Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Problems with using overlay mapping for planning and their implications for geographic information systems

  • Forum
  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As part of the planning process, maps of natural factors are often superimposed in order to identify areas which are suitable or unsuitable for a particular type of resource management. Overlay maps may also be used to identify analysis areas for predictive modeling of resource productivity and ecological response to management. Current interest in applying computer-assisted mapping technology to making overlay maps is drawing attention to geographic information systems for this purpose. The resultant maps, however, may be so inaccurate or unable to capture significant units of productivity and ecological response that they could lead to imperfect or false conclusions. Recommendations are made on how to proceed in light of these problems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature cited

  • Aandahl, A. R., and A. Herrwagen. 1964. Parallelism in the development of soil survey and range site concepts. American Society of Agronomy.ASA Special Publications 5:137–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, R. G. 1985. The factor of scale in ecosystem mapping.Environmental Management 9:271–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, R. G. 1987. Suggested hierarchy of criteria for multiscale ecosystem mapping.Landscape and Urban Planning 14:313–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, J. K., and J. K. Sailor. 1987. Use of a geographic information system for storm runoff prediction for small urban watersheds.Environmental Management 11:21–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dangermond, J., B. Derrenbacher, and E. Harnden. 1982. Description of techniques for automation of regional natural resource inventories. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, California. 52 pp. (mimeo).

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, L. S. 1980. Strategy for building a location-specific, multi-purpose information system for wildland management.Journal of Forestry 78:402–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO. 1984.Land evaluation for forestry. FAO Forestry Paper 48, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy, 123 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, B. K. 1981. The use of overlays in site quality mapping.Canadian Journal of Forest Research 11:361–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gersmehl, P. J. 1980. Productivity ratings based on soil series: a methodology critique.Professional Geographer 32:158–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hole, F. D., and J. B. Campbell. 1985. Soil landscape analysis. Rowman and Allenheld, Totowa, NJ, 196 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, L. D. 1977. Methods for generating land suitability maps: a comparative evaluation.Journal American Institute of Planners 43:386–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, K. N., T. W. Stuart, and S. A. Crim. 1986. FOR-PLAN version 2: an overview. USDA Forest Service, Land Management Planning Staff, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, K. N., R. W. Phillips, J. E. Schmautz, E. H. Stone, and D. J. Wright. 1977. A method for identifying the suitability of lands for resource management. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC, 11 pp. (mimeo).

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDougall, E. B. 1975. The accuracy of map overlays.Landscape Planning 2:23–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, F. C. 1985. Using a geographic information system for forest land mapping and management.Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 51:1753–1759.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moss, M. R. 1985. Land processes and land classification.Journal of Environmental Management 20:295–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Omi, P. N., L. C. Wensel, and J. L. Murphy. 1979. An application of multivariate statistics to land-use planning: classifying land units into homogeneous zones.Forest Science 25:399–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, J. S. 1980. The common denominator in land classification in Canada: an ecological approach to mapping.Forestry Chronicle 56:19–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, F. 1983. Resource suitability: methods for analysis.Environmental Management 7:401–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomlin, C. D., J. K. Berry, and S. M. Tomlin. 1981. Fundamental overlay mapping techniques. Pages 470–481in T. B. Brann (ed.), Proceedings, Workshop In-Place Resource Inventories: Principles and Practices, August 9–14, 1981, Orono, Maine. Society of American Foresters, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varnes, D. J. 1974. The logic of geological maps with reference to their interpretation and use for engineering purposes. US Geological Survey Professional Paper 837, Washington, DC, 48 pp.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. USDA Forest Service, 20013, Washington, DC, USA

    Robert G. Bailey (Land Management Planning Staff)

  2. Land Management Planning Systems, USDA Forest Service, 3825 East Mulberry Street, 80524, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA

    Robert G. Bailey (Land Management Planning Staff)

Authors
  1. Robert G. Bailey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bailey, R.G. Problems with using overlay mapping for planning and their implications for geographic information systems. Environmental Management 12, 11–17 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867373

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867373

Key words

Search

Navigation