Landcover Classification for Conservation
Planning
Reason for Improved Landcover Classification:Habitat Modeling when data is not available for RSF’s
Identifying Ecological Communities
Many Problems with Existing Classifications:“One size fits all” attitude
Extent of area covered
Disconnect between botanical and remote sensing classifications
Lack of consistent standards
End result:1,000’s of project specific landcover classifications
They are usually incompatible with each other
Existing classifications are “manipulated” or less than desired
classifications are used
Montana GAP Landcover
Montana & Wyoming GAP
Wyoming Classification8028 acres
80% lodgepole pine20% subalpine meadow
Methods to Account for Differences
Crosswalk
Independent rating
Conservation Needs of a Landcover Classification
(emphasis on wildlife modeling)
Information and Scale Must Match the Needs of the SpeciesStructureAdaptable across different scales
Minimize source of errors
Compatibility
Easy to produce
Cost effective
Vegetation Resources InventoryThe B.C. Landcover Classification Scheme
Level 1 Level 2 - Lifeform Level 3 - Landscape Position
Riparian ConiferUpland ConiferAlpine Conifer
Riparian BroadleafUpland Broadleaf
Riparian Mixed TreedUpland Mixed Treed
Mature trees (pole size & greater) dense (>60% crown closure)Mature trees (pole size & greater) open (26 - 60% crown closure)Mature trees (pole size & greater) sparse )10 - 25% crown closure)
Mature trees (pole size & greater) dense (>60% crown closure)Mature trees (pole size & greater) open (26 - 60% crown closure)Mature trees (pole size & greater) sparse )10 - 25% crown closure)
Mixed Conifer / Broadleaf (< 75% of conifer or broadleaf)
Seedling and sappling sized trees, closed (>50% crown closure)Seedling and sappling sized trees, open (10 - 49% crown closure)
Mature trees (pole size & greater) dense (>60% crown closure)Mature trees (pole size & greater) open (26 - 60% crown closure)Mature trees (pole size & greater) sparse )10 - 25% crown closure)
Broadleaf (> 75% broadleaf)
Seedling and sappling sized trees, closed (>50% crown closure)Seedling and sappling sized trees, open (10 - 49% crown closure)
Level 4 - Structure Classes (for each Class in Level 3)Vegetated treed (>10% total vegetation cover, of which >15% is treed)
Conifers (> 75% conifers)
Seedling and sappling sized trees, closed (>50% crown closure)Seedling and sappling sized trees, open (10 - 49% crown closure)
Proposed Classification Scheme
Level 1 Level 2 - Lifeform Level 3 - Landscape Position
Riparian ShrubNon-riparian Mesic ShrubUpland Shrub
Agricultural Lands - IrrigatedRiparian HerbaceousNon-riparian Mesic HerbaceousUpland HerbaceousAlpine Herbacesous
Riparian MixedMixed ShrubUpland Mixed
Unvegetated Land (<10% cover)WaterUrban
Level 4 - Structure Classes (for each Class in Level 3)
Vegetated non-treed (>10% total vegetation cover, of which <15% is treed)
Dense shrub (>60% canopy cover)Open shrub (26 - 60% canopy cover)
Shrubs (>75% of the vegetated cover is shrubs)
Sparse shrub (10 - 25% canopy cover)
Dense herbaceous (>60% canopy cover)
Herbaceous (>75% of the vegetated cover is herbaceous)
Open herbaceous (26 - 60% canopy cover)Sparse herbaceous (10 - 25% canopy cover)
Dense mixed (>60% canopy cover)Open mixed (26 - 60% canopy cover)
Mixed shrub / herb (<75% of the vegetated cover is either shrub or herbaceous)
Sparse mixed (10 - 25% canopy cover)
Standing Burnt Forest (<5 years prior to satelite acquisition date)
Proposed Classification Scheme - continued
Ancillary DataElevationHydrologyLandscape position
Ancillary DataEcoregionSlopeAspect
ImageryBandsIndicesPCA
Level 1
Level 2Lifeform
Level 3Landscape position
Level 4Species
Level 4Structure
Supervised
Classificatio
n
Fuzzy
Classificatio
n
Model
UnsupervisedClassification CART
Proposed MethodsCan be used for any resolution imageryAllows nesting of different types of imagery
Ecoregions
ProvincesSectionsSub-Sections
QuickBird Scene
Orthophoto Classification