Analytical sophistication cannot overcome bad data

Although environmental planners are aware of this, data very quickly becomes outdated. This is strangely enough a very common occurrence in areas where developments are rapidly altering current and accurate data pertaining to roads, vegetation types and other variables which impacts on the relevance of a GIS model.

The Table Mountain National Park, during the first three years, when most of the initial clearing took place, the sites were small and clearing contracts significantly more than present, the data being entered into the GIS model was becoming outdated fairly quickly. This meant finding a time scale for collecting data which was effective for section rangers to analyze data and plan for future clearing sites and contracts. In this instance data collection took place on a quarterly basis.

Translating concepts into metrics requires dual vision

This means not only being able to really zoom in on the details but also being able to step back and still be able to view the conceptual intent of the analysis. Fundamental to GIS metrics is its relevance to the conservation issues at hand.

There is no greater waste of money than having a GIS based planning tool which is not being used by managers and planners, either because the data is too old or the criteria required to make effective decisions are irrelevant.

Conservation values are not black and white - but rather varying shades of gray

Most GIS models often define values arbitrarily. In doing so these models often fail to capture those gray tones which provide a more accurate account of variables needed to make informed decisions.

Incorrect scale analysis obscures patterns

Analyzing data at the incorrect scale could spell disaster for small yet high value areas, e.g. riparian vegetation zones of a few meters could be lost if data were to be interrogated at a 1:10000 or 1:20000 scale (which is the scale at which orthophotos are available). The solution; as a general rule it is suggested that the finer the scale the better.

What’s missing from the analysis

This fundamental yet simple question can get lost among the plethora of information which is fused to formulate a GIS analysis. It is as important to determine what has been left out of a GIS model as it is to understand and interrogate what has been included

When providing inputs into the initial design of the Alien Clearing database for the Cape Peninsula (now Table Mountain) National Park a lot of emphasis was placed on the clearing techniques, species cleared and completion dates, yet what was not captured was the restoration potential for particular sites.

Ground truthing– an essential activity

It is amazing how often this simple common sense principle is overruled by technology. No GIS model can be considered complete without a reality check, whether in the form of aerial photographs on in situ field observations. This step also doesn't have to be costly or elaborate, but what it definitely is, is crucial.

GIS based planning is a critical tool in improving the effectiveness and efficiency of conservation efforts. This tool is critically important to conservation agencies faced with limited time and resources. This tool does not however work if junk data gets entered into it. Without the presence of accurate relevant data, the analysis produced by GIS models serves no real purpose to conservation and instead becomes a dangerous advocate for views other than conservation in the real world.

If you or your organization feels that you need assistance with the setting up of your GIS models please feel free to give us a call.