[Someone]

“World Heritage Site” is a title countries apply for at UNESCO.

Once on a list, treaties require countries to protect the site.

Because of that, the decision whether to ask UNESCO to put that sticker on a site is a political choice.

[prawn]

And for that reason, generally Australia would favour protecting something especially notable or with tourism potential. Seems this is down the scale a bit.

Nearest Western-international parallel might be Bears Ears in the US. There are specific features likely to hold off development, but other areas are sparse or remote wilderness less likely to survive political assault?