Integrating GIS Technologies with the Visual Resource

Integrating GIS Technologies with the

Visual Resource Management Inventory Process

Technical Note 407

November 2001

U.S. Department of the Interior

Bureau of Land Management

Copies available from:

Bureau of Land ManagementNational Business Center

Printed Materials Distribution Services (BC-650B)P.O. Box 25047

Denver, Colorado 80225-0047

BLM/WO/ST-01/001+8400

This document is also available on the NSTC Web site at http://www.blm.gov/nstc

Production services provided by:

Information and Communication StaffTerry D’Erchia, Chief (303) 236-6547

Jennifer Kapus: Layout and DesignKathy Rohling: Editing

Lee Barkow, DirectorNational Science & Technology CenterP.O. Box 25047Denver, Colorado 80225-0047

The Bureau of Land Management’s National Scienceand Technology Center supports other BLM officesby providing a broad spectrum of serviceassessments; architecture and engineering support;library assistance; mapping science; photo imaging; geographic information systems applications; and publications support.

Integrating GIS Technologies with the

Visual Resource Management Inventory Process

Technical Note 407

November 2001

U.S. Department of the Interior

Bureau of Land Management

By:

Russell JacksonCartographerBranch of PhotogrammetricApplicationsBLM National Scienceand Technology CenterDenver, Colorado

Chris HoryzaPlanning TeamLeader/GIS SpecialistBLM Phoenix Field OfficePhoenix, Arizona

Suggested citation:

Jackson, R. and C. Horyza. 2001. Integrating GIS technologies with the visual resource management inventory process, Technical Note 407. Bureau of Land Management, Denver, Colorado. BLM/WO/ST-01/001+8400. 27 pp.

iii

Table of Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Inventory Process Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2Determining Key Observation Points and Minimum Mapping Units . . . . . . . . . .2Data Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

VRM Inventory Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5Scenic Quality Evaluation–Key Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Landform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6Color . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6Scarcity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6Cultural Modifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6Adjacent Scenery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Scenic Quality Evaluation Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7Sensitivity Level Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Sensitivity Level Rating Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8Distance Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Visual Resource Inventory Classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Visual Resource Management Classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

Appendix A -Bureau of Land Management,Standard Theme Specifications for theVisual Resource Management Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Appendix B -Scenic Quality Inventory and Evaluation Chart fromBLM Manual Handbook 8410-1 (Illustration 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

Appendix C -Determining Visual Resource Inventory Classesfrom BLM Manual Handbook 8410-1 (Illustration 11) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

The purpose of this technical note is to assistfield offices in using current geographicinformation systems (GIS) and imageprocessing technologies to facilitate new, orimprove on existing, visual resourcemanagement (VRM) inventories. Thistechnical note seeks to use technology availablein the field to improve existing VRMinventory procedures without changing thebasic concepts the inventory is built on.

As previously noted in WO IM No. 2001-038, Development/Approval of PreparationPlans for New Planning Starts, use of currenttechnologies are needed to assist managers incompleting new, or amending current,planning documents. The methodologydescribed throughout this technical note canbe quickly distributed to the field and providesdefensible and repeatable VRM data forinclusion in the Bureau’s resource managementplan (RMP) process.

This technical note attempts to modernize theVRM inventory process by taking advantageof advances in GIS and image processingtechnologies in order to accomplish thefollowing goals:

• Enhance the repeatability of VRM results.• Reduce the amount of time needed to

conduct an inventory.• Reduce the workload that a VRM

inventory has on the local office.

• Reduce the cost of the inventory.• Improve the quality of VRM inventories

for land management decisionmakers.

Inventory Process Model

The inventory process model described hererepresents a process guided primarily by atraditional VRM inventory using GIS as astorage and production medium. This modelrequires:

• Simple overlay analysis and reporting.Most of the analysis and reporting wouldrequire only basic training in GISapplications. The training could beprovided by a State Office, the NationalScience and Technology Center (NSTC),or contract experts on a periodic or “asneeded” basis.

• Local inventory labor. This process modelgenerally provides a combination oftechnical expertise and labor requirementswithin the capacity of most field offices.

• Data preparation. This would be necessaryprior to any GIS analysis being performed.If possible, this could be accomplished bythe current field office staff. The datapreparation could be provided by a StateOffice, the NSTC, or contract experts on aperiodic or “as needed” basis.

1

Introduction

• Local GIS support. The support could beprovided by resource specialists with GISability or “as-needed” off-site support.Regardless of how the GIS support isacquired, it is recommended that a GISSpecialist be an active member of theinterdisciplinary team performing thescenic evaluations.

Assumptions

Three assumptions guided development of thisinventory process model:

• The VRM inventory process is followed asdescribed in BLM Manual Handbook8410-1, Visual Resource Inventory. It maybe argued that some adjustments to theVRM inventory procedure are made witheach inventory. Handbook H 8410-1,Section I, Implementation Options, statesthat adaptations to the inventory methodmay be made if they (1) provide a morecost-effective way to complete a qualityinventory, and (2) keep the conceptualframework of VRM system intact. It isbelieved the inventory process modeldescribed here meets these criteria.

• The data generated in support of localVRM inventories will conform to theBLM Standard Theme Specifications forthe Visual Resource Management Program(see Appendix A).

• The spatial component of any datagenerated during the VRM process willmeet the guidelines for geospatial data at ascale of 1:100,000, as stipulated by theFederal Geographic Data Committee(FGDC), Geospatial Positioning AccuracyStandards, Part 3: National Standard forSpatial Data Accuracy. See the FGDC’sWeb site (www.fgdc.gov) for completedetails.

Determining Key Observation Pointsand Minimum Mapping Units

Before any major analysis or mapping for theVRM inventory can be completed, twodecisions must be made:

• What are the visual resource managementobjectives of the inventory and how willthese objectives be expressed by theselection of key observation points (KOPs)or areas? Much of the analysis andmapping will be based on the locations ofthese KOPs and they should be selected atthe beginning of the process. How thisselection is made may vary from inventoryto inventory.

• What is the minimum mapping unit(MMU) that will be used? The MMU isused to express what the smallestmanageable VRM unit can be. It can varyfrom less than 100 to several thousandacres. This is important because a GIS cangenerate a large number of very small areas(or polygons or pixels) that, in a practicalsense, are not manageable. By deciding atthe beginning of the project what theminimum size area that is practical tomanage will be, techniques in GIS can beused to keep the product maps as simple aspossible and yet reflect realisticmanagement objectives.

These two decisions should be based on theunique physiographic characteristics of theinventory area and the objectives driving themanagement of the visual resources. Sincethese decisions will vary from office to office,and possibly between inventories withinoffices, inventories conducted by differentoffices, or by different teams at different times,may not seamlessly fit together into a maprepresenting a larger area.

2

Data Categories

Information, or data, that must be addressedduring the VRM inventory process can bedivided into three main categories: dataidentification, data conversion, and dataanalysis.

Data Identification

Data identification includes data that needs tobe identified, or acquired, by the VRM teamprior to beginning the VRM inventory. Someexamples are:

• Location of key observation points (KOPs)on overlays

• Highlighting vegetation communities andtheir characteristics on overlays

• Location of existing structures in thevisible landscape and their properplacement on an overlay

• Acquisition of digital elevation models

Data Conversion

Data conversion refers to the type ofinformation that may be created prior to GISanalysis being performed. Some examples are:

• Digitizing or scanning of overlays• Registration of those same overlays• Projection or reprojection of data

Data Analysis

Data analysis refers to the variety of GIS datathat will be generated while performing theVRM inventory. Some examples are:

• Buffers at various distances• Viewshed analysis for visible or not visible

(one example is to identify seldom seenareas)

• Conversion of polygon data to grids andadding multiple grids together

• Conversion of grids back to polygons(conversion to shape files)

• Overlay (intersection or clip) to assessacreage

• Production of map products for field oroffice use.

The examples provided for each of thecategories are not all inclusive and should notbe treated as such. They are provided forguidance and to show the types of data thatmay be needed by the VRM team. Specificdata needs will vary from team to team andfrom inventory to inventory.

Steps within data conversion and data analysismay require the conversion of hardcopy plotsor maps to digital format by digitizing,scanning, or some form of grid conversion.Digitizing could be performed on a variety oftablets found around the agency. Gridconversion can be performed within a numberof GIS applications. While the GISapplication used is not critical for digitizing orgrid conversion, the Bureau’s defaultapplication at the time this publication wentto press was ESRI’s Arc/Info. ESRI provides anexcellent suite of software products that willperform conversions as well as meet all theneeds of the inventory teams. However, otherGIS applications are capable of providing thesame functionality as Arc/Info. Regardless ofthe application used, be sure that data formatsand structures are consistent and that theapplication provides portability betweensystems via some type of exchange format.

3

There are three primary components toconsider in completing a VRM inventory: ascenic quality evaluation, a sensitivity levelanalysis, and a delineation of distance zones.Following is a discussion of these threecomponents and recommendations on how tocomplete them utilizing GIS and imageprocessing technologies.

Scenic Quality Evaluation–

Key Factors

The scenic quality evaluation component ofthe VRM inventory is divided into seven keyfactors: landform, vegetation, water, color,scarcity, cultural modifications, and adjacentscenery. Each of the factors is rated separately,allowing the combination of factors to definethe boundaries of differing scenic qualityrating units (SQRUs). Though the handbookcalls for defining SQRUs before rating theevaluation factors, even in its mostrudimentary application, GIS can assist withthe complex overlay analysis required to allowthe landscape to define the units. Each ratingfactor and the proposed solution will bediscussed. The explanations of the ratingcriteria for the key factors have been adaptedfrom BLM Handbook 8410-1.

During the discussion of the seven key factors,certain aspects will appear very similar and

repetitive from key factor to key factor. Yet,because the key factors are so very distinctivethey must be addressed and completedindividually. In fact, the data capture phase isextremely critical to the success of the entireVRM inventory process. Without proper datainput, the process potentially could becompleted but generate invalid results. Toensure this doesn’t happen, a methodical andconscientious approach when capturing theinitial data is critical. Be sure the spatial datacorresponds to the numerical rating generatedfrom H-8410-1, Scenic Quality Inventory and Evaluation Chart, Illustration 2 (see Appendix B).

Landform

The rating criteria for landform is thattopography becomes more interesting as it getssteeper or more massive, or more severely oruniversally sculptured.

The team evaluating the inventory area wouldmap areas according to their landform ratingas described on the Scenic Quality Inventoryand Evaluation Chart. Mapping would bedone at 1:100,000 scale, or larger, asappropriate to the inventory area.

Mylar overlays would be placed over the maps.Using their knowledge of the area beingevaluated, team members would annotate areasof particular landform interest on the overlays.The overlays would then be digitized or

5

VRM Inventory Components

scanned and converted to grid (cell or raster)data for later analysis.

Vegetation

The rating criteria for vegetation gives primaryconsideration to the variety of patterns, forms,and textures created by plant life.

Vegetation is classified as described in thetraditional inventory method on the ScenicQuality Inventory and Evaluation Chart andmapped on 1:100,000 scale overlays (or a scaleappropriate to the inventory area). As with thediscussion under landform, mylar overlaysshould be used by the team to capture theappropriate vegetation information. Theoverlays are then digitized and converted togrid for later analysis.

Water

The rating criteria for water describes it as thatingredient which adds movement or serenityto a scene; the degree to which waterdominates the scene is the primaryconsideration in selecting the rating score.

Manual mapping of areas is rated for thedominance of visible water’s contribution tothe scene as described. This is mapped on a1:100,000 scale, then digitized and convertedto grid for later analysis.

Color

The rating criteria for color considers theoverall color(s) of the basic components of thelandscape (e.g., soil, rock, vegetation) as theyappear during seasons or periods of high use.Criteria to use when rating color can bedescribed in the context of variety, contrast,and harmony.

Based on the knowledge of the team and fieldvisits as necessary, map areas of rich color

contrasts and variety and rate them asdescribed on the Scenic Quality Inventory andEvaluation Chart. This is mapped on a1:100,000 scale, then digitized and convertedto grid for later analysis.

Scarcity

The rating criteria for scarcity provides anopportunity to give added importance to oneor all of the scenic features that appear to berelatively unique or rare. Rating scores arebased on the degree of the feature’s rarity andon the opportunity for consistent exceptionalwildlife or wildflower viewing. This key factorallows a rating score over five with a writtenjustification.

Landscape features that are unique or rare inthe physiographic region are mapped andrated according to the criteria in the ScenicQuality Inventory and Evaluation Chart.These overlays are then digitized andconverted to grid for later analysis.

Cultural Modifications

The rating criteria explains that culturalmodifications in the landform/water,vegetation, and addition of structures shouldbe considered and may detract from thescenery in the form of a negative intrusion orcomplement or improve the scenic quality of alandscape. This is the only scenic quality keyfactor that can receive a negative score,reducing the overall scenic rating.

Existing cultural modifications can be mappedin the “visible” area. Based on local knowledgeand field visits where considered necessary,landscapes can be mapped and rated accordingto the visual impact of those features. Theseoverlays would be digitized and converted togrid for later analysis.

6

Adjacent Scenery

The rating criteria describes adjacent sceneryas the degree to which scenery outside thescenery unit being rated enhances the overallimpression of the scenery within the ratingunit. This factor is generally applied to unitsthat would normally rate very low in score,but the influence of the adjacent unit wouldenhance the visual quality and raise the score.

In a practical sense, if the adjacent scenery keyfactor can add from 0 to 5 points to a scenicquality rating, then the preliminary scenicquality rating score must be between 7 and 11for this factor to have an effect on the overallrating. Regardless of the analytical model, thescores for the other scenic quality key factorsshould be added together first. If the totalscore for scenic quality is between 7 and 11,only then should the adjacent scenery keyfactor be analyzed, scored, and added to thescenic quality total score.

For those areas determined to have apreliminary scenic quality rating of C, but areclose enough to the B rating to potentiallybenefit from an adjacent scenery score, theteam can adjust the scenic quality rating basedon consensus of the influence of adjacentscenery. This is a subjective rating andadjustments to the GIS database would bedone manually.

Scenic Quality Evaluation

MethodologyThe proposed scenic quality evaluationmethodology is divided into the followingsteps:

1. All grids that were created representing thescenic quality key factors aremathematically added together.

2. The product grid can be reclassified intothree categories based on the scenic qualityrating guidance in handbook H-8410-1,where scores of 11 or less = C scenery, 12to 18 = B scenery, and 19 or more = Ascenery.

3. Areas with scores of 7 to 11 can beextracted separately for consideration ofthe adjacent scenery key factor.

4. Once a final scenic quality rating grid isgenerated, it is vectorized and anypolygons smaller than the agreed uponMMU absorbed (eliminated) into thelarger surrounding units.

An alternative to vectorizing the grid datawould be to analyze for clumps of gridcells of similar value that total less than theagreed upon MMU size and absorb theminto the majority surrounding rating unit.

This small area elimination process couldwait until the final VRM inventoryclassification is complete, but may keepthe overall process cleaner if it is done atthis point. Regardless of when it is done, agrid should be the product of the scenicquality evaluation and it should beavailable for later analysis with the othermajor VRM components.

Sensitivity Level AnalysisThe ratings for evaluating scenic sensitivityare, by design, very subjective. Thiscomponent of the VRM inventory is thepublic’s opportunity to have their feelings andopinions about areas in the landscapeaddressed in the ranking process. Because ofthis subjectivity, there could be tremendousvariability in the ratings generated byadjoining offices, and GIS support of the

7

process could be potentially complex.Therefore, this process defers to traditionalmethods of acquiring this information.

Sensitivity Level Rating Units

Using traditional techniques to assess visualsensitivity, delineate sensitivity level ratingunits (as described in handbook H-8410-1 at1:100,000 scale) and score their sensitivity.Digitize these overlays and convert to grid forlater analysis with the other two VRMinventory component overlays.

Distance Zones

The basic assumption of distance analysis isthat visual change is more significant the closerit is to the observer. In the traditionalapproach to this VRM component, KOPs orareas are defined at the beginning of theinventory and this component is analyzedfrom those.

Use of GIS technology can result inconsiderable savings of time and a moreaccurate representation of the visiblelandscapes from pre-mapped KOPs and areas.The result of this analysis, if documented, isalso more repeatable and defensible than thetraditional method.

Handbook H-8410-1 defines two distance-related zones and one zone related tolandscape screening for this component.

Foreground/ . . . . 0–5 miles from KOPMiddleground

Background . . . . 5–15 miles from KOP

Seldom Seen . . . . Areas screened from view or7–15 miles from KOP

GIS definition of these zones will requireseveral steps.

The recommended methodology forcomputing distance zones is divided into thefollowing steps:

1. Define and map the KOPs on 1:100,000map overlays and digitize them.

2. Generate distance buffers from the KOPsconsistent with the distances defined in H-8410-1 for the foreground/middlegroundand background zones. To the productmap, add an attribute called “value” andassign 5 to foreground/middleground and15 to background.

3. Conduct a viewshed analysis from thesame KOP data using medium resolutionterrain data (30-90 meter). The pixels thatare classified as not seen are extracted to anew layer and assigned a value of 1. Thisrepresents the seldom-seen class.

4. The products of steps 2 and 3 arecombined in a way that where the seldomseen exists, it replaces the distance zonepixels. (Merge or mosaic can be used, butbe aware of the consequences on theoutcome of the order in which maps arespecified.)

5. Areas smaller than the agreed upon MMUshould be absorbed into the larger classessurrounding them. The final product willbe a raster layer with all three zonesrepresented.

8

The process of defining the visual resourceinventory classes is the same regardless of theoffice performing the inventory. Using rasterprocessing capability, the overlays for the threecomponents (and special management areas ifthere are any) are added together orrecombined for the final classes. Two possiblemethods are provided.

Method 1

1> Assign the value of 1000 to all features ofthe Special Management Areas(Wilderness) overlay.

2> Assign values to the Scenic Quality where“A” scenery = 500, “B” scenery = 300, and“C” scenery = 100.

3> Assign values to Visual Sensitivity whereHigh = 50, Moderate = 30, and Low = 10.

4> Assign values to the Distance Zones whereforeground/middle ground = 5,Background = 3, and Seldom Seen = 1.

Then, add the reclassified raster maps togetherand reclassify the product as follows:

1> Values greater than or equal to 1000 = Class I.

2> Values greater than or equal to 355 butless than 1000 = Class II.

3> Values of 155, 335, and 353 = Class III.4> The value of 351 is Class III if it is

adjacent to Class III, II, or I. If adjacentto Class IV, it is Class IV.

5> All other values = Class IV.

Method 2

If the GIS supports Boolean analysis, the cellvalues are not as important as in Method 1, aslong as they can be defined by theirappropriate class. A Boolean formula, such asfollows, could be written to define the visualresource inventory classes from the separateoverlays.

If Special Management Areas = yes, Class I.

Or, if Scenic Quality is “A”, Class II,

Or, if Scenic Quality is “B,” andSensitivity is “high,” and Distance is “foreground/middle ground”,Class II,

Or, if Scenic Quality is “B,” andSensitivity is “high,” and Distance is“background,” Class III,

Or, if Scenic Quality is “B,” andSensitivity is “medium,” and Distance is“foreground/middle ground,” Class III,

Or, if Scenic Quality is “B,” andSensitivity is “high,” and Distance is“seldom seen,’ and adjacent to Class I, II,or III, Class III,

9

Visual Resource Inventory Classes

Or, if Scenic Quality is “B,” andSensitivity is “high,” and Distance is“seldom seen,’ and adjacent to Class IV,Class IV,

Or, if Scenic Quality is “C,” andSensitivity is “high,” and Distance is“foreground/middle ground,” Class III,

Or, if Scenic Quality is “B,” andSensitivity is “medium,” and Distance is“background” or “seldom seen,” Class IV,

Or, if Scenic Quality is “B,” andSensitivity is “low,” Class IV,

Or, if Scenic Quality is “C,” andSensitivity is “high,” and Distance is“background” or “seldom seen,” Class IV,

Or, if Scenic Quality is “C,” andSensitivity is “medium” or “low,” Class IV.

The previous classification methods are justtwo possibilities. Both were based on the tablein handbook H-8410-1, Illustration 11, undersection A2 (see Appendix C). These analysessimply use the same products described in thehandbook, but derived from various digitalmethods. The classification criteria used toderive the final inventory classes is the same.The crosshatching patterns described insection B of the same illustration, thoughelegant in their simplicity as a method toderive VRM classes, would be unnecessary.

10

At this point in the process, the product maprepresents the visual resource inventory classes.Conversion of these to final visual resourcemanagement classes involves assessment by thepublic, the planning team, and management asa part of the alternative and impact assessmentin the resource managementplan/environmental impact statement(RMP/EIS) process. Changes may be made to

the classes or their boundaries to conform tothe management objectives defined in theRMP/EIS. These changes may take the formof manual manipulation of the data or can begenerated from other GIS analysis. Thechanges made and methods used will beunique to each RMP/EIS. The final productof this effort will be the visual resourcemanagement classes data.

11

Visual Resource Management Classes

Publications

Ackerson, V. and E. Fish. 1980. “An Evaluationof Landscape Units,” PhotogrammetricEngineering and Remote Sensing, Vol 46, No.3,pp. 347 358.

Carlson, C. and G. Jones. 1996. Evaluatingscenic resources. Technical Information Series,Vol. 3, No. 1, Scenic America.

Galliano, S. and G. Loeffler. 2000. Sceneryassessment: scenic beauty at the ecoregion scale.Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-472. USDA ForestService.

Hanna, K. 1999. GIS for landscape architects.ESRI Press. Redlands, CA.

Hanna, K. and R. Brian Culpepper. 1998. GISin site design. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., NewYork, NY.

Litton Jr., R. Burton and Tetlow, Robert. 1978.A landscape inventory framework: scenicanalyses of the northern Great Plains. PSW-135.USDA Forest Service Research Paper.

Magill, A. 1992. Managed and naturallandscapes: what do people like? PSW 213.Pacific Southwest Research Station, USDAForest Service.

Magill, A. 1990. Assessing public concern forlandscape quality: a potential model to identifyvisual thresholds. PSW-203. Pacific SouthwestResearch Station, USDA Forest Service.

McGaughey, R. and A. Ager. 1996. UTOOLSand UVIEW: analysis and visualization software.

Miller, P. 1984. A comparative study of theBLM scenic quality rating procedure andlandscape preference dimensions. LandscapeJournal, Vol. 3, No. 2.

Sempek, J. 1991. VRMS/MOSS-MAPS pilotstudy, Cedar City District, Kanab ResourceArea, Utah. USDI Bureau of Land Management.

Sipes, J, 1998. Shaping digital terrain. LandscapeArchitecture Magazine.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forest Service.1996. Landscape aesthetics: a handbook forscenery management. USDA Forest ServiceHandbook Number 701.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.1971. Inventorying and quantifying the visualresource. 2380 Landscape Management. USDAForest Service, Region 1, Missoula, MT.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.1997. Scenery management system usinggeographic information systems. Cibola NationalForest, R3, USDA Forest Service.

13

Bibliography

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of LandManagement. 1984. Visual resourcemanagement. BLM Manual Handbook H-8400,Rel. 8-24. Washington, DC.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of LandManagement. 1986. Visual resource inventory.BLM Manual Handbook H-8410-1, Rel. 8-28.Washington, DC.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of LandManagement. 1986.Visual resource contrastrating. BLM Manual Handbook H-8431-1, Rel.8-30. Washington, DC.

Web Sites3DNature, Inc., World Construction Set.<www.3dnature.com> (March 2001)

American Society of Landscape Architects.<http://www.asla.org> (February 2001)

Buckley, D., C. Ulbricht, and J. Berry. 1998.The virtual forest: Advanced 3-D visualizationtechniques for forest management and research.GIS-98 @ Resource Technology Conference.<http://www.innovativegis.com/products/vforest>(November 2000)

Bureau of Land Management, Visual ResourceManagement.<http://www.blm.gov/nstc/VRM/index.html>(February 2001)

Computers & Geosciences.<http://www.elsevier.com> (October 2000)

ESRI. ArcView 3D Analyst Tutorial. Redlands,California. <www.esri.com> (March 2001)

ESRI. ArcView Spatial Analyst Tutorial.Redlands, California. <www.esri.com> (March 2001)

IEEE Technical Committee on Visualization andGraphics. <http://www.cc.gatech.edu/gvu/tccg/>(February 2001)

Imaging Systems Laboratory, Department ofLandscape Architecture, Pennsylvania StateUniversity. <www.imlab.psu.edu/projects/index.html> (November 2001)

Landscape Architecture & EnvironmentalPlanning, University of California. <http://www-laep.ced.berkeley.edu/laep/index.html>(December 2000)

Open GL Organization. <www.opengl.org>(February 2001)

Orland, B., E. Weidemann, L. Larsen, and P.Radja. 1997. Exploring the relationship betweenvisual complexity and perceived beauty.University of Illinois.<http://www.landarch.uiuc.edu> (November 2001)

MacEechren, A. and J.M.Kraak. Proposed termsof reference 1993 @ 2003. InternationalCartographic Association Commission onVisualization & Virtual Environments.<http://www.geovista.psu.edu/index.html>(November 2000)

Pennsylvania State University, GeographicVisualization Science, Technology, and Applications Center. <http://www.geovista.psu.edu/index.html>(November 2000)

USDA Forest Service. 1998. Vantage point,image and paper collection. University ofWashington and the USDA Forest Service,Pacific Northwest Research Station.<http://forsys.cfr.washington.edu> (November 2000)

14

THEME NAME: Scenic Quality Class

THEME ABBREVIATION: vr.sqc

PURPOSE: This theme identifies visualresource considerations that must be made inresource management plans (RMPs) and in theimplementation of resource projects.

DESCRIPTION: This theme identifies thescenic quality of the landscape, which is aninventory component of BLM’s VisualResource Management System. Scenic Qualityis the overall impression retained after drivingthrough, walking through, or flying over anarea of land. Each area is rated by sevenfactors: landform, vegetation, water, color,influence of adjacent scenery, scarcity, andcultural modifications.

SOURCE: Information is based on fieldexamination and professional judgementregarding scenic values. This information maybe documented in a separate report availablefrom previous work (done by contract or byBLM) or it may be created or updated as partof an ongoing planning activity. It must beincorporated (in full or by reference) in themanagement situation analysis (MSA)document for each RMP.

DATA FEATURE TYPE: Polygon

THEME TYPE: Basic

HISTORICAL RECORD: Yes

UNIQUE IDENTIFIER: Identify byState/Field Office/polygon number. Forexample, ut050.010 means Utah/RichfieldField Office/polygon #10.

SCALE: 1:100,000

ATTRIBUTE DEFINITIONS:Class A: These areas combine the mostoutstanding characteristics of each ratingfactor.

Class B: These areas have a combination ofsome outstanding features and some that arefairly common to the physiographic region.

Class C: These areas have only features that arecommon to the physiographic region.

15

Appendix A

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENTSTANDARD THEME SPECIFICATIONS

FOR THE VISUAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

THEME NAME: Visual Sensitivity

THEME ABBREVIATIONS: vr.vs

PURPOSE: Visual resource considerationsmust be made in resource management plan(RMP) decisions and in the implementation ofresource projects.

DESCRIPTION: Visual sensitivity is aninventory component of BLM’s VisualResource Management System.

SOURCE: This information is obtained fromfield studies, visitor use or traffic statistics, andis documented in the management situationanalysis (MSA) of RMPs.


THEME TYPE: Basic


UNIQUE IDENTIFIER: Identify bystate/Field Office/polygon number. Forexample, ut050.001 means Utah/RichfieldField Office/polygon #1.

SCALE: 1:100,000

ATTRIBUTES: CODES:High Sensitivity HMedium Sensitivity MLow Sensitivity L

ATTRIBUTE DEFINITIONS:

Visual sensitivity is the measure of humanattitudes in the evaluation of a landscape.Visual sensitivity is determined in two ways: 1)use volume and 2) user or public reaction. Thetwo ratings are combined in a matrix todetermine the overall sensitivity rating of high,medium, or low.

THEME NAME: Visual Distance Zones

THEME ABBREVIATIONS: vr.vdz

PURPOSE: Visual resource considerationsmust be made in resource management plans(RMSs), in the implementation of projects,and in management actions.

DESCRIPTION: Visual distance zones areinventory components of BLM’s VisualResource Management System. Distancezones provide consideration of the proximityof the observer to the landscape. The qualityof a landscape (and reaction) may bemagnified or diminished by the visibility ofthe landscape from major viewing routes andkey observation points. A landscape scene canbe divided into three basic distance zones:foreground/middleground, background, andseldom seen.

SOURCE: This information can bedetermined from topographic information andfield observation. It is usually part of anoverall visual resource investigation and isdocumented along with the other portions ofthe study, in a separate report in themanagement situation analysis (MSA) for anRMP. In some cases this theme can begenerated by computer program if suitabletopographic information and key observationpoints or routes are available in the data base.


THEME TYPE: Basic and Generated



16

SCALE: 1:100,000

ATTRIBUTES: CODES:Foreground/Middleground Zone FMBackground Zone BGSeldom Seen Zone SS


Foreground/Middleground Zone: This is thearea that can be seen from each travel route orsensitivity area for a distance of 3 to 5 mileswhere management activities might be viewedin detail.

Background: This is the remaining area thatcan be seen from each travel route toapproximately 15 miles.

Seldom Seen: This is the area that is notvisible from each travel route or sensitivity areaor is the area visible beyond approximately 15miles. Because areas that are closer have agreater effect on the observer, such areasrequire more attention than do areas that arefarther away.

THEME NAME: Visual ResourceManagement Inventory Classes

THEME ABBREVIATION: vr.vrmic

PURPOSE: Visual resource considerationsmust be made in resource management plans(RMPs) and in the implementation of resourceprojects. Although this theme providesgenerated information, it is given its owntheme for data storage purposes and ease ofretrieval.

DESCRIPTION: Visual resourcemanagement (VRM) inventory classes areinventory components of BLM’s VisualResource Management Program. They resultfrom combining the other VRM inventorycomponents including distance zones,sensitivity levels, and scenic quality.

SOURCE: This theme is derived bycombining the vr.vdz,vr.vs, and vr.sqc themes.


THEME TYPE: Generated

HISTORIC RECORD: Yes

UNIQUE IDENTIFIER: Identify byState/Field Office/polygon number. Forexample, ut050.010 means Utah/RichfieldField Office/polygon #10

SCALE: 1:100,000

ATTRIBUTES: CODES:VRM Inventory Class I IVRM Inventory Class II IIVRM Inventory Class III IIIVRM Inventory Class IV IV

17


VRM Inventory Class I areas are where onlynatural ecological changes and very limitedmanagement activities occur. Any contrastcreated within the characteristic landscapemust not attract attention. This classificationis applied to wilderness areas, visual ACEC’s,key natural areas bordering scenic travelroutes, and other similar situations.

VRM Inventory Class II areas are wherechanges in any of the basic elements (form,line, color, texture) caused by a surface-disturbing activity should not be evident inthe characteristic landscape. Contrasts mustnot attract attention.

VRM Inventory Class III areas are wherecontrasts to the basic elements caused by amanagement activity may be evident, butshould remain subordinated to the naturallandscape.

VRM Inventory Class IV areas are wherecontrasts may attract attention and be adominant feature of the landscape in terms ofscale, but should repeat the form, line, colorand texture of the characteristic landscape.

THEME NAME: Visual ResourceManagement Classes

PURPOSE: Visual resource considerationsmust be made in resource management plans(RMP’s), in the implementation of projects,and in management actions.

DESCRIPTION: Each of the four VisualResource Management (VRM) Classes allowsfor a different degree of modification to thebasic elements of the landscape. VRM classesare assigned to BLM- managed public lands inthe Record of Decision for a ResourceManagement Plan. They are determined byapplying management constraints to VisualResource Inventory Classes.

SOURCE: The various classes are determinedfor each area of public land according toalternatives and decisions considered in theland use planning process. The Record ofDecision documents the applicable locationsand classes for management.


THEME TYPE: Generated

HISTORIC RECORD: Yes


SCALE: 1:100,000

ATTRIBUTES: CODES:VRM Class I IVRM Class II IIVRM Class III IIIVRM Class IV IV

18


VRM Class I areas are where only naturalecological changes and very limitedmanagement activities are allowed. Anycontrast created within the characteristiclandscape must not attract attention. Thisclassification is applied to wilderness areas,visual ACEC’s, and other similar situations.

VRM Class II areas are where changes in anyof the basic elements (form, line, color,texture) caused by a surface-disturbing activityshould not be evident in the characteristiclandscape. Contrasts must not attractattention.

VRM Class III areas are where contrasts to thebasic elements caused by a managementactivity may be evident, but should remainsubordinate to the existing landscape.

VRM Class IV areas are where contrasts mayattract attention and be a dominant feature ofthe landscape in terms of scale, but shouldrepeat the form, line, color, and texture of thecharacteristic landscape.

19

SCENIC QUALITY INVENTORY AND EVALUATION CHARTFROM BLM MANUAL HANDBOOK 8410-1

(Illustration 2)

21

Appendix B

Key factors

Landform

Vegetation

Water

Color

Influence of adjacentscenery

Scarcity

Cultural modifications

High vertical relief asexpressed in prominentcliffs, spires, or massiverock outcrops, or severesurface variation or highlyeroded formationsincluding major badlandsor dune systems; or detailfeatures dominant andexceptionally striking andintriguing such as glaciers.5

A variety of vegetativetypes as expressed ininteresting forms, textures,and patterns.5

Clear and clean appearing,still, or cascading whitewater, any of which are adominant factor in thelandscape.5

Rich color combinations,variety or vivid color; orpleasing contrasts in thesoil, rock, vegetation, wateror snow fields.5

Adjacent scenery greatlyenhances visual quality.

5

One of a kind; orunusually memorable, orvery rare within region.Consistent chance forexceptional wildlife orwildflower viewing, etc.* 5+

Modifications addfavorably to visual varietywhile promoting visualharmony.

2

Steep canyons, mesas,buttes, cinder cones, anddrumlins; or interestingerosional patterns orvariety in size and shape oflandforms; or detailfeatures which areinteresting though notdominant or exceptional.

3

Some variety of vegetation,but only one or two majortypes.

3

Flowing, or still, but notdominant in the landscape.

3

Some intensity or variety incolors and contrast of thesoil, rock and vegetation,but not a dominant scenicelement.3

Adjacent scenerymoderately enhancesoverall visual quality.3

Distinctive, thoughsomewhat similar to otherswithin the region.

3

Modifications add little orno visual variety to thearea, and introduce nodiscordant elements.

0

Low rolling hills, foothills,or flat valley bottoms; orfew or no interestinglandscape features.

1

Little or no variety orcontrast in vegetation.

1

Absent, or present, but notnoticeable.

0

Subtle color variations,contrast, or interest;generally mute tones.

1

Adjacent scenery has littleor no influence on overallvisual quality.0

Interesting within itssetting, but fairly commonwithin the region.

1

Modifications add varietybut are very discordant andpromote strongdisharmony.

-4

Illustration 2 - Scenic Quality Inventory and Evaluation Chart

Rating Criteria and Score

* A rating of greater than 5 can be given but must be supported by written justification.

22

INSTRUCTIONS

Purpose: To rate the visual quality of the scenic resource on all BLM managed lands.

How to Identify Scenic Value: All Bureau lands have scenic value.

How to Determine Minimum Suitability: All BLM lands are rated for scenic values. Also rateadjacent or intermingling non-BLM lands within the planning unit.

When to Evaluate Scenic Quality: Rate for scenery under the most critical conditions (i.e.,highest user period or season of use, sidelight, proper atmospheric conditions, etc.).

How to Delineate Rating Areas: Consider the following factors when delineating rating areas.

• 1 Like physiographic characteristics (i.e., land form, vegetation, etc.).

• 2 Similar visual patterns, texture, color, variety, etc.

• 3 Areas which have a similar impact from cultural modifications (i.e., roads, historical and otherstructures, mining operations, or other surface disturbances).

Explanation of Criteria: (See Illustration 1)

NOTE: Values for each rating criteria are maximum and minimum scores only. It is also possible toassign scores within these ranges.

SCENIC QUALITYA = 19 or moreB = 12-18C = 11 or less

23

DETERMING VISUAL RESOURCE INVENTORY CLASSESFROM BLM MANUAL HANDBOOK 8410-1

(Illustration 11)

25

Appendix C

Illustration 11 - Determining Visual Resource Inventory Classes

A. Basis for Determining Visual Resource Inventory Classes

1. Class I. Class I is assigned to all special areas where the current management situations requires maintaining anatural environment essentially unaltered by man.

2. Classes II, III, and IV. These classes are assigned based on combinations of scenic quality, sensitivity levels, anddistance zones as shown in the following matrix:

B. How to Map Visual Resource Inventory Classes II, III, and IV.

Mapping inventory classes can be cumbersome and time consuming if not done in a systematic manner. Many systemshave been developed to do this task. One that has been used effectively is:

Step I: Code each of the 3 overlays as follows:

Scenic Quality A B C

Sensitivity Levels High Medium Low

Distance Zones F/M B S/S

Step 2: Copy the codes from the overlays onto a single new overlay.

Step 3: Delineate the boundaries of the inventory classes on a new overlay using the following information as a guide:

Class II 4 or more lines

Class III 3 lines

Class IV 2 lines or less

Visual Sensitivity Levels

High Medium Low

I I I I I IIII II II II II IIIIIII III III IV IV IVIIIV IV IV

IV*

* if adjacent area is Class III or lower, (ie - Class II) assign Class III,if higher, (ie. Class IV) Class IV

IV IV IVIII

ABC

b s/s f/m b s/s s/sf/mDistance Zones

Special Areas

ScenicQuality

27

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form ApprovedOMB No. 0704-0188

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18296-102

NSN 7540-01-280-5500

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering andmaintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of infromation, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington,VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.

1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBER

10. SPONSORING/MONITORINGAGENCY REPORT NUMBER

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

12a.DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b.DISTRIBUTION CODE

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES

16. PRICE CODE

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATIONOF REPORT

18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATIONOF THIS PAGE

19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATIONOF ABSTRACT

20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT

Final

Integrating GIS Technologies with the Visual Resource Management InventoryProcess - Technical Note 407

U.S. Department of the InteriorBureau of Land ManagementNational Science and Technology CenterP.O. Box 25047Denver, CO 80225-0047

BLM/WO/ST-01/001+8400

The purpose of the technical note is to assist BLM field offices in using current geographic informationsystems (GIS) and image processing technologies to facilitate new, or improve on existing, visual resourcemanagement (VRM) inventories. This technical note seeks to use technology available in the field toimprove existing VRM inventory procedures without changing the basic concepts the inventory is builton.

Technical Note 407 attempts to modernize the VRM inventory process by taking advantage of advancesin GIS and image processing technologies to: enhance the repeatability of VRM results; reduce theamount of time needed to conduct an inventory; reduce the workload that a VRM inventory has on thelocal office; reduce the cost of the inventory; and improve the quality of VRM inventories for landmanagement decision makers.

Visual Resource Management Inventory Process, Geographic Information Systems, Image Processing Technologies, VRM Inventory Components.

Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified UL

36 including covers

6. AUTHOR(S)

Russell Jackson, Chris Horyza

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

The mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement orrecommendation for use by the Federal Government.

Documents

Integrating GIS Technologies with the Visual Resource