Comparing Three Great Lakes Research Projects By Mary Bresee.
13
Comparing Three Great Lakes Research Projects By Mary Bresee
-
Upload
dylan-leonard -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
Transcript of Comparing Three Great Lakes Research Projects By Mary Bresee.
Comparing Three Great Lakes Research Projects
By Mary Bresee
FIA & Satellite Imagery
• Forest Inventory Analysis (FIA) ~ an annual survey which includes soil, understory vegetation, tree crown conditions, composition and coarse woody debris (http://biology.usgs.gov/luhna/chap6.html).
• Satellite imagery ~ mechanisms affecting ecological processes and ultimately human impacts (He et al. 1998).~ facilitates the assessment of conditions, changes, and trends (Bresee et al. in press)
Research Projects
• Historical Landcover Changes~150 years in GLR
~Reconstructed from U.S General land survey and USFS fourth FIA
• Regional Forest Assessment~Distribution of age and species
~ Combination of Satellite Imagery (Multitemporal Landsat Thermatic Mapper) and FIA
• Chequamegon Landscape Dynamics
~ Landsat Imagery (MSS, TM, and ETM+)
Results ~ 150 Years Landcover Change
Boreal forest and conifer swampPine forest and barrensNorthern mesic forestAspen-birch forestOak forest and savannaWet mesic forestNon-forestWater
Spruce-fir-cedarJack-red-white pineMaple-basswood-birchAspen-birch forestOak-hickoryElm-ash-cottonwood-soft mapleNon-forestWater
Results ~ 150 Years Landcover Change
Results ~ Regional Forest
Assessment
a) Spatial distribution of associated tree species by ecoregion following integration of satellite classification and FIA database; a) basswood, b) red maple, and c) yellow birch
Tree spp of interest
Other forest
Non-Forest
Results ~ Regional Forest
Assessment
Tree spp of interest
Other forest
Non-Forest
Chequamegon~Landscape change
1972
0 6 123 Kilometers
1987
Water
LegendJP NFBGMHCMH RP RFS
1978 1982
1992 2001
Results ~ Chequamegon Landscape Dynamics
MH MRP MHC MJP RFS NFBG
Cover Type
0
3
6
9
12
15T
otal
Are
a (h
a, T
hous
ands
)
1972 1978 1982 1987 1992 2001
MH MRP MHC MJP RFS NFBG
Cover Type
0
3
6
9
12
15T
otal
Are
a (h
a, T
hous
ands
)
1972
MH MRP MHC MJP RFS NFBG
Cover Type
0
3
6
9
12
15T
otal
Are
a (h
a, T
hous
ands
)
1972 19781978 19821982 1987 19921987 1992 2001
Results ~ Chequamegon Landscape Dynamics
MH RP MHC JP RFS NFBG
Cover Type
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
Clu
mp
iness
(%
)
1972 1978 1982 1987 1992 2001
MH RP MHC JP RFS NFBG
Cover Type
0
700
1400
2100
2800
MX
PS
(h
a)
1972 1978 1982 1987 1992 2001
Discussion
• Scale ~ important to define in objectives otherwise results can be obsolete
Ex. Study 1 indicated that areas in the Washburn Peninsula have not changed extensively within the last 150 years, while study indicated large changes.
• Data Collection Methods~ important to understand the limitations of satellite imagery
• Fragmentation ~ can be detected at the landscape level Ex. 1 vs Ex. 3
Conclusions
• Satellite imagery can quantify landscape change - based on management direction and with adequate field measurements. BUT IT’S DEPENDANT ON SCALE
• Linking process to Management/Disturbance ~ the ability to link processes and management is key in understanding pattern processes interactions
• Linking process to pattern
Questions ?
