Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Enhanced Detection of Wetland-Stream Connectivity Using LiDAR

  • Article
  • Published:
Wetlands Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The spatial relationship between wetlands and streams influences their structure and function, and is currently tied to the regulatory status of wetlands. Efforts have been made to assess connectivity between wetlands and streams and possible management implications by comparing existing wetland and stream maps (e.g., National Hydrography Dataset [NHD]) but the reliability of these assessments is affected by the accuracy and inherent nature of input datasets. Stream datasets derived using semi-automated and automated interpretation of LiDAR derived digital elevation models were found to be considerably more accurate than NHD High Resolution (12% less accurate than automatically generated streams) and Plus (29% less accurate than automatically generated streams) and in general use of LiDAR derived datasets was found to significantly increase percent area and total number of wetlands that were considered connected at multiple buffer lengths ranging from 0 to 80 m. When wetland-stream connectivity as judged using NHD was compared to a semi-automatically generated highly accurate LiDAR derived stream dataset, the High Resolution NHD was found to underestimate semi-natural palustrine wetland area connected by 15% and number of wetlands connected by 13% on average while NHD Plus was found to underestimate semi-natural palustrine wetland area and number connected by 27% on average.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ator S, Denver J, Krantz D, Newell W, Martucci S (2005) A surficial hydrogeologic framework for the Mid-Alantic Coastal Plain. U. S. Department of the Interior

  • Bailly J, Lagacherie P, Millier C, Puech C, Kosuth P (2008) Agrarian landscapes linear features detection from LiDAR: application to artificial drainage networks. International Journal of Remote Sensing 29:3489–3508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bedford B, Godwin K (2003) Fens of the United States: distribution, characteristics, and scientific connection versus legal isolation. Wetlands 23:608–629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooter W, Rineer J, Bergenroth B (2010) A nationally consistent NDHplus framework for identifying interstate waters: implication for integrated assessments and interjurisdictional TMDLs. Environmental Management 46:510–524

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cowardin L, Carter V, Golet F, LaRoe E (1979) Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson J, Dabolt T, Wilen B (2009) NSDI cooperative agreements program category 2: best practices in geospatial service oriented architecture (SOA). Available via http://www.fgdc.gov/grants/2008CAP/Reports/035-08-2-VA-FinalReport.pdf. Accessed 5 Jan 2012

  • Federal Geographic Data Committee (1998) Geospatial positioning accuracy standards: part 3: national standard for spatial data accuracy. Available via http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standards-projects/accuracy/part3/chapter3. Accessed 5 Jan 2012

  • Fisher T, Benitez J, Lee K, Sutton A (2006) History of land cover change and biogeochemical impacts in the Choptank River basin in the mid-Atlantic region of the US. International Journal of Remote Sensing 27:3683–3703

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs J (1993) Importance of small wetlands for the persistance of local-populations of wetland-associated animals. Wetlands 13:25–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heine R, Lant C, Sengupta R (2004) Development and comparison of approaches for automated mapping of stream channel networks. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 94:477–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lang M, McCarty G, Ritchie J, Sadeghi A, Hively W, Eckles S (2008) Radar monitoring of wetland hydrology: dynamic information for the assessment of ecosystem services. Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE International Geoscience & Remote Sensing Symposium I 261–I 264

  • Leibowitz S (2003) Isolated wetlands and their functions: an ecological perspective. Wetlands 23:517–531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leibowitz S, Wigington P, Rains M, Downing D (2008) Non-navigable streams and adjacent wetlands: addressing science needs following the Supreme Court’s Rapanos decision. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6:366–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin G, Suloway L, Plocher A, Hutto F, Miner J, Phillips C, Agarwal J, Lin Y (2002) Status and function of isolated wetlands in Illinois. Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer J, Wallace J (2001) Lost linkages and lotic ecology: rediscovering small streams. Ecology: Achievement and Challenge 295–317

  • Morrice J, Valett H, Dahm C, Campana M (1997) Alluvial characteristics, groundwater-surface water exchange and hydrological retention in headwater streams. Hydrological Processes 11:253–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller J (1979) Problems in the definition and measurement of stream length. The Professional Geographer 31:306–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy P, Ogilvie J, Connor K, Arpl P (2007) Mapping wetlands: a comparison of two different approaches for New Brunswick, Canada. Wetlands 27:846–854

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadeau T, Rains M (2007) Hydrological connectivity of headwaters to downstream waters: introduction to the featured collection. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 43:1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naiman R, Bilby R, Schindler D, Helfield J (2002) Pacific salmon, nutrients, and the dynamics of freshwater and riparian ecosystems. Ecosystems 5:399–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nardi F, Grimaldi S, Santini M, Petroselli A, Ubertini L (2008) Hydrogeomorphic properties of simulated drainage patterns using digital elevation models: the flat area issue. Hydrological Sciences Journal-Journal Des Sciences Hydrologiques 53:1176–1193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reif M, Frohn R (2009) Mapping isolated wetlands in a karst landscape: GIS and remote sensing methods. GIScience and Remote Sensing 64:187–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson C (2003) Pocosins: hydrologically isolated or integrated wetlands on the landscape? Wetlands 23:563–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robb J (2002) Estimating Indiana’s isolated waters through geographic information systems. National Wetlands Newsletter 24:9–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy A, Dybas A, Fritz K, Lubbers H (2009) Urbanization affects the extent and hydrologic permanence of headwater streams in a Midwestern US metropolitan area. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 28:911–928

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semlitsch R, Bodie J (1998) Are small, isolated wetlands expendable? Conservation Biology 12:1129–1133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharitz R (2003) Carolina bay wetlands: unique habitats of the southeastern United States. Wetlands 23:550–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiner R (1990) Use of high-altitude aerial-photography for inventorying forested wetlands in the United States. Forest Ecology and Management 33–4:593–604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiner R (2003) Estimated extent of geographically isolated wetlands in selected areas of the United States. Wetlands 23:636–652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullah S, Faulkner S (2006) Denitrification potential of different land-use types in an agricultural watershed, lower Mississippi valley. Ecological Engineering 28:131–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • US Environmental Protection Agency and United States Geological Survey (2010) NHD Plus user guide. Available via ftp://ftp.horizon-systems.com/NHDPlus/documentation/NHDPLUS_UserGuide.pdf. Accessed 5 Jan 2012

  • US Geological Survey (2000) The national hydrography dataset concepts and content. Available via http://nhd.usgs.gov/chapter1/chp1_data_users_guide.pdf. Accessed 5 Jan 2012

  • Vance L (2009) Geographically isolated wetlands and intermittent/ephemeral streams in Montana: extent, distribution, and function. Montana National Heritage Program. Available via http://mtnhp.org/reports/Isolated_Wetlands.pdf. Accessed 5 Jan 2012

  • Winter T, LaBaugh J (2003) Hydrologic considerations in defining isolated wetlands. Wetlands 23:532–540

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Wetlands Component of the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Conservation Effects Assessment Project. Thanks goes to Steve Strano, William Effland, Jeanne Christie, and Stephen Samuels for reviewing an initial draft of this article and to Andrew Russ for geospatial technical support. All trade names are included for the benefit of the reader and do not imply an endorsement of or preference for the product listed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Megan Lang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lang, M., McDonough, O., McCarty, G. et al. Enhanced Detection of Wetland-Stream Connectivity Using LiDAR. Wetlands 32, 461–473 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-012-0279-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-012-0279-7

Keywords

Navigation