❓ WA Parliamentary Question on Notice regarding the deployment and subsequent discontinuation of shark drum lines off Perth's northern beaches in August 2016, and related concerns about public safety.
AnsweredQoN 984Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
SHARK DRUM LINE PROGRAM
984. Hon LYNN MacLAREN to the Attorney General
representing the Minister for Fisheries:
I refer to the decision to deploy
drum lines off Perth's northern beaches on 25 August.
(1) Who ordered the deployment of
drum lines, and on whose advice?
(2) With
reference to comments attributed to a Fisheries spokesperson in a WAtoday
article on 26 August that ''the decision to deploy the shark capture
gear was not connected to the serious threat guidelines, and was based on the
special circumstances that developed off the northern beaches'', what is
the government's explanation for deploying drum lines in circumstances
that do not meet the criteria outlined in the serious threat guidelines?
(3) Will the
minister list all shark species detected on receivers and/or sighted by
reliable authorities within one kilometre of the coast between Trigg and
Hillarys in the week prior to 25 August?
(4) What was the reason for
discontinuing the drum lines on 26 August?
(5) At any point,
were concerns raised with the government that deploying baited drum lines near
where a children's surf carnival was planned could attract big,
dangerous sharks into the area?
984. Hon LYNN MacLAREN to the Attorney General
representing the Minister for Fisheries:
I refer to the decision to deploy
drum lines off Perth's northern beaches on 25 August.
(1) Who ordered the deployment of
drum lines, and on whose advice?
(2) With
reference to comments attributed to a Fisheries spokesperson in a WAtoday
article on 26 August that ''the decision to deploy the shark capture
gear was not connected to the serious threat guidelines, and was based on the
special circumstances that developed off the northern beaches'', what is
the government's explanation for deploying drum lines in circumstances
that do not meet the criteria outlined in the serious threat guidelines?
(3) Will the
minister list all shark species detected on receivers and/or sighted by
reliable authorities within one kilometre of the coast between Trigg and
Hillarys in the week prior to 25 August?
(4) What was the reason for
discontinuing the drum lines on 26 August?
(5) At any point,
were concerns raised with the government that deploying baited drum lines near
where a children's surf carnival was planned could attract big,
dangerous sharks into the area?
AnswerView source ↗
On behalf of the Minister for
Fisheries, I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question.
(1) The
deployment was ordered by the director general of the Department of Fisheries,
on advice from the department's duty shark operations manager.
(2) The prolonged
period and pattern of sightings in a relatively small area was unprecedented
and was not contemplated in the serious threat policy. It was apparent that a risk
to water users in the Trigg to Hillarys area existed, and as this was assessed
as a special circumstance, a capture order was issued.
(3) There were no
detections. Sightings reported to the water police of sharks sighted within one
kilometre of the coast between Trigg and Hillarys between 18 and 25 August 2016
are set out in tabular form, and I seek leave to have the table incorporated
into Hansard rather than my reading
it out.
Leave granted.
The
following material was incorporated —
20-Aug
Toms
Whaler
2.3m
50mts
from shore
21-Aug
Trigg
unknown
3m
30mts
from shore
21-Aug
Trigg
Bronze
Whaler
2.5m
15mts
from shore
22-Aug
Bennion
Beach
2 x
unknown
N/A
50mts
from shore
24-Aug
Mettams
Pool
unknown
2m
20mts
from shore
25-Aug
Trigg
unknown
2.5m
30mts
from shore
(4) Weather
conditions were unsafe for deployment.
(5) No.
Fisheries, I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question.
(1) The
deployment was ordered by the director general of the Department of Fisheries,
on advice from the department's duty shark operations manager.
(2) The prolonged
period and pattern of sightings in a relatively small area was unprecedented
and was not contemplated in the serious threat policy. It was apparent that a risk
to water users in the Trigg to Hillarys area existed, and as this was assessed
as a special circumstance, a capture order was issued.
(3) There were no
detections. Sightings reported to the water police of sharks sighted within one
kilometre of the coast between Trigg and Hillarys between 18 and 25 August 2016
are set out in tabular form, and I seek leave to have the table incorporated
into Hansard rather than my reading
it out.
Leave granted.
The
following material was incorporated —
20-Aug
Toms
Whaler
2.3m
50mts
from shore
21-Aug
Trigg
unknown
3m
30mts
from shore
21-Aug
Trigg
Bronze
Whaler
2.5m
15mts
from shore
22-Aug
Bennion
Beach
2 x
unknown
N/A
50mts
from shore
24-Aug
Mettams
Pool
unknown
2m
20mts
from shore
25-Aug
Trigg
unknown
2.5m
30mts
from shore
(4) Weather
conditions were unsafe for deployment.
(5) No.
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.