CHAPTER 1 THE UNITED STATES 2001 NATIONAL LAND COVER DATABASE

Similar documents
Utility of National Spatial Data for Conservation Design Projects

Estimating Probability of Success Rate

Lesson Plan 3 Google Earth Tutorial on Land Use for Middle and High School

Lesson Plan 3 Land Cover Changes Over Time. An Introduction to Land Cover Changes over Time

Validation of the ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model (GDEM) Version 2 over the Conterminous United States

An Internet-based Agricultural Land Use Trends Visualization System (AgLuT)

A Strategy for Estimating Tree Canopy Density Using Landsat 7 ETM+ and High Resolution Images Over Large Areas

Development of a 2001 National Land-Cover Database for the United States

MAPPING IMPERVIOUS SURFACES AND FOREST CANOPY USING CLASSIFICATION AND REGRESSION TREE (CART) ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION

ESTIMATION OF SUB-PIXEL IMPERVIOUS SURFACES USING LANDSAT AND ASTER IMAGERY FOR ASSESSING URBAN GROWTH

Summary Description Municipality of Anchorage. Anchorage Coastal Resource Atlas Project

AGOG 485/585 /APLN 533 Spring Lecture 5: MODIS land cover product (MCD12Q1). Additional sources of MODIS data

Urban Tree Canopy Assessment Purcellville, Virginia

Completion of the 2011 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States Representing a Decade of Land Cover Change Information

Yanbo Huang and Guy Fipps, P.E. 2. August 25, 2006

Harrison 1. Identifying Wetlands by GIS Software Submitted July 30, ,470 words By Catherine Harrison University of Virginia

GIS at the Purdue Center for Regional Development: Some Examples

Houston-Galveston Area Council 2008 Land Cover Image Processing Protocol. Prepared by: Roger Meyer 811 Nth 9 th Ave East Duluth, MN 55805

GIS Changing the World GIS Day November 15, 2017

Sensitivity of AERSURFACE Results to Study Area and Location. Paper 2009-A-127-AWMA

A comprehensive change detection method for updating the National Land Cover Database to circa 2011

Link to USGS Phase 6 Land Use Viewer website:

Summary of Available Datasets that are Relevant to Flood Risk Characterization

Effects of input DEM data spatial resolution on Upstream Flood modeling result A case study in Willamette river downtown Portland

An Internet-based Agricultural Land Use Trends Visualization System (AgLuT)

Targeted LiDAR use in Support of In-Office Address Canvassing (IOAC) March 13, 2017 MAPPS, Silver Spring MD

NATIONAL VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION STANDARD, VERSION 2 WORKING DRAFT

SYNERGISTIC USE OF FIA PLOT DATA AND LANDSAT 7 ETM+ IMAGES FOR LARGE AREA FOREST MAPPING

New Land Cover & Land Use Data for the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

ANCILLARY DATA VARIABLES

Updating the 2001 National Land Cover Database land cover classification to 2006 by using Landsat imagery change detection methods

ISO Land Cover for Agricultural Regions of Canada, Circa 2000 Data Product Specification. Revision: A

SECTION 1: Identification Information

Display data in a map-like format so that geographic patterns and interrelationships are visible

An Automated Object-Oriented Satellite Image Classification Method Integrating the FAO Land Cover Classification System (LCCS).

Resolving habitat classification and structure using aerial photography. Michael Wilson Center for Conservation Biology College of William and Mary

Module 2.1 Monitoring activity data for forests using remote sensing

Joint International Mechanical, Electronic and Information Technology Conference (JIMET 2015)

The Wide Dynamic Range Vegetation Index and its Potential Utility for Gap Analysis

A Method to Improve the Accuracy of Remote Sensing Data Classification by Exploiting the Multi-Scale Properties in the Scene

Evaluating Urban Vegetation Cover Using LiDAR and High Resolution Imagery

Quality Assessment of Shuttle Radar Topography Mission Digital Elevation Data. Thanks to. SRTM Data Collection SRTM. SRTM Galapagos.

Urbanization and the Loss of Resource Lands in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

Overview. Project Background Project Approach: Content and Application Development Application Demonstration Future Developments

The Road to Data in Baltimore

Spanish national plan for land observation: new collaborative production system in Europe

Modeling Important Bird Habitat Using Multiple Alternative Land Cover Scenarios within the Chippewa River Watershed, Minnesota

Manuscript submitted to Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing (research paper)

Providing Public Access to King County GIS Data. Presented by: Michael Jenkins King County GIS Center Seattle, WA

Phase 6 Land Use Database version 2

MAPPING AND ANALYSIS OF FRAGMENTATION IN SOUTHEASTERN NEW HAMPSHIRE

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION HABITAT ANALYSIS

Urban Growth Analysis: Calculating Metrics to Quantify Urban Sprawl

AN INTEGRATED METHOD FOR FOREST CANOPY COVER MAPPING USING LANDSAT ETM+ IMAGERY INTRODUCTION

Plastic debris in 29 Great Lakes tributaries: Relations to watershed attributes and hydrology

Data Visualization and Evaluation

To: Ross Martin, Lisa Stapleton From: Brad Lind Subject: Joint Funding Agreement with USGS for 2012 Imagery Date: March 14, 2012.

MAPPING LAND USE/ LAND COVER OF WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT USING NDVI TECHNIQUES AND GIS Anusha. B 1, Sridhar. P 2

Semester Project Final Report. Logan River Flood Plain Analysis Using ArcGIS, HEC-GeoRAS, and HEC-RAS

USING HYPERSPECTRAL IMAGERY

2015 KANSAS LAND COVER PATTERNS PHASE I - FINAL REPORT

the Clinch/Hidden Valley study site were used in this mountainous classification.

Geospatial Assessment in Support of Urban & Community Forestry Programs

Development and Land Use Change in the Central Potomac River Watershed. Rebecca Posa. GIS for Water Resources, Fall 2014 University of Texas

Object-Oriented Oriented Method to Classify the Land Use and Land Cover in San Antonio using ecognition Object-Oriented Oriented Image Analysis

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July ISSN

Comparison of NLCD with NWI Classifications of Baldwin and Mobile Counties, Alabama

Wetland Mapping. Wetland Mapping in the United States. State Wetland Losses 53% in Lower US. Matthew J. Gray University of Tennessee

KNOWLEDGE-BASED CLASSIFICATION OF LAND COVER FOR THE QUALITY ASSESSEMENT OF GIS DATABASE. Israel -

Mapping Spatial Thematic Accuracy Using Indicator Kriging

COMBINING ENUMERATION AREA MAPS AND SATELITE IMAGES (LAND COVER) FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AREA FRAME (MULTIPLE FRAMES) IN AN AFRICAN COUNTRY:

Louisiana Transportation Engineering Conference. Monday, February 12, 2007

Landslide Classification: An Object-Based Approach Bryan Zhou Geog 342: Final Project

Phase 6 Land Use Database version 1

Kimberly J. Mueller Risk Management Solutions, Newark, CA. Dr. Auguste Boissonade Risk Management Solutions, Newark, CA

W I N D R E S O U R C E A S S E S S M E N T

USE OF LANDSAT IMAGERY FOR EVALUATION OF LAND COVER / LAND USE CHANGES FOR A 30 YEAR PERIOD FOR THE LAKE ERIE WATERSHED

Capabilities and Limitations of Land Cover and Satellite Data for Biomass Estimation in African Ecosystems Valerio Avitabile

Southern California Earthquake Center

Chapter 13. Perspectives on LANDFIRE Prototype Project Accuracy Assessment. James Vogelmann, Zhiliang Zhu, Jay Kost, Brian Tolk, and Donald Ohlen

The Redwood National and State Parks Vegetation Classification and Mapping Project Map Data Sets Completed and Delivered! 1

Defense Meteorological Satellite Program. Sprawl. Sprawl Highlights

Introduction. Elevation Data Strategy. Status and Next Steps

Improvement of the National Hydrography Dataset for US Forest Service Region 3 in Cooperation with the National Forest Service

2016 MBNEP Uplands/Wetlands Habitat Mapping Project Trend Analysis Report

7.1 INTRODUCTION 7.2 OBJECTIVE

URBAN CHANGE DETECTION OF LAHORE (PAKISTAN) USING A TIME SERIES OF SATELLITE IMAGES SINCE 1972

A Comparison of Approaches to Impervious Surface Characterization

Erosion Susceptibility in the area Around the Okanogan Fire Complex, Washington, US

IMPROVING REMOTE SENSING-DERIVED LAND USE/LAND COVER CLASSIFICATION WITH THE AID OF SPATIAL INFORMATION

Sources of Imagery and GIS Data Layers (Last updated October 2005)

CUYAHOGA COUNTY URBAN TREE CANOPY & LAND COVER MAPPING

3 SHORELINE CLASSIFICATION METHODOLOGY

NASA, EPA, USGS Partnership. U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey

A Landsat-based Assessment of Mobile Bay Land Use and Land Cover Change from 1974 to 2008

Yaneev Golombek, GISP. Merrick/McLaughlin. ESRI International User. July 9, Engineering Architecture Design-Build Surveying GeoSpatial Solutions

Fundamentals of Remote Sensing REMS5001 CAPSTONE PROJECT

Cross-Sensor Continuity Science Algorithm

4. GIS Implementation of the TxDOT Hydrology Extensions

2011 Land Use/Land Cover Delineation. Meghan Jenkins, GIS Analyst, GISP Jennifer Kinzer, GIS Coordinator, GISP

Transcription:

CHAPTER 1 THE UNITED STATES 2001 NATIONAL LAND COVER DATABASE Collin Homer*, Jon Dewitz, Joyce Fry, and Nazmul Hossain *U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Center for Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Sioux Falls, SD 57198 Science Applications International, Corporation (SAIC), contractor to USGS EROS Sioux Falls, SD 57198 Key words: land cover, national database, remote sensing, imperviousness, and tree canopy INTRODUCTION Land cover information is required by a broad spectrum of scientific, economic, and governmental applications, and provides essential input to analyze a variety of national issues. Thus, credible consistent national land cover information is increasingly more important. In 1999, new land cover research was implemented to expand and update the United States Geological Survey s National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD) 1992 into a full scale land cover database (with multiple instead of single products), and to produce it across all 50 States and Puerto Rico. This new database called the National Land Cover Database 2001 has been under production for six years. The 2001 refers to the nominal year from which most of the Landsat 5 Thematic Mapper (TM) and Landsat 7 Enhanced Thematic Mapperplus (ETM+) imagery was acquired. Three products from this database were completed in January 2007, for the conterminous United States, including 16 classes of land cover, percent tree canopy, and percent urban imperviousness. 5

6 NORTH AMERICA LAND COVER SUMMIT NLCD 2001 production was funded through an organization called the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (MRLC). This consortium consists of 13 programs across 10 Federal agencies that require land cover data for addressing their agency needs (www.mrlc.gov). MRLC provided the umbrella to coordinate multi-agency NLCD mapping production and funding contributions. In addition to NLCD data, MRLC also offers approximately 8,300 terrain-corrected Thematic Mapper (TM) and Enhanced Thematic Mapper (ETM+) scenes spanning growing season dates from 1982-2007, available for public Web-enabled download from www.mrlc.gov. METHODS NLCD 2001 production was accomplished according to protocols outlined in Homer et al. (2004) across 65 mapping zones for the conterminous United States. Production occurred with 12 mapping teams from both the government and private sector. To ensure consistency among teams, products were generated using standardized processes in data preparation, classification, and quality control. NLCD 2001 products were generated from a standardized set of input data layers mosaiced by mapping zone, including multi-season TM and ETM+ imagery centered on a nominal collection year of 2001, and Digital Elevation Model-based derivatives. This standard set of input data layers provided the best available data resources to derive the desired products. All data were geo-registered to the Albers equal-area conic projection grid, and resampled to 30m grid cells. The land cover classification was accomplished using commercial decision tree (DT) software called See5* (Quinlan 1993). This was applied to standardized input data layers prepared for each mapping zone, and subsequently extrapolated through ERDAS IMAGINE* into classified pixels using customized software. DT is a supervised classification method that relies on large amounts of training data, which were collected from a variety of sources including existing Landsat-based classifications and training data pools, field sampling, and limited on-screen sampling. Training data were used to map all land cover classes except for the four urban classes, which were derived from thresholding of the imperviousness data product. When land cover modeling was completed, the final product was aggregated to a one acre minimum mapping unit (0.4 hectare or five TM pixels) to reduce single pixel

THE UNITED STATES 2001 NATIONAL LAND COVER DATABASE 7 scattering using a smart eliminate aggregation algorithm. This algorithm uses eight-corner connectivity from a central pixel to allow non-linear features like roads and streams to remain intact, and accesses a weighting table to allow smart decisions on a dissolve protocol. Although every effort was made to maintain consistency in classification between mapping zones during production, some edge matching was required to merge the 65 completed zones. A three kilometer buffer around each zone, (six kilometer overlap was available between mapping zones) served as the interface area for defining the most successful edge-matching boundary. Imperviousness and tree canopy were classified using commercial regression tree (RT) software called Cubist* (Yang et al. 2002). Training data were generally derived from 1-m resolution Digital Orthoimagery Quarter Quadrangles (DOQQs) that were classified categorically into canopy/noncanopy, or impervious/non-impervious for each 1-m pixel. This training information was then used to derive the RT model, which was subsequently extrapolated across the mapping zone to derive continuous canopy and imperviousness predictions. A masking strategy was then used to further reduce errors of commission over areas with spectrally similar features that proved difficult to discriminate accurately (e.g. shrub and grass areas for canopy and bare agriculture fields for imperviousness). This masking method depended upon other ancillary GIS data layers to help define or eliminate problem areas. Final canopy and imperviousness products were not aggregated with smart eliminate like land cover, but were left in the single pixel format. A three kilometer boundary buffer was also used with these products, (six kilometer overlap was available between mapping zones) to serve as the interface area for defining the most successful edge-matching boundary. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Sixteen classes of land cover were modeled for the conterminous United States. (Table 1 and Figure 1). Initial land cover product accuracy from cross-validation estimates was generated during classification, with an overall national accuracy of 83.9%. Continuous predictions from 1-100% for both tree canopy and urban imperviousness were also modeled over the conterminous United States, with accuracy estimates derived from cross-validation and reported as an average error estimate. The tree

8 NORTH AMERICA LAND COVER SUMMIT canopy mapping zone average error estimates ranged within a given zone from to 6% to 17% deviation from prediction, and urban imperviousness average error estimates ranged within a given zone from 4% to 17% deviation from prediction. NLCD Land Cover Class Digital Code NLCD Class Name 11 Open Water 12 Perennial Ice/Snow 21 Developed, Open Space 22 Developed, Low Intensity 23 Developed, Medium Intensity 24 Developed, High Intensity 31 Barren Land 41 Deciduous Forest 42 Evergreen Forest 43 Mixed Forest 52 Shrub/Scrub 71 Grassland/Herbaceous 81 Pasture/Hay 82 Cultivated Crops 90 Woody Wetlands 95 Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands Table 1. Conterminous United States NLCD 2001 land cover legend by digital code The major value of NLCD 2001 products lie in their ability to provide a complete, consistent coverage of the nation s land cover, and to serve as a resource for regional-to-national scale applications. These types of products are designed to meet land cover requirements over larger areas, and are not designed for local application (e.g., county-level use). However, the ability to modify and customize NLCD 2001 data products for more specific application was accommodated in the original database design. Users not only have three products to synergistically combine, but can also download the original imagery for additional modification or correction if desired. Now that two eras of national land cover data are available, many users will be tempted to directly compare the two land cover layers as a way to measure land cover change. Users are cautioned that new improvements in mapping methodology, input data, and minor mapping legend modification will confound comparison between NLCD 1992 and NLCD 2001. Direct comparison of these two independently created land cover products is not recommended, because differences in the methodology

THE UNITED STATES 2001 NATIONAL LAND COVER DATABASE 9 Figure 1. NLCD 2001 conterminous United States land cover product. NLCD 2001 Land Cover Class Types

10 NORTH AMERICA LAND COVER SUMMIT used to produce the two products will overwhelm true differences due to land cover change. However, an NLCD bridge product to aid land cover change analysis between the two eras will soon be available at the Anderson Level I thematic scale (Fry et al. in prep), and is scheduled for release for the conterminous United States by the end of 2007. All NLCD 2001 products and mapping tools are available via Web-enabled file download from the MRLC Consortium website (www.mrlc.gov) with options for both dynamic download (user-defined download areas) and FTP download by zonal groupings. In most cases, files are available in several formats, and mapping zone metadata are supplied with all downloads. All NLCD 2001 product sets are distributed at 30m resolution in the NLCD standard NAD 83, Albers equal-area conic projection. NLCD 2001 data for Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico will be completed by August 2008, which will then represent the first compilation of nationwide land cover ever produced at 30m resolution. NLCD 2001 will then provide a comprehensive land cover resource for the entire United States, and support hundreds of applications that require this scale of information. Future updates of NLCD 2001 are now being prototyped to ensure that land cover information stays current, and that land cover change is quantified and analyzed to broaden the utility of this information. REFERENCES Fry, J., M. Coan, C. Homer, D. Meyer and J. Wickham. 2008. Completion of the National Land Cover Database 1992-2001 Retrofit Change Product. USGS Open File Report. In preparation. Homer, C., C. Huang, L. Yang, B. Wylie and M. Coan. 2004. Development of a 2001 National Landcover Database for the United States. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 70 (7): 829-840. Quinlan, J.R. 1993. C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann: San Mateo, California. Yang, L., C. Huang, C. Homer, B. Wylie, and M. Coan. 2002. An Approach for Mapping Large-area Impervious Surfaces: Synergistic use of Landsat 7 ETM+ and High Spatial Resolution Imagery. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing 29 (2): 230-240.

THE UNITED STATES 2001 NATIONAL LAND COVER DATABASE 11 AKNOWLEDGMENTS This research reflects an enormous team effort across many organizations and individuals. Special acknowledgment is made for the support of the individuals and agencies of the MRLC Consortium, the many NLCD 2001 Federal mapping teams from the USGS, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, and the private-sector mapping teams of SAIC, MDA Federal, and Sanborn who performed work under several USGS and NOAA contracts. Endnote * The use of any trade, product, or firm name is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

12 NORTH AMERICA LAND COVER SUMMIT