© Commonwealth of Australia 2003
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 Commonwealth available from the Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Intellectual Property Branch, Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, GPO Box 2154, Canberra ACT 2601 or at

The Commonwealth of Australia acting through the Bureau of Rural Sciences has exercised due care and skill in the preparation and compilation of the information and data set out in this publication. Notwithstanding, the Bureau of Rural Sciences, its employees and advisers disclaim all liability, including liability for negligence, for any loss, damage, injury, expense or cost incurred by any person as a result of accessing, using or relying upon any of the information or data set out in this publication to the maximum extent permitted by law.

Copies available from:

Richard Thackway

Bureau of Rural Sciences

GPO Box 858

Canberra, ACT 2601

Telephone: 02 6272 4856
Email:

Internet:

Preferred way to cite this publication:

Thackway, R., Yapp, G., Cunningham, D., McNaught, I., (2003) Towards a national set of core attributes for mapping Weeds of National Significance (WONS). Discussion paper, September 2003. Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra.

Executive summary

Consistent and reliable information is essential to demonstrate performance and investment returns by all stakeholders involved in managing weed infestations.
A national weeds workshop was held on 22 July 2003 to discuss a consistent national attribute framework for mapping the 20 Weeds of National Significance (WONS).
The workshop agreed on at least 11 core attributes for mapping WONS (and other weeds) …
… and on the need for a user’s manual (or ‘toolbox’) for collectors of new WONS data.
This document is a draft discussion paper for national distribution ahead of proposed State and Territory-based workshops to begin to implement the agreed core attributes. / Consistent and reliable information is essential to demonstrate performance and investment returns by all engaged in treating weed infestations, to show real achievements in the prevention of incursions, and to counter the impression that weeds are a ‘black hole into which money is being poured’. This requires data collections that yield information on the effect of weed programs – e.g. the rate of change and causes of change in extent of weeds.
This was the challenge faced by a national workshop held on 22 July 2003 of Weed Coordinators and other State, Territory and Commonwealth experts. The Workshop’s primary objective was to consider and, if possible, to agree on a consistent attribute framework for mapping the 20 Weeds of National Significance (WONS).
A range of stakeholders and investors have an interest in information on the location and area of WONS infestations over time and under different land management strategies.
The workshop agreed that at least the following core attributes should be developed as the ‘national set of core attributes for WONS’ and that this list should be used for collecting, translating and compiling WONS datasets:
  1. Data record (Unique identifier)
  2. Name of weed
  3. Latitude
  4. Longitude
  5. Precision of latitude and longitude
  6. Day/Month/Year
  7. Source of data
  8. Area
  9. Density
  10. Treatment (types of control)
  11. Comments
It was further agreed that these core attributes can and should be applied to other weed species other than WONS. To facilitate this, the workshop proposed that a toolbox — a user’s manual for collecting new WONS attribute data should be developed to promote the collection of these core attributes within new WONS datasets. It was agreed that additional work will be required to develop guidelines for consistently describing the attributes for “area” and “density”.
A consistent attribute framework initiative would add value to existing weed data collected by a wide range of parties and enable the development of an up-to-date integrated picture of the extent and occurrence of weeds. In addition to assessing progress on weed control and management, other potential applications of this information relate to vegetation condition, biodiversity assessments, and resource management generally.
This document is a discussion paper resulting from the workshop held on the 22 July 2003, which will be widely distributed through Weeds Coordinators and other relevant mechanisms in August 2003. State-based workshops are planned to commence in September/October 2003, to progress and finalise the discussion paper. These workshops will involve a wide range of stakeholders including government, non-government, regional and community groups and research organisations, to highlight the benefits of implementing the core attributes for WONS and to facilitate the identification and sharing of weed data collected to-date.

Abbreviations

Abbreviation / Definition
ABIS / Australian Biotaxonomic Information System
AgForce / A Queensland primary producer lobby group
AGWA / Department of Agriculture, Western Australia
ALUM / Australian Land Use and Management Classification
ANZLIC / Australian and New Zealand Land information Council
ARMCANZ / Agriculture & Resource Management Council of Australia & New Zealand, Australian & New Zealand Environment & Conservation Council and Forestry Ministers
AVH / Australian Virtual Herbarium
BBBS / Bitou bush and boneseed
BC / Bridal Creeper
CAMS / Catchment Activity Management System
CSIRO / Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
DLWC / Department of Land and Water Conservation (NSW)
DNR / Department of Natural Resources (Victoria)
DNRE / Department of Natural Resources and the Environment (Victoria)
DPIF / Department of Primary Industries and Forestry (Northern Territory)
EPA / Environment Protection Authority (NSW, Queensland)
GPS / Global Positioning System
HISPID / Herbarium Information Standards and Protocols for Interchange of Data
ICMC / Integrated Catchment Management Committee
LG / Local Government (from Pond Apple Strategic Plan)
MMG / Mesquite Management Group
NAP / National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality
NAQS / Northern Australian Quarantine Strategy
NAWWG / National Alligator Weed Working Group
NHT / Natural Heritage Trust
NLWRA / National Land and Water Resources Audit
NRM / Natural Resource Management
NSWAg / New South Wales Agriculture
NVIS / National Vegetation Information System
NWSEC / National Weed Strategy Executive Committee
PondMG / Pond Apple Management Group
PWCNT / Parks and Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory
QDNR / Queensland Department of Natural Resources
ROTAP / Rare Or Threatened Australian Plants
RVMG / Rubber Vine (weed) Management Group
SPRAT / Species Profiles for Rare and Threatened
SSC / state strategy coordinator (from Gorse Strategic Plan)
WONS / Weeds of National Significance
WTMA / Wet Tropics Management Authority

Contents

Executive summary

Abbreviations

Contents

Introduction

The national interest in weeds information

Background to weed mapping

Rationale for an enhanced approach to WONS data

Proposed core and optional attributes for mapping and reporting

Rationale for a core set of WONS attributes

A national WONS workshop to consider core attributes and future directions

Workshop comments on the agreed core WONS attributes

Core attribute 1. Data record (unique identifier)

Core attribute 2. Name of weed

Core attributes 3 and 4. Latitude and longitude

Core attribute 5. Precision of latitude and longitude

Core attribute 6. Day/month/year

Core attribute 7. Source of data

Core attribute 8. Area

Core attribute 9. Cover and/or density within area

Core attribute 10. Treatment (types of control)

Core attribute 11. Comments

Workshop comments on non-core or optional attributes

Other issues

Human and technical resources

Local and regional implementation

Compatibility with other approaches and programs

Data management

Conclusions and the way forward

State-based workshops to progress the development of core attributes

Development of a WONS users manual

Developing distributed and linked systems of WONS/weeds databases

Acknowledgements

References

Appendix A. Strategies, actions and responsibilities relevant to data collection and mapping

Appendix B. Draft specifications for core and optional attributes

Appendix C. Participants at the National WONS Workshop, Canberra, 22 July 2003.

1

Introduction

The national interest in weeds information

The inaugural list of 20 Weeds of National Significance (WONS) was endorsed in 1999 by the Agricultural and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand (ARMCANZ), the Australia and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) and Forestry Ministers. WONS status brings a weed species under national management for the purpose of restricting its spread and/or eradicating it from parts of Australia.

The Australian Government has particular quarantine–related responsibilities to prevent or control the introduction of plants that are potential agricultural or environmental weeds. Its responsibility for control of established weeds however is more limited, although the Australian Government continues to make a significant contribution to the total effort through programs such as the Natural Heritage Trust. Currently, the Australian Government involvement is strongly directed towards encouragingaction at a more strategic level, through better informed policy and better directed programs, and through investments that increase self-sufficiency and develop local and regional capacity (Morton et al. 2002[1]). The aim is to improve the cost effectiveness and efficiency of programs with a component of Australian Government funding.

National engagement to reach agreement on a national core set of data attributes for mapping Weeds of National Significance (WONS) relates to perceived needs for action to:

  • foster agreement on attributes as a prerequisite to improving knowledge of the current and potential distribution of WONS
  • give national leadership through coordination to improve the sharing of the existing information and expertise held by a range of sources
  • increase usage of existing weeds information e.g. by making linkages with other natural resource management issues
  • assist integration with other relevant natural resource information themes, especially vegetation.

Consistent and reliable information is essential to demonstrate performance and investment returns by all engaged in treating weed infestations, to show real achievements in the prevention of incursions, and to counter the impression that weeds are a ‘black hole into which money is being poured’. This requires data collections that yield information on the effect of weed programs – e.g. the rate of change and causes of change in extent of weeds.

This was the challenge faced by Weed Coordinators and other State, Territory and Commonwealth experts (refer Appendix C) at a national workshop held on 22 July 2003. The workshop’s primary objective was to consider and, if possible, to agree on a consistent framework for mapping WONS. This framework initiative would add value to existing weed data collected by a wide range of parties and enable the development of an up-to-date integrated picture of the extent and occurrence of weeds. In addition to assessing progress on weed control and management, other potential applications of such information relate to vegetation condition, biodiversity assessments and resource management generally.

This document is a discussion paper resulting from the workshop held on 22 July 2003, which will be widely distributed through Weeds Coordinators and other relevant mechanisms in September 2003. State-based workshops are planned to commence in September/October 2003, to progress and finalise the discussion paper. These workshops will involve a wide range of stakeholders including government, non-government, regional and community groups and research organisations, to highlight the benefits of implementing the core attributes for WONS and to facilitate the identification and sharing of weed data collected to-date.

Background to weed mapping

Weeds of National Significance (WONS) have been identified as those weeds that currently pose the most serious threat to the productive capacity of Australian agriculture and its natural ecosystems (Thorp and Lynch, 2000). They can, therefore, have a major impact on the health, safety, amenity and economic well-being and quality of life of Australians.

WONS were identified using a risk assessment system. Assessors considered the invasiveness and impact characteristics of a large number of weeds according to; current and potential distribution; current socio-economic and environmental impact; and effects on primary industries. Seventy-one weeds were nominated and from these, 20 weeds were accorded the status of Weeds of National Significance (Table 1).

The report on the assessment procedure and its results (Thorp and Lynch, 2000) includes maps of the current and potential distribution of the 71 nominated weeds. Data used for preparing these maps were based on observed and modelled distribution and density for each weed at scales ranging from 0.125 degree cells for the Australian Capital Territory and Tasmania, to 0.25 degree cells for Victoria and 0.5 degree cells for the remainder of Australia (although density information was not available for Western Australia).

Table 1. Weeds Of National Significance (WONS)

Common Name / Scientific Name / Reference to WONS strategy
Alligator weed / Alternanthera philoxeroides / ARMCANZ (2000a)
Athel pine / Tamarix aphylla / ARMCANZ (2000b)
Bitou bush / Boneseed / Chrysanthemoides monilifera / ARMCANZ (2000c)
Blackberry / Rubus fruticosus agg. / ARMCANZ (2000d)
Bridal creeper / Asparagus asparagoides / ARMCANZ (2000e)
Cabomba / Cabomba caroliniana / ARMCANZ (2000f)
Chilean needle grass / Nassella neesiana / ARMCANZ (2000g)
Gorse / Ulex europaeus / ARMCANZ (2000h)
Hymenachne / Hymenachne amplexicaulis / ARMCANZ (2000i)
Lantana / Lantana camara / ARMCANZ (2000j)
Mesquite / Prosopis spp. / ARMCANZ (2000k)
Mimosa / Mimosa pigra / ARMCANZ (2000l)
Parkinsonia / Parkinsonia aculeata / ARMCANZ (2000m)
Parthenium weed / Parthenium hysterophorus / ARMCANZ (2000n)
Pond apple / Annona glabra / ARMCANZ (2000o)
Prickly acacia / Acacia nilotica ssp. indica / ARMCANZ (2000p)
Rubber vine / Cryptostegia grandiflora / ARMCANZ (2000q)
Salvinia / Salvinia molesta / ARMCANZ (2000r)
Serrated tussock / Nassella trichotoma / ARMCANZ (2000s)
Willows except weeping willows, pussy willow and sterile pussy willow / Salix spp. except S. babylonica, S. X calodendron and S. X reichardtiji / ARMCANZ (2000t)

Compilation of the datasets required for assessment and mapping was a very large undertaking. Since the WONS report was published National Strategies for each of the 20 WONS have been published (Table 1). Information presented in Thorp and Lynch (2000) provides a valuable, though somewhat coarse baseline, against which the performance of the National Strategies for each of the 20 WONS can be assessed. However, the legacy of the earlier WONS project means that the data custodians have little ownership in maintaining or updating the Thorp and Lynch (2000) report or the underlying centralised national WONS dataset. There is an emerging need to ensure ongoing maintenance and updating of a current and authoritative WONS dataset/s. These can exist at different spatial scales. An alternative model for engaging data custodians in translating and compiling and making these datasets available is urgently needed.

Rationale for an enhanced approach to WONS data

While the existence of the 20 WONS strategies represents an outstanding achievement of cooperation, the implementation of the strategies needs to yield evidence of successful implementation. Inefficiencies in the current procedures for monitoring and reporting mean that to-date this evidence is not forthcoming. This evidence will be critical to those making persuasive and compelling cases for support for weed management activities from the Natural Heritage Trust, through the regional NRM organisations - which will have a range of competing priorities to consider.

One key question that follows from this is – what is the minimum information requirement for compilation of reports that will provide measures of what has been achieved, not just in terms of treatment of weeds infestations but, more importantly, in terms of where has there been effective prevention of new infestations?

The individual National Strategies for WONS recognise the need for strategic actions to collect data and produce informative maps. Key strategies include:

  • surveying and mapping all occurrences affecting key assets
  • prioritising ‘core’ infestations
  • filling in gaps in knowledge of dynamics by documenting and mapping density and modelling potential spread
  • carrying out surveillance and establishing and implementing a code for evaluation of change as a result of treatments
  • compiling information to guide the implementation of the best management practices
  • approving and applying a methodology for mapping
  • engaging local communities in monitoring
  • building databases needed for compiling national assessments of distribution and impacts.

For a summary of relevant National Strategies, and their proposed actions and responsibilities see Appendix A.

Nearly all the National Strategies include the collection and mapping of data on the change in distribution and density of the weeds. There is also an expectation that responsibility will be widely shared from local and community level up to State and Territory agencies and some national bodies. As noted earlier the Australian Government continues to make a significant contribution to the control of WONS through regionally delivered programs such as the Natural Heritage Trust (NHT) and the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality (NAP). Effectively implemented, these actions could provide the data needed for reporting against relevant performance criteria identified in the National Strategy documents (see below under the discussion of ‘issues relevant to local and regional implementation’ and compare the general indicators for performance in Table 4 on page 14). Despite considerable investment in the areas of weed survey and mapping and in monitoring the control and/or eradication at national, state, regional and local levels, key decision makers are unable to access up-to-date and accurate information for the following two key questions:

  1. What WONS (type and extent) are found where - before any management has occurred?
  2. What WONS (type and extent) are found where - after a management action/s has occurred – i.e. monitoring effectiveness of management /eradication?

Before information can be compiled to answer these two questions and thus begin to drive regional investment strategies for NAP and NHT regions it is necessary to understand the types of WONS data and information that are already being collected at international, national, state, regional and local levels. A review and analysis of Australian and overseas weed datasets and weed mapping programs, was conducted to ascertain what attributes are currently being collected. The output from this step was then the basis of a Draft Issues Paper which proposed a core set of WONS attributes that represented a ‘best match’ between what was already commonly collected and available, and what was needed to drive regional investment strategies for NAP and NHT regions. The Draft Issues Paper was distributed to key stakeholders, prior to the WONS Canberra workshop in July. In addition, that list of core attributes for WONS was cross-matched to two species-based iInternet mapping systems, the Australian Virtual Herbarium (CHAH 2003) and the Species Profiles for Rare and Threatened Database (anon. n.d.; Chapman et al. 2002)to ascertain what core attributes were in those systems for accessing and sharing specimen-backed and biological survey records.