Home Resources Resources

Resources

ArcGIS Desktop 9.3 Help. 2009. Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.3/index.cfm?TopicName=welcome

 

ArcHydro Data Model. Center for Research in Water Resources, University of Texas at Austin. http://www.crwr.utexas.edu/giswr/hydro/ArcHOSS/model/index.cfm

 

Awl, J., Christie, J., Heber, M. and B. Wilen. 2009. A New Mapping Standard. National Wetlands Newsletter 31(5): 10-11. http://www.aswm.org/swp/mapping/christie_mapping.pdf

 

Bartoldus, C. 2000. The Process of Selecting a Wetland Assessment Procedure: Steps and Considerations. Wetland Journal 12(4):4-40.

 

Bartoldus, C., Garbisch, E., and M. Kraus. 1994. Evaluation for Planned Wetlands (EPW). Environmental Concern Inc., St. Michaels, MD. 327 pp.

 

Blackwell, P.R. and G. Wells, 1999. DEM Resolution and Improved Surface Representation. ESRI Users Conference, Proceedings.

 

Brander, L., Raymond, J., Vermaat, J. 2003.  The Empirics of Wetland Valuation: A Comprehensive Summary of a Meta-Analysis of the Literature. Environmental and Resource Economics 33: 223-250. http://www.environmental-expert.com/Files%5C6063%5Carticles%5C9162%5C1.pdf

 

Brooks, R., D. Wardrop, and J. Bishop. 2002. Watershed-Based Protection for Wetlands in Pennsylvania: Levels 1 & 2 - Synoptic Maps and Rapid Field Assessments, Final Report. Penn State Cooperative Wetlands Center, University Park, PA, USA. The Penn State Cooperative Wetlands Center, University Park, PA 16802. Report No. 2002-1.

 

Brown, E., Caraco, D., and R. Pitt. 2004. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination. A Guidance Manual for Program Development and Technical Assessments. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, MD. http://www.cwp.org/store/free-downloads.html

 

Burglund, J. 1999. Montana Wetland Assessment Method. Montana Department of Transportation and Morrison- Maierle, Inc., Helena, MT, USA. Source: Montana Department of Transportation, Environmental Services, 2701 Prospect Ave., P.O. Box 201001, Helena, MT 59620-1001.

 

Cappiella, K., Schueler, T., Tasillo, J., and T. Wright. 2005. Adapting Watershed Tools to Protect Wetlands. Article 3 of the Wetlands and Watersheds Article Series. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, Maryland.

 

Cappiella, K., Kitchell, A., and T. Schueler. 2006. Using Local Watershed Plans to Protect Wetlands. Article 2 of the Wetlands and Watersheds Article Series. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, Maryland.

 

Castelle, A., C. Connoly, M. Emers, E. Metz, S. Meyer, M. Witter, S. Mauermann, T. Erickson, S. Cooke. 1992. Wetland Buffers: Use and Effectiveness. Adolfson Associates, Inc. Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program, Washington Dept. of Ecology. Publication No. 92-10. Olympia, WA.

 

Chase, V.P., L.S. Deming, F. Latawiec, 1997.  Buffers for Wetlands and Surface Waters: A Guidebook for New Hampshire Municipalities. Audubon Society of New Hampshire.

 

Chin. N. T. 1996. Watershed Urbanization Effects on Palustrine Wetlands: A Study of the Hydrologic, Vegetative and Amphibian Community Response Over Eight Years. Master’s Thesis. University of Washington. Seattle, WA.

 

Christie, J. and L. Stetson. 2009. Mapping Coalitions. National Wetlands Newsletter 31(5): 11. http://www.aswm.org/swp/mapping/christie_mapping.pdf

 

City of Oakdale, Minnesota. No date. Adopt-A-Wetland How-to Kit. http://oakdale.govoffice2.com/vertical/Sites/%7B9D2ABE6F-4847-480E-9780-B9885C59543F%7D/uploads/%7B07710162-E46A-488A-8C36-0EEFEB0B7407%7D.PDF

 

Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R., Sutton, P., and van den Belt, M. 1997. The Value of the World’s Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital. Nature 387: 253-260. http://www.uvm.edu/giee/publications/Nature_Paper.pdf

 

Cowardin, L.M., Carter, V., Golet, F.C., and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. FWS/OBS-79/31. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/_documents/gNSDI/ClassificationWetlandsDeepwaterHabitatsUS.pdf

 

Dahl, T. 1990. Wetlands – Losses in the United States, 1780s to 1980s. Washington, DC. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 13p. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/wetlands/wetloss/

 

Dahl, T. 2006. Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Conterminious United States 1998 to 2004.  U.S. Department of the Interior; Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington D.C.

 

Dahl, T., and C. Johnson. 1991. Wetlands – Status and Trends in the Conterminous United States, Mid-1970s to Mid-1980s. Washington, DC. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 22p. http://www.nwrc.usgs.gov/wdb/pub/others/wetstatus.pdf

 

Dahl, T., Dick, J., Swords, J. and B. Wilen. 2009. Data Collection Requirements and Procedures for Mapping Wetland, Deepwater, and Related Habitats of the United States. Division of Habitat and Resource Conservation, National Standards and Support Team, Madison, WI. 85p. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/_documents/gNSDI/DataCollectionRequirementsProcedures.pdf

 

Dreher, D., S. Elston, and C. Schaal. 1992.  Advanced Identification (ADID) Study Lake County, IL. http://www.lakecountyil.gov/Stormwater/Publications/FloodplainStormaterWetlands/Advanced%20Identification%20(ADID)%20Wetland%20Study%20(1992).pdf

 

Emmons & Olivier Resources (EOR). 2001. Benefits of Wetland Buffers: A Study of Functions, Values and Size. Prepared for: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Deephaven, MN. http://www.lakecountyil.gov/Stormwater/Publications/FloodplainStormaterWetlands/Advanced%20Identification%20(ADID)%20Wetland%20Study%20(1992).pd%09f

 

Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). 2009. ArcGIS Desktop 9.3 Help. http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.3

 

Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). 2009. Wetland Mapping Standard. FGDC Wetlands Subcommittee. FGDC Document Number FGDC-STD-015-2009. http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standards-projects/wetlands-mapping/2009-08%20FGDC%20Wetlands%20Mapping%20Standard_final.pdf

 

Fennessey, M.S., A.D. Jacobs, and M.E. Kentula. 2004. Review of Rapid Methods for Assessing Wetland Condition. EPA/620/R-04/009. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/monitor/RapidMethodReview.pdf

 

Gritzner, J. 2006. Identifying Wetland Depressions in Bare-Ground LIDAR for Hydrologic Modeling, ESRI User’s Conference, Proceedings.

 

Hatfield, C, Mokos, J.,Hartman, J., and M. Kaplan. 2004. Development of Wetland Quality and Function Assessment Tools and DemonstrationRutgers University and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. http://www.state.nj.us/dep/dsr/wetlands2/report.pdf

 

Hicks, A. and B. Carlisle. 1998. Rapid Habitat Assessment of Wetlands, Macro-Invertebrate Survey Version: Brief Description and Methodology. Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Wetland Assessment Program, Amherst, MA, USA.Source: Bruce K. Carlisle, Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management, 100 Cambridge Street, Boston, MA 02202.

 

Hirschman, D. and J. Kosco. 2008. Managing Stormwater in Your Community: A Guide for Building an Effective Post-Construction Program. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD. EPA Publication No: 833-R-08-001. http://www.cwp.org/store/free-downloads.html

 

Hollands, G., and D. Magee. 1985. A Method for Assessing the Functions of Wetlands. In J. Kusler and P. Riexinger (eds.), Proceedings of the National Wetland Assessment Symposium, Association of Wetland Managers, Berne, NY.

 

Horner, R. R., Azous, A. L., Richter, K. O., Cooke, S. S., Reinelt, L. E., and K. Ewing. 1997. Wetlands and Stormwater Management Guidelines. Pages 198-227 in Azous, A. L. and R. R. Horner. Wetlands and Urbanization: Implications for the Future. Final Report of the Puget Sound Wetlands and Stormwater Management Research Program. Washington State Department of Ecology, King County Water and Land Resources Division, and the University of Washington, Seattle. http://www.kingcounty.gov/environment/waterandland/wetlands/wetlands-urbanization.aspx

 

International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). 2009.  An Integrated Wetland Assessment Toolkit: A guide to good practice. Eds. Oliver Springate-Baginski, David Allen and William Darwall. Cambridge, UK. Available online at: http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iwa_toolkit_lowres.pdf

 

Jacobs, A., Whigham, D., Fillis, D., Rehm, E., and A. Howard. 2008. Delaware Comprehensive Assessment Procedure Version 5.1. Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Dover, DE  http://www.dnrec.delaware.gov/Admin/DelawareWetlands/Documents/DE_%20Comprehensive%20Assessment%20_v5.1.pdf

 

King County, Washington. 2005. Critical Area Ordinance User’s Manual. Department of Development and Environmental Services. http://www.kingcounty.gov/property/permits/codes/CAO.aspx#manual

 

King, D. 1998. The Dollar Value of Wetlands: Trap Set, Bait Taken, Don’t Swallow. National Wetlands Newsletter. 20(4): 7-11. http://kingeconomics.com/pubs/King%20Value%20of%20Wetlands%20paper.pdf

 

King, D. and C. Bohlen. 1994.  Making Sense of Wetland Restoration Costs.  Prepared for the U.S. EPA, Office of Policy Analysis.

 

Kuehner, K.J. 2004. An Historical Perspective of Hydrologic Changes in Seven Mile Creek Watershed. Cottonwood Water Quality Board. http://mrbdc.wrc.mnsu.edu/org/bnc/pdf/smc_airphoto.pdf

 

Lane Council of Governments. 1991. West Eugene Wetlands Special Area Study, Draft Technical Report. Lane Council of Governments, Eugene, OR.

 

Louis Berger and Associated, Inc. 1997.  Costs for Wetland creation and Restoration Projects in the Glaciated Northeast.  A Report to EPA.

 

Mack, J. 2001. Ohio Rapid Assessment Method for Wetlands v. 5.0: User’s Manual and Forms. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Division of Surface Water, 401/Wetland Ecology Unit, Columbus, OH, USA.Technical Report WET/ 2001-1. http://www.epa.state.oh.us/portals/35/401/oram50sf_s.pdf

 

Mark, D. M. 1988. Network Models in Geomorphology. Modelling in Geomorphological Systems. John Wiley.

 

Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). No Date. Wetlands and Waterways Photos. http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/Water/WetlandsandWaterways/AboutWetlands/Pages/Programs/
WaterPrograms/Wetlands_Waterways/about_wetlands/photos.aspx

 

Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. 2002. Mecklenburg County Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance. http://charmeck.org/mecklenburg/county/WaterandLandResources/LandDevelopment/Documents/ErosOrd.pdf

 

Miller, R., and B. Gunsalus. 1997. Wetland Rapid Assessment Procedure (WRAP) Technical Publication REG-001. South Florida Water Management District, Natural Resource Management Division, West Palm Beach, FL. http://www.sfwmd.gov/portal/page/portal/xrepository/sfwmd_repository_pdf/wrap99.pdf

 

Minnesota Storm-Water Advisory Group (MNSWAG). 1997. Storm-Water and Wetlands: Planning and Evaluation Guidelines for Addressing Potential Impacts of Urban Storm-Water and Snow-Melt Runoff on Wetlands. State of Minnesota Stormwater Advisory Group.

 

Mitchell, G. 1993. Assessment of Erosion/Sediment Control in Highway Construction Projects.  Ohio University Center for Geotechnical and Environmental Research. Final Report to Ohio Department of Transportation. FWHA/OH-93/011. Columbus, OH. 20 pp.

 

Mitsch, W.J., and J.G. Gosselink. 2000. Wetlands, 3rd Edition. John Wiley & Sons, NY. 920 pp.

 

Munoz, B., Lesser, V.M., Dorney, J.R., and R. Savage. 2009. A Proposed Methodology to Determine Accuracy of Location and Extent of Geographically Isolated Wetlands. Environ Monit Assess 150: 53-64.

 

National Association of Counties (NACo). 2007. County Wetlands Data Guidebook. Community Services Division of the County Services Department. Washington, DC. http://www.naco.org/Template.cfm?Section=New_Technical_Assistance&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=23988

 

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). 2007. Valuing New Jersey’s Natural Capital: An Assessment of the Economic Value of the State’s Natural Resources. Available online at: http://www.nj.gov/dep/dsr/naturalcap/

 

North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). 1995. Guidance for Rating the Values of Wetlands in North Carolina. Raleigh, NC. 57 pp.

 

Paterson, R.G. 1994. Construction Practices: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. Watershed Protection Techniques 1(3): 95-99.

 

Schueler, T. R. and K. Brown. 2004. Urban Stream Repair Practices. Urban Subwatershed Restoration Manual Series Manual 4. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, MD. http://www.cwp.org/store/free-downloads.html

 

Semlitsch, R.D. and Jensen, J.B. 2001.  Core Habitat, Not Buffer Zone. National Wetlands Newsletter 23(4): 5-11.

 

Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database. 2007. SSURGO Data Packaging and Use. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/documents/SSURGODataPackagingandUse.pdf

 

Stetson, L. 2009. Mapping Wetlands Together: Identifying Partners for Coalitions. Wetland News. Association of State Wetland Managers. http://www.aswm.org/swp/mapping/wetland_mapping_coalitions.pdf

 

Strommen, B., Cappiella, K., Hirschman, D., and J. Tasillo. 2007. A Local Ordinance to Protect Wetland Functions. Article 4 in the Wetlands and Watershed Article Series.  Center for Watershed Protection.  Ellicott City, Maryland.

 

The Nature Conservancy (TNC). No date. Connecticut. http://www.nature.org/wherewework/northamerica/states/connecticut/

 

Tiner, R. 1999. Wetland Indicators; A Guide to Wetland Identification, Delineation, Classification, and Mapping. Lewis Publishers, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

 

Tiner, R. 2002. Enhancing Wetlands Inventory Data for Watershed-based Wetland Characterizations and Preliminary Assessments of Wetland Functions. In R.W. Tiner, Watershed Based Wetland Planning and Evaluation. A Collection of Papers from the Wetland Millenium Event (August 6-10, 2000). Quebec City, Quebec Canada. Distributed by the ASWM Inc. Berne, NY: 17-39.

 

Tiner, R. 2003a. Dichotomous Keys and Mapping Codes for Wetland Landscape Position, Landform, Water Flow Path, and Waterbody Type Descriptors. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory Program, Northeast Region, Hadley MA. 44 pp. http://library.fws.gov/wetlands/dichotomouskeys0903.pdf

 

Tiner, R. 2003b. Correlating Enhanced National Wetlands Inventory Data with Wetland Functions for Watershed Assessments: A Rationale for Northeastern U.S. Wetlands. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory Program, Northeast Region, Hadley MA. 26pp. http://library.fws.gov/Wetlands/corelate_wetlandsNE.pdf

 

Tiner, R. 2005. Assessing Cumulative Loss of Wetland Functions in the Nanticoke River Watershed using Enhanced National Wetlands Inventory Data. Wetlands 25(2): 405-419. http://library.fws.gov/Wetlands/TINER_WETLANDS25.pdf

 

Tiner, R. 2008. Background on LLWW and Preliminary Wetland Functional Assessment. http://old.aswm.org/swp/mapping/background_llww_123008.pdf 

 

Tiner, R. (editor). 2009. Status Report for the National Wetlands Inventory Program: 2009. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Habitat and Resource Conservation, Branch of Resource and Mapping Support, Arlington, VA. 48pp. http://library.fws.gov/wetlands/nwi_status_2009.pdf

 

Tiner, R. 2010a. NWIPlus Geospatial Database for Watershed-Level Functional Assessment. National Wetlands Newsletter 32(3): 4-7,23.

 

Tiner, R. 2010b. Wetlands of Cape Cod and the Islands, Massachusetts: Results of the National Wetland Inventory and Landscape-level Functional Assessment. National Wetlands Inventory Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Region, Hadley MA. 78 pp. http://www.fws.gov/northeast/wetlands/publications/Wetlands%20of%20Cape%20Cod_Final_Report.pdf

 

Tiner, R. 2011a. Dichotomous Keys and Mapping Codes for Wetland Landscape Position, Landform, Water Flow Path, and Water Body Type Descriptors: Version 2.0. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory Program, Northeast Region, Hadley MA.

 

Tiner, R. 2011b. Correlating Enhanced National Wetlands Inventory Data with Wetland Functions for Watershed Assessments: A Rationale for Northeastern U.S. Wetlands. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory Program, Northeast Region, Hadley MA. (To be released April 2011).

 

Tiner, R., and H. Bergquist. 2003. Historical Analysis of Wetlands and their Functions for the Nanticoke River Watershed: A Comparison between Pre-Settlement and 1998 Conditions. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Program. Northeast Region, Hadley, MA. NWI Technical Report. 41 pp. http://library.fws.gov/Wetlands/Nanticoke04.pdf

 

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). No date. Digital Library System. http://images.fws.gov/

 

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1995. Photointerpretation Conventions for the National Wetlands Inventory. St. Petersburg, FL. 60p.

 

Urban Land Institute (ULI). 1994. Wetlands: Mitigating and Regulating Development Impacts. Second Edition. Urban Land Institute. Washington, D.C.

 

Wardrop, D.H., Kentula, M.E., Stevens, D.L., Jensen, S.F., and R.P. Brooks. 2007. Assessment of Wetland Condition: An Example from the Upper Juniata Watershed in Pennsylvania, USA. Wetlands 27(3): 416-431.

 

Washington State Department of Ecology. 1993. Washington State Wetlands Rating System: Western Washington, second edition. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA, USA, Publication #93-74. http://www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/93074.html.

 

Wright, T., Tomlinson, J., Schueler, T., Cappiella, K., Kitchell, A., and D. Hirschman. 2006. Direct and Indirect Impacts of Urbanization on Wetland Quality. Article 1 in the Wetlands and Watershed Article Series.  Center for Watershed Protection.  Ellicott City, Maryland.

 

 
Digitize
The process of converting features on a paper map into digital format using a trace methodology, which results in the creation of a spatial dataset.
Ecotone

A transition area between two adjacent, but different plant communities.

Indirect Wetland Impacts
Impact to wetlands caused by inputs of stormwater and pollutants generated by land development or other activities within the wetland CDA.
Direct Wetland Impacts
Wetland loss or degradation resulting from activities that occur within wetlands, such as dredging, filling and draining.  Activities that cause direct impacts are largely regulated through the federal and state wetland permitting process.
Stormwater Treatment Practices

A structural or non-structural practice designed to temporarily store or treat stormwater runoff in order to mitigate flooding, reduce pollution, and provide other amenities (also called a Best Management Practice – BMP).

Hydrogeomorphic
Factors that influence how wetlands function, including geomorphic setting, water source, and hydrodynamics.
Hydrogeomorphic
Factors that influence how wetlands function, including geomorphic setting, water source, and hydrodynamics.
Sinks
A cell or set of spatially connected cells that cannot be assigned flow direction in a raster elevation dataset. This can occur when all neighboring cells are higher than the processing cell or when two cells flow into one another. Sinks can indicate areas where water is likely to pond, but can also be an error in the dataset.
Facultative Wetland Plants
Species that usually occur in wetlands (approximately 67% - 99% probability), but also occur in non-wetland areas (approximately 1% - 33% probability).
Obligate Wetland Plants
Species that occur almost always in wetlands under natural conditions (greater than 99% probability), but which may also occur rarely in non-wetlands (less than 1% probability).
Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (IFSAR)
A radar technique that uses two or more synthetic aperture radar (SAR) images to generate surface elevation using differences in the phase of waves returning to the satellite or aircraft.
Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (IFSAR)
A radar technique that uses two or more synthetic aperture radar (SAR) images to generate surface elevation using differences in the phase of waves returning to the satellite or aircraft.
Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR)

A remote sensing technique that measures properties of pulsed laser light reflected from objects to determine their position, velocity, and other information.

Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR)

A remote sensing technique that measures properties of pulsed laser light reflected from objects to determine their position, velocity, and other information.

Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR)

A remote sensing technique that measures properties of pulsed laser light reflected from objects to determine their position, velocity, and other information.

Digital Elevation Model (DEM)
A digital file consisting of terrain elevations for ground positions at regularly spaced horizontal intervals.
Digital Elevation Model (DEM)
A digital file consisting of terrain elevations for ground positions at regularly spaced horizontal intervals.
Hyperspectral Data

Information collected and processed from across the electromagnetic spectrum. Spectral signatures (unique “fingerprint” left by specific objects) enable identification of materials that make up a scanned object.

Remote Sensing
Gathering and recording information about objects without actual contact through the use of such techniques as photography, infra-red imagery, and radar.
Hydrophytes
A plant that grows wholly or partially submerged in water.
Blackspots
Areas on aerial photos that show up as dark blue, dark grey, or black and are indicative of saturated soil conditions.
Stereoscopic
The ability to see three dimensionally by using two views of a single object from slightly different positions typically through the use of an optical aid known as a stereoscope.
Hydric Soils
Soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded for a long enough period during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper soil horizons.
Hydric Soils
Soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded for a long enough period during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper soil horizons.
Hydric Soils
Soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded for a long enough period during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper soil horizons.
Hydric Soils
Soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded for a long enough period during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper soil horizons.
Hydric Soils
Soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded for a long enough period during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper soil horizons.
Hydric Soils
Soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded for a long enough period during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper soil horizons.
Hydric Soils
Soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded for a long enough period during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper soil horizons.
Hydric Soils
Soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded for a long enough period during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper soil horizons.
Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

A system that integrates hardware, software, and data for capturing, managing, analyzing, and displaying all forms of geographically referenced information.

Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

A system that integrates hardware, software, and data for capturing, managing, analyzing, and displaying all forms of geographically referenced information.

Digitize
The process of converting features on a paper map into digital format using a trace methodology, which results in the creation of a spatial dataset.
Minimum Mapping Unit

The minimum size or dimensions for features to be mapped as lines or areas for a given map scale.