-
Link to the Conservation Planning Model
-
by Dr. Rob Balwin, Clemson University. See Video, Model (PPT image), 1-pager briefing paper.
Located in
LP Members
/
…
/
Project Documents
/
Content from AppLCC Staff
-
AppLCC Species List
-
WG members -- I will attach a copy of the AppLCC species-habitat database we mentioned on the Jan 14/15 meeting, should that be helpful in your work. The following information was provided on how the data were assembled. (1.) Criteria used for assembling the species – i.e., SGCN, Listed/Proposed/Candidate etc. Criteria for assembling the original list were the SGNC species with the addition of federally listed species. (2) How was the habitat association was assigned (and if the habitat classification system was standardized when assigned). With the exception of mussels and fish (used Natureserve scheme for those) the habitat association is not based on any standard habitat classification scheme and is a very broad summary of the habitats listed in the source information. (3) How species were included (i.e., reference to the 75% range. All species that were found (even partially) within the AppLCC boundary were included in this list. Species listed on SWAPs, but not found within the LCC Boundary were deleted. If (by visual inspection of range maps found in the source material) more than 75% of a species range was found with the LCC Boundary, it was coded a YES in the LCC GLOBAL TRUST column - the thought behind this was that the LCC has a global responsibility to preserve those species. (4) Re: plants and what criteria was used to exclude species from the list).
• Plants were not included because only one state (Georgia) and the federal list had plants listed (so the ranking of plant species when you do your "how many states is the species found in" analysis would have been heavily skewed, making them seem much less important than they actually are. To be true to the process, I would suggest getting plant lists from each state (maybe S1-S2 species).
• Invertebrates were not included simply because I ran out of time cleaning up the list and range information for many of them is not easily available. I do believe they should be included in the final list of species. and would be happy to work on the invert list if you'd like...it would take some coordination with states to get range info.
• The fish list was almost finished (data is readily available on Natureserve Explorer)
(5) Re: migratory birds handled in assembling this data set. The original list of migratory birds was created using the same process as for all other species. The only difference is that they have two possible habitat associations - breeding habitat and wintering habitat (if applicable) because managing for both of these is important to their conservation.
(6) Final note - there may be a few (less than ten) duplicate species because some states had a subspecies listed, while others had the only species listed.
Located in
LP Members
/
…
/
Project Documents
/
Content from AppLCC Staff
-
Content from AppLCC Staff
-
Contains any materials the CCVA Team has requested from AppLCC staff or staff thought might be helpful for the Team's work.
Located in
LP Members
/
…
/
Climate Change Workspace
/
Project Documents
-
Literature
-
Folder content from the GoogleDocs site for the NatureServe CCV WorkGroup.
Located in
LP Members
/
…
/
Climate Change Workspace
/
Project Documents
-
Criteria
-
This is the folder for the Criteria for selecting habitats and species for CCVA (HG, KH, BC)
Located in
LP Members
/
…
/
Climate Change Workspace
/
Project Documents
-
Downscale
-
This is a folder for the Downscale subGroup (HH & PB)
Located in
LP Members
/
…
/
Climate Change Workspace
/
Project Documents
-
Methods
-
This is the subGroup working on CC Vulnerability Assessments. (JO & KB)
Located in
LP Members
/
…
/
Climate Change Workspace
/
Project Documents
-
Final Agenda with Hotlinks
-
To the April 19th Partners meeting at NCTC.
Located in
News & Events
/
Events
/
Notes - GACP Meeting - April 19th
-
Session 7 - Brainstorming and Action Items
-
Session from 2-4pm;
• What guidance can we offer to the National and Regional Conservation Efforts?
• What priority request for science delivery (application/staff-fellowship) and Project-level support across the region if FY18 Allocations available?
• How can our science partners keep the vision & forward movement on this important conservation agenda: i.e., contribute to the larger and longer-term vision of advancing the art/science/fellowship of system-conservation?
• (continue) What is the Statement of Commitment of the new and reengaging partnership – aspects of funding, staffing(fellowship), etc… & [ID next steps]
Located in
News & Events
/
Events
/
Notes - GACP Meeting - April 19th
-
Session 6 - Research Presentation & Discussion Notes
-
notes on the presentation and following discussion point
Located in
News & Events
/
Events
/
Notes - GACP Meeting - April 19th
