The last place in the world that should be industrialised
In one of the planet's most ecologically intact corners, a Texas energy company's ambition to drill for gas in Western Australia's Kimberley region has met a quiet but persistent wall of federal doubt. Black Mountain Energy's Valhalla project — proposed across lands threaded by the heritage-listed Fitzroy River and sheltering species found nowhere else on Earth — has repeatedly failed to satisfy Australian federal officials who say the company cannot demonstrate what harm it would cause, because it has not yet done the work to know. The story is an old one: the pace of extraction outrunning the patience of understanding, in a place where the cost of being wrong may be irreversible.
- Federal environment officials have sent the same message to Black Mountain Energy again and again — your data on water systems and endangered species is insufficient — yet the company has not delivered what was asked.
- An independent scientific committee found the company's assessments limited, disjointed, and largely unsupported by evidence, leaving critical questions about groundwater movement and ecosystem survival unanswered.
- The project threatens not only the critically endangered northern blue-tongued skink and largetooth sawfish, but also the cultural and spiritual world of Indigenous traditional owners whose relationship to the Fitzroy River runs deeper than any environmental form can easily measure.
- Conservation group Environs Kimberley, armed with freedom-of-information documents, is now pressing the environment minister to end the assessment entirely, arguing the company has exhausted its goodwill without producing the required science.
- The federal department remains publicly neutral while the assessment continues, but the trajectory is one of mounting evidentiary pressure on a company that has yet to show it can meet the bar the law requires.
A Texas oil and gas company, Black Mountain Energy, is seeking permission to drill twenty fracking wells in Western Australia's Kimberley — a landscape that forms part of the largest intact tropical savanna on Earth. The proposed Valhalla project sits near the Fitzroy River, a nationally heritage-listed waterway that serves as a nursery for the critically endangered largetooth sawfish and sustains ecosystems home to species like the northern blue-tongued skink, found nowhere else in the world.
For months, Australian federal environment officials have pushed back on the company's environmental work, finding it inadequate on nearly every front. Documents obtained through freedom-of-information requests reveal a consistent pattern: Black Mountain has not properly mapped the region's water resources, has not characterised the groundwater systems that sustain local life, and has not demonstrated how fracking might affect them. When the company claimed the Fitzroy River would be unaffected, officials replied that there was simply no evidence to support that conclusion.
An independent scientific committee, reviewing the project's water impact assessment in January, found the company's conclusions largely unsupported and the overall analysis disjointed. Fundamental questions — how water moves underground, where groundwater-dependent ecosystems exist, how surface and subsurface systems interact — remain unresolved. Without answers, no one can predict what drilling would do to the species and systems that depend on this landscape.
Federal officials also noted that Black Mountain had not adequately consulted with Indigenous traditional owner groups, whose cultural and spiritual ties to the Fitzroy River are profound and legally relevant under Australian environmental law.
Conservation group Environs Kimberley, which obtained the documents, has called on Environment Minister Murray Watt to terminate the assessment altogether. Executive director Martin Pritchard argued the company has had more than enough time to do the required work and appears unwilling to do it — leaving the government unable to make any meaningful judgment about harm. The Kimberley, he noted, ranks among the least impacted coastlines on the planet. Whether Black Mountain has finally provided the data officials have repeatedly requested remains publicly unknown.
A Texas oil and gas company is seeking permission to drill twenty wells in one of the world's last truly wild places, and the Australian federal government keeps telling it the same thing: you haven't done your homework.
Black Mountain Energy, operating through a subsidiary called Bennett Resources, wants to frack for gas in the Kimberley region of Western Australia, specifically in an area west of Fitzroy Crossing known as the Valhalla project. The Kimberley is part of the largest and most intact tropical savanna on Earth. The Fitzroy River, which runs near the proposed drilling site, is listed as a national heritage treasure. The landscape supports species found nowhere else—the critically endangered northern blue-tongued skink, the largetooth sawfish, which uses the Fitzroy as a nursery ground for its young.
For months, federal environment officials have been pushing back on the company's environmental assessments. Documents obtained through freedom of information requests show a pattern of concern: Black Mountain Energy has not adequately mapped the region's water resources, has not properly characterized the groundwater systems that sustain local ecosystems, and has not done enough work to understand how fracking might affect these systems. In correspondence last year, federal officials told the company repeatedly that it had failed to identify surface water and groundwater resources or to properly study the ecosystems that depend on groundwater to survive. Without that work, officials wrote, they could not assess what damage the drilling might cause.
The company argued the Fitzroy River would not be affected. Federal officials responded that there was insufficient evidence for that claim. They also noted that Black Mountain had not adequately consulted with traditional owner groups who hold cultural and spiritual connections to the river—connections that, in Indigenous Australian practice, are often expressed through stories and traditions like the Rainbow Serpent. The company needed to demonstrate it had assessed all the ways its project could affect those values.
In January of this year, an independent scientific committee advising the government on the water impacts of gas projects weighed in. Black Mountain's assessment, the committee found, was limited and disjointed. The company had reached conclusions that were largely unsupported by evidence. There was, the committee and the department agreed, substantial uncertainty about how water moves through the ground in this region, how surface water and groundwater interact, and where groundwater-dependent ecosystems actually exist. That uncertainty meant no one could accurately predict what would happen to the northern blue-tongued skink or the largetooth sawfish if drilling began.
Conservation groups have seized on these gaps. Environs Kimberley, which obtained the documents, has asked the federal environment minister, Murray Watt, to terminate the entire assessment. Martin Pritchard, the group's executive director, argued that Black Mountain has had ample time to do the work the department requested and appears unwilling to do it. "Without that work there's no way the commonwealth could make a decision on whether there would be significant impacts or not," he said. He also framed the larger stakes: the Kimberley sits in the top 4 percent of the least impacted coastlines anywhere on the planet. "This is the last place in the world that should be industrialised by the oil and gas fracking industry."
The federal environment department said it cannot comment on specifics while the project remains under active assessment. But officials reiterated that any project seeking approval under national environmental law must pass rigorous scrutiny of its potential impacts on protected matters. Black Mountain will eventually be required to publish its environmental documentation for public review and to show how it has addressed the department's concerns. As of now, it remains unclear whether the company has provided the data officials have repeatedly requested.
Citações Notáveis
Without that work there's no way the commonwealth could make a decision on whether there would be significant impacts or not.— Martin Pritchard, executive director of Environs Kimberley
This is the last place in the world that should be industrialised by the oil and gas fracking industry.— Martin Pritchard, Environs Kimberley
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why does the federal government keep asking for more data if the state of Western Australia has already recommended approval?
Because they're operating under different laws. The state approved it under state environmental law. But the federal government has jurisdiction over matters of national significance—water resources, threatened species, heritage values. Those trigger a separate, stricter assessment process.
So the company could theoretically get state approval and still be blocked federally?
Yes. And that's what seems to be happening here. The state said yes, but the feds keep saying the company hasn't proven it understands what it might break.
What's the actual problem with the data they've submitted?
They haven't mapped the groundwater system. They haven't identified which ecosystems depend on that groundwater. So when they say the Fitzroy River won't be affected, it's an assertion without evidence—they don't actually know how water moves through the ground there.
And that matters because?
Because fracking injects water and chemicals deep underground. If you don't understand the groundwater system, you can't predict whether those chemicals might migrate toward the river, or toward the aquifers that feed the ecosystems that endangered species depend on.
How long has the company had to do this work?
Long enough that conservation groups are now asking the minister to just cancel the whole thing. The implication is they've had years and are either unable or unwilling to do it properly.
What happens next?
The company either provides the data or it doesn't. If it does, the assessment continues. If it doesn't, the minister could terminate it. Either way, the decision will rest on whether anyone can actually prove the project is safe.