DOCSLIB.ORG

Monitoring Vegetation Change in the El Pinacate Y Gran Desierto De Altar Biosphere Reserve, Sonora, Mexico (1994-2005)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Monitoring Vegetation Change in the El Pinacate Y Gran Desierto De Altar Biosphere Reserve, Sonora, Mexico (1994-2005) Monitoring Vegetation Change in the El Pinacate y Gran Desierto de Altar Biosphere Reserve, Sonora, Mexico (1994-2005) Item Type text; Electronic Thesis Authors Fisher de Leon, Anna Denisse Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 30/09/2021 17:43:34 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/193381 MONITORING VEGETATION CHANGE IN THE EL PINACATE Y GRAN DESIERTO DE ALTAR BIOSPHERE RESERVE, SONORA, MEXICO (1994-2005) by Anna Denisse Fisher de León ________________________ A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the SCHOOL OF NATURAL RESOURCES In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE WITH A MAJOR IN RENEWABLE NATURAL RESOURCES STUDIES In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2007 2 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission fro extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his or her judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author. SIGNED: ____Anna Denisse Fisher de Leon_____ APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR This thesis has been approved on the date shown below: ___________________________________ _______09-17-2007_____________ Dr. William W. Shaw Date: Professor of Wildlife and Fisheries Resources 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my thesis committee members, Dr. Shaw, Dr. Marsh and Floyd Gray for all of their comments and direction. I would also like to give special thanks to Floyd Gray and the U.S. Geological Survey for providing the necessary funds to acquire the satellite imagery. I would like to express gratitude to Erick Sanchez for sharing all of his knowledge and data on the PBR, which were immensely important for the completion of this project. I would like to express thanks to the Department of Arid Lands for allowing me to use their facilities and to its graduate students for helping me find my way through the software, especially to Hugo and Grant for having the patience to answer all my questions I would also like to thank Dr. Yool, Dr. Turner, and Dr. Ezcurra for all of their helpful comments. Many thanks to the PBR managers for their collaboration on this project. 4 DEDICATION I would like to dedicate this thesis to my parents, for their unconditional love and support, to Christophe, for all your love and am looking forward to sharing my future with you, and all to my friends for always being my family away from home. 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES...……………………………………………………………..….…...7 LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………….......8 ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………….....9 CHAPTER ONE. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………...10 1.1 Study Area………………………..………………………………………………….16 1.1.1 Climate…...………………………………………………………………...17 1.1.2 Local Geomorphology………………………………..………………........18 1.1.3 Vegetation………………………………………………………………….21 1.2 Land Cover Change Analysis ………………………………………...………..……27 1.2.1 Satellite Systems.……………...…………………………………………...29 1.2.2 Image Analysis and Normalization...……..….………………………..…...30 1.2.2.1 Geometric Correction..……………..…………...……………….31 1.2.2.2. Radiometric Correction……...………...………....….…………..32 1.3 Change Detection Techniques...……………………………..……………………....35 1.3.1 Image Differencing Method…………………………………..……..……..37 1.3.2 Vegetation Indices……………………………….………..……………….38 1. 3.3. Multi-temporal Kauth-Thomas Transformation……………….....………43 1.3.4 Unsupervised Classification ……………………………...…...………..…44 1.3.4.1. Accuracy Assessment……………………..……………………45 CHAPTER TWO. MATERIALS AND METHODS………………………………...47 2.1 Geometric Correction……………………………………………………..………….47 2.2 Radiometric Correction………………………………………………..……………..48 2.3 Vegetation Index Differencing……………………………………..………………..52 2.4 Multi-temporal Kauth-Thomas (MKT) Transformation……………………..……....53 2.5 MODIS-EVI Comparison…………………...….………………..…………………..54 2.6 Unsupervised Classification…………………………………………………..……...55 2.6.1 Accuracy Assessment………………………………….…………...……...56 2.6.2 Rate of change …………………………………...…………...……………57 2.7 Key interviews and Sketch Mapping…...…………………...……………………….57 CHAPTER THREE. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………59 3.1 Image Analysis and Normalization…………….……………………………….……59 3.2 Vegetation Index Differencing Results………………………………………………59 3.2.1SAVI Differencing Results..………..………………………..……………..60 3.2.2 MKT Differencing Results………………...…………..…………….….....63 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS – Continued 3.2.3 MODIS-EVI Comparison……………………………..………….………..66 3.3 Causes of Land Cover Change………………………..……………………………...68 3.4 Unsupervised Classification Results……….………..……………………………….70 3.4.1 Accuracy Assessment……………….…..…………………………………72 3.4.2 Rate of Change………………………...…………………………………...75 3.5 Key Interviews and Sketch Mapping…..…………………………………………….78 3.5.1 Local Analysis of Vegetation Changes...…………………………………..79 CHAPTER FOUR. CONCLUSIONS……………………………………...………....85 4.1 Future Work………..………………………………………………………...89 APPENDIX A. RADIOMETRIC CORRECTION RESULTS .………….......................92 APPENDIX B. QUESTIONNAIRE......………………...….............................................94 APPENDIX C. IMAGE DIFFERENCING IMAGES,………...…...................................96 APPENDIX D. IMAGE DIFFERENCING SUMMARY.………….………………….106 APPENDIX E. LAND COVER CLASSIFICATION ……………………...….............108 APPENDIX F. LAND COVER MAPS…………………………...…...........................109 APPENDIX G. TIMELINE……………………...…......................................................113 APPENDIX H. LOCAL ANALYSIS OF VEGETATION CHANGES…...……..…...114 APPENDIX I. SKETCH MAP...………………...…...…...............................................116 REFERENCES……………………………………………………………...….............117 7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. El Pinacate and Desierto de Altar Biosphere Reserve…………………………17 Figure 2. Change-no change histogram thresholds ………………………………...........38 Figure 3. Spectral signature curve of healthy vegetation…………………...……………40 Figure 4. MKT two-dimensional coordinate system…………………………………….43 Figure 5. Example of error matrix……………………………………………………….46 Figure 6. Z-scores of precipitation data from the Pinacate Biosphere Reserve.…...……70 Figure 7a. SAVI 1994-2000 Difference Image…………………………………………..97 Figure 7b. SAVI 2000-2005 Difference Image……………………………………...…..98 Figure 8a. Brightness 1994-2000 Difference Image……………………………………..99 Figure 8b. Greenness 1994-2000 Difference Image……………………………………100 Figure 8c. Wetness 1994-2000 Difference Image……………………………...………101 Figure 9a. Brightness 2000-2005 Difference Image……………………………………102 Figure 9b. Greenness 2000-2005 Difference Image……………………………………103 Figure 9c. Wetness 2000-2005 Difference Image……...………………………………104 Figure10. MODIS-EVI Difference Image……………………...………………………105 Figure 11a. Land cover classification map during 1994………………………………..110 Figure 11b. Land cover classification map during 1994………………………………..111 Figure 11c. Land cover classification map during 1994………………………………..112 Figure 12. Local Analysis of Grazing Area………………………….…………………114 Figure 13. Local Analysis of Agricultural Area………………………………………..115 Figure 14. Sketch Map…………………………………………………….……...……116 8 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Landsat TM and Landsat ETM+ satellite characteristics………………………29 Table 2. Landsat TM 5 postcalibration dynamic ranges………...……………………….49 Table 3. ETM+ high-gain and low-gain postcalibration dynamic ranges……………….50 Table 4. - Minimum DN values for the COST Model…………………………………...50 Table 5. Landsat TM Solar Exoatmospheric Spectral Irradiances………………………51 Table 6. Image acquisition dates…………………………………………………………51 Table 7. Tasseled cap coefficients for Landsat TM data at-satellite reflectance………...53 Table 8. Tasseled cap coefficients for Landsat ETM+ at-satellite reflectance…………..53 Table 9. Error matrix for land cover classes ……..……………………………………...74 Table 10. Changes in area extent per vegetation type…………………………………...75 Table 11. Rate of change per vegetation type ………………………………………..….77 Table 12. Image normalization statistics……..……………………………………….....92 Table 13. Summary of vegetation index differencing results……………………...…...106 Table 14. Land cover classes extracted from Landsat images……..…………………...108 Table. 15. Timeline……………………………………………………………………..113 9 ABSTRACT At a time of increasing climatological and anthropogenic impacts, managers of Natural Protected Areas in Mexico require monitoring efforts to assess the ecological integrity of their regions and adapt management activities accordingly. However, for many of these areas, like the Pinacate and Gran Desierto de Altar Biosphere Reserve (PBR), the location and extent of land cover impacts are generally unknown. An analysis of the natural vegetation of this area, with the use of several remote sensing techniques, concluded that it continues to be relatively stable at a landscape level. Any perceivable changes appear to be the result of natural vegetative
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sonoran Desert GEORGE GENTRY/FWSGEORGE the Sonoran Desert Has 2,000 Endemic Plant Species—More Than Anywhere Else in North America
    in the shadow of the wall: borderlands conservation hotspots on the line Borderlands Conservation Hotspot 2. Sonoran Desert GEORGE GENTRY/FWSGEORGE The Sonoran Desert has 2,000 endemic plant species—more than anywhere else in North America. hink deserts are wastelands? A visit to one of the national monuments or national wildlife refuges in the Sonoran Desert could change your mind. These borderlands are teeming with plants and animals impressively adapted to extreme conditions. T During your visit you might encounter a biologist, a volunteer or a local activist in awe of the place and dedicated to protecting it. The Sonoran Desert is so important to the natural heritage of the United States and Mexico that both countries are vested in conservation lands and programs and on a joint mission to preserve it. “A border wall,” says one conservation coalition leader, “harms our mission” (Campbell 2017). The Sonoran Desert is one of the largest intact wild areas mountains, where they find nesting cavities and swoop in the country, 100,387 square miles stretching across the between cactuses and trees to hunt lizards and other prey. southwestern United States and northwestern Mexico. This Rare desert bighorn sheep stick to the steep, rocky slopes of desert is renowned for columnar cactuses like saguaro, organ isolated desert mountain ranges where they keep a watchful pipe and cardón. Lesser known is the fact that the Sonoran eye for predators. One of the most endangered mammals in Desert has more endemic plant species—2,000—than North America, Sonoran pronghorn still occasionally cross anywhere else in North America (Nabhan 2017).
    [Show full text]
  • Geographical Names and Sustainable Tourism
    No. 59 NOVEMBERNo. 59 NOVEMBER 2020 2020 Geographical Names and Sustainable Tourism Socio- Institutional cultural Sustainable Tourism Economic Environmental Table of Contents The Information Bulletin of the United Nations MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIRPERSON ............................................... 3 Group of Experts on Geographical Names (formerly Reconsidérer notre mobilité ......................................................... 3 UNGEGN Newsletter) is issued twice a year by the Secretariat of the Group of Experts. The Secretariat Reconsider our mobility ............................................................... 4 is served by the Statistics Division (UNSD), MESSAGE FROM THE SECRETARIAT ................................................. 5 Department for Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), Secretariat of the United Nations. Contributions “Geographical names and sustainable tourism ............................ 5 and reports received from the Experts of the Group, IN MEMORIAM ................................................................................ 7 its Linguistic/Geographical Divisions and its Working Groups are reviewed and edited jointly by the Danutė Janė Mardosienė (1947-2020) ........................................ 7 Secretariat and the UNGEGN Working Group on SPECIAL FEATURE: GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES AND SUSTAINABLE Publicity and Funding. Contributions for the TOURISM ......................................................................................... 9 Information Bulletin can only be considered when they are made
    [Show full text]
  • 37Th World Heritage Committee Session Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 16-27 June 2013
    Enhancing the IUCN World Heritage Programme II – Focus Europe 7-11 November 2013, Vilm, Germany 37th World Heritage Committee Session Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 16-27 June 2013 Boris Erg IUCN The 37th Session of the World Heritage Committee took place in the Kingdom of Cambodia, in Phnom Penh and Siem Reap-Angkor, from 16th to 27th June 2013. It was organized by UNESCO and the National Commission of Cambodia with the support of the Office of the Council of Ministers. World Heritage Committee The Committee is a governing body responsible for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. It decides on new inscriptions on the World Heritage List. It examines State of Conservation reports and also decides on the inscription or deletion of properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger. World Heritage Committee (ctd.) The 21 States Parties of the current World Heritage Committee are the following: Algeria, Cambodia, Colombia, Estonia, Ethiopia, France, Germany, India, Iraq, Japan, Malaysia, Mali, Mexico, Qatar, Russian Federation, Senegal, Serbia, South Africa, Switzerland, Thailand, and United Arab Emirates. During the 19th session of the General Assembly (19-21 November 2013), 12 seats will have to be filled. Outgoing members in 2013 are: Cambodia, Estonia, Ethiopia, France, Iraq, Mali, Mexico, Russian Federation, South Africa, Switzerland, Thailand, United Arab Emirates. IUCN’s advisory role Ahead of the annual World Heritage Committee meeting, IUCN submits its recommendations regarding the inscriptions of new sites following a rigorous evaluation process through which it works with members on the ground, scientific experts, independent feedback and desk reviews. IUCN also submits “state of conservation” reports for sites under threat or sites that are already on the danger list or that it considers should be.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.Bacterias Promotoras De Crecimiento De Plantas Autóctonas Y Su Efecto En Prosopis Chilensis (Molina) Stunz
    Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas ISSN: 2007-0934 [email protected] Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias México Villegas-Espinoza, Jorge Arnoldo; Rueda-Puente, Edgar Omar; Murillo-Amador, Bernardo; Puente, María Esther; Ruiz-Espinoza, Higinio; Zamora-Salgado, Sergio; Beltran Morales, Félix Alfredo Bacterias promotoras de crecimiento de plantas autóctonas y su efecto en Prosopis chilensis (Molina) Stunz Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas, vol. 5, núm. 6, agosto-septiembre, 2014, pp. 1041-1053 Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias Estado de México, México Disponible en: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=263131532011 Cómo citar el artículo Número completo Sistema de Información Científica Más información del artículo Red de Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y Portugal Página de la revista en redalyc.org Proyecto académico sin fines de lucro, desarrollado bajo la iniciativa de acceso abierto Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas Vol.5 Núm.6 14 de agosto - 27 de septiembre, 2014 p. 1041-1053 Bacterias promotoras de crecimiento de plantas autóctonas y su efecto en Prosopis chilensis (Molina) Stunz* Native plant growth promoting bacteria and their effect on Prosopis chilensis (Molina) Stunz Jorge Arnoldo Villegas-Espinoza1, Edgar Omar Rueda-Puente2, Bernardo Murillo-Amador3, María Esther Puente3, Francisco Higinio Ruiz-Espinoza1, Sergio Zamora-Salgado1 y Félix Alfredo Beltran Morales1§ 1Departamento Académico de Agronomía- Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur. Carretera al sur km 5.5, A. P. 19-B, C. P. 23080. La Paz, Baja California Sur, México. Tel. (612) 123 88 00. Ext. 5518, 5507, 5110 y 5509. ([email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]).
    [Show full text]
  • Invasion of Non-Native Plants
    Changes in the Pinacate Reserve Ecosystems: Invasion of Non-Native Plants Denise Z. Avila-Jiménez Centro de Datos para la Conservación (CDC), Instituto del Medio Ambiente y el Desarrollo Sustentable del Estado de Sonora (IMADES), Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico Abstract—Over the years, humans have modified the Sonoran Desert by introducing invasive plants that prosper in disturbed and non-disturbed habitats. These invaders modify the dynamics and structure of populations and the composition of communities, which in turn can result in radical changes in wildlife habitat. The natural landscape of the Sonoran Desert is characterized by extensive valleys with parallel and discontinuous arrangements of narrow ranges (Shreve and Wiggins, 1964). Within this ecosystem is the heart of the Sonoran Desert called the Pinacate Reserve (Reserva de la Biosfera El Pinacate y Gran Desierto de Altar). The Pinacate Reserve registers 97 invasive plant species, of which 18 are altering the natural ecosystems. In 2002 the Sonora Conservation Data Center (CDC) started this area, the Reserve personnel, students, and social workers a project to identify and map invasive species in Sonora and have made some first attempts to control the Sahara mustard implemented a pilot program in the Pinacate Reserve. This by mechanical and manual efforts. The results have not yet project found a total of 97 invasive species in the Reserve, 18 of been impressive since it is a task that will require a long-term which represent the greatest threat to the natural habitat of the commitment. area (table 1). Salt cedar (Tamarix ramosissima), buffelgrass Exotic plants invade both the low parts of the Reserve and (Pennisetum ciliaris), and Sahara mustard (Brassica tournefor- the core zone known as Sierra Pinacate, where there are records tii) have been considered the primary concerns for the Reserve of some invasive species already established, like red brome area (CDC, 2002).
    [Show full text]
  • Species of Common Conservation Concern
    XXIV Meeting of the Canada/Mexico/U.S. Trilateral Committee for Wildlife and Ecosystem Conservation and Management Victoria, Canada April 8-12, 2019 Working Table: Species of Common Conservation Concern Co-Chairs: • Craig Machtans, Manager, Species at Risk and Migratory Bird Programs, Northern Region, Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Canada; • Eduardo Ponce Guevara, Acting Director for Priority Species Conservation, National Commission for Natural Protected Areas (CONANP), Mexico; • Maricela Constantino, Biologist, Branch of Delisting and Foreign Species, Division of Conservation and Classification, Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Facilitators: • Angélica Narvaez, Coordinator for Monitoring and Recovery of Endangered Species, Office of Priority Species for Conservation (CONANP), Mexico. [email protected] • Maricela Constantino, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, [email protected] Remote Access Information: Remote connection to the species working table will be available for presenters and participants. For audio access use the information below (Please note we are limited to 20 lines): Toll Free Conference Call: Mexico +001-866-295-6360 USA and Canada 866-692-3582 Participant Passcode: 34281388# Remote access to view or present a powerpoint is available through the internet using the Webex platform. Please contact [email protected] directly to obtain instructions for connection via Webex. 2019 Priorities: Trilateral Committee/Species of Common Conservation
    [Show full text]
  • 21, 2021 All Times Eastern Zone Co-Chairs: M
    Species of common conservation concern working table Trilateral Meeting May 17 – 21, 2021 All times Eastern zone Co-chairs: Maricela Constantino (FWS, USA), Jose Eduardo Ponce Guevara (CONANP, Mexico), and Craig Machtans (Environment and Climate Change, Canada) Facilitators: Joshua Daskin (FWS, USA) & Angelica Navarez (CONANP, Mexico) Contents Monday, May 17, 2020 ................................................................................................................................. 4 2:15 – 2:55pm Table welcome, co-chair reports ....................................................................................... 4 2:55 – 3:15pm Grassland and Black-Tailed Prairie Dog Conservation .................................................... 4 3:30 – 3:50pm Black-footed ferret recovery update for Mexico, Canada, and the United States ............ 5 3:50 – 4:10pm Genetic Rescue for the Black-Footed Ferret ................................................................... 10 4:10 – 4:30 USFWS Species Range Project ........................................................................................... 12 4:45 – 5:05 Population and trophic ecology of the Sonoyta mud turtle at remaining populations in Sonora, Mexico ....................................................................................................................................... 13 5:05 – 5:25 North American Management of Feral Swine and Rabies .................................................. 14 Tuesday, May 18, 2021 ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Granite Landscapes, Geodiversity and Geoheritage—Global Context
    heritage Review Granite Landscapes, Geodiversity and Geoheritage—Global Context Piotr Migo ´n Institute of Geography and Regional Development, University of Wrocław, pl. Uniwersytecki 1, 50-137 Wrocław, Poland; [email protected] Abstract: Granite geomorphological sceneries are important components of global geoheritage, but international awareness of their significance seems insufficient. Based on existing literature, ten distinctive types of relief are identified, along with several sub-types, and an overview of medium-size and minor landforms characteristic for granite terrains is provided. Collectively, they tell stories about landscape evolution and environmental changes over geological timescale, having also considerable aesthetic values in many cases. Nevertheless, representation of granite landscapes and landforms on the UNESCO World Heritage List and within the UNESCO Global Geopark network is relatively scarce and only a few properties have been awarded World Heritage status in recognition of their scientific value or unique scenery. Much more often, reasons for inscription resided elsewhere, in biodiversity or cultural heritage values, despite very high geomorphological significance. To facilitate future global comparative analysis a framework is proposed that can be used for this purpose. Keywords: geoheritage; geodiversity; granite landforms; landform classification; World Heritage 1. Introduction Geoheritage is variously defined in scholarly literature, but notwithstanding rather subtle differences there is a general agreement that is refers to elements of the Earth’s geo- Citation: Migo´n,P. Granite diversity that are considered to have significant scientific, educational, cultural or aesthetic Landscapes, Geodiversity and value and are therefore subject to conservation and management [1,2]. Geodiversity, in Geoheritage—Global Context. turn, means the natural range of geological (rocks, minerals, fossils), geomorphological Heritage 2021 4 , , 198–219.
    [Show full text]
  • El Pinacate Y Gran Desierto De Altar, Municipios De Plutarco Elias Calles, Puerto Peñasco Y San Luis Rio Colorado, Sonora, Mexico
    PROGRAMA DE MANEJO RESERVA DE LA BIOSFERA EL PINACATE Y GRAN DESIERTO DE ALTAR, MUNICIPIOS DE PLUTARCO ELIAS CALLES, PUERTO PEÑASCO Y SAN LUIS RIO COLORADO, SONORA, MEXICO. SISTEMA DE AREAS NATURALES PROTEGIDAS DEL ESTADO DE SONORA (SANPES) HERMOSILLO, SONORA, AGOSTO DE 1994. RESPONSABLES: GRUPO BASE: Biol. Carlos Castillo Sánchez (Centro Ecológico de Sonora) M.C. Peggy J. Turk-Boyer (Centro Intercultural de Estudios de Desiertos y Oceános) M.C. Raúl F. Venegas Cardoso (Universidad Autónoma de Baja California) Dr. Francisco Paz Moreno (Universidad de Sonora) Arqlga. Elisa Villalpando Canchola (Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia) C. Fernando Valentine (Tohono O'odham Nation) COLABORADORES: Biol. Leonardo Varela (Procuraduría Federal de Protección al Ambiente de la SEDESOL) Biol. Germán Daniel González (SEDESOL) C. José García (Tohono O'odham Nation) M.C. Rosa Imelda Rojas Caldelas (UABC) M.C. Thalía Gaona Arredondo (UABC) Lic. Onésimo Cuamea Velazquez (UABC) C. Lena M. Enas (Tohono O'odham Nation) C. Fernando Corral Chavira (Confederación Nacional Campesina, Puerto Peñasco) Ecol. Isabel Granillo Duarte (Centro Ecológico de Sonora) AGRADECIMIENTOS: A los C. Presidentes de los Municipios de Plutarco Elías Calles, Prof. Armando Luis Celaya Duarte; Puerto Peñasco, C. Fernando Martínez Vásquez y San Luis Río Colorado, C. Ing. Gilberto Madrid Navarro, por su apoyo directo o indirecto en la elaboración de este documento. A los presidentes de los Comités de la Confederación Nacional Campesina de Plutarco Elías Calles, Puerto Peñasco y San Luis Río Colorado, C. Jose Faustino Avendaño, C. Eduardo Acedo Reyes y C. Fernando Arellano García respectivamente, así como al C. Javier Padilla ejidatario de la Sierrita del Rosario y a Don Jesús Valencia Oros del ejido Los Norteños por su apoyo durante la organización de las reuniones informativas y de concertación llevadas a cabo en Puerto Peñasco y San Luis Río Colorado.
    [Show full text]
  • Sonoran Desert Full of Plant Life, Animal Life and Rising Population by Encyclopaedia Britannica, Adapted by Newsela Staff on 11.07.19 Word Count 622 Level 830L
    Sonoran Desert full of plant life, animal life and rising population By Encyclopaedia Britannica, adapted by Newsela staff on 11.07.19 Word Count 622 Level 830L Image 1. The iconic cacti of Saguaro National Park in Arizona. The Sonoran Desert is located in the U.S. Southwest and northwestern Mexico. Photo by: Joe Parks via Wikimedia Commons The Sonoran Desert is a hot, dry area in the Southwest region of the United States and in northwestern Mexico. It covers an area of 120,000 square miles. The desert extends through southwestern Arizona and southeastern California. It covers much of the Mexican state of Baja California and the western half of the state of Sonora. The Colorado and Yuma deserts lie within the Sonoran Desert. The Sonoran Desert has a subtropical climate. It receives 3 to 15 inches of rain each year. Most of it falls from July to September, when brief thunderstorms bring heavy rain. Lighter rainfall occurs in December and January. Freezing weather is rare. The hottest and driest part of the desert is near the lower Colorado River. There, summer temperatures can reach more than 120 degrees Fahrenheit (49 degrees Celsius). Rainfall there is less than 3 inches. The Sonoran Desert has a wide variety of vegetation. Its plant life is the most diverse of all the North American deserts. The saguaro cactus is the signature plant of the desert. Other common This article is available at 5 reading levels at https://newsela.com. plant types include the barrel cactus, yucca, ironwood and elephant tree. In Baja California, the unusual boojum tree and the giant cardon cactus grow.
    [Show full text]
  • Sonoran Desert in California
    A Framework for Effective Conservation Management of the Sonoran Desert in California January 2009 This page intentionally left blank. A Framework for Effective Conservation Management of the Sonoran Desert in California Prepared by Prepared for The Nature Conservancy January 2009 A framework for effective conservation management of the Sonoran Desert in California This page intentionally left blank. Conservation Biology Institute ii A framework for effective conservation management of the Sonoran Desert in California TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................ vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................vii 1. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................... 1 1.1. A Region of Under-Appreciated Natural Significance............................. 1 1.2. The Need for a Conservation Framework ................................................... 2 1.3. Overview of Project Approach......................................................................... 3 2. THE STUDY AREA........................................................................ 5 2.1. Geomorphology..................................................................................................... 5 2.2. Climate ..................................................................................................................... 6 2.3. Hydrology ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Generación De Un Mosaico Nacional Con Imágenes Rapideye $ a Map of Mexic
    Received: 15 Nov. 2019, Accepted: 26 Feb. 2020 Published online: 30 Apr. 2020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/igg.25940694.2020.1.67.148 Volume: 4, Issue: 1, Pages: 1-7 Un mapa de México en 100,000 millones de pixeles – generación de un mosaico nacional con imágenes RapidEye I A map of Mexico in 100,000 million pixels - generation of a national mosaic with RapidEye images Florian Hruby*a, Margarita Ascención Merinoa, Rainer Ressla aComisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (CONABIO), Insurgentes Sur 4903, Parques del Pedregal, Alcaldía de Tlalpan, Ciudad de México. C.P. 14010, México Resumen El presente artículo resume los pasos seguidos para la generación del primer mosaico nacional sin nubes y de alta resolución (5m). Se presentan tanto las dificultades de la producción de mosaicos en términos generales, como la metodología que hemos seguido para finalizar este proyecto con éxito. Los principales pasos son la preselección de datos de un acervo total de 50,000 imágenes RapidEye, la optimización de histogramas y de divisiones entre imágenes adyacentes y la fusión de 4,500 escenas para generar un mapa satelital del país entero. Discutimos también el pos-procesamiento para eliminar nubes y desaturar particularmente las regiones desérticas, lo cual constituye una diferencia respecto de propuestas alternativas. Adicionalmente, incluimos detalles acerca de la disponibilidad de los datos. Finalmente, cerramos el texto con posibles aplicaciones de una imagen satelital de México de aproximadamente 100,000 millones de pixeles. Palabras clave: mosaico; geovisualización; imágenes satelitales; percepción remota; big data Abstract The present paper presents a workflow for the generation of a 5m spatial resolution, completely seamless and cloud-free mosaic of Mexico.
    [Show full text]