• Smaller BBB grazing properties ( less than 30,000ha ) were most satisfied with LDC Project implementation , indicating the importance of tailoring more unique activities to the larger properties .
• BBB landholders with properties with declining or stable ground cover trends ( 1994 to 2018 ) were the most confident that land management improvements being supported by the LDC Project would lead to improved water quality outcomes . This was the highest priority land condition segment of the catchment reinforcing that the support offered was delivering the desired messaging to this group ( Jarvis et al , 2020 ).
• Overall , all landholders were generally positive when asked about the LDC Projects ’ role in demonstrating new ways of managing gullies . However , landholders involved in Landscape Remediation projects were less positive than those not involved in Landscape Remediation projects ( Jarvis et al ., 2020 ). Management of the involvement of landholders from start to finish was also recognised as important .
• The LDC Project implementation team found there was a saturation point of community events / workshops / funding opportunities offered , i . e . more social investment does not necessarily equal more outcomes .
This additional information is extremely valuable in informing future program design and implementation .
future priorities and design
The data presented in this report , and in particular , in response to Q2 and Q3 can be used to provide guidance on spatial priorities ( sub-catchment scale ) for achieving the greatest water quality outcomes from a biophysical perspective . This can be assessed in the context of the additional outcomes ( including social and engagement learnings ) presented in Section 6 to assess feasibility and likelihood of implementation .
load contributions and ‘ hot spots ’
The greatest fine sediment , PP and PN reductions have been achieved in the Bowen sub-catchment ( around 60 %). This is where most of the gully projects were completed ( 10 out of 23 in total ), generating two thirds of the fine sediment reduction in the Bowen sub-catchment , and also two thirds of the reductions achieved through gully projects . The next highest contributor to the reductions were the GLM Wire & Water projects . The emphasis on gully investments in the Bowen sub-catchment explains the relatively high fine sediment reductions compared to the total project area shown in Figure 43 . A similar case also exists for Glenmore Creek , where the Mt Wickham large scale gully project generated a majority ( 93 %) of the fine sediment reduction over a relatively small area . This emphasises the points raised in response to Q1 regarding the effectiveness of gully projects per unit area .
101