Development of Indicators Using Remote Sensing Technology – funded by NASA
Download
1 / 15

Development of Indicators Using Remote Sensing Technology – funded by NASA - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 94 Views
  • Uploaded on

Development of Indicators Using Remote Sensing Technology – funded by NASA. G. Niemi, C. Johnston, T. Brown & P. Wolter; University of Minnesota, Duluth. Classify land use change from 1992-2002.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Development of Indicators Using Remote Sensing Technology – funded by NASA' - hanae-rivas


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Development of Indicators Using Remote Sensing Technology – funded by NASA

G. Niemi, C. Johnston, T. Brown & P. Wolter; University of Minnesota, Duluth

  • Classify land use change from 1992-2002.

  • Produce land use and wetland classification using new high-resolution satellite data (QuickBird; 2.44m).

    • Persistent, emergent, floating aquatic, and submergent aquatic vegetation (SAV)

  • Develop a bathymetry map of near-shore areas during low water period

    • Model shoreline mobility

    • Assess susceptibility of wetland vegetation to changing water levels

30


Sample of the multi temporal landsat classification literature as of 1991
Sample of the multi-temporal Landsat classification literature as of 1991

  • Kalensky 1974 “could improve results”

  • Kalensky and Scherk 1975 “multi-date is best”

  • Kan and Weber 1978 “no clear benefit”

  • Beaubien 1979 “provides better contrast”

  • Walsh 1980 “September better than June”

  • Nelson 1984 “avoid senescent imagery”

  • Toll 1985 “not significantly better”

  • Schriever and Congalton 1991 “more efficient”


Layered Classification Approach literature as of 1991

Using Vegetation Indicies (NDVI)

and Image Differencing


jack pine literature as of 1991

jack pine - hardwood

jack pine - oak

red pine

red pine - hardwood

spruce-fir

spruce-fir - hardwood

cedar

cedar - hardwood

tamarack

black spruce

acid bog conifer, stagnant

conifer, regeneration

black ash

black ash - conifer

black ash - conifer under.

hardwoods, misc. (lowland)

aspen-birch

aspen-birch - conifer

aspen-birch - conifer under.

northern hardwoods

northern hardwoods - conifer

northern hwd, con. under.

red oak

pin oak

oak - pine

hardwood, regeneration

water

emergent, aquatic

emergent

Sphagnum spp.

agriculture

grass, native

grass, native (lowland)

grass, cool season

grass, domestic

brush, alder

brush, alder (lowland)

brush, willow

brush, willow (lowland)

brush, misc.

brush, misc. (lowland)

brush, ericacious

developed


National land cover dataset nlcd
National Land literature as of 1991Cover Dataset (NLCD)

Our Processing Steps

  • Stratify Landsat-7 with NLCD

  • Classify using phenology

  • Age structure by species

  • Change analysis

  • Develop landscape indicators

The USGS, in cooperation with the EPA, has produced a land cover dataset for the conterminous United States on the basis of 1992 Landsat thematic mapper imagery and supplemental data. The NLCD is a component of the USGS Land Cover Characterization Program.


Landscape indicators
Landscape Indicators literature as of 1991

  • Wetland acreage losses or gains

  • Area of land paved or permanently covered

  • Wetland size, abundance

  • Aerial extent of wetland types

  • Nature and extent of riparian vegetation

  • Exotic species

  • Land use adjacent to coastal wetlands

  • Urban density

  • Farmland as a percentage of total land

  • Number of wetlands per unit area

  • Area of forest cut

31


QuickBird Sites in literature as of 1991Red& Radar DEM Sites inYellow

33


2 October 2001 literature as of 1991

Level = 577.5 ft.


Little Tail Point literature as of 1991

Green Bay

34


Wet Meadow literature as of 1991

Nuphar advena

Typha latifolia

Phragmites australis


36 literature as of 1991


2 October 2001 literature as of 1991

Level = 577.5 ft.

15 July 1997

Level = 581.3 ft.

March 1964

Level = 576.1 ft.

October 1986

Level = 583.4 ft.

6 September 1999

Level = 578.4 ft.


Some of the indicators we hope to derive
Some of the indicators we hope to derive: literature as of 1991

  • Area of land paved

  • Area of forest permanently lost to development

  • Urban density and rate of change

  • Loss/gain of wetlands

  • Percent change in land use type

  • Area of redeveloped brown fields

  • Loss/gain of forested land

  • Percent cropland by area and change through time

  • Area of cropland within 1, 5, and 10 Km or a shoreline

  • Area of cropland near waterways on slopes

  • Proportion of various land use/cover types in the basin

  • Coastal wetland size, abundance and susceptibility to high water threats

  • Nature and extent of riparian vegetation


Visit our website literature as of 1991

http://glei.nrri.umn.edu


ad