8.2 Required 10-Year Comprehensive Review and Revision
8.2.4 Technical Review and Revision (2012–2015) In 2012 and 2013, the Technical Team, along with NCWRC biologists, partners, and stake- holder volunteers, collaboratively reviewed draft copies of NCNHP’s climate vulnerability assessment reports (NCNHP 2010) using onsite workgroup meetings, virtual meetings, and data sharing via multiple web-based tools (e.g., online meeting rooms, Microsoft OneNote, electronic comment forms) . Te NCNHP vulnerability assessments describe how climate change and other impacts are expected to afect fsh and wildlife species and compare and rank climate change against other categories of threats. Recommendations developed during the collaborative review identify needs for survey, monitoring, research, manage- ment, programs, and partnerships to address the impacts. Tese recommendations have been incorporated into natural community descriptions for aquatic, wetland, and terres- trial systems (see Chapter 4 of this Plan). In 2013 and 2014, the vulnerability assessments were revised to incorporate technical review comments and were published as draft natural community descriptions for public review on the NCWAP web page. An announcement requesting review assistance was distributed to a list of over 700 partner and stakeholder email addresses and was promi- nently featured on the NCWAP web page for nearly eight months. A sign-up form was also made available online for the public to participate on an ad hoc Stakeholder Review Team to assist with reviewing the draft descriptions. Te draft documents were available in PDF format, which could be viewed in a number of ways: online in a web browser using a vari- ety of electronic devices (computer, mobile phone, tablet, e-reader); after downloading to a local storage device for ofine viewing on an electronic device; or by downloading and then printing the pages. Each PDF document contained a URL link to automatically submit comments through the internet to NCWRC. Te web page included telephone and email contact information to request additional information, report problems or difculties accessing the draft Plan, or ask questions. Comments received were evaluated and incor- porated as appropriate; approximately 20 comments were received during this review pro- cess. Te information developed during this review has been incorporated into Chapter 4 Habitats. A workgroup formed in 2013 by the WAP Revision Technical Team was tasked with devel- oping new evaluation metrics and ranking criteria for identifying SGCN and other priority species (see Appendix F for more information). To help facilitate the evaluation process, NCWRC created a database interface to collect evaluation input and made it accessible through a secured internet portal for Taxa Team members to submit evaluation data. Te database was designed to reduce reviewer bias by standardizing the review process, con- solidate data, calculate ranking scores, track revisions, and provide a consistent informa- tion collection method. Reports compiled from database entries were provided to Taxa Team members and peer review volunteers. Tree email announcements were sent to a list of species experts to request peer review assistance. A sign-up form was also available on
853
2015 NC Wildlife Action Plan
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online