Road Density as an Indicator of Road Hazard

Similar documents
A Method Using ArcMap to Create a Hydrologically conditioned Digital Elevation Model

LEAGUE NOTES ON APPROVED COMMUNITY WATER SUPPLY PLAN

Revising the Nantahala and Pisgah Land Management Plan Preliminary Need to Change the Existing Land Management Plan

DOÑA ANA COUNTY DESIGN STORM CRITERIA GUIDELINES FOR COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL SITES. Run-off Analysis Methods

4. Environmental Impacts Assessment and Remediation Targets

Decision Memo. Restore Act Land Acquisition

Integrated Restoration Prioritization

1.7.0 Floodplain Modification Criteria

Remote Sensing, GPS and GIS Technique to Produce a Bathymetric Map

Restoration Planning and Development of a Restoration Bank

September 25, Dear Concerned Citizen:

Emery, Gary GIS Coordinator, Fisheries Dept, Hoopa Valley Tribe, P.O. Box 417, Hoopa, CA 95546; phone (530) x 22; gis@pcweb.

DEQ Response to Comments regarding the Public Notice for a Coal Mining Project in the Panther Creek watershed In Craig and Nowata Counties.

AN INITIATIVE TO IMPROVE

3. The submittal shall include a proposed scope of work to confirm the provided project description;

JACIE Science Applications of High Resolution Imagery at the USGS EROS Data Center

GLOSSARY OF TERMS CHAPTER 11 WORD DEFINITION SOURCE. Leopold

Series 2016A-2 (Green Bonds) Final Proceeds Allocation April 2016

18 voting members 44 stakeholders 114 list. Senators: Wyden & Merkley Representative DeFazio

King Fire Restoration Project, Eldorado National Forest, Placer and El Dorado Counties, Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION. Background

Natural Resource-Based Planning*

Appendix A. Lists of Accomplishments and Project Costs. UMRWD 10 Year Plan Update. Appendix A UPPER MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED DISTRICT

University of Arkansas Libraries ArcGIS Desktop Tutorial. Section 5: Analyzing Spatial Data. Buffering Features:

Angora Fire Restoration Activities June 24, Presented by: Judy Clot Forest Health Enhancement Program

ANGORA FIRE RESTORATION PROJECT

March Prepared by: Irvine Ranch Water District Sand Canyon Avenue. Irvine, CA Contact: Natalie Likens (949)

4.2 Buena Vista Creek Watershed

Final Report. Dixie Creek Restoration Project. Funded by Plumas Watershed Forum

Appendix J Online Questionnaire

Development of an Impervious-Surface Database for the Little Blackwater River Watershed, Dorchester County, Maryland

Project Theory-Climate Change and Traditional Ecological Knowledge Adaption in the Klamath Basin

Restoring Anadromous Fish Habitat in Big Canyon Creek Watershed. Summary Report 2002

Upper Des Plaines River & Tributaries, IL & WI Feasibility Study

Increasing water availability through juniper control.

USDA Forest Service Proposed Soil and Water Restoration Categorical Exclusions Frequently Asked Questions Table of Contents

The LAndscape Management Policy Simulator (LAMPS) Pete Bettinger Department of Forest Resources Oregon State University

BLACK/HARMONY/FAREWELL CREEK WATERSHED EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT CHAPTER 12 - STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

Flood Plain Reclamation to Enhance Resiliency Conserving Land in Urban New Jersey

Effects of Land Cover, Flow, and Restoration on Stream Water Quality in the Portland, OR and Vancouver, WA Metro Area

Floodplain Connectivity in Restoration Design

May 9, Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Power Fire Restoration Project (CEQ# )

Chapter 3 SENSITIVE AREAS AND VEGETATED CORRIDORS

As stewards of the land, farmers must protect the quality of our environment and conserve the natural resources that sustain it by implementing

What We Do: Wetlands, Wildlife Habitat & Flood Hazards in the Root River Watershed

Miquon Creek STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT WHO WE ARE

HCP Team Meeting. November 18, icfi.com

Clean Water Services. Ecosystems Services Case Study: Tualatin River, Washington

October 11, Sharon Stohrer State Water Resources Control board P.O. Box 2000 Sacramento, CA

Introduction to GIS.

Cellular Antenna Proposal Form

Request for Proposals for Topographic Mapping. Issued by: Teton County GIS and Teton County Engineering Teton County, Wyoming

BIG CREEK Nos. 1 AND 2 (FERC Project No. 2175) VOLUME 1 (BOOK 1 OF 27 BOOKS) INITIAL STATEMENT, EXHIBITS A, B, C, D AND H (PUBLIC INFORMATION)

Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping. Changes Since Last FIRM

Protecting Floodplain. While Reducing Flood Losses

LOW INTEREST LOANS FOR AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION

Rocky EEP Preliminary Findings Report Summary February 2005

What is GIS? Geographic Information Systems. Introduction to ArcGIS. GIS Maps Contain Layers. What Can You Do With GIS? Layers Can Contain Features

Buffer Operations in GIS

NEW DIGITAL TERRAIN MODELING (DTM) TOOLS FOR CABLE ROUTE PLANNING by Dr. Jose M. Andres Makai Ocean Engineering Inc.

FRONT RANGE WATERSHED PROTECTION DATA REFINEMENT WORK GROUP

Watershed Treatment Model for Urban Watersheds. Neely L. Law Watershed Analyst Center for Watershed Protection

Standards: Human activity has consequences on living organisms and ecosystems. (94412, )

DRAFT SOUTH FORK SKYKOMISH RIVER

Abaya-Chamo Lakes Physical and Water Resources Characteristics, including Scenarios and Impacts

LYNDE CREEK WATERSHED EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT CHAPTER 12 - STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

Weed Survey and Mapping

Chapter 9. Selected Watershed Initiatives in the Great Basin Region

DANIELS RUN STREAM RESTORATION, FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA: FLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS REPORT

Urban Stream Restoration Defining the Full Benefits of a Project. Warren C. High MACTEC Engineering and Consulting

G3 GRANT LID RETROFIT FOR THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL PARKING LOT

Henry Van Offelen Natural Resource Scientist MN Center for Environmental Advocacy

Environmental Case Study Decatur, Georgia, DeKalb County A Suburban Creek Resists Channelization

Using an All lands Framework for Conservation of Ecosystem Services

Habitat Opportunities in the Duwamish Transition Zone

ROSE CREEK WATERSHED HYDROLOGIC, HYDRAULIC, SEDIMENT TRANSPORT, AND GEOMORPHIC ANALYSES TASK 1 EXISTING DATA AND INFORMATION SUMMARY REPORT BACKGROUND

Land Conservation in the Floodplain

Prioritizing Riparian Restoration at the Watershed, Reach and Site Scales. Richard R. Harris University of California, Berkeley Cooperative Extension

Considerations of Spatial and Temporal Scales in Restoration. Gordon H. Reeves U.S. Forest Service PNW Research Station Corvallis, OR

Revision of Land and Resource Management Plan for the Santa Fe National Forest;

Flood Risk Management

Flood Risk Management

Laws of Minnesota 2009 Final Report

Upper Deschutes Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement

Addendum D. Nomination of Moody Wash ACEC

3.4 DRAINAGE PLAN Characteristics of Existing Drainages Master Drainage System. Section 3: Development Plan BUTTERFIELD SPECIFIC PLAN

Lower Crooked Creek Watershed Conservation Plan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Backyard Buffers that Work for People and Nature by Restoring Ecological Function

Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Capital Budget Approved by Legislature in June 2013

Tennessee Watershed Modeling Tools. Southern Region Watershed Meeting, July Forbes Walker University of Tennessee Extension

Earth Data Science in The Era of Big Data and Compute

Watershed Modeling System

Using ArcGIS ModelBuilder to batch process files

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Page. Executive Summary

REPORT TO REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY COMMISSION MEETING OF WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 2013 LEECH WATER SUPPLY AREA RESTORATION UPDATE

Appendix C - Risk Assessment: Technical Details. Appendix C - Risk Assessment: Technical Details

Avison Management Services Ltd. COMPANY PROFILE

Understanding Raster Data

Addendum. Use Attainability Analysis for Site Specific Selenium Criteria: Alkali Creek. February 23, 2009

Objectives. Raster Data Discrete Classes. Spatial Information in Natural Resources FANR Review the raster data model

Transcription:

Road Density as an Indicator of Road Hazard ame of indicator Road density Questions potentially addressed AQ (1) How and where does the road system modify the surface and subsurface hydrology of the area? AQ (2) How and where does the road system cause surface erosion? AQ (6) How and where is the road system hydrologically connected to the stream system? How do the connections affect water quality and quantity (such as, elevated peak flow, delivery of sediments, thermal increases) Description of indicator Road density is a simple indicator of the concentration of roads in an area. The road density can be determined for road segments that have characteristics that are attributed, like road segments within a 1- meter buffer of stream channels. Road density maps can be created for a specific area such as a watershed or by using an Arc Macro Language program (AML) like the moving windows type explained below. It can be also used in combination with other layers such as wildlife habitat type. Units of indicator The units for road density are expressed as length per unit area, typically in miles of road per square mile. cales May be useful at all scales larger than site. A map of road density at the Forest scale indicates locations of concentrated roads. At the watershed scale, the map can be used to compare the distribution of road density among watersheds. Related Indicators Road density does not directly relate to other indicators. Utility Probably most useful as a visual aid for finding areas with relatively high concentrations of roads. Road density is most useful where a high concentration of roads is problematic to a watershed or to wildlife. This may be the case with species that are sensitive to the disturbance and danger associated with roads. Acquisition Readily available if a roads coverage exists for the area. Road density can be determined by simply dividing the length of road in a polygon by the area. It can also be produced by using a road density AML, which runs in ARC/IFO GRID. This program creates a grid of road density by using a circular, moving window. 165

Data needs Must have a roads coverage for the GI process. Road density by watershed can be done manually by determining the length of roads and dividing by the area. Accuracy and precision This macro can produce very different results (figure 2-28), depending on the window size selected. The default setting for the window size is 1 square mile. The default setting for the cell size is 1 acre. etting the window size less than the default will lower the density values on the road-density map because the moving window is less likely to overlap the adjacent roads. Reducing the cell size will smooth the polygon output but will add processing time. If the input roads coverage does not extend beyond the cover used to clip the output coverage, it may not be accurate around the perimeter. Durability Will change over time if roads are dropped or added to the roads coverage. Monitoring value Can be useful if a resource responds to a threshold value of road density. Limitations Road density may not be appropriate for some analyses because it does not reflect the character of individual roads. In some watersheds, the aquatic effects from a single problem road will be greater than in an area with high road density. This macro is very sensitive to the size of moving window selected. The roads coverage must extend beyond the boundary, if the road density along the perimeter is to be accurate. Typical availability Wherever a digital roads coverage exists. Road density can be determined manually for an area such as a watershed or district, but it would be very tedious to manually recreate the moving windows AML. Where applicable Road density is probably best applied in combination with a polygon coverage. An example of a combination is road density in riparian reserves (figure 2-33). Examples Road density was calculated for three watersheds (figures 2-29, -3, - 31) on the ix Rivers F, by using the default moving-window size of one square mile and a cell size of 3 X 3 meters (default is 1 acre or about 64 X 64 meters). The distribution of road density (figure 2-32) shows the Bluff Creek watershed with a fairly normal distribution. The orth Fork Eel river road density has more than 18 percent of its area in the zero category because of the two wilderness areas in the 166

southeastern portion. The upper Mad River watershed has a road distribution that is skewed to the right because of its relatively higher road density. The Boise ational Forest (figure 2-33) used road density in Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas to define priority watersheds for restoration. An example for two ranger districts (figure 2-34) highlights locations of high road density. The moving window AML was used to emphasize areas with high concentrations of road segments within 1 meters of a stream channel (figure 2-35). The Bluff Creek watershed was subdivided into upper, middle, and lower areas to show how road-segment densities may vary. The road density map (figure 2-36) shows a relatively small variation between the three areas. The connected road density map (figure 2-37) reveals that roads in the upper part of the watershed are considerably less connected than those in the middle and lower areas. The road density map for the middle and lower slope positions (figure 2-38) has even more variation between the upper area of the watershed and the other two areas. Development needs The moving window macro is being integrated into a software package that will have a menu interface and include other macros (ee Appendix 3). This package will also calculate road densities by the analysis area that the user chooses, such as district, watershed, or subwatershed. Tools references Hydrologic Condition Assessment Tools Module of Indicators for Roads Analysis (ee Appendix 3) 167

Road Density - Layer Watershed - cale Bluff Creek Watershed Orleans Ranger District 16-acre window Boundary >-.5 >.5-1. >1.-1.5 >1.5-2. >2.-2.5 >2.5-3. >3.-3.5 >3.5-4. >4.-4.5 >4.5-5. >5. 32-acre window 64-acre window 8-acre window 1 1 2 3 4 5 Miles W E 1:25, Figure 2-28. Output of road density AML for the Bluff Creek watershed with variation in size of the moving window (default is 64 acres). ote the change in values produced by varying the window size. 168

Road Density - Layer Watershed - cale Bluff Creek Watershed Orleans Ranger District Boundary >-.5 >.5-1. >1.-1.5 >1.5-2. >2.-2.5 >2.5-3. >3.-3.5 >3.5-4. >4.-4.5 >4.5-5. >5. W E 1:12, 1 1 2 3 4 Miles Figure 2-29. Road density for the Bluff Creek watershed, using a moving windows AML. The window size is one square mile (64 acres), and the cell size is 3 X 3 meters. 169

Road Density - Layer orth Fork Eel River Mad River Ranger District Boundary >-.5 >.5-1. >1.-1.5 >1.5-2. >2.-2.5 >2.5-3. >3.-3.5 >3.5-4. >4.-4.5 >4.5-5. >5. W E 1:14, 1 1 2 3 4 5 Miles Figure 2-3. Road density for the orth Fork Eel River within the ix Rivers F. ote the difference in road density between the north and south areas of the watershed. 17

Road Density - Layer Watershed - cale Upper Mad River Mad River Ranger District Boundary >-.5 >.5-1. >1.-1.5 >1.5-2. >2.-2.5 >2.5-3. >3.-3.5 >3.5-4. >4.-4.5 >4.5-5. >5. W E 1:15, 1 1 2 3 4 5 Miles Figure 2-31. Road density for the upper Mad River watershed. 171

Percentage of watershed area 2 18 16 14 12 1 8 6 4 2 Road density distribution for 3 watersheds on the ix Rivers F Bluff Creek orth Fork Eel River Upper Mad River >-.5 >.5-1 >1-1.5 >1.5-2 >2-2.5 >2.5-3 >3-3.5 >3.5-4 >4-4.5 >4.5-5 >5 Figure 2-32. Road density distribution for three watersheds. ote the significant differences in the distributions. 172

Figure 2-33. Example from the Boise ational Forest using road density in Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas to select watersheds with priority for restoration. 173

Example Road Density - Layer District - cale Gasquet and Orleans Ranger Districts Boundary >-.5 >.5-1. >1.-1.5 >1.5-2. >2.-2.5 >2.5-3. >3.-3.5 >3.5-4. >4.-4.5 >4.5-5. >5. W E 1:45, 5 5 1 15 2 Miles Figure 2-34. Road density for the Gasquet and Orleans Ranger Districts. The large roadless areas are wilderness. 174

Connected Road Density - Layer Watershed - cale Bluff Creek Watershed Orleans Ranger District Boundary Inside 1-meter buffer Outside 1-meter buffer Crenulated streams Connected road density (miles/square mile) >-.75 >.75-1.5 >1.5-2.25 >2.25 W E 1:12, 1 1 2 3 4 Miles Figure 2-35. Road density in the Bluff Creek watershed for road segments within a 1-meter buffer of crenulated-contour streams. The moving window size is one square mile and the cell size is 3 X 3 meters. 175

Road Density - Layer Watershed - cale Bluff Creek Watershed Orleans Ranger District 2.68 2.75 Upper Bluff (2.68) Middle Bluff (2.75) Lower Bluff (3.9) 3.9 W E 1:12, 1 1 2 3 4 Miles Figure 2-36. Road density for the upper, middle, and lower areas of the Bluff Creek watershed. ote the minimal differences in the road density values. 176

Connected Road Density - Layer Watershed - cale Bluff Creek Watershed Orleans Ranger District.85 1.41 Inside 1-meter buffer Outside 1-meter buffer Crenulated streams Connected road density (miles/square mile) Upper Bluff (.85) Middle Bluff (1.41) Lower Bluff (1.57) 1.57 W E 1:12, 1 1 2 3 4 Miles Figure 2-37. Road density for the upper, middle, and lower areas in the Bluff Creek watershed for the road segments within 1 meters of crenulated-contour streams. ote the higher densities for the middle and lower areas. 177

Road Density - Layer Middle and Lower lope Positions Watershed - cale Bluff Creek Watershed Orleans Ranger District.68 1.5 Road density by slope positions (miles/square mile) Upper Middle Lower Upper Bluff (.68) Middle Bluff (1.5) Lower Bluff (2.17) 2.17 W E 1:12, 1 1 2 3 4 Miles Figure 2-38. Road density for the upper, middle, and lower areas of the Bluff Creek watershed for the road segments in the middle and lower slope positions. ote the increasing density from north to south. 178