Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · ofr20081216

A Vegetation Database for the Colorado River Ecosystem from Glen Canyon Dam to the Western Boundary of Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona

Abstract

A vegetation database of the riparian vegetation located within the Colorado River ecosystem (CRE), a subsection of the Colorado River between Glen Canyon Dam and the western boundary of Grand Canyon National Park, was constructed using four-band image mosaics acquired in May 2002. A digital line scanner was flown over the Colorado River corridor in Arizona by ISTAR Americas, using a Leica ADS-40 digital camera to acquire a digital surface model and four-band image mosaics (blue, green, red, and near-infrared) for vegetation mapping. The primary objective of this mapping project was to develop a digital inventory map of vegetation to enable patch- and landscape-scale change detection, and to establish randomized sampling points for ground surveys of terrestrial fauna (principally, but not exclusively, birds). The vegetation base map was constructed through a combination of ground surveys to identify vegetation classes, image processing, and automated supervised classification procedures. Analysis of the imagery and subsequent supervised classification involved multiple steps to evaluate band quality, band ratios, and vegetation texture and density. Identification of vegetation classes involved collection of cover data throughout the river corridor and subsequent analysis using two-way indicator species analysis (TWINSPAN). Vegetation was classified into six vegetation classes, following the National Vegetation Classification Standard, based on cover dominance. This analysis indicated that total area covered by all vegetation within the CRE was 3,346 ha. Considering the six vegetation classes, the sparse shrub (SS) class accounted for the greatest amount of vegetation (627 ha) followed by Pluchea (PLSE) and Tamarix (TARA) at 494 and 366 ha, respectively. The wetland (WTLD) and Prosopis-Acacia (PRGL) classes both had similar areal cover values (227 and 213 ha, respectively). Baccharis-Salix (BAXX) was the least represented at 94 ha. Accuracy assessment of the supervised classification determined that accuracies varied among vegetation classes from 90% to 49%. Causes for low accuracies were similar spectral signatures among vegetation classes. Fuzzy accuracy assessment improved classification accuracies such that Federal mapping standards of 80% accuracies for all classes were met. The scale used to quantify vegetation adequately meets the needs of the stakeholder group. Increasing the scale to meet the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)-National Park Service (NPS)National Mapping Program's minimum mapping unit of 0.5 ha is unwarranted because this scale would reduce the resolution of some classes (e.g., seep willow/coyote willow would likely be combined with tamarisk). While this would undoubtedly improve classification accuracies, it would not provide the community-level information about vegetation change that would benefit stakeholders. The identification of vegetation classes should follow NPS mapping approaches to complement the national effort and should incorporate the alternative analysis for community identification that is being incorporated into newer NPS mapping efforts. National Vegetation Classification is followed in this report for association- to formation-level categories. Accuracies could be improved by including more environmental variables such as stage elevation in the classification process and incorporating object-based classification methods. Another approach that may address the heterogeneous species issue and classification is to use spectral mixing analysis to estimate the fractional cover of species within each pixel and better quantify the cover of individual species that compose a cover class. Varying flights to capture vegetation at different times of the year might also help separate some vegetation classes, though the cost may be prohibitive. Lastly, photointerpretation instead of automated mapping could be tried. Photointerpretation would likely not improve accuracies in this case, howev

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 35° to 37.5° latitude; -114.5° to -111° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Barbara E. Ralston, Philip A. Davis, Robert M. Weber, Jill M. Rundall. 2008. A Vegetation Database for the Colorado River Ecosystem from Glen Canyon Dam to the Western Boundary of Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20081216

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona