1. An Improved Method for Classifying Forest Fragmentation Jason Parent and James Hurd jason.parent@uconn.edu Center for Land use Education and Research

2. 2 “Forest fragmentation is the process of dividing large tracts of forest into smaller isolated tracts surrounded by human- modified environments.” “Forest fragmentation is the process of dividing large tracts of forest into smaller isolated tracts surrounded by human- modified environments.” Society of American Foresters (1998)

3. 3 “ …continued declines and fragmentation of the forestland base may lead to the impairment of our forest ecosystems’ ability to protect water flow and quality, to provide healthy and diverse forest habitat, and to remain a viable economic resource that provides recreation, timber, and other forest products.” Society of American Foresters (1998)

4. 4 Why map forest fragmentation? ► Identify areas in which to focus management efforts aimed at minimizing forest fragmentation. ► Allow better land use planning to minimize forest fragmentation in the future

5. 5 An improved method to map forest fragmentation ► Vogt et al. (2007) propose a method that classifies forest based on pixel-level patterns.  The authors found this method to yield more accurate results than the method proposed by Riitters et al. (2002).

6. 6 Forest classes ► Four classes of forest are identified – in terms of the type of fragmentation present:  Core – interior forest pixels that are not degraded from “edge effects”.  Perforated – forest along the inside edge of an small forest perforation.  Edge – forest along the outside edge of a forest patch.  Patch – small fragments of forest that are entirely degraded by “edge effects”.

7. 7 Forest classes

8. 8 A tool for mapping fragmentation in the landscape ► We present the Landscape Fragmentation Analysis tool (LFA) for mapping fragmentation in the landscape. ► Based on the method developed by Vogt et al. (2007).  LFA procedures are functionally equivalent and yield identical results but are more efficient.  LFA procedures are more intuitive. ► Can analyze fragmentation for any land cover type:  Forest land, shrub land, urban land, etc. ► The LFA tool is a python script that runs in ArcToolbox. ► Requires ArcView 9.2 with Spatial Analyst

9. 9 Input land cover map ► The LFA tool requires a 3 class land cover map as input: …assuming forest is the land cover type of interest…  1 = non-forest  2 = water  3 = forest ► Water is not considered to be a fragmenting feature and does not affect the analysis. ► To include water as a fragmenting feature, include water in the non-forest class (value = 1).

10. 10 Extracting land covers of interest Forest Non-forest Water

11. 11 Edge width ► Edge-width is the distance over which non-forest land covers can degrade forest land covers. ► Core, perforated, edge, and patch forest are defined in terms of the “edge width”. ► Numerous studies have documented “edge effects” on wildlife habitat:  Edge-width varies by species and can range from 50 meters to several hundred meters.  100 meters is often used as a general edge-width.

12. 12 Defining core, peripheral, and patch forest Assuming an edge-width of 100 meters… ► Core forests consist of any forest pixels that are more than 100 meters from non-forest. ► Peripheral forest consists of forest pixels that are within 100 meters of non-forest and the tract contains core forest.  Further classified into edge and perforated forest ► Patch forests do not contain any forest pixels that are more than 100 meters from non-forest – they are entirely encompassed by the edge-effect.

13. 13 core forest <= 100 m from non-forest > 100 m from non-forest core pixels in tract peripheral forest Note: assuming edge- width is 100 meters no core pixels in tract patch forest Classifying core, peripheral, and patch forest Forest

14. 14 Core, patch, and peripheral forest 100 200 300 0m core

15. 15 <= 100 m from forest all pixels less than 100 m of forest non-forest patch Classifying non-forest patches Note: assuming edge- width is 100 meters Non-forest

16. 16 Non-forest patches 100 200 300 0m

17. 17 peripheral forest not adjacent to non-forest patch adjacent to non-forest patch perforated forest edge forest Classifying perforated and edge forest

18. 18 core 100 200 300 0m Core, patch, edge and perforated forest

19. 19 Specifying parameters for LFA Output map Input edge width Input land cover

20. 20 Downloading the LFA tool ► The Landscape Fragmentation Analysis tool is available through the Center for Land use Education and Research (CLEAR) at:  http://www.clear.uconn.edu/tools/geospatial/Landscape _Fragmentation.zip http://www.clear.uconn.edu/tools/geospatial/Landscape _Fragmentation.zip http://www.clear.uconn.edu/tools/geospatial/Landscape _Fragmentation.zip ► Forest fragmentation analysis results for Connecticut Changing Landscape land cover data will also be available through CLEAR’s website:  www.clear.uconn.edu www.clear.uconn.edu

21. 21 References ► Vogt, P., K. Riitters, C. Estreguil, J. Kozak, T. Wade, J. Wickham. 2007. Mapping spatial patterns with morphological image processing. Landscape Ecology 22: 171-177. ► Riitters, K., J. Wickham, R. O’Neill, K. Jones, E. Smith, J. Coulston, T. Wade, J. Smith. 2002. Fragmentation of continental United States forests. Ecosystems 5 : 815-822.

22. An Improved Method for Classifying Forest Fragmentation Jason Parent and James Hurd jason.parent@uconn.edu Center for Land use Education and Research Questions?