Appendix 5
Reference Document 5-2
take into account the ability of a species to disperse to reach any new areas that may become climatically suitable. These resulting predictions from these models allow researchers to create spatially explicit estimates of whether suitable climate conditions for a species are likely to remain stable, become more widespread in the landscape (i.e. increase), or become more geographically rare in the future (i.e. decrease). For example, if suitable climate conditions for a species were projected to decrease greatly in an area in the future, then the species would be considered more vulnerable to climate change than a species for which climate conditions were predicted to remain stable. It is important to note that raw data from niche models (e.g., spatial raster data) is not usually readily available to the public due to the large size of the files but instead is available in summary form in the research literature (i.e., academic journal articles). Therefore, more translational effort is needed with niche model results as the form of the data might not be readily interpretable by users. Niche model results can be used in tandem with CCVI estimates to enhance the understanding of a given species’ vulnerability, because CCVIs and niche models have complementary strengths that can help land managers make informed conservation decisions. Niche models offer more refined and spatially explicit predictions (i.e., changes in suitable habitat) about the direct exposure of a species to climate change but are only available for a limited set of species, in part because the models require extensive data on a species before they can be applied. CCVI estimates use an expert judgment-based approach that allows integration of different types of information about species and what might make them vulnerable to climate change (e.g., their natural history). It is important to compare CCVI estimates with available ecological niche model predictions for SGCN to fully understand a given species’ vulnerability to climate change while keeping in mind the geographic (e.g., region or habitat evaluated) and biological contexts (e.g., estimated dispersal distance) of these assessments.
Summary of available climate change vulnerability indices
The USGS Southeast Climate Adaptation Science Center (SE CASC) and the University of Tennessee - Knoxville launched a research effort to support the SEAFWA states in integrating climate change considerations into their 2025 SWAP updates. This effort collated CCVI scores from 10 data sources within the eastern United States. It draws from CCVI assessments published in four SWAPs in the Southeast (West Virginia, Byers & Norris 2011; Tennessee, Glick et al. 2015; Florida, DuBois et al. 2011; and Louisiana, Holcomb et al. 2015) as well as the Illinois SWAP (Walk et al. 2011), Natural Heritage Programs in the Northeast (Schlesinger et al. 2011, Furedi et al. 2011), the Appalachian and North Atlantic Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (Sneddon & Galbraith 2015, Sneddon & Hammerson 2014), and the National Park Service Cumberland Piedmont Network (Bruno et al. 2012), all of which were informed by state conservation practitioners. This work compiles 1,600 CCVI estimates for 795 species (note: some species have multiple CCVI estimates coming from different states). Many of these are on the RSGCN list for the Southeast. For North Carolina, 207 SGCN have been scored via CCVI estimates to date by other institutions (Armsworth et al., 2025a & 2025b). Most CCVI assessments for North Carolina’s SGCN to date have focused on birds. Many of these CCVI assessments indicate that while some bird species may be vulnerable, a larger proportion may remain stable or increase under changing climatic conditions (Figure 18). Though more assessments are needed
2025 NC Wildlife Action Plan
15 of 66
Made with FlippingBook Ebook Creator