Identify keystone species (trout, etc.) within the Central Appalachian CBA
Identify keystone species (trout, etc.) within the Central Appalachian CBA (FROM FSC: How does this mitigate the risk of sourcing from areas where this species is being threatened by forest management activities?)
2 comments0 replies
0
Christopher Gibbons
Aug 14, 2018
Eh. I agree with the FSC question.
Ashley Hawk
Oct 12, 2018
To get the most benefit, take this option one step further by not only identifying keystone species, but identifying ways that sourcing is still an option but does not negatively impact species habitat. Specialists are very sensitive to certain management activities, but perhaps there are certain operations that can improve their habitat. By identifying the species and the habitat in which they thrive, forest management activities can potentially improve their habitat. One drawback is that these species may be difficult to identify on a very fine scale. Resources would need to be available to do species or habitat presence assessments through database queries as well as on the ground verification that they exist or could potentially exist there.
Demonstrate contributions/participation in efforts related to conserving aquatic biodiversity within the Central Appalachian CBA; consider contributions to FSC that are pooled and used together to maximize their impact
Participate in the discussion forum to share ideas and provide feedback about practical actions that companies can take to promote positive impacts on forest management, and reduce the risk of procuring wood from forests where important ecological values are threatened.
The forum is organized by each Regional Meeting with each Specified Risk Topic listed under each meeting:
Asheville (Appalachian Region)
Atlanta (Southeast/Mississippi Alluvial Valley Regions)
Portland (Pacific Coast/Rocky Mountain Regions)
Please post your comments and mitigation ideas under the correct topic. Example: To suggest a mitigation idea for Houston Toad, go into "Atlanta Meeting", find "Houston Toad" and add your comment within that section.
Please keep all comments as succinct as possible, and be respectful of others and their ideas. Moderators will remove any inappropriate content.
If you have any general questions, please fill out the contact form, or email standardsforum@us.fsc.org.
Want to post anonymously? Send your comments with the specific topic to standardsforum@us.fsc.org to be posted.
Eh. I agree with the FSC question.
To get the most benefit, take this option one step further by not only identifying keystone species, but identifying ways that sourcing is still an option but does not negatively impact species habitat. Specialists are very sensitive to certain management activities, but perhaps there are certain operations that can improve their habitat. By identifying the species and the habitat in which they thrive, forest management activities can potentially improve their habitat. One drawback is that these species may be difficult to identify on a very fine scale. Resources would need to be available to do species or habitat presence assessments through database queries as well as on the ground verification that they exist or could potentially exist there.