Invasive Species Presence

AUS-ASC-FOR-ISP General Moderate confidence

Benchmark Value

58 %
Direction: Lower is desirable ↓
Form: Point

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 6 benchmarks together — the OptimalRange form drives the primary score, while 5 guard(s) constrain the result.

Contributing Benchmarks

OptimalRange Primary MinimumOnly Guard OptimalRange Guard LowerThreshold Guard MaximumOnly Guard Point Guard

Evidence & Context

"Littoral rainforest Saplings 58%."

Metric Definition:

Percentage of saplings showing browse damage or presence markers.

Benchmark Definition:

This benchmark represents the percentage of saplings damaged by feral deer, indicating severe impact on forest regeneration in rainforest contexts.

Sources (1)

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

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

View Source

Supporting Sources (8)

Additional references from the underlying research that informed this benchmark.

Preview of Ecological assessments for WildCount - TEF
Ecological assessments for WildCount - TEF
Direct Evidence Government

DCCEEW (2024). Bushfire recovery for wildlife and their habitat - Phase 2 Recovery and Resilience funded projects.

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 Great Divide Northern Forests (2023–24) Scorecard Report
Great Divide Northern Forests (2023–24) Scorecard Report
Direct Evidence Journal

Great Divide Northern Forests (2023–24) Scorecard Report

View Source
Preview of Motion on recreational hunting and invasive deer management
Motion on recreational hunting and invasive deer management
Regulatory Framework Government

Motion on recreational hunting and invasive deer management

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

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

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 Pristine Reference
  • Evidence Type DegradationThreshold

Lifecycle

  • Status Active
  • Version 4
  • Effective From 10 Apr 2026

Related Benchmarks

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

14 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
Point Active v4
5 % High
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
MaximumOnly Active v3
— % Moderate
Production Forestry · Pristine Reference
OptimalRange Active v2
14 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
Point Active v2
6 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
Point Active v2
9 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
Point Active v2
14 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
Point Active v2
42 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Pristine Reference
Point Active v1
— % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
OptimalRange Active v1
42 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Pristine Reference
Point Active v1
5 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
MaximumOnly Proposed v4
20 % Low
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
MaximumOnly Proposed v4
20 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
MaximumOnly Proposed v4
9 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
Point Superseded v3
5 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Pristine Reference
Point Superseded v3
42 % Low
Production Forestry · Pristine Reference
Point Proposed v2
5 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Pristine Reference
Point Superseded v2
20 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
MaximumOnly Superseded v2
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
— % Moderate
Production Forestry · Pristine Reference
OptimalRange Superseded v1
5 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Pristine Reference
Point Superseded v1
14 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
Point Superseded v1
6 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
Point Superseded v1
9 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
Point Superseded v1
14 % Moderate
Production Forestry · Conservation Target
Point Superseded v1