ࡱ> PRQ#` |,bjbj .:|$$nj$l$l$l$l$l$l$$Y&h($$$j$j$rTV P4_j$$0$VM)D:M)VVhM)>,J$n$$~.$d   Secured Lands 2007 Conference Call January 24, 2008 10am 12 noon In Attendance: Melissa Clark, Mark Anderson, Dan Morse, Jessica Dyson, Michelle Canick, Dan Coker, Ellen Creveling, Brad Stratton, August Froehlich, Rachel Ralls, Kevin Ruddock, Chris Bruce, John Binhammer, Alli Jones, Pete Ingraham. Agenda Overview of the Secured Lands and Measures Project Overview of the Data Collection Process Introduction to the Spatial Data Manager (Melissa Clark) ERO Goals for the Data for the next year Geodatabase Compare 2005, 2006 and 2007 Data Linking with CLS Measures Report Proposed Timeline for submission of the Secured Lands - February 15th 2008 Round Robin State by State discussion Introduction Current state of TNC Land Data Current state of CLS Links with TNC data Current state of other non-TNC data (State, Federal Local, etc.) Sources of Error in the data (boundary shifts, new polygons, GAP Code Changes, Other) Mark Anderson - Introduction 3rd year of secured lands work works well in creating reports of how much protection we have of each target across the region. Produced a report two years ago, had trouble last year tracking the changes. TNC lands: We have a really good spatial data set of all the TNC secured lands in our region. Part two is all the private lands and whats happening with them- hardest part. Some states have done a really good job of tracking private lands, some have not. Third is public lands, and each state has different sources and different updating schedules for these lands. The process weve been using is straightforward. Each state is responsible for upgrading their TNC lands, assessing their private and public lands, and turn in the data to the region. We then compile it into a single, regional field that can be cut into any number of formats (ILs, ecoregions, states) and return it back to the states. GAP status and conservation management status. One of our pushes, this year were expanding a little farther in promoting the GAP status field. GAP status is permanent protection, although it can be an easement or a fee acquisition. Then the status itself is a level of intent of what that land is used for, very simple code. If its protected solely for biodiversity, there is a GAP status of 1 or 2, If its intended for multiple uses (extraction, timber) then it gets a GAP status 3. And if theres no intent at all, then there is a GAP status 4 or 0. Our judgment of GAP status is a lot different than the GAP program defines theirs, so weve come up with our own . Broken the status into 3 parts: tenure, intent, and the potential to manage effectively. (Note this is a field that ERO normally fills out. Tenure relates to GAP status in that everything is permanent. Potential to manage effectively is mainly for a rating of the organization who manages said land if they have the resources to effectively conserve the land. Last piece weve worked on but have not gotten right yet is the linking of TNC lands to CLS. Weve made a lot of progress, those two things should be 1:1, but when we query the database to see how much land TNC protected last year there is a great differentiation between what our spatial data says and CLS. Melissa Clark introduction! Whats going on with servers, CLS, datasets. Timeline- hoping for submission of data for February 15, 2008. Dan Coker in ME: February sounds good to turn in data. Current state of CLS links- some polygons have CLS links using the MABR field. In Maine no one manages the state layer. Dan keeps up with the big projects. Pete Ingraham in NH: dataset doesnt link particularly well with CLS. Started working on it himself with a volunteer. Stewardship manager tracks differently than CLS tracks it, differently than the GIS manager and the state tracks it. GRANIT manages public lands dataset, fairly up to date. Got a grant to update secured lands and TNC GAP status to the state-managed data. From 2008, GRANIT will be tracking GAP status. Major update last year to get TNC polygons to match secured lands. John in VT: No current GIS person in VT. They are looking to hire someone in March or later. Prior to Sarah leaving they were updating their layer. Brad in NY: All 2007 TNC lands are up to date, still going through a process of quality checking previous years of TNC data. At the end of last year they didnt get everything quite right and felt there were some easements and parcels that werent quite coded correctly so working on correcting that. Diligent in attributing the changes in geometry on whether they were real or fake. No CLS changes, only easements going into the shape files. Would first have to get geometry of parcels into CLS first. Non-TNC data is similar to Maine, no data sets available for non-TNC data. Has himself been pretty aware of CLS stuff, downloaded some datasets. Should be fine for February deadline. Jessica in MA: Just started, still trying to get familiar with the datasets. In the beginning of February will be meeting with GIS person, and will have a much better feeling for secured lands after that. In terms of CLS with TNC data, only had the briefest overview on how it works. Probably not able to make Feb. 15th deadline, but would really like to be more familiar with the data before projecting the date for having it together. Kevin in RI: Current state of TNC data is good, small backlog but no problems getting it up to date. CLS: all easements are in there, but a large backlog of TNC properties that havent been put into CLS that need to be coded. Could do more, could have product by Feb. 15, but would benefit from more time. State data- no comprehensive state-wide covereage. State hired interns that went town to town collecting data, compiled data set. No interns this year. Discussion about RI GAP Status It is internally consistent, but much not match up with other states. Ken in CT: Pretty much same boat as last year. TNC data is current, can be put into dataset. Other than that, theres no new data for any other entities around the state. Not too many changes to the database. State has tried several times to do comprehensive inventory but they havent made much progress. No links to CLS except what they had to put in for the easements. Rachel in PA: TNC lands look good. Have CLS person run data sets, looks good just not coded. Most up to date data set Part time; dont have time to contact all state agencies. The ones that are contacted have datasets that have boundaries that run together, so there are errors, working on getting an intern or volunteer to contact state agencies. Michelle in MD: TNC lands data in terms of easements is in good shape. For older data its not so present. Only just started to code fields with CLS IDs, need two IDs, one for secured lands. Other non-TNC data; updated files come from MD DNR, they have shape files that they keep for federal, state, and county lands. Each separate shape files have different attributes, and theres no way to tell which polygons are new. Plenty of sources of error, still have lots of polygons that were digitized, plenty of overlaps and gaps that shouldnt be there. Can make Feb. 15th data by updating TNC transaction from 2007, some of the historic stuff wont be in any better shape than it is now. Ellen in NJ: Filling in as their data manager just started, currently at CLS training. TNC lands should be up to date and pretty accurate, will be totally awesome next year but pretty good right now. The green acres program in NJ tracks state owned lands for easements; they also track for county and non-profit owned lands. State tracked non-profit lands have all TNC polygons, without those you end up with slivers, so some errors. Can meet Feb. 15th deadline, will not be complete but will be fairly good. Looking at measures for state of NJ looking at 7 secured lands layers Chris in VA: in pretty good shape and Feb. 15th deadline would be good to go. TNC lands look good, managed in separate database. Its tricky to pick out whats new and add it to the regional dataset. The CLS link is a can of worms, have kept it closed for the time being. They have a couple of folks who work with CLS and have kept up with discrepancies between GIS and CLS. Pretty good non-TNC lands coverage. DCR have been tasked with keeping the governor updated on state-set goals for land conservation; have been doing well with updates to managed lands. There should be a field in the data that indicates date on which sets were changes. Alli in WV: all transactions done in the last year, minus the co-op, have been included in the dataset. Can work on getting them done probably by the 15th. Havent done much work linking to CLS. Need to make sure the datasets can correspond. August in OH: Theyve got current TNC ownership layer with easements done, but are not linked to CLS. Have taken parcels out of the protection log. Dont know where they are on shapes for stuff that was done in the past, transfers and such. Have a current state land ownership layer from this summer, and working on getting a federal layer. Next Steps: Turn in Data February 15th Send out document with GAP code definitions and about assigning GAP Codes Possible conference calls about GAP codes and incorporation CLS information CD0 6 7  ! # 3 5 D E }   P R Q():a|uhVjh9hWhhW56hh }56h }hhhIchIcH*hh8Q5hB"[ hl6H* hl6hlCJOJQJ^JaJhIchl5 hl5hrhIchl7#4CD/ 0 7 j  # 5 E  R  & Fgdl & FgdlgdIcgdl|, XYde()y123hyPopr!+$-$f&h&&''p)q) * *t*++++++{,|,ั hQhhh_h_H*h>L5h*h*H*h*hChCH*hCh_h~hQhQH*hQhWh9hVj' !!$$&&q)r)e*f*+++++/,0,|,gd & Fgd,1h/ =!"#$% D@D NormalCJ_HaJmH nHsH tHDAD Default Paragraph FontRiR  Table Normal4 l4a (k@(No List|$:#4CD/07j#5ERXY d e ( ) y123q!r!e"f"#####/$0$~$00000000000 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00 00 0#4C7j#5ER~$@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0 00P|, |,|,9 :!;!<# ~$ ~$9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsState9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplace @ODMr!v!~$Y P & $u<w /N! ""4"~$33333333333333oo#{$~$oo#{$~$#yA3O?nc\"x5Gh^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(pp^p`CJOJQJo(@ @ ^@ `CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(PP^P`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(pp^p`CJOJQJo(@ @ ^@ `CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(PP^P`CJOJQJo(h^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hH#yAO?5Gc\"                  S! 8 % 8 8 z 8 (l 8 5p 8 k s 8 ed MaIctt&tQ2?7>NVj F N w ) H4 J  . K=9fs?!9i/i0B&kqmLCE/*M>)R /!/6!a"V#$i$7W%2n&Cz&_(}(*o*B+<,@-B.V.f.e14,5>L526T89-A$ABKBoBCCOkO6PQ8Q?QSD%TFU(&VHX)*YRYHuYZ$=Z7 [B"[KP^7`&a~bVbJbdHd~dLefe2"ft&f--fofjgnhvhh`{kl~:mnJxndoZqg:rWr5tJXtmu-vNvFw ,x;x/mxnyByNz{g{E2{XG|u|{| }?} H}H}!~1~ O *afeOnV]WovuzICU< L YfbQj$_ d9E]%ISvL N+@dIiWYr`7:~QOUS 2Y[Uo`87QH+,:PxD}5~;~u'4y 4[g ,Zb4p* 6\.w3lA)EVR Cul+a?4LVL/bkH_elLBiE<[a.k-5Ar7247#t5yFV3MPuT{kLrNM$9W^**1+01Msx]#,0_@,drB>IUPKf~~Dr 156]6 0+ 9}/xLHzG8[IJy:@m$m$<.m$m$|$P@UnknownGz Times New Roman5Symbol3& z Arial;SimSun[SO?5 z Courier New;Wingdings"qhrQr Br B!24j$j$2QHX ?l2"Secured Lands 2007 Conference Callcwrightmmlclark    Oh+'0 ( H T `lt|$Secured Lands 2007 Conference CallcwrightNormal mmlclark4Microsoft Office Word@&P @S_@V_r ՜.+,0  hp  The Nature ConservancyBj$ #Secured Lands 2007 Conference Call Title  !"#$%'()*+,-./0123456789:<=>?@ABDEFGHIJMRoot Entry F04_OData 1Table&i)WordDocument.:SummaryInformation(;DocumentSummaryInformation8CCompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89qRoot Entry FЍ?/_U@Data 1Table&i)WordDocument.:  !"#$%'()*+,-./0123456789:<=>?@ABTS, SummaryInformation(;DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q՜.+,D՜.+,d  hp  The Nature ConservancyBj$ #Secured Lands 2007 Conference Call Title4 $