Archived page, Submission Lancelin Defence Training Area Extension Proposal:Public Environmental Review/Public Environmental Report

Submitted to the Environmental Protection Authority 12th July 2002

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on this proposal. Recfishwest is recognised by Government as the peak body representing the interests of more than 600,000 recreational fishers in Western Australia.

We recognise that the bulk of the proposal and recommendations are not marine oriented and therefore of little direct concern for our organisation.

However a key policy of Recfishwest is that the coastline of Western Australia should be accessible to the public.

The issue of coastal access is raised as a consequence of the PER proposal and management strategy to prevent access to the Defence Training Area (DTA) by the general public and for this to be achieved by fencing and signage.

Recfishwest understands the rationale for these management proposals as they pertain to defence force activity and safety concerns. We point out however that they will impose a further limitation upon those fishers who, under current management arrangements, access the coast via tracks through the existing DTA.

The fishers with whom we have consulted in this matter certainly do not support these proposals. However these concerns are secondary to their position that their access to and along the coast and beaches for the purpose of fishing is not compromised.

Recfishwest supports this position and believe that it is appropriate and necessary for the Government to make provision for public access along the coast immediately adjacent to the DTA.

We believe that the access strip should be sufficiently wide to facilitate access along the coast, according to the topography of the area, in an environmentally acceptable manner. For example, where there are impassable features such as rock outcrops permanent or seasonal water, steep terrain, or vegetated or mobile dunes, the access strip must be sufficiently wide to accommodate suitable passing tracks.

We believe that a recognised coastal access strip could be easily and clearly distinguished by appropriate signage.

SCOPE of PER

Recfishwest is very concerned with a statement contained within the text of Section 7.4.1. This statement reads 'Recreational off-road driving by the public will be prohibited within the DTA, including along the beach front...'

The relevant recommended management strategy under section 7.4.1 is to 'Restrict non-Defence access to Proposal Area, particularly recreational 4WD vehicles'.

Recfishwest has assumed that the 'Proposal Area' referred to within this proposed management strategy and elsewhere throughout the PER refers to the 'DTA Extension Area' which is the subject of this PER.

Assuming this understanding is correct, then this statement is neither supported by any proposed management strategy or recommendation nor is it referred to anywhere else within the PER.

If, however, the term 'Proposal Area' is interpreted and being used by the proponent to describe an area that includes the proposed DTA Extension Area, the existing DTA and the beachfront, then Recfishwest has major concerns with the PER proposal. If this interpretation is correct then Recfishwest strongly opposes the PER management proposals pertaining to public access.

We are deeply concerned that the issue of public coastal/beach access may have been inappropriately woven into this Area Extension proposal. Whilst we understand that this can be an issue for the Department of Defence for occasional operational reasons we believe it is an existing issue not specific to the area extension proposal which is the subject of the PER.

Recfishwest recommends that if the Department of Defence wishes to address the specific issue of coastal/beach access it should do so separately to the DTA Extension Proposal and in a open manner involving the key stakeholders, including Recfishwest.

Coastal Closures

Recfishwest has been alerted to concerns that the DTA extension proposal may result in an increase in the number and duration of coastal closures (inshore boating and beach access) due to an anticipated increase in Naval ship to shore bombardment exercises.

The PER is silent on this issue and we would therefore be extremely concerned should a direct consequence of the proposal be a significant increase in the number and duration of coastal closures that would otherwise not have been feasible. Recfishwest would be strongly opposed to the DTA Extension Proposal should this be the case.

Recfishwest believes that the consequence of the proposal upon coastal closures must be formally documented and stakeholder discussion facilitated prior to a decision being made on the DTA Extension Proposal.



This page last updated on 30 December 2003.