General Comments for Project 2 2018

  1. Many different approaches were taken to change the emphasis on slope compared to aspect.  Only one group got it about right.  One good approach is to compute the hazard based on slope
    Con(slope < 25, 0, slope – 25)
    where slopes are increasingly hazardous above 25
    and then index this to 10 or 5 afterwards or as part of this calculation, e.g., if slope goes to 50,
    Con(slope < 25, 0, Int(slope – 25) / 5) would work
    and then MULTIPLY by an aspect index that varies from 1 (south-facing) to 2 or 3 but not much more depending on what the numbers are for slope (north facing and depending on how much more risky your expert says….) such that it only accentuates, not substitutes for slope hazard. Some projects had med-high risk on the lowest slope hazard due to aspect due to addition when aspect contributed too much.
  2. For gradational legends, having a limit set by the data is fair, but not very helpful for the map user, e.g.,
    Here’s what you can do.  In the Symbology pane, you can choose to label the closest integer value (or round to 10’s? without generalizing too much).
    What would be nice is to be able to do it the old fashioned way like I have done for other maps in older versions and other programs.  Declare a high and low value (regardless of data distribution) and put breaks in the stretch legend.
    Your ideas for a workaround would be appreciated.
  3. Good names are important as metadata and to keep you from having to open something to see what is on the map.
    What is displayed on each of these maps? Watersheds? hazard?
  4. Same goes for models.  Label and model name should be identifying.
  5. Layout choices for the hazard and some comments.
-black grids for streams doesn’t work so well

-No labels is great so we can see the hazard better, but having the names would make it more useable (label points off to left of basin?)

-pretty busy with so many elements piled atop one another

-Am I seeing other layers below the hazard map along the edges? Turn unused layers off (plus it draws faster).

– Don’t use background maps when overlay is solid

no streams on this one….easier to see hazard.
this group included both risk in black and white and watershed summary risk in color. works well. again, I’d move the names to be adjacent and not cover up the necessary info
This group also included the slope and aspect leading to the hazard (but I’d have gotten rid of the rectangle and made them bigger as a result binary hazard is quite clear here (although, what’s the black edge? artifact from PDF?). labels obscure critical info
This group has the hazard just in the watershed which works too (and if you unbold the text, it wouldn’t obscure the hazard as much).
  1. Model documentation
    Use labels