scholarly journals Synthesizing Data to Classify and Risk Assess Vegetation Types for Regulations in Inland New South Wales Australia

Land ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 1050
Author(s):  
John Benson
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Risk Category ◽  
Ecological Communities ◽  
South Wales ◽  
Extensive Field ◽  
Ecosystem Risk ◽  
Field Samples

From 1998, land-use regulations in New South Wales Australia referred to risk status of plant community types and abiotic landscapes. Lacking was a uniform vegetation classification for 77% of NSW comprising the inland arid, semi-arid and cropping agricultural zones: regions that contain patchy floristic plot data. In response, 562 plant communities, mainly at levels 8 in the IVC, were classified by synthesizing plot-based analyses, qualitative descriptions, maps, extensive field checks, new field samples and peer review. Qualitative information was vital to complete a thorough classification. Each type was assigned a risk category based on six risk assessment criteria developed prior to IUCN RLE. Occurrences in protected areas were audited and related to original extent yielding a protected area/adequacy code. Results were used in land change assessment tools and contributed to the listing of 40 threatened ecological communities under biodiversity laws. Two mapping methods attained different levels of reliability. Applying risk criteria to coarse versus fine levels in typologies can produce different results. Mid-to fine level global hierarchies best suit ecosystem risk assessment.

Ecosystem risk assessment for Cumberland Plain Woodland, New South Wales, Australia

2014 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 400-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark G. Tozer ◽  
Michelle R. Leishman ◽  
Tony D. Auld
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
South Wales ◽  
Ecosystem Risk

Sexual risk assessment in general practice: evidence from a New South Wales survey

Sexual Health ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asaduzzaman Khan ◽  
David Plummer ◽  
Rafat Hussain ◽  
Victor Minichiello
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Sexual Risk ◽  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
Sexual History ◽  
History Taking ◽  
South Wales ◽  
Sexually Transmissible Infections ◽  
Sexual History Taking ◽  
Sexual Histories

Background: Physicians’ inadequate involvement in sexual risk assessment has the potential to miss many asymptomatic cases. The present study was conducted to explore sexual risk assessment by physicians in clinical practice and to identify barriers in eliciting sexual histories from patients. Methods: A stratified random sample of 15% of general practitioners (GP) from New South Wales was surveyed to assess their management of sexually transmissible infections (STI). In total, 409 GP participated in the survey with a response rate of 45.4%. Results: Although nearly 70% of GP regularly elicited a sexual history from commercial sex workers whose presenting complaint was not an STI, this history taking was much lower (<10%) among GP for patients who were young or heterosexual. About 23% never took a sexual history from Indigenous patients and 19% never elicited this history from lesbian patients. Lack of time was the most commonly cited barrier in sexual history taking (55%), followed by a concern that patients might feel uncomfortable if a sexual history was taken (49%). Other constraints were presence of another person (39%) and physician’s embarrassment (15%). About 19% of GP indicated that further training in sexual history taking could improve their practice. Conclusions: The present study identifies inconsistent involvement by GP in taking sexual histories, which can result in missed opportunities for early detection of many STI. Options for overcoming barriers to taking sexual histories by GP are discussed.

The 10 Lords of the Universe - the New South Wales TSC Act's Scientific Committee

1997 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leong Lim
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Planning ◽  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
Species Conservation ◽  
Scientific Committee ◽  
Ecological Communities ◽  
South Wales ◽  
The People ◽  
Good Government ◽  
The Universe

The question as to whom should the authority to determine listing and delisting of species, populations, ecological communities and key threatening processes that affects the state's wildlife (flora and fauna) be delegated, for what purpose and what priority we should place them in relation to all of society's needs, is a fundamental and an important one. The authority for setting up the Scientific Committee of the Threatened Species Conservation Act (New South Wales) 1995 is examined. Its functions and the individuals that make up this Committee, who they represent and the determinations this Committee has reached so far are discussed. The implications for the listing of species, populations and ecological communities with some of the more serious problems such listings have caused are outlined with particular reference to the application of the 8-Point Test under s 5A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. These practical difficulties aside, the fundamental question still remains; Can the New South Wales State Parliament delegate its legislative powers for peace, welfare and good government, to a lower authority that is not directly elected by the people, accountable to no one and that has no propriety interest in the subject matter? Thus a question of Constitutional validity of all or part of the TSC Act arises.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document