• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

VOLUME 6 NUMBER 3 OCTOBER, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER 1981 PARKS AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR MANAGERS OF NATIONAL PARKS, HISTORIC SITES, AND OTHER PROTECTED AREAS DA Dl/ I PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES Volume 6, Number 3 October, November, December 1981 WILLIAM C. DRAEGER and 1 Remote Sensing: A Tool for Park Planning and Management LAWRENCE R. PETTINGER TREVOR A. CROFT 7 Lake Malawi National Park: A Case Study in Conservation Planning GERRY McSWEENEY 11 Glaciers and Tourism in New Zealand's Westland National Park JO McCREA 15 Canada's New Grasslands National Park 16 PARK TECHNIQUES PAUL GUT 16 Tourist Lodges in Nepal's Langtang National Park JOHN GERRITSEN 20 Prefabricated Pig Trap Door 20 Decorative, Functional Weathervane 21 CNPPA NOTES 23 BOOKS & NOTICES Front cover: Rugged mountains and glaciers of New Zealand's Westland National Park tower over rainforests along the Omoeroa River. Photo: G. Salmon Second class postage paid at Washington, tion with FAO, UNEP, UNESCO, OAS, identified source publication. In such event no D.C. PARKS (USPS 397-270) is issued Parks Canada, U.S. National Park Service, reprint is authorized except upon permission quarterly in separate editions in English, in Ministere de l'Environnement—D.P.N., of of the copyright holder or the source publica­ French under the title PARCS, and in Spanish France, and the World Wildlife Fund. It is tion. Reprinted material should bear the under the title PARQUES. Published at produced with the cooperation of the Eastern author's name and credit to PARKS Maga­ Room 3121. 1100 L Street, N.W., National Park and Monument Association, zine should be given. The Editor would Washington, D.C. and with the financial assistance of the appreciate two copies of any material so used. Postmasters: Change of Address forms Federal Government, States and Territories of All editions of PARKS Magazine are 3579 should be addressed to the Editor. Australia, and of New Zealand. printed in the United States. PARKS Magazine, c/o National Park PARKS' printing costs are paid with do­ The English edition of PARKS Magazine Service, Department of the Interior, nated funds. Ideas or viewpoints expressed do is available on microfilm from University Washington, D.C. 20240/USA. not necessarily reflect those of the sponsors, Microfilms International. 300 North Zeeb PARKS Magazine is published by the collaborators or advisors. Road, Ann Arbor. Michigan 48106/U.S. A. International Union for Conservation of All material may be reprinted unless it is Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), Dr. either protected by copyright or the material Lee M. Talbot, Director General, in associa­ has been reprinted in the issue from an PARKS 1 Milium C. Draeger and Lawrence R. Pettingcr Remote Sensing: A Tool for Park Planning and Management Remote sensing may be defined as the science of imaging or measuring objects from a distance. More commonly, however, the term is used in reference to the acquisition and use of photographs, photo-like images, and other data acquired from aircraft and satellites. Thus, remote sensing includes the use of such diverse materials as photographs taken by hand from a light aircraft, conventional aerial photographs obtained with a precision mapping camera, satellite images acquired with sophisticated scanning devices, radar images, and magnetic and gravimetric data that may not even be in image form. Remotely sensed images may be color or black and white, can vary in scale from those that cover only a few hectares of the earth's surface to those that cover tens of thousands of square kilometers, and they may be interpreted visually or with the assistance of computer systems. This article attempts to describe several of the commonly available types of remotely sensed data, to discuss approaches to data analysis, and to demonstrate (with image examples) typical applications that might interest managers of parks and natural areas. Despite the diversity of types of data, remotely sensed images are used by those with interest in natural resources because they possess some unique characteristics. They offer a different vantage point from that which we have on earth, and allow us to see things that we cannot see from the ground. They provide a view of a larger area than can be seen from the ground, thus permitting an interpretation of spatial relationships or the comparison of an area with its surroundings. These images also provide a permanent record of conditions at a given point in time, so that temporal comparisons may be made. If a sensor is used that records radiation outside the visible portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, they may also provide information that cannot be sensed with the eye. Aerial photographs or satellite images often appear in magazines or journals, including this one, to show features or conditions of the landscape discussed in the text. However, such photographs also can be used by the resource manager or planner as a tool to acquire more detailed information. It is the process of image analysis, interpretation, and extraction of information that sets the science of remote sensing apart from the art of photography. Figure I. Black-and-white copy of a color-infrared aerial photograph The Relevance of Remote Sensing to Parks Management showing New Jersey coastal marsh (scale approximately 1:18,000, or 1 cm = 180 m). Plant communities shown are salt marsh cord grass (A) and salt Remotely sensed data can be used to produce maps of vegetation type, meadow grass/spike grass (B). Several wetland alterations are also density, and condition; soil types; topographic classes; extent and condi­ identified(C = new channel: D = drainage ditch: E = dike: S = dredge tion of water bodies; and land use. If interpretation is repeated at a later spoil deposit). 2 PARKS date, changes and trends can be monitored. It is often possible to produce regarding the optimum selection of types of images and analysis tech­ quantitative estimates of the amount of resources, such as timber volume niques to be used and to assess results that could be expected. Neverthe­ orrangeland carrying capacity. In addition, one may make measurements less, the use of remote sensing need not be expensive. For example, of distance, area, or elevation directly from images. usable images may have already been acquired for another purpose. Or. if The kind of information that is needed for intelligent land management the areas of interest are small, it may be possible to obtain suitable is traditionally gathered using only ground methods that may be more photographs inexpensively using a hand-held camera on a short flight expensive, time consuming, or inaccurate than if remote sensing tech­ over the area in a light plane. niques were incorporated into the process. Much of the land in large The definition of the information requirements usually determines if a parks or protected natural areas is remote, and the collection of ground remote sensing approach is appropriate and, if so, the image type and data is expensive and time consuming. Due to the lack of intensive scale that would be best. Each decision on the best type of remotely development, these lands often have not been well mapped or described. sensed data must be based on several factors: Furthermore, the measurement of dynamic phenomena—such as vegeta­ 1. Availability of data: Are existing images appropriate for the in­ tion succession or degradation, land use change, or soil erosion — tended application, or must new imagery be acquired? necessitates costly multiple field visits. 2. Budget: Does the available budget limit the type of data that can be Remote sensing, however, does not make ground data collection acquired or the analysis approach which can be taken? What resources obsolete or unnecessary. On the contrary, the most successful remote are available for field reconnaissance and verification of interpretation? sensing applications are those in which both ground and remotely sensed 3. Analysis equipment available: What image interpretation equip­ information are used together in a way that is faster, cheaper, and/or more ment is available? Does lack of equipment preclude using certain types of accurate than conventional methods. In fact, remotely sensed data are data (for example, interpretation of aerial photographs in transparency often of little use without supporting ground data for training the format requires light tables for illumination)? interpreter and for verifying and evaluating his results. 4. Manpower: What is the skill level of available personnel? How much image interpretation experience do they have? How familiar are they with the environmental conditions within the project area? Selection of Image Type and Method of Analysis 5. Size and distribution of the project area: If the area is small and easily accessible, remotely sensed data may not be necessary. The information and the amount of detail that can be extracted from Aerial photographs are the most common data type which would images varies with the type of image, its resolution (dependent on flying satisfy most park planning and inventory needs. Conventional scales height and sensor characteristics), the time of acquisition, the interpreta­ (1:15,000 to 1:40,000) are commonly used to map vegetation or other tion procedures used, and the local conditions. Interpretation keys or natural resources, plan park development, and identify critical habitat guides are useful for analyzing images, but in most cases the interpreter areas and areas of environmental hazard. Small-scale aerial photographs must train himself to recognize the image signatures of the specific or satellite images might be appropriate if the project area is large. Larger features of interest in his particular area, on the type of image he is using. scale aerial photographs are usually used if detailed, site-specific analysis This training is best done by going into the field with the images to be is required.

Load more

  26

Copy Link