Differential assessment of designations of wetland status using two delineation methods

Meiyin S Wu, Dennis Kalma, Carol Treadwell-Steitz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Two different methods are commonly used to delineate and characterize wetlands. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) delineation method uses field observation of hydrology, soils, and vegetation. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's National Wetland Inventory Program (NWI) relies on remote sensing and photointerpretation. This study compared designations of wetland status at selected study sites using both methods. Twenty wetlands from the Wetland Boundaries Map of the Ausable-Boquet River Basin (created using the revised NWI method) in the Ausable River watershed in Essex and Clinton Counties, NY, were selected for this study. Sampling sites within and beyond the NWI wetland boundaries were selected. During the summers of 2008 and 2009, wetland hydrology, soils, and vegetation were examined for wetland indicators following the methods described in the ACOE delineation manual. The study shows that the two methods agree at 78 % of the sampling sites and disagree at 22 % of the sites. Ninety percent of the sampling locations within the wetland boundaries on the NWI maps were categorized as ACOE wetlands with all three ACOE wetland indicators present. A binary linear logistic regression model analyzed the relationship between the designations of the two methods. The outcome of the model indicates that 83 % of the time, the two wetland designation methods agree. When discrepancies are found, it is the presence or absence of wetland hydrology and vegetation that causes the differences in delineation.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)23-29
Number of pages7
JournalEnvironmental Management
Volume54
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jan 2014

Fingerprint

Wetlands
wetland
Hydrology
Engineers
hydrology
method
Sampling
vegetation
sampling
Photointerpretation
Rivers
Soils
Watersheds
Catchments
Fish
Logistics

Keywords

  • Army Corps of Engineers
  • NWI
  • National Wetlands Inventory
  • Wetland delineation
  • Wetlands

Cite this

Wu, Meiyin S ; Kalma, Dennis ; Treadwell-Steitz, Carol. / Differential assessment of designations of wetland status using two delineation methods. In: Environmental Management. 2014 ; Vol. 54, No. 1. pp. 23-29.
@article{28a774fb01494c20ac3e0785438c58ab,
title = "Differential assessment of designations of wetland status using two delineation methods",
abstract = "Two different methods are commonly used to delineate and characterize wetlands. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) delineation method uses field observation of hydrology, soils, and vegetation. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's National Wetland Inventory Program (NWI) relies on remote sensing and photointerpretation. This study compared designations of wetland status at selected study sites using both methods. Twenty wetlands from the Wetland Boundaries Map of the Ausable-Boquet River Basin (created using the revised NWI method) in the Ausable River watershed in Essex and Clinton Counties, NY, were selected for this study. Sampling sites within and beyond the NWI wetland boundaries were selected. During the summers of 2008 and 2009, wetland hydrology, soils, and vegetation were examined for wetland indicators following the methods described in the ACOE delineation manual. The study shows that the two methods agree at 78 {\%} of the sampling sites and disagree at 22 {\%} of the sites. Ninety percent of the sampling locations within the wetland boundaries on the NWI maps were categorized as ACOE wetlands with all three ACOE wetland indicators present. A binary linear logistic regression model analyzed the relationship between the designations of the two methods. The outcome of the model indicates that 83 {\%} of the time, the two wetland designation methods agree. When discrepancies are found, it is the presence or absence of wetland hydrology and vegetation that causes the differences in delineation.",
keywords = "Army Corps of Engineers, NWI, National Wetlands Inventory, Wetland delineation, Wetlands",
author = "Wu, {Meiyin S} and Dennis Kalma and Carol Treadwell-Steitz",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00267-014-0273-3",
language = "English",
volume = "54",
pages = "23--29",
journal = "Environmental Management",
issn = "0364-152X",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "1",

}

Differential assessment of designations of wetland status using two delineation methods. / Wu, Meiyin S; Kalma, Dennis; Treadwell-Steitz, Carol.

In: Environmental Management, Vol. 54, No. 1, 01.01.2014, p. 23-29.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Differential assessment of designations of wetland status using two delineation methods

AU - Wu, Meiyin S

AU - Kalma, Dennis

AU - Treadwell-Steitz, Carol

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - Two different methods are commonly used to delineate and characterize wetlands. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) delineation method uses field observation of hydrology, soils, and vegetation. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's National Wetland Inventory Program (NWI) relies on remote sensing and photointerpretation. This study compared designations of wetland status at selected study sites using both methods. Twenty wetlands from the Wetland Boundaries Map of the Ausable-Boquet River Basin (created using the revised NWI method) in the Ausable River watershed in Essex and Clinton Counties, NY, were selected for this study. Sampling sites within and beyond the NWI wetland boundaries were selected. During the summers of 2008 and 2009, wetland hydrology, soils, and vegetation were examined for wetland indicators following the methods described in the ACOE delineation manual. The study shows that the two methods agree at 78 % of the sampling sites and disagree at 22 % of the sites. Ninety percent of the sampling locations within the wetland boundaries on the NWI maps were categorized as ACOE wetlands with all three ACOE wetland indicators present. A binary linear logistic regression model analyzed the relationship between the designations of the two methods. The outcome of the model indicates that 83 % of the time, the two wetland designation methods agree. When discrepancies are found, it is the presence or absence of wetland hydrology and vegetation that causes the differences in delineation.

AB - Two different methods are commonly used to delineate and characterize wetlands. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) delineation method uses field observation of hydrology, soils, and vegetation. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's National Wetland Inventory Program (NWI) relies on remote sensing and photointerpretation. This study compared designations of wetland status at selected study sites using both methods. Twenty wetlands from the Wetland Boundaries Map of the Ausable-Boquet River Basin (created using the revised NWI method) in the Ausable River watershed in Essex and Clinton Counties, NY, were selected for this study. Sampling sites within and beyond the NWI wetland boundaries were selected. During the summers of 2008 and 2009, wetland hydrology, soils, and vegetation were examined for wetland indicators following the methods described in the ACOE delineation manual. The study shows that the two methods agree at 78 % of the sampling sites and disagree at 22 % of the sites. Ninety percent of the sampling locations within the wetland boundaries on the NWI maps were categorized as ACOE wetlands with all three ACOE wetland indicators present. A binary linear logistic regression model analyzed the relationship between the designations of the two methods. The outcome of the model indicates that 83 % of the time, the two wetland designation methods agree. When discrepancies are found, it is the presence or absence of wetland hydrology and vegetation that causes the differences in delineation.

KW - Army Corps of Engineers

KW - NWI

KW - National Wetlands Inventory

KW - Wetland delineation

KW - Wetlands

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84902553142&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00267-014-0273-3

DO - 10.1007/s00267-014-0273-3

M3 - Article

VL - 54

SP - 23

EP - 29

JO - Environmental Management

JF - Environmental Management

SN - 0364-152X

IS - 1

ER -