WSRRI Spatial Priorities Documentation
WSRRI Map Portal
  • THE WSRRI SPATIAL PRIORITIES
    • About WSRRI
    • WSRRI Spatial Priorities
    • WSRRI Targets
    • Map Portal
  • DATA INPUTS
    • Data Inputs Overview
    • Remote Sensing Data
    • Climate
    • Energy and Transportation Infrastructure
    • Topography, Hydrology, & Soils
  • METHODS
    • Methods Overview
    • Landcover
    • Rangeland Fractional Cover
    • Human Footprint
    • Habitat Suitability
    • Resistance to Movement
    • Core Habitat
    • Corridors
    • Spatial Priorities
Powered by GitBook
On this page
  1. METHODS

Landcover

TerrAdapt's landcover model employs an advanced classification system to identify and categorize the 19 types of landcover across Washington. Using satellite imagery, geospatial data, and machine learning algorithms, the model is capable of distinguishing between different landcover types such as forests, urban areas, water bodies, agricultural lands, native shrubsteppe habitats and more (see the taxonomy in the table below).

Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Value

Non-vegetated

Water

Water

1

Non-vegetated

Snow and Ice

Snow and Ice

2

Non-vegetated

Barren

Barren

3

Natural vegetation

Wetland

Emergent Wetland

4

Natural vegetation

Wetland

Woody Wetland

5

Natural vegetation

Grass and Forb

Mesic Grass and Forb

6

Natural vegetation

Grass and Forb

Xeric Grass and Forb

7

Natural vegetation

Shrub

Mesic Shrub

8

Natural vegetation

Shrub

Xeric Shrub

9

Natural vegetation

Forest

Deciduous Forest

10

Natural vegetation

Forest

Coniferous Forest

11

Human modified

Irrigated Agriculture

Pasture

12

Human modified

Irrigated Agriculture

Irrigated Rowcrops

13

Human modified

Irrigated Agriculture

Orchard

14

Human modified

Non-irrigated Agriculture

Non-Irrigated Rowcrops

15

Human modified

Non-irrigated Agriculture

Fallow

16

Human modified

Developed

Developed - High Intensity

17

Human modified

Developed

Developed - Medium Intensity

18

Human modified

Developed

Major Road

19

Training the model

For each class in our landcover taxonomy, we created between 500 and 5,000 observations divided among the years 2008, 2011, 2013, 2016, 2019, and 2021 based on the consensus among the following existing landcover-related datasets:

Dataset
Citation
Data availability

2015-present

1985-2021

1992, 2001, 2006, 2011, 2016, 2019, and 2021

1986-present

1984-present

2008-present

2009-present

1985-present

2021

More observations were produced for more common landcover classes compared to rare classes. Not all datasets were available for every year across the full extent of the region. Also, the landcover datasets in the table above only partially conformed to our landcover taxonomy, and some landcover classes were widely included in these datasets while others were only available in a small subset. Given these limitations, there were a variable number of datasets that were available to assess model agreement depending on the class, location, and year. However, in all cases, at least two datasets agreed on the class of the observation in our training dataset. The total number of training data samples was 78,500.

For each observation of a consensus landcover class, our Google Earth Engine-based workflow extracted the value of all covariates matched to the year corresponding to the sampling year of the consensus landcover observation. The result was a table (a Google Earth Engine FeatureCollection) with attributes for the consensus landcover class and all covariates.

All training data locations were assigned a 'fold' (value from 1 to 10) that was used to reduce autocorrelation during model validation. Folds were assigned based on a 10 km x 10 km grid of randomized folds across the region. During model training, one fold of data was always withheld, and because of the spatial assignment of folds, the withheld data was spatially separated from all other folds and therefore expected to be a more independent assessment compared to validation based on folds that were spatially intermixed.

Developing the landcover data product

In addition to assessing the probability that a pixel belonged to each landcover class in our taxonomy, we also created a discrete landcover classification based on the landcover class with the highest probability in each pixel. We modified this discrete classification by assigning all pixels that coincided with the road classes of 'freeway' or 'primary road' a class value of 19 to indicate the presence of a major road.

PreviousMethods OverviewNextRangeland Fractional Cover

Last updated 1 year ago

v1

v1.3

v1.4

v200

TerrAdapt's landcover model uses a variety of covariates as environmental predictors of the landcover classes in our taxonomy. The data sources for these covariates are described in the section. All covariates were stored in Google Earth Engine (either in the public data catalog or TerrAdapt's private asset storage) and available for use in our dynamic workflow.

We used the random forest classifier () implemented in Google Earth Engine to predict each landcover class in our taxonomy from the covariates at all training data locations. We trained 10 replicate models per landcover class in a k-fold approach () with a unique 'fold' of 1/10th of the data withheld for validation as described above in the section. The model predicted the probability that the observation belonged to the class of interest rather than any other class.

DATA INPUTS
Breiman 2001
Fushiki 2011
Training the model
Dynamic World
Brown et al. 2022
LCMAP
Xian et al. 2022
US National Landcover Database
Homer et al. 2020
Rangeland Analysis Platform
Jones et al. 2018
JRC Global Surface Water
Pekel et al. 2016
USDA CroplandCROS
Boryan et al. 2011
Canada Annual Crop Inventory
Fizette et al. 2013
North American Land Change Monitoring System
Houseman et al. 2022
ESA WorldCover
Zanaga et al. 2021