ninti one research presentation day theme 2: knowledge to practice

2013 Ninti One Research Presentation Day

Innovation for Remote Australia

www.nintione.com.au

Theme 2 – Knowledge to Practice

Facilitator: Steve Fisher

Speakers: Quentin HartKarl HamptonDanny WareMervyn RaggettTim DriverJohn Guenther

The Australian Feral Camel

Management Project

The first step in reducing destruction of desert wetlands and cultural sites

Quentin Hart

AFCMP Scope

• Largest CfoC project:

‐ $16.6 million over four years plus partner contributions

‐ 20 project partners

‐ feral camel distribution of 3.3 million sq km

‐ hundreds of landholders

• Ninti One was contracted by Aust Govt in early 2010

Developing the knowledge base

• Desert Knowledge CRC project (NHT 2006‐08)

• Aimed to develop national management framework to reverse population growth and resultant impacts

• Key tasks: >distribution, abundance, population dynamics>stakeholder perceptions>review legislation>assess impacts>review management options, including management decision framework

Tracking the increase in the feral camel population: >first attempt to quantify numbers in 1969>first aerial surveys 1980s>repeat aerial surveys 1993, 2001

Popn: was estimated at 1 million: 43% on Aboriginal land; 22% pastoral; 10% conservation; 25% Crown

The management challenge

• Australian Government expectations (e.g. verification and monitoring requirements)

• Other stakeholders: commercial use industry, RSPCA

• Comprehensive governance structure

• Large number of landholders across different land tenures

• Extremely mobile animals

• Rainfall!

Landholder perceptions• Conservation managers: viewed feral camels as a pest

• Pastoralists: 84% managed camels (usually culling) but recognised that commercial use could be an option

• Aboriginal lands: Culling considered wasteful but growing frustration about impacts

• Identified impacts: >infrastructure damage >livestock competition>biodiversity>water quality>cultural sites>human safety>greenhouse (emissions and veg impact)

Management options: physical removal required (culling and mustering)

GOOD OUTCOME

POOR OUTCOME

GOOD OUTCOME

POOR OUTCOME

Project partners• Alinytjara Wilurara NRM Board (South Australia)• Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands (APY Lands)• Australian Wildlife Conservancy• Biosecurity SA• Central Land Council• CSIRO• Department of Agriculture and Food WA• Department of Environment and Conservation (WA)• Department of Environment and Natural Resources (SA)• Department of Environment and Resource Management (Qld)• Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport (NT)• Flinders University• Kimberley Land Council• Natural Resource Management Board NT Inc• Ngaanyatjarra Council Inc (WA)• Ninti One Ltd• NT Cattlemen’s Association• Pila Nguru Aboriginal Corporation (WA)• Rangelands NRM (WA)• South Australian Arid Lands NRM Board

Project achievements to date

• Project partners remain engaged and effective collaborations – benefits for other NRM

• Proactive engagement of commercial use industry

• Landholder consents in place – long‐term benefits

• Despite rainfall in 2010‐11, over 150,000 feral camels removed, and on track to achieve density targets at most assets

Project achievements to date

• Rigorous process of standards, training and verification to ensure high level of animal welfare

• Comprehensive environmental monitoring in place –baseline for future work

• Improved knowledge of feral camel population dynamics

• Capacity building – culling, commercial use and environmental monitoring

AFCMP should be considered the start, rather than the end, of nationally‐coordinated feral

camel management

Further information:feralcamels.com.au

feralscan.org.au/camelscan

www.nintione.com.au

Knowledge to Practice

Australian Feral Camel Management & Community Research in remote Australia

Karl Hampton, Senior Research OfficerDanny Ware & Mervyn Raggett, Aboriginal Community Researcher’s

Knowledge to Practice – Best Practice• We use a Participatory Research methodology of face to face interviews

with Aboriginal people conducted by Aboriginal Community Researchers.

• 48 Community Researchers are based across the Northern Territory, South Australia, Western Australia and Queensland.

• From various language groups with a majority fluent Aboriginal language speakers.

• Ninti One is surveying residents of Aboriginal communities on the ‘Changing Views’ towards feral camels.

• Ninti One is currently surveying in 33 communities in the Northern Territory, South Australia and Western Australia. These surveys are due to be complete by the end of August 2013.

Summary of results from surveys to date……

• 187 surveys completed across 20 communities.

• 13 different languages identified from Communities surveyed.

……Summary of results from surveys to date.

Aboriginal people we have spoken to during our community surveys have talked about a close affiliation and respect for the camel, either through religious beliefs or acknowledgement of their role during the earlier

settlement days when they were used as transport for Aboriginal and Non Aboriginal pioneers. At the same time they are concerned about the impacts

of feral camels.

….Summary of results from surveys to date

• Top three most common places people see camels are: along the road when travelling, in the bush when visiting country or homelands and near waterholes.

How often have you seen camels in the last year?• Majority of times are:‐ Every month ‐ A few times a year.

Most common damage by camels seen by Aboriginal people surveyed are:‐ Tree’s and plants ‐ Waterholes and rock holes ‐ Sacred sites.


• 60 responses out of the 187 people surveyed have identified working in the Land Management area.

• 22 identified as having received training in camel management.


……Summary of results from survey to date.

• Most popular practices for future camel management are: more mustering and trucking away, fencing them out of communities and more on the ground shooting for local meat

• Acknowledgement that aerial culling is required in some situations.

www.nintione.com.au

Knowledge to PracticeCanberra 2013

Tim DriverPrecision Pastoral Pty Ltd

The Pastoral Enterprise,a staple in remote communities. The pastoral industry has been and will

remain a staple in remote Australia

Tools that are improving and assisting in beef business operations

Ninti One’s Pastoral Industry Engagement

Ninti One understood the issues affecting the long term profitability of the pastoral sector.


Reducing Operational Expenses & Increasing

Production Reducing the monitoring costs of livestock

water infrastructure through use of telemetry

Increasing the production from the livestock asset


Ninti One Trusted Adviser

Napperby Field day 2007

Ninti One was demonstrating it’s commitment to Pastoral Industry


Remote Livestock Management System


RLMS Video


Average Weight Vs. Rainfalls


• This data can be used for more effective marketing of your cattle

Sale Price: 390 c/kg cwt Sale Price: 379 c/kg cwt


Precision Pastoral Pty Ltd was tasked with commercialising research from the former Desert Knowledge CRC

Precision Pastoral

April 2010

Today… Precision Pastoral is currently administering

a Commercialisation Australia grant which is preparing the company for the commercial release of the RLMS.

Pre-commercial systems are successfully being trialled on 8 properties.

Creating new online software tools to assist in on-farm decision making.

Participating in the next generation of research being undertaken by CRC-REP


www.nintione.com.au

Knowledge to Practice

Remote Education Systems Principal Research Leader ‐ John Guenther

Research questions

1. What is education for in remote Australia and what can/should it achieve?2. What defines ‘successful’ educational outcomes from the remote Aboriginal

and Torres Strait Islander standpoint?3. How does teaching need to change in order to achieve ‘success’ is defined by

the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander standpoint? 4. What would an effective education system in remote Australia look like?

Data collection

• Community surveys• In‐depth interviews• Thinking Outside The Tank (focus groups)• Myschool datasets• Census and other secondary data sources• ‘Collegial snapshot surveys’• Active advisory group

What have we found?• Mainstream assumptions don’t necessarily apply• The deficits defined and articulated by the system are not seen as such by

remote community members;• Engagement in learning is dependent on culture and community;• Strategies don’t improve outcomes;• Not a lot has changed;• Race and remoteness don’t make a lot of difference to outcomes • Cultural and worldview ‘distance’ does.

We’re not looking for the magic bullet solution!

Implications from the research

• Shifting the focus from bums on seats (attendance) to real world learning;• Withdrawal of punitive measures and incentives designed to force compliance and

therefore;• Directing resources to building local capacity and engagement;• Adapting curriculum to the things that matter in remote communities, for example

• Land tenure, legal issues, negotiations with mining• Local/regional politics and governance• Applying local/cultural knowledge to land management

• Setting up two‐way knowledge exchanges through partnerships with city‐based schools;

• Opportunities to focus on learning designed to increase confidence and build identity first.

• Separate learning spaces for post‐primary students

Partners

www.nintione.com.au

ninti one research presentation day theme 2: knowledge to practice

Technology