GIS technology has been utilized by the Service for about 20 years, but it has not come close to reaching its' full potential for improving analysis of spatial data and automating manual functions for increased efficiency. There are a number of reasons for this including cost, complexity of the technology, scarcity of data, and lack of computer hardware, software, and computer-based skills in the Service. Many of these problems have been resolved or reduced in scope. The need to analyze and share large amounts of data with many partners for ecosystem management projects provides an important impetus for expanding the use of GIS in the Service. The GIS Steering Committee and the Internet provide two very different but effective ways of sharing information and coordinating activities. In addition there is a large reservoir of field level demand for assistance in utilizing the technology in an efficient and rational manner.
GIS is a powerful technology for analyzing spatial patterns, helping to organize vast data bases, and presenting results in a manner not otherwise possible. Because spatial analyses are such an integral part of the USFWS's mission, GIS can greatly assist managers in the decision-making process regarding the disposition of natural resources. The need to resolve conflicts between increasingly limited natural resources and development issues will accelerate in the 21st century. GIS is one of several tools that will aid the USFWS in this difficult process. Other agencies and the private sector have made a commitment to proceed with implementation of GIS in their organizations. This trend has been particularly rapid in natural resource applications. In the near future, GIS will be so prevalent in natural resources management, that those organizations without some capability in this area will be severely handicapped.
The overall direction of the Service in the GIS arena is to get tools and information into the hands of the users, not rules on what to do or not do. The data standards that are being pursued either originate at a basic common sense level, or are required to meet objectives laid down by OMB and others. There is also a strong push to incorporate the technology into Service initiatives such as ecosystem approaches to management, to modernize our approach to problem solving. The points the Service is currently emphasizing in GIS are:
Some of the major benefits that flow from these items are:
As new offices start into the GIS arena generally the first question posed is what GIS software and hardware should we be using. There is no simple answer, which is why the Service does not have any standards for GIS hardware or software. Most regions are using a suite of software packages. The different programs have very different strengths. Once an office decides what type of project(s) they wish to use GIS for, a specific recommendation on software can be made. The type of software then impacts the hardware needed.
Some of the software programs currently in use in the Service include (but are definitely not limited to!) Arcview 2, Arc/Info (PC and UNIX), Autocad, Arc/Cad, EPPL7, MIPS, IDRISI, MapInfo and Atlas. The best way to figure out what you need it to write a short outline of what you want to do - water management plan maps, facility location planning, etc. - and then talk to an experienced GIS user such as the GIS coordinator in your region to help decide what software would meet your needs. Then you can try to determine if data already exists somewhere and what hardware will be needed. One generalization on hardware: memory needs (RAM and hard disk) increase very rapidly in this area, so buy as much as you can possibly afford.
Data is far more complex than hardware or software, and generally more expensive. Data should be obtained in a vector format when possible. This gives you the flexibility to edit the original data if necessary, or convert it into a number of other formats. Arc/Info (both PC and UNIX), DLG and DXF formats are all common and quite flexible. A major exception to getting vector data would be satellite data, which starts life in raster format. Getting the right type of data is the most important item, as data will be your biggest expense; the right data can be used over multiple software programs, hardware systems, and projects for many years.
There is an ongoing effort at the national level to set at least some data standards, particularly for layers of data that will be created by FWS offices. This effort is part of the metadata documentation process (next section). Defining standards is complicated by the diverse geography the Service covers; for example, trying to define vegetative classifications that cover everything from Hawaii to Alaska to Iowa is very challenging.
Some standards are fairly simple, such as using the Service NWI data for wetlands, where the digital data is available. The use of the two character state codes and the FIPS codes for counties in related databases are two other standards that could be adopted with minimal problems. A vegetative classification system is being tested currently at Assateague NWR and the adjacent Chincoteague NP. The national GIS Steering Committee is discussing a standard for automating (either digitizing or by other methods) refuge boundaries. Included will be a discussion of the quality of the hard copy map (USGS quads, legal realty ownership maps, other?), technical tolerances used to digitize, scales and potential uses (e.g.. is the quality good enough for legal work, or limited to resource assessments).
Generally the first recommendation for obtaining data for a GIS project is to check all sources to see what is already available. This is something your GIS coordinator can assist with. Potential sources are NWI, USGS, states (DNR, DOT, GIS section), Nature Conservancy or other organizations, counties, or local universities. Costs sharing on new data creation is another good alternative. There are a number of contractors who have been utilized by other natural resource agencies, and are known to provide a good quality product. Some guidelines are also available to use when contracting to get quality data. (Visit the Environmental Management Technical Center (EMTC) site to see current on-line abstracts, and once at the site go to publications/reports, entering SOP in the query search box ). Some data layers could be digitized in a regional office or other central support point; for example data layers for refuge boundaries and management units are being done in several regions. The real issue on digitizing data in the regions is available trained staff and time.
Digitizing large amounts of data at a field office should be the LAST resort. Digitizing is a complex and time-consuming process. The resulting data forms the basis of your future work. You need good quality data to do good quality analyses (garbage in, garbage out still applies). While digitizing in the office controls the costs, it is slow when you're trying to fit it in between all the other work.
In April, 1994, Executive Order 12906 was signed, requiring all Federal agencies to initiate documentation of geospatial data that they create (whether directly or by contract). Implementation was generally to start in early 1995 for new data. Major objectives behind the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) and the Executive Order are to foster an infrastructure for an information based society, to build the partnerships needed to implement that structure, and to encourage the sharing of data and information about data in order to reduce duplication of effort and avoid waste.
One item specified in the executive order is the standardization of documentation about data, or metadata. Agencies are required to document new data as it is created, and to adopt a schedule to document existing data. The rational behind this is to make it easier to 'advertise' what data exists through the also mandated National Spatial Data Clearinghouse (Clearinghouse). Standard data descriptions make it easier for the public and other groups to locate data they want. This entire effort is just one piece of the 1994 Plan for the National Spatial Data Infrastructure. The US Fish and Wildlife Service delayed implementation until 1996 to allow time to train GIS users in what they needed to document and to find a usable way of creating the documentation.
At the March 1996 GIS Steering Committee meeting a program called Metamaker, created by the Environmental Management Technical Center (EMTC) for documenting data, was demonstrated. It was easy to use, providing the user has a basic understanding of the metadata terms he/she is documenting and has a fast computer (486 or better) with 16 MB of RAM. Most offices using GIS will have a computer that meets those specs. However, many users still are not conversant with the metadata terms, although a training session was held at the GIS Workshop in Minneapolis in July 1995 that some staff attended. GIS coordinators in every region have been reviewing the Metamaker software. In addition, there is another program available over the Internet at the University of Oklahoma (Go to the clearinghouse section once at the site and then metadata). This program is easy to use, but you need to be on-line to use it.
The GIS Steering Committee has also reviewed a list of the basic information FWS needs to keep track of to document our data and comply with the executive order. This information is now available in plain English, not technical terminology, on this Internet site . Offices are responsible for documenting any data that they create or contract to create. This DOES NOT include data you receive from sources such as the USGS or NWI, but may include data received from contractors that have edited USGS or NWI data. Those contractors should be required to supply documentation with the data; if they are not familiar with the metadata requirements, they can contact the GIS coordinator for background; most large contractors are already familiar with the requirements.
This may seem unwieldy now, but 5 years down the road when the original staff member leaves who created the data, and you have no ideas about data history/quality/etc. the value of documentation will become very clear.
For additional information regarding this Web page, contact Deb Southworth Green, in the Division of Information Resources and Technology Management, at Deb_Green@fws.gov
Return to the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service GIS Home Page
Visit the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Home Page
Keywords=GIS, data, metadata, steering, GPS
Last Modified January 02, 2001 11:51 AM