w.g. kepner and d.f. bradford 29 april 2004

W.G. Kepner and D.F. Bradford

29 April 2004

Regional Gap Analysis Program for

Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Colorado, and Arizona

The Gap Analysis ProgramThe Gap Analysis Programhttp://www.gap.uidaho.edu/gaphttp://www.gap.uidaho.edu/gap

SW ReGAPSW ReGAP

What Is GAP?A “gap” is the lack of

representation or under-representation of an element of biodiversity (plant community or animal species) in an area intended for its long term maintenance.

Gap analysis is a process to keep common species common by plugging the gaps in our network of lands managed for biodiversity.


SW ReGAPSW ReGAP

5-state Regional Approach


SW ReGAPSW ReGAP

Project area: 530, 415 sq mi, 339,465,600 ac- 93% of the size of Alaska

BLM lands: 31% of area USFS lands: 14% of area State lands: 7% of area Tribal lands: 9% of area

Gap Objectives

1) Map the distributions of natural communities using NVCS.

2) Map predicted habitat of native vertebrate species.

3) Map the degree of management for biodiversity maintenance focusing on intent.

4) Analyze the representation of biotic elements in the conservation network to identify “gaps” in long-term security.

5) Provide this information to the public and those entities charged with land use research, policy, planning, and management.


SW ReGAPSW ReGAP

Digital Land Cover Map

(5 states/NVCS)

Digital Land Status Map

(5 states)

Digital PotentialHabitat Maps(~833 Vertebrate species/5 states)

Analyses for “Gaps”In Biodiversity

Protection

Southwest ReGap Product Development


SW ReGAPSW ReGAP

State Project Principle Investigators and NatureServe Cooperator:

AZ: Kathryn Thomas, USGS Colorado Plateau Field Station, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff.

CO: Don Schrupp, Colorado Division of Wildlife; Lee O’Brien, NREL, Colorado State University; Dianne Osborne, BLM-NSTC.

NV: William Kepner and David Bradford, EPA – National Exposure Research Lab, Las Vegas.

NM: Ken Boykin, USGS Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces.

UT: Doug Ramsey and John Lowry, Utah State University; Collin Homer, USGS EROS Data Center.

NatureServe: Regional plant ecology coordination – Pat Comer and Keith Schulz

Who is SWReGAP?


SW ReGAPSW ReGAP

Products of GAP

Digital products on CD-ROM and the Internet: Land Cover GIS Coverage Animal Habitat GIS Coverages Stewardship/Ownership GIS Coverages Analyses of “gaps” and general

representation Areas of species richness Ancillary data used in modeling A report of methods and results


SW ReGAPSW ReGAPProject Timeline

1998 First organizational workshops held.

1999 Planning workshop held and initial GAP funds distributed. Regional and State coordinators hired.

2000-1 Primary landsat imagery acquired along with field data. Regional animal habitat modeling methods established. Land cover mapping and animal habitat modeling work ongoing.

2002-3 Land cover mapping and animal modeling continues. Stewardship mapping begins in 2003.

2004 Land cover mapping and stewardship mapping will be complete in September 2004.

2005 Animal modeling will be complete in March 2005. Analysis completed, report written, and data published by fall 2005.

Vertebrate Habitat

Modeling and Mapping

Model habitat of vertebrate species that reside, breed, or use habitat in the five-state region for a substantial portion of their life history.

Produce Regionally Consistent Produce Regionally Consistent MapsMaps

Predicted distribution of mule deer habitat (Odocoileus hemionus) in the five SWReGAP States.


SW ReGAPSW ReGAP

Animal Distribution ModelingCharacteristics: Map all terrestrial vertebrates (birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians) that breed or use habitat in the state for an important part of their life history.

Modeling utilizes, but is not constrained by known occurrence, also includes probable and possible occurrence to define range limits.

Requires active participation of vertebrate experts in determining geographic range, habitat relation models, and draft map review.

Does not include habitat quality or viability at this time.


SW ReGAPSW ReGAP

Land Ownership

Characteristics: Maps categories of public land ownership and

voluntarily provided private conservation lands.

Emphasizes managing entity over ownership.

Categorizes all land according to four levels of commitment to biodiversity maintenance.

Categorization based on expressed long-term intent rather than short-term actual practices.

Allows sublevels for states to include greater detail.


SW ReGAPSW ReGAP

GAP Management Categories:

Status 1: Highest level of management intent for biodiversity, e.g., Research Natural Areas.

Status 2: High level of intent but allows some use, e.g., Wilderness Areas that allow grazing.

Status 3: Intent to preserve special features or endangered species in context of human use, i.e., public multiple use lands.

Status 4: No known intent to maintain biodiversity.

Stewardship


SW ReGAPSW ReGAP

Analyses: Animals

Who are the land stewards and how well is the animal species protected?

USFS: 53.0%BLM: 0.85%Protected: 7.3%


SW ReGAPSW ReGAP

Sage GrouseSage GrouseCentrocercus urophasianusCentrocercus urophasianus

Conservation Lands

Sage Grouse Distribution

•Prefers large canopy sagebrush plants, open areas for leks,

•Protection is currently <6% of its western range.

Preliminary Stewardship Layer


SW ReGAPSW ReGAP


SW ReGAPSW ReGAP

William Kepner [email protected]

David Bradford [email protected]

Todd Sajwaj [email protected] http://leopold.nmsu.edu/ fwscoop/swregap/default.htm

w.g. kepner and d.f. bradford 29 april 2004

Documents