|
The Fraser Island Defenders Organisationwill be hosting theThird Biennial Fraser Island ConferenceSHIFTING SANDS
Mt Nebo Road, The Gap, Brisbane |
Keynote Speaker Prof. Bruce Thom, leading Australian coastal geomorphologist, first identified Fraser Island’s international status in 1975, declaring to the Fraser Island Environmental Inquiry Fraser Island is to the dune systems of the world what the Great Barrier Reef is to the world’s coral reefs. He is a member of the Wentworth Group of concerned Australian scientists.
Expressions of interest in attending can be emailed to shiftingsands@fido.org.au
Terry J. Brown
Department of Tourism, Leisure, Hotel and Sport Management, Griffith University, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
The concept of carrying capacity and its relevance as a visitor management tool has come under increasing scrutiny in recent years. However, this critique does not render the concept meaningless, but rather challenges us to apply it more effectively for controlling visitor numbers and activities in order to sustain conservation and experience values into the future. This paper summarises the concerns with carrying capacity and introduces a new Australian visitor management framework developed by Queensland Parks and Wildlife for addressing capacity issues in protected areas. The Sustainable Visitor Capacity (SVC) methodology is a collaborative, multi-stakeholder approach to assessing visitor sites for landscape quality, values and impacts so that these may be linked to requirements for more effectively managing visitor engagement with the resource. A recent trial of the approach on Fraser Island was used to inform infrastructure and education needs, visitor use patterns, desired behaviours and appropriate visitor numbers.
Peter Stanton
The records of history give a clear and consistent picture of Aboriginal use of fire in most parts of Australia, and from this the likely pre-European condition of the vegetation of the island can be deduced, and changes to it since then assessed. It is concluded that there has been widespread destabilisation of the island’s habitats, with unforeseeable but potentially disastrous consequences. Many of the problems identified are related to the long term exclusion of fire, either deliberately or by neglect of active management.
For more than two decades there has been some recognition within managing agencies, and the general public, that all is not well with fire-management on Fraser Island, and this has sparked debate, discussion, and workshops, and the production of a fire-management plan. The island, however, still continues to suffer from the exclusion of fire, and destructive activities relegated to its suppression. Ways to reverse these trends, and to overcome the likely institutional impediments to progress, are discussed.
Dr Wade Hadwen
Australian Rivers Institute Griffith University Nathan Campus Nathan QLD 4111
Greg Carter
Department of Conservation Programme Manager - Visitor & Historic Assets
Adam J. O'Neill1 and Arian D. Wallach1,2
1 C&A Environmental Services, Rangeland Research and Restoration, POB 177, West Burleigh, 4219, QLD.
2 School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Adelaide, SA, 5005, Australia. E-mail: arian.wallach@bigpond.com
Worldwide, research and conservation focus is turning towards the key ecological role of large predators. The devastating consequences following their loss, and the extraordinary ecological recovery that follow their reinstatement, is a pattern emerging globally. One of the clearest examples of the devastating consequences of large predator control comes from Australia, where almost half of all mammalian extinctions in the past 200 years have occurred.
Recent advances in ecological research have demonstrated a compelling link between the extinction crisis and dingo control. Since European occupation, dingoes have been controlled across the continent. Still today, dingoes are controlled on all landholding types in every State and Territory; whether they are listed as a pest or an endangered species. Poison-baiting with sodium monofluoroacetate (1080) is the most common method of control, followed by shooting and trapping. Australia is unique in that it has but a single large mammalian predator, and that this predator can be poisoned, shot and trapped everywhere.
Dingoes, like all wolf species, are socially complex predators. They form long-term social bonds that may persist for generations, and it is precisely this characteristic that makes them the top predators that they are. The main impact of control is not necessarily on dingo numbers. Their abundance may decrease, increase or remain the same, following control. Instead, the main impact of lethal control is to fracture the dingoes' pack structure. Without the pack, their ecological functioning is compromised and biodiversity is ultimately lost. The disruption of pack stability also alters population demographics resulting in an increase in young dingoes that may have a higher tendency to become destructive and aggressive.
Since 2001, over 50 dingoes have been destroyed on Fraser Island due to human-dingo conflict. This level of intervention will undoubtedly mean that the Fraser Island dingo population is being held in a constant state of social instability. It is also not evident that the objectives of these culls are being realized, namely reducing attack rates on humans. In light of recent attacks, it seems likely that this management strategy may only serves to exacerbate the problem. Given the size of Fraser Island's dingo community, we suggest that if the Island's ecology is to be prioritized and conserved, a complete cessation of the dingo culling practice is necessary. Implementing an "at your own risk" policy on the island appears to be warranted.
RW (Bill) Carter, Peter Brooks, Daryle Sullivan, Neil Tindale and Nikita Tully
University of the Sunshine Coast
Concern for the maintenance of water quality of the lakes on Fraser Island has attracted research attention but the impact of beach camping on freshwater beach-flows has been poorly considered. The assumption has been that the natural assimilative capacity of the foredune ecosystem is sufficient to dissipate any negative environmental impact. An exploratory study of nutrients, faecal coliforms and faecal sterols in the watertable and beach flows associated with camping and non-camping zones reveals concerning and, in some cases, extreme differences. The study suggests nutrient levels in the watertable are enriched in camping areas and that in some areas faecal coliforms persist in beach flows. The link to a human cause is supported by the presence of strong faecal sterol signals in soil samples from the watertable interface.
The risk implications for human health are significant although the biological impact implications remain unexplored. It will be important to clarify the temporal and spatial nature of the variables measured to inform the management decision making process, because the groundwater pollutants may be localised and short-term seasonal. If this is the case, then management strategies of camp area rotation and health warnings may be appropriate. If the human waste signals are more widespread and persistent, then a major change in human waste disposal when camping will be essential.