Roan Mountain Highlands Conservation Planning

1
Roan Mountain Highlands Conservation Planning

• GIS Approach for Implementing State Wildlife
  Action Plan Priorities at the Local Level

Andrew D. Carroll 04-01-2009
2
Overview

• Project Background
• Review of State Wildlife Action Plans (SWAP)
  Objectives
• Case Study
• Roan Highlands Project

3
Project Location
4
(No Transcript)
5
http//www.learnnc.org/lp/media/collections/nc/ove
rmountain.jpg
6
Privately Owned Lands

• 81 of total project area is private or not
  managed for resource conservation

7
Background Roan Highlands
8
So What is A SWAP?

• Wildlife Action Plans

9
State Wildlife Action Plans

• State fish and wildlife agencies developed plans
• Assess the condition of habitat
• Outline actions needed to conserve species
• List specific conservation projects

10
SWAPs What They Can Do

• Clear management goals based on science
• Priorities can be spatially defined
• Identify conservation targets
• Identify protection gaps
• Identify restoration targets
• Funding opportunities between public-private
  partnerships

11
Challenges of Using SWAP Datasets

• States not held to uniform standard for output
• Some states developed detailed models
• Other states relied on existing datasets
• Local planning government not familiar

12
The Disconnect Planning Implementation

• Local planning occurring without access to
  thorough inventory of resources and ecological
  functions
• Lack of understanding results in unplanned loss
• Landuse changes causing permanent losses in
• - Ecological function
• - Wildlife diversity
• - Agricultural resources
• - Hunting and recreation
  access
• - Cultural identity

13
Solutions NGOs GIS

• NGOs take an active role in planning and
  implementation
• Partner and inform local communities
• Serve critical niche as middle men
• Often serve as data librarians
• Active in conservation design
• Provide mechanism for acquisition or protection

14
Case Study

• GIS SWAP Applications in Western North Carolina

15
Roan Highlands SWAP Toolkit

• Project funded by Wildlife Conservation Society
• Managed by SAHC
• Create GIS-based Toolkit
• Enable local government and NGOs to use SWAP
  data
• Two SWAP reports for project area

Carter, TN
Avery, NC
Mitchell, NC
16
Project Objectives

• Spatially define SWAP targeted habitats
• Make this data available to local government and
  SAHC
• Prioritize SWAP with other datasets AT
  Viewshed, NC One Naturally, natural heritage
  data

17
Step 1 Inventory of Existing Data Resources

• SAHC provided large library from in-house GIS
• Previous studies served as invaluable resources
• - Roan Mountain Massif Conservation Site
  (Landscape) Design (Kenney)
• - SAFC Return of the Great Forest (Erwin)

18
Step 2 Created Uniform Parcel Coverage

• Not all counties maintained parcel data in GIS
  format
• Required to be created from scratch
• Once completed, merged with other counties using
  crosswalk table

19
Cross-walked to Single Feature Class
20
Two SWAPs - One Project
21
TN SWAP - Sample Output Data
22
NC WAP Geospatial Products
23
How do we make them talk???

• Two options
• 1) Index of SWAP priority targets using common
  ecological systems file and existing datasets
• 2) Resample entire project area using method of
  one state (redo SWAP effort)
• What works best for our timeline and funding?

24
Selected Index Approach

• Final index counts tallied for defined area
  (parcels or
• 1 KM2 grids)
• Allows for prioritization of high resource areas
• Flexible Approach parameters easily weighted
• Accepted weaknesses
• - relies on data with varying spatial scales,
  no standardization in approach acceptable error

25
Step 3 Selected Model Parameters
26
GAP Analysis Data Ecological Systems
27
Ecological Systems

• Southeast REGAP project (NC State UGA) 2008
• NatureServe Ecological System Classification
  (2003)
• GAP used by both SWAPs
• Cross walked with old GAP data

http//www.natureserve.org/library/usEcologicalsy
stems.pdf
28
Extracted Systems for Project Area

• Previous studies and SAHC input used to select
  systems unique to Roan
• - Spruce-Fir
• - Early Successional
• - High Elevation Outcrop
• - Northern Hardwood
• - Montane Oak
• - Cove Forest
• - Riverine-Aquatic

Used subset of SWAP GAP category
29
Ecological Systems Total Number

• Extracted raster systems converted to vector
  format
• Calculated total number of designated systems per
  parcel gt 60 acres or 1Km2 grid cell

30
Ecological Systems Patch Size

• Calculated area for contiguous patches of habitat
• Use natural statistical breaks (4 breaks) to
  select top half of patches
• Larges patches assigned a highest value

31
Ecological System Proportion of SWAP Ecological
Systems

• Total SWAP area approximated for grids and tracts
• Erased grid and tract features with merged SWAP
  systems feature class
• Percentage used to define ranking using intervals
  of .20

32
Appalachian Trail Viewshed

• Used trail to create observation points
• Calculated visibility using DEM and Spatial
  Analyst
• Visible grids or tracts assigned a ranking
• 0 Not visible
• 5 Visible

33
NC One Naturally BWHA Model

• Selected top half of Biological Wildlife
  Habitat Assessment Layer
• Assigned intersecting grids and tracts with
  ranking value

34
TN Wildlife Action Plan (WAP)

• Selected top half of combined aquatic,
  subterranean, and terrestrial GCN priority areas
• Assigned intersecting grids and tracts with
  ranking value

35
Heritage Datasets

• Collection of TN and NC Heritage datasets used to
  select tracts and grids
• Intersection features assigned a ranking value

36
Existing Conservation Framework

• Based on principles of corridor ecology
• Tracts or grids touching the boundary of an
  existing conservation land selected
• Assigned ranking value

37
Final Output 1 Square Km Grid
38
Final Output Parcel Data
39
Indexed Tract Summary

• Using top 50 of cumulative total score
• - 160 parcels
• - 27,936 acres, mean 175 acres, SD 271 acres
• - Mean 3 SWAP systems, SD 1
• - Mean SWAP .36, SD .18
• - Mean Total Score 22, SD 6

40
Interactive Toolkits

• Public Toolkit

• NGO Toolkit

41
Local Government Outreach

• Varying levels of technical capabilities pose
  largest hurdle
• Planners at local levels receptive
• Relying on regional planning entities more
  feasible for initial release of data
• NGOs crucial partner

42
Closing Thoughts

• Possible to utilize existing GIS and SWAP
  resources to develop valuable tools that leverage
  conservation funding, while providing valuable
  contributions to landscape level planning
• Technology facilitates transfer to local level
  planning
• NGOs poised to serve as host to these tools