The Objectives of the Plan are: improved priority setting and transparency in declaration processes in invasive species management coordinated prevention, eradication and response are implemented for high priority invasive species partnerships between community, industry and government are achieving effective containment and control of widely established invasive species efficiently applied regulation underpins effective control of invasive species the community, industry and government have relevant information to inform and report on invasive species management. Table 1 The structure of the Plan Goal 1. Setting priorities Goal 2. Prevention and eradication Goal 3. Control of widespread and established invasive species Goal 4. Regulation and compliance Goal 5. Information and accountability Community, industry and government actions in invasive species management are targeted to deliver the greatest benefit from the resources available for prevention, eradication, containment and targeted protection. Effective border quarantine, surveillance and detection, and eradication actions prevent new high-impact invasive species becoming established in Western Australia. Landholders, industries and governments work together to reduce the impacts of widespread and established invasive species. Ensure regulatory and compliance mechanisms underpin activities in invasive species management. Ensure priority setting and continuous improvement in invasive species management is informed by relevant and timely information available to, and shared between, all parties. Strategy G1.1 – Evaluating risks for invasive species 3 Actions Strategy G2.1 – and border processes 2 Actions Strategy G3.1 – Routine surveillance 2 Actions Strategy G4.1 – Effective regulatory mechanisms Strategy G5.1 – Sharing information and knowledge 3 Actions
Developing and maintaining an emergency response capability requires sufficient resources and highly trained personnel. Well-trained and resourced staff are required to ensure this ‘insurance’ capability. G2.2 G2.3 Information on invasive species is held by a range of agencies and organisations and may not be readily available to all parties. Improved systems of information storage and retrieval, and for sharing of this information between partners, are required. G5.1 Biosecurity knowledge is at risk of diminishing with smaller, dispersed agency levels. Generational transfer of new knowledge becomes more difficult. Generating new knowledge through partnership arrangements and use of web-based information systems will assist in enhancing effective knowledge transfer. G5.1 is a mixed understanding across governments, industry, landholders and the wider community about the ‘big picture’ for the invasive species situation in WA, and respective roles and responsibilities of all parties for invasive species management, resulting in poorly uncoordinated effort. An important requirement is for all parties to have a shared understanding, and accept and act upon their roles and responsibilities. G1.2 G2.2 G2.3 G2.4 G3.1 G3.2 G3.3 G4.2 G5.1 The resources for invasive species management will always be constrained. A sound process for identifying priorities for investment, based on a robust understanding of the impact of invasive species, will ensure resources are used most effectively. G1.1 G1.2 G1.3 G2.3 G2.4 G3.2 G3.3 In some cases, asset-based control is too expensive to generate sufficient benefits from reduced impacts. Continued investment in researching more control technologies is required. G1.3 While regulation is necessary to address aspects of invasive species management, it is expensive and on its own is insufficient for meeting objectives. Improved legislative capacity, coupled with collaborative management by partnerships between government, industry, landholders and the wider community, will be more effective in the long run. G4.1 G4.2 efficient
Continued investment in R&D, particularly in the development of technologies that can deliver positive benefit-cost ratios, is required. Strategy 1.3 actions Action 2018 outcome Responsibilities Linkages with other actions G1.3.1. Review future estimates of resources required for effective management of priority invasive species and species groups. WA Government is able to meet commitments in this Plan and in national agreements. BSOG, DAFWA, DPW, DoF G2.2.3 G2.4.1 G1.3.2. Determine and publicise evidence-based cost-sharing principles for use by agencies and communities in invasive species management. Cost-sharing principles developed which are used in management plans for priority invasive species and species groups. BSOG, DAFWA, DPW, DoF G1.3.1 G1.3.3. Encourage WA and Australian Government community-based programs to support investment in management of priority invasive species and species groups. Investment through WA and Australian Government community-based programs complement and support State and community invasive species management plans. State NRM Office, DAFWA, DPW, DoF, of Regional G1.1.3 G3.3.6 G1.3.4. Identify priorities and seek funding for R&D in invasive species management. R&D projects established that deliver increased effectiveness and efficiency in invasive species management. BSOG, DAFWA, DPW, DoF G1.3.1 Goal 2 – Prevention and eradication Goal 2. Effective border quarantine, surveillance and detection, and eradication actions prevent new high-impact invasive species becoming established in Western Australia. Outcome: The border protection, emergency response and eradication programs operating under this Plan engage all stakeholders in effective and timely action in
G2.2.1. Complete a assessment of the current level of active post-border surveillance. Active surveillance is set at an appropriate level on a regional basis to manage risks. DAFWA, DPW, DoF G2.1.1 G2.1.2 G2.2.2. Maintain consistent encouragement of community surveillance activity and capacity. Community surveillance activity complements and supports government activity. DAFWA, DPW, DoF, other agencies G3.1.1 G3.1.2 G2.2.3 Identify and support high risk creating industries and activities in mitigating risks. High risk creating industries implementing management plans to mitigate risks. BSOG, DPW, DoF, other agencies G1.3.1 G3.1.2 G3.2.3 G3.3.5 Strategy 2.3 – Emergency Response In the event that an invasive species does ‘slip through the net’ and enter the state, quick and decisive action is needed to remove it before it can establish. Emergency response capacity is needed, much in the same way that emergency teams are in place to respond quickly to address major accidents or natural disasters. General Emergency Response Plans (ER Plans) have been developed at national and state-level. At the national level, the Biosecurity Incident Management System has been developed to provide guidance on contemporary practices for the management of biosecurity incident response and initial recovery operations in Australia. At the state level, the State Emergency Management Plan for Animal and Plant Pests and Diseases (March 2008) addresses outbreaks or incursions in WA. Through this Plan, species-specific ER Plans will be developed for high risk invasive species of particular importance. The need for species-specific ER Plans ER Plans for specific invasive species detail the strategies, actions, resources and responsibilities that are required to prevent widespread establishment of potentially harmful species. ER Plans need to be maintained in a high state of readiness for immediate implementation once an incursion of a high priority invasive species occurs in WA. The criteria used to determine the invasive species for potential emergency response planning are that the invasive species:
Tree sparrow The tree sparrow occurs naturally in Eurasia but introduced populations have established in America and Australia, in Victoria, New South Wales (Riverina region) and the Australian Capital Territory. Tree sparrows often arrive in Western Australia on ships from south-east Asia. Birds are usually found near sea ports. Same impact as house sparrows. Common or Indian myna Medium-sized bird native to the Middle East, India and Asia. It is not native to Australia but has established populations in eastern and south-eastern Australia, as well as other countries worldwide. The species is listed by the IUCN (World Conservation Union) as one of 100 of the world’s worst invasive alien species. It is a pest of agriculture causing damage to orchard fruits such as fig, apple, pear, strawberry, guava, mango and grape. It also damages standing cereal crops including maize, wheat and rice. It is considered an environmental pest and is reported to eat eggs and young birds and mammals including endangered species. The myna aggressively competes for nest hollows and food, adversely affecting the breeding success of other birds and hollow-nesting mammals. It has the potential to transmit diseases to humans and can carry blood-borne parasites plasmodium that causes malaria, as well as other parasites such as mites, roundworm and threadworm. Mites from nests built in urban dwellings can invade homes and cause dermatitis and allergies in susceptible people.
Large feral herbivores (DAFWA) Feral camels Feral donkeys Feral horses Feral goats Feral camels are widespread in UCL and UMR east of the pastoral leasehold areas, with spread into adjacent pastoral leases. Feral horses and donkeys are mainly found in the Kimberley and Pilbara. Feral goats are mainly found in the Gascoyne and Murchison areas. Competition with domestic livestock for feed resources. Damage to infrastructure. Destruction of seasonal wetland habitats in UCL, UMR and conservation reserves. Introduced predators (DAFWA and DPW) Foxes Wild dogs Feral cats Feral pigs are widespread south of the Pilbara. Wild dogs are widespread in pastoral and on the margins of agricultural areas. cats are widespread across the state. pigs are widespread in the Kimberley, Gascoyne and south-west Western Australia. Livestock losses due to wild dog predation. Native fauna losses due to feral cat and fox predation. Native fauna losses and habitat destruction due to feral pig predation and foraging. Exotic freshwater fish (DoF, SRT) Koi carp Gambusia Goldfish Swan-Canning Riverpark and other freshwater bodies in the south west. Competition with native species for resources. Destruction of native habitat. Disease and parasite transmission. Aquatic weeds (Department of Water) Salvinia Water hyacinth Occasional outbreaks in wetlands, and in the south west of the state. Destruction of natural habitat. Fouling of open waters. Eutrophication. Opuntioid cacti (DAFWA) (see commentary in Box 8) Cacti and prickly pear Becoming common around old town sites and homesteads in the rangelands. Modification of natural habitat. Competition with forage species by domestic livestock. Loss of amenity.
selected higher priority species and species groups. implemented by responsible parties. management response plan. G3.2.2. Establish formal partnership arrangements between Departments and other parties with responsibilities in the management of priority widespread and established invasive species and species groups. Government, industry and community organisations and landholders fully aware of their roles and responsibilities, which are documented in response plans. As identified in each management response plan. G3.2.1 G5.1.1 G5.1.2 G3.2.3. Develop and publicise control practices for the higher priority invasive species and species groups (as shown in Table 6). Effective and efficient practices delivering improved control of priority widespread and established invasive species. As identified in each management response plan. G3.3.2 G3.3.3 G3.4.2 Strategy 3.3 – Processes, organisations and resources in controlling invasive species Landholders have the primary responsibility in controlling the impact of widespread and established species on land they own or manage, especially those categorised in the C3 – Management category under the BAM Act. It is not always possible or efficient for landholders to act individually and use only their own resources to control many of these species. A range of processes, organisational structures and resources are available or are being developed that can complement the essential efforts of individual landholders. Encouraging a community coordinated approach The preferred approach for managing widespread and established invasive species is through a community coordinated approach. Where invasive species occur widely across property and jurisdictional boundaries, effective control is difficult and costly for individual landholders to achieve in isolation. Under these circumstances, a community-led, cross-tenure, landscape-scale approach is required. This involves proactive leadership by the community to control invasive species, with engagement and cooperation between government, industry and the community that adds value to landholder efforts and responsibilities. Establishing biosecurity groups A community coordinated action approach can involve formation of a biosecurity group that is responsible for controlling invasive species on public and private land within the group’s defined area, for example, a local government authority (LGA) or
Strategy 5.1 actions Action 2018 outcome Responsibilities Linkages with other actions G5.1.1. Formalise arrangements and standards in data and information management required for invasive species management. MOUs and standards established for the acquisition, storage, retrieval and interpretation of relevant invasive species management data and information. BSOG, WALIS, DAFWA, DPW and other agencies G2.1.1 G2.1.2 G3.1.1 G3.1.2 G3.2.2 G5.1.2. Facilitate data coordination between agencies and for whole-of-state reporting. Relevant parties have access to valid and reliable relevant data and information required to support the design and implementation of invasive species management programs. BSOG, WALIS, DAFWA, DPW and DoF and other agencies G2.1.1 G2.1.2 G3.1.1 G3.1.2 G3.2.2 G5.1.3. Improve accessibility of publicly available information (e.g. Apps) on invasive species to support community coordinated action in surveillance and management activities. Increased use of accessible information resulting in increased levels of, and more effective community coordinated action. BSOG, WALIS, DAFWA, DPW and DoF, and other agencies G2.2.2 G2.2.3 G3.3.2 G3.3.3 Strategy 5.2 – Monitoring and evaluation Measuring the impacts of invasive species management is essential for several reasons. For example, the findings from monitoring and evaluation enable: trends in impacts achieved and resources committed to be measured, informing evaluation of the effectiveness and efficiency of the activities undertaken resources to be reallocated where the impacts from existing effort are unsatisfactory funders of invasive species management to have confidence in the effectiveness and efficiency of the activities undertaken areas for improvement in invasive species management to be identified.