Addressing the 2007 APPEA conference, Bourne, who is also a former chief executive of BP Australia, conceded that development of the region would be inevitable.

But he rejected as being too environmentally sensitive the site chosen by Woodside to host an LNG plant that would process gas from its Browse Basin fields.

“WWF believes there is no place for a LNG plant emplaced upon Scott Reef,” he told delegates.

“We do not believe that everywhere can be ‘up-for-grabs and I know many in this industry concur that some places must be off-limits.

“To construct a facility there would attract global attention and generate global outrage, regardless of the scale of development.”

Bourne’s comments follow the recent launch of a nationwide advertising campaign, calling for a total ban of all LNG-related activity in the region. Along with Woodside, Inpex also has plans for an LNG plant for the Kimberley.

Despite rejecting Woodside’s proposal, Bourne said WWF had responded to industry calls for fast-tracking the development of Browse Basin gas reserves.

He called for the sector and state and federal governments to work together to develop a framework that would minimise the footprint of gas development in the region.

“It is simply inconceivable that major development should occur without a rigorous assessment of cumulative impacts and a careful analysis of options,” Bourne said.

“We want to see Australian oil and gas operators known for their legacy of sensible development and environmental leadership and not to be known as the first to dismantle a coral ecosystem like Scott Reef in the name of purely economic progress.”

Woodside is considering a "lagoon-based" LNG processing facility on Scott Reef as part of its giant $12 billion Browse gas development.

The company has also faced opposition to its Pluto LNG plant plans for the Burrup Peninsula because of its impact on ancient rock art, but is expected to give the project the nod in a few months.