Characterizing Meadow Vegetation 

With Multitemporal Landsat 

Thematic Mapper Remote Sensing

Alan A. Ager and Karen E. Owens1

Abstract

Wet meadows are important biological components in the Blue Mountains of 

eastern Oregon. Many meadows in the Blue Mountains and elsewhere in the 

Western United States are in a state of change owing to grazing, mining, logging, 

road development, and other factors. This project evaluated the utility of remotely 

sensed data to characterize and monitor meadow vegetation for 32 meadows in the 

Wallowa-Whitman and Umatilla National Forests. The meadows had been previously classified into different plant community types based on the occurrence of 

specific indicator species of sedge (Carex spp). We analyzed the spectral signature 

of the sample meadows by using the Kauth-Thomas (tasseled-cap) transformation 

calculated for a temporal series of five Landsat thematic mapper (TM) images. The 

Landsat TM images were obtained for monthly intervals from April to September 

in 2000. We found that the sequence of Landsat TM scenes provided ample resolution to differentiate most of the plant communities examined. A larger sample size 

and additional field verification of the meadow vegetation data would have provided 

a more definitive evaluation of the methods. The multitemporal approach holds 

promise for monitoring change in wetland indicator species like the sedges, and 

for rapid characterization of grass, grasslike, and herbaceous vegetation over large 

areas. The technique also may be useful to detect the current location and spread of 

plants, especially those with distinctive vegetative or floral phenologies. 

Keywords: Meadows, Carex, Landsat, multitemporal, sedge.

1

Alan A. Ager is an operations research analyst, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Umatilla National Forest, 2517 Hailey Ave., Pendleton, OR 97801; and 

Karen Owens is a remote sensing analyst, Remote Sensing Applications Center, 2222 

West 2300 South, Salt Lake City, UT 84119.

United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

Pacific Northwest

Research Station

Research Note

PNW-RN-544

May 2004
2

RESEARCH NOTE PNW-RN-544

Introduction

Wet meadows are important biological components in the Blue Mountains of eastern Oregon. They support high levels of plant and animal diversity and are home 

to many rare and endemic plant and animal species (Crowe and Clausnitzer 1997). 

Meadows are highly valued for their scenic and recreational qualities and are an 

important component of wildlife and amphibian habitat. They also serve as groundwater reservoirs, feeding mountain streams that are spawning and rearing habitat 

for threatened and endangered salmonids.

Vegetation in many meadows in the Blue Mountains has undergone significant 

change owing to disturbances like grazing, mining, logging, road development, and 

other practices (Crowe and Clausnitzer 1997, Kaufman and Krueger 1984). These 

disturbances often result in downcutting of streams that pass through the meadows, 

triggering long-term changes in meadow vegetation and interdependent hydrologic 

function. Depth to ground water is a major determinant of meadow vegetation, especially shallow-rooted species of sedges and grasses (Otting 1998). When ground 

water is lowered and obligate wetland plant species are displaced, the belowground 

biomass and soil water-holding capacity of the meadow is reduced as well (Otting 

1998). This in turn diminishes the capability of the meadow to provide cool subsurface water during summer, which is crucial to the maintenance of aquatic habitat 

for federally listed species like chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha 

Walbaum) and bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus Suckley).

Meadow restoration is currently a high priority for the USDA Forest Service 

and other federal land management agencies (Crowe and Clausnitzer 1997). Meadow 

characterization is an important component of this process and is essential for 

designing site-specific restoration projects. A useful tool in this regard would be the 

development of remote sensing methods that aid in differentiating between sedge 

species that are sensitive to seasonal patterns of soil moisture vs. those that are not. 

The plant species of most interest are the sedges (Carex spp.) that have well-known 

preferences for seasonal patterns of soil moisture (Crowe and Clausnitzer 1997). In 

addition, the presence or absence of specific sedge species can be an indicator of 

overgrazing or other disturbances (Crowe and Clausnitzer 1997, Otting 1998).

A number of previous studies have demonstrated the utility of using remotely 

sensed data for vegetation classification work for rangelands (e.g., Clark et al. 2001, 

Tueller 1989) and forests (e.g., Franklin et al. 2000, Townsend and Walsh 2001). 

However, previous work has focused on the detection of relatively coarse vegetation 

categories, and to our knowledge, there are no studies that have attempted to distinguish among individual plant communities that are defined by their composition 

of forbs, grass, or grasslike species (Crowe and Clausnitzer 1997) with the use of 
3

Characterizing Meadow Vegetation With Multitemporal Landsat Thematic Mapper Remote Sensing

remotely sensed data. The objective of this project was to test the utility of remotely 

sensed data to aid land managers in the identification and characterization of meadows primarily dominated by sedge species in the Blue Mountains. 

Methods

The meadows included in this study are located in the Blue Mountains between 

Heppner and La Grande, Oregon, on the Umatilla and Wallowa-Whitman National 

Forests (figs. 1 and 2). The meadows represented a variety of vegetative types and 

moisture conditions and were located at elevations between 3,150 and 5,500 feet. A 

number of meadows were known to have experienced overgrazing and other

Figure 1—General location on the Umatilla and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests of meadows 

studied.

Figure 2—Desolation Meadow at the headwaters of Desolation Creek, North Fork John Day Ranger 

District, Umatilla National Forest, is typical of the meadows included in the study. 
4

RESEARCH NOTE PNW-RN-544

practices that led to changes in vegetative composition over the past 20 or more 

years. In all, 32 meadows were included in the study, 22 of which were part of 

the riparian classification work of Crowe and Clausnitzer (1997). The remaining 

meadows were typed as part of the Umatilla National Forest vegetation inventory. 

Meadows were chosen based on minimum size (>2 ha) and the absence of intermittent shrub or forest vegetation. The meadows were digitized by using digital ortho 

photos from 1998 as a backdrop. Boundaries were digitized approximately 15 m 

inside the meadow edge to eliminate the influence of adjacent, nonwetland areas. 

Although initial analyses were performed with all five dates of imagery (see below), 

the June and August dates were dropped for the cluster analyses owing to clouds 

obscuring several key meadows.

Five scenes of enhanced thematic mapper (TM) imagery (30 by 30 m) acquired 

throughout the 2000 growing season were used for the project. The five acquisition 

dates for the imagery were April 9, June 16, July 2, August 3, and September 20. 

The data were obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey EROS Data Center. The 

TM imagery was georeferenced and corrected for terrain. The images were checked 

for accurate coregistration and were found to be within one pixel of each other. The 

imagery was processed by using ERDAS® Imagine 8.5.2

The tasseled-cap (Kauth-Thomas) transformation (Crist and Cicone 1984, Crist 

and Kauth 1986, Kauth and Thomas 1976) was applied to each image, transforming the Landsat TM data with predefined coefficients into three new components 

related to scene brightness, greenness, and moisture content (fig. 3). The brightness component is a weighted average of all the bands. The greenness component 

weights most heavily the near-infrared radiation (IR) and red bands and is an 

indicator of photosynthetic activity. Moisture content component is related to soil 

moisture status, and weights the mid-IR bands most heavily (fig. 3).

Zonal means of tasseled-cap derived brightness, greenness, and moisture values 

were calculated for each meadow. Initial examination of these values revealed distinct seasonal patterns between meadows (fig. 4). Seasonal greenness and moisture 

“signatures” were identified and appeared to correspond well with different plant 

compositions and their seasonal patterns of spring green-up and fall senescence.

Tasseled-cap values (brightness, greenness, and moisture) of 32 meadows for 

three dates of imagery were analyzed with a principal components analysis (PCA) 

by using SAS software (SAS Institute 1997). Plots of PCA scores were examined to 

2 

The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information and 

does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or 

services. 
5

Characterizing Meadow Vegetation With Multitemporal Landsat Thematic Mapper Remote Sensing

Figure 3—Tasseled-cap-derived images of (A) original color-infrared image (note the snow in the upper right corner, 

the river running diagonally, and the harvested patches); (B) color composite of brightness, greenness, and moisture 

content; (C) greenness in gray scale; (D) moisture content (soil moisture) in gray scale (note lighter shades of gray 

indicate higher amounts of greenness and wetness).
6

RESEARCH NOTE PNW-RN-544

5.00

0.00

-5.00

-10.00

-15.00

-20.00

-25.00

-30.00

-35.00

-40.00

Month

Gre

e

n

n

e

s

s

v

alu

e

s

April June July September

Meadow 214

Limber Jim

Meadow 236

Matlock

Desolation

Alder

Round

Squaw

Starkey

Figure 4—Greenness plots of nine samples demonstrate the potential of using tasseled-cap indicators for characterizing meadows. 

Meadows 214, 236, and Limber Jim are dominated by hydrophytic sedge species, indicators of wet conditions throughout summer (high and increased levels of greenness at the end of the season). Matlock and Desolation Meadows are dominated by tufted 

hairgrass, an indicator of drier conditions (decrease in greenness values late in season). Alder, Round, and Squaw Meadows also 

showed a decrease in values late in summer from drying out. Starkey is a dry bunchgrass grassland.
7

Characterizing Meadow Vegetation With Multitemporal Landsat Thematic Mapper Remote Sensing

determine relationships among the meadows. Ideally, similar meadows (with similar plant associations and seasonal hydrological patterns) will fall into clusters in 

the PCA plots. The small number of meadows included in the study precluded using 

a more formal supervised classification.

Results

The first three principal components explained 81 percent of the total variation of 

the three tasseled-cap indices for the sample meadows. Variable loadings for the 

principal components were complex and difficult to interpret. Principal component 

analysis 1 (PCA1) loaded heavily for the negative late-season greenness. Principal 

component analysis 2 (PCA2) loaded high for greenness in all seasons and negative 

moisture in the late season. A plot of PCA1 versus PCA2 scores showed clusters of 

meadows that in many, but not all, cases corresponded to specific plant associations. 

Overall, the PCA performed relatively well in terms of differentiating plant meadows (fig. 5), especially considering that most of the meadows contain other sedge 

species as minor components of the vegetation. 

The group of dry upland bunchgrass (Agropyron spicatum (Pursh) Scribn. & 

Smith. [AGSP]) sample sites formed a cluster with high scores for PCA1 and low 

scores for PCA2. These grasslands were included to examine the signature of dry 

upland communities relative to the remaining sample. The slightly moister fescue 

grassland (Festuca idahoensis Elmer [FEID]) also showed a slightly higher score 

for PCA2, providing a clear contrast among upland meadows with different moisture levels. 

The meadows with higher scores for PCA2 were primarily CANE (Carex

nebrascensis Dewey) and DECA (Deschampsia cespitosa (L.) Beauv.). The CANE 

meadows typed out with the highest combined scores, although one DECA meadow 

and one CAAQ (C. aquatilis Wahl.) meadow were intermingled. Data from both of 

these meadows have not been field validated, and it is likely that the DECA meadow 

is not typed correctly.3 Carex nebrascensis is a specific indicator for overgrazed 

meadows. Most of the DECA meadows form a large cluster (fig. 5) with moderate 

to high PCA2 scores. 

The plant associations dominated by the two most hydrophytic species, CAAQ 

and CAUT (C. utriculata Stokes), were not well represented in the sample. In the 

case of CAAQ, some differences in PCA scores for the two meadows were 

3 

Riley, S. 2003. Personal communication. Botanist, Umatilla NF, 2517 SW Hailey Ave., 

Pendleton, OR 97801.
8

RESEARCH NOTE PNW-RN-544

4

3

2

1

0

-1

-2

-3

-4

-5

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

P

C

A

1

PCA 2

AGSP

AGSP

AGSP

AGSP

FEID

JUBA

DECA

DECA

DECA

DECA DECA

DECA

DECA

DECA

DECA

DECA

DECA

CANE

CANE

CANE

CALAS

CALAS

CAAQ

CAAQ

CAUT

CALU

CALU

CALU

CALU

CALU

ELP A2

CALA3

Figure 5—Plot of principal component scores for 32 meadows on the Umatilla National Forest. Labels are the plant associations according to 

Crowe and Clausnitzer (1997). Three outliers that did exhibit close association among similar meadow types are shown in italics. PCA1 and 

PCA2 are the first and second principal components.
9

Characterizing Meadow Vegetation With Multitemporal Landsat Thematic Mapper Remote Sensing

displayed. The same is true for CALA3 (C. lanuginosa Michx.), another meadow 

type where the sample size was limited. In both cases, it is possible that the meadows contained significant cover of additional sedge species. Low PCA1 scores were 

associated with the CALU (C. luzulina Olney) meadows. This sedge is an obligate 

hydrophytic species, and the CALU meadows are located at high elevations and are 

very wet. All four CALU meadows formed a relatively tight cluster in the PCA plot 

(fig. 5).

Discussion

The elimination of two (June and August) of the five Landsat scenes owing to 

clouds most likely reduced the effectiveness of the methods used here. However, even with this reduced set of images, this analysis demonstrated the utility 

of within-year, multitemporal Landsat TM imagery for differentiating meadow 

samples based on the dominant sedge species. Most of the samples fell into logical 

clusters of meadows with similar plant association types. These results suggest that 

the tasseled-cap transformation was able to capture key differences among species of sedge. Although outliers were found in the results, they may well be from 

meadows that might be more aptly characterized as mixes of sedge species rather 

than dominated by a particular one. The results also suggest that the methods can 

be used to differentiate among upland grassland communities, although the sample 

of grasslands in the study was insufficient to evaluate this possibility.

Certain sedge species are excellent indicators of seasonal hydrological condition. They are very responsive to slight changes in water table over time and, 

therefore, are good features to use for identifying hydrologically degraded meadows 

(Crowe and Clausnitzer 1997). Being able to use remotely sensed data to detect the 

sedge species associated with specific hydrologic conditions could be invaluable for 

efficient mapping and monitoring of these sensitive areas.

As new meadows are located and added to the data set, it should be possible 

to characterize them based on their similarity to existing clusters. Given a larger 

sample and a validated reference data set, a supervised classification could be used 

for identifying and characterizing meadows over large areas. Owing to time and 

resource constraints, the effects of including or excluding TM scenes on meadow 

classification results were not explored, nor did this analysis consider additional 

principal components, use of the raw Landsat data, or other transformations. Given 

the promising results from the simple approach used here, it is likely that the 

classification/clustering process of the meadows could be improved.

The potential applications of this process fall into three general categories: 

classification, verification, and monitoring. First, in areas where meadow or 
10

RESEARCH NOTE PNW-RN-544

nonforest vegetation has not been classified, a relatively small number of training 

sites could be collected and used to classify meadows and grasslands. Vegetation typing could then be used to help prioritize fieldwork for identifying rare and 

endemic riparian plants, and for identifying hydrologically important meadows. 

Second, in areas where meadow inventories have been completed, the methods 

developed here could be used for verification or screening of plant association data 

for errors. Third, methods used here could aid in the identification of degraded 

meadows by monitoring changes in PCA scores, or similar measures, over time. For 

example, imagery of this study area from 5 and 10 years ago could be compared 

with the current imagery to identify and delineate areas where there has been a loss 

or gain of obligate wetland species of sedge or other plants.

The presence of specific indicator species in meadows can yield valuable information on meadow conditions in terms of seasonal trends in subsurface moisture 

and grazing pressure. A multitemporal approach was found to be especially effective in characterizing the seasonal phenology of meadow vegetation and in differentiating among meadows dominated by closely related sedge species. The ability 

to perform meadow characterizations over large areas provides an additional tool 

for monitoring of meadows over time and identifying those that meet criteria for 

restoration projects. 

The methods described here also may be useful for screening large areas for 

infestation of invasive plants that have distinct vegetative and floral phenologies. 

For instance, sulfur cinquefoil (Potentilla recta L.) has a distinctive floral phase 

in late June that might be detectable with the methods described here.4 Another 

invasive, meadow hawkweed (Hieracium caespitosum Dumort.) remains green late 

in the growing season and may well have a unique spectral signature compared to 

surrounding vegetation. 

4

Parks, C. 2003. Personal communication. Plant pathologist, Forestry and Range Sciences 

Laboratory, 1401 Gekeler Lane, La Grande, OR 97850-3399.
11

Characterizing Meadow Vegetation With Multitemporal Landsat Thematic Mapper Remote Sensing

Acknowledgments

We thank Colin Griswold for assistance with digitizing meadows and Scott Riley 

for his field observations in some of the meadows included in the study. Haiganoush 

Preisler, Pat Clark, and Catherine Parks provided helpful reviews. This work was 

supported in part by the Focused Science Delivery Program, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station, Portland, Oregon.

English Equivalents

1 meter (m) = 3.28 feet

1 hectare (ha) = 2.47 acres

Literature Cited

Clark, P.E.; Seyfried, M.S.; Harris, B. 2001. Intermountain plant community 

classification using Landsat TM and SPOT HRV data. Journal of Range 

Management. 54: 152–160.

Crist, E.P.; Cicone, R.C. 1984. Application of the tasseled cap concept to 

simulated thematic mapper data. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote 

Sensing. 50: 343–352.

Crist, E.P.; Kauth R.J. 1986. The tasseled cap de-mystified. Photogrammetric 

Engineering and Remote Sensing. 52: 81–86.

Crowe, E.; Clausnitzer, R. 1997. Mid-montane wetland plant associations of the 

Malheur, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests. R6-NR-ECOL-TP22–97. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Region. 299 p.

Franklin, J.; Woodcock, C.E.; Warbington, R. 2000. Multi-attribute vegetation 

maps of Forest Service lands in California supporting resource management 

decisions. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing. 6: 1209–1217.

Kauffman, J.B.; Krueger, W.C. 1984. Livestock impacts on riparian ecosystems 

and stream management implications: a review. Journal of Range Management. 

37: 430–437. 

Kauth, R.J.; Thomas, G.S. 1976. The tasseled cap—a graphic description of the 

spectral-temporal development of agricultural crops as seen by Landsat. In: 

Proceedings of a symposium on machine processing of remotely sensed data. 

West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University, Laboratory for Applications of Remote 

Sensing: 41–51.
12

RESEARCH NOTE PNW-RN-544

Otting, N. 1998. Ecological characteristics of montane floodplain plant 

communities in the upper Grande Ronde basin, Oregon. Corvallis, OR: Oregon 

State University. 71 p. M.S. thesis.

SAS Institute. 1997. SAS/STAT software: changes and enhancements through 

release 6.12. Cary, NC.

Townsend P.A.; Walsh, S.J. 2001. Remote sensing of forested wetlands: 

application of multitemporal, multispectral satellite imagery to determine plant 

community composition and structure in Southeastern USA. Plant Ecology. 

157(2): 129–149.

Tueller, P.T. 1989. Remote sensing technology for rangeland management 

applications. Journal of Range Management. 42: 442–453.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, 

color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all 

prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program 

information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and 

Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal 

opportunity employer.

USDA is committed to making its information materials accessible to all USDA customers and employees.

Pacific Northwest Research Station

Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw

Telephone (503) 808-2592

Publication requests (503) 808-2138

FAX (503) 808-2130

E-mail pnw_pnwpubs@fs.fed.us

Mailing address Publications Distribution

Pacific Northwest Research Station

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, OR 97208-3890
U.S. Department of Agriculture

Pacific Northwest Research Station

333 SW First Avenue

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, OR 97208-3890

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300