Description: Only includes subwatersheds for the South Atlantic-Gulf region (03). This data set is a complete digital hydrologic unit boundary layer to the Subwatershed (12-digit) 6th level for the entire United States. This data set consists of geo-referenced digital data and associated attributes created in accordance with the "Federal Guidelines, Requirements, and Procedures for the National Watershed Boundary Dataset; Chapter 3 of Section A, Federal Standards, Book 11, Collection and Delineation of Spatial Data; Techniques and Methods 11-A3" (04/01/2009). http://www.ncgc.nrcs.usda.gov/products/datasets/watershed/index.html . Polygons are attributed with hydrologic unit codes for 4th level sub-basins, 5th level watersheds, 6th level subwatersheds, name, size, downstream hydrologic unit, type of watershed, non-contributing areas and flow modification.
Definition Expression: N/A
Copyright Text: Funding and support for the Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) were provided by the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the United States Geological Survey. Representatives from the U.S. Geological Survey and Environmental Protection Agency contributed a substantial amount of time and salary towards quality review and updating of the dataset in order to meet the Federal Standards for Delineation of Hydrologic Unit Boundaries.
Description: These are the original hexagons created for the 2013 Crucial Habitat Assessment Tool (CHAT) for Colorado, but the attributes have been updated with the 2015 revision to reflect the revised (2015 SWAP Revision) list of Tier 1 Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN), and to incorporate updated occurrence data and improved distribution data for some species. CNHP developed species distribution models for 17 Tier 1 SGCN. Both documented and modeled distribution data for Tier 1 animal and plant SGCN have been combined at the resolution of 640 acre hexagons across the state. Each hexagon is then placed into one of six CHAT priority categories based on rules developed by the Western Governor's Association CHAT member organizations. Use field [hexScoreCat] to duplicate the CHAT map in the 2015 Colorado State Wildlife Action Plan revision. CHAT Category Criteria 1 At least one T, E, G1, or G2 species with documented occurrence, or at least two G3 species with documented occurrence 2 At least one document occurrence of a C or G3 species, or at least two documented occurrences of a G4 species 3 Modeled distribution of at least one G3 species, or documented occurrence of at least one G4 species 4 Modeled distribution of at least one C or G4 species, or documented occurrence of at least one G5 species 5 Modeled distribution of at least one G5 species
Definition Expression: N/A
Copyright Text: Hexagons created by:
Michael Houts
GIS/Remote Sensing Specialist
Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks, and Tourism
Kansas Applied Remote Sensing Program
Kansas Biological Survey
785-864-1515
mhouts@ku.edu
Description: Appendix 4.26, 4.31, 4.32, and 4.33 in Kentucky's Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Plan. Each taxonomic conservation area (6 total) was assigned a value of 1 and then all were summed together. Ecoregions with values of 4 or more were considered tier I areas
Description: Critical Natural Landscape complements Core Habitat and includes large natural Landscape Blocks that provide habitat for wide-ranging native species, support intact ecological processes, maintain connectivity among habitats, and enhance ecological resilience; and includes buffering uplands around coastal, wetland, and aquatic Core Habitats to ensure their long-term integrity.
Definition Expression: N/A
Copyright Text: The BioMap2 data layers were produced by the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program (NHESP) of the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife and the Massachusetts Program of The Nature Conservancy (TNC).
Description: This dataset represents the Terrestrial Conservation Opportunity Areas identified by the 2015 update to Missouri's State Wildlife Action Plan.
Definition Expression: N/A
Copyright Text: Missouri Department of Conservation
Description: Conservation Opportunity Areas (COAs) are large, loosely defined, geographic areas within Mississippi that have been identified by MDWFP as priority areas for implementing conservation actions recommended in Mississippi’s State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP). They may contain priority habitats or Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN), represent areas that have unique habitats (e.g. prairies) within them but they are composed of many different habitats, or may have been chosen because they have a wide range of SGCN, or include areas that are particularly important to one SGCN. These priority areas should not be used to exclude conservation actions in other areas of the state. All SGCN and their habitats in Mississippi are important. The COAs were developed to provide direction when resources are limited. Conservation investments in COAs can potentially benefit a wider range of species or priority habitats. COAs can also be a guide to organizations seeking to focus on key areas in Mississippi and are an opportunity to develop partnerships. In the future iterations of the SWAP, as more information on SGCN and their habitats is known or as resources or priorities change, the COAs may be refined to support conservation needs of the state’s SGCN. The Best Practices for State Wildlife Action Plans (AFWA 2012) lists the creation of COA’s as a “Best practice” for SWAP Required Element Two, describing the extent and condition of key habitats and community types. Since the purpose of COAs are to direct the conservation of SGCN and their important habitats, the firrst step in identifying priority areas was to map the records of SGCN across the state. We chose to focus on Tier 1 and Tier 2 species (Figure 6.1a). We first concentrated on areas with heavier clusters of Tier 1 and Tier 2 species. Boundaries were defined using Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) boundaries. Next, we reviewed other statewide plans that listed priority areas for conservation developed by state and federal resource agencies or non-government conservation organizations working in Mississippi’s landscapes. Examples of plans considered include: Mississippi Forestry Commission’s Forest Legacy Areas, €The Nature Conservancy’s Conservation Area Plan for the Pascagoula and the Pearl Rivers, Gulf Coast Joint Venture Landbird Plan, Land Trust for €The Mississippi Coastal Plain Conservation Legacy Strategy for the Mississippi Gulf Coast, the Partnership for Gulf Coast Land Conservation’s Land Conservation Vision for the Gulf of Mexico Region, among many others).
Description: Areas identified as priority areas for terrestrial conservation efforts within the Montana State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP). Watersheds identified as priority areas for aquatic conservation efforts within the Montana State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP).
Description: This metadata record describes a shapefile depicting Nebraska's Biologically Unique Landscapes (BULs) as identified in conjunction with the development of a comprehensive wildlife conservation plan (Schneider et al 2005, aka the Natural Legacy Plan, and its subsequent revision in 2010/2011) for the state. The following summary of how BULs were defined is copied directly from Chapter 3, page 15 of that Schneider et al 2005: "One of the goals of the Natural Legacy Project is to identify a set of priority landscapes that, if properly managed, would conserve the majority of Nebraska's biological diversity. These landscapes, which we are calling Biologically Unique Landscapes, were selected based on known occurrences of at-risk species and ecological communities. In addition to at-risk species, these landscapes support a broad array of common species. The following sections describe the approach we used to identify the at-risk species, ecological communities and biologically unique landscapes."
Initial efforts to implement the Natural Legacy Plan focused on nine Biologically Unique Landscapes (BULs) that had 'Flagship Initiatives' underway. Flagship Initiatives are coordinated efforts that include conservation actions on private and public lands, education and outreach, and monitoring and research.
As part of the revision of the Natural Legacy Plan in 2010, six boundaries were modified. The changes were approved in 2011.
Definition Expression: N/A
Copyright Text: Aditya Peri, Data Manager for the Nebraska Natural Heritage Program (NNHP) at the time of the shapefiles' creation, did the editing to create the 2005 version of the data.
Description: The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (DNR) provides this geographic data "as is." DNR makes no guarantee or warranty concerning the accuracy of information contained in the geographic data. DNR further makes no warranties, either expressed or implied, as to the condition of the product, or its fitness for any particular purpose. The burden for determining fitness for use lies entirely with the user. Although these data have been processed successfully on computers of DNR, no warranty, expressed or implied, is made by DNR regarding the use of these data on any other system, nor does the fact of distribution constitute or imply any such warranty. In no event shall the DNR have any liability whatsoever for payment of any consequential, incidental, indirect, special, or tort damages of any kind, including, but not limited to, any loss of profits arising out of use of or reliance on the geographic data.
Description: Landowners and land managers throughout Oregon can contribute to conserving fish and wildlife by maintaining, restoring, and improving habitats. These conservation actions benefit Strategy Species and Strategy Habitats, and are important regardless of location. However, focusing investments in prioritized areas, or Conservation Opportunity Areas (COAs), can increase the likelihood of long-term success, maximize effectiveness over larger landscapes, improve funding efficiency, and promote cooperative efforts across ownership boundaries. COAs are places where broad fish and wildlife conservation goals would best be met, and have been designated for all ecoregions within the Conservation Strategy, except the Nearshore ecoregion. COAs were delineated through a spatial modeling analysis, incorporating datasets focusing on Oregon Conservation Strategy components (Strategy Species, Strategy Habitats, and Key Conservation Issues), and expert biologist review. More information on COA methodolofy can be found here: http://oregonconservationstrategy.org/conservation-opportunity-areas/methodology/.COAs include supporting information in an associated COA profile, including details about the area’s Conservation Strategy priorities, recommended actions consistent with local priorities, and ongoing conservation efforts. Links to COA profiles are provided as an attribute in the COA dataset, and can also be found here - http://oregonconservationstrategy.org/conservation-opportunity-areas/.
Definition Expression: N/A
Copyright Text: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Conservation Strategy, Salem, OR.
Support for the 2016 COA analysis was provided by: The Nature Conservancy, Portland, OR; US Fish and WIldlife Service, Portland, OR; and the Oregon Biodfiversity Information Center, Institute of Natural Resources, Portland State University, Portland, OR.
Description: Conservation Opportunity Areas (COA) are places in Wisconsin that contain ecological features, natural communities, or Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) habitat for which Wisconsin has a unique responsibility for protecting. The identification and subsequent mapping of these areas will allow managers to make the most efficient use of resources by targeting conservation action work to benefit SGCN and their habitats. Sites were identified by an interdisciplinary team and involved input from various DNR staff, along with public input. This work was a continuation of the "Ecological Priorities" identified in the Wisconsin Wildlife Action Plan (see http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/er/wwap/ for more information).
Description: Aquatic conservation areas were developed for each of the 6 basins defined and described in Wyoming's 2010 SWAP. Information on watershed characteristics, description of aquatic wildlife, identification of conservation areas, current conservation initiatives, and recommended conservation actions and future monitoring for each aquatic basin were developed originally by four WGFD biologists: the Fish Management Coordinator, Assistant Fish Management Coordinator, Aquatic Habitat Program Manager and the Assistant Aquatic Habitat Program Manager. Information was gathered by consulting department records and sources as well as other pertinent scientific and government agency sources. The WGFD Strategic Habitat Plan was consulted in some cases for development of conservation areas. In many cases, the priority conservation areas identified in the SWAP had already been identified during the development of the WGFD’s Strategic Habitat Plan (SHP). In the SHP, drainages or portions of drainages that needed to be protected or managed in order to maintain Wyoming’s aquatic SGCN were called “crucial” aquatic habitat areas. Many of these crucial areas were included as priority conservation areas for aquatic wildlife in the SWAP. The priority conservation areas in the SWAP were identified using the best available fish and habitat survey information. These areas generally represent only a fraction of the streams in each basin, but the management of fishes and habitats in these streams is critical to WGFD efforts to conserve Wyoming’s rarest native fishes. Unfortunately, this detailed survey information is still lacking for mollusks, and crustaceans. The list of priority conservation areas will likely be revised as the department gains more information about where these species are found and what habitats they require. For information about the 2010 SWAP, see http://gf.state.wy.us/SWAP2010/Plan/index.asp.