Common use of Essential data Clause in Contracts

Essential data. At a minimum, a determination of the potential distribution of a terrestrial pest or disease requires the following types of data: information to underpin a correct diagnosis/taxonomic identification climate data knowledge of overseas range, including native and invaded ranges. Data on the types and range of obligate hosts or habitats is valuable for determining the potential distribution of terrestrial pests and diseases, provided it is available and incontrovertible. Secondary data that directly affect the potential distribution of a pest or disease can be used to determine the potential area of infestation. Secondary data will only be used if all parties on the NBMCC agree and only if it is available, highly relevant and incontrovertible. Secondary data includes: insolation humidity land use vegetation cover soil type. If the secondary data are known to limit the extent of potential distribution they should be combined with the modelling output to increase the robustness of the conclusions on potential distribution. It may also be useful to analyse a number of factors to establish the timing of management actions and response arrangements (for example: it is important to undertake action within days for an outbreak of eucalyptus rust, while action may be delayed for up to 18 months with the European house borer). Such factors may include: reproductive rates dispersal capacity/dispersal pathways vector dispersal natural barriers the presence of natural enemies (predators/competitors/diseases/parasites) in Australia. When providing advice to the NBMG, the NBMCC will need to advise on the level of confidence it has in the information that underpins the climate suitability map for the pest or disease species. The most accurate data available should be used. The best sources of data are: published, peer-reviewed data museum/herbarium/collection records and expert advice, properly elicited. Other sources of data that may be available are: free databases (such as ECO, GBIF, PaDIL) and internet sources, where the level of confidence ranks (highest to lowest): validated data sources with open access validated data sources without open access survey data and open access (e.g. a google search). Where data are not validated, these sources should be checked and validated where possible. The data sources listed in item 6.5(d) of this attachment should be assessed according to their confidence ratings (see table in item 6.5(h) of this attachment). Assessments of survey data should consider the methodology used. If the methodology is not available, a low confidence rating should be assigned to these data. Surveys that follow international standards, such as those outlined in ISPM-6 (for plant pests and diseases) or OIE reporting standards (for animal Pests and diseases) should be assigned a higher confidence rating. Surrogate species (closely related species) information should not be used as there is no direct correlation between surrogates and the actual pest/disease species. Formal and informal networks of experts are an essential source of information and data. These networks should be encouraged and communicated to ensure timely and effective decision-making. A table outlining the confidence rating of different data sources is provided below. Peer-reviewed scientific paper High High quality science or plant specific books (e.g. floras), non-peer reviewed scientific paper (e.g. conference proceedings), Personal communications from experts (e.g. PhD, or higher degree on species being assessed), Unpublished reports from highly reliable sources (e.g. commercial reports or honours theses, etc.), Internet information from Herbaria data, or Internet information that cites sources from the ‘Medium/High’ category above. Medium/High