SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Comprehensive Conservation Plan”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

USGS1988

Selawik National Wildlife Refuge land cover mapping project users guide

Title III of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA, 1980) established the Selawik National Wildlife Refuge (SNWR). Section 304 of the Act requires the Secretary of Interior to "prepare, and from time to time revise, a comprehensive conservation plan" for the refuge. Before developing a plan for the refuge, the Secretary shall "identify and describe--a) the populations and habitats of the fish and wildlife resources of the refuge; b) the special values of the refuge as well as any other archeological, cultural, ecological, geological, historical, palentological, scenic, or wilderness value of the refuge; c) areas within the refuge that are suitable for use as administrative sites or visitor facilities...; d) present the potential requirements for access with respect to the refuge...; and e) significant problems which may adversely affect the populations and habitats of fish and wildlife identified and described..." (ANILCA, 1980). Vegetation, water, and terrain (elevation, slope, and aspect) are the components of habitat and can be used in the determination of the above requirements. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) has the responsibility for collecting the resource information to address the research, management, development and planning requirements identified in Section 304. Because of the brief period provided by the Act for data collection, habitat mapping, and habitat assessment, the USFWS in cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey's EROS Field Office, used digital Landsat multispectral scanner (MSS) data and digital terrain data to produce land cover and terrain maps. A computer assisted digital analysis of Landsat MSS data was used because coverage by aerial photographs was incomplete for the refuge and because the level of detail obtained from Landsat data was adequate to meet most USFWS research, management and planning needs. Relative cost and time requirements were also factors in the decision to use the digital analysis approach.

Alaska↗

USGS2004

Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge: A survey of visitor experiences: Report to respondents

In the fall of 2000, researchers from the Policy Analysis and Science Assistance Program (PASA) of the Fort Collins Science Center (FORT) in the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) met with the staff of the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge (CPNWR) to discuss the issues related to social, economic, and human dimensions of natural resource management as it related to the Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) planning process. As a result of the meeting a research study was designed to better understand how visitors are affected by environmental management decisions and provide information to assist the refuge managers in making decisions regarding public use and recreational management related to the goals of the proposed CCP. More specifically, information was collected to document the type and frequency of visitor use; assess the importance of recreational activities; and to determine visitor attitudes about recreation management decisions within the refuge. To this end, we designed a study to assess the effects of the no-action and alternative management plans for the Refuge visitors’ perceptions and likely visitation patterns. In fall of 2002 a questionnaire was developed in collaboration with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the CCP planning team and mailed to 1090 people who visited the refuge between June 2001 and June 2002. We used standard research methods in designing and administering the questionnaire. Six hundred and eightyfive (685) completed questionnaires (74%) were considered usable. We developed the questionnaire (OMB Control Number 1040-00) to answer the following questions: What are the important differences in visitors’ attitudes and perception regarding recreation and visitor use at CPNWR? What are the factors that explain the differences in visitor attitudes and perception regarding recreation and visitor use at CPNWR? What are the regional economic impacts of visitor spending? In general the respondents indicated support for current management practices of CPNWR. We found that people came to the Refuge to experience a connection with the resource and the environment. More than half of the respondents said that viewing the desert scenery, seeking wilderness solitude and viewing wildlife were the most important reasons for making the visit to the refuge.

Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge↗

USGS2005

Regional economic effects of current and proposed management alternatives for Sand Lake National Wildlife Refuge

The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 requires all units of the National Wildlife Refuge System to be managed under a Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP). The CCP must describe the desired future conditions of a Refuge and provide long range guidance and management direction to achieve Refuge purposes. Sand Lake National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), located 27 miles northeast of Aberdeen, South Dakota, is in the process of developing a range of management goals, objectives, and strategies for the CCP. The CCP for Sand Lake NWR must contain an analysis of expected effects associated with current and proposed Refuge management strategies. Special interest groups and local residents often criticize a change in Refuge management, especially if there is a perceived negative impact to the local economy. Having objective data on income and employment impacts may show that these economic fears are drastically overstated. Quite often, residents do not realize the extent of economic benefits a Refuge provides to a local community; yet at the same time overestimate the impact of negative changes. Spending associated with Refuge recreational activities such as wildlife viewing and hunting can generate considerable tourism activity for the regional economy. Refuge personnel typically spend considerable amounts of money purchasing supplies in the local lumber and hardware stores, repairing equipment and purchasing fuel at the local service stations, as well as reside and spend their salaries in the community. The purpose of this study was to provide the economic analysis needed for the Sand Lake NWR CCP by evaluating the regional economic impacts associated with the Sand Lake NWR Draft CCP management strategies. For Refuge CCP planning, an economic impact analysis describes how current (No Action Alternative) and proposed management activities (alternatives) affect the local economy. This type of analysis provides two critical pieces of information: (1) it illustrates a refuge’s contribution to the local community; and (2) it can help in determining whether local economic effects are or are not a real concern in choosing among management alternatives. Sand Lake NWR is currently managed to improve and maintain habitat for nesting and resting waterfowl and other migratory birds, such as diving and puddle ducks, geese, grebes, herons, egrets, gulls, and terns. There are three alternatives evaluated in the draft CCP. Alternative 1, the No Action alternative, would continue Refuge management at current levels and would not involve extensive restoration of cropland, grassland, and wetland habitat or improvements to roads, interpretive, and administrative facilities. No new funding or staff levels would occur and programs would follow the same direction, emphasis, and intensity as they do at present. Alternative 2 would maximize the biological potential of the refuge for species of grassland-nesting birds. This would be accomplished through intense management of upland habitat for nesting migratory birds, minimal management for resident species, and minimization of public use that may interfere with migratory bird production. The third alternative takes an integrated approach, with management practices that would serve to maximize the biological potential of Sand Lake for migratory birds. This report first provides a description of the local community and economy near the Refuge. An analysis of current and proposed management strategies that could affect the local economy is then presented. The Refuge management activities of economic concern in this analysis are Refuge personnel staffing and Refuge spending within the local community, and spending in the local community by Refuge visitors.

Sand Lake National Wildlife Refuge↗

USGS2005

Regional economic effects of current and proposed management alternatives for Arrowwood National Wildlife Refuge

The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 requires all units of the National Wildlife Refuge System to be managed under a Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP). The CCP must describe the desired future conditions of a Refuge and provide long range guidance and management direction to achieve Refuge purposes. Arrowwood National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), located along the James River in east central North Dakota, is in the process of developing a range of management goals, objectives, and strategies for the CCP. The CCP for Arrowwood NWR must contain an analysis of expected effects associated with current and proposed Refuge management strategies. Special interest groups and local residents often criticize a change in Refuge management, especially if there is a perceived negative impact to the local economy. Having objective data on income and employment impacts may show that these economic fears are overstated. Quite often, residents do not realize the extent of economic benefits a Refuge provides to a local community, yet at the same time overestimate the impact of negative changes. Spending associated with Refuge recreational activities such as wildlife viewing and hunting can generate considerable tourism activity for the regional economy. Additionally, Refuge personnel typically spend considerable amounts of money purchasing supplies in the local lumber and hardware stores, repairing equipment and purchasing fuel at the local service stations, as well as reside and spend their salaries in the local community. The purpose of this study was to provide the economic analysis needed for the Arrowwood NWR CCP by evaluating the regional economic impacts associated with the Arrowwood NWR Draft CCP management strategies. For Refuge CCP planning, an economic impact analysis describes how current (No Action Alternative) and proposed management activities (alternatives) affect the local economy. This type of analysis provides two critical pieces of information: 1) it illustrates a refuge’s contribution to the local community; and 2) it can help in determining whether local economic effects are or are not a real concern in choosing among management alternatives. Refuge personnel provided the information needed to analyze the economic impacts of the three alternatives evaluated in the draft CCP. This report first provides a description of the local community and economy near the Refuge. An analysis of current and proposed management strategies that could affect the local economy is then presented. The Refuge management activities of economic concern in this analysis are Refuge personnel staffing and Refuge spending within the local community, and spending in the local community by Refuge visitors.

Arrowwood National Wildlife Refuge↗

USGS2009

Stakeholder Evaluation for Canaan Valley National Wildlife Refuge: Completion Report

The National Wildlife Refuge System, managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), is the largest system of public lands in the world dedicated to wildlife conservation. There are over 545 national wildlife refuges nationwide, encompassing 95 million acres. As part of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, each refuge is developing 15-year comprehensive conservation plans (CCPs). Each CCP describes a vision and desired future condition for the refuge and outlines goals, objectives, and management strategies for each refuge's habitat and visitor service programs. The CCP process for Canaan Valley National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge) in Davis, West Virginia was initiated in 2006. This planning process provides a unique opportunity for public input and involvement. Public involvement is an important part of the CCP process. Participation by parties with a stake in the resource (stakeholders) has the potential to increase understanding and support and reduce conflicts. Additionally, meaningful public participation in a decision process may increase trust and provide satisfaction in terms of both process and outcome for management and the public. Public meetings are a common way to obtain input from community members, visitors, and potential visitors. An 'Issues Workbook' is another tool the FWS uses to obtain public input and participation early in the planning process. Sometimes, however, these traditional methods do not capture the full range of perspectives that exist. A stakeholder evaluation is a way to more fully understand community preferences and opinions related to key topics in refuge planning. It can also help refuge staff understand how changes in management affect individuals in terms of their preference for services and experiences. Secondarily, a process such as this can address 'social goals' such as fostering trust in regulating agencies and reducing conflict among stakeholders. As part of the CCP planning effort at Canaan Valley National Wildlife Refuge, the FWS sponsored a stakeholder evaluation conducted by the Policy Analysis and Science Assistance Branch of U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center the winter of 2006-2007. The stakeholder evaluation was intended to answer the following questions: 1)Which Refuge management issues are most important, and to whom?, 2)How do opinions about what is most important to stakeholders overlap or conflict?, 3)Why do stakeholders emphasize specific issues, and what values are driving this?, and 4)What potential solutions do stakeholders have for addressing important issues? This information will be used by the Refuge to help guide development of their CCP as they strive to balance stakeholder desires with their charge to manage the unique wetlands and uplands of the Canaan Valley for wildlife conservation.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2009

Moosehorn National Wildlife Refuge Workbook Summary

The Moosehorn National Wildlife Refuge in eastern Maine is currently developing a comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) that will guide Refuge management over the next 15 years. Workbooks were provided to local residents as part of the scoping process in order to get feedback on current and future management issues from the public. The workbooks asked questions regarding residents' use of the Refuge, conservation problems and issues in the region, the acceptability of Refuge management actions, and the importance of, satisfaction with, and acceptability of various activities allowed on the Refuge. The focus of this report is to present the results of the completed workbooks. Because of the small number of returned workbooks, it is not possible to generalize these findings to the broader public, nor is it possible to determine if respondents represent the average user. However, the results do provide an idea of possible conflicts and important issues that the Refuge may have to address in the future. The permitted uses of the Refuge are one possible conflict area. Many respondents were supportive of consumptive recreation (hunting, fishing, and trapping), but a few were adamantly opposed to these sorts of activities on the Refuge. Another issue that received several comments was motorized recreation. While some people felt strongly that ATVs and snowmobiles should be allowed, others felt just as strongly that motorized recreation of any type should not be allowed in the Refuge. Many in the sample were also very concerned about Refuge development and its effects on the human and natural environments. Issues mentioned include the loss of access to private land for consumptive recreation, concern about fish and wildlife habitat degradation, and water quality.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2011

Vegetation communities at Big Muddy National Fish and Wildlife Refuge, Missouri

New and existing data were used to describe and map vegetation communities at Big Muddy National Fish and Wildlife Refuge. Existing data had been gathered during the growing seasons of 2002, 2003, and 2004. New data were collected in 2007 to describe previously unsampled communities and communities within which insufficient data had been collected. Plot data and field observations were used to describe 17 natural and semi-natural communities at the Association level of the National Vegetation Classification System (NVCS). Four ruderal communities not included in the NVCS are also described. Data were used to inform delineation of communities using aerial photos from 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, and 2007. During this process, eleven additional land cover classes including cultural features, managed vegetation communities, and water features were identified. These features were mapped, some were described, but no vegetation data were collected. In 2009, nearly all community polygons were field visited and classified to the Association level. When necessary, polygon boundaries were adjusted based on field observations. The final map includes 482 polygons of 27 land cover classes encompassing 3,174 hectares on 5 units of the refuge. Data and information will inform the development of the refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan.

Missouri↗

USGS2011

Species accounts for the Alamosa/Monte Vista/Baca National Wildlife Refuge Complex

As part of an interagency agreement between the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Alamosa/Monte Vista/Baca National Wildlife Refuge Complex requested help with the synthesis of scientific information for 10 focal species and their habitat requirements in response to common Refuge management activities in the San Luis Valley, Colorado. This information will be instrumental in developing the Service's Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP), which is required by law for each unit of the National Wildlife Refuge System. After consultation with Refuge managers and USGS staff, the 10 species chosen for detailed literature reviews and synthesis of information were the following: (1) American Avocet ( Recurvirostra americana ); (2) Wilson's Phalarope ( Phalaropus tricolor Porzana carolina ); (4) White-faced Ibis ( Plegadis chihi ); (5) Black Tern ( Chlidonias niger ); (6) Short-eared Owl ( Asio flammeus ); (7) Brewer's Sparrow ( Spizella breweri ); (8) Savannah Sparrow ( Passerculus sandwichensis ); (9) Northern Leopard Frog [ Lithobates (=Rana) pipiens ]; and, (10) Tadpole Shrimp ( Triops longicaudatus ).

Colorado↗

USGS2013

Regional economic impacts of current and proposed management alternatives for Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge

Montana↗

USGS1994

Development of a digital land cover data base for the Selawik National Wildlife Refuge

Digital land cover and terrain data of the Selawik National Wildlife Refuge were produced by the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) Earth Resources Observation Systems Alaska Field Office for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. These and other environmental data were incorporated into a Fish and Wildlife Service geographic information system to prepare a comprehensive conservation plan and an environmental impact statement for the refuge and to assist in research and management of the refuge. The digital data base, stored on tapes, includes land cover classifications from Landsat multispectral scanner data, elevation, slope, and aspect data for the area covered by the USGS Selawik and Shungnak l:250,000-scale topographic maps. The maps incorporate more than 90 percent of the refuge. Additional digital data in the data base include (a) land cover of the entire refuge at 50-, 200-, and 400-m pixel sizes derived from Landsat multispectral scanner data; (b) Landsat multispectral scanner data registered to a 50-m Universal Transverse Mercator grid; (c) elevation, slope, aspect, and solar illumination data registered to each Landsat scene; (d) stream hydrography and surficial geology digitized from USGS l:250,000-scale quadrangle maps; and (e) Refuge and wilderness boundaries. In addition to the digital products, color hard copy maps were produced from the l:250,000-scale quadrangle base land cover, elevation, slope, and aspect digital data.

Alaska↗

USGS2013

Assessment of water-quality data from Long Lake National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota--2008 through 2012

ong Lake National Wildlife Refuge, located in south-central North Dakota, is an important habitat for numerous migratory birds and waterfowl, including several threatened or endangered species. The refuge is distinguished by Long Lake, which is approximately 65 square kilometers and consists of four primary water management units. Water levels in the Long Lake units are maintained by low-level dikes and water-control structures, which after construction during the 1930s increased the water-storage capacity of Long Lake and reduced the frequency and volume of flushing flows downstream. The altered water regime, along with the negative precipitation:evaporation ratio of the region, may be contributing to the accumulation of water-borne chemical constituents such as salts, trace metals, and other constituents, which at certain threshold concentrations may impair aquatic plant, invertebrate, and bird communities of the refuge. The refuge’s comprehensive conservation planning process identified the need for water-quality monitoring to assess current (2013) conditions, establish comparative baselines, evaluate changes over time (trends), and support adaptive management of the wetland units. In 2008, the U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and North Dakota Department of Health began a water-quality monitoring program at Long Lake National Wildlife Refuge to address these needs. Biweekly water-quality samples were collected for ions, trace metals, and nutrients; and in situ sensors and data loggers were installed for the continuous measurement of specific conductance and water depth. Long Lake was characterized primarily by sodium, bicarbonate, and sulfate ions. Overall results for total alkalinity and hardness were 580 and 329 milligrams per liter, respectively; thus, Long Lake is considered alkaline and classified as very hard. The mean pH and sodium adsorption ratio for Long Lake were 8.8 and 10, respectively. Total dissolved solids concentrations averaged approximately 1,750 milligrams per liter, and ranged from 117 to 39,700 milligrams per liter. Twelve of the 14 trace metals detected in the water samples had established North Dakota water-quality standards for aquatic life, and only aluminum and copper consistently exceeded these criteria. Aluminum is considered harmful to aquatic biota in acidic (pH less than 5.5) systems and most of the copper standard exceedances were collected from highly concentrated waters because of evaporation and seasonally low water levels. Concentrations for various forms of nitrogen and phosphorus generally were similar to reported regional values. Specific conductance of Long Lake varied seasonally and annually both within and among management units, with values ranging from less than 500 to nearly 40,000 microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius. Long Lake was characterized by consistent seasonal patterns of increasing specific conductance from spring (March and April) to fall (September and October), with levels stabilizing through the end of the sampling season (November). These seasonal patterns in specific conductance were associated with decreasing water levels throughout the summer due primarily to evaporation and continuous water releases through the Unit 1 outlet structure, which resulted in the concentration of salts. Specific conductance of each unit, along with water levels, also varied among years. Overall, specific conductance levels were greatest during the drier year of 2008 when water levels were low. Specific conductance levels were lowest during the spring of 2009 following above-average volumes of fresh water from snowmelt runoff. Comparisons of specific conductance among sample sites that were spatially distributed within each management unit suggested that spatial variability within units was low except for areas associated with local inflows. Data collected during this study revealed consistent seasonal patterns and low within-unit spatial variability of specific conductance. Based on these data results, future sample collection efforts may be reduced, as well as the number of sample locations, to limit sampling costs. Water-quality samples collected monthly or seasonally during the growing season (spring, summer, and fall) from a single representative location within each water-management unit should provide sufficient data to assess seasonal changes in water-quality over time and provide information for Long Lake management decisions.

North Dakota↗

USGS2004

Managing National Wildlife Refuges for historic or non-historic conditions: Determining the role of the refuge in the ecosystem

The 1997 Refuge Improvement Act mandates that National Wildlife Refuges (NWR) develop Comprehensive Conservation Plans and that the Refuge System be administered in a manner that ensures the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the System are maintained. Refuges must determine their role in the landscape and decide if refuge lands will be managed for historic or non-historic conditions. This decision should be based on an understanding of the Refuge Purpose and supported by available science. Case studies for Sherburne NWR and Bosque del Apache NWR illustrate two possible approaches to determining future management.

Natural Resources Journal↗

USGS1998

Selecting habitat management strategies on refuges

This report is a joint effort of the Biological Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to provide National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) managers guidance on the selection and evaluation of habitat management strategies to meet stated objectives. The FWS recently completed a handbook on writing refuge management goals and objectives (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1996a). the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 requires that National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS) lands be managed according to approved Comprehensive Conservation Plans to guide management decisions and devise strategies for achieving refuge unit purposes and meeting the NWRS mission. It is expected that over the next several years most refuges will develop new or revised refuge goals and objectives for directing their habitat management strategies. This paper outlines the steps we recommend in selecting and evaluating habitat management strategies to meet specific refuge habitat objectives. We selected two examples to illustrate the process. Although each refuge is unique and will require specific information and solutions, these two examples can be used as guidance when selecting and evaluating habitat management strategies for other refuge resources: Example 1. Management of floodplain woods habitat for forest interior birds. The biological recourse of concern is the quality and quantity of floodplain woods habitat for eastern forest interior birds in the Cypress Creek NWR (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1996b). Example 2. Management of habitat for biodiversity: Historical landscape proportions. The biological resource of concern is the change in diversity associated with man-induced changes in the distribution and abundance of habitat types at the Minnesota Valley NWR (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1996c).

Information and Technology Report↗

USGS1986

Development of labd cover and terrain databases for the Innoko National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska, using LANDSAT and digital terrain data

Landsat-derived land cover maps and associated elevation, slope, and aspect class maps were produced for the Innoko National Wildlife Refuge (3,850,000 acres; 1,555,095 hectares) in northwestern Alaska. These maps and associated digital data products are being used by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service for wildlife management, research, and comprehensive conservation planning. Portions of two Landsat Multispectral Scanner (MSS) scenes and digital terrain data were used to produce 1:250,000 scale land cover and terrain maps. Prints of summer and winter Landsat MSS scenes were used to manually interpret broad physiographic strata. These strata were transferred to U. S. Geological Survey 1:250,000-scale topographic maps and digitized. Seven major land cover classes and 23 subclasses were identified. The major land cover classes include: forest, scrub, dwarf scrub and related types, herbaceous, scarcely vegetated areas, water, and shadow.

Conference Paper↗

USGS1985

Landsat-faciliated vegetation classification of the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge and adjacent areas, Alaska

A Landsat-based vegetation map was prepared for Kenai National Wildlife Refuge and adjacent lands, 2 million and 2.5 million acres respectively. The refuge lies within the middle boreal sub zone of south central Alaska. Seven major classes and sixteen subclasses were recognized: forest (closed needleleaf, needleleaf woodland, mixed); deciduous scrub (lowland and montane, subalpine); dwarf scrub (dwarf shrub tundra, lichen tundra, dwarf shrub and lichen tundra, dwarf shrub peatland, string bog/wetlands); herbaceous (graminoid meadows and marshes); scarcely vegetated areas ; water (clear, moderately turbid, highly turbid); and glaciers. The methodology employed a cluster-block technique. Sample areas were described based on a combination of helicopter-ground survey, aerial photo interpretation, and digital Landsat data. Major steps in the Landsat analysis involved: preprocessing (geometric connection), spectral class labeling of sample areas, derivation of statistical parameters for spectral classes, preliminary classification of the entree study area using a maximum-likelihood algorithm, and final classification through ancillary information such as digital elevation data. The vegetation map (scale 1:250,000) was a pioneering effort since there were no intermediate-sclae maps of the area. Representative of distinctive regional patterns, the map was suitable for use in comprehensive conservation planning and wildlife management.

Alaska↗

USGS1986

Vegetation mapping of Nowitna National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska using Landsat MSS digital data

A Landsat-derived vegetation map was prepared for Nowitna National Wildlife Refuge. The refuge lies within the middle boreal subzone of north central Alaska. Seven major vegetation classes and sixteen subclasses were recognized: forest (closed needleleaf, open needleleaf, needleleaf woodland, mixed, and broadleaf); broadleaf scrub (lowland, alluvial, subalpine); dwarf scrub (prostrate dwarf shrub tundra, dwarf shrub-graminoid tussock peatland); herbaceous (graminoid bog, marsh and meadow); scarcely vegetated areas (scarcely vegetated scree and floodplain); water (clear, turbid); and other areas (mountain shadow). The methodology employed a cluster-block technique. Sample areas were described based on a combination of helicopter-ground survey, aerial photointerpretation, and digital Landsat data. Major steps in the Landsat analysis involved preprocessing (geometric correction), derivation of statistical parameters for spectral classes, spectral class labeling of sample areas, preliminary classification of the entire study area using a maximum-likelihood algorithm, and final classification utilizing ancillary information such as digital elevation data. The final product is a 1:250,000-scale vegetation map representative of distinctive regional patterns and suitable for use in comprehensive conservation planning.

Alaska↗

USGS1988

Intermediate-scale vegetation mapping of Innoko National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska using Landsat MSS digital data

A Landsat-derived vegetation map was prepared for lnnoko National Wildlife Refuge. The refuge lies within the northern boreal subzone of northwestern central Alaska. Six major vegetation classes and 21 subclasses were recognized: forest (closed needleleaf, open needleleaf, needleleaf woodland, mixed, and broadleaf); broadleaf scrub (lowland, upland burn regeneration, subalpine); dwarf scrub (prostrate dwarf shrub tundra, erect dwarf shrub heath, dwarf shrub-graminoid peatland, dwarf shrub-graminoid tussock peatland, dwarf shrub raised bog with scattered trees, dwarf shrub-graminoid marsh); herbaceous (graminoid bog, graminoid marsh, graminoid tussock-dwarf shrub peatland); scarcely vegetated areas (scarcely vegetated scree and floodplain); and water (clear, sedimented). The methodology employed a cluster-block technique. Sample areas were described based on a combination of helicopter-ground survey, aerial photo-interpretation, and digital Landsat data. Major steps in the Landsat analysis involved preprocessing (geometric correction), derivation of statistical parameters for spectral classes, spectral class labeling of sample areas, preliminary classification of the entire study area using a maximum-likelihood algorithm, and final classification utilizing ancillary information such as digital elevation data. The final product is 1:250,000-scale vegetation map representative of distinctive regional patterns and suitable for use in comprehensive conservation planning.

Alaska↗

USGS1987

Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge land cover mapping project user's guide

Title III of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA, 1980) established the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge (YFNWR). Section 304 of the Act requires the Secretary of Interior to "prepare, and from time to time revise, a comprehensive conservation plan" for the refuge. Before developing a plan for the refuge, the Secretary shall "identify and describe--a) the populations and habitats of the fish and wildlife resources of the refuge; b) the special values of the refuge as well as any other archeological, cultural, ecological, geological , historical, palentological, scenic, or wilderness value of the refuge; c) areas within the refuge that are suitable for use as administrative sites or visitor facilities...; d) present the potential requirements for access with respect to the refuge...; and e) significant problems which may adversely affect the populations and habitats of fish and wildlife identified and described..." (ANILCA, 1980). Vegetation, water, and terrain (elevation, slope, and aspect) are the components of habitat and can be used in the determination of the above requirements. The U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) has the responsibility for collecting the resource information to address the research, management, development and planning requirements identified in Section 304. Because of the brief period provided by the Act for data collection, habitat mapping, and habitat assessment, the USFWS in cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey's EROS Field Office, used digital Landsat multispectral scanner (MSS) data and digital terrain data to produce land cover and terrain maps. A computer assisted digital analysis of Landsat MSS data was used because coverage by aerial photographs was incomplete for much of the refuge and because the level of detail obtained from Landsat data was adequate to meet most USFWS research, management and planning needs. Relative cost and time requirements were also factors in the decision to use the digital analysis approach.

Alaska↗