Comparison of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Platforms for Assessing Vegetation Cover in Sagebrush Steppe Ecosystems

In this study, the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) as a quick and safe method for monitoring biotic resources was evaluated. Vegetation cover and the amount of bare ground are important factors in understanding the sustainability of many ecosystems. Methods that improve speed and cost efficiency could greatly improve how biotic resources are monitored on western lands. Sagebrush steppe ecosystems provide important habitat for a variety of species including sage grouse and pygmy rabbit. Improved methods of monitoring these habitats are needed because not enough resource specialists or funds are available for comprehensive on-the-ground evaluations. In this project, two UAV platforms, fixed-wing and helicopter, were used to collect still-frame imagery to assess vegetation cover in sagebrush steppe ecosystems. This paper discusses the process for collecting and analyzing imagery from the UAVs to 1) estimate percentage of cover for six different vegetation types (shrub, dead shrub, grass, forb, litter, and bare ground) and 2) locate sage grouse using representative decoys. The field plots were located on the Idaho National Laboratory site west of Idaho Falls, Idaho, in areas with varying amounts and types of vegetation cover. A software program called SamplePoint was used along with visual inspection to evaluate percentage of cover for the six cover types. Results were compared against standard field measurements to assess accuracy. The comparison of fixed-wing and helicopter UAV technology against field estimates shows good agreement for the measurement of bare ground. This study shows that if a high degree of detail and data accuracy is desired, then a helicopter UAV may be a good platform to use. If the data collection objective is to assess broad-scale landscape level changes, then the collection of imagery with a fixed-wing system is probably more appropriate./En este estudio se evaluó el uso de vehículos aéreos no tripulados (VANT) como un método rápido y seguro para monitorear recursos bióticos. La cubierta vegetal y la cantidad de suelo desnudo son factores importantes para entender la sustentabilidad de varios ecosistemas. Métodos que mejoren la rapidez y el costo podrían mejorar la manera en que los recursos bióticos de las tierras del oeste son monitoreados. El ecosistema de estepa de artemisa provee hábitat para varias especies que incluyen al ganso sage y conejo pigmeo. Es necesario mejorar los métodos de monitoreo de estos hábitat porque no hay suficientes especialistas en recursos o fondos disponibles para evaluaciones completas en el terreno. En este proyecto, se utilizaron dos plataformas de VANT, alas fijas y helicóptero para recolectar imágenes fotográficas para evaluar la cubierta vegetal en un ecosistema de estepa de artemisa. En este artículo se discute el proceso de recolección y análisis de imágenes de un VANT para 1) estimar el porcentaje de cubierta de seis diferentes tipos de vegetación (matorral, matorral seco, zacate, hierbas, mantillo y suelo desnudo) y 2) ubicar gansos sage usando señuelos. Las parcelas experimentales se ubicaron en el Laboratorio Nacional de Idaho sitio localizado en Idaho Falls, Idaho en áreas con diferentes cantidades y tipos de cubierta vegetal. Se uso el programa de software SamplePoint junto con inspecciones oculares para evaluar el porcentaje de cubierta de seis tipos de cubiertas. Los resultados se compararon contra medidas de campo estándar para evaluar su precisión. La comparación de la tecnología de helicóptero VANT y alas fijas contra estimaciones de campo muestra buena relación para las medidas de suelo desnudo. El estudio muestra que sí se requiere alto grado de detalle y precisión en los datos el helicóptero VANT podría ser una buena plataforma para usarse. Pero sí el objetivo de recopilación de datos, es evaluar a gran escala los niveles de cambio en el paisaje entonces, la recopilación de imágenes con el sistema de alas fijas es probablemente más apropiado.The Rangeland Ecology & Management archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact [email protected] for further information.Migrated from OJS platform August 202

Origin, Persistence, and Resolution of the Rotational Grazing Debate: Integrating Human Dimensions Into Rangeland Research

The debate regarding the benefits of rotational grazing has eluded resolution within the US rangeland profession for more than 60 yr. This forum examines the origin of the debate and the major reasons for its persistence in an attempt to identify common ground for resolution, and to search for meaningful lessons from this central chapter in the history of the US rangeland profession. Rotational grazing was a component of the institutional and scientific response to severe rangeland degradation at the turn of the 20th century, and it has since become the professional norm for grazing management. Managers have found that rotational grazing systems can work for diverse management purposes, but scientific experiments have demonstrated that they do not necessarily work for specific ecological purposes. These interpretations appear contradictory, but we contend that they can be reconciled by evaluation within the context of complex adaptive systems in which human variables such as goal setting, experiential knowledge, and decision making are given equal importance to biophysical variables. The scientific evidence refuting the ecological benefits of rotational grazing is robust, but also narrowly focused, because it derives from experiments that intentionally excluded these human variables. Consequently, the profession has attempted to answer a broad, complex question—whether or not managers should adopt rotational grazing—with necessarily narrow experimental research focused exclusively on ecological processes. The rotational grazing debate persists because the rangeland profession has not yet developed a management and research framework capable of incorporating both the social and biophysical components of complex adaptive systems. We recommend moving beyond the debate over whether or not rotational grazing works by focusing on adaptive management and the integration of experiential and experimental, as well as social and biophysical, knowledge to provide a more comprehensive framework for the management of rangeland systems.The Rangeland Ecology & Management archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact [email protected] for further information.Migrated from OJS platform August 202