for future nominations are being investigated by the Department of Conservation and Land Management. (g) Action 1.1 of the State Weed Plan requires the establishment of a broad, skills-based weed-coordinating group. The terms of reference and selection criteria for the Western Australian Weeds Committee have been established. Expressions of interest for membership of the Committee closed on 27 February 2004 and these are currently being assessed by a sub-group of the State Weed Plan steering group and a nominated representative from the Natural Resource Management Council. This Committee held its first meeting on 24 May 2004. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Weed Plan, which has key objectives of integrating environmental and agricultural weed management and promoting coordination between different land managers for regional weed management. (h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields. There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(c) The Conservation Commission, in assessing land use applications involving wetlands, applies ESD principles in its decision-making process. (d) The Environmental Protection (Western Swamp Tortoise Habitat) Policy was gazetted on 18 February 2003. (e) I remitted the Environmental Protection Policy (EPP) to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in October 2003 for further advice. I understand the EPA is preparing a draft EPP, which will be released shortly for public comment. Following the analysis of submissions on the EPP, the EPA would prepare a revised draft EPP and report, and transmit these to me under Section 28 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 . (f) The priority areas identified in the policy commitment were added to the list of Wetlands of International Importance in January 2001. Priorities for future nominations are being investigated by the Department of Conservation and Land Management. (g) Action 1.1 of the State Weed Plan requires the establishment of a broad, skills-based weed-coordinating group. The terms of reference and selection criteria for the Western Australian Weeds Committee have been established. Expressions of interest for membership of the Committee closed on 27 February 2004 and these are currently being assessed by a sub-group of the State Weed Plan steering group and a nominated representative from the Natural Resource Management Council. This Committee held its first meeting on 24 May 2004. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Weed Plan, which has key objectives of integrating environmental and agricultural weed management and promoting coordination between different land managers for regional weed management. (h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields. There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(d) The Environmental Protection (Western Swamp Tortoise Habitat) Policy was gazetted on 18 February 2003. (e) I remitted the Environmental Protection Policy (EPP) to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in October 2003 for further advice. I understand the EPA is preparing a draft EPP, which will be released shortly for public comment. Following the analysis of submissions on the EPP, the EPA would prepare a revised draft EPP and report, and transmit these to me under Section 28 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 . (f) The priority areas identified in the policy commitment were added to the list of Wetlands of International Importance in January 2001. Priorities for future nominations are being investigated by the Department of Conservation and Land Management. (g) Action 1.1 of the State Weed Plan requires the establishment of a broad, skills-based weed-coordinating group. The terms of reference and selection criteria for the Western Australian Weeds Committee have been established. Expressions of interest for membership of the Committee closed on 27 February 2004 and these are currently being assessed by a sub-group of the State Weed Plan steering group and a nominated representative from the Natural Resource Management Council. This Committee held its first meeting on 24 May 2004. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Weed Plan, which has key objectives of integrating environmental and agricultural weed management and promoting coordination between different land managers for regional weed management. (h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields. There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(e) I remitted the Environmental Protection Policy (EPP) to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in October 2003 for further advice. I understand the EPA is preparing a draft EPP, which will be released shortly for public comment. Following the analysis of submissions on the EPP, the EPA would prepare a revised draft EPP and report, and transmit these to me under Section 28 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 . (f) The priority areas identified in the policy commitment were added to the list of Wetlands of International Importance in January 2001. Priorities for future nominations are being investigated by the Department of Conservation and Land Management. (g) Action 1.1 of the State Weed Plan requires the establishment of a broad, skills-based weed-coordinating group. The terms of reference and selection criteria for the Western Australian Weeds Committee have been established. Expressions of interest for membership of the Committee closed on 27 February 2004 and these are currently being assessed by a sub-group of the State Weed Plan steering group and a nominated representative from the Natural Resource Management Council. This Committee held its first meeting on 24 May 2004. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Weed Plan, which has key objectives of integrating environmental and agricultural weed management and promoting coordination between different land managers for regional weed management. (h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields. There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(f) The priority areas identified in the policy commitment were added to the list of Wetlands of International Importance in January 2001. Priorities for future nominations are being investigated by the Department of Conservation and Land Management. (g) Action 1.1 of the State Weed Plan requires the establishment of a broad, skills-based weed-coordinating group. The terms of reference and selection criteria for the Western Australian Weeds Committee have been established. Expressions of interest for membership of the Committee closed on 27 February 2004 and these are currently being assessed by a sub-group of the State Weed Plan steering group and a nominated representative from the Natural Resource Management Council. This Committee held its first meeting on 24 May 2004. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Weed Plan, which has key objectives of integrating environmental and agricultural weed management and promoting coordination between different land managers for regional weed management. (h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields. There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(g) Action 1.1 of the State Weed Plan requires the establishment of a broad, skills-based weed-coordinating group. The terms of reference and selection criteria for the Western Australian Weeds Committee have been established. Expressions of interest for membership of the Committee closed on 27 February 2004 and these are currently being assessed by a sub-group of the State Weed Plan steering group and a nominated representative from the Natural Resource Management Council. This Committee held its first meeting on 24 May 2004. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Weed Plan, which has key objectives of integrating environmental and agricultural weed management and promoting coordination between different land managers for regional weed management. (h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields. There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields. There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(c) ensure the application of ESD indicators in the assessment of all land use activities which may affect wetlands; (d) conclude the Western Swamp Tortoise EPP as a priority; (e) finalise the Swan Coastal Plain Wetlands EPP; (f) continue the process of nominating significant wetlands for inclusion on the Ramsar Convention’s List of Wetlands of International Importance; (g) initiate a coordinated inter-agency response to the State Weed Strategy to ensure a comprehensive implementation of the necessary measures to address the environmental and economic threat; (h) ensure the protection of wild and scenic rivers; (i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(d) conclude the Western Swamp Tortoise EPP as a priority; (e) finalise the Swan Coastal Plain Wetlands EPP; (f) continue the process of nominating significant wetlands for inclusion on the Ramsar Convention’s List of Wetlands of International Importance; (g) initiate a coordinated inter-agency response to the State Weed Strategy to ensure a comprehensive implementation of the necessary measures to address the environmental and economic threat; (h) ensure the protection of wild and scenic rivers; (i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(e) finalise the Swan Coastal Plain Wetlands EPP; (f) continue the process of nominating significant wetlands for inclusion on the Ramsar Convention’s List of Wetlands of International Importance; (g) initiate a coordinated inter-agency response to the State Weed Strategy to ensure a comprehensive implementation of the necessary measures to address the environmental and economic threat; (h) ensure the protection of wild and scenic rivers; (i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(f) continue the process of nominating significant wetlands for inclusion on the Ramsar Convention’s List of Wetlands of International Importance; (g) initiate a coordinated inter-agency response to the State Weed Strategy to ensure a comprehensive implementation of the necessary measures to address the environmental and economic threat; (h) ensure the protection of wild and scenic rivers; (i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(g) initiate a coordinated inter-agency response to the State Weed Strategy to ensure a comprehensive implementation of the necessary measures to address the environmental and economic threat; (h) ensure the protection of wild and scenic rivers; (i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(h) ensure the protection of wild and scenic rivers; (i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(i) review the proposed setbacks after conducting a scientific study of the needs of the southern foreshore of the Moore River estuary; (j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(j) investigate means to scale back the Moore River development in order to reduce the environmental and planning hazards currently presented; and (k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(k) initiate a zoning review to protect landscapes and flood prone areas along the Swan-Canning River system?
(b) introduce an MOU between all Government agencies and statutory authorities to ensure the conservation of Bushplan sites under Government control; (c) monitor the effectiveness of the MOU and make any necessary changes to ensure the conservation of Bushplan sites; (d) implement land swaps where appropriate in order to conserve Bushplan sites held by Government agencies and Statutory Authorities; (e) require formal assessment by the EPA for developments proposed for Bushplan sites and include comprehensive community consultation as a part of the process; (f) implement a Statement of Planning Policy to cover Bushplan sites; (g) implement interim protection measures to ensure that Bushplan sites are protected prior to purchase (by means of special control areas under the MRS); (h) introduce Conservation zones as a new zoning category for Town Planning Schemes to recognise bushland as a legitimate land use and to provide necessary protection; and (i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(c) monitor the effectiveness of the MOU and make any necessary changes to ensure the conservation of Bushplan sites; (d) implement land swaps where appropriate in order to conserve Bushplan sites held by Government agencies and Statutory Authorities; (e) require formal assessment by the EPA for developments proposed for Bushplan sites and include comprehensive community consultation as a part of the process; (f) implement a Statement of Planning Policy to cover Bushplan sites; (g) implement interim protection measures to ensure that Bushplan sites are protected prior to purchase (by means of special control areas under the MRS); (h) introduce Conservation zones as a new zoning category for Town Planning Schemes to recognise bushland as a legitimate land use and to provide necessary protection; and (i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(d) implement land swaps where appropriate in order to conserve Bushplan sites held by Government agencies and Statutory Authorities; (e) require formal assessment by the EPA for developments proposed for Bushplan sites and include comprehensive community consultation as a part of the process; (f) implement a Statement of Planning Policy to cover Bushplan sites; (g) implement interim protection measures to ensure that Bushplan sites are protected prior to purchase (by means of special control areas under the MRS); (h) introduce Conservation zones as a new zoning category for Town Planning Schemes to recognise bushland as a legitimate land use and to provide necessary protection; and (i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(e) require formal assessment by the EPA for developments proposed for Bushplan sites and include comprehensive community consultation as a part of the process; (f) implement a Statement of Planning Policy to cover Bushplan sites; (g) implement interim protection measures to ensure that Bushplan sites are protected prior to purchase (by means of special control areas under the MRS); (h) introduce Conservation zones as a new zoning category for Town Planning Schemes to recognise bushland as a legitimate land use and to provide necessary protection; and (i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(f) implement a Statement of Planning Policy to cover Bushplan sites; (g) implement interim protection measures to ensure that Bushplan sites are protected prior to purchase (by means of special control areas under the MRS); (h) introduce Conservation zones as a new zoning category for Town Planning Schemes to recognise bushland as a legitimate land use and to provide necessary protection; and (i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(g) implement interim protection measures to ensure that Bushplan sites are protected prior to purchase (by means of special control areas under the MRS); (h) introduce Conservation zones as a new zoning category for Town Planning Schemes to recognise bushland as a legitimate land use and to provide necessary protection; and (i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(h) introduce Conservation zones as a new zoning category for Town Planning Schemes to recognise bushland as a legitimate land use and to provide necessary protection; and (i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(i) prioritize the purchase of private Bushplan sites according to ecological and social significance.
(b) Work is progressing on developing a wetland manual to assist all stakeholders (government agencies, landowners & community groups) to prepare wetland management plans. (c) The Conservation Commission, in assessing land use applications involving wetlands, applies ESD principles in its decision-making process. (d) The Environmental Protection (Western Swamp Tortoise Habitat) Policy was gazetted on 18 February 2003. (e) I remitted the Environmental Protection Policy (EPP) to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in October 2003 for further advice. I understand the EPA is preparing a draft EPP, which will be released shortly for public comment. Following the analysis of submissions on the EPP, the EPA would prepare a revised draft EPP and report, and transmit these to me under Section 28 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 . (f) The priority areas identified in the policy commitment were added to the list of Wetlands of International Importance in January 2001. Priorities for future nominations are being investigated by the Department of Conservation and Land Management. (g) Action 1.1 of the State Weed Plan requires the establishment of a broad, skills-based weed-coordinating group. The terms of reference and selection criteria for the Western Australian Weeds Committee have been established. Expressions of interest for membership of the Committee closed on 27 February 2004 and these are currently being assessed by a sub-group of the State Weed Plan steering group and a nominated representative from the Natural Resource Management Council. This Committee held its first meeting on 24 May 2004. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Weed Plan, which has key objectives of integrating environmental and agricultural weed management and promoting coordination between different land managers for regional weed management. (h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields. There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(c) The Conservation Commission, in assessing land use applications involving wetlands, applies ESD principles in its decision-making process. (d) The Environmental Protection (Western Swamp Tortoise Habitat) Policy was gazetted on 18 February 2003. (e) I remitted the Environmental Protection Policy (EPP) to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in October 2003 for further advice. I understand the EPA is preparing a draft EPP, which will be released shortly for public comment. Following the analysis of submissions on the EPP, the EPA would prepare a revised draft EPP and report, and transmit these to me under Section 28 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 . (f) The priority areas identified in the policy commitment were added to the list of Wetlands of International Importance in January 2001. Priorities for future nominations are being investigated by the Department of Conservation and Land Management. (g) Action 1.1 of the State Weed Plan requires the establishment of a broad, skills-based weed-coordinating group. The terms of reference and selection criteria for the Western Australian Weeds Committee have been established. Expressions of interest for membership of the Committee closed on 27 February 2004 and these are currently being assessed by a sub-group of the State Weed Plan steering group and a nominated representative from the Natural Resource Management Council. This Committee held its first meeting on 24 May 2004. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Weed Plan, which has key objectives of integrating environmental and agricultural weed management and promoting coordination between different land managers for regional weed management. (h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields. There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(d) The Environmental Protection (Western Swamp Tortoise Habitat) Policy was gazetted on 18 February 2003. (e) I remitted the Environmental Protection Policy (EPP) to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in October 2003 for further advice. I understand the EPA is preparing a draft EPP, which will be released shortly for public comment. Following the analysis of submissions on the EPP, the EPA would prepare a revised draft EPP and report, and transmit these to me under Section 28 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 . (f) The priority areas identified in the policy commitment were added to the list of Wetlands of International Importance in January 2001. Priorities for future nominations are being investigated by the Department of Conservation and Land Management. (g) Action 1.1 of the State Weed Plan requires the establishment of a broad, skills-based weed-coordinating group. The terms of reference and selection criteria for the Western Australian Weeds Committee have been established. Expressions of interest for membership of the Committee closed on 27 February 2004 and these are currently being assessed by a sub-group of the State Weed Plan steering group and a nominated representative from the Natural Resource Management Council. This Committee held its first meeting on 24 May 2004. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Weed Plan, which has key objectives of integrating environmental and agricultural weed management and promoting coordination between different land managers for regional weed management. (h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields. There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(e) I remitted the Environmental Protection Policy (EPP) to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in October 2003 for further advice. I understand the EPA is preparing a draft EPP, which will be released shortly for public comment. Following the analysis of submissions on the EPP, the EPA would prepare a revised draft EPP and report, and transmit these to me under Section 28 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 . (f) The priority areas identified in the policy commitment were added to the list of Wetlands of International Importance in January 2001. Priorities for future nominations are being investigated by the Department of Conservation and Land Management. (g) Action 1.1 of the State Weed Plan requires the establishment of a broad, skills-based weed-coordinating group. The terms of reference and selection criteria for the Western Australian Weeds Committee have been established. Expressions of interest for membership of the Committee closed on 27 February 2004 and these are currently being assessed by a sub-group of the State Weed Plan steering group and a nominated representative from the Natural Resource Management Council. This Committee held its first meeting on 24 May 2004. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Weed Plan, which has key objectives of integrating environmental and agricultural weed management and promoting coordination between different land managers for regional weed management. (h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields. There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(f) The priority areas identified in the policy commitment were added to the list of Wetlands of International Importance in January 2001. Priorities for future nominations are being investigated by the Department of Conservation and Land Management. (g) Action 1.1 of the State Weed Plan requires the establishment of a broad, skills-based weed-coordinating group. The terms of reference and selection criteria for the Western Australian Weeds Committee have been established. Expressions of interest for membership of the Committee closed on 27 February 2004 and these are currently being assessed by a sub-group of the State Weed Plan steering group and a nominated representative from the Natural Resource Management Council. This Committee held its first meeting on 24 May 2004. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Weed Plan, which has key objectives of integrating environmental and agricultural weed management and promoting coordination between different land managers for regional weed management. (h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields. There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(g) Action 1.1 of the State Weed Plan requires the establishment of a broad, skills-based weed-coordinating group. The terms of reference and selection criteria for the Western Australian Weeds Committee have been established. Expressions of interest for membership of the Committee closed on 27 February 2004 and these are currently being assessed by a sub-group of the State Weed Plan steering group and a nominated representative from the Natural Resource Management Council. This Committee held its first meeting on 24 May 2004. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Weed Plan, which has key objectives of integrating environmental and agricultural weed management and promoting coordination between different land managers for regional weed management. (h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields. There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields. There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003. The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River. Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One). (k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes. (2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(2) The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d) (a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position. A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever. (e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances. The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i) (f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly. (g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites. (h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual. The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the Town Planning Regulations 1967, and is prescribed under Section 8 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions. Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3). (i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC). Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
15 June 2004
Responded by
Minister for the Environment
Response time
97 days
(1)
(a) Wetlands on the Swan Coastal Plain from Moore River to Dunsborough have been audited and changes are tracked in a wetland database managed by the Water and Rivers Commission.
(b) Work is progressing on developing a wetland manual to assist all stakeholders (government agencies, landowners & community groups) to prepare wetland management plans.
(c) The Conservation Commission, in assessing land use applications involving wetlands, applies ESD principles in its decision-making process.
(d) The Environmental Protection (Western Swamp Tortoise Habitat) Policy was gazetted on 18 February 2003.
(e) I remitted the Environmental Protection Policy (EPP) to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in October 2003 for further advice. I understand the EPA is preparing a draft EPP, which will be released shortly for public comment. Following the analysis of submissions on the EPP, the EPA would prepare a revised draft EPP and report, and transmit these to me under Section 28 of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
.
(f) The priority areas identified in the policy commitment were added to the list of Wetlands of International Importance in January 2001. Priorities for future nominations are being investigated by the Department of Conservation and Land Management.
(g) Action 1.1 of the State Weed Plan requires the establishment of a broad, skills-based weed-coordinating group. The terms of reference and selection criteria for the Western Australian Weeds Committee have been established. Expressions of interest for membership of the Committee closed on 27 February 2004 and these are currently being assessed by a sub-group of the State Weed Plan steering group and a nominated representative from the Natural Resource Management Council. This Committee held its first meeting on 24 May 2004. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Weed Plan, which has key objectives of integrating environmental and agricultural weed management and promoting coordination between different land managers for regional weed management.
(h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields.
There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public.
The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response
(i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003.
The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River.
Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One).
(k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes.
(2)
The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d)
(a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position.
A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme
(d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever.
(e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances.
The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986.
The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i)
(f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly.
(g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites.
(h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual.
The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the
Town Planning Regulations 1967,
and is prescribed under Section 8 of the
Town Planning and Development Act 1928
as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions.
Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3).
(i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC).
Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
(a) Wetlands on the Swan Coastal Plain from Moore River to Dunsborough have been audited and changes are tracked in a wetland database managed by the Water and Rivers Commission.
(b) Work is progressing on developing a wetland manual to assist all stakeholders (government agencies, landowners & community groups) to prepare wetland management plans.
(c) The Conservation Commission, in assessing land use applications involving wetlands, applies ESD principles in its decision-making process.
(d) The Environmental Protection (Western Swamp Tortoise Habitat) Policy was gazetted on 18 February 2003.
(e) I remitted the Environmental Protection Policy (EPP) to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in October 2003 for further advice. I understand the EPA is preparing a draft EPP, which will be released shortly for public comment. Following the analysis of submissions on the EPP, the EPA would prepare a revised draft EPP and report, and transmit these to me under Section 28 of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
.
(f) The priority areas identified in the policy commitment were added to the list of Wetlands of International Importance in January 2001. Priorities for future nominations are being investigated by the Department of Conservation and Land Management.
(g) Action 1.1 of the State Weed Plan requires the establishment of a broad, skills-based weed-coordinating group. The terms of reference and selection criteria for the Western Australian Weeds Committee have been established. Expressions of interest for membership of the Committee closed on 27 February 2004 and these are currently being assessed by a sub-group of the State Weed Plan steering group and a nominated representative from the Natural Resource Management Council. This Committee held its first meeting on 24 May 2004. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Weed Plan, which has key objectives of integrating environmental and agricultural weed management and promoting coordination between different land managers for regional weed management.
(h) In regard to the issue of protection of wild and scenic rivers, Western Australia has 48 rivers recognised as being near pristine or relatively natural, with the majority being located in the Kimberley. Others are located in the Pilbara, Central Deserts and southern Goldfields.
There are a range of land tenure arrangements for each wild river, including vacant Crown land, pastoral, Indigenous Lands Trust, Australian Defence Forces and conservation reserves. Most wild rivers have multiple lease arrangements, which means that there is no simple process to reserve the rivers for conservation or to develop a set of conditions to apply to pastoral leases. However, work is progressing on the range of strategies that are required for the different lease conditions and these are being developed in consultation with stakeholders, land and lease holders, Indigenous communities and the general public.
The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response
(i–j)The government has prepared a new statement of planning policy (State Coastal Planning Policy, Statement of Planning Policy no 2.6) which gives specific guidance as to the nature of proposed setbacks for development all around the Western Australian coast. This policy was prepared with extensive community consultation and was gazetted on 10 June 2003.
The SPP also states that development should occur only within the context of a broader regional strategy. In the case of Moore River, this is fulfilled by the Central Coast Planning Strategy and the Draft Gingin Coast Structure Plan recently released by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, for public comment. Both these plans indicated a moderate level of urban growth at Moore River.
Accordingly, the next step in the development process is the lodgement of a subdivision application. This then triggers the assessment process inherent in the SPP, particularly Clause 5.1.viii which states that subdivision applications should ensure the identification of coastal foreshore reserves takes into account consideration of ecological values, landscape, seascape, visual amenity, indigenous and cultural heritage value, public access, public recreation needs and safety to lives and property, (as described for the physical processes setback in Schedule One).
(k) The Minister for the Environment released the “Swan and Canning Rivers Landscape Policy Manual” in 2002 which identified important landscape precincts around the Swan and Canning river system and which provides guidelines for local government and landowners on how to prepare plans to protect river landscapes.
(2)
The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (a-d)
(a), (b) and (c) The Government established an inter-agency working group to review the Labor Government’s Policy commitments against Bush Forever. The Cabinet Sub Committee on Environment Policy has considered a report of the inter-agency group. It is expected that Cabinet will consider the findings of the group in the near future with a view to establishing a whole-of-government position.
A number of government sites are identified for reservation for Parks and Recreation in a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme
(d) Land-swaps are investigated on a case-by-case basis through the implementation of Bush Forever.
(e) The EPA has published a Guidance Statement to provide advice on the level on assessment for proposals affecting natural areas within the System 6 region and Swan Coastal Plain portion of the System 1 region. The Guidance Statement also sets out the likely level of assessment that the EPA may set on proposals that impact on Bush Forever sites in a range of circumstances.
The EPA’s Guidance Statement advises that where a proposal will result in a direct loss of regionally significant bushland the EPA is likely to recommend a formal level of assessment pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1986.
The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure provided the following response (f-i)
(f) The WAPC has endorsed a draft SPP (Statement of Planning Policy) and a complementary amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The MRS Amendment was referred to the EPA and was found to be environmentally acceptable. The draft SPP and MRS Amendment will be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for approval for advertising shortly.
(g) The draft SPP and proposed MRS amendment (identified in 2 (f)) will provide statutory planning protection for all Bush Forever sites through a Special Control Area in the MRS. In addition, proposed amendments to the Environment Protection Act 1986 propose clearing controls which will cover Bush Forever sites.
(h) This matter is being addressed in the Western Australian Planning Commission's review of the Model Scheme Text and Planning Schemes Manual.
The Model Scheme Text is set out in Appendix B of the
Town Planning Regulations 1967,
and is prescribed under Section 8 of the
Town Planning and Development Act 1928
as a set of core legal and administrative provisions for local government town planning schemes which are to be applied consistently across the State. The provisions are required to be incorporated into all new local government town planning schemes, except where I, as Minister, agree to variations to the provisions.
Notwithstanding the review, it needs to be pointed out that a number of existing local government town planning schemes already contain Conservation Zones that generally seek to apply special land use controls to land possessing significant aesthetic, ecological or conservation values (e.g. the Shire of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 and the Shire of Albany Town Planning Scheme No. 3).
(i) Around $24 million has being spent or committed to date acquiring Bush Forever Sites of highest conservation value, principally in private ownership. Up to $100 million is committed over the next 10 years through the Metropolitan Region Improvement Fund (administered by the WAPC).
Not all private sites will be acquired as Bush Forever identifies other mechanisms to encourage private conservation management and Negotiated Planning Solutions for lands with prior planning commitments and approvals.
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.