Monday, December 14, 2015

Lab 4: Answering a Spatial Question


Solving a Spatial Problem of Water Quality

By: Joseph Mandelko

 

            The tourist town of Algoma Wisconsin is plagued by poor water quality. The town of 3,200 people is in Kewaunee County on the Door Peninsula. This particular area of Wisconsin has a bedrock called the Niagara Escarpment, because of the formation of this escarpment the water table is in some cases a few feet below the surface and the escarpment is uniquely porous. These special situations result in a water table that is easily contaminated, much easier than most other areas in the United States. Compounding the issue is the fact that Kewaunee County has become the home of over 17 large dairy farms, or CAFOs. These CAFOs use liquid manure to spread on their field and if they over water, which usually happens, the liquid manure runs into the water table and as a result appears in citizens wells.

            The goal of this spatial inquiry is to find a place on public park land, an already established area of meeting for people in Wisconsin, where citizens can obtain filtered drinking water. I thought it best to have the potential location be within two miles of the city center and in an area where most of the population lived. I also wanted the potential areas to be at least 100 meters away from rivers and roads to prevent additional runoff and flood water so the area providing filtered water was not compromised. My intended audience would be the people of Kewaunee County and the upper Northeast corner of Wisconsin. The water quality issue is not all that well known outside of Northern Kewaunee and this map shows, for people not familiar with Algoma, where a filtered water source could be. The city of Algoma could also use this if they ever decided they wanted to place a filtered water tank somewhere in its vicinity for citizens to obtain water until the pollution problem is solved.

            In order to answer this question I had to pull data from a few sources. After initial background information was gathered I needed to find spatial data. I used USA Census 2010 data for the roads and population area I wanted to include. I used DNR data from Wisconsin to show where city parks were located. I could have gotten this data from the Census website and the DNR data from the parks information on the DNR website. However since I had access to data already in useable formats in my University of Wisconsin Eau Claire folder I used the data I had available to me there. While I feel my end result is accurate for its intended purpose I do have some concerns with the data. First of all the parks data. The data does not say what the parks are currently used for. For example, one of the parks is on Lake Michigan and while most of it is away from the water’s edge it would not be wise to place a drinking water source in the sand on the shores of a Great Lake. This is a concern prior knowledge brings up, not a concern that is easily addressed by the dataset. I also have the concern of the population centers, the data is five years old and no doubt there has been some population movement recently since water quality has become a growing concern.

            The methods I used to answer my question are most easily explained through looking at my data flow model (figure 1) I used to organize my question. However it will make more sense supplemented by a description as the data in the dataflow model has already been clipped. First I had to assemble my data that I wanted included in the final project. Since using all of the “detailed” roads, rivers, counties, and population tracts takes a large amount of processing power I clipped those classes. After creating a feature class of Kewaunee County by making a layer from my selected county I was able to clip the other classes by that feature class. When I had clipped what I needed I had the roads, population tract, rivers, and parks of Kewaunee County. At that point I was ready to narrow down my information to the Algoma population tract using the summarize tool. Eventually I had a feature class intersected into all of my positive values. From there I could subtract what I didn’t want, those would be the areas within 100 meters of a river or road. I created each of those buffers in separate feature classes then intersected them together and erased them from the positive feature class I had made. The result was essentially the final map (figure 2). I had to use a smaller amount of tools than expected though I ended up relying heavily on clip, intersect, erase, and buffer tools.

            In the end I came up with my answer which appears in green on the map (figure 2). The green is the park land that would be acceptable for a public water source to be placed in a park, in Algoma, and within reach of its residents. The tools I used narrowed down the initial results. I used the erase too to subtract areas I didn’t want and what was deemed an acceptable area by my methods was left on the top. There is a place for filtered public water sources to be placed in Algoma.

            Overall I believe the project, in its simplicity, was a success. There is a lot more data that could be helpful, some of the issues were explained earlier. I think if I were to do this again and was able to work with raster data it would be ideal to place a well, not a tank, as the water source for Algoma. This would require a lot more information about the areas geology and the layout of the town in order to ensure the new public well would not be contaminated. If this information was known it could create a very real solution to a very real problem, not just a quick fix. One of the issues I also had with this is that there are so many options of things to do and data to look at that it can be overwhelming so choosing a question to answer was difficult. I also had trouble using the data flow model builder so while I had an initial data flow model for my approach to the question I wasn’t able to run it through the process and ended up using the tools in a capacity outside of the model builder. It wasn’t an issue and I still answered my original question but I know the process would have been smoother run through model builder. There are improvements I would make in my own process if I were to do it again but it was a good project to do. It is important how to ask and answer your own questions using GIS, my understanding of data, tools, and methodology were tested.

(Figure 1)
(Figure 2)

Friday, December 4, 2015

Lab 3


Bears, Python, and Habitats

By: Joseph Mandelko

 
The focus of Lab 3 is to successfully use various geoprocessing tools to analyze vector data in ArcGIS to find appropriate habitats for black bears in central Marquette County in Michigan. The scenario is that I am working for the Michigan DNR to find where the black bear population they have in Marquette County is currently and what types of land the bears tend to prefer as a habitat. I was then tasked to find the areas of that habitat that were included in the land the DNR is already managing. Lastly they wanted the areas of bear habitat on their land to be at least 5 kilometers away from any urban areas.
To complete the objectives laid out for me I used the tools in Arctoolbox to intersect, clip, erase, join, buffer, and dissolve what I needed to in order to get the information on the map display as simple as possible while still displaying the required information. Perhaps one of the most important and useful tools learned in this lab was the intersect tool. It was needed to put two data sets together on the map display temporarily so I could work with one simple data set not two data sets. For example, after finding the land that belonged to the DNR, where bears tend to live, and in the areas near streams, I could intersect them all together to create one simple dataset. After I had that feature I could subtract the data feature I had created displaying urban areas. From that point I simply had to erase the intersected data set from the areas covered by the urban areas buffer. What remained was my final answer of where bears could live on DNR land.
I also used Python to test a few of the tools using a different input method. My paired down written code is an example of tool use from python. This code creates a buffer of 1 kilometer around streams in the study area. Then the urban areas are subtracted to get areas near streams that are not urban areas (figure 1). The entire collection of tools and data sets I used can be seen and followed in my data flow model (figure 2).         
What I found is that there is ample area for an established black bear habitat in central Marquette County in Michigan. The bear habitat is seen in the green crosshatching feature on the map. This is the area that can be on DNR management land, near streams, and suitable for bears as well as being at least 5 kilometers from urban areas. The red striped area is the suitable bear habitat fitting all of the requirements except that of being far enough away from urban areas and populations (figure 3).




(figure 1) Example of Python Code



(figure 2) Data flow model for Lab 3
(figure 3) Final Map of Bear Habitat

Sources:
Center for Shared Solutions and Technology Partnerships
http://www.mcgi.state.mi.us/mgdl/framework/metadata/Marquette.html
Michigan Center for Geographic Information
http://www.mcgi.state.mi.us/mgdl/nlcd/metadata/nlcdshp.html
 

 

 

 

Friday, October 30, 2015

Lab 2


From Census to GIS Online

By: Joey Mandelko

            The goal of Lab 2 was to create a map from census data. With the ability to make a map out of data found online it is possible to map and query a large variety of information that is already at the disposal of the public. In order to complete this lab, I had to choose a set of data to display using the census data I had available to me from the state of Wisconsin, to create a map and publish it on ArcGIS Online.

 I chose the data file average household size and downloaded the excel file containing the information. After unzipping the file it was possible to open it and save it as an excel workbook file, this applied for both the metadata and tabular data. I then removed the second row of data so it fit with the data processing standards in Arcmap and was able to find the folder in ArcCatalog. Next I joined the data file with the shapefile of Wisconsin and downloaded the shapefile. Once the data was joined with the shapefile I was able to map the average household size by county and format it into a map. At that point I removed any extraneous layers and made a description and labels for my map and posted it online in the Arcgis Online forum for UW-Eau Claire. In that display it is possible to click on each county and a box appears showing the name of the county and the dataset, in this case household size, underneath the name of the county. When comparing the map of household size and population one thing is very clear, the largest centers of population do not have the largest average number of people in each home. The largest households are in a few of the northern counties and several in the rural farming areas where the counties containing population centers like Milwaukee, Madison, Green Bay, and Eau Claire tended to have smaller sized households. Based off of previous knowledge of the state it was very interesting to correlate a connection between the Amish faming centers and the larger household sizes contained in the county. This would be a very interesting variable to map in more detail to discover if there really was a connection between the two.

Any further potential mapping could be done using the same source, which was the United States Census Fact Finder. Both sets of data, for household and population, were from the 2010 Wisconsin census.  

Friday, October 2, 2015

GIS 1 Lab 1 Basedata

The Confluence Proposal
By: Joey Mandelko
 
The Confluence, a collaboration project between the public University of Eau Claire Wisconsin and the private citizens of the city and county of Eau Claire, aims to develop a center for arts on the confluence of the Chippewa River and Eau Claire River. The goal for the project of developing various maps centered on the proposed site of the Confluence Project is to become familiar with the types of data used in analysis of public spaces and land management in public areas. The first objective was reach was to familiarize myself with the Eau Claire geodatabase and the various data sets inside of it. Once an understanding of the layout of the geodatabase was reached the second objective, of digitizing the proposed area of the Confluence Project could be achieved. The third objective was to learn about the Public Land Survey System by creating a map, again focused on the Confluence, to be able to observe and look for patterns in the land survey system. Objective four was to use an online resource to be able to describe each land parcel in the proposal in legal terms. The last objective to be reached was to organize a layout displaying the maps I had made with the information I needed to use to reach the objectives.

To complete the first objective I made a separate geodatabase to hold the datasets I would use then reviewed the datasets held in the original geodatabase for Eau Claire City and Eau Claire County. I did all of this movement and research in ArcCatalog. For Objective two I added a basemap of World Imagery and added parcel_area dataset to the map. After making that layer hollow I was able to make use the edit toolbar to access the editing tool and digitize a polygon of the two land parcels to be involved in the Confluence. Objective three was designed to teach about the layout of the Public Land Survey System. I added PLSS_Townships dataset from the Eau Claire geodatabase as well as the PLSS_Sections and PLSS_Quarter_Quarter_sections to the map surface and used the Identify tool to look into each Dataset to answer questions for the completion of the objective. Objective four was to create the Legal description of the two land parcels. I used the Identify tool again to obtain the parcel_ID then plugged that number into www.eauclairewi.gov/departments/public-works/engineering/mapping-services and was able to pull up the legal information for each parcel. Objective 5 was completed all in ArcMap by creating a basic map for the following topics concerning public land use and the Confluence: Civil Divisions, Census Boundaries, Public Land Survey System, Parcels to be used for the Confluence, and Zoning area. Each map used a layer of world image projection and the two parcels in questionas well as the specific data from the dataset dragged and dropped into the display. I then added to each of the displays, shown on an 11x17 landscape display, the required features for a clear map such as a scale bar and a legend.