Posted to the windsurfing WA section, but others may not get to read so posting here as well.

Guys and girls, something that you may want to follow up on.
WWW.dig.wa.gov.au
Then to the Caravan Parks Camping.
This was in the Sunday times today. Some of the proposed changes taken from the Sunday Times article are, for those who caravan, camper-trailer or tent.

In a nut shell, some proposed changes are:
Should you pull up in a safe place and be there for more than 24 hours, you will receive an infringement notice from the local police, yes police, not Rangers or Shire officials.
Regardless of any recent area's that were termed free camping site.
Should you want to stay at a friends property, regardless of size of property for more than 36 hours, you must apply for a permit Then the local authorities will need to come out and inspect your friends place to ensure he/she has enough ablutions and fresh water. Cost is above staying in a registered caravan and camp park.
Should there be more than one caravan/ camper trailer/ tent, then the land holder must apply for a "gathering permit"
By the sounds of things, the way its being proposed, the caravan parks association have a friendly ear in high places and want all and everybody located in caravan parks, full stop. Its up to you to download the pdf. http://dlg.wa.gov.au/Content/Legislation/UnderReview/CaravanCampingLegislation/Default.aspx

read, and absorb what you want to do in regards to responding to this proposed change.

It undermines the integrity of legislation when you write something that won't be adhered to or enforced, and is already mostly covered by local government bylaws that are already not adhered to and enforced to varying degrees by rangers.

Ok, now I've actually read some of the documentation like the consultation paper in the links I'm not sure where they get the above proposed changes from in the Sunday Paper. Are they from the committee or just some of the ideas put forward by lobby groups?

Local police are probably authorised officers under the old legislation and probably the new. They're snuck into pretty much every piece of legislation as 'authorised officers' by default but I don't know many police that enforce the Zoological Parks Authority Act and give tickets for someone who touch, molest, shout at or disturb an animal in a zoological park (Yes it's illegal to molest a zoo animal with a $600 fine). Local government are expected to take the lead in education and enforcement. I doubt Police are ever going to be interested in people camping and issuing tickets for over-staying.

The free campsite / 24 hour rest area is ambiguous. The consultation paper addresses this, the scope of this proposed legislation does not have authority to influence most roadside rest areas, they are actually 'owned' and managed by Main Roads anyway. The proposal just changes the inconsistencies in wording of different acts. Main Roads refer to them as 24 hour rest areas with the intention of allowing for fatigue management, they were never intended by MainRoads as free camping areas for weeks at a time for tight-arsed grey nomads.

The legislation doesn't look to have a say in camping at a mates place that I can see. Nor does it have scope to. This sounds like a hair-brained idea put forward by a lobby group ignorant of the scope and intent of the review. Likewise a 'gathering permit'.

It appears to me like they're trying to make the scope of the review and new legislation friendly towards people actually holidaying. It actually looks like they're trying to limit the loopholes that allow people to live in caravan parks, rip the wheels off their vans and turn them into sh1tty pretend houses. They want to make these caravan parks forced over into compliance with building codes, not caravan park legislation, presumably to encourage park managers to not fill holiday parks with permanent vans.

The scope of the review and the consultation paper released actually looks pretty positive at first glance.

pretty much all local governments already have local bylaws prohibiting camping anywhere without permission of the land owner, its obviously enforced by zealots in the big tourist towns influenced by big rate-paying parks and hotels, this review doesn't look like it has the scope to influence this sort of enforcement anyway. I'd punt they're happy to leave that to local government to sort out.

up to you whether you dig deaper than the dribble in the Weekend paper.

^^ agreed

I think they are also trying to combat the 'bush doofs' where 1000 drug-fkd hippies turn up to a private property for a party and the owner just says "they are my mates and camping for the weekend" (try living within a few km of that crap for a weekend )

Also, the Shire Rangers can't enforce a lot of this as they are busy being assaulted by bogans with fighting dogs or sorting out tree/fence line issues...... somebody needs to look at the groups camping for free 20km out of town for a few nights at "rest" areas. It is annoying to stop at a place designed as a pee stop and find it a fly-blown hole due to long term camping.