Previously, I wrote that this Story Map shows small polygons of habitat as buffers around representative observations. However, the actual locations are not accurate because the underlying observation data has been randomized to protect populations of rare species.
The first map ("Preliminary Conservation Zones" and "Potential Dispersal Zones" for the American, Rusty-patched, Suckley's, and Western bumble bees) shows the correct kind of critical habitat (buffered observations) USFWS has designated for rusty patch and would likely designate for other proposed species, but the locations are incorrect. For example, the mapped locations of Rusty patch on that map do not line up to the USFWS GIS for rusty patch critical habitat.
Some of the other species may be are incorrect as well,
depending on whether the data source (GBIF) considers the species endangered
and so randomized the locations within a 0.2 degree lat/long box. That
seems to be the case for the Western Bumble bee, but not the American bumble
bee.
The map shows a mix of accurate and inaccurate, specific
habitat points. This is confusing and potentially misleading, if the
intent is to facilitate conservation planning. For example, when I zoom
to an area of interest, I might think there is no mapped habitat
there. But if there is some nearby, I can't tell from if that habitat is or isn’t within my area of interest.
The easiest fix would be to increase the size of the
buffers so that they include the entire randomized area (0.2 degree, lat/long) that each point comes from. A note could say that critical
habitat would likely be designated in a subset of those larger polygons based
on the buffer size USFWS decides.
No comments:
Post a Comment