Table 1. Potential User's Interests by Data Category' 



Table 2. Percent of Respondents Indicating a Preference 

 for Various Data Presentation Techniques 



3 Includes only categories in which at least 70% of respon- 

 dents indicated interest. 



DATA PRESENTATION FORMATS 



The survey of potential users of environmental 

 data indicated little preference for data formats. 

 Ail groups reported that they employ maps, charts, 

 tables, and reports with about the same frequency 

 and all groups rely to a lesser extent on computer- 

 ized information. The apparent tendency to de- 

 emphasize computerized information may reflect 

 economic constraints, limited computer access, 

 lack of valid data banks, or mistrust of computer- 

 ized printouts. In response to the survey concern- 

 ing preferred data presentation formats, computer 

 tape and flow diagrams were again deemphasized, 

 but maps were preferred (Table 2). There was no 

 difference in the format preferences among differ- 

 ent management interests. However, the permit 

 and project review group preferred a significantly 

 higher scale than presently available. For example, 

 representatives of the Galveston and Lafayette 

 FWS field offices indicated that maps and photos 

 currently used are at the 1:24,000, and 1:62,500 

 levels of resolution. The representatives expressed a 

 desire to have the information provided at the 

 1:2,000 and 1:5,000 levels. Potential users for the 

 other characterization studies have expressed essen- 

 tially the same type of data format priorities. 



CONCEPTUAL MODEL 



Construction of a conceptual model of the eco-, 

 system was one of the first tasks performed during 



Data presentation techniques 



% of respondents 

 indicating preference 



the characterization of the Chenicr Plain. The 

 model identified, as accurately as possible, the sys- 

 tem components and their functional interactions 

 and regulatory processes. The initial model served 

 as a guide for development of the characterization 

 and identified the data that should be assembled 

 and where the data would be applied in the charac- 

 terization. In addition to functioning as a guide in 

 the data collection effort, the model also assured 

 what appropriate focus would be given to the vari- 

 ous components of the ecosystem. 



After the data was assembled, analyzed, and 

 applied to the appropriate components, the result- 

 ing model served to identify data gaps and provid- 

 ed insight to areas requiring special attention. 



The conceptual model of the Chenier Plain eco- 

 system characterization contained components, 

 flows, structure, and external forcing functions and 

 presented them in proper relationship. It further 

 provided the organizational framework for devel- 

 opment of the products of the characterization. 

 Description, explanation, and prediction followed 

 the outline of the conceptual model so that the 

 ecosystem, its basins, habitats or communities, 

 populations, and individuals could be elaborated 

 more systematically in the characterization. 



Data, flow diagrams, or other forms of infor- 

 mation proposed for inclusion in the characteriza- 

 tion were tested for (1) reliability; (2) clarity of 

 content; (3) relevance, i.e., identifiability and 

 specificity of the information, interaction, etc., 

 and (4) redundancy. The conceptual model was 

 also checked for organization and completeness. 



The conceptual models for the other character- 

 ization studies have evolved from an initial guide to 

 data collection and utilization, to a system of qual- 

 itative ecological modeling for user orientation. 

 This approach includes modeling ecosystems by in- 

 corporating generalized energese diagrams with 

 coincidental graphic displays that illustrate repre- 

 sentational ecosystem cross sections and appropri- 



12 



