Identifying wetland meadows in Grand Teton National Park using remote sensing and average wetland values

Six spectrally and ecologically distinct montane meadow community types were identified and mapped within Grand Teton National Park by analysis of Indian IRS-1B LISS-II imagery. A distinct to-xeric-hydric gradient among the meadow types was predicted by analysis of the satellite data. Thirty sites (five replicates for each of six meadow typ were selected for intensive field sampling. At each of the 30 sites, meadow vegetation was sampled in 20 m by 20 m square plots for canopy cover of all species. Using wetland indexes (on a scale of 1–5, where obligate wetland species = 1, facultative land = 2, facultative = 3, facultative upland = 4 and upland species = 5), average wetland values were calculated and ranged from 1.88 for A-type meadows and 2.86 for B meadows to 4.40, 4.49, 4.74, and 4.43 for C, D, E and F meadows, respectively. Because average wetland values of A and B meadows were < 3.00, they were determined to be indicative of wetlands. Eight out of ten obligate wetland plants had their greatest cover on A meadows (the wettest of the gradient) and had significant cover differe among meadow types using the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test. Average wetland values and plant species cover were used, in conjunction with remotely sensed data, to identify as wetlands 1,258 hectares of A meadows and 1,711 hectares of B meadows in Grand Teton National Park.

[1]  J. R. Jensen,et al.  Measurement of seasonal and yearly cattail and waterlily changes using multidate SPOT panchromatic data , 1993 .

[2]  R. Tiner,et al.  Wetlands of the United States , 1993 .

[3]  Jay E. Anderson,et al.  Watersheds and Vegetation of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem , 1991 .

[4]  William A. Niering,et al.  Vegetation of the Santa Catalina Mountains , 1963 .

[5]  Lynn Krise Lyon,et al.  Practical handbook for wetland identification and delineation , 1993 .

[6]  F. James Rohlf,et al.  Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research , 1969 .

[7]  Rf Daubenmire,et al.  Canopy coverage method of vegetation analysis , 1959 .

[8]  S. Sader,et al.  Accuracy of landsat-TM and GIS rule-based methods for forest wetland classification in Maine , 1995 .

[9]  William A. Niering,et al.  Vegetation of the Santa Catalina Mountains, Arizona: IV. Limestone and Acid Soils , 1968 .

[10]  Sunil Narumalani,et al.  Predictive modeling of cattail and waterlily distribution in a South Carolina reservoir using GIS , 1992 .

[11]  J. G. Lyon,et al.  Use of aerial photographs to measure the historical areal extent of lake Erie coastal wetlands , 1992 .

[12]  John R. Jensen,et al.  Introductory Digital Image Processing: A Remote Sensing Perspective , 1986 .

[13]  J. A. Thomasson,et al.  Differentiating bottomland tree species with multispectral videography , 1994 .

[14]  D. H. Knight,et al.  Mountains and Plains: The Ecology of Wyoming Landscapes , 1994 .

[15]  Robert H. Whittaker,et al.  VEGETATION OF THE SANTA CATALINA MOUNTAINS, ARIZONA. V. BIOMASS, PRODUCTION, AND DIVERSITY ALONG THE ELEVATION GRADIENT' , 1975 .

[16]  Debbie Whitall,et al.  WETLANDS , 1995, Restoration & Management Notes.