134 Plant Protection Quarterly Vol.6(3) 1991 officially be controlled by Local Govern- Role of Local Government in environmental weed ment. However, in municipalities around ’s urban-rural fringe, there are control a range of non-noxious weeds (environ- mental weeds) invading bushland as well Ian Stevenson, Shire of Mornington, Queens Street, Mornington, 3931, as urban areas. Although there may be . some interest in controlling these weeds, neither State nor Local Government are empowered under the Vermin and Nox- Summary tion or do not occur in the State, are borne ious Weed Act to do so. Local Government has the legislative by the Department of Conservation and Attempts by some Councils to control power to control weeds on both private Environment (DCE). Landholders are re- noxious weeds usually consists of issuing and public land. In particular, the Local quested to control weeds in Categories 2 infringement notices for the removal of Government Act 1989 and Planning and and 3 on their properties and Category 3 blackberry (Rubus fruticosus spp. agg.), Environment Act 1987 provide opportu- weeds on their adjoining half width of often following a complaint from nearby nities for local Councils to enforce envi- roadside. Non-urban municipalities are residents. It is normally blackberry which ronmental weed control. Successful responsible for controlling weeds in these is referred to by municipal fire preven- weed control campaigns have occurred categories where they occur on public tion officers (most of whom have little in many urban-rural fringe municipali- land (reserves, roadsides, Crown Land) ecological training) when issuing fire haz- ties around Melbourne. Furthermore, managed by Local Government. ard notices under the Country Fire Author- Local Government has the ability to ini- In 1987, the Dandenong Region of DCE ity Act 1958. Under the 1973 schedule of tiate a range of non-regulatory activities found that due to expanding urbaniza- the Act, fire hazard notices (in by producing policy and education strat- tion, it was not possible for the Depart- Mornington Shire) may state ‘Dispose of egies as well as creating incentives for ment to enforce the Vermin and Noxious all bracken, undergrowth, noxious environmental weed control. Weed Act on all urban and rural residen- weeds, other weeds and grass over the tial properties. To make the most of height of 75 mm’. The referral to ‘other Introduction dwindling resources, it decided to focus weeds’ is discretionary and vague but Local Government is in close contact with its efforts on specific weeds in designated provides an opportunity for the removal the community and can have an impact areas, particularly agricultural, horticul- of environmental weeds. on control of environmental weeds on tural and public land. Consequently, DCE Another opportunity available to Local both public and private land. Local Gov- will not service properties where the av- Government for control of environmen- ernment has some selective and limited erage landholding is under two hectares. tal weeds is the creative use of the Local legislative power which is explored in this If municipalities wished to enforce vermin Government Act 1989 which permits a paper. Just as importantly, Local Govern- and noxious weeds control in these urban council to pass local laws (By-Laws) for ment has the ability to use a range of non- areas, they are able to use discretionary any matter which it ‘deems to have a regulatory activities to achieve control of powers under the Local Government Act function’. Accordingly, the Shire of environmental weeds. when deemed to be necessary. DCE will, Eltham is formulating a local law to re- however, provide weed control advice strict the sale and presence of a range of Legal powers and information to both private and pub- environmental weeds declared by the The Local Government Act 1958, under sec- lic landholders. Council. This local law aspires to achieve tion 696A, gives power to Local Govern- Under the Vermin and Noxious Weed two goals: ment authorities to notify the owner or Act, Local Government can issue weed re- 1. Prohibit the sale of environmental occupier of a property ‘to destroy any moval notices in both urban and rural weeds from nurseries within the Shire; weed which is a noxious weed within the precincts within its municipal boundaries. 2. Sanction the issuing of infringement meaning of the Vermin and Noxious Weeds Therefore, it has powers similar to those notices for private land that direct the Act 1958’. The latter Act aimed to achieve of State Government. A survey of eight owner to remove declared environ- two primary objectives: Local Government bodies in the Mel- mental weeds. 1. To stop the spread of vermin and bourne urban-rural fringe showed that This law is still to be enacted. No doubt, it weeds from contaminated to clean ar- noxious weed infringement notices were will be watched with interest by munici- eas of the State and; not being issued. Reasons for this in- palities wishing to create similar laws. Lo- 2. To protect one property owner from cluded: lack of resources, ‘not a Council cal laws must not conflict with any other another where the latter is not under- priority’ or an inability for Council to legislation and can be challenged in court. taking responsible vermin and weed ‘clean up its own backyard’. The occur- Community support for the principle of management programs. rence of dense weed infestations on its environmental weed control will be a nec- The use and value of this legislation is lim- public reserves make it very difficult for essary requirement before the local law is ited for Local Government. The Vermin Councils to attempt to control weeds officially passed. The commitment by and Noxious Weeds Act relates to rural ‘over the fence’ on private land. Further- council to resource the action with en- land-use practices and weeds of agricul- more, some Councils are averse to fur- forcement officers is also fundamental to tural importance and is more applicable ther diversification of their services, espe- the law’s effectiveness in weed control. It to municipalities outside the Melbourne cially in hard economic times. Some are may be advisable to phase in the controls and Metropolitan Area. also wary of State Government passing in more weed-prone or ecologically sen- In recent years, the then Department of their initiatives onto Local Government, sitive areas and establish effective com- Conservation, Forests and Lands (CFL) imparting increased responsibilities to munity acceptance for the law before ex- determined that it would be more effi- Local Government without commensu- panding it to the entire municipality. cient to have four categories of noxious rate increases in financial resources. Another opportunity for Local Govern- weeds and thus direct State Government ment to influence environmental weed resources towards high priority species. Legislation for environmental weeds? control is through its statutory planning Control costs for Category 1 noxious At present, only plants declared under responsibilities. The Planning and Environ- weeds, species that have limited distribu- the Vermin and Noxious Weeds Act can ment Act 1987, which determines the basis Plant Protection Quarterly Vol.6(3) 1991 135 for local planning schemes for a munici- cluded on the revegetation schedule. Ex- and seek privacy and refuge in rural resi- pality, is the legislative tool. This Act al- periences in Mornington have shown that dential living (Wagner 1975). Perhaps it is lows for conservation provisions and many landscape designers and develop- this background that has reduced the im- vegetation protection laws, offering a lo- ers are willing to co-operate; many are portance of noxious agricultural weeds cal authority legal powers to regulate not familiar with local weed problems and but highlighted the threat of environ- vegetation removal on private land. Cou- are grateful for the advice. However, en- mental weeds to bushland in these areas. pled with the statewide regulations on forcement of the landscape plans is criti- Consequently, it is the communities in native vegetation removal, which are in- cal. Frequently, the species planted are municipalities such as Eltham, cluded in every planning scheme within not those on the original council-en- Sherbrooke, Mornington, Hastings and Victoria, it is possible for a Council to af- dorsed plan as it can sometimes be diffi- Flinders that are most active in environ- fect the type and form of vegetation on cult to acquire all listed plants from nurs- mental weed control. private land. eries. The success of weed removal cam- Loss of native vegetation, due to urban paigns frequently depends on the links expansion may be retarded by vegeta- Problems in implementation developed between Council and the com- tion protection laws. Opportunities for Planning scheme provisions may be diffi- munity. Local environment groups and environmental weed invasion are there- cult to implement because of a misunder- schools have assisted with the removal of fore minimized. In many bayside munici- standing of the terms. Terms such as environmental weeds, such as sallow wat- palities, the gradual loss of coastal tea-tree ‘weed’, ‘pest plant’, ‘native’ and ‘exotic’ tle (Acacia longifolia (Andr.) Willd.) and (Leptospermum laevigatum (J.Gaertn.) F. are vague and open to interpretation. sweet pittosporum (Pittosporum Muell.) along roadsides, foreshores and Planners and other enforcement officers, undulatum Vent.) In Frankston, Local private land has resulted in the invasion most of whom have little or no ecological Government crews concentrate on weed of grasses such as Pennisetum training, lack expertise to interpret cor- removal in areas where community as- clandestinum Hochst. (kikuyu grass), rectly these terms. sistance is available. The involvement of Ehrharta erecta Lam. (panic veldt grass) The lack of broad ecological principles schools, environment groups and ‘friends and Briza spp. (quaking grasses) and the and protection in Local Planning Schemes groups’ not only assist labour-intensive subsequent displacement of most herba- is evident from studies by Durkin (1990). efforts but also assist in recruiting grants ceous native ground-covers, including Most of the terms and clauses used con- from sources other than Council’s rate orchids. centrate on tree removal and replace- revenue. An evaluation of local planning ment, neglecting the ecological impor- The Local Government Act under Sec- schemes to determine the strength of tance of native understorey species. Most tion 86 allows for Councils to establish ad- vegetation protection laws was con- common environmental weeds in south- visory committees of non-elected com- ducted by Durkin (1990). He recorded ern Victoria occur in the understorey and munity representatives as a means of municipalities with planning schemes receive little attention by planning strengthening their own expertise. In the having wording directed to vegetation schemes. municipalities of Sandringham and retention and enhancement. In 28 Mel- Another problem is that of resource Frankston a Natural Environment Advi- bourne metropolitan and urban-rural availability. Some Councils lack funds or sory Committee fulfils this role. In municipalities there was no reference to commitment towards aspects of environ- Flinders, a Weed Advisory Committee is environmental weeds in any planning mental weed control. Many rural munici- used. scheme examined. It can be inferred from palities are small and unlikely to enforce this survey that the ecological effects of weed control on private land. In a small Policy and education weed invasion, especially those of envi- but growing number of municipalities on Many Councils are committed to some ronmental weeds, are of low priority in the rural-fringe, Councils have strength- form of policy development for environ- Local Government town planning. ened their commitment to environmen- mental weeds. Many Melbourne munici- Nevertheless, there is scope under the tal weed policies and education; some palities on the urban-rural fringe have Planning and Environment Act for Local have employed Conservation Officers, listed the main environmental weeds in Government to have an impact on envi- e.g. Sandringham, Springvale, their area. Municipalities in Eltham, the ronmental weed control. Because some Sherbrooke, Eltham, Mornington and Dandenongs and the Mornington Penin- Councils request a permit for clearing Flinders Shire. Appointment of a Land sula have produced related educational vegetation their is an opportunity for in- Protection Officer at Eltham is an innova- material for distribution in their Shires. put into the loss of indigenous plants as tive appointment for Local Government. For example, a Peninsula Municipal well as advising applicants on problems It is a specialized position concentrating Group formed to produce the booklet associated with environmental weeds. on regulation, incentives and educational ‘Peninsula Pest Plants’ that contained col- Vegetation change can be one of sev- aspects of both noxious and non-noxious our photographs of 32 main weed species eral criteria given consideration when as- weed control. and control measures for each. This publi- sessing planning applications. For exam- cation was funded by rate revenue from a ple, from the Hastings Conservation Initiatives in environmental weed number of Councils and freely distrib- Zone, ‘Where applicable all building plans control uted to residents throughout the region shall show a landscape plan clearly indi- Concerns about environmental weeds and has helped to raise awareness about cating all existing trees on site, those trees are most pronounced in the urban-rural environmental weeds. It does not directly to be retained and the type , density and fringe municipalities around Melbourne regulate the sale of offending weeds from other vegetation to be planted on the including those in the Dandenongs, nurseries, but aims to change attitudes land’. and Diamond Val- and buying preferences by the public. A Through the Planning and Environ- ley. Here, population growth has caused companion booklet on ‘Peninsula Local ment Act it is possible for committed an increase in urbanization and subdivi- Native Plants’ is currently being pro- Councils to stipulate landscape plans as a sion of rural properties. The large num- duced. provision of planning permits. Officers bers of hobby-farmers in these areas rec- The development of local conservation inspecting these plans can exercise some ognize the problems caused by environ- strategies under the auspices of Councils degree of control over the removal of mental weeds. These urban people derive is unique to Victoria. This process is able environmental weeds on the site or in- their income from work in nearby cities to assess community attitudes to environ- 136 Plant Protection Quarterly Vol.6(3) 1991 mental matters including environmental Incentives ices. In doing so, it has the power to seize weeds. Local Government can, however, The use of incentives in weed manage- opportunities for conservation in addition have a tendency to be parochial in its out- ment is seldom used in Local Govern- to acting as a link between Government look and activities. This may be due to ment. The Victorian Local Government and local non-government community localized rate collection schemes which Act, section 161 allows Councils to apply a organizations. Potentially, Local Govern- normally restricts works and programs lower level of rating on properties which ment has a wide range of functions and to those affecting rate-payers within the conform to sound management prac- possibilities in environmental weed con- municipal boundaries. Ecological issues tises. Councils could also give rate con- trol – not fully understood by the general such as environmental weed control can- cessions to conserve areas of special sig- public. not be solved on this basis. Alternatively, nificance (Bowman 1990) such as remnant Not only are there opportunities for Local Government can: vegetation. This may be of particular Local Government to be involved in envi- 1. Share resources by combining skills value along streamlines on private land. ronmental weed control but there is also and finances. These initiatives also tend In the , a series of rate a responsibility to do so. Especially in ur- to attract greater external grant fund- rebates, not reductions, are envisaged for ban-rural fringe localities, Local Govern- ing for projects than individual Council landholders willing to revegetate their ment involvement in weed control has submissions. land and control weed invasion to the sat- been effective, even if filling the ‘gaps’ 2. Develop a ‘weed week’ activity across a isfaction of the Local Council. Other in- and needs that have not been satisfied by region. Co-ordinated by a regional mu- centives offered include herbicide subsi- any other source. Local Government can nicipal group, this activity can concen- dies and distribution of herbicides to be a resource that the Commonwealth trate working-bees in local reserves ‘friends groups’ or catchment manage- and State Governments cannot afford to and draw attention to problem weed ment groups for supervised use in re- ignore. It is a resource that needs to be species across a larger area. serves controlled by Council. Commu- further nurtured and tapped. 3. Initiate a local municipality ‘Environ- nity attitudes and Council priorities de- ment Week’ involving schools, commu- termine the effectiveness of these actions; Acknowledgments nity and council representatives. In the unlike South Australia, no municipalities I wish to thank the following people for Shire of Mornington, about 2500 pri- within Victoria have taken the lead in of- their assistance in preparing this paper: mary school children attend a range of fering rate incentives to this stage. Gwyn Cleeves (Shire of Hastings), David horticulture and environmental activi- Gray (Shire of Mornington), Ray Lee ties provided by community groups, Conclusion (), Betty Clift (Shire of local nurseries and government repre- The traditional role of Local Government Flinders), Dennis Corbett (DCE), sentatives. has been to provide a range of local serv- Marianne Henderson (Shire of Eltham) and the Municipal Conservation Associa- tion, Victoria.

References Bowman, M. (1990). ‘Legislative Oppor- tunities and Constraints in Land Con- servation for Local Governments in the Murray-Darling Basin States’, pp. 9-10 (National Soil Conservation Program Project, Australian Local Government Association, Canberra). Durkin P. (1990). ‘Good Intentions and Lost Opportunities’, Unpublished Re- port, Conservation Council of Victoria. Wagner, C. (1975). ‘Rural Retreats’. 63 pp. (Australian Government Publishers, Canberra).