So far the progress I have made for my course project is displaying data on two maps. I have one map that displays raster data of suitable peregrine falcon habitat. This USGS data is based on 2001 ground conditions. They applied a deductive habitat model to "remotely-sensed data layers within the species known range." There is also a vector map of the known range, which is also based on 2001 ground conditions, and was "created by attributing sub-watershed polygons with information of a species presence, origin, seasonal and reproductive use."
I am a bit torn about whether I should use one over the other, or both. One of my main concerns with this data is that the ground conditions are based in 2001. The metadata does point to the fact that the data was compiled between 2008 and 2013, which is more recent. I cannot find nationwide data that is more recent than that.
My next steps will be applying forest fragmentation data and urbanization effects on the displayed habitat/range data.
I think that the first map is a better representation of suitable peregrine falcon habitat. The raster data is much more clear and concise in comparison to the vector data. I don't think that the points and polygons are as accurate, and I think it is more confusing to understand. Nice job so far!
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lexie that the first map seems to visually represent the data better for the peregrine falcon habitat. I would be curious myself to see more recent data but this is an awesome topic and you are off to a great start!
ReplyDelete