FINAL REPORT Remote Sensing Technology for Threatened and Endangered Plant Species Recovery ESTCP Project RC-201203 OCTOBER 2018 Erin Questad California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Susan Cordell USDA Forest Service Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry James Kellner Brown University Distribution Statement A This document has been cleared for public release Page Intentionally Left Blank This report was prepared under contract to the Department of Defense Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP). The publication of this report does not indicate endorsement by the Department of Defense, nor should the contents be construed as reflecting the official policy or position of the Department of Defense. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the Department of Defense. Page Intentionally Left Blank REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From - To) 31-10-2018 ESTCP Final Report Sept. 2012 – July 2017 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER W912HQ-12-C-0069 Remote Sensing Technology for Threatened and Endangered Plant Species Recovery 5b. GRANT NUMBER RC-201203 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER RRC-201203 Questad, Erin J; Cordell, S.; Kellner, J.; Uowolo, A.; Paolini, J. 5e. TASK NUMBER 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION California State Polytechnic University, Pomona REPORT 3801 West Temple Ave.; Pomona, CA 91768 USDA Forest Service, Inst. of Pacific Islands Forestry 60 Nowelo St.; Hilo, HI 96720 Brown University Providence, RI 02912 9. SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S) EESTCP Environmental Security Technology Certification Program 4800 Mark Center Drive, Suite 16F16 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT Alexandria, VA 22350-360505 NUMBER(S) RRC-201203 12. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Distribution A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited 13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 14. ABSTRACT For the more than 100,000 plant species worldwide thought to be at risk of extinction, a lack of suitable habitat is the major barrier to their recovery (Pitman and Jorgensen 2002, Godefroid et al. 2011, Maschinski and Haskins 2012). The two primary conservation actions for threatened, endangered, and at-risk plant species (TER-S) are to restore suitable habitat areas so that extant populations can expand and to reintroduce individuals to restored or protected areas. Reintroduction is an expensive, slow effort but is often essential when population sizes are very low or there are other barriers to dispersal among suitable habitats (Maschinski and Haskins 2012). The success rates of reintroduction projects are variable, and low success is often due to a lack of suitable habitat, the very cause of decline (Godefroid et al. 2011, Drayton and Primack 2012, IUCN 2013). This demonstration addresses a major challenge to reintroduction success - finding suitable habitats in fragmented and degraded landscapes. r the more 15.thanhus, SUBJECT a major TERMS challenge to reintroduction success is finding suitable habitats in fragmented and degraded landscapes. Remote Sensing Technology, Threatened and Endangered Plant, Species Recovery 16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION 18. NUMBER 19a. NAME of RESPONSIBLE OF ABSTRACT OF PAGES PERSON ErinErin Questad Questad a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE 152 19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER UNCLASS UNCLASS UNCLASS UNCLASSUNCLASS (include area code) 9909-869-4206 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18 Page Intentionally Left Blank FINAL REPORT Project: RC-201203 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 Study Site Overview ...................................................................................................... 3 1.2 OBJECTIVE OF THE DEMONSTRATION ............................................................... 4 1.3 REGULATORY DRIVERS ......................................................................................... 4 2.0 TECHNOLOGY/METHODOLOGY DESCRIPTION ......................................................... 5 2.1 TECHNOLOGY/METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW ..................................................... 5 2.1.1 Initial Study area ............................................................................................................ 5 2.1.2 High resolution surface cover mapping ......................................................................... 7 2.1.3 Topographic suitability modeling .................................................................................. 7 2.1.4 Image segmentation ....................................................................................................... 9 2.1.5 Stereographic digital elevation models .......................................................................... 9 2.1.6 Expected applications of the technology ..................................................................... 11 2.2 TECHNOLOGY/METHODOLOGY DEVELOPMENT .......................................... 11 2.3 ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS OF THE TECHNOLOGY/ METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................... 15 3.0 PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................... 17 3.1 DESCRIPTION OF PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES ............................................. 19 4.0 SITE DESCRIPTIONS ........................................................................................................ 25 4.1 SITE LOCATION AND HISTORY ........................................................................... 25 4.2 SITE CHARACTERISTICS ....................................................................................... 28 5.0 TEST DESIGN .................................................................................................................... 31 5.1 CONCEPTUAL TEST DESIGN ................................................................................ 31 5.2 BASELINE CHARACTERIZATION AND PREPARATION.................................. 31 5.3 DESIGN AND LAYOUT OF TECHNOLOGY AND METHODOLOGY COMPONENTS ......................................................................................................... 31 5.3.1 Task 1 ........................................................................................................................... 32 5.3.2 Task 2 ........................................................................................................................... 34 5.3.3 Task 3 ........................................................................................................................... 35 5.4 FIELD TESTING........................................................................................................ 36 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page 5.4.1 Task 1. Experimental Outplanting ............................................................................... 36 5.4.2 Task 2. Field verification of new HSMs ...................................................................... 39 5.4.3 Task 3. Technology transfer......................................................................................... 39 5.5 SAMPLING PROTOCOL .......................................................................................... 40 5.5.1 Task 1 ........................................................................................................................... 40 5.5.2 Task 2 ........................................................................................................................... 41 5.5.3 Calibration of Equipment ............................................................................................. 42 5.5.4 Quality Assurance Sampling ........................................................................................ 42 5.5.5 Sample Documentation ................................................................................................ 42 5.6 SAMPLING RESULTS .............................................................................................