• Save
Gsgis2008 Nvcsmpm
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Gsgis2008 Nvcsmpm

on

  • 261 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
261
Views on SlideShare
261
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Gsgis2008 Nvcsmpm Gsgis2008 Nvcsmpm Presentation Transcript

  • Federal Geographic Data Committee Vegetation Subcommittee Update USGS GIS 2008 Workshop M.P. Mulligan FGDC Vegetation Subcommittee USGS representative 303-202-4242 email:mpmull@usgs.gov Ralph H. Crawford, Chairperson
  • FGDC National Vegetation Classification Standard
    • Purpose and Scope
    • History / Status
    • Changes to the NVC Hierarchy
    • Implementation
    Overview
  • FGDC National Vegetation Classification Standard
    • Purpose
      • Facilitate data-sharing between Federal agencies and partners.
      • A cross-walking standard for vegetation data.
      • Does not replace classification systems used by individual agencies.
    Purpose and Scope View slide
  • FGDC National Vegetation Classification Standard
    • Scope
      • Mandatory for all vegetation data gathered using federal funds.
      • Cross-walking requirement applies to:
        • Vegetation plot data
        • Vegetation types (taxonomic units)
        • Vegetation map units
    Purpose and Scope View slide
  • FGDC National Vegetation Classification Standard - 1997
    • Established a physiognomic/floristic vegetation hierarchy.
    • Established a content standard for the physiognomic levels.
    • Initiated the development of a process standard for the floristic levels.
    History
  • Objectives of Revising the FGDC Vegetation Classification Standard
    • Fix the recognized problems with the physiognomic hierarchy.
    • Complete the process standard for classifying alliances and associations.
    • Establish all levels of the FGDC hierarchy as a “ dynamic content standard .”
    Status / Timeline
  • Dynamic Content Standard
    • Would not require following the 12-step FGDC standards approval process to revise the list of vegetation types.
    • The classification content would be maintained by an authorized body with oversight from a national peer review board.
    Status / Timeline
  • Current Timeline
    • July 2006 – Review of draft standard by FGDC agencies and partners.
    • Oct 2006 – Address review comments.
    • Nov 2006 – Submit final to S.W.G. (Step 6)
    • Early 2007 – Public Review. (Steps 7-10)
    • Late 2007 – Approval by Coordination Group. (Step 11)
    • Early 2008 – Endorsement by Steering Committee.
    • New Standard was endorsed last February! (Step 12)
    • 2008 and beyond – Implementation.
    Status / Timeline
  • Changes to the FGDC Hierarchy
    • Move Natural vs Cultural vegetation distinction to top of hierarchy.
    • Reduce and revise physiognomic levels.
    • Add new floristic levels that reflect broad phyto-geographic affinities.
    • Move some physiognomic criteria lower in the hierarchy.
    Hierarchy Revision
  • Hierarchy Revision Species mostly in the dominant layer Alliance Species in the dominant layer Alliance Biogeographic species groups similar in response to continental climate Division Biogeographic species groups similar in response to regional climate Macrogroup Biogeographic species groups similar in response to regional climate & soils Group Species in all layers Association Species in all layers Association Specific morphology of dominant growth forms / abiotic factors Formation Natural vs. Cultural vegetation Subgroup Growth form response to continental climate, topography, soils. Formation Growth form  Global climate Subclass Leaf morphology / Global climate Group Leaf morphology / herb periodicity Subclass Canopy cover of growth forms Class Growth form  Moisture-Temperature Class Dominant growth form Order Natural vs. Cultural vegetation -------- Vegetated vs. Non-vegetated -------- Vegetated vs. Non-vegetated Division Criteria Level Criteria Level Proposed Hierarchy 1997 Hierarchy
  • Hierarchy Revision Species mostly in the dominant layer Alliance Species in the dominant layer Alliance Biogeographic species groups similar in response to continental climate Division Biogeographic species groups similar in response to regional climate Macrogroup Biogeographic species groups similar in response to regional climate & soils Group Species in all layers Association Species in all layers Association Specific morphology of dominant growth forms / abiotic factors Formation Natural vs. Cultural vegetation Subgroup Growth form response to continental climate, topography, soils. Formation Growth form  Global climate Subclass Leaf morphology / Global climate Group Leaf morphology / herb periodicity Subclass Canopy cover of growth forms Class Growth form  Moisture-Temperature Class Dominant growth form Order Natural vs. Cultural vegetation -------- Vegetated vs. Non-vegetated -------- Vegetated vs. Non-vegetated Division Criteria Level Criteria Level Proposed Hierarchy 1997 Hierarchy
  • Hierarchy Revision Species mostly in the dominant layer Alliance Species in the dominant layer Alliance Biogeographic species groups similar in response to continental climate Division Biogeographic species groups similar in response to regional climate Macrogroup Biogeographic species groups similar in response to regional climate & soils Group Species in all layers Association Species in all layers Association Specific morphology of dominant growth forms / abiotic factors Formation Natural vs. Cultural vegetation Subgroup Growth form response to continental climate, topography, soils. Formation Growth form  Global climate Subclass Leaf morphology / Global climate Group Leaf morphology / herb periodicity Subclass Canopy cover of growth forms Class Growth form  Moisture-Temperature Class Dominant growth form Order Natural vs. Cultural vegetation -------- Vegetated vs. Non-vegetated -------- Vegetated vs. Non-vegetated Division Criteria Level Criteria Level Proposed Hierarchy 1997 Hierarchy
  • Hierarchy Revision Pinus taeda - Pinus echinata Alliance Alliance Southeastern North American Evergreen Broadleaf and Conifer Forest Division Southern Pine Forest Macrogroup Shortleaf Pine - Loblolly Pine - Oak Forest Group Pinus taeda/Symplocos tinctoria-Morella cerifera-Vaccinium elliotii Association Association Rounded-crowned Natural/Semi-natural Temperate or Subpolar… Formation Natural/Semi-natural Temperate or Subpolar Needle-leaved… Subgroup Temperate Evergreen Broadleaf and Conifer Forest Formation Temperate Forest and Woodland Subclass Temperate or Subpolar Needle-leaved Evergreen Closed… Group Evergreen Closed Tree Canopy Subclass Closed Tree Canopy Class Forest and Woodland Class Tree Dominated Order Natural/Semi-natural Vegetation -------- Vegetated -------- Vegetated Division Criteria Level Criteria Level Proposed Hierarchy 1997 Hierarchy
  • Implementation Partnership Implementation National Science Foundation Gap Analysis Program
  • Key NVC Concepts
    • Based on archived plot data.
    • Definitive list of accepted types.
    • On-going process (like soils).
    • Open and transparent.
    • Conforms to standards.
    Implementation
  • NVC Strengths
    • Wall-to-wall coverage of the country.
    • Documented in one unified database.
    • Relatively consistent hierarchy levels.
    • Hierarchy spans all levels of ecological organization for conservation and management planning.
    • Committed partners.
    Implementation
  • Past NVC Challenges
    • Not open to all users to propose changes; essentially a proprietary system.
    • Underlying data lacking or unavailable.
    • Methods unclear and perhaps inconsistent.
    • No external review of the classification.
    • Not widely applied.
    Implementation
  • Partner Goals for the NVC
    • Advance standardization of the NVC.
    • Improve quality and quantity of data underlying the NVC.
    • Foster research for the NVC.
    • Coordinate refinement of the NVC.
    • Promote understanding and application of the NVC.
    Implementation
  • NVC Database Classification Mgt. US-NVC Panel Proposal Review System Analysis & Synthesis Plot Archive Database(s) US-NVC Proposed data flow NVC Website Peer Review NVC Proceedings Legend External Action Internal Action Software Entity Implementation
  • Association and Alliance Descriptions Implementation
  • Prototype Plot Database for the NVC Implementation
  • Prototype Plot Database for the NVC Implementation
  • Peer Review Process
    • Coordinated by ESA Vegetation Classification Panel.
      • Peer review database
      • Electronic publication of revisions and new types.
    • Regional panels of reviewers from FGDC partners and academia.
    • Applied to all levels of the NVC hierarchy.
    Implementation
  • Prototype NVC Peer Review System Implementation
  • Prototype NVC Peer Review System Implementation
  • Prototype Electronic NVC Proceedings Implementation
  • FGDC Vegetation Standard
    • The new FGDC standard will be a dynamic content standard, refined over time.
    • Implementation of the revised standard will require commitment from all partners.
    • Implementing the new FGDC standard will facilitate movement toward a consistent U.S. classification system for existing vegetation.
    Conclusions
  • USGS Potential NVCS Uses
    • Climate change
    • Ecosystem Mapping
    • Interagency Data Exchange (crosswalk standard)
    • International collaboration (similar hierarchical standards in process with
    • Mexico, Canada, Europe
  • NSDI actions
    • The 2008 NSDI CAP program just awarded 2 grants to promote the standard. One project will take place in Oklahoma and the other in Montana. Here are links to info about the projects, http://www.fgdc.gov/grants/2008CAP/Category6/08HQAG0032 and http://www.fgdc.gov/grants/2008CAP/Category6/08HQAG0033.