Southern Blue Ridge: An Analysis of Matrix Forests - Conservation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

We developed a four-step analysis process to assess, prioritize, and direct conservation strategies toprotect the Southern Blue Ridge matrix forest system:• Delineate matrix forest blocks to identify and subdivide the forested landscape into discrete blocksof contiguous forest, using roads and other fragmenting features in GIS.• Screen each matrix forest block for size and condition using land cover and size criteria, related todisturbance and species’ needs.• Classify the candidate matrix forest blocks into multiple groups that reflect similar combinations ofelevation, geology, and landforms (Ecological Land Units).• Evaluate and prioritize a network of functional matrix forest blocks representative of the diversityof ecoregional forest landscape types, using additional data and expert review.DELINEATING MATRIX FOREST BLOCKSUsing GIS data, we subdivided the entire forested landscape of the Southern Blue Ridge into discreteunits (“matrix forest blocks”), bounded on all sides by major roads (road classes 1-4; ESRI 2009), lakes,or large rivers (>3,681m 2 drainage area) (USEPA and USGS 2008) (Table 1 and Appendix B). Roads werean appropriate choice for this task, as they disrupt the movement of some organisms and the flow ofsome ecological processes, and they increase the level of access into interior forest areas. Additionally,we analyzed and sometimes adjusted blocks according to the location of roads, railroads, powerlines,logging trails, housing developments, agricultural lands, and mining operations from obtained digitaldata or aerial imagery (Table 1) that can be highly correlated with human natural resource extractive orother ecologically-incompatible activities that can impair connectivity and forest processes. DelineatedSBR matrix forest blocks were bounded on all sides by connected fragmenting roads (or other features),forming polygons that completely encircled large contiguous patches of forest. However, delineatedblocks are not necessarily roadless, as blocks can contain intersecting roads (roads that extend intoblock boundaries, but do not bisect the block).6
Table 1. Data used to evaluate potential fragmenting features in matrix forest block delineation.PotentialFragmentingFeatureRoadsData Analyzed(Year)Streetscarto layerfrom ESRI GIS data(ESRI 2009)Description of AnalysisDetailed road data was evaluatedagainst aerial imagery (accessedusing Google Earth and ArcGISOnline 2010-2011) to determineaccuracy and completeness of roadcoverage.Final Decision: FragmentingFeature?Road classes 1 through 4, which roughlyequates to Interstates (1), U.S. Routes andsome State Routes (2), State Routes and oldhighways (3), and exit and on ramps, serviceroads, and rest area roads (4), weredetermined to be fragmenters.PowerlinesRailroadsVentyx powerlinetransmission data(Ventyx 2010)Ventyx Railroaddata (Ventyx 2010)Powerline Transmission data wasevaluated against aerial imagery(accessed using Google Earth andArcGIS Online 2010-2011) to assessvegetation cuts (width andmanagement intensity).Railroad corridors were evaluatedagainst aerial imagery (accessedusing Google Earth and ArcGISOnline 2010-2011) to assessvegetation gaps (width,management, tunnel openings, andadjacency to roads/ rivers).Due to high variability of the width of thepowerlines and the degree to which theywere maintained as cut areas across theregion, powerlines were not uniformlyviewed as fragmenting features but wereconsidered on a case-by-case basis; wherepowerlines were large in width and requiredvegetation management continuouslythroughout individual blocks, these wereviewed as fragmenters.Due to sporadic traffic and often narrowopenings made for trains, railroads were notviewed as uniform fragmenting features;railroad attributes (width, management,tunnel openings, and adjacency toroads/rivers) were considered as potentialfragmenters within individual blocks.LakesNationalHydrographyDatabase (USEPAand USGS 2008)Waterbodies were evaluated todetermine if they created significantgaps in forest canopy.Determined to be fragmenting features.RiversNationalHydrographyDatabase (USEPAand USGS 2008)Waterbodies were evaluated todetermine if they created significantgaps in forest canopy.Large rivers or stream segments (draining>3,861 miles 2 ) were determined to befragmenting features.Developed/DisturbedAreasSE GAP NLCD 2006land cover (Fry etal. 2011)Land cover data was utilized tovisually assess fragmentation offorest cover.Not used as fragmenting features duringinitial block identification. Somemodifications to blocks were manually madebased on this later in the process.7
Page 1 and 2: Southern Blue Ridge:An Analysis of
Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CONTENTSEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 5 and 6: EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe Southern Blue
Page 7 and 8: The Southern Blue Ridge is a forest
Page 9: Figure 2. Regional Forest Conservat
Page 13 and 14: gradients, are more prone to certai
Page 15 and 16: Table 2. Average Territory Size of
Page 17 and 18: CLASSIFYING THE MATRIX FOREST BLOCK
Page 19 and 20: LANDFORMLandforms anchor and contro
Page 21 and 22: The analysis resulted in 25 ELU gro
Page 23 and 24: Figure 5. Southern Blue Ridge Poten
Page 25 and 26: Figure 7. Prioritized Southern Blue
Page 27 and 28: RESULTS OF ANALYSISAll final SBR ma
Page 29 and 30: protection, but are subject to natu
Page 31 and 32: CONCLUSIONSThe goal of this analysi
Page 33 and 34: LITERATURE CITEDAnderson, M.G. 2008
Page 35 and 36: Lafon, C.W., Hoss, J.A. and Grissin
Page 37 and 38: Appendix A: State Expert Review Tea
Page 39 and 40: Appendix B: Fragmenting Features: D
Page 41 and 42: Geology class Lithotypes Metaequiva
Page 43 and 44: Tier BlockName OrdGroupLabelAcresT1
Page 45 and 46: Appendix E: Final Southern Blue Rid
Page 47 and 48: ELU_GroupBlock Name Revised Name St
Page 53: Field NamesSuccessional Shrub/Scrub

Southern Blue Ridge: An Analysis of Matrix Forests - Conservation ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?