Critical Lands Project

IDENTIFYING CRITICAL LANDS FOR CONSERVATION IN WASHINGTON COUNTY

 Peter August, Duane Chapman, Susan Baxter, and Alyson McCann,

Department of Natural Resources Science

University of Rhode Island

Kingston, RI 02881

 

The major institutional players in land conservation in Rhode Island are The Nature Conservancy, US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Audubon Society, and the RI Department of Environmental Management.  There has, however, been an rapid growth in the number of small, local conservation organizations, such as Land Trusts and conservation commissions, that are becoming effective agents in purchasing land for open space.  The Rhode Island land conservation community is fortunate in having access to many sources of funds that are dedicated to purchasing land and these include state and local bonds, private Foundations, oil spill settlement funds, and monies specifically targeted for groundwater and wetlands protection.  State, federal, and local conservationists are now in the position of having to decide which lands are most valuable for natural resource protection.  

 Many of the small municipal-based conservation organizations do not have ready access to the scientific data they need to objectively evaluate conservation value of potential properties they might acquire.  Furthermore, they do not have the technical or ecological background to identify critical regions for protection.  We have been working for four years in developing a simple analytical protocol that provide local conservation organizations guidance in identifying the most important lands for conservation.  Our model is based on the premise that single-theme conservation prioritizing -- for example groundwater, wetland, biodiversity, or cultural resource criteria -- is good and appropriate for many conservation applications and transactions.  However, all things being equal, any property that contain multiple resources has more value than properties that only contain a single resource.  Therefore, areas in the community where we have high co-occurrence of natural and cultural resources are critically important targets for protection because they represent the most (economic) value for the conservation dollar.

 The purpose of this project is to develop a statewide inventory of critical data for land conservation prioritization and conduct our co-occurrence analyses for the communities in mainland Washington County, Rhode Island (plus West Greenwich):

 Scope of Work

The methods we will use in this project are as follows:

 Phase 1 of Project:

1) Consolidate all the critical data for the analysis into a single, seamless GIS workspace and conduct the spatial modeling required for the assessment.  Our data inventory is given in Table 1. The fundamental steps and timeline involved in the analysis are:

a)      Consolidate statewide data in vector format

b)      Convert data to 30 m cell size raster representation

c)      Create Theme composites (see Table 1) from the constituent gridded datasets

d)      Mask out freshwater and saltwater bodies, already protected lands, and areas outside of RI

e)      Sum the composites and filter the result with a 3-cell average moving window (i.e., reclassify every pixel by taking the mean value of all pixels within a 3 cell radius)

f)        Extract town subsets of the data and prepare the package of deliverables.  This will consist of four (4) sets of the following laminated maps (at 1:24,000 scale):

·         a plot of the digital orthophoto of the community,

·         plots of each resource theme (4 maps) and constituent data,

·         the composite plot for the community,

·         a plot of soil constraints to development,

·         a plot of the USGS Digital Raster Graphics dataset (DRG),

·         a map of the critical lands composite for all of southern Rhode Island,

·         a mylar grid reference plot.

 Phase 2 of Project

1) Assist the project facilitator to convene a meeting of each of the nine communities to review the package of maps and analyses to identify two staff weeks time equivalent of data revision or analysis that might be done to enhance the planning maps.

2) Spend two weeks per community enhancing their GIS data as per #1 above.

3) Recreate the two sets of updated maps for each of the communities as detailed in Phase 1, step 1f (above).

4) Create 3 duplicate CD's of gif images of all maps for DEM use.

5) Create world wide web representations of all critical resource maps.

 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Table 1.  Resource Themes and Constituent RIGIS Data Used in the Critical Lands Analysis

Farmland Resources

            Agricultural lands (1995 LULC dataset)

            Prime and Important soils (SSURGO data)

Cultural, Recreational, and  Aesthetic Resources

            Scenic Inventory (DEM)

            Historical Regions (1998 RIGIS version)

            Greenway Corridors (RIGIS, DOP)

Biodiversity Resources

            Wetlands (1995 RIGIS LULC)

            Land within 100m wetlands, rivers/streams, estuaries, shore

            Forests (1995 RIGIS LULC)

            Lands within 100m already protected land (TNC dataset)

            DEM heritage dataset on critical/unique habitats

Groundwater Resources

            Aquifers (RIGIS, DEM)

            Aquifer Recharge Areas (RIGIS, DEM)

            Wellhead Protection Areas (RIGIS, DEM)

Protected Lands

            DEM Management Areas (RIGIS)

            Audubon Land (TNC, RIGIS)

            Nature Conservancy Land (TNC)

            Land Trust Properties (TNC)

            Federal Refuges (RIGIS)