Julie Prior-Magee

U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Discipline, Las Cruces, New Mexico

Introduction

Part of the mission of the Gap Analysis Program (GAP) is to facilitate application of GAP data and information to land management activities. To do this, GAP strives to make all project information available to the public and those charged with land use research, policy, planning, and management. The Southwest Regional Gap Analysis Project (SWReGAP) has been providing provisional data for use to the public pending final data and report completion. Feedback from a variety of users is demonstrating how SWReGAP data is being applied to various natural resource issues in the Southwestern United States. Current and planned applications are summarized below.

Applications of Land Cover Mapping Data

Provisional land cover data are currently being made available by the regional land cover mapping lab at Utah State University (earth.gis.usu.edu/swgap/). Land cover data and related datasets such as landform, geology, mapping zone boundaries, and training site data are available. As of May 2006, 313 users have registered before downloading the provisional data. Federal agencies represented the largest group of registered users (46%). Department of the Interior agencies using the data included: Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), Office of Surface Mining and Reclamation, and Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Other federal agency users included U.S. Forest Service (USFS), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). In addition, commercial (12%), non-profit (12%), state agencies (11%), and other organizations (19%) were identified as user groups. Tribal natural resource professionals, universities, and local governments are included in the other organizations user group.

Approximately 59% of users were interested in subsets of regional data while 41% were interested in using the entire five-state regional dataset. The top four uses of the data included: 1) research and education; 2) resource/land use planning and management; 3) inventory and reference; and 4) habitat assessment and modeling. Fire/fuels assessment/modeling and watershed/hydrological modeling and assessment were also mentioned as important uses of land cover mapping data. In addition to these more expected uses, other users noted that land cover data would support archaeological studies, environmental analyses for border protection activities, representation of mine areas and surrounding landscapes, and evaluation of impacts of energy development operations on ecosystems (Lowry et al. 2005).

Ecoregion Delineation

Since 1994, U.S. EPA researchers have collaborated with other federal agencies and states to refine Level III ecoregions and develop larger-scale, Level IV Ecoregions on a state-by-state basis. U.S. EPA has noted that these efforts are greatly aided by coordinated, multi-state data bases such as SWReGAP since land use and land cover data are important components of ecological regions. In Colorado, SWReGAP data were used to modify drafts and final versions of Level III and IV ecoregions. In 2004 field verification to examine ecoregions and boundaries used SWReGAP land cover data overlaid by ecoregion boundaries, the road network, and GPS tracking to help with boundary revisions and in explaining variation in characteristics from region to region. Colorado GAP Principal Investigator, Don Schrupp, was able to participate in this field verification allowing him to view many miles of the classification accuracy of land cover data. Final ecoregions of Colorado were much improved by use of SWReGAP data. These data also helped with listing of vegetation and land cover in the table of characteristics.

In New Mexico, use of SWReGAP land cover data in ecoregion mapping was facilitated by Ken Boykin and Scott Schrader of SWReGAP. Both NM-GAP and SWReGAP data were examined in developing the initial draft of New Mexico Ecoregions mapped at 1:250,000 scale. Draft ecoregion boundaries were plotted on a statewide map of SWReGAP land cover for the ecoregion review meeting, exhibiting the close relationship between land cover, Ecoregions, and boundaries. Scott Schrader also participated in the statewide ecoregion field trip to help develop the final draft map. Ecoregions of Nevada and Utah were completed before SWReGAP data were available, however U.S. EPA plans to use SWReGAP data for ecoregion mapping in Arizona. The data were also valuable in a recent effort to join some Level III boundaries with Mexico in a project with the Commission for Environmental Cooperation to revise North American ecoregion maps (G. Griffith, U.S. EPA, personal communication).

Fire and Watershed Ecology Applications

BLM State Fire Management Officers from Utah and Nevada were tasked to develop a map of Fire Regimes and Condition Classes (FRCC) for their lands. They used SWReGAP land cover data to categorize vegetation layers into fire regimes and condition classes. The 30-meter resolution FRCC maps provide a strategic look at the degree of departure from historical fire regimes. The resulting analysis will assist in fire management planning and establishing hazardous fuels project priorities. A joint statewide map for Utah and Nevada will promote consistency in fire management planning and actions across state lines (Sheffey and Pollet 2005).

LANDFIRE is a five-year, multi-partner wildland fuels and fire regime mapping project. Mapping of existing vegetation and structure is an important component of LANDFIRE and SWReGAP field data were used to train decision tree models for the project (Kost 2005).

The Nature Conservancy (TNC) in Arizona recently presented a map of historic fire return intervals (FRI), pre-European settlement (1890), for Arizona and New Mexico. FRI describes the number of times fire has occurred within an area. TNC aggregated 98 land cover types from SWReGAP data into 21 Potential Natural Vegetation Types (PNVT). The PNVTs were based on similar land cover type descriptions, locations within mapped boundaries of current and historic vegetation, and on-the-ground knowledge of TNC ecologists. Historic FRIs were then assigned to each PNVT based on current scientific literature. The historic FRI map was used to conduct analyses of FRI by land tenure using SWReGAP stewardship data and USFS Region 3 forest boundaries. Results show that 64% of land within state boundaries fell into high or moderate frequency FRI classes. A majority of high frequency class PNVTs occur on federal lands with USFS managing the largest proportion (48%). These results will be useful to land managers responsible for fire management and restoration activities in Arizona and New Mexico (Schussman et al. 2006).

USDA-Agricultural Research Service, U.S. EPA, and University of Arizona have developed a GIS tool to facilitate modeling runoff at different spatial and temporal scales. The Automated Geospatial Watershed Assessment (AGWA) tool is a GIS interface designed to input digital land-cover information and to automate the parameterization and execution of the Soil Water Assessment Tool and KINEmatic Runoff and EROSion (KINEROS2) hydrologic models, and spatially display model results for evaluating watershed condition. SWReGAP land cover data were used in the AGWA tool for watershed assessment (Hernandez et al. 2005).

Other Applications

Nevada Natural Heritage Program used 17,000 plots of SWReGAP ground data to map invasive annual grasses across Nevada. These data provided a large number of plots and vegetation data collected for an independent project. SWReGAP data may also be used for accuracy assessment (Peterson 2005).

The Sagebrush Vegetation Mapping Project, an effort of the USGS and Oregon State University, mapped sagebrush and steppe vegetation in the western U.S. SWReGAP data were integrated with data from other vegetation mapping efforts in the region. Mapping was based on map zones used in the SWReGAP effort (Kagan et al. 2005).

The Grand Canyon Wildlands Council used SWReGAP land cover data to analyze the distribution of more than 70 ecosystems that provide habitat for 2,577 plant and animal species in the Grand Canyon ecoregion (GCE). They found that current land management practices do not protect all ecosystems in the region. GCE scrublands on the southern Colorado Plateau are among the most extensive ecosystems, but only 3.4% exist in core protected areas. Wetland, riparian, and springs habitat are rare and support relatively high levels of sensitive species, but only 5% of springs habitats and 9% of riparian habitats lie in protected core areas (Burke et al. 2005).

Applications of Other SWReGAP Data Sets

Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies (CWCS)

New Mexico ’s CWCS used SWReGAP data for a variety of purposes. Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) were associated with land cover types thus providing expert review for SWReGAP habitat models while also providing a method to identify key habitats for the CWCS. The stewardship layer provided the most current spatial stewardship information for the state and was used in combination with other data layers to provide an assessment of conservation prioritization. In Colorado, SWReGAP Wildlife Habitat Relationship (WHR) models were used to identify key habitats for SGCN, while also comparing those key habitats identified by the previous Colorado GAP effort. During the mammals session of the Colorado CWCS Science Forum, the ‘online’ SWReGAP vertebrate modeling outputs were accessed to provide regional landscape perspectives in the identification of key habitats and species distributions (Young et al. 2005).

SWReGAP data will benefit future regionalization of CWCS efforts by providing: 1) regionally consistent spatial data layers for modeling purposes; 2) a landscape level model repository; and 3) a test-bed for inductive/deductive model comparisons. In addition, when considering SGCNs that are common across all five state strategies, the regional dataset will provide an opportunity to develop shared strategies to effect species conservation across state boundaries. The spatial habitat models, when used in conjunction with the stewardship mapping data layer, can also help to identify the need for and benefits of “partnered” strategies for conservation. The regional nature of SWReGAP data sets complement the ecoregional frameworks described in many of the state strategies (Schrupp and Boykin 2005).

County-Level Conservation Planning

A project is under development with Clark County Nevada to provide data for their Multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). SWReGAP is proposing to provide predicted habitat distributions for 37 amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals addressed in the MSHCP. These distributions could be improved for Clark County and the surrounding Mojave Desert region by incorporating additional information that was not used in SWReGAP (e.g., SSURGO soils data, Nevada Breeding Bird Atlas) and by using known locality records and local knowledge. These improved distributions would be useful in planning surveys of selected species. These surveys would benefit Clark County in its evaluation of status and distribution of species as well as benefit SWReGAP by providing data to evaluate accuracy of the original models (D. Bradford, U.S. EPA, personal communication).

Ecoregional Conservation Planning

The Southwest Region of USFWS is conducting ecoregional analyses to set goals and objectives for species populations and natural vegetation communities. They are using SWReGAP data to help determine which priority species and communities occur within permanently conserved areas. The stewardship dataset has already helped set coarse-filter conservation objectives for natural communities in the Lower Colorado River watershed. They will be using these data for a similar process in the Middle and Upper Rio Grande watershed (R. Dietz, USFWS, personal communication). An example species habitat objective using SWReGAP data can be described as follows: Maintain enough hectares of Bell’s vireo (BEVI) habitat in GAP status 1 and 2 lands within the study area to support a population of 21,935 individuals. Add 14,986 hectares of BEVI riparian habitat to GAP status 1 and 2 lands to support an estimated population of 1,123 individuals – habitat patches of at least 27.6 hectares are suggested. Add 90,402 hectares of BEVI upland habitat to GAP status 1 and 2 lands to support an estimated population of 20,315 individuals – habitat patches of at least 8.9 hectares are suggested (Dietz and Stockenberg 2005).

Forest Stewardship Program

The Forest Stewardship Program (FSP) was established under the 1990 U.S. Farm Bill and encourages non-industrial private forest land owners to take a more active approach to managing their forests and related resources. The goal is to enhance long-term stewardship and conservation of private forest lands. The Utah Division of Forestry, Fire, and State Lands worked with the Remote Sensing/GIS Lab at Utah State University to incorporate SWReGAP stewardship and land cover data into the FSP Spatial Analysis Project in Utah. The data were used to identify privately-owned forested and non-forested open space that could potentially benefit from the FSP (Langs et al. 2005).

Wind Energy Development

Recently land and wind resources on the Navajo Reservation were analyzed to determine suitable land for wind energy development and potential wind energy capacity. Sustainable Energy Solutions (SES) of Northern Arizona University used SWReGAP data to assess wind energy development exclusions on Navajo lands. In particular, three exclusion categories (urban/developed land, wetlands, and open water) were based on SWReGAP data. Previous studies were only able to use 1km resolution data; but the resolution of SWReGAP data enabled them to identify wetlands and small rural communities as exclusion areas. Because wetlands provide an indication of potential bird habitat, excluding these areas to wind energy development will address concerns regarding birds using areas near wind turbines. Highlighting the presence of small rural communities offers stakeholders an understanding of where people live on the land. SES will be using SWReGAP stewardship data in their next study of wind energy development exclusions that will cover the entire state of Arizona. SES believes the SWReGAP stewardship data will be important for increasing their understanding of wind energy development exclusions since many of the exclusion layers are based on ownership. Furthermore, the stewardship data contains the most current and accurate assessment of owners/stewards and will improve the overall quality of their work (G. Brummels, Sustainable Energy Solutions, Northern Arizona University, personal communication).

Conclusion

To date federal and state agencies make up the majority of SWReGAP data users, with some use by non-profit, commercial, tribal, and academic groups. It will be important to promote GAP data use to these non-federal/state groups who may not be as familiar with the data. Users want the ability to access both region-wide data and subsets of this data. While it has been crucial for GAP to begin developing regionally consistent datasets, it will also be necessary to provide access to state-level data.

Land cover data, WHR models, and stewardship data have been used for a variety of purposes either as separate datasets or in conjunction with each other. In particular, land cover and stewardship data are often used together. At the state level, CWCS has demonstrated use of multiple GAP datasets to support species conservation planning. Users have also expressed interest in ancillary datasets from SWReGAP. For example, many projects noted use of ground truth data to support their own mapping efforts. GAP should continue to educate users about potential uses of the datasets individually as well as in conjunction with other GAP datasets. In addition, users should also be informed of the variety of ancillary datasets that could be used in their own research and mapping efforts. To facilitate application of SWReGAP data it will be important to monitor current uses to gain a better understanding of how GAP can continue to educate the public about this vast data resource.

Literature Cited

Abele, S.L., J. Bair, D.E. McIvor, L.A. Neel, R.J. Phenix, A.E. Shaul, and J.C. Sjöberg. 2005. Using the Southwest Regional Gap Analysis Project data to describe land cover and ownership patterns in Nevada for wildlife conservation planning. Presentation at the 2005 National Gap Analysis Conference and Interagency Symposium, Reno, Nevada.

Burke, K.J., L.E. Stevens, B.S. Perla, and K.H. Crumbo. 2005. Conservation planning using Southwestern ReGAP data: Seven E’s in the Grand Canyon ecoregion. Presentation at the 2005 National Gap Analysis Conference and Interagency Symposium, Reno, Nevada.

Dietz, R. and E. Stockenberg. 2005. Landscape-scale conservation assessment: Setting science-based habitat objectives. Presentation at the 2005 National Gap Analysis Conference and Interagency Symposium, Reno, Nevada.

Hernandez, M., L. Levick, W. Kepner, D. Goodrich, D. Semmens, and E. Canfield. 2005. SWReGAP data to estimate change in watershed response in a Nevada watershed using a GIS-based hydrologic modeling approach. Presentation at the 2005 National Gap Analysis Conference and Interagency Symposium, Reno, Nevada.

Kagan, J., J. Hak, S. Knick, and S. Hanser. 2005. Sagebrush Vegetation Mapping Project:
Large-scale mapping for sagebrush/shrub steppe habitats in the western U.S. Presentation at the 2005 National Gap Analysis Conference and Interagency Symposium, Reno, Nevada.

Kost, J.R. 2005. LANDFIRE: A partnership for national fire and fuel assessment. Presentation at the 2005 National Gap Analysis Conference and Interagency Symposium, Reno, Nevada.

Langs, L.A., Wells, K., and J.H. Lowry. 2005. Application of SWReGAP data to the Forest Stewardship Program Spatial Analysis Project in Utah. Presentation at the 2005 National Gap Analysis Conference and Interagency Symposium, Reno, Nevada..

Lowry, J., R.D. Ramsey, and L. Langs. 2005. An overview of the southwest regional land cover dataset. Presentation at the 2005 National Gap Analysis Conference and Interagency Symposium, Reno, Nevada.

Peterson, E.B. 2005. Use of ground data from GAP in combination with project-specific data
for mapping cover of invasive annual grasses across Nevada. Presentation at the 2005 National Gap Analysis Conference and Interagency Symposium, Reno, Nevada.

Ramsey, R.D. 2005. A comparison of current land cover condition to NRCS ecological site descriptions for Box Elder County, Utah. Presentation at the 2005 National Gap Analysis Conference and Interagency Symposium, Reno, Nevada.

Schrupp, D.L., and K.G. Boykin. 2005. The Future Opportunities – Leveraging GAP Data for Implementation Efforts in Support of Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies. Presentation at the 2005 National Gap Analysis Conference and Interagency Symposium, Reno, Nevada.

Schussman, H., C. Enquist, and M. List. 2006. Historic fire return intervals for Arizona and New Mexico: A regional perspective for southwestern land managers. The Nature Conservancy, Arizona.

Sheffey, J., and J. Pollett. 2005. Utilizing GAP Vegetation Data to Identify Fire Regime/Condition Class in Utah and Nevada. Presentation at the 2005 National Gap Analysis Conference and Interagency Symposium, Reno, Nevada.

Young, K., K. Boykin, and D. Schrupp. 2005. Combining the efforts of the Southwest Regional Gap Analysis Project and CWCS in New Mexico and Colorado. Presentation at the 2005 National Gap Analysis Conference and Interagency Symposium, Reno, Nevada.

Return to Table of Contents