Managing GIS in BLM Oregon/Washington

1
Managing GIS in BLM Oregon/Washington

• Terry Hobbs
• GIS Coordinator
• Oregon State Office

2

• Orientation
• History
• How were organized
• Service First GIS
• Converting from contract to government staff
• GIS Centralization

3
BLM Office

4
History

• NW Forest Plan, 1993
• Joint BLM/FS management plan for western Oregon
• Large contract staff hired
• 3 shifts/24 hours
• Service First GIS, 2006
• Conversion from mixed government/contract staff
  to all government in 2008

5
How were organized

• In the Branch of IRM
• Advantage for IT support
• Disadvantage for budget scrutiny
• 10 Districts with GIS Coordinators
• 1,006 users region-wide
• 206 concurrent users
• 59 GIS Specialists

6
(No Transcript)
7
Service First GIS

• 2006 joint Director assigned over FS Data
  Resources Management and BLM GIS/RS
• Tasked to identify areas where we could better
  integrate GIS
• Selected geospatial training, mobile GIS and
  remote sensing as the first areas to focus on

8
Service First GIS Training

• Similar training needs in both agencies
• No dedicated coordinator for training in either
  agency
• Big demand

9
Service First GIS Training

• Established a GIS Training Coordinator position
  (FS)
• Big kudos to Chris Strobl for developing program!
• Incorporated the 2 existing BLM instructors
• Presented 50 classes in 2008
• GPS for Natural Resource Applications
• Intermediate ArcGIS
• MS Access
• Using ArcPad 7
• Introduction to ArGIS 9.2
• Geodatabase Demo
• 524 students attended

10
Service First GIS Training

• Distributed training using LiveMeeting
• Average cost per student 159
• Organize demo sessions with both live events
  and recorded sessions
• Class materials available on-line
• Formed a S1st Geospatial Training subcommittee
• Developed a joint website with ArcMap interface
• http//fsweb-sfpnw.r6.fs.fed.us/gis/

11
Service First Mobile GIS

• Huge demand in both agencies for resource grade
  GPS
• No standardization in either agency
• No coordinator position in BLM OR/WA
• FS R6 lost their coordinator

12
Service First Mobile GIS

• Established 2 positions (BLM)
• Organized a cadre of users from both agencies
• Standardized GPS software for both agencies
• Standardizing GPS hardware
• Developed integrated installation documentation
  for
• ArcPad license users, Pathfinder Office and GSP
  Analyst
• Developed a standard ArcPad toolbar
• Provide ArcPad training
• 9 classes offered
• 65 students attended
• Develop custom interfaces

13
Service First Remote Sensing

• Similar needs in each agency
• Limited but specialized expertise
• Regional analysis

14
Service First Remote Sensing

• Project support
• Data acquisition coordination
• LiDAR hydro pilot
• Develop methods for stream channel delineation
• Swap expertise

15
Service First Remote Sensing

• Not as formalized as Training and Mobile GIS
• Much smaller user base
• Open communication and collaboration
• Doesnt need to be as formal because is working
  as it is

16
Service First GIS Challenges

• Cannot connect networks
• Data standards are different
• Staff organization
• FS all field GIS work for DRM at the Regional
  Office
• BLM field GIS work for District Managers
• On different versions of ArcGIS
• DOILearn and AgLearn do not interface
• Transferring funding between agencies

17
BLM Contract Conversion

• Began contracting GIS/IT support with the NW
  Forest Plan in 1993
• Contract support continued for the next 15 years
• In 2008 decision was made to eliminate current
  GIS/IT support contract with Northrup Grumman
• A new TO was established
• Actively began the process in March 2008

18
Lessons learned from contract conversion

• Had 7 months to hire 68 positions (21 GIS)
• Only 6 mos into it
• Overall cost savings 2.7 million (incl IT, GIS,
  Apps dev, Web)
• Good responsive HR staff essential
• Used PD amendments extensively
• Used Selective Factors liberally
• Take advantage of all hiring authorities
• Interns, veteran authorities, etc.

19
GIS Centralization

• Decision made in 2005 to centralize GIS
  processing and data at the State Office
• Conducted the Western Oregon Plan Revision on
  Citrix as a pilot
• Have implemented certain business processes on
  Citrix
• Just beginning to bring entire Districts in

20
GIS Before Centralization

• House the official copy of corp state-wide data
  at the State Office in Portland
• All corp data replicated to District servers
• Edits performed at field office then uploaded
  back to corp data in Portland
• Transactional SDE only on datasets with
  established standards
• Transactional SDE performed centrally on Citrix
  farm in Portland
• Districts organize local data as they see fit

21
GIS After Centralization

• All users on Citrix farm in Portland
• No more replicating corp data to District servers
• Corp datasets will be transactional, versioned
  editing will be centralized
• Districts will still have dedicated space to
  organize their local data as they see fit

22
Architecture

• Citrix farm at State Office in Portland
• 25 servers, 64 bit processors
• NetApps storage
• 7.5 Tb of data,
• Estimate an additional 5Tb at districts
• Standard plotters at all sites
• Oracle database
• Common directory structure designed by field GIS
  coordinators

23
GIS CentralizationLessons Learned

• Cultural change
• Fear of loss of control
• Perception that it will be slower
• GIS intertwined in daily business processes
• Need to centralize applications other than GIS
• Data organized differently at each office
• Data cleanup and organization the biggest task
• How-to documentation very important
• Network is the weakest link
• Takes more time than you think

24
GIS CentralizationAdvantages

• Common data structure (Oregon Data Framework)
• Standard data organization
• Easier to identify redundant data
• Less time spent on data management
• More reliability in data currency
• Common tools that work for every user
• 64 bit processing
• Everyone gets software upgrades at the same time
• Centralized editing
• Reduced need for IT support at Field Offices
• Faster/easier data calls

25
Questions?