Hawai`i Spatial Analysis Project
Paul J. Conry, State Forester
Sheri S. Mann, Statewide Stewardship Coordinator
Ronald J. Cannarella, Planning & Information Services Forester
Yoshiko Akashi, GIS Analyst
Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
June 2008
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This is the final report for the Spatial Analysis Project (SAP) for the State of Hawaii. The
SAP was conducted with financial support of the USDA Forest Service’s Forest
Stewardship Program, with in-kind support provided by the State of Hawaii and the
Hawaii Forest Stewardship Committee.
The Hawaii Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) has invested several hundred
hours over a two-year period to assemble and analyze the GIS data layers used in the
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project. The first step was to convert hand-drawn Stewardship
plans and maps to a GIS layer and associated tables. This process was relatively simple
for the 26 Stewardship plans in Hawaii. The majority of the Hawaii SAP project was
devoted to creating, refining or adapting our data to fit the twelve GIS layers which were
required by the Forest Service as the basis for the statewide Suitability Assessment.
SAP results:
There are approximately 1,887,341 acres of land in Hawaii that are eligible for inclusion
in the Forest Stewardship Program.
Of those eligible 1,887,341 acres, approximately 702,876 are currently forested.
Of those eligible 1,887,341 acres, this project rated 28% as having a “High Stewardship
Potential”, 32% were rated “medium” and 41% were rated “low” potential for achieving
the objectives of the Forest Stewardship Program.
I. Spatial Analysis Project (SAP) Introduction
Forest Stewardship Program:
Established through the 1990 Farm Bill, the Forest Stewardship Program (FSP)
encourages private forest landowners to manage their lands using professionally prepared
forest stewardship plans. These plans consider and integrate forest resources, including
timber, wildlife and fish, water, aesthetics, and all associated resources to meet
landowner objectives. Nationally, the FSP has been successful in meeting the intent of
the program; more than 25 million acres of private forests have been placed under
professional forestry management. In Hawaii the FSP is guided by the state Forest
Stewardship 5-year plan and the Hawaii Forest Stewardship Handbook.
SAP Purpose and Background:
Since its inception, the FSP has been delivered and made available to nonindustrial
private forest landowners on a first-come, first-served basis. While this customer-friendly
approach has assisted landowners in improving their forest resources across the nation,
there was no comprehensive assessment of the program’s effectiveness across the
landscape. At both State and national levels, there was no mechanism for identifying and
targeting lands which have the greatest need for professional expertise, or exhibit the
greatest potential for achieving the objectives of the FSP.
Given limited program resources and a demand that exceeds program capacity, FSP
coordinators and managers recognized the need to demonstrate accountability for results
on the ground. In order to address this need, the Northeastern Area and the states of
Page 1 of 20
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, and Missouri began a pilot Forest Stewardship
Program Spatial Analysis Project (SAP) in 2001. The overarching purpose of the SAP
was to develop a systematic methodology to assess the impact of the Stewardship
Program to date, and to strategically implement the program to more effectively address
critical resource management needs in the future. Since 2001, the Spatial Analysis Project
has expanded to all States and Territories in the country.
Appendix A contains detailed Final SAP Product Guidance for State Deliverables
(version 0-20-2007.
The SAP has two main components;
1)
A Suitability Analysis of all lands eligible for the Forest Stewardship Program
which takes into consideration the resource “richness” across the state, and known
threats to the forest and other natural resources, and
2)
A Stewardship Plan database that is an inventory of existing Forest Stewardship
Plans that the State tracks through time.
Focus of the Suitability Assessment
Because SAP is intended to meet Forest Stewardship Program objectives, it focuses on all
private lands that could be eligible for the Forest Stewardship Program – those lands
either currently forested or have the potential to be reforested or afforested in the future.
The suitability assessment was conducted on the main Hawaiian islands from Ni`ihau in
the west, to the island of Hawai`i in the east.
Areas Excluded from the Suitability Assessment
Any lands that are not eligible for Forest Stewardship Program benefits are excluded
from analysis. Public lands are not eligible for the program, and so they have been
excluded. The Forest Stewardship Program does not currently serve urban communities,
excluding those areas that have been developed. All open water is also excluded from the
SAP analysis. The small islands, reefs and atolls that make up the Northwest Hawaiian
Islands are publicly owned and not permanently inhabited, and so they are not included in
this analysis.
Common National Datalayers and Methodology for the Suitability Assessment
Each State’s SAP is based on a set of twelve GIS datalayers that were selected by the
USDA Forest Service to address the resources, issues, and opportunities within each
state, and across the Nation. All States and Territories are required to use the same twelve
common datalayers themes. Nine of the required layers were selected as indicators of
“resource richness”, and three were selected as indicators of “resource threats”
Page 2 of 20
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Common National Datalayers
Resource Richness
1. Private
Forestland
2. Priority
Watersheds
3. Public Water
Supplies
4. Riparian Areas
5. Wetlands
6. Threatened and Endangered
Species
7. Proximity to Protected
Areas
8. Slope
9. Forest Patch Size
Resource Threats
10. Forest Health
11. Threat of Development
12. Fire
II. Methodology
Hawaii-Specific Datalayers
Several of the required “national level” datasets are not available for Hawaii, and in those
instances, we relied on locally developed datasets. For example, we substituted Hawaii
GAP data for the Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) dataset from which forested land
Page 3 of 20
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
layer is derived, and we substituted point data from the Hawaii Invasive Species Council
for the National Insect and Disease Risk (NIDRM) Map for the Forest Health layer.
In several instances, we included additional datasets which highlight the exceptionally
high number of endangered species found in Hawaii. Refer to Table 1 for a comparison
of the Common National Datalayers and the Hawaii-specific Datalayers used.
Data Layer Identification
For the Hawaii SAP each individual GIS layer was evaluated by natural resource
specialists within the Division of Forestry and Wildlife, and using the “reclass” function
in ArcGIS, a numerical value from 0 to 10 was assigned to the attribute(s) of the layer
used in the analysis. For example, in the “Forest Lands” layer, those lands mapped as
“Native Forest” were assigned the full value of 10 points, with the assumption that
preservation of native forest is a highly relevant objective of the Forest Stewardship
Program; those lands which were mapped as “Mixed Native/Alien Forest” were assigned
a value of 8, and those lands which were mapped as Alien Forest were assigned a value
of 5. Those lands which do not currently have forest cover received a value of 0, as
required by the national SAP guidelines. (Note: In this example, we recognized that there
are extensive lands in Hawaii that are not currently forested, such as grazed pastureland,
which were scored “0” in the “Forest Lands” layer. These lands however are capable of
supporting forests, and could be good candidates for the Hawaii Forest Stewardship
Program. For this reason, we added an additional layer that is unique to Hawaii called
“Prime Forest Lands”, in order to represent this potential, while meeting the national
guidelines for the SAP.) Appendix B contains maps of the individual reclass layers used
in the Suitability Analysis and hyperlinks to those GIS layers that are public.
Our methodology differs somewhat from that of other states, where each input layer is
generally assigned a value of 1 or 0. We believe that our approach allows us to “fine
tune” the analysis based on the quality of the data, and on the significance of the attribute.
Table 1 shows the required SAP input layers, and the input layers that were utilized for
the Hawaii SAP. Appendix B contains maps of the individual data layers, data source
information and detailed assumptions for each layer.
Page 4 of 20
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Table 1: Required Data Input Layers for the Spatial Analysis Project
Required Data Input Layers for
Hawaii Data Input Layer Map Number
the Spatial Analysis Project
Used
PRIVATE FORESTLAND This GAP FORESTLAND
Map 1
data layer is intended to place
NLCD (National Land Cover
Forested
emphasis on eligible private lands Dataset) is not available for
Lands
with existing forest cover.
Hawaii. We substituted GAP
Nationally available data source – landcover data.
NLCD.
http://hbmp.hawaii.edu/Publi
c_data/HIGAP/
Map 2A
FOREST HEALTH – Forest
INVASIVE SPECIES
Targeted
Health/History of Traditional
ERADICATIONS
Forest Health data layer
Invasive
Pests
This data layer is intended to place (National Risk Map) is not
Species
available for Hawaii.
importance on areas where
silvicultural treatments can address Invasive species are of great
risks to forest health. Nationally
concern in Hawaii and so we
available data source – US Forest
substituted two GIS layer.
Service.
The first map (Map 2A)
Map 2B
shows the point locations
Native
where the Hawaii Invasive
Species
Species Committees have
Habitat
treated a targeted invasive
Quality
species since 2001.
Data
sources; Email: Sky
Harrison
(sharrison@usgs.gov)
Phone: 808-984-3722
The second map (Map 2B)
depicts Native Species
Habitat Quality. Areas
mapped as High and Medium
received values of 10 and 8
respectively. Areas mapped
as Low received 0.
Data Source:
http://hbmp.hawaii.edu/Publi
c_data/HIGAP/
Page 5 of 20
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Required Data Input Layers for
the Spatial Analysis Project
PRIORITY WATERSHEDS –
Watershed Boundary
This data layer is intended to place
emphasis on landscapes that
impact long-term watershed
function. Priority watersheds can
be: those that are impaired or
deforested, but could be
measurably improved through
planning and active management,
or those that are currently
productive, but somehow
threatened. States are to use 8 digit
HUC code or greater for defining
watershed boundaries. State or
region specific data source.
Hawaii Data Input Layer Map Number
Used
Map 3
PRIORITY
DOH & EPA
WATERSHEDS
Hawaii used the watersheds
Priority
which contained WaterWatersheds
Quality Limited Segments
listed in the Clean Water Act
Section 303(d) list, as
presented in the 2006 State
of Hawaii Water Quality
Monitoring and Assessment
Report.
(http://hawaii.gov/health/env
ironmental/envplanning/wqm/2006_Integrat
ed_Report/2006_Chapter_IV
_Assessment_of_Waters.pdf)
Contact Dept of Health Staff
for shapefile of stream
segments on the 303(d) list.
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES –
Municipal Water Resource –
This data layer places emphasis on
areas of watersheds that drain onto
public drinking water supply
intake points. State or region
specific source.
GROUND WATER
MANAGEMENT AREAS
and AQUIFERS OF
DRINKING/ECOLOGICA
L IMPORTANCE.
Throughout the state of
Hawaii, nearly all public
water supplies are derived
from wells. Therefore,
Aquifers layer from the
Hawaii Dept of Health.,
selecting those aquifers
mapped as being sources of
drinking water or having
ecological significance.
http://www.state.hi.us/dbedt/
gis/dohaq.htm
Page 6 of 20
Map 4
DOH
Aquifers of
Importance
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Required Data Input Layers for
the Spatial Analysis Project
RIPARIAN AREAS – This layer
is intended to place importance on
river and stream corridors where
buffers of forest or vegetative
cover can have a positive or
restorative effect on water quality
and riverine ecosystems.
Acceptable buffer width is 300 ft
or 100 m – or accepted Best
Management Practice designation.
Nationally available data source –
USGS.
WETLANDS – This data layer is
intended to identify wetlands
where planning and management
can achieve a higher degree of
protection for purposes including
water quality and wildlife habitat.
Nationally available data source –
USFWS.
THREATENED AND
ENDANGERED SPECIES –
This data layer is intended to
identify areas that provide habitat
for threatened and endangered
species. State or region specific
data source.
Hawaii Data Input Layer
Used
RIPARIAN AREAS
We used the nationally
available USGS dataset of
perennial and intermittent
streams. Two buffered zones
were created based on the
DOFAW Best Management
Practices, from 0 – 60 ft, 60
– 120 ft from perennial and
intermittent streams.
http://www.state.hi.us/dbedt/
gis/streams.htm
WETLANDS
We used the nationally
available USGS National
Wetlands Inventory and
buffered to 120 ft as per
DOFAW Best Management
Practices.
http://www.state.hi.us/dbedt/
gis/wetlnds.htm
CRITICAL HABITAT &
THREATENED AND
ENDANGERED SPECIES
Management of Threatened
and Endangered species is
extremely important in
Hawaii. For this reason, we
included two layers in our
analysis; A) the Designated
Critical Habitat layer from
the US Fish & Wildlife
Service, and B) T&E species
occurrences from the Hawaii
Biodiversity Mapping
Project (formerly known as
the Hawaii Natural Heritage
database).
http://www.state.hi.us/dbedt/
gis/criticalhab.htm
Page 7 of 20
Map Number
Map 5
Riparian
Areas
Map 6
Proximity to
Wetlands
Map 7A
Designated
Critical
Habitat
Map 7B
Threatened &
Endangered
Species
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Required Data Input Layers for
the Spatial Analysis Project
PROXIMITY TO
PROTECTED AREAS – This
data layer is intended place
emphasis around areas that are
assumed to be permanently
protected (and managed) and thus
contribute to a viably large,
interconnected forest landscape.
This layer is based on the
assumption that public lands are in
a permanently protected status,
and is intended to include private
lands in a permanently protected
status (easements, or other). State
or region specific data source.
SLOPE – This layer is intended as
a proxy for forest timber or fiber
productivity potential and can be
substituted with a more
meaningful soils data layer if
available. Slope was chosen as
nationally available proxy for
timber or fiber productivity
because of its relationship to ease
and feasibility for forest harvesting
operations. Determination of what
constitutes low, medium, and high
slope will be done on a state-bystate basis. Nationally available
data source – USGS.
Hawaii Data Input Layer
Used
GAP STEWARDSHIP
We used the Hawaii GAP
Stewardship layer, which
identifies four levels of
stewardship for all lands in
Hawaii.
Map Number
Map 8
Proximity to
Protected
Area
http://hbmp.hawaii.edu/Publi
c_data/HIGAP/
PRIME FOREST LANDS
For assessing timber
productivity we used the
Prime Forestlands data layer
produced by the Division of
Forestry and Wildlife. This
layer evaluated the potential
of land for producing timber
based on a combination of
rainfall, soils and elevation,
regardless of current land
use. A slope layer was
initially developed for this
analysis, but resource
managers and the Forest
Stewardship Committee
weighted the “slope” layer 0.
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
at DOFAW,
Ronald.j.Cannarella@hawaii.
gov, (808) 576-4189
Page 8 of 20
Map 9
Prime Forest
Lands
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Required Data Input Layers for
the Spatial Analysis Project
FOREST PATCHES – Forest
Patch Size – This data layer is
intended to emphasize forest
patches of ecologically and/or
economically viable size. Each
state or territory is to determine a
viable minimum forest patch size
or preferred patch size range.
Within each State’s spectrum of
patch sizes, patches of
intermediate size may present
greatest potential to benefit from
increased stewardship activity.
The integrity of the forest resource
is likely somewhat intact, while
gaps in the landscape exist.
Nationally available data source –
NLCD.
THREAT OF DEVELOPMENT
– This data layer is intended to
emphasize areas that are projected
to experience increased housing
development in the next 30 years.
Increased management of private
forests can improve the likelihood
that these lands will remain
forested and continue to provide
forest values such as timber,
wildlife habitat, and water quality.
This layer is particularly important
in the wildland-urban interface.
Nationally available data layer –
Housing Density Projections (D.
Theobald, Colorado State
University)
Hawaii Data Input Layer
Used
GAP FOREST PATCHES
NLCD (National Land Cover
Dataset) is not available for
Hawaii. We substituted GAP
landcover data.
Map Number
10
Forest Patch
Size
http://hbmp.hawaii.edu/Publi
c_data/HIGAP/
CHANGE IN
HOUSEHOLDS
Housing Density Projections
(D. Theobold) are not
available for Hawaii. We
used the US Census Bureau
data and calculated the
percentage growth in the
number of households
between 1990 and 2000.
http://www.state.hi.us/dbedt/
gis/tracts90.htm
http://www.state.hi.us/dbedt/
gis/tracts00.htm
Page 9 of 20
Map 11
Change in
Population
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Required Data Input Layers for
the Spatial Analysis Project
FIRE – This data layer identifies
areas where planning and
management are likely to reduce a
relatively high risk of wildfire.
State or region specific data
source.
Land Eligible for Forest
Stewardship Program
This is the “analysis mask” layer.
Final project analysis is conducted
only on those lands eligible for the
Forest Stewardship Program
Hawaii Data Input Layer Map Number
Used
Map 12
COMMUNITIES AT RISK
Communities
FROM WILDFIRE
at Risk from
We used the Communities at
Risk From Wildfires GIS
Wild Fire
layer produced by the
Division of Forestry and
Wildlife.
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
at DOFAW,
Ronald.j.Cannarella@hawaii.
gov, (808) 576-4189
Union of Government
Owned Lands Layer, plus
GAP Landcover Layer.
Map 13
http://www.state.hi.us/dbed
t/gis/govown.htm
http://hbmp.hawaii.edu/Publi
c_data/HIGAP/
Assigning Weights to Each Layer
In addition to evaluating the values for the input layers, members of the Forest
Stewardship Committee were also requested to assign a “weight” to each layer for the
final analysis. The process of evaluating the individual layers, as well as the weight of
each layer was an iterative one. Committee members were requested to assign a value of
0 1o 10 for a given layer; with 10 indicating that we met the Forest Service’s data
requirement and that the attribute is considered relevant to the Forest Stewardship
Program in Hawaii. During this process, several of the data layers that were initially
proposed by DOFAW staff were rejected by the Stewardship Committee either because
they were not considered credible or relevant to the program. During this process, it was
determined for example that slope is not a significant consideration when evaluating
Forest Stewardship Proposals in Hawaii, and so the layer was assigned a weight of 0
effectively removing it from our analysis.
The final weight for the input layers is the median value of all of the values provided by
the committee.
Page 10 of 20
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Table 2 shows the absolute weight and percent assigned to each input layer.
Table 2: Weight and percent of each data layer used in the analysis.
Map
No
1
2a
2b
3
4
5
6
7a
Weight
10
7
8
8
3
10
5
5
Percent
11%
7%
9%
9%
3%
11%
5%
5%
7b
8
9a
9b
10
11
12
10
7
7
0
3
8
3
11%
7%
7%
0%
3%
9%
3%
94
100%
Layer Name
Forested Lands
Targeted Invasive Species
Native Species Habitat
DOH & EPA Priority Watersheds
Aquifers of Importance
Riparian Areas
Proximity to Wetlands
Designated Critical Habitat
Threatened and Endangered
Species
Proximity to Protected Areas
Prime Forest Land
Slope
Forest Patch Size
Change in Population 1990 - 2000
Communities at Risk From Wildfire
Input Data layer
rc2_gapforest
rc1_ISCinvas
rc1_habqual
rc1_wshed303d
rc1_aquifer
rc3_riparian
rc1_wetland
rc1_crithab
rc1_rarespp
rc1_protected
rc1_pforest
rc3_slope
rc3_patch
rc1_popgrow
rc1_fire
Development of the Stewardship Capable Lands Analysis Mask.
Finally, an “analysis mask” was created which excluded those lands which are not
eligible for the Forest Stewardship Program in Hawaii. Areas excluded from analysis are
comprised of developed areas, public lands and surface water. For developing our
analysis mask we utilized State of Hawaii GIS data layer identifying government-owned
lands (State of Hawaii, Federal Government, Counties and Hawaiian Homelands) for
identifying developed lands and open water we used the GAP landcover map. Our
analysis mask consisted of a grid with values of “0” for those lands not eligible for FSP,
and “1” for those lands which are eligible.
GIS Analysis and Deliverables
Seven deliverable maps (Appendix C) and four final SAP Analysis (Tables 3, 4, 5, and 6
below) were created following the Final SAP Product Guidelines in Appendix A.
Page 11 of 20
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Table 3. Stewardship Capable Lands (also on Deliverable Map1 in Appendix C)
Stewardship Capable Lands
Forest
Stewardship
Potential
Acres
High
Medium
Low
Total
Non-forest
% of
total
Forest
436,648
216,313
49,915
702,876
Acres
62%
31%
7%
100%
Total
% of
total
NonForest
Acres
% of
Total
7%
32%
60%
100%
521,066
600,061
766,214
1,887,341
28%
32%
41%
100%
84,419
383,748
716,298
1,184,465
Table 4. Stewardship Potential (also on Deliverable Map 2 in Appendix C)
Stewardship Potential
Acres capable
of Stewardship
Stewardship Plan
(acres)
Stewardship
Plans vs. Acres
Capable of
Stewardship (%)
Low
Medium
High
Total
766,214
600,061
521,066
1,887,341
6,247
6,921
4,760
17,929
0.82%
1.15%
0.91%
0.95%
Table 5. Private Forest Lands Stewardship Potential (also on Deliverable Map 3 in
Appendix C).
Private Forest Lands
Stewardship Potential
Low
Medium
High
Acres capable
of Stewardship
Stewardship
Plan
(acres)
Stewardship
Plan
acres as a
percent of acres
private forests
Total
49,915
216,313
436,648
702,876
239
4,230
3,809
8,279
0.48%
1.96%
0.87%
1.18%
Page 12 of 20
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Table 6. Non-forest - Non-developed Lands Stewardship Potential (also on
Deliverable Map 6 in Appendix C).
Non-forest - Non-developed
Lands Stewardship Potential
Non-forest - Nondeveloped Lands
Low
Medium High
Acres capable of
Stewardship
Stewardship Plan
(acres)
Stewardship Plan
acres as a percent
of
acres non-forest non-developed
lands
716,298
383,748
84,419
6,008
2,691
951
0.84%
0.70%
Total
1,184,465
1.13%
9,650
0.81%
Weighted Sum Overlay Analysis
In short, the weighted sum analysis consists of three phases 1) data creation phase
(convert everything to perfectly aligned grids), 2) reclass each grid (refer to Individual
Layer Maps in Appendix B for maps of the reclassed grids), 3) perform weighted sum
function to stack up the grids and add the values of all cells in each column of the stack,
4) reclassify the output of step 3 to produce high, medium and low valued cells, 5)
reclassify the product in step 4 to identify forested and non-forested cells, 6) mask out, or
“zero out” those cells not eligible for the forest stewardship program.
Figure 1 shows a flowchart of the processes used by the model to produce the final
weighted overlay grid HMLfornofor.
Page 13 of 20
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Page 14 of 20
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
To conduct the analysis, two types of input layers were used; vector layers and raster
layers. Most of the input layers were provided to us as vector shapefiles, which consist of
data represented as points, lines or polygons. All vector input layers were converted to
ESRI ArcGIS Grid format using ArcEditor 9.2 and Spatial Analyst 9.2. We used the
Model Builder function of Spatial Analyst to assure consistency of our data. Those data
layers that were provided to us in raster format were also processed through Model
Builder to assure that all Grids aligned as a perfect stack.
Grid cells used in the Hawaii SAP are 30 meters by 30 meters (900 square meters per
cell, or approximately 0.22 acres per cell). All cells were “snapped” to the Hawaii GAP
landcover Grid, which in turn, was developed from the Landsat Thematic Mapper
satellite sensor.
Once each input grid is created it is “reclassed” to assign the value from 0 to 10. The 15
reclassed grids are then multiplied by the “weight” factor assigned by the Stewardship
Committee, and then added together using the “weighted sum” function of Spatial
Analyst so that each cell in the Stewardship Potential output layer is the sum of all of the
cells in the input grids.
The product of the weighted sum was a grid across all landcover types in Hawaii named
“weight_allin”. The minimum value was 40, and the maximum value was 910. Figure 2
shows a bar graph of values in the weighted_allin product with the summed value of all
15 input grids on the x-axis, and the number of cells with that value on the y-axis.
The grid “weight_allin” was used to produce Hawaii’s deliverable Map 7 “Forest
Stewardship Program Values Across the Landscape, with Reserves and Existing Forest
Stewardship Plans, Hawaii”. The symbology used in that map is a color ramp of all
values in the grid, prior to categorization to High, Medium and Low in the following step.
The effect of not classifying this grid, and of not masking out the public lands and
developed lands provides a picture of Forest Stewardship Program values across the
whole landscape of Hawaii.
Page 15 of 20
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Figure 2: Screen Shot of the Classify Dialogue Box used to reclass “weight_allin” to
“HiMedLo_all”.
Creating High, Medium and Low Classes
For the final analysis, SAP Product Guidelines required that we classify the results of the
“weight_allin” grid into three categories; high, medium, and low. To do this we utilized
the “reclass” function of Spatial Analyst and chose the “quantile” method with three
classes. This method divides the output into three classes, each with 1/3 of the total
number of cells. With the Hawaii weighted analysis, the class definition values are shown
in Table 7. The “weighted_allin” grid was then reclassed to produce another grid named
“HiMedLo_all where cells with Low Stewardship Potential were assigned a reclassed of
10, cells with Medium were assigned a reclass value of 100, and cells with High were
reclassed to 1000. Table 7 shows the values in the “weighted_allin” grid, and the
reclassed values in “HiMedLo_all” grid.
Table 7: Class definitions for High, Medium and Low Stewardship Potential
Stewardship Potential Class “weighted_allin” cell value Reclassed HiMedLo_all cell
Definition
value
Low Stewardship Potential
40 – 244
10
Medium Potential
244 – 374
100
High Potential
374 – 900
1000
Page 16 of 20
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Creating Forest and Non-Forest Classes
To produce the first analysis table (Table 3 above, and on deliverable Maps 1 and 2) we
created a grid called “rc1_fornonfor” by performing a reclass on the Hawaii GAP
landcover dataset, as cross walked to the MRLC values in the Product Guidelines. Cells
in “rc1_fornonfor” were assigned a value of 1 if they were forested, and value of -1 if
they were not forested. Table 8 shows the Hawaii GAP classes and their reclassed values
in “rc1_fornofor”.
Table 8. Reclass table from Hawaii GAP to rc1_fornofor.
Hawaii GAP MAPUNIT
MRLC Crosswalk
Undefined
Mixed Native-Alien Forest
Mixed Native-Alien Shrubs and Grasses
Native Coastal Vegetation
Deschampsia Grassland
Aalii Shrubland
Bog Vegetation
Native Dry Cliff Vegetation
Native Shrubland / Sparse Ohia (native
shrubs)
Native Wet Cliff Vegetation
Open Mao Shrubland
Uluhe Shrubland
Closed Hala Forest
Closed Koa-Ohia Forest
Closed Ohia Forest
Closed Pouteria Forest (native trees)
Koa Forest
Mamane / Naio / Native Trees
Native Mesic to Dry Forest and Shrubland
Native Wet Forest and Shrubland
Ohia Forest
Olopua-Lama Forest
Open Koa-Mamane Forest
Open Koa-Ohia Forest
Open Ohia Forest
Water
Wetland Vegetation
Open Water
(Ocean)
Forested
No forest, no
devel*
No forest, no
devel*
No forest, no
devel*
No forest, no
devel*
No forest, no
devel*
No forest, no
devel*
No forest, no
devel*
No forest, no
devel*
No forest, no
devel*
No forest, no
devel*
Forested
Forested
Forested
Forested
Forested
Forested
Forested
Forested
Forested
Forested
Forested
Forested
Forested
Open Water
No forest, no
devel*
Page 17 of 20
Reclassed
values in
rc1_fornofor
NoData
1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-1
-1
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Hawaii GAP MAPUNIT
MRLC Crosswalk
Agriculture
High Intensity Developed
Low Intensity Developed
Alien Grassland
Alien Shrubland
Alien Forest
Kiawe Forest and Shrubland
Uncharacterized Forest
Uncharacterized Open-Sparse Vegetation
Uncharacterized Shrubland
Very Sparse Vegetation to Unvegetated
Reclassed
values in
rc1_fornofor
No forest, no
devel*
Developed
Developed
No forest, no
devel*
No forest, no
devel*
Forested
Forested
Forested
No forest, no
devel*
No forest, no
devel*
No forest, no
devel*
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
1
1
1
-1
-1
-1
By multiplying the “HiMedLo_all” grid times the “rc1_fornofor” grid, we produced an
intermediate grid with values of 1000 and -1000 for “High Stewardship Potential,
Forested” and High Stewardship Potential, Not Forested” respectively. Likewise,
Medium values of 100 and -100, and low values of 10 and -10 were produced across the
entire landscape.
Masking Out Lands Not Eligible for the Forest Stewardship Program
The final step in the Hawaii SAP was to mask out those lands not eligible for the Forest
Stewardship Program because they are 1) public lands, or 2) because they are developed
or 3) because they are open water. To do this we created a grid named “steweligible”
with three possible values “1” for those lands which are eligible for the Forest
Stewardship Program because they are privately owned and not developed, a value of “0”
for those lands which are not eligible because they are public lands, developed or open
water. Those cells which represent the ocean waters around the island were assigned
“NoData”. We then multiplied the two grids “steweligible” times the intermediate grid in
the step above to produce the grid “HMLfornofor”. HMLfornofor is the master grid from
which all of the deliverable tables were produced. HMLfornofor conveniently contains all
required values, High, Medium and Low Stewardship Potential, forested and nonforested, and eligible or not eligible for the Forest Stewardship Program, while preserving
all cells which consist of land.
III. Analysis of Area of Stewardship Plans Classified as High, Medium, and Low
Many of our stewardship projects are of a small scale, or consist of narrow features such
as stream buffers, wind rows. So this layer was maintained as a polygon coverage for
analysis. The final grid HMLfornofor was then converted to a polygon shapefile
“HMNfornofor_py”, and intersected with ForStewPlan to produce the analysis shapefile
Page 18 of 20
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
HMLForStewPlan. It is from this final coverage that we obtained the plan-specific
numbers required for Tables 4, 5 and 6 (Deliverable Maps 2, 3, and 6).
Discussion
The results of this analysis indicated that the majority of the lands classified as “High”
are found in forested upland areas with abundant rainfall and ripatian areas. Those areas
classified as “:Low” consist mainly of agricultural areas and grasslands found at lower
elevations. These results are consistent with other states’ SAP projects.
At every step in this project, committee members engaged in spirited discussions on just
what the data layers and rankings are intended to represent. Some of these discussions are
at the very heart of what the Forest Stewardship Program is attempting to accomplish in
Hawaii. For example, should areas dominated by native species receive a higher rank
than those dominated by non-native species? Should the presence of a targeted invasive
species add to the value of a project (potentially facilitating the eradication of the weed),
or detract from the project because of the potential for the land to be overrun by the
weed? And what exactly is a “priority watershed”? Consensus seems to be that the
priority watershed is the one in which the observer resides.
By assigning values and weights to input data layers, this project challenged committee
members and staff to distinguish between objective information, and personal values. In
the end, there is no correct solution or map. But the data layers are in the public domain,
and the committee will make the models available to any group or individual who would
like to run the analysis for themselves, with their own attribute values and weights.
The Hawaii SAP has provided invaluable data and GIS training to DOFAW staff and
their cooperators. Because of the flexibility built into the SAP process by the Forest
Service, we were able to meet the Forest Service requirements for deliverable products,
while adapting to our unique environment and island geography.
SAP will provide DOFAW with new data, new technology and new institutional
capacity, which will be used in several concurrent planning exercises. We will be
adapting the SAP methodology as part of the State Assessment for the State and Private
Forestry redesign. We will also be using the data and capacity to redo the DOFAW
Management Guidelines in 2008 and 2009.
Several of the innovations developed by the Hawaii SAP may be useful to other states:
• By conducting the analysis using all data layers across the entire landscape, and
“zeroing out” those lands not eligible for the Forest Stewardship Program as the
last step allows us to utilize the layers in other analysis projects. Using the
“NoData” approach to masking out lands irretrievably throws data away. The
trade off is that it takes longer to process a grid when all cells have a value; thus it
took nearly 90 minutes to run the weighted sum overlay analysis model for the
whole state.
• By assigning values within a layer it allowed us to “fine tune” the analysis and
take advantage of the data richness of the input layers.
Page 19 of 20
Hawaii Spatial Analysis Project
June 11, 2008
Acknowledgements
Our sincere thanks to the USDA Forest Service Forest Stewardship Program, and Region
5 for providing funding and technical guidance on this project. Mahalo to Skip Edel of
the Colorado Forest Service for his initial guidance and training as we learned how to use
Spatial Analyst and manipulate large grid datasets. Thanks to Yoshiko Akashi for
developing and maintaining many of Hawaii’s most important base layers, and for taking
the first crack at the Hawaii SAP. Many thanks to the Hawaii Forest Stewardship
Committee for being so engaged and passionate about their mission, and about the role of
SAP in fulfilling that mission. And finally, thanks to Sheri Mann and M. Irene Sprecher
of DOFAW for their patience and support.
Ronald Cannarella
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
June 11, 2008
Page 20 of 20
Appendix A
Final SAP Product Guidance
(State Deliverables)
Updated 02-20-2007
Final SAP Product Guidance (State Deliverables)
(updated 02-20-2007)
Upon completion of analysis and project development, each state will provide to the
USDA Forest Service, the following:
1. Seven Final Map Products (link to Missouri’s final map products) and associated Analysis
Tables (see Analysis and Map Products below)
The seven final maps combine datalayers of the Statewide Assessment (component #1) with
the Stewardship Plan database (component #2) to assess existing Stewardship tracts and their
relationship to the lands eligible for the Forest Stewardship Program, ranked by extent of
potential benefit (high, medium, and low) from Forest Stewardship Program assistance.
Analyses are included on appropriate Final Maps.
2. SAP Final Composite Datalayer of Stewardship Potential
The final composite data layer of Stewardship Potential (H/M/L) is the result of the 12 layer
(plus any state-specific) overlay analysis. It is depicted on maps 1 and 2.
3. Forest Stewardship Plan database – for those states completing FULL SAP Analysis
The Forest Stewardship Plan database is shared with the USDA Forest Service by each state
as their full SAP analysis is completed and will include spatial and attribute information
requested in the national Forest Stewardship Program Standards and Guidelines (link to the
guidelines) but specifically will not include confidential landowner contact information. The
Forest Stewardship Plan database will be updated annually, and will be provided to the
USDA Forest Service, or as updated through Web-DET (link to Web-DET)
The attribute database will either be in MS Access (prior to FY 2006) or ArcGIS
geodatabase format as provided by the USDA Forest Service.
The spatial datalayer of Forest Stewardship Management Plans is in the form of
shapefiles (prior to FY 2006) or as part of the Forest Stewardship Plan ArcGIS
geodatabase.
4. Metadata consistent with Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Standards for
all GIS datalayers delivered to FS
FGDC-compliant metadata will be provided by each state for the composite datalayer of
Stewardship Potential, and the datalayer of Forest Stewardship Plans
5. State-Specific Methodology
Each state will provide a detailed description of the process used to conduct their SAP
statewide assessment (link to Missouri’s state-specific methodology), including:
Data sources used for each of the common datalayers, the parameters used for range of
meaningful measure (e.g. range of slope values used to define slope datalayer, riparian
buffer width, etc), and a spatial display of each individual datalayer;
Description of role of the State Forester’s Stewardship Coordinating Committee in
developing the statewide assessment;
Description of the weighting scheme, weighting rationale, and final outcome.
Page 1 of 7
Spatial Analysis Project – Final Map Products
Spatial Analysis Map Products (See map templates in file FS_templates_*.zip)
Seven final maps are to be developed for each State’s Spatial Analysis Project.
1. Potential for Forest Stewardship Program Benefits
2. Potential for Forest Stewardship Program Benefits and Existing Stewardship Plans
3. Forest Stewardship Potential on Private Forest Lands and Existing Stewardship Plans
4. Resource Richness
5. Resource Threats
6. Forest Stewardship Potential on Non-forested – Non-developed Lands and Existing
Stewardship Plans
7. Regional Map (as identified by individual State)
Maps 1 through 3 and Map 6 include analysis tables, summarizing area and percentages by high,
medium, and low Forest Stewardship Program potential.
GIS Guidance for ALL Maps:
Refer to Map Templates for placement of Titles, Tables as appropriate, Logos – State and
Federal, etc.
Label, in BLACK all maps in the upper left corner with the appropriate Map number as in 1
for Map 1; 2 for Map 2; 3 for Map 3, etc.
Area EXCLUDED from analysis (Areas without Stewardship Potential) is WHITE and: is
comprised of
(1)
Developed areas: MRLC categories 21, 22, 23, and 32.
(2)
Public Lands:
(3)
Surface Water:
Area INCLUDED in Analysis, but not covered by primary themes in the maps is in light gray.
Legends and Table Backgrounds: Solid light gray
In the legend, the order of all ramped colors (greens for Stewardship Potential, orange for
Threats) is: “Low” at the top, “Medium” in the middle and “High” at the bottom.
Stewardship Plan Locations: Appear as polygons, not
centroids on the relevant maps.
Legend text should refer to ‘Stewardship Plans’ (not
‘Properties’).
Adjacent States, Nations, and Waters: The area
surrounding the State Maps should be displayed as follows:
Adjacent “other” states: beige
Ocean or other open adjacent water: light blue
Adjacent nations (specifically Canada and Mexico): same
beige as adjacent states, with a heavier (thicker) black line
separating nations, than the black line separating states.
Page 2 of 7
Map 1
Map Title: Potential for Forest Stewardship Program Benefits [State Name]
Tables and Legend Background: Light Gray
Legend:
Legend Title: Stewardship Potential
Area excluded from Analysis text should say “Areas without Stewardship Potential”.
Color: Ramping green for Low / Medium / High
Move second column of boxes to the RIGHT so as not to be placed directly below
Stewardship Potential.
Table:
Stewardship Capable Lands Table (left).
Stewardship Capable Lands
Stewardship
Potential
Acres
Forest
% of total
Forest
Non-forest
% of total
Acres
Non-Forest
Total
Acres
% of Total
High
Medium
Low
Total
Map 2
Map Title: Potential for Forest Stewardship Program Benefits and Existing
Stewardship Plans [State Name]
Tables and Legend Background: Light Gray
Legend:
Legend Title: Stewardship Potential
Color: Ramping green for Low / Medium / High
White: Areas without Stewardship potential
Black: Forest Stewardship Plans.
Move second column of boxes to the RIGHT so as not to be placed directly below
Stewardship Potential.
Table:
Low
Stewardship Potential
Medium
High
Acres capable of
Stewardship
Stewardship Plan
(acres)
Stewardship
Plans vs. Acres
Capable of
Stewardship (%)
Page 3 of 7
Total
Map 3
Map Title: Forest Stewardship Program Potential on Private Forest Lands* and Existing
Stewardship Plans [State Name]
*Includes Classes of Land Cover (MRLC):
41 Deciduous Forest
42 Evergreen Forest
43 Mixed Forest
51 Shrub Land
61 Orchards / Vineyards / Other
91 Woody Wetlands
[This is basically a grid where all cells that are classified as ‘Private Forest’ are coded to 0 and
all other cells coded to Null or ‘No Data’. When this is used in conjunction with the H/M/L
Composite (through raster addition) it has the effect of excluding or removing all cells that are
NOT Private Forest and showing only those that are.]
Legend:
• Legend Title: Stewardship Potential
• Color: Ramping Green Low, Medium, High color ramp;
• White: Area without Stewardship potential
• Gray: Non-forest - Non-developed
• Black: Stewardship Plan polygons
Table:
Relating to Stewardship Plans calculations should be based on H/M/L composite ON ONLY
Private Forest Lands
Table title: “Private Forest Lands (newline) Stewardship Potential”
Vertical spacing for above table title: 0.7 (this makes it fit into the existing space in the table)
Table’s last row-leftmost text: “Stewardship Plan (newline) acres as a % of (newline) Private
Forests:”
Private Forest Lands
Stewardship Potential
Low
Medium
High
Acres capable of
Stewardship
Stewardship Plan
acres
Stewardship Plan
acres as a
percent of acres
private forests
Page 4 of 7
Total
Map 4
Map Title: Resource Richness* [State Name]
*Includes Data Themes:
Private Forest Lands
Forest Patches
Proximity to Public/ Protected Lands
Wetlands
Riparian Areas
Threatened and Endangered Species
Public Water Supplies
Slope
Priority Watersheds
Legend:
• Legend Title: Resource Richness
• Color: Ramping Green Low, Medium, High for all lands in analysis (forested and nonforested)
• Gray: Area included in the analysis, but no datalayer “hits” (with 0.5 light gray outline)
with text: “Area Included, (newline), Non-resource”
• Legend Box: Adjust box width accordingly.
Map 5
Map Title):
Resource Threats* [State Name]
*Includes Data Themes:
Wildfire Assessment
Change in Households
Forest Pests
Legend:
• Legend Title: Resource Threats
• Color: Low, Medium, High color ramp of Yellow, Orange, Red (respectively) for all lands
in the analysis (forested and non-forested);
• White: Areas without Stewardship potential.
• Gray: Area included in analysis, but no threat (with 0.5 light gray outline) w/text: “Area
included, (newline), Non-Threat”
• Legend box: Adjust width accordingly
Page 5 of 7
Map 6
Map Title: Forest Stewardship Program Potential on Non-forested – Non-developed*
Lands and Existing Stewardship Plans [State Name]
*Includes Classes of Land Cover (MRLC):
31 Bare Rock/Stand/Clay
33 Transitional (Barren)
71 Grasslands / Herbaceous
81 Pasture / Hay
82 Row Crops
83 Small Grains
84 Fallow
85 Urban / Recreational Grasses
92 Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands
As with Private Forests, this is basically a grid where all cells that are classified as NFND are
coded to 0 and all other cells coded to Null or ‘No Data’. When this is used in conjunction with
the HML Composite (through raster addition) it has the effect of excluding or removing all cells
that are NOT NFND and showing only those that are.
Legend:
Legend Title: Stewardship Potential
Color: High, Medium, Low green color ramp (of just the non-forest – non-developed lands
included in the analysis)
White: Areas without Stewardship potential
Gray: Private Forests
Table:
Non-forest – Non-developed
Lands Stewardship Potential
Non-forest – Nondeveloped Lands
Low Medium
High
Acres capable of
Stewardship 51,017 1,012,615
Total
744,137 1,807,769
Stewardship Plan
acres
2,395
21,430
18,080
41,905
Stewardship Plan
acres as a percent of
acres non-forest –
non-developed lands
4.7%
2.1%
2.4%
2.3%
Page 6 of 7
Table calculations should be based on H/M/L from composite ON ONLY non-forest – nondeveloped lands
Table title: “Non-forest – Non-Developed (newline) Lands Stewardship Potential”
Vertical spacing for above table title: 0.7 (this makes it fit into the existing space in the table)
Table’s last row-leftmost text: “Stewardship Plan (newline) acres as a % of (newline) nonForest-non-Developed:”
Map 7
Regional Map
Be consistent with other map format templates on legend, logos, arrows, background etc.
Include Stewardship Plan layer.
Include proximity location map of state.
ArcGIS
*Green color ramp (hue, saturation, value), for display of
L/M/H Stewardship Potential:
Low (light green)
Medium (medium green)
High (dark green)
117
116
110
18
66
100
99
95
53
*Yellow/Orange/Red color ramp (hue, saturation, value), for
display of L/M/H Resource Threats:
Low (yellow)
Medium (orange)
High (red)
40
28
0
71
100
100
99
98
99
Page 7 of 7
Appendix B
Individual Map Layers with
Reclassed Values
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
Map 1
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
Forested
Lands
k
Moloka`i
Wailuku
k
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Maui
Kaho`olawe
City & County of Honolulu
Data Source: Hawaii GAP Analysis
Project statewide landcover map
(2005), Hawaii State GIS and
National GAP Program. Data
were aggregated from 37 classes
to three classes Native Forest,
Mixed Native/Alien, and Alien Forest.
Assumption: Forest land is one of the
12 data layers required by SAP. For this
analysis, native forest received the
highest value of 10. Lands which are
not currently forested are not included
in this layer.
Hilo
k
LEGEND
O`ahu
10 = Native Forest
k
KailuaKona
8 = Mixed Native/Alien
Forest
5 = Alien Dominated
Forest
k
Honolulu
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
³
0
21°0'0"N
20°0'0"N
Hawai`i
19°0'0"N
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Date of Production: May 30, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
Map 2A
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
Targeted Invasive
Species
Wailuku
k
Data Source: Hawaii Invasive Species
Committee (HISC), 2008. Point locations
were collected by GPS for all instances
where the island Invasive Species
Committee (ISC) field crew conducted
a treatment for targeted invasive species.
Points were buffered by 800 meters,
which is the search radius for
Miconia calvescens, a high-priority
invasive plant.
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Maui
Kaho`olawe
Assumption: Areas treated by the ISC's
field teams represent locations of
invasive species of concern to the
community because of potential
economic and ecological impacts .
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
LEGEND
O`ahu
10 = Location of
Treatment with
800 meter buffer.
Major Road
k
KailuaKona
k
Honolulu
0
³
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
Hawai`i
21°0'0"N
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
20°0'0"N
19°0'0"N
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Date of Production: May 21, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
Map 2B
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
Native Species
Habitat Quality
Wailuku
k
Data Source: Hawaii Cooperative
Studies Unit/University of Hawaii
at Hilo, "Technical Report
HCSU-008; Mapping Plant Species
Ranges in the Hawaiian Islands:
Developing a Methodology and
Associated GIS Layers", Price, J.,
Gon, S., Jacobi, J., Matsuwaki, D.,
November 2007.
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Maui
Kaho`olawe
Assumption: Areas rated 'high'
and 'medium' habitat quality are
good candidates for the Forest
Stewardship Program. Areas rated
'low' have ben highly modified by
development and agriculture and
and thus received a value of 0.
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
O`ahu
LEGEND
k
KailuaKona
8 = Medium
10 = High
k
Honolulu
0
³
Major Road
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
Hawai`i
21°0'0"N
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
20°0'0"N
19°0'0"N
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Date of Production: May 21, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
Map 3
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
DOH & EPA Priority
Watersheds
Wailuku
k
Data Source: 2006 State of Hawaii
Water Quality Monitoring and
Assessment Report: Integrated
Report to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, and the U.S.
Congress Pursuant to Sections
303(d) and 305(b) of the Clean
Water Act (PL 97-117). State of
Hawaii Dept of Health, analysis by
Division of Forestry and Wildlife.
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Lana`i
Maui
County of
Hawai`i
Kaho`olawe
Assumptions: Those watersheds
listed in section 303(d) containing
stream segments listed as Category
5 due to pollution by non-point
sources received the highest value.
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
O`ahu
LEGEND
10 = Priority 5
Watershed
Major Road
Watershed Boundary
k
KailuaKona
k
Honolulu
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
³
0
21°0'0"N
Hawai`i
20°0'0"N
19°0'0"N
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Date of Production: May 22, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
Map 4
DOH Aquifers of
Importance
Wailuku
k
Data Source: State of Hawaii
Department of Health
Groundwater Protection Program.
GIS data from State of Hawaii
GIS. Data year not known,
digitized in 1992.
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Maui
Assumption: Nearly all public
water supplies in the state utilize
wells. This was the best data
layer available. Aquifers mapped
by Dept. of Health as Drinking
Ecologically Important received
the highest value of 10 points.
Kaho`olawe
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
O`ahu
LEGEND
k
10 = Drinking or
Ecologically
Important Aquifer
Major Road
KailuaKona
k
Honolulu
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
³
0
21°0'0"N
Hawai`i
20°0'0"N
19°0'0"N
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Date of Production: May 21, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
Map 5
Riparian
Areas
Wailuku
k
Data Source: USGS dataset
depicting perennial and
intermittant streams/State of
Hawaii GIS.
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Maui
Perennial and intermittant
streams were buffered to
60 ft and 120 ft as directed
by the DOFAW Best
Management practices for
forestry along streams.
Kaho`olawe
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
O`ahu
LEGEND
k
KailuaKona
60 ft From Stream
120 ft From Stream
Major Road
k
Honolulu
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
³
0
21°0'0"N
Hawai`i
20°0'0"N
19°0'0"N
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Date of Production: April 7, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
Map 6
Proximity to
Wetlands
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
Wailuku
Data Source: National Wetlands
Inventory 1978, US Fish and
Wildlife Service, State of Hawaii GIS.
k
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Assumptions: The National Wetlands
Inventory is the standard data set
utiilized by government for determining
if a permit is required by the Army
Corps of Engineers. Preservation of
wetlands is a national priority. Mapped
wetlands were buffered at one mile, two
miles and three miles. Areas within one
mile of a mapped wetland received
the highest value of 10 points, areas
between one and two miles of a wetland
received 8 points, areas betweeen 60
and 120 ft received 6 points. The SAP
team recognizes that the NWI for
Hawaii should be updated.
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Maui
Kaho`olawe
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
O`ahu
LEGEND
10 = Mapped as a wetland
k
KailuaKona
8 = 0 - 60 ft from
mapped wetland
6 = 60 - 120 ft from
mapped wetland
k
Honolulu
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
³
0
21°0'0"N
Hawai`i
20°0'0"N
19°0'0"N
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Map No:
Date of Production: April 7, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
Designated
Critical
Habitat
Map 7A
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
Wailuku
k
Data Source: US Fish & Wildlife
Service 2004, State of Hawaii
GIS. Any areas mapped as Critical
Habitat necessary for the recovery
of one or more Federally
listed threatend or endangered
speces was mapped.
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Maui
Kaho`olawe
Assumptions: Areas designated
as Critical Habitat for one or more
species received the full value of
10 points for this analysis
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
O`ahu
LEGEND
10 = Designated Critical
Habitat by US Fish
& Wildlife Service.
k
KailuaKona
Major Road
k
Honolulu
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
³
0
21°0'0"N
Hawai`i
20°0'0"N
19°0'0"N
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Map No:
Date of Production: March 7, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
Threatened &
Endangered
Species
Map 7B
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
Wailuku
k
Data Source: Hawaii Biodiversity
Mapping Program Data 2001,
State of Hawaii GIS. Data mapped
are limited to those points where
threatened and endangered species
have been observed subsequent to
1980.
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Maui
Assumptions: We created a buffer
around the observation point, with
three zones; less than 1000 ft from
an observation point, 1000 2000 ft from an observation point,
and from 2000 - 2600 ft of
an observation point.
Kaho`olawe
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
O`ahu
LEGEND
10 = less than 1000 ft.
from recent
observation
8 = 1000 - 2000 ft. from
recent observation
3 = 2000 - 2600 ft. from
recent observation
k
KailuaKona
k
Honolulu
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
³
0
21°0'0"N
Hawai`i
20°0'0"N
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
19°0'0"N
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Map No:
Date of Production: April 7, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
Map 8
Proximity to
Protected Area
Wailuku
k
Data Source: Hawaii GAP Analysis
Land Stewardship Map, February
2006, National GAP Program and
State of Hawaii GIS. Management
Intent status 1, 2, and 3 (Permant
protection) were mapped as
Protected Areas.
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Maui
Assumptions: Areas adjacent to
permanently protected areas are
highly regarded by the Forest
Stewardship Program. We created
a buffer of one mile around
protected areas, and assigned the
highest value of 10 points to those
lands.
Kaho`olawe
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
O`ahu
LEGEND
k
KailuaKona
10 = Within one mile
of protected area
Major Road
k
Honolulu
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
³
0
21°0'0"N
Hawai`i
20°0'0"N
19°0'0"N
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Map No:
Date of Production: March 7, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
Map 9
Prime Forest
Lands
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
Data Source: Prime Forest Lands
Assessment, Division of Forestry
and Wildlife, 1982 State of Hawaii GIS.
Wailuku
k
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Maui
Kaho`olawe
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
Assumptions: Lands were mapped
according to their potential to grow
timber based on the combination of
soils, slope, rainfall and elevation.
Current vegetation and land use
were not considered. Lands rated
with the highest potential were given
the hightest score of 10 for this layer.
Land which were considered incapable
of growing timber were assigned a
value of 0.
LEGEND
O`ahu
10 = Prime 1 or Unique
8 = Prime 2 Forest
k
7 = Prime 2R Forest
KailuaKona
6 = National Standard
Major Road
k
Honolulu
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
³
0
21°0'0"N
Hawai`i
20°0'0"N
19°0'0"N
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Date of Production: April 13, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
Map 10
Forest Patch
Size
Wailuku
k
Data Source: Derived from Hawaii
GAP landcover map, GAP National
Program, State of Hawaii GIS. We
created three classes of patch size,
greater than 1000 acres, from 300 1000 acres, and less than 300 acres.
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Maui
Assumptions: Forest patch size is
generally not considered of
importance for evaluating Hawaii
Forest Stewardship Projects.
patches of contiguous forest
over 1000 acres in area received
the highest value of 10 points.
Kaho`olawe
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
O`ahu
LEGEND
8 = less than 300 acres
k
9 = from 300 - 1000 acres
KailuaKona
10 = greater than 1000 ac
Major Roads
k
Honolulu
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
³
0
21°0'0"N
Hawai`i
20°0'0"N
19°0'0"N
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Map No:
Date of Production: April 12, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
Map 11
Change in
Population
1990 to 2000
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
Wailuku
k
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Data Source: Percent change in population by census tract,
derived from US Census Data for 1990 and 2000. National
Census Bureau, State of Hawaii GIS. Three classes were
derived.
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Assumption: Forest Stewardship projects would be desirable
in areas experiencing population growth. Areas with the
highest increase received the highest score of 10 points.
Maui
Kaho`olawe
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
LEGEND
O`ahu
10 greater than 40%
increase in population
k
8 = 20% to 40% increase
KailuaKona
5 = 0 to 20% increase
k
Honolulu
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
³
0
21°0'0"N
Hawai`i
20°0'0"N
19°0'0"N
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Map No:
Date of Production: March 7, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
Map 12
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
Communities at
Risk from
Wild Fire
Wailuku
k
Data Source: Assessment by the
Division of Forestry and Wildlife,
2006 - 2007 based on fire histoy,
rainfall and fuels.
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Assumptions: This assessment
was conducted to map the risk
of wildfire for populated areas.
Those areas with highest risk
received the maximum value
of 10. Those areas that did
not have significant populations
received a value of 0.
Maui
Kaho`olawe
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
LEGEND
O`ahu
6 = Low Risk
k
8 = Medium Risk
KailuaKona
10 = High Risk
Major Roads
k
Honolulu
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
³
0
21°0'0"N
Hawai`i
20°0'0"N
19°0'0"N
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Map No:
Date of Production: April 13, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
Map 13
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
Land Eligible for
Forest Stewardship
Program
Wailuku
k
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Data Source: This layer is a
composite of several data
sources; privately owned
lands derived from State of
Hawaii Tax Map Key (TMK) data
(2006), and then updated by
DOFAW to include major changes
in 2007. Developed land and open
water obrained from the Hawaii
GAP landcover ananlysis 2005.
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Maui
Kaho`olawe
This layer is sometimes referred to
as the "analysis mask" in the SAP
guidelines.
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
O`ahu
LEGEND
k
Eligbile for Forest
Stewardship Program
KailuaKona
Major Roads
k
Honolulu
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
³
0
21°0'0"N
Hawai`i
20°0'0"N
19°0'0"N
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Date of Production: May 30, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella
Forest Stewardship Program
Spatial Analysis Project
Map 14
County of Maui
Kaunakakai
k
Moloka`i
Forest
Stewardship
Projects
Wailuku
k
HAWAII STATEWIDE
GIS PROGRAM
Lana`i
County of
Hawai`i
Data Source: State of Hawaii
Forest Stewardship Program,
2008.
Maui
This layer is used for suitability
analysis.
Kaho`olawe
City & County of Honolulu
Hilo
k
O`ahu
LEGEND
k
KailuaKona
Forest Stewardship
Projects 2008
k
Honolulu
161°0'0"W 159°0'0"W 157°0'0"W 155°0'0"W
22°0'0"N
³
0
21°0'0"N
Hawai`i
20°0'0"N
19°0'0"N
Honolulu k
Main
Hawaiian Islands
Lihu`e
k
5
10
20
Miles
30
Ni`ihau
County of Kaua`i
Kaua`i
State of Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Date of Production: May 30, 2008
Contact: Ronald Cannarella