Geodataset Name:       IWHRS_COMP_2009
Geodataset Type:       RASTER
Geodataset Feature:    
Feature Count:         

DATA SOURCE(S):                    Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
SCALE OF ORIGINAL SOURCE MAPS:     Unknown
GEODATASET EXTENT:                 State of Florida

PUBLICATION DATE:                  2010
TIME PERIOD OF CONTENT:            2009
DOWNLOAD LINK:                     http://www.fgdl.org/metadataexplorer/explorer.jsp

FEATURE ATTRIBUTE TABLES:

Datafile Name: IWHRS_COMP_2009.VAT

FEATURE ATTRIBUTE TABLES CODES AND VALUES:

Item	Item Description
Rowid	Internal feature number.
VALUE	unique value
COUNT	numbers of cells for each value
DISTTOMANAGED	The distance to managed lands data layer was constructed by performing a find distance query in ArcGIS on the FNAI FLMA database. From the results, the range of values was divided into 10 discrete categories using natural breaks. Values assigned to pixels were inversely proportional to the distance to managed lands, (e.g. a pixel with a value of 10 falls in the closest interval to managed land, 9 is the next interval outward from managed land land, and so forth until the outermost interval).
FFBOT_SOR	Florida Forever Board of Trustees lands serve to conserve and protect unique natural areas, endangered species, unusual geologic features, wetlands, and archaeological and historical sites. Save Our Rivers lands conserves lands for water management, water supply, and the conservation and protection of water resources, and wildlife. For the FFBOT/SOR data layer, lands identified on either of these lists were given a value of 10 where all other areas were given a value of 0. Overlaps with existing managed areas were eliminated from the analysis.
FNAI	The FNAI conservation needs assessment layer contains six priority classes. The classes prioritize habitats throughout Florida based on number of rare species and those species with the greatest conservation need. We reclassified the six FNAI conservation needs assessment priority classes on a 0 to 10 scale as follows:0: No priority, 2: Priority 6 habitats, 3: Priority 5 habitats, 5: Priority 4 habitats, 7: Priority 3 habitats, 8: Priority 2 habitats, 10: Priority 1 habitats
GREENWAYS	To include landscape connectivity in the IWHRS 2009, we utilized the results of the Florida ecological greenways network and critical linkages prioritization results (Florida Geographic Data Library 2007). We reclassified the six prioritization classes on a 0 to 10 scale as follows: 0: No linkage, 2: Low priority linkage, 3: Moderate-low priority linkage, 5: Moderate priority linkage, 7: High priority linkage, 8: Very high priority linkage, 10: Critical priority linkage
HETEROGENEITY	This layer measures the spatial complexity and variability of habitat patches in the state of Florida. The spatial heterogeneity analysis only includes natural land cover types from the FWC 2003 landcover image. Any open water, disturbed communities, agriculture, exotic plants, urban, and mining landcover categories were excluded. Due to computer processing limitations landcover classes were grouped to seven general categories. To represent the number of patch types we ran a Variety moving window analysis in ArcGIS using a 570 m (19 pixels) window. 570 m as a radius gets as close to a 100 ha circle as possible given 30 m pixel intervals in the landcover image. We then ran a Maximum Zonal Statistic in ArcGIS to obtain the maximum variety value for each patch. The resultant layer attributes each patch with the highest number of different patches within 570 m. To represent proportion of each type we used Fragstats and performed Simpson?s Evenness Index (SIEI) landscape analysis. Then using zonal statistics in ArcGIS, we obtained the mean SIEI value for each patch. To represent the spatial arrangement of patches we used Fragstats and performed a patch analysis using the Mean Proximity Index. To represent patch shape we used Fragstats and performed a patch analysis using the Fractal Dimension analysis. To represent the contrast between neighboring patches we used Fragstats and performed a patch analysis using the Edge Contrast Index. To obtain our final spatial heterogeneity layer we first transformed any of the intermediate data layers that were non-normally distributed. Next, we standardized the data ranges between the intermediate layers so that all were on a 0 to 1 scale and then added all layers together to obtain our measure of spatial heterogeneity. The range of values was divided into 10 discrete categories using a quantile methodology, the higher the value in the spatial heterogeneity layer the more heterogeneous the patch.
LISTEDSPECIES	Using wildlife potential habitat maps for listed species created by the FWC, the data layer was classified based on the presence, number, and level of imperiled status for listed species present. The ranking scheme of the coverage is given below:0: No listed species present, 1: 1 species of special concern, 2:> 2 Species of Special Concern,3: 1 Threatened species and < 1 Species of Special Concern, 4: 1 Threatened Species and > 2 Species of Special Concern, 5: 2 Threatened Species and < 1 Species of Special Concern, 6: 2 Threatened Species and > 2 Species of Special Concern, 7: > 3 Threatened Species and > 0 Species of Special Concern, 8: 1 Endangered Species and > 0 Threatened Species and > 0 Species of Special Concern, 9: 2 Endangered Species and > 0 Threatened Species and > 0 Species of Special Concern, 10: >3 Endangered Species and > 0 Threatened Species and > 0 Species of Special Concern
MANAGEDLANDS	To construct the public lands data layer, all public lands identified in the FNAI FLMA database were given a value of 10; all other areas were classed 0.
PRIORITYSHCA	We used the prioritized SHCA dataset in the Wildlife Habitat Conservation Needs in Florida report (Endries et al. 2009) and reclassified the five SHCA priority classes on a 0 to 10 scale as follows:0: No SHCA, 2: Priority 5 SHCA, 4: Priority 4 SHCA, 6: Priority 3 SHCA, 8: Priority 2 SHCA, 10: Priority 1 SHCA
ROADLESSPATCH	We used the FWC 2003 land cover image to identify habitat statewide. We updated the 2003 land cover image with a 2008 developed lands dataset. To construct the data layer for roadless habitat patch size, the hybrid FWC 2003/2008 land cover image was reclassified so that only categories representing natural land cover habitat (values 1 to 26) were identified and grouped into single-value continuous patches. To ensure that all major roads were accurately represented as sectioning the landscape, the April 2008 version of the Florida Department of Transportation Roads Characteristics Inventory (RCI) dataset (Florida Department of Transportation 2008) was converted into a 30 m grid where all road networks were given a value of NoData and all other areas were given a value of 0. Next, an addition calculation was performed with the reclassed land cover image and RCI grid. The resulting grid represents native vegetation patches as a single value and all non-native vegetation and road areas as no data. We calculated the total area of each continuous patch by performing a region group analysis, which clusters each patch and identifies the total number (count) of pixels per patch. Habitat patches were ranked using a 10 class quantile classification scheme due to the large size range of the parcels (from 0.15 km2 to 3490 km2). The quantile classification method identifies class cut-off values so that the total area of land in each class is approximately the same. Scoring was as follows: 0: < 0.15 km2, 1: 0.15 km2 to 2.22 km2, 2: 2.22 km2 to 8.87 km2, 3: 8.87 km2 to 21.24 km2, 4: 21.24 km2 to 43.69 km2, 5: 43.69 km2 to 76.80 km2, 6: 76.80 km2 to 124.87 km2, 7: 124.87 km2 to 209.08 km2, 8: 209.08 km2 to 442.89 km2, 9: 442.89 km2 to 1070.73 km2, 10: > 1070.73 km2
SPRICHNESS	To model biodiversity for the species richness data layer, we utilized the potential habitat maps of 95 wildlife species that were created by the FWC and merged all species maps into a single layer. A pixel?s value represents a classification of the number of species identified as having potential habitat at that site. The range of values was 0 (representing no species) to 21 species overlapping in a single pixel. We classified the final layer using a 10 class quantile classification scheme. The classification values are given below:0: No species present, 1: 1 species, 2: 2 species, 3: 3 species, 4: 4 species, 5: 5 species, 6: 6 species, 7: 7 species, 8: 8 species, 9: 9 - 10 species, 10: >11 species
CUMM_VALUE	Represents the cummulative total of the values from the 10 layers. Ranges from 1 to 87.
IWHRS_CLS	The final calculation was then classified using a 10 class scheme. The resulting value assigned to each pixel indicates its importance to wildlife (e.g. the higher the value of a pixel the more important it is to wildlife).1: 1 to 10, 2: 11 to 18, 3: 19 to 26, 4: 27 to 34, 5: 35 to 42, 6: 43 to 49, 7: 50 to 55, 8: 56 to 60, 9: 61 to 66, 10: 67 to 87
DESCRIPT	GeoPlan added field based on the field VALUE.
FGDLAQDATE	The date FGDL acquired the data from the source.

USER NOTES:

Logically consistent. All attribute values fall within defined values

Visually inspected for completeness to ensure all values fell within speciified ranges and all pixel cells were classified

GeoPlan relied on the integrity of the attribute information within the original data.

Prior to July 1, 2004, the Fish and Wildlife Research Institute (FWRI) was known as the Florida Marine Research Institute (FMRI). The institute name has not been changed in historical data sets or references to work completed by the Florida Marine Research Institute. The institute name has been changed in references to ongoing research, new research, and contact information. The IWHRS was originally created in 2001 and underwent a major revision in 2007 using updated datasets. In 2008 changes were made to five of the data layers (Listed Species Locations, Species Richness, Managed Lands, Distance to Managed Lands, and Florida Forever Board of Trustees/Save Our Rivers Lands) using data not available in 2007, and the Landscape Diversity layer was replaced with a Spatial Heterogeneity layer. In 2009, the binary Strategic Habitat Conservation Areas (SHCA) layer was replaced with a prioritized SHCA layer and all other layers except Spatial Heterogeneity and Landscape Connectivity were updated with data not available in 2008. For more inforrmation on the Integrated Wildlife Habitat Ranking System see http://myfwc.com/research/gis/data-maps/terrestrial/wildlife-habitat-ranking-system/.

The IWHRS is provided as part of the FWC's continuing technical assistance to various local, regional, and state agencies and entities interested in wildlife needs and conservation in order to: (1) determine ways to avoid or minimize project impacts by evaluating alternative placements, alignments, and transportation corridors during early planning stages, (2) assess direct, secondary, and cumulative impacts to habitat and wildlife resources, and (3) identify appropriate parcels for public land acquisition for wetland and upland habitat mitigation purposes. Predictions suggest that the size of new managed lands and their proximity to existing managed areas can be critical to the maintenance of their species diversity and persistence.

This data is provided 'as is' and its horizontal positional accuracy has not been verified by GeoPlan

This data is provided 'as is' and its vertical positional accuracy has not been verified by GeoPlan

Acknowledgement of the FWC-FWRI (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission-Fish and Wildlife Research Institute) as the data source would be appreciated in any products developed from these data, and such acknowledgment as is standard for citation and legal practices for data source is expected by users of this data. Please cite the original metadata when using portions of the record to create a similar record of slightly altered data, such as reprojection. If any data are modified or adjusted, please share the edited information with FWC. Users should be aware that comparison with other data sets for the same area from other time periods may be inaccurate due to inconsistencies resulting from changes in mapping conventions, data collection, and computer processes over time. FWC shall not be liable for improper or incorrect use of this data. These data are not legal documents and are not to be used as such. This is not a survey data set and should not be utilized as such. These data are not to be used for navigation.

The Florida Geographic Data Library is a collection of Geospatial Data compiled by the University of Florida GeoPlan Center with support from the Florida Department of Transportation. GIS data available in FGDL is collected from various state, federal, and other agencies (data sources) who are data stewards, producers, or publishers. The data available in FGDL may not be the most current version of the data offered by the data source. University of Florida GeoPlan Center makes no guarantees about the currentness of the data and suggests that data users check with the data source to see if more recent versions of the data exist. Furthermore, the GIS data available in the FGDL are provided 'as is'. The University of Florida GeoPlan Center makes no warranties, guaranties or representations as to the truth, accuracy or completeness of the data provided by the data sources. The University of Florida GeoPlan Center makes no representations or warranties about the quality or suitability of the materials, either expressly or implied, including but not limited to any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or non-infringement. The University of Florida GeoPlan Center shall not be liable for any damages suffered as a result of using, modifying, contributing or distributing the materials. A note about data scale: Scale is an important factor in data usage. Certain scale datasets are not suitable for some project, analysis, or modeling purposes. Please be sure you are using the best available data. 1:24000 scale datasets are recommended for projects that are at the county level. 1:24000 data should NOT be used for high accuracy base mapping such as property parcel boundaries. 1:100000 scale datasets are recommended for projects that are at the multi-county or regional level. 1:125000 scale datasets are recommended for projects that are at the regional or state level or larger. Vector datasets with no defined scale or accuracy should be considered suspect. Make sure you are familiar with your data before using it for projects or analysis. Every effort has been made to supply the user with data documentation. For additional information, see the References section and the Data Source Contact section of this documentation. For more information regarding scale and accuracy, see our webpage at: http://geoplan.ufl.edu/education.html

REFERENCES:

The Integrated Wildlife Habitat Ranking System 2009 website: http://myfwc.com/research/gis/data-maps/terrestrial/wildlife-habitat-ranking-system/ The Integrated Wildlife Habitat Ranking System 2009 Final Report: http://myfwc.com/media/1205697/IWHRS_09.pdf

DATA LINEAGE SUMMARY:

For a complete description on the process steps and methodology please see the final report availble for download at http://myfwc.com/ media/1205697/IWHRS_09.pdf Process Date: GeoPlan downloaded this dataset from FWC's Integrated Wildlife Habitat Ranking System 2009 website at:http://myfwc.com/research/gis/data-maps/terrestrial/ wildlife-habitat-ranking-system/ on 7/19/2011.The dataset was archived with several other datasets in .ZIP format. The archive was named data.zip. The iwhrs_comp09 raster was extracted and the following QA/QC steps were performed by GeoPlan. - Added the FGDLAQDATE field based on the date GeoPlan acquired the data from the source. Process Date: 110727

MAP PROJECTION PARAMETERS:

Projection                          ALBERS
Datum                               HPGN
Units                               METERS
Spheroid                            GRS1980
1st Standard Parallel               24  0  0.000
2nd Standard Parallel               31 30  0.000
Central Meridian                   -84 00  0.000
Latitude of Projection's Origin     24  0  0.000
False Easting (meters)              400000.00000
False Northing (meters)             0.00000

DATA SOURCE CONTACT (S):

Name:
Abbr. Name:
Address:


Phone:

Web site:
E-mail:
Contact Person:
         Phone:
        E-mail:

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission-Fish and Wildlife Research Institute
FWC
Fish and Wildlife Research Institute
St. Petersburg, Florida
33701
727-896-8626


http://myfwc.com/research/gis/data-maps/terrestrial/wildlife-habitat-ranking-system/
GISLibrarian@MyFWC.com
GISLibrarian

Name:                   FLORIDA GEOGRAPHIC DATA LIBRARY
Abbr. Name:             FGDL
Address:                Florida Geographic Data Library
                        431 Architecture Building
                        PO Box 115706
                        Gainesville, FL  32611-5706
Web site:               http://www.fgdl.org

Contact FGDL: 

      Technical Support:	        http://www.fgdl.org/fgdlfeed.html
      FGDL Frequently Asked Questions:  http://www.fgdl.org/fgdlfaq.html
      FGDL Mailing Lists:		http://www.fgdl.org/fgdl-l.html
      For FGDL Software:                http://www.fgdl.org/software.html