Tongass National Forest

Much project work has been conducted since 1997 (and before 1997). This work has most often involved generation of field verified data and information that has been used for project NEPA, final project design and implementation. Various analyses have usually been done in GIS formats and have often added clarification of various types of resource information. Project design and implementation has often fine-tuned the project data with additional field measurement based efforts.

For a variety of reasons, this improved data has not been consistently incorporated into corporate data systems. Often project teams are beginning their next high priority project as one is being completed. Clean up work, like incorporating new or updated data into the corporate system has received less priority. Resource specialists get inconsistent advice about updating layers and different resource areas are using layers with varying degrees of updated field data. New or updated data is passed on to GIS data stewards, usually in a Supervisor Office and not at the District, for them to review and incorporate into the corporate data. This has not been accomplished consistently across the Tongass, often because the data stewards have other priority work they are doing, lack sufficient training to incorporate the information, lack of specific direction to the data stewards, or a combination of these factors. There appears to be a lack of direction in resource Handbooks for use, incorporation, and maintenance of GIS data, including linkage to the corporate data dictionary.

Ongoing changes in corporate data requirements and structure have also added to this situation. Personnel turnover is contributing to problems in this area. When updated or new data is not incorporated into the corporate system, new people or teams are re-visiting field locations that have been inventoried in recent years. In addition, some resource data is not consistent (coding, etc.) across the Forest. The Forest unification at the 3 SO levels still have inconsistencies. Adding to this situation is the fact that most project work is being done at the District level, where Districts often have a parallel GIS system to the corporate system. This often happens because the Districts feel compelled to continue working on their projects and do not have time to wait for data stewards or others to maintain or upgrade the corporate GIS layers.

Much is going on nationally to structure our data systems so they are consistent and these system updates are ongoing at the Forest level. The Forest Plan SEIS required us to update a lot of the Forest Plan Final EIS layers and information. Changes in technology, such as use of Forest-wide polygon coverage instead of grids, provide us good opportunities to strategically design and update our data systems so we can take advantage of our project generated data consistent with national corporate systems. Being able to successfully do this will significantly improve our Forest Plan data and analyses needs into the future.

The SEIS has a series of closeout work items, many of which are designed to update/upgrade our GIS layers. The land status layer has been updated to incorporate land status changes since 1997 based on input from the Districts. This layer is a foundation layer for nearly all mapping or analyses using GIS systems. The data dictionary has been updated slightly so the changes can be tracked through time. The Forest LUD layer has also been redone using the land status layer as its base. This should significantly reduce project mapping and analyses slivers. The data dictionary is also being updated slightly so that changes in LUDs can be tracked through time. Old Growth Reserve LUD will now be identified in the system as to their size (large, medium, small). A suitability layer for timber was created. This layer will be frozen as of 2003 as a reference for future Forest Planning periodic analyses needs. A working suitable layer will be made available in the Tongass NF corporate system. The suitability analysis requires use of many other resource layers (riparian, soils risks, high vulnerability karst, wildlife features, beach fringe, etc.) in order to be run. Many of these items are also what timber sale project teams have to assess and often generate new or updated data during timber sale Gate 1, 2 and 3 work activities. There may be an opportunity to link all of these efforts together (or require) in a manner that the corporate database is being updated on an ongoing basis rather than continue to run parallel to GIS systems. The SEIS Closeout work also includes updates to the recreation ROS corporate GIS layer and the scenery EVC layer.

Tongass GIS program personnel have made significant progress in routinely updating unified covers when updates are elevated, as well as refining library structure and macros for ease of use and compatibility with project needs. They’ve also made excellent use of the fsweb intranet to provide a wide range of information to GIS users.

Conduct a comprehensive review of current processes for generating and maintaining corporate data. This effort needs to consider current National data requirements, standards for incorporation of ground verified project data, and individually developed resource tracking systems (i.e. SEIS Closeout, RO generated suitability layer, Caouette model). Incorporate procedures to track status of metadata so people know the vintage, precision, and accuracy of the data being used. The roles and responsibilities of data stewards will need to be part of the review and refreshed process as applicable. This would result in a proposal to be presented to the Forest Leadership Team that would make adjustments to current policies.

• Forest Planner
• GIS Group Leader
• Data Stewards
• Various Resource Group Leaders

• Review document with findings and recommendations for policy and procedure adjustments.
• Develop and deliver appropriate training packages for users and data managers/stewards.