WebMail 
Evaluating a Pest Plant Management Strategic Plan
Evaluating a Pest Plant Management Strategic Plan
|
Background: Landowners and land managers of all levels have the responsibility for managing Weeds of National Significance (WoNS) while state and territory governments have the responsibility for legislation and regulation of weeds. The WoNS pose or potentially can pose such a serious threat to Australia that it is necessary to co-ordinate their management at a national level, thus there is a national strategic plan for each WoNS that defines and identifies the strategies and actions necessary to control these weeds. There are three stages for management of WoNS. Phases 1 & 2 are at the national level and provide for a Management Coordinator and a National management Group/Steering Committee to oversee implementation of strategic plans and coordinate priority actions. In phase 3, the states and territories have the responsibility for national coordination within their jurisdiction. The problem is that many WoNS are widespread, occurring in a wide variety of habitats and governing bodies may have locally defined issues that limit the efficacy of implementation of nationally based strategic plans. A review of national strategic plans with a focus on their efficacy at the local level can highlight the areas where the strategic plan may be lacking or identify areas where improvements can be made to assist local management of WoNS. If management of WoNS does not succeed at the local level, it cannot succeed at the national level! Conducting a review of a strategic plan forces one to consider what should go into one thus assists in understanding how to produce a plan. TASK Choose one of the following Pest Plant Strategic Plans and nominated locality to review: 1. iii. Weeds of National Significance: Brooms (Cytisus scoparius, Genista Monspessulana and G. linifolia) Strategic Plan 2012 – 2017; review with respect to the efficacy of the Strategic Plan within the Wimmera. 2. vi. Weeds of National Significance: Bitou bush (Chrysanthemoides monilifera ssp. rotundata (DC) T. Norl.) and boneseed (Chrysanthemoides monilifera ssp. monilifera (L.) T. Norl.)) Strategic Plan 2012 – 2017; review with respect to the efficacy of the Strategic Plan within the Wimmera. Before you can begin your report, you must gather the background information so that you have a basis to determine whether something is good, bad, indifferent or missing in the strategy. Useful background information includes: Once you have the background information, you can review your pest management strategy. Some things to consider in your report: |
WEEDS OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE Brooms (Cytisus scoparius, Genista monspessulana and G. linifolia) Strategic Plan 2012 to 2017 National Brooms Strategic Plan 2012 – 2017 © Commonwealth of Australia and the Australian Weeds Committee, 2012 ISBN [to be completed by secretariat] This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Australian Weeds Committee. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Secretariat, Australian Weeds Committee. Supporting information about the Australian Weeds Strategy, Weeds of National Significance and progress to date may be found at www.weeds.org.au, where links and downloads provide contact details for all species, their management committees and copies of the strategy. This strategy was developed under the leadership of the National Brooms Coordinator – Matt Springall, NSW Office of Environment and Heritage, NSW with full cooperation of all the States, Territories and Commonwealth of Australia. Comments and constructive criticism are welcomed as an aid to improving the process and future revisions of this strategy. Published by: Australian Weeds Committee, Canberra For further information contact: Secretariat Australian Weeds Committee [Insert contact details of AWC] Publication date: [Month] [Year] Copies available from: Pest and Ecological Management Unit Office of Environment and Heritage NSW PO Box 1967, Hurstville NSW 2220 Preferred way to cite this publication: Australian Weeds Committee (2012) Weeds of National Significance, Brooms Strategic Plan. Australian Weeds Committee, Canberra. Cover design by: Office of Environment and Heritage NSW (Photo : K. Harvey, OEH) The editors have tried to make the information in this product as accurate as possible. However, they do not guarantee that the information is totally accurate or complete. Therefore, you should not rely solely on this information when making a commercial decision. National Brooms Strategic Plan 2012 – 2017 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 VISION 3 1 THE CHALLENGE 3 2 INTRODUCTION 4 2.1 Principles underpinning the plan 4 2.2 The current situation 5 2.2.1 Scotch broom 6 2.2.2 Montpellier broom 6 2.2.3 Flax-leaf broom 7 2.2.4 Broom hybrids 8 2.2.5 Other non WoNS brooms 8 2.3 Strategic plan development 8 2.4 Relevance to other strategies 9 3 STRATEGIC GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 9 3.1 GOAL 1: New infestations are prevented from establishing 11 3.2 GOAL 2: Established infestations are under strategic management 12 3.3 GOAL 3: Greater capability and commitment to manage brooms 15 4 STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 19 5 MONITORING EVALUATION REPORTING AND IMPROVEMENT 22 5.1 Targets and Measures 22 5.2 Program Logic Model for Brooms National Strategic Plan 26 6 TECHNICAL BACKGROUND 27 6.1 Broom identification 27 6.2 Broom biology and ecology 27 6.3 Broom distribution and spread 28 6.4 Summary of impacts 28 6.5 Control options 29 6.5.1 Chemical control 29 6.5.2 Physical control 29 6.5.3 Biological control 29 6.5.4 Fire 29 6.6 Quarantine and legislation 31 7 APPENDICES 33 7.1 The WoNS Program and its phases 33 7.2 Glossary 34 7.3 References 35 National Brooms Strategic Plan 2012 – 2017 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Broom species are serious weeds of Australia’s environment and primary production, including pastoral and forestry operations. In 2012, three species, Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius), Montpellier broom (Genista monspessulana) and flax-leaf broom (Genista linifolia), were listed as Weeds of National Significance due to their invasiveness, potential for spread and severe impacts on Australia’s environment and primary industry. Originating in Europe, brooms were introduced to Australia predominantly as ornamental plants. Brooms have now naturalised in all States and Territories, except the Northern Territory, and have become a major threat to pastoral and forestry operations and a wide range of natural ecosystems, including alpine areas and wetlands. Once established, broom invasions can change fire frequency and intensity, outcompete or inhibit natural regeneration and recruitment of native species,and provide harbour for feral animals. Effective control measures for brooms are expensive due to their ability to rapidly re-establish from a persistent seed bank, requiring intensive and long term follow-up and site restoration. Mature brooms have the ability to produce thousands of seeds per plant annually and the seeds can remain dormant in the soil for decades. Effective control relies on an integrated approach involving chemical, manual and biological control. Integration of broom control with fire management also has the potential to improve management outcomes. This National Strategic Plan provides a framework to prevent spread and reduce the impacts of brooms throughout Australia. The Plan aspires to deliver the following Goals and Objectives: Goal 1. New infestations are prevented from establishing: 1. Invasion vectors, sources and pathways are identified and managed to prevent or reduce spread. 2. Surveillance and response mechanisms are ensuring timely detection of infestations. 3. Priority outlier infestations are contained or eradicated and spread from core infestations is prevented. Goal 2. Established infestations are under strategic management: 1. Priority assets are benefitting from long term strategic weed control programs. 2. Integrated weed management practices are improving natural resource condition and sustainable production. Goal 3. Greater capability and commitment to manage brooms 1. Infestations are mapped to national standards and to a level sufficient to inform decision making. 2. Best practice management delivers efficient, effective and long-term control of brooms. 3. Capability and motivation to manage brooms is enhanced by education and awareness. 4. Research priorities for brooms are identified, promoted, addressed and results are informing management. 5. Local to national planning incorporates strategic brooms priorities. 6. Appropriate policies, codes of practice, legislation and enforcement are supporting strategic management objectives. 7. Stakeholders are committed to effective delivery of the National Strategic Plan. 8. The National Strategic Plan is relevant and effective. National Brooms Strategic Plan 2012 – 2017 2 This Plan complements the Australian Weeds Strategy. Like the Australian Weeds Strategy, it is aspirational and does not specifically address resourcing. However, the Plan fosters a shared approach, and identifies efficiencies and collaborative actions that help to ensure existing resources can be allocated to achieve improved, strategic management outcomes. The Plan outlines measurable, targeted actions to allow progress towards the objectives over the next five years. National Brooms Strategic Plan 2012 – 2017 3 Vision Brooms are effectively managed to prevent further spread and to reduce their negative impacts on Australia’s natural environment and primary production. 1 THE CHALLENGE Brooms are shrubs in the pea family that are native to Europe and the Mediterranean, including North Africa. They were introduced to Australia predominantly as ornamental plants and have escaped from these plantings to become serious weeds of the environment and primary production. Three species, Scotch or English broom (Cytisus scoparius), Montpellier or Cape broom (Genista monspessulana) and flax-leaf broom (G. linifolia) – collectively referred to as brooms in this document, were listed as Weeds of National Significance (WoNS) because of their invasiveness, high potential for further spread and severe ecological and economic impacts. Brooms have been recorded in all states and territories of Australia, with the exception of Northern Territory (NT), and are widespread across many temperate and alpine regions. Brooms invade native vegetation, plantation and pastoral systems, where they cause significant impacts. They form dense infestations that damage conservation and production assets. Robust growth allows brooms to dominate understorey and shrub layers, eventually impacting the regeneration of canopy species by simplifying the understorey flora and preventing over-storey regeneration. Brooms are aggressive invaders of natural vegetation across a wide variety of habitats and are capable of completely transforming ecological communities by excluding other vegetation and altering fire behaviour and regimes. They grow quickly, produce large amounts of highly persistent seed, tolerate a range of environmental conditions, and fix nitrogen in the soil, which in turn provides conditions even more suitable for growth of broom plants. While brooms establish rapidly after disturbance, particularly from fire or vegetation clearing, they are also capable of invading relatively undisturbed areas. Once established, broom invasions can change fire frequency and intensity, and outcompete and inhibit natural regeneration and recruitment of native species. Brooms are considered serious pests in grazing, orchard and forestry lands. Mature stands are often unpalatable and will outcompete good pasture if left untreated. In addition, they can provide harbour for feral animals such as foxes, pigs and rabbits. Brooms are problematic for reforestation efforts in forestry operations, particularly after harvesting, and are known to reduce timber yields through competition. Effective control measures for brooms can be costly due to their ability to rapidly re-establish from a persistent seed bank, requiring intensive and long term follow up and site restoration. While there are many effective control methods available for brooms, the often remote and inaccessible nature of the landscape where they occur can make control expensive. Despite this, there are good opportunities to prevent further spread of brooms, including within, and from, core infestations. Integrating broom control programs with fire management may have significant benefits and can be essential for success in many cases. Existing control programs in some parts of the country have demonstrated significant progress and provide good models for further action. National Brooms Strategic Plan 2012 – 2017 4 2 INTRODUCTION This Brooms National Strategic Plan 2012 -2017 (the Plan) is broad in scope and incorporates goals for the three broom WoNS; Scotch, Montpellier and flax-leaf broom. It outlines priority actions to prevent further spread, reduce impacts and increase the capability of land managers to manage these three brooms across Australia in a collaborative and effective manner. The Plan builds on and complements existing weed management strategies and initiatives from local to national levels, in order to achieve improved understanding of these species and their management, and provide a basis for strategic on-ground management outcomes. 2.1 Principles underpinning the plan The WoNS Strategic Plans provide a framework for the coordinated management of the 32 WoNS. These Plans represent the shared vision of all stakeholders, including States/Territories and the Australian Government, and form a critical component of the national weed management effort. The WoNS initiative establishes national priorities and facilitates action where there is significant national or cross-jurisdictional benefit to be gained. WoNS strategic plans do not specifically address resourcing; however, they aim to identify efficiencies and ensure existing resources can be allocated to achieve the most strategic management outcomes. WoNS Strategic Plans are based on recognition and acceptance of seven principles outlined in the Australian Weeds Strategy (AWS; NRMMC 2006): 1. Weed management is an essential and integral part of the sustainable management of natural resources for the benefit of the economy, the environment, human health and amenity. 2. Combating weed problems is a shared responsibility that requires all parties to have a clear understanding of their roles. 3. Good science underpins the effective development, monitoring and review of weed management strategies. 4. Prioritisation of and investment in weed management must be informed by a risk management approach. 5. Prevention and early intervention are the most cost-effective techniques for managing weeds. 6. Weed management requires coordination among all levels of government in partnership with industry, land and water managers and the community regardless of tenure. 7. Building capacity across government, industry, land and water managers and the community is fundamental to effective weed management. In addition to the AWS, WoNS strategic plans are also aligned to the 2012 Intergovernmental Agreement on Biosecurity (IGAB; COAG 2012), which outlines national invasive species management objectives. The IGAB aims to enhance Australia’s biosecurity system by fostering a collaborative approach to minimise the impact of pests across the biosecurity continuum, including ‘a national management framework to ensure that nationally significant pests and diseases established in Australia are contained, suppressed or otherwise managed.’ WoNS can contribute to this aim by facilitating coordinated, strategic management of nationally significant weeds. The IGAB principles highlight the importance of managing invasive species across the biosecurity continuum. The ‘One Biosecurity’ report (Beale et al. 2008) also recognises that weeds and other invasive species are biosecurity threats that are most effectively managed in a collaborative manner across this continuum. This includes a ‘spatial continuum’ of pre-border, border and post-border, as well as a ‘management continuum’ that spans prevention, eradication, containment and asset protection, depending on the scale of weed invasion. In most instances, complete control (i.e. eradication) of long-established weeds and other invasive species is unachievable. However, well researched, strategic and coordinated management approaches can reduce National Brooms Strategic Plan 2012 – 2017 5 current and potential impacts and provide a good return on investment. Effective weed management requires an approach that spans the biosecurity continuum (Figure 1). Figure 1 : Biosecurity continuum – Stages of weed invasion with corresponding goals, management objectives and actions at each stage. Modified from Hobbs and Humphries (1995) and DPI (2010). Effective management includes spread prevention practices and eradication of outlying infestations to protect environments where the weed has not yet taken hold, establishment and defence of containment lines to halt or reduce the rate of spread; and the identification and protection of key environmental, social and economic assets in areas where the weeds are already widespread. Paired with these efforts is the need for strong education, extension and capacity building programs, and support mechanisms to ensure on-ground outcomes are achieved. 2.2 The current situation Infestations of brooms are recorded from all states of Australia, including south-east Queensland and southwest Western Australia (WA). The three species of broom have a wide distribution across Australia (see Figures 2 and 3) and are impacting on a range of ecological communities, including endangered systems such as alpine areas and wetlands. They can be significant weeds of grazing and forestry operations, with the costs of control potentially exceeding the value of the land once large broom infestations have established. Brooms share similar characteristics that allow them to outcompete desirable plants and dominate native ecosystems. They grow quickly, produce large amounts of seed, tolerate a range of environmental conditions and increase soil nitrogen, which in turn forms ideal conditions for broom regeneration. Brooms establish rapidly after disturbance, such as fire or grazing, but can also invade relatively undisturbed areas. If not controlled, brooms can modify native ecosystems by changing fire frequency and intensity, changing vegetation structure, altering soil chemistry and providing harbour for invasive animals. Invasion by brooms can also impact native animals, contributing to changes in species diversity and density. There are effective control measures for brooms, however due to their ability to rapidly re-establish from a persistent seed bank, intensive follow-up and site restoration is required. In addition to chemical and 1. New infestations are prevented from establishing 2. Established infestations are under strategic management Management Objective WoNS Strategic Goals Aims 3. Capability and willingness to manage the WoNS is increased PREVENT SPREAD REDUCE IMPACT National Brooms Strategic Plan 2012 – 2017 6 mechanical controls, several invertebrates that feed exclusively on broom plants or their seeds have been introduced to Australia as biological control agents and are showing promise for long term management of broom populations. In large infestations, integrated management using a combination of biological, chemical and mechanical controls can effectively reduce the impact and spread of brooms. The current priorities for management of brooms vary between jurisdictions and the species concerned. Areas with well established broom populations generally regard broom control as a high priority whereas in areas with low density, scattered populations at early stages of invasion brooms are often considered lower priority weeds within that landscape. This is reflected in the state and territory legislation across Australia. While C. scoparius and G. monspessulana are declared weeds across most, but not all, states, G. linifolia is not currently declared, except in Victoria, Australian Capital Territory (ACT), and small areas of New South Wales (NSW). See section 6.6 for a list of declarations across jurisdictions. 2.2.1 Scotch broom Scotch broom (C. scoparius), also known as English broom, was first introduced to New South Wales (NSW) around 1800 by Governor King as a substitute for hops and was subsequently used as a garden or hedge plant, and occasionally for erosion control, through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. It is now estimated to have infested over 200,000 ha of southern Australia, including 150,000 ha in Victoria (Vic). Recently it was detected as naturalised in Western Australia (WA), where it was previously unrecorded, and has the potential to spread, however early eradication efforts appear to be successful. This weed is also regarded as a serious pest in many other parts of the world, including in North America and New Zealand. Scotch broom is well-recognized for its deleterious impacts on the environment, agriculture and forestry, having been first identified as a serious weed in the Barrington Tops region of New South Wales in the 1960s. Well documented strategic control programs have been in place for Scotch broom in regions such as Barrington Tops (NSW) and Alpine National Parks (Vic) since the 1980s, and there is a large amount of literature and research available for this species, both from Australia and internationally. Biological control programs for Scotch broom began in the United States of America as early as 1960 and in Australia from 1990. A number of agents have now been released for Scotch broom in Australia, and while initial results are promising for the longer term, further redistribution and monitoring efforts could improve agent impact across larger areas. Figure 2 : Current (2012) and potential (Potter et al. 2009) distribution of Cytisus scoparius in Australia. 2.2.2 Montpellier broom National Brooms Strategic Plan 2012 – 2017 7 Montpellier broom (G. monspessulana), also known as Cape broom, French broom or Canary broom, is the most widespread of the three species in Australia, invading over 600,000 ha. It has the potential to inhabit drier and warmer areas than Scotch broom, and has also been found in wetlands. Montpellier broom has spread primarily as a garden escape to become a major weed in Australia, New Zealand, North America and many other temperate regions globally. In Australia, it has naturalised in all states and territories (except the NT) but its history of introduction to Australia is not well recorded. It may have been recorded growing in NSW as early as 1803, but first appeared in a catalogue of plants in Melbourne Botanic Gardens in 1857 under the name of G. canariensis, and was also recorded in the Adelaide Botanic Gardens in 1858 (Parsons and Cuthbertson 1992). It was frequently planted as a hedge plant and now commonly occurs in the southeastern states in a variety of habitats receiving more than 500 mm in annual rainfall, including: forest margins; neglected areas, particularly poorly managed pastures; roadsides and watercourses. Two biological control agents for Montpellier broom have been identified for use in Australia. One of these, a psyllid, was found to already occur in wild populations in Adelaide, though it is not yet widespread and does not occur in Western Australia. Redistribution efforts in eastern states have shown initial localised impacts to be significant, and the psyllid has the potential to provide substantial benefits to long term broom management. Figure 3 : Current distribution (2012) of Genista monspessulana and G. Linifolia in Australia. 2.2.3 Flax-leaf broom Flax-leaf broom (G. linifolia), while much less widespread in Australia than the other broom weeds, has the potential to colonise the same areas as Montpellier broom and is spreading in a similar manner. It is recorded from dry coastal vegetation, heathland, ephemeral wetland, lowland grassland and grassy woodland, dry and wet sclerophyll forest and riparian vegetation, predominantly in the far south of Australia. Unlike Scotch broom, and even Montpellier broom, there has been relatively little research undertaken on flax-leaf broom. While it has been approved as a target for biological control, there has been no work on agents for this species to date. National Brooms Strategic Plan 2012 – 2017 8 2.2.4 Broom hybrids While the identity of the three WoNS brooms is unambiguous, there are taxonomic issues around other Cytisus and Genista species. Genetic studies of Scotch broom indicate that a variety of forms were introduced to Australia and hybridisation between these forms is occurring (Smith 2000, Kang et al. 2007). Evidence also exists of hybridisation within genera of closely related Cytisus and Genista species (Kleist and Jasieniuk 2011). Some of these species, forms, cultivars or hybrids of Cytisus and Genista, may be available for trade, including on the online market. There are also several different coloured forms of Cytisus naturalised in NSW, Victoria and Tasmania (Hosking et al. 1998). However, uncertainty exists around the correct taxonomic status of many of these entities (Atkinson and Shephard 2000, Malécot et al. 2009), and further work is required to determine if any of these pose a weed threat. These issues may have implications for the success of biological control, given the potential for hybridisation of other Cytisus and Genista forms with the WoNS broom species. Hybridisation may also impact the potential invasiveness of closely-related species that may still be available for trade. Taxonomic and genetic studies of Cytisus and Genista currently naturalised and commercially available in Australia would be useful for management, including for prevention of spread and future biological control of the WoNS. 2.2.5 Other non WoNS brooms There are many species of shrubs from the tribe Genisteae which are commonly known as brooms, none of which are native to Australia. Some of these brooms are recorded as naturalised in Australia and/or in other parts of the world. These plants include Cytisus multiflorus (white Spanish broom), Genista stenopetala (Madeira broom), G. canariensis (Canary broom), Retama raetam (white weeping broom), Calicotome spinosa (spiny broom), Spartium junceum (Spanish broom) and Chamaecytisus palmensis (tree lucerne or tagasaste). Two of these brooms, C. multiflorus and R. raetam are on the National Environmental Alert List, and both the Genista species can be easily misidentified as G. monspessulana. While these other species are not considered in this Plan, their weed potential should be recognised and appropriate risk assessment and risk abatement should be undertaken for these species. 2.3 Strategic plan development This Plan was developed by the national coordinator for brooms assisted by NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) staff and other WoNS Coordinators, with input from a number of people involved in the management of these invasive species. A range of consultation processes was used, including meetings with individuals, regional weed groups, state agencies (for agriculture and environment), land owners and community groups. Information on the distribution, control methods, species’ characteristics, attitudes to management and perceived knowledge gaps collected during this process have informed this Plan. State wide workshops were held in South Australia (Adelaide), Tasmania (Launceston), Western Australia (Perth) and Queensland (Brisbane) through 2012. Regional workshops were held in New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia and the ACT. In addition, WoNS coordinators undertook extensive discussions with stakeholders nationally, including with key people such as researchers and weed managers. In April 2012, a WoNS State/Territory Agency National Strategy Workshop was held in Adelaide with representatives from all jurisdictions. During this workshop, the principles that underpin this Plan (and other new WoNS Plans) were agreed upon. The objectives and strategic actions of this
Is this the question you were looking for? If so, place your order here to get started!
