home
1Division of Biology, Kansas State University, Manhattan
2Kansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Kansas State University, Manhattan
3Center for Advanced Land Management Information Technologies, University of Nebraska, Lincoln
4Wildlife and Fisheries Science, South Dakota State University, Brookings
5 GIS Support and Research Facility, Iowa State University, Ames
6Iowa Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Iowa State University, Ames
7Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamestown, North Dakota
Partnerships and Matching Funds from the Great Plains States
Partnering within the Great Plains states has been very important to the success of the Great
Plains Regional GAP project. Over $3.5 million have been received in monetary and in-kind
support from partners for the direct funding of basic layers of gap analysis as well as spin-offs of
the GAP projects important to partners in the Great Plains (Table 1). Successes in basic gap
analysis efforts would not have been possible without the direct and financial support of our
many partners in the Great Plains. In addition to the financial aspects of partnering,
contributions of partners have demonstrated their interest in our work and the value of creating
high-quality, state-of-the-art products. Our partnering support, both in direct and in-kind
financial aspects, also has stimulated several spin-off projects within the basic GAP effort,
thereby facilitating future partnering with various agencies and organizations.
Background on the Formation of the Great Plains Regional GAP Group
The Great Plains Regional GAP project originated as a two-pronged effort; one effort was
focused on land cover and the other on vertebrate modeling. The desire to produce a seamless
land cover map within EPA-Region 7 brought together the four states of the region (Iowa,
Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska) in 1996 to form the MidAmerica Remote Sensing Consortium
to work on this common initiative. The Consortium expanded to include South Dakota in 1997.
In contrast, the vertebrate group was brought about partially by the recognition that the ranges of
many vertebrate species crossed state boundaries. Also, significant to the formation of the
vertebrate group were repeated observations of the continuing successful cooperation of the land
cover group. Further, the spatial arrangement (north-south) of the region’s major grassland types
(tallgrass, mixed-grass, and shortgrass prairies) made it highly likely that many vertebrate
species would be shared among the Great Plains states. Individuals within the vertebrate group
indicated their interest in pursuing common goals at the National GAP meeting in Reston,
Virginia, in August 1997.
Great Plains Regional GAP Meetings and Partnerships
The first formal meeting of the Great Plains Regional GAP group was hosted by the KS-GAP
project at the University of Kansas in Lawrence in October 1997. States participating were
Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and South Dakota. North Dakota joined the
regional group in spring 1998. Since that time, the group has held semi-annual meetings in the
spring and fall. Oklahoma and Missouri discontinued participation in the regional group in
spring 1998 and spring 1999, respectively.
The spring and fall meetings have facilitated numerous interactions between the land cover and
vertebrate modeling groups in addition to providing time to discuss the “nuts and bolts” of GAP
tasks in separate breakout sessions. Joint sessions have included six-month progress reports for
each state project as well as discussions of funding opportunities and successes (Table 2). In
breakout sessions, the land cover group has discussed the challenges of distinguishing among
grassland types. They also have worked to design a common regional protocol for conducting
accuracy assessment of each state’s land cover map. Likewise, the vertebrate group has
considered issues that are related to development of vertebrate distribution maps and wildlife
habitat relationship models. At the spring 1999 meeting, KS-GAP demonstrated a Microsoft
Access database expert system that they developed to assist modeling habitats of vertebrates in
Kansas. Subsequently, the five states decided to use the same database expert system with some
modifications. This decision was made to ensure that all vertebrate species and vegetative
alliances occurring in the Great Plains states would be included in the database, which would
allow vertebrates to be modeled across the region.
Our last regional meeting occurred on 24-25 October 2000 at EROS Data Center. Our focus has
now moved from intrastate land cover classifications to interstate evaluations of land cover
classes (cross-walks) and how state modifications in vertebrate mapping will impact regional
vertebrate models. Although these questions eventually surface in all GAP projects, regional
meetings have allowed GAP project personnel to anticipate problems and to have potential
solutions or recommendations at hand. Furthermore, discussions have begun to address rules for
development and cross-walking of state stewardship layers, which will allow cross-walking of
stewardship categories and processing of a regional stewardship map.
Breakout sessions also fostered discussions about types of in-kind support in each state that
partners were providing for land cover mapping, vertebrate modeling, and stewardship mapping.
For example, in-kind support has included waiver of indirect costs by universities on grants and
contracts funded to support producing land cover and vertebrate maps, Landsat Thematic
Mapper scenes, and metadata on museum voucher specimens (Table 3). In-kind support has
been very valuable to each state both in terms of services provided as well as monetary values
associated with these services (Table 4). Although we have placed a dollar value on in-kind
services and support, some of these estimates for in-kind support undoubtedly are undervalued.
For example, museum records of specimens useful to GAP projects have been valued at $1 per
record, but total costs would be in the millions of dollars were these specimens to be collected
today.
| State | Monetary | In-Kind | Total |
| Iowa | $142,000 | $193,000 | $335,000 |
| Kansas | $810,402 | $800,349 | $1,610,751 |
| Nebraska | $620,017 | $99,000 | $719,017 |
| North Dakota | $800,500 | $800,500 | |
| South Dakota | $20,000 | $142,000 | $162,000 |
| Total | $1,592,419 | $2,034,849 | $3,627,268 |
Table 4. In-kind partners of the Great Plains states over GAP I funding period and estimated
value of services or support provided.