** PROVISIONAL **

Author: E. Gage

Select tabs to view all figures/tables

Introduction

The abundance and functional charcteristics of wetlands vary among units in the NPS Intermountain Region (IMR).

Objectives

  1. Summarize charteristics of NPS Intermountain Region units to faciliate discussions with NPS units and plan additional data collection
  2. Identify and characterize watersheds (HUB10) intersecting NPS Intermountain Region units to explore the utility of existing geosptatial data for informing and contextualizing potential service areas.

The following is a working analysis and all results are subject to revision.

Data and analysis

Data:

  • NPS Park Boundaries1
  • National Hydrography Dataset 10th Level HUBs2
  • National Wetlands Inventory polygons (rasterized)

Analysis: Identified all HUB10 watersheds intersecting Intermountain Region NPS units. Conducted zonal statistics for each NPS unit and interesecting HUB to calculate the area mapped for each NWI type.

NPS Units in Intermountain Region

NPS IMR – Basic info

Fig 1. All IMR units

Fig 2. Selected IMR units

Short list of sites circulated by J.W. and NPS IMR for initial outreach to individual units.

Fig 3. NPS IMR Unit area

Note varying y axis values between panels.

Note varying y axis values between panels.

Table 1. IMR Unit area

NPS IMR by Ecoregion (Omernik 1987)

Fig 4. IRM - Omernik L3 Ecoregion

Table 2. Omernik L3 Ecoregions

Fig 5. Omernik L2 Ecoregions

NPS wetlands mapped by NWI

Area mapped by NWI within the boundaries of NPS Intermountain region units:

Fig 6. NWI area by park type

Area mapped by NWI within NPS unit boundary:

Note varying y axis values between panels.

Note varying y axis values between panels.

Table 3. NWI area by IMR unit

Fig 7. NWI area by wetland type

IMR unit maps by NWI wetland type class

Fig 8. All Wetland Types

Fig 9. SS

Fig 10. FEM

Fig 11. Riverine

Fig 12. Lake

Fig 13. Radial Plots: Em and FOR/SS

NWI types “Emergent” and “Forested/Shrub-scrub”, selected parks (16Mar28 list)

NWI types “Emergent” and “Forested/Shrub-scrub”: Top 30% of units by NWI area

Fig 14. Radial Plots: Riverine and Lake

NWI types “Riverine”" and “Lake”, selected parks (16Mar28 list)

NWI types “Riverine”" and “Lake”: Top 30% of units by NWI area

Analysis of Watersheds intersecting NPS IMR units

This section evaluates wetland resources in watersheds intersecting HUB10

Table 4. Intersecting H10 watersheds

NWI area by wetland type and HUB10

Fig 15. HUC10 watersheds

Table 5 H10 Proportion NWI

Fig 16. NWI area by wetland type per HUB10 watershed

Fig 19. Proportion of each intersecting H10

  • Proportion of total NWI mapped area by wetland type and HUB10
  • Each stacked bar represents on interesecting HUB10.

Socieconomic and demographic analyses

This section will analyze economic and demographic variables from from different sources to infom potential market factors affecting the viability of mitigation banks or ILF instruments for funding.

Download the ACS (2015) and decenial (2010) data for the following variables:

2015 Population by state and county

BIN

References

  • Omernik, JM. 1987. Ecoregions of the conterminous United States, (map scale 1:7,500,000) Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr., 77: 118–125

  1. NPS IRMA Data Store↩

  2. NHD Watersheds↩