Predicted Terrestrial Vertebrate Species Distributions for Wyoming

Metadata also available as - [Outline] - [Parseable text] - [SGML] - [DIF]

Frequently-anticipated questions:

What does this data set describe?
    Title:
    Predicted Terrestrial Vertebrate Species Distributions for Wyoming
    Abstract:
    This dataset contains the predicted distributions of 445 terrestrial vertebrate species in Wyoming, created in a GIS modeling process using species habitat assocation rules in combination with species geographic range. Because of the large size of this dataset, it is distributed in two ways (complete, statewide), and tiled into 56 1:100,000-scale quadrangles units which are small enough to be utilized in the PC Arc/Info or ArcView environment.

  1. How should this data set be cited?

    Analysis, Wyoming Gap , 19961201, Predicted Terrestrial Vertebrate Species Distributions for Wyoming: University of Wyoming, Spatial Data and Visualization Center, Laramie, Wyoming.

    Online Links:

  2. What geographic area does the data set cover?

    West_Bounding_Coordinate: -111.04334522
    East_Bounding_Coordinate: -103.83352708
    North_Bounding_Coordinate: 45.10795123
    South_Bounding_Coordinate: 40.95004394

  3. What does it look like?

    <URL:http://www.sdvc.uwyo.edu/images/gapvert.gif> (gif)
    Predicted distribution of the American Marten.

  4. Does the data set describe conditions during a particular time period?

    Beginning_Date: 1950
    Ending_Date: 1994
    Currentness_Reference:
    Publication date, specific to individual datasets used to compile information on species occurrences and habitat associations.

  5. What is the general form of this data set?

    Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: map

  6. How does the data set represent geographic features?

    1. How are geographic features stored in the data set?

      This is a Vector data set. It contains the following vector data types (SDTS terminology):

      • GT-polygon composed of chains (201941)

    2. What coordinate system is used to represent geographic features?

      Horizontal positions are specified in geographic coordinates, that is, latitude and longitude. Latitudes are given to the nearest 0.001. Longitudes are given to the nearest 0.001. Latitude and longitude values are specified in decimal degrees.

      The horizontal datum used is North American Datum of 1983.
      The ellipsoid used is GRS1980.
      The semi-major axis of the ellipsoid used is 6378137.
      The flattening of the ellipsoid used is 1/298.257.

  7. How does the data set describe geographic features?

    Entity_and_Attribute_Overview:

    The main entity, or feature of this dataset are the polygons representing species distribution. Attributes for these features are the 445 element codes, each representing the distribution of an individual species by the values 0,1 and 2. 

    0 = species not present
1 = species predicted to be present within primary habitat
2 = species predicted to be present within secondary habitat
    The species' common and scientific names as well as other information (season, abudance, rankings) associated with these attributes are in a INFO file which is included with this dataset, VERTMODEL.NAME. For ArcView users, this INFO file is also provided in dBase format, called names.dbf. For more detail about the attributes in the main coverage and the associated attribute files, please see the Entity/Attribute Detailed information section of this metadata. 

    Other attributes associated with the distribution polygons:
TOT_RICH: the total number of species predicted to occur within each
           polygon (species richness).
BIRD_RICH: total number of birds out of 291 species within each polygon
MAM_RICH: total number of mammals out of 116 species within each polygon
REPT_RICH: total number of reptiles out of 26 species within each polygon
AMPH_RICH: total number of amphibians out of 12 species within each polygon
    There are additonal entities/attributes derived from source datasets (land cover, elevation, hexagon, and riparian model), included in this dataset for the purpose of updating the predicted species distributions. 

    LANDCOV-ID: an id number corresponding to polygons in the land cover
PRIMARY: code for land cover type occupying the largest area within the
         original land cover polygon.
PRIM_PERCENT: percent of area of the original land cover polygon occupied by
         the primary land cover type.
SECONDARY: code for land cover type occupying the second largest area
         within the original land cover polygon.
SEC_PERCENT: percent area of the original land cover polygon occupied
         by the secondary type
PRIMARY2: the original PRIMARY code from the land cover map, recorded
         in those cases where unclassified riparian from the riparian/
         aquatic model replaced upland cover types from the land cover map.
BUFFER: GIS-generated buffers of USGS Digital Line Graph perennial hydro-
         graphy, designated as riparian corridors.
MINOR1: USGS Digital Line Graph code identifying the type of hydrographic
         features included in the riparian/aquatic model
HEXAGON: an identification number corresponding to the original polygons in
         the hexagon database
ELEVATION: elevation contours in 150 meter intervals, corresponding to the
         original polygons in the elevation database .
    Additional files are also included with this dataset for the purposes of identifying the habitat associations and hexagon occurrences for each species which were used in modeling the species distributions. These files can be directly related to the items in VERT.PAT by means of the relate table, VERT.RELATE, or they can also be joined in ArcView based on their common fields. Files which may be related or jointed are: 

    VERT.NAME   (relation is elcode)
VERT.ELEV   (relation is elevation)
VERT.HEX    (relation is hexagon)
VERT.PRI    (relation is primary)
VERT.SEC    (relation is secondary)
VERT.HEXSRC (relation is hexagon)
    These files contain the codes for elevation contours, hexagons, primary and secondary cover types, along with an item for all 445 species. The values for each species are usually 0 or 1, 1 indicating association and 0 indicating no association. The file VERTMODEL.HEX has a total of 7 different values for describing species occurence, though only the first four of these values was used to actually define species' presence in VERT.PAT. VERT.HEXSRC (hexagon occurrence source) contains a 10-character code which to identify the source of the hexagon occurrence. The full name of the sources are contained in another file, VERTMODEL.REV.

    Note to ArcView users: because dBase format can only handle up to 255 fields, these INFO files cannot be directly converted to dBase format. Therefore, the dataset in shapefile format is accompanied by only one of these tables, vertname.dbf

    ArcView 3.0's IMPORT71 utility can successfully import these tables into ArcView, however they will still be in INFO format and must be loaded as tables from the info directory created automatically by the IMPORT71 command.

    Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation: n/a
    species distribution polygons
    Attributes for all 445 species distributions are contained in 445 fields eached labeled the species' element code. Additional attributes pertaining to distribution polygons are richness fields: TOT_RICH, BIRD_RICH, MAM_RICH, AMPH_RICH, REPT_RICH (Source: n/a)

    Remaining 445 attributes are species codes.
    Identifies species presence/absence within polygons. (Source: n/a)

    ValueDefinition
    0not present
    1Species present, associated cover type is primary
    2Species present, associated cover type is secondary

    TOT_RICH
    The total number of species predicted to occur within individual polygons (species richness) (Source: n/a)

    Range of values
    Minimum:7
    Maximum:319 (out of 445 total)

    BIRD_RICH
    The total number of bird species predicted to occur within individual polygons (species richness) (Source: n/a)

    Range of values
    Minimum:2
    Maximum:249 (out of 291 birds total)

    MAM_RICH
    The total number of mammal species predicted to occur within individual polygons (species richness) (Source: n/a)

    Range of values
    Minimum:5
    Maximum:73 (out of 116 mammals total)

    AMPH_RICH
    The total number of amphibian species predicted to occur within individual polygons (species richness) (Source: n/a)

    Range of values
    Minimum:0
    Maximum:7 (out of 12 amphibians total)

    REPT_RICH
    The total number of reptile species predicted to occur within individual polygons (species richness) (Source: n/a)

    Range of values
    Minimum:0
    Maximum:18 (out of 26 reptiles total)

    ELCODE
    Element code by which species are identified. These codes are used as field names within the polygon attribute table (VERTMODEL.PAT). The element codes are also recorded in the VERTMODEL.NAME info file along with species common and scientific names for identification purposes. However, because of the necessary structure of the polygon coverage, it is not possible to relate or join the polygon coverage with the VERTMODEL.NAME (Source: The Nature Conservancy databases)

    Formal codeset
    Codeset Name:species element codes
    Codeset Source:Codes described in VERTMODEL.NAME file

    SCOMNAME
    Common name of species (Source: n/a)

    Formal codeset
    Codeset Name:common names
    Codeset Source:listed in VERTMODEL.NAME file

    SNAME
    Scientific name of species (Source: n/a)

    Formal codeset
    Codeset Name:scientific names
    Codeset Source:listed in VERTMODEL.NAME file

    RIPARIAN
    Species with or with or without a riparian/aquatic association, recorded in the VERTMODEL.NAME file (Source: n/a)

    Range of values
    Minimum:0 (no riparian association)
    Maximum:1 (riparian association)

    COVERTYPE
    The number of covertypes that a species is associated to, recorded in the VERTMODEL.NAME file (Source: n/a)

    Range of values
    Minimum:1
    Maximum:42

    ELEVMAX
    Maximum elevation range recorded for species, in 150 m intervals. 4200 is assumed to be the maximum if no recorded range was found in the literature. Recorded in the VERTMODEL.NAME file (Source: n/a)

    Range of values
    Minimum:1050
    Maximum:4200

    ELEVMIN
    Minimum elevation range recorded for species, in 150 m intervals. 900 is assumed to be the minimum if no recorded range was found in the literature. Recorded in the VERTMODEL.NAME file (Source: n/a)

    Range of values
    Minimum:900
    Maximum:4050

    ABUNDANCE
    General abundance of species poplutions, recorded in VERTMODEL.NAME file. (Source: Oakleaf et al 1992, Baxter & Stone 1985)

    ValueDefinition
    AAbundant
    CCommon
    UCUncommon
    UKUnknown

    SEASON
    Seasonal occurrence of species in the state, recorded in VERTMODEL.NAME file. (Source: Oakleaf et. al 1992)

    ValueDefinition
    RYear-round resident
    SRSummer resident
    WWinter resident
    MMigrant
    AAccidental
    PPeripheral

    SRANK
    The Nature Conservancy state rank for species, priority status, recorded in the VERTMODEL.NAME file. (Source: Garber 1995)

    ValueDefinition
    Sx, SxB, SxN, SZNPriority status, "x" being a value 1-5 with 1 being highest priority; B breeding status, N non breeding status, Z status does not apply
    SEStatus is exotic or introduced
    SUStatus is undetermined
    SAStatus is accidental

    R2 (39 species), R4 (1 species), R2,R4 (13 species)
    US Forest Service Region 2 or 4 sensitive species, recorded in VERTMODEL.NAME file (Source: Garber 1995)

    ValueDefinition
    Ssensitive

    USFWS
    US Fish and Wildlife Service - federal listing for species, recorded in VERTMODEL.NAME file. (Source: Federal register)

    ValueDefinition
    >LE: endangered (3 species); >LELT: endangered/threatene (3 species) >LT: threatened (1 species); >C2: candidate (28 species); >C3: candidate (3 species); C2NL: candidate (3 species); >E/SA: (1 species, Peregrine Falcon)federal listing

    GROUP
    Taxonomic group, recorded in VERTMODEL.NAME file (Source: n/a)

    ValueDefinition
    Bird, Mammal, Amphibian, Reptilefour taxonomic group names

    WGFD_PRIORITY
    Identifies species that are considered to be sensitive or a management priority by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department. Listed in VERTMODEL.NAME file. (Source: n/a)

    ValueDefinition
    SSC1, SSC2, SSC3 (56 out of 445)1 is highest priority

    GAP
    Species identified as gaps by the Wyoming Gap Analysis project. A "gap" is a species whose habitat is not sufficiently protected by the current network of parks and reserves in Wyoming. Listed in the VERMMODEL.NAME file. (Source: Wyoming Gap Analysis)

    ValueDefinition
    gap species (72 species)either gap, or not

    MAP
    Identifies if there were recognized problems/weakness in modeling the species' predicted distribution. (Source: Wyoming Gap Analysis)

    ValueDefinition
    >D (insufficient information about statewide distribution); >H (habitat resolution insufficient to represent species habitat); >M (some records used to define range may be misidentifications)n/a

    RANGE
    Identifies type of range that species has in Wyoming. (Source: Wyoming Gap Analysis)

    ValueDefinition
    >Endemic (5 species endemic to Wyoming) >Periphal (44 species; species' range in Wyoming is less > than 10% of its total range in US and covers less than > 10% of area in Wyoming) >Disjunct (3 species; range in Wyoming is two or more areas significantly separate or disjunct from each other) >Peripheral ? (21 species; not enough known about these > species' distributions; may or may not be peripheral)n/a

    SPPNUM
    species id number (Source: Wyoming Gap Analysis)

    Range of values
    Minimum:1
    Maximum:445

    land cover polygons
    This entity has several attributes which are associated with the original land cover polygons, including LANDCOV-ID, PRIMARY, PRIM_PERCENT, SECONDARY, SEC_PERCENT, and PRIMARY2. The field PRIMARY is a unique identifier which may be used to relate or join the VERTMODEL.PRI and VERTMODEL.SEC infofiles to the main polygon attribute table. These two files contain additional attributes that describe the association of each species to each of the land cover types. (Source: n/a)

    LANDCOV-ID
    Identifer for the original polygons in landcov, a coverage used in creating vertmodel (Source: n/a)

    Range of values
    Minimum:0
    Maximum:60772

    PRIMARY
    Codes for primary land cover type (Source: Land cover classifcation, see metadata for landcov)

    Formal codeset
    Codeset Name:codes for land cover types
    Codeset Source:See metadata for landcov

    SECONDARY
    Codes for secondary land cover type (Source: see metadata for landcov)

    Formal codeset
    Codeset Name:codes for land cover types
    Codeset Source:See metadata for landcov

    PRIM_PERCENT, SEC_PERCENT
    percent of primary/secondary cover type in polygon (Source: See metadata for landcov)

    Range of values
    Minimum:0
    Maximum:100

    PRIMARY2
    Original primary codes of upland cover types, replaced by the code 60000 for unclassified riparian or 52001 for open water, based on modeled riparian/aquatic areas (Source: see metadata for landcov)

    Formal codeset
    Codeset Name:codes for land cover types
    Codeset Source:see metadata for landcov

    Species association to primary land cover types
    Identifies species association to primary land cover types recorded for each species within 445 unique fields within the VERTMODEL.PRI file (Source: Literature and expert opinion)

    Range of values
    Minimum:0 (species not associated)
    Maximum:1 (Species associated)

    Species association to secondary land cover types
    Identifies species association to secondary land cover types recorded for each species within 445 unique fields within the VERTMODEL.SEC file (Source: Literature and expert opinion)

    Range of values
    Minimum:0 (species not associated)
    Maximum:1 (Species associated)

    riparian buffers
    This entity is original polygons from the riparian/aquatic model, specifically variable-width buffers of hydrographic features (BUFFER attribute), and actual water bodies (lakes, ponds, reservoirs) (MINOR1 attribute) taken from USGS 1:100,000-scale hydrography DLGS. (Source: n/a)

    BUFFER
    identifies riparian buffer polygons (Source: see Wyoming Gap Analysis Final Report)

    Range of values
    Minimum:0 (not a buffer)
    Maximum:1 (part of buffer)

    MINOR1
    DLG code for water bodies (Source: see metadata for 1:100,000 USGS DLGS for Wyoming)

    ValueDefinition
    412lake
    101reservoir
    111marsh
    420emphemeral wash
    421large river

    hexagons
    This entity is original polygons from the hexagon dataset, used to delineate the occurence code of species within the area of each hexagon in Wyoming. There are three additional INFO files associated with this entity, containing additional attributes and related to the polygon coverage by the codes in the HEXAGON field. These files are VERTMODEL.HEX, VERTMODEL.HEXSRC, and VERTMODEL.REV (Source: EPA)

    HEXAGON
    Identifer for the original polygons in the hexagon dataset. This field is present in the VERTMODEL.PAT, VERTMODEL.HEX, VERTMODEL.HEXSRC and VERTMODEL.REV files and is the unique identifier between them. (Source: n/a)

    Range of values
    Minimum:17806
    Maximum:21933

    Hexagon occurrence codes
    Identifies type of species occurrence within hexagons, recorded for each species within 445 unique fields in the VERTMODEL.HEX file (Source: n/a)

    ValueDefinition
    1confirmed
    2predicted
    3possible
    4historical
    5historical, excluded
    6questionable, excluded
    7excluded

    Codes of sources for hexagon occurrences
    Identifies the source of the hexagon occurrence, (either a publication or a reviewer), recorded for each species within 445 unique fields in the VERTMODEL.HEXSRC file. (Source: n/a)

    Formal codeset
    Codeset Name:Codes of names/publications of sources
    Codeset Source:VERTMODEL.HEXSRC file

    Names of sources (publications or reviewers)
    Lists the full name of the publication or reviewer corresponding to the codes contained in VERTMODEL.HEXSRC. The codes and corresponding names recorded in VERTMODEL.REV file cannot be related or joined to the VERTMODEL.HEXSRC file. (Source: n/a)

    Formal codeset
    Codeset Name:Names/publications of sources
    Codeset Source:VERTMODEL.REV file

    elevation contours
    This entity is original polygons from the 150 m elevation contour dataset. The ELEVATION field can be used to relate the polygons to species elevation association matrix, VERTMODEL.ELEV (Source: n/a)

    ELEVATION
    Elevation contours in 150 m intervals. This field is present in both VERTMODEL.PAT and VERTMODEL.ELEV and is the unique identifier. (Source: n/a)

    Range of values
    Minimum:900
    Maximum:4200

    Species association to elevation
    Identifies species association with elevation ranges, recorded for each species within 445 unique fields within the VERTMODEL.ELEV file (Source: n/a)

    Range of values
    Minimum:0 (species not associated)
    Maximum:1 (Species associated)

  8. What biological taxa does this data set concern?

    Taxonomy:
    Taxonomic_Keywords: terrestrial vertebrates
    Taxonomic_Keywords: mammals
    Taxonomic_Keywords: birds
    Taxonomic_Keywords: amphibians
    Taxonomic_Keywords: reptiles
    Taxonomic_Coverage:
    Specific_Taxonomic_Information:
    Kingdom: Animal
    Division-Phylum: Chordata/Vertebrata
    General_Taxonomic_Coverage: 
    TIGER SALAMANDER: AMBYSTOMA TIGRINUM, NORTHERN SHRIKE: LANIUS EXCUBITOR
BOREAL WESTERN TOAD: BUFO BOREAS BOREAS, LOGGERHEAD SHRIKE: LANIUS LUDOVICIANUS
GREAT PLAINS TOAD: BUFO COGNATUS, SOLITARY VIREO: VIREO SOLITARIUS
WYOMING TOAD: BUFO HEMIOPHRYS BAXTERI, WARBLING VIREO: VIREO GILVUS
WOODHOUSE'S TOAD: BUFO WOODHOUSII, RED-EYED VIREO: VIREO OLIVACEUS
BOREAL CHORUS FROG: PSEUDACRIS TRISERIATA, TENNESSEE WARBLER: VERMIVORA PEREGRINA
PLAINS SPADEFOOT TOAD: SCAPHIOPUS BOMBIFRONS, ORANGE-CROWNED WARBLER: VERMIVORA CELATA
GREAT BASIN SPADEFOOT: SCAPHIOPUS INTERMONTANUS, NASHVILLE WARBLER: VERMIVORA RUFICAPILLA
BULLFROG: RANA CATESBEIANA, VIRGINIA'S WARBLER: VERMIVORA VIRGINIAE
NORTHERN LEOPARD FROG: RANA PIPIENS, NORTHERN PARULA: PARULA AMERICANA
SPOTTED FROG: RANA PRETIOSA, YELLOW WARBLER: DENDROICA PETECHIA
WOOD FROG: RANA SYLVATICA, CHESTNUT-SIDED WARBLER: DENDROICA PENSYLVANICA
COMMON LOON: GAVIA IMMER, MAGNOLIA WARBLER: DENDROICA MAGNOLIA
PIED-BILLED GREBE: PODILYMBUS PODICEPS, BLACK-THROATED BLUE WARBLER: DENDROICA CAERULESCENS
HORNED GREBE: PODICEPS AURITUS, YELLOW-RUMPED WARBLER: DENDROICA CORONATA
RED-NECKED GREBE: PODICEPS GRISEGENA, BLACK-THROATED GRAY WARBLER: DENDROICA NIGRESCENS
EARED GREBE: PODICEPS NIGRICOLLIS, TOWNSEND'S WARBLER: DENDROICA TOWNSENDI
WESTERN GREBE: AECHMOPHORUS OCCIDENTALIS, BLACKBURNIAN WARBLER: DENDROICA FUSCA
CLARK'S GREBE: AECHMOPHORUS CLARKII, BLACKPOLL WARBLER: DENDROICA STRIATA
AMERICAN WHITE PELICAN: PELECANUS ERYTHRORHYNCHOS, BLACK-AND-WHITE WARBLER: MNIOTILTA VARIA
DOUBLE-CRESTED CORMORANT: PHALACROCORAX AURITUS, AMERICAN REDSTART: SETOPHAGA RUTICILLA
AMERICAN BITTERN: BOTAURUS LENTIGINOSUS, OVENBIRD: SEIURUS AUROCAPILLUS
GREAT BLUE HERON: ARDEA HERODIAS, NORTHERN WATERTHRUSH: SEIURUS NOVEBORACENSIS
GREAT EGRET: CASMERODIUS ALBUS, MACGILLIVRAY`S WARBLER: OPORORNIS TOLMIEI
SNOWY EGRET: EGRETTA THULA, COMMON YELLOWTHROAT: GEOTHLYPIS TRICHAS
CATTLE EGRET: BUBULCUS IBIS, WILSON'S WARBLER: WILSONIA PUSILLA
BLACK-CROWNED NIGHT-HERON: NYCTICORAX NYCTICORAX, YELLOW-BREASTED CHAT: ICTERIA VIRENS
WHITE-FACED IBIS: PLEGADIS CHIHI, SUMMER TANAGER: PIRANGA RUBRA
TUNDRA SWAN: CYGNUS COLUMBIANUS, WESTERN TANAGER: PIRANGA LUDOVICIANA
TRUMPETER SWAN: CYGNUS BUCCINATOR, ROSE-BREASTED GROSBEAK: PHEUCTICUS LUDOVICIANUS
GREATER WHITE-FRONTED GOOSE: ANSER ALBIFRONS, BLACK-HEADED GROSBEAK: PHEUCTICUS MELANOCEPHALUS
SNOW GOOSE: CHEN CAERULESCENS, BLUE GROSBEAK: GUIRACA CAERULEA
CANADA GOOSE: BRANTA CANADENSIS, LAZULI BUNTING: PASSERINA AMOENA
WOOD DUCK: AIX SPONSA, INDIGO BUNTING: PASSERINA CYANEA
GREEN-WINGED TEAL: ANAS CRECCA, DICKCISSEL: SPIZA AMERICANA
MALLARD: ANAS PLATYRHYNCHOS, GREEN-TAILED TOWHEE: PIPILO CHLORURUS
NORTHERN PINTAIL: ANAS ACUTA, RUFOUS-SIDED TOWHEE: PIPILO ERYTHROPHTHALMUS
BLUE-WINGED TEAL: ANAS DISCORS, AMERICAN TREE SPARROW: SPIZELLA ARBOREA
CINNAMON TEAL: ANAS CYANOPTERA, CHIPPING SPARROW: SPIZELLA PASSERINA
NORTHERN SHOVELER: ANAS CLYPEATA, CLAY-COLORED SPARROW: SPIZELLA PALLIDA
GADWALL: ANAS STREPERA, BREWER'S SPARROW: SPIZELLA BREWERI
AMERICAN WIGEON: ANAS AMERICANA, FIELD SPARROW: SPIZELLA PUSILLA
CANVASBACK: AYTHYA VALISINERIA, VESPER SPARROW: POOECETES GRAMINEUS
REDHEAD: AYTHYA AMERICANA, LARK SPARROW: CHONDESTES GRAMMACUS
RING-NECKED DUCK: AYTHYA COLLARIS, SAGE SPARROW: AMPHISPIZA BELLI
LESSER SCAUP: AYTHYA AFFINIS, LARK BUNTING: CALAMOSPIZA MELANOCORYS
HARLEQUIN DUCK: HISTRIONICUS HISTRIONICUS, SAVANNAH SPARROW: PASSERCULUS SANDWICHENSIS
SURF SCOTER: MELANITTA PERSPICILLATA, BAIRD'S SPARROW: AMMODRAMUS BAIRDII
WHITE-WINGED SCOTER: MELANITTA FUSCA, GRASSHOPPER SPARROW: AMMODRAMUS SAVANNARUM
COMMON GOLDENEYE: BUCEPHALA CLANGULA, FOX SPARROW: PASSERELLA ILIACA
BARROW'S GOLDENEYE: BUCEPHALA ISLANDICA, SONG SPARROW: MELOSPIZA MELODIA
BUFFLEHEAD: BUCEPHALA ALBEOLA, LINCOLN'S SPARROW: MELOSPIZA LINCOLNII
HOODED MERGANSER: LOPHODYTES CUCULLATUS, WHITE CROWNED SPARROW: ZONOTRICHIA LEUCOPHRYS
COMMON MERGANSER: MERGUS MERGANSER, HARRIS' SPARROW: ZONOTRICHIA QUERULA
RED-BREASTED MERGANSER: MERGUS SERRATOR, DARK-EYED JUNCO: JUNCO HYEMALIS
RUDDY DUCK: OXYURA JAMAICENSIS, MCCOWN'S LONGSPUR: CALCARIUS MCCOWNII
TURKEY VULTURE: CATHARTES AURA, LAPLAND LONGSPUR: CALCARIUS LAPPONICUS
OSPREY: PANDION HALIAETUS, CHESTNUT-COLLARED LONGSPUR: CALCARIUS ORNATUS
BALD EAGLE: HALIAEETUS LEUCOCEPHALUS, SNOW BUNTING: PLECTROPHENAX NIVALIS
NORTHERN HARRIER: CIRCUS CYANEUS, BOBOLINK: DOLICHONYX ORYZIVORUS
SHARP-SHINNED HAWK: ACCIPITER STRIATUS, RED-WINGED BLACKBIRD: AGELAIUS PHOENICEUS
COOPER'S HAWK: ACCIPITER COOPERII, WESTERN MEADOWLARK: STURNELLA NEGLECTA
NORTHERN GOSHAWK: ACCIPITER GENTILIS, YELLOW-HEADED BLACKBIRD: XANTHOCEPHALUS XANTHOCEPHALUS
BROAD-WINGED HAWK: BUTEO PLATYPTERUS, BREWER'S BLACKBIRD: EUPHAGUS CYANOCEPHALUS
SWAINSON'S HAWK: BUTEO SWAINSONI, COMMON GRACKLE: QUISCALUS QUISCULA
RED-TAILED HAWK: BUTEO JAMAICENSIS, BROWN-HEADED COWBIRD: MOLOTHRUS ATER
FERRUGINOUS HAWK: BUTEO REGALIS, ORCHARD ORIOLE: ICTERUS SPURIUS
ROUGH-LEGGED HAWK: BUTEO LAGOPUS, NORTHERN ORIOLE: ICTERUS GALBULA
GOLDEN EAGLE: AQUILA CHRYSAETOS, SCOTT'S ORIOLE: ICTERUS PARISORUM
AMERICAN KESTREL: FALCO SPARVERIUS, ROSY FINCH: LEUCOSTICTE ATRATA
MERLIN: FALCO COLUMBARIUS, PINE GROSBEAK: PINICOLA ENUCLEATOR
PEREGRINE FALCON: FALCO PEREGRINUS, PURPLE FINCH: CARPODACUS PURPUREUS
PRAIRIE FALCON: FALCO MEXICANUS, CASSIN'S FINCH: CARPODACUS CASSINII
GRAY PARTRIDGE: PERDIX PERDIX, HOUSE FINCH: CARPODACUS MEXICANUS
CHUKAR: ALECTORIS CHUKAR, RED CROSSBILL: LOXIA CURVIROSTRA
RING-NECKED PHEASANT: PHASIANUS COLCHICUS, WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILL: LOXIA LEUCOPTERA
BLUE GROUSE: DENDRAGAPUS OBSCURUS, COMMON REDPOLL: CARDUELIS FLAMMEA
WHITE-TAILED PTARMIGAN: LAGOPUS LEUCURUS, PINE SISKIN: CARDUELIS PINUS
RUFFED GROUSE: BONASA UMBELLUS, LESSER GOLDFINCH: CARDUELIS PSALTRIA
SAGE GROUSE: CENTROCERCUS UROPHASIANUS, AMERICAN GOLDFINCH: CARDUELIS TRISTIS
SHARP-TAILED GROUSE: TYMPANUCHUS PHASIANELLUS, EVENING GROSBEAK: COCCOTHRAUSTES VESPERTINUS
COLUMBIAN SHARP-TAILED GROUSE: TYMPANUCHUS PHASIANELLUS COLUMBIANUS, CINERUS OR MASKED SHREW: SOREX CINEREUS
WILD TURKEY: MELEAGRIS GALLOPAVO, PREBLE'S SHREW: SOREX PREBLEI
NORTHERN BOBWHITE: COLINUS VIRGINIANUS, VAGRANT SHREW: SOREX VAGRANS
VIRGINIA RAIL: RALLUS LIMICOLA, DUSKY OR MONTANE SHREW: SOREX MONTICOLUS
SORA: PORZANA CAROLINA, DWARF SHREW: SOREX NANUS
AMERICAN COOT: FULICA AMERICANA, WATER SHREW: SOREX PALUSTRIS
SANDHILL CRANE: GRUS CANADENSIS, MERRIAM'S SHREW: SOREX MERRIAMI
WHOOPING CRANE: GRUS AMERICANA, PYGMY SHREW: SOREX HOYI
BLACK-BELLIED PLOVER: PLUVIALIS SQUATAROLA, HAYDEN'S SHREW: SOREX HAYDENI
LESSER GOLDEN PLOVER: PLUVIALIS DOMINICUS, EASTERN MOLE: SCALOPUS AQUATICUS
SNOWY PLOVER: CHARADRIUS ALEXANDRINUS, LITTLE BROWN MYOTIS: MYOTIS LUCIFUGUS
SEMIPALMATED PLOVER: CHARADRIUS SEMIPALMATUS, YUMA MYOTIS: MYOTIS YUMANENSIS
PIPING PLOVER: CHARADRIUS MELODUS, KEEN'S MYOTIS: MYOTIS KEENII
KILLDEER: CHARADRIUS VOCIFERUS, LONG-EARED MYOTIS: MYOTIS EVOTIS
MOUNTAIN PLOVER: CHARADRIUS MONTANUS, FRINGED MYOTIS: MYOTIS THYSANODES
BLACK NECKED STILT: HIMANTOPUS MEXICANUS, LONG-LEGGED MYOTIS: MYOTIS VOLANS
AMERICAN AVOCET: RECURVIROSTRA AMERICANA, CALIFORNIA MYOTIS: MYOTIS CALIFORNICUS
GREATER YELLOWLEGS: TRINGA MELANOLEUCA, WESTERN SMALL-FOOTED MYOTIS: MYOTIS CILIOLABRUM
LESSER YELLOWLEGS: TRINGA FLAVIPES, SILVER-HAIRED BAT: LASIONYCTERIS NOCTIVAGANS
SOLITARY SANDPIPER: TRINGA SOLITARIA, BIG BROWN BAT: EPTESICUS FUSCUS
WILLET: CATOPTROPHORUS SEMIPALMATUS, RED BAT: LASIURUS BOREALIS
SPOTTED SANDPIPER: ACTITIS MACULARIA, HOARY BAT: LASIURUS CINEREUS
UPLAND SANDPIPER: BARTRAMIA LONGICAUDA, SPOTTED BAT: EUDERMA MACULATUM
WHIMBREL: NUMENIUS PHAEOPUS, TOWNSEND'S BIG-EARED BAT: PLECOTUS TOWNSENDII
LONG-BILLED CURLEW: NUMENIUS AMERICANUS, PALLID BAT: ANTROZOUS PALLIDUS
MARBLED GODWIT: LIMOSA FEDOA, BRAZILIAN FREE-TAILED BAT: TADARIDA BRASILIENSIS
SANDERLING: CALIDRIS ALBA, AMERICAN PIKA: OCHOTONA PRINCEPS
SEMIPALMATED SANDPIPER: CALIDRIS PUSILLA, EASTERN COTTONTAIL: SYLVILAGUS FLORIDANUS
WESTERN SANDPIPER: CALIDRIS MAURI, MOUNTAIN (NUTTALL'S) COTTONTAIL: SYLVILAGUS NUTTALLII
LEAST SANDPIPER: CALIDRIS MINUTILLA, DESERT COTTONTAIL: SYLVILAGUS AUDUBONII
BAIRD'S SANDPIPER: CALIDRIS BAIRDII, SNOWSHOE HARE: LEPUS AMERICANUS
PECTORAL SANDPIPER: CALIDRIS MELANOTOS, WHITE-TAILED JACK RABBIT: LEPUS TOWNSENDII
STILT SANDPIPER: CALIDRIS HIMANTOPUS, BLACK-TAILED JACK RABBIT: LEPUS CALIFORNICUS
LONG-BILLED DOWITCHER: LIMNODROMUS SCOLOPACEUS, PYGMY RABBIT: BRACHYLAGUS IDAHOENSIS
COMMON SNIPE: GALLINAGO GALLINAGO, LEAST CHIPMUNK: TAMIAS MINIMUS
WILSON'S PHALAROPE: PHALAROPUS TRICOLOR, YELLOW-PINE CHIPMUNK: TAMIAS AMOENUS
RED-NECKED PHALAROPE: PHALAROPUS LOBATUS, CLIFF CHIPMUNK: TAMIAS DORSALIS UTAHENSIS
FRANKLIN'S GULL: LARUS PIPIXCAN, UINTA CHIPMUNK: TAMIAS UMBRINUS
BONAPARTE'S GULL: LARUS PHILADELPHIA, YELLOW-BELLIED MARMOT: MARMOTA FLAVIVENTRIS
RING-BILLED GULL: LARUS DELAWARENSIS, UINTA GROUND SQUIRREL: SPERMOPHILUS ARMATUS
CALIFORNIA GULL: LARUS CALIFORNICUS, THIRTEEN-LINED GROUND SQUIRREL: SPERMOPHILUS TRIDECEMLINEATUS
HERRING GULL: LARUS ARGENTATUS, ALLEN'S THIRTEEN-LINED GROUND SQUIRREL: SPERMOPHILUS TRIDECEMLINEATUS ALLENI
CASPIAN TERN: STERNA CASPIA, SPOTTED GROUND SQUIRREL: SPERMOPHILUS SPILOSOMA
COMMON TERN: STERNA HIRUNDO, GOLDEN-MANTLED GROUND SQUIRREL: SPERMOPHILUS LATERALIS
FORSTER'S TERN: STERNA FORSTERI, WYOMING GROUND SQUIRREL: SPERMOPHILUS ELEGANS
BLACK TERN: CHLIDONIAS NIGER, BLACK-TAILED PRAIRIE DOG: CYNOMYS LUDOVICIANUS
MOURNING DOVE: ZENAIDA MACROURA, WHITE-TAILED PRAIRIE DOG: CYNOMYS LEUCURUS
BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO: COCCYZUS ERYTHROPTHALMUS, ABERT'S SQUIRREL: SCIURUS ABERTI
YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOO: COCCYZUS AMERICANUS, EASTERN FOX SQUIRREL: SCIURUS NIGER
COMMON BARN OWL: TYTO ALBA, RED SQUIRREL: TAMIASCIURUS HUDSONICUS
FLAMMULATED OWL: OTUS FLAMMEOLUS, NORTHERN FLYING SQUIRREL: GLAUCOMYS SABRINUS
EASTERN SCREECH OWL: OTUS ASIO, NORTHERN POCKET GOPHER: THOMOMYS TALPOIDES
WESTERN SCREECH OWL: OTUS KENNICOTTII, WYOMING POCKET GOPHER: THOMOMYS CLUSIUS
GREAT-HORNED OWL: BUBO VIRGINIANUS, IDAHO POCKET GOPHER: THOMOMYS IDAHOENSIS
NORTHERN PYGMY-OWL: GLAUCIDIUM GNOMA, PLAINS POCKET GOPHER: GEOMYS BURSARIUS
BURROWING OWL: ATHENE CUNICULARIA, OLIVE-BACKED POCKET MOUSE: PEROGNATHUS FASCIATUS
GREAT GRAY OWL: STRIX NEBULOSA, PLAINS POCKET MOUSE: PEROGNATHUS FLAVESCENS
LONG-EARED OWL: ASIO OTUS, SILKY POCKET MOUSE: PEROGNATHUS FLAVUS
SHORT-EARED OWL: ASIO FLAMMEUS, GREAT BASIN POCKET MOUSE: PEROGNATHUS PARVUS
BOREAL OWL: AEGOLIUS FUNEREUS, HISPID POCKET MOUSE: PEROGNATHUS HISPIDUS
NORTHERN SAW-WHET OWL: AEGOLIUS ACADICUS, ORD'S KANGAROO RAT: DIPODOMYS ORDII
COMMON NIGHTHAWK: CHORDEILES MINOR, AMERICAN BEAVER: CASTOR CANADENSIS
COMMON POORWILL: PHALAENOPTILUS NUTTALLII, PLAINS HARVEST MOUSE: REITHRODONTOMYS MONTANUS
CHIMNEY SWIFT: CHAETURA PELAGICA, WESTERN HARVEST MOUSE: REITHRODONTOMYS MEGALOTIS
WHITE-THROATED SWIFT: AERONAUTES SAXATALIS, DEER MOUSE: PEROMYSCUS MANICULATUS
BLACK-CHINNED HUMMINGBIRD: ARCHILOCHUS ALEXANDRI, WHITE-FOOTED MOUSE: PEROMYSCUS LEUCOPUS
CALLIOPE HUMMINGBIRD: STELLULA CALLIOPE, CANYON MOUSE: PEROMYSCUS CRINITUS
BROAD-TAILED HUMMINGBIRD: SELASPHORUS PLATYCERCUS, PINON MOUSE: PEROMYSCUS TRUEI
RUFOUS HUMMINGBIRD: SELASPHORUS RUFUS, NORTHERN GRASSHOPPER MOUSE: ONYCHOMYS LEUCOGASTER
BELTED KINGFISHER: CERYLE ALCYON, BUSHY-TAILED WOOD RAT: NEOTOMA CINEREA
LEWIS' WOODPECKER: MELANERPES LEWIS, SOUTHERN RED-BACKED VOLE: CLETHRIONOMYS GAPPERI
RED-HEADED WOODPECKER: MELANERPES ERYTHROCEPHALUS, HEATHER VOLE: PHENACOMYS INTERMEDIUS
WILLIAMSON'S SAPSUCKER: SPHYRAPICUS THYROIDEUS, MEADOW VOLE: MICROTUS PENNSYLVANICUS
RED-NAPED SAPSUCKER: SPHYRAPICUS NUCHALIS, MONTANE VOLE: MICROTUS MONTANUS
DOWNY WOODPECKER: PICOIDES PUBESCENS, LONG-TAILED VOLE: MICROTUS LONGICAUDUS
HAIRY WOODPECKER: PICOIDES VILLOSUS, PRAIRIE VOLE: MICROTUS OCHROGASTER
THREE-TOED WOODPECKER: PICOIDES TRIDACTYLUS, WATER VOLE: MICROTUS RICHARDSONI
BLACK-BACKED WOODPECKER: PICOIDES ARCTICUS, SAGEBRUSH VOLE: LEMMISCUS CURTATUS
NORTHERN FLICKER: COLAPTES AURATUS, MUSKRAT: ONDATRA ZIBETHICUS
OLIVE-SIDED FLYCATCHER: CONTOPUS BOREALIS, PREBLE'S MEADOW JUMPING MOUSE: ZAPUS HUDSONIUS PREBLEI
WESTERN WOOD PEWEE: CONTOPUS SORDIDULUS, BEAR LODGE MEADOW JUMPING MOUSE: ZAPUS HUDSONIUS CAMPESTRIS
WILLOW FLYCATCHER: EMPIDONAX TRAILLII, WESTERN JUMPING MOUSE: ZAPUS PRINCEPS
LEAST FLYCATCHER: EMPIDONAX MINIMUS, COMMON PORCUPINE: ERETHIZON DORSATUM
HAMMOND'S FLYCATCHER: EMPIDONAX HAMMONDII, COYOTE: CANIS LATRANS
DUSKY FLYCATCHER: EMPIDONAX OBERHOLSERI, GRAY WOLF: CANIS LUPUS
GRAY FLYCATCHER: EMPIDONAX WRIGHTII, RED FOX: VULPES VULPES
CORDILLERAN FLYCATCHER: EMPIDONAX OCCIDENTALIS, SWIFT FOX: VULPES VELOX
EASTERN PHOEBE: SAYORNIS PHOEBE, GRAY FOX: UROCYON CINEREOARGENTEUS
SAY'S PHOEBE: SAYORNIS SAYA, BLACK BEAR: URSUS AMERICANUS
ASH-THROATED FLYCATCHER: MYIARCHUS CINERASCENS, GRIZZLY OR BROWN BEAR: URSUS ARCTOS
CASSIN'S KINGBIRD: TYRANNUS VOCIFERANS, RINGTAIL: BASSARISCUS ASTUTUS
WESTERN KINGBIRD: TYRANNUS VERTICALIS, COMMON RACCOON: PROCYON LOTOR
EASTERN KINGBIRD: TYRANNUS TYRANNUS, AMERICAN MARTEN: MARTES AMERICANA
HORNED LARK: EREMOPHILA ALPESTRIS, FISHER: MARTES PENNANTI
TREE SWALLOW: TACHYCINETA BICOLOR, ERMINE: MUSTELA ERMINEA
VIOLET-GREEN SWALLOW: TACHYCINETA THALASSINA, LEAST WEASEL: MUSTELA NIVALIS
NORTHERN ROUGH-WINGED SWALLOW: STELGIDOPTERYX SERRIPENNIS, LONG-TAILED WEASEL: MUSTELA FRENATA
BANK SWALLOW: RIPARIA RIPARIA, BLACK-FOOTED FERRET: MUSTELA NIGRIPES
CLIFF SWALLOW: HIRUNDO PYRRHONOTA, MINK: MUSTELA VISON
BARN SWALLOW: HIRUNDO RUSTICA, NORTH AMERICAN WOLVERINE: GULO GULO LUSCUS
GRAY JAY: PERISOREUS CANADENSIS, AMERICAN BADGER: TAXIDEA TAXUS
STELLER'S JAY: CYANOCITTA STELLERI, EASTERN SPOTTED SKUNK: SPILOGALE PUTORIUS
BLUE JAY: CYANOCITTA CRISTATA, WESTERN SPOTTED SKUNK: SPILOGALE GRACILIS
SCRUB JAY: APHELOCOMA COERULESCENS, STRIPED SKUNK: MEPHITIS MEPHITIS
PINYON JAY: GYMNORHINUS CYANOCEPHALUS, NORTHERN RIVER OTTER: LUTRA CANADENSIS
CLARK'S NUTCRACKER: NUCIFRAGA COLUMBIANA, MOUNTAIN LION: FELIS CONCOLOR
BLACK-BILLED MAGPIE: PICA PICA, LYNX: LYNX CANADENSIS
AMERICAN CROW: CORVUS BRACHYRHYNCHOS, BOBCAT: LYNX RUFUS
COMMON RAVEN: CORVUS CORAX, WAPITI OR ELK: CERVUS ELAPHUS
BLACK-CAPPED CHICKADEE: PARUS ATRICAPILLUS, MULE OR BLACK-TAILED DEER: ODOCOILEUS HEMIONUS
MOUNTAIN CHICKADEE: PARUS GAMBELI, WHITE-TAILED DEER: ODOCOILEUS VIRGINIANUS
PLAIN TITMOUSE: PARUS INORNATUS, MOOSE: ALCES ALCES
BUSHTIT: PSALTRIPARUS MINIMUS, PRONGHORN: ANTILOCAPRA AMERICANA
RED-BREASTED NUTHATCH: SITTA CANADENSIS, AMERICAN BISON: BISON BISON
WHITE-BREASTED NUTHATCH: SITTA CAROLINENSIS, MOUNTAIN GOAT: OREAMNOS AMERICANUS
PYGMY NUTHATCH: SITTA PYGMAEA, MOUNTAIN SHEEP: OVIS CANADENSIS
BROWN CREEPER: CERTHIA AMERICANA, COMMON SNAPPING TURTLE: CHELYDRA SERPENTINA
ROCK WREN: SALPINCTES OBSOLETUS, WESTERN PAINTED TURTLE: CHRYSEMYS PICTA
CANYON WREN: CATHERPES MEXICANUS, ORNATE BOX TURTLE: TERRAPENE ORNATA
BEWICK'S WREN: THRYOMANES BEWICKII, WESTERN SPINY SOFTSHELL TURTLE: TRIONYX SPINIFERUS
HOUSE WREN: TROGLODYTES AEDON, NORTHERN EARLESS LIZARD: HOLBROOKIA MACULATA
MARSH WREN: CISTOTHORUS PALUSTRIS, EASTERN SHORT-HORNED LIZARD: PHRYNOSOMA DOUGLASI
AMERICAN DIPPER: CINCLUS MEXICANUS, NORTHERN SAGEBRUSH LIZARD: SCELOPORUS GRACIOSUS
GOLDEN-CROWNED KINGLET: REGULUS SATRAPA, NORTHERN PLATEAU LIZARD: SCELOPORUS UNDULATUS ELONGATUS
RUBY-CROWNED KINGLET: REGULUS CALENDULA, RED-LIPPED PRAIRIE LIZARD: SCELOPORUS UNDULATUS ERYTHROCHEILUS
BLUE-GRAY GNATCATCHER: POLIOPTILA CAERULEA, NORTHERN PRAIRIE LIZARD: SCELOPORUS UNDULATUS GARMANI
EASTERN BLUEBIRD: SIALIA SIALIS, NORTHERN TREE LIZARD: UROSAURUS ORNATUS
MOUNTAIN BLUEBIRD: SIALIA CURRUCOIDES, NORTHERN MANY-LINED SKINK: EUMECES MULTIVIRGATUS
TOWNSEND'S SOLITAIRE: MYADESTES TOWNSENDI, PRAIRIE LINED RACERUNNER: CNEMIDOPHORUS SEXLINEATUS
VEERY: CATHARUS FUSCESCENS, RUBBER BOA: CHARINA BOTTAE
SWAINSON'S THRUSH: CATHARUS USTULATUS, EASTERN YELLOWBELLY RACER: COLUBER CONSTRICTOR FLAVIVENTRIS
HERMIT THRUSH: CATHARUS GUTTATUS, PLAINS HOGNOSE SNAKE: HETERODON NASICUS
AMERICAN ROBIN: TURDUS MIGRATORIUS, PALE MILK SNAKE: LAMPROPELTIS TRIANGULUM
CATBIRD: DUMETELLA CAROLINENSIS, SMOOTH GREEN SNAKE: OPHEODRYS VERNALIS
NORTHERN MOCKINGBIRD: MIMUS POLYGLOTTOS, GREAT BASIN GOPHER SNAKE: PITUOPHIS MELANOLEUCUS DESERTICOLA
SAGE THRASHER: OREOSCOPTES MONTANUS, BULLSNAKE: PITUOPHIS MELANOLEUCUS SAYI
BROWN THRASHER: TOXOSTOMA RUFUM, BLACK HILLS REDBELLY SNAKE: STORERIA OCCIPITOMACULATA PAHASAPAE
AMERICAN (WATER) PIPIT: ANTHUS RUBESCENS, WANDERING GARTER SNAKE: THAMNOPHIS ELEGANS VAGRANS
SPRAGUE'S PIPIT: ANTHUS SPRAGUEII, WESTERN PLAINS GARTER SNAKE: THAMNOPHIS RADIX HAYDENII
BOHEMIAN WAXWING: BOMBYCILLA GARRULUS, COMMON GARTER SNAKE: THAMNOPHIS SIRTALIS
CEDAR WAXWING: BOMBYCILLA CEDRORUM, PRAIRIE RATTLESNAKE: CROTALUS VIRIDIS
MIDGET FADED RATTLESNAKE: CROTALUS VIRIDIS CONCOLOR

Who produced the data set?

  1. Who are the originators of the data set? (may include formal authors, digital compilers, and editors)

  2. Who also contributed to the data set?

  3. To whom should users address questions about the data?

    Data Manager
    Spatial Data and Visualization Center
    Box 4008 University Station
    Laramie, Wyoming 82071
    USA

    307-766-2735 (voice)
    n/a

    Hours_of_Service: 8:00 - 5:00 MST

Why was the data set created?
The purpose of the vertebrate species maps developed for gap analysis is to provide more precise information about the current distribution of individual native species within their general ranges than is generally available from published range maps. Range maps which rely only on the location of specimens do not include information on the ecological conditions that favor the presence of the species. Habitat features, such as vegetation, can enhance traditional approaches despite some limitations (Scott et al. 1993). Using both point locality records and habitat conditions, these predicted distributions provide better estimates about the actual amount of habitat area and the nature of its configuration.

Besides gap analysis, the predicted terrestrial vertebrate species distributions may be used to answer a wide variety of management, planning, and research questions relating to individual species or groups of species.

How was the data set created?
  1. From what previous works were the data drawn?

    landcov (source 1 of 5)
    Analysis, Wyoming Gap , 19961201, Land Cover types for Wyoming: Univ. of Wyoming Dept. of Botany, Laramie, WY.

    Type_of_Source_Media: digital map
    Source_Contribution:
    Used to produce the composite "habitat" layer for modeling species distributions.

    elev (source 2 of 5)
    Analysis, Wyoming Gap , 19961201, 150 m elevation contours for Wyoming: Spatial Data and Visualization Center, Laramie, WY.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    The elevation contour maps is not available as a standalone product, since its only purpose was to enhance the predicted species distributions
    Type_of_Source_Media: digital map
    Source_Scale_Denominator: 250000
    Source_Contribution:
    The elevation GIS layer was unioned with other GIS layers in order to produce the composite "habitat" layer for modeling species distributions.

    riparian (source 3 of 5)
    Analysis, Wyoming Gap , 19961201, Riparian/Aquatic model for predicted species distributions in Wyoming.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    The riparian/aquatic model is not available as a standalone product, since its only purpose was to enhance the predicted species distributions for Wyoming. Details of development of this model and its limitations are available in the Wyoming Gap Analysis Final Report (Merrill et al 1996).
    Type_of_Source_Media: digital model
    Source_Scale_Denominator: 100000
    Source_Contribution:
    The riparian/aquatic model was unioned with other GIS layers in order to produce the composite "habitat" layer for modeling species distributions.

    hex (source 4 of 5)
    EPA, unknown, Hexagon grid: Spatial Data and Visualization Center, Laramie, WY.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    This dataset was produced by the EPA as a grid system to encompass the entire world, for analysis purposes. The hexagons, which are 635 square km in area, are available for the United States or just for Wyoming. There are 436 hexagons encompassing Wyoming.
    Type_of_Source_Media: digital map
    Source_Contribution:
    The hexagon grid was unioned with other GIS layers in order to produce the composite "habitat" layer for modeling species distributions.

    none (source 5 of 5)
    Colorado Division of Wildlife, 1990, Wildlife Habitat Relationships database: Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver, CO.

    Type_of_Source_Media: digital database
    Source_Contribution:
    This database was used as the base for the Wyoming Wildlife Habitat Relationship database, linking wildlife assocations to the land cover, elevation, and riparian model datasets for modeling of distribution.

  2. How were the data generated, processed, and modified?

    Date: 1992 (process 1 of 5)
    Criteria were developed to choose which species would be modeled. There are over 600 terrestrial vertebrate species that have been recorded in Wyoming, but many of these species (especially birds) are rare or accidental and have been documented within the state only a few times. These species were excluded. Exotic/introduced species were also excluded, unless they were of importance as a game species. A total of 445 species distributions were modeled for this dataset.

    Data sources used in this process:

    • none

    Date: 1992 (process 2 of 5)
    The distributional limits of each species were defined by recording the species presence or absence within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hexagon grid system for Wyoming (hex). Species were recorded within each of the 436 hexagons for Wyoming using 1 of 7 definitions. We used only the data classified in the first 4 categories to actually create species distributions. Statement of probabilities in these descriptors were used as guidelines to subjectively qualify the occurrence of a species within a hexagon consistent with the descriptions. At this time, they do not represent a quantified analysis of the probability of occurrence

    CONFIRMED (C) The species is confidently assumed (> 95% certain) or known to occur in the hexagon. Information sources confirming occurrence within a hexagon included species locality records and expert opinion.

    PREDICTED (PR) The species is predicted to occur in the hexagon based on the fact-pattern (i.e., presence of suitable habitat or conditions and historical record and/or presence in adjacent hexagons[s]); at least 80% certain that the species occurs in the hexagon, based on expert opinion only.

    POSSIBLE (PO) The species possibly or potentially occurs in the hexagon; its estimated likelihood of occurrence in the hexagon is thought to be between 80% and 10% , based on expert opinon or published range maps.

    HISTORICAL (H) The species is confidently assumed (> 95% certain) or known to have occurred in the hexagon prior to 1950, based on locality records or expert opinion. The historical presence within the hexagon was included as part of the species' current distribution.

    HISTORICAL (Hx) The species is confidently assumed (> 95% certain) or known to have occurred in the hexagon prior to 1950, based on locality records, however experts did not feel the species was likely to occur in the hexagon at present.

    QUESTIONABLE (?) The occurrence of the species within a hexagon was still in question after having been reviewed by experts. Hexagons coded as questionable were not included as part of the species' current distribution.

    EXCLUDED (X) The documented occurrence of a species was excluded by expert review after once having been coded as confirmed, predicted, or possible.

    Three primary sources of information were used to document the occurrence (or expected occurrence) of a species within a hexagon: (1) species locality records, (2) published range maps, and (3) the opinions of experts. Species locality records (i.e., recorded occurrences of observed, trapped, or killed individuals) were obtained from 16 existing wildlife databases (listed in the citations section) collected from state and federal agencies, conservation groups, museums, and outdoor science schools in Wyoming. Fifteen of the species databases were non-spatial, tabular databases which included Public Land Survey System (PLSS) descriptions or coordinates for the location of observed species. PLSS locational descriptions were converted to latitude- longitude coordinates for import into Arc/Info using a fortran program called TR-LL. Hexagons encompassing locality records with a date > 1950 were coded as Confirmed, while those populated with locality records < 1950 were coded as Historical. Range maps published by Clark and Stromberg (1987) and Baxter and Stone (1985) also were used to document the occurrence of species within hexagons for mammal and herptile species. Wyoming-specific range maps for birds did not exist. For mammals and herptiles, the geographic range of each species was manually transferred from paper maps to the computerized hexagon grid using a mouse to select the hexagons which overlapped with range map polygons. Hexagons populated in this manner were coded as Possible. In developing the database for species distributions for Wyoming, we did not differentiate between breeding and winter ranges for bird species.

    Data sources used in this process:

    • hex

    Date: 1994 (process 3 of 5)
    Once species were documented within the appropriate hexagons, we assigned species to spatially-explicit polygons of mapped habitat, specifically land cover, elevation, and presence of riparian/aquatic feature Information used create the Wildlife Habitat Relationships (WHR) database came from existing WHR databases, published and unpublished literature, and individuals having expert knowledge of a particular species. The majority of the WHR information was provided by the Colorado Division of Wildlife (Schrupp and Cade 1990). In addition, we used WHR information from the UT-GAP and regional species guides to check and supplement WHRs defined by Colorado. We also completed an extensive literature review on habitat associations for 103 species of concern and on Wyoming species that were not recorded in the Colorado database.

    Use of land cover in mapping habitat relationships - See the metadata available for the WY-GAP land cover for more information about the 41 land cover types mapped for Wyoming. A cross-walk was developed between habitat types listed in the Colorado Wildlife Habitat Relationship Database to the 41 habitat types in Wyoming in order to assign species to correct habitat.

    Use of riparian/aquatic areas in mapping habitat relationships - GAP has adopted a 40-ha MMU standard for delineating riparian and other wetland features in the land cover map. Although this is a significant reduction from the 100-ha unit used in mapping upland land cover types, even with a 40-ha MMU, many small riparian and aquatic features still are not distinguished from upland cover types. Based on the assumption that riparian vegetation occurs along streams and other water bodies, we modeled riparian areas by creating buffers around hydrographic features. A similar approach was taken by the Idaho GAP (ID-GAP) and UT-GAP. They created buffers of 200 - 400 meters (Idaho) or 100 meters (Utah) around hydrographic features (Scott et al. 1993, Edwards et al. 1995). We developed a riparian model using a system of variable buffer widths related to stream order, assuming that width of riparian areas along streams increases with stream order. Larger buffers were assigned to streams of higher order than streams of low order, based on average riparian widths for ordered streams measured off of TM imagery. 

    Buffers used for stream orders:
1st order: 40m each side
2nd order: 40m
3rd order: 60m
4th order: 90m
5th order: 120m
6th order: 150m
7th order: 210m
rivers represented by two shorelines on USGS 1:100,000 maps: 300m
lakes reservoirs and ponds: 90m.
    Buffer widths were determined by overlaying hydrographic features from USGS 1:100,000 digital lines graphs on a Landsat Thematic Mapper image of the southeast corner of the stat and measuring widths of riparian vegetation along the hydrography at approximately 1-km intervals. Buffers widths were averaged by order and values rounded to the nearest 10m, and the values listed above were used to buffer all the perennial water features in the USGS digital line graphs according to their Strahler order. See associated metadata for the ordered USGS digital line graphs for more details on this process (also available from the Wyoming Water Resources Center). The buffers were combined with the land cover layer and labelled "unclassified riparian" except where the buffers intersected with land cover polygons labelled riparian (either primary or secondary coverage), in which case the buffers inherited the riparian land cover designation. This riparian modeling approach allowed us to approximate the location and amount of area in riparian vegetation zones. Unlike other riparian mapping approaches, such as aerial videography, it did not allow us to determine the vegetative composition or structure within the buffer. Another major limitation with our approach is that it did not identify wetlands associated with groundwater, which constitutes a significant proportion of total wetland habitat. Our reviewers agreed that despite the fact that the majority of the modeled riparian was not classified by vegetation, associating species to the unclassified riparian was still likely to portray a more accurate representation of the species distribution than the riparian types in the land cover map alone, and this was confirmed in our accuracy assessment of riparian species.

    Use of elevation contours in mapping habitat relationships - Elevational ranges used by vertebrate species were obtained from the Colorado database or literature sources. In cases where there were no specific literature sources documenting species-elevation associations for Wyoming, sources from other states within the region (CO, MT, ID, UT) were used. In these cases, we adjusted the elevational range documented in the literature to similar ranges in Wyoming using the treeline elevation as a reference for adjustment. Elevation contours with an interval of 150 m were derived from a Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of 90-meter resolution. The 150 m interval was chosen because it corresponded closely to values given for elevational ranges of species reported by literature sources.

    Data sources used in this process:

    • landcov, elev, riparian, hex

    Date: 1995 (process 4 of 5)
    The completed GIS layers of hexagons, land cover, elevation, and riparian/aquatic areas were combined in a GIS overlay process to develop a composite habitat layer for predicting species distributions. Tiny sliver polygons (<.2 ha in size) created by this GIS process were eliminated to reduce the size of the coverage for processing purposed. Species occurrence was predicted in polygons if: (1) occurrence was documented in the hexagon, (2) suitable land cover was present, and (3) the land cover was within the documented elevational range for the species. Both the primary (land cover occupying the largest proportion of the area of each polygon) and secondary (land cover occupying the second largest proportion of the area of each polygon) types were used to place a species in a polygon of associated habitat. Our modeling process sometimes resulted in species distributions which ended abruptly at the edge of hexagons, even when suitable habitat was present outside of the hexagon where species occurrence was not documented. To mitigate this problem, species distributions were extrapolated beyond the hexagon boundaries into immediately adjacent polygons of suitable habitat.

    Data sources used in this process:

    • landcov, elev, riparian, hex

    Date: 1994 (process 5 of 5)
    Hardcopy maps of predicted species distributions were reviewed by over 60 acknowledged experts including state and federal biologists, university professors, and Audobon society members. Participants were asked to review and change if necessary both the hexagon distributions as well as the WHR information used to predict species distributions. Changes made on the hardcopy maps were then used to update the digital data.

    Data sources used in this process:

    • none

  3. What similar or related data should the user be aware of?

    Baxter, G.T. and M.D. Stone., 1985, Amphibians and Reptiles of Wyoming.: Wyoming Game and Fish Dept., Cheyenne, Wyoming.

    Other_Citation_Details: Range maps for creating species distributions
    Clark, T.W. and M.R. Stromberg., 1987, Mammals in Wyoming: Mus. of Nat. Hist. U. Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas.

    Other_Citation_Details: Ranges maps for creating species distributions
    Edwards, T.C.,Jr., C.H. Homer, S.D. Bassett, A. Fa, 1995, Utah Gap Analysis: an environmental information system.: Utah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Logan, Utah.

    Other_Citation_Details: related methods to Wyoming Gap
    Garber, C.S., 1995, Wyoming vertebrate species of concern list (unpublished report): Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, Laramie, Wyoming.

    Other_Citation_Details: Sensitivity rankings for Wyoming species
    Merrill, E.H., T.W. Kohley, M.E. Berendsen, W., 1996, Wyoming Gap Analysis: a geographic analysis of biodiversity.: Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Laramie, Wyoming.

    Other_Citation_Details: Complete methods and results of Wyoming Gap
    Oakleaf, B., B. Luce, S. Ritter and A. Cervo, 1992, Wyoming bird and mammal atlas.: Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

    Other_Citation_Details: Species distribution and habitat information.
    Schrupp, D.L. and A.L. Cade., 1990, Colorado wildlife species database.: Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver, Colorado..

    Other_Citation_Details: Species habitat information.
    Scott, J.M., F.Davis, B.Csuti, R. Noss, B. B, 1993, Gap Analysis: a geographic approach to protection of biological diversity.: Wildlife Monograph 123, n/a.

    White, D., J. Kimmerling, and W.S. Overton, 1992, Cartographic and geometric components of a global sampling design for environmental monitoring.: Cartogr. and Geogr. Info. Sys. 19:5-22., n/a.

    Other_Citation_Details: Information on hexagon grid.

How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data set?
  1. How well have the observations been checked?

    Some of the attributes in this dataset were derived from 4 other datasets produced by Wyoming Gap Analysis, including: 

    land cover <URL:http://www.sdvc.uwyo.edu/clearinghouse/metadata/landcov.html>
150m elevation contours derived from USGS 90m digital elevation model,
riparian/aquatic model,
EMP hexagons
    See metadata for these datasets for more details about descriptions and QA processes related to development of predicted species distributions.

    The attributes specifically related to species distributions are 445 items which are element codes for identifying species, and are coded to indicate the distribution for that species both in primary and secondary habitat.

    Properly designed, long-term field surveys provide the best source of independent data to assess our predicted vertebrate distributions. The large size of the Wyoming and the high number of vertebrate species in this analysis precluded any sort of field survey for accuracy assessment. Initial attempts to have the reviewers provide an accuracy rating for each map were abandoned because it resulted in excessive demands on the reviewers time. Assessment therefore was based on an approach used by UT-GAP (Edwards et al. 1995), comparing the predicted species distributions to existing species checklists.

    To obtain the estimate of accuracy for this dataset, we compared lists of predicted species to checklists of terrestrial vertebrate species developed for Yellowstone National Park, Devils Tower National Monument, Seedskadee and Elk National Wildlife Refuges, Thunder Basin National Grassland, Bighorn National Forest, Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area, and a bird observation checklist developed for Jackson Hole which encompassed Grand Teton National Park. The species checklists compiled for all the areas were derived from published and unpublished reports that were not used directly in developing the WY-GAP databases. Of the 8 test areas, only 3 of them (Devils Tower National Monument, Yellowstone National Park, and the Bighorn National Recreation Area) had complete checklists for all 4 taxonomic groups. The other areas had checklists for either birds or mammals.

    By comparing the checklists of these areas with a list of species predicted to occur in these areas based on the modeling process, omission and commission errors and an overall accuracy rating for each site and taxonomic group. To determine the influence of the modeling strategies on the accuracy of species distributions, we conducted the accuracy assessment based on models generated both with and without inclusion of modeled riparian/aquatic areas.

    Comission error = the number of species predicted to occur within an area that are missing from the area's field observation checklist. Omission error = the number of species not predicted to occur within an area which are listed on the area's field observation checklist. Accuracy = number of matches (species that are both predicted to occur within the area and are listed on the area's checklist) divided by the total number of species present on both lists.

    When species predictions were based on modeled riparian/aquatic areas, our accuracy averaged 79.5% across sites and taxa, falling to 76.9 % when the modeled riaprian/aquatic areas were removed. The exclusion of modeled riparian areas generally had little to no affect on accuracy of predicting reptiles and mammals, but reduced the accuracy of predicting the occurrence of birds and amphibians at some sites by 10 - 30%. The reduction in accuracy was the result of species such as waterfowl, shorebirds and riparian- or water-dependent birds and amphibians.

    Errors of omission averaged 12.2% (0 - 36.6%) for all taxonomic groups, and were often high for birds, indicating that our models tended to under-predict the presence of bird species. Among the birds, 96% of the omission errors were the result of no recorded occurrence of the species within any of the hexagons encompassing the accuracy assessment area(s).

    Errors of commission averaged 8.3% (0 - 34.8%) for all taxonomic groups and were highest for mammals, indicating that our models tended to over-predict the presence of mammal species. Most of the commission errors for mammals were the result of over- predictions of bat, rodent and rabbit/hare species. For example, of the 40 species having an error(s) of commission, 31 species were in these three taxa. Over-predicted distributions of bat, rodent, and rabbit/hare species were related to a lack of point locality data used to define range extent. Lack of information resulted in the inclusion of many hexagons labeled as Possible in the distributions of these taxa because published range maps showed these species widely distributed across large portions of the state.

    In mapping and reviewing species distributions in Wyoming, we identified species for which data were insufficient for modeling purposes and found several important factors that may contribute to potential errors in these maps that should be recognized when using them.

    Limits to a species' range were determined by defining the presence of a species within hexagons using locality records. For many species there were an inadequate number of locality records to confidently determine its range. For example, sightings of the fisher (Martes pennanti) were infrequent and often questioned by our reviewers resulting in limited data for describing the overall range of the fisher. In particular, there was a dearth of information for many bat species and some small mammals which was most likely due to their inconspicuousness and nocturnal behavior. In one instance, we did not have sufficient new data to map the distribution of the three, recently-recognized species of rosy finch (Leucosticte tephrocotis, L. atrata, L. australis) because existing locality records for the rosy finch did not differentiate between these new species.

    To compensate for the lack of locality records for amphibians, reptiles, and mammals, we used existing range maps from Baxter and Stone (1985) and Clark and Stromberg (1987) to assign the presence of a species in a hexagon and labeled these hexagons as Possible. In contrast, range maps of Wyoming did not exist for birds and we relied solely on point locality records and expert opinion to determine ranges of birds. During the review process, we found that the reviewers of the maps were hesitant to extrapolate the range of birds far beyond known occurrences or to contract the ranges of amphibians, reptiles and mammals from published range maps. As a result, the number of hexagons designated as Possible is much lower for birds than for herptiles and mammals and maps of bird distributions are more fragmented. These differences may affect future management area evaluations. Our accuracy assessment indicated that the inclusion of Possible hexagons increased the overall accuracy of the mammal and herptile distribution maps. It is not known if inclusion of more Possible hexagons, based on regional range maps, would increase the accuracy of the bird distribution maps.

    Distributions of some species were identified by reviewers as problematic due to possible misidentification in locality records where species' ranges overlap. Species with a high probability of misidentification included cottontail species (Sylvilagus floridanus, S. nuttallii, and S. audubonii); the least weasel (Mustela nivalis) and the ermine (M. erminea); the gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus ocythous) and the swift fox (Vulpes velox velox); the Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis); the California myotis (Myotis californicus); the grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum) and savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandichensis); and many of the empidonax flycatchers. Thus, the mapped distributions of these species should be used with some caution.

    The point locality data, and the reviewers themselves, may have introduced biases into the distribution maps due to opportunistic rather than systematic sampling (i.e., uneven sampling). The location of species locality records collected in the field are undoubtedly influenced by population densities and existing transportation routes. For example, members of the Audubon Society Chapters in Casper, Jackson and Buffalo volunteered to participate in our review. These areas also had the highest diversity of birds. Likewise, the lack of reviewers for the Thunder Basin National Grassland may, in part, have contributed to the low bird diversity in this area. Thus, areas of high or low species richness may be an artifact of mere data collection intensity or effort. In addition, locality records are likely biased against species with nocturnal behavioral (e.g., bats, rubber boa (Charina bottae)) and of small size/or inconspicuous habits. While we are confident that the review process reduced the omission errors in the species distribution maps, we must acknowledge the potential biases associated with overconfidence of experts.

    The reliability of predicting species distributions based primarily on vegetation that is mapped on a coarse scale is questionable. Working with remotely sensed data limited our ability to map micro-habitats (e.g., caves, cliffs) and small pocket habitats such as juniper, aspen, or bitterbrush shrub which occur in narrow strips along ridges or within canyons. We mapped the distribution of other micro-habitat specialists by assigning them to broad land cover types, based on the assumption that certain land cover polygons contain the micro-habitat features of importance. For example, the distribution of the cliff chipmunk (Tamias dorsalis utahensis) and the canyon mouse (Peromyscus crinitus doutii) were predicted using juniper cover, even though these species are limited to rock outcrops that are usually encompassed by juniper habitats. As a result the distribution of these species are over- estimated. Our use of small geographic units such as the hexagon minimized the extent of this over-prediction for micro-habitat specialists with restricted ranges, such as the canyon wren (Catherpes mexicanus), and the chimney swift (Chaetura pelagica), but it was difficult to minimize over-prediction for micro-habitat specialists with broad ranges. Many species of bats have broad geographic ranges, but may actually be limited within these extents because of special roosting requirements, features such as caves, abandoned mine shafts and buildings that could not be mapped at the scale of our land cover map. We have documented most of these micro-habitat mapping problems (Merrill et al. 1996b) and data users should be cognizant of these limitations.

    These predicted species distributions should not be regarded as a substitute for detailed biological inventories on species distributions. Rather they are a methodology for organizing. existing data into static maps that represent dynamic distributions. Uncertainty exists in the current predictions of species due to incomplete information, data biases, map resolution, habitat models, and dynamics of species populations. To date, there have been only a few efforts to quantify the effects of the uncertainty in the data used to map species distributions and its effect on the interpretation of the program's results.

  2. How accurate are the geographic locations?

    Does not apply since this dataset is a model and because of the generalization of the source datasets used to generate this coverage.

  3. How accurate are the heights or depths?

  4. Where are the gaps in the data? What is missing?

    Species distribution attributes for all the polygons in vertmodel are complete (value 0 is not a null value). Because of the probablistic and dynamic nature of species distributions, it is not possible to determine how complete the information is related to their distribution, as far as correctness.

    The number of terrestrial vertebrate species (445) included in this dataset are complete for Wyoming based on the following selection criteria: 

    Year-round, summer, or winter residents (Oakleaf et al. 1992)
Neotropical migratory birds, not including those listed as
"accidental" or "rare" migrants (Oakleaf et al. 1992)
Exotic game species;
Species and subspecies of management concern (federally listed
species and species with a Nature Conservancy state ranking
of 1 or 2)
Subspecies recognized as the only representative of its species
in Wyoming;
All amphibians and reptile species and subspecies in Wyoming as
listed by Baxter and Stone (1985).
    Other attributes in this dataset associated with the land cover, elevation, hexagon and riparian buffer components are complete based on the decision rules used to derive those components.

  5. How consistent are the relationships among the observations, including topology?

    All polygons are closed and adjacent polygons do not have identical attributes. Each polygon has one and only one attribute.

How can someone get a copy of the data set?
Are there legal restrictions on access or use of the data?

Access_Constraints:
Because of the large number of items in this database (445 items for species and additional items), this database will not import directly into PC Arc/Info. Indirectly, it can be brought into PC Arc/Info as an ArcView shapefile and converted with the shapearc command. The IMPORT71 command must be used in order to bring the complete database into Arcview (IMPORT alone will not import all the items). Additional attribute files can be accessed in ArcView by adding new tables in INFO format and accessing these files within the info directory that is created when the dataset has been imported.

Use_Constraints:
This dataset was produced with an intended application at the state or ecoregion level - geographic areas from several hundred thousand to millions of hectares in size. The data provide a course-filter approach to analyses, meaning that not every occurrence of animal habitat is mapped; only large, generalized distributions are mapped, based on the USGS 1:100,000 mapping scale in both detail and precision. Therefore, this dataset can be used appropriately for coarse-scale (> 1:100,000) applications, or to provide context for finer-level maps or 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.

  1. Who distributes the data set? (Distributor 1 of 1)

    Data Manager
    Spatial Data and Visualization Center
    Box 4008 University Station
    Laramie, Wyoming 82071
    USA

    307-766-2735 (voice)
    n/a

  2. What's the catalog number I need to order this data set?

  3. What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read?

    The distributor shall not be held liable for improper or incorrect use of this data, based on the description of appropriate/inappropriate used described in this metadata document. It is strongly recommended that this data is directly acquired from the distributor described above or from another U.S.G.S. Biological Resource Division server and not indirectly through other sources which may have changed the data in some way. This data was developed and is meant to be used at the 1:100,000-scale (or smaller scale) for the purpose of assessing the conservation status of vertebrate species over large geographic regions. The distributor makes no claims as to the data's suitability for other purposes.

  4. How can I download or order the data?

Who wrote the metadata?
Dates:
Last modified: 22-Jan-1998

Metadata author:
Margo Berendsen
Box 4008 University Station
Laramie, Wyoming 82071
USA

307-766-2751 (voice)
meh@uwyo.edu

Metadata standard:
FGDC Content Standards for Digital Geospatial Metadata (FGDC-STD-001-1998)

This page is <http://www.wygisc.uwyo.edu/clearinghouse/metadata/vertmodel.faq.html>
Generated by mp version 2.7.27 on Fri Sep 23 22:03:05 2005