Invasive Species Presence

AUS-ASC-FOR-ISP General Moderate confidence

Benchmark Value

20 %
Thresholds: Lower: —, Upper: 20
Direction: Lower is desirable ↓
Form: MaximumOnly

Scoring Curve

This curve shows how a field measurement for this indicator would score across all available benchmark forms in this context. The scoring engine uses 3 benchmarks together — the Point form drives the primary score, while 2 guard(s) constrain the result.

Contributing Benchmarks

Point Primary UpperThreshold Guard MaximumOnly Guard

Evidence & Context

"Follow-up treatments... kept its cover below 20% and height below 50 cm."

Metric Definition:

Percentage of total vegetation cover attributed to invasive species.

Benchmark Definition:

This benchmark defines the maximum invasive species cover threshold to maintain sustainable forest management against woody weed invasion.

Justification:

Threshold identified for maintaining a sustainable managed state in forests facing woody weed invasion.

Sources (1)

Preview of Murray Region Forestry Hub (2025). Blackberry Strategic Plan and Actions.
Murray Region Forestry Hub (2025). Blackberry Strategic Plan and Actions. GreyLiterature

Murray Region Forestry Hub (2025). Blackberry Strategic Plan and Actions.

View Source

Supporting Sources (5)

Additional references from the underlying research that informed this benchmark.

Preview of DCCEEW (2011). Nomination for feral deer as a key threatening process.
DCCEEW (2011). Nomination for feral deer as a key threatening process.
Direct Evidence Journal

DCCEEW (2011). Nomination for feral deer as a key threatening process.

View Source
Preview of Frontiers in Forests and Global Change (2020). Non-native Forest Pests in Australia.
Frontiers in Forests and Global Change (2020). Non-native Forest Pests in Australia.
Direct Evidence Journal

Frontiers in Forests and Global Change (2020). Non-native Forest Pests in Australia.

View Source
Preview of Natural Resources Commission NSW (2022). Insights report - November 2022.
Natural Resources Commission NSW (2022). Insights report - November 2022.
Direct Evidence Journal

Natural Resources Commission NSW (2022). Insights report - November 2022.

View Source
Preview of Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (2015). Aquatic value identification and risk assessment manual.
Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (2015). Aquatic value identification and risk assessment manual.
Direct Evidence Journal

Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (2015). Aquatic value identification and risk assessment manual.

View Source
Preview of WA Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (2009). Forest Health Surveillance Report.
WA Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (2009). Forest Health Surveillance Report.
Direct Evidence Journal

WA Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (2009). Forest Health Surveillance Report.

View Source

Context

  • Region Australia
  • Biome Alpine and Subalpine Complex
  • Land Use Production Forestry
  • Assessment Conservation Target
  • Evidence Type TargetCondition

Lifecycle

  • Status Active
  • Version 2
  • Effective From 9 Apr 2026

Notes

Specifically evaluated for Acacia longifolia management.

Related Benchmarks

Other benchmarks in the AUS-ASC-FOR-ISP family.

14 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
Point Active v4
5 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Pristine Reference
Point Active v1
42 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Pristine Reference
Point Active v1
— % Moderate
Production Forestry · Pristine Reference
OptimalRange Active v1
9 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
Point Superseded v3
6 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
Point Superseded v2
5 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
MaximumOnly Superseded v1
14 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
Point Superseded v1