• Like
  • Save
Tomer - Challenges of Developing Conservation Planning Tools
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Tomer - Challenges of Developing Conservation Planning Tools

  • 613 views
Published

 

Published in Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
613
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. The Challenges of Developing Conservation Planning Tools Using LIDAR Topographic Data M.D. Tomer, D.E. James, D.B. Jaynes National Soil Tilth Laboratory, USDA-ARS T. M. Isenhart, and S. Krogh Iowa State University
  • 2. Map of research site showing sampling transects, and the wetness index which indicates the relative frequency of saturated soil conditions.
  • 3. Placement of buffers Placement of wetlands Terrain analysis tools to target specific conservation practices
  • 4. Precision Conservation
    • Effective targeting of conservation practices to improve water quality requires knowledge of
      • what pollutants are being transported,
      • pathways they are being transported along,
      • timing of their transport, and
      • what opportunities exist to trap or treat them.
  • 5. Aspects of targeting Dosskey et al. (2002) Helmers et al., 2005 Where? When? What pathway? TILE DRAINAGE SUBSURFACE OVERLAND
  • 6. Using LiDAR data to plan and target conservation practices Source: USGS
  • 7.  
  • 8. Delineation of nutrient interception wetlands
  • 9. Issues to address:
    • Accuracy analysis, patterns/implications of errors.
    • Appropriate scale of analysis may vary not only with scale of planning, but type of practice being planned.
    • Hydrologic routing:
      • Across vegetation boundaries–moving from field to watershed scales raises issues inherent to method of data acquisition.
      • Across glacial terrain with potholes and subsurface drainage.
      • Across existing terraces
  • 10. Lidar coverage of Walnut Creek
  • 11. Accuracy/error analysis
  • 12. Accuracy/error analysis
  • 13. Influence of scale: Flow accumulation pathways on 1, 5, and 10 m grids. “ Channel” thresholds shown are identical at each scale. Scale
  • 14. Hydrologic routing Lidar image: processed DEM at 1 m grid Note detail shown in roads, ditches, fence lines, tillage, and vegetation boundaries. This affects flow routing!
  • 15. Hydrologic routing - boundaries Grass Waterways
  • 16. Hydrologic routing - boundaries
  • 17. Mapped changes in surface elevation from 2002 to 2005 Hydrologic routing - boundaries
  • 18. Landscape connectivity: In tile drained landscapes, ponded areas often have a surface inlet and direct conduit to the stream
    • Terrain Modeling:
    • Ponding
    • Runoff
    Hydrologic routing - potholes
  • 19. Hydrologic routing - potholes
  • 20. Hydrologic routing - potholes
  • 21. Effect of existing conservation practices on hydrologic flow routing Hydrologic routing - terraces
  • 22. Learning to use Lidar terrain data for conservation planning
    • How to represent / model hydrologic modifications and conservation practices already placed on the landscape? May be most important question at both field and watershed scales.
    • Extraordinary detail may or may not represent actual flow routing, especially along boundaries (fences, buffers, etc.). “Scaling up” may or may not address this issue, depending on the particular application.
  • 23. Learning to use Lidar terrain data for conservation planning
    • Accuracy assessment - need to document error effects? Contracted accuracy assessments generally on hard surfaces, not in tall grass, forests, and tilled and untilled fields.
    • Lidar DEMs have great potential as powerful conservation planning aide but are not a substitute for first hand knowledge gained by site visits and landowner contacts.