Biosecurity: a shared responsibilty

1 Sept

The world is rife with security issues and it’s hard to keep up with them all. Biosecurity is one worth focusing on, not just because September is biosecurity month. To understand why, it’s interesting to look at snapshots from Australia’s history and what’s happening currently, and biosecurity challenges resulting from human activities.

By Angela Hoskins

Border control workers talking to people in cars before being transported to Tasmania. — Melbourne, 11 March, 2019: Biosecurity check on vehicles from the MS Spirit of Tasmania II. Biosecurity Tasmania carries out these checks to protect the state from pests, weeds, and diseases, with random vehicle checks also occurring upon arrival in Devonport. (Image from Shutterstock)

Biosecurity: a brief summary of Australia’s historical and current context

Humanitarian security, environmental security, IT security, biosecurity — so many human-made challenges seem to be ramping up, worldwide.

Biosecurity is an important one because it helps us ensure the safety and quality of produce and trade, and therefore the economy. Managing biosecurity helps prevent the spread of pests, diseases, and invasive species that can damage native ecosystems. Being aware of, and, addressing biosecurity issues helps us maintain a good lifestyle into the future.

International travel and trade and the of spread pests and pathogens

The arrival of the first fleet to Australia in 1788 may not have been planned as an invasion but that is what it became, destroying lives and lifestyles of the country’s inhabitants, the first nation people. The boats and those who disembarked not only carried disease, but also plants like the prickly pear to feed the cochineal insects (Dactylopius coccus). The aim of importing the bugs was to set up an industry to make sought-after red dye, as was done in the day, on the other side of the world, because kings, cardinals, and the British army loved wearing red. Red was the colour of authority. ‘Redcoat’ uniforms were synonymous with the exercise of power. The cochineal insects didn’t survive but the prickly pear cactus spread like no one’s business and 60 million acres (24.3 million hectares) of land in Queensland and NSW became ‘unusable’. Many farmers left their properties and livelihoods because the prickly pear problem was unmanageable (National Museum of Australia). After much trial and error, in 1920 the commonwealth, Queensland and New South Wales governments established the Commonwealth Prickly-Pear Board (CPPB) which decided on trialing prickly pear control through biological agents, specifically cactoblastis moths that destroys the cactus. Prickly pear continues to be a problem in New South Wales and Queensland — although not on the same scale — because new varieties, that do not act as hosts for cactoblastis moths, have become established.

Prickly pear found on Morwong Beach on Coochiemudlo Island in 2024. — From Coochiemudlo Bushcare Facebook post in July 2024: ‘Bushcare had a productive morning's weeding behind Morwong Beach yesterday but we came across a particularly nasty invader. Just behind the high tide mark half a dozen Prickly Pear were in a close group.’ Photo by Peter Wear.

Gamba grass in the Northern Territory — a decision gone wrong

African gamba grass was introduced into Australia in the 1930s as cattle feed. Graziers in the NT have actively cultivated this grass during the 1980s and early 1990s because it is easily established, drought resistant and adapted to hardy soils. This aggressive introduced grass has spread throughout the NT and national parks, even into parts of Western Australia and Queensland. Gamba grasses are a highly combustible and can be up to 12 times more intense than native grass fires (The Guardian).

Research in the early 2000s demonstrated that gamba grass tripled fire intensities, reduced available soil nitrate levels by 70% and tripled grass water use. But because some graziers valued gamba grass, politicians were initially reluctant to ban it.

Gamba grass now growing invasively throughout national parks in the NT. It’s negatively impacting the work of Indigenous rangers and threatening protected areas across northern Australia.

Work towards managing gamba grass, to avert ecosystem collapse, is ongoing. It currently involves efforts between governments, local communities and related organisations (Invasive Species Organisation).

Importing beef products to Australia

Biosecurity rules in Australia, and the traceability requirements for imported goods, are a point of national pride. The rules around importing beef products date back to the 1990s, and these rules were strengthened following a mad cow disease scare in the USA in 2003.

In July 2025, the Australian government lifted biosecurity restrictions on beef imports from the USA with a statement saying that a biosecurity review found the US had improved its traceability system for their exported beef. Perhaps more accurately, the lifting of the rules stand to benefit a trade deal with the Trump administration (QUT).

It will be interesting to see if there is much demand in Australia for beef imported from the USA.

Red imported fire ants

Red imported fire ants were first detected in Australia in Queensland in February 2001 after they arrived in imported goods. Fire ants can impact our environment and agriculture — they inflict painful stings on people, pets, and livestock, and cause extensive damage to ecological and agricultural systems. They are now present in multiple Australian states. Industries, communities, and individuals are encouraged to remain vigilant in detecting fire ants on our properties, and when transporting building or landscaping materials.

A single fire ant was detected and intercepted at an Australia Post parcel centre in the state’s south in January 2024. There was no incursion into the state, and, at the time of writing, Tasmania remains free from fire ants (Australian Government | Outbreak).

Suminoe oysters: a recent biosecurity alert

Biosecurity Queensland (BQ) put out a report in August 2025 for us to look out for Suminoe oyster (Magallana ariakensis), also known as Chinese river oyster. It’s as an invasive high-risk aquatic animal and marine pest that attaches to boat hulls and has spread around Asia, and was first found in Moreton Bay in June 2023 (Qld Government). BQ’s report noted that the Suminoe oyster, which competes with native species for space and may carry exotic diseases and parasites, has been detected in numerous estuaries in the north of Moreton Bay. Communities have been asked to help monitor the potential spread of this pest to other areas of the bay.

Learn how to identify the Suminoe oyster

Report a sighting of the Suminoe oyster with BQ.

Australian interstate quarantine rules

Pests, diseases and weeds can travel with us on interstate road trips so there are restrictions on what you can take with you, across state borders, within Australia. There are also biosecurity or quarantine zones within each state and territory to limit the spread of pests that are localised to that area (Australia Interstate Quarantine).

Potato mop-top virus

As an island, Tasmania has strong biosecurity laws. However, in August 2025 it was reported that the potato mop-top virus, a soil borne fungus, as been detected in seed potato crops, and it could have been present in that state for the past two years. How it got there is unknown, so far it hasn’t been detected on the mainland. Although mop-top virus is not dangerous to human health, it can significantly affect yields as it rots the skin and flesh of potatoes (ABC News). In 2018, New Zealand detected the mop-top virus in one potato seed paddock, and how it arrived there is also also unknown. Once it arrives, the virus is hard to eradicate. Mop-top virus has also been found in the USA where they suspect that the main route of transmission could be ornamental plant potting mix (ABC News).

A personal tale about international border-control enforcement

In the 1990s, a man in his early twenties, a family friend from France, arrived in Melbourne with a generous collection of cheese in his luggage. The cheeses were not commercially packed and Australian border control consequently confiscated them before the visitor could exit the airport. This infuriated him. It was explained that the biosecurity rules were in place to help prevent serious pests and diseases into Australia’s unique environment. He thought Australians were neurotic and arrogant.

The challenges of human-made biosecurity issues

Nations and communities all over the world are dealing with extremes in temperatures, floods, and bushfires, and rising sea levels, yet, scientific advice with curbing the global warming is largely ignored. Lifestyles and food sources are at risk. Scientists attribute global warming primarily to increased carbon dioxide emissions and other human activities (NASA).

How are decisions about biosecurity made?

Scientists and other experts advise authorities, and us, on how to best to deal with the world’s biosecurity issues. All around the world, at any given time, there are people working on solutions — and achieving insights, and recommending solutions — to correct the trajectory of issues like global warming and plastic pollution. It’s up to policy makers to take up the science: on a national scale the wheels turn slowly; on a world-wide stage it seems near impossible.

Are efforts to slow down biosecurity concerns stymied by systems like capitalism, profit before people, the epidemic of hyper individualism and short-term gains?

Economic rationalism, or neoliberalism, advocates policies like privatization, deregulation, free trade, and reduced government intervention, with the goal of promoting economic growth and efficiency through market mechanisms. Key aspects include shrinking the state and replacing public services with private, for-profit companies (Investopedia).

Often, big corporations have the ears of political powers and policy makers with the aim to maintain corporate profit growth. Somewhere along the line, expert advice from the scientists can get lost in translation from one vested interest to the other.

The global plastic pollution treaty

In August 2025, a landmark global plastics treaty aimed to find consensus on how to tackle in the problem by negotiating improvements to plastic design, production and consumption. The talks failed because consensus was consistently blocked by some countries including the USA (ABC News).

The use of plastics to make products and packaging is only one burdensome issue for the environment and biosecurity. Evidence is clear that plastic pollution has had disastrous outcomes for animal health (including us), sea life, and the environment. Seabirds in Australia, particularly on Lord Howe Island but also all over the world, are facing a significant threat from plastic ingestion. Same with other species that live in the sea, like turtles (JCU).

Good news: PFAS chemicals to be banned and an alternative on the way

PFAS chemicals are known as ‘forever chemicals’ because they persist in the environment, which is not good because they are a carcinogen and can cause other severe health problems, and an environmental risk. PFAS chemicals have been found water courses and reservoirs (Australian Government). PFAS chemicals are used in way too many products to list but this Time Magazine article gives us the run down of products that contain PFAS, many of which are used in the home on a daily basis.

In July 2025, Australia put a ban in place on the import, use, and manufacture of three types of PFAS. But, there are now more than 14,000 PFAS chemicals in use by manufacturers. In response to public concern, the European Union has proposed to restrict all types of PFAS by 2030 (The Conversation). Let’s hope they keep to this, and other countries follow.

The good news is that scientists have found a market-ready replacement for PFAS according to this recent (May 2025) article from Forbes.

So, on a positive note, there is hope that governments and policy makers can, eventually, respond to the science.

Plus, there is always people power, even market sentiment, when consumers choose to buy sustainably-made products.

A group of long-lasting chemicals known as PFAS have been used in firefighting foam and some non-stick cookware, as well as food packaging, cosmetics and waterproof clothes. Because of their widespread use they can be found almost everywhere in our environment, causing deep concern about potential health impacts. Craig Reucassel filed this guest report for 7.30 (ABC) on 23 July 2024.