Geology topics

Jason W. Karl

Publications and source records attributed to Jason W. Karl.

15 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2025

Evaluation of the gap intercept method to measure rangeland connectivity

Characterizing the connectivity of materials, organisms, and energy on rangelands is critical to understanding and managing ecosystem response to disturbances. For over twenty years, scientists and rangeland managers have used the gap intercept method to monitor connectivity. However, using gap intercept measurements to infer ecosystem processes or inform management actions and conservation practices on rangelands has been limited because there are few tools and syntheses to help managers pragmatically interpret gap measurements. In this synthesis, we review the different ways the gap intercept method is conducted and highlight considerations when collecting and using gap intercept data. We discuss what is known about how gap intercept data can be used to assess wind and water erosion, biocrust abundance and composition, soil fertility, plant community dynamics, wildlife habitat characteristics, and fuel connectivity and fire behavior. Finally, we identify emerging opportunities regarding the collection and use of gap intercept data to assess rangeland connectivity, ecosystem function, and ecological processes. Through this synthesis we demonstrate the value of the gap intercept method, particularly “all-plant” (i.e., whole-community) canopy gap, in supporting assessments of rangeland condition and vulnerability, and in planning future management actions.

Rangeland Ecology & Management↗

USGS2024

Using the TSS-RESTREND methodology to diagnose post-reclamation vegetation trends on the western slope of Colorado

We evaluated the use of the time series segmented residual trends (TSS-RESTREND) methodology to analyze plant community trends after oil and gas reclamation. We focused on reclaimed well pads managed by the Bureau of Land Management in northwestern Colorado. We assessed whether TSS-RESTREND could detect postreclamation changes in a plant community and if such changes corresponded with management actions. We used precipitation data and the greenness-to-cover index to calculate the residuals of the vegetation–precipitation relationship (VPR residuals). The VPR residuals represent plant community trends caused by disturbance or management actions and not by precipitation. We then used breaks for additive season and trend and the Chow test on the VPR residuals of each well pad to identify abrupt changes in plant community composition from 2000 to 2020. Afterward, we applied a segmented residual trend (RESTREND) analysis to the VPR residuals before and after an identified breakpoint or a singular RESTREND when no significant breakpoint was found to determine if reclamation had an effect on vegetation response to precipitation. We found a slight positive increase in VPR residuals over time since reclamation, indicating a more positive response to precipitation over time. In addition, well pads with lower aridity index values had a small positive trend in VPR residuals over time, suggesting the negative impact of aridity on plant community composition diminishes with increasing time since reclamation. To further understand the connection between management actions and outcomes, we compared findings from TSS-RESTREND with aerial imagery and well pad documentation. With this information, we categorized the well pads into six groups based on reclamation outcomes. This approach provided insights into the effects of management actions on recovery. Overall, TSS-RESTREND methodology can help identify changes in plant community composition over time, enhancing our understanding of plant community dynamics in these severely degraded areas.

Colorado↗

USGS2022

Ten practical questions to improve data quality

High-quality rangeland data are critical to supporting adaptive management. However, concrete, cost-saving steps to ensure data quality are often poorly defined and understood. Data quality is more than data management. Ensuring data quality requires 1) clear communication among team members; 2) appropriate sample design; 3) training of data collectors, data managers, and data users; 4) observer and sensor calibration; and 5) active data management. Quality assurance and quality control are ongoing processes to help rangeland managers and scientists identify, prevent, and correct errors in past, current, and future monitoring data. We present 10 guiding data quality questions to help managers and scientists identify appropriate workflows to improve data quality by 1) describing the data ecosystem, 2) creating a data quality plan, 3) identifying roles and responsibilities, 4) building data collection and data management workflows, 5) training and calibrating data collectors, 6) detecting and correcting errors, and 7) describing sources of variability. Iteratively improving rangeland data quality is a key part of adaptive monitoring and rangeland data collection. All members of the rangeland community are invited to participate in ensuring rangeland data quality.

Rangelands↗

USGS2022

Sampling design workflows and tools to support adaptive monitoring and management

On the Ground • Adaptive land management requires monitoring of resource conditions, which requires choices about where and when to monitor a landscape. • Designing a sampling design for a monitoring program can be broken down in to eight steps: identifying questions, defining objectives, selecting reporting units, deciding data collection methods, defining the sample frame, selecting an appropriate design type, deciding stratification and allocation, and identifying the required sampling effort. • Here, we provide descriptions of each step in the process and identify tools and resources to complete each step.

Rangelands↗

USGS2021

Global application of an unoccupied aerial vehicle photogrammetry protocol for predicting aboveground biomass in non-forest ecosystems

Non-forest ecosystems, dominated by shrubs, grasses and herbaceous plants, provide ecosystem services including carbon sequestration and forage for grazing, and are highly sensitive to climatic changes. Yet these ecosystems are poorly represented in remotely sensed biomass products and are undersampled by in situ monitoring. Current global change threats emphasize the need for new tools to capture biomass change in non-forest ecosystems at appropriate scales. Here we developed and deployed a new protocol for photogrammetric height using unoccupied aerial vehicle (UAV) images to test its capability for delivering standardized measurements of biomass across a globally distributed field experiment. We assessed whether canopy height inferred from UAV photogrammetry allows the prediction of aboveground biomass (AGB) across low-stature plant species by conducting 38 photogrammetric surveys over 741 harvested plots to sample 50 species. We found mean canopy height was strongly predictive of AGB across species, with a median adjusted R 2 of 0.87 (ranging from 0.46 to 0.99) and median prediction error from leave-one-out cross-validation of 3.9%. Biomass per-unit-of-height was similar within but different among, plant functional types. We found that photogrammetric reconstructions of canopy height were sensitive to wind speed but not sun elevation during surveys. We demonstrated that our photogrammetric approach produced generalizable measurements across growth forms and environmental settings and yielded accuracies as good as those obtained from in situ approaches. We demonstrate that using a standardized approach for UAV photogrammetry can deliver accurate AGB estimates across a wide range of dynamic and heterogeneous ecosystems. Many academic and land management institutions have the technical capacity to deploy these approaches over extents of 1–10 ha −1 . Photogrammetric approaches could provide much-needed information required to calibrate and validate the vegetation models and satellite-derived biomass products that are essential to understand vulnerable and understudied non-forested ecosystems around the globe.

Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation↗

USGS2021

Improving Landsat predictions of rangeland fractional cover with multitask learning and uncertainty

Operational satellite remote sensing products are transforming rangeland management and science. Advancements in computation, data storage and processing have removed barriers that previously blocked or hindered the development and use of remote sensing products. When combined with local data and knowledge, remote sensing products can inform decision‐making at multiple scales. We used temporal convolutional networks to produce a fractional cover product that spans western United States rangelands. We trained the model with 52,012 on‐the‐ground vegetation plots to simultaneously predict fractional cover for annual forbs and grasses, perennial forbs and grasses, shrubs, trees, litter and bare ground. To assist interpretation and to provide a measure of prediction confidence, we also produced spatiotemporal‐explicit, pixel‐level estimates of uncertainty. We evaluated the model with 5,780 on‐the‐ground vegetation plots removed from the training data. Model evaluation averaged 6.3% mean absolute error and 9.6% root mean squared error. Evaluation with additional datasets that were not part of the training dataset, and that varied in geographic range, method of collection, scope and size, revealed similar metrics. Model performance increased across all functional groups compared to the previously produced fractional product. The advancements achieved with the new rangeland fractional cover product expand the management toolbox with improved predictions of fractional cover and pixel‐level uncertainty. The new product is available on the Rangeland Analysis Platform (https://rangelands.app/), an interactive web application that tracks rangeland vegetation through time. This product is intended to be used alongside local on‐the‐ground data, expert knowledge, land use history, scientific literature and other sources of information when making interpretations. When being used to inform decision‐making, remotely sensed products should be evaluated and utilized according to the context of the decision and not be used in isolation.

Methods in Ecology and Evolution↗

USGS2021

Oil and gas reclamation on US public lands: How it works and improving the process with land potential concepts

• There are three general stages of a well's life on US public land: 1) the permitting process to drill, 2) active extraction of fossil fuel resource, and 3) plugging and abandonment of well. • There is no national standard for oil and gas reclamation in the United States similar to mining and therefore current reclamation practices and standards fail to achieve long-term effectiveness across the western United States. • A reclaimed well pad's land potential is determined by 3 properties: static (e.g., climate), dynamic (e.g., soil stability), and process (e.g., water retention). • Understanding a reclaimed well pad's land potential enables federal land agencies to outline surface reclamation goals and requirements consistently and clearly. • Monitoring for land potential increases the capacity of the private industry to practice adaptive management by enabling companies to respond to plant community changes while maintaining long-term progress toward recovery.

Rangelands↗

USGS2017

Fine-resolution repeat topographic surveying of dryland landscapes using UAS-based structure-from-motion photogrammetry: Assessing accuracy and precision against traditional ground-based erosion measurements

Structure-from-motion (SfM) photogrammetry from unmanned aerial system (UAS) imagery is an emerging tool for repeat topographic surveying of dryland erosion. These methods are particularly appealing due to the ability to cover large landscapes compared to field methods and at reduced costs and finer spatial resolution compared to airborne laser scanning. Accuracy and precision of high-resolution digital terrain models (DTMs) derived from UAS imagery have been explored in many studies, typically by comparing image coordinates to surveyed check points or LiDAR datasets. In addition to traditional check points, this study compared 5 cm resolution DTMs derived from fixed-wing UAS imagery with a traditional ground-based method of measuring soil surface change called erosion bridges. We assessed accuracy by comparing the elevation values between DTMs and erosion bridges along thirty topographic transects each 6.1 m long. Comparisons occurred at two points in time (June 2014, February 2015) which enabled us to assess vertical accuracy with 3314 data points and vertical precision (i.e., repeatability) with 1657 data points. We found strong vertical agreement (accuracy) between the methods (RMSE 2.9 and 3.2 cm in June 2014 and February 2015, respectively) and high vertical precision for the DTMs (RMSE 2.8 cm). Our results from comparing SfM-generated DTMs to check points, and strong agreement with erosion bridge measurements suggests repeat UAS imagery and SfM processing could replace erosion bridges for a more synoptic landscape assessment of shifting soil surfaces for some studies. However, while collecting the UAS imagery and generating the SfM DTMs for this study was faster than collecting erosion bridge measurements, technical challenges related to the need for ground control networks and image processing requirements must be addressed before this technique could be applied effectively to large landscapes.

Remote Sensing↗

USGS2017

Monitoring protocols: Options, approaches, implementation, benefits

Monitoring and adaptive management are fundamental concepts to rangeland management across land management agencies and embodied as best management practices for private landowners. Historically, rangeland monitoring was limited to determining impacts or maximizing the potential of specific land uses—typically grazing. Over the past several decades, though, the uses of and disturbances to rangelands have increased dramatically against a backdrop of global climate change that adds uncertainty to predictions of future rangeland conditions. Thus, today’s monitoring needs are more complex (or multidimensional) and yet still must be reconciled with the realities of costs to collect requisite data. However, conceptual advances in rangeland ecology and management and changes in natural resource policies and societal values over the past 25 years have facilitated new approaches to monitoring that can support rangeland management’s diverse information needs. Additionally, advances in sensor technologies and remote-sensing techniques have broadened the suite of rangeland attributes that can be monitored and the temporal and spatial scales at which they can be monitored. We review some of the conceptual and technological advancements and provide examples of how they have influenced rangeland monitoring. We then discuss implications of these developments for rangeland management and highlight what we see as challenges and opportunities for implementing effective rangeland monitoring. We conclude with a vision for how monitoring can contribute to rangeland information needs in the future.

Book chapter↗

USGS2017

Enhancing wind erosion monitoring and assessment for U.S. rangelands

On the Ground Wind erosion is a major resource concern for rangeland managers because it can impact soil health, ecosystem structure and function, hydrologic processes, agricultural production, and air quality. Despite its significance, little is known about which landscapes are eroding, by how much, and when. The National Wind Erosion Research Network was established in 2014 to develop tools for monitoring and assessing wind erosion and dust emissions across the United States. The Network, currently consisting of 13 sites, creates opportunities to enhance existing rangeland soil, vegetation, and air quality monitoring programs. Decision-support tools developed by the Network will improve the prediction and management of wind erosion across rangeland ecosystems.

Rangelands↗

USGS2016

Spatially explicit rangeland erosion monitoring using high-resolution digital aerial imagery

Nearly all of the ecosystem services supported by rangelands, including production of livestock forage, carbon sequestration, and provisioning of clean water, are negatively impacted by soil erosion. Accordingly, monitoring the severity, spatial extent, and rate of soil erosion is essential for long-term sustainable management. Traditional field-based methods of monitoring erosion (sediment traps, erosion pins, and bridges) can be labor intensive and therefore are generally limited in spatial intensity and/or extent. There is a growing effort to monitor natural resources at broad scales, which is driving the need for new soil erosion monitoring tools. One remote-sensing technique that can be used to monitor soil movement is a time series of digital elevation models (DEMs) created using aerial photogrammetry methods. By geographically coregistering the DEMs and subtracting one surface from the other, an estimate of soil elevation change can be created. Such analysis enables spatially explicit quantification and visualization of net soil movement including erosion, deposition, and redistribution. We constructed DEMs (12-cm ground sampling distance) on the basis of aerial photography immediately before and 1 year after a vegetation removal treatment on a 31-ha Piñon-Juniper woodland in southeastern Utah to evaluate the use of aerial photography in detecting soil surface change. On average, we were able to detect surface elevation change of ± 8−9cm and greater, which was sufficient for the large amount of soil movement exhibited on the study area. Detecting more subtle soil erosion could be achieved using the same technique with higher-resolution imagery from lower-flying aircraft such as unmanned aerial vehicles. DEM differencing and process-focused field methods provided complementary information and a more complete assessment of soil loss and movement than any single technique alone. Photogrammetric DEM differencing could be used as a technique to quantitatively monitor surface change over time relative to management activities.

Utah↗

USGS2016

The integrated rangeland fire management strategy actionable science plan

The Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy (hereafter Strategy, DOI 2015) outlined the need for coordinated, science-based adaptive management to achieve long-term protection, conservation, and restoration of the sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) ecosystem. A key component of this management approach is the identification of knowledge gaps that limit implementation of effective strategies to meet current management challenges. The tasks and actions identified in the Strategy address several broad topics related to management of the sagebrush ecosystem. This science plan is organized around these topics and specifically focuses on fire, invasive plant species and their effects on altering fire regimes, restoration, sagebrush and greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), and climate and weather.

Report↗

USGS2014

Interpretation of high-resolution imagery for detecting vegetation cover composition change after fuels reduction treatments in woodlands

The use of very high resolution (VHR; ground sampling distances < ∼5 cm) aerial imagery to estimate site vegetation cover and to detect changes from management has been well documented. However, as the purpose of monitoring is to document change over time, the ability to detect changes from imagery at the same or better level of accuracy and precision as those measured in situ must be assessed for image-based techniques to become reliable tools for ecosystem monitoring. Our objective with this study was to quantify the relationship between field-measured and image-interpreted changes in vegetation and ground cover measured one year apart in a Piñon and Juniper (P–J) woodland in southern Utah, USA. The study area was subject to a variety of fuel removal treatments between 2009 and 2010. We measured changes in plant community composition and ground cover along transects in a control area and three different treatments prior to and following P–J removal. We compared these measurements to vegetation composition and change based on photo-interpretation of ∼4 cm ground sampling distance imagery along similar transects. Estimates of cover were similar between field-based and image-interpreted methods in 2009 and 2010 for woody vegetation, no vegetation, herbaceous vegetation, and litter (including woody litter). Image-interpretation slightly overestimated cover for woody vegetation and no-vegetation classes (average difference between methods of 1.34% and 5.85%) and tended to underestimate cover for herbaceous vegetation and litter (average difference of −5.18% and 0.27%), but the differences were significant only for litter cover in 2009. Level of agreement between the field-measurements and image-interpretation was good for woody vegetation and no-vegetation classes (r between 0.47 and 0.89), but generally poorer for herbaceous vegetation and litter (r between 0.18 and 0.81) likely due to differences in image quality by year and the difficulty in discriminating fine vegetation and litter in imagery. Our results show that image interpretation to detect vegetation changes has utility for monitoring fuels reduction treatments in terms of woody vegetation and no-vegetation classes. The benefits of this technique are that it provides objective and repeatable measurements of site conditions that could be implemented relatively inexpensively and easily without the need for highly specialized software or technical expertise. Perhaps the biggest limitations of image interpretation to monitoring fuels treatments are challenges in estimating litter and herbaceous vegetation cover and the sensitivity of herbaceous cover estimates to image quality and shadowing.

Utah↗

USGS2014

Modeling vegetation heights from high resolution stereo aerial photography: an application for broad-scale rangeland monitoring

Vertical vegetation structure in rangeland ecosystems can be a valuable indicator for assessing rangeland health and monitoring riparian areas, post-fire recovery, available forage for livestock, and wildlife habitat. Federal land management agencies are directed to monitor and manage rangelands at landscapes scales, but traditional field methods for measuring vegetation heights are often too costly and time consuming to apply at these broad scales. Most emerging remote sensing techniques capable of measuring surface and vegetation height (e.g., LiDAR or synthetic aperture radar) are often too expensive, and require specialized sensors. An alternative remote sensing approach that is potentially more practical for managers is to measure vegetation heights from digital stereo aerial photographs. As aerial photography is already commonly used for rangeland monitoring, acquiring it in stereo enables three-dimensional modeling and estimation of vegetation height. The purpose of this study was to test the feasibility and accuracy of estimating shrub heights from high-resolution (HR, 3-cm ground sampling distance) digital stereo-pair aerial images. Overlapping HR imagery was taken in March 2009 near Lake Mead, Nevada and 5-cm resolution digital surface models (DSMs) were created by photogrammetric methods (aerial triangulation, digital image matching) for twenty-six test plots. We compared the heights of individual shrubs and plot averages derived from the DSMs to field measurements. We found strong positive correlations between field and image measurements for several metrics. Individual shrub heights tended to be underestimated in the imagery, however, accuracy was higher for dense, compact shrubs compared with shrubs with thin branches. Plot averages of shrub height from DSMs were also strongly correlated to field measurements but consistently underestimated. Grasses and forbs were generally too small to be detected with the resolution of the DSMs. Estimates of vertical structure will be more accurate in plots having low herbaceous cover and high amounts of dense shrubs. Through the use of statistically derived correction factors or choosing field methods that better correlate with the imagery, vegetation heights from HR DSMs could be a valuable technique for broad-scale rangeland monitoring needs.

California;Nevada↗

USGS2012

A holistic strategy for adaptive land management

Adaptive management is widely applied to natural resources management (Holling 1973; Walters and Holling 1990). Adaptive management can be generally defined as an iterative decision-making process that incorporates formulation of management objectives, actions designed to address these objectives, monitoring of results, and repeated adaptation of management until desired results are achieved (Brown and MacLeod 1996; Savory and Butterfield 1999). However, adaptive management is often criticized because very few projects ever complete more than one cycle, resulting in little adaptation and little knowledge gain (Lee 1999; Walters 2007). One significant criticism is that adaptive management is often used as a justification for undertaking actions with uncertain outcomes or as a surrogate for the development of specific, measurable indicators and monitoring programs (Lee 1999; Ruhl 2007).

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation↗