Volume No. 11, 2002
FINAL REPORT SUMMARIES
The SC-GAP Project began in 1996 as an effort of the South Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit. Partners in the project from the beginning included the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Coastal Ecosystems Project. The objectives of the project were to (1) map the vegetation of South Carolina in as much detail as possible with the goal being the production of a land cover map easily cross-walked to the TNC alliance level, which is dominant species, (2) produce a database of vertebrate ranges and habitat affinities for use in predicting vertebrate distributions within the state, (3) produce a database of protected lands within the state including both public and private agencies with associated ownership data and classify them by protection status, (4) analyze the relative protection of the state’s biodiversity through a gap analysis, (5) build partners during the development and implementation stages of the SC-GAP Project, and (6) provide scientific data on South Carolina’s biodiversity to managers and decision-makers.
The SC-GAP land cover mapped the state’s natural and man-made vegetation types to two classifications. A general 27-class habitat map was used in modeling vertebrate distributions. We also produced a more detailed 54-class map in accordance with the National GAP guidelines of mapping to the alliance level where possible. The initial data used in developing the map was remotely sensed satellite data that was preclassified to 28 classes. We used data from detailed soil surveys, National Wetlands Inventory surveys, and elevation maps to improve this classification and develop our 54-class land cover. This was aggregated into the habitat map for use in producing vertebrate distributions. The accuracy of the map was determined through a combination of aerial photography and ground assessment points that were compared with the general land cover. Overall map accuracy of the general land cover, Anderson Level II, and Anderson Level I classifications were 33%, 50%, and 71%, respectively.
The vertebrate database was developed through consultation with current literature, with acknowledged state experts, and with general taxonomic guides. This produced a database with ranges and habitat affinities for a total of 455 vertebrate species that regularly occur in South Carolina. After the database was completed, experts were again consulted to assist in resolving conflicts in the data and quality-checking the database. A total of 65 amphibians, 73 reptiles, 249 birds, and 68 mammals were included in the final database and predictive modeling. Modeling was done by attributing each species to the counties where it is known to occur and to the habitat types it uses within those counties. These occurrence maps were overlaid to produce coverages of overall species richness and richness for each taxonomic group. The accuracy of the predicted vertebrate distributions was assessed by comparing a list of species that SC-GAP predicts would be present at a site to a list of species known to occur at the site. We used species lists from five areas within the state to check our accuracy. The accuracy ranged from 57% to 85% depending on the site. For the largest site with the longest period of study the accuracy was 85%.
The third database component of the project was the production of a database on land ownership within the state. This was accomplished through a partnership with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, who assisted in mapping stewardship lands for the eight coastal counties. If all GAP status lands (1 through 4) are considered, there is a total of 6,580 acres of publicly and privately owned land within the state, comprising about 8.1% of the total. If only the lands of highest protection (GAP status 1 and 2) are counted, this amounts to 1,801 acres or about 2% of South Carolina. Clearly there is a need for more activity in land protection within the state.
The gap analysis phase of the project indicates the need for further action to protect our natural habitats and our rural landscapes. While many of our forests receive at least some level of protection, very little of our scrub/shrub, grassland, or cultivated land is protected according to GAP status. The very large majority of our vertebrate species are protected on less than 10% of their habitat. For some species of concern, we have reached or surpassed our conservation goals, especially for those with specific habitat needs. For species such as bats, however, where habitat requirements are less well defined, more work needs to be done in ensuring their ongoing protection.
The outreach portion of the project has been very successful through partnerships developed during the accomplishment of our goals. These partnerships will continue through activities such as finer-scale mapping of state natural land covers, through scientific studies of invertebrate diversity and better habitat modeling, and through ongoing land cover and change detection projects. There are many committed and excellent land managers, planners, agency personnel and conservation groups who are interested in the SC-GAP data, and it is our hope that they will take it, use it, and make it better.
The Kansas Gap Analysis Project (KS-GAP) began in June 1995. From the beginning GAP has been a partnership effort in production as well as in support. Kansas GAP has been coordinated at the Kansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit. The land cover map was developed from Landsat Thematic Mapper data by the Kansas Applied Remote Sensing Laboratory at the University of Kansas and the Kansas Biological Survey, also at the University of Kansas. The stewardship layer was developed by the Geographic Information System Spatial Analysis Laboratory (GISSAL) at Kansas State University. GISSAL also developed the initial Geographic Information System to hold the spatial and attribute data, and incorporated the initial vertebrate distribution models into the GIS. Vertebrate distribution models were developed by personnel at the Kansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit and others at the Division of Biology at Kansas State University. Unit personnel developed the final vertebrate distribution models and the final GIS.
The KS-GAP land cover map is the third statewide vegetation cover map developed for Kansas and is the first to map vegetation at the alliance level. The map is based on remote sensing of three dates of imagery for the 16 thematic mapper Landsat scenes that cover the state. Kansas is divided into eleven physiographic regions based on a combination of underlying geology, soils, and vegetation, which were used in conjunction with the satellite data and other data sources to delineate land cover classes. Man-made features and open water were screened using one of the earlier maps. Agricultural cropland was then distinguished from natural vegetation by use of an unsupervised classification. Finally, natural vegetation classes were identified with a supervised classification.
The Kansas land cover map includes 40 natural vegetation classes, 2 semi-natural classes (non-native grassland and CRP), and three man-made classes (urban, cropland, and open water). The 40 natural vegetation classes include 10 forest, 5 woodland, 4 shrubland, 11 upland, and 10 wetland alliances. Forty-eight percent of the land cover of Kansas is cropland, 10% is non-native grassland and CRP, and native grasslands cover an additional 26%. Classification accuracy varied according to the level of the classification. At the Anderson level 1 classification, overall accuracy is 88-89%. At the finer level of the formation, accuracy was between 64 and 66%, and at the finest level (alliance) accuracy was 49-51%. These accuracy figures are based on small samples for some cover classes, so they should be interpreted cautiously.
Vertebrate distribution models were developed for 359 species, including 190 species of breeding birds, 72 species of mammals, 71 reptiles, and 26 species of amphibians. Lists of species to be modeled were generated and reviewed by scientific review committees of experts identified for each taxonomic group. Development of vertebrate models involved three steps: First, species distributions were identified from combinations of museum specimens, literature searches, and on-line databases. Second, habitat associations for each species were identified by in-depth literature searches. Third, habitat associations identified from the literature were linked to the land cover map cover classes with the help of a database decision-support system developed by Unit personnel. Each phase of model development was reviewed by our Scientific Review Committees for accuracy and completeness.
Bird species richness is highest in the Arkansas River Lowlands, Smoky Hills, and High Plains physiographic regions in Kansas, and mammals had their highest diversity in the same areas, but in reverse order. The pattern at the hexagon scale may be biased, reflecting highest diversity in areas experiencing the most intense research in the vicinity of the state’s major universities, where there is a higher probability of detection. Reptile diversity patterns are similar between the hexagon scale and the physiographic region. Reptile species are most abundant in the Arkansas River Lowlands, followed by the Flint Hills, and Osage Cuestas. Amphibian diversity is highest in the Osage Cuestas (23 species), and Glaciated Region (20 species). The Ozark Plateau, Flint Hills, and Cherokee Lowlands each had 19 species. An interesting feature of the richness patterns is that each of the four vertebrate classes has a unique distribution independent of the other three classes in Kansas.
Land stewardship in Kansas is dominated by private ownership, probably to a greater degree than for any other state. There are 312,284 ha of public land or land managed for long-term management of biodiversity (1.7% of the surface area of Kansas). There are only 122 ha under status 1 management, 38,684 ha in status 2, and 222,729 ha identified in management status 3. The remainder of the state is managed as status 4.
One of the primary goals of Gap Analysis projects is to identify “gaps in the protection of biodiversity” in individual states, identified as species or communities that have inadequate protection of habitats under public management for the long-term protection of biodiversity. By this definition, the entire state is a gap. Clearly this is not an adequate view for conservation where land-ownership is almost entirely private, and other approaches to conservation are required. Kansas is unique in having the smallest proportion of its lands in public ownership, but the remaining states in the Great Plains are similarly dominated by private land ownership. Private ownership does not necessarily imply a lack of conservation. At this time, although several Great Plains plant and animal species have greatly reduced distributions compared to former times, none are known to be extinct.
A different conservation approach that focuses on working with private landowners is needed in this region. Possibilities include conservation incentives in the Farm Bill, state and federal agency conservation programs such as the Fish and Wildlife Service Partners for Wildlife Program and the NRCS Wetland Reserve Program. The most powerful long-term tool for conservation in states like Kansas is education of children who will become the private land stewards in the future. Gap analysis can be incorporated into science curricula at both the primary and secondary school levels to instill conservation values at an early age.
(Status as of December 2002)
All completed products and reports will be available through the GAP Web site at http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp. Drafts and other products may be obtained from the state project PI as noted.
Alabama
Project under way
Anticipated completion date: December 2005
Contacts: James B. Grand, PI
Leader, Alabama Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit
Auburn University, Auburn
bgrand@acesag.auburn.edu, (334) 844-4796
Amy L. Silvano, Project Coordinator
Alabama Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit
Auburn University, Auburn
silvaal@auburn.edu, (334) 844-9295
Land cover: Land cover mapping is currently in progress. All Landsat scenes for the state have been acquired through the Multi- Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (MRLC) with the exception of one scene in the Gulf coastal plain. An image analyst/remote sensing technician was hired in June 2002 to facilitate image interpretation. Initial classification was focused on portions of the Piedmont and Southeastern Plains to encompass the Tallapoosa and Coosa watersheds, which will aid both terrestrial and aquatic GAP projects. The four scenes spanning this region have been classified to Anderson Level II (8 classes) using digital ortho-quarter quads (DOQQ) and leaf-off scenes for interpretation. A set of decision rules utilizing ancillary data will be drafted in early 2003 to further refine the Anderson Level II classes to finer GAP-level mapping units. Efforts to classify remaining scenes will continue through 2003 as will field verification work, which was initiated in fall 2002.
Animal modeling: Animal modeling began mid-year 2002 for 372 terrestrial vertebrate species including 65 amphibians, 161 breeding birds, 59 mammals, and 87 reptiles. A steering committee was established to provide expert reviews throughout each modeling phase, and a GIS technician was hired in July 2002 to develop vertebrate models. Hexagon range extents for nearly 90% of species to be modeled have been drafted and are being updated with current location data. Completion of the remaining draft ranges and expert reviews are scheduled for February 2003. The wildlife habitat relationship database has been constructed, and literature reviews have commenced for both amphibian and avian species. We expect to expand literature reviews to all taxa and begin model development in 2003.
Land stewardship mapping: Stewardship mapping is under way. Digital boundary files and ownership data have been compiled from various public and private agencies through cooperative arrangements. Building of this layer will continue through the duration of the project and will be finalized in the last year (early 2005) to provide the most up-to-date data for our gap analysis.
Reporting and data distribution: Report writing will be ongoing through the duration of the project. Project updates and current information can be found on our Web site at http://www.auburn.edu/gap.
Other accomplishments and innovations: AL-GAP has partnered with Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fishes, Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, and the School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences at Auburn University to build species distribution maps for the forthcoming publication of Imperiled Vertebrate Wildlife and Freshwater Mollusks of Alabama. AL-GAP personnel presented at the Alabama State GIS Symposium in August 2002 and participated in National GIS Day events held at Auburn University with a GAP presentation and poster display.
Not started
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD. Remapping under way (see Southwest Regional GAP).
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD.
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD.
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD. Remapping under way (see Southwest Regional GAP).
Connecticut
(see Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island)
(see Maryland, Delaware, and New Jersey)
Draft data available from state (http://www.wec.ufl.edu/coop/gap/). Review under way.
Georgia
Project under way (http://narsal.ecology.uga.edu/gap.html)
Anticipated completion date: July 2003
Contacts: Elizabeth A. Kramer, PI
Natural Resource Spatial Analysis Laboratory
Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athen
lkramer@arches.uga.edu, (706) 542-2968
Matthew J. Elliott, Coordinator
Natural Resource Spatial Analysis Laboratory
Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens
melliott@arches.uga.edu, (706)
542-3489
Land cover: A 44-class land cover map has been created. A ground-based accuracy assessment is complete for the mountain regions, and an aerial videography assessment is under way for the Piedmont and Coastal Plain.
Animal modeling: Final models have been created for about 50 species. We anticipate completing the remainder by April 2003.
Land stewardship mapping: The stewardship layer was completed in 1999. We will include recent land purchases by the State of Georgia, an updated Forest Service boundary, and several land trust acquisitions by March 2003.
Analysis: We expect to complete analysis of Georgia’s land cover and wildlife habitat distributions by June 2003.
Reporting and data distribution: The final report for Georgia GAP should be completed by July 2003.
Other accomplishments and innovations: The initial 18-class general land cover map created as the first stage of GAP mapping provided the base layer for the Georgia Land Use Trends (GLUT) project, which examines changes over the period 1974-1998. We have also completed land cover maps for 1974, 1985, and 1992, and are beginning accuracy assessment and data analysis.
Hawaii
Project under way
Anticipated completion date: June 2005
Contact: Dan Dorfman
Research and Training, University of Hawaii, Honolulu
Dorfman@hawaii.edu,
(808) 956-6616
Land cover: HI-GAP is using a spectral decision-tree approach to vegetation classification. HI-GAP’s land cover work is based on using spectral properties evident in Landsat TMe 7 images, which have been processed to “at satellite” reflectance values. Classification decisions are based on spectral properties revealed by “raw” bands, vegetation/soil indices, principal component analysis, and the tasseled-cap treatment. Initial efforts are focused on the island of Oahu.
Terrestrial Ecological Systems (corresponding to the Group level of the NVC) are being developed first to represent the physiognomic level of distinction. This effort will be followed by an Alliance level classification representing floristic variations within vegetation systems.
Animal modeling: We have been collaborating with the Hawaii Forest Bird Interagency Database Project to develop bird distributions. The distribution of the only land mammal native to Hawaii, the Hoary Bat, as well as some invertebrates will also be mapped. Species distribution modeling has been initiated for native and nonnative freshwater aquatic species of vertebrates and selected macroinvertebrates. We have been experimenting with various GIS methods for capturing the necessary physical attributes of each stream segment. Our results have been positive, and we now have a set of physical attributes we will capture for all streams in Hawaii and a solid methodology for modeling physical attributes needed to predict species distributions. We are now in the process of implementing the methodology we have developed for Hawaii and expect to have results to test by the end of spring 2003 (see also the report on Hawaii Aquatic GAP on page 79).
Land stewardship mapping: Stewardship mapping has been completed both for the terrestrial and marine environment. GIS data sets are available for dissemination through the Hawaii Natural Heritage Program’s FTP site, the National Gap Analysis Program Office, and the Pacific Basin Information Node (PBIN) of the National Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII).
Analysis: Analysis is currently scheduled for FY05. We plan to employ a simulated annealing approach to optimizing biological viability goals while minimizing exposure to degradation of ecological integrity and socioeconomic factors. The gap analysis for our project is anticipated to employ the use of SITES/Marxan for design of a comprehensive ecosystem conservation approach.
Reporting and data distribution: Data are available for both aquatic species survey information mapping and stewardship mapping. Contact HINHP or the National GAP Office for details.
Other accomplishments and innovations: HI-GAP is working in concert with NBII’s Pacific Basin Information Node to compile data on and map the distribution of the top incipient invasive species on each island. Each island’s Invasive Species Committee (ISC) has provided location data and status information for key invasive species, which will be consolidated into one database over the next few months. HI-GAP is currently working with members of Hawaii’s Coordinating Group on Alien Pest Species (CGAPS) to define those alien species that are considered threats to the biodiversity of the Hawaiian Islands. Once the species have been chosen, relevant information will be compiled and mapped, creating an alien species layer that will be used in determining degree of threat to existing native flora and fauna.
Idaho
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD.
Illinois
Project under way (http://www.inhs.uiuc.edu/cwe/gap/gapintro.html)
Anticipated completion date: March 2003
Contacts: Pat Brown, PI
Director, Center for Wildlife Ecology
Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign
pbrown@mail.inhs.uiuc.edu, (217) 244-4289
Tari Weicherding, Coordinator
Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign
tweicher@uiuc.edu, (217) 265-0583
Land cover: The land cover layer and accuracy assessment are complete. The land cover layer can be viewed and downloaded at http://www.agr.state.il.us/gis/index.html.
Animal modeling: The wildlife habitat relationship database has been completed for 472 species. Predicted distribution models are currently being created for all species. We anticipate having all models reviewed and finalized by March 2003. None of the vertebrate maps have been validated.
Land stewardship mapping: The land stewardship layer is complete and will be updated as needed.
Analysis: Analysis will begin in early 2003.
Reporting and data distribution: We expect to complete reporting and data distribution within the next four months. The Illinois Gap Analysis Project Web page can be reached at www.inhs.uiuc.edu/cwe/gap/gapintro.html.
Indiana
Project under way
Anticipated completion date: June 2003
Contact: Forest Clark
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bloomington
(812) 334-4261 x206
All of the primary data layers are complete, and analysis is near completion. Preliminary products will be delivered to the national GAP office for review in early 2003. We anticipate completion within six months.
Land cover: The Indiana land cover data are complete. We are incorporating these data into our gap analysis of Indiana. The data have also been used by various Indiana GAP partners for diverse projects and provided to numerous organizations upon request.
Animal modeling: The Indiana project completed the modeling of 300 vertebrate species. Pangaea Information Technologies, Ltd. was contracted to run the final models in the autumn of 2002. We are incorporating the models into our gap analysis of Indiana.
Land stewardship mapping: The land stewardship map of Indiana, developed primarily under the aegis of the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Division of Fish and Wildlife, is complete. We are incorporating these data into our gap analysis of Indiana.
Analysis: A preliminary gap analysis of Indiana has been run in cooperation with Pangaea Information Technologies, Ltd. The initial results have been forwarded to the national GAP office for review. We will continue to evaluate the data in the coming months in preparation for the Indiana Gap Analysis Project final report.
Reporting and data distribution: We are continuing the analysis phase of the project and have initiated writing of the final report. We propose to continue that process through the winter/spring of 2003 and, in cooperation with the national GAP office, make products available in the summer of 2003.
Other accomplishments and innovations: The Indiana Biodiversity Initiative (IBI), which uses Indiana Gap Analysis products extensively to identify landscape level conservation sites, received a generous grant from the Efroymson Fund of the Central Indiana Community Foundation. Working with our partner D.J. Case & Associates, the grant will support completion and pilot implementation of the IBI Regional Assessments in the spring of 2003.
Iowa
Draft data available from state (http://www.ag.iastate.edu/centers/cfwru/iowagap/. Review under way.
Anticipated completion date: December 2002
Contact: Kevin Kane
Director, GIS Support and Research Facility
Iowa State University, Ames
kkane@iastate.edu,
(515)
294-0526
The Iowa Gap Analysis Project (IA-GAP) finished its fourth and final year of funding in 2001. All that remains to be done is submitting the final report. The IA-GAP home page is accessible at http://www.iowagap.iastate.edu/.
Land cover: Land cover mapping is 100% complete. Final maps will be published in the final report and on the IA-GAP Web site. Data can also be viewed on the Iowa Geographic Image Map server at http://ortho.gis.iastate.edu/gaplandcover/gap_lc.html.
Animal modeling: Models have been completed for all species. Iowa has been a cooperator in the upper Midwest vertebrate modeling initiative along with North and South Dakota. Final distribution maps will be published in the final report and on the IA-GAP Web site.
Land stewardship mapping:Stewardship mapping and attribution is complete. Final maps will be published in the final report and on the IA-GAP Web site. The IA-GAP stewardship image map server can be accessed at http://maps.gis.iastate.edu/iagap.
Analysis: Analysis is complete.
Reporting and data distribution: Final maps, report, and data will be published on CDs, the GAP home page, and the IA-GAP Web site.
Other accomplishments and innovations:
Land cover accuracy assessment -The final report submitted to EPA Region VII can be viewed on the IA-GAP home page (http://www.iowagap.iastate.edu/) or on the National GAP site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Bulletins/10/methodological_study.htm).
NatureMapping -In 1999, Iowa State University Extension (ISUE) Wildlife Programs began offering the Iowa NatureMapping Program to a wide-ranging audience. NatureMapping is a citizen-based wildlife monitoring program, which is an education and outreach component of IA-GAP. Reliable, accurate, and up-to-date information about Iowa’s wildlife collected by Iowans will give those making decisions in wildlife management and research, urban development, or conservation and preservation a valuable layer of data not otherwise available in traditional land use planning. NatureMapping is a way to collect large data sets while reconnecting people to their local resources.
Iowa Geographic Information Image Server -The server is serving aerial photography (orthophotos), topographic maps, and other Iowa grid data from http://ortho.gis.iastate.edu. This service is heavily used by IA-GAP and our cooperators as well as many other Iowa users for a variety of applications. The goal for 2003 is to update storage to provide data at higher resolution and serve more data, including integrating vector data and new Iowa color infrared photography coordinated by the Iowa DNR.
Kansas
Draft data available from state (http://www.ksu.edu/kansasgap/). Review under way.
Anticipated completion date: January 2003
Contact: Jack Cully
USGS, Manhattan
bcully@ksu.edu, (785) 532-6534
Land cover: Complete
Animal modeling: Complete
Land stewardship mapping: Complete
Analysis: Complete
Reporting and data distribution: Finishing final edits on final report.
Other accomplishments and innovations: Developing a set of Great Plains regional animal distribution models using our database decision support system. States included are: Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming, South Dakota, Iowa, Montana, North Dakota, and Minnesota.
The Kansas Gap Analysis Program (KS-GAP) Education Project (contact: Glennis A. Kaufman, PI, Kansas State University, Manhattan, gkaufman@ksu.edu) has been developing seven modules for use in the elementary classroom. These modules use land cover data, stewardship data, and predicted distribution and habitat associations for terrestrial vertebrates in Kansas as the prototype. An oral presentation was given at the12th Annual National Gap Analysis Program Meeting at Shepherdstown, WV, about fostering the partnerships with trial schools and the initiation of module development. At the same meeting, a poster also was presented that showed our progress on the State Project Resource Manual. The manual will illustrate the methods used in developing the modules as well as equipment needed to develop these resources for elementary schools. We anticipate that the pilot project with the ten trial classrooms will be completed by mid-February 2003. The educational modules are served from the Web site, www.ksu.edu/kansasgap/. This project is supported by grants from USGS/BRD and the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks.
The KS-GAP Tools Project (contact: Glennis A. Kaufman, PI, Kansas State University, Manhattan, gkaufman@ksu.edu) is developing tools for use in management decisions for the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks. These decision tools are based on the land cover, stewardship, and vertebrate data layers developed in the KS-GAP state project. In 2003, the individuals involved in this project will provide presentations and hands-on training in the use of these tools. This project is supported by a renewable grant from the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks.
Kentucky
Draft data available from state (http://www.kfwis.state.ky.us/KYGAPWeb/index.htm). Review under way.
Anticipated completion date: March 2003
Contacts: Keith Wethington, PI
Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources,
Frankfort
keith.wethington@mail.state.ky.us,
(502) 564-7109
Tom Kind, Co-PI
Murray State University, Murray
tom.kind@murraystate.edu,
(270) 762-3110
Land cover: Complete.
Animal modeling: Complete.
Land stewardship mapping: Complete.
Analysis: Complete.
Reporting and data distribution: The KY-GAP team is now in the process of compiling the final report. We anticipate acceptance from National GAP by late winter or early spring 2003.
Other accomplishments and innovations: Several ancillary projects have been developed from these data. Three workshops have been conducted in conjunction with Murray State University, University of Louisville, University of Kentucky, and the KY Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Resources to train middle and high school teachers to use ArcView and the land cover and animal modeling data sets. These workshops were funded by a grant from the USGS. The KY Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Resources has also used these data to examine priority areas for the Comprehensive Plan portion of the State Wildlife Grants Program.
Louisiana
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD.
Maine
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD.
Maryland, Delaware, and New Jersey
Draft data available from state (http://fwie.fw.vt.edu/MDGAP/). Review under way.
Anticipated completion date: January 2003
Contact: D. Ann Rasberry
University of Maryland Eastern Shore, Princess Anne
darasberry@mail.umes.edu,
(410) 651-6069
Land cover: Land cover mapping for the three-state area was completed during 2001. An additional transformation on the data set was performed in 2002 to improve spatial accuracy and increase the nominal scale to 1:24,000. An accuracy assessment was conducted with nearly 2,500 points randomly selected from the project video. The final fuzzy accuracy assessment calculations have been completed; a report was presented at the annual GAP meeting in West Virginia and can be viewed from the GAP Web pages. The draft data sets were delivered to the Operations Office in January 2003.
Land stewardship mapping: The land stewardship mapping for the project was completed in 2002. Intense editing was conducted to resolve property boundary conflicts. The data sets were delivered to the Operations Office in January 2003.
Analysis: The tables for the land cover analyses have been created. The results of the gap analysis for the project will be completed and presented in the final report in January 2003.
Reporting and data distribution: The final report development was nearly completed in 2002. The report will be delivered to the Operations Office in January 2003.
Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island
Project under way
Anticipated completion date: May 2003
Contacts: Curtice Griffin
University of Massachusetts,
cgriffin@forwild.umass.edu,
(413) 545-2640
Benjamin Zuckerberg
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
bzucker@forwild.umass.edu,
(413) 545-3589
Land cover: Although the land cover map was completed in 1997, preliminary field assessment by cooperators indicated that there were significant classification errors, especially in the Cape Cod region. We corrected these misclassification errors and other rectification problems. The land cover map is corrected and completed for the study region.
Animal modeling: Habitat models were revised and completed for birds, reptiles, amphibians, and mammals. Additional expert reviews and revisions were made for all coarse range maps. Predicted habitat distributions for all 273 vertebrates modeled in the Southern New England region are complete. We are currently investigating the use of ancillary data sets for species whose breeding requirements make them difficult to map (e.g., bald eagles and shorebirds).
Land stewardship mapping: We updated and analyzed stewardship and management data for conservation lands throughout Southern New England. Ownership and management of these conservation lands included federal, state, private, nonprofit, municipal, and town-owned properties. Nearly 24% of the total land area of Southern New England is in conservation. However, only 4% is classified as GAP management categories 1 and 2 (the highest levels of biodiversity conservation). Of conservation lands, the major owners include state agencies (59.8%), private owners (17.4%, including private conservation easements, nonprofit organizations, and unrestricted management), and local governments (19.0%, including locally owned parks, recreation areas, and wildlife areas). In Southern New England, federal agencies own only 4% of the conservation land.
Analysis: Accuracy assessment for the land cover map was initially completed in 1996 (Slaymaker et al. 1996). However, considering the recent corrections of misclassification and rectification errors, we hope to redo the land cover map accuracy assessment. We are currently collecting species list and survey data to complete accuracy assessment for the predicted species distribution maps.
Reporting and data distribution: Once the databases and analyses are updated, all data layers will be made available on the National Gap Analysis home page. Until then, there will be only limited access to the data. The final report and data will also be distributed via CD-ROM. Availability of the data and final report is planned for May 2003.
Literature cited:
Slaymaker, D.M., K.M.L. Jones, C.R. Griffin and J.T. Finn. 1996. Mapping deciduous forests in Southern New England using aerial videography and hyperclustered multi-temporal Landsat TM imagery. Pages 87-101 in J.M. Scott, T.H. Tear, and F.W. Davis, editors. Gap Analysis: A landscape approach to biodiversity planning. American Society of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Bethesda, Maryland.
Michigan
Project under way
Anticipated completion date: September 2003
Contact: Mike Donovan
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Wildlife Division, Lansing
donovanm@state.mi.us, (517) 335-3445
Land cover: Land cover mapping followed the Upper Midwest GAP protocol (ftp://ftp.umesc.usgs.gov/pub/misc/umgap/98-g001.pdf). Mapping of the existing natural and seminatural land cover of Michigan continues in cooperation with the DNR’s Integrated Forest Monitoring Assessment and Prescription (IFMAP) project, utilizing new Landsat 7 imagery. The entire state should be completed in 2003. The existing land cover classification for the state (from original MRLC imagery) has been cross-walked to the NVCS.
Animal modeling: Wildlife Division research faculty at Michigan State University (MSU), in cooperation with the Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) and other Wildlife Division staff, will be completing work on a species distribution modeling project and gap analysis.
Land stewardship mapping: The stewardship data layer has been delivered to UMESC and is being reviewed.
Reporting and data distribution: Draft land-cover data and stewardship data are available from the USGS Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center. Contact Kirk Lohman at (608) 781-6341 or klohman@usgs.gov.
Minnesota
Project under way
Anticipated completion date: September 2003
Contact: Gary
Drotts
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Brainerd
gary.drotts@dnr.state.mn.us, (218) 828-2314
Land cover: Land cover mapping followed the Upper Midwest GAP protocol (ftp://ftp.umesc.usgs.gov/pub/misc/umgap/98-g001.pdf). The state Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has completed classification of the entire state and, with the assistance of NatureServe, the classification has been cross-walked to the NVCS.
Animal modeling: Hexagon species range maps have been developed for Minnesota and delivered to the USGS Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center (UMESC). Species expert review teams are helping to develop habitat suitability. The animal modeling coordinator for the Minnesota DNR is Jodie Provost ( Jodie.provost@dnr.state.mn.us). Vertebrate distribution mapping and gap analysis will be completed in 2003.
Land stewardship mapping: Stewardship mapping is completed, and a draft version is available from UMESC.
Reporting and data distribution: Draft land-cover data and stewardship coverages are available from UMESC. Additional land cover data are expected to become available in 2003. Contact Kirk Lohman at (608) 781-6341 or klohman@usgs.gov.
Mississippi
Project under way
Anticipated completion date: December 2003
Contacts: Francisco J. Vilella, PI
USGS Biological Resources Divisio
Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit
Mississippi State University, Mississippi State
fvilella@cfr.msstate.edu, (662) 325-0784
Richard B. Minnis, Coordinator
Department of Wildlife and Fisher
Mississippi State University, Mississippi State
rminnis@cfr.msstate.edu,
(662)
325-3158
Land cover: The MS-GAP land cover map was completed in 1999 and has been continually used by numerous state, federal, and local resource agencies since its completion. Requests for data remain high. Land cover data is available for download from the MS-GAP home page (http://www.cfr.msstate.edu/gap/gap.htm).
Animal modeling: Modeling for animal ranges and distribution has been completed. Distributions were developed for 402 species including 58 mammals, 216 birds, and 128 reptiles and amphibians.
Land stewardship mapping: Land stewardship mapping was completed in cooperation with the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks and the US Forest Service. As with many other eastern states, Mississippi is mostly comprised of status 4 lands. Less than 1% of the state is in level 1 status, while level 2 status lands comprise 7% of the state.
Analysis: Analysis is complete and is being used to finalize the MS-GAP final report. A draft final report will be submitted to the National GAP office during 2003.
Reporting and data distribution: Our current efforts are centered on finalizing the MS-GAP final report. Data are being distributed as requested from cooperators and other agencies.
Missouri
Draft data available from state. Review under way.
Anticipated completion date: March 2003
Contact: Timothy L. Haithcoat
Geographic Resources Center
University of Missouri-Columbia
HaithcoatT@missouri.edu, (573) 882-2324
Land cover: Phase I land cover was completed by the Missouri Resource Assessment Partnership. Metadata has been compiled for the base land cover map as well as all derivative databases created from this base such as ecotones, interiors, etc. Ancillary land cover databases (sink holes, wetlands, glades, etc.) compiled for this project were also documented.
Animal modeling: Three hundred forty-eight vertebrates were modeled (66 mammals, 164 birds, 74 reptiles, and 44 amphibians). Ninety-meter grids representing the species’ predicted distributions were created for final GAP reporting. Metadata has been compiled for these predictive species maps with the exception of the avian grids.
Land stewardship mapping: Stewardship was created by the Missouri Resource Assessment Partnership. Public lands comprise only 6.7% of Missouri with 4.7% under federal and 2% under state jurisdiction. All areas greater than 16 hectares were analyzed for biodiversity components. Metadata has been compiled for these stewardship maps.
Analysis: All analyses have been completed, and the peer-reviewed final report has been submitted to the National GAP office.
Reporting and data distribution: A draft report has been submitted. GIS data have been submitted for review.
Montana
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD.
Nebraska
Project under way
Anticipated completion date: March 2003
Contacts: Geoffrey M. Henebry, Coordinator
CALMIT, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
ghenebry@calmit.unl.edu, (402)
472-6158
James W. Merchant, PI
CALMIT, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
jmerchant1@unl.edu,
(402) 472-7531
Land cover: The land cover map has been completed.
Animal modeling: We are in the midst of expert reviews, accuracy assessments, and metadata preparation. Plans for the next three months include completing expert reviews, accuracy assessments, and metadata for models and maps.
Land stewardship mapping: Land stewardship mapping has been completed.
Analysis: Draft maps of species richness by taxon are complete. Initial expert reviews are encouraging. Final analysis is pending completion of expert review and revision of animal models.
Reporting and data distribution: Metadata assembly, data lineage, and methods documentation are nearing completion.
Nevada
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD. Remapping under way (see Southwest Regional GAP).
New Hampshire
(see Vermont and New Hampshire)
New Jersey
(see Maryland, Delaware, and New Jersey)
New Mexico
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD. Remapping under way (see Southwest Regional GAP).
New York
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD.
North Carolina
Draft data available from state (http://www.ncgap.ncsu.edu/). Review under way.
Anticipated completion date: March 2003
Contact: Alexa J. McKerrow
North Carolina State University, Raleigh
mckerrow@unity.ncsu.edu, (919) 513-2853
Land cover: The statewide land cover is complete (Figure 1). The land cover map contains over 60 cover types across the state, ranging from spruce-fir forests to ocean beaches. The final assessment of the statewide mosaic is under way.
Figure 1. North Carolina land cover.
Animal modeling: Our vertebrate species database contains biological, range, and distribution models for 416 terrestrial vertebrate species that breed in North Carolina. Review of the species occurring throughout the Roanoke-Tar-Neuse-Cape Fear (RTNCF) ecosystem has been ongoing as a part of the use and distribution of the GAP Ecosystem Data Explorer Tool.
Land stewardship mapping: The stewardship map contains over 2000 polygons with information on ownership, management, and the level of protection for long-term biodiversity (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Land management status as a proportion of all land in North Carolina. Large water bodies (e.g., bays and reservoirs) were excluded from the area calculations.
Analysis: Analyses have been completed for the RTNCF ecosystem and are under way for the statewide data layers.
Reporting and data distribution: The statewide report is near completion; internal review of the land cover and stewardship chapters is ongoing. Completion of the vertebrate species and analysis chapters is expected by mid-February.
Other accomplishments and innovations: A GAP Ecosystem Data Explorer workshop for wildlife and conservation biologists was held January 27, 2003. While the core audience was Fish and Wildlife biologists, this workshop included individuals from Natural Resources Conservation Service, North Carolina Wildlife Resources, and North Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
North Dakota
Project under way
Anticipated completion date: September 2003
Contact: Larry Strong
USGS Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamesto
larry_strong@usgs.gov, (701)253-5524
Land cover: Activities in 2002 included: (1) refinement of regression tree models predicting the relative abundance (% biomass) of common grass species in North Dakota (ND), (2) analysis of multitemporal Thematic Mapper (TM) imagery using classification tree and supervised clustering and maximum likelihood methods, (3) integration of grassland plant community map (from cluster analysis of grass species relative abundance maps) and land cover maps from TM imagery, and (4) design and data collection for an accuracy assessment of the land cover map. Land cover data for the accuracy assessment were collected using aerial photography and ground surveys in a two-phase, unequal-probability, stratified random sampling design. Primary activities in 2003 will be completion of a vegetation and land cover map for ND in winter of 2002-03 and the construction and analysis of data sets for accuracy assessment of the map.
Animal modeling: Wildlife habitat relationship models have been reviewed and updated as necessary. Some comments are still being received. Environmental data grids for modeling species distributions were evaluated and prepared. Efforts for 2003 include running species models when the land cover map is completed, reviewing model outputs, and assessing the accuracy of species distribution maps by comparisons with species lists available for national wildlife refuges and parks.
Land stewardship mapping: Cooperators continued to provide significant in-kind resources. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the North Dakota Game and Fish Department, and the Bureau of Land Management continued work on their land unit vectors. Information on the land cover composition of FWS fee-title lands was received. Vector and management data for the final U.S. Forest Service Dakota Prairie Grasslands Management Plan were received. Additional land stewardship data for Bureau of Reclamation and national and state park lands were acquired or constructed. A procedure addressing coincident lines and polygon sliver problems was developed for assembling the individual agency land ownership vectors into a single public land stewardship vector for ND. Where necessary, land ownership vectors are snapped to U.S. Public Land Survey System section and quarter section vectors derived from 1:24,000 scale maps or to land ownership vectors developed using GPS. We will complete the acquisition of vectors for public lands and assemble and attribute a single public land stewardship vector for ND in winter of 2002-03.
Analysis: Gap analysis, creation of final digital map products for delivery to the National Gap Analysis Program, and report writing will be major activities in the spring and summer of 2003.
Reporting and data distribution: The final report and CDs for distribution of products to the National Gap Analysis Program will be completed by September 30, 2003. The report and data will also be made available to North Dakota GIS Technical Committee for distribution on the ND GIS Hub.
Other accomplishments and innovations: Two posters on the land cover objective were presented in 2002:
Strong, L.L. 2002. Integration of GIS and remote sensing for mapping rangeland plant communities of the Northern Great Plains. 55th Annual Meeting of Society for Range Management, 13-19 February 2002, Kansas City, Missouri.
Strong, L.L. 2002. Integrating GIS and remote sensing to create a vegetation and land cover database for North Dakota. 9th Annual Conference of The Wildlife Society, 24-28 September 2002, Bismarck, North Dakota.
Project under way
Anticipated completion date: September 2005
Contact: Donna N. Myers, Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey, Columbus
dnmyers@usgs.gov, (614) 430-7715
The Ohio Gap Analysis Project consists of terrestrial and aquatic components. Both component projects are working together to enhance the wetland habitat classification in the Lake Erie Basin in Ohio. The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (Ohio DNR), the Ohio Lake Erie Commission (OLEC), and the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) continue to play active roles in the project. About 75% of the aquatic GAP project and about 40% of the terrestrial GAP project were completed by the end of 2002.
Land cover: Progress was made toward the goal of completing, in draft form, 66% of the land-cover map by June 2003. A complete draft land-cover map is planned for production by June 2004. Accelerated mapping activities began with the hiring of a second vegetation classification specialist and several graduate students to assist with image processing and other activities in October 2002.
The acquisition of aerial digital images began in 2002 after completion of a pilot study in the fall of 2001. A total of 32,346 digital images were taken during 30 days of flying in the growing season of 2002. These images represent about 60% of the state, completing the goal for calendar year 2002. About 20 additional days are needed in 2003 to complete flights in remaining areas and will result in about 60,000 photos covering most of Ohio, including overlap with adjacent states. The resolution of these images is 0.30 meters. To date, all the digital photographic images have been stored on two identical sets of DVDs. A highly automated solution for georeferencing these images is under development and will replace a manual method currently being used. In 2002, approximately one-third of the state’s land cover was completed using an unsupervised classification of leaf-on and leaf-off LANDSAT 7 images taken in 1999 and 2000.
The National Vegetation Classification System is being used to develop terrestrial and wetland vegetation alliances in Ohio. Preliminary ground-truth data were collected from most of the areas that were photographed in 2001-02. Initial vegetation classification was begun in 2002 using the ground-truth data and aerial imagery to train photo interpreters on canopy color, shape, and texture of forested, wetland, and other natural areas. Field verification of 39 wetland sites was conducted in 2001-02. When completed in 2003, about 18,000 data samples representing all plant community alliances in Ohio will have been collected for field verification. These samples will serve as the basis for the final alliance classification, planned for completion by December 2003. In 2004, the wetlands alliances will be further classified with hydrology-related information to indicate wetland type, such as coastal, riverine, or isolated, to help model and predict species occurrence.
Animal modeling: The hexagon range maps were released for review in spring of 2001, and the expert review of these maps was completed in the summer and fall of 2001 for all amphibians, birds, and mammals. The expert review of Ohio reptiles is still under way, and further comments are expected from two herpetologists in Ohio for reptile range information. The reptile range maps will be 75% completed in June 2002 and fully completed in 2003.
The literature review of habitat affinity information for each terrestrial vertebrate species is being developed and is connected to an Access database. The literature review of Ohio terrestrial vertebrates is complete for 50% of the species list. The Vertebrate Modeling Database developed by the Kansas GAP was used as a guide, and this work has been ongoing since 2000. The habitat affinity database and literature review are planned for completion in 2003.
Land stewardship mapping: The land stewardship map is 85% complete. In 2002, available data and maps of Army Corps of Engineers land, county and local parks, and privately-owned preserves were added. Upcoming work on the land-stewardship map entails attributing and verifying the GAP status for some of the newer acquisitions. Completion is planned for May 2003.
Reporting and data distribution: Hexagon range maps for birds, amphibians, and mammals are planned for release and review on the Ohio-GAP Web page (http://oh.water.usgs.gov/ohgap/ohgap.html) in early 2003. Stakeholder meetings were held on June 6 and December 4, 2002. Two stakeholder meetings are planned for 2003.
Other accomplishments and innovations: One of the largest stressors to animal and plant communities in Ohio is the transportation network and related urban sprawl that develops around new and improved roadways. Ohio-GAP, in cooperation with OLEC, Cuyahoga River Community Planning Organization, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Ohio Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, and Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency, will begin to develop a Decision Support System to aid in the early integration of environmental and transportation planning at the watershed scale. Early integration of biodiversity information into transportation planning can help to avoid, reduce, or mitigate the cumulative effects of urban development on Ohio’s natural landscapes. The project was funded cooperatively through grants from the USGS Gap Analysis Program and Cooperative Water Program, OLEC, and EPA-Region 5.
Oklahoma
Draft data available from state. Review under way.
Oregon
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD.
Pennsylvania
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD.
Puerto Rico
Project under way
Anticipated completion date: October 2005
Contact: William Gould
International Institute of Tropical Forestry, Rio Piedras
wgould@fs.fed.us, (787) 766-5335 x209
Land cover: The International Institute of Tropical Forestry has recently mapped land cover for Puerto Rico at the formation level using 1991-92 Landsat TM data (Helmer et al. 2002). The land cover map has 27 vegetation and 4 nonvegetation classes. In the last year we have compiled more detailed information on the associations and dominant communities from field studies and the literature, including information on eight of the major forest types on the island (Carrero et al. in prep.). These include two coastal flooded forest types (black mangrove and Pterocarpus), mature dry forests, lowland moist forests, submontane tabonuco forests, montane palo colorado, palm and elfin forests. These span a range of important habitat types in Puerto Rico. We have also compiled a cloudfree mosaic from more recent (1999-2001) Landsat TM data. Our goals for next year are to improve the mosaic with atmospheric and radiometric correction, classify the image using the methods and land cover classes of Helmer et al. (2002) and expand on the habitat information within the mapped formations. A particular gap in vegetation description exists in understanding the younger lowland and submontane moist and dry forest types that have emerged on abandoned agricultural land in the last 20 - 50 years. These forests are dominated by exotic tree species but have significant numbers of native species. Little has been written about their species composition, habitat characteristics, and extent.
Animal modeling: We have compiled a list of 437 vertebrate taxa in a Microsoft Access database and are beginning to compile information on an initial set of 16 taxa with a range of habitat distributions (very restricted to wide ranging). We have also created a hexagon coverage that includes 7 hexagons nested within the EMAP hexagons typically used in the GAP program. This is to accommodate the finer scale of biotic and landscape heterogeneity found on the island. In the coming year we will produce habitat models for our initial species, produce range maps, and have vertebrate experts review the habitat models and range maps. We will use this process to refine our modeling efforts for all species and continue to compile information on the habitat characteristics of the remaining species.
Land stewardship mapping: We have a GIS coverage of all managed lands for Puerto Rico, and in the coming year we will classify these into the four management strategies used in the GAP program.
Analysis: Gap analyses will begin as we complete our vertebrate models and database in 2004.
Reporting and data distribution: Two posters were presented at the National GAP meeting (Reyes et al. 2002 and Carrero et al. 2002), a poster was presented at the Luquillo LTER meeting in January 2003 (Carrero et al. 2003), two talks were given in late 2001 (Gould 2001a, b) and two in 2002 (Gould and Carrero 2002, Gould et al. 2002), and a paper on our vegetation description is in preparation for Conservation Biology (Carrero et al. in prep.).
Other accomplishments and innovations: We have established a collaboration with the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources in Puerto Rico that will aid us in compiling information on vertebrate species habitat preferences. We have acquired the volunteer services of an Argentinean landscape ecologist to visit our Institute for 2003 to work on the PR GAP project. He will focus on refining our cloudfree imagery and updating our vegetation map. We are working closely with the North Carolina GAP project in order to gain from their expertise and experience.
Literature cited:
Carrero, G., W. Gould, G. González, and J. Ramírez. 2002. Variation in endemic, non-native, and critical plants in eight forest types in Puerto Rico. Poster presented at the 12th National GAP Meeting, Shepherdstown, West Virginia.
Carrero, G., W. Gould, G. González, and J. Ramírez. 2003. Endemic, non-native, and critical plants in eight forest types along an elevational gradient. Poster presented at the Luquillo LTER Annual Meeting, January 2003, San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Carrero, G., W. Gould, G. González, and J. Ramírez. In prep. Native, endemic, non-native, and critical plants in eight forest types in Puerto Rico: Implications for conservation. Conservation Biology.
Gould, W.A. 2001a. Puerto Rico Gap Analysis Project. Presented at Departmento Recursos Naturales Ambiental (DNRA) meeting, December 2001, San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Gould, W.A. 2001b. Puerto Rico Gap Analysis Project. Presented at North Carolina State University GAP workshop, December 2001, Durham, North Carolina.
Gould, W.A., G. Carrero, and B. Reyes. 2002. Puerto Rico Gap Analysis Project. Presented at the February 2002 Southeast Regional GAP meeting, Chattanooga, Tennessee.
Gould, W.A., and G. Carrero. 2002. Puerto Rico Gap Analysis Project. Presented at the IITF Science Seminar Series, December 2002, Río Piedras, Puerto Rico.
Helmer, E.H., O. Ramos, T. del Mar Lopez, M. Quiñones, and W. Diaz. 2002. Mapping forest type and land cover of Puerto Rico, an island within the Caribbean biodiversity hotspot. Caribbean Journal of Science 38:165-183.
Reyes, B., G. Carrero, and W. Gould. 2002. Puerto Rico Gap Analysis Project. Poster presented at the 12th National GAP Meeting, Shepherdstown, West Virginia.
Rhode Island
(see Massachusetts, Connecticut, & Rhode Island)
South Carolina
Draft data available from state. Review under way.
South Dakota
Draft data available from state (http://wfs.sdstate.edu/sdgap/sdgap.htm). Review under way.
Anticipated completion date: March 2003
Contact: Jonathan A. Jenks
South Dakota State University, Brookings
jonathan_jenks@sdstate.edu,
(605) 688-4783
Land cover: Completed.
Animal modeling: Completed.
Land stewardship mapping: Completed.
Analysis: Completed.
Reporting and data distribution: The final report and data are in review.
Southwest Regional GAP (SWReGAP)
Remapping under way for the five-state region encompassing Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah. State coordination for all aspects of the project is facilitated through the SWReGAP Web site (http://leopold.nmsu.edu/fwscoop/swregap/default.htm).
Anticipated completion date: December 2004
Contacts: Julie Prior-Magee, SWReGAP Coordinator
USGS/BRD, Las Cruces, New Mexico
jpmagee@nmsu.edu, (505) 646-1084
Arizona: Kathryn A. Thomas, PI
USGS/BRD Southwest Biological Science Center
Colorado Plateau Field Station, Flagstaff
Kathryn_A_Thomas@usgs.gov, (928) 556-7466 x235
Colorado: Donald L. Schrupp, PI
Colorado Division of Wildlife
Habitat Resources Section, Denver
hqwris@lamar.colostate.edu, (303) 291-7277
Nevada: David F. Bradford, C
U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, Las Vegas
bradford.david@epa.gov, (702) 798-2681
William G. Kepner, Co-PI
U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, Las Vegas
kepner.william@epa.gov, (702) 798-2193
New Mexico: Ken Boykin, Project Coordinator
USGS/BRD, NM Coop. Fish & Wildlife Research Unit, Las
Cruces
kboykin@nmsu.edu, (505) 646-6303
Utah: R. Douglas Ramsey, PI
RS/GIS Laboratory, Utah State University, Logan
dougr@cnr.usu.edu, (435) 797-3783
Land cover: The RS/GIS Lab at Utah State University is the regional land cover mapping lab for the five-state southwest region. Coordination with the other four states is facilitated through a Web page that allows access to spatial data, procedural documents, and an Internet Map Server (http://www.gis.usu.edu/docs/projects/swgap). During 2002 the five-state region completed the following tasks:
Coordination with USGS National Mapping Division at EROS Data Center – One of the most significant developments related to land cover was the initiation of a more formal relationship with the EROS Data Center (EDC). Based on this relationship, SWReGAP will participate in a more coordinated fashion with the USGS National Mapping Division’s National Land Cover Database (NLCD) program. The objective of this relationship is to ensure the resulting SWReGAP land cover map is complementary to the NLCD. Increased interaction between SWReGAP and EDC has already improved information, training, and data transfer between the two mapping programs and is expected to increase technical transfer through the remainder of the land cover mapping effort.
Development of regional target legend for Ecological Systems – An equally significant development has been NatureServe’s development of a target legend comprised of 100+ Ecological Systems for the five-state region. Ecological Systems are groups of National Vegetation Classification System (NVCS) Associations. As part of this effort, NatureServe developed Ecological System descriptions that include lists of NVCS Associations for each system. NatureServe also developed dichotomous keys to aid in labeling field training sites for a large portion of the five-state region. The target Ecological System legend is considered nearly inclusive of all land cover classes that the project anticipates mapping. Additional classes include some NVCS alliances and aggregations of Ecological Systems.
Land cover mapping methods – SWReGAP uses mapping zones to provide a gross biophysical stratification of the five-state area, and as a programmatic means to segment the work among participating states. Landsat 7+ imagery for three dates (spring, summer, and fall) as well as DEM-derived ancillary data layers are being used as the spatial data source for land cover description. The land cover mapping protocol follows approaches employed by EROS Data Center for the National Land Cover Database effort. Classification and Regression Trees (CART) are being employed to create a coarse-level map. Subsequent classification at the level of Ecological Systems and NVCS Alliances are accomplished via CART as well as traditional supervised and unsupervised image classification methodologies.
Field data collection – Presently approximately 50% of field data collection has been completed (approximately 32,000 training sites for the region), and the remaining 50% is anticipated to be completed during the 2003 field season. In addition to training sites collected by project personnel, SWReGAP has obtained existing field data through cooperation with government agencies, military installations, and Natural Heritage Programs.
Land cover regional coordination – In December 2002, Utah State University (USU) hosted a land cover workshop for the five states in the SWReGAP region. A key function of the workshop was to bring together scientists and technical experts from EROS Data Center, NatureServe, and USU to refine land cover mapping protocols for the region, as well as develop standard procedures for vegetation classification at the Ecological System level. As a result of the workshop, land cover mapping protocols were identified that are standardized and consistent with land cover mapping protocols currently used by other projects in the USGS. These protocols will be compiled in a land cover mapping protocol document that will be available on the Web.
Goals for the coming year – We are in the process of establishing milestones for the coming year. The timeline for the SWReGAP project requires the completion of the land cover map by December 31, 2003. With this target in mind, 50% of the region should be mapped by June 2003.
Animal modeling: The New Mexico project serves as the regional animal habitat modeling lab for the five-state southwest region. The regional lab has focused on the following objectives: (1) identifying the list of taxa to be modeled, including decision rules and orchestrating review of this list among the five projects; (2) allocating taxa modeling responsibilities among the projects with project review of allocation; (3) identifying multiple modeling techniques that may be of use for the project; and (4) creating a database to facilitate association compilation, expert review and modification, and potential end-user application. In addition, the New Mexico project conducted a regional animal habitat modeling workshop in Las Cruces, New Mexico, in April 2002.
Decision rules and modeling allocation – Taxa inclusion into the modeling process was determined by a series of decision rules. Currently 839 species-level taxa are to be modeled in the SWReGAP effort. At the species level, the following taxa were excluded:
Taxa with only incidental, accidental, or vagrant occurrence.
Taxa for which authoritative taxonomic sources have eliminated species standing.
Taxa that have been extirpated from the area to be modeled for 20 years or >5 demographic generations, whichever is a greater time span. (Retain ecologically or demographically recent extirpations). Note that taxa that are extirpated within one or several state project areas but have occurred anywhere in the region within this time limit will be modeled across the region. Also, wide-ranging taxa that have been extirpated but are considered for reestablishment may not be excluded if projects and regional lab agree to retain them for modeling.
Taxa representing unsuccessful introduction or reestablishment in the area subject to distribution modeling.
Exotic (nonnative), primarily urban-dwelling taxa.
Exotic taxa with restricted occurrence associated with specialized or ephemeral landscapes or only under human manipulation such that the taxon cannot be modeled effectively using GIS layers available for SWReGAP.
A taxa allocation decision rule was created to distribute initial taxa modeling responsibilities among all projects in a manner that capitalizes on previous modeling experience, is localized to the distribution of taxa experts, and is sensitive to local conditions applicable to more restricted taxa. All projects will have opportunity for input on modeling approach and results for all taxa, regardless of the lead assignment.
The region has agreed to a set of core data layers that will be minimally addressed in each wildlife habitat relationship model. These core data layers are land cover, elevation (minimum and maximum), slope, aspect, soils, hydrology (distance to and association with permanent water), and patch size. Other layers specifically addressed in the database are mountain ranges, temperature (minimum and maximum), and precipitation. In addition, the database is being created in such a way that further data layers can be incorporated into the model-building process. This will allow each project to address subregional modeling needs.
Land stewardship mapping: Land stewardship mapping activities will begin regionwide during 2003. Collaboration with BLM to obtain regionwide stewardship information and methods to consistently map stewardship across the five states will be discussed early in 2003.
Regional cooperation: Regional cooperation continues to be critical to the proper functioning of SWReGAP. Individual states contributed to the regional project during 2002 by participating in (1) two land cover mapping workshops in January and December; (2) regional breakout sessions held at the National Gap Analysis Meeting to coordinate animal habitat modeling and land cover mapping activities; (3) an animal habitat modeling workshop in April to facilitate collection of animal habitat modeling data; and (4) preparation of a regional brochure for outreach and education.
Regional poster and presentations – The SWReGAP poster was presented at various regional and national conferences across the U.S. In addition, the SWReGAP states and Regional Coordinator gave presentations throughout the year. For example, the Utah Project provided an overview of the GIS tools used in SWReGAP at the 23rd Annual ESRI Conference in San Diego and participated in the “Workshop on Remote Sensing for Sagebrush” hosted by the USGS Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center in Boise, Idaho. An article entitled “Preclassification: An Ecologically Predictive Landform Model,” authored by Gerald Manis, John Lowry, and Doug Ramsey, was published in the 2001 GAP Bulletin.
Regional Web site and listserv – The New Mexico Project continues to maintain the main Web page and listserv communications for the entire region. The Utah Project maintains a Web page allowing access to spatial data and an Internet Map Server.
Analysis: Analysis for SWReGAP will take place when the mapping tasks are completed.
Reporting and data distribution: All products derived from the Southwest Regional Gap Analysis Project are scheduled to be complete by 2004 with some possibility of timeline revisions to be considered by the group in 2003.
Other accomplishments and innovations:
AZ-GAP – Arizona has documented many previously undescribed alliances in the NVCS for Arizona and submitted these alliances to NatureServe for inclusion in the land cover classification system for the region.
CO-GAP – The Colorado Project Coordinator continued development of an ArcView tool to collect and review vertebrate range distribution information. For animal habitat modeling, work has begun through the Natural Resource Ecology Lab at Colorado State University to depict uncertainty in habitat modeling outputs.
NV-GAP – Nevada staff established an interagency agreement engaging U.S. EPA-Las Vegas, the BLM Field Office in Ely, and the Eastern Nevada Landscape Coalition. This unique agreement allowed the state to achieve field data collection goals for the 2002 field season and established a strong relationship with BLM for future work to benefit both SWReGAP and BLM. In addition, discussions were held to establish a collaborative relationship with the USGS SageMap project in 2003.
UT-GAP – One key innovation developed in 2002 is an Internet-based tool for image standardization. Image standardization is the process of normalizing image pixel values for differences in sun illumination geometry, atmospheric effects, and instrument calibration. Standardizing imagery improves the ability to mosaic adjacent imagery and compare imagery over time (e.g., change detection). The image standardization Web site can be reached at http://www.gis.usu.edu/docs/projects/swgap/ImageStandardization.htm and provides three tools that create ERDAS Imagineä spatial models (.gmd format).
Another innovation is an ArcView extension to facilitate interaction between the SPLUS statistical software and ArcView GIS. The StatMod ArcView extension was developed by Christine Garrard as part of an MS degree in biology at Utah State University. StatMod is a tool designed to provide a GUI interface between the spatial modeling capabilities of ArcView GIS with two statistical software packages (SAS and SPLUS) to facilitate ecological predictive modeling. The extension is available for free and can be downloaded, with user guide, from http://bioweb.usu.edu/gistools/statmod or from the ESRI ArcScripts Web page.
Tennessee
Draft data available from state. Review under way.
Contact: Jeanette Jones
Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency, Nashville
Jeanette.Jones@state.tn.us, (615) 781-6534
Land cover: Completed. The final map contains 30 land cover classes with 18 forest alliance groups.
Animal modeling: Predicted species distributions and species richness data have been completed for Tennessee’s 364 terrestrial vertebrate species.
Land stewardship mapping: Completed.
Analysis: Gap analysis has been completed.
Reporting and data distribution: Revisions to the final report are in progress.
Texas
Project under way
Anticipated completion date: April 2003
Contacts: Nick C. Parker
Texas Tech University, Lubbock
nick.parker@ttu.edu,
(806) 742-2851
Sheri Haskell
Texas Tech University, Lubbock
seh@hobbes.tcru.ttu.edu, (806)
742-1596
Land cover: Complete.
Animal modeling: Complete.
Land stewardship mapping: Complete.
Analysis: Accuracy assessment for predicted vertebrate distribution under way.
Reporting and data distribution: Final report is 90% complete.
Other accomplishments and innovations: Data are being used as part of a 150-year analysis of change in land use and land cover in Texas. Data are also being used to develop models for vertebrate distribution by guilds based on elevation, precipitation, temperature, and soils, but not vegetation. This model developed for Texas will then be modified and applied to the entire Chihuahuan Desert, where the vegetation data layer is nonexistent.
Utah
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD. Remapping under way (see Southwest Regional GAP).
Vermont and New Hampshire
Draft data available from state. Review under way.
Anticipated completion date: June 2003
Contact: David E. Capen
University of Vermont, Burlington
dcapen@snr.uvm.edu,
(802) 656-3007
Land cover: Complete.
Animal modeling: Complete.
Land stewardship mapping: Complete.
Analysis: Nearly complete.
Reporting and data distribution: Digital coverages were submitted in mid-2001. The final report will be distributed for peer review in early 2003.
Virginia
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD.
Washington
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD.
West Virginia
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD.
Wisconsin
Project under way
Anticipated completion date: September 2003
Contact: Daniel Fitzpatrick
U.S. Geological Survey
Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, La Crosse
Daniel_Fitzpatrick@usgs.gov, (608) 783-7550 x12
Land cover: Land cover mapping followed the Upper Midwest GAP protocol (ftp://ftp.umesc.usgs.gov/pub/misc/umgap/98-g001.pdf). Land cover mapping is completed, and a draft version is available from the USGS Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center (UMESC). With the assistance of NatureServe, the classification has been cross-walked to the NVCS.
Animal modeling: Wisconsin vertebrate mapping is being undertaken by UMESC. A regional vertebrate mapping approach, coordinated by UMESC and including participation by Minnesota and Michigan, was initiated in the fall of 2000. Regional species lists, range maps based on EPA hexagons, and habitat suitability matrices stratified by Bailey’s Ecoregion Provinces are a few of the strategies being employed to minimize cross-state edge-matching and to reduce duplication of effort.
Land stewardship mapping: The Wisconsin DNR has finished compiling data for state, county, and U.S. Forest Service lands. UMESC has acquired coverages of DOI lands and has compiled the complete stewardship coverage. Stewardship attributing is being reviewed.
Reporting and data distribution: Land-cover data are available from UMESC. Contact Kirk Lohman at (608) 781-6341 or klohman@usgs.gov.
Wyoming
Data on GAP Web site (http://www.gap.uidaho.edu/Projects/Data.asp) or CD.
Return to Table of Contents