The data is available for distribution as one statewide file or tiled into 56 separate files by USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle. The format for distribution is either ARC/INFO export format or ArcView shapefile.
This data was developed for the purpose of identifying opportunities for cooperative management of biodiversity elements, however it may also be used for a variety of other resource management applications.
Appropriate uses include: 1. statewide biodiversity planning; 2. regional and large area resource planning; 3. coarse-filter evaluation of potential impacts or benefits of major projects/initiatives on biodiversity - such as utility or transportation corridors, wilderness proposals, open space or recreation proposals; 4. environmental impact assessment for large projects such as military activities; 5. education at all levels for both students and citizens. Inappropriate uses of this data include: 1. Generating specific measurements from the data finer than the nearest thousand hectares; 2. Establishing exact boundaries for regulation or acquisition; 3. Establishing definite presence or absence of any element; 4. Determining abundance, health, or condition of any element; 5. Establishing a measure of accuracy of any other data by comparison with this dataset; 6. Combining this data with any other data finer than 1:100,000-scale for analysis; 7. Use of this data to map small areas (less than thousands of hectares) typically requiring mapping resolution at 1:24,000-scale and using aerial photographs or ground surveys; 8. Altering the data in anyway and redistributing it as a GAP product.
The informal verification of the ownership and administration attributes was performed using two methods. 1. Comparison of ownership/administrative boundaries and thematic inforamtion with original sources, and 2. requesting informal map reviews from groups to which the data was distributed to in its draft form. Ownership boundaries digitized by WY-GAP were checked systematically for correct land coding by overlaying 1:100,000-scale plots of digital data with the source maps. Similarly, thematic accuracy of administrative units was systematically checked by a visual comparison with source maps.
In the informal review process, agencies were asked to make updates and check ownership polygons for errors. Twenty-three of the 56 1:000,000-scale quadrangles in the state were checked by BLM personnel in this review process, and changes resulting from this review (mostly updates) were incorporated in to the final version.
1. Boundaries for the selected SMA were digitized directly from 1:100,000 scale Surface Management Status Maps published by the Bureau of Land Management.
2. Boundaries for the selected SMA were manually transcribed from a 1:126,720 scale USFS Management Area Map to the corresponding 1:100,000 scale BLM Surface Management Status Map and digitized.
3. Boundaries for the selected SMA were digitized from a paper overlay that had been manually traced from a USFS 1:24,000 scale stand management map.
4. Boundaries for the selected SMA were digitized directly from 1:24,000 scale blue line reproductions of Wildlife Habitat Management Unit (WHMA) maps developed by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department in Cheyenne, Wyoming.
5. Boundaries for the selected SMA were derived from 1:24,000 scale blue line reproductions of Wildlife Habitat Management AREA (WHMA) maps developed by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department in Cheyenne, Wyoming. The reproduced maps did not contain control points (points of known latitude-longitude) and could not be registered for digitizing. Also, the WHMA boundary was considered to be irregular or non-linear, such as boundaries following rivers. Transcribing irregular boundaries would have introduced considerable positional inaccuracies. Therefore, a data-capture method was developed which consisted of several steps. First, the WHMA boundary was digitized from the blue line map using digitizer units (inches). Second, the digitized boundary was converted to raster format. Third, the rasterized boundary was matched up with the corresponding area within the vector landstat layer and points common to both the rasterized boundary and the landstat layer were identified. Fourth, the CONTROLPOINTS routine within ARC/INFO was used to link common points between the WHMA raster and the vector landstat layer (note: the number of common points varied with WHMA - see blue line map for the number of control points used). Fifth, the WHMA raster was "rubbersheeted" to fit the landstat layer using the ARC/INFO GRIDWARP command. Sixth, the warped WHMA boundary was converted back into a vector format and incorporated into the landstat layer using the ARC/INFO UNION command. Seventh, sliver polygons were removed.
6. Boundaries for the selected SMA were derived from 1:24,000 scale blue line reproductions of Wildlife Habitat Management Unit (WHMA) maps developed by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department in Cheyenne, Wyoming. If the boundary of the SMA consisted of polygons already within the landstat layer, then the SMA was not digitized from the 1:24,000 scale blue-line maps. Instead, the existing landstat polygons were verified using the blue-line maps to ensure correct boundary locations and attributed with the SMA code. The positional accuracy of the WHMA boundaries taken from the landstat layer is recorded as FAIR.as the WHMA boundary was linear in nature, then the WHMA boundary was transcribed onto the corresponding BLM map and digitized. WHMA boundaries done in this manner were adjusted to fit existing linework in the landstat layer. The positional accuracy of the WHMA boundaries taken from the landstat layer is recorded as POOR. 7. Boundaries for the selected SMA were manually transcribed from a small scale map provided in the Resource Management Plan to the corresponding 1:100,000 scale BLM Surface Management Status Maps and digitized.
8. Boundaries for the selected SMA were given to WY-GAP from the Shoshone National Forest of the USFS. The SMA boundary was digitized at the Shoshone Supervisor's Office using 1:24,000 scale base maps.
9. Boundaries for the selected SMA were given to WY-GAP from the National Ecology Research Center (NERC). The SMA boundary was digitized at the NERC Office using 1:24,000 scale base maps.
10. Boundaries for the selected SMA were digitized directly from a map sent by the resource manager that was not included in the resource management document.
11. Boundaries for the selected SMA were derived from a map sent by the resource manager that was not included in the resource management document. The SMA boundary was transcribed to the corresponding 1:100,000 scale BLM Surface Management Status Map and digitized.
12. Boundaries for the selected SMA were derived from USPLS legal descriptions listed in the resource management document.
The ownership entity has two attributes:
OWNER: complete ownership category codes including withdrawals (106 total)
DISPLAY: condensed ownership classification (useful for display purposes)
1 National Park Service: National Park/Monument
2 National Park Service: National Recreation Area
3 U.S. Forest Service: National Forest
4 U.S. Forest Service: National Grassland
5 U.S. Forest Service: Wilderness Area
6 U.S. Forest Service: Research Natural Area
7 U.S. Forest Service: National Recreation Area
8 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: National Wildlife Refuge
9 U.S. Bureau of Land Management
10 U.S. Department of Defense
11 U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs
12 Wyoming State Lands
13 Wyoming State Park
14 Wyoming State Wildlife Habitat Management Unit
15 Private lands
16 Nature Conservancy Preserve
17 Water
The management status entity has one attribute:
MSTAT: four codes pertaining to how well the land is managed with
regard to biodiversity
The special managed area entity has two related attributes:
SMA1: Primary code for special managed area
SMA2: Where two special managed areas overlap, this identifies
the secondary code of the overlapping area
When a code for the attribute SMA2 exists (not zero), it means that
the special managed area identified by the code overlaps another
special managed area identified by the SMA1 code. The managing agency
coded by SMA1 has primary jurisdiction over the land (there are two
instances: Wind River Indian Reservation (SMA2) with Wyoming Game
and Fish Dept.'s Spence/Moriarity WHMA (SMA1), and the Bighorn National
Recreation Area (SMA2) with Yellowtail WHMA (SMA1),
Because all the area encompassed by the Reservation and the Bighorn
Recreation Area are not coded for primary management, in order
to determine the correct areas for these units, selection for its code
must be done at both the SMA1 and SMA2 attributing level.
The quadrangle features have four attributes: QUAD: code for the 1:100,000 quadrangles from which the ownership was digitized QUADNAME: USGS name of quadrangle EDITION date of map edition MAPCOND: condition of map used for digitizition
The US National Forest boundaries have two attributes: USFS: code identifying different National Forests USFSNAME: name of National Forests
ARC/INFO export format: when the file is imported into ARC/INFO, it also comes along with these additional INFO files:
LANDOWN.OWN: Full names of all ownership/withdrawal categories LANDOWN.SMA: Names and descriptions of special management areas LANDOWN.USFS: Names of all USFS National Forests LANDOWN.QUAD: Names, dates and quality of all source maps LANDOWN.DISPLAY: A simplified ownership categorization for making mapsTo perform a relate (link) between these files and the polygon attribute table, there is also an INFO file called LANDOWN.RELATE
ArcView shapefile format: these tables are also provided in dbase format for linking to the landownership in ArcView.
owner.dbf: Full names of all ownership/withdrawal categories managed.dbf: Names and descriptions of special management areas usfs.dbf: Names of all USFS National Forests quad.dbf: Names, dates and quality of all source maps display.dbf: A simplified ownership categorization for making maps