Prairie Restoration Prioritization and Suitability Modeling (Screening)

Objective

Evaluate relative prairie restoration suitability across the preserve by integrating three key environmental factors:

• Existing land cover feasibility
• Soil drainage characteristics
• Terrain slope constraints

The objective was to support screening-level restoration prioritization, not site design or species-specific.

Data used

• National Land Cover Database (NLCD) - land cover classification
• USDA gSSURGO soils - drainage class evaluation
• Digital Elevation Model (DEM) - elevation surface
• Derived slope raster - terrain constraint analysis
• Preserve boundary geometry for clipping and spatial standardization

All datasets were projected to a consistent coordinate system and raster alignment prior to modeling.

Approach

A weighted multi-criteria suitability model was developed using:

• Land Cover Suitability (40%)
  Restoration feasibility based on current land cover types.
• Soil Suitability (35%)
  Drainage class used as the primary indicator of prairie compatibility.
• Slope Suitability (25%)
  Gentle slopes favored due to reduced erosion risk and easier management access.

Each criterion was standardized to a common suitability scale and combined using raster-based weighted overlay modeling to produce a composite prairie restoration suitability surface.

Key outputs

• Land cover suitability map
• Soil drainage suitability surface
• Slope-based terrain suitability classification
• Composite prairie restoration suitability raster
• Management zone delineation with acreage summaries by suitability class

Summary of findings

The preserve exhibits spatially variable but clearly defined restoration potential.

• High-suitability areas occur where favorable land cover, well-drained soils, and gentle terrain coincide.
• Moderate-suitability areas dominate much of the preserve and may support phased or adaptive restoration.
• Low-suitability areas are generally associated with steeper terrain, less favorable soils, or incompatible land cover types.

Overall, results support a targeted, phased restoration strategy rather than uniform treatment across the preserve.

Limitations

• Based on generalized raster datasets (screening-level analysis).
• Soil and land cover data may not reflect recent management actions.
• Does not incorporate species-specific ecological requirements.
• Not a replacement for field surveys, ecological assessments, or implementation design.

Despite these limitations, the analysis provides a defensible spatial foundation for preliminary prairie restoration planning.