Data from: Prioritizing land management efforts at a landscape scale: a case study using prescribed fire in Wisconsin

Hmielowski TL, Carter SK, Spaul H, Helmers DP, Radeloff VC, Zedler PH

Date Published: October 28, 2015

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.s18gk

 

Files in this package

Content in the Dryad Digital Repository is offered "as is." By downloading files, you agree to the Dryad Terms of Service. To the extent possible under law, the authors have waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this data. CC0 (opens a new window) Open Data (opens a new window)

Title Data Steps and Code
Downloaded 40 times
Description Description of steps and code used to identify the most frequently burned fire dependent vegetation (see Step 2 in methods) and the indices used to calculate the priority areas for prescribed fire use (see Steps 4 - 7 in methods).
Download Hmielowski et al. Fire Prioritization Dat...de.pdf (301.9 Kb)
Details View File Details
Title Historic Prairie Savanna Vegetation
Downloaded 13 times
Description Shapefile used to determine historic extent of prairie and savanna vegetation types in Wisconsin. Used in Step 2 of methods to include pasture and managed grasslands that had potential to include remnant prairie patches.
Download HistoricPrairieSavannaVegetationMask.zip (1.244 Mb)
Details View File Details
Title Frequently Burned Vegetation
Downloaded 16 times
Description This shapefile is the result of Step 2 and Step 3 in the methods, where we have identified the most frequently burned fire dependent vegetation for the purpose of this study. Key fields: Community group (Group), Mean fire return interval (FireRetInt), and Community Rarity (RarityRank)
Download FireDependentVegetationInWisconsin.zip (28.86 Mb)
Details View File Details
Title HUC12WatershedBoundaries
Downloaded 13 times
Description This shapefile includes the indices and prioritization scenarios calculated in Steps 4-7 in the methods. This includes the management benefit index (Step 4), management effort Index (Step 5), management feasibility index (Step 6), and the prioritization scenarios of maximum ecological benefit, maximum benefit with minimum effort, and the comprehensive prioritization (Step 7). All indices and prioritization scenarios are calculated for "managment units" which were the HUC12 watershed designations (Available from http://nhd.usgs.gov/wbd.html). Key fields: Management Benefit Index (BenefitInd). Management Ease Index (MgtEaseInd). Management Effort Index (Effort_Nor). Ecological Benefit (EcBenefit). Maximum Ecological Benefit with Minimum Effort (EcBenEffor). Comprehensive Prioritization (CompRank)
Download HUC12WatershedBoundaries.zip (32.90 Mb)
Details View File Details

When using this data, please cite the original publication:

Hmielowski TL, Carter SK, Spaul H, Helmers DP, Radeloff VC, Zedler PH (2016) Prioritizing land management efforts at a landscape scale: a case study using prescribed fire in Wisconsin. Ecological Applications 26(4): 1018-1029. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/15-0509

Additionally, please cite the Dryad data package:

Hmielowski TL, Carter SK, Spaul H, Helmers DP, Radeloff VC, Zedler PH (2016) Data from: Prioritizing land management efforts at a landscape scale: a case study using prescribed fire in Wisconsin. Dryad Digital Repository. http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.s18gk
Cite | Share
Download the data package citation in the following formats:
   RIS (compatible with EndNote, Reference Manager, ProCite, RefWorks)
   BibTex (compatible with BibDesk, LaTeX)

Search for data

Be part of Dryad

We encourage organizations to: