Technology Transfer

United States

Environmental Protection

Agency

Office of Research and

Development

Cincinnati, OH 45268

EPA/625/R-98/003

September 2000

Environmental Planning for

Communities

A Guide to the Environmental

Visioning Process Utilizing a

Geographic Information

System (GIS)

Environmental Planning for

Communities

A Guide to the Environmental

Visioning Process Utilizing a

Geographic Information

System (GIS)
EPA/625/R-98/003

September 2000

Environmental Planning for

Communities

A Guide to the Environmental Visioning Process

Utilizing a Geographic Information System (GIS)

Technology Transfer and Support Division

Office of Research and Development

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Cincinnati, OH

Printed on Recycled Paper
ii

Notice

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and

Development funded and managed the research described here under contract

#7CR388NTSX to Global Quality Corp. It has been subjected to the Agency’s peer and

administrative review and has been approved for publication as an EPA document.

Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or

recommendation for use.
iii

Contents

1 Introduction/Purpose of This Guide ......................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1

1.1.1 The CBEP Approach ...................................................................................................... 1

1.1.2 Evolution of Media-Based/Command-Control Approach to CBEP ................................... 2

1.1.3 Environmental Visioning as It Relates to CBEP .............................................................. 2

1.1.4 GIS as a Tool to Support Environmental Visioning .......................................................... 2

1.2 Purpose of This Guide ........................................................................................................ 3

1.2.1 Where Does This Guide Fit Into EPA Programs? ............................................................ 3

1.2.2 Relationship of This Guide to Other CBEP and Environmental Visioning Products.......... 3

1.2.3 Audience for This Guide .................................................................................................. 3

1.3 Organization of This Guide ................................................................................................ 3

1.3.1 Overview of CBEP (Chapter 2) ....................................................................................... 3

1.3.2 Overview of Environmental Visioning (Chapter 3) ............................................................ 3

1.3.3 GIS-Based Environmental Visioning (Chapter 4) ............................................................. 4

1.3.4 Creating a GIS to Support Environmental Visioning (Chapter 5) ...................................... 4

1.3.5 Appendices..................................................................................................................... 4

1.4 Reference ............................................................................................................................. 4

2 Overview of Community-Based Environmental Protection (CBEP) ........................................ 5

2.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 5

2.1.1 History of CBEP ............................................................................................................. 5

2.2 Key Components of CBEP .................................................................................................. 7

2.2.1 Establishing Partnerships ............................................................................................... 7

2.2.2. Defining Geographic Boundaries .................................................................................... 8

2.2.3 Achieving Environmental Results ................................................................................... 9

2.3 References ......................................................................................................................... 11

3 Overview of Environmental Visioning .................................................................................... 12

3.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 12

3.2 Evolution of Environmental Visioning ............................................................................ 12

3.3 Key Features of Environmental Visioning in the CBEP Context .................................... 12

3.4 Environmental Visioning Tools ....................................................................................... 13

3.4.1 Graphic Tools ............................................................................................................... 13

3.4.2 Software Tools ............................................................................................................. 14

3.5 Steinitz Framework for Environmental Planning and Evaluating Alternative Futures.. 14

3.6 References ......................................................................................................................... 18
iv

Contents (continued)

4 GIS-Based Environmental Visioning ...................................................................................... 19

4.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 19

4.1.1 Definition of a GIS ........................................................................................................ 19

4.1.2 History of a GIS............................................................................................................ 19

4.1.3 Organization of This Chapter ........................................................................................ 19

4.2 Components of a GIS........................................................................................................ 20

4.2.1 GIS Data ...................................................................................................................... 20

4.2.1.1 Global Positioning System (GPS) Data ................................................................ 20

4.2.1.2 Remote Sensing Data .......................................................................................... 20

4.2.2 GIS Hardware ............................................................................................................... 21

4.2.3 GIS Software ................................................................................................................ 21

4.2.3.1 GIS Database Software ....................................................................................... 22

4.2.4 Models ......................................................................................................................... 22

4.2.5 Outputs ........................................................................................................................ 23

4.3 Benefits/Pitfalls of GIS Applications ................................................................................ 23

4.3.1 Benefits ........................................................................................................................ 23

4.3.2 Pitfalls .......................................................................................................................... 23

4.4 Existing Approaches to GIS-Based Environmental Visioning ....................................... 25

4.4.1 Quantitative .................................................................................................................. 25

4.4.2 Qualitative .................................................................................................................... 26

4.4.3 Advanced vs. Basic ..................................................................................................... 26

4.5 Case Studies...................................................................................................................... 26

4.5.1 West Muddy Creek, Benton County, Oregon ................................................................ 26

4.5.2 Monroe County, Pennsylvania ...................................................................................... 28

4.5.3 Camp Pendleton, California .......................................................................................... 33

4.6 References ......................................................................................................................... 36

5 Creating a GIS to Support Environmental Visioning ............................................................. 38

5.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 38

5.1.1 Importance of a GIS in Environmental Visioning ........................................................... 38

5.1.2 Organization of This Chapter ........................................................................................ 38

5.2 Groundwork for a Successful GIS Application ............................................................... 38

5.2.1 GIS Tools ..................................................................................................................... 38

5.2.2 Issues to Be Addressed ............................................................................................... 38

5.2.3 Size of Study Area ....................................................................................................... 39

5.2.4 Range of Analyses to Be Completed ............................................................................ 39

5.2.5 Definition of Desired Data Resolution ............................................................................ 39

5.2.6 Available Data .............................................................................................................. 39

5.2.7 Available Hardware ....................................................................................................... 39

5.2.8 Available Software ........................................................................................................ 39

5.2.9 Available Support/Resources ........................................................................................ 39

5.3 GIS Outputs ....................................................................................................................... 40

5.3.1 Basic Output ................................................................................................................ 40

5.3.2 Advanced Outputs ........................................................................................................ 40

5.4 Developing the GIS for Environmental Visioning ........................................................... 40

5.4.1 Road Map for Building a GIS ........................................................................................ 40
v

Contents (continued)

5.4.2 GIS operations ............................................................................................................. 41

5.4.3 Resource Planning........................................................................................................ 42

5.4.4 Data Acquisition ........................................................................................................... 43

5.4.5 Personnel Requirement................................................................................................. 44

5.4.6 System Integration ....................................................................................................... 44

5.5 How to Create an Environmental Vision Using the GIS .................................................. 44

5.6 References ......................................................................................................................... 45

Appendix A: Bibliography .......................................................................................................... 46

Appendix B: Glossary of Terms ................................................................................................. 48

Appendix C: List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................. 49
vi

Figures

Figure 2 - 1. Community-based environmental planning. ................................................................ 6

Figure 3 - 1. Green community flow chart (source: http://www.epa.gov/region03/greenkit). .......... 16

Figure 3 - 2. Steinitz’s framework for landscape planning

(source: http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/brc/maps/fig_5.html. ............................................................ 17

Figure 4 - 1. Changes in habitat areas resulting from the alternative futures

relative to 1990 conditions (source: Hulse et al., 1997). ................................................................ 27

Figure 4 - 2. Changes in species richness resulting from the alternative futures

relative to 1990 conditions (source: Hulse et al., 1997). ................................................................ 29

Figure 4 - 3. Impacts on water quality resulting from the alternative futures

relative to 1990 conditions (source: Hulse et al., 1997). ................................................................ 30

Figure 4 - 4. Erosion and total suspended solids (metric tons/hectare) by sub-basins resulting

from the alternative futures compared to 1990 and 1850 conditions (source: Hulse et al., 1997). .. 31

Figure 4 - 5. Impact on natural and cultural systems resulting from the alternative futures

(source: Steinitz (ed.) et al., 1994). ............................................................................................... 34

Figure 4 - 6. Map of the study area (source: Steinitz (ed.) et al., 1996). ....................................... 35

Figure 4 - 7. Comparative impacts of the alternative futures (source: Steinitz (ed.) et al. 1996). .. 37
vii

Acknowledgments

Many people contributed their expertise to the preparation and review of this

publication. Overall technical guidance was provided by Susan Schock and Daniel

Murray of U.S. EPA’s National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL).

The document was prepared by Global Quality Corp., who was assisted by Pacific

Environment Services, Inc. The following people provided guidance and review:

Dr. James Goodrich National Risk Management Research Laboratory

Dr. Walter Grayman Walter M. Grayman Consulting Engineer

James Kreissl National Risk Management Research Laboratory

Richard Sumner Office of Research and Development

Ronald Landy Office of Research and Development

Dr. David Hulse University of Oregon

Dr. Carl Steinitz Harvard University
1

1 Introduction/Purpose of this Guide

A GIS, in its simplest form, is common off-the-shelf (COTS)

computer software that can be run on desktop personal

computers to produce simple maps. A complex GIS can

support scientific what-if analysis and modeling, and has

the power to depict environmental data in relation to the

geography and the capacity to model the landscape as it

may evolve over time. This guide explains how a GIS can

be used for environmental visioning.

1.1.1 The CBEP Approach

CBEP is a comprehensive ecosystem management and

planning approach promoted by EPA, to assess and manage the quality of air, water, land and living resources in

an area in a “holistic context.” The CBEP approach has

been developed and employed to better reflect the unique

needs and requirements of regional and local conditions

and to stimulate and promote a more effective partnership

with local communities.

1.1 Introduction

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has

shifted the focus of many of its ecosystem protection programs from command-and-control to the Community-Based

Environmental Protection (CBEP) approach. In contrast

to the previous regulatory approach, the CBEP approach

emphasizes decision making by local stakeholders to address community-wide environmental issues. As an essential step in the CBEP approach, community leaders,

citizens, and planners develop an environmental vision of

their preferred “green” community. An environmental vision

in its simplest form is a picture or a description of a preferred future state of the community, chosen from several

alternative futures. The entire process of generation and

selection of alternative landscape futures will be referred

to as environmental visioning in this Guide. One of the

important tools that can be used to develop and support

such a vision is the geographic information system (GIS)

technology.

The Key CBEP Steps

Establish Partnerships and Develop an Environmental Vision: Ecosystem protection projects often

start at a grass roots level with small groups sharing a common interest in protecting or restoring their

local environment. Ultimately, the small groups expand and align into larger groups of stakeholders, who

develop partnerships by coming to agreement on issues, vision, and information. This naturally leads to

the development of a set of community-derived goals and actions.

Assess Ecosystem: Once an organization has been developed and goals have been established, the

next task is to assess the current condition of the local ecosystem. This can be achieved by defining the

indicators of ecosystem such as human health, natural habitat and creating links between ecosystem,

local economy, and quality of life.

Develop Ecosystem Strategies: After developing ecosystem indicators and environmental trends,

strategies for ecosystem protection can be evaluated and implemented. The strategies usually involve

voluntary initiatives, such as volunteer cleanups, land acquisition, or education programs. Legal strategies can also be considered, including local laws, zoning ordinances, property taxes and municipal fees,

performance standards, and transfer of development rights and growth planning, in addition to enforcement of state and federal environmental laws. The selection of appropriate strategies includes the analysis of socioeconomic impacts and the ability to adapt the selected strategies to changing conditions and

new information.

EPA has published a guide to the CBEP process (Community Based Environmental Protection: A

Resource Book for Protecting Ecosystems and Communities, EPA 230-B-96-003), which contains

detailed guidance on the implementation of CBEP initiatives.
2

CBEP emphasizes a collaborative approach to environmental protection instead of the traditional “end-of-pipe”

approach EPA has employed historically. The CBEP approach tailors environmental programs to address the particular needs of individual communities, watersheds or other

planning units. In some cases, CBEP activities may go

beyond achieving national environmental standards by

enacting more strict standards and policies that reflect

local concerns.

CBEP is designed to maximize the use of scarce resources, encourage local support, consider the economic

well being of communities, and allow EPA to work in partnership with residents to solve environmental problems.

CBEP partnerships may include representatives from all

levels of government, public interest groups, industry, academia, private landowners, concerned citizens and others. The active integration of all of these interest groups

fosters a better understanding of environmental problems,

as well as producing more achievable, effective, and popular

solutions. Improved environmental protection results are

achieved by focusing activities on issues unique to specific geographic boundaries, and by identifying overall environmental improvements and trends. CBEP success is

measured by examining environmental improvement over

an entire area of concern, instead of looking at facility-byfacility progress.

1.1.2 Evolution of Media-Based/

Command-Control Approach to CBEP

The traditional approach to pollution control has been a

media-based, command-control process, where air, water

and land resources have been addressed separately

through regulations, criteria and standards. This process

has been effective in significantly reducing the release of

pollutants to the environment from point sources. A point

source, such as combined sewer discharge, is a discharge

whose location can be exactly pinpointed on a map. In

contrast, a non-point source (NPS) of pollution, such as

agricultural runoff, occurs over an entire geographic area.

The reductions have been accomplished through the development of regulations, criteria, and standards, directed

largely at point sources, which can be easily identified

and regulated.

The environmental problems that many communities now

face are more complex and difficult to define. In order to

deal with these environmental problems, EPA is promoting the CBEP approach. The CBEP approach proactively

involves all social, economic, and political issues from

different interest groups into the environmental decisionmaking process. CBEP recognizes that environmental

decisions cannot be made in a vacuum, independent from

the other societal demands—jobs, fire protection, education, etc.—that impact the use of the communities’ material, financial, and human resources. When environmental

issues are openly addressed in a CBEP process, local

constituents have an opportunity to take a more active

role. If the process includes consensus and negotiation,

the local constituents can extend their support for the implementation of the selected environmental management strategies more aggressively.

1.1.3 Environmental Visioning as It Relates

to CBEP

Environmental visioning is a step in the CBEP process

that develops a picture of a preferred future environment.

The question “Where do we want to be” is the central theme

of any visioning process and the environmental vision statement for the community becomes the driving force for

implementation of CBEP efforts. Preferred communities

often are called “Green Communities,” and the term refers

to sustainable communities with healthy environments,

vibrant economies and a high quality of life for residents

(http://www.epa.gov/region03/greenkit) Sustainable communities combine residential, commercial and industrial

development while maintaining local ecosystems.

1.1.4 GIS as a Tool to Support

Environmental Visioning

A GIS is a computer software tool that supports a variety

of purposes, including map-making and scientific analysis. A GIS has the inherent ability to generate graphical

and tabular displays, and the capacity to support “what-if”

analyses by modeling different scenarios that are important building an environmental vision. Color-coded GIS

maps can either be viewed on a computer screen, or printed

as hard copy.

Several vendors provide off-the-shelf GIS software that

can run on a variety of platforms, ranging from desktop

personal computers to high-powered computer workstations. GIS data generally consist of two components:

graphical data about the geography, and tabular data about

each feature in the geography. For example, the graphical

component may include display of county boundaries on

the screen, whereas the tabular database component keeps

track of the county population, average income, and other

relevant attributes. The values from the database can be

used to color-code the geographic areas, thereby providing a visual representation of the conditions. A GIS can

also be used to display and manipulate satellite images of

a geographic area to perform analyses of the environment.

GIS capabilities can be applied no matter what the size of

the geographic area under consideration. In addition, the

geography being depicted, as well as the database values

used for color-coding the maps, can be based on reality or

imagination (e.g., the environmental vision). Therefore, a

GIS becomes an ideal tool to support the environmental

visioning step of the CBEP process. In addition, a GIS

can be used as valuable tool for ongoing ecosystem management (Sumner and Kapuscinski, 1998). By using a GIS,

community members become familiar with the mapped

information and gain an appreciation of the community’s

dependence on the ecosystem. This process is fueled by

the availability of relevant knowledge bases on the Internet.
3

1.2 Purpose of This Guide

The purpose of this Guide is to explain how a GIS can be

used by communities as a tool to support environmental

visioning as part of the CBEP process. Although significant reference material exists on CBEP and on GIS applications, the use of GIS in the CBEP process has not been

presented in a comprehensive document. A few case studies have shown how a GIS can be used effectively during

environmental visioning, but a general discussion of that

theme has not been prepared.

This Guide to the Environmental Visioning Process Utilizing a Geographic Information System (GIS) has been developed consistent with the requirements of CBEP. In this

framework, the guide can be utilized to meet the needs of

individual media issues (e.g., the watershed management

approach to water quality issues) and to support integrated

ecosystem analyses, embodying the multiple impacts on

air, water, and land resources.

1.2.1 Where Does This Guide Fit Into EPA

Programs?

For more than 25 years, EPA and its associated state and

local agencies have achieved significant strides in protecting all aspects of our environment. The air, water, and

land resources, which have supported the social and economic growth of this nation, have been reasonably protected and preserved for future generations through the

application of national, technology-based standards. While

these technology-based standards for individual media

have been successful, new approaches, such as CBEP,

are now required to ensure the long-term health and welfare of ecosystems and the population.

In this process, the singular objectives of environmental

control and management cannot be viewed exclusive of

the other societal demands, such as police and fire protection, and schools. Planning processes require a balanced approach to community, environmental, and ecosystem management within an open, public decision-making framework.

The ability to effectively and efficiently address and display these complex issues requires utilization of tools,

such as GIS technology. A GIS integrated with models

and other display software, allows the evaluation of a myriad

of alternative management strategies and presents them

in a manner in which community stakeholders can evaluate them in decision-making processes. Use of GIS in

this manner will permit a more inclusive decision-making

process, conducted in a rational, objective, meaningful,

and understandable way to all participants.

1.2.2 Relationship of This Guide to Other

CBEP and Environmental Visioning

Products

EPA has produced several products relating to environmental visioning and CBEP, including a “Storefront of Community Environmental Tools” on the EPA home page on

the Internet (www.epa.gov). Many of these products reference the value of GIS in environmental visioning and CBEP,

but do not include any details on how to develop a GIS or

what to include in an effective GIS program.

The Environmental Protection Agencies in several states

have published guidebooks for environmental planning,

although focused more towards water quality. For example,

the Ohio EPA (OEPA) has published a guide for watershed-based approach to the development of a water quality protection plan (OEPA, 1997).

This Guide supplements the above products by addressing the technical and organizational aspects of GIS. For

example, the guide discusses what type of data should be

collected, and how to arrange the data into map layers

that can be used to envision future environmental conditions. References to data and tools available through EPA

are provided throughout this Guide, which also discusses

previous studies on evaluating alternative futures.

1.2.3 Audience for This Guide

This Guide is meant for everyone who is interested and

wants to participate in the CBEP process. The Guide provides introductory material for newcomers to the GIS technology and advanced material for the more technically oriented GIS users. Although not targeted as a ‘how to’ manual

for the sophisticated GIS professional, the Guide discusses

both the technical and nontechnical issues involved in using

a GIS for environmental visioning that should address the

needs of a broad audience.

1.3 Organization of This Guide

Following this Introduction (Chapter 1), the Guide has been

organized to provide users with a framework for incorporating a GIS into the CBEP process and for initiating efforts to implement such an approach for their area. Examples are provided to gain a better understanding of the

‘real world’ applications.

1.3.1 Overview of CBEP (Chapter 2)

The details of the components of CBEP programs are discussed in Chapter 2. Topics addressed include how to organize community groups, how to set goals for CBEP

projects, how to assess community conditions, and how

to define, evaluate and choose strategies for ecosystem

protection and restoration. The Steinitz framework (Steinitz,

1990) for landscape planning is also discussed.

1.3.2 Overview of Environmental Visioning

(Chapter 3)

Chapter 3 presents the history of environmental visioning;

its advantages as a guide for setting goals in ecosystem

management and the processes that affect it. Examples

of recent visioning activities are also presented.
4

1.3.3 GIS-Based Environmental Visioning

(Chapter 4)

An overview of GIS and a discussion of its primary components (e.g. software, hardware, and databases) are presented in Chapter 4. Also GIS-based environmental visioning and the advantages and limitations of GIS applications are discussed.

1.3.4 Creating a GIS to Support

Environmental Visioning (Chapter 5)

Chapter 5 provides guidance on how to establish a GIS for

environmental visioning. GIS data needs emphasizing the

scope and usage of data (extent, type, quality, resolution

and accuracy) for environmental visioning are discussed.

Some basic GIS products used for effective communication are also presented. Helpful information on what to

consider when establishing a GIS is presented along with

methods for acquiring GIS data.

1.3.5 Appendices

A bibliography of referenced material is attached as

Appendix A, followed by glossary of terms (Appendix B).

1.4 Reference

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, A Guide to

Developing Local Watershed Action Plans in Ohio, Ohio

EPA, 1997.

Steinitz, Carl; A Framework for Theory Applicable to

the Education of Landscape Architects (and Other Environmental Design Professionals), Landscape Journal, October 1990, pp. 136-143.

Sumner, R. and J. Kapuscinski. Building the Vision for

Ecosystem Management. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon (submitted for publication).
5

2 Overview of Community-Based Environmental Protection (CBEP)

ter resources to competing environmental demands. Ongoing efforts to manage the impact of pollution from point

sources and non-point sources including, combined sewer

overflows, storm water discharges, and agricultural runoff

have been reinitialized and reemphasized.

The requirements for high-quality water that can support

aquatic life and human uses have become increasingly

more stringent. Similarly, increased emphasis on risk analysis techniques that require integration of many environmental factors, pollutant sources, costs, and economic

variables, demands a more sophisticated and complete

approach in evaluating environmental impacts and associated management strategies.

Commensurate with the above programs, it is essential to

have interactive, public, decision-making processes that

integrate all aspects of a community into environmental

decisions, and that consider the environmental impacts of

all activities in a community. For example, consider the

following problems:

• Polluted runoff from non-point sources in areas

that lack vegetation to absorb heavy rainfall or

snowmelt. These sources include parking lots,

streets and highways, heavily tilled farm fields,

and clear-cut forest areas.

• Difficult-to-control environmental problems created

by urban sprawl, including polluted runoff caused

by the replacement of vegetation with paved surfaces, poor air quality from increased vehicle miles

per person due to longer commutes, and habitat

fragmentation for animals and plants.

To address these complex issues, CBEP has been employed as a holistic approach to environmental protection

that is sensitive to local conditions and employs multilevel, cross-sector partnerships to achieve results. CBEP

efforts sometimes go by other names, such as ecosystem management or place-based and/or geographically

targeted environmental protection. An important factor in

these efforts is that the people who live and/or work in the

community (the local stakeholders) have a common interest in protecting an identifiable, shared environment and

quality of life.

The role of EPA in the implementation of the CBEP will

vary from place to place and from one issue to another. In

2.1 Introduction

Since EPA was formed over twenty-five years ago, its regulatory focus has emphasized a media-based approach towards pollution control. However, EPA is now in the process of shifting the focus of its regulatory program to CBEP.

CBEP emphasizes a geographic focus, development of

partnerships among stakeholders within the ecosystem,

and a focus on environmental results (EPA, 1997b). An

important step in this process for a community is the development of its vision of a preferred environmental state

(Figure 2-1). This preferred environmental state has been

defined by EPA as a “green community.” Figure 2-1 illustrates an example of a CBEP progression. A small group

alerts potential stakeholders about their concerns; the

stakeholders discuss the issues and develop their vision

of preferred community; goals and strategies are set for

achieving the vision; and the strategies are implemented.

2.1.1 History of CBEP

In a sense, environmental protection has its roots in a

community-based movement. On the first Earth Day (April

22, 1970), 20 million people turned out to show support for

environmental causes. The momentum of Earth Day and

other influences led to the formation of EPA. As discussed

earlier, EPA subsequently developed regulatory programs,

which have significantly reduced the effects of pollution.

However, the work is ongoing and the efforts are far from

complete.

EPA is emphasizing a CBEP approach to improve the effectiveness of federal environmental regulations and programs. The CBEP approach tailors programs to address

the environmental conditions of a particular watershed,

ecosystem or other area of concern. The goal of CBEP

programs is to assess and manage the quality of air, water, land, and living resources in a place as a whole. In this

manner, environmental management strategies will better

reflect local conditions and will more effectively promote

and establish partnerships for environmental protection.

However, CBEP does not represent the only approach to

the integrated evaluation of environmental issues. A strong

watershed management context was established for water quality issues in the Clean Water Act of 1972 (as embodied in the 303(e), 208, and 201 water quality planning

processes). A new initiative of ecosystem and watershed

management has been proposed, recognizing the continued need to reevaluate and manage the allocation of wa-
6

Figure 2-1. Community-based environmental planning (source: USEPA, 1997b).

Consensus

Process

Vision of

Ideal Community

React to

New Information

Sense of Place Sense of Conditions

Involve Stakeholders

Sense of

 Condition

Initiators

Sense of

Place

Re-evaluate

Assess Progress

Goals for

Sustainable

Ecosystems

Goals for

Quality

of Life

Goals for

Sustainable

Local Economy

Organize

Mission

Assess

Plan

Enact Strategies

Information on:

• Ecosystem

Health

• Local

Economy

• Local Quality

of Life
7

many places, EPA will be an active partner in designing

and implementing effective environmental solutions. In

most places, EPA will support and assist the efforts of

others by providing environmental information, monitoring

systems, scientific analyses and other types of assistance.

2.2 Key Components of CBEP

While there are no prescriptions for CBEP, EPA has defined the following key components of an effective CBEP

program: (http://www.epa.gov/reinvent/notebook/)

• Partnerships and stakeholder involvement from all

levels of government, public interest groups, industry, academia, private landowners, concerned

citizens, and others. EPA anticipates that these

relationships established with regional and community organizations will bring about a better understanding of environmental problems and effective solutions.

• A geographic focus, which allows for a more comprehensive approach to environmental protection.

Environmental protection efforts become more

effective when they are directed towards specific

watersheds or other ecosystems.

• A focus on environmental results over an entire

area of concern, looking beyond facility-by-facility progress. Environmental programs that have

integrated multimedia approaches, are now emphasized over the traditional end-of-pipe regulatory approach.

Some examples of CBEP Projects that include these components and are already underway include:

Clear Creek, Colorado—A partnership of local organizations, private citizens, industry and several agencies to protect the Clear Creek Watershed which covers roughly 600 square miles. Actions taken to restore

the river include:

• Superfund remedial actions

• Voluntary cleanups

• Wetlands planning

• Mapping of endangered species

• Land use plans

• Water quality projects

• An emergency dial-down system to inform water

users when spills have occurred in the creek.

St. Louis, Missouri, and East St. Louis, Illinois—An

effort to enhance communication and coordination

among the many agencies involved in environmental

issues in the St. Louis Metropolitan area. The goal is

to promote creative solutions to environmental problems such as hazardous and radioactive waste sites,

poor air quality, wetland and riparian management issues. Actions taken include creating multimedia teams

within EPA to work on issues in the area, as well as

hiring an on-site liaison in response to community requests for more regular contact.

Brunswick, Georgia—An initiative to use regulatory

and non-regulatory approaches to assess the environmental condition of the area and respond to environmental problems. Issues include mercury and polychlorinated biphenyl contamination in creeks, hazardous waste and potential problems in air quality. Actions taken include a strategy to reach across mediaspecific programs in a coordinated ecosystem protection manner; expanded site assessments; and sampling of surface water, sediments, fish tissue, private

wells, and marshes in the area.

Henryetta, Oklahoma—A partnership with city and

state agencies and a citizens’ advisory group to address concerns about: the redevelopment of an abandoned mining and smelter site owned by the city; solid

waste collection and recycling issues; and drinking

water and wastewater delivery systems.

2.2.1 Establishing Partnerships

The first step in any CBEP initiative is to develop partnerships that include as many community stakeholders as

possible. CBEP initiatives often begin at the grassroots

level, when friends and neighbors share a common interest in protecting or restoring the local environment. These

initiatives may be spurred by noticeable air or water pollution, a development that causes ecosystem damage, some

obvious ecological effect such as a fish-kill, or some other

symptom of an underlying ecological problem. Ideally, a

community might come together to protect local ecosystems before they become threatened.

A concerned citizen, local official, or other project initiator

may have some idea of desired outcomes or may have

identified ecosystems or ecosystem components to improve or protect. Project initiators in other communities

have found it useful to reach out early to other stakeholders. Potential stakeholders include anyone with an interest in what the initiator is thinking about—to begin an exchange of ideas about the desired outcomes or conditions

that sparked their interest. Ultimately, stakeholders develop

partnerships by coming to agreement on issues, vision,

and information, leading to the development of a set of

community goals and actions.

Possible stakeholders include anyone in the community

who takes a natural interest in environmental protection.

Groups that might be affected by changes in commercial

activity resulting from ecosystem protection strategies are

also potential stakeholders. Other stakeholders include

businesses or labor unions. Local elected officials and
8

community leaders can help identify potential stakeholders, in addition to participating themselves.

Potential stakeholders might include the following organizations and individuals.

1. Members of existing organizations that use or are

concerned with the environment or land-use issues, such as the Audubon Society (http://

www.audubon.org) and the Sierra Club (http://

www.sierraclub.org).

2. Private landowners whose property includes habitat areas that the community wants to protect,

including farmers, ranchers, timber companies,

and private residents.

3. Local chapters of relevant national professional

organizations, including ecologists, biologists and

landscape architects.

4. Local governments, including, local watershed organizations and conservation districts, local parks

and recreation departments, and state departments of environmental protection, agriculture, fish

and game, transportation, and commerce.

Many diverse ethnic, religious, or other groups might be

interested in sharing their points of view and participating.

Often, a community’s ecosystem protection effort will interest people who live in distant places. For example, environmental projects in rural vacation areas often draw the

interest of city-dwellers that visit them. Similarly, a river

restoration effort may affect many downstream communities.

Engaging people from all key stakeholder groups as soon

as possible produces many benefits. People are much more

likely to work together successfully if they are involved

from the beginning rather than after decisions are made.

For example, developers may be more willing to discuss

alternative development schemes if they are invited to help

plan ecosystem protection strategies. Many community

members gain a sense of well being from volunteering their

time to create a better community; involvement in the effort can be a source of personal enrichment.

Most communities have found that communication is vital

in getting stakeholder involvement. For example, visiting

some of the groups noted above at one of their meetings

and speaking for five minutes might successfully draw

stakeholder participation. Likewise, establishing a name

for the group and developing a newsletter to document

decisions made and activities undertaken, keeps everyone engaged and keeps the public abreast of the latest

developments.

2.2.2. Defining Geographic Boundaries

As CBEP partnerships evolve, their geographic boundaries

will evolve as well. A key step in the CBEP process is

clearly defining the geographic boundaries of the effort.

Determining these boundaries isn’t always straightforward.

In particular, it involves an understanding of the complex

interactions between people and their environment.

The boundary-drawing exercise is complicated by the fact

that most ecosystems are not wholly self-contained. A

lake, for example, may be a component of a larger natural

system of rivers and streams within a watershed. Therefore, runoff, spills, flooding, and other problems affecting

related water bodies might affect the lake. Some ecosystems are so complicated that it may be difficult to address

the entire system. River deltas, with their networks of fresh

and saltwater marshland and rivers and lakes, and large

urban air sheds are examples of such a system. Furthermore, most communities and their attendant ecosystems,

such as forests or lakes, do not coincide with city, county,

and even state boundaries.

These considerations may tend to discourage communities from going forward with ecosystem protection plans.

The community may feel that its ecosystems are so interconnected with the larger environment that whatever small

steps it takes locally will be overwhelmed by events occurring in related ecosystems in other towns or states.

Alternatively, the community may keep increasing the area

of interest to incorporate as many ecosystem features as

How to Establish Partnerships

Start at a grass roots level with friends and neighbors as initiators.

Identify stakeholders – anyone with a natural interest in the environment is a potential stakeholder.

Involve key decision makers from local government, environmental regulatory agencies, industry, and

local citizens groups.

Develop partnerships by agreeing on issues, which lead to a set of community goals.

Communication is vital to maximizing stakeholder involvement – such as public presentations to local

community groups or publishing newsletters.
9

possible, then realize that it will need to reach out to other

communities for their cooperation.

Some communities have found it useful to start small.

Considering ecosystems in the context of the larger environment of which they are a part, doesn’t require tackling

the entire system at once.

Sometimes, however, retaining a small geographic scope

may not be feasible or desirable. For example, expanding

the scope could help to include the following:

A Critical Locale—A project may be more effective if it covers an important tributary to a river or

woodland that contains a crucial nesting site for

birds.

A Critical Stakeholder—A large landowner may

be able to make a significant contribution to the

health of local ecosystems through land management techniques.

Special Skills or Resources—The community

may want to expand boundaries, for example, to

make the project relevant to a nearby university

or to include endangered species habitat that will

capture the interest of federal agencies.

Special Constituencies—The community may

want to expand boundaries in an explicit effort to

include, for example, groups who historically have

been overburdened by environmental degradation

or have been systematically left out of other community decisions. One community can use the

boundary-drawing exercise to help in thinking about

other communities with which to cooperate. If a

community is considering making a river swimmable, for example, the effort will be affected by

what goes on upstream. For this reason, communities often work closely with the watershed association and state entities, and may involve other

towns.

Communities often start with the most obvious ecosystem unit and enlarge the area of interest by considering

related ecosystems. If a community is focusing on a small

pond, for example, it may also consider including wetlands,

marsh, or wooded areas around the pond. Outlining the

area on maps clearly shows topography (e.g., elevation

and water bodies), as well as political features (e.g., roads

and state, county, and city boundary lines).

One way to define natural ecosystem boundaries is to

define watersheds. A watershed is an area where rain and

other water drain to a common location such as a river,

lake, or wetland. This collection of water may occur naturally (as with rain running down a hillside) or with the influence of drainage infrastructure such as ditches and storm

sewers. Watersheds range in size from a few acres that

drain to a farm pond to thousands of square miles. Landscapes such as watersheds may contain many different

and interrelated ecosystems (such as forests, streams,

urban areas, and wetlands).

Ecosystem managers often use watersheds as a meaningful way to define areas of concern. Watersheds typically cut across political boundaries like neighborhoods,

subdivisions, city limits, and state lines. Since watersheds

are often drawn around sloping geographic features such

as valleys and mountains, they are also meaningful with

regard to air and land issues. Thus, watershed management often requires coordination among different governments and organizations. While such coordination can

prove challenging, watershed-based efforts can ultimately

establish a seamless network of environmental protection

across large regions.

In drawing boundaries, projects may consider whether to

include a buffer zone around special features in the ecosystem. Such a zone absorbs the effects of human activity around the core of the ecosystem, preventing damage

to the system itself. For example, for a seacoast, a zone

of non-marsh, non-sandy terrain between the water’s edge

and development can prevent erosion and protect delicate

tidal ecosystems.

2.2.3 Achieving Environmental Results

An essential step in the CBEP process is for the region of

concern to develop an environmental vision. This environmental vision will address the current condition of the local environment; will address all of the actions and issues

that will affect the environment in the future; and will define the community environmental goals in the future. Environmental visioning can be thought of as the picture of where the community wants to be, and CBEP

is the overall process of developing and implementing that vision and moving the community towards

the preferred state.

Various methods of goal setting such as visioning—forming a concept of what the preferred state of the community’s

ecosystems should be—can help a community develop

goals. The environmental visioning process involves all

interested community members from the start. Using environmental visioning as a means to develop community

How to Define a Geographic Boundary

Start small and progress to larger and more

complex ecosystems

Define critical locale, stakeholders, resources,

or special constituencies

Select an area which has achievable goals

As partnerships overlap with other communities, boundaries should overlap as well
10

goals takes advantage of the breadth and depth of ideas

within the community and ensures that all affected members shape the initial proposals.

The question “Where do we want to be?” is the central

theme of the environmental visioning process. Environmental visioning enables community members to express

their shared values to invoke an image of the future. Environmental visioning is the process which focuses on where

a community wants to be within a specified timeframe,

whether it be 5, 10 or 20 years into the future. The environmental visioning process will result in an environmental

vision statement with one or more alternative futures proposed. These futures should represent variations on a

theme aimed at achieving sustainable solutions for the

environment, economy and social well being. It has been

suggested that a community should develop a set of rigorous measures for evaluating its commitment to the future

(Sumner, 1998). These benchmarks can be a set of community attributes, such as number of viable businesses,

school class size, and amount of steam bank vegetation.

With regard to environmental visioning, EPA Region III

has introduced the concept of “green communities”. Green

communities are sustainable communities that integrate

a healthy environment, a vibrant economy, and a high quality of life. EPA Region III has developed a green communities checklist which is presented below—(http://

www.epa.gov/region03/greenkit).

When thinking about environmental goals and visions,

many communities have considered not only ecological

protection, but also the ways in which the environment

interacts with quality of life and the local economy. These

three endpoints can guide goal setting. For example, your

primary ecological protection goal might be protecting

streamside or woodland habitat. An associated “sustainable economy” goal might be working with landowners to

preserve their woodlands by carefully planning and selecting the timber harvest to protect tree age, size, and species diversity, and replanting species native to the area.

Improving the quality of life might combine protecting wildlife habitat with construction of nature trails to provide hiking and walking benefits. Goals to improve ecosystems

can include both present and future generations—that is,

the ecological legacy the community wants to leave its

children and grandchildren.

Tying goals to indicators, or specific measures of how well

the community is achieving its goals, is a concrete way to

determine progress and to modify and adjust the process

over time. For example, measuring community progress

in protecting aquatic species might involve counting the

number of wading birds in the area. Specifically, the community could seek to double the wading bird population by

the year 2000. Measuring the economic health of the community might involve tracking employment in eco-tourism

businesses with a goal such as 50 percent growth in local

eco-tourist business by the year 2000.

By stating goals in concrete, measurable terms, the community ensures that it can objectively assess the project’s

progress. The use of such indicators is discussed in more

detail in Chapters 3 and 5.

As more and more stakeholders join the effort, the community may need to go through the goal development process more than once. The period after the assessment,

planning, and execution of a particular ecosystem protection project provides an opportunity to reevaluate whether

the community is meeting goals, using indicators, and

whether these goals indeed represent the priorities of the

community. If not, then the strategies chosen may not be

effective and the underlying goals may not be relevant

Geographic Boundary and Partnerships

A group of individuals becomes organized around a perceived problem or issue (e.g., deteriorating water

quality or lost fishery). On further examination, the group assesses the appropriate geographical boundaries

within which ecological and social processes affect that issue (watershed). Given the chosen boundary, the

group may need to increase or otherwise adjust its membership to generate sufficient capacity for addressing

the stated issue. After further consideration, the group can decide the efficacy of the originally perceived

problem. In the esoteric terms of “risk assessment,” the group moves from problem recognition” to “risk

definition.” This point is important because the group may originally perceive a problem, e.g., a fishery

problem, only to later realize that the real issue is water supply. They may not be able to fix the local fishery

problem until they fix, or concurrently work on, the broader water supply problem.

How to Achieve Results through

Environmental Visioning

• Establish an environmental vision

• Establish goals with sustainable economics

• Tie goals to specific indicators of progress

• Redefine goals and environmental vision as

progress continues
11

and realistic. Ultimately, the community may want to undertake another goals development session.

Unless key community members participate in setting

goals, the goals produced won’t legitimately reflect the

wishes of the community as a whole. Goal setting works

best when participants are an inclusive group.

2.3 References

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, People,

Places, and Partnerships: A Progress Report on Community Based Environmental Protection, EPA-100-R97-003, Office of the Administrator, Washington, DC

July, 1997a.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, CommunityBased Environmental Protection: A Resource Book

for Protecting Ecosystems and Communities, EPA

230-B-96-003 Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation, Washington, DC, September 1997b.

U.S. EPA Home page: http://www.epa.gov/epahome/

general.htm

Checklist for a Green Community

A Green Community Strives to:

Environmentally

• Comply with environmental regulations

• Practice waste minimization and pollution prevention

• Conserve Natural Resources through sustainable land use

Economically

 • Promote diverse, locally owned and operated sustainable businesses (profitable, nonpolluting, socially

responsible)

 • Provide adequate affordable housing

 • Promote mixed-use residential areas which provide for open space

 • Promote economic equity

Socially

• Actively involve citizens from all sectors of the community through open, inclusive public outreach

efforts

• Ensure that public actions are sustainable, while incorporating local values and historical and cultural

considerations

• Create and maintain safe, clean neighborhoods and recreational facilities for all

• Provide adequate and efficient infrastructure (such as land, water, sewers, ... communication and energy systems) that protects public health and the environment, and transportation systems that accommodate broad public access including bike and pedestrian paths.

• Ensure equitable and effective educational and health-care systems.

Source: www.epa.gov/region03/greenkit/indicator.htm
12

3 Overview of Environmental Visioning

was named “the best turnaround story” in the nation. The

Chattanooga story is told in further detail in the “Chattanooga: A Sustainable Community” case study presented

in this chapter.

More and more communities are employing environmental visioning to achieve a sustainable mix of residential,

commercial and industrial development that ensures the

long-term well-being of their communities. EPA has documented several case studies of ongoing community-based

visioning efforts to support sustainable development. These

studies include:

• The Franklin Land Trust (Ashfield, Massachusetts)

has protected 11 rural and farmland sites through

innovative partnerships with farmers, state agencies, and other farmland preservation groups.

• Sustainable Urban/Rural Enterprise (SURE) is a

civic nonprofit corporation promoting the dual goals

of economic development and environmental stewardship for the City of Richmond, Indiana and

Wayne County.

• Dunn, Wisconsin implemented a land use plan in

order to preserve the town’s rural integrity, protect

natural habitat, conserve resources, preserve open

space and maintain farming as the town’s primary

economic activity. The plan included growth control measures through zoning restrictions, lot size

limits, conservation easements and the purchase

of development rights.

 • The Groundwater Guardian Program is a project

started by the Groundwater Foundation (Lincoln,

Nebraska), which helps communities promote

knowledge about groundwater issues and institute

local groundwater protection programs.

These and other case studies are presented in further detail

on EPA “Green Communities website” on the Internet

(www.epa.gov/region03/greenkit).

3.3 Key Features of Environmental

Visioning in the CBEP Context

A healthy environment, vibrant economy, and high quality

of life are desirable goals. However, communities often

approach these three goals separately. The CBEP pro3.1 Introduction

Environmental visioning is a set of steps by which members of a group or community gather their ideas about a

preferred condition (e.g. environmental health), formulate

goals and come up with strategies for achieving the goals.

These steps are a part of the overall Community-Based

Environmental Planning (CBEP), discussed in Chapter 2,

that builds the environmental vision and takes the actions

necessary to move the community towards its preferred

state. The environmental visioning process brings together

community stakeholders from public, private and civic

sectors to discuss local concerns, layout alternative futures, and draw short and long term plans for the community. The success of environmental visioning projects depends on the participation and commitment of stakeholder.

Environmental visioning engages community members in

assessing the current state of the environment, in visualizing a preferred state, and in proposing a practical methodology for moving towards the preferred state. A number

of community meetings may be used for brainstorming,

shaping ideas into goals, and setting strategies (EPA,

1994).

3.2 Evolution of Environmental Visioning

In many ways communities have always practiced some

sort of forecasting to predict future trends and to allocate

future resources such as demand for utilities. Traditionally,

this process has been implemented by local government

agencies, but it did not often reflect the context of problems across the entire community. With communities becoming increasingly diverse in every way and the decision-making power being more widely and thinly distributed, communities will be forced to employ inclusive approaches such as the process of environmental visioning.

The concept of environmental visioning is often thought of

as relatively a new idea. However, one of the most successful environmental visioning projects was started in

Chattanooga, Tennessee in 1969. In 1969, Chattanooga

was named the most polluted city in the country with air

pollution reducing visibility and increasing rates of respiratory illness. To address the problem, local leaders formed

the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Air Pollution Control

Board. The Board set pollution reduction goals and ensured that they were met. In 1990, Chattanooga was one

of the few cities across the country in compliance with all

national ambient air quality standards and on Earth Day
13

the community wants to be in 5, 10, 20 or more

years, the community can highlight its strengths

and weaknesses. This process can promote ideas

which will result in a vision statement. GIS is an

effective tool, particularly, for its use in this phase

of the environmental visioning process.

4. How do we get there?

Once action plans have been developed that will

direct the community towards a sustainable future, the momentum should be maintained by

implementing 1 or 2 projects which will illustrate

that all this time and effort was not wasted. Early

success will bring long-term commitments and participation necessary to sustain more difficult and

time-consuming projects.

5. How do we know that it works?

Benchmark may be established as indicators of

progress. They can be defined using the same

information compiled for environmental visioning.

For example, if the environmental vision includes

cleaning stream banks in few phases, these

phases would become benchmarks. Achieving one

benchmark at a time is indication of progress. The

environmental visioning process is summarized

in EPA Region III’s “Green Community Flow Chart”

as shown in Figure 3-1.

3.4 Environmental Visioning Tools

Environmental visioning is a process of expressing a preferred state that a community hopes to attain. Some of

the visual tools that are available to community members

for illustrating their vision, as well as other future alternatives, are discussed below.

3.4.1 Graphic Tools

• General data display methods, such as graphs,

charts, and tables, show trends and valuable statistical information. Also they are easily developed

using personal computers.

• Maps of local cultural and natural resources. For

example, land use maps provide information on

current land use, which is basis for identifying

potentially developable areas, and for estimating

development impacts.

• Regional and local planning maps, such as site

plans, renderings, and panoramas provide two- or

three-dimensional perspectives on current and

future landscapes.

• Drawings and illustrations. This tool is particularly

useful for interactively changing illustrations and

can be used to visualize a particular feature for

discussion.

• Photographs such as digital mapping. For example, photographic images can be manipulated

cess emphasizes all three simultaneously and addresses

the following questions:

1. Where are we now?

Before goals and objectives can be set, a community must assess its current condition. The first

question in CBEP process—“Where are we

now?”—is geared towards characterizing the current condition of the community and assessing

its strengths and weaknesses. When reviewing the

current condition of the community, it is important to look at economic, environmental and social conditions. Once an assessment is complete,

community members can then rank the problem

areas based on risk to the environment, quality of

life, and economic sustainability.

As discussed previously, the key to success in

the community assessment phase is involving the

right people. This effort will start small, as a planning team that seeks out local experts. The team

leading the assessment should be representative

of the entire community at large and include personnel knowledgeable on a variety of topics. Information on involving the entire community in the

assessment phase is available in the CBEP resource book published by EPA on the Internet.

The boundaries of the study area can be defined

in several fashions. It can be defined in terms of

the problems to be addressed, a watershed boundary or municipal limits. The boundaries of the study

are most critical in the data gathering process. If

the area is too small, problems which affect the

entire community may not be realized. Economic

and environmental problems often don’t lend themselves to political boundaries. Therefore, the study

area should be chosen carefully so that issues to

be dealt with are clear.

2. Where are we going?

After completing the community assessment, the

baseline knowledge necessary to evaluate trends

and predict what is in store for the area of concern in the near future should be available. The

task is to project the baseline data into the future

and learn “Where are we going?” This projection

includes evaluating socioeconomic trends, environmental trends, civic participation trends, and

sustainability trends. Several case studies that

explain trend analysis are available from EPA in

the “Green Communities Tool Kit” on the Internet

(http://www.epa.gov/region03/greenkit/2tools.htm).

3. Where do we want to be?

After the community assessment has been completed and current trends have been established,

the vision statement is established by answering

the question “where do we want to be?” By proposing alternative futures and models of where
14

to show different design features or alternative

developments in an urban (town center) or suburban setting These provide a means for highlighting features of interest in a community vision. Digital imaging, which combines emerging photographic technology with manipulations by computers, is a great tool for communities wishing to

visualize alternative futures.

3.4.2 Software Tools

• Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software

is a powerful tool that can gather, analyze, and

integrate nearly any combination of data (e.g.,

census tract information, natural resources, and

infrastructure) and print the data in maps or display them on computer screens.

• Multimedia software uses a combination of computer animation, video, and audio data, to create

a highly sophisticated, computer presentation

stored on a compact disc.

• Virtual Reality provides a visual experience using

imaginary data, by using computer software, a

head-mounted display with miniature screens, and

movement-sensitive gloves.

3.5 Steinitz Framework for Environmental

Planning and Evaluating Alternative

Futures

Overview

Over the past decades, a number of researchers and practitioners have established protocols and frameworks for

Chattanooga: A Sustainable Community

Chattanooga, Tennessee, a mid-sized city located along the Tennessee River just north of the Georgia

border, was not only voted the most polluted city in the United States in 1969, but faced the label of an

“invisible” city with no real image. Job layoffs, deteriorating city infrastructure, racial tensions, and social

division only compounded the pollution problems. Recognizing these serious problems, a few visionary

community leaders created Chattanooga Venture – a nonprofit organization with the goal of full participation

from the community in cleaning up their city environmentally, socially, and economically.

Chattanooga Venture designed and implemented a project called “Vision 2000” which brought together over

1700 people to take part in city planning over a four month period. The community participants were encouraged to dream of what they wanted their community to be and to organize these dreams into a formal list.

Diverse groups of community members united and literally used brown paper and markers as they brainstormed,

debated, categorized and organized their concerns.

The result was a set of 40 goals for the city to achieve by the year 2000. The goals were categorized

according to future alternatives, places, people, work, play and government. The action led to 223 projects

and programs with an investment in the community of over $800 million, that varied in scope but all worked

to create a sustainable community. Chattanooga Venture has also compiled a step-by-step guide for other

communities to use in the visioning process.

Environmental problems were the impetus for the community-wide actions that led to the creation of several

public/private partnerships.

• The Environmental City Project – working for expansion or relocation of nonpolluting industries, retention

of sound environmental businesses, and fostering environmental awareness.

• The Chattanooga Environmental Initiative - strives to make the city a national center for environmental

information and business and create a zero emissions industrial park.

• The Tennessee River Gorge Trust - protects 25,000 acres of land.

• Electric bus technology – Chattanooga maintains the largest fleet of free electric buses in the country.

• The Greenways Planning Project, which is creating a network of protected space and linear parkways

through eight counties.

More information is available on the Internet at www.Chattanooga.net
15

conducting ecosystem planning efforts. A large portion of

the research has been devoted to the representation of

the problem as a multi-objective mathematical optimization model, and the application of efficient solution techniques to obtain an optimal solution (Gershon and

Duckstein, 1983). Instead of looking for an optimal solution, another body of research has focused on generating

diverse alternatives within the planning constraints (Brill,

1979; Kshirsagar, 1983). An application of such techniques

to land use planning has been discussed by Kshirsagar

and Brill (1984).

Steinitz (1993) has developed and employed a technique,

referred to as the ‘Steinitz Framework,’ which has proven

successful in instituting the visioning process. The Steinitz

Framework is provided here as a guide for structuring an

environmental visioning effort. A similar framework in the

context of watershed analysis has been proposed by Montgomery et al., (1995).

There are structural similarities among critical phases and

milestones addressed in designing environmental, landscape, and ecological projects (Steinitz, 1993). Based on

these similarities, Steinitz presented six project phases,

known as the “Steinitz Framework” (Steinitz, 1993), through

which ecological projects pass both during early stages in

defining the project scope and methodology, and later towards implementation and project conclusion (Figure 3-2).

The six phases of the Steinitz Framework are discussed

below in the context of environmental planning. The name

of each phase includes the word “models” to emphasize

the fact that a variety of models (methods) is available to

achieve the end-result of that phase. One or more of these

models can be used in each phase. These phases together

address the basic questions raised by the CBEP in Section 3.3.

Representation Models

The first step in any environmental planning project is to

characterize the initial or current state in content, boundary, space, and time. All natural and cultural systems are

characterized during this phase. These include, but are

not limited to, hydrology, geology, land cover/use, topography, biodiversity, fires, roads and public ownership. Representation of landscape is best done with visualization

techniques. For example, maps and pictures give good

visual sense of the landscape. GIS provides tools for putting together layers of information about the landscape’s

natural and cultural systems, and for displaying them visually on computer screens or on printed maps.

Process Models

Once the pertinent elements of landscape are characterized, their structural and functional relationships can be

studied to describe how the landscape operates. This phase

includes modeling key processes and their relationship

with other interacting processes. Typical processes include

physical, such as hydrology and geology; biological, such

as vegetation and wild life; and cultural, such as land use

and management practices.

Evaluation Models

This phase evaluates how well the current landscape is

functioning. First, some measures of judgement are established for rating performance from least to most desirable, based on the benefits and pitfalls of each scenario.

Then the current landscape and the state of its elements

are evaluated using the performance standards. For example, a survey on visual preference could indicate how

well the visual landscape is functioning. Alternatively, a

study on the patterns of precipitation, stream hydrographs

Advantages of CBEP-based

Environmental Visioning

The primary advantages are:

• Greater depth and breadth of issues that are

addressed

• Involvement of the full community

• Fostering of environmental stewardship in all

local decisions

As communities work toward sustainable solutions, they realize that they can achieve a mix of

residential, commercial, and industrial development that ensures the long-term well being of

the community – both economically and environmentally. The environmental visioning process

strives to be non-adversarial, to build constructively on differences, and to achieve a strong

community-based consensus.

Basic Questions Addressed in CommunityBased Environmental Planning (CBEP)

• Where are we now? - Develop a community

profile based on a self-assessment.

• Where are we going? - Formulate a trend

statement based on important economic, social and environmental trends.

• Where do we want to be? - Develop a community vision statement.

• How do we get there? - Develop community

action plans.

• How do we know if it is working? - Establish benchmarks as indicators of progress
16

and flooding, could be used to evaluate stream performance

related to flooding.

Change Models

Predictable changes in landscape are based on current

trends, such as demographic changes, urban development,

and deforestation. Changes may also be proposed to reflect community needs. These changes can be modeled

using cultural parameters, such as, growth and development plans; or natural process, such as hydrologic and

drought cycles. Using several scenarios of land development policies, as well as other cultural and natural changes,

produces a number of alternative scenarios.

Impact Models

Process models are used to simulate changes and predict the impacts resulting from such changes. This phase

provides information about the alternative futures of the

landscape. In any given area, the physical processes (e.g.,

hydrology, biology, and geology) affect each other. For

example, high-density land developments traditionally increase pavements and contiguous hard surfaces resulting

in high runoff from precipitation and less infiltration. This

process results in a reduction of soil moisture, erosion of

stream banks, and decline in vegetation growth. Thus, traditional land developments not only affect the hydrologic

process, but also impact some biological processes that

thrive on soil moisture and vegetation health. Thus, the

impacts of land development and deforestation on

biodiversity or hydrologic processes may constitute one

aspect of the study. At this stage, the impacts from several change scenarios are studied to yield a number of

alternative futures.

Decision Models

A comparative analysis of the predicted changes and their

impacts on the landscape presents decision makers with

the opportunity to make informed decisions on what

changes should (not) happen in order to reach the preferred alternative future. Adequate information is required

in order to reach healthy decisions.

Figure 3-1. Green community flow chart (source: http://www.epa.gov/region03/greenkit).

Portions reprinted with permission of the Oregon Visions Project.

Lets Go! How do we

get there?

Where do we

want to be?

Where are we

going?

Where are we

now?

Community

Profile

Trend

Statement

Vision

Statement

Action

Plan

Implementation

Plan

Visioning Action Plan

Risk Management

Environmental

Solution

Environmental

Self

Assessment

How are we doing?

Measures of Success

Public

Participation

Economic

Profile Projects/

Planned Activities

(Incremental Success)

Probable

Scenarios

Planned Full

Build-Out

Case

Studies

Community

Participation

Trends

 n Environmental n Socio-Economic

 n Demographic

Community

Participation

and

Feedback

Alternate

Futures

 n Keep Simple n Graphics

 n Flexible

VISION

FOR

2020

Celebrate

Completion

of

Visioning

Economic

Community Involvement

A Green Community
17

Figure 3-2. Steinitz’s framework for landscape planning (source: http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/brc/maps/fig_5.html).
18

3.6 References

Brill, E.D., Jr., The Use of Optimization Models in

Public Sector Planning, Management Science 25(5),

1979.

Gershon, M. and L. Duckstein, Multiobjective Approaches to River Basin Planning, Journal of Water

Resources Planning and Management, American Society of Civil Engineers, 109(1):13-28, 1983.

Kshirsagar, S.R., Ideation and Evaluation in Environmental Planning, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana, 1983.

Kshirsagar, S.R. and E.D. Brill Jr., Ideation and Evaluation Methods Applied to Landuse Planning, Environment and Planning B, 11:313, 1984.

Montgomery, D.R., G.E. Grant, and K. Sullivan, Watershed Analysis as a Framework for Implementing

Ecosystem Management, Water Resources Bulletin,

American Water Resources Association, 31(3):369-

386,1995.

National Civic League, The Community Visioning and

Strategic Planning Handbook, NCL Press, Denver,

Colorado, 1997.

Steinitz, Carl, Geographical Information Systems: A

Personal Historical Perspective, The Framework For

A Recent Project, (And Some Questions For The Future); European Conference on Geographic Information Systems, Genoa, Italy, March 30,1993.

Sumner, Richard, and David Hulse, EPA Research is

Helping Communities Achieve Their Desired Vision of

the Future, Watershed Management Council Networker,

Fall 1997, 7(3): 10-11,19.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Planning for Small Communities: A Guide for Local

Decision-Makers, EPA/625/R-94/009, Washington, DC,

1994.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Conference on Environmental Problem-Solving with Geographic Information Systems, Office of Research and

Development, Washington, DC, September 1995.

Application of the Steinitz Framework in the Snyderville Basin, Utah

The Snyderville Basin, Utah, is located east of the highly developed Great Salt Lake Valley. The population

in the area is approximately 10,000, who depend on agriculture and recreation as major economic activities.

With world class ski resorts, such as Park City and Deer Valley, one of the most valued attributes of the

county is its open landscape. Population growth in the Salt Lake Valley is expected to expand to the Snyderville

area, threatening the environmental quality of the county.

In order to understand the extent of the problem, a GIS representation of the area was established. It included

digital representation of terrain elevations, land cover, and land ownership. The GIS data, in addition to other

non-GIS information, made a basis for evaluation of the current state of the ecosystem. Potential changes in

the environment were simulated using current growth and development trends, and their impacts on the

natural resources were estimated. The GIS provided tools for integrating geographic and descriptive information, and for presenting changes and their impacts in visual outputs, such as maps.

Five alternative futures were considered for the basin, in order to minimize infrastructure developments and

their impact on the environment. All of the futures require public management of growth and development in

the area.

Source: http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/brc/framework/snyderville_basin.html
19

in Canada, and the application of the Aerial Design and

Planning Tool (ADAPT) System statewide in Kentucky and

Ohio are examples of some of these pioneering efforts.

In the United States, major environmental programs were

often drivers for the development and implementation of a

GIS. For example, the Clean Water Act Amendments required the completion of basin-wide planning efforts under

Section 303(e), area wide waste water management and

planning under Section 208, and local facilities’ plans under Section 201. The GIS capabilities, developed and applied in response to these needs, incorporated spatial database elements and integrated analytical models for rainfall runoff modeling, sewer design and costing, and water

quality impact analysis.

In addition, GIS graphical display capabilities were used

to show the impact of alternative development and management scenarios. Similarly, the programs and regulations developed in response to Section 502 of the Surface

Mining Control Act required the development of land use

plans associated with surface mining activities. This act

also provided funding for regional and statewide planning

efforts that was used to develop GIS capabilities to support the needs of sound environmental development and

management of our nation’s coal resources.

Although the application of GIS for environmental problems and issues has spanned at least 30 years, it was not

until the 1980s, with the advent and broad utilization of

microcomputer capabilities, that GIS technology and applications have accelerated. The rapid and expanded use

of GIS is stimulated by a wide range of issues supported,

both by the public and private sector due to:

 • Reductions in the cost of hardware and software

 • Efficiency in the development of the spatial database component (generally the most expensive

element) in the application of GIS technology)

Several processes within CBEP and environmental visioning are very important from the perspective that they can,

will, and do benefit from GIS applications.

4.1.3 Organization of This Chapter

The advent of environmental visioning, CBEP, watershed

analysis, risk management and analysis, and related activities, have made comprehensive and efficient use of

4 GIS-Based Environmental Visioning

4.1 Introduction

4.1.1 Definition of a GIS

A GIS is a computerized, integrated system used to compile store, manipulate, and output mapped spatial data

associated with a particular geographic area or region. The

incorporation of geographic information into a GIS supports a wide range of analyses and promotes the use of

these data to better understand the characteristics of the

region under a wide range of management and/or development scenarios.

Although a GIS can be used to create maps, it is important to recognize that a GIS in itself is not just a mapmaking system, nor does it always attempt to provide an

exact replication of all mapped data. A GIS contains analytical tools that also allow the user to identify the spatial

relationships between map features. It utilizes the computerized representation of these features to provide the

input data to a wide range of process, impact, and evaluation models. It also serves as the receptor for the output

of these models and analytical tools to display impacts

and results of development/management scenarios in both

a graphical and tabular fashion.

4.1.2 History of a GIS

Engineers, landscape architects, and planners have long

utilized some of the fundamental techniques such as manually created overlays, embodied within a GIS, long before

the advent of computerized capabilities and data management systems. The advent of computers has increased

the ease, complexity, and speed of completing such analyses.

Much in the evolution of GIS can be traced to the early to

mid 1960s. For example, Howard Fisher at Harvard University invented two early GIS tools, SYMAP and SYMVU,

which combined early data storage techniques in association with chloropleth plotting (SYMAP) and vector plotting techniques (SYMVU). These systems were used to

display individual and combined characteristics stored in

a digital database to better understand the interaction and

consequences of various terrestrial parameters.

Significant increase in the use of GIS techniques began in

the early 1970s, improving upon the capabilities inherent

in SYMAP/SYMVU. The PIOS system in San Diego (which

became the forerunner of ESRI’s ARC/INFO technology),

Maryland’s ‘MAC1’ system, efforts by Dr. Roger Tomlinson
20

GPS receivers have a wide range of accuracy. The U.S.

Air Force, which controls the GPS satellites, deliberately

introduces noise, known as Selective Availability (SA), to

GPS signals so that a single receiver (field) for civilian

use has a positional accuracy of 100 meters. Using a second GPS receiver (reference), located at a position with

known geographic coordinates, can significantly reduce

SA. The reference GPS receiver uses the knowledge of

its position to correct not only SA, but also other errors

related to the atmosphere, clock, and orbit of the satellites. This correction method called differential GPS (DGPS)

results in sub-meter accuracy. DGPS can be made in realtime through radio communication between the reference

and field receivers. Alternatively, corrections can be made

after data collection through a process known as postprocessing. The prices of GPS receivers and their functional capabilities change with the intended use. For example, a recreational GPS costs a few hundred dollars, a

GPS/GIS may cost several thousand dollars, and a Survey/GPS can cost up to $50,000. The following categories

are common uses and characteristics of GPS receivers:

• Recreation—Portable, stand-alone, few channels,

no data logging, 100-meter accuracy

• Navigation—Differential, 1-meter accuracy, specialized navigation features

• GIS—Portable, differential, 1-meter accuracy, data

logging capability, software interface

• Survey/Geodesy—Portable, differential, dual frequency, centimeter accuracy, data logging capability

• Military applications require receivers with high

accuracy

GPS/GIS receivers are generally portable weighing one

kilogram (hand-held units) or 3 kilograms (backpack units).

Some receivers store only coordinates of positions, while

others can also record attributes in 3-level hierarchical

structures.

4.2.1.2 Remote Sensing Data

Remote sensing is a method of gathering information about

an object without physical contact (Campbell, 1987). The

information is obtained by recording the electromagnetic

radiation reflected or emitted by the object. Some remote

sensors, such as radiometers, produce data points while

others scan a surface (e.g., earth) and produce images.

The latter group is referred to as imaging sensors. Satellite images and aerial photographs are examples of commonly used data from imaging sensors.

The most commonly used remote sensing data comes

from satellite systems, airborne systems, and groundbased systems. Each system has advantages and shortcomings in the following areas:

GIS in the efforts to reduce the synergistic impacts of

pollutants, and adopt pollutant management strategies. To

illustrate the use of GIS in supporting these efforts, this

chapter:

• Provides an overview of the various GIS components

• Identifies some of the benefits/pitfalls of GIS applications

• Summarizes existing approaches to GIS-based

environmental visioning and highlights such approaches in several example case studies.

4.2 Components of a GIS

The three components of a GIS from a systems perspective are: (1) data, (2) hardware and, (3) software.

4.2.1 GIS Data

GIS data are stored in two complementary forms: geographic and descriptive. Geographic data include the geometry of physical features, such as sizes and shapes,

and include such elements as political boundaries, soil

boundary, roads, rivers, and buildings. Descriptive data

are typically stored in tabular forms and contain information about physical features and their relationships. For

example, when representing a lake, the boundaries of the

lake are stored with geographic reference, such as latitude and longitude. Descriptive data about the lake, such

as name, water quality, list of recreational activities, and

standards and regulatory policies are stored in tabular

forms. Descriptive data are usually coded so that they

can be linked to the corresponding physical features. Therefore, a mouse click on a lake brings to the screen tabular

information on the physical characteristics of the lake.

Common suppliers of data are local, state, and federal

government agencies and private suppliers. The typical

data sources are global positioning system (GPS) data

and remote-sensing data, which are discussed in further

detail in the following subsections.

4.2.1.1 Global Positioning System (GPS) Data

The Global Positioning System (GPS) provides the means

to determine the latitude and the longitude of any position

on the earth using a GPS receiver. The GPS is a set of

satellites that transmit radio signals to GPS receivers for

locating the position of the receiver. (Diggelen, 1994). The

GPS technology is increasingly used for obtaining geographically referenced data in many applications, including GIS.

A GPS signal is a code modulated in a carrier radio wave.

Each satellite transmits the signal in two frequencies so

that errors introduced in the signal as it passes through

the ionosphere are corrected. In order to determine the

latitude, longitude, altitude, and time, a receiver should

get signals from at least four satellites. The more signals

received and processed the better the accuracy.
21

• Spatial resolution

Spatial resolution is defined as the smallest object that can be identified in an image. Generally,

it depends on the sensor altitude and field of view

(FOV). Satellite data has low resolutions varying

from five meters to kilometers, although efforts

are directed towards achieving higher resolutions.

Airborne systems offer higher resolution since aircraft altitude is lower. Spatial resolutions in the

order of centimeters can be obtained with airborne

sensors.

• Spectral channels

Remote sensors use filters that are sensitive to

narrow bands of the radiation spectrum. The breakdown of the total radiation into small bands is important for studying different types of objects.

Some bands are useful for studying water, others

provide information about air, vegetation, soils,

rocks, etc. For example, combinations of some

bands, known as vegetation indices, provide valuable information about vegetation health, plant

stress, and potential yield of a crop. Sensors that

measure radiation in a number of fine bands are

useful for a wide range of studies.

• Radiometric quality

The quality of radiometric data gathered by a sensor is affected by several factors. Radiometric

resolution is the detail in radiometric values (digital numbers) and depends on the sensor type. For

example, a 7-bit system has a range of 128 values (shades) for each pixel (unit of image), while

an 8-bit system provides 256 values for the same

pixel.

Another factor that affects the radiometric quality

is the atmosphere. Atmospheric material (e.g.,

gases, clouds, and water vapor) between a satellite sensor and the surface of the earth can affect

the quality of the satellite image by attenuating

radiation or reflecting and emitting into the sensor.

• Ground coverage

Ground coverage is the geographic area that an

image covers. For example, a satellite image may

cover a large area of 100 kilometers by 60 kilometers, while a typical image from an airborne

system would cover an area of 3 kilometers by 2

kilometers. A large number of images may be processed if an airborne system is used for studies

covering large areas.

• Flexibility

Flexibility in timing and location of data acquisition is important for many projects. For example,

with airborne systems, you can decide where,

when and how often to collect data, and at what

altitudes (with limitations). Satellite systems do

not offer such flexibility.

4.2.2 GIS Hardware

Computer hardware used to support GIS is a highly variable part of the overall system. A fully functional GIS must

contain hardware to support data input, output, storage,

retrieval, display, and analysis.

GIS data and databases are sometimes so huge that it

takes minutes just to display, and hours to make an analysis. Users should customize their hardware environment

to best meet their own individual needs.

A typical GIS unit is composed of a computer workstation, printer, plotter, and digitizing table. The workstation is

desirably equipped with a high-speed processor, large storage capacity, and a high-resolution color monitor. Getting

high-speed processors and high-resolution monitors can

improve the efficiency of the presentations. However, highend products cost more than low-end products and a balance between cost and performance should be considered. In addition, simplified fast GIS products are far more

effective with local organizations.

4.2.3 GIS Software

Software is a combination of computer programs, routines,

and symbolic languages that control and operate computer

hardware, or manipulate data. There are two classes of

software in a GIS environment. The first is the operating

system software, which is designed to allow communication between the computer and the user. The operating

system controls the flow of data, the application of other

How to Detect Environmental Changes Using

Remote Sensing

• Define scope of change detection

- Study area

- Frequency of change (e.g., seasonal, year)

- Change indicators (classes of vegetation, soil,

etc.)

• Process and classify multiple-date digital images

of the area with similar

- Spatial resolution

- Spectral channels

- Radiometric quality

- Atmospheric conditions

- Phenological considerations

• Perform GIS-based analysis

- Change detection

- Statistical analysis

More information is available on the Internet site:

http://www.geog.nottingham.ac.uk/~dee/ceo/

chdetect/rssec.html
22

programs, the organization and management of files, and

the display of information.

The second class of software is the GIS software, which

includes programs and tools that provide an interface between users and their geographic data. These tools include those used for entering, manipulating, analyzing, and

displaying GIS data. As a user submits a request by clicking on a mouse, or entering a command on a keyboard,

GIS software interprets the request and executes a set of

commands to produce the results. The unique method of

storing and manipulating data differentiates GIS from other

drafting or cartographic software.

4.2.3.1 GIS Database Software

A GIS must allow the operator to: (1) incorporate (import)

data from outside sources, (2) easily update and alter data,

and (3) ask data-related questions of (or query) the database. The database management system (DBMS) software, that is a part of a typical GIS, provides these capabilities. In order to store and manipulate data, DBMS uses

a data model, such as the hierarchical, network, and relational data models. The hierarchical data model consists

of an ordered set of trees, organizing the data into childparent structures. The network model is based on two sets

of data, a set of records and a set of links. Network databases are complex, and can be regarded as an extended

form of the hierarchical databases, since they use multiple child-parent relationship structures.

The relational model, which is the most widely used data

model, is based on the mathematics of set theory. The

basic model consists of three parts: data structures, known

as tables or relations, rules for data integrity, and data

manipulation operators. A relational DBMS (RDBMS) allows for easy data entry and manipulation, provides fast

query and display, and maintains data integrity and security. All GIS packages use some type of database for storing and maintaining data.

4.2.4 Models

A model is an abstraction of reality designed to achieve a

specific goal. Models can be classified into conceptual

models and mathematical/computer models. “There are

some very generic, conceptual models that will help kindle

the visioning process. One such model is rooted in conservation biology. It depicts the importance of conserving

those landscape patches that are relatively intact and environmentally significant (e.g., refugia). Another conceptual model of great importance is rooted in landscape ecology. It depicts landscapes as being comprised of various

pathways for the movement of energy and materials (e.g.,

source areas, channels, and sinks). Therefore, in order to

conserve our valued, ecologically significant patches, we

must protect other patches and corridors that serve as

their source, channel, and sink areas. Landscape design

and environmental visioning can proceed using these

models as initial assumptions.” (Sumner, 1998).

Mathematical models use equations and formulas for estimating results. They are useful in simulating various scenarios and events and in predicting current and future impacts. A GIS provides tools for developing models or creating interface for existing models. For example, existing

hydrologic, hydraulic and water quality models can enhance

a GIS by increasing its capacity to simulate flooding, to

estimate stream bank erosion, and to predict pollutant loading.

The broad categorization of models is presented to dispel

the notion that models are necessarily complex “things”

that are implemented in computer software. This categorization of models into conceptual and mathematical is not

the only one. For example, Steinitz (1993) classified models into six groups, according to their use in landscape

planning. McAllister et al., (1996) provide a conceptual

framework for synoptic assessment of the Prairie Pothole

Region (PPR) as a rapid assessment technique for cases

in which time, resources, and information are limited. Another conceptual framework adopted by public agencies

across the Northwest for watershed management and native fish recovery has been published by the Pacific Rivers Council (1996).

How to Map Industrial and Urban Air Pollution Using Remote Sensing

Air pollutants released by industrial and urban sites may be mapped by using the Light Detection and Range

(LIDAR) finding technology. LIDAR is an instrument that measures the reflection and scattering of infrared

pulses aimed at an object (e.g., clouds, gases).

Fluxes of SO2, NO2, and Hg released into the atmosphere by industrial plants can be measured using the

differential absorption LIDAR (DIAL). The concentrations of these gases can be shown both vertically and

horizontally, to identify the most vulnerable areas.

For more information, visit the Internet site:

http://atompc2.fysik.lth.se/AFDOCS/progrep/html/30.htm
23

4.2.5 Outputs

Output data from GIS can be presented in several forms

including maps, graphs, tables and animated displays.

Maps are usually paper-based medium on which images

are drawn. Examples of GIS maps include topographic

maps, road maps, and land cover/land use maps. Graphs

are charts used to compare data elements or show temporal or spatial trends. GIS provides methods for summarizing data into graphs. Tables are the basis of a database,

and illustrate information in columns and rows. They can

be used for creating graphs. GIS products outputs can

also be displayed in an animated manner. For example, a

set of digital maps or graphs can be “set in motion” to

display temporal changes.

4.3 Benefits/Pitfalls of GIS Applications

This section will highlight some of the benefits and pitfalls

with a GIS application, particularly as they relate to the

environmental visioning process. This list is not meant to

be all-inclusive but does identify the key elements of GIS

application that need to be considered by all users. Users

must be aware of the full range of benefits and opportunities that can be realized through the application of this

technology, to reap the maximum benefits.

4.3.1 Benefits

The important benefit of a GIS application to environmental visioning is its inherent ability to support the incorporation and analysis of all spatial data essential to the complete integrated environmental decision-making process.

The integration of data, models and perspectives for representation of a desired community is inherent in the environmental visioning and CBEP approach.

A GIS provides the uniformity of data usage and the flexibility to test and evaluate multiple scenarios that will preclude these arguments from interfering with the decisionmaking process. Use of a common database takes out

the differences in presentation, evaluation, and decision

making, based on using different forms and types of data.

A GIS provides the opportunity to conduct sensitivity analyses appropriate for the level of accuracy of the input data.

This allows the engineers, planners, elected officials, and

the public in general to focus on the impacts and analysis

of alternatives, as opposed to arguments over the accuracy of the data being utilized in the analysis. Visual outputs, available through use of GIS technology, can be used

to present maps, overlays, and three-dimensional depictions of alternative environmental and ecosystem management scenarios.

Clearly, one of the decided benefits and advantages of the

GIS technology is to enhance the communication of information, outputs, and decision-making materials to a wide

range of decision-makers. Application of a GIS can significantly reduce time and monetary constraints, and the

complexities associated with traditional, analytical, and

evaluation methodologies.

After the planning process and decision-making efforts

have been moved onto the implementation phase, the GIS

can continue to support the process by tracking the success and/or failures associated with alternative strategies.

A GIS permits the tracking of plan performance and the

testing of new approaches, based on new parameters, new

information, and/or new conditions within or outside the

study area. Supporting the implementation process enhances the environmental visioning and CBEP process

and ensures a continually evolving ecosystem and environmental management approach.

Thus, it is essential, when developing and applying a GIS,

that the capabilities for ongoing application and utilization

are incorporated within the decision-making group/organization. Such an ongoing staff/personnel commitment will

be required to take full advantage of the efforts initiated in

the initial visioning efforts.

4.3.2 Pitfalls

Application of GIS technology has not been without its

stumbles, falls, and, unfortunately, some significant collapses. The current stand-alone and various loose or tight

coupling approaches for integrating GIS with environmental modeling are essentially technology driven without adHow to Create Process Models

The “process models” used in evaluating the ecological effects of “alternative futures” often are associational.

Many visioning projects start with a classification and characterization of land cover within a study area (e.g.,

forest, agriculture, high-density urban, low density urban).

Environmental attributes then are assigned to each class. The level of effort afforded to characterization can

range from using the best professional judgement (BPJ) to empirically derived data. When following the simple

BPJ or rule-based approach, for example, land cover can be simply associated with higher versus lower

wildlife function. Likewise, some classes can be associated with high and low water quality. Each alternative

future represents a relative change (acreage) in the various patches of land cover, with corresponding (shift)

effect on a given assessment endpoint (wildlife, water quality) – and from there we get into the “evaluation” and

“change” models”( Sumner, 1998).
24

equately addressing the conceptual problems involved in

the integration (Sui, 1999).

Instead of being dictated by GIS technology, it is imperative to evaluate the necessity for a GIS based on the size

of the study area as well as the nature of the solutions

that are required. For example, a small community of 5000

people may be interested in implementing GIS software to

integrate their geographic and local information, as well as

to serve as a platform for spatial visualization and analysis for better community services, within a limited budget

and time frame. GIS application, for such a project, can

be out of reach due to constrained resources such as data,

software, time and staff expertise, unless help from external agents such as federal and/or state governments, academic and/or local institutions for hardware and human

resources is obtained.

The first issue faced for setting up a GIS is the substantial time and cost required to compile the necessary data

and analyze the system’s data. Improper applications of

GIS will result in costly time-consuming efforts of implementing the GIS and training the personnel to operate it.

High initial costs will be incurred in purchasing the necessary hardware, software, and for constant maintenance,

leading to difficulty in complying with the stringent time

and budget constraints.

GIS applications are disadvantageous when one fails to

1. Understand the requirements for the vision in mind.

2. Define the tools (such as the extent of spatial visualization, the need of external models) that

would be required in order to attain the vision. For

instance, if people fail to look carefully at the data

and explore the cartographic alternatives, they can

easily overlook interesting spatial trends or regional

groupings (Monmonier, 1996).

3. Select the right technology that would integrate

the required tools for better decision making. With

powerful computers and “user friendly” mapping

software, unintentional cartographic self deception can be inevitable (Monmonier, 1996).

Another major pitfall in developing a GIS relates to the

development of the database. The cost to develop a GIS

database rapidly accelerates with the application of the

GIS, thus exceeding the requirements of the problem(s)

at hand. Often this means capturing “potential” data, larger

than needed, resulting in the development of an extensive

GIS database, leading to tremendous expenditures that

may not be required. The “potential” data may not be consistent with the modeling and analytical tools to be employed. Such an approach used is called a ‘data-driven, or

bottom-up approach.

For example, in early GIS applications associated with

non-point source analysis, some GIS efforts stressed incorporation of soils series survey data from the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service, because soil series

maps were deemed to be “the best data available.” As

soon as the data were encoded, after laborious and timeconsuming efforts, applications of erosion modeling based

on the Universal Soil Loss Equation immediately aggregated the detailed information from the soils series into

data organized by soils association.

The ‘bottom-up’ approach caused large expenditure of

money to incorporate data into a format that was not used

in the analysis. Considerable money could have been saved

if soils’ associations had been incorporated; recognizing

this level of detail was most appropriate to support the

analysis tools and the questions to be answered.

A more appropriate approach to selection and development of a GIS database is a ‘top-down’ approach, based

on the following scenario:

Delineate Effective Riparian Buffers Using GIS-based Models

GIS can be used to delineate an effective riparian buffer for protecting stream water quality from agricultural

chemicals and sediment loading. A riparian buffer is a vegetated patch along a stream or lakeshore. It has the

following advantages:

Protects stream/lake water quality by reducing direct sediment and chemical loading

Maintains stream bank integrity by reducing precipitation runoff and erosion

Enhances biodiversity and aquatic life

Buffer widths can either be assigned (e.g., 50-200 meters) or determined from Riparian Buffer Delineation

Equations (RBDE). Effective solutions can be obtained by using RBDE in a GIS environment.

More information can be obtained on the Internet at: (http:www.grida.no/prog/global/cgair/awpack/water.htm)
25

1) Define the problem that needs to be solved and

addressed.

2) Identify and select the tools (i.e., models, analytical capabilities) that will be used to generate the

alternative management scenarios for environmental visioning. The choice of development tools

strongly influences the user interface (Moser et

al., 1999).

3) Define the levels and types of data necessary to

support these tools and address the problem.

4) Incorporate these data into the GIS, and integrate

the GIS with the models.

This top-down approach, as opposed to the data-driven

bottom-up approach, is the most cost-effective and meaningful way to establish a GIS to meet the needs of each

specific visioning application. However, this does lead to

a chicken and egg problem, where it is necessary to understand the details to select a “right” GIS tool, but the

detail requirements can be rapidly developed with a GIS.

This problem can be defused by developing a pre-implementation plan such as to

(i) Hold discussions with people who have been in

similar situations, and learn from their experience.

(ii) Hire GIS and planning experts who can draw upon

their experiences to recommend ways to build the

GIS or to select better GIS visioning tool.

(iii) Conduct a pilot plan study to carry out a cost analysis to evaluate the time required to build the system, cost of operating the system over an extended period, time savings using the system and

non-quantifiable benefits of GIS.

GIS capabilities greatly enhance the amount of information, data, and analytical capabilities available to the decision-making group(s). In doing so, there is always the possibility that the capabilities of the GIS can create a sense

of ‘information overload’ on the decision makers. The use

of a GIS must be tailored and targeted to the needs of

each decision-making group, so that the appropriate information is presented in an understandable and meaningful

way.

Similarly, the technical complexity of using a GIS can

sometimes intimidate and confuse some of the stakeholders and, thus, delay the decision-making process. Fortunately, the application and acceptance of computer tools

has greatly increased in the last decade, and the historical fear of computers or misunderstanding of their application has diminished.

The construction of a database, the application of modeling tools, and the acquisition of hardware and software to

support these efforts can be an expensive process. Improper planning of a GIS application can result in expensive investments, with little or no tangible outputs to contribute to the environmental visioning and decision-making process.

In the worst circumstances, the misapplication of a GIS

can frustrate and/or preclude the successful completion

of the process itself. The demands and capabilities of the

latest technology can hide the inadequacies and complexities of the simulation models. Hence, it is necessary to

hold a series of negotiations involving trade-offs between

clarity and capabilities of the interface, features of the simulation model, and the time and effort required to develop a

good interface between the developers and client/users

(Moser et al., 1999).

One of the key detriments to the effective use of GIS technology is lack of adequately trained in-house human resources. This issue has to be addressed early, and proper

measures, such as employee training, hiring experts, and

outsourcing, must be undertaken.

The final and important aspect of GIS application is budgetary control. Unfortunately, the ‘bells and whistles of new

technology,’ the temptation to incorporate more data and

information, and the ability to generate a wide range of

outputs can yield significant overruns in the proposed budget. Thus, it is imperative that the top-down approach to

GIS development be employed and that only the required

data, models, and display tools be selected to meet the

specific problems and issues being addressed by the visioning process.

4.4 Existing Approaches to GIS-Based

Environmental Visioning

4.4.1 Quantitative

Quantitative analysis involves numerical measurement to

analyze a phenomenon. It is the most common approach

for studying directly observable processes. Some of the

issues addressed during an environmental visioning process require some degree of measurement, what their

current state is, and what it should be. For example, the

boundary of a watershed basin marked in a GIS layer involves a quantitative analysis. The process requires the

terrain elevations of the area, so that the high points are

linked together to form the boundary of the watershed.

Quantitative approaches use clearly defined methodology

and provide objective scientific results that are generally

acceptable.

Most physical processes discussed during environmental

visioning require quantitative analysis. For example, hydrologic studies involving estimation of runoff from precipitation or simulation of groundwater flow; vegetation

mapping used for assessing forest stand; and land cover

analysis used for estimating agricultural production all use

quantitative analyses. Performance standards (e.g., ratio

of impervious to pervious surfaces) used in zoning and

land management are also quantitative. However, some
26

social and cultural processes cannot be analyzed with

quantitative approaches.

4.4.2 Qualitative

Qualitative approaches are used for processes that do not

require numerical measurements. Observations on some

natural phenomena can be recorded in word categories

that describe the processes involved or state the condition of a system. For example, in order to evaluate the

visual preference of a community, a set of photographs

representing different scenes of an area may be used

(Steinitz et al., 1996). A response from visual observation

of the photographs can be categorized from worst to best.

Although qualitative analysis is subjective, some processes that are important for decision making require it.

Qualitative data should be tackled with caution when designing a study or when interpreting the results of the study.

4.4.3 Advanced vs. Basic

A very basic environmental visioning approach can start

with a description of the preferred state, requiring a pen

and paper, as tools, but no more. An artist’s rendition of

the preferred state, either using paint on a canvas or by

digitally manipulating photographs, can also fall into the

basic category.

GIS technology can also be used in the basic approach.

Visual technology that manipulates digital images (images

captured by video camera or other scanning device) can

also be used to produce alternative scenarios. This approach was effectively used in the Mill Creek Project in

Moab, Utah (Natural Resources Conservation Service,

1995). For example, current GIS maps may be edited to

depict desired environmental conditions, such as location

of new riparian zones. Basic environmental visioning approaches do not engage in advanced modeling or significant analytical computations.

Advanced environmental visioning involves studying the

key variables that affect environmental processes and often requires analytical modeling. For example, the interaction between physical, biological, and cultural processes

may be modeled to depict how predictable changes affect

the whole landscape. Such comprehensive analyses lead

to realistic visions by providing the likely alternative futures.

The advances in computer software, hardware and graphic

presentation have made it possible to use GIS to readdress the environmental issues and provide a better means

to better understand and manage the growth, environmental quality, and economic vitality of the communities. Smith

(1999) introduced a new suite of software with a core GIS

program designed to involve people in the decision-making process, evaluate different scenarios and policy decisions, and present the result in a fully interactive 3-D environment. Examples of GIS-based advanced environmental visioning are discussed in the next section.

4.5 Case Studies

This section presents the summary of three case studies

that used GIS for environmental planning. The studies

depict the likely landscape futures for their communities

by using advanced, GIS-based environmental visioning.

The first study actively involved community members in

determining the alternative futures, whereas the other two

studies were primarily conducted with the help of area planners and designers.

4.5.1 West Muddy Creek, Benton County,

Oregon

Note: This review summarizes the document “Possible

Futures for the Muddy Creek Watershed, Benton County,

Oregon” by Hulse (ed.) et al., (1997). Reference to the

document is listed at the end of the chapter and in the

bibliography in Appendix A. Further information can be

obtained at: http://ise.uoregon.edu/Muddy/

Muddy_abstract.html

Introduction

Oregon’s Willamette River Basin encompasses an area of

approximately 12,000 square miles in thirteen counties.

The basin provides rich and diverse landscapes including

high mountains, wilderness areas, productive agricultural

lowlands, and large urban centers. Forests cover 75% of

the basin’s area. The population in the Willamette River

Basin is expected to double early in the 21st century. Growth

and development for accommodating the anticipated demographic change pose threats to the health and preservation of the current ecosystem.

To learn about the possible futures of the Willamette River

Basin, a representative area that would reflect impacts

from growth and development was studied. The West

Muddy Creek Watershed has high-quality natural resources

and is located in an area that has potential for growth and

development. The watershed is large enough to capture

important hydrologic processes and is representative of

the Willamette River Basin in terms of biodiversity and

land use practices.

Recognizing the importance of local stakeholders’ participation in defining the important issues that affect both

development and conservation of the environment, community involvement was pivotal in depicting plausible alternative futures. A series of public meetings were held,

followed by intensive discussions in small groups. The leading community concerns were related to watershed health

and included maintaining rural character, reducing land use

regulations, and improving summer stream flow and fish

habitat. Two indicators of watershed health, terrestrial

biodiversity and water quality, were studied to assess the

current state and possible futures of the ecosystem.

Ecosystem Health and Indicators

Biodiversity, defined as richness of life processes, is important for the health and stability of ecosystems. Generally, there is a complex interdependence among species,

such that a change in some species or their habitat af-
27

fects other species to a varying degree. Hence, a study

on biodiversity in the West Muddy Creek Watershed would

provide information useful in tracking environmental health

of the Willamette River Basin. The study took two approaches to assessing biodiversity: one focused on the

well being of a few species (single species approach), and

the other addressed a variety of species (multi-species

approach). Human beings benefit from biodiversity in a

number of ways. For example, supply of vital resources,

such as food and water, depends on the quality of

biodiversity. Yet, human actions, which cause loss of wildlife habitat, are the biggest threat to biodiversity (National

Research Council, 1992).

The study on the water quality of the watershed identified

sources of non-point source (NPS) pollution, including

sediment and nutrient transport processes, such as the

total phosphorous, nitrate, and suspended solids in runoff

waters. The land use practices and hydrologic processes

were modeled to assess pollution contributions from subbasins. Information on dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform,

stream temperature, and water flow modifications were

obtained from the Oregon Department of Environmental

Quality. A GIS hydrologic model used these data, in addition to climatic and land cover data, to simulate possible

changes and predict impacts. The model was calibrated

with field data from the Muddy Creek and its tributaries.

Conservation and Development

Residential development, agriculture, and forestry will account for most of the anticipated changes in the West

Muddy Creek Watershed ecosystem. Through an environmental visioning process, stakeholders and researchers

identified a range of possible futures for the watershed.

The future alternatives were based on the degree of development and conservation adopted during the period between 1990 and 2025. The number and distribution of new

residents, timber harvesting, and agricultural management

in the watershed will define the patterns of landscape. For

example, low-density residential areas may require less

development in infrastructure, while high-density areas

would require improved water supply, sewer system, and

transportation infrastructures.

Anticipated changes in the agricultural landscape come

from the introduction of new crops, such as hybrid poplar,

and the degree of replacement of old crops. These changes

will vary with the various development plans.

Forest management policies also vary with ownership (e.g.,

private, public), and size (e.g., small, large industrial), at

least for privately owned areas. Changes in forested lands

are based on the different management guidelines on harvest cycles, harvest cuts (location, type, size, distribution), treatment of riparian zones, and replanting procedures.

In order to define the structure for the study process, the

past landscape trajectories (how Muddy Creek had evolved

during the past 150 years) were studied in detail. A study

Figure 4-1. Changes in habitat areas resulting from the alternative futures relative to 1990 conditions (source: Hulse et al., 1997).

Change in Native Species

Richness from Present to High

Development Future

Change in Native Species

Richness from Present to Mod

Development Future

Change in Native Species

Richness from Present to Plan

Trend Future

Change in Native Species

Richness from Present to High

Conservation Future

Change in Native Species

Richness from Present to Mod

Conservation Future

Number of

species

gained or lost

relative to

1990 conditions

- 150

150

- 10

- 50

50

10

- 1
28

of the trajectories helped the researchers to characterize

how the area had changed, and to examine how the change

agents interacted to result in diverse landscapes over time.

Alternative Futures for Muddy Creek

Five alternative futures for the Muddy Creek Watershed

were considered: high and medium conservation, high and

medium development, and Plan Trend, which is projection

of the current development plans. Each alternative future

is based on a set of scenarios representing possible

changes in demography, urban development, agriculture,

and forestry.

The Plan Trend Alternative Future is based on projection

of current land use and zoning trends. This alternative

assumes accommodation of new residents in existing rural residential zones. No major changes are expected in

current agricultural lands, however, small pasture areas

will be taken over by hybrid poplar. Public forests will follow current guidelines, including 300-foot buffers for riparian zones. Rotation schedules will be 80 years for public

forest and 50 years for private forests of all ages.

The High Development Future assumes that the population would double by the year 2025. High development strategies will be employed in order to accommodate such a

large number of people and to generate revenues. While

no significant change is anticipated in the agricultural landscape, the High Development Future recognizes a change

in forest management. For example, all public and private

forests will be managed under a 40-year rotation cycle,

compared to the 80-year cycle in the Plan Trend. Smaller

riparian buffers (40 feet) will be used.

The High Conservation Future is based on an extensive

conservation effort and a small population growth that is

accommodated within the existing rural residential areas.

A 100-foot buffer zone along streams, and additional 100

feet of cover crops or secondary forest products are introduced. Moreover, a 200-foot wide hedgerow/windbreak will

be established along all paved roads. Wetlands are connected by hedgerows, which also line the edges of all grass

seed fields. Under this future, public forests are carefully

managed to simulate pre-settlement conditions, and old

growth patches in private forests are purchased.

The Moderate Development and Moderate Conservation

Futures are middle grounds between High Development

and Plan Trend, and High Conservation and Plan Trend,

respectively. Hence, the impact on agricultural and forest

areas will be intermediate between the corresponding futures.

Comparison of the Alternative Futures

Maps representing the response of the ecosystem to the

alternative futures relative to the status in 1990 were created using the biodiversity model. Figures 4-1 and 4-2 illustrate the results. The Moderate and High Conservation

Futures are the only options that maintain the conditions

of 1990. The other futures, including the Plan Trend, result

in a higher risk to biodiversity and environmental health.

Similarly, the water quality will deteriorate if Plan Trend or

any of the Development Futures are employed. The two

Conservation Futures slightly improve water quality (Figures 4-3, and 4-4). Therefore, a Future Alternative between

Plan Trend and Moderate Conservation seems to provide

a good balance between conservation and development.

4.5.2 Monroe County, Pennsylvania

Note: This review summarizes the document “Alternative

Futures for Monroe County, Pennsylvania” by Steinitz (ed.)

et al., (1997). Reference to the document is listed at the

end of the chapter and in the bibliography in Appendix A.

Further information can be obtained at: http://

www.gsd.harvard.edu/depts/larchdep/research/monroe

Introduction

Monroe County has traditionally enjoyed good water quality, diverse landscape scenery, and year-round recreational

opportunities. The County’s local economy also benefits

GIS used for Identifying & Evaluating Alternative Futures for Muddy Creek, Oregon

A research project on the possible futures for Muddy Creek, Oregon, was carried out in areas west of the

Willamette River. The goals of the study included describing land use impacts on the ecology and quality of

life, and identifying alternative futures for the area. Water quality and biodiversity were considered indicators of

ecosystem health. Scenarios of possible future changes including the current development plans, moderate

and high development, and moderate and high conservation, as well as their impact on the two indicators were

studied.

The landscape changes were evaluated using GIS-based simulations. The biodiversity model estimated the

change in potential habitat areas for 234 species of amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals, while the water

quality model simulated pollutant loads under the five development scenarios. The results illustrated on GIS

simulated perspectives indicated a high ecological risk if moderate or high development occurs. On the other

hand, the ecological response indicates a lower risk if moderate or high conservation alternatives are adopted.
29

Figure 4-2. Changes in species richness resulting from the alternative futures relative to 1990 conditions (source: Hulse et al., 1997).

High

Development 2025

Moderate

Development 2025

Plan

Trend

2025

Moderate

Conservation 2025

High

Conservation 2025

1850

Future or Past Landscape

Percent at Risk

Change in Habitat Area from Present to Future or Past for

Native Species - Muddy Creek Study Area

30

20

10

0

-10

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

Amphibians

Reptiles

Mammals

All Vertebrates

Birds

from the quality of natural resources. For example, recreational activities such as fishing, boating, and swimming

are all too common in the streams and lakes. Continuation

of these benefits depends on preservation of the ecosystem. Today, Monroe County is one of the fastest growing

areas in Pennsylvania. The current growth trend indicates

that the County’s population will nearly double by the year

2020. Urban development associated with this demographic

change is expected to affect Monroe County’s ecosystem

and quality of life.

In light of these concerns, a study on the possible futures

of the County was conducted using the “Steinitz Framework” (Section 3.5). In order to evaluate the current state

of the County and compare it to the alternative futures, a

number of processes, grouped into six major categories,

were selected for evaluation. These were:

• Geology (surface water quality, ground water recharge area, and agricultural soils)

• Biology (biodiversity, bear habitat, and special

natural areas)

• Visual landscape (scenic landscape elements and

view quality)

• Demography (projected population change)

• Economy (land value, cost of public actions, and

employment)

• Politics (private role, township role, county role).

Ecosystem Health and Indicators

The county’s drinking water comes from underground wells

and is rated as high quality. However, the groundwater is

vulnerable to contamination from some development areas that lack proper sewage system. Surface waters are

also of high quality supporting a variety of recreational

activities. Current regulations require a vegetation buffer

along streams, preserving stream bank integrity and reducing soil erosion and pollutant loading. The risk of overuse and new developments associated with population

growth threatens the ecosystem. The county also has large

areas of highly productive agricultural soils. These soils

are expected to be the first victims of urban development.
30

Monroe County has seen a sharp demographic change

during the past few decades. The county’s population

doubled in the last twenty years. Current forecasts show

that the population will also double during the next two

decades. Most of the new residents are expected to relocate from metropolitan New York and New Jersey. The

challenge in Monroe County is how to accommodate such

population increase while preserving its high quality ecosystem and unique identity.

The natural landscape has economic value related to tourism and recreational activities. However, future investments

and policies, in addition to efforts in natural conservation

and infrastructure development, will affect land values. The

land values are based on accessibility, such as vicinity to

interstate highways or state and county roads, services,

such as water supply and sewage system, and access to

scenic views and water bodies. Much of the recent developments are on areas with high land values.

Townships provide government services for most of the

residents in Pennsylvania. For example, planning, zoning,

and wastewater management activities are in the jurisdiction of townships. Township programs affect areas beyond

their boundaries, burdening the county to coordinate among

township plans, policies and decisions that affect the natural resources.

Monroe County has a high biodiversity in a valuable landscape that has been a center for studies for a long time.

EPA has recognized the risk to biodiversity and has conducted research on preservation methods. Interpreted satellite images of the county provided information on the

vegetation types, which was used for estimating the number of species that potentially use them for habitat. Therefore, biodiversity density maps of the area were generated. In addition to species richness and biodiversity, several endangered plants and animals are also found in the

county. For example, the world’s only mesic pine barren is

found on the Pocono Plateau. Another example is the black

bear, which is the symbol of choice for Monroe County.

The wetlands and low shrub areas that provide habitat for

the black bear are currently regulated. However, most corridors that link these wetland patches are threatened by

urban development.

The visual landscape of Monroe County has a high aesthetic value. The scenic landscape of lakes, streams,

wetlands, and agricultural lands attracts many visitors and

tourists each year. It also attracts new residents, whose

arrival threatens the very ecosystem that brought them to

Monroe County. While improvements in the current infrastructure may add value to the visual landscape, any endeavor to increase its capacity (e.g., enlarging roads) or

to establish new developments poses a threat to the ecosystem.

Figure 4-3. Impacts on water quality resulting from the alternative futures relative to 1990 conditions (source: Hulse et al., 1997).

0.80 Risks to Water Quality by Scenario

0.60

0.40

0.20

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

Risks to Water Quality by

Scenario

Percent Increase or Decrease

Relative to 1990

High

Development

2025

Moderate

Development

2025

Plan Trend

2025

Moderate

Conservation

2025

High

Conservation

2025 1850

Surface Runoff

Total Phosphorus

Total Suspended Solids
31

Urban Development and Conservation

The interaction between policies and actions of the County

and Townships towards conservation and development will

shape the future patterns of urban development and will

shape the landscape. The major projects that make the

basis for future alternatives are related to conservation,

recreation, sewage, railroad, zoning, development guidelines, Pocono raceway, and billboards.

Two levels of conservation were considered. The first assumes that future developments will not affect all public

lands owned by the U.S. or the Common Wealth, or regulated by government. These include lakes, streams, and

wetlands. The second conservation plan is based on preservation of ecologically essential lands. These include areas of importance to the geologic landscape (surface water, groundwater, wetlands, and agriculturally productive

soils), biologic landscape (biodiversity and bear habitat),

and visual landscape (water bodies, agricultural lands, and

other scenic areas). Currently, most of these areas are

privately owned. Hence, acquisition of conservation rights

through purchase or other means is necessary.

Recreation (e.g., tourism, resort hotels) is a leading industry in Monroe County’s economy. Some of the measures the county may take in order to keep this industry

healthy include preservation of the landscape and development of additional public and commercial recreation

services.

The Tunkhannock Township has the Pocono raceway, which

provides a unique recreational service to the Mid-Atlantic

States. Expansion of the raceway and development of recreational services (e.g., hotel, indoor sports coliseum) are

desired for accommodating more people. On the other hand,

conservation of the ecologically rich Long Pond is a priority. A number of alternative designs were considered for

expanding the raceway and for developing additional recreational services. A design plan that would have least

Figure 4-4. Erosion and total suspended solids (metric tons/hectare), by sub-basins, resulting from the alternative futures compared to

1990 and 1850 conditions (source: Hulse et al., 1997).
32

impact on the ecology, while providing major access to

the raceway and its recreational facilities, was proposed.

Railroad services are important for Monroe County in order to improve business with the metropolitan areas of

New York and New Jersey. In addition, most of the new

residents are expected to keep their jobs in these metropolitan areas. The desired rail service includes high-speed

commuting and slower freight and tourism services. A new

alignment, capable of supporting state of the art high-speed

trains, was proposed. This alignment would use several

existing right-of-ways, in addition to acquiring right-of-way

for some sections. Construction of railroad stations was

also proposed on flat areas where commercial development around the station would be feasible. The services

accompanying the proposed railroad station include parking lots, and commercial and retail. Also proposed near

the railroad station is a recreational area. Other actions

that will affect the future alternatives include improving

road conditions and reorganizing road signs.

Most of the soils in Monroe County do not support septic

discharges. Despite this fact, residential septic tanks are

commonly used in most of the County’s townships. Only

the four Boroughs have sewer treatment systems. Any

new development should include a sewer service. One

option is to increase the capacity of the existing sewer

treatment facilities, and to link sewer lines from newly developed areas to these facilities. A less expensive alternative is to use greenhouses and constructed wetlands

for processing waste. Though environmentally sound, these

methods are less efficient and have limited capacity. In

any case, groundwater quality will be affected if waste is

not properly treated.

Monroe County has zoning codes that reflect population

density and type of activity. There are three categories of

residential codes: high density (one residential per unit

acre or less), medium density (one residential per one to

two acres), and low density (one residential on more than

two acres). Another two classes are commercial and industrial zones. Two additional zones were proposed to provide a greater zoning flexibility: very low density residential (one residential per 20 acres) and mixed residentialcommercial.

Alternative Futures for Monroe County

The future of Monroe County is determined by the set of

choices made from the above-mentioned alternative

change. Six possible alternatives are presented in this

study. The first alternative, the Plan Trend, is a projection

of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan. The assumptions in the alternative were that only the public lands that

are currently owned or regulated will be conserved. Infrastructure developments will include wastewater management, while current railroad alignments will be used.

Another alternative, the Build-out, assumes that the market will determine development and conservation actions.

This alternative will yield results similar to the other suburban developments in the region (e.g., Connecticut, New

Jersey). Low-density population is considered, with no

major infrastructure developments, such as sewer management, roads, or railroad services.

Four other alternative futures were proposed, namely, Township, Southern, Spine, and Park. These were generated

by simulating landscape changes that could result in a

more favorable conservation based on the County’s physical landscape characteristics.

The Township Alternative proposes high-density urban

development in existing subdivisions, and mixed residential-commercial development near town centers. Thus it

provides conservation for open spaces and maintains traditional Township political structures. New railway alignment and alternative sewer technology make part of the

infrastructure development.

Based on two distinct characters of the county, the Southern Alternative envisions conservation for the north and

its wilderness, and development for the south. This ensures that both areas maintain their unique landscape. In

order to extend conservation efforts in the north, development rights may be transferred to southern areas. Improvements in roads and adoption of alternative sewer systems

are proposed. However, development in the south will folGIS Used for Studying Possible Futures in Monroe County, Pennsylvania

Monroe County, Pennsylvania, faced problems rooted in population growth and suburban land development. A

GIS was used to put together data gathered from various sources in order to assess the current state of the

landscape. The data included interpreted satellite images, infrastructure plans, and field notes. GIS maps

illustrating the current condition of the ecosystem were produced. These base maps were used for simulating

the possible development changes, and comparing impacts from the changes. Six possible futures for the

County were based on several scenarios of land development practices and their impacts on the landscape.

The results were illustrated in number of GIS maps and other governmental images. Further information is

available at:

http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/depts/larchdep/research/monroe
33

low strict guideline for protecting agriculturally productive

soils and other valuable landscape.

To accommodate the anticipated population growth, while

minimizing impacts on the landscape, the Spine Alternative proposes that, urban development be planned between

Mount Pocono and Stroudsburg. This alternative will also

promote tourism. Fast access to employment centers in

metropolitan areas of New York, Philadelphia, and New

Jersey will be made possible by high-speed commutertrains. This requires new railway alignment and development of several railroad stations. The plan includes sewer

treatment in high-density areas and improvements in roads.

Finally, the Park Alternative proposes that all undeveloped

lands be conserved. This alternative recognizes the negative impact of urban development on the environment, and

envisions preservation of the county’s high quality landscape by concentrating new developments in and around

existing centers, perhaps at high densities. A new railroad

and sewer system will include infrastructure services.

Comparison of Alternative Futures

Maps representing each of the alternative futures were

compared to a map illustrating the current state of the

ecosystem. The evaluation focused on the relative changes

in natural resources (geologic, biologic, and visual landscapes), as well as changes in the demography, economy

and politics of the county. The results are summarized in

Figure 4-5. The proposed four alternative futures provide

better results than the projection of current plans.

4.5.3 Camp Pendleton, California

Note: This review summarizes the document “Biodiversity

and Landscape Planning: Alternative Futures for the Region of Camp Pendleton, California” by the Steinitz (ed.) et

al., (1996). Reference to the document is listed at the end

of the chapter and in the bibliography in Appendix A. Further information can be obtained at: http://

www.gsd.harvard.edu/brc/brc.html

Introduction

Camp Pendleton is located in one of the country’s most

desirable areas that is experiencing growth and development. Its unique location provides scenic landscapes and

wilderness, and a fast access to the metropolitan centers

of Los Angeles and San Diego (Figure 4-6). The region

surrounding Camp Pendleton is one of the most biologically diverse ecosystems in the country, ranging from

coastal lagoons and estuaries, to oak woodlands and coniferous mountains, to hot and dry deserts. The region

provides habitat for more than 200 species listed as endangered, threatened, or rare.

The study was conducted to investigate how population

growth and subsequent developments would change the

landscape ecosystem in the region of Camp Pendleton.

To capture the physical processes, such as the hydrologic regimes, the five drainage basins surrounding Camp

Pendleton were included in the study. These are the San

Juan, San Mateo, San Onofre, San Luis Rey, and Santa

Margarita watersheds. A number of processes that reflect

the health of the ecosystem were studied. These include

physical processes, such as soils, fires, and hydrology;

visual preference; and biodiversity, which was assessed

by three models based on landscape patterns, single species and species richness approaches. Analytical models

representing the above processes and a GIS were used

for simulating changes for the alternative futures.

Ecosystem Health and Indicators

The current land uses and management practices were

studied to identify potential development areas and to evaluate the current and future protection efforts. The most protected areas in the region are the biological reserves, which

are managed to maintain natural conditions. National forests, BLM lands, and State, County and local parks also

provide habitat for many species, enriching the ecosystem, but they are not managed to conserve biodiversity.

Other lands, including agricultural areas, military zones,

Indian reservations, private holdings, and urban areas have

potential for development.

There are several classes of soils in the region, varying in

appearance, texture, productivity, and management requirements. Generally speaking, coastal plains have well drained

sandy-clay-loam soils that are highly fertile, and suitable

for agricultural crop production. Foothills are covered with

moderately drained soils that support citrus, avocados,

and other irrigated crops. Mountain soils, on the other hand,

are generally excessively drained and are unsuitable for

crops. Urban development is expected to take over some

of the rich agricultural soils. Hydrologic processes have

direct relationship with biodiversity and environmental quality. A hydrologic regime also responds to changes in land

cover. For example, developments in an area generally

increase the impervious surface resulting in low infiltration

and high runoffs. This results in flooding if stream channel

capacities are exceeded. Future developments in the Camp

Pendleton region are expected to increase the volume and

velocity of runoffs, possibly resulting in major floods. Physical damages caused by floods and loss of water to the

ocean are among the disadvantages of developments.

The major vegetation types in the area include herbaceous,

hardwood and conifer trees, and shrubs, including chaparral, desert, coastal sage, and great basin shrubs. Varied

vegetation is important for biodiversity, and survival of

endangered species. Vegetation growth and health is affected by a set of processes, including hydrology, soils,

and land management.

Survival of native plants in the area is also affected by the

fire regime. While fire poses threat to life and property of

residents, periodic fires are needed to enhance native plant

communities. However, the fire regime responds to hydrologic conditions and land management practices. For example, there is high potential for fire during dry and hot

weather.
34

Figure 4-5. Impact on natural and cultural systems resulting from the alternative futures (source: Steinitz (ed.) et al., 1994).

Existing Plan Trend Build-Out Township Southern Spine Park

Geologic Landscape

Surface Water + - - - 0 0 0 + +

Water Recharge - - - - - 0 - +

Agricultural Soils + - - - + + + +

Biological Landscape

Biodiversity + + - - - 0 + 0 + +

Bear Habitat + + - - - - 0 + - + +

Spec. Nat. Areas + - - - - + + + + +

VisualLandscape

Scenic Elements + - - - - - 0 + + + +

View Quality + - - - - - + + + + +

Demographics

Pop. Capacity + - - - - - - -

Economics

Cost Public Action $20m $20m $20m $1733m $1854m $1996m $2072m

Annual Cost of --- $1m $1m $104m $120m $106m $135m

20yr. Bond @4%

Overall + + + - - - - -

Politics

Private Roles + + + + + - - - -

Township Roles + + - - - - + - - - -

County Roles 0 - - 0 + + + + +

Legend

Most Positive + +

Positive +

Neutral 0

Negative -

Most Negative - -
35

GIS Used for Envisioning the Future for the Camp Pendleton Region

Located between San Diego and Los Angeles, Camp Pendleton is surrounded by the largest undeveloped area

in southern California. A number of species, listed as endangered or of concern, use this area as habitat.

Current growth trends indicate that land developments will alter the landscape ecosystem. Steinitz et al.,

(1996) conducted research to investigate the possible futures for this area and their impact on biodiversity.

The tools used in the study included GIS aided with analytical models for simulation of the processes involving hydrology, soils, fire, visual preference, and biodiversity. The Steinitz Framework was used to study six

alternative projected developments and their impacts on biodiversity, landscape ecology, agricultural soils, fire

risk, hydrologic regime, and visual preference. The considered alternative developments included the current

local and regional plans, two futures with low-density growth, one of which introduces conservation strategies

in the year 2010, large-lot ownership with conservation of biodiversity, multi-center development, and a single

new city. The results were summarized in a table rating the impacts from these alternatives into five categories, from the worst to the best (Figure 4-7).

Figure 4-6. Map of the study area (source: Steinitz (ed.) et al., 1996).
36

Alternative Futures of Camp Pendleton, California

The Plans Build-Out Future is a projection of the regional

land use plans, which are coordinated at county and regional levels. This future alternative assumes no changes

in current urban infrastructures and considers continued

protection for biological reserves, national forests, BLM

lands, and state and county parks. Urban development

will take over all developable and unprotected lands. High

development is anticipated on slopes between 0% and

5%, while orchard may take over some of the slopes higher

than 25%, on which developments are restricted.

The Spread Alternative is a continuation of the current

development patterns in Southern California. It is based

on medium density single-family-residence in the valleys

and extensive rural residence throughout the landscape.

No major changes are anticipated in conservation lands

or transportation infrastructure development. Developments

are assumed to continue without regard to environmental

programs such as biodiversity, erosion control, flooding,

and water quality. Another alternative, Spread with Conservation, assumes that by the year 2010, conservation

projects will start to save the then fragmented ecological

patches and critical vegetation.

The Private Conservation Alternative Future is based on

private ownership of environmentally sensitive areas, and

a low-density residential development in ecologically important areas. Developments in these areas will be conservation oriented, while the current development plans

will be followed on other developable lands.

The Multi-Center Future Alternative envisions accommodation of population growth by developing small number of

centers with a high residential density, and commercial

services. Lands that are critical for habitat continuity are

purchased for conservation. Also protected are fertile agricultural soils, wetlands and riparian vegetation, coastal

estuaries and scrubs, and scenic landscapes.

Finally, the New City Alternative Future proposes development of an urban center in the Temecula Valley. New residences in this area will be encouraged to protect environmentally sensitive areas. Urban communities in coastal

areas will be satellites for the New City. In this alternative,

currently protected areas and other environmentally important locations will be protected, and sound environmental programs will be adopted.

Comparison of the Alternative Futures

Impacts from the Alternative Futures were compared as

indicated by such process as soils, hydrology, fire,

biodiversity, and visual preference. For example, the Multicenter and Private Conservation Futures result in the least

amount of loss in agricultural soils, while the Plan Buildout has the biggest impact by loosing half of these fertile

soils. Similar comparisons based on the other processes

were made ranking the Alternative Futures from worst to

best for each process. The results are illustrated in Figure

4-7.

Related Studies

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) has

successfully created GIS databases with biological information, such as vegetation and the location of certain

plants, soils, and vernal pools, covering the Southwestern, Northwestern and Eastern portion of the San Diego

region (SANDAG, Info, 1998). The information is used by

the decision makers to assess and rank land based on

biological factors. GIS is successfully used for conducting gap analysis (i.e., examining land use management

layers along with biological information) to connect and

develop separate areas for healthier habitats for wildlife,

as well as estimating land value information necessary to

create the habitat preserves (Miller, 1994).

4.6 References

Campbell, J.B., Introduction to Remote Sensing,

Guildford Press, New York, 1987.

Diggelen, Frank Van, GPS for GIS – A Comparative

Survey, GIS World, October 1994, pp. 34-40.

Smith, S.G., “Three Dimensional Visualization for Community Planning, Impact Analysis, and Policy Simulation”, Presented at the ESRI User Conference, July

1999.

Hulse, David (ed.), Lisa Goorjin, David Richey, Michael

Flaxman, Cheryl Hummon, Denis White, Katheryn

Freemark, Joseph Eilers, Joseph Bernert, Kellie

Vache, Jolie Kaytes, and David Diethelm. Possible

Futures for the Muddy Creek Watershed, Benton

County, Oregon, The University of Oregon, 1997.

McAllister, L.S., B.E. Peniston, J. Hyman, and B.

Abbruzzese, Conceptual Framework for a Synoptic Assessment of the Prairie Pothole Region, EPA/600/R96/061, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Health and Environmental Effects Research

Laboratory, Western Ecology Division, Corvallis, OR

1996.

Miller, B., “An Ounce of Prevention is worth a Pound

of Gnatcatchers”, Government Technology, November

1994.

Monmonier Mark, How to Lie with Maps, University of

Chicago Press, Second Edition 1996.

Moser, D, Walsh, M, and Rogers, C, “Negotiating a

User Interface”, 26th Annual Water Resources Planning and Management (ASCE) Panel Discussion, June

1999.

National Research Council, Restoration of Ecosystems, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.,

1992.
37

Figure 4-7. Comparative impacts of the alternative futures (source: Steinitz (ed.) et al. 1996).

Visual

Preference

Agricultural

Productive

Soils

Runoff

Curve

Number

Flood

Hydrograph

Water

Discharge

Fire

Risk

Landscape

Ecological

Pattern

Single

Species

Potential

Species

Richness

Species with

500+ Home

Ranges

(via GAP)

Plans

Spread

Spread

with Conservation 2010

Private

Conservation

MultiCenters

New

City

Worst Best

Natural Resource Conservation Service, 1995. Managing Change in Rural Communities: The Role of Planning and Design, 1995.

The Pacific Rivers Council, Inc., Healing the Watershed: A Guide to the Restoration of Watershed and

Native Fish in the West, Pacific Rivers Council, Inc.

2nd Edition, Eugene, OR, 1996.

SANDAG, “Vegetation in the San Diego Region”,

SANDAG Info, January-February 1998.

Steinitz, Carl. (ed.), Douglas Olson, Elke Bilda, John

Ellis, Torgen Johnson, Ying-Yu Hung, Edith Katz, Paula

Meijerink, Allan Shearer, H. Roger Smith, and Avital

Sternberg. Alternative Futures For Monroe County,

Pennsylvania, The Harvard University Graduate School

of Design, 1994.

Steinitz, Carl. (ed.), Michael Binford, Paul Cote, Thomas Edwards Jr., Stephen Ervin, Richard Forman,

Craig Johnson, Ross Kiester, David Mouat, Douglas

Olson, Allan Shearer, Richard Toth, and Robin Wills.

Biodiversity and Landscape Planning: Alternative futures for the region of Camp Pendleton, CA, The

Harvard Graduate School of Design, Cambridge, MA,

1996.

Sumner, Richard, Personal communication, 1998.

Sumner, Richard, and David Hulse, EPA Research is

Helping Communities Achieve Their Desired Vision of

the Future, Watershed Management Council Networker,

Fall 1997, 7(3): 10-11,19.
38

5 Creating a GIS to Support Environmental Visioning

the groundwork that is involved in selecting a GIS application. A description of the various types of GIS output is

given in Section 5.3, and Section 5.4 provides guidance

on how to adapt the selected GIS for environmental visioning. Section 5.5 delineates the steps to be conducted

for evaluating and comparing possible future scenarios for

the community.

5.2 Groundwork for a Successful GIS

Application

5.2.1 GIS Tools

Currently, there are four different types of GIS tools in the

market, categorized based on increasing cost and functionality (ESRI, 1996).

1. Consumer GIS represents the low cost products

available at retail computer stores. These transform the information from databases, spreadsheets to color-filled maps.

2. Desktop mapping represents the next step in providing simple tools to explore digital maps.

3. Desktop GIS provides more functionality. It can

create, edit, display, and manage spatial data, and

can also analyze and model geographic relationships.

4. Professional GIS packages offer the most advanced spatial and preprocessing tools available.

The decision makers must choose the most appropriate

GIS they require for their application. By following a series

of logical steps (discussed in the following sections), the

selection and successful application of a GIS in environmental visioning can be achieved.

5.2.2 Issues to Be Addressed

The first step involved in the selection and development

of a GIS, is to explicitly define the following:

• Goal for the environmental visioning project and

issues concerned with planning, land development,

conservation of ecology, transportation, and environmental management.

• Needs and requirements for the particular project.

5.1 Introduction

5.1.1 Importance of a GIS in Environmental

Visioning

To illustrate the significance of a GIS in environmental

visioning, consider the following scenario. The town planners of a developing area are faced with the problem of an

increase in the traffic flow due to the population growth

and suburban land development. Their goal is to build highways in order to improve the transit accessibility over the

next 15 years, within the geographic boundary of concern.

A GIS provides tools to put together the data gathered

from various sources (such as population density, transportation routing, business areas) in order to compare and

assess the existing route accessibility. A GIS is then used

in analyzing, and visualizing the population trend and economic growth, travel behavior (tendency of the people in

using the routes) over time as well as existing land use to

correlate it with the demographic pattern. The GIS tools,

with or without the aid of other analytical models, help in

the study of the alternative futures for the area. The visualization of the generated GIS maps allows the user to

emphasize, generalize, and omit certain features (routes)

from the display, to meet the design objectives (improving

the accessibility of highly congested areas). The results

that are obtained from the GIS analysis can be printed on

maps or other visual material. This would allow the town

planners to make informed decisions on the implementation of an optimal number of highways at feasible locations.

Thus, understanding the interaction among several processes, natural or cultural, and the environmental impact

from changes made in one or more of these processes is

required for envisioning a path to a preferred future. An

accurate representation of the natural and cultural entities

is a prerequisite for understanding and evaluating the current conditions of an ecosystem. Chapter 4 discussed the

functional capabilities of GIS components that could be

used for environmental visioning and this chapter deals

with how to select and use GIS tools for environmental

visioning.

5.1.2 Organization of This Chapter

This chapter includes five sections that describe the elements of GIS used for environmental visioning. This section provides a brief introduction on the importance of GIS,

and the organization of the chapter. Section 5.2 discusses
39

(discussed in Section 5.4) soon after the decision is made

to utilize a GIS.

5.2.7 Available Hardware

The selection of an appropriate GIS hardware depends on

the scope of the environmental visioning project as well

as on the available resources. The GIS hardware can be

setup in a stand-alone or in a networked configuration.

Stand-alone configuration uses one or more workstations

operating independently. In a networked configuration, two

or more workstations are linked together, or to a central

computer called server, so that their data and software

can be shared.

The typical requirements for a stand-alone GIS unit are

listed below.

• Computer workstation

- High-speed processor, large memory and disk

space

- High resolution color monitor

- Keyboard

- Mouse

- CD-ROM

- Tape drive

• Map input devices

• Digitizing table

• Scanner

• GPS receivers

- Portability

- Number of channels

- Differential accuracy

- Memory

- Software (DOS/Windows)

- Data dictionary levels

• Plotter

• Printer

• Screen copy devices

Additional hardware that is usually needed, depending on

the scale of the environmental visioning project, includes

computer servers, which provide high computational power,

large storage space, and a file-sharing capacity in networked configurations.

5.2.8 Available Software

After deciding the hardware, the next step is choosing the

GIS software. Several commercial GIS packages available in the market can be readily installed and operated.

They provide a separate version for each operating platform (e.g., UNIX, Windows). However, there are some packages that operate only under a particular system. Section

4.2.3 gives further details on the types of software and

database.

5.2.9 Available Support/Resources

Last is to consider the elements that aid in the successful

performance of a GIS application. These include:

• The tools to be employed such as the hardware

requirements against the computer capabilities

available to the decision-making group, range of

public and commercially software packages that

could meet the needs.

• Extent of the data required.

5.2.3 Size of Study Area

The second step in the selection and development of a

GIS is size of the study area. It is important to clearly

identify all the areas that are included in and/or impacted

by the decision-making process, so that the information

can be collected, stored, and analyzed over the appropriate area. Larger areas contribute more data, leading to

large data sets, thus requiring a more powerful GIS technology, which creates higher costs.

5.2.4 Range of Analyses to Be Completed

After delineating the tasks that are to be accomplished in

a defined area of study, the third step is to consider the

range of analyses that needs to be completed in the GISbased project. In a multimedia environmental analysis,

such as environmental visioning, information and modeling tools on air, water, land, and other environmental impacts, such as noise, may need to be incorporated into

the analytical process. Some expensive GIS products provide built-in support for models, such as network routing,

but may incur more costs.

5.2.5 Definition of Desired Data Resolution

The fourth step in the decision of a GIS application is to

determine the degree of accuracy that is required for a

good data representation.

For example, to study the nature of the water quality in a

watershed, a hydrologic model can be generated using

the information based on stream temperature, water flow

modifications, dissolved oxygen, climatic and land cover

data. If the study of the water quality is focussed on identifying specific sources of pollutants in the runoff waters,

detailed information on sediment and nutrient transport

processes such as total phosphorus, nitrate, and suspended solids, will be required. Thus, it is important to

understand the nature and the complexity of the problems

to be addressed, the tools to be used, and, therefore, the

desired resolution and confidence in the data required in

generating the appropriate outputs.

5.2.6 Available Data

The next important task, after doing a thoughtful analysis

on what type of data is required, how the data will be used,

and what analyses are to be performed at what resolution

and scale, is the acquisition of GIS data. If information is

already available in a digitized format, selection of a GIS

should be based on the one that can accept this information in a short time, thus expediting the process of developing the database for specific applications. The feasibility of obtaining such information should be investigated
40

• Training: If the people involved are technically oriented, with prior GIS experience, this can enhance

the capabilities and utilization of the technology.

Those who do not have GIS experience should

be trained to acquire a basic understanding of the

GIS.

• Technical support: Some members of the environmental visioning team should be designated

to work with consulting firms, local universities,

government staff, or others who are going to support the GIS application.

• Good product documentation: This may enrich the

contribution of the members to the development

and implementation of the technology.

5.3 GIS Outputs

Having made the decision on the GIS application that is to

be utilized for analysis, the next stage in the process of

planning is to explore the ways to transfer the spatial GIS

results from screen to print. Two types of output can be

generated:

5.3.1 Basic Output

Base Maps

A base map, typically, has general information that covers

the study area and illustrates major infrastructures (such

as roads and buildings), and natural land covers (such as

streams and water bodies). In a GIS environment, base

maps are used as sources of geographic reference for other

maps or layers of information. The USGS topographic maps

are good sources of base maps.

Other Maps and Overlays

A GIS generally stores physical information in thematic

layers or digital maps. The layers are geographically referenced so that overlaying information matches. Examples

of thematic maps are hydrographic maps, vegetation maps,

and land cover/land use maps. Information from more than

one GIS layer may be printed on a single map sheet, resulting in mapped overlays. These maps are generally produced to display information of interest, by eliminating irrelevant material.

5.3.2 Advanced Outputs

Landscape Scenarios

A GIS provides tools for generating landscape scenarios

by modeling and projecting existing information. For example, a number of scenarios may be generated to illustrate how the landscape will look, say in 10 years, based

on different land development and conservation practices.

These alternatives are important in the prediction and visualization of the environmental impacts. Some GIS packages provide additional tools for interactively querying environmental effects in an ecosystem.

Animation

Animation provides enhanced visual sensing for temporal

changes or trends in some processes. For example,

changes in a forestland over the past decades can be

shown by animation. This provides a focus on the dynamic

changes for the visual observer. Some GIS packages display 3-dimensional elements, such as the landscape of a

canyon, which allows the viewer to “walk through” or “navigate” through space, looking at scenes from different

angles.

5.4 Developing the GIS for Environmental

Visioning

5.4.1 Road Map for Building a GIS

Typical environmental visioning projects, that involve balancing between development and conservation, go through

several phases of increasing value and complexity. The

first and most widely used phase is representation, which

involves inventory of resources and production of maps

based on known information requirements. The second

phase is building an information management system for

improving data access and manipulation. The third phase

is advanced GIS, which provides additional modeling and

simulation capabilities, acquired by incorporating analytical models into the GIS (Klimas, 1998).

Phase 1: Representation of the geographic area involves

creation, georeferencing, and arranging the geographic data

for the natural and cultural systems and infrastructures,

within the area of concern. It is also termed base data,

which is representation of features (as indicated below) in

the GIS database.

• Hydrology

- Rivers

- Lakes

- Water bodies

• Geology

- Soil types

• Hydrogeology

- Groundwater

- Surface water

• Biology

- Vegetation classes

- Wetland species

- Fish and important species

- Wildlife

• Topography

- Terrain elevations

• Land use

- Agricultural

- Industrial

- Residential

• Infrastructures

- Transportation

- Energy and power grids

- Buildings

- Communication Systems

- Navigable waterways

- Sewer and water installation

• Demography

- Census data
41

5.4.2 GIS operations

The previous section gave an outline on collecting, manipulating, analyzing, and presenting the GIS data. This

section describes these operations in detail.

• Data input

- Manual digitizing. Hardcopy map can be digitized manually by using a special digitizing

tablet over a digitizing table that is configured

to record tablet movement over the table. For

example, moving the tablet over a stream on

the paper map generates a series of points

making a line representing the stream.

- Scanning. Hardcopy maps can also be

scanned to produce a raster image of the map.

Scanning is more suited to raster GIS. However, special software is commercially available that can convert raster data into vector.

- Keyboard entry. This method involves entering data through a computer keyboard. It is

labor intensive and not practical for large data

sets.

File Loading. Data obtained from GPS and other survey

instruments, or generated by a cartographic software, can

be loaded into GIS using interfaces provided in the GIS

package.

• Data manipulation (conversion, validation, rectification)

- Raster-to-Vector. This process converts raster data (e.g., scanned maps, interpreted satellite images) to vector format using either a

single batch process, or a semiautomatic

operation of line -following.

- Vector-to-Raster. This process converts the

geometric features of a database to a raster

grid of cells or pixels, usually allowing the user

to specify the resolution and number of rows

and columns of the raster map.

- Identification and correction of graphical errors. This process involves several commands

or functions for identifying, displaying, and

correcting overshoots, undershoots, open

polygons, and similar errors manually.

- Identification and correction of attribute errors.

Attribute tabular data describing the graphical data are often not in the desired format or

structure. Based on the required geographic

model, the attributes tables are joined or split,

or new relations between tables are created.

In addition to tabular relationships, the attributes usually need cleaning and corrections.

The advantages of using a GIS include:

Shortened turn around time for creating ‘what

if’ scenarios

Enhanced flexibility in type and format for presentation of data and information necessary

to evaluate such scenarios

Provides a common information framework with

which disparate stakeholder groups can

achieve similar understanding of landscape

status and trends

Some of the base data are processed to yield meaningful

derived data. Examples of derived data include slope and

aspect acquired from elevation data, stream buffers based

on streams, and vegetation classes (e.g., forest, wetland,

and riparian) from vegetation and other themes. Both base

and derived data are usually manipulated to generate interpreted maps. For example, Elk habitat—an interpreted

data set—can be mapped using vegetation maps as well

as slope and aspect data.

Phase 2: An information management system The GIS

data structure can be improved for better security and easy

accessibility, by integrating the GIS database with the other

databases. Using this database, the GIS can produce maps

that provide valuable information related to the geographic

data. Examples of such databases include records of air

and water quality, pollution history, and regulatory policies.

A hydrologic map can show not only the locations of

streams, but also the water quality, sampling locations,

and sources of contamination.

Phase 3: Enhanced modeling and analysis Most GIS

packages can characterize the environmental setting and

simulate the spatial changes, but they require external

models for solving complex scientific and engineering problems. For instance, a study is conducted in an area to

predict the fate of contaminants in groundwater. GIS software can create a three dimensional terrain representation, but hydraulic and hydrologic models have to be used

to simulate complex groundwater flow and predict subsurface contaminant fate.

The enhanced GIS (a combination of the GIS and other

analytical models) has the functional capabilities to:

• Simulate possible future changes

• Predict impact from a set of scenarios

• Evaluate resulting future conditions
42

- Interface with external models. External models are sometimes needed to provide functionality that is not available in the GIS package. For example, hydrologic models may be

interfaced with the GIS software to provide

more analytical capabilities.

• Data output and presentation. One of the final GIS

output operations is map making. However, for

printing purposes, the maps are usually created,

edited, and displayed several times. The following

activities include the output operations:

- Generate symbols and legends for maps. The

process of associating certain graphic or label features with selected symbols, patterns,

and colors may require creating reference lookup tables.

- Display spatial/attribute data. Data display involves zooming (magnifying or reducing the

scale of a map, or image displayed on the

monitor), panning (changing the position at

which the view is displayed, without modifying the scale), and refreshing display.

- Generate reports. This process involves generating statistical summaries of spatial features as well as their attributes in the tabular

data. Additional reporting capabilities, come

at varying degrees with the relational database management system (RDBMS) used.

- Print maps. This process is accomplished in

two steps: create a digital map and plot (print)

the map. The main features of a map are spatial data (polygons, lines, and points) representing physical features (e.g., roads, houses)

supported by explanatory text (e.g., names),

symbols (e.g., north, scale), and legends.

5.4.3 Resource Planning

The costs incurred in the development of a GIS, includes

initial investment costs, and the maintenance cost.

• Purchasing cost constitutes a large portion of a

GIS system.

- Hardware: High-powered networked systems

provide greater efficiency and high performance. They are sometimes too costly for

small projects, and require highly skilled operators.

- Software: Public domain GIS packages can

be obtained either free of charge or with nominal fees.

- Data acquisition (discussed in Section 5.4.4).

- Geo-referencing. This process assigns known

geographic coordinates (e.g., latitude and longitude) to the GIS data. Examples of geo-referencing uses include spatial analyses (e.g.,

distance measurements) and network modeling.

- Transform map projections. GIS maps are

often transformed from one map projection

(digitized map) to another in order to conform

to data standards.

- Merge data and map joining. Digital maps

separately digitized from different paper maps

are merged to form a large mosaic map of an

area of interest.

• Data analysis

- Compute buffers. A buffer is a zone of a specified distance around a feature. For example,

to determine the number of hospitals that are

located within a distance of 2 miles around a

particular residence, a buffer zone for the

specified distance (2 miles), is created around

the feature (the residence).

- Analyze point, line, and polygon overlays.

These help in describing the relationship between the features. For example, in a

biodiversity model, one can determine what

features (animals, human beings, plants etc.,)

affect another feature (e.g., food) or what do

the features have in common.

- Perform proximity analysis. This analysis is

used to determine which features are near

others. For instance, identifying the location

of the nearest fire station to a residential

colony and computing the distance.

- Query spatial and attribute data. Queries are

questions sent to the GIS database that return requested information if available. For

example, a query on the number of facilities

that discharge contaminants into a water system returns count of facilities in that category

and highlights the selected facilities on the

computer display.

- Model digital terrain elevations. Terrain elevations are modeled to produce surface maps

with slopes and aspects for studying., For

example, hydrologic processes such as precipitation runoff and snow melting.

- Perform network analysis. This analysis is

used to model flow (such as water, traffic)

through a linear feature (e.g., road, stream).
43

• Maintenance cost

- User training

- System management

- Database maintenance

- Data conversion

- Hardware/software upgrades

- Supplies

- Internal staff

Today, the price of a GIS software and hardware package,

vary from a few hundred dollars to thousands of dollars.

How much should you pay? The value of any GIS component is not reflected by an affordable price but, more importantly, by its functional capabilities. Inappropriate selection and utilization of a GIS can lead to significant overruns and expenditures in the project. Cost-related issues

of data acquisition, personnel requirements, and system

management are addressed in the following sections.

5.4.4 Data Acquisition

The following three approaches are commonly used to

obtain data (Ossenholler, 1997).

• Existing data

This is the easiest and often the least expensive,

data acquisition method. A number of GIS institutions provide data either free of charge or for a

small fee. The following are a few available

sources:

- National sources, such as the U.S. Geological Survey, the National Weather Service, and

the National Spatial Data Infrastructure

(www.fgdc.gov)

- State and regional agencies

- Local planning commissions

- Other organizations, such as educational institutions, and nonprofit organizations that

make use of spatial databases for their operations and activities.

- Data can also be purchased from commercial companies. Some software vendors provide data or links to data sources.

Also check the value of the existing data to your projects

and examine the following.

- Extent: Do the data cover the area under investigation? How much information is available?

- Quality of data: Are the data geo-referenced?

What is the scale and resolution of data?

- Availability and timeliness: How and when can

you obtain the data?

In addition to these concerns, consider the following if

purchasing data:

- Make sure the vendor knows what you expect

- Examine the data before purchasing

- Obtain licensing agreement and review for restrictions on data use

- Get metadata for evaluating the data

• Field collection

Field acquisition is used if data is not available at

the desired quality, coverage or price. Intensive

field campaigns can be expensive and require

human and financial resources. The following tips

may useful for collecting data:

• Assemble base-line data. Examples of commonly

used base-line maps include:

- Topographic maps

- Road maps

- Soil surveys

- Aerial photographs

- Satellite images

- Census data

These base-line data provide understanding of the

project area and help in designing a data collection strategy.

• Plan data collection strategy

- Windshield surveys provide fast results and

better understanding of the study area.

- Field sampling may be considered since a

thorough collection of data in large project

areas is expensive. However, sampling should

be repeatable, representative and unbiased.
44

• Contracting data acquisition

A contractor may be paid to gather the required

data if qualified staff members are not available

and existing data is not adequate.

- Make sure the contractor knows what is expected by arranging meetings between the

contractor and data users

- Examine the data before purchasing

- Obtain contract agreements and review for restrictions on data use

- Get metadata for evaluating the data

5.4.5 Personnel Requirement

The number of trained personnel and the required GIS

experience depend on the complexity of the environmental visioning project. Three classes of skilled personnel

are needed:

• GIS manager who runs overall management and

maintenance of the GIS

• GIS analyst who is responsible for project level

analysis and research

• GIS technician who assists in data acquisition,

data input, and data output

The GIS technician should have basic computer knowledge, and should be trained for handling data input and

output devices, such as digitizing tables, scanners, and

plotters. The GIS manager and GIS analyst require advanced training and experience to do their tasks. Several

GIS analysts may be needed for demanding projects, while

a single GIS analyst may be able to perform all three categories for small projects.

5.4.6 System Integration

It is important to integrate the GIS into existing information architecture. Whether such integration can be

seamlessly achieved depends on the heterogeneity of the

hardware in place. Existence of multitude of computer platforms and their diverse operating systems can make the

job of intersystem linkage quite difficult. Lack of well-linked

architecture can raise significant barriers to efficient information transfer.

5.5 How to Create an Environmental Vision

Using the GIS

At this stage, you must have a vision in mind, a trend

plan, and have made the decision on the GIS application

that you are going to implement to attain that vision. This

section describes the steps that should be considered to

achieve the desired results using the GIS application:

1. GIS database: The first step is to create a database containing both map data (depicting location of geographical objects) and attribute data

(describing physical characteristics of each object). Physical characteristics (such as agricultural yield, soil types, annual precipitation) and/or

nonphysical characteristics (such as, soil moisture conditions, water availability) are examples

of attribute data.

2. Representation: In order to understand the extent

of the problem, a GIS representation (2-D or 3-D

visualization) of the study area is established, like

an architect’s blueprint representation of a building. It is important to be aware that sometimes

the GIS may use a geographic boundary slightly

different than that defined in the CBEP for varied

reasons.

For example, if a stream extends beyond the

project boundary, activities upstream of the project

boundary will have impact on both water quality

and quantity. Consequently, some major upstream

activities have to be included in the study. Alternatively, partnerships may be extended to the

upstream communities in a watershed. (Refer to

Chapter 2, Section 2.2 for partnerships and geographic boundaries.)

Steps for the application of a GIS in environmental visioning:

1. Database: Create a GIS database with the geographic and descriptive data of the study area.

2. Representation: Spatial representation of the

data using GIS tools, by generating maps and

pictures.

3. Processing: Simulate the current scenario

using GIS tools with or without the aid of external models.

4. Evaluating: Based on certain tradeoffs, the feasibility of the current scenario is assessed.

5. Scenario building: The changes with the pertinent parameters in the current scenario are

constructed, simulated and evaluated, in order to achieve the vision in mind.

6. Decision making: Comparison of the different

scenarios and a visual representation of their

impacts leads you to make informed decisions

on the implementation of the best scenario.
45

3. Processing: Mapped data indicates where the

objects are located. For example, an aerial photo

may show that there is land development in certain sections of a county but cannot explain why

there isn’t in other areas. Using the tools provided

by the GIS, a relational link between the tabular

data, describing the physical and nonphysical

characteristics of the pertinent parameters of the

project, can be created. GIS analysis can show

the connection between land use, population

growth, and economic effects.

If the project requires the functions of external

models, then GIS can be interfaced with those

models to provide a better analysis. For instance,

during a spill management study, in order to trace

the pollutant in a water body, a hydraulic model is

used to determine the temporal change of pollutant concentrations in the water body. The solution

obtained from the hydraulic model can then be

used in GIS to do a spatial and temporal study on

the patterns of the pollutant travel in the water

body. Refer section 4.2.5 for a broad categorization of the models.

4. Evaluation: Sometimes a change in the assumptions made in a process model results in a forecast different than expected. It is important to test

the model’s assumptions through sensitivity analysis and determine how much the solution depends

on the assumptions used by the model. The evaluation step is to establish certain measures of

judgement, to rate the effect of the changes in

the scenario from the least to most desirable. For

example, if you are faced with the question of

setting a speed limit along roads to decrease the

traffic fatalities occurring, it would be necessary

to compare and assess the traffic trend with varying posted speeds to come up with a viable solution.

5. Scenario building: This step should lead you to

answers, to questions of the type “What would

happen if....” You can create a hypothetical situation, and different model designs can be constructed, processed and evaluated by following

steps 2, 3, 4. The GIS provides tools for depicting

different perspectives on how the landscape will/

should look in the future. Digital images or photographs of the area may be manipulated to reflect

changes and illustrate a future environmental vision.

6. Decision making: The final step is to make the

decision. The problem has been assessed and

you have come up with either different solutions

to solve the problem, or created situations to

achieve your vision. A comparative analysis on

the alternative future scenarios based on current

regional plans as well as other possible options,

predicted changes, and their visual impacts allows you to make informed decisions on what

changes, should or should not be made to achieve

your vision.

5.6 References

Culpepper, R. Brian and Shelby D. Johnson, Desktop

GIS for Business Geographics, Business Geographics,

May 1998, pp.32-38.

ESRI, “Enterprise GIS in the 90s”, Arc News Summer

1996, vol. 18 no.2, pp. 38.

Klimas, Paul J., Five Stages of GIS Development,

CE News, July 1998, pp. 48.

Korte, George B., The GIS Book, Onword Press, Santa

Fe, New Mexico, 1994.

Montgomery, Glenn E. and Harold C. Schuch, GIS

Data Conversion Handbook, World Books, Fort Collins,

Colorado, 1993.

Ossenholler, Jeff, Find the Right Fit: How to Select

the Best Data Collection Strategy, GIS World, July

1997, pp. 52.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Conference on Environmental Problem-Solving with Geographic Information Systems, Office of Research and

Development, Washington, DC, September 1995.
46

Appendix A: Bibliography

Kshirsagar, S.R. and E.D. Brill Jr., Ideation and Evaluation

Methods Applied to Landuse Planning, Environment and

Planning B, 11:313, 1984.

McAllister, L.S., B.E. Peniston, J. Hyman, and B.

Abbruzzese, Conceptual Framework for a Synoptic Assessment of the Prairie Pothole Region, EPA/600/R-96/

061, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National

Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory,

Western Ecology Division, Corvallis, Oregon 1996

Montgomery, Glenn E. and Harold C. Schuch, GIS Data

Conversion Handbook, GIS World Books, Fort Collins, Colorado, 1993.

Montgomery, D.R., G.E. Grant, and K. Sullivan, Watershed Analysis as a Framework for Implementing Ecosystem Management, Water Resources Bulletin, American

Water Resources Association 31(3):369-386,1995

National Civic League, The Community Visioning and Strategic Planning Handbook, NCL Press, Denver, Colorado,

1997.

National Research Council, Restoration of Aquatic Ecosystems, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1992

Ossenholler, Jeff, Find the Right Fit: How to Select the

Best Data Collection Strategy, GIS World, July 1997, pp.

52.

The Pacific Rivers Council, Inc., Healing the Watershed:

A Guide to the Restoration of Watershed and Native Fish

in the West, Pacific Rivers Council, Inc. 2nd Edition, Eugene, Oregon, 1996.

Rajani, Purvi, Compatibility, Functionality Top Software

User Wish Lists, GIS World, July 1996, pp.94.

Steinitz, Carl; A Framework for Theory Applicable to the

Education of Landscape Architects (and Other Environmental Design Professionals), Landscape Journal, October 1990, pp. 136-143.

Steinitz, C. (ed.), et. al. “Alternative Futures for the

Snyderville Basin, Summit County, Utah.” Graduate School

of Design, Harvard University, 1992.

Brown, Terry; Conceptualizing Smoothness and Density

as Landscape Elements in Visual Resource Management;

Landscape and Urban Planning, 1994, 30:49-58

Business Geographics, 1998 Buyers Guide: Data, Hardware, Software, Mapping/Analysis Software, Business

Geographics, December 1997.

Community Environmental Council, Sustainable Community Indicators: Guideposts for Local Planning, CEC, 1995.

Culpepper, R. Brian and Shelby D. Johnson, Desktop GIS

for Business Geographics, Business Geographics, May

1998, pp.32-38.

Diggelen, Frank Van, GPS for GIS – A Comparative Survey, GIS World, October 1994, pp. 34-40.

Gimblett, Randy H., Ball, George L., and Guisse, Amadou

W.; Autonomous Rule Generation and Assessment for

Complex Spatial Modeling; Landscape and Urban Planning, 1994, 30:13-26

Gladchild, Pat, Neighborhood Planning for Community

Revitalization, 1994.

Hart, Maureen, Guide to Sustainable Community Indicators, QLF/Atlantic Center for the Environment, Ipswich,

Massachusetts, May 1995.

Hulse, David (ed.), Lisa Goorjin, David Richey, Michael

Flaxman, Cheryl Hummon, Denis White, Katheryn

Freemark, Joseph Eilers, Joseph Bernert, Kellie Vache,

Jolie Kaytes, and David Diethelm. Possible Futures for

the Muddy Creek Watershed, Benton County, Oregon, The

University of Oregon, 1997.

Interagency Ecosystem Management Task Force, The

Ecosystem Approach: Healthy Ecosystems and Sustainable Economies, Report of The Interagency Ecosystem

Management Task Force, Volume 1, June 1995.

Klimas, Paul J., Five Stages of GIS Development, CE

News, July 1998, pp. 48.

Korte, George B., The GIS Book, Onword Press, Santa

Fe, New Mexico, 1994.
47

Sumner, Richard, and David Hulse, EPA Research is Helping Communities Achieve Their Desired Vision of the Future, Watershed Management Council Networker, Fall 1997,

7(3):0-11,19.

Sumner, R. and J. Kapuscinski. Building the Vision for

Ecosystem Management. U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR. (submitted for publication)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Community-Based

Environmental Protection: A Resource Book for Protecting Ecosystems and Communities, Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation, Washington, DC, September 1997.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental

Planning for Small Communities: A Guide for Local Decision-Makers, EPA/625/R-94/009, Washington, DC, 1994.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Conference on Environmental Problem-Solving with Geographic

Information Systems, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC, September 1995.

Steinitz, Carl; Geographical Information Systems: A Personal Historical Perspective, The Framework For A Recent Project, (And Some Questions For The Future); European Conference on Geographic Information Systems,

Genoa, Italy, March 30,1993.

Steinitz, Carl. (ed.), Douglas Olson, Elke Bilda, John Ellis,

Torgen Johnson, Ying-Yu Hung, Edith Katz, Paula Meijerink,

Allan Shearer, H. Roger Smith, and Avital Sternberg. Alternative Futures For Monroe County, Pennsylvania, The

Harvard University Graduate School of Design, 1994.

Steinitz, Carl. (ed.), Michael Binford, Paul Cote, Thomas

Edwards Jr., Stephen Ervin, Richard Forman, Craig

Johnson, Ross Kiester, David Mouat, Douglas Olson, Allan

Shearer, Richard Toth, and Robin Wills. Biodiversity and

Landscape Planning: Alternative futures for the region of

Camp Pendleton, CA, The Harvard Graduate School of

Design, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1996.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, A Guide to Developing Local Watershed Action Plans in Ohio, Ohio EPA,

1997
48

Appendix B: Glossary of Terms

Attribute an item of text, a numeric value or an image that is a characteristic

of a spatial entity

Biodiversity the number and variety of different species

Buffer user-specified distance around a point, line or area

Data model a view of data for representing the real world

Digitizing conversion of existing maps from paper or film into digital form

Ecosystem a physical environment and its community of plants and animals

Georeferencing, geocoding assigning geographic coordinates to physical structures

Global Positioning Systems a system that receives radio signals from satellites and identifies

the location of the signal receiver

Habitat an environment that supports plant and animal species

Indicators specific measures of progress or condition

Operating System computer programs which control the operation of the computer

itself

Peripheral a hardware component connected to a computer to perform special

functions

Raster a data structure composed of a grid of cells

Relational Database a database which arranges data in the form of tables

Resolution the size of the smallest object which can be represented

Scanning conversion of data from analog (paper or film) into digital raster form

Vector a data structure composed of points and lines

Watershed an area where rain and other water drain into a common location

such as a river or lake
49

Appendix C: List of Abbreviations

BPJ Best Professional Judgement

CBEP Community-Based Environmental Protection

COTS Common off the Shelf

DBMS Database Management System

DGPS Differential Global Positioning System

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FOV Field of View

GIS Geographic Information System

GPS Global Positioning System

LIDAR Light Detection and Range

NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service

NPS Non-point Source

OEPA Ohio Environmental Protection Agency

OSEC Office of Sustainable Ecosystems and Communities

PCSD President’s Council on Sustainable Development

RBDE Riparian Buffer Delineation Equations

RDMS Relational Database Management System

SA Selective Availability

USGS United States Geologic Survey
United States

Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Research and Development

Cincinnati, OH 45268

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use

$300

EPA/625/R-98/003

PRESORTED STANDARD

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

EPA PERMIT NO. G-35