1. Remote Sensing Classification Systems

2. 1. Land Use and Land Cover
Land use - reflects people's relation to the environment 

Land cover - natural/artificial compositions at the surface

3. 1. Land Use and Land Cover
The USGS classification system (Anderson et al., 1976)
most commonly used national classification system for remote sensing data
for both satellite images and air photos
based on land capability, vulnerability to management, and potential use

4. Anderson Classification System Level I1
Urban or build-up land 2
Agricultural 3
Rangeland 4
Forest land 5
Water 6
Wetland 7
Barren land 8
Tundra 9
Perennial snow or ice

5. Anderson System level II
1 Urban or built-up land
level II
11 Residential
12 Commercial and service
13 Industrial
14 Transportation, communications, and utilities
15 Industrial and commercial complex
16 Mixed urban or built-up land
17 Other urban or built-up land

6. Anderson System level II ..
2 Agricultural land
21 Cropland and pasture
22 Orchards, groves, vineyards, nurseries, and
ornamental horticultural areas
23 Confined feeding operations
24 Other agricultural land

7. Anderson System level II ..
3 Rangeland
31 Herbaceous rangeland
32 Shrub and brush rangeland
33 Mixed rangeland
4 Forest land
41 Deciduous forest land
42 Evergreen forest land
43 Mixed forest land

8. Anderson System level II ..
5 Water
51 Streams and canals
52 Lakes
53 Reservoirs
54 Bays and estuaries
6 Wetland
61 Forested wetland
62 Nonforested wetland

9. Anderson System level II ..
7 Barren land
71 Dry salt flats
72 Beaches
73 Sandy areas other than beaches
74 Bare exposed rock
75 Strip mines, quarries, and gravel pits
76 Transitional areas
77 Mixed barren land

10. Anderson System level II ..
8 Tundra
81 Shrub and brush tundra
82 Herbaceous tundra
83 Bare ground tundra
84 Wet tundra
85 Mixed tundra
9 Perennial snow or ice
91 Perennial snowfields
92 Glaciers

11. 2. Classification Criteria
The interpretation accuracy of lulc categories should be 85%+
The accuracy of several categories should be about equal
Repeatable results should be obtainable by different interpreters and sensing time
The system should be applicable over extensive areas
The categories should be used as surrogates for activities

12. Classification Criteria ..
The system should be suitable for data obtained
at different times of the year 

Subcategories can be obtained from finer scale
data 

Aggregation of categories must be possible 

Comparison with future lulc should be possible
Multiple use of land should be recognized when
possible

13. 2. .. Minimum Areas and Image Resolution

Depend on 

the scale and resolution of the source data
the scale of data compilation or image
interpretation 

the final scale of the map 

no less than 0.25cm~0.5cm on a side on a map

14. 2. .. Expanded Classifications
The USGS classification system is aimed at level I and II 

Level I and II are adequate for planning and management 

The two levels are adequate for monitoring lulc changes 

The system is open-ended and allows levels of subcategories

15. Anderson System level III
1 Urban or built-up land
11 Residential
111 Rural
112 Low density
113 High density
12 Commercial and service
121 Low impervious cover
122 Medium impervious cover
123 High impervious cover

16. Anderson System level III
1 Urban or built-up land
11 Residential
111 Single-family units
112 Multifamily units
113 Mobile-home units
114 Residential under construction
115 Other residential

17. Anderson System level V
1 Urban or built-up land
11 Residential ……
12 Commercial and service
121 Commercial
1211 Automotive (cars, trucks, motorcycles)
12111 Dealership
12112 Gas station
12113 Junkyard
12114 Service or repair

19. 3. Plant Classification Floristic
- a botanical classification, e.g. specie, genus, family
Life form
- physical form of plants, e.g. trees, shrubs, herbaceous

20. Plant classification .. The two systems may not relate to each other
Remote sensing classification is more commonly based on life form 

Floristic classification is possible only when fine resolution image is available or in pure stand situation

21. USGS, state agencies, and private vendors 1:24,000 DEM 1:250,000 DEM
4. Digital Elevation Models
USGS, state agencies, and private vendors
1:24,000 DEM
1:250,000 DEM

22. 4. (1) 1:24,000 DEM Developed and distributed by USGS
A regular grid in UTM coordinate system
  A 7.5 by 7.5 minute coverage

23. 1:24,000 DEM ..
 Data are ordered from south to north in profiles that are ordered from west to east
 A 30 by 30 meter spacing along and between profiles (spatial resolution)
 The profiles do not always have the same number of elevation points
 The measuring unit for the elevation is meter in most cases

24. The profiles do not always have the same number of elevation points
1:24,000 DEM ..
 The profiles do not always have the same number of elevation points

25. 4. (2) 1:250,000 DEM Developed by Defense Mapping Agency and
distributed by USGS
 A regular grid in geographical coordinate system
 A 10 x 10 coverage
 The measuring unit for the elevation is meter
The spacing along profiles is 3 arc-second
(“spatial resolution”)

26. 4. (2) 1:250,000 DEM
A 10 x 10 coverage
 The spacing between and along profiles is 3 arc-second

27. Contours and 3D

28. Elevation
                
NIMA & NASA

29. Slope aspect
Derived
from DEM
                

30. Slope angle
Derived
from DEM
                

31. 3D
NIMA &NASA
                

32. Color infrared composite of the IKONOS draped over the DEM as viewed from the west side of the study area to the east from an elevation of 10,000 m, Xichang, China Xu, University of Utah, Gong, UC-Berkeley

33. Readings
Chapter 4
Jensen, J. Remote Sensing of the Environment- An Earth Resource Perspective, 2007, Prentice Hall.