CHAPTER 1I: APPROACH AND METHODS 19
In addition to the assistance solicited from members of the Advisory Committee, Expert Team and
Technical and Steering Committees, public input has been sought in many capacities since the beginning
of Mississippi’s planning process and included:
A. Individual briefings and group meetings. These occurred throughout the development of the
CWCS. Presentations were provided upon request to any individual, organization, company or
agency. A list of presentations made is included in Appendix IV. CWCS Coordinators and
Technical Committee members made presentations to organizations such as the Mississippi Forestry
Association, the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service State Technical Committee, the All
Bird Conservation Workshop, the Mississippi Department of Transportation staff members, U.S.
Forest Service staff working on the revision of the state forest m,anagement plan, the Mississippi
Wildlife Federation Board of Directors and affiliate representatives, the Mississippi Department of
Marine Resources staff, American Fisheries Society, Mississippi Chapter members, the Mississippi
Bat Working Group and the Mississippi Forest Legacy Program development committee. Briefings
were provided at the beginning of the planning process to representatives from statewide
conservation organizations such as the Audubon Society, the Mississippi Wildlife Federation, The
Nature Conservancy and the Mississippi Fish and Wildlife Foundation. All organizations assigned
representatives to participate in the Advisory Committee.
B. A promotional brochure was completed in early 2004 and used for presentations, and was
distributed through MDWFP’s offices to the potential stakeholders and the public to provide
information and solicit input. The brochure was also on posted on the agency website and provided
to all Advisory Committee and Steering Committee members to use in communication with their
staff, volunteers and others. A copy of the brochure can be found in Appendix V.
C. A CWCS website was developed in early 2004 (www.mdwfp.com/cwcs) and has been used to post
all plan elements after review by Advisory, Technical and/or Steering Committee. The website was
the primary method of providing material to the public and stakeholders for additional review and
comments and included a page for feedback. The site will remain active as this strategy is
implemented and additional planning iterations are developed.
D. A technical survey entitled Evaluation of Species of Greatest Conservation Need in Mississippi was
distributed in late 2003 to 81 biologists in the state and region with expertise on potential species of
concern to seek their input and evaluation of the status of species and to recommend additional
species for listing as a SGCN. Forty-six experts responded to the survey and provided information
on the distribution and abundance of species, priority habitats, research, survey and monitoring
recommendations and other information critical to the development of this CWCS. They also
evaluated the state heritage ranks for these species and made recommendations on any needed