Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

P. Comer

Publications and source records attributed to P. Comer.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Mapping moderate-scale land-cover over very large geographic areas within a collaborative framework: A case study of the Southwest Regional Gap Analysis Project (SWReGAP)

Land-cover mapping efforts within the USGS Gap Analysis Program have traditionally been state-centered; each state having the responsibility of implementing a project design for the geographic area within their state boundaries. The Southwest Regional Gap Analysis Project (SWReGAP) was the first formal GAP project designed at a regional, multi-state scale. The project area comprises the southwestern states of Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah. The land-cover map/dataset was generated using regionally consistent geospatial data (Landsat ETM+ imagery (1999-2001) and DEM derivatives), similar field data collection protocols, a standardized land-cover legend, and a common modeling approach (decision tree classifier). Partitioning of mapping responsibilities amongst the five collaborating states was organized around ecoregion-based "mapping zones". Over the course of 21/2 field seasons approximately 93,000 reference samples were collected directly, or obtained from other contemporary projects, for the land-cover modeling effort. The final map was made public in 2004 and contains 125 land-cover classes. An internal validation of 85 of the classes, representing 91% of the land area was performed. Agreement between withheld samples and the validated dataset was 61% (KHAT = .60, n = 17,030). This paper presents an overview of the methodologies used to create the regional land-cover dataset and highlights issues associated with large-area mapping within a coordinated, multi-institutional management framework. ?? 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Remote Sensing of Environment↗

How much is enough? The recurrent problem of setting measurable objectives in conservation

International agreements, environmental laws, resource management agencies, and environmental nongovernmental organizations all establish objectives that define what they hope to accomplish. Unfortunately, quantitative objectives in conservation are typically set without consistency and scientific rigor. As a result, conservationists are failing to provide credible answers to the question “How much is enough?” This is a serious problem because objectives profoundly shape where and how limited conservation resources are spent, and help to create a shared vision for the future. In this article we develop guidelines to help steer conservation biologists and practitioners through the process of objective setting. We provide three case studies to highlight the practical challenges of objective setting in different social, political, and legal contexts. We also identify crucial gaps in our science, including limited knowledge of species distributions and of large-scale, long-term ecosystem dynamics, that must be filled if we hope to do better than setting conservation objectives through intuition and best guesses.

BioScience↗