Glyphosate resistance in the crystal ball: are non-cropping industries in Queensland at risk?

Abstract

The risk of glyphosate resistance in non-cropping situations is poorly documented. In order to get a better understanding of this risk in Queensland, we modified the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Glyphosate Resistance Toolkit to deal with non-cropping situations, collected data from over 140 workshop participants on their patterns of herbicide use, and used the modified toolkit to score each participant’s risk. The collated information provided us with a way to test for risk variations between regions and industry types, and gave an insight into the participants’ level of knowledge about resistance and what factors restrict their choices around sustainable herbicide use.
Water, railway and aviation infrastructure authorities, and local governments were using the highest-risk strategies for weed management (from the point of view of glyphosate resistance). Most industry sectors tested had a high degree of variation in risk levels: some managers in each sector reported using low-risk strategies, and some reported using high-risk strategies. No consistent differences were found between northern, central, and south-eastern Queensland.
Identifying sectors at high risk of resistance will allow us to develop and deliver strategies for more sustainable glyphosate use, tailored to those sectors that most need help. Having identified high-risk situations, we can work towards ensuring that a range of chemical and non-chemical weed control methods are available in those situations and that weed managers have the knowledge and flexibility needed to use them effectively.