Review of Acacia georginae Research and Management Options

Summary

The literature review showed that there is not one specific management practice that is ideal for reducing the effect of fluoroacetate poisoning. Existing ideas that have not been presented as part of this study are costly or not properly resolved. The issue of injecting the genetically modified rumen bacteria into cattle to detoxify the gidyea is the technically ideal method, but operationally flawed as it could affect the marketability of products produced in this region. The GMO debate is already a focal point for many agricultural industries, so this solution could reduce consumer confidence and erode market share in today's fiercely competitive environment. Approximately 70 percent of meat produced in Australia is exported overseas.

Although reports have indicated that Australians are not particularly sensitive to the use of GMOs, many foreign markets are, which means that this strategy is very risky. This report also indicated that using fire could be a useful means of eradicating the poison gidyea. The strategic management of fire in this low rainfall environment is critical to prevent land degradation and ongoing negative biodiversity effects. Whether a controlled burn would be able to successfully target populations of poison gidyea without negatively affecting advantageous plant species needs to be considered. The use of new imaging technology would be sufficient for identifying the different populations of trees. Large paddocks containing more than 70 percent Acacia georginae are extremely difficult to manage.

One possibility is to leave mobs of cattle in these areas and repeatedly test them to establish whether a percentage of them become genetically resistant to the toxicity of Acacia georginae. The animal welfare issues surrounding running cattle in highly toxic gidyea paddocks and survivors being bred to be stock in this country would clash with the welfare standards expected of Australian beef producers. Large stands of gidyea are a major problem for producers and the only possibility of utilising this land is to clear/burn or use a genetically tolerant animal for grazing. Areas with a lower percentage affected by poison gidyea can be utilised with the development of an infrastructure like time control grazing that can segregate the animals from the most toxic parts of the property. This segregation has high initial development costs and additional needs to develop watering points. Watering points can be controlled to force cattle to move away from areas of concern during the dry season.

To best assess this scenario would require detailed imagery to separate the areas with the largest concentrations of poisoned gidyea. After the amount of usable land has been identified, the cost benefit analysis would need to be done to evaluate how feasible that is to construct something of this scale. If supplements could be used during the dry season in conjunction with the NIRS system the number of fatalities could be reduced. A combination of all these management strategies may be the most cost effective in reducing fatalities and increasing land usage and productivity. A major focus of current research needs to be on communication with researchers overseas to assess whether techniques or practices used by other countries could be applied to Australian research and development.