Project under way
Anticipated completion date:December 2005
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
<%Case "AK"%>Not started.
Data on GAP Web site and CD
Remapping under way (see Southwest Regional GAP).
Data on GAP Web site and CD
Data on GAP Web site and CD
Data on GAP Web site and CD
Remapping under way (see Southwest Regional GAP).
Project Under Way
Anticipated completion date: May 2003
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.
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).
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.
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.
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. Draft data available from state.
Review under way. Anticipated completion date:
January 2003 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. 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. 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. The final report
development was nearly completed in 2002. The report will be
delivered to the Operations Office in January 2003. Draft data available from state 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. Final models have been created for about
50 species. We anticipate completing the remainder by April
2003. 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. We expect to complete analysis of
Georgia’s land cover and wildlife habitat distributions by
June 2003. The final report for
Georgia GAP should be completed by July 2003. 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. Project under way Anticipated completion date: June 2005 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. 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). 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 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. Data are available for
both aquatic species survey information mapping and stewardship
mapping. Contact HINHP or the National GAP Office for
details. 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. Data on GAP Web site
or CD. 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. 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. The land stewardship
layer is complete and will be updated as needed. Analysis will begin in early 2003. 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. Project under way Anticipated completion date: June 2003 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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.
Draft data available from state
Review
under way. Anticipated completion date: December 2002 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 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. 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. 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 is complete. Final maps, report, and
data will be published on CDs, the GAP home page, and the IA-GAP
Web site. 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. Draft data available from state.
Review under way. Anticipated completion date: January 2003 Complete Complete Complete Complete Finishing final edits on
final report. 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. Complete. Complete. : Complete. Complete. 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. 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. Data on GAP Web site 
or CD. Data on GAP Web site
or CD. Draft data available from state. Review under way. Anticipated completion date: January 2003 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. 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. 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. The final report
development was nearly completed in 2002. The report will be
delivered to the Operations Office in January 2003. Project Under Way Anticipated completion date: May 2003 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. 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). 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. 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. 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. 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. Project under way Anticipated completion date: September 2003 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.
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. The stewardship data layer has
been delivered to UMESC and is being reviewed. 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. Anticipated completion date: September 2003 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. 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. Stewardship mapping is
completed, and a draft version is available from UMESC. Draft land-cover data
and stewardship coverages are available from UMESC.
Additional land cover data are expected to become available in
2003. Contact Daniel Fitzpatrick at (608) 783-7550 x12 or Daniel_Fitzpatrick@usgs.gov. Project under way Anticipated completion date: December 2003 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). 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 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 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. Our current efforts are
centered on finalizing the MS-GAP final report. Data are
being distributed as requested from cooperators and other
agencies. Draft data available from state.
Review under way. Anticipated completion date: March 2003 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. 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. 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. All analyses have been completed, and the
peer-reviewed final report has been submitted to the National GAP
office. A draft report has been
submitted. GIS data have been submitted for review. Data on GAP Web site
or CD. Project under way Anticipated completion date: March 2003 The land cover map has been completed. 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
has been completed. 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. Metadata assembly, data
lineage, and methods documentation are nearing completion. Data on GAP Web site or
CD
Remapping under way (see Southwest Regional GAP). Draft data available from state. Review under way. Anticipated completion date: June 2003 Complete. Complete. Complete. Nearly complete. Digital coverages were
submitted in mid-2001. The final report will be distributed
for peer review in early 2003. 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. 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. 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. The final report
development was nearly completed in 2002. The report will be
delivered to the Operations Office in January 2003. Data on GAP Web site or CD. 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. 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. 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. Analyses have been completed for the RTNCF
ecosystem and are under way for the statewide data layers. 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. 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. Project under way Anticipated completion date: September 2003 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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 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. 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. 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. : 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. 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. 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. Draft data available from state. Review under way.
Data on GAP Web site
or CD.
Data on GAP Web site or CD. Project under way. Anticipated completion date: October 2005 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. 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. 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. Gap analyses will begin as we complete
our vertebrate models and database in 2004. 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.). 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. 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. Project Under Way Anticipated completion date: May 2003 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. 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). 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. 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. 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. 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.
Data on GAP Web site
or CD.
Draft data available from state. Review under way. Anticipated completion date:
March 2003 Completed. Completed. Completed. Completed. The final report and
data are in review. 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 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 methodsSWReGAP 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 collectionPresently 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 coordinationIn 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 yearWe 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. Delaware
Status:
Contact:
D. Ann Rasberry
University of Maryland Eastern Shore, Princess Anne
darasberry@mail.umes.edu,
(410) 651-6069Land cover:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Florida
Status:
Review under way.Georgia
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)
542-3489Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Other accomplishments and innovations:
Hawaii
Status:
Contact:
Dan Dorfman
Research and Training, University of Hawaii, Honolulu
Dorfman@hawaii.edu,
(808) 956-6616 Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Other accomplishments and innovations:
Idaho
Status:
Illinois
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)
265-0583Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Indiana
Status:
Contact:
Forest Clark
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bloomington
(812) 334-4261 x206Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Other accomplishments and innovations:
Iowa
Status:
Contact:
Kevin Kane
Director, GIS Support and Research Facility
Iowa State University, Ames
kkane@iastate.edu,
(515)
294-0526Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis
Reporting and data distribution:
Other accomplishments and innovations
Kansas
Status:
Contact:
Jack Cully
USGS, Manhattan
bcully@ksu.edu,
(785) 532-6534Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Other accomplishments and innovations:
Kentucky
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) 762-3110Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Other accomplishments and innovations:
Louisiana
Status:
Maine
Status:
Maryland
Status:
Contact:
D. Ann Rasberry
University of Maryland Eastern Shore, Princess Anne
darasberry@mail.umes.edu,
(410) 651-6069Land cover:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Massachusetts
Status:
Contacts:
Curtice Griffin
University of Massachusetts,
cgriffin@forwild.umass.edu,
(413) 545-2640
Benjamin Zuckerberg
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
bzucker@forwild.umass.edu,
(413) 545-3589Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Literature cited:
Michigan
Status:
Contact:
Mike Donovan
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Wildlife Division, Lansing
donovanm@state.mi.us,
(517) 335-3445 Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Reporting and data distribution:
Minnesota
Status:
Project under way
Contact:
Kirk
Lohman
Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, LaCross, WI, 54603
Klohman@usgs.gov,
(608) 781-6341Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Reporting and data distribution:
Mississippi
Status:
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)
325-3158Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Missouri
Status:
Contact:
Timothy L. Haithcoat
Geographic Resources Center
University of Missouri-Columbia
HaithcoatT@missouri.edu,
(573) 882-2324Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Montana
Status:
Nebraska
Status:
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) 472-7531Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Nevada
New Hampshire
Contact:
David E. Capen
University of Vermont, Burlington
dcapen@snr.uvm.edu,
(802) 656-3007 Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
New Jersey
Contact:
D. Ann Rasberry
University of Maryland Eastern Shore, Princess Anne
darasberry@mail.umes.edu,
(410) 651-6069Land cover:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
New Mexico
<% case "NY"%>
New York
Status:
North Carolina
Contact:
Alexa J. McKerrow
North Carolina State University, Raleigh
mckerrow@unity.ncsu.edu,
(919) 513-2853Land cover:

Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:

Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Other accomplishments and innovations:
North Dakota
Status:
Contact: Larry Strong
USGS Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamesto
larry_strong@usgs.gov,
(701)253-5524Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Other accomplishments and innovations:
Ohio
Status:
Contact:
Donna N. Myers, Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey, Columbus
dnmyers@usgs.gov, (614) 430-7715Land cover:
Animal modeling
Land stewardship mapping
Reporting and data distribution:
Other accomplishments and innovations:
Oklahoma
Status:
Oregon
Status:
Pennsylvania
Status:
Puerto Rico
Status:
Contact:
William Gould
International Institute of Tropical Forestry, Rio Piedras
wgould@fs.fed.us,
(787) 766-5335 x209Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Other accomplishments and innovations:
Literature cited:
Rhode Island
Status:
Contacts: Curtice Griffin
University of Massachusetts,
cgriffin@forwild.umass.edu,
(413) 545-2640
Benjamin Zuckerberg
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
bzucker@forwild.umass.edu,
(413) 545-3589Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Literature cited:
South Carolina
Status:
South Dakota
Status:
Contact:
Jonathan A. Jenks
South Dakota State University, Brookings
jonathan_jenks@sdstate.edu,
(605) 688-4783Land cover:
Animal modeling:
Land stewardship mapping:
Analysis:
Reporting and data distribution:
Southwest Regional GAP (SWReGAP)
Status:
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 x235Colorado:
Donald L. Schrupp, PI
Colorado Division of Wildlife
Habitat Resources Section, Denver
hqwris@lamar.colostate.edu,
(303) 291-7277Nevada:
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) 798-2193New Mexico:
Ken Boykin, Project Coordinator
USGS/BRD, NM Coop. Fish & Wildlife Research Unit, Las
Cruces
kboykin@nmsu.edu,
(505) 646-6303Utah:
R. Douglas Ramsey, PI
RS/GIS Laboratory, Utah State University, Logan
dougr@cnr.usu.edu,
(435) 797-3783Land cover:
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 allocationTaxa 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.
We are continuing to review modeling techniques that can be applied to Gap Analysis habitat association information. We have included, within our present modeling endeavor, the option of applying a weighted index overlay procedure in addition to the standard Boolean AND overlay procedure. This pilot project will determine feasibility of applying this particular procedure at larger scales or including other more rigorous procedures in the future. Index overlay offers a subjective consideration of the relative value of habitat variables, and fuzzy sets allow for the inclusion of ambiguity at the habitat boundaries. If applicable, two products will be produced: nonbinary representations incorporating uncertainty and the traditional GAP binary representations.
The New Mexico project is in the process of creating a modifiable database to be used to compile taxa-specific information for modeling purposes. The intent is to create a data set that manages information and is used to construct each taxon’s wildlife habitat relationship model. The database is being created to address several concerns of the regional group regarding expert participation and end-user functionality. It should be noted that the process of populating the regional database for wildlife habitat relationship models and defining range limits runs simultaneously. Included within the database is a user-friendly method to define range limits using the 8-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC). Incorporating regional suggestions we have defined a 3-character coding system based on historic/recent distribution as either known (K), potential (P), or extirpated (X). Following the example from Colorado we developed a coding system based on reproductive use (breeding, nonbreeding, both) and seasonal use (migratory, wintering, summering, wintering and summering).
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.
Although the database is not currently ready to be populated, states are beginning the phase of gathering information on taxa to facilitate database population by compiling data. The protocol for database population has been submitted to each state project with a hard copy form to be used for data collection. Initial data collection received thus far at the regional lab includes complete or partial habitat models for 256 taxa of the 839 total to be modeled in the region. Completion of land cover mapping is projected for December 31, 2003, and will impact when models will be run and predicted animal habitat distributions will be mapped.
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 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 for SWReGAP will take place when the mapping tasks are completed.
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.
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.
<%case "TN"%>Draft data available from state. Review under way.
Completed. The final map contains 30 land cover classes with 18 forest alliance groups.
Predicted species distributions and species richness data have been completed for Tennessee’s 364 terrestrial vertebrate species.
Completed.
Gap analysis has been completed.
Revisions to the final report are in progress.
<%case "TX"%>Project under way
Anticipated completion date: April 2003
Complete.
Complete.
Complete.
Accuracy assessment for predicted vertebrate distribution under way.
Final report is 90% complete.
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.
<%case "UT"%>Data on GAP Web site
CD.
Remapping under way (see Southwest Regional GAP).
Draft data available from state. Review under way.
Anticipated completion date: June 2003
Complete.
Complete.
Complete.
Nearly complete.
Digital coverages were submitted in mid-2001. The final report will be distributed for peer review in early 2003.
<%case "VA"%>Data on GAP Web site and
CD.
Data on GAP Web site and CD.
Project under way
Anticipated completion date: September 2003
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.
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.
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.
Land-cover data are available from UMESC. Contact Kirk Lohman at (608) 781-6341 or klohman@usgs.gov.
<%case "WY"%>
Data on GAP Web site and CD.
<%Case Else %>Go to the State Projects section and choose a state first.
<%End Select %>
Literature | About GAP | Projects and Products | Tools | Meetings | Search | Links | Bulletin Boards | Site Map
USGS ||Gap Analysis Program || NBII
||
Disclaimer || Privacy || Accessibility||
GAP Webmaster ||