{
    "identifier": "http://www.landscape.blm.gov/arcgis/rest/services/COP_2010/COP_TS_175855_GreaterSageGrouse/MapServer/29",
    "@type": "Dataset",
    "name": "Near-Term Terrestrial Intactness",
    "description": "<a href=\"http://www.landscape.blm.gov/COP_2010_metadata/COP_N_TI_4km_poly.xml\">See metadata (FGDC section) for complete information about this layer. <\/a>This dataset provides an estimate of near-term terrestrial intactness, based on a fuzzy logic model that integrates multiple measures of landscape development and vegetation intactness. A powerpoint version of the logic model is available at: Vector\\Conservation_Elements\\Terrestrial\\Ecosystem\\Documentation\\COP_TI_logic_models.pptx\t\t\t\t\t\tThis model integrates agriculture development (from LANDFIRE EVT v1.1), urban development (from LANDFIRE EVT v1.1 and NLCD Impervious Surfaces, combined with estimates of urban growth from David Theobald), linear development (from BLM GTLF, utility lines, and pipelines), energy and mining development (from state mine and USGS national mines datasets as well as AZ uranium mines, geothermal wells, and oil/gas wells), invasive vegetation (multiple sources combined for invasives analyses in this REA), and measures of natural vegetation fragmentation calculated using FRAGSTATS.\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tTerrestrial intactness is high in areas where development is low, vegetation intactness is high, and fragmentation is low.\t\t\t\t\t\tCaution is warranted in interpreting this dataset because it provides a single estimate of terrestrial intactness based on available data.  The degree of terrestrial intactness likely varies for a particular species or conservation element, and may depend on additional factors or thresholds not included in this model.  Instead, this model should be taken as a general measure of intactness that can serve as a template for evaluating across many species at the ecoregion scale, and provides a framework within which species-specific parameters can be incorporated for more detailed analyses.\t\t\t\t\t\tNote: this dataset does not include near-term estimates of energy development; at the time this model was executed, reliable data were not available.  Such data have since been incorporated for this REA, and could be included in a revised estimate.  In particular, this dataset from Holly Copeland (2009) is located at Vector\\Existing_Source_Datasets\\economy\\Energy\\COP_Future_Petroleum.gdb\\COP_ProjectedWells_Anticipated_polyThese data are provided by Bureau of Land Management (BLM) \"as is\" and may contain errors or omissions. The User assumes the entire risk associated with its use of these data and bears all responsibility in determining whether these data are fit for the User's intended use.These data may not have the accuracy, resolution, completeness, timeliness, or other characteristics appropriate for applications that potential users of the data may contemplate. The User is encouraged to carefully consider the content of the metadata file associated with these data. The BLM should be cited as the data source in any products derived from these data.",
    "spatialCoverage": {
        "geo": {
            "@type": "GeoShape",
            "box": " 35.4899302297252 -114.411127321621  41.1690420833902 -106.800760637371"
        },
        "@type": "Place"
    },
    "@context": "http://schema.org/",
    "url": "http://www.landscape.blm.gov/arcgis/rest/services/COP_2010/COP_TS_175855_GreaterSageGrouse/MapServer/29",
    "sameAs": "https://gptogc.esri.com/geoportal/sitemap/document/%7B23C4D681-61B1-4AFC-8481-E64653830760%7D?f=dcat"
}