Grand Canyon Monitoring and Res

Results and Recommendati

from the Remote Sensing Init
Presentation Orde

• Brief History• Objectives• General Approach• Approach & Results for Sp

Monitoring Requirements

• Summary Recommendation
Brief History

• 1997 – stakeholders request GCMR

investigate expanded use of remotetechnologies for data collection.

• 1998 – GCMRC convenes remote-s• 1999-2003 – data collection, evaluat

summary reports for specific requi
Initiative Objective

• Less intrusive, cost effective ap

that: 

– Provide acceptable accuracies– Increase capability and producti– Expand spatial coverage
General Approach

• Review current monitoring require

(parameters, accuracies) - interview

• Literature review to determine mos

approaches/technologies

• Review characteristics of all existin

airborne and spaceborne sensors 
General Approach 

(con

• Determine monitoring resources a

by remote sensing

• Selection of viable sensors for test• Data collection• Evaluation and report generation
Sensors Considered Inapp

• All spaceborne – generally too low 

some 1 m resolution, but all sensorgeosynchronous orbit with data co9:45AM local producing serious sh

• Airborne radar – aircraft too larg

canyon, too low resolution above cbackscatter interference from can

• SHOALS LIDAR – restricted to v

water and provides only 3-m point 
Resources not Approac

• Very small or obscured features – 

plants, cave/adit deposits

• Chemical characteristics of water• Faunal populations• Fish foodbase
Resources Approach

• Archaeological structures• Camping sites/beaches• Physical characteristics of wat• Channel substrate
Resources Approached 

(

• Terrestrial sediment deposits – geo

topography

• Terrestrial vegetation mapping• Terrestrial canopy volumes
Archaeological Struct

• Requirement: detect structures and 

modifications

• Approach: 100-cm thermal-infrare

different resolutions (11-100 cm) of visible/near-infrared image data, anresolution (3 cm) stereo photogram
Detection Study Area – Un
Detection - Result

• Requires CIR with resolutions <11 c• Daytime TIR less effective than 100 

11-cm CIR image 100-cm 
High-resolution Photogra

• Study area: Several selected archa• Approach: Photogrammetric analy

resolution stereo imagery (240-m Aacquired pre- and post-monsoon se

• Results: Could not achieve the req

vertical accuracy to detect arroyo amodifications in post-monsoon data

• Possible Alternative: very high-res

cm) LIDAR (100-m AGL; $6,200)
Camping Sites/Beac

• Requirement: Monitor quality of c

and beaches throughout the CRE; open, smooth surfaces near river, babove water’s edge to avoid daily fl

• Approach: Image analysis of 44-cm

rectified, digital visible and near-inimagery and 1-m DSM data produccm stereo, b&w imagery (6,100-m Aimage data have 25-cm positional a
Camping Sites/Beac

• Results: Image color 

and texture and DSM data can be used to map all campableareas throughout the 

CRE in a matter of a few months, which cannot be achieved by ground surveys.
Physical Characteristics o

• Requirements: Map the warm-wat

habitats and monitor suspended sedconcentration.

• Approaches: 100-cm, georectified, 

thermal-infrared imagery (365-m A15-30 cm visible (blue-green and grimagery (275-m AGL; $25 unrectifi
Warm-water habitats - Awatu

Georectification produced 

1-2 m positional accuracy; 0.3 degree temperature sensitivity

TEMPERATU

< 12.5 13.0 13

CIR Image 
Warm-water habita

• Results: Mapped all warm-water h

between RM30 and RM74 with a 2multispectral flight and a week of dprocessing.

• Note: Mapping to absolute temper

requires ground-truth water tempefrom water gaging stations.
Suspended Sediment - 

• Results: Blue-green/green band ratio, water-gage data, provide total suspended concentrations. Cannot approach frequemeasurements, but does provide instantaarea concentration maps.
Suspended Sedime

• Note: Requires periodic ground calibr

accuracy. More accurate for silt/clay particle flux at this time.
Channel Substrate

• Requirements: (1) distribution of fi

coarse-grained sediment and (2) sutopography (bathymetry).

• Approaches: 15-cm, high-gain colo

(275-m AGL; $25 unrectified), 22-c

b&w (1,100-m AGL; $1,250 rectifie

photogrammetry. 
Channel Sediments – northern 

22-cm high-gain, digital b&w –before Sept. 2000 flow spike

22-cm high-gain,digital b&w,after Sept. 2000 flow spike

positional accuracy = 30 cm.
Channel S

15-cm, georectified, dimagery acquired with in May, 2003

100 m
Channel Morpholo

• Results: High-gain capability provid

cameras can map sediment distributsize on channel substrate, but uncertime what size ranges can be discern

• Note: Method limited by water clar

both of which attenuate light. Imagof inexpensive data to 1 m positional without accurate GPS/IMU informaabout 2 hours processing per image half year for 100 miles of 15-cm ima
Bathymetry – channel top

• Photogrammetry is unable to mode

channel topography due to a lack of texture on sediment deposits.

• SHOALS (green and NIR LIDAR) 

testing; recent developments allow m20 m in turbid water and 40 m in clbut still 2 m point spacing.

• Acoustic multibeam data are slow t

process, but may be only viable appespecially in deep water

.
Terrestrial sediment de

• Requirements: Map spatial distrib

geomorphology, and volume of finecoarse-grained sediment deposits. believed required image resolution provided by aerial photography; 30positional accuracy; topography 

≤ 

vertical accuracy.
Terrestrial sediment de

• Approach: For geomorphic mappi

photographic and digital b&w, truecolor-infrared imagery at resolutiofrom 6 cm to 30 cm. Determined abdifficulty of different imagery for mspatial distribution and geomorphoand coarse-grained sediment.
Geomorphology - Emi

0 5 m

0 5 m

• Results: Natural-color better than b&

distinguishing surface materials and s
0 5 m 0 5 m

Geomorphology - Emi

• Results: CIR imagery provides more unamb

identification, which allows better and more texture analyses, which is an important attrideposits.
• Results: For most GCMRC mappi

applications, image resolution near was found acceptable by the scientiresult opened the door for digital sewhich cannot obtain 6 cm resolutioprovide calibrated, orthorectified dmany monitoring requirements.

For Mapping in Gen
Topography – FIST LTM 

• Approach: Comparison of airborne 

ground surveyed elevations on bare aground using following data:

• 6-cm stereo photography (610-m AG• 22-cm stereo digital imagery (6,100-m • LIDAR data – low res. (3,000-m AGL

very high res. (100-m AGL; $6,200) 
Topography – Eminenc

0 25 m
Ground Survey (2-3 m poin

0 25 m
Subarea for DSM/LID

0 25 m
Ground Survey (2-3 m poin

0 5 m (invasive, $1,000
Low Resolution (3.75 m) 

0 5 m (noninvasive; 3,000-m 
Moderate Resolution (1.5 m

0 5 m (noninvasive; 1,500-m 
Automated Photog. (1 m

0 5 m (~invasive; 2,400-m A
High Resolution (0.8 m) 

0 5 m (noninvasive; 1,800-m 
Very High Resolution (0.3 m

0 5 m (noninvasive; 100-m A
Topography – Summ

133 cm**

71 cm**

60-280 cm30-200 cm

129 cm

54 cm

5 cm

Accuracy

Veg.

Ground Surveys 5 cm unknown Very high-res. LIDAR 8 cm 4 cm High-res. LIDAR 17 cm 6 cm 

Mod.-res. LIDAR 15-40 cm * 25-30 cm 

Low-res. LIDAR 45-100 cm* unknown 

p

44 cm* unknown Automated Photogrammetry

p

32 cm unknown Manual Photogrammetry

Precision In

Accuracy

Method Bare

* have vertical offsets, some variable

** better processing may reduce these values
Very High Res. LIDAR Manual Ph

858 860 862 

858860862864866868870

Ground Surve

Photogrammetric Elevation (meters AMSL)

Bare Ground Po

slope = 0.991

R2 = 0.978

RMSE = 32 cm

n = 1235

Results on Bare Gro

(noninvasive; 100-m AGL; $6,200/km)

(invasive; 3$3,000/km)

834 836 838 840 842 844 846 848 850 852

834836838840842844846848850852

Ground Survey Elevations (m0

FLI-MAP LIDAR Elevations (m)

Bare Ground Points Within Study Area Rm 43-46

slope = 0.999

R2 = 0.999

RMSE = 8 cm

n = 520
Very High Res. LIDAR Manual Pho

858 860 862 

858860862864866868870

Ground Surve

Photogrammetric Elevation (meters AMSL)

Vegetated Ground 

Results on Vegetated G

836 838 840 842 844 846 848

836838840842844846848

Ground Survey Elevations (m0

FLI-MAP LIDAR Elevations (m)

Points in Vegetation Within Study Area Rm 43-46
• Manual photogrammetry – Although 

accuracies obtained for bare and veground, method is invasive due to rcontrol panels and method may not acceptable accuracies in vegetation winter months due to extensive sha

• Automated photogrammetry – provi

inexpensive DSM data for monitoriwide changes, but not for detailed smonitoring.

Topography – Comm
• High and very high resolution LIDA

systems provide good bare-ground are completely non-invasive, are noshadows or cloud cover. In fact, accvery high resolution LIDAR data is caccuracy of ground surveys, and may for Archaeology requirements. Imprprocessing might produce much higaccuracies within vegetation and mprovide accurate canopy volumes.

Topography – Comm
Canopy Volume

• Requirements: Provide estimates o

volumes within the CRE with 80-90accuracy. Data used to model carbfor aquatic environment and to promeasure of quality of habitats for b
Canopy Volume

• Approach: Compared all previous 

data (photogrammetric, LIDAR) wvegetated terrain with ground mea

canopy heights.

• Evaluated manual photogrammetr

and moderate-resolution LIDAR. Aphotogrammetry and higher resoludata currently being evaluated.
Canopy Volume

• Results: 

– Low and moderate resolution LIDAR 

(>40% error) for estimating canopy v

– Manual photogrammetry approaches 

accuracy, but processing very difficultconsuming, and expensive.
Vegetation Monitor

• Requirements: Map the distributio

and non-native species and vegetatithroughout the CRE with 30-cm poaccuracy and 80% vegetation mappaccuracy. Provides base map for furetrospective temporal change anal
Vegetation Monitor

• General Approach: Examined colo

film and digital imagery, and digitamultispectral (4 to 12 bands) imageresolutions from 11 cm to 100 cm foterm vegetation monitoring sites. Chyperspectral data acquired in 199were found to be too noisy. Multispacquired at 365-m to 6,100-m AGL CIR film 730-m to 3,050-m AGL fo
Vegetation Monitor

• Initial Approach: Determined map

accuracies for various vegetation cowithin the vegetation LTM sites usispectral and textural information peach type of image data for the vegcommunities. 
Kwagunt Marsh

Field mapping 100-cm multispectral 

67% accuracy 

PHAU, agst

TARA, BRRU, baem

SAEX, EQFE, MUAS, baem

PRGL,ACGR,TESECAREX, JUTO, PLMA

50 m 50 m 50 
Initial Results for Si

• Accurate mapping requires data th

calibrated for large regions = digita

• MS data produces higher accuracie

100-cm resolution cannot be used foverification.

• CIR data approaches MS mapping 

only using vegetation texture, which at resolutions > 30 cm and is non-ex100-cm resolution.
2002-3 CRE Invent

• Employed a “calibrated,” digital sy

acquired 4-band imagery at 44 cm imagery at 22-cm and a DSM at 1 m 

• Acquired at 6,100-m AGL at $625/k

days for entire CRE.

• Automated rectification to 25 cm p

accuracy.
Current mappin

digital, orthrect

50 m

Kwagunt Marsh -Preliminary 2003vegetation map
50 m 50 m

1999 field unit outlines superimposed on2003 preliminary vegetation map

Kears
2002-3 CRE Inventory 

• Unknown at this time whether addi

(MS data) would be better for vegemapping, which precludes texture, better calibrated 4-band data will paccuracies near the 70-80% level. Isome field work will be required to accuracy for all species, but remote does significantly reduce the time fovegetation inventory mapping.
Minimum Imagery Pro

• For most applications:

– Spatial resolution 15-20 cm (archaeolog

100 cm)

– If analog imagery, scanned at 15 micro– Color-infrared (TIR for warm-water ha– GPS/IMU instrumentation (

φ, 

κ, 

α for a

– Dual sensors/aircraft to insure against w

equipment failures; 50% reduction in c(only 15% more cost) 

– Accurate and complete metadata– Acquired under TOD flight restrictions 

GCMRC shadow models to minimize sh
Boxes indicate areas with restricted time w

data collection to minimize shadows with t
• Calibrated, digital sensors (12-16-b

preferred for vegetation and aquatmonitoring) – assumes variable det

• Orthorectified to 30-cm positional a• Note: EarthData Corp. has dual se

provide these minimum and optimuprotocols, plus a 1-m DSM, with a 4mission for $625/km.

Optimum Imagery Pro
• Terrestrial sediments (≤ 25 cm accu

– Minimum = 1:4,800-scale, stereo phot– Optimum = high or very high resoluti

• Archaeology (≤ 6 cm accuracy)

– very high resolution LIDAR (limited a

• Canopy Volume (≤ 50 cm accuracy

– 1-m DSM (automated photogrammetr– High or very high resolution LIDAR (

limited area coverage)

Elevation Data Proto
• Channel (≤ 15 cm accuracy)

– Minimum = acoustic multi-beam– Possibly = SHOALS LIDAR will prob

areas of clear, calm water to depths 20

unknown). In the rapids, there will be to the water’s mirror surface. RecentEngineers have achieved 20 m depth pturbid water, and therefore, the system worth considering, but its best point s

Elevation Data Proto