Ord River Dam Catchment Area (Straying Cattle) Act 1967

This short statute vests ownership and the right of possession of animals described as “cattle” found at large within specified areas of land in the Crown, and removes any entitlement to compensation for that transfer. The Act’s operative provision is section 3, which in three separate paragraphs (ss 3(1), 3(1a) and 3(1b)) declares that, notwithstanding any other law, property in and the right to possession of cattle that are at large on or after specified commencement dates within the land described in Parts I, II and III of the Schedule vests in the Crown. The Minister is given an administrative discretion: any such cattle “may be dealt with or disposed of in such manner as the Minister from time to time directs” (s 3(1), (1a), (1b)). Section 3(2) then states that no compensation is payable by or on behalf of the Crown by reason of the operation of this Act.

Mechanically, the Act does three things and only three things, as reflected in the text:

• It defines the relevant animals by reference to an inclusive definition in section 2: “cattle includes bull, ox, cow, steer, heifer, horse or mule or their young” (s 2).
• It identifies the geographic scope by reference to the Schedule, which lists three groups of land and ties Parts I and II to particular pastoral leases resumed by proclamation under section 109 of the Land Act 1933 and Part III to specified mapped areas on the shores of Lake Argyle (Schedule, Parts I-III).
• It extinguishes any private property and compensation claim in respect of animals found at large in those areas from the specified dates (ss 3(1), 3(1a), 3(1b), 3(2)).

The Act does not provide procedural detail for locating, seizing, notifying owners, selling animals, or paying any proceeds to former owners. It does not create civil remedies for owners under this Act, nor does it describe enforcement machinery such as offences, penalties, licences or administrative processes. The statutory operation relies on an express “notwithstanding the provisions of any other Act or law” override (ss 3(1)-(1b)), meaning the vesting intention is stated to operate regardless of other statutory or common law property protections. The Act’s long title states its purpose as vesting property in the Crown in respect of cattle found at large on certain Crown lands, and for incidental and other purposes.

Scope of animals: The Act uses an inclusive statutory definition in section 2. “Cattle” is expressly defined to include not only bovine animals (bull, ox, cow, steer, heifer) but also horses and mules and their young (s 2). That definition determines which animals are subject to the Crown vesting provision in s 3.

Timing and phased application: The vesting is constructed in three date-triggered tranches. Section 3(1) applies on or after 1 January 1969 to land described in Part I of the Schedule. Section 3(1a) applies on or after 1 January 1970 to land described in Part II. Section 3(1b) applies on or after 1 January 1985 to land described in Part III. Each paragraph therefore creates a temporal cutoff for the Act’s operation in relation to the different mapped or proclaimed parcels of land.

Geographic definition via Schedule and proclamations: The geographic reach is provided by the Schedule. Parts I and II identify areas by reference to former pastoral leases and proclamations made under section 109 of the Land Act 1933, including publication dates and references to schedules to those proclamations. Part III identifies areas “on the shores of Lake Argyle” by reference to specific Lands and Surveys plans and public plans (Schedule, Part III). The Schedule therefore ties vesting to parcels resumed for “Regeneration of eroded areas in the Ord River Dam Catchment Area” by specific proclamations referenced by date and schedule.

Vesting and ministerial disposal: The core legal mechanism is an automatic vesting of both “property in” and the “right to possession” of cattle in the Crown when the statutory conditions are met (s 3(1)-(1b)). That vesting is unconditional in the sense it is stated to be “notwithstanding” other laws. Once vested, the Minister has a broad administrative discretion to “deal with or dispose of” the animals as the Minister directs. The Act does not limit or prescribe the manner of disposal, sale proceeds, record-keeping, or notice obligations.

Compensation exclusion: Section 3(2) provides that “No compensation is payable by or on behalf of the Crown by reason of the operation of this Act.” That clause removes a statutory entitlement to compensation arising from the vesting under this Act.

Precedence and interaction: The repeated “notwithstanding the provisions of any other Act or law” language in each of the vesting paragraphs is the primary mechanism by which the Act seeks legal precedence over other statutes or property law protections in affected cases (ss 3(1)-(1b)). The Schedule’s reliance on proclamations and resumption under the Land Act 1933 links the Act’s scope to earlier executive land-resumption actions.

Owners and claimants of animals: Persons who own or claim title to any animal falling within the statutory definition of “cattle” are directly affected if their animals are found “at large” in the specified areas on or after the relevant dates. Because section 3 vests property and the right to possession in the Crown “notwithstanding the provisions of any other Act or law” (ss 3(1)-(1b)), private property rights in respect of such animals are displaced for those circumstances. Section 3(2) makes clear those owners will have no statutory compensation by reason of the Act.

Occupiers and managers of neighbouring pastoral lands: Holders of pastoral leases or others who operate livestock near the catchment boundaries are affected indirectly. Their liability and property expectations change if animals stray across the boundary into the specified Crown lands after the relevant date. The Act places the risk of losing title on owners whose animals go “at large” into the scheduled areas; it therefore imposes a practical compliance and risk management cost on adjacent graziers and pastoralists.

Minister and executive agencies: The Minister gains a positive property interest and unconstrained administrative authority to deal with or dispose of the animals (s 3(1)-(1b)). Agencies supporting the Minister will have to operationalise the ministerial discretion in practice, including locating animals, deciding on disposal options, arranging for removal, sale, euthanasia, or other dispositions, and keeping records , none of which are set out in the Act.

Land administrators and mapping authorities: The Schedule ties affected land parcels to proclamations under the Land Act 1933 and to Lands and Surveys mapping plans. The Notes indicate Lands and Surveys plans are now held by the Land Information Authority (see Land Information Authority Act 2006 s 100, in the Act’s Notes). Those public land and mapping custodians will be relevant for determining whether a given location falls within the specified parts of the Schedule and thus whether the adverse vesting applies.

Local communities and service providers: Farmers, stock agents, drovers and transporters who move animals in the region will face indirect consequences because the Act changes property outcomes once animals are found in the catchment areas. They bear practical costs associated with prevention and monitoring, given that the Act removes the opportunity for statutory compensation.

Judicial or administrative decision-makers: Although the Act itself provides minimal procedural detail, disputes about whether particular animals were “at large” in the identified land at the relevant time, whether the land location falls within the Schedule, or whether vesting has occurred will be matters for courts or tribunals if litigated. The Act’s “notwithstanding” language may affect legal arguments about pre-existing rights, but the text contains no guidance on resolution mechanics.

Crown rights conferred: The Act confers two interrelated rights on the Crown in respect of relevant animals. First, “property in” the animals vests in the Crown. Second, the “right to possession” also vests in the Crown. Those two rights are set out in each of ss 3(1), (1a) and (1b). Together they transfer legal title and possession rights from the private owner (if there was one) to the Crown once an animal is “at large” within the specified lands on or after the stated date for that part of the Schedule.

Ministerial discretion and function: The Minister has the right and duty to manage animals once the Crown’s property and possession rights have vested. The Act authorises the Minister to “deal with or dispose of [any such cattle] in such manner as the Minister from time to time directs” (ss 3(1), (1a), (1b)). The wording sets a permissive administrative power rather than a prescriptive duty; it does not prescribe processes, timelines, or reporting requirements for ministerial action. The text thus creates a broad executive power rather than a set of enforceable ministerial duties.

No statutory compensation: Section 3(2) expressly removes any entitlement to compensation “by reason of the operation of this Act”. For owners whose animals are taken under the Act’s operation, there is no statutory compensation from the Crown in respect of that transfer under this Act. The presence of that clause is a primary right-limiting feature.

Definition-based rights and obligations: The definition in section 2 determines the class of animals covered; by including horses and mules, the Act extends the Crown’s property and possession rights to equids as well as bovines. Owners of animals that fall within that statutory definition will find their private rights extinguished in the specified circumstances.

Absence of procedural rights: The Act does not create procedural safeguards such as notice-to-owner obligations, an opportunity to reclaim animals, timelines for disposal, or an administrative review or appeal mechanism against ministerial disposal decisions. Those are rights that are often present in stray-livestock frameworks but are not in this statute; their absence is legal baggage for private owners and places the burden on owners to take precautionary measures to avoid loss.

No penalty-based duties: The Act does not impose duties enforceable by penalty on owners to prevent straying, nor does it set out penalties for failure to contain animals. Any duties of containment arising under other laws are not created by this Act; the Act focuses solely on property vesting and ministerial disposal powers.

No penalties or offences in the Act: The Act contains no criminal offences, civil penalties, infringement notices, licensing regimes, or administrative sanctioning mechanisms. The Act’s text does not create any penalty for owners whose animals stray, nor does it prescribe enforcement steps such as seizure powers, notice periods, or retention timelines. The legislative instrument is therefore not enforcement-focused in the conventional regulatory sense; its operative effect is dispossessory and administrative rather than penal.

Enforcement mechanism implicit via vesting and ministerial disposal: The practical mechanism for enforcement under the Act is the automatic vesting of property and possession in the Crown (ss 3(1)-(1b)) once the statutory conditions are met, and the consequent exercise of ministerial discretion to deal with or dispose of the animals as the Minister directs. The Act therefore relies on administrative action by the Minister (and agencies acting under the Minister’s direction) to give effect to the vesting. The Act itself does not specify the operational steps for that administration.

Absence of mandated procedures creates operational discretion: Because the Act does not prescribe procedures for how animals are to be dealt with, enforcement in practice will depend on ministerial or departmental policies, which are not included in the text. The Crown’s right to dispose can mean sale, destruction, or other dispositions authorised by the Minister, but those options are not limited or qualified by the Act. That creates an enforcement gap that will be filled through administrative practice rather than statutory procedure.

Evidence and dispute resolution: The Act contains no evidentiary standards for proving that cattle were “at large” on specified dates within the Schedule areas. Disputes about whether vesting has occurred, whether a particular animal fell within the definition of “cattle”, or whether the land location was within the Schedule will require external resolution (judicial or administrative) if contested. The Act’s “notwithstanding” language may affect the legal framing of such disputes (ss 3(1)-(1b)), but the statutory text does not supply adjudicative mechanisms or alternative remedies.

No compensation entitlements: Section 3(2) eliminates statutory compensation by or on behalf of the Crown under this Act. That means there is no enforcement-related financial remedy in statute for owners whose animals are taken under the Act’s operation.

Practical enforcement actors not specified: The Act does not name any enforcement agency, ranger, police power, or departmental officer who must carry out the Minister’s directions. The Minister must rely on existing administrative capacity to enforce the vesting and disposal functions; the Act does not allocate personnel, budgets, or procurement authority, nor does it require reporting on actions taken under the Act.

Express statutory precedence: Each of the vesting paragraphs in section 3 begins with the phrase “Notwithstanding the provisions of any other Act or law” (ss 3(1), (1a), (1b)). That language is the Act’s primary method of interaction with other statutes and legal rights: it aims to displace other statutory or common law protections regarding ownership and possession of animals found at large in the defined areas. The text therefore represents an explicit legislative instruction that the vesting operates irrespective of other statutory schemes unless another law later alters that effect.

Connection to land-resumption under the Land Act 1933: The Schedule repeatedly identifies land described in Parts I and II as “formerly comprised in Pastoral Leases … resumed under section 109 of the Land Act 1933, for the purpose of ‘Regeneration of eroded areas in the Ord River Dam Catchment Area’, by proclamation published in the Government Gazette” (Schedule, Parts I and II). The Schedule therefore links the Act’s application to land already converted to Crown control through resumption under the Land Act 1933, so the Act operates within the context of land-status established by those earlier proclamations. The Schedule references the specific Schedules to those proclamations, and the Government Gazette dates where they were published.

Mapping and custodianship: Part III of the Schedule identifies areas by reference to Lands and Surveys plans and public plans (Schedule, Part III). The statutory Notes indicate “Lands and Surveys plans now being held by the Western Australian Land Information Authority (see the Land Information Authority Act 2006 s. 100)”. That provides a contemporary pointer for locating the plan references in the Schedule and identifying the land extent for the Act’s purposes.

Limits on compensation claims arising under this Act: Section 3(2) expressly removes compensation for loss caused “by reason of the operation of this Act.” That creates an internal statutory interaction stating that any compensation entitlement otherwise available in other contexts is not provided under this Act; it is a self-contained limit on remedies within the Act’s operation.

Absence of cross-reference to animal welfare, trespass, or stray cattle frameworks: The Act does not refer to animal welfare legislation, local government stray-livestock ordinances, trespass, or other common law remedies. Consequently, the statute neither adopts nor disapplies such laws by textual reference; the only textual interaction the Act asserts is the “notwithstanding” override of “any other Act or law” as to property and possession rights in the relevant animals.

Legislative chronology provided in the Act’s compilation notes identifies the following formal amendments and reprint history. Each entry below is taken from the Act’s Compilation table and the marginal editorial notes included in the text.

• Original enactment: Ord River Dam Catchment Area (Straying Cattle) Act 1967 (36 of 1967). Assent 21 November 1967. Commenced 21 November 1967. This is the original Act that created the framework described in the body of the text.

• Amendment 1969: Ord River Dam Catchment Area (Straying Cattle) Act Amendment Act 1969 (56 of 1969). Assent 29 September 1969. Commenced 29 September 1969. The text records that section 3 was amended by No. 56 of 1969 s. 2 and the Schedule was amended by No. 56 of 1969 s. 3 (see marginal note “[Section 3 amended: No. 56 of 1969 s. 2; … Schedule amended: No. 56 of 1969 s. 3.]”). The 1969 amendment appears to have added or modified the timing or geographic scope reflected in the expanded or reworded s 3 and Schedule. The Compilation table records the amendment in the history.

• Amendment 1984: Ord River Dam Catchment Area (Straying Cattle) Amendment Act 1984 (67 of 1984). Assent 5 November 1984. Commenced 3 December 1984. The text notes that s 3 was amended by No. 67 of 1984 s. 2 (marginal note “[Section 3 amended: … No. 67 of 1984 s. 2.]”). That amendment added or modified the s 3(1b) vesting clause operative from 1 January 1985 (see s 3(1b) and Schedule Part III).

• Reprint: Reprint 1 of the Act as at 12 March 2004 is recorded in the Compilation table, which incorporates the amendments then in force.

• Formatting standardisation: The Standardisation of Formatting Act 2010 (19 of 2010), s. 24, is cited in the marginal notes as having inserted or standardised headings in the Act (see marginal notes “[Heading inserted: No. 19 of 2010 s. 24(2).]” and similar notes in the Schedule). That 2010 change is a drafting and presentation amendment rather than a substantive amendment to the vesting rules.

How the amendments show in the text:

• The insertion of s 3(1a) and s 3(1b) , and the staggered commencement dates they carry , reflects the cumulative legislative expansion of the geographic coverage (Parts II and III of the Schedule) at different times (1 January 1970 and 1 January 1985 respectively). The marginal notes indicate that those additions are the product of the 1969 and 1984 amending Acts.

The Act as provided contains no case law, no reported decisions, and no statutory references to judicial interpretation. The text does not list any litigation or judicial clarification. The Schedule’s references to proclamations and Government Gazette entries are administrative and not judicial. The Compilation table and Notes do not cite any judicial proceedings.

Consequently, based solely on the statute text and compilation notes provided, there is no internal record in the Act of litigation, judicial interpretations, or precedential rulings construing its provisions. Any disputes about:

• whether a particular animal was “at large” within the Schedule areas on or after the relevant date;
• whether a given location falls within the Schedule (including interpreting the referenced proclamations and Lands and Surveys plans); or
• the scope and limits of the Minister’s discretion to “deal with or dispose of” animals,

would require resort to courts or tribunals for adjudication, but none are recorded in the Act’s text. The Act does not refer to any cases, nor does it summarise any judicial outcomes.

Because the Act contains no procedural enforcement or remedy provisions, litigated issues would likely focus on factual questions (location and timing) and on interpreting the meaning of undefined terms (for example “at large”) and the scope of the Schedule, as well as any ways in which other laws might operate despite the Act’s “notwithstanding” wording. The statute itself does not supply guidance on which judicial or administrative forum is the intended venue for resolving such disputes.

Users requiring information about litigation history will need to consult external legal databases, court records and government archives; that material is not contained in the Act text provided.

Definition traps: The Act’s definition of “cattle” in section 2 is broader than colloquial usage , it expressly includes horses and mules and their young (s 2). Owners who do not ordinarily treat equids as “cattle” for commercial or regulatory purposes will nonetheless find horses and mules within the scope of this statute if they are “at large” in the specified areas on or after the relevant dates.

Three separate commencement dates: The vesting applies in separate phases tied to Parts I, II, and III of the Schedule (ss 3(1), (1a), (1b)). This means that whether an animal’s entry into the area is governed by the Act depends on both location and date. For example, an animal on land described in Part II is captured by the vesting only if it is at large on or after 1 January 1970 (s 3(1a)). Understanding which date applies to which parcel is necessary to determine whether vesting has occurred.

“No compensation” clause: Section 3(2) states that “No compensation is payable by or on behalf of the Crown by reason of the operation of this Act.” That is a blunt statutory bar to compensation claims under the Act, so owners cannot rely on this Act as a statutory route to recover loss from the Crown when animals vest. That does not, however, in and of itself address other possible causes of action under unrelated laws , but the Act’s repeated “notwithstanding” wording is designed to displace other statutory or legal claims that would otherwise defeat the vesting.

“Notwithstanding the provisions of any other Act or law”: The statute is drafted to assert primacy over any conflicting provisions elsewhere. That language is a legislative device to ensure the vesting is effective even if other statutes, regulations or legal doctrines would otherwise give owners rights to their animals. Practitioners should be aware that the phrase alters the normal interplay with other statutes and requires careful analysis if attempting to assert alternative legal claims.

Undefined key term , “at large”: The Act does not define “at large”. That omission creates legal uncertainty: does “at large” mean physically trespassing the boundary of an owner’s property, wandering beyond fences, being unaccompanied, or otherwise in free range? The statute leaves that term to be construed by decision-makers, which could generate contested factual and legal arguments if a dispute arises.

No procedural protections: The Act does not prescribe notice, holding periods, sale procedures, record-keeping obligations, or appeals processes in respect of ministerial disposal decisions. Practically, that leaves owners vulnerable to ministerial decisions on how an animal is “dealt with” without statutory recourse under this Act. The absence of procedural detail increases administrative uncertainty.

Step 1 , Map and document the geographic scope: The first compliance step for owners, managers and advisers is to determine whether the land where animals might be found falls within Parts I-III of the Schedule. Parts I and II reference specific pastoral leases and proclamations made under section 109 of the Land Act 1933 and identify Government Gazette publication dates and Schedules to those proclamations (Schedule Parts I, II). Part III references Lands and Surveys plans and public plans (Schedule Part III). The Act’s Notes indicate that the Lands and Surveys plans are now held by the Western Australian Land Information Authority (see the Land Information Authority Act 2006 s. 100, in the Act’s Notes). Practically, compliance requires consulting those proclamations, the Schedules to them, and the Lands and Surveys plans to determine whether particular land coordinates or boundary markers fall within the catchment areas.

Step 2 , Identify the relevant commencement date: For each parcel, identify the effective date for vesting under the relevant Schedule part: Part I (on or after 1 January 1969), Part II (on or after 1 January 1970), Part III (on or after 1 January 1985) (ss 3(1), (1a), (1b)). Confirm that any potentially affected period for your operations is after the appropriate trigger date.

Step 3 , Understand which animals are covered: Section 2’s inclusive definition of “cattle” includes horses and mules and their young. Ensure that stock registers, stock-brand records, movement permits and transport documentation account for that definitional reach (s 2).

Step 4 , Prevent straying into Schedule areas: Because the Act vests ownership automatically for animals “at large” in the scheduled areas on or after the relevant dates and expressly disclaims compensation (s 3(2)), owners who wish to avoid involuntary loss should adopt containment and monitoring measures. Those measures may include reinforcing fencing on boundaries abutting the catchment area, adjusting grazing rotations to avoid grazing near the catchment lands, using GPS or regular mustering to prevent animals wandering, updating stock-keeper protocols, and ensuring third parties (contractors, drovers) are aware of catchment boundaries.

Step 5 , Maintain contemporaneous records: Given the statutory uncertainties about terms like “at large” and the absence of statutory process, owners should keep contemporaneous evidence of animal location, movement, muster records, brand registrations, and any attempts to recover animals if they stray. Such records will be relevant if a dispute arises about whether vesting occurred on a particular date or whether animals were on the owner’s land at a given time.