USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program Overview

1. USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program Overview Karl E. Brown, Vegetation Mapping Program Mgr Natural Resource Program Center Biological Resources Management Division, I&M National Meet: Successful Approaches Feb 8, 2006

2. Outline Background Approach, Process & Products Present Program Status Hybrid Techniques Available Data / Website

3. Outline – Leveraged Efforts Biological Inventories Program – Mark Wotawa Aquatic Vegetation inclusion; Standards & Map Classes FIREPRO Sister Agency partners DOI Agriculture - Forest Service

5. What is it? High priority requirement of the NPS I&M Program National (Service Wide) Program Begins long term vegetation monitoring program Has many short term immediate applications

6. NPS I&M Program

7. National Program Differs from other NPS vegetation mapping projects ~270 park units (full park coverage) 4423 7.5 minute USGS quadrangles National scope Participation of multiple agencies Consistency in detail and accuracy between parks Produces digital products available on WWW Coordination at multiple levels

8. Standards NPS management policies, standards & guidelines Federal Geographic Data Committee standards metadata, transfer, classification etc. Nationally consistent, hierarchical, classification scheme National Map Accuracy Standards Thematic accuracy >80% per class Scale of 1:24,000 Minimum mapping unit of 0.5 hectare

9. Major Steps for each Park Scoping meeting Data review Data acquisition Field sampling Classification characterization Photo interpretation, mapping and automation Accuracy assessment Final product review These are the basic steps that are required for each park unit Data review - there are usually a lot of data avalaible for each unit, and it takes time and coordination to bring them together The field sampling should ideally take place when the photo interpreters are doing their field work, so there can be coordination between what the ecologists classifiy and what the intepreters identify The accuracy assessment should ideally be done when the mapping is complete so we can design a stratified random sample, but for efficiency’s sake, we often do accuracy assessment at the same time as the original field samplingThese are the basic steps that are required for each park unit Data review - there are usually a lot of data avalaible for each unit, and it takes time and coordination to bring them together The field sampling should ideally take place when the photo interpreters are doing their field work, so there can be coordination between what the ecologists classifiy and what the intepreters identify The accuracy assessment should ideally be done when the mapping is complete so we can design a stratified random sample, but for efficiency’s sake, we often do accuracy assessment at the same time as the original field sampling

10. Products from the Program Aerial photography/ imagery (hardcopy / digital, some new DOQQs) Field data (hardcopy and database) Classification report (Description and Key) Photo interp report (Description and Key) Accuracy report Vegetation map data (digital coverage) All appropriate metadata

11. FGDC National Vegetation Classification System A. PHYSIOGNOMY Division/Order - Tree Dominant (dominant life form) Class - Woodland (spacing & height of dominant form) Subclass - Evergreen Woodland (morphological & phenological similarity) Group - Temperate Evergreen Needle-leaved (climate, latitude, growth form, leaf form) Formation - Evergreen Needle-leaved Woodland with Rounded Crowns (mappable units) B. FLORISTICS Alliance (Cover Type) - Douglas Fir Woodland (dominant species) Association (Community) - Douglas Fir / Snowberry Woodland (subdominant or associated species) The system is hierarchical which allows it to be used for many different levels of analysis and study - from National to regional to each Park to each site. It is also standard - so we do not have to reinvent the wheel for each park, although a lot of development work has to be done for each park.The system is hierarchical which allows it to be used for many different levels of analysis and study - from National to regional to each Park to each site. It is also standard - so we do not have to reinvent the wheel for each park, although a lot of development work has to be done for each park.

12. Present Status Approximately 109 projects in process 30 Parks started (1994-2000) 29 Park projects started in 2001 11 Park projects started 2002-2004 2005 completed 11 more parks, continued 73 ongoing projects, and initiated 24 new starts 39 Parks completed for web access more completed soon; 62 AA stage completed 62 FY 05; 80 FY 06; 116 FY 07; 146 FY 08 Alaska: 6 parks complete in 2003; 3 in 2004; 3 new ongoing in 2005; 4 more completed 2006-7; 3 more starts 2006-08 USGS partnering on funding, 3 protocols, archiving contract, collaborative fire and fuels datasets, variability analysis and surface model developments

13. Status January 2005

14. Maps and Spatial Data

15. Accuracy Assessment Assessment of class accuracy across the park:

16. Metadata

17. Reports

18. Data Availability All products are made available via a public internet website: http://biology.usgs.gov/npsveg/

19. Gunnison Gorge NCA

20. USGS-USFWS Vegetation Mapping Projects We are just getting started with FWS. We are working with Region 6 out of Denver to start 2 refuges – Ouray and Lacreek. There are close to 150 refuges in Region 6 and over 500 refuges nationwide covering 92 million acres of land and water. Region 6 is taking the lead for the Agency on this effort – we have really not had national support to date, but I think with the completion of these two projects will really show the agency the value of these products – consistent, useful for practical on-the-ground management, yet scientifically sound. We are just getting started with FWS. We are working with Region 6 out of Denver to start 2 refuges – Ouray and Lacreek. There are close to 150 refuges in Region 6 and over 500 refuges nationwide covering 92 million acres of land and water. Region 6 is taking the lead for the Agency on this effort – we have really not had national support to date, but I think with the completion of these two projects will really show the agency the value of these products – consistent, useful for practical on-the-ground management, yet scientifically sound.

21. Relationship of the Veg Mapping Program with FIREPRO efforts Fire Fuels Mapping Similar but not the same (ht to live crown, dead and down) Fire Effects Monitoring Similar but not the same (sampling techniques)

22. New Models and FIREPRO efforts Relationship with FIREPRO Multiple park unit projects Initiate and manage locally “Regional/Network” field teams Field based proposals “New/other” technologies

23. New Models “New/other” technologies High Resolution Remote Sensing eCognition segmentation Laser Rangefinder Remote GPS positioning Sister Bureau hybrid techniques FWS Lower cost Veg Map “Light” Savings from reduced field collection

24. Multiresolution Segmentation Levels can be used to compare results of segmentation based on different scale parameters and homogeneity criterion. Layers can be weighted. Weights determine to which degree the information is used during the process of object generation.

25. Image Object information Identify Shape Add new items from the Feature View Number of Objects Average object Size Input Mode Options

26. Create Polygons Polygons will be generated for the highlighted levels Show Polygons

27. eCognition Contacts Definiens Imaging- eCognition http://www.definiens-imaging.com Erin Stockenberg erin_stockenberg@fws.gov Beverly Friesen bafriesen@usgs.gov

28. Hybrid techniques – summary of current efforts Mixed imagery and Sister Bureau eCog segmentation and skeleton polygon sampling (GRSA) PI / eCog linework and model verification (MEVE) / ground reference; add attributes (field & automation savings) Classical accuracy assessment (AA) or small park protocol (census of MMU @ GRKO, LIBI, KNRI, FOUN) Verify eCog gradient test against completed AA (ROMO) Machine classification and PI field sample verification (LAVO)

29. National Park / Environs – data successes Consider areas of interest for small park protocol Evaluate sparse vegetation protocol need and sample sizes Fire and fuels protocols may integrate fuels stratification in sample design Develop fuel model polygons from NVCS vegetation polygons / photos Other fire and monitoring program data needs…

30. NPS / Environs – fire data summary Park Fire Management team field verify / photo reference fuel model types Evaluate Landfire data potential How map classes improve Landfire and other models Research partnering for a hybrid approach, as needed Fire fuel classes / types Fuel loadings (1/10/100 hr…) Fire Regime Condition Class Landfire update as appropriate and as supported by partnership

31. Summary of Efforts in 2006 Fund ongoing projects in 25+ networks Provide technical support and planning assistance to parks, networks, and regions Prioritize candidate projects with VMP team Facilitate new starts based on funding in 12-18 networks using hybrid innovations Action plan for creation / migration of NPS data, and USGS-NPS archiving Develop a VMP advisory group process, and serve planning templates on the web

32. More Information Visit the USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Website: http://biology.usgs.gov/npsveg

33. Thanks Karl Brown, Ph.D. NPS I&M (Program Lead) (970) 225-3591 karl_brown@nps.gov Chris Lea NPS I&M (Ecologist) (303) 969-2807 chris_lea@nps.gov