Kakadu National Park Landscape Symposia Series 2007–2009

8.3 Implementation of the project

8.3.1 Selection of target species

8.3.2 Community consultation

8.3.3 The next steps

The Envirofund supported component of the Weedy Time Bomb Project will be completed in 18 months, after which time the project partners are committed to undertake ongoing monitoring and control of the target species in the Jabiru area for a further three years with a commitment from some of the partners (notably GAC and ERA/EWLS to continue the project beyond this time.

8.4 Acknowledgments

8.5 Postscript

References

Kakadu National Park 1997. Survey of plants prohibited for cultivation in Jabiru, Kakadu National Park.

Smith NM 2002. Weeds of the wet/dry tropics – a field guide. Environment Centre of the Northern Territory, Darwin NT.

Department of Natural Resources, Environment & The Arts 2008. Weed risk assessment. Weed All About It Newsletter no 5, p3.

Gardener M, Puig P, Addison J & Mercer R 2006. Weed monitoring at Ranger and Jabiluka. EWLS, Darwin.

Weed Management Act 2001 (NT) administered by the Northern Territory Department of Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts (see http://www.weeds.gov.au/government/roles/state.html#nt)

9 Workshop summaries: priority issues for management, knowledge gaps and ways forward

M Ibbett¹⁹

9.1 Focus summary

The priority issues identified by workshop participants were:

• 
  The need to identify the geographic distribution of existing and emergent weed species in the region, with a focus on using distributional mapping and modelling to identify avenues and barriers to dispersal;
  
• 
  The need to acquire and allocate adequate resources, including funding, personnel and equipment, to tackle weed management issues across the region;
  
• 
  The need to develop consistent and effective methods of data acquisition and management across the region, and to improve the manner in which weed management agencies share and utilise this information;
  
• 
  The need to improve community awareness of weed issues across the region to better enable communities and agencies to manage problem weeds;
  
• 
  The need to better integrate the management of weed issues with other major management activities such as fire and feral animal control; and
  
• 
  The need to improve our understanding of the impacts of major weed species, particularly grassy weeds on biodiversity, traditional hunting and gathering activities and on local economies, including carbon trading opportunities for remote communities.
  

9.2 Introduction

9.3 Identifying and managing priority weed species

9.3.1 Management issues

• 
  Require clarification of who is responsible for managing weed issues across the region
  
• 
  Need a robust and strategic approach to prioritising weed management issues/areas based on criteria such as cultural significance, biodiversity value, size and location of infestation.
  
• 
  The priority weed species identified by workshop participants were: Gamba grass, annual and perennial mission grass, hyptis, stylom, mimosa, guinea grass, calopo, snakeweed, rattlepod, rubber bush and olive hymenachne.
  
• 
  Need to identify distribution of existing and emergent weed species and avenues for dispersal into Arnhem Land. Some species are not present yet or are present in only small infestations so may still be controllable.
  
• 
  Identify new areas of disturbance eg gravelpits, irrigation clearing, roads, unofficial tracks, walking tracks etc and look to control any emerging infestations.
  
• 
  Target areas and issues outside of Kakadu:
  

Barwananga – Maningrida – mission grass – outstations and roadsides – hunting/ fishing camps (but distribution not exactly known and needs work).

Adjamarrl – can’t access in wet. No gamba grass found, some grader (2 infestations on tracks) green panic, passion fruit, some mission grass (Marlwon)

High Plateau – mission grass need more information.

• 
  Identify new areas of disturbance eg gravelpits, irrigation clearing, roads, unofficial tracks, walking tracks etc and look to control any emerging infestations.
  

9.3.2 Knowledge gaps

• 
  Need to improve knowledge of current and potential distribution of weeds across the region, and identify avenues/barriers for dispersal and control
  
• 
  Need to improve understanding of general biology and ecology of priority weed species, including seed bank viability and dispersal, pathways of infestation.
  
• 
  Investigate and identify optimum methods of control/treatment through experimental trials (including optimal time and conditions for spraying, use of other methods of control including fire/mechanical removal etc, biological control including sterilants and methods to manage seed banks)
  
• 
  Investigate regeneration of native species after treatment of infestations, including active planting of native species
  

9.3.3 Moving forward

• 
  Investigate avenues for collaboration between agencies and neighbours for weed management, and formalise these agreements with MOUs or similar documentation
  
• 
  Continue to compile comprehensive distribution information for all species, including investigating the use of high resolution satellite imagery and on-ground surveys.
  
• 
  Develop a consistent approach to data acquisition and management and distribution mapping across the region, perhaps using KNP model.
  

9.4 Resource acquisition and allocation

9.4.1 Management issues

• 
  Resources: obtaining and efficiently allocating the limited resources that are available (including acquiring and managing adequate staff). Need to explore new ways of increasing the resources (staff but also other resources) available: eg partnerships with CDEP, community organisations, other Park users.
  
• 
  Is the current level of staffing adequate to cope with the existing and potential weed threat. Consider the KNP situation where there are dedicated crews for dealing with grass weeds and mimosa (is this approach working?).
  

9.4.2 Knowledge gaps

• 
  What level of resourcing is required to effectively tackle weed issues: eg. Is it adequate to have four dedicated rangers fighting grassy weeds in Kakadu? Can this model be used elsewhere?
  
• 
  Do onground staff, communities etc have access to the resources they require to effectively undertake weed management? No, but what additional resources do they require and how can they get them? Need to identify funding and resourcing opportunities.
  

9.4.3 Moving forward

• 
  Investigate how different ranger groups can work together and share resources such as helicopter flights along common boundaries, to make management activities more effective.
  

9.5 Data management and knowledge sharing

9.5.1 Management issues

• 
  Data acquisition and management: need to develop consistent and efficient methods of collecting, storing and accessing data that will overcome issues associated with knowledge and skills loss resulting from staff turnover, institutional reforms etc.
  
• 
  Regional communication and knowledge sharing: need to develop and maintain relationships between neighbouring land managers to more effectively manage weeds across the landscape and to share skills and information.
  
• 
  Data acquisition and management: need to develop consistent and efficient methods of collecting, storing and accessing data that will overcome issues associated with knowledge and skills loss resulting from staff turnover, institutional reforms etc.
  

9.5.2 Knowledge gaps

• 
  Outside of organisations like Kakadu and Weeds Branch the capacity of staff and institutions to manage and utilise data needs to be enhanced (ie improve staff development and access to computing, GPS and other date management equipment).
  

9.5.3 Moving forward

• 
  Develop a consistent approach to data acquisition and management and distribution mapping across the region, perhaps using KNP model.
  
• 
  Explore avenues for staff development through exchange between agencies
  
• 
  Develop comprehensive training for staff and other community groups including species identification, data collection and management, operation of equipment etc
  

9.6 Community education

9.6.1 Management issues

• 
  Community education: need to provide information to communities and outstations about existing and emerging weed issues and their management.
  
• 
  Education and management: need to improve hygiene practices of contractors, staff and visitors to Parks, mining leases and other areas.
  

9.6.2 Knowledge gaps

• 
  Best methods for improving community awareness about weed issues and for changing community behaviours need to be investigated.
  

9.6.3 Moving forward

• 
  Develop community education strategies suitable for all groups across the west Arnhem region.
  

9.7 Integrated management of weeds and other issues

9.7.1 Management issues

• 
  Require a more integrated approach to weed management and other landscape scale issues like feral animal control and fire
  

9.7.2 Knowledge gaps

• 
  Role of feral pigs, horses, buffalo and cattle in dispersal of some priority weeds needs to be better understood.
  
• 
  How can fire be better utilised in the strategic management of weed species, and how can burning activities be better managed to prevent (or at least not promote) the spread of priority weeds.
  

9.7.3 Moving forward

• 
  Consider developing comprehensive weed management strategies that take into account fire and feral animal management components (need to consider these factors as potential weed vectors and management tools).
  
• 
  Investigate avenues for collaboration between agencies and neighbours for weed management, and formalise these agreements with MOUs or similar documentation
  

9.8 Understanding the impacts and costs of weeds

9.8.1 Management issues

• 
  Changing fire regimes as a result of weed infestations pose a threat to biodiversity and local economy including potential impact on carbon trading funding
  
• 
  Impact of weeds on biodiversity, bush tucker and traditional hunting activities not known.
  

9.8.2 Knowledge gaps

• 
  Impact of weeds on traditional hunting and bush tucker not well understood at present
  
• 
  Need to investigate how weeds impact on the economic and ecological sustainability of communities and their industries, including opportunities like carbon trading, pastoral and tourism ventures.
  

9.8.3 Moving forward

• 
  Work with Indigenous communities, outstations, ranger groups to improve our understanding of the impacts of weeds on bush tucker and hunting, and also to consider how bush hunting practices may affect weed distribution etc.
  
• 
  ILC cattle project: hold discussions regarding management and monitoring of movement of stock and associated weed risks in and out of KNP and Arnhem Land. Investigate partnerships between ILC, landholders, ranger groups, NT Weeds Branch and KNP.