Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
Project Summary
One purpose of the Spatial Analysis Project (SAP) is to create a data layer for the state
that represents levels of potential benefit from, or suitability for inclusion in, the Forest
Stewardship Program as delivered by state forestry agencies and the U.S. Forest
Service. Private land program and GIS staff from the four states involved in the pilot
SAP effort (Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts and Missouri), along with Forest
Service program and GIS staff identified 12 factors (or layers of information) which help
identify the “Stewardship potential” of a given piece of land. Each state had the
opportunity to expand on the base 12 layers if need be. For Wisconsin, 3 additional
layers were included indicated with an asterisk (*) below. The information was
differentiated into two groups: A.) resource potential and B.) resource threats.
A.) The resource potential factors include:
• Riparian Corridors
• Priority Watersheds
• Forest Patch Size
• Natural Heritage Inventory
• Public Drinking Water Supply Sources
• Private Forest Lands
• Proximity to Public Lands
• Wetlands
• Topographic Slope
• Outstanding and Exceptional Resource Waters*
• Conservation Lands*
B.) The resource threat factors include:
• Forest Health
• Developing Areas
• Wildfire Assessment
• Impaired Waters (303d)*
Overarching considerations in choosing data layers for use in the Stewardship Spatial
Analysis Project (SAP) included:
1) that the data is regionally available and
2) that the data is consistent in addressing the various resource potentials and
resource threats
Project Goals:
• Assess program effectiveness in serving state-identified critical resource
management needs.
• Create geo-referenced (GIS) data displaying Stewardship Plans relative to
Stewardship potential.
• Relate factors such as stewardship practices completed and resource condition and
indicate what practices might be most effective in addressing critical needs.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 1 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
•
•
•
Assess threats to forest resources such as
1.) Insects and diseases
2.) Increasing population density
3.) Wildfire and
4.) Land use change such as ownership type and protection status.
Identify and develop a digital data layer of forestlands critical to state, regional, or
national resource issues, creating a statewide map to highlight lands where
stewardship planning and implementation would be especially valuable.
Provide tools that help states focus future stewardship efforts to effectively address
critical issues.
There are certain lands within any state are not eligible for inclusion in the Forest
Stewardship Program. Land use / land cover factors which identify these areas are
open water, urban areas and publicly owned lands. Wisconsin does not have one
dataset for public lands, so a layer was created by merging individual agency files (DNR
Managed Lands (including ownership, easement and leased lands), Board of
Commissioner of Public Lands (BCPL), National Forests, and County Forests). A mask
was created to exclude these areas from the analysis.
Once the 15 layers were identified, “sideboards” were created for each of the layers to
determine what criteria would be included in the analysis. Using a riparian buffer for
example, a distance for the buffer was agreed upon by a group of resource specialists.
Next, the relative importance of each of the layers was determined based on statespecific conditions. Resource Specialists from 3 divisions within the WDNR (9 people
total) discussed the sideboards used for each individual layer, ranked the layers and an
average weight was calculated for each.
The 15 layers were combined using a GIS overlay analysis which took into account the
weight for each layer. The final product was a single data layer which represents the
suitability of the land for inclusion in the Forest Stewardship Program. Possible values
from this analysis range from 0 to 1, with a value of 1 representing the highest level of
suitability. Actual values for Wisconsin ranged from .003002714 to .765691996. A
natural breaks classification algorithm was used to break the values into low, medium
and high classes. The result is shown below.
Summary statistics were calculated and a series of maps were then created to display
the data. See Appendix A and D for more detail on the tables and maps.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 2 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
Where have we been?
In order to understand where the Forest Stewardship Program has been previously
implemented, an approximation of the property boundaries where a Managed Forest
Law plans occurred were drawn on a map. These boundaries are a generalized spatial
representation of lands enrolled by landowners in the Managed Forest Law program.
Parcels smaller than 40 acres are not individually delineated in this layer, but are
represented by the 40-acre quarter-quarter they lie within. This process results in
polygons of 40 acres, minimum. However, the actual size of the enrolled property may
be as small as 10 acres.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 3 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
Certain government lots or fractional lots, that cannot be represented by a PLSS quarterquarter number, are not included in this GIS layer. An estimated 5% of the MFL lands
are excluded from this layer because of this issue. Currently no other stewardship plans
(other than those enrolled in MFL) are mapped.
Stewardship plan polygons were then overlaid on the Stewardship potential layer to
assess Stewardship efforts to date.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 4 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
Data Development
A.) Riparian Corridors:
Originally derived from the “blue lines”
from the 1:24,000 or 7.5 minute USGS
topographical quad maps. A 1:24K
scale representation of hydrographic
features were buffered to create
riparian corridors.
Importance:
It is likely that land within the buffer
corridor will be considered higher
priority for Stewardship attention.
Sideboards:
Riparian corridors were created by
buffering 300 feet each side of the
perennial, intermittent stream and 300
feet buffer from the shoreline on open
water. A 300 ft buffer was used
because that is standard distance for
shoreland zones for rivers, and a minimum buffer for most wildlife. The buffers are
shown in blue on the map at right.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 5 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
B.) Priority Watersheds:
Created as a result of the WDNR
NPS Water Pollution Abatement
Program, also generally know as the
NPS Priority Watershed Program.
These watersheds have been
identified as areas to clean up the
non-point source pollution, to
improve water quality. This
program is being phased out, but
projects will continue for
approximately 5-6 years. This
program is being replaced by
statewide performance standards,
and smaller scale projects.
Importance:
Areas of the state where a
considerable amount of resources
have been allocated, there is a
potential that inclusion of these
areas into the stewardship program
can benefit water quality.
Sideboards:
If the watershed was considered a priority through the NPS Water Pollution Abatement
program, it was included in the analysis. The priority watersheds are shown in blue on
the map.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 6 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
C.) Forest Patch Size:
All forest cover used in this project was
extracted from the WISCLAND
Landcover Data. This landcover
classification was based on Landsat™
30 meter imagery acquired in 1992 &
1993. See Appendix B for a cross walk
between WISCLAND and NLCD.
Importance:
In Wisconsin, areas with large
contiguous forest patches are more
important than areas with smaller forest
patches for wildlife. It is understood that
for some forest types, a small patch can
be more important (because it is a rare
or an uncommon type) than a larger
patch of a more abundant forest type.
It has also been recognized that smaller
patches and open areas can provide the
greatest potential to benefit from
increased Stewardship activity. Due to
the differences between WI’s northern and southern tension zones, a split of the state
was made to differentiate the forest patch size based on its geographical position within
the state.
Sideboards:
WLC classes were used to create a "forest" layer: deciduous forest, coniferous forest,
mixed forest & woodland, lowland shrub, forested wetlands, and shrubland (WLC level 2
classes 161, 175, 190, 217, 222, and 250). All forest polygons less than 10 acres in
size were deleted to reduce noise in the analysis, and because the minimum size tract
eligible for the Stewardship Program is 10 acres. Large roads create discontinuities in
forest cover and reduce forest patch size for some wildlife species. Accordingly, the
state-maintained roads were buffered by road type: 100 feet (each side) for interstates,
55 feet (each side) for U.S. and WI highways. This buffered road layer was then erased
through the forest patches layer. The erase process has the effect of cutting a hole in the
forest layer wherever the buffered roads occur. The state was then split into the
Northern and Southern Province based on the National Ecological Framework of
Hierarchical Units (NHFEU). For the northern ½ of the state, a 100 acre minimum forest
patch size was used, while a 40 acre minimum forest patch size was used in the
southern part of the state. The result is the forest patch layer. The result is shown in
green.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 7 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
D.) Natural Heritage Inventory:
Individual plant, animal occurrences,
and high quality community
occurrences from the Wisconsin
Natural Heritage Inventory Database
were used to represent areas of
biological importance. Records are
created using 1:24,000 scale USGS
topographic maps as the base,
buffering some points based on their
rank. NOTE: Not all parts of the state
have been inventoried for threatened
or endangered species or
communities. Not seeing an
occurrence located, does not
necessarily mean there are not
threatened or endangered species in
a given area.
Importance:
These areas are important from the
Forest Stewardship Program’s
perspective to help preserve and protect critical dwindling habitat and threatened or
endangered species. This includes maintaining and protecting rare natural communities
a diversity of plant and animal species.
Sideboards:
Any records from 1970 and more recent are included, excluding the unknown items in
the last observation field. Also excluded from the dataset was the “G” precision (general
precision, mappable to a five-mile radius). The points and polygons with a S (second,
mappable to an accuracy of a 3-second radius), F (forty, mappable to a 40 acre area), Q
(quarter, mappable to a 160 acre area), NM (not mapped, occurrences are not placed as
dots on a topographic map and lat/longs are not calculated and therefore there is no
other precision code. Generally the Element Occurrences (EOs) are not mapped for one
of two reasons: 1.) There are too many records (200-300+) occurrences and it was
decided that mapping each occurrence would not be a worthwhile use of staff time. 2.)
The EOs cover too large an area to effectively depict their locations on a map (as in the
case with the riverine aquatic taxa such as mussels or dragonflies).
The precision codes for the items above were then buffered to 2640 feet. Those with an
M precision was not buffered, since there is already an inherent buffer (1 - 1.5 mile
radius) created based on the M precision. These areas are shown in brown.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 8 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
E.) Public Drinking Water
Supply:
The purpose of the Drinking
Water System is to enforce Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
regulations covering Public
Water Systems (PWS). This is
an inventory of the public water
supply systems in the state of
Wisconsin. Source scale for this
data is 1:24,000. These are the
highest risk areas that could
threaten the public drinking
water supply.
“Raw” data is not
available for viewing
Importance:
This layer would be important
protect from a Forest
Stewardship perspective. It
helps illustrate the benefits of
slowing down water runoff from
the landscape and encouraging
groundwater recharge. In Wisconsin, the majority of the drinking water comes from a
groundwater source.
Sideboards:
Source Water Areas can be used without buffers, since an inherent buffer distance was
already included in this layer. This layer only includes the public drinking water supply.
No private wells are represented since the location is sensitive and rather inaccurate.
The “raw” data is not available for viewing, but was incorporated into the GIS analysis.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 9 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
F.) Private Forest Lands:
All forest cover used in this
project was extracted from the
WISCLAND Landcover Data.
This landcover classification was
based on Landsat™ 30 meter
imagery acquired in 1992 &
1993. See Appendix B for a
cross walk between WISCLAND
and NLCD.
Importance:
This layer illustrates the amount
of existing forests and the
importance of protecting and
practicing sustainable
management on the areas that
already exist within the state.
This layer will be useful as a
filter in identifying potential areas
for future Stewardship outreach.
Sideboards:
Five WLC classes were used to create a "forest" layer: coniferous forest, broad-leaved
deciduous forest, deciduous forest, mixed deciduous/coniferous, lowland shrub
wetlands, forested wetlands, and shrubland (WLC level 2 classes 161, 175, 190, 217,
222, and 250). All forest polygons less than 10 acres in size were deleted to reduce
noise in the analysis, and because the minimum size tract eligible for the Stewardship
Program is 10 acres. Private forest land is created by erasing a public lands shape file
through the forest layer, creating "holes" in place of the public lands. These areas are
shown in green.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 10 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
G.) Proximity to Public Lands:
In Wisconsin, no single layer
exists to represent public
ownership, so shapefile was
created by merging individual
agency files (DNR Managed
Lands (including ownership,
easement and leased lands),
Board of Commissioner of Public
Lands (BCPL), National Forests,
and County Forests).
Importance:
This layer starts with the
assumption that Public lands are
in a permanently protected status,
and includes private lands under a
permanent protection status
(easements or others). Areas that
are in close proximity to the public
lands would be weighted higher for
inclusion into the Forestry
Stewardship Program to increase the forest block sizes.
Sideboards:
The layers (DNR Managed Lands (including ownership, easement and leased lands),
Board of Commissioner of Public Lands (BCPL), National Forests, and County Forests)
were unioned, creating one layer, which was buffered by 2640 feet. The source scale
for all the individual shapefiles is 1:24,000. These areas are shown in tan.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 11 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
H.) Wetlands:
Wisconsin Wetland Inventory (WWI)
maps show graphic representations of
the type, size and location of wetlands
in Wisconsin. These maps have been
prepared from the analysis of high
altitude imagery in conjunction with
soil surveys, topographic maps,
previous wetland inventories and field
work. State statute defines a wetland
as “An area where water is at or near,
or above the land surface long enough
to be capable of supporting aquatic or
hydrophytic vegetation, and which
have soils indicative of wet
conditions.” The principal focus of
the WWI is to produce wetland maps
that are graphic representations of the
type, size and location of wetlands in
Wisconsin. Within this context, the
objective of the WWI is to produce
reconnaissance level information of
these habitats such that they are accurate at the nominal scale of the 1:24,000 (1 inch =
2000 feet) base map.
Importance:
Prioritization of this layer will result in using Stewardship to achieve higher degree of
protection for wetlands.
Sideboards:
Wisconsin Wetlands Inventory was used where available. In areas that WWI line work
did not exist, WISCLAND Landcover was used. ALL wetlands were used and buffered
by 300 feet, which is a standard distance for shoreline zoning. These areas are shown
on the map in blue.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 12 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
I.) Topographic Slope:
A statewide 30 meter Digital Elevation
Model (1:24,000 scale source) from the
National Elevation Dataset (USGS).
Importance:
This layer can be used to highlight areas
where degree of slope points to a critical
need for management plans and
professional assistance. These areas
need special attention for harvesting
activities, road building concerns, Best
Management Practices (BMPs) and
erosion control measures that will be
addressed in a forest stewardship plan.
Similarly this can be used as an indicator
of the site’s erodibility and of a need for
stewardship outreach and landowner
education.
Sideboards:
The DEM was used to select areas where
slope is greater than 12%. WI chose 12% as its cutoff because that is consistent with
other breaks found in soil slopes (soil surveys, etc.). These areas are shown in brown.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 13 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
J.) Forest Health:
For Wisconsin, there are a number of threats
to the resource that can be addressed
silviculturally. The ones included in this effort
include, Armillaria root rot (Aspen/Birch), Jack
Pine Budworm (Jack Pine), Oak Wilt (Oak),
Pine Bark Beetle (Pine), Budworm
(Spruce/Fir) and Emerald Ash borer (Ash).
These threats were mapped to determine the
risk of having 25% above normal mortality
over a 15 year period.
Importance:
The stewardship program is interested in
identifying areas of health risk where
silviculture can be used as a treatment. In,
Wisconsin there are a number of pests listed
above, that if an outbreak occurs, the
stewardship program can help with
treatments such as salvage cuts.
Sideboards:
Based on the threats identified that can cause a risk of over 25% above normal mortality
in a 15 year period, the values ranging from medium, high and very high risks (40 to
100) were selected for inclusion into this analysis. The areas are shown in Maroon.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 14 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
K.) Developing Areas:
Based on U.S. Census Bureau 1990 and
2000 data. Census block group polygons
from 1990 and 2000.
Importance:
Areas that meet these criteria are
beginning to develop, but are not yet at
the point where development pressures
are not out of control. Inclusion into the
Forestry Stewardship Program will help
keep these lands from becoming
developed.
Sideboards:
Census block group polygons were
unioned to deal with differing census
geography boundaries and the number of
households per square kilometer was
calculated. The change in number of
households / sq. km. from 1990 to 2000
was then calculated. Block group
polygons where the change was >= 1 and
<= 8 households / sq. km. and not in urban areas were selected. These areas are
shown in purple.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 15 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
L.) Wildfire Assessment:
An analysis was done to identify broad areas
of the state that are at relatively high
exposure to resource damage due to wildfire.
The approach used in this risk assessment
model is based on the “Methodology” section
of the NASF Field Guidance document, which
recommends assessing and mapping four
factors that represent wildfire risk: 1) Historic
Fire Occurrence, 2.) Hazard, 3.) Values
Protected, and 4.) Protection Capabilities.
Modifications to this methodology were made
to suit the statewide data layers available for
Wisconsin.
Importance:
This layer illustrates areas where a Fire
Protection Assessment indicates a higher
threat of wildland fires.
Sideboards:
The medium and high (5 through 9)
categories from the original assessment were used to create the "1" or hit cells for this
layer. These areas are shown in red.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 16 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
M.) Impaired Waters – 303(d):
Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act
requires each state to periodically submit to
EPA for approval a list of impaired waters.
Impaired waters are those that are not
meeting the state's water quality standards.
The WI DNR last submitted an updated list to
EPA in April 2004, approved by EPA in
September 2004.
Importance:
These are areas of the state where we can
hope to improve the water quality by entering
the surrounding land into the Forest
Stewardship Program.
Sideboards:
The waterbodies that were impaired by only
PCBs or Hg contamination were removed,
because the Forest Stewardship Program
cannot address these issues silviculturally.
Each side of the stream or shoreland was
buffered 300 feet which is the distance used most often in shore land zoning. These
areas are shown on the map in red.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 17 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
N.) Outstanding and Exceptional
Resource Waters - OERWs:
Wisconsin's Outstanding and Exceptional
Resource Waters Program is designed to
maintain the water quality in Wisconsin's
cleanest waters. An outstanding resource
water is defined as a lake or stream
having excellent water quality, high
recreational and aesthetic value, high
quality fishing and is free from point
source or non-point source pollution. An
exceptional resource water is defined as a
stream exhibiting the same high quality
resource values as outstanding waters,
but may be impacted by point source
pollution or have the potential for future
discharge from a small sewer community.
Importance:
These are the more pristine water
resources in the state. These waters are
in need protection in order to maintain
their high water quality and the critical habitat they provide for aquatic species.
Sustainably managed forests assist in keeping these waters clean by the use of BMPs
and other considerations when creating the management plans.
Sideboards:
Buffer the rivers and lakes 300 ft on each side of the stream, which is the distance used
most often in shore land zoning. These areas are shown on the map in red.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 18 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
O.) Conservation Lands:
State Natural Areas boundaries and The
Nature Conservancy (TNC) protected
lands. State Natural Areas (SNAs)
protect outstanding examples native
landscape of natural communities,
significant geological formations and
archeological sites found in Wisconsin.
The Nature Conservancy has identified
approximately 13 million acres in need
of conservation activity and taken a
leadership role in the protection of some
of our state's most critical landscapes.
Importance:
Proximity to these areas would indicate
a larger area of protection and need for
management plans. These areas are
important from the Forest Stewardship
Program’s perspective to help preserve
and protect critical dwindling habitat. This includes maintaining and protecting rare
natural communities.
Sideboards:
The 2 layers (SNAs and TNC lands) were unioned together and buffered 2640 feet.
These areas are shown on the map in green.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 19 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
P.) Analysis Mask:
The analysis mask contains the areas
not considered in the analysis:
urban/developed areas, publicly owned
lands, and open water.
Importance:
These are areas where the stewardship
program will not have an impact.
Sideboards:
Urban & developed areas were
compiled from the U.S. Census TIGER
files of incorporated places in
Wisconsin, urban lands from the
WISCLAND land cover classification
and census block-groups whose
household density was greater than 20
households / sq. km or whose growth in
household density from 1990 to 2000
was greater than 15 households / sq.
km. A composite shape file of these
areas, public lands and open water
polygons was created. The final layer was created by erasing the composite shape file of
unavailable areas through the Wisconsin state polygon, creating a state with holes in it
corresponding to the unavailable areas. The masked areas are shown at right in white.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 20 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
Q.) Stewardship Plan Ownership
Boundaries:
In Wisconsin the majority of
Stewardship Plans are entered into
the Managed Forest Law (MFL)
program. This program enacted in
1985, can ease the property tax
burden for Wisconsin forestland
owners who wish to manage their
woodlands. The MFL program is
intended to foster timber production
on private forests, while recognizing
other values. MFL participants pay
property taxes at a reduced rate. A
portion of the foregone taxes is
recouped by the state at the time the
timber is harvested. The Wisconsin
Department of Revenue estimates
MFL program participants can
reduce their property tax an average
of 80% after paying harvest taxes.
Importance:
This layer illustrates the property boundaries where the Forest Stewardship plans
already exist. Stewardship plan polygons were then overlaid on the Stewardship
potential layer to assess Stewardship efforts to date.
Sideboards:
These boundaries are a generalized spatial representation of lands enrolled by
landowners in the Managed Forest Law program. Parcels smaller than 40 acres are not
individually delineated in this layer, but are represented by the 40-acre quarter-quarter
they lie within. This process results in polygons of 40 acres, minimum. However, the
actual size of the enrolled property may be as small as 10 acres.
Certain government lots or fractional lots, that cannot be represented by a PLSS quarterquarter number, are not included in this GIS layer. An estimated 5% of the MFL lands
are excluded from this layer because of this issue.
Forest Crop Law boundaries are included in here as well. Other stewardship lands are
currently not mapped. The Stewardship Plan tracts are shown on the map in green.
Stewardship plan polygons were then overlaid on the Stewardship potential layer to
assess Stewardship efforts to date. For Wisconsin, 25% of stewardship plans fell into
the low stewardship potential category, 49% fell into the medium range, and 22% fell into
the high category. 4% fell into areas that, based on this analysis, had no stewardship
potential.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 21 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
Weighting
Of the 15 criteria identified as contributing to the potential Stewardship Program benefit
of a given piece of ground, some will likely be more important than others. To account
for differing levels of importance, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources program
staff (3 Divisions, 9 people total) ranked the 15 criteria. Staff members were asked to
rank each factor from 1 to 15, with 1 being the most important. A mean response value
was then calculated for each of the 15 factors. In order to give the most important factor
the largest numerical value, the mean response for each factor was subtracted from the
highest possible rank (15). These values were then converted to relative weights by
dividing each by the sum by 15, the total number of layers used in the analysis. The
relative weights were the values used in the analysis. The following table shows the
weights for each layer.
Theme
Riparian Corridors
Priority Watersheds
Forest Patch Size
Forest Health
Natural Heritage Inventory
Drinking Water Supply
Private Forest Land
Proximity to Public Lands
Wetlands
Topographic Slope
Developing Areas
Wildfire Assessment
Impaired waters (303d)
Outstanding/Exceptional
Resource Waters (OERWs)
Conservation Lands
Weight
.054
.069
.058
.079
.102
.077
.037
.068
.047
.081
.106
.048
.043
.059
.072
An interesting sidelight, not actually used in the analysis, is the tabulation of the number
of times a given factor was ranked as number one by the group during the ranking
process.
Criterion
Riparian Corridors
Natural Heritage Inventory
Drinking Water Supply
Topographic Slope
Forest Health
Conservation Lands
# 1’s
2
2
1
1
2
1
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 22 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
GIS Analysis
The GIS data representing each of the fifteen factors was converted to the ESRI Grid
format with a cell size of 30 meters, an area representing approximately one-half acre on
the ground. The Grid of each factor was converted to a 0, 1 format. For example, all the
30 m grid cells that fell within the riparian buffers were coded as a “1”, while all the cells
that were outside the areas of the riparian buffers were give the value “0” in that layer.
Each Grid is multiplied by its weight value, so that the cells coded as “1” take on the
weight value while all the “0” cells retain a value of 0. Because all fifteen grids were
derived from the same source, the grid cells of each layer line up exactly with the cells
from all the other layers. The overlay analysis procedure uses this fact to create a final
result Grid whose individual cell values equal the sum of the values in the same location
(on the same half-acre) from all fifteen layers. The maximum possible cell value in the
final Grid is 1. Result Grid values for Wisconsin ranged from .003002714 to
.765691996. No single cell location was a “hit” in all fifteen data layers, though many
were “misses” in all fifteen layers. The grid cell with the highest value had a value of 0 in
the Developing Areas layer but was a “hit” for the fourteen other layers.
The ESRI Spatial Analyst extension allows for the specification of an analysis mask.
The analysis mask layer described above was used in this capacity to exclude areas of
Wisconsin that do not meet eligibility criteria for inclusion in the Forest Stewardship
Program (open water, public lands, urban areas, etc.).
To make interpretation of results easier and allow for computation of area statistics,
three data classes were established to group the continuous cell values: Low, Medium
and High Stewardship Potential. There are several possible methods for establishing
class breaks. The Project group decided to use the Natural Breaks classification
algorithm available in Arc View. Class definition values for the Wisconsin final results
data are:
Low
Medium
High
0.003002714 - 0.153138399
0.153138310 - 0.288260516
0.288260517 - 0.765691996
The final result grid was reclassified to an integer grid where 1 represents Low, 2
Medium, and 3 High. For details on the GIS Technical Methodology used in Wisconsin,
see Appendix C.
Stewardship Plan Tract Digitizing
These boundaries are a generalized spatial representation of lands enrolled by
landowners in the Managed Forest Law program. Parcels smaller than 40 acres are not
individually delineated in this layer, but are represented by the 40-acre quarter-quarter
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 23 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
they lie within. This process results in polygons of 40 acres, minimum. However, the
actual size of the enrolled property may be as small as 10 acres.
Certain government lots or fractional lots, that cannot be represented by a PLSS quarterquarter number, are not included in this GIS layer. An estimated 5% of the MFL lands
are excluded from this layer because of this issue.
Forest Crop Law boundaries are included in here as well. Other stewardship lands are
currently not mapped.
Hard copy Stewardship plans are collected centrally then are converted to microfiche for
storage. Many foresters have estimated the tract boundaries, drawing them on paper to
submit as part of the plan. There are a few foresters who are using GIS to map their
entries, by “heads-up” digitizing the tracts. A separate tabular database is used to track
these plans. The Wisconsin DNR is working on an application re-design effort that will
store this information centrally, as well as allow for the field forester or consulting
forester to spatially represent the property and stands.
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 24 of 25
12/01/2006
Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project
Wisconsin Methodology
Contact Information
Janel Pike
GIS Development Specialist
(608) 266-2050
Janel.Pike@dnr.state.wi.us
Nicole Potvin
Stewardship Coordinator
(608) 266-2388
Nicole.Potvin@dnr.state.wi.us
Acknowledgements:
The project was evaluated and ranked by a number of WDNR staff, then the final
weighting was presented and approved by the Forest Stewardship committee on
1/17/06.
Project coordination
Janel Pike
Nicole Potvin
GIS Analysis
Nina Janicki-Rihn
Ranking members:
Forestry Jolene Ackerman – Fire Protection
Jeff Barkley – Public Lands Specialist
Eunice Padley – Forest Ecologist
Paul Pingrey – Private Lands/Certification Specialist
Nicole Potvin – Forest Stewardship Coordinator
Carmen Wagner – Forest Hydrologist
Water Jim Baumann – Watershed Management Specialist
Amy Ihlenfeldt – Public Water Supply Specialist
Lands –
Drew Feldkirchner – Endangered Resources Specialist
C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\sap\products\WI\Wisconsin_SAP_Methodology_10_2006_f.doc
WI SAP Methodology
Page 25 of 25
12/01/2006