GIS Projects: 2009 Priorities
description
Transcript of GIS Projects: 2009 Priorities
1
Natural Resource Program Center
GIS Projects: 2009 Priorities
Collective efforts of NRPC I&MGIS Team
2
Natural Resource Program Center
First, a brief review…
• In the event of questions or concerns who do you contact?
Before
3
Natural Resource Program Center
What’s on tap?• Analysis of inventory products• NPScape (major focus of
presentation)• VSIMS core functionality• Support of IRMA functional
requirements and use case analysis (not addressed here)
4
Natural Resource Program Center
Analysis of Inventory Products
Subtitle…
FANCY
5
Natural Resource Program Center
“Back to the Future” in the sense
• Over the years, the I&M program has invested millions of dollar$ in Inventory Products
• True value of inventory data is realized when:– Used as a baseline for future efforts– Applied in park decision making
6
Natural Resource Program Center
Initial Inventory Projects• Focus on “standard” inventory
products generated by soils, geology, base cartography, and other core inventories
• Work in concert with local (park) staff to identify management questions that can be addressed with available inventory data
7
Natural Resource Program Center
Navajo National Monument (NAVA)
• Park status: small resource staff, limited GIS expertise and resources, units managed in context of surrounding tribal lands
• Project goals are to : – Produce a baseline GIS library in an easy to use
format (Theme Manager). – Generate summary statistics for data layers (PMIS
input)– Utilizing existing I&M inventory products to
develop an analysis of erosion risk within the landscape context of the monument.
– Provide training and documentation to NAVA for project products
8
Natural Resource Program Center
NAVA Adjacent Land Use• Use base cartography (imagery) to
document change• Alteration to drainage patterns• Affects access to and stability of ruin
sites
1952 2007
9
Natural Resource Program Center
NAVA Erosion Modeling
Using Revised Universal Soil Loss v2 (RUSLE2) parameters
Frames:
•Elevation•Slope•Flow Accumulation•Slope-Length•Erosivity•Soil Erodibility•Land Cover•NDVI•Cropping Factor•Erosion Risk
10
Natural Resource Program Center
Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument (ORPI)
• Park status: resource staff dealing with significant impact to resources due to border activities, history of monitoring in the park, need to inform park management and work with law enforcement on interdiction efforts
• Project goals are to : – Using good science, staff experience and existing
geospatial datasets, identify information gaps and vulnerable areas.
– Identify temporal (historic) and spatial disturbance regimes related to cross-border traffic. Use outputs to help focus inventory & monitoring, law enforcement efforts and research on the environmental impact of border-related disturbances.
11
Natural Resource Program Center
Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument (ORPI)
• Cost-surface modeling of border crossing:
Basic model Include pedestrian fence
12
Natural Resource Program Center
NPScape Project
Objects near parks are closer and largerthan they appear
13
Natural Resource Program Center
NPScape Project Overview•Project is intended to provide a view of parks in their larger ecological context•Focus is on a consistent, servicewide approach that still has relevance at park level•Utilizing geospatial data available on a nationwide scale•Careful attention to developing procedures that can be replicated•SOPs and tools are being developed that can be customized for local applications (acknowledging our “one size” might not “fit all”)
14
Natural Resource Program Center
Suite of products for each metric
• Measure Development Summary (MDS)
• Data products• Standard Operating Procedures• Cartographic and other graphic
outputs• Tables and other summaries• Interpretation/summary by park
15
Natural Resource Program Center
Project SOPs• Documentation ensures consistency and
adherence to project standards…• Hopefully dodge the “hit by the bus”
situation
16
Natural Resource Program Center
Initial focus on four metrics
• Population• Land Cover• Conservation Status• Roads
17
Natural Resource Program Center
Population Measures
• Recent change in population density (1990 – 2000)
• Historic change in population density (1790 – 1990)
• Recent population change• Etc.
18
Natural Resource Program Center
Population and Housing MDS• Each MDS covers the following
topics:– Background (what are the monitoring
questions and ecological inferences)– Data sources and dimensions
(spatial, temporal, and thematic)– Derived metrics– Issues and assumptions considered in
the metrics
19
Natural Resource Program Center
Population Data Sources• 1990 Census Block Groups
(geography and STF1 content)• 2000 Census Block Groups
(geography and STF1 content)• Waisanen & Bliss Historic
Population (1790 – 1990, county-based)
• Etc.
20
Natural Resource Program Center
Population Processing SOPs• Perhaps the most important
project deliverable…• SOPs allow you to replicate or
customize process for local needs
21
Natural Resource Program Center
SOP Content• GIS Components developed in ArcGIS Model
Builder (leverage standard geospatial tools)• Documentation consists of: how to run existing
models, data requirements, model logic and assumptions, quality checks, and how to customize models
22
Natural Resource Program Center
Sample products: Historic Population Density
Different ways of representing content…depends on medium, e.g. print or web.
23
Natural Resource Program Center
Ability to look at individual county-level detail
Average U.S. Population Density (2000) = 30.7 people/km2
24
Natural Resource Program Center
Sample Products: Recent Population Density Change
Park1990 Population Density
(Persons/km2)2000 Population Density
(Persons/km2)BUFF 10 11GRSM 45 54KIMO 89 100MABI 24 26MISS 266 308PIPE 7 6SEKI 4 4WHIS 32 36
1990
2000
25
Natural Resource Program Center
Land Cover Measures
• Percent Natural/Percent Converted• Change in percent natural/percent
converted• Area in impervious cover• Etc.
26
Natural Resource Program Center
Land Cover Data Sources
• National Land Cover Data (NLCD)
• LANDFIRE• Gap Analysis Program (GAP)• NatureServe Ecological Systems• Etc.
27
Natural Resource Program Center
Sample Output: Percent Converted
Park %ConvertedBUFF 24%GRSM 20%KIMO 40%MABI 14%MISS 65%PIPE 87%SEKI 3%WHIS 9% Green = Natural NLCD Land Cover Classes
Yellow = Converted NLCD Land Cover Classes
28
Natural Resource Program Center
Sample Output: Land Cover Change (1992 – 2001)
Park Natural-to-Converted (%) Converted-to-Natural (%)BUFF 1.8 0.5GRSM 0.7 0.3KIMO 3.4 1.5MABI 1.4 0.2MISS 0.4 0.9PIPE 0.0 0.1SEKI <0.1 <0.1WHIS 0.2 <0.1
29
Natural Resource Program Center
Conservation Status Measures
• Percent protected land• Conservation Risk Index (CRI)• Etc.
30
Natural Resource Program Center
Conservation Status Data Sources
• Gap Analysis Program (GAP)• Protected Areas Database
(PAD-US)• Etc.
31
Natural Resource Program Center
Sample Output: Percent Protected Land
Park %ProtectedBUFF 6%GRSM 19%KIMO <1%MABI 2%MISS 2%PIPE <1%SEKI 49%WHIS 13%
32
Natural Resource Program Center
Sample Output: Conservation Risk Index (CRI)
• Utilizes input from Land Cover measure and a different Conservation Status measure
Converted land (%)CRI = --------------------------
Protected Land (%)
Unit % of Area Converted % of Area Protected CRIBUFF 24.2 6.6 3.67GRSM 19.9 19.2 1.04KIMO 40.1 0.8 50.13MABI 14.6 2.0 7.30MISS 65.8 2.1 31.33PIPE 87.5 0.7 125.00SEKI 2.9 49.9 0.06WHIS 9.4 13.5 0.70
33
Natural Resource Program Center
Transportation Measures
• Distance to roads• Road density• Etc.
34
Natural Resource Program Center
Transportation Data Sources
• ESRI StreetMap• TIGER Line Files• TeleAtlas• Etc.
35
Natural Resource Program Center
ParkInterstates(km/km2)
Major Roads(km/km2)
Streets(km/km2)
BUFF 0.00 0.17 0.98GRSM 0.03 0.20 1.56KIMO 0.04 0.37 2.20MABI 0.08 0.20 1.20MISS 0.09 0.70 2.68PIPE 0.00 0.20 1.11SEKI 0.00 0.06 0.43WHIS 0.03 0.21 1.14
Sample Output: Road Density• Not all roads are created equal: treat
local streets, major roads, and interstates differently
• Calculate density for each road “classification”
Can add gridded densitiesfor each layer to obtain totalroad density.
36
Natural Resource Program Center
Sample Output: Distance to Roads
• Surrogate for “road less” areas
Distance to major roads Distance to streets
Buffalo National River – 30km Buffer
37
Natural Resource Program Center
Project Updates and Links to Data/Products
http://www1.nrintra.nps.gov/im/monitor/npscape/index.cfm
http://nrinfo
38
Natural Resource Program Center
Vital Signs Internet Map Services (VSIMS)
• FY2009 Activities:– NRDT upload and map display functions
plus integration with IRMA– Development staff opening
• Demo during Weds Show and Tell session
39
Natural Resource Program Center
Questions or Comments?
• Swap Meet• Happy Hour (Meet Brent in
back corner of bar, he’s buying!)
• Ad Hoc