1. USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program & Benthic Overview
Karl E. Brown, Vegetation Mapping Program Mgr Natural Resource Program Center
Biological Resources Management Division
Benthic Habitat Mapping Workshop June 3-5, 2008

2. Outline and Overview Background Approach, Process & Products
USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program Overview
Outline and Overview
Background
Approach, Process & Products
Present Program Status
Hybrid Techniques
Available Data / Website
Suggestions to the Benthic Habitat Mapping Effort

3. What is it? High priority requirement of the NPS I&M Program
Background
What is it?
High priority requirement of the NPS
I&M Program
National (Service Wide) Program
Begins long term vegetation monitoring
program
Has many short term immediate
applications

4. NPS I&M Program Base Cartographic Soils Geology Vegetation
Background
NPS I&M Program
Base Cartographic
Soils
Geology
Vegetation
Bibliographies
Species lists
Air quality
Water quality

5. NPS vegetation mapping projects
Background
National Program
Differs from other
NPS vegetation mapping projects
270 park units (full park coverage)
minute USGS quadrangles
National scope
Participation of multiple agencies
Consistency in detail and accuracy between parks
Produces digital products available on WWW
Coordination at multiple levels

6. Standards NPS management policies, standards & guidelines
Background
Standards
NPS management policies, standards & guidelines
Federal Geographic Data Committee standards
metadata, transfer, classification etc.
Nationally consistent, hierarchical, classification scheme
National Map Accuracy Standards
Thematic accuracy >80% per class
Scale of 1:24,000
Minimum mapping unit of 0.5 hectare

7. Major Steps for each Park
Data Issues
Major Steps for each Park
Scoping meeting
Data review
Data acquisition
Field sampling
Classification characterization
Photo interpretation, mapping and automation
Accuracy assessment
Final product review
These are the basic steps that are required for each park unit
Data review - there are usually a lot of data avalaible for each unit, and it takes time and coordination to bring them together
The field sampling should ideally take place when the photo interpreters are doing their field work, so there can be coordination between what the ecologists classifiy and what the intepreters identify
The accuracy assessment should ideally be done when the mapping is complete so we can design a stratified random sample, but for efficiency’s sake, we often do accuracy assessment at the same time as the original field sampling

8. Products from the Program
Data Issues
Products from the Program
Aerial photography/ imagery (hardcopy / digital, some new DOQQs)
Field data (hardcopy and database)
Classification report (Description and Key)
Photo interp report (Description and Key)
Accuracy report
Vegetation map data (digital coverage)
All appropriate metadata

9. FGDC National Vegetation Classification System 2006
Data Issues
FGDC National Vegetation Classification System 2006
A. PHYSIOGNOMY
Division/Order - Tree Dominant (dominant life form)
Class - Woodland (spacing & height of dominant form)
Subclass - Evergreen Woodland (morphological & phenological similarity)
Group - Temperate Evergreen Needle-leaved (climate, latitude, growth form, leaf form)
Formation - Evergreen Needle-leaved Woodland with Rounded Crowns (mappable units)
B. FLORISTICS
Alliance (Cover Type) - Douglas Fir Woodland (dominant species)
Association (Community) - Douglas Fir / Snowberry Woodland (subdominant or associated species)
The system is hierarchical which allows it to be used for many different levels of analysis and study - from National to regional to each Park to each site.
It is also standard - so we do not have to reinvent the wheel for each park, although a lot of development work has to be done for each park.

10. Standard Comparisons 1 2 3 New mid levels 4 5 6 7 8
FGDC standard
Revised Hierarchy 1
CLASS
CLASS 2
SUBCLASS
SUBCLASS 3
FORMATION GROUP
FORMATION
New mid levels 4
FORMATION SUBGROUP
DIVISION 5
FORMATION
MACROGROUP 6
ALLIANCE
GROUP 7
ASSOCIATION
ALLIANCE 8
ASSOCIATION

11. Present Status Data Issues Approximately 165 projects in process
30 Parks started ( )
29 Park projects started in 2001
11 Park projects started
2005 completed 11 more parks, continued 73 ongoing projects, and initiated 24 new starts
39 Parks completed for web access
more completed soon; 62 AA stage completed
62 FY 05; 80 FY 06; 116 FY 07; 146 FY 08
Alaska: 6 parks complete in 2003; 3 in 2004; 3 new ongoing in 2005; 4 more completed ; 3 more starts
USGS partnering on funding, 3 methods, archiving contract, collaborative fire and fuels datasets, variability analysis and surface model developments

12. Program Status
Status June 2007

13. Process & Products
Maps and Spatial Data

14. Accuracy Assessment Assessment of class accuracy across the park:
Process & Products
Accuracy Assessment
Assessment of class accuracy across the park:

15. Process & Products
Metadata

16. Process & Products
Reports

17. Data Availability http://biology.usgs.gov/npsveg/ Process & Products
All products are made available via a public internet website:

18. USGS-BLM Vegetation & Invasive Plants Characterization Projects
Program Status
USGS-BLM Vegetation & Invasive Plants Characterization Projects
Gunnison Gorge NCA

19. USGS-USFWS Vegetation Mapping Projects
Program Status
USGS-USFWS Vegetation Mapping Projects
Ouray NWR
Lacreek NWR
We are just getting started with FWS. We are working with Region 6 out of Denver to start 2 refuges – Ouray and Lacreek. There are close to 150 refuges in Region 6 and over 500 refuges nationwide covering 92 million acres of land and water.
Region 6 is taking the lead for the Agency on this effort – we have really not had national support to date, but I think with the completion of these two projects will really show the agency the value of these products – consistent, useful for practical on-the-ground management, yet scientifically sound.

20. New Models “New/other” technologies Sister Bureau hybrid techniques
High Resolution Remote Sensing
eCognition segmentation
Laser Rangefinder Remote GPS positioning
Sister Bureau hybrid techniques
FWS Lower cost Vegetation Map “Light”
Savings from reduced field collection
BLM / USFS vegetation cross walks ROMO/GRSA
Field Vegetation Guides – VOYA
Network strategy / plans PACN & MOJN

21. Cabrillo is working with State, Corps, and US Navy to figure out jurisdiction of the park acres.

22. Multiresolution Segmentation
Hybrid Techniques
Multiresolution Segmentation
Levels can be used to compare results of segmentation based on different scale parameters and homogeneity criterion.
Layers can be weighted. Weights determine to which degree the information is used during the process of object generation.

23. Hybrid techniques – summary of current efforts
Mixed imagery and Sister Bureau eCog segmentation and skeleton polygon sampling (GRSA)
PI / eCog linework and model verification (MEVE) / ground reference; add attributes (field & automation savings)
Classical accuracy assessment (AA) or small park methodology (census of GRKO, LIBI, KNRI, FOUN)
Verify eCog gradient test against completed AA (ROMO)
Machine classification and PI field sample verification (LAVO)

24. National Park / Environs – data successes
Summary & Partnerships 1
National Park / Environs – data successes
Consider areas of interest for small park methodology
Evaluate sparse vegetation sampling need and plot sizes
Fire and fuels protocols may integrate fuels stratification in sample design
Develop fuel model polygons from NVCS vegetation polygons / photos
Other fire and monitoring program data needs…

25. NPS / Environs – fire data summary
Summary & Partnerships 2
NPS / Environs – fire data summary
Park Fire Management team field verify / photo reference fuel model types
Evaluate LANDFIRE data potential; AA of EVT layers
How map classes improve Landfire and other models
Research partnering for a hybrid approach, as needed
Fire fuel classes / types
Fuel loadings (1/10/100 hr…)
Fire Regime Condition Class
LANDFIRE update as appropriate and as supported by partnership

26. Summary of Efforts in 2007-8 Fund $4M ongoing projects in 25+ networks
Summary & Partnerships 3
Summary of Efforts in
Fund $4M ongoing projects in 25+ networks
Provide technical support and planning assistance to parks, networks, and regions
Prioritize candidate projects with VMP team
Facilitate new planning based on park and network leveraged funding using hybrid innovations; new starts in ~
Action plan for creation / migration of NPS data, and USGS-NPS archiving
Develop and serve planning templates on the web and a PLOTS 3.0 database update

27. Suggestions to Benthic Efforts
Benthic Partnerships 1
Suggestions to Benthic Efforts
Stabilize the mapping standard, even a draft for NPS Marine Parks
Work the 3 prototype parks, networks, and regional candidate areas
Evaluate candidate projects against the draft standard
Grow / update from the prototypes

28. Benthic Habitats of Florida Bay, Florida, 1991-1995
Source: NOAA Coastal Services Center

29. Suggestions to Benthic Efforts
Benthic Partnerships 2
Suggestions to Benthic Efforts
Learn the USGS business model and facilitate joint papers on standards innovations
Regional Executive partnership on Green Book budget development, and USGS-NPS archiving
Develop and serve planning templates on the web and a draft 1.0 (geo?) database container

30. Contact Information
More Information
Visit the USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Website:
Karl Brown, Ph.D.
NPS I&M (Program Lead)
Mike Mulligan
USGS (Program Lead)
Chris Lea
NPS I&M (Ecologist)
Theresa Singh
USGS (VMP Website)
Tammy Hamer
NPS I&M (Program Assistant)

31. Thanks Karl Brown, Ph.D. NPS I&M (Program Lead) (970) 225-3591
Chris Lea
NPS I&M (Ecologist)
(303)
Tammy Hamer
NPS I&M Program Assistant
(970)