Southeast Blueprint v3.0
This is an older version of the Southeast Blueprint. The Southeast Conservation Blueprint is a map of important areas for conservation and restoration across the Southeast and Caribbean. The Blueprint is the primary product of the Southeast Conservation Adaptation Strategy (SECAS). Through SECAS, diverse partners are working together to design and achieve a connected network of lands and waters that supports thriving fish and wildlife populations and improved quality of life for people across the southeastern United States and the Caribbean.
Extent of Southeast Blueprint v3.0
The Southeast Blueprint covers the entire SECAS geography with the exception of the U.S. Virgin Islands, where the appropriate spatial plans have not yet been identified. The SECAS geography encompasses the states and territories that are part of the Southeast Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, which includes 15 states as well as Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Some of the data used to create the Southeast Blueprint extends beyond the SECAS geography; however, we clipped the Blueprint to the SECAS boundary to make the file download more manageable and to reflect the area where Blueprint user support and partner input are focused
Input data
The Blueprint stitches together smaller subregional plans into one consistent map, incorporating the best available information about the current condition of key species and habitats, as well as future threats. The Blueprint is regularly updated and revised to incorporate improvements to the underlying data. Version 3.0 of the Southeast Blueprint integrates the following plans:
-- The Peninsular Florida Blueprint 1.2: Learn more and access the data on the Peninsular Florida CPA
-- The South Atlantic Conservation Blueprint 2.2: Learn more about the South Atlantic Blueprint here and access the data on the South Atlantic CPA
-- The North Atlantic Nature’s Network Conservation Design: Learn more about Nature’s Network here and access the data on the Northeast CPA
-- The Appalachian NatureScape Design (Phase II): Learn more about NatureScape here and access the data on the Appalachian CPA (note: the Phase II NatureScape Design was combined with Phase I species richness to produce the final Appalachian input to the Southeast Blueprint, as described in the mapping steps section below)
-- The Gulf Coastal Plains and Ozarks (GCPO) Blueprint 1.0: Learn more about the GCPO Blueprint here and access the data on the GCPO CPA
-- The Gulf Coast Prairie (GCP) Blueprint 1.0: Learn more and access the data on the GCP CPA
-- The Gulf Hypoxia Precision Conservation Blueprint v1.5 Sum - Conservation and Watershed Interests (2016) layer: Learn more on the LCC Network Science Catalog and access the data on DataBasin
-- The Caribbean Landscape Conservation Design: Learn more about the process and data used to develop the Caribbean LCD here (note: full data beyond the two pilot watersheds is available on request by emailing Matt Snider at matthew_snider@fws.gov)
-- The Crucial Habitat Assessment Tool (CHAT): Learn more about the CHAT and access the data on the CHAT website
Mapping steps
To improve consistency between inputs, we reclassified each input to get as close as possible to 30% of the input data area in high value and 20% of the input data area in medium value. When priorities were continuous, we used a quantile classification and selected break points. When priorities were discrete, we classified them to get as close as possible to those percentages.
The list below explains the how the priority classes from input data were translated into the Southeast Blueprint classes of “high” and “medium” (if a data value is not shown in the list, then it is not prioritized):
Peninsular Florida Blueprint:
-- High = Priority 1
-- Medium = Priority 2 and Connectivity
South Atlantic Blueprint:
-- High = Highest and High
-- Medium = Medium and Corridors
North Atlantic Nature’s Network:
-- High = Priority 1 and 2
-- Medium = Priority 3
Appalachian NatureScape:
In addition to the priority classes, we added the NatureScape Phase I Species Richness input to cover enough area to integrate with the other inputs.
-- High = Local Cores, Regional Cores, Other Important Areas, or Richness of 6+
-- Medium = Local Connectors, Regional Connectors, or Richness of 5
Gulf Coastal Plains and Ozarks Blueprint:
-- High = Integrated Landscape Assessment Classes 1 and 2. Class 1 included all current (extant) habitat systems in HUC12 watersheds with Integrated Watershed Ranks of Reference or Tier 1 (~11% of the GCPO region). Class 2 included potential (restorable) habitat systems in HUC12 watersheds with Integrated Watershed Ranks of Reference or Tier 1, as well as current habitat systems in watersheds ranked Tier 2 (~16% of the GCPO region).
-- Medium = Integrated Landscape Assessment Class 3. Class 3 included potential (restorable) habitat systems in HUC12 watersheds with Integrated Watershed Ranks of Tier 2, as well as current habitat systems in watersheds ranked Tier 3 (~23% of the GCPO region).
Gulf Coast Prairie Blueprint:
-- High = Combined top 10% of catchments for 11 GCP LCC broadly defined habitats. If a catchment had ranks for multiple habitats, the highest rank was assigned to the catchment.
-- Medium = Combined top 10-20% of catchments for 11 GCP LCC broadly defined habitats.
Gulf Hypoxia Blueprint (Missouri only):
We used the sum of priorities for water and conservation interests. This layer was used specifically to fill in a gap in Blueprint prioritization in the Northern part of Missouri. This input covered the full state of Missouri. Priorities south of Missouri were sufficiently covered by the other Blueprint inputs.
-- High = 5 through 7
-- Medium = 4
Caribbean Landscape Conservation Design:
-- High = Top 8 priority ranked watersheds
-- Medium = 9 through 12 priority ranked watersheds
Crucial Habitat Assessment Tool (Texas and Oklahoma):
-- High = 1 and 2
-- Medium = 3
Once each input was spatially rebalanced, it was then resampled to 30 meter cell size. Inputs were mosaiced together to create one seamless layer. We used a relatively simple approach for dealing with areas of overlap between input layers:
-- If an area was a priority in any of the inputs, it was included in the Southeast Blueprint.
-- If two inputs disagree on whether an area should be medium or high value, use the score from the input that has been in development the longest. This favors the most well-established plans. The datasets listed in the mapping steps above reflect the order of precedence.
-- In the final Blueprint, we assign a value of “not identified as medium or high” to any pixel not already identified as “high conservation value” or “medium conservation value” and that overlaps with the Southeast Blueprint v3.0 Input and Overlap Areas. The “Southeast Blueprint v3.0 Input and Overlap Areas” file is an imperfect approximation of the analysis extent for each subregional Blueprint input and will continue to be improved over time. Areas outside of the input areas are kept as NoData.
Known issues
-- Areas where multiple subregional Blueprint inputs cover the same geography are likely over-prioritized. These areas include West Virginia, Eastern Texas, Western Virginia, North Florida, and eastern Oklahoma. This issue is most problematic in two major regions: 1) The Appalachian Mountains of West Virginia and Virginia and 2) East Texas. This issue is less of a problem in North Florida where consistency among the three Blueprint inputs was relatively high. In the Appalachians of West Virginia and Virginia, the over-prioritization is mostly due to differences in the methods used to integrate aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems between the Appalachian and the North Atlantic inputs. 80% of this overlap region is included in the Blueprint. In East Texas, a major part of the over-prioritization seems to be based on differences in how grasslands are prioritized. Between 93 and 99% of this region is included in the Blueprint, depending on which inputs are overlapping. To learn more about the overlap areas and the percentage of high and medium value in each area, see the Southeast Blueprint v3.0 Input and Overlap Areas.
-- Along the boundary between the South Atlantic and Appalachian subregions, there are scattered pixels that, based on the “Southeast Blueprint v3.0 Input and Overlap Areas” created on Dec. 21, 2018, are not covered by either the South Atlantic or Appalachian input layers. These pixels are not very noticeable in the final Southeast Blueprint and only add up to an area of approximately 24 acres. This gap occurs because the South Atlantic Blueprint Version 2.2 (200 meter pixel resolution) is clipped to the South Atlantic LCC boundary. Another factor is uncertainty about the analysis extent for the Appalachian NatureScape Phase II design. For more detailed information, see the Southeast Blueprint v3.0 Input and Overlap Areas metadata.
-- The Southeast Blueprint v3.0 Input and Overlap Areas file, which was used to differentiate between 0 (areas inside the analysis area that are determined to have lower conservation value) and NoData (areas outside of analysis area), is an imperfect approximation of the analysis extent for each subregional Blueprint input and will continue to be improved over time. For more detailed information, see the Southeast Blueprint v3.0 Input and Overlap Areas metadata. Specifically, there is an overestimation in the 0 (Not identified as high or medium) category in nearshore and marine environments. This overestimation is especially noticeable in the Chesapeake bay near Virgina and around Florida and the Gulf coast.
-- Corridors are under-prioritized in the western part of the SECAS geography since only the South Atlantic, North Atlantic, Appalachian, and Peninsular Florida Blueprint inputs formally include corridors. Work is underway in the Gulf Coastal Plains and Ozarks to create a hubs and corridors layer, but the data was not available in time for this Blueprint release.
-- Adaptation to climate change (not related to sea-level rise) is not formally included in the western part of the Southeast Blueprint as only the South Atlantic, North Atlantic, Appalachian, and Peninsular Florida Blueprint inputs specifically incorporate it.
-- Approaches to addressing urban growth and sea-level rise vary across the different inputs in the Southeast Blueprint. For example, in the Gulf Coastal Plains and Ozarks Blueprint, an index of future urbanization reduces the priority. Future sea-level rise either increases or decreases the priority depending on the ecosystem. In the Peninsular Florida Blueprint, future urban growth does not directly impact priority. Future sea-level rise is addressed through corridors facilitating coastal to inland connectivity developed in Florida CLIP. In the South Atlantic Blueprint, a majority of people felt conservation actions were important in priority areas predicted to change due to urban growth and sea-level rise and did not want to reduce the priority there. Instead of changing the priority, the approach to change is to work together to make sure actions taken on the Blueprint are the best balance of “high urgency” places predicted to change, and “low risk” places less likely to change. Discussions about how to best integrate strategies for change across the full region are ongoing.
-- Native prairie is under-prioritized in Oklahoma, Louisiana, and the South Piedmont. This is due to mismatches in state datasets (Southwest Louisiana), the narrow focus of the CHAT (Flint Hills region of Oklahoma), and the difficulty of identifying certain types of prairies with remote sensing (South Piedmont).
-- A section of Northeast Louisiana, Western Mississippi, and Eastern Missouri along the Mississippi Alluvial Valley seems to be under-prioritized. The priorities in this region, which come from the Gulf Coastal Plains and Ozarks (GCPO) Blueprint, are based on current condition, which is currently more degraded than other regions in the valley. However, there are important restoration and management opportunities in that region. Ecosystem-specific layers depicting these opportunities are available in the data gallery for the GCPO Conservation Blueprint.
-- Some areas of coastal marsh seem to be under-prioritized (e.g., coastal Louisiana).
-- While the input data from each subregional Blueprint input is intended to identify areas of high and medium conservation value, approaches and methods vary. As a result, specific definitions of “high conservation value” also vary.
-- The Caribbean Landscape Conservation Design identified two HUC10 watersheds (HUC10) for conservation action: the Rio Grande de Arecibo watershed and Rio Herrera to Cabezas de San Juan coastal watersheds. These two watersheds were selected based on an informal Structured Decision Making Process with local experts. As described in the mapping steps, we reclassified Southeast Blueprint inputs to result in approximately 30% of the input data area in a high value and 20% of the input data in a medium value. As the Caribbean Landscape Conservation Design did not meet these thresholds, we expanded the Southeast Blueprint to include other watersheds scored in the Structured Decision Making process, but not included in the original Design.
Contact Blueprint staff to get help and provide feedback
Do you have a question about the Blueprint? Would you like help using the Blueprint to support a proposal or inform a decision? Staff across the Southeast are here to support you!
The Blueprint is also revised based on input from people like you. So if you have a suggestion on how to improve the priorities, let us know!
To get help or provide feedback, reach out to the staff person working in your state:
-- VA - Renee Farnsworth, (413) 253-8375
-- NC - Hilary Morris, (919) 707-0252
-- SC - Hilary Morris, (919) 707-0252
-- GA - Hilary Morris, (919) 707-0252
-- FL - Beth Stys, (850) 404-6113
-- KY - Hilary Morris, (919) 707-0252
-- WV - Renee Farnsworth, (413) 253-8375
-- TN - Hilary Morris, (919) 707-0252
-- Puerto Rico, Brent Murry, (787) 764-7790
-- AL - Todd Jones-Farrand, (573) 355-0753
-- MS - Todd Jones-Farrand, (573) 355-0753
-- AR - Todd Jones-Farrand, (573) 355-0753
-- MO - Todd Jones-Farrand, (573) 355-0753
-- LA - Todd Jones-Farrand, (573) 355-0753
-- OK - Blair Tirpak, (337) 266-8619
-- TX - Blair Tirpak, (337) 266-8619
-- Southeast-wide - Rua Mordecai, (919) 707-0122
