Large scale aerial photography of native range transects
by James Stuart Anderson
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE
in Range Science
Montana State University
© Copyright by James Stuart Anderson (1978)
Abstract:
The use of remote sensing in locating and describing specific plant communities on rangeland is of
considerable value to the resource manager. With this technique, permanent, and precise records of site
and vegetation characteristics can be obtained relatively inexpensively. This project's use of aerial
photography on rangeland includes the modifications of procedures commonly used in "conventional"
aerial photography. Large scale stereoscopic aerial photography (1/3800 to 1/9000) was taken with
small cameras throughout the growing season, using color and color infrared film as well as
black-and-white. From this, seasonal profiles of plant species and community signatures were
examined. Ground truth data consisting of soil moisture, phenology, and photographic ground obliques
were collected as promptly as possible following the aerial photography. Spectral signatures from color
and color infrared photography were analyzed and compared to detailed vegetative mapping on
black-and-white photography of the same area. A unique spectral signature or combinations of spectral
signatures during one or more phenological stages differentiated three tree species, four shrub species,
two grass species, and three forb species.
The occurrences of these species' discriminating spectral signatures were related to their phonological
stages. Their colors were described with the Munsell color notation. STATEMENT OF PERMISSION TO COPY
' In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the require­
ments for an advanced degree at Montana State University, I agree that
the Library shall make it freely available for inspection.
I further
agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly
purposes may be granted by my major professor, or, in his absence, by
the Director of Libraries.
It is understood that any copying or
publication in this thesis for.financial gain shall not be allowed
without my
Signature
Date
^^
LARGE SCALE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY OF NATIVE RANGE TRANSECTS
by
JAMES STUART ANDERSON
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree
of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
Range Science
Approved:
Head, Major Department
Graduate Dean
MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY
Bozeman, Montana
June, 1978
ill
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I
wish to express my gratitude and appreciation to Dr, John E,
Taylor, and Mr. Wayne C. Leininger for their guidance, assistance,
and encouragement throughout the entire period of this study.
sincere appreciation is also expressed to the following:
My
Dr. Gerald
A. Nielson and Dr. Gene F. Payne for their advice and assistance with
the manuscript; Mr. William E. Woodcock for designing the camera
mount, and his helpful suggestions in conducting the aerial photog­
raphy; Miles City Aero Service for their expertise in the art of flying
and their enthusiasm while conducting the aerial photography;
Mr. Wallace McRae, and the Custer National Forest, Ashland Division
for their cooperation and allowing access to the study sites; Mr. David
Litz for drafting many figures within this manscfipt; Mrs. Frankie
Larson for her patience in typing this manuscript and many personal
friends and the Lord Jesus Christ whose encouragements and inspirations
made possible the completion of this study.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
.Page
V I T A ..........................
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS............
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS..................
iv
LIST OF T A B L E S ..............................................
v
LIST OF FIGURES..............................................
vi
LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES......................................
viii
ABSTRACT............
ix
INTRODUCTION . ............................................ . .
.I
REVIEW OF LITERATURE ............................
. . . . . .
Phenological Effects ................................
Film and F i l t e r s ............
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA.
. . . . .
.............
2
. .
. . . . .
Climate. ..............................................
Vegetation . . ....................................
7
7
9
.
14
18
MATERIALS AND METHODS........................................
20
Ground Truth Data....................................
Data Analysis............................................
26
33
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION..............................
36
Prairie Sandreed Community ..............................
Chokecherry Community. . . . ................. . . . . .
Little Bluestem Community................................
Soils........................
36
47
51
56
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS......................................
57
APPENDIX . ................
61
LITERATURE CITED ............................................
90
V
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
1
Page
THREE YEAR SUMMARY OF MONTHLY PRECIPITATION (CENTIMETERS)
NEAR THE HALFWAY RESERVOIR STUDY SITE. DATA WERE .
COLLECTED AT SONNET 2WNW, MONTANA (APPROXIMATELY 21 km
east of Study-site).......
2
. ......................
is
THREE YEAR SUMMARY OF MONTHLY TEMPERATURE (DEGREES
CELSIUS) NEAR THE HALFWAY RESERVOIR STUDY SITE. DATA
WERE COLLECTED AT SONNETTE 2WNW, MONTANA (APPROXIMATELY
21 km EAST OF STUDY S I T E ) ............................ .. ,
15
THREE YEAR SUMMARY OF MONTHLY PRECIPITATION (CENTIMETERS)
NEAR THE McRAE KNOLLS STUDY SITES. DATA WERE COLLECTED
AT COLSTRIP, MONTANA (APPROXIMATELY 13.8 km N.W. OF
STUDY SITE)........................
16
TWO YEAR SUMMARY OF MONTHLY TEMPERATURE (DEGREES
CELSIUS) NEAR THE McRAE KNOLLS STUDY SITE. DATA WERE
COLLECTED AT COLSTRIP, MONTANA (APPROXIMATELY 13.8 km
N.W. OF STUDY S I T E ) .......... ............................
17
FILM, FILTER, SCALE, ALTITUDE, AND LENS COMBINATIONS
FOR TWO FORMAT (24x36 mm AND 55x55 mm) CAMERAS USED
IN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY, SUMMER, 1976........................
25
6
INDEX TO MAP C O D E S ......................................
27
7
PHENOLOGY CODES ..........................................
31
8
A COMPARISON OF THE IfUNSELL COLQR, STANDARDS. AND
PLANT COMMUNITY SPECTRAL SIGNATURES RECORDED ON COLOR
AND COLOR IR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY AT McRAE KNOLLS STUDY
SITE, 1976. . ....................... .....................
37
A COMPARISON.OF.THE MUNSELL .COLOR STANDARDS AND
PLANT COMMUNITY SPECTRAL SIGNATURES RECORDED ON COLOR
AND COLOR IR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY AT HALFWAY RESERVOIR
STUDY SITE, 1976
40
3
4
5
9
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
1
Portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. , . ,
3
2
Aerial photography study sites in Southeastern Montana , .
10
3
Typical aspect of Halfway Reservoir Study Site ..........
11
4
Soils map with soil sample and photo locations of
Halway Reservoir Study Site. . . . . . . . . ............ ■
12
5
Typical aspect of McRae Knolls Study Site..........
13
6.
Spectral sensitivity of Kodak aerochrome infrared film
2443 (Kodak, 1 9 7 1 ) ............ ......................... .
21
7
Absorption curve of Hasselblad 0-4 orange filter . . ; . .
22
8
Absorption curve of Kodak Wratten #15 orange filter. . . .
22
9
Assembling aerial ground marker....................
24
10
Field procedures of random Daubenmire transects. . . . . .
11
Soil sample and photo locations, McRae Knolls Study Site
12
A description of the Munsell hue designation . ...........
35
13
Detailed vegetational community map with transect
locations (*> marks location), McRae Knolls Study Site
(for numerical code refer to Table 6 on page 2 7 ) ........
42
Aerial color photography exposed on July 15, 1976 with
the prairie sandreed community identified by the
marker (scale is I to 580) ..............................
43
14
15
16
29
.
Aerial color IR photography exposed on July 15, 1976
with the prairie sandreed community identified by the
marker (scale is I to 6 1 8 ) ................ ............ .
Prairie sandreed during the boot phonological state on
July 28, 1976............ ............................ . .
32
44
45
vii
Figure
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Page
Prairie sandreed during the seed shatter phenological
stage on August 27, 1976, . ............................
46
Aerial color IR photography exposed on May 4, 1976 with
chokecherry (a) and skunkbush sumac (b) identified by
the markers (scale is I to 980). ................... ..
48
Aerial color IR photography exposed on May 19, 1976 with
chokecherry (a) and skunkbush sumac (b) identified by
the markers (scale is I to 980) . .....................
49
Aerial color IR photography exposed on June 3, 1976 with
chokecherry (a) and skunkbush sumac (b) identified by
the markers (scale is I to 618) , . .................. ..
50
Detailed vegetational community map with transect
locations (« marks location), Halfway Reservoir Study
Site (for numerical codes refer to Table 6 on page 27'). .
52
Aerial color photography exposed on September 27, 1976
with little bluestem community identified by the marker
(scale is I to 5 5 5 ) .............................. .
53
Aerial color IR photography exposed on September 27, 1976
with little bleustem community identified by the marker
(scale is I to 5 2 5 ) ...................... .............
54
Little bluestem during the seed shatter phenological
stage on September 29, 1976 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
55
viii
LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES
TABLE
I
II
III
Page
CANOPY COVERAGE AND PERCENT COMPOSITION (PERCENTAGE) FOR
HALFWAY RESERVOIR AND McRAE KNOLLS STUDY SITES, 1976
(RANDOM TRANSECT CONSISTING OF 20 FRAMES (2 b y '5 dm)}. . .
62
PHENOLOGICAL PROFILE OF THE McRAE KNOLLS STUDY
SITE, 1976 ..............................................
77
PHENOLOGICAL PROFILE OF THE HALFWAY RESERVOIR STUDY
SITE, 1976 ................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
80
IV PERCENT COMPOSITION (PERCENTAGE) FOR HALFWAY RESERVOIR
AND McRAE KNOLLS STUDY SITE, 1976. . . . . ..............
V
VI
VII
83
SOIL TEXTURE CLASSIFICATION AND PERCENT MOISTURE AT
HALFWAY RESERVOIR SITE, 1976 ............................
84
SOIL TEXTURE CLASSIFICATION AND PERCENT MOISTURE AT
McRAE KNOLLS SITE, 1976................
85
SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAMES OR RANGE PLANTS, ...........
86
Ix
ABSTRACT
The use of remote sensing in Iocating--Ahd describing specific
plant communities on Rangeland is of considerable value to the
resource manager. With this technique, permanent, and precise
records of site and vegetation characteristics can be obtained
relatively inexpensively. This project’s use of aerial photography
on rangeland includes the modifications of procedures commonly used .
in "conventional" aerial photography. Large scale stereoscopic aerial
photography (1/3800 to 1/9000) was taken with small cameras through­
out the growing season, using color and color infrared film as well
as black-and-white. From this, seasonal profiles of plant species
and community signatures were examined. Ground truth data consisting
of soil moisture, phenology, and photographic ground obliques were
collected as promptly as possible following the aerial photography.
Spectral signatures from color and color infrared photography were
analyzed and compared to detailed vegetative mapping on black-andwhite photography of the same area. A unique spectral signature or
combinations of spectral signatures during one or more phenological
stages differentiated three tree species, four shrub species, two
grass species, and three forb species.
The occurrences of these species' discriminating spectral
signatures were related to their phenological stages. Their colors
were described with the Munsell color notation.
INTRODUCTION
Aerial photography has been' used extensively for mapping broad
vegetational community stands.
Most of this work has been concentrated
on the identification of crop, grass, shrub and timber stands from
small scale aerial photography.
Positive identification of individual species and plant community
stands is often difficult by the use of aerial photography.
The reason
for this may be unsuitable photographic scale, improper film and filter
combinations, lack of steroscopic coverage, photography exposed during
a nondiscriminating phonological period, or the lack of quantified
spectral signatures characteristic of community stands.
This study is an attempt to use the above criteria advantageously
to distinguish, identify, and describe a species * or community's
spectral signature from photographic imagery.
From this, aerial
photography could be used in obtaining permanent, precise data for
rangeland inventories and for monitoring changes in vegetation which
might result from management decisions.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The first photographic imagery process dates' back to 1839 when
Daguerre produced an image on a silvered copper plate.
In 1858,
. >
Nadars produced' the first aerial photograph from a balloon at a height
of 80 meters (H).
In 1909, the first photographs from an airplane
were taken over Mourmillion by the Frenchman, Maurisse.
Later,
reconnaisance photography from airships or airplanes played an important
role during the first World War (Gerhsheim and Gernsheim, 1969).
Since that time, aerial photography has been applied in biological
and physical sciences' such as archaeology, agriculture, range management,
forestry and others (Smith, 1968).
According to Parker and Wolff (1965),
the extensive varieties of film and filter combinations available today
make aerial cameras one of our most powerful tools for remote’sensing.
Carneggie and Reppert (1969) reported numerous potentials exist
for large scale photography in range inventory, management, and research.
Shrub, grass, and forb species were differentiated using color and/or
color infrared (IR) aerial photography.
Image Discrimination and Identification
Tone, texture, pattern, shape, size and shadow are useful para­
meters for interpreting aerial photographs (Driscoll, 1971; and Olson,
1960).
Colwell (1954) considers tone contrast between an image and its
background as the primary image characteristic for the detection of an
object from a single photograph.
According to Colwell (1966), and Roger
(1953), contrast of the image and its background, resolution of the
-3-
photographic image, and difference in parallax are factors associated
with the recognition of images on aerial photographs.
Factors Affecting Leaf Reflectance
Knowledge of the manner in which solar energy interacts with
grassland vegetation is necessary to interpret remote sensing data in
this ecological zone (Tucker, 1975).
According to Gates (1970),
the precise spectral quality and intensity of plant reflectance and
emittance depend on leaf geometry, morphology, physiology, chemistry,
soil site, and climate.
The composition of incident sunlight (Fig.I)
coupled with the complexity of plant reflection determine the spectral
complexity of reflected light (Gates, 1967).
REFLECTIVE
REGIONS
EMISSIVE
REGIONS
HERTZIAN
I-
0.1
0i4 07 LO
INFRARED
IO
IOO
WAVELENGTH (MICRONS)
Fig. I.
Portion of the electromagnetic spectrum.
WAVES
-4-
Colwell (1956) stated that a high, percentage of green' light ( 500 to
600 nanometers (nm)} Is reflected from plants.
According to Peafman
(1966), the 540 nm wavelength produced the maximum reflectance from
plants within the visible spectrum.
Billings and Morris (1951)
reported 15 percent reflectance from the upper leaf surface at. the 550
nm wavelength.
This agrees with Shull (1929) who reported 6 to 25-
percent reflectance from green light between 540-560 nm.
Lack of strong vegetative reflectance in the visible range can be
attributed to the leaf pigments which absorb light (Gausman ejt al.,
1976; Woolley, 1971; Knipling, 1970; Hoffer and Johannsen, 1969; and
Gates and Tantraporn, 1952).
Tucker (1975) and Colwell (1956) reported
that blue light (400 to 500 nm) and red light (600 to 700 nm) are
largely absorbed by chlorophyll, while Tucker (1975) and Pearman (1966)
reported reduced pigment absorption within the green spectrum of 500
to 600 nm.
Moss and Loomis (1952) discovered that plants absorbed 82
percent and transmit 10 percent of the visible region (400 to 700 nm)
with maximum absorbance at 680 nm and minimum absorbance at 550 nm
wavelengths.
According to Tucker (1975) and Fritz (1967), near or photographic
infrared radiation exhibits high or enhanced reflectance from plant
■material.. Billings and Morris (1951) reported 50 percent feflectance
from the upper leaf surface in the near infrared wavelength (775 to
1100 nm), while Colwell (1956) reported 80 percent or more vegetative
-5-
reflectance in the hear infrared spectrum (700 to 900 nm).
Woolley
(1971) found vegetation to reflect or transmit 96 percent of the near
infrared (800 to 1100 hm).
Tucker and Maxwell (1976) reported that near infrared feflectance
is dependent on internal scattering in the absence of absorption within
a leaf, and the inter-leaf scattering, which, is dependent on canopy
geometry.
Within the plant leaf mesophyll, near infrared radiation passes
from hydrated cell walls (refraction index of 1.4) into intercellular
air spaces or lacunae (refraction index of 1.0) (Gausman et al., 1970).
Willstatter and Stoll (1928) found that an index of refraction of 1.33
for liquid water to 1.00 for air in the intercellular spaces provides
an efficient internal reflection at each interface.
According to Gausman and Allen, 1973; Sinclair et al., 1973;
Gates, 1970; and Knipling, 1970, spectral reflectance of the near
infrared is largely the result of the interaction of the incident
radiation with the leaf mesophyll structure.
Cell shape and size as
well as the amount of intercellular space are probable variables
determining the amount of near infrared reflectance (Gausman, 1970;
Allen et al., 1969; Gausman et al., 1969; and Gates eh a l ., (1965).
Near infrared reflectance was described by Billings and Morris
(1951) as being completely independent of the presence of chlorophyll..
—6—
Peairman (1966) reported Increased reflectance of visible light
due to wax and pubescence
covering the leaf surface.
Pubescence
provides an additional interface to incoming solar radiation, which has
the effect of scattering light and decreasing the amount of light
entering the leaf.
In contrast, Gausman and Cardenas (1969) found
that leaf pubescence did not increase reflectance within the visible
spectrum, although total reflectance within the near infrared waveband
(750 to 1000 nm) did increase (Gausman and Cardenas, 1968, 1969).
Leaf dehydration results in tissue collapse which increase the
number of airspaces and air-wall interfaces (Gausman et'al., 1976).
Knipling (1969) established that near infrared leaf reflectance
increased in many cases with initial leaf senescence.
Weber and Olson
(1967) also reported an increase in near infrared leaf reflectance
as the leaf dries.
According to Knipling (1969) and Colwell (1956), near infrared
leaf reflectance eventually decreases in advanced stages of leaf
senescence.
Gates (1970) found that a completely dry leaf reflects
small amounts of
near infrared radiation.
Coulson (1966) measured variation in reflectance from grass turf
due to changes in the angle of reflection.
He found that wavelengths
shorter than 700 nm varied only slightly in reflectance while wave­
lengths of 796 and 1025 nm showed greater variation.
This suggests
that the orientation of grass blades is an important variable determ­
ining the near infrared reflectance.
-7-
Phenological Effects
Plant phonological changes have been recognized as a most useful
aid in identifying vegetation from aerial photography (Haefner, 1967;
and Sayn-Wittengstein, 1961).
A need exists for a better understanding
and documentation of the phenology of range species before an optimum
date(s) for aerial photography can be recommended (Carneggie and Reppert»
1969).
According to Hoffner et al. (1966), different varieties of a species
and variation in maturity of different varieties can affect the response
reaching the sensor receiver.
Driscoll (1971) found there is no one
optimum time during the growing season to obtain aerial photographs for
interpreting the complex range environment.
Film and Filters
Stephen (1976) compared panchromatic, color and color infrared films
as to their usefulness in vegetational community discrimination.
Color IR was found to be most suitable because of its greater range of
hue, value, chroma and emulsion sensitivity.
and amplified color differences.
This resulted in enhanced
Driscoll et al. (1970) found color IR
film superior to color film for herbaceous species identification.
In
contrast, Haack (1962) discovered no statistical difference between
panchromatic," color and infrared films for forest surveys.
Panchromatic films may be used with a Wratten number 12 or 25
filter.
These filters reduce the affect of atmospheric haze by cutting
down the passage of ultraviolet
and blue light to the film surface.
—8—
The Wratten filter HF-3 reduces excessive bluishness in color
films caused by atmospheric haze.
The Wratten HF-3
filter is
primarily an ultraviolet absorber and is not recommended for use at
very low altitudes (below 152 meters) or on very clear days (Kodak,
1971).
According to Kodak (1971) and Fritz (1969) a Kodak Wratten
number 12 filter should always be used with color IR films, although
Colwell (1960) suggests Wratten 15 filter.
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA
This study was conducted at two sites (Halfway Reservoir and
McRae Knolls) in southeastern Montana (Fig. 2).
Both areas are on
the Missouri Plateau, an extensively dissected, unglaciated region
of Northern Great Plains {Both Bass (1932) and Sindelar et. al. (1975)
contributed to the above statement}.
The Halfway Reservoir study site (Fig. 3) is located on the Custer
National Forest (Fort Howes District), in Powder River County, approxi­
mately 40 km southeast of Ashland, Montana.
This study area has numerous outcrops of fine sandstone.
Figure
4 is a soils map based on the Powder River Soil Survey (U.S.D.A. Soil
Conservation Service nt al., 1971).
Upland bench and creek bottom soils
are of the Farland, and Farland Havrelon series complex, respectively,
and are in the fine-silty, mixed family of Typic Argiborolls.
soil series are deep, well-drained and of medium texture.
These
The Caba
series on side slopes is classified in loamy, mixed, calcareous, frigid,
shallow family of Typic Ustorthents.
This series is well-drained,
medium-textured and less than 50 cm in depth.
The McRae Knolls study site (Fig. 5) is located on the Wallace
McRae Ranch in Rosebud County, approximately 13.8 km southeast of
Colstrip, Montana.
CANADA
NORTH
DAKOTA
GREAT FALLS
• MISSOULA
HELENA#
MILES CITY
BUTTE
COLSTRIP
'HeRAE KNOLLS
BILLINGS
ASHLAND
IDAHO
WYOMING
Fig. 2.
)
SOUTH
HjEEWAr RESERVOIR DAKOTA
Aerial photography study sites in Southeastern Montana.
Fig. 3.
Typical aspect of Halfway Reservoir Study Site.
-12-
Fig. 4.
Soils map with soil sample and photo locations at Halfway
Reservoir Study Site.
Ca
- CABBA SERIES
Fe
- f a r l a n d s il t l o a m
py- A
SCALE
lako silt loam
r i w ^HAVRELON SILT
*
...
- S |
"
a
^fHOTO LOCATION WITH^AL: ^
SOIL
■ R lm ;
b
_
location
•
{
.' V H K j l B B J I
■ I
A 15
J
A 14
i
•
j
/
ieiS'- \
J
^
#%
I
,
X
V
I :
§
y
.
4)^ « A
0A
Sm
M jf- K '*
gW»
I s
4 <
I !V. * - - y
Fig. 5.
Typical aspect of McRae Knolls Study Site
-14-
This study area also has many outcrops of the fine sandstone.
The U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service (1978) mapped the area as
Busby-Reidel complex of the coarse loamy mixed (calcareous) Ustic
Torreorthent.
Soil texture varies from a sandy loam to a loam
(Taylor et al., 1975).
Climate
Both study areas are under the influence of a continental climate,
having cold winters and warm summers, with large variations in seasonal
precipitation (Sindelar et al., 1975).
The total annual precipitation near Halfway Reservoir (table I)
is approximately 45 cm.
Three-fourths of this precipitation occurs
from April to September during a normal year with May and June being
the wettest months (U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service et al., 1971).
The yearly average temperature is approximately 6.0° Celsius (C),
with June, July and August being the warmest months while January and
February are the coldest (table 2).
The total annual precipitation recorded near the McRae Knolls
study site is approximately 40 cm, with May and June the wet months
(table 3).
The yearly average temperature is approximately 9.0° C
with July and August being the warmest months, while January.and
February are the coldest (table 4).
TABLE I.
________
THREE YEAR SUMMARY .OF- MONTHLY PRECIPITATION (CENTIMETERS) NEAR THE HALFWAY
RESERVOIR STUDY SITE. DATA WERE COLLECTED AT SONNETTE 2WNW, MONTANA— '
(APPROXIMATELY 21 km EAST OF STUDY SITE)
_______________________________ _
Year
JA
FE
MA
AP
MY ■ . JU
JL
AG
SE
o.c
NO
DE
Total
annual
2.64
8.20
2.06
3.86
5.79
1.60
0.81
44.60e
1974 Actual
2/
1.42E- 1.42
2.21 ,7.54
1975 Actual
4.90
1.50
1.45
6.15
7.77 12.67
1.91
1.14
0.13
3.35
1.62
2.44
45.03
1976 Actual
2.84
0.41
.00
7.42
7.11
0.58
2.51
—
—
2.49
0.10
—
7.04
8.66
I/ U.S. Dept, of Commerce Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Environmental Data Service, Vol:77,78,79.
2/ Amount is partially estimated.
TABLE 2.
THREE YEAR SUMMARY OF MONTHLY TEMPERATURE (DEGREES CELSIUS) NEAR THE HALFWAY
RESERVOIR STUDY SITE. DATA WERE COLLECTED AT SONNETTE 2WNW, MONTANA*/
(APPROXIMATELY 21 km EAST OF STUDY SITE)
Year
Ja .
FE . MA .
AP
MY
0.4
6.9
9.2
9.7% 14.4M 20.9
1974 Actual
-7.8
-0.6^
1975 Actual
-6.9
-9.2
-2.7m
1.9
1976 Actual
-6.3M -1.6
-2.9m
6.7% 11.7
JU
17.1
M
JL
AG
SE
21.7
16.3
12.0
21.2M
17.9% 12.4
M
—
OC
NO
8.9
1.0 -3.9%
DE
Yearly
avg.
6.8%
6.9% -1.3 -2.6
5.1%
4.8% -1.8 —4.6
—
1/U.S. Dept, of Commerce Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Environmental Data Service, Vol: 77,78,79.
2/One or more days missing; if average value is entered, less than 10 days records are
missing.
TABLE 3.
'
THREE YEAR SUMMARY OF MONTHLY PRECIPITATION (CENTIMETERS) NEAR THE McRAE KNOLLS
STUDY SITE. DATA WERE COLLECTED AT COLSTRIP, MONTANA^/ (APPROXIMATELY 13.8 km
N.W. OF STUDY SITE)______ ___________
JA
FE
MA
AP
MY
0.20
2.34
1.30
7.75
9.37
1.42
1.42
1.88
4.72
6.27
Departure
--1.22
0.92
-0.58
3.03
1975 Actual— ^4.20
1.50
2.00
1.17
1.52
Norm
1.42
Depart
ture
-0:25
Year
1974 Actual
Norm
1976 Actual
Total
annual
JL
AG
SE
OC
NO
DE
2.67
5.00
2.84
2.87
9.55
2.08
0.74
46.71
8.41
3.00
3.53
3.50
2.64
1.70
1.60
40.11
3.10 -5.74
2.00 -0.69 -0.63
6.91
0.38 —0.86
6,60
6.50
7.80
9.30
4.30
0.00
2.00
3.20
3.10
2.70
46.60
0.91
5.41
7.19
8.97
0.66
0.64
1.73
2.13
1.37
0.56
32.26
1.42
1.88
4.72
6.27
8.41
3.00
3.53
3.50
2.64
1.70
1.60
40.11
0.10
-0.97
0.69
0.92
0.56 -2.34 -2.89 -1.77 -0.51 -0.33 -1.04
7.85
• JU
I/ U.S. Dept, of Commerce Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Environmental Data Service, Vol:77,78,79.
2j Numbers represent departure from the normal (based on 30 years of records).
3/ Munshower, Frank F. and Edward J., DePuit, 1976. The effect of stack emissions on the
range resource in the vicinity of Colstrip, Montana. Mont. Agr. Exp. Sta. Res, Rep. 98,
p 112.
TABLE 4.
____
TWO YEAR SUMMARY OF MONTHLY TEMPERATURE (DEGREES CELSIUS) NEAR THE McRAE KNOLLS
STUDY SITE. DATA WERE COLLECTED AT COLSTRIP, MONTANA^/ (APPROXIMATELY 13.8 km
N.W. OF STUDY SITE)______ '
______________ :
__ '
__________________________
.JA
Year
1974 Actual
-6.7^
FE
MA
AP
MY
1.6%
2.9
9.3
10.9%
19.6% 23.8% 17.2%
JU
JL
AG
SE
OC
—
M
NO ■
M
Norm
—6.1
-3.0
0.1
7.1
12.4
17.0
21.9
21.2
15.0
9.2
—
Departurex/
—0.6
4.6
2.8
2.2
-1.5
2.6
1.9
—4.0
—
—
—
1.0
0.8
8.8
14.4
17.8
23.6
21.6% 16.8% 7.8
1976 Actual
—
Norm
—
-3.0
0.1
7.1
12.4
17.0
21.9
21.2
Depar­
ture ..
■—
4.0
0.7
1.7
2.0
0.8
1.7
0.4
15.0
M
DE
Yrly
avg.
—
—
-3.5
—
8.3
—
.3%
9.2
-—
-3.5
3.8 --1.4
—
3.8
—
8.3
—
I/ U.S. Dept, of Commerce Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Environmental Data Service, Vol: 77,79.
2! One or more days missing; if average value is entered, less than 10 days records are
missing.
3/ Numbers represent departure from the normal.
—18—
Vegetation
The two study areas are classified within the mixed prarie (Stipa Bouteloua) association of the Northern Great Plains grassland by
Coupland (1961).
These areas have similar vegetational composition.
The exceptions
are the presence of Idaho fescuel/ (Festuca Idahoensjsl/) and ponderosa
pine (Pinus ponderosa) at Halfway Reservoir.
Halfway Reservoir is topographically dissected and has a pattern
of pine woodland (forest) interspersed through the grassland.
Principal
species are predominantly midgrasses, with the short grasses being '
less abundant (U.S.D.A. Forest Service, 1971),
Vegetation of McRae Knolls is characterized by mid and short grass
species of the mixed prairie with scattered sagebrush (Artemisia spp.)
and other drought tolerant shrubs (Sindelar et all., 1975),
The more abundant species occurring on the upland portions of both
study areas are: silver sagebrush (Artemisia cana), skunkbush sumac
(Rhus trilobata), fringed sagewort (Artemisia frigida), false
tarragon sagewort (Artemisia dracunculus), little bluestem (Andro'pogdn
scoparius), prairie sandreed (Calamovilfa longifolia), Japanese brome
(Bromus japonicus), threadleaf sedge (Carex filifolia), needle-and-thread
(Stipa comata), Sandberg bluegrass (Poa secunda), bluebunch wheatgrass
I/ Common names of plants are based on Beetle (1970).
2/ Scientific names of plants are based on Booth (1972 and 1959) and
Booth and Wright '(1959).
■ '
-19-
(Agropyron spicatum), prairie junegrass (Koeleria cristata),
silverleaf scurf-pea (Psoralea argophylla), and small soapweed
(Yucca glauca).
The more abundant species occurring in creek bottoms and run-in
areas of both sites are:
Boxelder maple (Acer negundo), green ash
(Fraxinus pennsylvanica), peachleaf willow (Salix amygdaloides),
Prunus spp., Kentucky bluegrass
(Poa pratensis), green needlegrass
(Stipa viridula), western wheatgrass (Agropyron smitbii)*„ and thistle
(Cirsium spp.).
For a more detailed list see Appendix I.
MATERIALS AND ..METHODS .
The aerial photography for this project was flown with a Cessna
182.
This aircraft has been modified with the addition of a 30.5 cm
(diameter) camera port.
This is the largest permissible opening without
altering the airframe or changing the position of the control cables or
wiring (Woodcock, 1976).
This aircraft is capable of obtaining an air­
speed of 193 km per hour and an altitude of 3048 m.
Woodcock (1976) designed the camera mount which fits this opening.
It accomodates both a 35 and a 70 mm format camera for simultaneous
exposure.
A Hasselblad 500 EL/M and a Leica Mda camera were used for
this.study.
The Leica was fitted with a Summicron 50 mm lens, while
a Zeiss Distagon 50 mm or a Planar 80 mm lens was used with the
Hasselblad.
During the study, both negative and transparency film types were
used.
Particular emulsions (70 mm and 120) film included H&W Control
VTE Pan film (black-and-white), Kodak Vericolor II film 6010 (color
negative film), Kodak Ektachrome MS Aerographic film 2448 (color
reversal film), and Kodak Aerochrome infrared film 2443 (false color
reversal film), . Figure 6 illustrates the sensitivity of color IR film
to different wave lengths of light.
A Hasselblad UV filter was used
in conjunction with black-and-white and color films while
a Hasseiblad 0-4 (orange) filter (Fig. 7) or a Wratten #15G
(orange) filter (Fig. 8) was
used to eliminate blue light
-21-
YELLOW-FORMING
/ LAYER
MAGENTA - FORMING
/
LAYER
CYAN-FORMING
/
LAYER
GREEN
INFRARED
WAVELENGTH (nm)
Fig. 6.
Spectral sensitivity of Kodak aerochrome infrared
film 2443 (Kodak, 1971).
_
TRANSMISSION (%)
-22-
500
600
7.
Absorption curve of Hasselblad 0-4 orange filter.
TRANSMISSION (%)
tT5
NANOMETERS
NANOMETERS
•Fig. 8.
Absorption curve of Kodak Wratten //15 orange filter.
-23-
from exposing color IR film.
The only 35 mm format film used was Kodak Ektachrome Infrared IE
(False color reversal film).
A number 15 (orange) filter was used with
this film.
Highly visible aerial markers consisting of two crosses, each
12.2 by 12.2 m, were assembled using white plastic sacks and large
nails at the Halfway Reservoir site (Fig. 9),
The crosses were con­
structed to allow the pilot to line up and fly toward Phillips Butte,
thus permitting the transect to be precisely reflown.
Cultivated field and fence lines provided suitable aerial markers
for the much smaller McRae Knolls site.
Eight aerial photographic missions were flown during the growing
season.
Table 5 lists
the films, filters, scales, altitudes and
lenses incorporated in our aerial photography at specific dates.
The interval between sequential exposures was designed to give
at least 60% overlap.
This permits stereoscopic observations of the
photographs.
Nearly cloudless atmospheric conditions were a prerequisite for
aerial photography.
We conducted this photography between 9:00 and
12:00 am, with the exception of the September 27 flight which was
flown during the afternoon.
-24-
Fig. 9.
Assembling aerial ground marker.
-25-
TABLE 5.
FILM, FILTER, SCALE, ALTITUDE, AND LENS COMBINATIONS FOR
FORMAT (24x36 mm and 55x55 mm) CAMERAS USED IN AERIAL
_________ PHOTOGRAPHY, SUMMER, 1976
LOCATION
AND
FILM
2AxJ6______
5/4
HcRee
i/18
Helfwey
7/15
MeRee
7/15
Helfway
8/25
McRae
8/25
Halfway
9/27
McRae
9/27
Halfway
10/6
McRae
10/6
Halfway
1:6000
1:6000
305
50 ram 50 mm
Infrared
Transparency
Infrared
Transparency
# 15 (orange
filter
1:6000
I:6000
I:6000
I:6000
305
305
Black & White
I
15 (orange)
filter
UV filter
11
6/18
McRee
# 15 (orange) UV filter
filter
I I
6/3
Helfwey
Color
Transparency
22
6/3
McRee
Infrared
Transparency
22
5/19
McRee
55x55______
Infrared
Transparency
~
FILTER
SCALE
ALTITUDE
LENS
24x36________55x55_______ 24x36
55x55
meters 24x36
55x55
1:6000
#15 G (orange)
30$
50 mm
filter
I:6000
305
Infrared
Transparency
Infrared
Transparency
# 15 (orange) 0-4 (orange)
filter
filter
I:6000
I:3800
305
50 mm
80 nan
Infrared
Transparency
Black & White
# 15 (orange
filter
UV filter
1:9000
1:5700
457
50 mm
80 nan
Infrared
Transparency
Color
Negative
# 15 (orange
filter
UV filter
1:6000
I:3800
305
50 mm
80 nan
Infrared
Transparency
Infrared
Transparency
# 15 (orange
filter
0-4 (orange)
filter
I:6000
I:3800
305
Infrared
Transparency
Color
Negative
« 15 (orange
UV filter
1:6000
I:3800
305
50 mm
Infrared
Transparency
Infrared
Transparency
V 15 (orange
0-4 (orange)
filter
I:6000
I:3800
305
50 ram 80
Infrared
Transparency
Color
Negative
I 15 (orange
filter
UV filter
I:6000
I:3800
305
50 ram 80 mm
Infrared
Transparency
Infrared
Transparency
# 15 (orange
filter
0-4 (orange)
fiIter
I:6000
I:3800
305
50 mm
80 mm
Infrared
Transparency
Color
Negative
# 15 (orange
filter
UV filter
I:6000
1:3800
305
50 mm
80 nan
Infrared
Transparency
Infrared
Transparency
# 15 (orange
filter
# 15 G (orange) 1:6000
filter
I:3800
305
50 mm
80 mm
Infrared
Transparency
Color
Negative
# 15 (orange
filter
UV filter
1:6000
I:3800
305
50 rrtn 80 ram
Infrared
Transparency
Infrared
Transparency
if 15 (orange
I 15 C (orange) I:6000
filter
1:3800
305
50 mm
Color
Negative
UV filter
l:3d00
305
80 mm
Infrared
Transparency
I
I:3800
305
80 nan
Color
Negative
UV filter
I:3800
305
80 mm
Infrared
Transparency
# 15 C (orange)
filter
1:3800
3b5
80 nan
Color
Negative
UV filter
I:3800
305
80 nan
Infrared
Transparency
I 15 G (orange)
filter
I:3800
305
80 mm
Color
Negative
UV filter
1:3800
305
80 mm
Infrared
Transparency
I
I:3800
305
80 mm
Color
Negative
UV filter
I:3800
305
80 nan
Color
Transparency
UV filter
I:3800
305
80 nan
Infrared
Transparency
I
1:3800
305
80 mm
Color
Negative
UV filter
I:3800
305
80 mm
Color
Transparency
UV filter
I:3800
305
80 mm
I:3800
305
80 nan
Infrared
Transparency
50 ram
80 nan
80 mm
filter
filter
filter
15 G (orange)
filter
15 G (orange)
filter
15 G (orange)
filter
# 15 G (orange)
filter
80 nan
-26-
Ground Truth Data
Black-and-white aerial photographs were enlarged to a scale of
approxmately I to 1700.
Using these photographs, detailed vegetational
maps were produced in the field.
Plant communities were named after
the dominant one or more species.
Refined vegetational maps were, then developed in the laboratory.by
transferring the plant community data onto overlays in color prints.
Since the color prints offer better discrimination of the plant commun­
ities than black-and-white prints, these maps have more precisely defined
community boundaries.
Sixty-seven community stands or individual species
(Table 6) were classified on these overlays.
Those communities that were relatively homogeneous were of partic­
ular interest to this project.
These communities were quantified as
to each species’ canopy coverage following the Daubenmire (1959) method.
Canopy coverage was used because it was assumed to be highly related to
spectral reflectance and therefore to the photographic record.
Sample plots within each plant community were located by randomly
placing a cord having one meter interval marks throughout the community.
Then, 2 x 5 dm plot frames were placed at each mark and canopy coverage
classes assigned (Fig. 10).
In areas of dense tree and shrub cover
(creek bottoms), canopy coverage data were estimated without plot
frames.
Phenology, photographic ground Obliques,.and soils data were
-
TABLE 6.
27 -
INDEX TO MAP CODES
Codes
Tree Types
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Shrub Types
16
.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
' 28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
Community
Acer negundo
A. negundo/Fraxinus pennsylvanica
F. pennsylvanica
F. pennsylvanica/Prunus virgihiana
Juniperus scopulorum
Pinus ponderosa
P. ponderosa/Rhus trilobata/P. virginiana
P. ponderosa/R. trilobata/Andropogon scoparius/
Agropyron spicatum
P. ponderosa/A. scoparius/A. spicatum
Populus deltoides
Prunes americana
P. virginiana
P. virginiana/P. americana/A. negundo/F. pennsyl- ■
vanica/Rosa woodsii/Symphoricarpos occidentalis
Prunus/A. negundo/F. pennsylvanica
Salix amygdaloides
Artemisia cana
A. cana/Bromus japonicus
A. cana/Bromus tectorum/B. japonicus
A. cana/Carex spp.
A. cana/Festuca Idahoensis
A. cana/mixed grasses
A. cana/Stipa viridula
A. tridentata
A. dracunculus
Chrysothamnus nauseosus/Agropyron smith!!
Cornus stolonifera
Crataegus chrysocarpa
C. douglasi
Crataegus spp.
Eurotia lanata
R. trilobata
R. trilobata/P. virginiana
R. trilobata/Ribes spp./P. virginiana '
Ribes spp.
R. woodsii
Shepherdia canadensis
—
TABLE 6.
2 8
"“
(CONTINUED)
Codes-
Community
Shrub Types (cont.)
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
S.
S.
S.
S.
S.
S.
S.
S.
S.
Forb Types
46
47
48
49
Artemisia ludoviciana
Glycyrrbiza lepidota
Medicago sativa
Yucca glauca
Grass Types
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
A. smithii
A. smithii (on hard pan area)
A. smithii/F. Idahoensis
A. spicatum/A. scoparius/R. trilobata
A. spicatum/R. trilobata/A. cana
A.J scoparius
Bouteloua curtipendula
Bromus inermis
B. iaponicus/B. tectorum
B. tectorum
Calamovilfa longifolia
C. longifoIia/Carex filifolia
C. filifolia/B . japonicis
Carex spp. (riparian)
F. Idahoensis
P. pratensis/A. smithii/S. viridula
P. pratensis/Carex spp.
P. pratensis/S. viridula/A. cana/A. smithii
occidentails
occidentalis/A. cana
occidentalis/A, cana/F. Idahoensis
occidentalis/mixed grasses
occidentalis/Poa pratensis
occidentalis/Ribes spp.
occidentalis/Ribes spp./R. woodsii
occidentalis/R. woodsii
occidentalis/R. woodsii/Ribes spp./P. virginiana
-29-
Fig . 10.
Field procedures of random Daubenmire transects
. -30-
collected in conjunction with the aerial photography.
These data were
not collected simultaneously with the aerial overflights, but as
close as possible to the flight time, usually within one or two days.
Phenology data were obtained for nearly all plant species on both
study sites.
Phenology was determined following the approach outlined
by. Taylor et al. (1975). ■ Table 7 is the phenology code which was used
for this phase of the study.
Photographic ground obliques were composed from a marker approxi­
mately 7 m from each vegetational stand (Fig. 4 and 11).'
Either a
Rolleicord with a Xenar 75 mm lens or a Hasselblad with a Planar 80 mm
lens was used with (vericolor II) print film.
Kodak Ektachrome Infrared
film was exposed using a Canon Ftb and a Canon 55 mm lens with a Hoya G
(orange) filter.
transparencies.
This latter photography produced 35 mm color infrared
A sign board was within the lower portion of the photo­
graphs to provide information on location, community classification,
and date of photography.
Surface soil samples were collected from marked locations on both
study sites (Fig. 4 and 11) following each flight and placed in seamless
soil cans.
These samples consisted of the surface centimeter of soil
after live and dead vegetation were removed.
Only the surface soil
was collected because it was the portion of the solum which would
directly effect the photographic imagery.
-31TABLE 7 •_PHENOLOGY CODES—
Code
Stages
I.
Cotyledon (newly germinated)
2
Seedling
3
. .
Basal rosette
4
Early greenup, vegetative buds swelling
5
Vegetative growth, twig elongation
6
Boot stage, flower buds appearing
7
. Shooting seed stalk, floral buds opening
8
Early flowering
9
Flowering, anthesis
10
,
Late flowering
11
Fruit formed
12
Seed shatter, dehiscence
13
.
Vegetative maturity. Summer dormancy,
leaf drop
14
Fall greenup
15
Winter dormancy
16
Dead
V
Taylor et al., 1975.
-32-
Fig , il.
Soil.sample and photo locations, McRae Knolls study site
• -photo
location
O - SOIL L OC ATIO N
with
a r r o w
indicating
direction
of ph ot o g r a ph
SCALE
1: 1180
A'
.
•i... •
:
89
:;
: %
*
.
#
44
H
4-
$4 *
mmk
-33-
The Montana State University Soil Testing Laboratory assigned a
textural class to each sample using the hand method.
Soil moisture was determined from the surface soil samples which
were collected in the same manner and location as the soil texture
samples.
Montana State University Soil Testing Laboratory determined
the percent soil moisture using gravimetric method.
Data Analysis
Photograpy
consisting of 85 x 85 mm color prints and 55 x 55 mm
color IR transparences was examined stereoscopically.
Photography
exposed at different dates and sites was analyzed for differences in
spectral signatures of the plant communities and soil textures and
moisture.
Those photographs having unique discriminating spectral
signatures were analyzed more completely.
This involved enlarging
'
prints to a scale of approximately I to 580.
x’
Then the colors from these unique spectral signatures were compared
visually to a color standard.
the color standard used.
The Munsell Book of Color (1976) was
Methods for comparing and matching specimens
with standards followed the recommendation of the American Society
of Testing and Materials (1969 and 1974).
A 200 watt incandescent
light bulb was placed 50 cm above the specimen and the color standard.
The specimen and standard were viewed from 44 to 46 degrees•from the
perpendicular.
—34-
Two photo-interpreters independently matched specimens and standards
by visual means.
The two resulting Munsell designations were compared
and found to be in close agreement.
Slight variations in the Munsell
designations occurred and may largely be due to individual differences
in color perception.
Specimens having low chroma (highly gray) resulted
in larger discrepancies than specimens of higher chroma.
The following discussion along with figure 12, described the
Munsell color notations on tables 8 and 9.
An example of the Munsell color notation is 5 R 6/8.
represents the hue, 6 is the value, and 8 is the chroma.
The 5 R
The hues
consist of five principal and five intermediate hues (Fig. 12).
Numerical values are used in conjunction with the hue symbols.
The
numerical value of 5 represents the most characteristic color of the
hue symbol, while other numerical values represent a gradual color
shift towards the preceding or following hue.
The value represents the degree of daylight reflectance of a
specimen.
Value range on a scale of 0 (ideal black) to 10 (ideal white).
Chroma represents the degree of departure from gray.
A gray
specimen has chroma of 0 while a specimen having the highest degree
of color saturation has a chroma of 20,
-35-
MUNSELL
hue
sym bo ls
w it h
n u m e r ic a l
values
A
^
S H IF T
TOW ARD
YELLOW RED
R = RED
FIG. 12.
— STRONG —
YELLOW
C O L O R A T IO N
Y = YELLOW
S H IF T
TOWARD
GREENYELLOW
G = GREEN
A D E S C R IP T IO N O F T H E
MUNSELL
B = BLUE
H UE
P = PURPLE
D E S IG N A T IO N .
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Various phenological stages were recorded on color and color
infrared films as the growing season progressed.
Initial examination
of this photography showed that discrimination and identification of
certain plant community stands were possible. Tables 8 and 9 show only
those plant communities that exhibit distinct spectral signatures on one
or both film types on the dates of observation.
The color of the
communities were quantified visually from the photographs and designated
in accordance with the Munsell system at specific dates and phenological
stages.
Four of the most distinctive communities are illustrated and
discussed.
Prairie Sandfeed Community
The prairie sandreed community (code 60B, Fig, 13) has 68.2% of
its composition as prairie sandreed (Appendix Table I).
A comparison of figures 14 and 15 illustrates that although both
color and color IR photography differentiate this community, the more
distinctive signature is produced on the color IR. The saturated red .
signature recorded on color IR is more distinctive than the light green
signature on color photography.
Aerial photography exposed on July 15 and August 25 was superior
to photography on other dates in discriminating prairie sandreedt
On these two dates, prairie sandreed was in the boot and seed shatter
stages, respectively, (Fig. 16 and 17).
Appendix Table II describes
the phenological profile of McRae Knolls study site.
TABLE 8.
A COMPARISON OF THE MUNSELL COLOR STANDARDS AND PLANT COMMUNITY SPECTRAL
SIGNATURES RECORDED ON COLOR AND COLOR IR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY AT McRAE KNOLLS
.
_________ STUDY SITE, 1976____________________________________________________________
Datei./
Community
Phenological
stage
Munsell color
notation?/
Common color
nomenclature?./
Color photography
June 18
July 15
Aug. 25
Sept. 27
Nov. 6
Acer negundo
Artemisia cana
A. dracunculus
Fraxinus pennsyIvanica
Medicago sativa
A. cana
A. dracunculus
Calomovilfa longifolia
Andropogon scoparius
A. cana
A. dracunculus
C. longifolia
A. scoparius
A. cana
A. dracunculus
A. scoparius
A. cana
A. dracunculus
C. longifolia
Yucca gIauca
5i/
5
11
6
6
11
6
6
12
13
10
11
15
13
. 13
15
14
8.5Y 4.3/6
5BG 5.5/1
4Y 3.5/3.6
3GY 2.5/6
3.5GY 4.3/5.6
5BG 5.8/1
2.5Y 3,7/5.4
1.5GY 6.4/5
. 4.5YR 3.4/5
5GY 5/1.6
2.5Y 3.5/3,2
7.5Y 5.2/6.4
6.5YR 5/4
3GY 5.5/1.4
1.5Y 5,4/4,6
8.5YR 3/4
5GY 5.2/1.4
9YR 3.8/4.6
IY 6.7/5,6
IGY 4/4.4
olive*
gray*
dark olive
dark green*
green*
gray*
olive brown
light green*
dark reddish brown
gray*
olive brown
olive yellow*
brown
gray*
light olive brown
dark brown
gray*
dark yellowish brown
light yellowish brown
dark green*
TABLE 8.
(CONTINUED)
Date
Community
Phenological
state
Munsell color
notation
A. cana
A. dracanulus
A. negundo
A. cana
A. dracunculus
F . pennsyIvanica
Prunus Virginia
Rhus trilobate
A. cana
A. dracunculus
R. trilobata
A. cana
A. dracunculus
A. cana
A. dracunculus
C. Iongifolia
M. sativa
A. scoparius
A. cana
5
5
12
IG 3.5/5
-IGY 4.3/4
5R 6.8/4.4
1.5G 4/4
1.5GY 4.8/4
6GY 3.7/3.6
6.5R 3.3/7
8.5YR 3.7/5
5YR 5.5/5.3
1.5YR 4.7/8
1.5YR 4.2/9
5X 8.3/4
9R 5/9.4
IY 6/5
6.5YR 3.5/4.8
IYR 5.6/8
8.5R 4.2/1.I
6.5YR 3.3/6
7.5YR 9.4/4
A.
C.
A.
A.
6
12
13
10
Common color
nomenclature
Color IR photography
May. 4
May 19
June 3
June 18
July 15
Aug. 25
Sept. 27
dracunculus
Iongifolia
scoparius
cana
A. dracunculus .
Y. glauca
5
6
6
6
11
11 ’
6 ,
11
13
2.5G 9.4/4
3.5YR 4.5/10
2.5YR 7/6
2.5GY 3.4/5
5YR 8.8/1.4
to
IG 4.8/6
5YR 4.5/5
. 5R 7.5/5
dark green*
yellow green*
pink* ■
gray green*
gray green*
gray green*
gray red*
dark brown
reddish brown
red
red
pale yellow
red
olive yellow
dark brown
light red
red*
strong brown
pink
light green*
red
light red
. dark green*
white
green*
reddish brown
pink*
TABLE 8.
(CONTINUED)
Date
Community
Nov . 6
A. cana
A. dracunculus
Y. glauca
Phonological
stage
13
13
14
Munsel color
notation
7.5G 9.4/2
l.GY 3.6/3.6
7.5R 7/8
Common color
nomenclature
very light green*
olive*
pink*
JL/ Dates of aerial photography missions.
2/ Details on the Munsell color notation are presented by The American Society for Testing
and Materials (1969)•
_3/ Common color nomenclature is determined by the Munsell Color Company (1954).
47 Numbers correspond to table 7 on page 31.
*’ Color nomenclature is assigned by. the author.
I
w
VO
I
TABLE 9.
A COMPARISON OF THE MUNSELL COLOR STANDARDS AND PLANT COMMUNITY SPECTRAL
SIGNATURES RECORDED ON COLOR AND COLOR IR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY AT HALFWAY
__________RESERVOIR STUDY SITE, 1976_____________________ ________________________
Datel./
Community
Phonological
stage
Munsell color
notation2/
Common color
nomenclatures/
1.5GY 5.2/6.4
. 5BG 6.4/1
IOG 7.5/1.4
2.5GY 4.8/6.2
9Y 7/6
8.5Y 4.5/7
5BG 7.5/1
IOGY 7.4/1.8
1.5GY 5/6.4
8.5Y 6.5/7
8YR 4.2/6
5BG 6.3/1
8.5YR 4.2/6.2
5BG 6.5/1
8.5YR 5/6
5BG 6.7/1
IGY 6/4
green*
gray*
gray*
olive*
gray yellow*
yellow brown*
gray *
gray green*
olive*
gray yellow*
strong brown
gray*
strong brown
gray*
strong brown
gray*
light green*
Color photography
June 3
June 18
Aug. 25
Sept. 27
Nov. 6
Acer negundo
Artemisia cana
A. Iudoviciana
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Salix species
A. negundo
A. cana
A. Iudoviciana
F. pennsylvanica
Salix species
Andropogon scoparius
A. cana
A. scoparius
A. cana
A. scoparius
A. cana
Yucca glauca
Si/
5 .
5
5.
5
12
6
12
11
15
13
... 15
TABLE 9. (CONTINUED)
Date
Community
Phenological
stage
Munsell color
notation
Common color
nomenclature
Color IR photography
June 3
June 18
July 15
Aug. 25
Sept. 27
Nov. 6
A. Iudoviciana
Salix species
A. cana
A. Iudoviciana
A. Iudoviciana
A. scoparius
A. cana
A. scoparius
Y. glauca
A. scoparius
A. cana
Y. glauca
5
5
5
12
6
12
13
15
13
15
7.5YR 8.5/3
1.5YR 7.5/8
9YR 8/5
IOYR 8.5/3
8.SR 7.4/6
8.5YR 4.6/9
6.5Y 9/4
2.5GY 3.2/5
7.SR 8/4
5GY 4/4.4
SG 6.3/2.4
IOR 7/5
pink
light red
very pale brown
very pale brown
pink*
strong brown
pale yellow*
dark green*
pink*
olive*
gray green*
light red
I/ Dates of aerial photography.
2f Details on the Munsell color notation are presented hy The American Society for
Testing and Materials, (1969)_.
3/ Common color nomenclature is determined by the Munsell Color Company, (1954).
4/ Number correspond to table 7 on page 31.
*
Color nomenclature is assigned by the author.
-42-
Fig. 13.
Detailed vegetational community map with transect locations
(q marks location), McRae Knolls study site (for numerical
code refer to table 6 on page 27).
Aerial color photography exposed on July 15, 1976 with the prairie
sandreed community identified by the marker (scale is I to 580).
Fig. 15.
Aerial color IR photography exposed on July 15, 1976 with the prairie
sandreed community identified by the marker (scale is I to 618).
-47-
The distinctive appearance of prairie sandreed on aerial photog­
raphy during the period from the boot stage through seed shatter may
indirectly be due to the high level of physiological activity of this
species during.this period.
Several researchers (Krall et al., 1971;
Blaisdell„ 1958 and Blaisdell and Pechariic, 1949) have shown that
grass plants near the time of floral development are growing rapidly.
Active growth increases cell numbers and the maintenance of turgid
cell walls.
This apparently increases the amount of cell wall air
interfaces encountered by IR radiation thus increasing its reflectance.
Chokecherry Community
Chokecherry (Prunus virginiana) is identified readily on color
IR photography flown on May 4 and 19 (Fig. 18 and 19).
On the earlier
date, chokecherry was the only native species which produced a red
signature.
Color IR photography exposed the following aerial mission
(June 3) did not discriminate between chokecherry and skunkbush sumac
(Fig. 20).
This, a comparison of the May and June photography is
necessary to identify the location of skunkbush communities.
Skunkbush sumac appears dark brown on color IR photography ' •
exposed in May, while it appears reddish on photography, exposed on
June 3 (Table 8).
By a thorough comparison of these photographs, a
{
color change from dark brown to red indicates the presence of skunkbush
sumac at the McRae Knolls study site.
Fig. 18.
Aerial color IR photography exposed on May 4, 1976, with chokecherry (a)
and skunkbush sumac (b) identified by the markers (scale is I to 980).
Fig. 19.
Aerial color IR photography exposed on May 19, 1976 with chokecherry (a)
and skunkbush sumac (b) identified by the markers (scale is I to 980).
I
Ui
0
1
Fig.
20.
Aerial color IR photography exposed on June 3, 1976 with chokecherry (a)
and skunkbush sumac (b) identified by the markers (scale is I to 618).
-51-
This example demonstrates how photography sequentially exposed
throughout the growing season can be beneficial in identifying plant
species.
Phonological data were initially collected on June 4 at McRae
Knolls study site.
By this time chokecherry and skunkbush sumac were
in the seed shatter growth stage (Appendix Table II). Due to the lack
of phonological data prior to June 4, the occurrence of the discrim­
inating spectral signatures of chokecherry and skunkbush sumac cannot
be described phenologically.
Little Bluestem Community
The little bluestem community in the following example is located
at A55 in Figure 21.
Percent composition of little bluestem in this
community is 66.6% (Appendix Table I).
Little bluestem is readily identified on color and color IR
photography exposed from seed shatter (August 25 and September 27) to
winter dormancy (November 6) (Fig. 22.and 23).
Color photography
produces excellent results with this species and may be superior
to color IR photograph.
Little bluestem's strong brown color (Fig. 24) contrasts strongly
with the lighter colors of other plant communities on color photography.
This contrast persists despite the darkening of other plant communities
as they matured.
-52-
Fig. 21.
Detailed vegetational community map with transect locations
(©marks location), Halfway Reservoir Study Site (for
numerical codes refer to Table 6 on page 27.).
Fig* 22.
Aerial color photography exposed on September 27, 1976 with little bluestem
community identified by the marker (scale is I to 555).
Fig.
23.
Aerial color IR photography exposed on September 27, 1976 with little
bluestem community identified by the marker (scale is I to 525).
!-56—
Soils
Variations.in surface soil texture or percent moisture were not
detected on color or color IR photography.
Figures 4 and 11 mark the
locations of known textures near the soil surface.
The failure to detect changes in surface soil texture and percent
moisture may be due to slight color shifts during the printing process
and the inability of the human eye to identify minute color changes^
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Large scale color and color IR aerial photography were exposed
throughout the growing season to record plant signatures from various
phonological stages and differences in surface soil textures and
moisture levels.
Comparison of this photography was useful in dis­
tinguishing vegetational stands.
Although different surface soil
textures and moisture levels existed, differences could not be detected
from aerial photography.
■Twelve different vegetational stands were identified from aerial
photography in conjunction with ground truth data.
Four of these,
prairie sandreed, little bluestem, chokecherry, and skunkbush sumac,
are most readily discriminated, and have been illustrated and discussed.
Prairie sandreed produced light green and olive green color on
color photography photographed during the boot (July 15) and seed
shatter (August 25) phenological stages, respectively.
Red and light
red spectral signatures were recorded on color IR during the boot
(July 15) and seed shatter. (August 25) phenological stages.
Little bluestem is readily identified on color and color IR
aerial photography from seed shatter (August 25 to September 27) to
winter dormancy (November 6).
Color photography produced excellent
results with this species and may be superior to color IR photography.'
Little bluestem’s strong brown color contrasts strongly with the lighter
color of other plant communities on color photography.
This contrast
persists despite the darkening of other plant communities as they mature.
-58-
Chpkecherry was the earliest native species to produce a red
signature on color IR photography.
Due to the lack of early phono­
logical data, the occurrence (May 19) of chokecherry's discriminating
spectral signature cannot be described phenologically.
Skunkbush sumac appears dark brown on color IR photography
exposed in May, while it appears red on photography exposed during
the seed shatter stage (June 3).
By a thorough comparison of these
photographs, a color change from dark brown to red indicates the
presence of skunkbush sumac at the McRae Knolls study site.
Deficiencies in methodology imposed limitations on discriminating,
identifying and quantifying spectral signatures on color photography.
These problems are: (a) the difficulty of making exact color matches
when producing color prints from duplicated transparencies; (b) the
lack of standard procedures in processing negatives and transparencies;
and (c) the unavailability of a microdensitometer for critical color
balance and color density measurements.
A system designed to eliminate the above deficiencies should be
capable of discriminating additional plant species and communities,
recording variations in surface soil texture and moisture levels, and
describing spectral signatures on aerial photography more quantitative­
ly.
More quality control standardization of techniques and the use
of more sensitive instruments should increase our ability to interpret
aerial photography with fewer ground truth data.
-59-
The capability of aerial photography to record and monitor large
areas
of land with.minimal man hours makes this an extremely useful
tool for the land manager.
In the past, aerial photography has been
used to interpret biological and physical characteristics of the land­
scape in a general fashion, but much more detailed and specific
information can be derived by this technique.
The research reported in this thesis was mainly intended to
benefit the researchers in the further study of large scale aerial
photographic interpretation.
Nevertheless some practical applications
of managing rangeland can be derived from this work.
Photography could be flown periodically (5 to 10 year intervals)
over representive portions of a management unit.
This photography
could be interpreted with minimal amounts of ground truth data and
key species could then be monitored through time in order to observe
changes of relative abundance, thus indicating range trend.
Prairie sandreed and little bluestem are two species which are
readily identified from aerial photography, and are key management
species in certain vegetational types.
The ability to distinguish and identify chokecherry and skunk- bush sumac in early spring on color IR photography may have implications
in determining available forage for big game.
Further research will refine and greatly increase the potential
of aerial photography.
Species identification and measurements of
absolute and relative abundance, phonological development, impact of
stress, and other information of range species could be obtained from
aerial imagery.
APPENDIX
APPENDIX TABLE I.
CANOPY COVERAGE AND PERCENT COMPOSITION (PERCENTAGE) FOR HALFWAY
RESERVOIR AND McRAE KNOLLS STUDY SITES, 1976
{RANDOM TRANSECT
___________________ CONSISTING OF 20 FRAMES (2 by 5 d m ) } _________________
17Al/
2OA
20B
2LA
21B
23A
Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover CompoCover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover CompoShrubs and Trees________________ sltion_______sition_____ sition______ sition
sition_____ sltion
Amelanchier alnifolia
Art^sia cana
A. dracunculus
A. friglda
A. trldentata
Chryaothamnus nauaeosus
Eurotia lanata
Gutierrizla sarothrae
Pinus ponderoaa
Prunua virglnlana
Rhus trilobata
Rosa arkansana
R. woodsii
Symphoricarpos occidentalis
Forbs
Achillea millefolium
Ambrosia psilostachya
Androsace occidentalis
Antennaria species
Artemisia ludovlciana
Arnica sororia
Aster species
Astragalus crassicarpus
Astragalus species
Cerastium arvense
Cirsium undulatum
Collomia linearis
Colllnsia parvifIora
Conyza canadensis
—
33.13
—
.50
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
30.81
—
.47
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
6.38
5.93
.63
.58
.50
.47
—
—
3.63
—
.13
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
3.67
—
.13
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.25
.25
2.00
2.03
—
—
—
—
18.63 16.45 10.50
•88 .77 —
1.13 .99
3.50
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.38
V Numbers and letters correspond to those in figures 13 and 21.
.33
—
9.47
—
3.16
—
—
—
—
—
2.63
—
—
—
—
—
-D
—
3.67
—
—
—
—
—
-75
1.05
—
4.63
4.17 —
—
12.25 17.13
4.63
4.17
1.63
1.47 —
.13
.17
3.88 3.43
—
3.63 3.21
19.63 17.37
1.38
—
1.22
—
APPENDIX TABLE I.
Forbs
Echinacea pallida
Erigeron divergens
Erysimum asperum
Gaura coccinea
Glycyrrhiza lepidota
Grindelia squarrosa
Hedeoma hispida
Lactuca serriola
Lepidium densiflorum
Liatris punctata
Lithospennum ruderale
Lupinus argenteus
Lupinus species
Lygodesmia Iuncea
Medicaco sativa
Monarda fistulosa
Oenothera serrulata
OpUntia polyacantha
Orthocarpus luteus
Petalostemon purpureum
Phlox species
Plantago purshii
Psoralea argophylla
Ratibida columnifera
Solidago missouriensis
SolidaRO species
Sphaeralcea coccinea
Taraxacum officinale
Tragopogon dubius
Vicia americana
Yucca glauca
Unknown forbs
(CONTINUED)
17A
2OA
20B
21A
21B
23A
Cover Compo­ Cover Compo­ Cover Compo­ Cover Compo­ Cover Compo­ Cover Compo­
sition
sition
sition
sition
sition
sition
—
—
—
—
—
.23
.12
.25
.13
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.25
.23
.83
—
3.75
—
—
—
—
—
.38
—
—
—
—
3.49
.88
.13
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.35
—
—
—
—
—
.Ii
.13
—
—
—
—
—
—
.25 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.25
—
—
—
—
—
—
.76
.75
.25
.63
.56 —
.13
.11
.38
.52
1.38 1.24
.25 .23
.13
—
.17 —
—
.22
—
—
—
—
—
.89
.89
.13
1.38
.25
5.88
—
—
.25
-—
—
.50
.51 —
—
—
1.00
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1.21
.13
.11
3.50 3.16 —
.22
.25 .23 —
5.19 14.63 13.19 3.75
—
—
.22 —
1.75
—
—
—
.25 .23 1.50
—
.13
—
—
—
.75
.88
.25 .23
—
—
.13 .11
—
—
—
.25
.22
.75
.25
.25
.66
.22
.22
5.24
2.45
2.10
.17
1.05
APPENDIX TABLE I.
Grasses and Sedges
Agropyron dasystachyum
A. smith!!
A. splcatum
Andropogon scoparius
Bouteloua curtipendula
B. gracilis
Bromus Iaponicus
B. marginsCus
B. tectorum
Buchloe dactyloides
Calmagrostis montanensis
Calamovilfa longifolia
Carex fillfolia
C. pensyIvanica
Carex species
Festuca Idahoensis
Koeleria cristata
Muhlenbergia cuspidata
Poa pratensis
P. secunda
Stipa comata
S. viridula
Others
Litter
Bare ground
Lichen
Moss
Rock
Erosion pavement
(CONTINUED)
17A
2OA
20B
2IA
21B
23A
Cover Compo­ Cover Compo- Cover Compo­ Cover Compo­ Cover Compo- Cover Compo­
sition
sition
sition
sition
sition
sition
1.50
1.40
2.41 3.00
2.38
2.65
4.50 4.06
3.50
5.88
—
4.90
8.22
—
9.75
3.63
___
___
—
.75
9.00
—
.25
—
.70
8.37
—
.23
2.75
.50
2.78
.51
—
—
—
—
.13
.25
—
—
32.63 45.63
.11 2.88 2.59
.13
.17
.22 3.88 3.49 2.88 4.02
—
—
—
.25 .23
—
— —
3.38
1.38
— —
—
— —
— —
— —
—
1.88
—
—
2.99
1.22
1.66
—
___
—
40.63 37.79
—
—
—
—
—
.75
15.63 15.82 21.75
.70
19.21 18.63 16.80
— —
— —
32.25 28.54
—
—
—
— —
20.75 18.36
3.75 3.32
—
66.88 67.72 54.75
.13
.13 1.13
48.34 21.25 19.17
.99
— —
—
—
.25
—
—
3.13 2.91
5.63 5.23
57.88
10.13
1.13
.13
—
—
—
—
.13
.13
.88
.13
.13 2.25
.89 —
—
50.63
7.25 —
5.63
1.38
—
—
—
44.63
8.75
3.88
9.88
— —
1.99
—
—
—
—
—
1.25 1.13
2.25 2.03
9.63 8.68
44.00
5.88
1.63
.88
—
—
— —
2.00
—
2.80
6.13
3.50
—
41.00
9.00
—
— —
—
— —
3.75
—
.35
—
5.42
3.10
81.25 _
6.25
4.63
—
___
—
— —
APPENDIX TABLE I.
(CONTINUED)
Shrubs and Trees
Amelanchler alnlfolla
Artemisia cana
A. dracunculus
A. frlglda
A. trldentata
Chrysothamnus nauseosus
Eurotla lanata
Gutlerrlzla sarothrae
Plnus ponderosa
Prunus ylrginiana
Rhus trllobata
Rosa arkansana
R. woods!!
Symphoricarpos occldentalis
Forbs
Achillea millefolium
Ambrosia psilostachya
Androsace occldentalis
Antennaria species
Artemisia ludoviciana
Arnica sororia
Aster species
Astragalus crassicarpus
Astragalus species
Cerastium arvense
Cirsium undulatum
Collomia linearis
Collinsia parvifIora
Conyza canadensis
24A
25A
30A
31A
37A
40A
Cover Compo- Cover Compo-Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo_____ sitlon______ sltion_____ sitlon______ sltion______sltion______ sitlon
3.75 3.17 —
17.50 14.86 —
.25
34.88 36.52
3.63 5.09
.13
.13
.25
.23
3.13
2.86
.11
.13
9.75 17.22 —
—
—
—
7.88 11.05
1.75 3.09 —
—
.13
.11 —
—
——
—
3.13 2.65 —
2.00 1.70
25.13 21.34
13.00 11.04
1.13
.63
74.25 41.48
1.50
2.65 —
__
2.50
39.25 35.93
2.12 11.00
6.15
3.88
3.55
6.38
3.56
6.00
5.49
.63
.53
2.88
2.44
.22
APPENDIX TABLE I.
Forbs
Echinacea pallida
Erlgeron dIvergens
ErvsImum aspemm
Gaura cocclnea
Glycyrrhlza lepldota
Grlndelia squarrosa
Hedeoma hispida
Lactuca serrlola
Lepldium denslflcrum
Liatris punctata
Lithospermum ruderale
Luplnus argenteus
Luplnus species
Lygodesmla Iuncea
Medicago sativa
Monarda fistulosa
Oenothera serrulata
Opuntla polyacantha
Orthocarpus luteus
Petalostemon purpureum
Phlox species
Plantago purshii
Psoralea argophylla
Ratlhida columnifera
Solldago missourlensis
Solidago species
Sphaeralcea cocclnea
Taraxacum officinale
Tragopogon dublus
Vlcia americana
Yucca glauca
Unknown forbs
(CONTINUED)
24A
25A
30A
31A
37A
40A
Cover Compo­ Cover Compo­ Cover Compo­ Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo­
sition
sition
sition
sition
sition
sition
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.75
.88 .74 —
1.38 2.43 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.18 —
—
.22
.13
—
.13
—
.79
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.38
—
4.63
—
—
—
.39
—
4.84
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.22
.13
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.42
.75
—
—
—
—
2.88 1.61
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1.05 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.75
3.13 2.65
—
—
.25
.35
.25 .76
—
—
—
—
—
1.13
.88 —
.63
.66 —
.38
—
—
.88 1.23 3.13
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.71 —
.51
.13
.22
-
—
.96 —
—
—
—
—
2.65 —
.38
.21
—
—
- ■ —
—
—
—
—
.13
—
—
—
•ii
—
—
—
.ii
.46
.13
.50
—
—
—
—
—
—
APPENDIX TABLE I
Grasses and Sedges____
Agropyron dasystachyum
A. smlthli
A. splcatum
Andropogon scoparlus
Bouteloua ourtlpendula
B. gracilis
Bromus Iaponicus
jS. marginatus
B^. teetotum
Bucfaloe dactyloides
Calmagrostis montanensis
Calamovilfa longifolia
Carex filifolia
C. pensylvanica
Carex species
Festuca idahoensis
Koeleria cristata
Mufalenbergia cuspidata
Poa pratensis
P. seeunda
Stipa comata
S^. viridula
Other
Litter
Bare ground
Lichen
Moss
Rock
Erosion pavement
(CONTINUED)
24A
25A
30A
31A
37A
40A
Cover Compo— Cover Compo— Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo_____ sition______ sition______sition_____ sition______sition______sition
1.25 2.21 —
—
6.50 5.52 —
.50
.52 29.50 52.10 3.50
4.91
.63 .53
.25
.14 2.25 2.06
.92
4.71
.88
4.50
—
.13
1.88
—
.22 .88
3.31 1.00
—
1.23
1.40
—
—
19.00
26.67
23.25 24.35
—
—
__
6.41
6.13
——
— —
19.00 19.90
—
—
69.88
4.00
12.88
—
— —
—
— —
— —
.25
.32
.50
15.13
—
—
.28 —
8.45 —
—
—
.52
.50
— —
—
.38
—
— —
3.09 23.50
1.75
6.13 10.82
.66
.38
— —
—
.13
16.25
43.38
1.13
.13
.13
—
—
— —
—
—
—
8.75
.22 —
50.00
12.63
3.63
.38
1.75
32.98
—
33.30 30
.88
1.88 1.59
.49 7.15 6
5.25 4.46 —
—
—
—
18.75 15.92 62.75 35.06 12.50 11
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
12.28
5.38 4.56 2.63 1.47
.75
—
— —
—
—
—
45.38
19.63
.25
1.88
1.13
—
81.25
.25
—
—
— —
—
— —
—
—
89.50
.75 —
.25
.13
—
—
APPENDIX TABLE I.
(CONTINUED)
47A
50A
5IA
51B
55A
56A
Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover CompoShrubs and Trees_________________ sltion______ sitlon______sition_____ sition______sitlon______sltlon
Amelanchier alnifolia
Artemisia cana
A. dracunculus
A. frigida
A. tridentata
Chrysothanmus nauseosus
Eurotia lanata
Gutierrieia sarothrae
Pinus ponderosa
Prunus virgin!ana
Rhus trilobata
Rosa arkansana
R. wood8Ii
Symphoricarpos occidentalis
Forbs
Achillea millefolium
Ambrosia psilostachya
Androsace occidentalis
Antennaria species
Artemisia ludoviclana
Arnica sororia
Aster species
Astragalus crassicarpus
Astragalus species
Cerastium arvense
Cirsium undulatum
Collomia linearis
—
—
18.00 12.34
—
—
—
2.25
.88
.38
1.54
.60
.26
4.13
2.83
2.00
.13
1.37
.09
—
.13
.16
.38
.49
.38
1.15 —
—
—
—
—
—
.13
—
6.38
—
8.39
—
.75
2.29
.72
.25
.25
2.38
.27 —
—
2.53 8.13 14
—
—
—
—
1.25
1.33 —
—
—
4.25 5.59 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.13
.50
.13
.13
.53 —
.13 —
—
—
—
.88
—
—
1.75 1.20
.88
.60
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.80 —
.75
2.75 8.40 1.00 2.90
1.15
APPENDIX TABLE I
Forbs
Colllnsla parv!flora
Conyza canadensis
RrMnacea pallida
Erlgeron divergens
Erysimum asperum
Gaura cocclnea
Glycyrrhiza lepldota
Grlndella squarrosa
Hedeona~Klspida
Lactuca serrlola
Lepldium denslflofum
Llatris punctata
Llthospermum ruderale
Luplnus argenteus
Luplnus species
Lygodesmla juncea
Medicago saliva
Monarda-flstnlosa
Jenothera serrulata
Opuntla polyacantha
Orthocarpus luteus
Petalostemon purpureum
Phlox species
Plantago purshil
Psoralea argophylla
Ratlbida columnIfera
Solldago mlssouriensls
Solldago species
Sphaeralcea cocclnea
Taraxacum officinale
Tragopogon dubius
Vicla americana
Yucca glauca
Unknown forbs
(CONTINUED)
47A
50A
5IA
51B
55A
56B
Cover Compo- Cover Compo-Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo_____ sitlon______ sltion______sitlon_____ sltlon______sltion______sition
.38
.26
.25
.17
36.38 24.94
.25
1.00
1.32 —
2.00
2.63
25
.17
1.64 —
13
—
1.25
.13
.16 —
—
.88
.60
.63
.43
—
.75
Z
.88
.13
—
—
.09
.60
.13
.88
—
.49
.75
—
—
2.00
1.37
.13
.09
—
0
.38
.76
.25
—
VO
1
-
-
.38 1.91 -
-
—
.38
.40
.38
.40
.13
.22
.99
—
—
—
—
6.88 9.05
.25
.33
.38
I
—
.13
—
.67
.45
.38
.99
.38
.60
.38
.25
.27 —
—
.13
.22
1.53
.49 —
—
.38
—
.50
.13
.49
—
.13
.63
1.63 4.71
4.88 5.19
—
—
.25
.45
—
—
—
—
.38
.40
—
___
___
—
APPENDIX TABLE I.
Grasses and Sedges
Agropyron dasystachyam
A. smithii
A. spicatum
Andropogon scoparius
Bouteloua curtipendula
B. gracilis
Bromus Iaponicus
B. marqinatus
B. tectorym
Buchloe dactyloides
Calmagrostis montanensis
Calamovilfa longifolia
Carex filifolia
C. pensyIvanica
Carex species
Festuca idahoensis
Festuca octoflora
Koeleria cristata
Muhlenbergia cuspidata
Poa pratensis
P. secunda
Stipa comata
S. viridula
Other
Litter
Bare ground
Lichen
Moss
Rock
Erosion pavement
(CONTINUED)
47A
50A
5LA
51B
55A
56A
Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo-■
sition
stion
sition
sition
sition
sition
3.75
—
—
—
—
1.75
——
.25
—
——
10.63
2.57
—
—
—
1.20
—
.17
—
7.28
45.63 31.28
—
—
1.63 1.11
—
.13
1.88
7.13
—
.09
1.29
4.88
15.25 20.07 18.13 55.34 29.25 84.78
.50
.53 2.38 4.24
—
—
—
—
—
—
3.38 3.59
.88 1.56
—
—
——
—
—
—
—
62.63 66.62 —
35.88 64.06
—
20.13 26.48 —
1.00 1.06 —
—
—
—
1.88 2.47 3.75 11.45
.63 1.81 1.63 1.73 1.63 2.90
——
——
—
—
—
——
——
.82
.38 1.15 —
.63
——
—
—
——
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.88 1.15 —
.13
.13 ——
—
5.38
.13
1.75
7.07 —
.16 —
2.30
.75
2.13
1.00
—
.99 —
2.80 4.88 14.89
1.32
74.88
.88
.25
.38
—
—
—
——
34.00
8.13
3.00
.75
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
17.13
39.13
1.88
7.50
—
—
—
——
.25 —
—
—
.13 .36
1.63 4.71
13.50 —
65.25 —
.63 —
——
——
.13 —
1.63
——
——
——
—
——
—
—
3.25 3.46
.13 .22
3.63 6.47
5.38 5.72 1.88 3.35
——
.88
.93 ——
3.50 3.72
.25 .45
66.75
2.38
.25
.13
.75
—
——
—
——
—
42.88
4.25
1.00
——
27.50
——
— —
——
——
—
APPENDIX TABLE I.
(CONTINUED)
Shrubs and Trees
58B
59A
60A
60B
62A
58A
Cover Compo­ Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo­
sition______sition_____ sition______sition______sition
sition
Amelanchier alnifolia
Artemisia cana
A. dracunculus
A. friglda
A. tridentata
Chrysothamnus nauseosus
Eurotia lanata
Gutierrizia sarothrae
Pinus ponderosa
Prunus virginIana
Rhus trilobata
Rosa arkansana
R. woodsii
Symphoricarpos occidentalls
4.63
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
5.75
—
7.50
6.11
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
7.59
—
9.90
3.13
Forbs
Achillea millerolium
Ambrosia psilostachya
Androsace occidentalls
Antennaria species
Artemisia ludoviciana
Arnica sororia
Aster species
Astragalus crassicarpus
Astragalus species
Cerastium arvense
Cirsium undulatum
Collomia linearis
—
14.75
—
—
—
.38
.67 —
—
—
11.29 —
—
3.50 4.51 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
4.13
—
—
4.13 5.45
—
—
—
—
—
—
15.50 27.87 —
4.50
.13
—
8.09 —
—
—
.22
.88 1.13 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
.25.31
—
—
APPENDIX TABLE I.
(CONTINUED)
58A
58B
59A
60A
60B
62A
Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover CompoForbs_________________ ________ sition______ sition______sition_____ sition______sition______sition
Collinsia parvifIora
Conyza canadensis
Echlnacea pallida
Erigeron divergens
Erysimum asperum
Gaura cocclnea
Glycyrrhiza lepldota
Grindelia squarrosa
Hedeoma hispida
Lactuca serriola
Lepidium densiflorum
Liatris punctata
Lithospermum ruderale
Lupinus argenteus
Lupinus species
Lygodesmia juncea
Medicago sativa
Monarda fistulosa
Oenothera serrulata
Opantia polyacantha
Orthocarpus luteus
Petalostemon purpureum
Phlox species
Plantago purshii
Psoralea argophylla
Ratibida columnifera
Solidago missouriensis
Solldago species
Sphaeralcea cocclnea
Taraxacum officinale
Tragopogon dubius
Vicia americana
Yucca glauca
Unknown forbs
.13
.17
.25
.45 —
—
5.25
9.44 —
—
.45 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
5.38 7.10
1.63 1.24 —
—
—
—
—
.38
.67 —
—
—
—
—
3.38
4.46
—
—
.25
.33
.50
.66
.63
.83
.50
.66
—
—
—
—
.25
.13
.10 —
.13
.10 —
—
—
—
—
.13
.10 —
—
.50
.38 —
—
.63
—
1.12 —
.25
.32
—
—
—
.12 —
—
—
—
—
>75
.69 —
—
.25
.23 —
.13
—
—
.25
.25
.31
.31
APPENDIX TABLE I.
Grasses and Sedges
Agropyron dasystachyum
A. smithii
A. spicatum
Andropogon scoparius
Bouteloua curtipendula
B. gracilis
Bromus Iaponicus
B. marginatus
B. tectorym
Buchloe dactyloides
Calmagrostis montanensis
Calamovilfa longifolia
Carex filifolia
C. pensyIvanica
Carex species
Festuca idahoensis
Festuca octoflora
Koeleria cristata
Muhlenbergia cuspidata
Poa pratensis
P. secunda
Stipa comata
S. viridula
Other
Litter
Bare ground
Lichen
Moss
Rock
Erosion pavement
(CONTINUED)
58B
59A
6OA
60B
62A
5BA
Cover Compo­ Cover Compo­ Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo­
sition
sition
sition
sition
sition
sition
1.25 1.65
—
—
3.88 2.97
—
—
—
—
1.13 1.49
12.63 16.67
—
4.13
—
—
—
—
2.50
—
17.75
5.45
—
—
—
—
3.30
—
23.43
56.63
—
—
—
18.50
—
.13
.17
—
.33
—
—
13.50 10.33
—
.25
—
—
.67
.88
20.00 15.31
43.35
—
—
—
14.16
—
—
42.88 ——
17.75 —
1.38 —
90.75 —
.13 —
2.50 —
—
—
—
—
1.12
9.44 —
—
.63
5.25
—
—
—
—
1.00 1.80
9.00 16.18
8.15
—
—
—
—
1.13
3.00 3.86 —
—
14.61 1.38 1.77 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
36.25 46.70
—
30.00 38.65
2.02
—
—
—
—
—
.45 —
.25
—
1.63 2.03
—
—
—
—
1.50 1.87
4.00 4.99
—
—
.88 1.09
.88 1.09
—
73.63 68.17 —
.12 51.25 63.96
.13
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.16
—
—
—
—
33.13 30.67 —
—
.25
.45
—
1.88 3.37 2.38 3.06 —
—
19.13 23.87
29.13 ——
15.63
3.25
18.38
11.75
—
77.63 —
5.50 —
96.25 —
—
—
.13
69.50 —
11.50 —
.50 —
1.63
—
—
—
APPENDIX TABLE I.
(CONTINUED)
62B
62C
62D
64A
67A
Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover CompoShrubs and Trees________________________ sitlon_______ sition______ sition______ sitlon______ sitlon
Amelanchler alnlfolia
Artemisia cana
A. dracunculus
A. frigida
A. trldentata
Chrysothamnus nauseosus
Eurotla lanata
Gutierrlzia sarothrae
Plnus ponderosa
Prunus vlrRlniana
Rhus trilobata
Rosa arkansana
R. woodsll
Symphoricarpos occidentalls
Forbs
Achillea millefolium
Ambrosia psllostachya
Androsace occidentalls
Antennaria species
Artemisia ludovlclana
Arnica sororla
Aster species
Astragalus crassicgrpus
Astragalus species
Cerastlum arvense
Cirsium undulatum
Collomia linearis
Colllnsla parylflora
Conyza canadensis
Echinacea pallida
Erigeron dlvergens
Erysimum asperum
—
—
——
1.00
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.88
.13
1.02
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.98
.14
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.25
.28
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
11.88
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
13.21
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
16.50
—
.25
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
2,38
•13
1.13
.13
—
—
—
2.64
7.88
—
.13
.14
.25
.28
.88
.97
1.21
—
—
12.21
—
.19
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
5,83
APPENDIX TABLE I
Forbs
Gaura coccinea
Glycrryhiza lepidota
Grindelia squarrosa
Hedeoma hispida
Lactuca serriola
Lepidium densifloruo
Liatris punctata
Llthospemm ruderale
Lupinus argenteus
Lupinus species
Lysodesmla .Iuncea
Medicago sativa
Monarda flstulosa
Oenothera serrulata
Opuntia polyacantha
Orthocarpus luteus
Petalostemon purpureum
Phlox species
Plantago purshil
Psoralea argophylla
Ratibida columnifera
Solidago missourlensis
Solidago species
Sphaeral coccinea
Taraxacum officinale
Tragopogon dubius
Vicia americana
Yucca glauca
Dnknown forbs
(CONTINUED)
62B
62C
62D
64A
67A
Cover Compo­ Cover Compo­ Cover Compo­ Cover Compo­ Cover Compo­
sition
sition
sition
sition
sition
_
—
—
—
22.50
—
—
—
—
—
5.25
—
—
—
.88
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1.63
.88
—
—
—
—
22.90
—
—
—
—
—
5.34
—
—
.89
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1.65
.89
—
—
—
—
21.63
—
—
—
—
—
8.88
—
—
—
24.20
—
—
—
—
—
9.93
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.38
2.55
.88
.94
—
—
—
—
—
—
•25
.28
.25
.13
.28
.14
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.42
—
—
—
.13
.14
—
—
.84
—
—
.25
.28
—
—
—
—
.75
—
—
—
—
2.38
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
27.88 29.89
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.13
.09
APPENDIX TABLE I.
(CONTINUED)
Grasses and Sedges
62B
62C
62D
64A
67A
Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compo- Cover Compositlon
sition
sition
sition
sition
Agropyron dasystachyum
A. smith!I
A. spicatum
Andropogan scoparius
Bouteloua curtipendula
B. gracilis
Bromus Japonicus
B. marginalus
B. tectorum
Buchloe dactyloides
Calamagrostis montanesls
Calamovilfa longifolia
Carex filifolia
C. pensyIvanica
Carex species
Festuca idahoensis
Festuca octoflora
Koeleria cristata
Muhlenbergia cuspidata
Poa pratensis
P. secunda
Stipa comata
S. viridula
.75
—
—
—
—
9.75
—
—
—
—
—
17.88
—
—
—
—
4.13
—
—
.13
33.50
—
Others
Litter
Bare ground
Lichen
Moss
Rock
Erosion pavement
78.13
3.63
4.38
—
—
—
2.38
—
—
—
.75
14.25
—
13.13
—
—
—
12.63
—
—
—
—
4.00
—
.13
—
9.25
—
69.00
4.25
2.38
—
—
—
2.66
—
—
—
.84
15.94
—
14.69
—
—
—
14.13
—
—
—
—
4.48
—
.14
—
10.35
—
1.50
—
—
—
2.25
13.13
—
.75
—
—
—
27.38
—
—
——
—
——
——
2.38
—
13.50
—
70.25
4.75
3.13
.13
——
—
1.61
—
—
—
2.41
14.08
—
.80
2.38
—
—
—
3.25
.63
—
—
2.64
—
—
——
3.62
.70
—
—
4.63
——
—
——
——
.25
—
—
3.42
——
——
——
——
.19
——
——
—
—
29.36
—
—
—
——
—
—
2.55
—
14.48
—
.75
—
—
11.38
—
53.38
—
1.25
—
—
.13
—
.25
.83
—
—
12.66
—
59.39
—
1.39
—
—
.14
—
.28
—
——
—
—
——
——
——
——
—
58.13
——
——
47.38
—
—
—
——
——
_
——
—
——
43.02
—
——
35.06
34.50
7.75
10.63
'.13
——
—
—
92.50
—
——
——
——
—
76-
.76
—
—
—
—
9.92
—
—
—
—
—
18.19
—
—
—
—
4.20
—
—
.13
34.10
—
-77-
APPENDIX TABLE II.
PHENOLOGICAL PROFILE OF McRAE KNOLLS STUDY SITE,
1976
June
4
June
22
July
20
Aug
24
Sept
28
6
6
7
10
11
10
11
12
10-11
12
Nov
6
SHRUBS & TREES
Acer negundo
Artemisia cana
A. dracunculus
A. frigida
A. tridentata
Atriplex nuttallii
Chrysothamnus nauseosus
Eurotia lanata
Fraxinus pennsyIvanica
Gutierrizea sarothrae
Juniperus scopulorum
Prunus virginiana
Rhus trilobata
Ribes species
Rosa arkansana
R. woodsii
Shepherdia argentea
Symphoricarpos occidentalis
Si/
5
5
5
5
6
.5
6
12
12
5
6
5
6
6
5
11
6
6
6
5
11
6
12
5
6
11
7
12
7
13
15
15
15
15
13
12
6
11
11
6
11
13
13
13
13
13
13
11
6
11
5
12
11
5
9
11
.6
13
11
6
11
13
6
13
12
5
12
13
9
12
13
10
11
13
11
13
13
12
12
12-13
15
H
12
12
11
11
11
6
11
12
12
11
13
13
15
13
15
15
15
FORBS
Achillea millefolium
Allium textile
Ambrosia psilostachya
Antennaria species
Arabis holboellii
Artemisia ludoviciana
Aster species
Astragalus crassicarpus
Astragalus species
Calochortus nuttallii
Camelina sativa
Castilleia sessiliflora
Chrysopsis villosa
Cirsium undulatum
Comandra umbellata
Delphinium bicolor
Echinacea pallida
Erigeron divergens
5
'5
11
11
11
6
5
11
5
9
6
9
9
10-11
13
10
12&3
12
10
9
16
12
15
13
12
13
16
13
13&3
13
13
11&3
13
16
12
13 .
15
I/ Codes correspond to phonological stages on Table 7.
-78-
APPENDIX TABLE II.
(CONTINUED)
June
22
June
4
FORBS (cent.)
Eriosonum annuum
Eriogonum species
Erysimum asperum
Evolvulus pilosa
Gaura coccinea
Glycyrrhiza lepidota
Grindelia squarrosa
Helianthus annuus
Lactuca pulchella
L. serriola
Leucocrinum montanum
Liatris punctata
Linum perenne
Lithospermum incisum
Lygodesmia iuncea
Medicago sativa
Melilotus alba
M. officinalis
Oenothera serrulata
0. fragilis
Opuntia polyacantha
Oxytropis besseyi
Penstemon albidus
Petalostemon purpureum
Phlox species
Plantago purshii
Polygala alba
Potentilla species
Psoralea argophylla
Ratibida columnifera
Senecio c a m s
Solidago missouriensis
Solidago species
Sphaeralcea coccinea
Taraxacum officinale
Tradescantia occidentalis
Tragopogon dubius
Vicia americana
Yucca glauca
Zigadenus venenosus
7
6
July
20
8
10
.8
9
9
8
■' 5
5
13
5
11
12
6
8
11
6
6
8
9
6
10
9
5
6
8
6
13
6
5
11
11
6
11
11
6
13
6
12
12
11
11
9
10
10
.
8
5
8
12
.7
10
5
11
■
6
6
10
6
6
8
10
12
9
11
16
13
13
16
13
10&3
12
10
16
12
16
10
13
12
13
16
13
12
12
13
13
15
11
13
13&3
13
13
16
16
11
13
8
6
13
13
Nov
6
10
13
13
7-12
11
11
10
Sept
28
12&3
11
12
9
6
Aug
24
15
14
13
■6
15
13
13
13
13 . 13
12
13
13
10 .
11
12
10
13
13
15
15
16
16
16
13
13
.13
14
APPENDIX TABLE II.
(CONTINUED)
June
4
June
22
July
20
Aug
24
Sept ■ Nov
28
6
GRASSES
Agropyron smithii
A. 'spicatum
Andropogon scoparius
Aristida longiseta
Bouteloua curtipendula
B. gracilis
Brotnus japonicus
B. tectorum
Calamovilfa longifolia
Carex filifolia
Elymus canadensis
Festuca octdflora
Koeleria cristata
Muhlenbergia cuspidata
Oryzopsis hymenoides
Poa secunda
P. pratensis
Sporobolus cryptandrus
Stipa comata
S. viridula
.5
7
5
5
8
5
7
5
:• I 5
9
9
10
11
5
5
13
13 .
8
8
.8
11
6
5
12
6
11
9
11
16
16
6
13
8
12
8
8
11
13
13
7
7
11
12
12
5
11
13 .. 13
13
.11
12
12
12
12
12
16
’ 16
16
16
12
.12
13
13
15
15
15
15
15
15
16
16
15
15
14
11
13
12
14
15
15
13
12 .
13
13 .
13
12
13
13
14
.
. 15
15 .
I'
-80APPENDIX TABLE III.
PHENOLOGICAL PROFILE OF THE HALFWAY RESERVOIR
STUDY SITE, 1976.
June
2
June
22
July
22
Aug
26
Sept
29
Nov
7
SHRUBS & TREES
Acer negudo
Amelanchier alnifolia
Artemisia cana
A. dracunculus
A. frigIda
A. tridentata
Chrysothamnus nauseosus
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Gutierrezia sarothrae
Juniperus horizontalis
J. scopulorum
Prunus americana
Prunus virginiana
Rhus tfilobata
Ribes species
Rosa arkansana
Rosa woodsii
Symphoricarpos occidentalis
111/
12
5
5
5
12
11
11
5
6
5
5
5
5
' 5. .
5
6
5
6
8
5
8
12
12
12
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
9
11
7
11-12
6
6
6
13
11
11
11
13
13
13
12-13
9-12
5
9-10
11
15
11
12
12-13
12
11
11
11
13
13
13
11
11
12
15
15
14
15
15
15
12
13
15
12
13
13
12
13
.15
13
. 11
15
11
FORBS
Achillea millefolium
Allium textile
Ambrosia psilostachya
Antennaria species
Arabis holboellii
Arnica sororia
Artemisia ludoviciana
Asclepias species
Aster species
Astragalus crassicarpus
Astragalus drummondii
Berberis repens
Besseya wyomingensis
5-6
10
11
5-9
5
9
11
6
13
12
10
5
10 .
13
6
13
13
13
5
6
5
9
6
11
13
13
13
9
6
13
I/ Codes correspond to phenology stages on Table 7.
-
appendix
TABLE III.
81
-
(CONTINUED)
June
2
June
22
July
22
10
13
13
8
13
10
7
3
Aug
26
Sept
29
Nov
7
FORBS (cont.)
Calochortus nuttallii
Camelina microcarpa
Cerastium arvense
Chrysopsis villosa
Cirsium arvense
C . undulatum
C. vulgare
Collomia linearis
Comandra umbellata
Conyza canadensis
Crepis acuminata
Descurainia sophia
Dodecatheon conjugens
Echinacea pallida
Erigeron divergens
Erysimum asperum
Galium species
Gaura coccinea
Geum triflorum
Glycyrrhiza lepidota
Grindelia squarrosa
Hedeoma Mspida
Heliahthella uniflora
Lactuca serriola
Lesquerella alpina
Leucocrinum montanum
Liatris punctata
Linum perenne
Lupinus argenteus
Lygodesmia juncea
Monarda fistulosa
Opuntia fragilis
Orthocarpus luteus
Oxytropis sericea
Petalostemon purpureum
Phlox species
Plantago purshii
Polygala alba
Potentilla arguta
11
.10
5-6
5
8
10
10
8
13
13
9-12
13
9-12
13
. 13
12
3
12
15
15
13
13
8
12
10-11
13
5
9
11
9
8
13
5
6
8
13
6
13.
8
7
6
13
10
9
13
13
9-11
6
15
6
6
15
12
8-10
6
13
11
5-6
10
15
13.
12
11
13
15&16
13
13
12
13
13
12
12
16
16
16
16
13
16
16
10-11
13
10
10
6
7
12
12&3
10
13
8
13
—
APPENDIX TABLE III.
82
—
(CONTINUED)
June
2
June
22
July
22
Aug
26
Sept
29
9
6
11
10
11
12-13
13
13
Nov
7
FORBS (cont.)
Potentilla species
Psoralea argophylla
P. esculenta
P. tenuifIora
Ratibida columnifera
Senecio canus
Solidago missouriensis
Sphaeralcea coccinea
Taraxacum officinale
Tragopogon dubius
Yucca glauca
Zigadenus venenosus
7
5
6
10
10
15
11
12
15
11
13
15
13
16&13
13
16
13
13
16
15
12
12
12
12
12
15
15
5
5
13
6
5
9
5
13
13
15&3
5
13
5
5
9
7
5
6
5
5
8
5
5
8
10
12
5
12
9
9
11
12
12
5
8
12
13
12
12
12
16
16
13
12
13
13
9
13
13
13
11
12
7
13
13
13
: 13
13
13
15
15
15
13
13
13
11
13
13
12
13
14
7
13
GRASSES
Andropogon gerardi
A. scoparius
Agropyron trachycaulum
A. smith!!
A. spicatum
Aristida longiseta
Bouteloua curtipendula
B. gracilis
Bromus japonicus
B. tectorum
Calamagrostis montanensis
Calamovilfa longifolia
Carex eleocharis
C. filifolia
C. pensyIvanica
Festuca idahoensis
Hordeum jubatum
Koeleria cristata
Muhlenbergia cusp!data
Phleum pratense
Poa pratensis
P. secunda
Stipa comata
S. viridula
5
12
5-8
8
12
9
10
11
7
7
12
13
12
12.
12
12-13
12
12
12
16
16
12
13
12
12-13
15
15
15
15
15
16&2
16&2
15
14
14
15
15
APPENDIX TABLE IV. PERCENT COMPOSITION (PERCENTAGE) FOR HALFWAY RESERVOIR AND McRAE
____________________ KNOLLS STUDY SITES, 1 9 7 6 _________________________
Shrubs and Trees
34a 2/ 35A
Artemisia cana
A. figida
Crataegus Columbiana
Prunus americana
P. virginiana
Bibies species
Rosa woods!!
Rhus trilobata
Symphoricarpos occidentalis
__
Forbs
Achillea millefolium
Ambrosia psilostachya
Artemisian ludovlciana
Aster species
Berberis repens
Cerastium arvense
Cirsium arense
Cirsium vulgare
Cirsium species
Heracleum lanatum
Monarda fistulosa
Polygonum bistortoides
Potentilla species
Psoralea argophvlla
Sphaeralcea coccinea
Tragopogon dubius
Grasses and Sedges
Agropyron smithii
A. trachycaulum
Bromus inermis
B. marinatus
Calamovilfa longifolia
Carex species
Elymus canadensis
E. cinerus
Poa pratensis
Stipa comata
Stipa viridula
—
—
—
—
90
T
—
5
—
—
T
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
T
——
—
—
—
—
—
——
T
—
_
—
—
—
T
90
—
5
T
—
—
T
—
5
—
—
—
35B
35C
35D
—
—
—
—
—
—
T
T
—
—
—
—
80
—
10
—
—
—
T
70
—
20
T
T
T
T
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
T
30
T
—
60
T
—
—
—
—
—
—
T
—
T
—
T
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
T
T
—
T
—
T
—
T
—
T
—
—
T
T
—
——
—
—
—
T
-—
—
T
—
—
T
—
—
—
—
T
T
T
T
T
T
—
—
—
—
—
—
T
—
T
—
T
—
—
T
—
T
T
—
—
30
30
—
30
—
T
—
—
—
—
—
T
—
T
40
10
—
40
5
40
—
40
—
—
—
—
T
—
T
—
90
—
T
T
—
70
—
20
—
T
T
—
T
—
—
—
T
5
—
—
—
—
T
43C
Tl/
T
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
T
43B
—
—
—
T
—
T
—
—
—
—
43A
37B
__
—
—
5
20
65
—
5
42A
35E
I/ Percent composition based on ocular estimation.
2/ Number and letter correspond to those in figures 13 and 21.
3/ Traces are less than 3 percent.
—
—
—
—
T
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
T
—
—
T
T
T
—
T
T
T
44A
5
T
T
T
5
T
44C
5
T
—
T
30
T
50
T
15
T
T
40
—
40
—
—
—
—
40
——
40
T
T
T
T
T
—
—
T
—
—
—
—
5
—
—
——
—
—
—
—
—
—
T
—
T
T
—
—
T
T
T
—
T
T
——
T
T
T
——
—
——
——
T
T
T
T
—
—
—
T
T
—
44B
T
T
5
T
T
T
T
T
T
-84-
APPENDIX TABLE .V.
,
Location
symbols
A li/
A 2
A 3
A 4
A 5
A 6
A 7
A 8
A 9
A 10
Hard Pan
Hard Pan
SOIL TEXTURE CLASSIFICATION AND PERCENT MOISTURE
AT HALFWAY RESERVOIR SITE, -1976__________ ' , ,
1 ■ Texture
Clay loam "
Clay loam
Loam
Loam
Silty clay loam
Loam
Loam
Silty loam
Clay loam
Loam
West loam.
East loam
June
2
June
19
30
38
47
26
9
30
19
30
27
33
44
54
62
49
29
38
9
25
18
41
I/ Symbols are located on figure 4.
July
16
2
3
2
2
3
4
2
2
2
3
I
I
Aug . Sept
26
. 29,
,
5 ■
40 ■
52
7 .
" 7
60
12
38
42
3
54
3
37
3
42
4
26
3
37
7
I
24
28
; I ...
‘ -.. .
■■
Nov
7
31
30
29
10
18
14
23
13.
3
4
-85-
APPENDIX TABLE VI.
Location
symbols
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
1— /
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
SOIL TEXTURE CLASSIFICATION AND PERCENT MOISTURE
AT McRAE KNOLLS SITE, 1976
Texture
Sandy loam
Sandy loam
Sandy loam
Sandy loam
Silty clay
Silty loam
Sandy loam
Loam
Clay loam
June
19
June
4
2
I
I
6
2
2
I
3
2
12
10
.
5
20
15 .
12
11
17
6
July
16
I
I .
I
2
2
2
I
2
2
Aug— /
Sept
28
5 ■'
2.
I
4
2
I
9
I/ Precipitation following the August 25 aerial mission prevented
the collection of soil samples.
2/ Symbols are located on figure 11.
Nov
6
7
3
2
9
8
3
5
8
5
APPENDIX TABLE VII.
SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAMES OF RANGE PLANTS
Scientific name_______ „
_______ Authority
Common name
Grasses and Sedges
Asropyron dasystachyumi/
A. smithii
A. spicatum
Andropogon scoparius
Bouteloua curtipendula
B. gracilis
Bromus iaponicus
B. marginatus
B. tectorum
Buchloe dactyloides
Calmagrostis montanensis
Calamovilfa longifolia
Carex filifolia
C. pensylvanica
Carex species
Festuca idahoensis
Festuca octoflora
Koeleria cristata
Muhlenbergia cuspidata
Poa pratensis
P . secunda
Stipa comata
S. viridula
(Hook.) Scribn.
Rydb.
(Pursh) Scribn. & Smith
Michx.
(Michx.) Torr.
(H.B.K.) Lag.
Thumb.
(Piper) Hitchc.
L.
(Nutt.) Engelm.
(Scribn.) Scribn.
(Hook.) Scribn.
Nutt.
Lam..
Elmer
Walt.
Pers.
(Torr.) Rydb
L.
Presl.
Trin. & Rupf.
Tr in.
thickspike wheatgrassE/
western wheatgrass
bluebunch wheatgrass
little bluestem
sideoats grama
blue grama
Japanese brome
mountain brome
cheatgrass brome
common buffalograss
plains reedgrass
prairie sandreed
threadleaf sedge
penn sedge
sedge
Idaho fescue
sixweeks fescue
prairie junegrass
stonyhills muhly
Kentucky bluegrass
Sandberg bluegrass
needle-and-thread
green needlegrass
APPENDIX TABLE VII.
(CONTINUED)
Scientific name
Authority
Common name
Forbs
Achillea millefolium
Ambrosia psilostachya
Androsace occidentalis
Antennaria species
Artemisia ludoviciana
Arnica sororia
Aster species
Astragalus crassicarpus
Astragalus species
Cerastium arvense
Cirsium undulatum
Collomia linearis
Collinsia parvifIora
Conyza canadensis
Echinacea pallida
Ergeron divergens
Erysimum asperum
Gaura coccinea
Glycrrhiza lepidota
Grindelia squarrosa
Hedeoma hispida
Lactuca serriola
Lepidium densiflorum
Liatris punctata
Lithospermum ruderale
Lupinus argenteus
Lupinus species
Lygodesmia juncea
Medicago sativa
L.
DC.
Pursh
Nutt.
Greene
Nutt.
L.
(Nutt.) Sprang
Nutt.
Lindl.
(L.) Cronq
Nutt.
T. & G.
(Nutt.) DC.
(Nutt.) Pursh
Pursh
(Pursh) Dunal
Pursh.
L.
Schrad.
Hook
Dougl.
Pursh
(Pursh) D.Doh
L.
common yarrow
western rockjasmine
pussytoes
Louisiana sagewort
aster species
groundplum milkvelch
milkvelch
field cerastium ■
wavyleaf thistle
narrow leaved collomi
smallflowered blueeyedmary
Canada horseweed
pale echinacea
spreading fleabane
plains wallflower
scarlet gaura
American licorice
curlycup gumweed
rough falsepennyroyal
prickly lettuce
prairie pepperweed
dotted gayfeather
wayside gromwell
silvery lupine
lupine
rush skeletonplant
alfalfa medic
APPENDIX TABLE VII.
(CONTINUED)
Scientific name.
Authority
Common name
Forbs
Monarda fistulosa
Oenothera serrulata
Opuntia polyacantha
Orthocarpus luteus
Petalostemon purpureum
Phlox species
Plantago purshii
Psoralea argophylla
Ratibida columnifera
Solidago missouriensis
Solidago species
Sphaeralcea coccinea
Taraxacum officinale
Tragopogon dubius
Vicia americana
Yucca glauea
L.
Nutt.
Haw.
Nutt.
(Vent.) Rydb
R. & S.
Pursh
(Nutt.) Woot. & Standi.
Nutt.
(Pursh) Rydb
Weber
Scop.
Muhl.
Nutt.
wild berggamot beebalm
plains pricklepear
yellow owlclover
purple prairieclover
phlox
wooly plantain
silverleaf scurfpea
upright prairie coneflower
Missouri goldenrod
goldenrod
scarlet globemallow
common dandelion
yellow salsify
American vetch
small soapweed
go
I
.APPENDIX TABLE VII.
(CONTINUED)
•
Scientific name
Authority
Common name
Shrubs and Trees
■Nutt.
Pursh
. L. . Willd.
Nutt.
(Pali.) Britt.
(Pursh) Moq.
. (Pursh) Britt. & Rusby..
Dougl.
L-.
Nutt.
Porter
.Lindl.
Hook.•
Saskatoon serviceberry
silver sagebrush
falsetarragon sagewort
fringed sagewort
big sagebrush
rubber rabbitbrush
common winterfat
broom snakeweed •
ponderosa pine
common Chokecherry
skunkbush sumac
Arkansas rose
Woods rose
western snowberry
I/ Scientific-names of plants are based on Booth (1972 and 1959) arid Booth.and Wright (1959).
2] Common names of plants are based on Beetle (1959).
-89-
Amelanchier alnifolia
Artemisia cana.
•
A. dracunculus
A. frigida
A. tridentata
Chrvsothamnus nauseosus
Eurotia lanata
Gutierrizia sarothrae
Pinus ponderosa
Prunus virginiana
Rhus trilobata
Rosa arkansana
R i woodsii
Svmohoricarpos occidentails
LITERATURE CITED
LITERATURE CITED
Allen, W. A.,
Gausman, A. J. Richardson and J. W. Thomas. 1969.
Interaction of isotropic light with a compact plant leaf. J.
Opt. Soc. Amer. 59:1376-1379.
American Society for Testing and Materials. 1969. Standard method of
specifying color by the Munsell System. Book of ASTM Standards.
Part 30 D 1535-68. 21 p.
American Society of Testing and Materials. 1974. Standard method .
for visual evaluation of color differences of opaque material.
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Part 29. 6 p.
Bass, N. W. 1932. The Ashland Coal Field, Rosebud, Powder River and
Custer Counties, Montana. U. S. Geol. Survey Bull. 831. 108 p.
Beetle, A. A. 1970. Recommended plant names.
Res. J. 31:124 p.
Wyoming Agr. Exp, Sta.
Billings, W. D. and R. J. Morris. 1951. Reflection of visible and
infrared radiation from leaves of different ecological groups,
Amer. J. Bot 38:327-331.
Blaisdell, James P. 1958. Season development and yield of native
plants on the upper Snake River Plains and their relation to
certain climatic factors. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bull. 1190. 68 p
Blaisdell, J. P. and J. F. Pechanic. 1949. Effect of herbage removal
of various dates on vigor of blue bunch wheatgrass and arrowleaf
balsamroot.
Ecology 30:298-305.
Booth, W. E. 1959. Flora of Montana. Part I, conifers and monocots.
The Research Foundation of Montana State College, 232 p. Illus.
Booth, W. E. 1972. Grasses of Montana. Dept. of Botany and Micro­
biology, Montana State University, 64 p. Booth, W. E. and J. C. Wright. 1959. Flora of Montana.
dicolyledons.
(Revised 1966) 305 p. Mimeo.
Part II,
Carneggie, David M. and Jack N. Reppert. 1969. Large scale 70 mm
aerial color photography. Photog, Eng. 34:249-257. .
-92-
Colwell, Robert N. 1954. A systematic analysis of some factors
affecting photographic interpretation. Photog. Eng. 20:433-454.
Colwell, R. N. 1956. Determining the prevalence of certain cereal
crop disease by means of aerial photography. Hilgardia 26:
223-286.
Colwell, R. N. 1960. Some uses of infrared aerial photography in
the management of wildland areas. Photog. Eng. 26:774-785.
Colwell, R. N. 1966. Uses and limitations of multispectral remote
sensing. Proc. 4th Symp. on Remote Sensing of Environment, Inst,
of Sci. and Tech., Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor, p 71-100.
CouIson, L. 1966. Effect of reflection properties of natural surface
in aerial reconnaissance. Applied Opt. 5:905-917.
Coupland, R. T. 1961. A reconsideration of grassland classification
in the Northern Great Plains of North America. J. Ecology 49:
135-167.
Daubenmire, R. 1959. A canope-coverage method of vegetational analysis.
Northw. Sci. 33:43-64.
Driscoll, R. S. 1971. Color aerial photography - a new view to
range management. U. S. Dept. Agr. Rocky Mountain Forest.and
Range Exp. Sta. Res. Paper RM 67. 11 p.
Driscoll, R. S., J. N. Reppert, R. C. Heller, and D. M. Carneggie.
1970. Identification and measurement of herbland and shrubland
vegetation from large scale aerial color photography. Proc. XI
Inter. Grassland Congress. 95-98.
Fritz, Norman L.
color film.
1967. Optimum method for using infrared sensitive
Photog. Eng. 33:1128-1138.
Gates, D. M. 1967.
17:303-307.
Remote sensing for the biologist.
Bioscience
Gates, David M. 1970. Physical and physiological properties of plants.
,Remote sensing with special reference to agriculture and forestry.
Nat. Acad. Sci. p. 242-252.
Gates, D. M., H. J. Keegar, J. C. Schlites and V. R. Weidner.
Special properties of plants. Appl. Opt. 4:11-20.
1965.
-93-
Gates, D. M. and W. Tentraporn.' 1952. The reflectivity of deciduous
trees and herbaceous vegetation with infrared to 25 micron.
Science 115:613-616.
Gausman, H. W. and W. A. Allen. 1973. Optical parameters' of leaves .
of 30 plant species. Plant Physiol. 52:57-62
Gausman, H. W,, W. A. Allen and R. Cardenas. 1969. Reflectance of
cotton leaves and their structure. Remote Sensing Environ,
1:19-22.
Gausman, H. W., W. A. Allen, R. Cardenas and A. J. Richardson. 1970.
Relation of light reflection to. histogial and physical evaluation,
of cotton leaf maturity (Gosypium hirsutum L.).Appl. Opt.
9:545-552.
Gausman, H. W. and R. Cardenas. 1968. Effect of pubesence oh. reflec­
tance of light. Proc. 5th Symp. on Remote Sensing of Environment
Inst, of Sci. and Tech., Univ. Michigan Ann Arbor. p. 291-297.
Gausman, H. W. and R. Cardenas, 1969. Effect of leaf pubescence of
Gynura aurantiaca on light reflectance. Bot. Gaz, 130:158-162,
Gausman, H. W., R. R. Rodrquez, 'and A. J, Richardson.. 1976.
Infinitive reflectance of dead compared to live vegetation.
Agron. J. 68:295-296,
Gernsheim, Helmut, and Alison Gernsheim. 1969. The History of PhotoRtaphy from the Camera Obscura to the Beginning of the Modern Era.
McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, St. Louis, San Francisco, 599 p.
Haack, P. M. 1962. Evaluating color, infrared, and panchromatic
aerial photos for forest survey of interior Alaska. Photog.
Eng. 28:592-598. .
Haefner, Harold. 1967. Airphoto interpretation of rural land use in
Western Europe. Photogram, 22:143-152.
-94-
Hoffer, R. M., R. A. Holmes, and J. R. Shay. 1966. Vegetative, soil,
and photographic factors affecting tone in agricultural remote
sensing. Proc. 4th Symp. on Remote Sensing of Environment, Inst,
of Sci. and Tech., Univ. Michigan, Ann Arbor, p. 115-134.
Hoffer, R. M. and C. J. Johannsen. 1969. Ecological potentials in
spectral signature analyzer. Purdue Univ. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull
3479.
Knipling, E. 'B. 1969, . Leaf reflectance and image formation on color
infrared film. Remote Sensing in Ecology, Univ. of Georgia,
Athens, p. 17-29.
Knipling, E. B. 1970. Physical and physiological basis for the
reflectance of visible and near infrared radiation from vegetation.
Remote Sensing Environment 1:155-159.
Kodak Data for Aerial Photograph.
80 p.
1971.
Kodak Technical Pub. M-29.
Krall, J. L., J. R. Strob, C. S. Cooper and S. R. Chapman. 1971.
Effects of time and extent of harvesting basin wildrye. J. Range
Manage. 24:414-418.
Moss, R. H. and W. E. Loomis. 1952. Absorption spectra of leaves.
I. The visible.spectrum. Plant Physiol. 27:370-377.
Munsell Book of Color. 1976.
Inc., Baltimore, Md.
Munsell Color Company, Inc.
MD.
Olson, C. E., Jr. 1960.
to several sensors.
Munsell Color, Macbeth Div. of Kollmorgen
1954.
Munsell Soil Color Charts, Baltimore
Element of photographic interpretation common
Photog. Eng. 26:651-657.
Parker, Dana C. and Michael F. Wolff.
Sci. and Tech. 43:20-31.
1965.
Remote Sensing.
Inter.
Pearman, G. L, 1966. The reflection of visible radiation from leaves
of some Western Australian species. Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 19:97-103.
Roger, E. J. 1953.
interpretation.
A plan for research in the field of aerial photo
Photo. Eng. 19:801-805.
-95-
Sayn-Wittgenstein, L. 1961. Phenological aids to species identifica­
tion on air photographs. Dept, of Forest, Canada, Forest Res.
Branch, Tech. Note 104. 26 p.
Shull, C. A. 1929. A spectrophotometric study of reflection of light
from leaf surfaces. Bot. Gaz. 87:583-607.
Sinclair, T. R., M. M. Schreeber, and R. M. Hoffer. 1973. Diffusion
reflectance hypothesis for the pathways of solar radiation through
leaves. Agron. J. 65:276-283.
Sindelar, B. W., R. Atkinson, M. Majerus, K. Proctor. 1975. Surface
mined land reclamation research at Colstrip, Montana. Mont. Agr.
Exp. Sta. Res. Rep. 69. 9.8 p.
Smith, John T. (Ed). 1968. Manual of Color Aerial Photography.
Soc. of Photog. Falls Church, V A . 550 p.
Amer.
Stephens, Peter R. 1976. Comparison of color, color infrared and
panchromatic aerial photography. Photo. Eng. and Remote Sensing
42:1273-1277.
Taylor, J. E., W. C. Leininger, and R. J. Fuchs. 1975. Baseline
vegetational study near Colstrip, Montana. Proc. Ft. Union Coal
Field Symp., Mont. Acad. Sci. p. 537-551.
Tucker, C. J. 1975. Spectral estimation of grass canopy vegetational
status. Ph.D. Dissertation, Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins.
106 p.
Tucker, C. J. and E. L. Maxwell. 1976. Sensor design for monitoring
vegetation canopies. Photpg. Eng. 42:1399-1410.
U.S.D.A. Forst Service. 1971. Soils of the Ashland and Fort Howes
Ranger Districts. Custer National Forest. 171 p.
U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service. USDI Bureau of Land Management
and Montana Agr. Exp. Sta. 1971. Soil survey Powder River Area,
Montana.
U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service.
Survey (in press).
1978.
Rosebud County, MT.
Soil
Warren, W. C. 1959. Reconnaissance geology of the Birney-Brpadus
coal field. Rosebud and Powder River counties, Montana. U.S.
Geol. Surv. Bull. 1072. p. 561-585.
-96-
Weber, F. P. and C. E. Olson. 1967.
Remote sensing implication of
changes in physiological structure and function of tree seedling
under moisture stress. Scientific and Tech. Aeospace Rep.»
NASA. 67 p .
Willstatter, R., and A. Stoll. 1928. Untersuchungen uber chlorophyll,
(springe, Berlin, 1913). English translation by F„ M. Shertz and
A. R. Hertz.
Woodcock, W. E. 1976. Aerial reconnaissance and photograimnetry with
small cameras. Photog. Eng. and Remote Sensing. 42:503-511.
Woolley, J. T. 1971. Reflectance and transmittance of light by leaves.
Plant Physiol. 47:656-662.
CTATF UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES
1762 1
N3T8
An224
cop.2
Anderson. J. S.
Large scale aerial
photography of native
range transects
887 4