Report Title - Weeds Australia

increase mustering costs, impede stock access to water, increase water loss from bore drainsand cause vehicle tyre damage.In areas with a prickly acacia canopy cover of 25–30%, pasture loss is estimated to be 50%.Pasture growth is virtually eliminated by a 50% canopy cover (J Carter, DPI, 1997, pers.comm., Mackey). In 2009, landholders spent approximately $6 million to control pricklyacacia in four of the five shires affected by core infestations (March 2010).With the potential to convert open grasslands to thorn veldt, the environmental impacts ofprickly acacia are equally significant. Prickly acacia causes a structural change to nativegrassland ecosystems characterised by loss of grass cover, increased bare ground anddevelopment of an intermittent tree canopy. These structural changes can favour somespecies over others (e.g. increased availability of perch sites may favour butcher birds to thedetriment of their prey) but few studies have examined whether prickly acacia causes adecline in biodiversity. Ecosystem changes threaten rare and vulnerable animals includingthe Julia Creek Dunnart (Sminthopsis douglasi), a form of the long-tailed planigale (Planigaleingrami) and two skink species.The Mitchell Grass Downs are one of the world’s unique grass landscapes. With the value ofthe outback tourism industry increasing markedly, there are concerns that infestations ofprickly acacia may reduce the natural values and attraction of the outback and the uniquedowns landscape.2.4 Control historyPrickly acacia was declared as a noxious plant in Queensland in 1957, but debate regardingthe benefits versus costs of prickly acacia continued until the early 1990s. As a result ofvarying community attitudes and a lack of management tools, control was generally ad hoc.Some landholders undertook modest control activities and others invested significantresources in attempts to eradicate it from their properties. Many control efforts initiallyfocused on minimising property management impacts (e.g. mustering, stock access to waterpoints).It was only in the mid-1990s that major coordinated control programs began through theformer Queensland-based Strategic Weed Eradication and Education Program. Between1998 and 2010, regional natural resource management (NRM) groups, in combination withstate and territory lead agencies, capitalised on various Australian, state and territoryfunding initiatives. All initiatives have been strongly supported at property, local governmentand regional levels.Within the past 10 years, a concerted effort has been made to eradicate prickly acacia fromWestern Australia, the Northern Territory and South Australia. While new occurrences haveoccasionally been found, a systematic approach has progressively reduced the number andarea of infestations in most jurisdictions. Eradication will require ongoing monitoring andfollow-up for an extended period.In Queensland, various strategic control projects have continued outside a core area of theMitchell Grass Downs, while within the core area control activities are focused on reducingthe impacts of prickly acacia on primary productivity. Control activity levels in the coreinfestation areas are now very high and all landholders recognise the detrimental impacts ofthis weed.5