Predictor Data Shapefile units from Recreation Model

[jam17m]

Hello!

I was hoping to get some help with understanding the contents of the “predictor_data.shp” included in the model output for Recreation and Tourism Model.

I am interested in modeling PUD visitation rates associated with coastal habitats like seagrass beds and coral reefs in Florida, controlling for other relevant socioeconomic factors. I’ve included several potential predictors including the percent overlap of these marine foundation habitats using the “polygon_area_coverage” option. My understanding is that the values should range somewhere between 0 and 100% depending on how much a given habitat overlaps the pixel.

But in the resulting predictor_data shapefile, it looks like these values have much different ranges.

Are the units for habitat overlap actually something different? Is there some kind of scaling that happens that I’m not aware of? Or does the “predictor_data.shp” not actually represent what I think it does (i.e,. the cell values for each calculated predictor)?

Thanks so much for your help!

Sincerely,
Jennifer

PhD Candidate
FSU Geography
jam17m@my.fsu.edu

[dave]

Hi @jam17m , thanks for posting.

It sounds like you wanted to use polygon_percent_coverage as the predictor type. polygon_area_coverage calculates the actual area (maybe square meters in your case?) of the predictor in each grid cell. So those are the values you’re reporting in your summary stats. Switching that type in the predictor CSV should give you the percentage values you’re expecting.

[jam17m]

Ah, yes! I see now I had just taken the wrong command to use in the predictors table.

Thank you for your help!

J