Search

Australian Wool Innovation Limited (AWI) commissioned three cross-sectional surveys of sheep producers' sheep parasite control practices over a 15-year period from 2003 to 2018. The aims were to document current sheep parasite incidence and control practices, to measure change in sheep parasite control practices over time and to inform extension messages for sheep industry advisors and sheep farmers. The surveys were conducted in 2004, 2012 and 2019 measuring sheep parasite control practices in the years 2003, 2011 and 2018. The surveys focused on incidence and control of the three major sheep parasite groups; gastrointestinal nematodes, blowflies and lice. The 2003 and 2011 surveys were paper-based and the 2018 survey was accessed via a link to an online survey. This article is the first in a series of four presenting the results of the three surveys and will cover methods, demographics, production systems and general parasite management. Response rates to the surveys declined each year from the peak response rate in 2003 (n = 1365 in 2003; n = 575 in 2011 and n = 354 in 2018). Mean reported rainfall was significantly lower in 2018 (407 mm) than in 2003 (611 mm) and 2011 (650 mm). The demographics of the respondents and their production systems were largely similar between the three surveys for respondent age, median property size, income from wool and sheep meat, proportion of the property area cropped, median sheep dry sheep equivalent (DSEs), ewes as a proportion of the total flock and median cattle DSEs. Month of weaning was more likely to be in summer months for summer dominant rainfall areas and spring for intermediate and winter dominant rainfall areas. There was a marked increase in the proportion of respondents asking for an animal health history when introducing sheep to their flock from 2011 (9%) to 2018 (65%). Similarly, a greater proportion of respondents isolated introduced sheep for at least 2 weeks in 2018 (82%) compared with 2011 (19%). However, there was a decrease in the use of a quarantine lice treatment for introduced sheep from 2011 (50%) to 2018 (21%). Farmers rated themselves, other farmers or member of their staff as most important sources of information on parasite control in both 2011 and 2018. There was a significant increase in the proportion of respondents visiting the ParaBoss suite of websites from 2011 to 2018 confirming their growing importance for information delivery and decision support.

The sheep body louse (Bovicola ovis) is a parasite of major economic concern in Australia. This article reports lice incidence and control practices on Australian sheep farms as determined by three cross-sectional surveys of the years 2003, 2011 and 2018. The incidence of live lice detected within a flock was similar across the survey years with a slight decline in 2018 (2003: 20%, 2011: 18.6% and 2018: 13.9%). In an average year, most farmers did not see any direct or indirect evidence of lice infestation (2011: 59.3% and 2018: 69.5%), however, over a five-year period 38.9% (2003), 66.3% (in 2011) and 55.8% (in 2018) reported seeing evidence of lice infestation at least once with significant variation between sheep producing regions in 2011. In an average year, nearly three quarters of respondents treated for lice (2011:73.5% and 2018: 73.3%) with the majority treating immediately following shearing and very few treating sheep with long wool. Even higher percentages treated for lice at least once in the preceding five-year period (2011: 86.2% and 2018: 87.5%). Backliner was the most popular method of chemical application for lice control in sheep off-shears or with short wool (2003: 77%, 2011: 73% and 2018: 74.3%). For long wool treatments, hand jetting declined in popularity from 2003 (64%) to 2011 (54%) and 2018 (8.6%) as backliners became more popular (2003: 36%, 2011: 51% and 2018: 60%). The use of benzoylphenyl urea insect growth regulators (IGR) for off-shears/short wool treatment declined from 2003 (92.8%) to 2011 (51%) and 2018 (2.9%) and were largely replaced by neonicotinoids and spinosad for backliner/spray-on products. The use of organophosphates declined for plunge dipping (2003: 83.8%, 2011: 83% and 2018: 7.7%). Spinosad use for plunge dipping off-shears/short wool increased over the survey years (2003, 0%, 2011: 9% and 2018:46.2%). The use of IGRs declined for backliner application on long wool and were mainly replaced by spinosad in 2011 and 2018. Fewer respondents reported suspected resistance to lice control products in 2018 (8%) compared with 2003 (26%) and 2011 (13%) with most reporting suspected resistance to IGR and synthetic pyrethroids and emerging suspicions of resistance to neonicotinoids in 2018. Resistance to lice control products also reduced in importance as a reason for recurring lice infestations between 2011 (ranked 2nd) and 2018 (ranked 6th). Biosecurity was important to sheep producers with the highest ranked reason for recurring lice infestations being from stray or purchased sheep.

Cross-sectional surveys of sheep parasite control practices in Australia were conducted in 2004, 2012 and 2019 to document parasite problems, control practices and measure change over time. This article reports the results pertaining to gastrointestinal nematode infection; comparisons between years are mostly descriptive and not based on statistical inference. There was a general increase in the use of grazing management to prepare clean pastures for sheep to control gastrointestinal nematode infections with the largest increases in the use of: cropping, long acting anthelmintics to prepare clean pastures, feeding strategies, selecting rams for resistance to nematodes, and leaving some sheep untreated. The proportion of respondents using faecal worm egg count monitoring (WEC) and the number of WEC monitors per year were similar in 2003 (weaners: 3.0 WEC/year, adult ewes: 2.6 WEC/year) and 2018 (lambs and weaners and adult ewes both 3.1 WEC/year) but lower in 2011(lambs and weaners: 2.0 WEC/year, adult ewes: 2.9 WEC/year), whilst there was a higher number of anthelmintic treatments given in 2011 than 2003 and 2018 which were similar. There was an increase in the proportion of respondents carrying out WEC monitors themselves from 2011 (21%) to 2018 (30%) and a corresponding reduction in the use of private laboratories, government laboratories and veterinarians with regional differences in who carried out WECs. The top three anthelmintic groups used did not differ between the three survey years with macrocyclic lactones the most used followed by benzimidazoles (BZ) and levamisole (LEV) although the percentage of MLs used in 2011 and 2018 was lower than in 2003 with higher proportions of respondents using BZ and LEV groups in the latter two survey years. Moxidectin was in the most commonly used active in all survey years. There was an increase in the use of combination of anthelmintics from different groups, especially for a combination of three anthelmintics (2003: 4.4%, 2011: 19.1%, 2018: 21.5%), with lower use of single anthelmintics in 2011 (57.0%) and 2018 (55.4%) compared with 2003 (74.5%). The use of testing for anthelmintic resistance was generally low across the survey years with a lower proportion of respondents using tests in 2011 and 2018 than in 2003 (2003:48%, 2011: 29%, 2018: 37%). Time of year, results from WEC and seasonal weather condition were the most important factors when deciding when to apply anthelmintic treatment.

How can engagement practitioners get past previous misconceptions landholders hold about the organisation they represent? Barry Davies works to break down fallacies by connecting with farmers on a personal level. Barry’s first engagement experience was leading a farming initiative with troubled youth from Perth. After a stint in farming himself, he felt motivated to help people help themselves, and began working for the government. Because approaching farmers as the representative of a government agency often created apprehension, he knew he had to prove himself. Barry was able to break through barriers due to his empathy for the emotional and financial toll that farming can take. He has also implemented an approach he calls “positive engagement”—engagement even when there is not a problem. He points out that building strong relationships when things are going well typically makes addressing problems that arise later much easier. From a long and varied career leading engagement initiative, Barry offers an array of techniques for making the work personal, breaking down social barriers and helping others to do the same.

In this chapter we highlight the positive lessons, innovations, breakthroughs, and insights gleaned from the practice stories. We make suggestions about how these lessons might strengthen the practice of community engagement for community-led pest management.

The Mount Mee wild dog case study describes a local government program that supports local landholders to participate in coordinated control. The Mount Mee example shows how local government leadership can support landholders to increase participation in wild dog control. Making it easy for landholders to participate is identified as the most important ingredient for success in this case. The local government program demonstrates a commitment to respectful communication with landholders and develops procedures to build relationships across the region. Council staff use local wild dog data to engage landholders in conversation, integrating scientific expertise with locally produced knowledge. This approach has created a safe and embracing culture that is shown to nurture community participation. By reducing the administrative and regulatory burden on individual landholders and community leaders, local government enables responsible and motivated members of the community to focus on building relationships, sharing information and creating a norm of civic duty and participation amongst their neighbours. The local council’s willingness to act for the public good creates political and social capital that leads to a generally supportive and encouraging atmosphere for wild dog control. The needs of the farming community, local government and state agencies have become aligned with the aspiration to make a civic contribution to the wider public good.

In this section, the social dynamics that underpin community formation in wild dog management groups are revealed in three case studies of wild dog management groups. The narrative approach allows us to see that: Groups create shared stories about the problems they face and the solutions they pursue; and These stories include details about the process of group formation and action for wild dog management. In these stories, the affected community is shown to be: resilient to change, firmly located in the landscape, persistent over time, and operating in a highly context-driven climate of social relations, power dynamics and historical tensions. The stories help us understand: the emotional dimensions of wild dog management; the constraints on community capacity to act; the pivotal role played by community leaders in generating and sustaining community efforts; the expression of power through the creation and sharing of knowledge; and how issues of community pest management are framed, including concepts of both success and failure.

Transitioning to a new job can be difficult, especially when you feel that you’re starting from scratch. Although she faced challenges when first taking on an engagement role, Jess Marsh’s perseverance and willingness to learn from others contributed to her success. Jess depended on the relationships and trust she built with landowners, government officials and co-workers in order to see projects through. Early experiences also showed her the importance of understanding local context. Now, before she starts any new project, Jess looks into what has already been implemented, what worked, what did not work and why it did not work. She recognises that, based on historical context and previous patterns of interaction, the same issue may need to be approached differently in different places. For this reason, she seeks to hear all sides of a story. With a genuine respect for people that transcends her desire for any professional gain, Jess is able to build relationships with landowners that put them at the centre of decision-making in communities.

What drives engagement practitioners to persevere in the face of intractable issues? In many cases, it is passion. Dave Berman exemplifies a passionate practitioner. He believes that good science is essential to good community engagement. This unwavering commitment propels him through difficult situations in his work on feral horses, rabbits and cats. He first learnt about feral horses as a young man, developing a long-lasting affection for them. This led him to research their impacts and use this science to liaise between horse conservationists and pest management organisations, two groups that often have opposing goals. Although it is not always easy, Dave finds creative ways to communicate scientific knowledge to landholders and community members so they can find common ground. Dave views this as useful, applied work. Ultimately, Dave defines success as bringing science to the table so communities can co-create goals and solutions that make a real impact.

Some people’s careers follow a straight line while others’ are full of twists and turns; Harley West was in the latter category. After 15 years as an organic farmer, he fell into an engagement role. As an engagement practitioner, West was determined to make sure that all stakeholders were at the table and that their voices were taken seriously. He sought to ensure that everyone who attended a meeting walked away feeling as though they were involved in the decision-making process, whether they were for or against it. He observed that when people walked away from a meeting feeling unheard or disappointed, they had the potential to become “silent destructors” who would do anything to sabotage plans moving forward. Engaging people in such a way that everyone feels involved can be daunting. In addition to interacting with farmers during workshops, Harley also held one-on-one meetings to understand people’s perspectives, noting that these collective and individual interactions complemented each other. Though he did not set out to become involved in community engagement, Harley ultimately found himself in a position that seemed as though it was made for him.

How can community engagement officers build relationships in new, unfamiliar locations? Greg Mifsud has gained this experience by engaging landholders across Australia. He has worked to build trust in communities where he didn’t know anyone, and where he faced community hostility because of the history between key stakeholders. In dealing with these challenges, his genuine good intent and open communication has enabled him to connect with landholders. For Greg, it is equally important to change the behaviour of landholders as it is to change the way that government responds to issues. A lack of ongoing support and short timelines for initiatives can stand in the way of critical relationship-building. Greg acknowledges the discouragement that some community engagement professionals may feel at points in their career. Through both on-ground experience and training sessions, he has come to believe that a failed attempt at engagement is not necessarily a failure on the part of the engagement professional. To this end, he aims to reflect on his approaches, adjust them and implement new ones whenever possible.

Ben Allen combines expert knowledge with vital local knowledge in his work with communities. He sees that the “expert” status held by scientists—and scientists’ detachment from the people impacted by their research—often undermines progress. Ben finds that collaborating with landholders is the most effective way to approach issues; farmers contribute valuable information about their community and the history that shaped it. Ben makes it a priority to meet landholders in their homes, even if it means driving 13 h. He seeks to conduct applied research that will be directly relevant and useful to the people with whom he is working. This reflects his belief that by working together, community members and scientists can address invasive species issues in much more effective ways than either can do on their own.

Practice stories (or practitioner profiles as we call them here) are useful learning tools. They open a window into lived experience, illustrating challenge and opportunity, as well as wisdom gained from this experience. The profiles collected here contain useful first-hand knowledge of the intersection of pest management and community engagement in both personal and professional experience. While practitioners reveal diverse objectives, they share a common desire to bring people together, across their differences, for mutually beneficial and acceptable outcomes. The result is a collection that shows how the interaction between ideas, experience and reflection can sustain an individual in their work with community, over time.

In this chapter, we introduce concepts that ground our research purpose, methodology and analysis. We provide key background information to illustrate the current ecological and social landscape of pest management in Australia. This includes: Outlining how Australia’s history and culture influence the current context of pest management today. Presenting our framing of pest management as a community problem that requires collective action. We make recommendations about how these concepts might help practitioners in their work with community members. These include: Being alert to the influence of power dynamics in shaping community interactions, including how sources of knowledge are used and valued. Developing skills in critical reflection about community values and beliefs as a necessary foundation for addressing public issues such as pest management. Recognising that terms and ideas, such as “community engagement” and “shared responsibility”, can carry diverse meanings for different people. Practitioners should push past assumptions to define terms with community members within their specific context. Suggesting that stories are one way to build common purpose and increase the likelihood of shared community action. This chapter aims to persuade you, the reader, that best practice community pest management is achieved through a balance of both social and scientific knowledge. We suggest that: Storytelling and dialogue allow individuals and groups to rethink present issues and future possibilities, encompassing diverse or less dominant perspectives to challenge current thinking. Readers can use the stories to prompt reflection about ways of approaching issues in working with people in community.

In this chapter, we investigate some of the common themes that emerge in the wild dog group case studies. These include: The emotional dimensions of wild dog management—how positive and negative emotions influence a community response to wild dog threats. The capacity of an affected community to act—how different models of decision-making, levels of support from government or industry, skills and financial resources in the affected community, and the ability to influence policymakers, shape the community response. The importance of leadership and community structure—in particular, the role of a willing leader and supportive members; the creation of shared experiences and a common purpose; and characteristics of determination and persistence. The role of power and influence—the successful community groups were able to access important information and share it, breaking down power imbalances, and empowering their members. Naming and framing the issue—developing a shared understanding of the problem was essential to creating a shared vision for action; groups were more successful when they ‘owned’ the problem of wild dog management and co-created the solutions.

Can growing up in the Australian bush be an asset to your career? In Brett Carlsson’s case, it certainly helps. Brett engages landholders in such a way that puts decision-making back in their hands. He cultivates trust, not through skills he learned in a classroom, but through years of on-ground experience. Bonding with farmers over a shared appreciation for the land allows for open and honest discussion, and helps Brett to understand their situation on a deeper level. As landholders begin to feel a sense of ownership of an issue, they come together and create local community committees. As a result, the community is able to negotiate with the local government with an organised voice. Often taking calls late into the night, Brett is convinced that his quality of relationships with landholders should be a measure of success. His ability to blur the lines between personal and professional relationships has created an important foundation for long-term community engagement and problem-solving in Queensland.

The neighbouring communities of Ensay and Swifts Creek face similar threats from wild dogs but are shown to respond in very different ways. This case study reveals how local context influences the way an issue is understood by different communities. Through dissent and discord, a significant connection between knowledge of the issue and power to steer the agenda is identified.

Navigating community and government power dynamics can pose a challenge to engagement practitioners. In this profile, Michael Reid describes how he learned to not just navigate, but meaningfully reshape, power dynamics in such a way that levels the playing field between landholders and policy-makers. The son of a South African immigrant, Mike felt drawn from a young age to learn about power and to work for social justice. At university, he combined an Applied Science degree in Agriculture with a degree in Sociology. Throughout his career, he has sought to apply lessons from both fields—framing issues to highlight the social and political dimensions as much as the scientific ones. By bringing landholders to the seat of government and government officials out to farms, he seeks to build common understanding and create opportunities for everyone to have a voice and tell their own story. Mike believes a collaborative approach to learning can allow for a fundamental reimagining of ecosystems and political systems alike.

Information can be the key to addressing some of the most challenging natural resource management issues, but is all information equal? In his role as a zoologist, Matt often has to interface with community members and local councils. He makes it clear that, in addition to the scientific facts, the beliefs and perceptions of community members have significant bearing on how issues are defined and addressed. Often putting aside his own ideas and scientific interests, he strives to work in the best interest of the community members; in his view, this is the compromise of a public servant. His sincere desire to understand invasive species issues from the perspective of those who experience them day-to-day informs Matt’s approach to engagement with landholders and other stakeholders.

The Northern Mallee Declared Species Group (NMDSG) case documents challenges faced by a single-species wild dog action group in a changing policy context. A looming state government reform to the funding and management regime is seen to threaten the group’s long-running and well-tested model of community-led action.

Being a facilitator comes with the responsibility of finding value in all forms of knowledge that stakeholders bring to the table. Lisa Adams values different perspectives and takes them into account while addressing critical environmental and public health issues. Lisa views herself as a perpetual student, constantly seeking new information and adjusting her approaches. She came to appreciate the criticality of local knowledge while facilitating workshops in Southeast Asia. This was a formative experience for Lisa, even though the organisation she worked with did not integrate the community members’ ideas. In her subsequent work on rabbit management in Victoria, she made sure that all stakeholders were heard, respected and included. She explains that her initial lack of knowledge about the rabbit management system was advantageous, because it encouraged her to seek out local knowledge. Adams’ powerful dedication to democratic and participatory community engagement is the centre of her philosophy on problem-solving and innovation.