Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2018C00160:reg:2008:p4
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2018C00160
Segment Type: reg
Provision Reference: reg 2008 (pt 4/19)
Character Range: 10485–13321

through seeds carried in their dung; and by fouling waterholes.

1.2.3 Managing the threat

Control of unmanaged goats relies on a range of approaches. The main techniques suitable for broadscale control are mustering (mainly suitable in areas of flat terrain), trapping (mainly suitable in arid or semiarid areas where water sources are limited) and aerial shooting (useful in inaccessible terrain). Eradication from offshore islands (or from mainland areas that have similarly isolated populations) is feasible and has been achieved by various methods. Other pressures on goats, such as predation by dingoes, may also reduce their numbers.

In some areas of broadacre grazing it can be difficult to differentiate between managed and unmanaged herds. In these areas, the impacts from goats need to be considered as a component of the overall grazing pressure from both introduced livestock and from native species. Best practice management in these 'blended' situations (or where unmanaged goats alone are present) should involve reduction of the threat to native species that may be affected by competition and land degradation from goats. The varying contexts in which goats are found reinforces the need for governments, the goat industry and other key stakeholders to work together to abate the impact on biodiversity from goats.

1.2.4 The review of the 1999 TAP

In accordance with the requirements of the EPBC Act, the original TAP for feral goat competition and land degradation (EA 1999a) was reviewed in 2004–05 by the Bureau of Rural Sciences (BRS) (Hart 2005) as part of a broader review encompassing the original TAPs for cats (EA 1999b), foxes (EA 1999c) and rabbits (EA 1999d).

The BRS review found that it was difficult to accurately determine the extent to which the goat TAP had reduced the impacts of goats on biodiversity. This reflects the current paucity of nationally consistent data on the ranges and densities of goats and their impacts, and the difficulties of linking outcomes in goat population changes to the outputs of the TAP. The invasive species indicator data to be produced under the National Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (NRMMC) should improve the availability of continental overview data over the next year or so.

The BRS surveyed a broad range of stakeholders and assessed a range of projects commissioned by the Department of Environment and Heritage (now the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts) that were developed under the auspices of the existing TAPs. This has helped to identify actions that will need to be initiated or continued into the future. The review concluded, however, that the goat-related projects that were assessed had positively contributed to reducing the impacts of goats.

The BRS review proposed a number of changes to the actions found