Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2011L01416:body:0:p6
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2011L01416
Segment Type: other
Provision Reference: 
Character Range: 13925–17005

managing them.

Cane toads have had an adverse impact on a number of matters of NES and those impacts are expected to continue as they expand their range. For example, cane toads have impacted:
       * listed threatened species such as the northern quoll Dasyurus hallucatus – an EPBC Act listed endangered species
       * Wetlands of International Importance listed under the terms of the Ramsar Convention, including iconic wetlands in Kakadu National Park
       * World Heritage properties such as the Wet Tropics of Queensland and the Gondwana Rainforests of Australia.

1.2.2 Managing the threat
Since 1986, the Australian Government has directed approximately $11 million to development of a broad-scale means to control cane toads and a further $9 million to other cane toad research and management activities (details in Table 1).

       Table 1: Australian Government funding on cane toad research and management 1986 to 2009.

Area of expenditure
Research on impacts             $5,212,518
Research control                $11,111,922
(long term/biological control)
Research control                $1,303,235
(short/medium term control)
Management                      $1,162,117
Community groups                $1,283,234
Education                       $44,468
TOTAL                           $20,117,494

Over $11 million of the Australian Government cane toad funding has been provided for the search for a biological control agent in the toads' native habitat in South America, and research directed at modifying a virus in order to disrupt the development of infected cane toad tadpoles. In 2008, an independent review of the CSIRO's cane toad biological control research (Shannon and Bayliss 2008) resulted in funding for this project being discontinued. The review team found that "there are still major technical hurdles to be overcome in the development of a self-disseminating genetically modified cane toad control agent. The long term feasibility of the approach is also questionable on several counts including the availability of an acceptable viral vector, the difficulty of generating an appropriate immune response from virally expressed proteins, and the major hurdle of obtaining approval for release. The lack of a national and international risk assessment and management plan for the release of a virally vectored genetically modified organism regardless of exact product specification is also a major deficit and should be an essential part of any further program in this area".

To date no broad-scale or biological control has been identified and it is unlikely that such a control could be developed and approved for use before the cane toad will have reached its maximum extent (see Figure 1) and impact. The option for undertaking research into broad-scale biological control of cane toad is subject to there being a significant change to the technical hurdles identified in the review of CSIRO's cane toad biological control research (Shannon and Bayliss 2008) or some other significant step in 'proof of concept'. This TAP has a five