DOCSLIB.ORG

Mapping Vegetation Types in a Savanna Ecosystem in Namibia: Concepts for Integrated Land Cover Assessments

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Mapping Vegetation Types in a Savanna Ecosystem in Namibia: Concepts for Integrated Land Cover Assessments Christian H ttich Dissertation zur Erlangung des naturwissenschaftlichen Doktorgrades der Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena Mapping Vegetation Types in a Savanna Ecosystem in Namibia: Concepts for Integrated Land Cover Assessments Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades doctor rerum naturalium (Dr. rer. nat.) vorgelegt dem Rat der Chemisch-Geowissenschaftlichen Fakult t der Friedrich-Schiller-Universit t Jena von Dipl.-Geogr. Christian H&ttich geboren am 12. Mai 19,9 in Jena 1 2 Gutachter- 1. .rof. Dr. Christiane Schmullius 2. .rof. Dr. Stefan Dech (Universit t /&rzburg) 0ag der 1ffentlichen 2erteidigung- 29.04.2011 3 Acknowledgements I _____________________________________________________________________________________ Ackno ledgements 0his dissertation would not have been possible without the help of a large number of people. First of all I want to thank the scientific committee of this work- .rof. Dr. Christiane Schmullius and .rof. Dr. Stefan Dech for their always present motivation and fruitful discussions. I am e9tremely grateful to my scientific mentor .rof. Dr. Martin Herold, for his never-ending receptiveness to numerous questions from my side, for his clear guidance for the definition of the main research issues, the frequent feedback regarding the structure and content of my research, and for his contagious enthusiasm for remote sensing of the environment. Acknowledgements are given to the former remote sensing team of “BIO0A S&d?- Dr. Ursula Gessner (DFD-DLR), Dr. Rene Colditz (COAABIO, Me9ico), Manfred Beil (DFD-DLR), and Dr. Michael Schmidt (COAABIO, Me9ico) for e9tremely fruitful discussions, criticism, and technical support during all phases of the dissertation. I am very thankful for a number of impressive field campaigns in Aamibia and South Africa. I also have to thank a lot Dr. Jens Oldeland (University of Hamburg) for his motivation and valuable feedback to my manuscripts and very forthcoming brainstorming. I am very grateful to Ben Strohbach and Franziska Bangombe from the Aational Botanical Research Institute of Aamibia, for their e9tremely helpful discussions on vegetation ecology in Aamibia, for valuable refinements of the manuscripts, for the provision of the vegetation data, and the guidance during our field campaigns. I really appreciate Dr. Christopher Conrad for scientific support and to ensure a very open, friendly, and inspiring working atmosphere. I am really thankful to my colleagues from the Institute of Geography and GeologyCs Remote Sensing Unit in /&rzburg- Sarah Asam, Anna Cord, Sebastian Fritsch, 2itus Himmler, Dr. Doris Blein, .attrick Bn1fel, Dr. 0obias Landmann, Sylvia Le9, Fabian L1w, Dr. Miriam Machwitz, Dr. Aoellie Dahou R&th, Gunther Schorcht, Martin Schmidt, Dr. Matthias Schramm, Michael 0hiel, Dvonne /alz, Dr. Martin “Oggi? /egmann, Julian Eeidler. Special thanks to all of you for reviewing and improving the earlier manuscripts of the dissertation. I am really grateful to work in the FBiotopC with Ursula, Miriam, and Oggi, Finn, and later with Anna and Aoellie. /ithout their fellowship and the valuable help to a large number of specific problems this dissertation would not have been finished Get. Acknowledgements are also given to my student assistants- Sylvia Le9, Michael Gottschling, Michael /iesner, and .eter Eellner. 0hey did a great Gob during hours of remote sensing data pre-processing. I am deeply grateful to my parents Conny and Frank H&ttich. /ithout their motivation and financial support during my studies this dissertation would not have been realised. I am very thankful to my brothers Georg and Martin H&ttich, my grandmothers Marianne Frenzl and Renate H&ttich, and my friends for their tolerance and demonstrating me from time to time that there is a life besides remote sensing. 0his dissertation is dedicated to my wife Franziska, for her love, patience, and her understanding for too long office hours, my frequent absence during the field conference trips, and for her mental support. 0his dissertation has been carried out in the framework of the “BIO0A Southern Africa? proGect funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). Jena, April 2011 Christian H&ttich I II _____________________________________________________________________________________ II Abstract III _____________________________________________________________________________________ Abstract Mapping Vegetation Types in a Savanna Ecosystem in Namibia: Concepts for Integrated Land Cover Assessments CHRIS0IAA HH00ICH 0he characterisation and evaluation of biodiversity and land-cover in Southern AfricaCs Savannas is a maGor prerequisite for suitable and sustainable land management and conservation purposes. However, mechanisms for frequent update of the status and trends of biodiversity and land change processes are still missing. 0he knowledge of the spatial distribution of vegetation types is an important information source for all social benefit areas. Remote sensing techniques are essential tools for mapping and monitoring of land-cover. 0he development and evaluation of conceptsC for integrated land-cover assessments attracted increased interest in the remote sensing community since evolving standards for the characterisation of land-cover enable an easier access and inter- comparability of earth observation data. Regarding the comple9ity of the savanna biome in terms of the spatiotemporal heterogeneity of the vegetation structure and rainfall variability, the main research needs are addressing the assessment of the capabilities and limitations of using satellite data for land-cover and vegetation mapping purposes. /hile integrating Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) time series data for mapping vegetation types in Aamibia, the temporal characteristics of semi-arid life-forms types were used for the classification of vegetation types in Aamibia. 0he Random Forest framework was applied and evaluated for classifying vegetation types using MODIS time series metrics as input features. 0he study region comprised the Balahari in the north-eastern communal lands of Aamibia. Regarding of the evolving global standardisation process for land-cover, there is the need to report the capabilities and limitations of the FAO and UAE. Land Cover Classification System (LCCS) in regional case studies. LCCS is evaluated in terms of the applicability in open savanna ecosystems and as ontology for the semantic integration of an in-situ vegetation database in a coarse scale mapping framework based on MODIS data. Further, the capabilities of the methodological setups of global land-cover mapping initiatives are assessed while using the results of the integrated vegetation type mapping framework. In order to assess the e9isting accuracy uncertainties of mapping savannas at global scales, the effects of composite length and varying observation periods were compared in terms of mapping accuracy. 0he implications for global monitoring were discussed. 0he determinants of precipitation amount and mapping accuracy were evaluated by comparing MODIS and 0ropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (0RMM) time series data. Integrating multi-scale land-cover information, such as life form, cover, and height of vegetation types ( in-situ ), vegetation physiognomy and local patterns (Landsat), and phenology (MODIS) in an ecosystem assessment framework, resulted in a fle9ible land-cover map including a broad structural-physiognomic and a phytosociological legend. 0he principle of classifiers and modifiers in LCCS proved to be applicable in dry savanna ecosystems and can be confirmed as overarching land-cover ontology. Analyses of time series classifications showed that mapping accuracy increases with increasing observation period. Small composite period lengths lead to increased mapping accuracies. 0he relationship between mapping accuracy and observation period was observed as a function of precipitation input and the magnitude of change between land-cover stages. 0he integration of in-situ data in a multi-scale framework leads to improved knowledge of the regionalisation of Aamibian vegetation types. On the one hand, the case study in the north-eastern Balahari showed that multi-data mapping approaches using in-situ to medium resolution MODIS time series data bear the potential of the wall-to-wall update of e9isting vegetation type maps. On the other hand, the global remote sensing community can e9tend the reference databases by integrating regional standardised biodiversity and ecotype assessments in calibration and validation activities. 0he studies point on the uncertainties of mapping savannas at global scales and suggest III I2 Abstract _____________________________________________________________________________________ possible solutions for improvements by adapting the remotely sensed feature sets, classification methods, and integrating dynamic processes of semi-arid ecosystems in the mapping framework. Keywords: 2egetation types, land-cover, savanna, MODIS time series, Random Forest, LCCS, 0RMM, Aamibia IV Deutsche Eusammenfassung 2 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Deutsche $usammenfassung Vegetationskartierung in der Trockensavanne Namibias unter Nut%ung botanischer Felddaten und multitemporaler Satellitendaten: Kon%epte %ur integrativen Erfassung der Landbedeckung CHRIS0IAA HH00ICH Die Erfassung und Bewertung des Eustandes
Recommended publications
  • Grassland & Shrubland Vegetation

    Grassland & Shrubland Vegetation

    Grassland & Shrubland Vegetation Missoula Draft Resource Management Plan Handout May 2019 Key Points Approximately 3% of BLM-managed lands in the planning area are non-forested (less than 10% canopy cover); the other 97% are dominated by a forested canopy with limited mountain meadows, shrublands, and grasslands. See table 1 on the following page for a break-down of BLM-managed grassland and shrubland in the planning area classified under the National Vegetation Classification System (NVCS). The overall management goal of grassland and shrubland resources is to maintain diverse upland ecological conditions while providing for a variety of multiple uses that are economically and biologically feasible. Alternatives Alternative A (1986 Garnet RMP, as Amended) Maintain, or where practical enhance, site productivity on all public land available for livestock grazing: (a) maintain current vegetative condition in “maintain” and “custodial” category allotments; (b) improve unsatisfactory vegetative conditions by one condition class in certain “improvement” category allotments; (c) prevent noxious weeds from invading new areas; and, (d) limit utilization levels to provide for plant maintenance. Alternatives B & C (common to all) Proposed objectives: Manage uplands to meet health standards and meet or exceed proper functioning condition within site or ecological capability. Where appropriate, fire would be used as a management agent to achieve/maintain disturbance regimes supporting healthy functioning vegetative conditions. Manage surface-disturbing activities in a manner to minimize degradation to rangelands and soil quality. Mange areas to conserve BLM special status species plants. Ensure consistency with achieving or maintaining Standards of Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management for Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota.
  • Land Cover Austin, TX This Enviroatlas Map Shows Land Cover for the Austin, TX Area at High Spatial Resolution (1-Meter Pixels)

    Land Cover Austin, TX This Enviroatlas Map Shows Land Cover for the Austin, TX Area at High Spatial Resolution (1-Meter Pixels)

    • Austin, TX • New Haven, CT • Baltimore, MD • New York, NY • Birmingham, AL • Paterson, NJ • Brownsville, TX • Philadelphia, PA • Chicago, IL • Phoenix, AZ • Cleveland, OH • Pittsburgh, PA • Des Moines, IA • Portland, ME • Durham, NC • Portland, OR • Fresno, CA • Salt Lake City, UT • Green Bay, WI • Sonoma County, CA • Los Angeles, CA • St Louis, MO • Memphis, TN • Tampa, FL • Milwaukee, WI • Virginia Beach, VA • Minneapolis, MN • Washington, DC • New Bedford, MA • Woodbine, IA Meter Scale Urban Land Cover Austin, TX This EnviroAtlas map shows land cover for the Austin, TX area at high spatial resolution (1-meter pixels). The land cover classes are Water, Impervious Surface, Soil and Barren, Trees and Forest, Grass and Herbaceous, and Agriculture.1 Why is high resolution land cover important? Land cover data present a “birds-eye” view that can help identify important features, patterns and relationships in the landscape. The National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD)2 provides land cover for the entire contiguous U.S. at 30- meter pixel resolution. However, for some analyses, the density and heterogeneity of an urban landscape requires higher resolution land cover data. Meter Scale Urban Land Cover (MULC) data were developed to fulfill that need. In comparison, there are 900 MULC pixels for every one NLCD pixel. Anticipated users of MULC include city and regional planners, water authorities, wildlife and natural resource Figure 2: MULC for Austin, managers, public health officials, citizens, teachers, and TX. students. Potential applications of these data include the How can I use this information? assessment of wildlife corridors and riparian buffers, This data layer can be used alone or combined visually and stormwater management, urban heat island mitigation, access analytically with other spatial data layers.
  • Large Scale High-Resolution Land Cover Mapping with Multi-Resolution Data

    Large Scale High-Resolution Land Cover Mapping with Multi-Resolution Data

    Large Scale High-Resolution Land Cover Mapping with Multi-Resolution Data Caleb Robinson Le Hou Kolya Malkin Georgia Institute of Technology Stony Brook University Yale University Rachel Soobitsky Jacob Czawlytko Bistra Dilkina Chesapeake Conservancy Chesapeake Conservancy University of Southern California Nebojsa Jojic∗ Microsoft Research Abstract uses include informing agricultural best management practices, monitoring forest change over time [10] and measuring urban In this paper we propose multi-resolution data fusion meth- sprawl [31]. However, land cover maps quickly fall out of ods for deep learning-based high-resolution land cover map- date and must be updated as construction, erosion, and other ping from aerial imagery. The land cover mapping problem, at processes act on the landscape. country-level scales, is challenging for common deep learning In this work we identify the challenges in automatic methods due to the scarcity of high-resolution labels, as well large-scale high-resolution land cover mapping and de- as variation in geography and quality of input images. On the velop methods to overcome them. As an application of other hand, multiple satellite imagery and low-resolution ground our methods, we produce the first high-resolution (1m) truth label sources are widely available, and can be used to land cover map of the contiguous United States. We have improve model training efforts. Our methods include: introduc- released code used for training and testing our models at ing low-resolution satellite data to smooth quality differences https://github.com/calebrob6/land-cover. in high-resolution input, exploiting low-resolution labels with a dual loss function, and pairing scarce high-resolution labels Scale and cost of existing data: Manual and semi-manual with inputs from several points in time.
  • Understanding the Causes of Bush Encroachment in Africa: the Key to Effective Management of Savanna Grasslands

    Understanding the Causes of Bush Encroachment in Africa: the Key to Effective Management of Savanna Grasslands

    Tropical Grasslands – Forrajes Tropicales (2013) Volume 1, 215−219 Understanding the causes of bush encroachment in Africa: The key to effective management of savanna grasslands OLAOTSWE E. KGOSIKOMA1 AND KABO MOGOTSI2 1Department of Agricultural Research, Ministry of Agriculture, Gaborone, Botswana. www.moa.gov.bw 2Department of Agricultural Research, Ministry of Agriculture, Francistown, Botswana. www.moa.gov.bw Keywords: Rangeland degradation, fire, indigenous ecological knowledge, livestock grazing, rainfall variability. Abstract The increase in biomass and abundance of woody plant species, often thorny or unpalatable, coupled with the suppres- sion of herbaceous plant cover, is a widely recognized form of rangeland degradation. Bush encroachment therefore has the potential to compromise rural livelihoods in Africa, as many depend on the natural resource base. The causes of bush encroachment are not without debate, but fire, herbivory, nutrient availability and rainfall patterns have been shown to be the key determinants of savanna vegetation structure and composition. In this paper, these determinants are discussed, with particular reference to arid and semi-arid environments of Africa. To improve our current under- standing of causes of bush encroachment, an integrated approach, involving ecological and indigenous knowledge systems, is proposed. Only through our knowledge of causes of bush encroachment, both direct and indirect, can better livelihood adjustments be made, or control measures and restoration of savanna ecosystem functioning be realized. Resumen Una forma ampliamente reconocida de degradación de pasturas es el incremento de la abundancia de especies de plan- tas leñosas, a menudo espinosas y no palatables, y de su biomasa, conjuntamente con la pérdida de plantas herbáceas. En África, la invasión por arbustos puede comprometer el sistema de vida rural ya que muchas personas dependen de los recursos naturales básicos.
  • Edition 2 from Forest to Fjaeldmark the Vegetation Communities Highland Treeless Vegetation

    Edition 2 from Forest to Fjaeldmark the Vegetation Communities Highland Treeless Vegetation

    Edition 2 From Forest to Fjaeldmark The Vegetation Communities Highland treeless vegetation Richea scoparia Edition 2 From Forest to Fjaeldmark 1 Highland treeless vegetation Community (Code) Page Alpine coniferous heathland (HCH) 4 Cushion moorland (HCM) 6 Eastern alpine heathland (HHE) 8 Eastern alpine sedgeland (HSE) 10 Eastern alpine vegetation (undifferentiated) (HUE) 12 Western alpine heathland (HHW) 13 Western alpine sedgeland/herbland (HSW) 15 General description Rainforest and related scrub, Dry eucalypt forest and woodland, Scrub, heathland and coastal complexes. Highland treeless vegetation communities occur Likewise, some non-forest communities with wide within the alpine zone where the growth of trees is environmental amplitudes, such as wetlands, may be impeded by climatic factors. The altitude above found in alpine areas. which trees cannot survive varies between approximately 700 m in the south-west to over The boundaries between alpine vegetation communities are usually well defined, but 1 400 m in the north-east highlands; its exact location depends on a number of factors. In many communities may occur in a tight mosaic. In these parts of Tasmania the boundary is not well defined. situations, mapping community boundaries at Sometimes tree lines are inverted due to exposure 1:25 000 may not be feasible. This is particularly the or frost hollows. problem in the eastern highlands; the class Eastern alpine vegetation (undifferentiated) (HUE) is used in There are seven specific highland heathland, those areas where remote sensing does not provide sedgeland and moorland mapping communities, sufficient resolution. including one undifferentiated class. Other highland treeless vegetation such as grasslands, herbfields, A minor revision in 2017 added information on the grassy sedgelands and wetlands are described in occurrence of peatland pool complexes, and other sections.
  • Existing Vegetation Classification and Mapping

    Existing Vegetation Classification and Mapping

    Existing Vegetation Classification and Mapping Technical Guide Version 1.0 Guide Version Classification and Mapping Technical Existing Vegetation United States Department of Agriculture Existing Vegetation Forest Service Classification and Ecosystem Management Coordination Staff Mapping Technical Guide Gen. Tech. Report WO-67 Version 1.0 April 2005 United States Department of Agriculture Existing Vegetation Forest Service Classification and Ecosystem Management Coordination Staff Mapping Technical Guide Gen. Tech. Report WO-67 Version 1.0 April 2005 Ronald J. Brohman and Larry D. Bryant Technical Editors and Coordinators Authored by: Section 1: Existing Vegetation Classification and Mapping Framework David Tart, Clinton K. Williams, C. Kenneth Brewer, Jeff P. DiBenedetto, and Brian Schwind Section 2: Existing Vegetation Classification Protocol David Tart, Clinton K. Williams, Jeff P. DiBenedetto, Elizabeth Crowe, Michele M. Girard, Hazel Gordon, Kathy Sleavin, Mary E. Manning, John Haglund, Bruce Short, and David L. Wheeler Section 3: Existing Vegetation Mapping Protocol C. Kenneth Brewer, Brian Schwind, Ralph J. Warbington, William Clerke, Patricia C. Krosse, Lowell H. Suring, and Michael Schanta Team Members Technical Editors Ronald J. Brohman National Resource Information Requirements Coordinator, Washington Office Larry D. Bryant Assistant Director, Forest and Range Management Staff, Washington Office Authors David Tart Regional Vegetation Ecologist, Intermountain Region, Ogden, UT C. Kenneth Brewer Landscape Ecologist/Remote Sensing Specialist, Northern Region, Missoula, MT Brian Schwind Remote Sensing Specialist, Pacific Southwest Region, Sacramento, CA Clinton K. Williams Plant Ecologist, Intermountain Region, Ogden, UT Ralph J. Warbington Remote Sensing Lab Manager, Pacific Southwest Region, Sacramento, CA Jeff P. DiBenedetto Ecologist, Custer National Forest, Billings, MT Elizabeth Crowe Riparian/Wetland Ecologist, Deschutes National Forest, Bend, OR William Clerke Remote Sensing Program Manager, Southern Region, Atlanta GA Michele M.
  • Chapter 3 Vegetation Diversity 3

    Chapter 3 Vegetation Diversity 3

    Chapter 3 Vegetation Diversity Vegetation Diversity INTRODUCTION Biodiversity has been defined as the variety of living organisms; the genetic differences among them; and the communities, ecosystems and landscapes in which they occur (Noss 1990, West 1995). Biodiversity has leapt to the forefront of issues due to a variety of reasons; changing societal values, accelerated species extinctions, global environmental change, aesthetic values, and the value of goods and services supplied (West 1995). Maintenance of ecological functions, processes, and disturbance regimes is as important as preserving species, their populations, genetic structure, biotic communities, and landscapes. Hence ecosystem-level processes, services, and disturbances must be considered within the arena of biodiversity concerns (West and Whitford 1995). The biological diversity that is supported by a particular area is generally a positive function of the degree of environmental heterogeneity occurring over space and time within that area (Longland and Young 1995). Vegetation is a cornerstone of biological diversity. Vegetation exerts its influence into almost every facet of the biophysical world. Many biophysical processes and functions depend on or are connected to vegetative conditions. Vegetation is an integral part of ecosystem composition, function, and structure. Vegetation shapes and in turn, is shaped by the ecosystems in which it occurs. It provides plant and animal habitat, and determines wildfire and insect hazards. Leaves, branches, and roots contribute to soil productivity and stability. Large wood in streams increases physical complexity, providing more habitat diversity. Vegetation shades streams, helping to maintain desirable water temperature, and also acts as a physical and biological barrier or filter for sediment and debris flowing from adjacent hillsides toward streams.
  • 7. Shrubland and Young Forest Habitat Management

    7. Shrubland and Young Forest Habitat Management

    7. SHRUBLAND AND YOUNG FOREST HABITAT MANAGEMENT hrublands” and “Young Forest” are terms that apply to areas Shrubland habitat and that are transitioning to mature forest and are dominated by young forest differ in “Sseedlings, saplings, and shrubs with interspersed grasses and forbs (herbaceous plants). While some sites such as wetlands, sandy sites vegetation types and and ledge areas can support a relatively stable shrub cover, most shrub communities in the northeast are successional and change rapidly to food and cover they mature forest if left unmanaged. Shrub and young forest habitats in Vermont provide important habitat provide, as well as functions for a variety of wildlife including shrubland birds, butterflies and bees, black bear, deer, moose, snowshoe hare, bobcat, as well as a where and how they variety of reptiles and amphibians. Many shrubland species are in decline due to loss of habitat. Shrubland bird species in Vermont include common are maintained on the species such as chestnut-sided warbler, white-throated sparrow, ruffed grouse, Eastern towhee, American woodcock, brown thrasher, Nashville landscape. warbler, and rarer species such as prairie warbler and golden-winged warbler. These habitat types are used by 29 Vermont Species of Greatest Conservation Need. While small areas of shrub and young forest habitat can be important to some wildlife, managing large patches of 5 acres or more provides much greater benefit to the wildlife that rely on the associated habitat conditions to meet their life requirements. Birds such as the chestnut- sided warbler will use smaller areas of young forest, but less common species such as golden-winged warbler require areas of 25 acres or more.
  • Ecoveg: a New Approach to Vegetation Description and Classification

    Ecoveg: a New Approach to Vegetation Description and Classification

    REVIEWS Ecological Monographs, 84(4), 2014, pp. 533–561 Ó 2014 by the Ecological Society of America EcoVeg: a new approach to vegetation description and classification 1,11 2 3,12 4 5 DON FABER-LANGENDOEN, TODD KEELER-WOLF, DEL MEIDINGER, DAVE TART, BRUCE HOAGLAND, CARMEN 1 6 7 8 9 10 JOSSE, GONZALO NAVARRO, SERGUEI PONOMARENKO, JEAN-PIERRE SAUCIER, ALAN WEAKLEY, AND PATRICK COMER 1NatureServe, Conservation Science Division, 4600 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22203 USA 2Biogeographic Data Branch, California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California 95814 USA 3British Columbia Ministry of Forests and Range, Research Branch, Victoria, British Columbia V8W 9C2 Canada 4USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Natural Resources, Ogden, Utah 84401 USA 5Oklahoma Biological Survey and Department of Geography, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma 73019 USA 6Universidad Cato´lica Boliviana San Pablo, Unidad Acade´mica Regional Cochabamba Departamento de Ciencias Exactas e Ingenierı´as, Carrera de Ingenierı´a Ambiental, Cochabamba, Bolivia 7Ecological Integrity Branch, Parks Canada, Rue Eddy, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0M5 Canada 8Ministe`re des Ressources Naturelles 2700, Rue Einstein, Bureau B-1-185, Quebec City, Quebec G1P 3W8 Canada 9North Carolina Botanic Garden, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599 USA 10NatureServe, 2108 55th Street, Boulder, Colorado 80301 USA Abstract. A vegetation classification approach is needed that can describe the diversity of terrestrial ecosystems and their transformations over large time frames, span the full range of spatial and geographic scales across the globe, and provide knowledge of reference conditions and current states of ecosystems required to make decisions about conservation and resource management.
  • Glossary and Acronyms Glossary Glossary

    Glossary and Acronyms Glossary Glossary

    Glossary andChapter Acronyms 1 ©Kevin Fleming ©Kevin Horseshoe crab eggs Glossary and Acronyms Glossary Glossary 40% Migratory Bird “If a refuge, or portion thereof, has been designated, acquired, reserved, or set Hunting Rule: apart as an inviolate sanctuary, we may only allow hunting of migratory game birds on no more than 40 percent of that refuge, or portion, at any one time unless we find that taking of any such species in more than 40 percent of such area would be beneficial to the species (16 U.S.C. 668dd(d)(1)(A), National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act; 16 U.S.C. 703-712, Migratory Bird Treaty Act; and 16 U.S.C. 715a-715r, Migratory Bird Conservation Act). Abiotic: Not biotic; often referring to the nonliving components of the ecosystem such as water, rocks, and mineral soil. Access: Reasonable availability of and opportunity to participate in quality wildlife- dependent recreation. Accessibility: The state or quality of being easily approached or entered, particularly as it relates to complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Accessible facilities: Structures accessible for most people with disabilities without assistance; facilities that meet Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards; Americans with Disabilities Act-accessible. [E.g., parking lots, trails, pathways, ramps, picnic and camping areas, restrooms, boating facilities (docks, piers, gangways), fishing facilities, playgrounds, amphitheaters, exhibits, audiovisual programs, and wayside sites.] Acetylcholinesterase: An enzyme that breaks down the neurotransmitter acetycholine to choline and acetate. Acetylcholinesterase is secreted by nerve cells at synapses and by muscle cells at neuromuscular junctions. Organophosphorus insecticides act as anti- acetyl cholinesterases by inhibiting the action of cholinesterase thereby causing neurological damage in organisms.
  • Ecological Land Cover and Natural Resources Inventory for the Kansas City Region

    Ecological Land Cover and Natural Resources Inventory for the Kansas City Region

    Ecological Land Cover and Natural Resources Inventory for the Kansas City Region 2. Ecological Land Cover Assessment and Natural Resource Inventory Methods This section describes the general approach and methodology used to complete the ecological classification and inventory for the Kansas City region. Applied Ecological Services, Inc. (AES) used the following tasks to complete the ecological survey and inventory, which are described in detail in the following sub-sections: 1. Data Assembly and Mapping: digital information from several government sources was used to establish baseline information about land cover in the region. 2. Field Reconnaissance: The digital information was validated and/or refined through field inspections and verifications. 3. Ecological Land Cover Classification Development: Using data from the data assembly and subsequent field reconnaissance, AES created an ecological classification representing existing natural resources in the region, a GIS-based information database, and a regional map of ecological land cover. 4. Data Extrapolation and Second Field Verification: The ecological classification involved an iterative process in which initial data were assembled, evaluated in the field, revised, and then re-evaluated in the field a second time. Final data were assembled after the second field reconnaissance, evaluated, and incorporated into the GIS program and the regional land cover map. Details of the methodology of this process are provided in Appendix A. This program was completed between June 2003 and June 2004. 2.1. Data Assembly and Base Mapping The initial phase of the ecological classification and inventory work involved data identification and assembly; the synthesis of data and creation of GIS base maps and graphics; and solicitation of input from local experts on the type and condition of natural resources in the Kansas City metropolitan area.
  • Natural Resources Inventory

    Natural Resources Inventory

    Natural Resources Inventory Columbia Metropolitan Planning Area Review Draft (10-1-10) NATURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY Review Draft (10-1-10) City of Columbia, Missouri October 1, 2010 - Blank - Preface for Review Document The NRI area covers the Metropolitan Planning Area defined by the Columbia Area Transportation Study Organization (CATSO), which is the local metropolitan planning organization. The information contained in the Natural Resources Inventory document has been compiled from a host of public sources. The primary data focus of the NRI has been on land cover and tree canopy, which are the product of the classification work completed by the University of Missouri Geographic Resource Center using 2007 imagery acquired for this project by the City of Columbia. The NRI uses the area’s watersheds as the geographic basis for the data inventory. Landscape features cataloged include slopes, streams, soils, and vegetation. The impacts of regulations that manage the landscape and natural resources have been cataloged; including the characteristics of the built environment and the relationship to undeveloped property. Planning Level of Detail NRI data is designed to support planning and policy level analysis. Not all the geographic data created for the Natural Resources Inventory can be used for accurate parcel level mapping. The goal is to produce seamless datasets with a spatial quality to support parcel level mapping to apply NRI data to identify the individual property impacts. There are limitations to the data that need to be made clear to avoid misinterpretations. Stormwater Buffers: The buffer data used in the NRI are estimates based upon the stream centerlines, not the high water mark specified in City and County stormwater regulations.