Ref: MG/AR/GG20240129
29 January 2024
Committee Secretary
Senate Standing Committees on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport
By Email: rrat.sen@aph.gov.au
Dear Sir/Madam
Re: Red Imported Fire Ants in Australia
AgForce Queensland Farmers Limited (AgForce) thanks the Committee for the opportunity to contribute to the inquiry into Red Imported Fire Ants (RIFA) in Australia. AgForce is strongly committed to combatting the spread of RIFA in Queensland and highly supportive of inter-jurisdictional
efforts towards eradicating this pestilence from our shores.
About AgForce
AgForce is a peak organisation representing Queensland’s cane, cattle, grain and sheep, wool & goat producers. The cane, beef, broadacre cropping and sheep, wool & goat industries in Queensland generated around $10.4 billion in on-farm value of production in 2021-22. AgForce’s purpose is to advance sustainable agribusiness and strives to ensure the long-term growth, viability, competitiveness and profitability of these industries. Over 6,500 farmers, individuals and businesses provide support to AgForce through membership. Our members own and manage around 55 million hectares, or a third of the state’s land area. Queensland producers provide high-quality food and fibre to Australian and overseas consumers, contribute significantly to the social fabric of regional, rural and remote communities, as well as deliver stewardship of the state’s natural environment.
Championed by southeast Queensland based members of our Biosecurity Committee, AgForce has a lengthy history of engaging with the National Fire Ant Eradication Program (NFAEP). We are members of the Fire Ant Suppression Taskforce (FAST), including through the Lockyer Valley Community Partnership Group. In addition, AgForce collaborates closely with the Invasive Species Council as part of the Fire Ant Coalition (an alliance of environment, agriculture, industry and land management groups). Our efforts have contributed towards development of the (draft) Self-Management Operations Manual produced by Queensland’s Department of Agriculture & Fisheries (DAF); media and lobbying to raise the profile of the pest; and targeting of awareness and educational campaigns with a particular emphasis on agricultural landholders.
Key Points
In this submission, AgForce seeks to convey to the Committee:
A. Available evidence on the potential costs and impacts of widespread RIFA in Australia points to one conclusion: our nation cannot afford NOT to eradicate RIFA. Failure to
eradicate RIFA will have devastating and long-term impacts on the wellbeing of our nation, with the notable inclusion of agricultural production, the safety of farming families and natural capital conserved on farmland.
B. Assessment of fire ant response plans for achieving eradication:
- Greater emphasis is needed on stakeholder engagement to integrate diverse knowledge and perspectives and to manage potential conflicts of interest.
- The program should invest in broad-based R&D partnerships (citizen science, industry, academic and government) to bring together the necessary diverse expertise for developing new solutions.
- The NFAEP website does NOT provide sufficient information on available registered treatments. The public need to be reassured about use of RIFA products and farmers must be given sufficient and appropriate products to enable treatment of their large properties.
C. Delays while awaiting funding from federal, state and territory governments sets back the eradication program. This super-pest does not recognise bureaucratic timeframes.
D. The program has been successful in eradicating the ants from Freemantle, Sydney and Gladstone. The largest infestation in southeast Queensland has proved more difficult to eradicate (see matters identified under B, C and F).
E. The varroa mite situation may have been avoided if adequate resourcing was available for checking containerised imports at the Port of Newcastle. A national container levy on imports arriving via sea has been abandoned that would have raised $325 million for increased biosecurity over three years (Source: ABC Rural, 2020).
F. Other related matters. AgForce recommends the following actions to the Committee:
- Pre-purchase pest inspections of properties in southeast Queensland should target fire ants.
- Closer collaboration between Queensland Police, Local Councils and Biosecurity Queensland to control and contain the spread of RIFA.
Each of these key points is expanded upon below, based on the items listed on the inquiry web site.
A. THE EXPECTED COSTS AND IMPACTS OF WIDESPREAD RIFA
“Red Imported Fire Ant is not just another invasive, it is a ‘super pest’ whose impacts, if unchecked, will surpass the combined effects of many of the pests we currently regard as Australia’s worst invasive animals (rabbits, foxes, feral pigs, camels, wild dogs, feral cats, cane toads).”McLeod, 2004.
Weeds and pests are already costing Australian farmers $5.3 billion a year through management and production loss (ABARES 2023). The additional costs due to RIFA would represent a serious blow to Australia’s capacity for agricultural production.
According to the Invasive Species Council, more than 99% of the mainland and 80% of Tasmania are suitable for fire ants.
Due to the efforts of the NFAEP, Australia has so far remained largely protected from RIFA. Published impact estimates for widespread RIFA in Australia are based largely on the United States. Given the uniqueness of our continent, there are inherent difficulties in accurately ascertaining the true impact of widespread RIFA in Australia.
One study has estimated the likely impact of RIFA in Australia, if not eradicated, at between A$8.5 and A $45 billion (Wylie and Janssen‐May 2017). The same study highlights these agricultural risks posed by RIFA:
- Damage to over 50 species of crops
- Predation of biological control agents and lower populations of beneficial insects including honeybees
- Loss of organic certification status due to use of chemical control products
- Costs due to RIFA control, and repairs to damaged machinery and infrastructure
- Animal injury and death from stings. Penned or newborn animals are at greatest risk
- Malnutrition and dehydration when animals cannot access food or water without being seriously stung
- Increased production costs potentially leading to higher purchase price of agricultural products
- Damage to telecommunications and electrical equipment
- Medical treatment (and tragically high risk of death) for farming families and agricultural workers.
Further to the final point, it is worth noting that the agricultural sector is already experiencing difficulties in recruiting agricultural workers and RIFA is likely to escalate these difficulties. AgForce is also concerned over the likely impact on markets for Australian agricultural commodities resulting from export limitations to RIFA free countries or countries that limit agricultural produce treated for RIFA.
In addition, AgForce urges the Committee to consider the potential of RIFA to undermine conservation of natural capital in farming landscapes. Lach and Barker (2013) assessed the risks to native fauna in the southeast Queensland bioregion and concluded that among vertebrates assessed, RIFA is likely to cause population declines in 45% of birds, 38% of mammals, 69% of reptiles and 95% of amphibians. Mammal young that shelter in a den are unable to protect themselves during the early part of their development. Iconic Australian species that could be impacted in this way include platypus and echidna.
B. ASSESSMENT OF FIRE ANT RESPONSE PLANS FOR ACHIEVING ERADICATION
B1. Early and Active Stakeholder Participation
AgForce has long held the view that the fire ant program in southeast Queensland was too slow to realise the importance of widespread and well-resourced stakeholder engagement. Stakeholder engagement is widely advocated to integrate diverse knowledge and perspectives in the management of invasive species and to deal with potential conflicts of interest (Shackleton et al., 2019). The southeast region of Queensland is undergoing rapid population increase and subsequent development, with a high density of urban and per-urban householders, diverse businesses and large land areas under both private and public management (schools, sporting clubs, recreational areas, vacant council-owned blocks, farmland etc). In this complex environment, stakeholder engagement is especially crucial.
A related issue is that, given the rapid rate of urban development in southeast Queensland, more effort including enforcement was needed during the early stages of the eradication program to contain the spread of RIFA via soil, building materials, machinery etc. This needs to remain a focus for the program.
B2. Need for Broad-Based and Diverse R&D Partnerships
As noted in the National Biosecurity Strategy (DAFF 2022), capacity for detection, identification, traceability and response to biosecurity threats is increased by coordination and engagement with biosecurity stakeholders, the use of citizen science and greater private sector investment in the development and delivery of innovations that provide for better biosecurity outcomes.
The Program’s 2020-23 Strategy recommended investigating new technologies, necessitating that the Program should partner with industry, academic and government to ensure the necessary expertise (NRIFAEP 2021). Among the potential solutions was environmental DNA (eDNA) for detection of RIFA, which would increase
surveillance and testing capacity for RIFA by orders of magnitude. At this stage, AgForce is not aware of any attempts by the program to invest in such broad-based R&D approaches.
Similarly, AgForce has urged that the NFAEP utilises citizen science. Worldwide, decision-makers are increasing their use of citizen science to improve conservation, natural resource management, and environmental protection in residential environments (Cooper et al, 2007; McKinley et al, 2017). To our knowledge, the NFAEP has made little effort to actively explore citizen science for RIFA.
B3. Insecticide Control of Fire Ants
Our membership has expressed frustration that the NFAEP website does NOT provide sufficient information on all available registered products for RIFA treatment. We refer the Committee to the links below:
https://www.fireants.org.au/treat/residential-landowner-or-tenant/treatment-types/fire-ant-bait
There is an overly narrow focus on two types of ant baits and the website incorrectly implies that only licensed pest managers can use Fipronil – we refer the Committee to this Fipronil Label which indicates that anyone can use it for spot application in domestic situations for nesting ants – including RIFA. This messaging leads
to delays in effective treatment: fire ant baits take one to four months to control a nest, while Fipronil can take up to one week.
It is also relevant to add that the preferred method of treatment used by the NFAEP for broadcast control of RIFA is an insect growth regulator (IGR). The effectiveness of IGRs can be affected by rainfall, as heavy rain can wash away the pesticide. The NFAEP treatment schedule occurs over summer when RIFA are more actively foraging.This raises serious concerns, as southeast Queensland has a summer-dominant rainfall pattern, with frequent storms and heavy rainfall especially along the coastal areas where RIFA infestations are at high density.
Given that land managers in the suppression zone are being specifically directed to undertake their own control activities, the NFAEP needs to be transparent and comprehensive with the range of control options – to reduce risks over supply limitations (i.e, for the few bait products listed on the NFAEP website), provide better choice of product and crucially, enable speed of effective treatment.
We note this consideration is comprehensively dealt with in Submission No 7 on page 6 and Appendix 2, where the author outlines that there are 43 insecticide products containing seven active constituents registered for fire ant control in Australia, plus an additional four active constituents registered for use through APVMA Minor Use permits. In comparison, the NFAEP website lists only 10 ant bait products containing three active constituents, plus the use of Fipronil for nest injection by licensed pest managers (refer to the above comments on Fipronil).
Public reassurance about product safety
AgForce is concerned about the urgent need to reassure the community about insecticides used for RIFA abatement. Social media is rife with misinformation about negative health, safety or environmental harm caused by treatment of RIFA. We strongly contend that the (minimal) risk of harm to non-target organisms from correctly applied
registered insecticides for RIFA control is dwarfed by the devastation that uncontrolled RIFA will cause to all facets of life in Australia.
Provision of free RIFA control products to large landholders
Currently, free bait is only supplied in sufficient quantities to treat small residential properties. For farmers in suppression zones, plans should prioritise free supply of adequate chemical products for RIFA control. While biosecurity is highly prioritised by farmers, they face a suite of challenges unknown to landholders in urban environments. They have an increased risk of invasion (and re-infestation) by RIFA – due to their large and complex landscapes that are often intersected by watercourses and corridors for roads and utilities. Additionally, most farms are family businesses with limited human or other resources and multiple competing tasks, particularly when dealing with production challenges (eg, drought, flood, fires, low product prices and rising costs of inputs). Primary producers are well trained to undertake chemical applications and if given access to sufficient product are likely to deal competently with fire ant infestations. While appreciating the cost of this proposal to the NFAEP, with careful prioritisation and targeting of areas based on exposure risk and producer willingness, this step also represents efficiencies in dealing with RIFA over large land areas.
C. EVALUATION OF FUNDING
Patchy, inconsistent and unreliable funding has been an ongoing issue for the NFEAP since RIFA was first detected in Brisbane in 2001. Secure and uninterrupted funding for RIFA eradication is essential.
Waiting for funding to eventuate from the various federal, state and territory governments impedes on ground surveillance and control activities, as well as vital awareness and engagement activities. Continuing this non-sensical approach to RIFA funding could undermine the vast effort and resources spent to date.
D. THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ERADICATION EFFORTS AND THE SPREAD OF FIRE ANTS
Fire ant outbreaks in Gladstone, Fremantle and Sydney have been eradicated. Only southeast Queensland remains. Without the efforts of the NFAEP the pest would have achieved far greater distribution based on international experience. According to the Invasive Species Council, fire ants have an average spread of about 50-80
kilometres per year in China and the US. So far in Australia, fire ants have a much lower average annual spread of 5 kilometres per year. From the National Biosecurity Strategy, without the NFAEP, fire ants would have spread as far north as Bowen, west to Longreach and south to Canberra by 2022.
For a comprehensive analysis of the situation in southeast Queensland (SEQ), we draw the attention of the Committee to the Strategic Review, which states:
“Before the Ten-Year Plan even began, RIFA eradication from SEQ was compromised. The inadequacy of funding and subsequent loss of momentum in implementing previous review recommendations between 2015 and 2018 set RIFA eradication back some years. With a fixed budget and RIFA spread beyond what the Ten-Year Plan had been based on, the Steering Committee and NRIFAEP management have been continually forced to make budget-driven decisions that prioritised efficiency over effectiveness.”
AgForce urges the Committee to strongly advocate for secure, sufficient and uninterrupted funding for RIFA eradication so that the program can ultimately succeed.
E. LEARNINGS FROM VARROA MITE IN MANAGING RED IMPORTED FIRE ANTS
The varroa mite situation may have been avoided through adequate resourcing for checking containerised imports at the Port of Newcastle – the first known point of detection for varroa. Likewise, RIFA are thought to have entered Australia in shipping containers (NFAEP). Imported cargo poses a risk as pests can 'hitchhike' undetected. In 2018, the Coalition Government announced a plan that would raise hundreds of millions of dollars to protect Australian farmers from pests and diseases by imposing charges on containerised and bulk imports arriving via sea. Instead, the Labour Government is rushing to impose the widely criticised and grossly unfair Biosecurity Protection Levy on Australian farmers who already shoulder billions in biosecurity management and related production losses (NFF 2023; ABARES 2023).
F. OTHER RELATED MATTERS
F1. Fire Ants as part of pre-Purchase Pest Inspections and Development Approvals
At present, routine pre-purchase building inspections for properties do not generally include RIFA, concentrating instead on insects that undermine structural integrity (wood boring insects etc). Under Queensland’s Biosecurity Act 2014, everyone, including individuals and organizations, has a general biosecurity obligation (GBO) to take all reasonable steps to prevent the spread of fire ants. This means that Queenslanders are legally required to report suspected sightings of fire ants within 24 hours of their discovery and take action to treat the pest depending on the nest's location. Pest inspectors (especially in southeastern Queensland) can play an important role in enabling landholders to meet their responsibility for RIFA as part of their GBO. Additionally, businesses providing pest inspection services are generally also licenced pest controllers and would be valuable partners in eradicating RIFA.
AgForce recommends all levels of government facilitate training workshops to expand private pest inspectors’ offerings in RIFA inspection and treatment services. Commercial pest controllers play a significant role in educating the urban population.
F2. Closer Collaboration between Queensland Police, Local Councils and Biosecurity Queensland
The New South Wales Police service have been conducting monitoring and compliance of the movement of high-risk materials (eg, see ABC News 16 Aug 2023). AgForce would be pleased to see a similar compliance effort on the Queensland side of the border, especially to reduce movement of contaminated materials to RIFA free
areas of the state.
In southeast Queensland, the RIFA hotspot of Australia, there has been a notable difference between local councils in their levels of engagement regarding RIFA. The reasons behind this are, we suggest, best directed towards NFEAP and the DAF. Any recalcitrance by councils is inexcusable given the GBO under the Biosecurity Act 2014 (as per F1, above). Barriers to council involvement in RIFA mitigation need to be adequately addressed as a matter of urgency.
AgForce has been impressed by the pro-active approach of Tweed Shire Council, who, guided by the invasive pest team at NSW DPI, have adopted several new measures to combat RIFA:
- Training of field-based staff to ensure they are alert to signs of fire ants
- Amending procurement procedures to ensure all materials used on Council properties are certified free of fire ants
- Amending Development Application procedures to ensure developers are aware of new control orders
- Supporting the NSW DPI with local knowledge and contact channels
AgForce would like to see similar actions embraced by local councils across the high-risk areas of Queensland. In addition, AgForce recommends inclusion of up-to-date RIFA advice in council notices (rates and water), as these important notices do get the attention of property owners.
Closing Comments
We value the opportunity to contribute to this inquiry and encourage the Committee to contact AgForce for further information. The policy contact for this matter is Dr Annie Ruttledge, Senior Policy Advisor (Sustainability & Biosecurity), via e-mail: RuttledgeA@agforceqld.org.au
or: 0429 062 852.
Yours faithfully
Michael Guerin
Chief Executive Officer
cc:
seniorclerk.committees.sen@aph.gov.au
References
ABC Rural, reporter Kath Sullivan. Wed 20 May 2020 at 4:25pm. Federal Government axes biosecurity levy designed to protect Australian farmers from pests and disease
Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (ABARES) Research Report No. 23. 29 November 2023. Cost of established pest animals and weeds to Australian agricultural producers (sirsidynix.net.au).
Cooper CB, Dickinson J, Phillips T, Bonney R. (2007) Citizen science as a tool for conservation in residential ecosystems. Ecology and society. 12(2).
DAFF 2022, National Biosecurity Strategy, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Canberra, August. This publication is available at: agriculture.gov.au/biosecurity-trade/policy/partnerships/nbcagriculture.gov.au/biosecurity-trade/policy/partnerships/nbc
Lach L and Barker G. (2013) Assessing the effectiveness of tramp ant projects to reduce impacts on biodiversity. A report prepared for the Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment. Water, Population and Communities, Canberra.
McKinley DC, Miller-Rushing AJ, Ballard HL, Bonney R, Brown H, Cook-Patton SC, Evans DM, French RA, Parrish JK, Phillips TB, Ryan SF. (2017) Citizen science can improve conservation science, natural resource management, and environmental protection. Biological Conservation. 208:15-28.
McLeod R. (2004) Counting the Cost: Impact of Invasive Animals in Australia 2004. Cooperative Research Centre for Pest Animal Control, Canberra.
National Farmers Federation (NFF), 9 November 2023: Weeds and pests cost farmers billions, reinforces need for container levy.
National Red Imported Fire Ant Eradication Program (NRIFAEP) Strategic Review Report August 2021. Report for the Steering Committee by Helen Scott-Orr, Monica Gruber and Will Zacharin (the Review Panel)
Shackleton RT, Adriaens T, Brundu G, Dehnen-Schmutz K, Estévez RA, Fried J, Larson BM, Liu S, Marchante E, Marchante H, Moshobane MC. (2019) Stakeholder engagement in the study and management of invasive alien species. Journal of environmental management. 229:88-101.
Wylie FR, Janssen‐May S. (2017) Red imported fire ant in Australia: what if we lose the war? Ecological Management & Restoration. 18(1):32-44.