GIS for Wildlife Management

8/8/2019 GIS for Wildlife Management

1/40

Wildlife Management

October 2010

GIS Best Practices


2/40

Table of Contents

What Is GIS? 1

GIS for Wildlife Management 3

Conservation Group Uses GIS to Help Save

Rare Ethiopian Wolves 5

Eradicating Rats on Lehua Island, Hawaii,with the Help of GIS and GPS 13

Disease Causing Steep Decline of Bats 19

Habitat Maps Created with GIS Aid Albertawith Grizzly Conservation 25

California Lake Threatened by Pike 33


3/40


4/40

GIS for Wildlife Management

Human-caused disruptions, such as habitat loss, pollution, invasive species inclimate change, are all threats to wildlife health and biodiversity. GIS technologtool for managing, analyzing, and visualizing wildlife data to target areas wheremanagement practices are needed and to monitor their effectiveness. GIS helmanagement professionals examine and envision

Habitat requirements and ranges

Population patches and linkages

Disease levels within populations

Progress of management activities

Historical and present wildlife densities

Understanding the specific needs of wildlife populations is key to preventing loextinctions, rehabilitating populations, and restoring habitat. In the following ca

learn how wildlife management professionals around the world have successfuto respond to invasive species, manage and facilitate disease prevention, minidetermine wildlife movement and habitat ranges.

Learn more about GIS for the environment at www.esri.com/industries/environwildlife.html.


5/40

Conservation Group Uses GIS to Help Save R

Ethiopian WolvesRabies Threatens This Endangered Species in Africa

By Christopher H. Gordon, Graham Hemson, and Anne-Marie E. StewartEthiopian Wolf Conservation Programme, Robe, Bale, EthiopiaWildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of OxfKingdom

Ethiopian wolves, the rarest canids in the world, face many threats to their survserious comes from rabies, transmitted to the animals from domestic dogs.

To protect the wolves, the Ethiopian Wolf Conservation Programme (EWCP) (worg), with help from other organizations, operates a rabies vaccination programgeographic information system (GIS) technology to target the best locations toand wolves that will prevent the spread of the virus.


6/40

Fewer than 450 Ethiopian wolves still roam the mountainous regions of Ethioplive at altitudes of more than 9,800 feet and are only found in seven isolated p

largest comprises 250 wolves that make their home in the protected area of thNational Park (BMNP) in south central Ethiopia.

The EWCP was founded in 1995 to promotesustainable solutions for protecting theEthiopian wolf. The organization mainly focusesits efforts in and around BMNP.

EWCP takes a three-pronged approach to

saving the wolves: Educating people about theimportance of protecting the wolves, monitoringof the wolf populations, and vaccinating thewolves and local dogs against diseases.

The Ethiopian highlands, where the wolvesreside, have become some of the most denselypopulated agricultural areas within Africa.With human development surrounding andencroaching on the animals' habitat, the wolvesare confined to small areas and isolated fromother wolf populations.

The majority of people living here arepastoralists, and their livestock overgraze andtrample the natural Afro-alpine habitat. With theclimate warming, the cultivation of crops at high

altitudes is becoming more viable and results inthe loss of indigenous plant species. This leadsto the destruction of habitat for rodents, whichare the wolves' main prey.

The Danger theWolves Face

Afro-alpine ranges and remaining wClimatic zones are illustrated in a gradmaps, A through I, illustrate the curre

wolf habitats. The Ethiopian wolf


7/40


8/40

bitten a wolf. Wolves are social pack animalsonce one has rabies, the disearapidly.

Thirty-nine carcasses were recovered from the Web Valley between August 28January 15, 2009. Because EWCP researchers are so familiar with the wolf pothey knew 13 more wolves were missing from the area.

Due in part to the information gained from mapping the outbreak, the EWCP repermission from Ethiopian conservation authorities to vaccinate 50 wolves agaPermission for vaccinating wolves is only granted by the authorities once a raboccurred.

The intervention began on October 20, 2008. The objectives were to contain thwithin the Web Valley and reduce the probability of the BMNP wolves becominprotecting wolf packs in other key adjacent subpopulations.

Effective planning for such an endeavor is critical, and ArcGIS Desktop ArcVietask. The locations of discovered carcasses were mapped, along with previouslocations and viable habitats.

Based on the maps and EWCP's understanding of the two previous rabies epidisease's potential spread was estimated. Decisions about where to set the livwolves were also made before mobilizing the vaccination team. Since restrictionumber of wolves that can be vaccinated, it was crucial to ensure that every vautilized to maximum effect. As Morebawa was the most immediately threatenetrapping the wolves for vaccination was focused on the Web Valley, East MoreWeb Isthmus (a small corridor) between these two populations. The potential snatural bottleneck to wolf distribution was highlighted by the GIS analysis.

During more than 1,200 hours of trapping, 50 wolves were vaccinated from 11Vaccination efforts were based on population viability modeling outcomes show40 percent of the wolves in each pack were vaccinated, the probability of that would increase from 54 percent to 90 percent


9/40

Figure 1: An overview of the Web Valley and Morebawa, showing wolf deaths caused by rabvaccination effort. The circled numbers represent the number of wolves vaccinated at each

The carcasses found to the south of the vaccination points were caused by a second ra

But despite wolf vaccinations conducted in October, rabies was spreading the domestic dog population around the national park. The EWCP team becarcasses from West Morebawa in early May 2009. In total, 11 carcasses wmonitors only identified 32 live wolves in a population that should have numSamples were collected from one wolf and it tested positive for rabies


10/40

vaccinated against rabies during the 2003 epidemic. EWCP focused the seconeffort on the third major subpopulation, the wolves on the Sanetti Plateau, and

48 wolves from nine packs in fewer than 700 hours of trapping. During the seceffort, two more carcasses were discovered on the Sanetti Plateau. Both weredead at a time when mortality would be naturally high in individuals of that agerecent independence and inexperience in finding food. They tested negative fo

Figure 2: Overview of BMNP showing all dog and wolf carcasses found and the trapping


11/40

postintervention monitoring. Combined with new technologies such as GISrapid and effective intervention procedures. Reactive intervention campaigfi

nancially and in terms of potential loss of population size and viability. Careduce the costs somewhat while increasing the effectiveness of any actio

The constant threat of rabies and the past history of two previous known owith this current epidemic suggest that this problem is not solved yet. Despdetection, a significant number of wolves in the BMNP still died.

An estimated 67 percent of wolves from six unvaccinated packs in Web anwolves in West Morebawa were lost. In all, the 50 carcasses and 66 missin

approximately 36 percent of BMNP's wolf population and possibly more thaglobal populationa worrisome and real threat to a wonderful species.

This intervention to help save the wolves would not have been possible witand support provided by the Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority. We Dr. Fekadu Shiferaw, Dr. Fekade Ragasa, Leta Edea, Edriss Ebu, Dr. Claurest of the EWCP team for their hard work and dedication. EWCP is a partWildCRU at the University of Oxford with Ethiopia's Wildlife Conservation ARegional Governments. It is chiefly funded by the Born Free Foundation an

Conservation Network, with additional financial support from the Frankfurt and many others. We thank the International Union for the Conservation ofSurvival Commission (IUCN/SSC) Canid and Veterinary Specialist Groupsendorsement of the intervention.

(Reprinted from the May 2010 issue of ArcWatchmagazine)

Acknowledgments


12/40

Eradicating Rats on Lehua Island, Hawaii, wi

of GIS and GPSBy Justin W. Fischer and Peter Dunlevy, U.S. Department of Agriculture

Highlights

Wildlife Services used GIS and GPS to document and track bait distributiodrop.

GIS and GPS were critical in making this eradication project effective and e

Use of the technologies ensured the coverage necessary for the project's g

Lehua Island is an uninhabited, 290-acre crescent-shaped volcanic cone locat150 miles north-northwest of Honolulu, Hawaii, or approximately 20 miles wesKauai. Lehua is a state-designated seabird sanctuary managed by the Hawaii and Natural Resources (HIDLNR) and federally owned by the U.S. Coast Gua

diversity of nesting seabirds, it is home to at least 17 recorded species of seabnot limited to, colonies of Laysan and black-footed albatross, red-footed and bnoddies, and Newell's shearwaters. Lehua is also home to several species of nand insects.

However, invasive rats are also flourishing on the island.Early biological surveys (1931) of Lehua discovered thepresence of Polynesian rats. Polynesian rats are slightly

smaller than their more common cousin, the Norwayrat, but are still effective predators of native island floraand fauna. Rats eat a wide variety of foods, includingfleshy fruits, seeds, flowers, and other plant parts and


13/40

In addition to rats, nonnative European rabbits were documented on Lehua in rabbits have also altered the island ecosystem by competing with seabirds for and decimating native plant communities. The combination of nonnative rats adepredating plant and animal communities for decades has dramatically reducmany native species found on Lehua.

Biological surveys were again conducted on Lehua in the late 1990s, and the iand rabbits on the island ecosystem were well documented. After consultationHIDLNR and Fish and Wildlife Service(FWS) biologists, it was decided thateradicating the rats and rabbits would

be the prudent management action. TheLehua Island Ecosystem RestorationProject was founded for this purpose.This project also focused on restoringnative plant communities and allowingrecolonization of the island by seabirds.The original Environmental Assessment(EA) and Final Supplemental EA were

approved in September 2005 andOctober 2008, respectively.

The EA proposed broadcasting baitpellets containing diphacinone overLehua using a helicopter. Diphacinoneis an anticoagulant rodenticide thatcauses internal hemorrhaging, resultingin death, and has been used throughoutthe world. This method of aerially broadcasting rodenticide to remove rats wasconducted on Mokapu Island, just off the north shore of Molokai, Hawaii, in FeThe EA also stated that the eradication would occur during winter months (DecF b ) B d t t i th i l d thi i h th t l t

This shows environmental monitoring plot G


14/40

On January 6, 2009, the FWS, HIDLNR, and United States Department of and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA-APHIS)-Wildlife Services conddrop involving the broadcast of 3,900 pounds of rodenticide on Lehua Islanwas spread uniformly over the entire island, they used a Trimble AgGPS Taccurately map the island boundary and record every flight path for each a

This is a 3D view of helicopter broadcasting bait. The transects (see red area)80 meters wide.

All data was stored in ESRI shapefile format on a removable compact flashAgGPS Trimflight 3 System in-cockpit display and lightbar provided the piloguidance along flight lines. The team downloaded GPS data from the CF c


15/40

individual polygons, converting all polygons to raster files, then overlaying the create a bait distribution density map. The goal of the bait drop was to broadcaover the entire island. ArcInfo was also used to calculate the three-dimensionathe island. The topography of Lehua is very steep, so the 3D surface area is mthe 2D planimetric area of the island. Determining correct surface area of the iimportant, because all rats must be exposed to lethal dosages of bait to achievand the Environmental Protection Agency label determines the maximum amothat can be broadcast per unit area (ha).

This is a bait distribution density map for thefirst broadcast.

A second bait broadcast occurred on January 13, 2009, to ensure an adequate


16/40

on the ground and measure bait disappearance by rats after each drop. Intfish, soil, and seawater samples were also collected 24 hours later and agaeach bait broadcast to determine if diphacinone residue was present in anyor the environment.

The presence of rats will be determined over the next two breeding seasonto assess whether the eradication effort was a success. The team will use traps, and tracking tunnels to determine whether rats were eradicated. TheGPS technology was critical during each bait broadcast for documenting bidentifying areas of the island that had been missed.

"Wildlife Services in Hawaii has conducted rat eradications on remote islanexplains Mike Pitzler, Hawaii, Guam, and Pacific Islands Wildlife Services Lehua is the first project in the world to use these safer methods developedthe last 15 years."

In 2005 and 2006, all rabbits were removed from the island through intensWith the rabbits already gone and the rats hopefully eradicated, plant comare expected to recover quickly on their own. Following verification of rat eisland, restoration of several native plant and invertebrate species will beg

and rabbits from Lehua Island should increase the populations of threateneseabirds using the island and also give all native species a better chance o

Justin W. Fischer is a GIS specialist/wildlife biologist with USDA-APHIS-WNational Wildlife Research Center's Chronic Wasting Disease Project and Technology Development Research Program. His current position involvesreduce chronic wasting disease transmission, spatial analysis using GIS antechniques, and database design and maintenance. Peter Dunlevy is a pro

supervisory wildlife biologist with USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services in HawaiiPacific islands. He is currently involved in development, planning, and impinvasive species eradications for native species and ecosystem restoration

About the Authors


17/40

Disease Causing Steep Decline of BatsMapping the Spread of White-Nose Syndrome with GIS

By Mylea Bayless, Bat Conservation International, and Zachary Wilson

Highlights

Using ArcGIS, BCI created an integrated geodatabase of critical hibernatio

BCI created maps based on georeferenced band recapture and radio telem

The maps have been widely distributed and were used in the congressionahearing.

Caves have become graveyards for what biologists estimate as more than onevictims of a devastating disease known as white-nose syndrome (WNS).

Building on the work of its partners, Bat Conservation International (BCI) is usicreate a geodatabase of critical hibernation sites and map the probable spread

Understanding how WNS has spread and is expected to spread in the future wrespond to the disease using surveillance and conservation actions.

The first case of WNS in hibernating bats was discovered in a cave near AlbanFebruary 2006. Since then, the disease is known to have killed bats in ConnecNew Hampshire, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virg

Named after a cold-loving white fungus found on bats' muzzles and wings, WNdamage on wing membranes, excessive loss of limited fat reserves during winstarvation before spring. Since the disease was first discovered, WNS has sprthe eastern United States and affected six species of insect-eating bats (one obat, is federally endangered), causing mortality approaching 100 percent at soTh l i b bi l i b li l b


18/40

The future spread of WNS could impact the most important hibernation sites for the endaIndiana and gray bats. Map sources: Bat Conservation International, National Atlas, Natura

North American Atlas, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Pennsylvania Game CommU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and West Virginia Division of Natural Resources.

BCI, a nonprofit organization based in Austin, Texas, is committed to conservinecosystems through worldwide partnerships, research, management, educatioMost North American bat species feed on night-flying insect pests that impact agriculture and human health Globally bats provide countless millions of doll

Why We Need toProtect Bats


19/40


20/40

is no longer a regional issue but has quickly become a national crisis and has affect bats internationally. Based on the testimony of bat experts during the heapparent that current funding for WNS research and monitoring is inadequate.

Jim Kennedy of BCI (left) and Chester Martin observe a colony of gray bats(photo by Merlin D. Tuttle, BCI).

GIS capabilities at BCI enabled researchers to clearly articulate the urgency aof WNS. GIS will also help BCI raise money to achieve its conservation missiodata and maps have a growing value in securing funding for nonprofit conserv

Proposal applications are often limited to one or two pages of narrative to captplanned use of potential grants. The addition of maps allows BCI to convey theproblem and work area at a glance without exceeding space constraints for theThe future opportunities GIS will bring to BCI are exciting, both to explore cons


21/40

BCI graciously acknowledges the support and investment of its many partnincluding the Beneficia Foundation, the Department of Defense Legacy ProRapid Response Fund, the Kabcenell Foundation, the National Fish and Wthe National Park Service, the Nina Mason Pulliam Charitable Trust, the UService, the U.S. Geological Survey, the Wallace Global Fund, ESRI, and oand federal agencies responsible for managing our nation's wildlife. The fothe latest information on white-nose syndrome: www.batcon.org/wns, wwwwhite_nose.html, www.nwhc.usgs.gov/disease_information/white-nose_syfort.usgs.gov/WNS.

(Reprinted from the Winter 2009/2010 issue of ArcNewsmagazine)

More Information


22/40

Habitat Maps Created with GIS Aid Alberta w

ConservationBy Maggie Jones, ESRI Writer

The ferocious and majestic grizzly bear is made feeble and meek from habitatstress caused by urban development, natural resource extraction projects, andareas where it roams.

Veterinarians and researchers from the Grizzly Bear Research Project place GPS collars monitor the animals' vital signs and draw blood to check for stress hormones Photo/Gord


23/40

of natural resources. In the wilderness of Alberta, Canada, the population of mroaming grizzlies has been reduced to fewer than 500 in just a few years.

Enter the Grizzly Bear Research Project (GBRP), a Foothills Research Institutdedicated to improving grizzly conservation in Alberta. The GBRP provides knoplanning tools, such as habitat maps, to land and resource managers who wantimber, conduct mining operations, and drill for oil within the province. These musing geographic information system (GIS) software, help decision makers betsafeguard the grizzly bears' habitat and educate the public about the bears.


24/40

"Considering that there were thousands of grizzlies in the region when it whundred years ago, the dwindling numbers today make the future of Albertlook particularly bleak," said David Laskin, a GIS analyst on the project. "Gsymbol of the Canadian Rockies and the Albertan wilderness; without themhere would be affected in some manner. As a result, there has been considfor developing an effective management plan for the remaining bears, andmade."

The GBRP team of researchers and scientists devised a strategy in 1999 tand population of the grizzlies for scientific purposes. When the grizzly popteam changed its focus to a conservationist mission.

A Plan for HabitatConservation


25/40

The concerned members now seek to provide bear health, habitat, and range to businesses, government officials, scientists, and conservationists. FRI workindustry managers and planners to mitigate the negative effects caused by devpublic access to forested areas, working to find simple solutions such as rerouplanning new roads for the least possible impact on bear habitat.

GIS analysts use GIS technology to produce habitat, probability of bear habitatravel corridor maps. The reports and maps provide an understanding of grizzlhow it relates to the landscape and environment. GIS allows people to view dathan columns of numbers, making it easier to read and understand. GIS can laof point information on top of a basemap. Point data collected with GPS that s

of bears enables the team to identify areas at risk of human-caused mortality.


26/40

"The reasons for population decline in Alberta are manifold," said Laskin. "dominant factors impacting grizzly mortality are human caused. As developencroaches on grizzly habitat, the number of animals getting hit by cars incFurthermore, these roads, trails, and cut-lines provide access for illegal huadded that these direct threats are compounded by the bears already havireproductive rates when compared with other grizzly populations in North Abe due to the bears experiencing more stress because they have to share human activities such as natural resource extraction, recreation, and urbanresources FRI can use to educate Albertans about what affects grizzly heabears will bethis is where the habitat maps come in.

People constantly change the landscape bybuilding houses and roads as well asharvesting natural resources. GIS technologyoffers a way to make dynamic maps that areable to keep up with those changes. TheGBRP team members create grizzly bearhabitat maps that display data layers of landcover, tree canopy cover, and tree species,

then plot grizzly movement data on top of thisvegetation data. First, the landscape data forthe habitat maps is derived from Landsatsatellite images; then, each summer, fieldcrews visit hundreds of locations within theextent of the satellite images and record theland-cover type and forest characteristics withhandheld GPS and PDA devices. ESRI's suite

of GIS products was selected for this projectbecause they can be used on handhelddevices, personal computers, and servernetworks. The team uses ESRI's ArcPad, a

Mapping the Grizzliesin the Field


27/40

then used in ArcGIS Desktop (ArcInfo)software to create the three main rastermap products: land cover, crown closure(the density of the forest canopy), and treespecies composition, which are combinedto derive grizzly habitat-use models.

Landscape structure is important whendefining grizzly habitat. Forest canopyinformation can reveal to researcherswhere grizzlies are likely to be found.

Grizzly bears prefer to use open forestsand meadows to forage for berries andvegetation; however, proximity to denseforest is crucial to provide a safe retreatfrom potential threats. When mapping landcoverthe trees, shrubs, wetlands, water,or barren regions of a study areathesatellite images are "stitched" together

using the Mosaic tool, which is one of themany tools ArcGIS users can apply totheir projects. Because the openness of aregion affects whether a grizzly will wantto forage there, the density of the crownclosure across the study area is examined.The crown closure is derived using amultitude of digital hemispherical photos

taken within a study plot below the canopy. A plot is the forest area beneath a in the satellite imagery. The photos are processed in the lab and converted intoof crown closure for each plot. The results are compared with other environmeand spectral information used to derive a linear statistical model.

The Map-O-Matic tool inputs basemaps anmap that contains user-defined


28/40

of broadleaf to needle-leaf trees is entered into a statisticalmodel and correlated with underlying environmental,topographic, and spectral information. Similar to the crownclosure maps, this relationship is applied to every pixel in thesatellite image to create the tree species composition map.

Researchers needed to ensure that they would be ableto combine the basemaps in a variety of ways. "Becauseecosystems are very complex and dynamic entities, staticland-cover maps are limited in their use due to the widerange of queries researchers have about bears and their

habitats," Laskin said. Questions about grizzly ecology areconstantly being answered, which opens the door for newquestions to be asked. Laskin also said that combiningbasemaps in a customized manner allows researchers tohave a suite of maps that is as flexible as the ever-evolvingresearch focus.

To give them this flexibility, project technicians developeda Microsoft Visual Basic tool called Map-O-Matic. This toolinputs basemaps and outputs a composite map that containsuser-defined classes. Obviously, researchers need to gointo the forest to obtain the grizzly location data. They tagbears with GPS collars that will transmit bear locations viaradio waves to the base station. To do this, team memberstranquilize the bearsfrom a great distance, of course.Then, while the bear is in a sleep state, scientists record its vital signs, takdocument other characteristic data. For example, wildlife veterinarians mon

bears they collar by identifying certain long-term stress hormones in their breleased remotely and falls off after about a year so that no harm comes to

The location data collected by the GPS and sent to the base station is stor

Grizzly beaAl


29/40

location points collected with GPS, enablesconservationists to monitor bear health and theeffects of changing landscapes on bear habitat.

The preliminary results of combining basemapsand landscape change, bear location, and bearhealth data suggest that grizzlies in areas ofincreased road density experience the highestlevels of long-term stress. This type of stresscould potentially impact their ability to forage orreproduce and therefore harm the overall well-

being of the local bears. Habitat maps also helpresearchers analyze various land-cover classesand their changes, the probability of a bearbeing in a certain area, bear movementcorridors, and areas of mortality risk. GIS givesresearchers and managers a better perceptionof data for improved decision making andplanning for grizzly conservation.

(Reprinted from the October 2008 issue ofArcWatch e-magazine)

Results of the Research

A grizzly bear hugs a tree in Canada.


30/40

California Lake Threatened by PikeGeospatial technologies aid response to invasive species

By Will Patterson and Ken DeVore, California Department of Fish and Game

Summary

The introduction of nonnative species can be beneficial. However, when nonnaquickly and threaten the abundance and diversity of native plants and animalsinvasive. Northern pike (Esox lucius), an extremely aggressive predatory fish, aquatic ecosystems by eating fish such as trout and salmon. Pike have adverstrout fishing and the local economy at Lake Davis in California.

In September 2007, the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) comptreatment project to eradicate the invasive northern pike from Lake Davis and Unlike an eradication effort in 1997, the 2007 project included significant use oimprove the likelihood of success.

Northern pike.Photographs courtesy of the California Department of Fish and Game.

Lake Davis is a large reservoir located in the Sierra Nevada mountains about 9


31/40

rediscovered in 1999. It is not known whether some pike survived the 1997 treillegally reintroduced to the reservoir.

The saga of Lake Davis has been a high profile and controversial issue. Sincehas tried to control and contain pike in Lake Davis using many techniques inclelectrofishing, and even explosives. Although more than 66,000 pike were rem2000 and 2007, the pike population continued to grow and spread further upsttributaries. If pike escape or are moved from the reservoir and become establiwaters, they could endanger other fish populations. Pike could negatively and portions of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, Feather, Sacramento, and Sansystems and other waters in California.

DFG conducted a joint environmentalreview process with the U.S. ForestService in accordance with the CaliforniaEnvironmental Quality Act and NationalEnvironmental Policy Act. The purpose ofthe 2007 project was the eradication ofpike from Lake Davis and its tributariesin a way that minimized impacts to theenvironment and local community. Afterextensive public outreach and input,several pike elimination alternativeswere evaluated. DFG determined thattreating the reservoir and its tributarieswith a rotenone piscicide had the fewestenvironmental and economic impacts.

Rotenone is a naturally occurring compound derived from the roots of a tropicabean family. A new commercial formulation of rotenone, CFT Legumine, was sthe 2007 treatment. Rotenone has been approved for fishery management useEnvironmental Protection Agency and California Department of Pesticide Regu

Lake Davis is a large reservoir located in the Sabout 90 miles northwest of La


32/40

GIS and GPS were involved from early project planning through implemenemployed for posttreatment monitoring. The project used ArcGIS Desktop ArcView), ArcGIS Explorer, and ArcView 3.x. Three Trimble GeoXM units, GPSMAP 60Cx and GPSMAP 76Cx units, and several older Garmin units were used for data collection. The new Garmin units included SiRF high-seand Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) differential capability, whichquality data collection even under riparian canopy conditions. GIS and GP2007 project for

Project area boundary definition

Grid referencing system creation

GPS basemap development

Aerial survey registration

Interactive map viewing

Map atlas creation

Field surveys and navigation

Bathymetric data analysis

Treatment status maps

Using GIS and GPS inthe Pike Eradication


33/40

Treatment of the waters of Lake Davis began on September 25, 2007.

The project area boundary was defined using GIS. The 44-square-mile projectreservoir and the tributaries leading into it. The California Interagency Watershof the most current and official California GIS layer for watershed boundaries,

represent the project area boundary.To geographically organize project resources, a grid of quarter-mile square cecover the entire project area. Each grid cell had a unique identification numberused for many spatial referencing aspects of project management including destream and reservoir treatment crews, chemical treatment calculations, commemergency response. The grid was developed as a vector GIS layer using theWorkstation Generate command with the Fishnet subcommand. (This operatioaccomplished with ArcToolbox using the Create Fishnet tool in the Feature Cla

Data Management tools.)

A project area basemap was developed using GIS shapefiles that were symbointo the Garmin GPS units using Garmin's MapSource Product Creator softwa

Project Area Boundary

Grid ReferencingSystem

GPS Basemap


34/40

Prior to the treatment, DFG conducted digital aerialphotography surveys of the project area at key times toevaluate the water levels and habitat conditions of the

reservoir and its tributaries. Rather than using traditionalorthorectification procedures, the ArcMap georeferencingtoolbar was used to save time by quickly bringing theaerial photographs into register with the rest of theproject GIS data.

Using ArcIMS and DFG's map viewer template, an onlineinteractive Lake Davis map viewer was set up for project

staff and the public. [DFG's map viewer template haswon awards from the Organization of Fish and WildlifeInformation Managers in 2005 and afirst place in theInternet Mapping contest at the 2003 ESRI InternationalUser Conference.]This made it easy to assess thegeography of the project area and particular GIS layersof interest using just a Web browser.

Separate reservoir and tributary stream map atlaseswere produced in hard-copy format and given to fieldcrews ahead of time so they could become familiar withareas they were assigned to treat. ArcView 3.x was usedto create the atlases because it can create multiple maplayouts from multiple views. The atlases included areaoverview maps and individual maps for each quarter-milegrid. Many of the maps used digital raster graphic (DRG)topographic maps draped over current aerial photographs. The ArcView 3.

extension obtained from ArcScripts (www.esri.com/arcscripts) was used to topographic map features and make the rest of the map transparent so thaphotographs could be seen underneath. In the stream map atlases, the ae

i t d l d th t hi f t i t d

Aerial Surveys

Interactive MapViewer

Map Atlases

Custom basemapsand loaded into Gasurveys, navigation

springs are shown iin red. Also note


35/40

For several years prior to the 2007 project, GPS units were used by stream fietheir assigned areas and map existing and potential locations (wet areas) to betreatment. During the treatment phase, GPS was used by field staff for navigat

treatment areas and by emergency medical technicians, fish disposal crews, astaff for general locational reference. Particularly sensitive habitat areas along habitat for threatened species were also identified using GPS and flagged in ththey would not be disturbed.

Field Surveys andNavigation

GPS t k f th i t t t i li d i


36/40

A section of a combined reservoir and stream treatment status map. GPS tracks withinoften follow the grid reference system as boat crews were assigned to treat particular

Bathymetric (water depth) contour data for Lake Davis was provided by theDepartment of Water Resources (DWR) in CAD format. Using various geo

techniques, DFG GIS staff produced derivative GIS products from the CADbathymetric triangulated irregular networks (TINs), digital elevation modelshillshades. These derivative products were used to help calculate the amo

Bathymetric DataAnalysis


37/40

A visualization of Lake Davis bathymetry.

During the chemical treatments, stream and reservoir treatment teams carried recorded daily travels as track logs. At the end of each day, the teams turned i

for processing. GIS staff downloaded the track logs from the units and convertshapefiles using DNR Garmin software (developed by the Minnesota DepartmResources [DNR]). Using ArcMap and ArcGIS Explorer, status maps were prodGPS track log shapefiles to show how the treatment was progressing. Project

Treatment StatusMaps


38/40

GIS and GPS proved to be powerful tools critical to the successful implemof this scope and complexity. GIS provided the means to create needed mand facilitate geographic analyses. GPS provided necessary tools for surve

tracking. Both technologies were utilized to produce status maps that wereconducting the 2007 treatment.

For more information, visit the Lake Davis Pike Eradication Project Web sitlakedavis/ or the DFG Web site at www.dfg.ca.gov.

Will Patterson is a GIS specialist for DFG's Biogeographic Data Branch in a bachelor's degree in geography and economics from the University of Cacertificate of study in GIS and remote sensing from Humboldt State Univerdegree in natural resources also from Humboldt State University. He is a foConference student assistant.

Ken DeVore is a GIS specialist for DFG's South Coast Region in San Diegbachelor's degree in anthropology from California State University, Stanisladegree in planning from the University of Southern California. DeVore wasfor the Lake Davis Pike Eradication Project.

The authors thank Greg Ewing, Lora Konde, and Isaac Oshima for their geassistance on this project. Thanks also go to the project management for aarticle and the project field teams for incorporating GIS and GPS into their

(Reprinted from JanuaryMarch 2008 issue of ArcUser)

Conclusion

About the Authors

Acknowledgments


39/40

Copyright 2010 Esri

All rights reserved.Printed in the United States of America.

The information contained in this document is the exc lusive property of Esri. This work is protected under United States copyright law and other i nternational copyright treaties and conventions. No part of thi s work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, elec tronic or mechanical,

including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system, except as expressly permitted in writing by Esri. All requests should be sent to Attention: Contracts and Legal Services Manager, Esri, 380 New York Street, Redlands, CA 92373-8100, USA.

The information contained in this document is subject to change without notice.

U.S. GOVERNMENT RESTRICTED/LIMITED RIGHTS

Any software, documentation, and/or data delivered hereunder is subject to the terms of the Li cense Agreement. In no event shall the U.S. Government acquire greater than RESTRICTED/LI MITED RIGHTS. At a minimum, use, duplication, or discl osure by the U.S. Government is subject to res tric-tions as set forth in FAR 52.227-14 Alternates I, II , and III (JUN 1987); FAR 52.227-19 (JUN 1987) and/or FAR 12.211/12.212 (Commercial Technical Data/Computer Software); and DFARS 252.227-7015 (NOV 1995) (Technical Data) and/or DFARS 227.7202 (Computer Software), as applicable.

Contractor/Manufacturer is Esri, 380 New York Street, Redlands, CA 92373-8100, USA.

@Esri.com, 3D Analyst, ACORN, ADF, AML, ArcAtlas, ArcCAD, ArcCatalog, ArcCOGO, ArcData, ArcDoc, ArcEdit, ArcEditor, ArcEurope, ArcExplorer, ArcExpress, ArcGIS, ArcGlobe, ArcGrid, ArcIMS, ARC/INFO, ArcInfo, ArcInfo Li brarian, ArcInfoProfessional GIS, ArcInfoThe Worlds GIS, ArcLoca-tion, ArcLogistics, ArcMap, ArcNetwork, ArcNews, ArcObjects, ArcOpen, ArcPad, ArcPl ot, ArcPress, ArcQuest, ArcReader, ArcScan, ArcScene, ArcSchool, Arc SDE, ArcSdl, ArcSketch, ArcStorm, ArcSurvey, ArcTIN, ArcToolbox, ArcTools, ArcUSA, ArcUser, ArcView, ArcVoyager, ArcWatch, ArcWeb,

ArcWorld, ArcXML, Atlas GIS, AtlasWare, Avenue, Business Analyst Online, BusinessMAP, Community, CommunityInfo, Data Automation Kit, Database Integrator, DBI Kit, EDN, Esri, EsriTeam GIS, EsriThe GIS Company, EsriThe GIS People, EsriThe GIS Software L eader, FormEdit, GeographicDesign System, Esri BIS, Geography Matters, Geography Network, GIS by Esri, GIS Day, GIS for Everyone, GISData Server, JTX, MapBeans, MapCaf, MapData, MapObjects, Maplex, MapStudio, ModelBuilder, MOLE, NetEngine, PC ARC/INF O, PC ARCPLOT, PC ARCSHELL, PC DATA CONVERSION, PC

STARTER KIT, PC TABLES, PC ARCEDIT, PC NETWORK, PC OVERLAY, PLTS, Rent-a-Tech, RouteMAP, SDE, SiteReporter, SML, SourcebookAmerica, Spatial Database Engine, StreetEditor, StreetMap, Tapestry, the ARC/INFO logo, the ArcAtlas logo, the ArcCAD logo, the ArcCAD WorkBench logo, theArcCOGO logo, the ArcData logo, the ArcData Online logo, the ArcEdit logo, the ArcEurope logo, the ArcExplorer l ogo, the ArcExpress logo, the ArcGIS logo, the ArcGI S Explorer logo, the ArcGrid logo, the ArcIMS l ogo, the ArcInfo logo, the ArcLogistics Route logo, the ArcNetwork logo, the ArcPad

logo, the ArcPlot logo, the ArcPress for ArcView logo, the ArcPress logo, the ArcScan logo, the ArcScene logo, the ArcSDE CAD Client logo, the ArcSDE logo, the ArcStorm logo, the ArcTIN logo, the ArcTools logo, the ArcUSA logo, the ArcView 3D Analyst logo, the ArcView Business Analyst logo,

the ArcView Data Publisher logo, the ArcView GIS logo, the ArcView Image Analysis logo, the ArcView Internet Map Server logo, the ArcView logo, the ArcView Network Analyst logo, the ArcView Spatial Analyst logo, the ArcView StreetMap 2000 logo, the ArcView StreetMap logo, the ArcViewTracking Analyst logo, the ArcWorld logo, the Atlas GIS logo, the Avenue logo, the Business MAP logo, the Community logo, the Data Automation Kit logo, the Digital Chart of the World logo, the Esri Data logo, the Esri globe l ogo, the Esri Press logo, the Geography Network logo, the MapCaf logo,the MapObjects Internet Map Server logo, the MapObjec ts logo, the MOLE logo, the NetEngine logo, the PC ARC/I NFO logo, the Production Line Tool Set logo, the RouteMAP IMS logo, the RouteMAP logo, the SDE logo, The Worlds Leading Desktop GIS, Water Writes, ww w.Esri.com, www.Esribis.

com, www.geographynetwork.com, www.gis.com, www.gisday.com, and Your Personal Geographic Information System are trademarks, registered trademarks, or service marks of Esri in the United States, the European Community, or cer tain other jurisdictions.

Other companies and products mentioned herein may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective trademark owners.


40/40

Since 1969, Esri has been giving customers around the world the

power to think and plan geographically. The market leader in geographic

information system (GIS) solutions, Esri software is used in more than

300,000 organizations worldwide including each of the 200 largest cities

in the United States, most national governments, more than two-thirds of

Fortune 500 companies, and more than 5,000 colleges and universities.

Esri applications, running on more than one million desktops and

thousands of Web and enterprise servers, provide the backbone for the

worlds mapping and spatial analysis. Esri is the only vendor that provides

complete technical solutions for desktop, mobile, server, and Internet

platforms. Visit us at www.esri.com.

Contact Esri

1-800-GIS-XPRT (1-800-447-9778)

Phone: 909 -793-2853

Fax: 909-793-5953

[email protected]

www.esri.com

380 New York Street

Redlands, CA 92373-8100 USA

Documents

GIS for Wildlife Management