Filters: Tags: Land use planning (X)
465 results (14ms)|
Filters
Date Range
Extensions Types
Contacts
Categories Tag Types Tag Schemes |
Scorecard analysis for terrestrial conservation elements and landscape condition. The landscape condition score represents area weighted mean value based upon the combined count and condition score. sum(count*score) / sum(count) *where count equals the cell count and score is the condition value. NatureServe’s ecological integrity framework provides a practical approach to organize criteria and indicators for this purpose (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2006, Unnasch et al. 2008). This framework provides a scorecard for reporting on the ecological status of a given CE within a given location, and if needed, facilitates the aggregation and synthesis of the component results for broader measures of ecological integrity at...
Scorecard analysis for terrestrial conservation elements and near future landscape condition. The landscape condition score represents area weighted mean value based upon the combined count and condition score. sum(count*score) / sum(count) *where count equals the cell count and score is the condition value. NatureServe’s ecological integrity framework provides a practical approach to organize criteria and indicators for this purpose (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2006, Unnasch et al. 2008). This framework provides a scorecard for reporting on the ecological status of a given CE within a given location, and if needed, facilitates the aggregation and synthesis of the component results for broader measures of ecological...
This layer represents the scorecard of one indicator of ecosytem integrity. This ecosystem assessment is for SNK 2010 landscape condtion (LCM). NatureServe’s ecological integrity framework provides a practical approach to organize criteria and indicators for this purpose (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2006, Unnasch et al. 2008). This framework provides a scorecard for reporting on the ecological status of a given CE within a given location, and if needed, facilitates the aggregation and synthesis of the component results for broader measures of ecological integrity at broader scales.
This layer represents the scorecard of one indicator of ecosytem integrity. This ecosystem assessment is for SNK 2010 landscape condtion (LCM). NatureServe’s ecological integrity framework provides a practical approach to organize criteria and indicators for this purpose (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2006, Unnasch et al. 2008). This framework provides a scorecard for reporting on the ecological status of a given CE within a given location, and if needed, facilitates the aggregation and synthesis of the component results for broader measures of ecological integrity at broader scales.
This layer represents the scorecard of one indicator of ecosytem integrity. This ecosystem assessment is for SNK 2010 landscape condtion (LCM). NatureServe’s ecological integrity framework provides a practical approach to organize criteria and indicators for this purpose (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2006, Unnasch et al. 2008). This framework provides a scorecard for reporting on the ecological status of a given CE within a given location, and if needed, facilitates the aggregation and synthesis of the component results for broader measures of ecological integrity at broader scales.
This layer represents the scorecard of one indicator of ecosytem integrity. This ecosystem assessment is for SNK 2010 landscape condtion (LCM). NatureServe’s ecological integrity framework provides a practical approach to organize criteria and indicators for this purpose (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2006, Unnasch et al. 2008). This framework provides a scorecard for reporting on the ecological status of a given CE within a given location, and if needed, facilitates the aggregation and synthesis of the component results for broader measures of ecological integrity at broader scales.
Scorecard analysis for terrestrial conservation elements and near-future landscape condition. The landscape condition score represents area weighted mean value based upon the combined count and condition score. sum(count*score) / sum(count) *where count equals the cell count and score is the condition value. NatureServe’s ecological integrity framework provides a practical approach to organize criteria and indicators for this purpose (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2006, Unnasch et al. 2008). This framework provides a scorecard for reporting on the ecological status of a given CE within a given location, and if needed, facilitates the aggregation and synthesis of the component results for broader measures of ecological...
Scorecard analysis for terrestrial conservation elements and near-future landscape condition. The landscape condition score represents area weighted mean value based upon the combined count and condition score. sum(count*score) / sum(count) *where count equals the cell count and score is the condition value. NatureServe’s ecological integrity framework provides a practical approach to organize criteria and indicators for this purpose (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2006, Unnasch et al. 2008). This framework provides a scorecard for reporting on the ecological status of a given CE within a given location, and if needed, facilitates the aggregation and synthesis of the component results for broader measures of ecological...
Scorecard analysis for terrestrial conservation elements and near future landscape condition. The landscape condition score represents area weighted mean value based upon the combined count and condition score. sum(count*score) / sum(count) *where count equals the cell count and score is the condition value. NatureServe’s ecological integrity framework provides a practical approach to organize criteria and indicators for this purpose (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2006, Unnasch et al. 2008). This framework provides a scorecard for reporting on the ecological status of a given CE within a given location, and if needed, facilitates the aggregation and synthesis of the component results for broader measures of ecological...
Scorecard analysis for terrestrial conservation elements and near-future landscape condition. The landscape condition score represents area weighted mean value based upon the combined count and condition score. sum(count*score) / sum(count) *where count equals the cell count and score is the condition value. NatureServe’s ecological integrity framework provides a practical approach to organize criteria and indicators for this purpose (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2006, Unnasch et al. 2008). This framework provides a scorecard for reporting on the ecological status of a given CE within a given location, and if needed, facilitates the aggregation and synthesis of the component results for broader measures of ecological...
This dataset shows unsettled state and native land claims at the section level filtered from general land status records in 2011 Land Information System Database downloaded from ASGDC. The Land Status attributes are a snapshot of the Land Information System Database and are only accurate as that database. The data is produced to the section (square mile) level.
This coverage displays the non-surveyed boundaries of active (recorded or interim) federal mining claims within the State of Alaska. Each mining claim is represented as an individual region, identified by the casefile serial number which can be linked to background data via the ALIS (Alaska Land Information System). Mining claim boundaries were identified in location notices from the original casefiles. They were plotted on maps based on rough sketches, claimant maps or physical descriptions. The mining claim boundaries were transferred (when applicable) by use of a zoom-transfer scope and light table from claimant maps or estimated from land descriptions onto 1:63,360 quadrangle maps. Claims were then digitized...
This simple assessment raster is used to answer management questions (MQs) about where change agents (CAs) overlap with BLM high biodiversity sites (HBS) in the Central Great Basin and Range Ecoregion. This is a basic footprint assessment of anthropogenic features (urban development, roads, etc) intersect with the areas of HBS. The HBS were derived from source data characterizing locations with concentrated at-risk biodiversity or existing source data of a prioritization exercise that identified areas of high conservation significance. It does not model actual response or condition of the HBS to the CAs. The data intersects two primary classes of information: The CAs consist of 19 classes which represent different...
Scorecard analysis for terrestrial conservation elements and Invasive Annual Plant Species. The annual grass index represents a summary score for a CE based upon the amount of the CE itersecting the annual grass model. The summary score is a weighted mean using the following formula. ((C0*0.5+C1*0.05+C2*0.05+C3+0.1+C4*0.1+C5*0.15)/Total Count)/0.5 *where C is the cell count by category. NatureServe’s ecological integrity framework provides a practical approach to organize criteria and indicators for this purpose (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2006, Unnasch et al. 2008). This framework provides a scorecard for reporting on the ecological status of a given CE within a given location, and if needed, facilitates the aggregation...
This simple assessment layer is used to answer management questions (MQs) about which high biodiversity sites (HBS) will experience significant climate change in the near future scenario in the Mojave Basin and Range Ecoregion. This is a basic intersect of areas that will likely experience significant climate change effects with the areas that have been identified by previous 3rd party analyses as having extraordinary biodiversity. It does not model actual response or condition of the HBS to climate change. Nearly all HBS in the ecoregion will experience significant effects according to the criteria that were selected. The climate space trends data layer was used to ascertain areas of significant climate changes....
This dataset is a 100-meter cell resolution raster of estimated use of public supply water for the southwestern United States. The dataset was generated from 1:100,000-scale county boundary data, 2005 LandScan population data, and USGS estimated use of water in the United States in 2000.
Scorecard analysis for terrestrial conservation elements and landscape condition. The landscape condition score represents area weighted mean value based upon the combined count and condition score. sum(count*score) / sum(count) *where count equals the cell count and score is the condition value. NatureServe’s ecological integrity framework provides a practical approach to organize criteria and indicators for this purpose (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2006, Unnasch et al. 2008). This framework provides a scorecard for reporting on the ecological status of a given CE within a given location, and if needed, facilitates the aggregation and synthesis of the component results for broader measures of ecological integrity at...
This layer represents the scorecard of one indicator of ecosytem integrity. This ecosystem assessment is for SNK 2010 landscape condtion (LCM). NatureServe’s ecological integrity framework provides a practical approach to organize criteria and indicators for this purpose (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2006, Unnasch et al. 2008). This framework provides a scorecard for reporting on the ecological status of a given CE within a given location, and if needed, facilitates the aggregation and synthesis of the component results for broader measures of ecological integrity at broader scales.
Scorecard analysis for terrestrial conservation elements and near-future landscape condition. The landscape condition score represents area weighted mean value based upon the combined count and condition score. sum(count*score) / sum(count) *where count equals the cell count and score is the condition value. NatureServe’s ecological integrity framework provides a practical approach to organize criteria and indicators for this purpose (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2006, Unnasch et al. 2008). This framework provides a scorecard for reporting on the ecological status of a given CE within a given location, and if needed, facilitates the aggregation and synthesis of the component results for broader measures of ecological...
These are the boundaries of current Land Use Plans. Represents the spatial extent and boundaries for existing BLM Land Use Planning Area (LUPA) polygons. Land Use Planning Areas are geographic areas within which the BLM will make decisions during a land use planning effort. Land Use Planning Area Boundaries shift from an "in-progress" status and become Existing Land Use Planning Areas when the Land Use Plan has been approvided and a Record of Decision Date has been established. At this point, these LUPAs are officially "existing".
|
|
