Monitoring Surface Area Change in Iowa's Water Bodies

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
LANDSAT Program Update Tim Newman Coordinator, USGS Land Remote Sensing Program National Geospatial Advisory Committee December 3, 2014.
Advertisements

Random Forest Predrag Radenković 3237/10
A Land Cover Map of Eurasia’s Boreal Ecosystems S. BARTALEV, A. S. BELWARD Institute for Environment and Sustainability, EC Joint Research Centre, Italy.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey USGS/EROS Data Center Global Land Cover Project – Experiences and Research Interests GLC2000-JRC.
September 5, 2013 Tyler Jones Research Assistant Dept. of Geology & Geography Auburn University.
Multiple Criteria for Evaluating Land Cover Classification Algorithms Summary of a paper by R.S. DeFries and Jonathan Cheung-Wai Chan April, 2000 Remote.
VALIDATION OF REMOTE SENSING CLASSIFICATIONS: a case of Balans classification Markus Törmä.
2 nd International Conference on Water and Flood Management ICWFM-2009 Flood Inundation Map of Bangladesh using MODIS Surface Reflectance Data AKM Saiful.
Global Land Cover: Approaches to Validation Alan Strahler GLC2000 Meeting JRC Ispra 3/02.
Global Monitoring of Large Reservoir Storage from Satellite Remote Sensing Huilin Gao 1, Dennis P. Lettenmaier 1, Charon Birkett 2 1 Dept. of Civil and.
1 Space Applications Institute Joint Research Centre European Commission Ispra (VA), Italy Global Vegetation Monitoring.
Module 2.1 Monitoring activity data for forests using remote sensing REDD+ training materials by GOFC-GOLD, Wageningen University, World Bank FCPF 1 Module.
Accuracy Assessment. 2 Because it is not practical to test every pixel in the classification image, a representative sample of reference points in the.
Methods of Validating Maps of Deforestation and Selective Logging Carlos Souza Jr. Instituto do Homem e Meio Ambiente da Amazônia—Imazon.
Ten State Mid-Atlantic Cropland Data Layer Project Rick Mueller Program Manager USDA/National Agricultural Statistics Service Remote Sensing Across the.
Mapping of mountain pine beetle red-attack forest damage: discrepancies by data sources at the forest stand scale Huapeng Chen and Adrian Walton.
Ramesh Gautam, Jean Woods, Simon Eching, Mohammad Mostafavi, Scott Hayes, tom Hawkins, Jeff milliken Division of Statewide Integrated Water Management.
Co-authors: Maryam Altaf & Intikhab Ulfat
earthobs.nr.no Land cover classification of cloud- and snow-contaminated multi-temporal high-resolution satellite images Arnt-Børre Salberg and.
The Dying Dead Sea Assessing the decline of the Dead Sea area in relation to irrigated agriculture Noel Peterson and Zach Tagar FR 5262.
Global land cover mapping from MODIS: algorithms and early results M.A. Friedl a,*, D.K. McIver a, J.C.F. Hodges a, X.Y. Zhang a, D. Muchoney b, A.H. Strahler.
earthobs.nr.no Temporal Analysis of Forest Cover Using a Hidden Markov Model Arnt-Børre Salberg and Øivind Due Trier Norwegian Computing Center.
Chuvieco and Huete (2009): Fundamentals of Satellite Remote Sensing, Taylor and Francis Emilio Chuvieco and Alfredo Huete Fundamentals of Satellite Remote.
National Mapping Division EROS Data Center U. S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Earth Resources Operation Systems (EROS) Data Center World Data.
Optimal use of new satellite resources. Research funded by NERC/CEH and JNCC. Rapid Land Cover Mapping.
Chuvieco and Huete (2009): Fundamentals of Satellite Remote Sensing, Taylor and Francis Emilio Chuvieco and Alfredo Huete Fundamentals of Satellite Remote.
Image Classification Digital Image Processing Techniques Image Restoration Image Enhancement Image Classification Image Classification.
Lu Liang, Peng Gong Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management, University of California, Berkeley And Center for Earth System Science,
Chuvieco and Huete (2009): Fundamentals of Satellite Remote Sensing, Taylor and Francis Emilio Chuvieco and Alfredo Huete Fundamentals of Satellite Remote.
The University of Mississippi Geoinformatics Center NASA MRC RPC – 11 July 2007 Rapid Prototyping of NASA Next Generation Sensors for the SERVIR System.
Assessing the Phenological Suitability of Global Landsat Data Sets for Forest Change Analysis The Global Land Cover Facility What does.
Global Land Cover Mapping Looking Back, Looking Forward Alan Belward Head of Land Resource Management Unit, European Commisison, Joint Research Centre.
474/574 Remote sensing Lab: Digitizing Sweet water Wetland Park areas, Tucson AZ by using remote sensing imagery (Aerial and Landsat) and ArcGIS software.
GLC mapping in semi-arid regions: a case study in West Africa Jean-François Pekel and Pierre Defourny Department of Environmental Sciences and Land Use.
Random Forests Ujjwol Subedi. Introduction What is Random Tree? ◦ Is a tree constructed randomly from a set of possible trees having K random features.
Citation: Moskal., L. M. and D. M. Styers, Land use/land cover (LULC) from high-resolution near infrared aerial imagery: costs and applications.
GLC 2000 Workshop March 2003 Land cover map of southern hemisphere Africa using SPOT-4 VEGETATION data Ana Cabral 1, Maria J.P. de Vasconcelos 1,2,
Updated Cover Type Map of Cloquet Forestry Center For Continuous Forest Inventory.
Mapping Canada’s Rangeland and Forage Resources using Earth Observation Emily Lindsay MSc Candidate – Carleton University Supervisors: Doug J. King & Andrew.
Cropland Extent Mapping in South America Global Food Security - Support Analysis m Chandra Giri, Ying Zhong January 19 th, 2016.
Christopher Steinhoff Ecosystem Science and Management, University of Wyoming Ramesh Sivanpillai Department of Botany, University of Wyoming Mapping Changes.
26. Classification Accuracy Assessment
Combining Models Foundations of Algorithms and Machine Learning (CS60020), IIT KGP, 2017: Indrajit Bhattacharya.
Quantifying Analyst Bias in Mapping Flooded Areas from Landsat Images
1 2 Mau forest Estate Tea Cloud & shadow South Nandi Forest Reserve
GEO-XIII Plenary, 8/10/2016 St Petersburg, Russian Federation
Semi-Supervised Clustering
Ecosystem Model Evaluation
Assessment of Current Field Plots and LiDAR ‘Virtual’ Plots as Guides to Classification Procedures for Multitemporal Analysis of Historic and Current Landsat.
Factsheet # 12 Understanding multiscale dynamics of landscape change through the application of remote sensing & GIS Land use/land cover (LULC) from high-resolution.
Factsheet # 9 Decadal Analysis of Wetland & Agricultural Change
HIERARCHICAL CLASSIFICATION OF DIFFERENT CROPS USING
Water Budget & Bank Storage
Global Surface Water Explorer
Meng Lu and Edzer Pebesma
Incorporating Ancillary Data for Classification
By Yudhi Gunawan * and Tamás János **
Geospatial data and the 2030 Agenda
University College London (UCL), UK
Evaluating Land-Use Classification Methodology Using Landsat Imagery
Potential Landsat Contributions
An Image Classification of Khartoum, Sudan
The Global Mangrove Watch (GMW)
Quantifying Producer Error in the Unsupervised Classification of Reservoirs Skye Swoboda-Colberg1, Chris Sheets2, Dr. Ramesh Sivanpillai3 1. Department.
The Pagami Creek Wildfire
University College London (UCL), UK
Copernicus Land Service
Image Classification of the Upper South Fork Eel River Watershed
Calculating land use change in west linn from
Forest / Non-forest (FNF) mapping for Viet Nam using PALSAR-2 time series images 2019/01/22 Truong Van Thinh – Master’s Program in Environmental.
Presentation transcript:

Monitoring Surface Area Change in Iowa's Water Bodies Charlie Labuzzetta Center for Survey Statistics & Methodology April 24th, 2018

Motivation Annual estimates of large water body (LWB) surface area extent on non-Federal lands are recorded as part of the National Resources Inventory (NRI). Landsat Mission satellite imagery provides opportunity to generate estimates of LWB surface area at higher temporal resolution. Higher temporal resolution data may help identify seasonal variation and structural breaks in surface area extent of these LWB. This method provides supplementary data for NRI surveys and validation.

Previous Methodology European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) – Monthly Water History Database Uses ”procedural sequential decision tree” [1] Classifies available LANDSAT pixels monthly from 1984 - 2015 Land ( pixel contains <30 m2 open water ) Water ( pixel contains 30 m2 open water ) Estimated <1% false water detection, <5% water omission JRC Water History Dataset

Google Earth Engine Provides quick access to Imagery Select via drawing a polygon Select via importing kml file Highspeed server-based computing Supports machine learning Random Forest Naïve Bayes Unsupervised K-means Methods Faster than Python

Classification Algorithm Training data NRI LWB polygon New image to classify Output DOY: 120 - 180 180 - 240 240 - 300 Example: NRI LWB for Dunbar Slough Wetland Management Area Landsat imagery within 800 m. buffered region around NRI LWB Naïve Bayes classifier to predict water-type land cover in each image Three images of an 800 m. buffered region around the centroid of the polygon are selected. JRC classifications with “cluster likelihood label permutations”* used as training labels. *method not described here

Case Study: Dunbar Slough 2014-09-19 2000-08-11 2007-07-14 1985-08-02 A B C D B A D C White pixel = JRC & CSSM predict water Blue pixel = Only CSSM predicts water

Validation Study Three LWB from each of Iowa’s nine agricultural districts were randomly selected from the NRI database. A date for testing was randomly selected for each LWB from the available Landsat images passing the quality controls (<1% cloud cover, <1% missing data) and where a 1 m2 high resolution National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) image was taken within the same month. Water body surface area was traced by hand in the NAIP imagery to calculate a validated proportion of water area to total area of the image.[5] Both our method, denoted CSSM, and the previous classifications by JRC were used to calculate predicted proportions. Errors for each method were quantified in comparison to the validated proportions. NAIP image with hand-drawn polygon

Validation Study JRC Method Error: Mean: -0.048 Median: -0.028 SD: 0.069 CSSM Method Error: Mean: -0.014 Median: -0.005 SD: 0.039

yijkl = μi + ⍺j + βk + 𝑒ijkl NRI Comparison Consider a simple linear model yijkl = μi + ⍺j + βk + 𝑒ijkl where yijkl denotes the lth measure of water surface area for the ith water body from the kth month of the jth year starting at 1997. Consider each to be categorical fixed effects with sum to zero constraints placed upon coefficients ⍺ and β. Thus, the predicted mean surface area for the ith LWB is estimated as μi. We compare the estimated mean surface area to the median permanent surface area recorded by NRI, which we denote ni. Consider ti to be the total area of the predicted region for water body i. Consider residuals of the form: ri = |ni – μi| / ti

NRI Comparison

NRI Comparison

Lowest Residuals r = 0.00016 r = 0.00016 r = 0.00019 NRI CSSM JRC

Highest Residuals r = 0.28204 r = 0.21101 r = 0.19586 NRI CSSM JRC

Beaver Creek / Des Moines River August 23rd, 2003 Should there be more LWBs here than NRI records? NRI CSSM JRC

Dead Lake / Mississippi River May 23rd, 2003 June 19th, 2009 This area is highly variable due to the influence of the Mississippi River. NRI CSSM JRC

Rush Lake June 29th, 2002 Rush Lake seems to have been much drier than NRI reports… NRI CSSM JRC

Thank you!

References [1] Pekel, Jean-Franois, Andrew Cottam, Noel Gorelick, and Alan S Belward. 2016. “High- Resolution Mapping of Global Surface Water and Its Long-Term Changes.” Nature 540:418. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature20584. U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2015. Summary Report: 2012 National Resources Inventory, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington, DC, and Center for Survey Statistics and Methodology, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/nri/12summary. Gorelick, Noel et al. 2017. “Google Earth Engine: Planetary-Scale Geospatial Analysis for Everyone.” Remote Sensing of Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.06.031. Landsat Imagery courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey. NAIP Imagery courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey.