Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>These points were created to better represent spatially the locations of actual visual encounters, instead of just the survey routes (HVESSampleLines). This point file will be used for analysis - to buffer and intersect with various landscape features.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Since 2006, staff have conducted visual encounter survey (VES) to assess amphibian distribution and abundance. OSMP staff monitor wetlands for the presence of native amphibians with a focus on locating sites that support northern leopard frogs (Lithobates pipiens)—a state sensitive species and one that staff specifically manage for as outlined in the Grassland Ecosystem Management Plan (Grassland Plan). The Grassland Plan contains three management objectives related to amphibians: 1) to increase the percentage of surveyed ponds supporting only native amphibians to 50%; 2) to increase the number of OSMP ponds where northern leopard frogs are present but non-native, invasive American bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus) are absent, and 3) to minimize undesignated trail density in northern leopard frog habitat blocks.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Study routes for amphibian visual encounters survey. Routes are next to streams and pond/lake perimeters.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Since 2006, staff have conducted visual encounter surveys in one form or another (VES) to assess amphibian distribution and abundance. OSMP staff monitor wetlands for the presence of native amphibians with a focus on locating sites that support northern leopard frogs (Lithobates pipiens)—a state sensitive species and one that staff specifically manage for as outlined in the Grassland Ecosystem Management Plan (Grassland Plan). The Grassland Plan contains three management objectives related to amphibians: 1) to increase the percentage of surveyed ponds supporting only native amphibians to 50%; 2) to increase the number of OSMP ponds where northern leopard frogs are present but non-native, invasive American bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus) are absent, and 3) to minimize undesignated trail density in northern leopard frog habitat blocks.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Points that represent all bat monitoring sites on OSMP, including watering holes, roosts and mist net sites. </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">THIS DATASET IS CONSIDERED SENSITIVE; PLEASE CONSULT WILDLIFE STAFF FOR GUIDANCE PRIOR TO ITS USE.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>This feature class contains all point features representing the on the ground points related to transected for Grassland Bird Monitoring. It inludes origin, middle and endpoints. This transect monitoring protocol is now used system-wide within OSMP grasslands. This contains transects were made during the grassland planning process to monitor grassland birds systemwide as well as original transects that were created before the grassland plan; design usually associated with Trails Study Area plans. If transects are added or modified by biologists, data is provided to GIS staff to update in this database. In the I&M Database these points are related to the "Sonbird Monitoring Line Transects" project.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">THIS DATASET IS CONSIDERED SENSITIVE; PLEASE CONSULT WILDLIFE STAFF FOR GUIDANCE PRIOR TO ITS USE.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>This feature class contains all line features representing the on the ground path to be transected for Grassland Bird Monitoring. This transect monitoring protocol is now used system-wide within OSMP grasslands. This contains transects were made during the grassland planning process to monitor grassland birds systemwide as well as original transects that were created before the grassland plan; design usually associated with Trails Study Area plans. If transects are added or modified by biologists, data is provided to GIS staff to update in this database. </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Wildlife staff conducts songbird point counts in forested habitats throughout OSMP to accomplish directives outlined in the Ecosystem Management Plans (i.e., forest and grassland) and Visitor Master Plan, and to assess potential changes in native bird communities in association with on-going habitat restoration activities, post-wildfire, and new trail development. Surveyed habitats include mixed conifer, ponderosa pine, and riparian forests. In 2016, wildlife staff also revived a project that assesses brown-headed cowbird abundance and distribution in thinned and unthinned ponderosa pine forest stands to evaluate the introduction of cattle in previously ungrazed grasslands near the forest ecotone on Shanahan Ridge </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Sample name in Monitoring Database can be joined to the "Sample_Name" field in this feature class. </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Forest raptor monitoring points updated for the WTSA process. Includes call points for Forest Owls and Forest Hawks. Target species are northern goshawk and flammulated owls. Detailed list of point names is listed in supplemental Info. Naming Convention: 2 letter project code , 2 letter location code, - , point number FO - Forest Owl FH - Forest Hawk</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN><SPAN>To monitor the effects of new trail development on ungulate use of the areas</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>, OSMP staff designed a monitoring plan that included the creation of pellet plots near the Spring Brook Loop and Goshawk Ridge Trails. Staff collected data one year prior to trail construction, and then once annually since the completion of the trail in 2008. Pellet plots consist of a center pivot point for a 5 m radius circular plot. Each plot is systematically searched for animal scat, with a focus on large ungulates, carnivores, and wild turkey. Staff randomly placed the plots at varying distances from the trails (i.e., treatment) and included 25 plots in an untrailed area to act as a control. The Goshawk Ridge Trail plots are separated even more intricately with plots stratified into seven different distance classes: 0-50m, 50-100m, 100-150m, 150-200m, 200-250m, 250-300m, and Controls. The project draws assistance from many different staff members, being organized and anchored by the Wildlife Crew, but being assisted by the Forestry, Trails, IMP, and Restoration Crews. In the early years, this project was part of an All Staff Work Day effort, but in recent years we have reverted to using smaller crews of more experienced people.</SPAN></SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>The Preble's meadow jumping mouse (Preble's or PMJM) is a small mammal approximately 9 inches in length with large hind feet adapted for jumping, a long bicolored tail (which accounts for 60% of its length), and a distinct dark stripe down the middle of its back which is bordered on either side by gray to orange-brown fur. To evade predators, the mouse can jump up to three feet. The species historical range included Colorado, Wyoming.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>This dataset identifies Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse critical habitat areas on City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks lands. Critical habitat is a term defined and used in the Endangered Species Act. It is specific geographic areas that contain features essential to the conservation of an endangered or threatened species and that may require special management and protection.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This data tracks the spatial extent of black-tailed prairie dog colonies on OSMP-managed lands over time, including any held in fee and on conservation easements where the department has a management agreement in place.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Data was collected using GPS and clipped to the City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks (OSMP) and Boulder County Parks and Open Space (BCPOS) properties. It has been collected yearly each fall since 1996, by OSMP wildlife staff. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Black-tailed prairie dog colonies create a unique habitat on the landscape. They create habitat and food for other animals of federal, state, and local conservation concern (e.g. burrowing owls, ferruginous hawks, bald and golden eagles, American badger, etc., (see the OSMP Grassland Ecosystem Management Plan for more details)). Their burrowing activity also causes conflicts when it occurs on parcels where the management focus is on agriculture or other purposes. The conflict can be especially high in areas of irrigated grasslands since the burrowing activity can alter how water is applied to the landscape, and prairie dog browsing can remove graminoid cover and encourage invasions of tenacious non-native form species. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>System-wide mapping was first initiated by the mandate to monitor black-tailed prairie dogs in the “City of Boulder Grassland Management: Black-tailed Prairie Dog Habitat Conservation Plan”. This plan was approved by the City of Boulder Open Space Board of Trustees on March 13, 1996. Annual system-wide mapping began that fall, and continued each subsequent fall starting on Sept 1. In 2012 a field was added to distinguish active vs inactive colonies. At this time we began also collecting inactive colony boundaries.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The spatial data informs the public, lessees, academic researchers, and partnering agencies as to the extent of the black-tailed prairie dogs on our properties. This data informs conservation planning for sensitive species, including the federally endangered black-footed ferret. The annual mapping can be used to visually demonstrate how populations fluctuate, highlight areas of conflict, and inform management decisions. This long term data set allows for a retrospective view of where prairie dogs have occurred on the system in the past, but where they may no longer persist. This historic view helps staff identify areas where prairie dogs are likely to become reestablished, either through natural recolonization or by direct relocation. Information on where prairie dogs have or do exist also helps inform Habitat Suitability Models. The data set also provides staff with tools to make management decision based on colony management designations (Prairie Dog Conservation Area, Grassland Preserve, Multiple Objective Area, Transition Area, Removal Area (see OSMP Grassland Ecosystem Management Plan for specifics on the designation process)) </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The data is not meant to estimate the population of individual animals on the system or to estimate colony density. </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This dataset contains field mapped perimeters of all active prairie dog colonies. Data was collected using GPS and clipped to the City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks (OSMP) and Boulder County Parks and Open Space (BCPOS) properties. It has been collected yearly each fall since 1996, by OSMP wildlife staff.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The data set also provides prairie dog colony management designations (Prairie Dog Conservation Area, Grassland Preserve, Multiple Objective Area, Transition Area, Removal Area (see </SPAN><A href="https://bouldercolorado.gov/media/2430/download?inline"><SPAN>OSMP Grassland Ecosystem Management Plan </SPAN></A><SPAN>for specifics on the designation process)) </SPAN></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Prairie dog colony management designations:</SPAN></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Grassland Preserve</SPAN><SPAN>: Conservation of prairie dogs and their associated species in large and ecologically diverse grassland habitat blocks.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Multiple Objective Areas</SPAN><SPAN>: Conservation of prairie dogs and their associated species is one of multiple management objectives.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Prairie Dog Conservation Areas</SPAN><SPAN>: Conservation of the prairie dog is the primary management objective; associated species managed opportunistically</SPAN></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Transition Areas</SPAN><SPAN>: Conservation of targets other than the prairie dog and associated community takes precedence-removal generally when relocation sites are available</SPAN></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Removal Areas</SPAN><SPAN>: Conservation of targets other than the prairie dog and associates incompatible with prairie dogs-management options include immediate removal. </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">THIS DATASET IS CONSIDERED SENSITIVE; PLEASE CONSULT WILDLIFE STAFF FOR GUIDANCE PRIOR TO ITS USE.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>This dataset includes all known Accipiter nests on OSMP Lands (includees Northern Goshawk, Sharp-Shinned Hawk and Cooper's Hawk). Data initially was collected around 2005 using systemwide call-back survey. Now biologists focus on known territories for annual surveys. Locations of nest trees are captured with Garmin GPS Units. At the end of the year the locations are provided to GIS to add to this feature class. </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>The ForestMonitoringPlots dataset includes all vegetation sampling that has been done in OSMP forests. The monitoring and inventory projects represented here are- forest overstory walk-throughs, forest overstory inventories, Open space forest understory monitoring, and long-term understory modified whittaker plots. All of the raw data collected at these points is stored in the OSMP Monitoring database or the OSMP Forest Inv Database. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Attributes include the type of inventory, the associated forest stand, the type of plot (overstory/understroy), the plot name, the old open space stand name if it applies, and how the point was recorded (GPS, digitized, etc). The points in the dataset may be adjusted over time as digitized points are replaced by GPS data. Additional points will be added annually as new areas are sampled or new monitoring projects are developed. </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>The GMAP Long Term Monitoring Transects are the transects used to evaluate various indicators of non-wetland grassland (xeric tallgrass prairie, mixedgrass prairie mosiac, and mesic bluestem prairie) condition. There are 96 transects in mixedgrass prairie habitat, 44 transects in xeric tallgrass prairie, and 20 transects in mesic bluestem prairie for a total of 160 transects. The transect locations were established using a GRTS sampling design run in the statistical software package R. We used a stratified sampling design (stratified by habitat/target type - xeric tallgrass prairie, mixedgrass prairie mosiac, and mesic bluestem prairie) and transects were assigned by the GRTS process to one of four panels. The GRTS sampling design provides randomly selected, spatially balanced transect locations to ensure coverage of the entire study area. OSMP's long term vegetation transects are monitoring on the following schedule: in years one and two all four panels are monitored; in years three through seven each of the four panels is monitored once during that four year period; then in years eight and nine all four panels are monitored again; and so forth. More details about the sampling design, monitoring schedule and monitoring objectives can be found in the project protocol. 2009-present.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: City of Boulder, Open Space and Mountain Parks
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Measures the height and abundance of tall oatgrass and the cover of all vascular species and ground cover before and after cattle grazing in 40 grazed and ungrazed (caged) plots.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Tall oatgrass is a non-native grass species that is invading upland grasslands at a rapid pace. We have uncertainty on how to best manage the species and how management such as intensive grazing, which was implemented in 2015 influences native vegetation and tall oatgrass abundance in the long-term. This study examines the efficacy of grazing as a management tool in the containment zone.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Vegetation monitoring in the Tallgrass West Implementation area tracks species composition, structure, and diversity of ~900 acres of grassland in the 1370-acre Tall Grass West Implementation Area, an important transitional area between the Rocky Mountain foothills and the Western Great Plains. The purpose of the monitoring is to describe the species composition, structure and diversity of the grassland vegetation, to determine temporal changes over time, and to relate those changes to agricultural management practices. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>26 permanent monitoring transects were installed in 2005 in the Boulder Greens Venture, Dover-Blacker, Hedgecock, Stengel I, T.H.P., Frasier Farms and Wells east properties. The area was stratified by three grazing treatments (continuously grazed, ungrazed since 2006, and ungrazed for > 10 years prior to 2006) and environmental gradient (riparian/floodplain, upland terraces, and grassland-forest inteface) and transects were randomly placed within each stratum where possible. 15 of the 26 vegetation transects were aligned with wildlife transects established at the same time to characterize bird habitat near and far from trails: random locations were constrained to areas near these transects. Additional transects established by ESCO Associates in earlier years as part of the Tall Grass State Natural Area Monitoring (10 transects) and Prairie Dog Vegetation Monitoring (2 transects) were also sampled as part of this study.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>Monitoring occurred in July or August between 2005 and 2008 with most but not all transects were sampled in all four years. Details about the sampling design, monitoring objectives and field procedures can be found in the project protocol. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>The 50-m transects were oriented randomly from the origin point. The transect origins were marked in the field with rebar stakes driven flush with the ground and topped with labelled aluminum caps. Four-foot tall, white fiberglass stakes were positioned at both the origin and endpoint of each transect. Transect orientations were recorded to facilitate consistent relocation of the transects. Names in the feature class are a concatenation of the “TGWV” prefix for Tall Grass West Vegetation, followed by the transect number (1-33, but no transects numbered 4, 12, 15, 17, 20, 21, 23, 27, 31). The same name is used in the OSMP Inventory and Monitoring database, but a leading zero is added to the transect number.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Vegetation abundance was monitored by point-intercept technique using a point-projection device mounted on a tripod. Crosshairs visible in the eyepiece delineated the intercept point, and low magnification of the lens allowed the botanist to identify the species or substrate (i.e. bare soil, litter, rock) beneath the point. Second hits were recorded when the cover-point optical device intercepted an additional point of canopy vegetation directly beneath the 1st intercept reading. Point intercepts were taken on both sides of the transect at 1.0 m intervals along a 50-m transect to give 100 points per transect used to derive % cover by species. All species observed within a 2-m wide belt transect on both sides of the 50m transect were also listed with 0.1 cover to derive species richness. Transect were photographed during each monitoring session, looking from the origin to the end point.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Frequency data were collected in ten 1 m x 5 m subplots located on one side of the 50 m transect when looking from origin to endpoint. All species in the subplots were tallied and frequency was determined as the number of subplots in which the species was present divided by 10 total plots surveyed. While cover and species richness were consistently sampled, frequency was monitored in only a subset of plots in each year. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Additional details on study objectives, design and methods can be found in the Tallgrass West Vegetation Monitoring Project protocol, updated april 2013.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN /></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Monitoring efforts include: </SPAN></P><UL><LI><P><SPAN>Prairie Dog Vegetataion Monitoring (1998-2012)</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Superior Associates Vegetation Monitoring</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Jewell Mountain Vegetation Monitoring (1999-2020)</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Tallgrass State Natural Area Long Term Vegetation Monitoring (1991-2021)</SPAN></P></LI></UL><P><SPAN>These are represented as several different monitoring projects in the I&M DB. Refer to the "Name" field to differentiate projects.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Data for the goat monitoring project are collected from both vegetation cover transects and chicory density plots, randomly located within a goat grazed area (grazed approximately every two years) and an area without goat grazing. The control and goat treatment subareas were subjectively chosen for their similar vegetation composition and land use history (including regular spring grazing by cattle). Within each sampling subarea, locations of six transect origins and 30 density plotcorners (southwest corners) were randomly selected using a simple random sampling tool implemented in ArcGIS. Monitoring for both chicory density and vegetation compositionoccurs each year prior to goat grazing in the 3rdand 4rth weeks of July. Details about the sampling design, monitoring objectives and field procedures can be found in the project protocol. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The twelve goat monitoring transects are used to evaluate the richness of native and nonnative plant species, the percent cover of plant species, and the percent cover of substrates (bare ground, rock, litter). The 50-meter transect end points are marked in the field using rebar topped with labeled aluminum caps. Each transect is sampled by identifying the species or substrate directly beneath the cross hairs of an optical scope arm extended 1 meter on both sides of the transect line at 1 m intervals. All species observed within a 2 m wide belt transect on both sides of the transect are also listed to derive species richness. Oblique photographs are taken along each transect looking from the transect origin towards the end point to qualitatively document the condition of the vegetation. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The 60 chicory density plots are used to monitor changes in chicory density within 2.0 m x 0.5 m plots. The southwest and northwest corners are marked in the field with aluminum washers secured with 6” penny nails. During sampling, all green chicory rosettes and reproductive stems within a rectangular PVC sampling frame are tallied.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks
Name: Prairie Dog Relocation Vegetation Monitoring
Display Field: SampleName
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPoint
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Vegetation cover and richness data is collected along 50 m transects within former prairie dog colonies to derive unbiased estimates of bare cover, native species and conservative species richness, and relative perennial graminoid cover. Results are evaluated against criteria in the GEMAP plan. </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Comprehensive Vegetation Data for OSMP fee properties and some Conservation Easements (primarily those for which OSMP has management responsibilities). The spatial and tabular data enables complex GIS analysis of relationships between vegetation and other natural resources. Also benefits future planning efforts, quantification of rare and tracked types, participates in the analyses for new trail placement, etc</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Comprehensive Vegetation Data for OSMP fee properties and some Conservation Easements (primarily those for which OSMP has management responsibilities). The spatial and tabular data enables complex GIS analysis of relationships between vegetation and other natural resources. Also benefits future planning efforts, quantification of rare and tracked types, participates in the analyses for new trail placement, etc</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Comprehensive Vegetation Data for OSMP fee properties and some Conservation Easements (primarily those for which OSMP has management responsibilities). The spatial and tabular data enables complex GIS analysis of relationships between vegetation and other natural resources. Also benefits future planning efforts, quantification of rare and tracked types, participates in the analyses for new trail placement, etc</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Wildlife closures on OSMP land that is regulated (in most cases) by 8-3-3 ordinance by City of Boulder. Entering wildlife closure area carries up to 90 days in jail or $1000 fine.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P STYLE="margin:0 0 7 0;"><SPAN><SPAN>Created 2017</SPAN></SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 7 0;"><SPAN><SPAN>Combined all previous wetland datasets into one. Query by Status an Category attributes.</SPAN></SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 7 0;"><SPAN>Lifecycle: Active (currently regulated by the city), Inactive (outside city limits or not regulated by the City), Proposed (wetland application submitted and pending acceptance)</SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 7 0;"><SPAN><SPAN>Category: Category A - High functioning wetland with 25-foot inner buffer and 25-foot outer buffer (50-feet total). Category B - Low functioning wetland with 25-foot total buffer</SPAN></SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 7 0;"><SPAN>Wetland descriptions and evaluations are available on the Ctiy of Boulder Wetland Regulation webpage. </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: Field and Digital by Land Stewardship Consulting. Supplemental wetlands added by the City of Boulder from previous mapping done by Cooper in 2004.
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This data set represents the spatial extent of OSMP's restoration area polygons which primarily feature more specific treatment boundaries found within the larger project boundaries; in some cases these extents may be the same. Treatment boundaries typically represent tasks that are non-liner or otherwise narrowly localized locations; specific tasks may include (but are not limited to) seeding, planting, noxious weed control, erosion control, etc.. Specific project descriptions, objectives and other detailed info is found in the Restoration and Reclamation Legacy Program database. Unique polygon identification numbers (TreatmentIDs) link the spatial data to more detailed tabular data. Treatment dates sapn from 1984-2012.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Wetland areas mapped by OSMP Staff in the 1990s, associated with a tabular database, and used for BVCP map display. All wetlands on any City owned lands are regulatory wetlands.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>All geometry can be found in Wetlands [City Utility Dataset]. The historic mapping, city utility layer, and vegetative riparian communities, in sum, are the most complete depiction of riparian areas on OSMP lands.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Merged into City of Boulder Public Works Wetlands feature class in 2017.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>