Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2023L01376:reg:3:p12
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2023L01376
Segment Type: reg
Provision Reference: reg 3 (pt 12/13)
Character Range: 116880–121645

Border Ranges, make it likely that populations in these areas are less vulnerable to the impacts of climate change (Powell et al. 2014). Macadamia tetraphylla populations located outside these areas are more at risk to the potential consequences of climate change that include increased environmental stress and lowered reproductive potential.

Prioritisation of threats
This risk assessment considers the likelihood of a threat occurring (Probability) and the level of significance of the threat (Consequence). The Probability of a threat occurring is evaluated on a sliding scale of five categories (from 'likely to 'remote'), and the Consequence of a threat is evaluated on a sliding scale of six categories (from 'negligible' to 'catastrophic'); definition of these categories used is provided in Appendix 2: Risk probability, consequence and impact analysis.
Probability and Consequence are combined in a matrix to provide an ordinal level of Risk associated with particular threatening process ranked from 0 (being circumstances where no threat exists) to 4 (where a catastrophic level of threat exists). See Appendix 2: Risk probability, consequence and impact analysis and Figure 2 for details. Threats are further classified according to the timeframe over which they are likely to have maximum impact on species survival: Short < 5 years, Medium (M) 5–15 years and Long term (L) >15 years. The derived table (Table 9) provides a basis for prioritisation of threats to guide management actions.
Table 9. Threat prioritisation
Threat                          Impacts                                                                                   Probability  Consequence   Risk (0–4)  Time (S, M, L)
Habitat loss and fragmentation  Loss of individuals                                                                       Likely       Moderate      2           L
                               Loss of populations                                                                       Possible     Catastrophic  4           L
                               Reduced connectivity and gene flow with genetic consequences                              Likely       High          3           M, L
                               Reduced habitat available for establishment                                               Likely       Moderate      2           M, L
                               Reduced ecosystem viability                                                               Likely       High          3           L
Small populations               Isolation; loss of diversity                                                              Likely       Very high     4           M, L
                               Degradation of habitat; change in environment                                             Likely       High          3           M, L
                               Reduction in pollinators                                                                  Likely       High          3           M, L
Weeds                           Increased fire risk at ecotones                                                           Likely       Moderate      2           S, M, L
Vine weeds                      Change in habitat structure, composition, and function; loss of individual trees          Likely       Very high     4           S, M, L
                               Reduced recruitment                                                                       Likely       Very high     4           S, M, L
Fire                            Habitat degradation through inappropriate fire regimes                                    Likely       Moderate      2           M, L
                               Loss of populations through wildfire                                                      Possible     Very high     3           M, L
                               Loss of only wild population of M. jansenii                                               Occasional   Catastrophic  4           S, M, L
Unmanaged livestock             Grazing and trampling                                                                     Likely       Moderate      2           S, M
Climate change                  Environmental stress                                                                      Possible     Moderate      2           M, L
                               Reduced reproduction                                                                      Possible     High          3           L
                               Local extinctions                                                                         Possible     High          3           L
Genetic pollution               Hybridisation of M. tetraphylla or M.