Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts Waterfowl Concentration Areas mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts Waterfowl Breeding Areas mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts Tundra and Trumpeter Swan habitat mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts Cavity Nesting Duck habitat mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts Shorebird Concentration Areas mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts Seabird Concentrations mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts Northwest White-tailed Deer habitat mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts Mule and Black-tailed Deer habitat mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts Rocky Mountain and Roosevelt Elk habitat mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts Mountain Goat habitat mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts Bighorn Sheep habitat mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts PHS species habitat mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: Areas “associated with” ferruginous hawk breeding habitat are lands that provide the ecosystem services of space and prey needed for ferruginous hawks to successfully reproduce (“breeding habitat”). Breeding habitat consists of natural vegetation or agricultural cover types like pasture. The breeding habitat can be divided into three areas, the Core Area, the Home Range, and the zone for suitable habitat.
Copyright Text: James Watson and Jeff Azerrad, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), Wildlife Program, and Habitat Program, Priority Habitats and Species (PHS).
OffSiteStatus
(
type: esriFieldTypeInteger, alias: Official Site Status
, Coded Values:
[999: NA]
, [1: Pair or reproductive]
, [2: Two birds, pair status unknown]
, ...3 more...
)
Description: Shoreform is a term often used in Puget Sound to describe a coastal landform. The term is generally used to describe landscape features on the scale of hundreds to thousands of meters in scale, such as coastal bluffs, estuaries, barrier beaches, or river deltas.The shoreform change data are a compilation of current and historic shoreforms applied to the ShoreZone shoreline. Historic and current shoreforms in Puget Sound were independently delineated and combined onto a single shoreline (ShoreZone) to provide a comparison of historic to current conditions.Translation of Current Shoreform to Shipman TypeThe current ShoreZone shoreline was classified according to a geomorphic classification system developed by McBride et al. (2005) and applied by SSHIAP (Todd et al. 2009). Because the shoreform classification system chosen for the Change Analysis is Shipman (2008), the current shoreline types (GeoUnits) had to be cross‐walked to the corresponding Shipman types. Some of the SSHIAP types may correspond to more than one Shipman type, so a first‐cut, automated translation was performed. The Shipman type assigned during the automated translation was the class expected to be correct most of time. There is no SSHIAP GeoUnit that corresponds to Shipman’s Open Coastal Inlet (OCI) shoreform in the automated translation process.This automated translation was followed by a visual review of all current shoreforms to make any necessary modifications to the current shoreform type.Simultaneous Review of Current and Historic ShoreformsAfter translation of the current shoreline type into the Shipman type, both current and historic shoreforms were displayed using the same symbology and edited as necessary. This review was performed in order to:• Assign the correct type to the current shoreform for GeoUnit types that may correspond to more than one Shipman type.• QC current and historic shoreform types and modify values as necessary.• Split historic shoreform segments when necessary to correspond to a region of change from historic to current.The review of historic and current shoreforms was guided by a list of expected shoreform transitions. These expected transitions were based on Shipman’s Transition Narrative (7/31/2007) and review of results in Whidbey and South Puget Sound sub‐basins. Any shoreform change not specified on this list was subject to additional scrutiny.Because of the difference in approaches and classification methods, if there were ambiguities in classification, it was more important to determine whether a section of shoreline had changed than to try to determine the “correct” type. The following general rules were applied:• If there was clearly no shoreline change, but the two shoreform types differed, the historic shoreform type was used for both current and historic.• If there was a question about where to place breaks for shoreline change, (because only part of a contiguous shoreform type had changed), the current shoreline was used as a guide.• Unless there was a shoreform change or obvious error, segment end point locations, in both the current and historic shoreline, were not changed.Attribute Transfer from Historic to Current ShorelineAfter historic and current linework were reviewed, the attributes from the historic shoreform data were transferred to the corresponding segments of the current shoreline. Once this process was complete, and the final data were intersected with the GSUs, it was possible to query each segment of the current shoreform data and find the historic shoreform type and its full length, or the length that was included within a specific GSU.This process entailed the following:• Assignment of a unique identifier to each section of contiguous historic shoreform.• Assignment of a unique identifier to each section of historic shoreline that will correspond to a section of current. (A contiguous section of a single shoreform type may be split due modification of part of that shoreline in modern times.)• Assignment of a unique identifier to each section of current shoreform.• Transfer of the historic shoreform type and its length to attributes in the corresponding current shoreline segment.On-line and Off-line EmbaymentsThe current shoreline (ShoreZone) does not depict all of the current estuarine wetlands or embayments (BE, BL, CLM). To handle this discrepancy, an additional attribute in the current linework indicates the presence of these features as “off‐line” wetlands and identifies their shoreform type.If the current embayment was delineated by the shoreline linework, the corresponding historic embayment attributes were transferred to the primary (“on‐line”) historic shoreform fields. If the current embayment was not delineated by the shoreline linework, the corresponding historic embayment attributes were transferred to the embayment (“off‐line”) shoreform columns.The length of the current off‐line embayment was transferred from the University of Washington Puget Sound River History Project current wetlands data. The criteria for including a wetland boundary as part of the historic embayment were based on the same rules used for historic shoreform delineation.Off‐line embayment attributes were assigned to an entire homogeneous section of shoreline. The on‐line shoreform was not split to indicate exactly where the off‐line embayment occurs. It was adequate to know that there was (or is) an embayment associated with that stretch of beach.NST Review (Fly-Bys)Shoreform change data for each sub‐basin were reviewed during a half‐day meeting with a minimum of three NST members present, as well as participants from SSHIAP. The participants viewed current shoreforms, historic shoreforms, and the combined data with ancillary and source datasets, including historic T‐sheets, aerial photos, and historic and current wetlands data. The reviews, called “fly‐bys,” had the following objectives:• Provide the NST with an understanding of the historic and current shoreform data and the process used to develop shoreform change data.• Get input from the NST on question areas, either site‐specific or general methodological questions.• Review all areas of shoreform transition as a QC measure.• Review any other areas of interest specified by the NST.• Develop or refine rules for situations of ambiguity in shoreform classification or shoreform change data developmentOverall, the NST reviewed approximately 58 percent (2,250 km) of the total shoreline length. The discussions at these meetings were iterative, and sometimes a general rule developed at a previous meeting was reversed in a later meeting as participants became more familiar with the data, the process, and had more examples for consideration. The general rules and methods that came out of these fly‐bys are described below.Expected Transitions MatrixThe NST representatives reviewed a matrix of expected shoreform transitions at the first fly‐by. Transitions that were not in this matrix were flagged during the QC process, and were given particular attention during review. The NST approved this list and it was subsequently updated in later fly‐bys. Barrier Beach Merge or SplitFor barrier beaches that were discontinuous in one dataset (due to an on‐line embayment) and continuous in the other (due to an off‐line embayment), the NST representatives approved this general rule: if the drift is the same direction, merge the discontinuous segments into one; if the drift is in opposite directions, split the continuous segment into two.Created ShoreformIt was acceptable to have shoreline in the current shoreform that was not in the historic. These were assigned the Artificial (ART) shoreform. Examples in Whidbey sub‐basin include Jetty Island at the mouth of the Snohomish River and a small “island” (of dredge material) at the southern end of the Swinomish Slough.Current Shoreline PositionSometimes the current shoreline (ShoreZone) mapped the backshore area, and the on‐line and off‐line shoreforms were the opposite of how they were mapped in the historic. When this occurred, they were swapped so that the beach shoreform was assigned to the line, and any embayment shoreform was off‐line.Rocky Shoreline in Current, not HistoricOften there were small bedrock islands that were mapped in the current shoreform, but not in the historic. It was assumed that the rock existed previously, but was not mapped on the historic T‐sheets. Therefore, it was not a true transition. The NST requested that shoreforms stay the same to reflect the source data (rocky in current and none in historic), but that it should not show up as a transition.Artificial/Modified ShorelineThere was extensive discussion regarding the definition of an artificial or modified shoreline. It was decided that the term Artificial was preferred to Modified. The definition is not based on function, rather it is based on the extent of obvious modification, such as dredging and fill. This extent can be determined by use of ancillary layers showing fill, or by areas where the shape and location of the shoreline has changed significantly. (Significant change was not rigorously defined, so some subjectivity is involved in classification of Artificial shoreforms.) In the case of railroads, although there may have been some fill involved, in many cases, these shoreforms were not significantly changed in location, shape, or visible processes from the historic shoreform, and therefore were classified as a non‐artificial beach type (such as Bluff‐backed Beach). Road causeways that were commonly built along former spits across the mouths of embayments were mapped as Artificial (ART) along the outside and the inside of the causeway. If the rest of the embayment was not artificial, it was mapped as the appropriate embayment type.Data SynthesisAfter the review meeting, any changes requested during the fly‐by were implemented. The changes were documented in a notes field in the attribute table.Two fields were added to aid in the display of on‐and off‐line transitions.Once the historic and current shoreform typologies on the current shoreline were finalized, the data were intersected with the GSU data. Because the shoreform delineation was an independent process from the GSUs, the lengths of each feature split up by the GSUs was calculated after this intersection step using lengths stored in the attribute table prior to intersection. The proportional lengths apply to both current and historic shoreforms, both on and off the ShoreZone shoreline. To accomplish this, the following calculations were performed:• Current on‐line shoreform GSU lengths are equal to the Shape Length calculated by the geodatabase. (C_LenGSU = Shape_Length)• Current off‐line embayment shoreform lengths are equal to the pre‐intersection total embayment length multiplied by the pre‐and post‐intersection length ratio (C_LenEmbGSU = C_LenEmb * C_LenGSU / C_LenFull)• Historic on‐line shoreform GSU lengths are equal to the transferred continuous shoreform length multiplied by the pre‐and post‐intersection length ratio (H_LenGSU = H_LenFull * C_LenGSU / C_LenFull)• Historic off‐line embayment shoreform lengths are equal to the pre‐intersection total embayment length multiplied by the pre‐and post‐intersection length ratio (C_LenEmbGSU = C_LenEmb * C_LenGSU / C_LenFull)These GSU lengths are ultimately used to calculate historic and current shoreform lengths at multiple scales. During QC, these fields were also compared against the historic shoreform data in a series of tabular queries to verify that all historic shoreformsand their lengths were correctly transferred into the shoreform change attribute table.Fields representing the percent change in length for both on‐and off‐line features were calculated as follows:• Chg_PropLen_OnLine = (C_LenFull – H_LenFull)/H_LenFull• Chg_PropLen_OffLine = (C_LenEmb – H_LenEmb/H_LenEmbThese percent changes in length reflect complete losses of shoreforms as well as lost lengths in shoreform.The extensive review and QC applied to these data indicate that they are quite accurate and consistent between sub‐basins. The shoreform data were developed specifically for the Change Analysis, so will be appropriate for project‐specific analyses.
Copyright Text: Simenstad, C.A., M. Ramirez, J. Burke, M. Logsdon, H. Shipman, C. Tanner, J. Toft, B. Craig, C. Davis, J. Fung, P. Bloch, K. Fresh, S. Campbell, D. Myers, E. Iverson, A. Bailey, P. Schlenger, C. Kiblinger, P. Myre, W. Gerstel, and A. MacLennan. 2011. Historical Change of Puget Sound Shorelines: Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Project Change Analysis. Puget Sound Nearshore Report No. 2011-01. Published by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle, Washington.
ZU
(
type: esriFieldTypeInteger, alias: Zone Unit
, Coded Values:
[0: Upland]
, [1: Land 200 meters from ShoreZone Shoreline]
, [2: Aquatic, no further than 10 meter bathymetric dpeth]
)
Description: These data represent a reconstruction of the mid-19th century condition of tidal-wetland in the Puget Sound region. It was constructed using 19th century US Coast & Geodetic Survey topographic sheets, supplemented with field notes and plat maps from 19th century government land survey and various other sources including other early maps, aerial photographs, early text sources, and recent data including high-resolution digital elevation models. For detail see: Collins, B. D. and A. J. Sheikh, 2005, Historical reconstruction, classification, and change analysis of Puget Sound tidal marshes. Project completion report to: Washington Department of Natural Resources, Aquatic Resources Division, Olympia, WA Olympia, WA 98504-7027. June 30, 2005 Historic and current shoreforms in Puget Sound were independently delineated using Geographic Information System (GIS) techniques and image interpretation. The historic data was combined with current shoreforms to provide a comparison of historic to current conditions in the fd_shoreform_change dataset.
Copyright Text: PSNERP Project Team (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; and PSNERP Nearshore Science Team), Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Inventory and Assessment Program, and Anchor QEA Consultant Team.
Description: This data describes linear shoreline features and is the primary component of the Washington State ShoreZone Inventory. Other components of the ShoreZone Inventory can be found in separate data layers and tables. The entire Washington State ShoreZone Inventory is comprised of the linear features in this data (szline.shp) and an associated tabular data file (xshrline.dbf) as well as polygon features (szpoly.shp), point features (szpt.shp) and their associated tabular data files (xshrpoly.dbf and xshrpt.dbf). The point data file szlnend.shp contains the endpoints for each shoreline unit. The overall ShoreZone Inventory dataset is an inventory of Washington State's saltwater shorelines conducted between 1994 and 2000 using the ShoreZone Mapping System. Physical and biological resources are described, along with information on the inventory data collection. The majority of the ShoreZone spatial data is line data, with some polygons and points. The inventory divides the shoreline into homogenous physical segments, the average linear segment length is 0.5 miles (0.8 km). Each spatial unit record has many corresponding tabular across-shore component records that describe the unit in more detail. The ShoreZone Inventory systematically characterizes shoreline morphology, substrate, wave exposure and biota. The inventory divides the shoreline into homogenous stretches called units. Within each unit, the shoreline is further divided into a series of across-shore components. Units are usually represented spatially by line segments, but can be polygons or points. Information on the unit and on its components is recorded in tables. These tables are then linked to spatial data, allowing a wide range of feature information to be illustrated on maps or analyzed numerically. Inventory information was collected from a helicopter during low tides. Video imagery of the shoreline was recorded, along with locational information (GPS). From the helicopter a geomorphologist and a marine ecologist recorded continuous commentary on the physical and biological features along the shoreline. Following the survey,the videotapes were taken back to the office for interpretation and classification. The geomorphologist divided the shoreline into units on orthophoto maps and described each unit. Next the marine ecologist added information on the living resources in each unit. Features such as eroding cliffs, sand and gravel beaches, sandflats and wetlands are some of geomorphic forms mapped. Visible macrobiotic, such as wetland grasses, intertidal algae, and subtidal vegetation such as eelgrass or kelp, are also mapped.
Description: This data describes shoreline polygon features and is one component of the Washington State ShoreZone Inventory. Other components of the ShoreZone Inventory can be found in separate data layers and tables. This polygon data layer includes features that have unique spatial characteristics that are not captured by a single line segment representation (line segments are the primary representation in the ShoreZone Inventory, see szline.shp). Examples of possible polygons include: a wetland where the shape of the wetland does not allow a reasonable approximation of area by a length and width estimate, and an intertidal ebb-tidal delta where controlling processes (tidal currents) differ substantially from surrounding units, or a very wide mudflat backed by a gravelly sand beach. The minimum area for a polygon is 1cm2 at a 1:12,000 mapping scale or 15,000ft2 The entire Washington State ShoreZone Inventory is comprised of the polygon features in this data (szpoly.shp) and an associated tabular data file (xshrpoly.dbf) as well as linear features (szline.shp), point features (szpt.shp) and their associated tabular data files (xshrline.dbf and xshrpt.dbf). The point data file szlnend.shp contains the endpoints for each shoreline unit. The overall ShoreZone Inventory dataset is an inventory of Washington State's saltwater shorelines conducted between 1994 and 2000 using the ShoreZone Mapping System. Physical and biological resources are described, along with information on the inventory data collection. The majority of the ShoreZone spatial data is line data, with some polygons and points. The inventory divides the shoreline into homogenous physical segments, the average linear segment length is 0.5 miles (0.8 km). Each spatial unit record has many corresponding tabular across-shore component records that describe the unit in more detail. The ShoreZone Inventory systematically characterizes shoreline morphology, substrate, wave exposure and biota. The inventory divides the shoreline into homogenous stretches called units. Within each unit, the shoreline is further divided into a series of across-shore components. Units are usually represented spatially by line segments, but can be polygons or points. Information on the unit and on its components is recorded in tables. These tables are then linked to spatial data, allowing a wide range of feature information to be illustrated on maps or analyzed numerically. Inventory information was collected from a helicopter during low tides. Video imagery of the shoreline was recorded, along with locational information (GPS). From the helicopter a geomorphologist and a marine ecologist recorded continuous commentary on the physical and biological features along the shoreline. Following the survey,the videotapes were taken back to the office for interpretation and classification. The geomorphologist divided the shoreline into units on orthophoto maps and described each unit. Next the marine ecologist added information on the living resources in each unit. Features such as eroding cliffs, sand and gravel beaches, sandflats and wetlands are some of geomorphic forms mapped. Visible macrobiotic, such as wetland grasses, intertidal algae, and subtidal vegetation such as eelgrass or kelp, are also mapped.
Name: Strategic Needs Assessment - Lost Embayments
Display Field: SubBasin
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPoint
Description: An embayment is an indentation of the shoreline larger in size than a cove but smaller than a gulf. Recovery of lost embayments was specifically identified by Fresh et al. (2010) and in PSNERP planning objectives. Therefore, we mapped and developed some attributes for discrete lost barrier embayments (i.e. where embayment shoreline length had been reduced to zero). We propose that in addition to historic embayment shoreline length and wetland area, that the continuity of embayment service provides benefits to mobile species dependant on the connectivity between embayment sites. Where loss of an embayment creates a larger gap in the continuity of embayment services, therefore the relative benefit derived from restoration would be greater than if the gap created were smaller. To describe this rarity we calculated the distance from each lost embayment to the nearest existing embayments to describe the potential for restoration to fill a gap in embayment services.
Copyright Text: PSNERP Project Team (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; and PSNERP Nearshore Science Team), Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Inventory and Assessment Program, and Anchor QEA Consultant Team.
Description: A barrier beach is a linear ridge of sand or gravel extending above high tide, built by wave action and sediment deposition seaward of the original coastline. Includes variety of depositional coastal landforms, including spits, tombolos, cuspate forelands, and barrier islands. The Barrier Embayment Strategy aims to protect and restore sediment input and transport processes to littoral drift cells where bluff erosion sustains barrier beaches that form barrier embayments, and restore the tidal flow processes found therein. These analyses are intended to serve as a durable framework, allowing us to evaluate a proposed action and its ability to restore or protect ecosystem dynamics and services in the context of a site, a sub-basin and the region, providing a powerful basis for planning and prioritization.
Copyright Text: PSNERP Project Team (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; and PSNERP Nearshore Science Team), Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Inventory and Assessment Program, and Anchor QEA Consultant Team.
Description: A beach is the gently-sloping zone of unconsolidated sediment along the shoreline that is moved by waves, wind and tidal currents. The Beach Strategy aims to protect and restore sediment input and transport processes in littoral drift cells where wave energy results in bluff erosion that sustains beach structure. These analyses are intended to serve as a durable framework, allowing us to evaluate a proposed action and its ability to restore or protect ecosystem dynamics and services in the context of a site, a sub-basin and the region, providing a powerful basis for planning and prioritization.
Copyright Text: PSNERP Project Team (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; and PSNERP Nearshore Science Team), Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Inventory and Assessment Program, and Anchor QEA Consultant Team.
Description: The Coastal Inlet Strategy aims to protect and restore tidal flow processes in coastal inlets, and protect and restore freshwater input and detritus transport processes therein. These systems are defined by an area protected from wave energy by landscape configuration, and largely independent on sediment transport systems. These analyses are intended to serve as a durable framework, allowing us to evaluate a proposed action and its ability to restore or protect ecosystem dynamics and services in the context of a site, a sub-basin and the region, providing a powerful basis for planning and prioritization.
Copyright Text: PSNERP Project Team (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; and PSNERP Nearshore Science Team), Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Inventory and Assessment Program, and Anchor QEA Consultant Team.
Description: The Coastal Inlet Strategy aims to protect and restore tidal flow processes in coastal inlets, and protect and restore freshwater input and detritus transport processes therein. These systems are defined by an area protected from wave energy by landscape configuration, and largely independent on sediment transport systems. These analyses are intended to serve as a durable framework, allowing us to evaluate a proposed action and its ability to restore or protect ecosystem dynamics and services in the context of a site, a sub-basin and the region, providing a powerful basis for planning and prioritization.
Copyright Text: PSNERP Project Team (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; and PSNERP Nearshore Science Team), Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Inventory and Assessment Program, and Anchor QEA Consultant Team.
Description: A delta is the deposit of sediment formed at a stream or river mouth, or other location where the slowing of water flow results in sediment deposition. The River Delta Strategy aims to protect and restore freshwater input and tidal flow processes where major river floodplains meet marine waters. These analyses are intended to serve as a durable framework, allowing us to evaluate a proposed action and its ability to restore or protect ecosystem dynamics and services in the context of a site, a sub-basin and the region, providing a powerful basis for planning and prioritization.
Copyright Text: PSNERP Project Team (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; and PSNERP Nearshore Science Team), Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Inventory and Assessment Program, and Anchor QEA Consultant Team.
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts cave locations mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts cave rich habitat areas mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts aspen stand distribution mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts herbaceous balds habitat mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts snag rich habitat areas mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts cliff habitats mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts talus slope habitat mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts inland sand dune habitat mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts biodiversity areas and corridors mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts wetland habitat mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts priority terrestrial habitats mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: This dataset was produced by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program and depicts priority aquatic habitats mapped by WDFW biologists and resource specialists within Washington State. It does not provide a complete record of all suitable habitats or species occurrences.The PHS program is WDFW’s primary means of sharing fish and wildlife information from our resource experts to local governments, landowners, and others who use this information to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Cities and counties primarily use PHS data to implement and update land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. Landowners also use PHS data when considering ways to develop or conserve their properties.The PHS program identifies priority habitats and species that require special conservation measures. Priority habitats hold unique or significant value for many fish or wildlife species. Priority species are those fish and wildlife species that need special conservation efforts due to low population numbers, sensitivity to habitat changes, tendency to form vulnerable aggregations, or their importance for commercial, recreational, or tribal purposes. EOFORM numbers uniquely identify mapped priority habitats and species. A species or habitat may occur in multiple areas, leading to overlapping polygons in PHS datasets. Mapped priority species areas in this dataset represent known use areas, not potential habitats. PHS datasets are compiled by WDFW biologists and resource specialists using the best available information from research, surveys, and field observations. The sources for each delineated feature are described in the attribute table. While these data represent the best knowledge of WDFW biologists, they do not provide a comprehensive inventory of priority habitats and species in Washington State. Datasets are updated as knowledge improves.PLEASE NOTE: This dataset may contain sensitive (confidential) fish and wildlife data that are subject to restricted distribution according to WDFW policy (POL 5210) and Washington State law (RCW 42.56.430). Records classified as sensitive will have a “Y” value in the “sensitive” attribute field.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Description: Biodiversity Areas are characterized by large, contiguous, areas of habitat, beneficial to multiple focal species, with minimal disturbance from human activities (e.g., urban or housing development, agriculture, roads, etc.). Corridors are modeled pathways between Biodiversity Areas with minimal anthropogenic or ecological barriers to movement. This dataset uses models developed as part of the Washington Connected Landscapes Project: Analysis of the Columbia Plateau Ecoregion by the Washington Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Working Group, which modeled wildlife habitat quality and permeability for individual focal species representing a range of habitat needs. Fundamentally, These areas are relevant to regional-scale planning activities and land use decisions such as informing open space planning, Urban Growth Boundary changes, zoning designations, comprehensive planning, or siting major developments. In their current format, these data are not well suited to site-specific land use proposals (e.g., where to site buildings on a parcel). Instead, these maps are intended to flag regions with high-quality, intact habitat and wildlife corridors so that decision-makers can account for those values when making major land use decisions affecting those regions.
Copyright Text: Washington Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Working Group (WHCWG) 2012. Washington Connected Landscapes Project: Analysis of the Columbia Plateau Ecoregion. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Washington Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA. Report document available online at: http://www.waconnected.org
Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, Habitat Program, Ecosystem Services, Priority Habitats and Species
Description: WDFW’s “Shrubsteppe and Eastside Steppe General Locations” datasets shows the general location of shrubsteppe and eastside steppe as defined by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species program. The map shows where WDFW recommends counties and cities require site-scale information be gathered to inform site-scale land use decisions. It is the best available information regarding the general location of shrubsteppe and Eastside steppe in Washington – and it has important limitations. It is appropriate to use this map for its primary purpose: to identify where site-specific data should be gathered to inform site-scale decisions. It is also appropriate to expect that on-the-ground conditions will vary from this general information. The map relies upon several GIS layers that are maintained by other agencies and updated at various intervals. This map is updated episodically when input layers are updated with the most current information. WDFW data experts, in consultation with subject matter experts and Habitat Program’s Chief Scientist, may without prior notice, update the map (e.g., input data, methodology) to reflect the best available information, best available science, and evolving values and policies. While this is the best available information with respect to the location of shrubsteppe and Eastside steppe in Washington, it has important limitations that users should understand. Challenges of Scale: The fundamental building block of this map is USGS’ 2016 Landfire Remap Existing Vegetation Type (click here for more information). The great benefit of this data is that it provides comprehensive, wall-to-wall coverage of the state. The primary drawbacks of this layer are that it (a) is comprised of 30-meter square pixels (0.22 acres) and (b) is designed to be used when zoomed out to a regional scale. USGS recommends users zoom in no closer than a scale of 1:5,000 (at this scale, a map on a piece of 8½ by 11-inch piece of paper with 1” margins covers 230 acres). A map at this scale is of little use for many important land use decisions (e.g., regarding development, restoration) which occur on a parcel scale – around 1 acre plus or minus. WDFW created this map and explanation of its proper use to inform parcel-scale land use decisions made by local governments and other conservation partners in a way that takes advantage of the benefits of the regional data while working within its limitations. USGS’ Use Limitations: USGS has a carefully worded statement on use limitations for this data. The statement in full reads: Although LANDFIRE products are delivered as 30-meter pixels, they should not be used at the individual pixel level or on small groups of pixels. LANDFIRE products were designed to support 1) national (all states) strategic planning, 2) regional (single large states or groups of smaller states), and 3) strategic/tactical planning for large sub-regional landscapes and Fire Management Units (FMUs) (such as significant portions of states or multiple federal administrative entities). The applicability of LANDFIRE products to support fire and land management planning on smaller areas will vary by product, location, and specific use. Further investigation by local and regional experts should be conducted to inform decisions regarding local applicability. However, it is the responsibility of the local user, using LANDFIRE metadata and local knowledge, to determine if and/or how LANDFIRE can be used for particular areas of interest. LANDFIRE products are not intended to replace local products, but rather serve as a back-up by providing wall-to-wall cross-boundary products. It is the responsibility of the user to be familiar with the value, assumptions, and limitations of LANDFIRE products. Managers and planners must evaluate LANDFIRE data according to the scale and requirements specific to their needs.(emphasis added) Mindful of these limitations, WDFW experts have investigated the Landfire data and determined that applying it at a parcel-scale to inform decisions described herein is a proper use of the data. Appropriate Uses:While it is appropriate to use this data as described below, it is also important for users to realize that it is appropriate to expect that on-the-ground conditions will vary from this general information. This is because this data reflects many sources that depict ecological systems, roads, agricultural lands, buildings, waterbodies, railroads, and airports. Users should consider that (a) each source has its own date when the data was gathered, (b) each source has a scale at which it was gathered and for which it is intended to be used, (c) the differing projections of these data sources can cause features to be offset from the location shown, and (d) each source has known errors of omission and commission (meaning that the GIS layer may miss on-the-ground features or may show features that do not actually exist on the ground). These variances do not invalidate the data to be used as described below. It is appropriate to use this data to identify where site-specific data should be gathered to inform site-scale decisions. (WDFW strongly recommends that site-scale land use decisions be informed by site-scale data.) a) The land use decision under consideration drives the precise type of site-specific information to be gathered (e.g., shrubsteppe presence/absence, boundary, quality), methods used to gather it, and qualifications of the person gathering it. b) Where this regional data shows higher variability (i.e., smaller patches or more pixelated appearance), a rapid shrubsteppe assessment (rather than a more extensive assessment) may be appropriate to confirm or refute the presence of shrubsteppe. It is appropriate to presume that places indicated as shrubsteppe are shrubsteppe and that places that are not indicated as shrubsteppe are not shrubsteppe. a) This presumption is stronger where the layer shows a high degree of uniformity of shrubsteppe (or non-shrubsteppe); it is weaker where there is less uniformity. b) For a specific site, this presumption should yield to the professional opinion of a qualified person with first-hand knowledge and/or reliable site-specific data of the site. It is appropriate to use this information to broadly estimate aspects of shrubsteppe (a) spatial attributes such as patch size and interior vs. edge, (b) connectivity (e.g., with other shrubsteppe, cliffs, dunes, etc.), and (c) restoration potential (to the extent that restoration potential is related to proximity to large or more uniform patches of shrubsteppe). Such estimates, when derived by qualified persons using reasonable methods, should be presumed to be valid. Inappropriate uses: To clarify appropriate uses, we identify some inappropriate uses of the “Shrubsteppe and Eastside Steppe General Locations” map. These examples are not exhaustive. It is inappropriate to assume that the pixelated edges represent the actual edge of shrubsteppe (a site-scale boundary evaluation is needed for this purpose). Where there is variation in pixels (i.e., smaller patches or more pixelated appearance), it is inappropriate to assume that the individual or small groups of pixels of shrubsteppe or non-shrubsteppe represent the precise location of shrubsteppe and non-shrubsteppe areas (a site-scale evaluation of the existence/extent of shrubsteppe is needed for this purpose). It is inappropriate to consider this modeled information to be accurate when appropriately gathered, site-scale data, or the professional judgment of an informed, qualified person says otherwise.
Copyright Text: Modelling: Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), Habitat Program, Priority Habitats and Species Section. Vegetation Layer: Landfire - 2016 Remap Existing Vegetation Type. Crop Layer: Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA)- WSDACrops2020. Road Layers: Washington State Dept of Transportation (WSDOT) - Local Agency Public Road Lines; WSDOT Roadway Width; DNR Roads. Railroad Layer: Washington State Dept of Transportation (WSDOT) - Rail Lines of Washington State (1:24K). Waterbodies Layer: United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) - National Hydrography Dataset (NHD), “NHDWaterbody” and “NHDArea” Buildings: Microsoft - USBuildingsFootprints. Airports: Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), Habitat Program, Priority Habitats and Species Section. Only GIS layers containing points of airport locations and lines depicting runways could be found. Decided to digitize polygons of the built environment at the airports. Thumbnail Photo: Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), Wildlife Program
Description: WDFW’s “Shrubsteppe and Eastside Steppe General Locations” datasets shows the general location of shrubsteppe and eastside steppe as defined by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species program. The map shows where WDFW recommends counties and cities require site-scale information be gathered to inform site-scale land use decisions. It is the best available information regarding the general location of shrubsteppe and Eastside steppe in Washington – and it has important limitations. It is appropriate to use this map for its primary purpose: to identify where site-specific data should be gathered to inform site-scale decisions. It is also appropriate to expect that on-the-ground conditions will vary from this general information. The map relies upon several GIS layers that are maintained by other agencies and updated at various intervals. This map is updated episodically when input layers are updated with the most current information. WDFW data experts, in consultation with subject matter experts and Habitat Program’s Chief Scientist, may without prior notice, update the map (e.g., input data, methodology) to reflect the best available information, best available science, and evolving values and policies. While this is the best available information with respect to the location of shrubsteppe and Eastside steppe in Washington, it has important limitations that users should understand. Challenges of Scale: The fundamental building block of this map is USGS’ 2016 Landfire Remap Existing Vegetation Type (click here for more information). The great benefit of this data is that it provides comprehensive, wall-to-wall coverage of the state. The primary drawbacks of this layer are that it (a) is comprised of 30-meter square pixels (0.22 acres) and (b) is designed to be used when zoomed out to a regional scale. USGS recommends users zoom in no closer than a scale of 1:5,000 (at this scale, a map on a piece of 8½ by 11-inch piece of paper with 1” margins covers 230 acres). A map at this scale is of little use for many important land use decisions (e.g., regarding development, restoration) which occur on a parcel scale – around 1 acre plus or minus. WDFW created this map and explanation of its proper use to inform parcel-scale land use decisions made by local governments and other conservation partners in a way that takes advantage of the benefits of the regional data while working within its limitations. USGS’ Use Limitations: USGS has a carefully worded statement on use limitations for this data. The statement in full reads: Although LANDFIRE products are delivered as 30-meter pixels, they should not be used at the individual pixel level or on small groups of pixels. LANDFIRE products were designed to support 1) national (all states) strategic planning, 2) regional (single large states or groups of smaller states), and 3) strategic/tactical planning for large sub-regional landscapes and Fire Management Units (FMUs) (such as significant portions of states or multiple federal administrative entities). The applicability of LANDFIRE products to support fire and land management planning on smaller areas will vary by product, location, and specific use. Further investigation by local and regional experts should be conducted to inform decisions regarding local applicability. However, it is the responsibility of the local user, using LANDFIRE metadata and local knowledge, to determine if and/or how LANDFIRE can be used for particular areas of interest. LANDFIRE products are not intended to replace local products, but rather serve as a back-up by providing wall-to-wall cross-boundary products. It is the responsibility of the user to be familiar with the value, assumptions, and limitations of LANDFIRE products. Managers and planners must evaluate LANDFIRE data according to the scale and requirements specific to their needs.(emphasis added) Mindful of these limitations, WDFW experts have investigated the Landfire data and determined that applying it at a parcel-scale to inform decisions described herein is a proper use of the data. Appropriate Uses:While it is appropriate to use this data as described below, it is also important for users to realize that it is appropriate to expect that on-the-ground conditions will vary from this general information. This is because this data reflects many sources that depict ecological systems, roads, agricultural lands, buildings, waterbodies, railroads, and airports. Users should consider that (a) each source has its own date when the data was gathered, (b) each source has a scale at which it was gathered and for which it is intended to be used, (c) the differing projections of these data sources can cause features to be offset from the location shown, and (d) each source has known errors of omission and commission (meaning that the GIS layer may miss on-the-ground features or may show features that do not actually exist on the ground). These variances do not invalidate the data to be used as described below. It is appropriate to use this data to identify where site-specific data should be gathered to inform site-scale decisions. (WDFW strongly recommends that site-scale land use decisions be informed by site-scale data.) a) The land use decision under consideration drives the precise type of site-specific information to be gathered (e.g., shrubsteppe presence/absence, boundary, quality), methods used to gather it, and qualifications of the person gathering it. b) Where this regional data shows higher variability (i.e., smaller patches or more pixelated appearance), a rapid shrubsteppe assessment (rather than a more extensive assessment) may be appropriate to confirm or refute the presence of shrubsteppe. It is appropriate to presume that places indicated as shrubsteppe are shrubsteppe and that places that are not indicated as shrubsteppe are not shrubsteppe. a) This presumption is stronger where the layer shows a high degree of uniformity of shrubsteppe (or non-shrubsteppe); it is weaker where there is less uniformity. b) For a specific site, this presumption should yield to the professional opinion of a qualified person with first-hand knowledge and/or reliable site-specific data of the site. It is appropriate to use this information to broadly estimate aspects of shrubsteppe (a) spatial attributes such as patch size and interior vs. edge, (b) connectivity (e.g., with other shrubsteppe, cliffs, dunes, etc.), and (c) restoration potential (to the extent that restoration potential is related to proximity to large or more uniform patches of shrubsteppe). Such estimates, when derived by qualified persons using reasonable methods, should be presumed to be valid. Inappropriate uses: To clarify appropriate uses, we identify some inappropriate uses of the “Shrubsteppe and Eastside Steppe General Locations” map. These examples are not exhaustive. It is inappropriate to assume that the pixelated edges represent the actual edge of shrubsteppe (a site-scale boundary evaluation is needed for this purpose). Where there is variation in pixels (i.e., smaller patches or more pixelated appearance), it is inappropriate to assume that the individual or small groups of pixels of shrubsteppe or non-shrubsteppe represent the precise location of shrubsteppe and non-shrubsteppe areas (a site-scale evaluation of the existence/extent of shrubsteppe is needed for this purpose). It is inappropriate to consider this modeled information to be accurate when appropriately gathered, site-scale data, or the professional judgment of an informed, qualified person says otherwise.
Copyright Text: Modelling: Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), Habitat Program, Priority Habitats and Species Section. Vegetation Layer: Landfire - 2016 Remap Existing Vegetation Type. Crop Layer: Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA)- WSDACrops2020. Road Layers: Washington State Dept of Transportation (WSDOT) - Local Agency Public Road Lines; WSDOT Roadway Width; DNR Roads. Railroad Layer: Washington State Dept of Transportation (WSDOT) - Rail Lines of Washington State (1:24K). Waterbodies Layer: United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) - National Hydrography Dataset (NHD), “NHDWaterbody” and “NHDArea” Buildings: Microsoft - USBuildingsFootprints. Airports: Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), Habitat Program, Priority Habitats and Species Section. Only GIS layers containing points of airport locations and lines depicting runways could be found. Decided to digitize polygons of the built environment at the airports. Thumbnail Photo: Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), Wildlife Program
Description: WDFW’s PHS_OregonWhiteOak layer consists of “Oak Woodlands in Southwest Washington” polygons (within all of Clark County and small portions of Skamania and Cowlitz counties) that shows modeled, presumed locations of Oregon White Oak Woodlands, oak areas mapped by the WA Dept of Natural Resources, as well as older polygons mapped by WDFW Habitat and Wildlife biologists. These oak polygons are defined by WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program.
Copyright Text: Washington Department Of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), Habitat Program, Ecosystem Services, Priority Habitats and Species (PHS)
Description: This data set represents the extent, approximate location and type of wetlands and deepwater habitats in the United States and its Territories. These data delineate the areal extent of wetlands and surface waters as defined by Cowardin et al. (1979). Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and near shore coastal waters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery. By policy, the Service also excludes certain types of "farmed wetlands" as may be defined by the Food Security Act or that do not coincide with the Cowardin et al. definition. Contact the Service's Regional Wetland Coordinator for additional information on what types of farmed wetlands are included on wetland maps. This dataset should be used in conjunction with the Wetlands Project Metadata layer, which contains project specific wetlands mapping procedures and information on dates, scales and emulsion of imagery used to map the wetlands within specific project boundaries.
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: The RMZ is measured from the wider of the centerline (when the stream is represented by a line), stream edge (when the stream is represented by a polygon), or outside edge of an observed migration zone (OMZ). The OMZ was created specifically for this effort to map RMZs by combining existing data sources showing mapped stream locations which included (a) the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) area polygons, (b) NHD waterbody polygons (e.g., lakes, ponds, sloughs, deltas) which intersect streams, (c) WDFW 2017 Visible Surface Water area polygons, and (d) areas marked as river in the NRCS soils data used to develop SPTH200. The OMZ is not a substitute for the channel migration zone (CMZ); rather, because no statewide dataset for CMZs currently exists, we created OMZs using existing data to enable the mapping of RMZs, knowing that in many instances the OMZ will be narrower than the CMZ. The dataset is subject to change as better base data becomes available. Caution: These data are a modeled representation of RMZs developed using GIS data and remote sensing datasets. As such they are estimates of RMZ locations and not surveys of known RMZ locations. This regional dataset was developed for analytical purposes and can be used to estimate the total area, distribution, or patterns of RMZs at a landscape scale (for example, county or watershed). This dataset is not intended to support site-scale land use decisions – other than for use as a flagging tool to determine where site surveys are necessary. True delineation of RMZ boundaries for any sitescale land use decisions require a field survey to verify a RMZ’s presence, boundary, and quality.
Copyright Text: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Description: This dataset shows Surf Smelt and Pacific Sand lance spawning locations in the Puget Sound area as surveyed by crews employed by the Washington Dept of Natural Resources. These locations have not yet undergone quality assurance or quality control by Washington Dept of Fish and Wildlife Forage Fish biologists. The surveys were conducted from October 31, 2012 to June 22, 2015.
Copyright Text: Washington Dept. of Natural Resources did the initial surveys. The data was sent to the Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife who generated a point layer of the spawning locations.
Description: Polygons in Puget Sound showing locations of documented Pacific Herring (Culpa harengus) adult holding areas (WDF, 1984, as ammended 1986). The polygons were later edited by Pat McAllister and most recently by Kurt Stick, and digitized by Dale Gombert, 2003, both WDFW. These polygons are documented Pacific herring (Culpa harengus) holding areas at specific sites throughout Puget Sound and Washington coastal areas and bays. Large numbers of adult herring from diverse parts of Puget sound congregate in a few major holding areas each winter prior to moving to their respective spawning grounds. Major holding areas include the Strait of Georgia, Bellingham Bay, the areas south and west of Protection Island, north Hood Canal and Hale Passage near Tacoma. Beasuse herring migrate considerable distances from their spawning grounds, impact on the critical habitats they utilize in one area could affect harvest or the food chain at other locations. Herring deposit their eggs on marine vegetation, eelgrass and various algae, in the shallow subtidal and intertidal zone generally at tidal elevations from +3 feet to -20 feet Mean Low Low Waterline (MLLW). Forage fish are small, pelagic schooling fish which are important as forage for predatory fish, birds, and mammals. They provide an important link in the food chain between zooplankton and piscivorous (fish-eating animals).
Copyright Text: This information was pulished as Technical Report 79, April 1992 Salmon, marine fish and shellfish resources and associated fisheries in Washington's coastal and inland mairne waters by the Habitat Management Division of the then Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF), now known as the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
This report resulted from the efforts of many individuals within WDF. Thom Hooper and Don Haring were project leaders for Habitat Management Division. Dick Allen, Brian Benson and Bill Graeber were the principal authors and Randy McIntosh provided the graphics for this report. Several other WDF personnel provided data for and/or reviewed portions of the report. They included Chuck Aldrich, Jon Anderson, Dan Ayers, Steve Berry, Alex Bradbury, Ray Buckley, Dick Bumgarner, Randy Carman, Theresa Clocksin, Anita Cook, Brian Culver, Wolf Dammers, Gary Davis, Dan Doty, Brett Dumbauld, Kurt Fresh, Lynn Goodwin, Mike Gross, Don Hendrick, Dwight Herren, Tom Jagielo, Gayle Kreitman, Paul LaRiviere, Doug Milward, Jim Norris, Tom Northup, Dan Pentilla, Cyreis Schmitt, Al Scholz, Doug Simons, Dennis Tufts, Wendy White, and Bill Wood. Special thanks are due to Dale Gombert of WDF for preparation of the majority of the maps and figures used in this report.
Description: This geospatial dataset represents the Olympic Mudminnow occupied watersheds based on the 6th level (12-digit) hydrologic unit boundaries from the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) layer in Washington State. The HUC12 boundaries were made from the Oregon and Washington datasets that have been nationally certified by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Whether a watershed is considered occupied is based on the known locations of Olympic Mudminnows within those watersheds. These locations were determined through a surveys and incidental observations by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Please Note: Not all streams or waterbodies in an occupied watershed contain Olympic Mudminnows.
Copyright Text: Occupied watersheds originally identified by the U.S. Fish and wildlife Service. Additional watersheds added by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife.