Assessment Item 2 - Environmental monitoring challenge - PROPOSAL
Due Date: 28 Oct 2018
Contribution to unit grade: 10%
Length:1000 words (ENV306); 1500 words (ENV506)
Students are required to address a landscape change analysis problem as described below.It is expected that students will utilise techniques that have been explored in this unit, and also in ENV101, ENV202/502 and ENV208/508.
Students are required to submit a brief project proposal detailing the following:
1. Introduction(including aims and objectives)
2.Methodological approach (data types,image processing steps and spatial analysis approach)
3. Expected results
4. References
I have added some materials we supposed to read to help in assignment. Information elsewhere is welcomed. Thanks
Remote sensing change detection for ecological monitoring in United States protected areas Biological Conservation 182 (2015) 233–242 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/ locate /biocon Review Remote sensing change detection for ecological monitoring in United States protected areas http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.12.006 0006-3207/� 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. ⇑ Address: 1255 Bunche Hall Box 951524, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA. Tel.: +1 401 743 0368. E-mail address: kwillis@g.ucla.edu Katherine S. Willis ⇑ Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles, USA a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 7 August 2014 Received in revised form 27 November 2014 Accepted 5 December 2014 Available online 3 January 2015 Keywords: Remote sensing Conservation Management Protected areas Ecological monitoring Change detection a b s t r a c t Remote sensing allows for cost- and time-efficient monitoring of landscapes vital to the conservation of natural resources, ecosystems, and biodiversity. This review synthesizes and recommends best practice change detection methods for land management groups to monitor chief ecological change indicators currently monitored in United States protected areas. The indicators frequently monitored via change detection and reviewed here include: land use/land cover, disturbance, and phenology. Landsat data products are recommended for monitoring land use/land cover and disturbance, due to their continuous data accessibility free of cost since 1972. Data from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer (MODIS) are recommended for monitoring changes in phenology due to its 1–2 day return interval at any given location. Best-practice remote sensing methods are stressed, such as careful validation of results, either by combination of remotely sensed datasets with high resolution imagery or in situ data, in order to increase accuracy and to better align the remotely sensed data to the scale of the on-the- ground processes. Reported results should always be presented with utmost clarity in a manner that is both applicable to managers and understood by the general public. Increased collaborations between ecologists, land managers, conservation groups, and scientists are compulsory for successful integration of remote sensing-based monitoring, which is vital for effective conservation in protected areas. Remote sensing change detection quantifies the effects of humans on a landscape scale without creating further disturbances to ecologically sensitive areas; the results of which can be used for efficient conservation management into the future. � 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234 3. Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234 4. Satellite imagery review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235 5. Change detection methods and requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235 6. Change detection applications to conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237 6.1. Uniform change detection: land use and land cover change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237 6.1.1. LULCC monitoring methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237 6.1.2. LULCC standardizing techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .