SpringerLink
Log in

A Semi-Automated, Multi-Source Data Fusion Update of a Wetland Inventory for East-Central Minnesota, USA

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Wetlands Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Comprehensive wetland inventories are an essential tool for wetland management, but develo** and maintaining an inventory is expensive and technically challenging. Funding for these efforts has also been problematic. Here we describe a large-area application of a semi-automated process used to update a wetland inventory for east-central Minnesota. The original inventory for this area was the product of a labor-intensive, manual photo-interpretation process. The present application incorporated high resolution, multi-spectral imagery from multiple seasons; high resolution elevation data derived from lidar; satellite radar imagery; and other GIS data. Map production combined image segmentation and random forest classification along with aerial photo-interpretation. More than 1000 validation data points were acquired using both independent photo-interpretation as well as field reconnaissance. Overall accuracy for wetland identification was 90 % compared to field data and 93 % compared to photo-interpretation data. Overall accuracy for wetland type was 72 and 78 % compared to field and photo-interpretation data, respectively. By automating the most time consuming part of the image interpretations, initial delineation of boundaries and identification of broad wetland classes, we were able to allow the image interpreters to focus their efforts on the more difficult components, such as the assignment of detailed wetland classes and modifiers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alaska Satellite Facility (2011) MapReady Remote Sensing Tool Kit Version 2.3.17 [computer software]. Available from https://www.asf.alaska.edu/data-tools/mapready/

  • Austin JE, Buhl TK, Guntenspergen GR, Norling W, Sklebar HT (2001) Duck populations as indicators of landscape condition in the prairie pothole region. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 69(1):29–48

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baatz M, Schäpe A (2000) Multiresolution segmentation: an optimization approach for high quality multi-scale image segmentation. In: Strobl J, Blaschke T (eds) Angewandte geographische informationsverarbeitung XII. Wichmann, Heidelberg, pp 12–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp (2011) Opticks Version 4.7.1. Available from http://opticks.org

  • Beven KJ, Kirkby MJ (1979) A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology. Hydrological Sciences Journal 24(1):43–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourgeau-Chavez LL, Kowalski KP, Carlson Mazur ML, Scarbrough KA, Powell RB, Brooks CN, Huberty B, Jenkins LK, Banda EC, Galbraith DM, Laubach ZM, Riordan K (2013) Map** invasive phragmites Australis in the coastal great lakes with ALOS PALSAR satellite imagery for decision support. Journal of Great Lakes Research 39(1):65–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Machine Learning 45(1):5–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brisco B, Touzi R, Van der Sanden J, Charbonneau F, Pultz T, D’Iorio M (2008) Water resource applications with Radarsat-2. International Journal of Digital Earth 1(1):130–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkett V, Kusler J (2000) Climate change: potential impacts and interactions in wetlands of the United States. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 36(2):313–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Congalton RG, Green K (2008) Assessing the accuracy of remotely sensed data: principles and practices. CRC press

  • Corcoran JM, Knight JF, Brisco B, Kaya S, Cull A, Murhnaghan K (2011) The integration of optical, topographic, and radar data for wetland map** in northern Minnesota. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing 27(5):564–582

    Google Scholar 

  • Corcoran JM, Knight JF, Gallant AL (2013) Influence of multi-source and multi-temporal remotely sensed and ancillary data on the accuracy of random forest classification of wetlands in Northern Minnesota. Remote Sensing 5(7):3212–3238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa LT, Farinha JC, Vives PT, Hecker N, Silva EP (2001) Regional wetland inventory approaches: The Mediterranean example. In Wetland Inventory, Assessment and Monitoring: Practical Techniques and Identification of Major Issues. Finlayson CM, Davidson NC & Stevenson NJ (eds). Proceedings of Workshop 4, 2nd International Conference on Wetlands and Development, Dakar, Senegal, 8–14 November 1998, Supervising Scientist Report 161, Supervising Scientist, Darwin

  • Cowardin LM, Carter V, Golet FC, LaRoe ET (1979) Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report No. FWS/OBS/-79/31, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl TE, Dick J, Swords J, Wilen BO (2009) Data collection requirements and procedures for map** wetland, deepwater and related habitats of the United States. Division of habitat and resource conservation, national standards and support team. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Madison, p 85

    Google Scholar 

  • Definiens AG (2009) Definiens eCognition developer 8 user guide. Definens AG, Munchen

    Google Scholar 

  • Dost RJJ, Mannaerts CMM (2008) Generation of lake bathymetry using sonar, satellite imagery and GIS. In ESRI 2008: Proceedings of the 2008 ESRI International User Conference

  • Drazkowski B, May M, Herrera DT (2004) Comparison of 1983 and 1997 southern Michigan national wetland inventory data. Department of Environmental Quality, Geological and Land Management Division, Michigan, p 15

    Google Scholar 

  • ERDAS (2008) ERDAS imagine version 9.2 [computer software]. Intergraph Corporation, Norcross

    Google Scholar 

  • ERDAS (2010) StereoAnalyst for ArcGIS version 10.0 [computer software]. Intergraph Corporation, Norcross

    Google Scholar 

  • ESRI (2011) ArcGIS desktop: release 10 [computer software]. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Euliss NH Jr, Gleason RA, Olness A, McDougal RL, Murkin HR, Robarts RD, Bourbonniere RA, Warner BG (2006) North American prairie wetlands are important nonforested land-based carbon storage sites. Science of the Total Environment 361(1):179–188

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • FGDC (2009) Wetlands map** standard, Document number FGDC-STD-015-2009. US Geological Survey Federal Geographic Data Committee, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  • Finlayson CM, Spiers AG (1999) Global review of wetland resources and priorities for wetland inventory. Supervising scientist report 144. Wetlands International Publication 53, Supervising Scientist, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Fournier RA, Grenier M, Lavoie A, Hélie R (2007) Towards a strategy to implement the Canadian wetland inventory using satellite remote sensing. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing 33(S1):S1–S16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frohn RC, Reif M, Lane C, Autrey B (2009) Satellite remote sensing of isolated wetlands using object-oriented classification of Landsat-7 data. Wetlands 29(3):931–941

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gong P, Niu ZG, Cheng X, Zhao KY, Zhou DM, Guo JH, Liang L, Wang XF, Li DD, Huang HB, Wang Y, Wang K, Li WN, Wang XW, Ying Q, Yang ZZ, Ye YF, Li Z, Zhuang DF, Chi YB, Zhou HZA, Yan J (2010) China’s wetland change (1990–2000) determined by remote sensing. Science China Earth Sciences 53(7):1036–1042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guisan A, Weiss SB, Weiss AD (1999) GLM versus CCA spatial modeling of plant species distribution. Plant Ecology 143(1):107–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gwin SE, Kentula ME, Shaffer PW (1999) Evaluating the effects of wetland regulation through hydrogeomorphic classification and landscape profiles. Wetlands 19(3):477–489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hepinstall JA, Queen LP, Jordan PA (1996) Application of a modified habitat suitability index model for moose. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 62(11):1281–1286

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg AR, Todd KW (2007) Automated discrimination of upland and wetland using terrain derivatives. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing 33(S1):S68–S83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irish JL, Lillycrop WJ (1999) Scanning laser map** of the coastal zone: the SHOALS system. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 54(2):123–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kloiber SM, Gernes MC, Norris DJ, Flackey S, Carlson G (2012) Technical Procedures for the Minnesota Wetland Status and Trends Program: Wetland Quantity Assessment. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Division of Ecological and Water Resources Report, November 2012. 41 pp. Retrieved from http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/eco/wetlands/wstmp_tech_procedures_2012.pdf

  • Knight JF, Tolcser B, Corcoran J, Rampi L (2013) The effects of data selection and thematic detail on the accuracy of high spatial resolution wetland classifications. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 79(7):613–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knutson MG, Sauer JR, Olsen DA, Mossman MJ, Hemesath LM, Lannoo MJ (1999) Effects of landscape composition and wetland fragmentation on frog and toad abundance and species richness in Iowa and Wisconsin, USA. Conservation Biology 13(6):1437–1446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li J, Chen W (2005) A rule-based method for map** Canada’s wetlands using optical, radar and DEM data. International Journal of Remote Sensing 26(22):5051–5069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LMIC (2007) (Now called Minnesota Geographic Information Office) Metadata for the National Wetlands Inventory, Minnesota. Retrieved from http://www.mngeo.state.mn.us/chouse/metadata/nwi.html

  • Macleod RD, Paige RS, Smith AJ (2013) Updating the National Wetland Inventory in East-Central Minnesota: Technical Documentation. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Division of Ecological and Water Resources. St. Paul, MN. Retrieved from http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/eco/wetlands/nwi_ecmn_technical_documentation.pdf

  • Maidment DR (ed) (2002) Arc Hydro: GIS for water resources (Vol. 1). ESRI, Inc, Redlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchand MN, Litvaitis JA (2004) Effects of habitat features and landscape composition on the population structure of a common aquatic turtle in a region undergoing rapid development. Conservation Biology 18(3):758–767

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minnesota Climatology Working Group (2012) 1981–2010 Normal Precipitation Maps. Retrieved from http://www.climate.umn.edu/doc/historical/81-10_precip_norm.htm

  • Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (1999) Ecological Provinces. Retrieved from http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/ecs/province.pdf

  • MnGeo (2010) Map Accuracy Report: East-Central Minnesota Ortho Project. Minnesota Geographic Information Office, St. Paul, MN. Retrieved from http://www.mngeo.state.mn.us/chouse/airphoto/2010_DOQ_Accuracy_Report_MnDOT_ecmn2010_03Jan2012.pdf

  • Moore ID, Grayson RB, Ladson AR (1991) Digital terrain modelling: a review of hydrological, geomorphological, and biological applications. Hydrological Processes 5:3–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munger JC, Gerber M, Madrid K, Carroll M, Petersen W, Heberger L (1998) U.S. National wetland inventory classifications as predictors of the occurrence of Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris) and pacific treefrogs (hylaregilla). Conservation Biology 12(2):320–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy PN, Ogilvie J, Connor K, Arp PA (2007) Map** wetlands: a comparison of two different approaches for New Brunswick, Canada. Wetlands 27(4):846–854

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myint SW, Gober P, Brazel A, Grossman-Clarke S, Weng Q (2011) Per-pixel vs. object-based classification of urban land cover extraction using high spatial resolution imagery. Remote Sensing of Environment 115(5):1145–1161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NRCS (2010) Natural Resources Conservation Service, Soil Survey Staff, United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for [Anoka, Carver, Chisago, Dakota, Goodhue, Hennepin, Isanti, Ramsey, Rice, Scott, Washington, and Wright Counties, Minnesota]. Retrieved from http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/ on 01/12/2010

  • NSGIC (2014) Letter from President Kenneth Miller to the Secretary of Interior, Sally Jewell, April 16, 2014. National States Geographic Information Council

  • Ozesmi SL, Bauer ME (2002) Satellite remote sensing of wetlands. Wetlands Ecology and Management 10(5):381–402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2011) R: A language and environment for statistical computing, reference index version 2.12. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org

  • Rampi LP, Knight JF, Pelletier KC (2014a) Wetland map** in the upper Midwest United States: an object-based approach integrating lidar and imagery data. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 80(5):439–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rampi LP, Knight JF, Lenhart CF, (2014b) Comparison of flow direction algorithms in the application of the CTI for map** wetlands in Minnesota. Wetlands, Feb. 2014

  • Tarboton DG (2003) Terrain analysis using digital elevation models in hydrology. In 23rd ESRI international users conference, San Diego, California (Vol. 14)

  • Tiner RW (1990) Use of high-altitude aerial photography for inventorying forested wetlands in the United States. Forest Ecology and Management 33:593–604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiner RW (2009) Status report for the national wetlands inventory program 2009. US fish and wildlife service. Branch of Resource and Map** Support, Arlington

    Google Scholar 

  • Trimble (2010) eCognition developer 8.64.0 user guide. Trimble, Munich, p 27

    Google Scholar 

  • Yerkes T, Paige R, Macleod R, Armstrong L, Soulliere G, Gatti R (2007) Predicted distribution and characteristics of wetlands used by mallard pairs in five Great Lakes States. The American Midland Naturalist 157(2):356–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Funding for this project was provided by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund as recommended by the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources. The Trust Fund is a permanent fund constitutionally established by the citizens of Minnesota to assist in the protection, conservation, preservation, and enhancement of the state’s air, water, land, fish, wildlife, and other natural resources. Special thanks to Molly Martin of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for technical and field assistance. We would also like to thank Dan Wovcha and Doug Norris from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for their helpful review of the draft manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 500 Lafayette Road North, St. Paul, MN, 55155, USA

    Steven M. Kloiber

  2. Ducks Unlimited Inc, 1220 Eisenhower Place, Ann Arbor, MI, 48108, USA

    Robb D. Macleod

  3. Equinox Analytics Inc, PO Box 6941, Columbia, SC, 29204, USA

    Aaron J. Smith

  4. Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, 1530 Cleveland Ave N, Saint Paul, MN, 55108, USA

    Joseph F. Knight

  5. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 5600 American Blvd West; Suite 990, Bloomington, MN, 55437, USA

    Brian J. Huberty

Authors
  1. Steven M. Kloiber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robb D. Macleod
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Aaron J. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Joseph F. Knight
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Brian J. Huberty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steven M. Kloiber.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM Fig. 5

A comparison of the original NWI wetland boundaries (green) to the updated wetland boundaries (blue) shown on top of a false color-infrared aerial image (JPG 1.52 mb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kloiber, S.M., Macleod, R.D., Smith, A.J. et al. A Semi-Automated, Multi-Source Data Fusion Update of a Wetland Inventory for East-Central Minnesota, USA. Wetlands 35, 335–348 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-014-0621-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-014-0621-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation