Review of Remote Sensing Applications for Natural Resource ... · Review of Remote Sensing Applications for Natural Resource Management © ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA PTY LTD iv 3.8 Regional

Re v i e w of R em o t e S e n s i n g A p pl i c a t i o n s f or N a t ur a l R es o ur c e M a n a ge m e n t

© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D i

Review of Remote Sensing Applications for Natural Resource Management

Prepared for

Queensland Department of Science, Information Technology and the Arts and Department of Natural Resources and Mines

19 December 2014


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D ii

DOCUMENT TRACKING

Item Detail

Project Name Review of Remote Sensing Applications for natural Resource Management

Project Number 14ARMNRM-0003

Project Manager

Bruce Wilson

Phone 07 3503 7193

Office address Suite 1, level 3, 471 Adelaide Street Brisbane QLD 4000

Prepared by Bruce Wilson, Steve Jarman, Paul Frazier

Reviewed by Robert Mezzatesta

Approved by Dr Ailsa Kerswell

Status FINAL

Version Number 1

Last saved on 19 December 2014

Cover photo USGS/NASA Landsat 5 image (16/2/2010, showing Cooper Creek, southwest

Queensland in flood

This report should be cited as ‘Eco Logical Australia 2014. Review of Remote Sensing Applications for natural Resource Management. Prepared for the Queensland Department of Science, Innovation, Information Technology and the Arts and the Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines’

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This document has been prepared by Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd.

Disclaimer

This document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the contract between

Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd and Queensland Department of Science, Innovation, Information Technology and the Arts. The

scope of services was defined in consultation with the Queensland Department of Science, Innovation, Information

Technology and the Arts and the Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines by time and budgetary constraints

imposed by the client, and the availability of reports and other data on the subject area. Changes to available information,

legislation and schedules are made on an ongoing basis and readers should obtain up to date information.

Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon

this report and its supporting material by any third party. Information provided is not intended to be a substitute for site

specific assessment or legal advice in relation to any matter. Unauthorised use of this report in any form is prohibited.

Template 08/05/2014


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D iii

Contents

Key Findings and Recommendations ................................................................................................... x

1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1

Scope ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1

Current RSC program .................................................................................................................. 2 1.2

Infrastructure and other enabling functions .................................................................................. 2 1.2.1

Datasets ....................................................................................................................................... 2 1.2.2

Derived products .......................................................................................................................... 4 1.2.3

Applications .................................................................................................................................. 4 1.2.4

2 Methods ....................................................................................................................................... 5

User needs ................................................................................................................................... 5 2.1

Identification of users ................................................................................................................... 5 2.1.1

User interviews ............................................................................................................................. 5 2.1.2

Review of current arrangements .................................................................................................. 5 2.2

Evaluation of opportunities ........................................................................................................... 6 2.3

3 User needs .................................................................................................................................. 7

DNRM ........................................................................................................................................... 8 3.1

Compliance .................................................................................................................................. 8 3.1.1

Operations .................................................................................................................................... 8 3.1.2

Policy ............................................................................................................................................ 9 3.1.3

Mining ......................................................................................................................................... 10 3.1.4

Water .......................................................................................................................................... 10 3.1.5

Salinity ........................................................................................................................................ 10 3.1.6

Additional issues ........................................................................................................................ 11 3.1.7

DAFF .......................................................................................................................................... 11 3.2

Grazing management ................................................................................................................. 11 3.2.1

Assessment of agricultural lands ............................................................................................... 12 3.2.2

DPC/DNRM/DEHP - Reef Plan .................................................................................................. 12 3.3

DEHP.......................................................................................................................................... 13 3.4

Petroleum & Gas ........................................................................................................................ 13 3.4.1

Coastal management ................................................................................................................. 14 3.4.2

State of the Environment ............................................................................................................ 14 3.4.3

Biodiversity ................................................................................................................................. 14 3.4.4

DSDIP......................................................................................................................................... 15 3.5

NPRSR - fire management......................................................................................................... 15 3.6

PSBA .......................................................................................................................................... 15 3.7


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D iv

Regional NRM Bodies ................................................................................................................ 16 3.8

4 Assessment of RSC products against user needs ............................................................... 18

Existing operational products ..................................................................................................... 18 4.1

Unexplained clearing assessment ............................................................................................. 18 4.1.1

Compliance support ................................................................................................................... 18 4.1.2

Reporting on clearing ................................................................................................................. 18 4.1.3

Woody extent and change.......................................................................................................... 26 4.1.4

Ground cover .............................................................................................................................. 27 4.1.5

Land use ..................................................................................................................................... 28 4.1.6

Fire scars .................................................................................................................................... 29 4.1.7

CSG compliance ........................................................................................................................ 30 4.1.8

Natural disasters ........................................................................................................................ 32 4.1.9

Weeds mapping ......................................................................................................................... 32 4.1.10

Products requiring further development ..................................................................................... 33 4.2

Hydrology ................................................................................................................................... 33 4.2.1

Lidar ............................................................................................................................................ 34 4.2.2

Real time, high resolution monitoring ......................................................................................... 36 4.2.3

4.2.3.1 UAVs ............................................................................................................................................. 37

5 Trade-offs in product delivery ................................................................................................ 38

Woody extent change data......................................................................................................... 38 5.1

Previous process ........................................................................................................................ 38 5.1.1

Updated process ........................................................................................................................ 39 5.1.2

Further refinement ...................................................................................................................... 39 5.1.3

6 Value for money ....................................................................................................................... 41

Contestability .............................................................................................................................. 41 6.1

7 Synergies between departments ............................................................................................ 44

8 Business continuity ................................................................................................................. 47

HPC continuity options ............................................................................................................... 47 8.1

Landsat platform ......................................................................................................................... 49 8.2

9 Current and future product communication.......................................................................... 50

Web delivery of applications/visualisation tools ......................................................................... 50 9.1

Current tools ............................................................................................................................... 50 9.1.1

Further developments ................................................................................................................ 50 9.1.2

9.1.2.1 Web version of VegMachine ................................................................................................... 50 9.1.2.2 AusCover visualisation tools ..................................................................................................... 50

Statistics reporting ...................................................................................................................... 51 9.1.3

Data delivery .............................................................................................................................. 55 9.1.4


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D v

10 Research and Development resourcing ................................................................................ 58

Budgets and outputs .................................................................................................................. 58 10.1

The Joint Remote Sensing Research Program (JRSRP) .......................................................... 59 10.2

11 Future research, programs and products .............................................................................. 61

12 Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 64

1. Unexplained clearing assessment ............................................................................................. 64

2. Compliance support ................................................................................................................... 64

3. Reporting .................................................................................................................................... 64

4. Woody extent and change in extent datasets ............................................................................ 64

5. Ground cover .............................................................................................................................. 64

6. Land use ..................................................................................................................................... 64

7. Fire scars .................................................................................................................................... 65

8. Lidar ............................................................................................................................................ 65

9. Hydrology ................................................................................................................................... 65

10. Funding of the RSC program ..................................................................................................... 65

11. Business continuity ..................................................................................................................... 65

12. Web delivery of data and applications ....................................................................................... 65

13. Research and Development ....................................................................................................... 65

13 References ................................................................................................................................ 66

Appendix A User Needs Questionnaire .............................................................................................. 71

Appendix B List of Interviewees .......................................................................................................... 72

Appendix C List of Non-respondents ................................................................................................. 74

Appendix D RSC Product List.............................................................................................................. 75

Appendix E New and Developing Technologies ................................................................................ 84


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D vi

List of figures

Figure 1 RSC products arranged into program hierarchy ....................................................................... 3

Figure 2: Numbers of users interviewed by group .................................................................................. 7

Figure 3 Policy and planning instruments associated with RSC products ............................................ 26

Figure 4: Comparison of imagery used for CSG Infrastructure mapping ............................................. 31

Figure 5: Lidar assessment of flood damage on the Lockyer Creek .................................................... 32

Figure 6: Standard Lidar products ........................................................................................................ 35

Figure 7: Extent of Airborne Lidar coverage stored by RSC ................................................................. 35

Figure 8: Pléiades satellite imagery after oil spill on left and after clean up on right. ........................... 36

Figure 9: Riegl RiCOPTER (from Riegl 2014a) .................................................................................... 37

Figure 10: Comparison of the previous and updated SLATS product delivery process ....................... 40

Figure 11: RSC program funding arrangements ................................................................................... 46

Figure 12: AusCover product download, visualisation portal ................................................................ 52

Figure 13: AusCover portal visualisation tool - seasonal fractional cover ............................................ 53

Figure 14 The chopper tool ................................................................................................................... 53

Figure 15: Example of data visualisation available on the AussieGRASS web site ............................. 54

Figure 16: Wetland extent summary tool .............................................................................................. 54

Figure 17: WorldView-3 imagery ........................................................................................................... 85

Figure 18: The A-Train .......................................................................................................................... 86

Figure 19 3D LiDAR vegetation height data from the Riegl RiCOPTER for a corridor study (from Riegl,

2014b) ................................................................................................................................................... 91

Figure 21: the BRAMOR rTK and launch system ................................................................................. 92


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D vii

List of tables

Table 1: Summary of RSC products, identified needs and limitations .................................................. 19

Table 2: RSC products with a potential delivery market ....................................................................... 43

Table 3 Summary of major RSC datasets by department use ............................................................. 45

Table 4 Indicative annual funding of the RSC program ........................................................................ 45

Table 5: Downloads for some RSC datasets for 2013 from QGIS web site. ........................................ 55

Table 6: Proportion of R&D budget for some private companies ......................................................... 59

Table 7: List of future R&D projects ...................................................................................................... 61

Table 8: A –Train Satellites (from NASA 2014) .................................................................................... 86

Table 9: Example UAV Applications ..................................................................................................... 89


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D viii

Abbreviations

Abbreviation Description

BPA Biodiversity Planning Assessments

CASA Civil Aviation Safety Authority

DAFF Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

DEHP Department of Environment and Heritage Protection

DEWS Department of Energy and Water Supply

DNRM Department Natural Resources and Mines

DSDIP Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning

DSITIA Department of Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts

eLVAS electronic Land and Vegetation Administration System (a DNRM database)

FPC Foliage Projective Cover

GDE Groundwater Dependent Ecosystem

GIS Geographic Information System

MDB Murray Darling Basin

MSES Matters of State Environmental Significance

NAFI North Australian Fire Information

NPRSR National Parks, Recreation, Sport and Racing

NRM Natural Resource Management (as in the non-government Regional NRM bodies)

PAA Protected Agricultural Areas

PALU Protected Agricultural Land Uses

PMAV Property Maps of Assessable Vegetation

PSBA Public Safety Business Agency

QFES Queensland Fire and Emergency Services

QGIS Queensland Government Information Service

QLUMP Queensland Land Use Mapping Program

RPI Act Regional Planning Interest Act 2014

RSC Remote Sensing Centre

SCA Strategic Cropping Areas

SCL Strategic Cropping Lands

SEA Strategic Environmental Areas

SLAM State Land Assets Management

SLATS State Landcover and Tree Study

http://dds.information.qld.gov.au/dds/


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D ix

VMA Vegetation Management Act 1999


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D x

Key Findings and Recommendations

The Remote Sensing Centre (RSC) produces a wide range of products which are extensively used

across the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM) and other Queensland Government

Departments particularly the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP), the

Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) and the Department of State Development,

Infrastructure and Planning (DSDIP). Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd (ELA) was engaged to conduct a

user needs analysis followed by a review of the current RSC deliverables and their fitness for purpose

for DNRM policy, planning, operational and legislative compliance needs.

User needs and RSC products

The major RSC products, an assessment of their fitness for purpose and recommendations for their

future production include:

Unexplained clearing assessment

The unexplained clearing assessment produced by the RSC provides DNRM with the means to

prioritise areas for subsequent compliance investigations.

Recent modifications to the process used to produce this assessment by the RSC has enabled an

interim product to be delivered 1 month after the last image is captured for the reporting period. This

revised process has addressed many of the previous limitations in relation to timing to meet DNRM

compliance needs.

Recommendations for future developments include quantification of the differences between the

interim and final woody data sets so users can assess any systematic differences and investigating

processes that can prioritise specific areas or issues (nominated by DNRM) for finalisation of data to

enable more real-time monitoring for auditing self-assessable codes under the Vegetation

Management Act 1999.

Compliance support

The RSC provides technical support for DNRM for more detailed compliance cases including

prosecutions under relevant legislation.

It is recommended that this service should be reviewed within the context that overall demand in

relation to vegetation matters has reduced in recent years, although the size of individual cases may

have increased and the service could be extended to other matters such as water.

Reporting on tree clearing

In the past two tree-clearing reports have been produced each year: a SLATS report which provides

information on total woody clearing broken down by region, local government, catchment etc. and a

SLATS supplementary report, which breaks the total area cleared down by type of clearing – thinning,

fodder harvesting etc. The information in the SLATS report and the SLATS supplementary report is

used across the Queensland Government and is accepted as the point of truth for tree clearing data

with a high acceptance by non-government stakeholders. These reports are not currently widely used

by the DNRM users interviewed, although the Land and Mines Policy Section indicated that the

supplementary report was still required for monitoring policy implementation.

It is recommended that the RSC should produce a clearing report with the area cleared broken down

by clearing type (fodder, thinning etc.) to provide fuller context for the tree clearing figures.


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D xi

The current pdf type report should be replaced with an online web-based reporting tool, possibly in

partnership with the State of the Environment reporting, that provides users with statistics for their

area of interest.

Woody extent and change in extent datasets

These datasets and derived products are used for a range of auditing, monitoring and assessment

activities within DNRM, Reef Plan reporting and implementation, biodiversity assessments by DEHP,

inputs into grazing management tools by DAFF and a range of applications by regional Natural

Resource Management (NRM) bodies.

The derivation of these data from the freely available US Landsat imagery from the US Geological

Survey provides a highly cost effective product that has a high acceptance from users. The scale of

resolution of these data is seen as a limitation by users for property level assessments, although

users showed a high level of awareness of the fit for purpose applications and need to incorporate

other higher resolution data when required.

The continued production of this dataset is essential to meet a range of whole of government needs,

although further improvements in automation and timeliness would increase its utility for DNRM

purposes.

Ground cover

The ground cover dataset provides essential inputs into a range of applications particularly for

reporting on the catchment loads and ground cover target in the Reef Plan and grazing management

applications for Reef Plan implementation and grazing/drought management applications used by

DAFF and the grazing industry

It is recommended that this dataset continue to evolve and improve to meet the current a future needs

identified in this report.

Land use

The land use data provide input into a range of applications and used by a wide range of Queensland

Government agencies. Major uses include incorporation into agricultural land use planning and trigger

maps and assessments under the Regional Planning Interest Act 2014 (RPI Act) by DNRM, DAFF

and DSDIP and Reef Plan reporting and implementation. These data are delivered by the RSC in

partnership with DNRM regional staff.

A main limitation of the land use data raised by users is the ad hoc nature of updates to the mapping

which is associated with the ad hoc nature of funding such as reef catchment science in combination

with a range of other short term funding sources. It is recommended that more frequent and/or

consistent updates are produced, particular in areas where land use changes more frequently, with a

forward schedule so users can see when areas will be updated.

Fire scars

The RSC fire scar mapping is used for assessment of fire hazard and risk by the Public Safety

Business Agency (PSBA) and as a potentially useful product by a range of other users. This is a

relatively new product that requires a greater level understanding about how it is best used. It is

recommended that RSC engages with users to clarify the role of the RSC fire scar mapping in relation

to other products available and its application in specific situations.


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D xii

Lidar

Lidar imagery can provide high resolution, three-dimensional information that can be used to meet a

wide range of vegetation and land surface data needs across DNRM (in relation to vegetation and

mining) and other agencies. Currently Lidar data are not very cost effective as they are expensive and

the existing coverage from airborne platforms is confined to small areas. However, Lidar data

coverage is becoming more widespread with potentially more cost effective delivery options (e.g. from

space) becoming available in the near future.

It is recommended that the RSC continue to capture all Queensland Government available Lidar data

onto the RSC computer system; develop standard products that can be used for vegetation and; land

assessments and make these products discoverable and accessible to users.

Hydrology

A wide range of remote sensing needs were identified in relation to management of surface water and

ground water by DNRM, and in relation to coal seam gas project compliance in DEHP and DNRM.

While some of these needs can be addressed by some current water related RSC products, many of

these needs require new products to be developed with appropriate resource allocation.

Value for money and synergies between Departments

The RSC program and long term monitoring datasets enable the production of applications and

products that provide defensible science and spatial data that are used to underpin a range of

Queensland initiatives across a range of agencies. The extensive use of the freely available Landsat

imagery for many of the RSC datasets enables the production of cost effective data compared to

other options available in the market.

In particular the core landscape monitoring data sets (woody vegetation, ground cover and land use)

and the underpinning enabling functions (image archive processing and High Performance Computing

(HPC) including the multi-petabyte scale data storage) service a wide range of interconnected uses

and users and it is difficult to allocate a proportion of their use to a specific department.

Therefore it is recommended that the $1.9 million annual funding for the enabling functions (image

archive and processing systems) should be shared across the whole of government. The $1.7 million

annual funding for the key landscape monitoring programs (woody vegetation, ground cover and land

use) should be proportioned across agencies by relative use, although this should be negotiated on a

multilateral/whole of government basis, in recognition that these services underpin a wide range of

interconnected uses and uses.

The funding and delivery of specific products for specific uses (currently $1.3 per annum) should

continue to be negotiated on a bilateral basis.

Business continuity

Many of the RSC products rely on the ongoing functioning of the HPC and associated satellite image

archive and the ongoing free supply of the Landsat imagery. It is recommended that the RSC review

the current situation to develop a medium to long term strategy to ensure their needs are met into the

future.

Product communication

A range of RSC products can currently be viewed and interpreted on a number of web based

applications and visualisation tools. It is recommended RSC, in partnership with users, further


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D xiii

develop web based applications and associated data visualisation tools to make RSC products more

accessible to users.

Research and Development

The current level of investment in R&D by the RSC represents the minimum required to ensure that

there is continued improvement in product quality and cost effectiveness while also developing new

products to meet emerging user needs. It is recommended that this level of R&D be continually

monitored and assessed against the criteria of ensuring that new and innovative products that meet

user needs continue to be produced in the medium to long term.

A list of potential priority R&D projects is provided. This list includes many areas highlighted in the

user needs assessment and includes ongoing continuous improvements of existing products as well

as the development of new products.


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 1

1 Introduction

The Remote Sensing Centre (RSC) within the Science Division of the Queensland Department of

Science, Innovation, Information Technology and the Arts (DSITIA) has been undertaking applied

remote sensing to research and monitor the State’s woody vegetation extent and woody clearing

since the mid-1990s.

The RSC also derives land use, ground cover and fire scar mapping and a range of other products

including cropping frequency, riparian vegetation extent, weed prevalence, water bodies and flood

extent, tropical cyclone damage, wildlife habitat, and landscape erosion features.

The RSC uses DSITIA’s High Performance Computing systems to support the storage and serving of

the extensive satellite image archive which is used to support the delivery of the range of datasets

and products. The archive includes satellite imagery, aerial imaging and photography, airborne Lidar

and terrestrial laser scanning.

The products delivered by RSC are funded by a mixture of DSITIA and other Department or external

sources. In the past, a substantial proportion of RSC funding was from direct “treasury special”

sources. Currently, the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM) approves funding each

year to the RSC to run the satellite image archive, the woody vegetation extent and change

monitoring and compliance support services.

Scope 1.1

Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd (ELA) was engaged to undertake a formal review of the needs for

remote sensing science by DNRM and other users across government. The scope items, and the

section of this report where they addressed, are:

1. Determine the need for remote sensing in DNRM’s natural resources and mining portfolios via

user needs analysis (section 3).

2. Review the current deliverables of the RSC science and projects and their fitness for purpose for

DNRM policy, planning, operational and legislative compliance needs (section 4).

3. Evaluate any trade-offs with changes in timeliness, scientific rigour, image resolution, quality, and

error levels against business outcomes and cost effectiveness (section 5).

4. Review the value for money of the current arrangements (section 6).

5. Evaluate synergies and potential for resource sharing where products are also useful for other

Queensland government departments (section 7).

6. Assess business continuity and security of product supply (section 8).

7. Advise on current and future product communication, web, internet and cloud delivery options,

including data visualisation and advanced server protocols (section 9).

8. Advise on the optimum proportion of resources addressing long-term core remote sensing

science capability in the RSC vis-à-vis value-added specific application products built on the

foundation capability (section 10).

9. Recommend future remote sensing research, programs and products that address DNRM needs, including funding requirements (section 11).



Current RSC program 1.2

A comprehensive list of over 70 datasets and products produced by the RSC are included in D.

These products range from raw and corrected imagery and associated field calibration data, to long

term landscape monitoring datasets and derived statistics and maps. However, many users

identify/access RSC products at a broader level and often use RSC products through applications

developed and delivered by third parties. Therefore the detailed RSC products are summarised into

groupings under the following broad headings:

Enabling functions - raw and corrected image archive, Research and Development, HPC

processing.

Datasets - state-wide long term monitoring and specific features/issues (over 25 individual

datasets).

Derived products - for specific users and applications (over 25 individual products).

Applications - usually developed by third parties for specific uses.

At this broader level the different datasets and products can be arranged into a logical hierarchy

forming an overall RSC program (Figure 1) with enabling functions and infrastructure underpinning

the monitoring datasets which support more specific user defined products which in turn support

applications and ultimately their use. The different products and the relationships between them are

briefly summarised below.

Infrastructure and other enabling functions 1.2.1

This is made up of the functions and infrastructure that underpin the datasets, products and

applications accessed by users. They include:

Image archive and HPC

This includes image correction science, storage architecture, cloud and cloud shadow removal,

workflow and associated software to process state-wide time series; and the HPC with “near-line”

multi-petabyte data storage capacity, an AARNet portal, and field calibration data.

The HPC infrastructure is critical to the ongoing RSC business continuity and is addressed in more

detail in section 8 of this report.

Research and Development (R&D).

Ongoing R&D activities are embedded within the operational activities of the RSC. These activities

ensure the ongoing development and evolution of existing products to allow for their continual

improvement over time as well as for the development of new products.

The proportion of R&D work carried out by the RSC is addressed in more detail under section 10 of

this report.

Datasets 1.2.2

The datasets can be divided into long term state-wide landscape monitoring datasets, which underpin

a wide range of products and applications, and other datasets that address specific areas and / or

issues.



Figure 1 RSC products arranged into program hierarchy

Landscape monitoring datasets

Woody vegetation - The woody extent and the change in extent datasets are produced by the

SLATS project originally to assess tree clearing and are referred to by some users as the

SLATS or tree clearing data. The derived data include woody vegetation cover (FPC) as well

biomass and other related attributes. These datasets are derived mainly from the Landsat

image archive although, where available, Lidar and radar products can provide more detailed

data on structure and biomass.

Ground cover – This dataset is derived from Landsat imagery using automated algorithms

that have been calibrated with field data. The current ground cover data are generated from

the total vegetation cover measured by the fractional cover dataset but only for areas where

the woody FPC cover is less than 15%. A new product showing ground cover “under trees”,

which includes areas where woody cover is greater than 15%, has recently been developed

(Scarth et al. 2014). This product is likely to replace the current dataset in the near future.

Land use - The Queensland Land Use Mapping Programme (QLUMP) produces land use

mapping according to the national Australian Collaborative Land Use Mapping Program

(ACLUMP) method and standards (Australian Government 2014). The QLUMP mapping is

compiled by RSC scientists in partnership with regional DNRM staff who provide significant

local knowledge and field checking. The land use mapping is generally derived from SPOT

imagery or higher resolution aerial photography if available.

Crop frequency mapping – Showing the frequency areas are cropped. Currently only

available for selected areas but is been expanded to cover all cropping areas in the state.



Fire scar mapping – This provides historical (from 1986) and current information about extent

and timing of fires. Fire scars are automatically detected and mapped using the dense time

series from the Landsat imagery archive.

Water body mapping – showing the extent of water bodies across the Landsat time series.

Persistent green – is a dataset that is under development that estimates the proportion of

green or photosynthetic vegetation cover that does not vary greatly in the amount of green

cover from season to season, which in most areas of Queensland, Persistent Green is likely

to represent woody vegetation.

Persistent green trend - indicate changes in thickness and extent of woody vegetation

including the recovery of healthier tree crowns (e.g. after drought).

Specific area / issues datasets

There are a range of datasets that have been produced for individual users or user groups with

specific needs. Specific area / issue data includes:

Coal seam gas (CSG) well infrastructure derived from Rapid Eye and other imagery.

Stream bank condition derived from Lidar for flood impact assessment in South East

Queensland (SEQ).

Various weed mapping datasets.

Habitat mapping (such as SEQ koala habitat).

Gully mapping in the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) catchments.

Derived products 1.2.3

A range of derived and special purpose products are produced by the RSC, including:

GBR catchment riparian woody extent and ground cover mapping for reporting under the

Reef Plan.

SLATS annual report detailing areas cleared broken down by attributes including local

government area and region.

Woody extent and ground cover mapping and statistics for input into various applications and

uses.

Unexplained clearing assessment that flags areas of clearing that are not associated with

approvals, for subsequent investigation by DNRM.

Annual composites of all fire scars mapped across the state in a calendar year, data on the

number of times an area has been burnt and the time since the last burn.

Water body mapping, including farm dams.

Estimates of carbon biomass derived from field calibration.

Land use summary regional reports and maps.

Applications 1.2.4

There are a range of higher order applications, often produced by third parties, serve up the RSC data

as tailored, interpreted products for specific uses/users. Some of these applications include:

FORAGE online reporting tool developed by DSITIA. This tool uses the RSC ground cover

and woody products for use in grazing lands assessment and monitoring in extension

activities and by individual land managers.

VegMachine developed by DAFF and CSIRO. This tool uses the RSC ground cover woody

cover and imagery products to report on the relative ground cover in user specified areas.



AussieGRASS is a tool that was developed in the 1990s to assist in the management of

pasture. It uses simulation modelling to synthesise multiple data sources about land cover,

climate and management to provide products which are surrogates for land condition and

agricultural productivity measures. AussieGRASS is a fundamental RSC program although it

is treated as an application here because it packages other RSC products with a range of

other data into a decision support tool for users.

NRM Spatial Hub is a tool being developed by a coalition of NRM organisations and will use

the RSC ground and woody vegetation data to generate information for use by land

managers.

2 Methods

User needs 2.1

Identification of users 2.1.1

The main source of information for this report was a series of interviews with users and staff from

DNRM, DEHP, DAFF, RSC and other organisations as well as published and unpublished documents

provided by the RSC. The participants interviewed were identified by DNRM and RSC.

User interviews 2.1.2

A questionnaire was developed to guide the interviews (Appendix A). In some cases interviewees

completed the questionnaire. However, in most cases the form was used as a guide for an open

ended discussion with respondents. The questionnaire focused on specific remote sensing uses and

requirements, including:

Existing uses of RSC products and exactly how and what they were used for

Gaps in user needs (i.e. potential uses of remote sensing information that are not currently

supported or available)

The user’s current understandings of what RSC products and information are available

Other key issues associated with the use of RSC products.

Interviews were conducted in October 2014, either in person or by phone and usually with 1-3 people

at a time.

Review of current arrangements 2.2

A review of the current deliverables provided by DSITIA’s RSC was carried out to assess their fitness

for purpose for DNRM policy, planning, operational and legislative needs. The review assessed

DNRM’s compliance requirements and the associated RSC products that are currently being utilised

to support these requirements. This assessment identified where there may be potential shortfalls or

efficiency gains in regard to the current deliverables and programs.

The review formed the basis of a tabularised report that assessed:

Product fitness for purpose (compliance suitability).

Product flexibility (multi-purpose use and value add for resource sharing with other Queensland

government agencies).

Product reliability (lifespan and future supply).



Evaluation of opportunit ies 2.3

Using the outcomes of the user needs and current deliverables review, an evaluation of potential

opportunities for remote sensing information, programs and products was carried out in the context of

Queensland government needs / operational requirements.

The evaluation included an exploration of current and emerging technologies for resource sharing,

internal and external communication and product delivery options and options for information

visualisation and analysis.



3 User needs

A total of 59 data users were interviewed. The users interviewed were mainly from DNRM, DEHP and

DAFF (Figure 2) but also from Public Safety Business Agency (PSBA), Department of State

Development, Infrastructure and Planning (DSDIP) and National Parks, Recreation, Sport and Racing

(NPRSR). They covered a wide range of activities and responsibilities including compliance,

vegetation management operations, policy, monitoring and auditing of State Land Assets

Management (SLAM), mining, ground water, petroleum and gas compliance, biodiversity, Great

Barrier Reef Water Quality, fire management, primary industries and regional natural resource

management. A list of individuals interviewed, their affiliation and allocated grouping is provided in

Appendix B

In addition to the above users, 4 people from DNRM – Land and Spatial Information were interviewed

to gain context into the coordination of their activities with the RSC. Another 12 people from the RMC

and one person from University of Queensland were interviewed to gain insights into how RSC

products were developed and delivered, as well as their use in Research and Development activities.

Figure 2: Numbers of users interviewed by group

6

3

1 1

3

8

4

7

12

2

1

2

4

1

12

1

3

1

3

1

0

5

10

15

DA

FF

DEH

P - b

iod

iversity

DEH

P - co

astal

DEH

P - p

etrole

um

& gas

DEH

P - SO

E

DN

RM

- com

plian

ce

DN

RM

- land

& sp

atial

DN

RM

- min

ing

DN

RM

- op

eratio

ns

DN

RM

- po

licy

DN

RM

- salinity

DN

RM

- wate

r

DP

C/D

NR

M/EH

P - re

ef plan

DSIP

DSITIA

- RSC

DSITIA

- soils

NP

RSR

- fire m

anage

me

nt

PSB

A

Re

gion

al bo

die

s

UQ

- research



Some users recommended by RSC/DNRM could not be interviewed (Appendix C). In most cases

these people put forward substitutes or their content area was covered by other interviewees. All areas

identified in the original list were therefore covered by at least one person interviewed.

There was a wide range of needs identified in the interviews. Many needs related to the existing uses of

current RSC products while some needs require the development of new products. The following

provides a brief summary of major needs of each of the groups interviewed. This is followed by a more

detailed assessment of the RSC products in relation to the identified needs in section 4.

DNRM 3.1

Compliance 3.1.1

The DNRM compliance activity requires an annual prioritisation of areas of “unexplained clearing” to

create compliance cases for subsequent investigation. Unexplained clearing is clearing that is not

associated with permits, self-assessable code notifications or exempt categories of clearing such as fire

break and fencing. These areas need to be assessed as they may include areas of illegal clearing. As

there are generally many more areas of unexplained clearing than can be addressed by current

resources, an overview of all the unexplained clearing across the state or a region is required to enable

the allocation of priorities for investigations. Generally, the largest areas receive higher priority, although

other factors such as a greater occurrence of unexplained clearing in a local region could be

considered.

Once the priority list has been allocated, investigation of individual cases occurs. This requires an initial

desktop assessment to verify the nature of vegetation particularly in terms of remnant/non-remnant

status, structure (height and cover) and vegetation type. This includes an assessment of if and when

the current clearing occurred as well as an assessment of historical clearing at the site to help

determine the remnant status of the current vegetation. The remote sensing needs of the desktop

assessment include the collation of the RSC woody extent and change in extent layers along with

current and historical Landsat and any other available current or historical imagery. Some of these

cases are investigated in more detail including on ground verification.

For compliance investigations, ready access to imagery that shows an area immediately before and

after a clearing event is often required. There is also sometimes a need for “near real time” imagery for

where land access is difficult and/or suspected illegal clearing is occurring. This is to prove clearing is

occurring but also to allow early intervention rather than trying to use a regulatory approach after the

clearing event has occurred. Users are aware such imagery can be purchased in specific situations

although resources are generally only available for specific cases. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs)

are also suggested as a possible solution to this need, although there was a low level of knowledge

about the legal and logistical aspects of this solution (see section 0).

Particular investigations and/or prosecutions require detailed technical support from the RSC. This can

involve the use of high resolution imagery, preparation of maps and statistics for court hearings and

providing expert witness evidence. The number of prosecutions requiring RSC support has decreased

over the last 3 years. Although the time spent by RSC staff on each individual case has increased

during this time it appeared overall demand for this service to DNRM for vegetation compliance matters

has decreased.

Operations 3.1.2

Some assessments previously carried out by DNRM staff are no longer required or have been replaced

by self-assessable codes. However, DNRM operations staff outlined a range of monitoring, auditing and



assessment verification activities which required remote sensing information about vegetation extent,

change in extent and type and land use. These activities included:

Verification of Property Maps of Assessable Vegetation (PMAV) applications, auditing of self-

assessable codes and detailed compliance investigations under the Vegetation Management

Act 1999 (VMA 1999).

Verification of clearing/development applications including Material Change of Use, and

Reconfigurations of Lots under the VMA 1999 and other legislation.

State Land Asset Management (SLAM which includes stock route management).

Assessment of strategic cropping areas/lands applications under the RPI Act to provide advice

to DSDIP.

A range of site specific assessments including pre-lodgement advice for clients and to the

Department.

Ad hoc advice relating to matters such as stock route condition, self-assessable codes and land

tenure conversions.

In many cases these assessments included a similar desktop assessment to that outlined in the

compliance investigations above. Additional needs include information on ground cover and condition,

land use mapping and fire history mapping.

Policy 3.1.3

DNRM Land and Mines policy identified the need to report on SLATS tree clearing change to monitor

the impacts of changes in Vegetation Management Policy. This is still required annually, although rather

than the full SLATS report, it is considered that the SLATS supplementary report is more useful for

policy needs. In the past this report has been compiled by the Vegetation Management Policy Group.

An example of the needs in this area is evident in a recent request to report on the total area cleared

under thinning self-assessable codes, which could only be replied to with gross area figures derived

from referrals. The SLATS data, if available at the time of the request, could be used to provide net

figures and a more realistic assessment of actual thinning carried out compared to the gross area from

the referrals.

The woody vegetation layer from RSC is used to define Category R (riparian areas in the Great Barrier

Reef catchments) and Category C (high value regrowth on leasehold lands) area certified under the

VMA 1999. The wetland mapping produced by the Queensland Herbarium, which uses the RSC water

body mapping as an input, is also certified under the VMA 1999. The regional ecosystem mapping from

the Queensland Herbarium, which also uses RSC SLATS products as an input, is a support map under

the VMA 1999. However, there are no plans to update these maps in the immediate future and currently

they are only updated by the PMAV process.

The land use mapping produced by the RSC is used to develop the Strategic Cropping Lands map by

DNRM. This SCL mapping is provided to DSDIP for incorporation into the Strategic Cropping Area

trigger map under the RPI Act (section 3.5).

Other potential remote sensing needs in the policy area included:

The derivation of changes in vegetation cover (thickening vs. thinning) from the persistent green

trend product to provide context for self-assessable thinning codes.

Ground cover for land condition assessments for future policy development around soil

conservation and land condition.

Detailed land contours that can be used to help define salinity and acid sulfate soils.



Mining 3.1.4

DNRM has an extensive role in assessing various aspects of mining that use remote sensing products.

Generally these assessments are concerned with land surface or sub-surface geology rather than the

terrestrial vegetation that has been the traditional focus of the RSC. The Mining section of DNRM

purchases radiometric remotely sensed data from private providers for use in geological survey. These

data are made available across government and used in other activities such as soils and regional

ecosystem mapping.

The assessment of abandoned mines requires detailed information on micro-topography to determine

the safety status of sites. At this stage most of the assessments are concerned with assessing flooding

and safety risks although the latter can include issues such as such as acid drainage from pyrites and

the presence of endangered regional ecosystems. Available imagery is used for additional desktop

assessments although this generally needs to be detailed aerial photography to be able to assess the

relevant features and provide detailed land surface information. UAVs have been used to collect this

information in situations where sites have been difficult to access in a safe manner (see section 0).

Potential needs include the use of specific sensors to detect chemical changes and emissions at

particular mine sites.

Water 3.1.5

The management of ground water, associated Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDEs) and

surface water requires the assessment/monitoring of a range of parameters, many of which can be

readily measured by remote sensing.

Examples of specific needs identified in the user survey include:

Monitoring changes in the extent of springs using site specific imagery.

Measurement of surface water permanence to support hydrological modelling of flows.

Direct monitoring of turbidity and other measures relevant to water quality.

Measurement of permanence, frequency of inundation of water to indicate where ground water

supports surface water wetlands, watercourses that are connected to the ground water and

other potential GDEs at a regional or local scale.

Use remote sensing to measure historical wetness/GDE extent mapping. This history often

needs to be longer than the satellite imagery archive so utilises the aerial photography archive.

Measurement of water balance recharge of ground water (indicated by ground cover, ground

surface cover) evapotranspiration.

Detailed assessment of individual springs with specific sensors to measure things like water

balance or evapotranspiration.

Use of remote sensing to measure hydraulic head and ground water.

Assessment of detailed geometry at a spring site including biomass changes and land use

impacts.

Detection of new dams and water discharge associated with CSG operations and across the

general landscape.

Monitoring water quality in rivers and estuaries to support water resource planning.

Salinity 3.1.6

Assessments of salinity hazard by DNRM include those required for reporting for the Murray Darling

Basin Salinity Management Strategy. The main remote sensing products required for this work include

digital elevation models along with the RSC woody extent and land use mapping data. SPOT and

Landsat imagery (accessed from the RSC archive of Landsat and aerial photography) is also used in

day to day assessments of salinity hazards. The imagery is used to map soils for background/context,



and is also used for assessing historical land use for detailed assessment of salinity at specific

locations.

The persistent green trend product is also seen as potentially useful for the assessment of hydrological

impacts to vegetation dynamics, which are currently been conducted in the Murray Darling Basin in

Queensland by DNRM. These studies also make use of remote sensing to assess vegetation

greenness.

Additional issues 3.1.7

Some additional issues were raised in the user interviews that while outside the scope of this study are

included here as they may have an influence on the effective use of RSC products.

Several user groups from DNRM identified the need to improve access and ability to collate RSC data

on internal IT systems. Some users are able to access information by assembling it onto the

Queensland Globe or a pre-package globe such as the “Compliance Globe”, which includes the

regulated vegetation map, cadastral information, tenure, self-assessable code notifications. This has the

added advantage of being a useful tool to communicate with landholders even by phone to determine

the exact locations of areas of interest. Other users who have good Geographic Information System

(GIS) skills and/or GIS support and are able to assemble and manipulate the information themselves,

while others who did not have these available had to make do with inefficient processes. Several users

commented that tools previously used to carry out such activities that would improve efficiencies are no

longer maintained and accessible.

Users from compliance required a method to update the regional ecosystem mapping in some cases

(12 a year). Assuming this cannot be done through a PMAV type amendment it would have to be done

by negotiating with the Queensland herbarium through the Memorandum of Understanding between

DNRM and DSITIA.

DAFF 3.2

Grazing management 3.2.1

Grazing management needs include information that can be used in audits of government schemes and

to facilitate extension and/or improved decision making tools for industry. Examples of needs and

current uses include extension activities that incorporate the RSC ground cover data from applications

such as CSIRO’s VegMachine and DSITIA’s FORAGE. These tools are used by DAFF extension

officers and NRM regional groups to assess funding applications as well the grazing Best Management

Practice guidelines to provide improved decision making tools to industry.

Drought committees in some parts of the state have recently begun using the ground cover tools (e.g.

FORAGE) to help assess individual properties for drought declarations or revocations by comparing

ground cover on the target property to the surrounding area. This information is proving to be a useful

objective tool that has improved efficiencies as departmental officers spend less time carrying out

property inspections.

The use of the RSC’s AussieGRASS pasture modelling application is well established within DAFF and

the grazing industry for drought assessments as well as reporting economic forecasts. This information

is used with other extension tools in grazing management workshops and extensively by industry.

Further needs identified included the estimate of biomass and quality (greenness) of the ground layer

rather than just cover which is currently measured. The incorporation of remote sensing data into the

AussieGRASS application, which is currently based mainly on simulation modelling (albeit with

calibration against data) is a potential area of development.



Other grazing management activities identified the need for additional mapping that can provide an

estimate of landscape health/condition. In addition to the current FORAGE/VegMachine applications,

several RSC products have potential to do this, although further work is needed to investigate and

calibrate the relationship between the mapped attributes and landscape health. Potentially useful RSC

products identified included fire scar mapping and persistent green trend in relation to changes in

woody foliage projected cover (FPC).

Assessment of agricultural lands 3.2.2

The Queensland Agricultural Land Audit (the Audit) has been compiled by DAFF to identify land

important to current and potential future agricultural production and the constraints to development. The

Audit is used as a key reference tool to help guide investment in the agricultural sector and inform

decision making to ensure the best use of our agricultural land in the future. The initial product was a

static map and associated reports but spatial datasets produced for the Audit can now be viewed on the

DAFF Web-based Agricultural Land Information (WALI).

Most of the current land-use information used in the Audit is sourced from the RSC land use mapping.

The Audit also uses the RSC product AussieGRASS to help define grazing classes.

The land use categories from QLUMP are used (directly or via the audit) to define trigger areas and

assess applications under the RPI Act as well as amendments to the VMA. DAFF (and DNRM) carryout

assessments in relation to Protected Agricultural Land Uses (PALUs) and Strategic Cropping Lands

(SCL) within Priority Agricultural Areas (PAA) and Strategic Cropping Areas (SCA) which are

designated under the RPI Act. The DAFF and DNRM assessments are provided as advice to DSDIP for

a final decision on the applications.

RSC products required to verify applications relating to SCL and PALUs include crop frequency

mapping and the QLUMP mapping, via the Audit or directly. Other remote sensing needs include

information on slope derived from Lidar, although this is sometimes supplied with larger applications

(e.g. from coal seam gas companies) under the RPI Act.

DPC/DNRM/DEHP - Reef Plan 3.3

The Water Quality Protection Plan for the Great Barrier Reef (Reef Plan) is a major government

initiative coordinated by the Department of Premier and Cabinet (DPC) with implementation by DEHP,

DNRM, DAFF and regional NRM bodies. Implementation of the Paddock to Reef component of the Reef

Plan requires and uses a number of remote sensing products.

The DNRM “Paddock to Reef” modelling component of the Reef Plan relies on the ground cover, land

use and woody extent data as inputs to the catchment water quality models or “Source Catchments”.

This modelling is used to estimate average annual loads of key pollutants (sediment, nutrients and

pesticides) for each of the 35 catchments draining to the Great Barrier Reef.

Ground cover and woody vegetation cover information is required to report against the ground cover

and riparian vegetation catchment indicators under the Reef Plan. The water bodies produced by the

RSC are used as an input to update the extent of wetlands produced by the Queensland Herbarium.

This wetland mapping is used to report directly on the change in extent of wetlands Reef Plan target

and as an input into the change in wetland function Reef Plan target.

The above measures calculated from RSC products - pollutant loads, ground cover, riparian vegetation

extent wetland extent and (in future) wetland function - are included in the annual Report Cards that

track the progress of the Reef Plan against the specified catchment targets.



Other remote sensing needs identified by users for reef plan modelling included:

Mapping of gullies and stream bank erosion.

Mapping of surface rock cover.

Direct measurement of change in land management.

Direct measurement of turbidity (in larger rivers).

Fire scar data could be incorporated models in future although additional information to that

currently collected, such as changes in cover and nutrient fluxes, may be required.

The Reef Water Quality Program (RWQP), run by DEHP, is part of the overall Reef Plan and aims to

help deliver on targets by changing management practices on grazing (and cane) lands. In recent years

the focus of this program has shifted from regulatory to a more extension approach with the emphasis

now on making relevant information available for land managers to facilitate management change. The

remote sensing information used in this programme includes ground cover, land use mapping and

potentially other datasets such as fire scar mapping. DEHP has previously contributed to funding for

delivery of these products.

The RSC ground cover and land use mapping dataset are incorporated into applications such as

FORAGE and VegMachine which allow land managers to assess ground cover in their areas of interest

relative to the surrounding region. These applications are also incorporated into the Best Management

Practice (BMP) guidelines that were developed as part of the RWQP and are used by extension officers

in DAFF, regional NRM bodies and industry.

DEHP 3.4

Petroleum & Gas 3.4.1

The Petroleum and Gas (P&G) compliance unit in DEHP needs remote sensing to audit the location of

P&G infrastructure relative to approved Environmental Authorities. This infrastructure includes wells,

pipelines, waste streams, gas processing plants etc.

DEHP has previously commissioned the RSC to conduct a trial project to develop a method and now

funds annual assessments. This annual monitoring does not include the whole state but focuses on

compliance priorities such as infrastructure location in relation to environmentally sensitive areas or in a

region. This information is used to assess if more detailed work and/or compliance investigations are

required and can include the utilisation of the RSC compliance support unit.

Other potential needs identified included:

An annual across the board assessment of new P&G infrastructure. This is currently being

investigated by the RSC to determine if it can be delivered in a cost effective manner.

The measurement of water discharge and dams levels in P&G holding ponds. This requirement

has also been identified by DNRM officers involved in CSG work (see section 3.1.5).

DEHP P&G compliance also investigates issues such as oil spills for which high resolution near real

time imagery is required. This is to provide an accurate picture of activities on the ground in what are

sometimes very remote localities.

Other activities of the P&G unit that require remote sensing include the assessment of approvals in

relation to Category A, B and C Environmentally Sensitive Areas define under the Environmental

Protection Act 1994 (EPA 1994). These requirements are similar to those used in the vegetation

monitoring, auditing and assessment by DNRM (section 3.1.2) including the woody extent layer to



assess regrowth vegetation and the regional ecosystem and wetland mapping (which use RSC

products as inputs in their compilation).

Coastal management 3.4.2

Coastal management requires the measurement of changes over time in coastal land forms and

geomorphology. This is done to carry out coastal hazard and risk assessments related to issues such

as storm surge, tidal inundation and mapping of evacuation areas. Detailed products derived from

repeat Lidar imagery, which have been obtained in coastal areas, are particularly useful for this use.

State of the Environment 3.4.3

The State of the Environment (SOE) report is to be published at least every four years as specified

under the Environmental Protection Act 1994 and the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995.

The State of the Environment report is a whole-of-government report that includes an assessment of the

condition of Queensland’s environment and identifies significant trends in environmental values.

This requires state-wide datasets (such as those produced by the RSC) that can be used to monitor

changes in the environment over time. The SOE has proposed to replace the static four yearly SOE

report with a web based reporting tool.

Biodiversity 3.4.4

The Biodiversity Planning Assessments (BPA) complied by DEHP require state or region wide datasets

that can be interpreted and incorporated into biodiversity assessments.

The extent of woody vegetation is currently used to indicate non-remnant woody vegetation to map

potential offset sites and/or hubs for use under the Environmental Offsets Policy. The riparian mapping

product is likely to be incorporated into the BPA as well. The woody change extent and water body

mapping is incorporated into updates of the regional ecosystem and wetland mapping (by the

Queensland Herbarium) which is used by DEHP in Biodiversity Assessments including the definition of

essential habitat. These are incorporated into mapping of Matters of State Environmental Significance

(by DSDIP) and into the essential habitat and wetland mapping under the VMA by DNRM.

The QLUMP mapping is used to indicate areas suitable or not suitable for off-sets. QLUMP is also used

in the aquatic conservation assessments as a measure of the naturalness criteria. These are

incorporated into the map of referable wetlands that is (currently) incorporated into the Matters of Sate

Environmental Significance which is used by DSDIP to define Matters of State Environmental

Significance.

The Biodiversity Planning Assessments require an index of vegetation condition. The ground cover

datasets have been trialled to do this but require further development to determine the most appropriate

way to use and interpret the data for condition. There may be some synergies with other application

being developed for grazing assessments, although for biodiversity purposes there is a need to

separate out exotic from native cover. The persistent green trend product could also provide useful

information in relation to condition.

Lidar and or radar imagery is potentially useful where there is a need to measure actual progress of

vegetation rehabilitation on an offset site under the Environmental Offsets Policy. Lidar could potentially

measure actual height and stem densities and other attributes that contribute to these measurements.

Fire history mapping is required to carry out ecological assessments, and calculation of greenhouse gas

emission calculations and changes in fire regime for incorporation into direct benefits management plan

under the Environmental offsets policy.



A range of remote sensing products can provide information to indicate species habitat or provide inputs

into species modelling. For example Lidar products are used to map vegetation structure to refine the

endangered Mahogany Glider habitat models which are incorporated into the essential habitat mapping

under the VMA and Matters of State Environmental Significance (MSES).

Remote sensing of woody vegetation structure is required for estimates of woody biomass and carbon

for use in the Regrowth Benefits Tool which is being produced for DEHP. The woody FPC extent is

used to delineate regrowth areas for potential carbon sequestration sites and the RSC biomass library

is used to calibrate radar imagery estimates of biomass. Detailed information on vegetation structure

such as that produced by Lidar imagery would be useful in this regard.

DSDIP 3.5

Implementation of the RPI Act by DSDIP requires information on cropping, horticulture and other

intensive agricultural land use categories. This information is used to derive the Priority Agricultural

Areas (PAA) and the Strategic Cropping Areas (SCA) mapping. The RSC land use and crop frequency

mapping products are considered essential inputs into the development of the above mapping by

DSDIP. The RSC land use mapping is a major dataset used to derived the PAA by DSDIP. The SCA

mapping is derived from Strategic Cropping Lands mapping developed by DNRM which incorporates

the RSC land use mapping (see section 3.1.3). The RSC satellite imagery is also used by DSDIP as

background to check the mapping and areas in the development of these products.

The RSC land use mapping is also used by DAFF (section 3.2.2) and DNRM (section 3.1.2) in the

assessment of applications made under the RPI Act for subsequent advice to DSDIP as the decision

agency. Land holders and other entities also use this information when making applications under the

RPI Act, including accessing the crop frequency mapping via DSITIA’s FORAGE application. The scale

and frequency of updates are considered as limitations to the mapping, although it is acknowledged that

the ongoing mapping program is continuously improving these aspects of the datasets.

A number of RSC products are, at least indirectly, incorporated into the Strategic Environmental Areas

(SEA) under the RPI Act and the Matters of State Environmental Significance (MSES) mapping used

under the State Planning Policy (SPP) to define state interests under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009

(SPA). This includes the regional ecosystem and wetland mapping (which are updated using the RSC

woody change and water body mapping). The terrestrial and aquatic Biodiversity Planning Assessments

and Essential Habitat mapping (see section 3.4.4) which are reliant on the wetland and regional

ecosystem mapping and therefore the RSC woody change and water body mapping.

NPRSR - f i re management 3.6

The management of fires on the conservation reserves requires mapping of fire history across the

reserve estate to enable the assessment of fire risk. The RSC fire scar history mapping can contribute

to these assessments along with other NPRSR data sources. The use of the RSC fire scar history

mapping product varies across the agency from frequent to intermittent mainly due to it not being widely

accessible on internal applications. More advanced users were able to download the datasets from

QGIS. The mapping is not always reliable in parts of the state where confounding land uses such as

cultivation are common.

PSBA 3.7

The PSBA requires fire scar mapping and vegetation information to assess fire hazard and risk across

Queensland. The PSBA has develop a number of applications that use RSC products including:



The Total Operational Map which uses arrange of datasets that includes the RSC fire scar

mapping to indicate fuel loads and likelihood of fire on a web server application for use by the

Queensland Fire and Emergency Services.

The Queensland Natural Disaster Register which uses fire scar and regional ecosystem

mapping to model fuel loads. This product in currently in an advanced development stage and

should be released in 2015.

The Bushfire Prone Area tool which uses fire scar, regional ecosystem, woody FPC and ground

cover mapping as well as other datasets such as the regional ecosystem mapping to map bush

fire prone areas on an annual basis.

Limitations to the existing RSC datasets include a lack of accuracy in the FPC product in some coastal

areas. There is also a need for a more integration between the RSC water body data set with the

related regional ecosystem and wetland mapping to define what the different products map and how

they can be readily combined to give an overall assessment of water in the landscape. Other needs

include the development of more detailed biomass mapping broken into woody and non- woody

fractions for use in fire hazard assessments.

Regional NRM Bodies 3.8

There are over 14 regional NRM bodies in Queensland covering a diverse range of environments and

associated issues. Only representatives from the SEQ regional body and the coordinating NRM

collective body were interviewed in this study. While the needs may be similar to other regional bodies

there could also be variations across the state not reflected in this summary.

The SEQ catchments group listed a wide range of needs for RSC products including development of

benchmarks for NRM plan targets in relation to matters including ecosystem services, fragmentation,

and riparian health. These benchmarks are incorporated into statutory regional plans (for DSDIP) and

the targets for water quality under the Healthy Country Program in SEQ (for DEHP) as well as reporting

to the Commonwealth Government. Other uses included generating habitat mapping for the DEHP's

Back on Track Program and producing a range of value added products for groups such as local

governments, non-government organisations and SEQWater. Extensive use was made of the RSC

woody cover, ground cover and land use mapping in these applications.

The catchments groups require assessments of landscape health across catchments but also for

monitoring and auditing of individual projects. The woody and ground cover products are used to

assess vegetation condition and health and quantify ecosystem services. The persistent green product

is seen as potentially useful for monitoring changes in landscape heath and identifying changes in

woody cover and associated impacts of grazing for use in extension activities with graziers. This

product is used to identify spread of Prickly Acacia to enable more strategic targeting of weed control

efforts.

The SLATS annual report is used extensively by SEQ Catchments (and other regional NRM bodies) to

provide relevant statistics on changes in extent of vegetation across their area. The report is also

supplied to local Governments and other organisations such as SEQWater and for the identification of

priorities for investments and extension work.

The ground cover data and associated FORAGE and VegMachine applications are extensively used by

regional bodies to engage with graziers and identify areas for investment in NRM projects and to

promote Best Management Practice (BMP) guidelines in the reef catchments.



The RSC fire scar mapping has been used to assess fire history and develop of fire management

guidelines by at least one regional body although it is not used by SEQ Catchments. The riparian trend

data is used for targeting rehabilitation sites and the use of laser scanning (including the terrestrial laser

scanner) is potentially useful for monitoring and auditing rehabilitation sites.



4 Assessment of RSC products against user needs

Table 1 provides a summary of the major uses identified in the user needs survey against the major

current operational and some developmental RSC products and Figure 3 summarises the major policy

drivers associated with each of the RSC products. Following is a more detailed assesment of these

RSC products which includes an assessment of their fit for purpose to meet the needs of DNRM and

other groups. Any limitations of, and/or improvements to, current products are also highlighted.

Existing operat ional products 4.1

Unexplained clearing assessment 4.1.1

The current compliance assessment produced by RSC allows for the rapid sorting and prioritising of

unexplained clearing for subsequent investigation by DNRM regional staff. Apart from relying on reports

from third parties this is the only cost effective method available to flag such areas. While the number of

cases proceeding to prosecution has declined in recent years, the ability to audit tree clearing across

the state is still seen as an important deterrent to illegal tree clearing and part of the DNRM compliance

strategy.

DNRM users in operations support indicated that it would be useful to acquire finalised SLATS data in a

quicker time frame for reporting and auditing priority areas or issues. Figures for priority areas (e.g.

thinning in the Brigalow Belt) could be produced from the interim SLATS data although the

recommended approach is to investigate further modification to the SLATS method and/or to prioritise

areas for finalisation (see section 5.1.3).

Compliance support 4.1.2

The RSC provides technical support to DNRM and DEHP for more detailed compliance cases including

prosecutions under relevant legislation. The number of prosecutions within DNRM has decreased over

the last 3 years and is now only one or two a year. Even though the time spent by RSC staff on each

individual case has increased, it appeared overall demand for this service to DNRM in relation to

vegetation matters had decreased.

The compliance support function delivered by RSC is also utilised (and paid for) by Petroleum & Gas

compliance at DEHP and may be relevant to other matters in DNRM such as water. The compliance

support service provided by RSC to DNRM should be reviewed in this context.

Reporting on clearing 4.1.3

The RSC continues to produce an annual SLATS report which includes statistics on clearing

categorised by attribute such as remnant status, local government area, regional NRM body or

bioregion. The SLATS supplementary report, which reports on areas by type of clearing such as

clearing permits, thinning and other self-assessable codes, has in the past been produced by the

DNRM policy group.

The user needs analysis found that the information in the SLATS report is used by a range of agencies

including regional NRM bodies and is considered reliable, point of truth data for tree clearing with a high

acceptance by stakeholders. These reports were not widely used by DNRM users interviewed, although

the land and mines policy section indicated that the supplementary report was still required for

monitoring policy implementation.



Table 1: Summary of RSC products, identified needs and limitations

1 Denotes derived from material provided by RSC

RSC product,

application DNRM/other agency needs Legislation/major policy Fit for purpose/ limitations/

Unexplained

clearing

assessment

DNRM – Prioritisation of unexplained

clearing for subsequent vegetation

compliance case investigations.

Vegetation Management Act 1999 (through the Sustainable

Planning Act 2009), subordinate legislation, policy and

instruments (Native Forest Practice, Area Management

Plans; Self-assessable vegetation clearing codes), DNRM

Compliance Strategy

Appropriate and required for compliance

strategy implementation. Updated interim

assessment provides a more timely product

for compliance needs although more timely

product required by DNRM for auditing self-

assessable codes and other specific issues.

Compliance

support

DNRM – Support for selected vegetation

compliance cases.





Compliance Strategy

This support is required although level of

demand for vegetation compliance should

be reviewed within the context of

requirements to support DEHP petroleum &

gas and any other needs within DNRM (e.g.

water).

Woody clearing

and clearing by

type reports

DEHP - SOE reporting. Environmental Protection Act 1994, Coastal Protection and

Management Act 1995 The replacement with an online report, as

per current WetlandInfo or SOE proposal, is

an alternative way to provide this data. The

gross clearing figures need to be broken

down by clearing type as per the

supplementary report to enable full

interpretation of results.

Regional NRM bodies - for reporting. Statutory Regional Plans, reporting for local government,

SEQWater state of the catchments

DNRM – To monitor vegetation

management policy implementation.


Planning Act 2009) and subordinate legislation



RSC product,


Woody extent and

change in extent

DNRM - Defining High Value Regrowth on

certified mapping, input wetlands regional

ecosystem mapping. These products are

currently updated only by the PMAV

process.



Appropriate for use in broader level

assessments. Where lack of resolution for

property level assessments is limiting,

available aerial photographs and other

higher resolution imagery is used to verify

Landsat based products.

- Used in development assessments

included broad scale clearing, Material

Change of Use, Reconfiguration of Lots

for advice to the decision agency DSDIP.

Sustainable Planning Act 2009 and other relevant

development assessment matters (e.g. local government

planning schemes).

- Monitoring and auditing of SLAM and

Stock route condition assessment.

Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Act

2002

- Input into salinity modelling and hazard

assessment.

Reporting in the MDB Salinity Management Stately

(schedule B salinity).

DEHP/DSDIP/DNRM - Input into regional

ecosystem mapping which is used for

supporting mapping under the VMA, input

into Biodiversity Planning Assessments

and definition of Critical Habitat by DEHP

and subsequent use in Matter of State

Environmental Significant by DSDIP and

definition of Environmentally Sensitive

Areas by DEHP.

Definition of Category A, B and C Environmentally Sensitive

Areas under the Environmental Protection Act 1994 (EPA

1994), Matters of State Environmental Significance

mapping under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.

Vegetation Management Act 1999 and Sustainable

Planning Act 2009 and subordinate legislation

Regional NRM bodies – for reporting and

assessments.

Statutory Regional Plans, Regional NRM Investment

Program.

DPC/DNRM/DEHP - input into catchment

loads modelling, direct reporting against

riparian target (GBR riparian mapping

product).

Reef Plan and Regional NRM Investment Program.



RSC product,


Woody extent and

change in extent

cont….

DEHP - identifying potential

Environmental Offset areas.

Identification of carbon in the regrowth

assessment tool.

Environmental Offsets Act 2014, Commonwealth emissions

reduction fund.

PSBA – defining fire hazard and risk Public Safety Business Agency Act 2014



RSC product,


Ground cover

monitoring

DPC (DNRM/DEHP) - input into

catchment loads modelling and direct

measurement of ground cover target

(Reef Plan ground cover and pollutants

loads targets).

DEHP - input into the grazing Best

Management Practice guidelines and

other extension activities.

Input into extension activities to improve

management practices

Reef Plan and Regional NRM Investment Program, Reef

Water Quality Program.

Provides fit for purpose products which are

incorporated into a range of applications for

specific uses. Ongoing improvements in

products are occurring.

DNRM - vegetation condition audits for

stock route and other State Land Assets.

Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Act

2002 and State Lands Assets Management (SLAM).

DAFF applications (FORAGE,

VegMachine, AussieGRASS) used to

assess drought and as an extension tool.

Used to help define grazing classes (via

AussieGRASS) in the Audit. Used (directly

or indirectly via derived applications) as

decision support tool for economic

forecasting and other assessments

Economic assessments forecasting, drought assessment,

tools for extension and decision making by land manager.

DSDIP (assessments by DAFF/DNRM) -

input into defining and assessments for

Strategic Cropping Lands and Priority

Agricultural Land Use.

Regional Planning Interest Act 2014 (used by assessment

agencies (DAFF and DNRM) to provide information to

decision agency (DSDIP).

PSBA – defining fire hazard and risk Public Safety Business Agency Act 2014



RSC product,


Land use mapping

DPC (DNRM/DEHP) - input into

catchment loads modelling (Reef Plan

pollutant loads targets).

Reef Plan and Regional NRM Investment Program, Reef

Water Quality Program.

More frequent and/or consistent updates are

required, preferably at least every 5 years,

and with a forward schedule. Generally

accepted as a useful regional scale

assessment tool, with continuous

improvements in scale and category

resolution over time requirement to meet

more detailed needs.

DAFF - incorporated into the Agricultural

Land Audit (the Audit) to help define land

important to current agricultural production

and for economic forecasting.

Assessment of PALU for advice to DSDIP

Queensland Government commitment to support the

agriculture pillar.

Regional Planning Interest Act 2014

DSDIP – incorporated into definition of

SAA and SCA Regional Planning Interest Act 2014

DNRM – Assessment of SCA for advice to

DSDIP Regional Planning Interest Act 2014

DEHP- Input into Biodiversity

Assessments which are incorporated into

Matters of State Environmental

Significance mapping used by DSDIP.

State Planning Act 2009

DEWS - development of irrigation

estimates in groundwater irrigation areas1

Water Act 2000.

Regional NRM bodies and other –

planning and reporting and extension Statutory Regional Plans and non-statutory planning.



RSC product,


Water body

mapping, other

hydrology

DNRM/DEHP/DSDIP - input into the

updating of the Queensland Wetland

Mapping which are incorporated in the

monitoring reef plan catchment indicator

targets (wetland extent and

condition).VMA regulated map, the

Aquatic Biodiversity Planning Assessment

(DEHP) and subsequently matters of

State Environmental Significance (DSDIP)

Reef Plan and Regional NRM Investment Program,

Vegetation Management Act 1999 and Sustainable

Planning Act 2009 and subordinate legislation. A range of needs in relation of hydrology

identified by DNRM users are not addressed

by current RSC products and require the

development of new products/applications.

DEWS – dam safety assessments1 Water Act 2000; National water compliance framework.

1

DNRM/DEHP – potential input into

Ground Water Dependent Ecosystem

(GDE) identification.

Water Act 2000, Office of Groundwater Impact Assessment.

Fire scar mapping

PSBA – defining fire hazard and risk Public Safety Business Agency Act 2014 Useful product although there needs to be

further engagement by the RSC with users

to clarify the role of the RSC fire scar

mapping in relation to other products

available and its application in specific

situations.

NPRSR - fire risk assessment for estate

although variable availability on intra

departmental systems and variable

reliability in some areas.

Nature Conservation Act 1992.

Coal seam gas

compliance

mapping

DEHP - Petroleum and Gas Compliance.

To highlight areas of activities that are

potentially outside approved areas or to

audit high risk areas and provide support

for subsequent investigations

Petroleum and Gas (Production and Safety) Act 2004 (P&G

Act), Petroleum Act 1923 and Water Act 2000 (Chapter 3).

Current program meets the needs of DEHP

subject to ongoing review. DNRM - Coal seam gas engagement and

compliance plan 2013. Provides support

for community liaison activities.

Support for the DNRM coal seam gas Engagement and

Compliance Plan 2013.



RSC product,


Lidar

DEHP – potential use to measure

progress in rehabilitation of offset areas

Environmental Offsets Act 2014, Commonwealth emissions

reduction fund.

Currently limited extent due to cost although

likely to become more widely available in the

future.

DNRM – potential use in verification of

development assessments included broad

scale clearing, Material Change of Use,

Reconfiguration of Lots for advice to the

decision agency DSDIP.

Detailed topographic information for

assessment of abandoned mines,

potential salinity, and acid sulfate soils

areas.



DNRM/DEHP – compliance investigations

where assessment of current activity is

required





Compliance Strategy

Real time

mapping/UAVs

DNRM – abandoned mines, springs and

other sites where detailed

assessments/specific sensors are

required.

Abandoned Mine Lands Program (AMLP), Water Act 2000

Currently purchased from private providers

for specific uses. Likely to become cheaper

more widely available over time.

Persistent green

trend

DEHP/DAFF - Assessment of

condition/landscape health – various

including reporting for SOE (DEHP),

regional NRM bodies, identification of

carbon in the regrowth assessment tool

(DEHP), input into grazing management

tools (DAFF)

Commonwealth emissions reduction fund under the Direct

Action Plan Requires further development to produce an

operational product.

DNRM – provide context for vegetation

management policy development in

relation to thickening and thinning.

Sustainable Planning Act 2009, self-assessable vegetation

clearing codes



Figure 3 Policy and planning instruments associated with RSC products

It is recommended that the RSC should consider producing the supplementary report instead of the

SLATS report for use by DNRM policy. This is because clearing under self-assessable codes is likely to

have increased in recent years and this information is required to interpret the gross figures.

The report could be produced bi-annually rather than annually as is the regional ecosystem extent and

change in extent report (by the Queensland Herbarium). It is recommended that the static pdf type

reporting be replaced with an on line web delivery system, similar to the summary tool on the

Queensland Government WetlandInfo web site (see section 9.1 on web delivery tools). The next SOE

report by DEHP is considering a similar approach and may be an avenue to producing such as

summary tool for woody extent and woody extent change.

Woody extent and change 4.1.4

This dataset underpins the compliance assessment product as well as a range of auditing, monitoring

and assessment activities carried out by DNRM regional staff, Reef Plan reporting and implementation,

biodiversity assessments by DEHP and a wide range of activities in regional NRM bodies. This dataset

also provides inputs into various grazing management tools developed and/or used by DAFF.

The woody extent and historical clearing data and associated Landsat imagery are widely used for

vegetation assessments by DNRM users particularly to determine the remnant status of vegetation

under the VMA in investigation of compliances cases and verification of development and PMAV

applications. The data are also used as context in a range of other monitoring and auditing



assessments that require advice on specific issues or situations such as management of State Lands

Assets (including stock routes) or advice on implementation of self-assessable codes under the VMA.

Other uses of the RSC woody extent and change in extent data include:

An input into the catchment loads modelling for reporting on progress against Reef Plan loads

target. This product is considered an essential input and appropriate for use in the catchment

scale modelling.

An input into the GBR riparian mapping for reporting against Reef Plan riparian target. This

product is considered an essential input and appropriate for use in the catchment indicator

reporting.

Defining regrowth vegetation on assessable vegetation under the VMA by DNRM regional staff.

State-wide updates to this mapping would require the RSC products although at this stage

updates only occur through the PMAV process.

Defining potential offsets areas for environmental and carbon sequestration. This product is an

important input into these tools that are/potentially widely used in DEHP and industry and need

to be updated annually.

Input into salinity modelling and hazard assessment by DNRM for reporting in the Murray

Darling Basin (MDB) Salinity Management Strategy (schedule B salinity).

Input into regional ecosystem mapping which is used for a variety of purposes included

supporting mapping under the VMA, input into Biodiversity Planning Assessments and definition

of Critical habitat by DEHP and subsequent use in Matter of State Environmental Significant by

DSDIP and definition of Category A, B and C Environmentally Sensitive Areas by DEHP.

Defining fire risk in Bushfire Prone Area mapping by the PSBA.

The resolution of these Landsat derived data is seen as a limitation for property level assessments.

However, users showed a high level of knowledge of the limitations and appropriate fit for purpose

applications. The products are used for regional/context assessment and some property level

assessments in western parts of the state. Generally more detailed SPOT imagery, aerial photography

from the DNRM SMARTMAP system or Google Earth imagery is used for property level assessments,

particularly for assessment of smaller areas in more coastal parts of the state.

The SPOT imagery does not have the historical archive of the Landsat imagery which lessens its utility

for assessment of remnant/non-remnant status. However, the state-wide SPOT captures are used

widely as an assessment tool and have been used to create a woody extent layer in parts of the state

(e.g. by RSC for koala habitat mapping and by SEQ catchments for assessments of ecosystem

services). The creation of a state-wide woody extent layer from the SPOT imagery would be a useful

additional tool, if it could be produced in a cost effective way.

Ground cover 4.1.5

The ground cover dataset underpins a range of other products and derived applications particularly for

Reef Plan reporting and implementation and as inputs into a variety of grazing management tools. Most

users access the ground cover data via derived applications that have been developed for a specific

use.

The ground cover dataset provides important inputs into the catchment loads modelling for reporting on

progress against Reef Plan loads target in the Reef Plan Report Cards. The ground cover data are also

used to produce the GBR ground cover mapping for reporting against Reef Plan ground cover target.

The ground cover is considered an essential input and appropriate for use in both these activities.



Various products are derived from the ground cover dataset and incorporated into the FORAGE and

VegMachine applications. These applications provide users with contextualised ground cover reports for

user defined areas within a regional context that partition out the effects of season from management.

These tools have been included in the grazing Best Management Practice guidelines that were initiated

by DEHP for use in the implementation of the Reef Plan by DAFF, industry and regional NRM bodies.

The FORAGE and VegMachine tools are also extensively used for more general extension activities by

DAFF, regional NRM groups and as an aid to decision making by private industry. The FORAGE

ground cover reports have recently been used for the assessment of drought declarations and

revocations of individual properties by DAFF staff and drought committees. Users indicated this

information is proving a useful objective tool as well an leading to improved efficiencies as departmental

officers do not have to spend time carrying out property inspections.

Other uses of the RSC ground cover data and derived products include:

Estimation of vegetation condition for biodiversity assessments. This has been trialled by DEHP

in several regions of the state. More work is required to determine the most appropriate way to

analyse and interpret the data for biodiversity.

Condition assessments of stock routes and other State Land Assets by DNRM monitoring and

auditing activities. This is not a major use but DNRM staff indicated it could provide useful

context.

Condition assessments for potential policy development around soil conservation and land

condition by DNRM policy.

Facilitate the definition of grazing classes in the Agricultural Audit by DAFF (via the

AussieGRASS application).

In some cases users indicated ground cover data are not accurate in specific areas or situations (e.g.

parts of SEQ). However, there is generally a good understanding of the dataset, its limitations and

appropriate applications. There is also widespread understanding of the continuous improvement that

had been made to the ground cover dataset over the years and support for its ongoing evolution and

improvement over time.

Land use 4.1.6

The land use data provides input into a range of applications, particularly for agricultural land use

planning and trigger maps and assessments under the Regional Planning Interest Act 2014 (RPI Act).

Most of the current land-use information used in the Queensland Agricultural Land Audit (the Audit) has

been obtained from the RSC land use mapping. The audit has been compiled by DAFF to identify land

important to agricultural production and the constraints to development. The Audit is a key reference

tool to help guide investment in the agricultural sector and inform decision making.

The RSC land use mapping is an important input into the map of Strategic Cropping Land (SCL). This

map is compiled by DNRM and used as a trigger map the RPI Act administered by DSDIP. The RSC

land use mapping is used (directly or indirectly via the audit) to assess applications under the RPI Act.

These assessments are carried out in relation to SCL and Protected Agricultural Land Uses (PALU).

The assessments are carried out by DNRM and DAFF to provide advice to DSDIP to make the final

decision. The related RSC cropping frequency product is also used in these assessments to help

identify and define recent areas of cropping activity.

Other uses of the RSC land cover data include:



An input into the catchment loads modelling to report on progress against Reef Plan loads

target. The land use mapping is an essential input into this modelling.

Incorporation into Best Management Practice Guidelines extension tools under the

implementation strategies for the Reef Plan (DEHP/Industry/Regional NRM bodies).

Development of irrigation estimates in groundwater irrigation areas by the Department of

Energy and Water.

Other planning and reporting by Regional NRM bodies and other groups e.g. defining the extent

of urban footprints and rural living areas or reporting on alienation of Ecosystem Services by

SEQ catchments.

A main limitation of the land use data raised by users is the ad hoc nature of updates to the mapping

associated with the ad hoc nature of funding, such as reef catchment science in combination with a

range of other short term funding sources. More frequent and/or consistent updates are required,

preferably at least every 5 years, and with a forward schedule rather than the current ad hoc

arrangements.

Other improvements included more detailed classes such as separating the broad grazing class into

native and non-native (for biodiversity assessments by DEHP), and refinements of some of the classes

important for management such as horticultural species (e.g. bananas). Increased resolution was raised

as an issue but it is generally accepted as a useful regional scale assessment tool, and that the

resolution of the product is being continuously improved over time.

Fire scars 4.1.7

The RSC fire scar mapping is seen as a potentially useful product by a range of users. Current and

potential uses include:

Assessment of fire risk/hazards on the reserve estate (NPRSR) and other areas (Public Safety

Business Agency (PSBA) and Queensland Fire and Emergency Services (QFES).

Development of fire management guidelines by regional NRM bodies for the Reef Water Quality

Program (DEHP) under the implementation of the Reef Plan.

Potentially incorporated into catchment loads models for the Reef Plan although it would require

more detailed quantification of intensity and associated changes in cover and nutrient flux.

Greenhouse gas emission calculations and direct benefit management plans for offsets by

DEHP.

Fire ecological assessments (DEHP).

The fire scar mapping program includes the cloud and cloud shadow removal science which is

incorporated into the range of other Landsat derived RSC products.

The fire scar mapping is extensively used for fire hazards assessments in a number of applications

developed by PSBA. However, other users reported varying levels of accuracy particularly in areas

where cultivation is widespread. These users were not aware of the recent improvements to the method

and associated accuracy made by the RSC. Others users have difficulty accessing the fire scar data on

internal IT systems or do (did) not know that it is available in QGIS.

Some users also indicated that they obtain fire data from alternative sources such as the North

Australian Fire Information (NAFI) data base which is derived from 1.1 km resolution NOAA satellite

imagery. The AussieGRASS application uses fire mapping as an input into its pasture models but this is

sourced from the Landgate Remote Sensing Centre in West Australia.



The fire scar mapping is a relatively recent product that was first released in December 2013 that

requires a greater level understanding about how it is best used. While the fire scar mapping product

has a range of existing and potential uses, there needs to be some engagement by the RSC with users

to clarify the role of the RSC fire scar mapping in relation to other products available and its application

in specific situations.

CSG compliance 4.1.8

The annual CSG compliance assessment carried out by the RSC does not include the whole state but

focuses on compliance priorities such as infrastructure location in relation to environmentally sensitive

areas or in a region. This infrastructure includes wells, pipelines, waste streams, gas processing plants

etc. The assessment is used to determine if more detailed work and/or compliance investigations are

required and can include the utilisation of the RSC compliance support unit.

The CSG compliance mapping was originally based on Rapid Eye imagery (5 metre resolution) which

was purchased by DEHP specifically for this use. It was found that after the initial baseline mapping

using this imagery was completed, new infrastructure could be readily detected on the (freely available)

Panchromatic Landsat imagery (15 metre resolution - Figure 4). This latter imagery is more appropriate

than the normal multi-spectral Landsat imagery for the distinctive but small CSG features

Current development work to assess the potential to use time series analysis to automatically detect

when and where some CSG infrastructure is installed is underway. The distinctive size, shape and pixel

brightness values of CSG infrastructure and the fact it remains static for a number of years suggest this

might be possible, based on the experience at the RSC using similar techniques on a number of other

projects. If this is possible it will further increase the efficiency of detection of new features and speed

up notification of potential breaches. Other potential needs identified included the measurement of

water discharge and dams levels in holding ponds. This requirement is readily measured by existing

remote sensing techniques for mapping surface water (see section 4.2) although these are unlikely to

be cost effective without further investigation.



Figure 4: Comparison of imagery used for CSG Infrastructure mapping

TL Landsat 8 Panchromatic 15m 19 April 2013. TR Landsat 8 Panchromatic 15m 11 July 2014 showing new CSG features.

BL: RapidEye multispectral, 5m, 22 March 2013 BC: Landsat 8 multispectral 30m resolution. BR Landsat 8 panchromatic, 15 m resolution 19 April 2013 showing good resolution compared to

multispectral and comparable resolution for CSG features compared to RapidEye



Natural disasters 4.1.9

The mapping of natural disasters by the RSC is carried out to address specific issues as the need

arises. Past assessments have included information to assess the impacts of floods and cyclones which

have been used by DAFF, DNRM and other agencies to estimate the extent of damage against land

use and potential costs of restoration. Examples of RSC natural disaster products include the Landsat

derived mapping of floods in the Gulf Plains, mapping damage to woodlands and forests resulting from

Tropical Cyclone Yasi (and previously Larry) and use of Lidar to assess changes in erosion associated

with the floods in the Lockyer Valley (Figure 5).

Figure 5: Lidar assessment of flood damage on the Lockyer Creek

The top two images are pre (left) and post (right) flood aerial photography. Bottom shows the same areas using

Lidar derived elevation data which highlights increased scouring of the creek after the floods.

Weeds mapping 4.1.10

Many users from DNRM, DAFF, DEHP and Regional NRM groups commented on the need for accurate

mapping of weeds. No staff from Biosecurity Queensland were included on the list of interviews but this

group requires similar information to map weed distribution across the state. The nature of weeds to be

identified differed between users. For example, users from DEHP required information on all exotics

versus native cover while other agencies required specific weeds that required management in specific

situations such as protecting pasture from grazing, which is not currently provided by RSC products.



Products requiring further development 4.2

Hydrology 4.2.1

The recently completed science capability audit for water by Greenfield and Riches (2014) has

highlighted that the RSC has traditionally focused on terrestrial rather than aquatic issues. Therefore

while some of the wide range of water related needs identified in the users survey can be addressed by

some existing RSC water related products, many of the needs identified require the development of

new products.

The RSC currently produces a water mask for use in processing the Landsat archive for woody extent

and change in extent analysis. This water mask is used in updates of the Queensland wetland mapping

which in turn provide inputs into the VMA certified mapping and the Aquatic Conservation Assessments

by DEHP and subsequent incorporation into Wetland Protection Areas and matters of State

Environmental Significance used by DSDIP. This water mask is able to generate an index of water

flooding frequency across the Landsat archive. This product could be used to assess some of the

hydrological user needs particularly in relation to permanency of water and the identification of

Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDEs).

Some other relevant approaches for remote sensing of issues related to GDEs have been summarised

in the GDE toolbox (Richardson et al. 2011) and the report on improved monitoring approaches for

springs in the Surat region (SKM 2014). GDE assessments are often based on the assumption that, if

vegetation is active, or wetlands and surface-water features persist, during dry periods they are likely to

be using or contain water other than surface runoff or rain-fed infiltration.

Examples of applications and remote sensing products related to hydrology that may be relevant

include:

Surface characteristics of GDE vegetation which contrast with nearby non-GDE vegetation

(particularly during dry periods or seasons), such as leaf-area index or greenness.

Higher rate of evapotranspiration (ET) where vegetation has access to groundwater, compared

with nearby non-GDE vegetation.

Constant activity rate of vegetation, suggesting a continuous supply of water. The NDVI

(Normalised Difference Vegetation Index), which is strongly correlated with primary productivity

and therefore is used as an indicator of live, green vegetation, is often used to indicate this.

Permanent high water levels within wetlands and possible presence of springs or seeps.

Detailed assessment of individual springs with specific sensors to measure attributes such as

water balance or evapotranspiration.

Use of remote sensing to measure hydraulic head and ground water using techniques such as

those outlined by Reeves et al, (2014) and Tregoining et al. (2012).

The Terrestrial Laser scanner from the RSC could be used for assessing detailed geometry at a

springs site including biomass changes and land use impacts.

Measurement of thermal anomalies related to a direct effect of groundwater on surface

temperature in groundwater discharge zones (including within water features).

Mapping of wetland/wetted extent from high resolution and multi spectral imagery or air-borne

thermal imagery to distinguish thermal anomalies associated with groundwater discharge.

Direct measurement of water quality in large rivers or estuaries.



Lidar 4.2.2

Lidar imagery can provide high resolution, three-dimensional information that can be used to derive a

number of vegetation structures (cover and height by layer) and land surface parameters which can be

made available as standard products (Figure 6). Identified needs that can be addressed by Lidar

products include assessments of:

Vegetation status under the VMA and other legislation (DNRM operations).

Gullies, stream bank erosion for input into reef modelling (DPC, DNRM, regional NRM bodies).

Defining high risk area for salinity, acid sulphate soils and coastal flooding storm surge zones.

Slope criteria for Strategic Cropping Lands and Priority Agricultural Land Use slope criteria

(DAFF, DNRM, DSDIP).

Detailed topography for assessment of drainage, flooding and safety on abandoned mines

(DNRM).

Erosion and flood recovery - before and after Lidar imagery can be used to assess changes in

stream profile (various).

Carbon accumulation in regrowth under the commonwealth’s Direct Action plan.

In combination with Lidar, the RSC has also developed methods to use the related space-borne radar

technology to derive vegetation structure and biomass products across the state. These products are

being integrated with the structural data derived from radar and cover and temporal data derived from

Landsat products to improve woody biomass and extent mapping across the state.

Existing Lidar data are expensive to capture and coverage from airborne platforms is likely to be cost

effective for specific projects over small areas. The current RSC archive (Figure 7) reflects this and

includes coastal data capture area of the eastern seaboard of the state, including captures from 2009 to

2012 and other ad hoc areas. However Lidar data may become more widespread in the futire. For

example, the Commonwealth has recently acquired Lidar data over extensive areas of the Queensland

Murray Darling Basin which should be available for use in Queensland. Furthermore there is currently a

project to place Lidar onto a space platform (University of Maryland 2014) and UAVs platforms may

potential make Lidar capture more cost effective.

RSC have developed systems to capture and store available Lidar data onto its computer infrastructure.

The capture of Queensland Government Lidar data is managed by the Spatial Imagery Subscription

Plan administered by DNRM and the Lidar coverage is likely to continue to increase over time.

Therefore, Lidar data could be used in situations where it is available and this information will become

more useful as Lidar coverage increases over time.

It is therefore recommended that the RSC:

Continue to capture all available Lidar data onto the HPC.

Develop standard products for all Lidar data stored, that can be used for vegetation and land

assessments.

Enable the above Lidar products to be discovered and accessed by users.



Figure 6: Standard Lidar products

Figure 7: Extent of Airborne Lidar coverage stored by RSC



Real time, high resolution monitoring 4.2.3

Several users highlighted the need for high resolution imagery and for real-time or near-real-time

monitoring. This included property level inspection where access is difficult or unsafe or for compliance

investigations to enable appropriate intervention where suspected illegal clearing is occurring.

In recent decades there has been a significant increase in the number of remote sensing satellites

launched into space. Advances in technology has also increased sensitivity, the range of sensors

available, resolution, operability and reduced the price of products. The use of Unmanned Aerial

Vehicles (UAVs) fitted with camera has also increased and these were often mentioned as a potential

solution by users.

Examples of a range of recently launched remote sensing satellites with possible applications to user

needs has been compiled and summarised in Appendix E. Following is a specific example of the

application of near real time monitoring using high resolution satellite imagery.

The DEHP Petroleum and Gas Compliance unit recently investigated an oil spill in remote south

western Queensland. Following advice from the RSC, this investigation used imagery from the recently1

(2011 and 2012) launched Pléiades 1A and 1B satellites (Figure 8). Features of using this technology

for this assessment include:

The identical twin satellites deliver high-resolution optical data products and offer a daily revisit

capability to any point on the globe (subject to cloud free images).

50cm black and white, 50 cm colour and 2 metre multispectral resolution products are available.

The scale of the imagery allowed for viewing of on ground activities including the extent of oil on

the surface and contour bank construction.

Costs associated with purchase of the imagery are in the order of $4,000 (AU). This is

substantially less than sending officers to this remote part of Queensland for an inspection of

the area, which at the time of the spill had strict controls on access.

Figure 8: Pléiades satellite imagery after oil spill on left and after clean up on right.

1 This satellite was launched in 2011 and the investigation occurred in 2013.



4.2.3.1 UAVs

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) have been increasingly used for environmental management

purposes and were mentioned by many users as a potential solution to their needs. UAVs are regularly

used in the mining industry in Queensland for applications such as the accurate measurement of the

area and volume of spoil or subsidence areas. They have also been used by DNRM as a cost effective

and safe method to map the topography at abandoned mine sites. Often these applications have used

Lidar sensors to provide accurate contour information. However, a much wider range of sensors are

potentially available including thermal imaging, methane detection, multispectral and photogrammetry.

Further details of available sensors and potential uses of UAVs are summarized in Appendix E.

In Australia, The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) regulates the use of UAVs. At the moment any

machine used for commercial purposes required a licenced operator. The current regulations for UAVs,

which were developed in 2002, are being reviewed by CASA and a complete re-write of regulations is

expected by 2016.

UAVs may have specific applications relevant to the user needs identified in this report. A UAV may

provide a cost-effective platform for appropriate sensors to accurately map specific features in a

landscape. For example Lidar measurement of drainage areas within the Great Barrier Reef catchments

to quantify erosion from gullies and stream bank erosion for improved inputs in the catchment load

models for reporting on reef plan could be carried out using a UAV. Other examples of applications

raised by users include survey for methane emissions from ground water or monitoring of various

attributes of endangered Great Artesian Basin springs.

Small do-it-yourself operated UAVs could provide simple aerial photography of an area to help with a

ground reconnaissance. However, the collection of quantitative geo-referenced imagery is likely to

require a larger licenced UAV from a licenced commercial provider. Indicative costs for a UAV survey

over a few hectares, using a licensed operator are in the order of $5,000-$10,000. However,

alternatives such as the high resolution satellite imagery may be a more cost effective alternative option

compared to UAVs for many of the real time monitoring needs identified by users.

UAV delivered remote sensing is not able to replace the large state-wide datasets required for

landscape scale assessment and prioritisation currently delivered by the RSC. UAV survey, delivered

by licensed operators, currently provides an additional option for collecting remote sensed data for

specific areas or features in the landscape. However, other tools, such as high resolution near-real time

satellite imagery may provide equally or more cost effective options in particular circumstances.

Figure 9: Riegl RiCOPTER (from Riegl 2014a)



5 Trade-offs in product delivery

Delivery of the woody extent change data, including the associated unexplained clearing assessment,

has in the past been delayed by up to two years after the clearing reporting period. This has made it

difficult to carry out investigations within the time frame required by legislation but also to allow early

intervention to halt any ongoing clearing. The RSC has recently taken steps to improve the process for

delivery of woody change products by a combination of automating more processes and delivering

interim products at an earlier date for use in compliance, followed by later completion of the final state-

wide product.

The updated process allows delivery of an interim unexplained clearing assessment 1 month after the

last image is captured for the reporting period and the final state-wide dataset to be delivered 8 months

later. This revised process has addressed many of the previous limitations in relation to timing of the

assessment. Further details of this process and possible future improvements are discussed below.

Woody extent change data 5.1

The delivery of the unexplained clearing assessment and woody change extent data under the previous

and updated process is shown graphically in Figure 10. The annual reporting of woody extent change

covers a 12 month period from dry season to dry season. The precise end date for the reporting period

is dictated by when suitable (cloud free) Landsat images can be captured for a particular location and

therefore varies from about June to November. Therefore the reporting period ends progressively,

between about June to November each year, for different parts of the state.

Previous process 5.1.1

The previous woody change assessment process delivered the state wide woody change products and

associated reports 20 or more months after the end of the reporting period. Under this process image

analysis did not begin until after images had been captured for the entire state, which was about

January in the year after the end of the reporting period. This analysis included application of automated

algorithms followed by desktop and field checking and associated manual editing and then a final

check. The change in extent data was generally completed by the September of the year after the

reporting period.

This was followed by statistical analysis and compilation of a state-wide SLATS report to accompany

the data in September. The associated unexplained clearing assessment, which breaks down the

clearing by permit and other exemptions was prepared concurrently with the full SLATS report and was

ready for release at the same time. The datasets and associated reports were completed and ready for

release by about April of the following year - about 22 months after the end of the reporting period2.

RSC unexplained clearing assessment

The unexplained clearing assessment uses data on permits, native forest practice notifications, self-

assessable codes and other exempt clearing and is obtained from the DNRM electronic Land and

2 Release of the report and data was subject to ministerial approval and therefore often did not occur until 2 or more years after

the reporting period.



Vegetation Administration System (eLVAS) database. There have been delays in transferring this data

from DNRM to RSC in the past, although RSC is not expecting delays in the future. The eLVAS data

are intersected with the preliminary woody change (tree clearing) layer and a series of rules and filters

are applied to flag areas of unexplained clearing. Further manual edits are carried out to eliminate linear

and other exempt clearing. The time taken to complete this manual editing varies with the amount of

exempt clearing that has occurred but generally takes about a week to complete.

Updated process 5.1.2

The modified woody change assessment process now in operation includes the production of an interim

change cover for use in the RSC unexplained clearing assessment that is completed 1 month after the

last image is captured for the reporting period, followed by the production of the final dataset 8 months

later.

Image analysis for the change cover now begins as soon as suitable (cloud free) imagery is captured

taking place progressively as images are acquired. The initial analysis focuses on parts of the state

where most (95%) of tree clearing has occurred in the past, which includes about half (50) of Landsat

scenes that cover the entire state. This interim analysis only includes automated processing and office

based checks and manual editing. It does not include field validation, further manual editing and final

checks. The interim analysis is completed by about December each year, shortly after the final scenes

for the reporting period are captured. This is followed by the RSC unexplained clearing assessment

which is expected to be completed by early February the year after the reporting period, for prioritisation

of investigations within each region.

After completion of the interim woody change data, the final state-wide woody change cover is then

produced by processing imagery from the remainder of the state and along with field validation, manual

editing and final checking. This is completed by June of the year following the reporting period. The

analysis and completion of the SLATS report is completed by the following August.

Further refinement 5.1.3

The user interviews indicated the updated timing and content of the interim RSC unexplained clearing

assessment was a major improvement over the previous process and is adequate for the purposes of

prioritising the work of compliance investigations in the regions. This new process is likely to require

continued refinement to ensure it continues to meet the requirements of DNRM compliance. There is

also a need to quantify the differences between the interim assessment and final assessment to allow

users to further assess the suitability of the interim products and make appropriate allowances

particularly if systematic differences occur.

Further reductions in the time lag the clearing and mapping of clearing by RSC are required to allow

DNRM to effective audit and where necessary intervene in suspected non-compliant activities,. For

example, to assess areas of thinning or fodder harvesting, currently only the gross area derived from

the total area referred under the self-assessable code notifications are available. The more timely

availability of woody change data from the RSC would allow the net area of thinning/fodder harvesting

to be assessed and audited. Currently the manual editing required to produce a final woody change

cover is a major constraint to delivering a more timely product. One solution suggested is to prioritise

the production of final woody change products for specific areas or issues.

Therefore, recommendations for future updates to the process are:

Undertake ongoing review and new interim unexplained clearing assessment to ensure it

continues to meet compliance and user needs.

Quantify changes that occur between the interim and final SLATS change cover products.



Investigate methods for further automating woody change monitoring to provide DNRM with

products for auditing specific areas or issues in near real time.

Month J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A

Previous process

Image capture

Image analysis

SLATS report

Unexplained clearing ass.

Final dataset

Updated process

Image capture

Interim image analysis

Unexplained clearing ass.

Statewide analysis Final SLATS report and datset

deliverable for DNRM RSC processing

Figure 10: Comparison of the previous and updated SLATS product delivery process



6 Value for money

The RSC runs one of the leading programs of its kind in Australia. Products and programs have been

so successful that they have been copied and adopted in New South Wales (and Victoria) because the

products produced are “… reliable and proven nature …. with a high acceptance by stakeholders”

(NSW DEH 2014). NSW now has a remote sensing program with a scope broadly similar to

Queensland RSC. The Queensland RSC has a total annual budget of about $4 million which equates to

about $2.30 per km2

of the state. This compares to the costs of the similar program in NSW which has

an annual budget of about $6 million which equates to about $7.30 per km2

of the state3. Much of the

difference in cost is because NSW programs use SPOT imagery which provides a high resolution

products and greater discrimination within the more sparsely wooded area. While this would address

some of the deficiencies identified in the current Landsat based products it would add up to $1.4 million

a year to the budget for a complete coverage of Queensland.

The extensive use of the freely available US Landsat imagery US Geological Survey provides a highly

cost effective product that has a high acceptance from users. The scale of resolution of these data is

seen for many of the RSC datasets enables the production of cost effective data compared to other

options available in the market. The RSC program and long term monitoring datasets (Figure 1)

enables the production of applications and products that provide defensible science and spatial data

that are used to underpin a range of Queensland initiatives across a range of agencies (Table 1).

The long term nature of the RSC program has enabled ongoing development and improvements of

existing products as well as the development of new products over time. For example the ground cover

dataset were initially developed as a by-product of the woody SLATS project. The measurement of

ground cover has evolved from the bare ground/ground cover index, derived from fractional cover

masked by the woody (tree) layer (DSITIA 2014). Ground cover dataset have been incorporated into a

wide range of products and applications and is now used as much as the woody extent data products

by the SLATS project.

Contestabil ity 6.1

The Queensland Government has identified the process of “contestability” as the means to provide

better value for money in the delivery of services. This includes testing of the market for product delivery

to ensure the current arrangements are providing value for money.

Many of the RSC products are difficult to test in the market because, apart from other state and

Commonwealth government organisations, there are few providers able to deliver the ongoing

extensive research and development and the (Landsat) satellite image archive hosted on the High

Performance Computing infrastructure that underpins the delivery of the products.

However, some of the higher order products delivered by the RSC and associated applications (such as

FORAGE and VegMachine) could potentially be delivered by external providers and tested in the

market (Table 2). This process is being progressed by DSITIA and will confirm the value for money of

the current arrangements or recommend appropriate changes to service delivery.

3 The NSW funding figure is based on the $24 million over 4 years from 2007 quoted on NSW Office of Environment and Heritage

web site : http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/projects/NativeVegetationMapping.htm [October 27 2014]

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/projects/NativeVegetationMapping.htm%20accesses%20October%2027%202014



The Independent Commission of Audit (COA) identified contestability as the means to provide better

value for money in the delivery of front-line services by the Queensland Government. Contestability

encourages more efficient and more innovative service delivery, whether by the public, private or the

not for profit sector. Contestability is a process where Government tests the market to ensure it is

providing the public with the best possible solution at the best possible price. Contestability does not

automatically result in the outsourcing of a service. A contestability review will consider a whole range of

service delivery options to ensure all possible options are considered. These include:

Keep and improve the service.

Joint ventures.

Performance-based contracting, such as payment by outcomes.

Mutual and employee-owned organisations.

It should be noted that commercial providers like Google are beginning to provide ‘big data’ applications

(Hansen et al 2013). An assessment of these products by the RSC has shown that they may be of

poorer quality compared to RSC products. While at present these applications are limited but they are

drawing on time series information and a range of current sensors and although they do not match the

services currently provided by RSC they have potential to do so in the future. There needs to be

ongoing monitoring of these developments and comparison of the associated products with the RSC

products to ensure that the most costs effective solution is used in the future.



Table 2: RSC products with a potential delivery market

Product Delivery Market

Comments

Vegetation extent, structure,

biomass and change Very limited Difficult to separate out individual services from historical time series archive.

Fire scar mapping (historical and

recent) Possible Techniques are reasonably established and transportable and can be applied to deliver recent mapping to add to existing historical mapping.

Ground cover monitoring

(historical and recent) Very limited Heavy reliance on Landsat image archive and automated processing and undergoing continuous improvement resulting from research and development work.

Land use and land use change Possible Standard national methods. Would need to be able to match the local input and knowledge currently provided by DNRM regional staff.

Seasonal crop mapping and

monitoring Possible Queensland specific methodology (version 1) which requires improvement, but could be evaluated in other states/territories.

Landscape erosion features (e.g.

gullies, stream banks, contour

banks) Very Limited

High degree of experimentation and development of techniques required with no certainly in final product

Riparian vegetation corridors Possible Use of existing data and techniques although there is also continued evolution of techniques making it difficult to test.

Coal seam gas infrastructure

mapping Possible

Use of current imagery to manually map limited number of features could be delivered by a number of organisations, although may be difficult to supply ongoing development of automated methods. May require government deliver to maintain independence of advice for investigations and expert evidence in court.

Water body and flood extent

mapping Very Limited By product of water masks from other processes.

Weeds mapping Very Limited High degree of experimentation and development of techniques required with no certainly in final product

Koala habitat mapping Possible

One-off woody vegetation cover from SPOT imagery has been produced by external providers in the past (see RPS 2014) although there are no plans to continue this mapping at the moment.

Natural disaster response mapping Very Limited Requires immediate response with little opportunity to develop specifications

Pasture biomass modelling and

forecasting (AussieGRASS

system) Very Limited Highly specialised modelling techniques.

Development of future

applications from datasets Possible Required in depth knowledge of the data although partnerships between RSC and users/other organisations may be appropriate



7 Synergies between departments

The user needs analysis and assessment of use of current products has shown there are multiple users

and uses for many of the RSC products. The uses of the core landscape monitoring datasets by

departments are summarised in Table 3. This shows that the image archive and the core landscape

monitoring datasets (woody vegetation, ground cover and land use) are used extensively by DNRM,

DEHP, DSDIP and DAFF. The state-wide fire scar mapping has some important potential uses but has

not yet been fully incorporated into operational applications by other agencies.

The total funding for the RSC is about $4.9 million per annum and is derived from a variety of sources

(Table 4). While the total amount and breakdown varies from year to year, the 2013/14 figures shows

that the satellite image archive and other enabling functions costs about $1.9 million/annum and the

core landscape monitoring datasets costs about $1.7 million/annum.

There is a mixture of funding sources directed at different levels of the RSC program (Figure 11).

Funding of the core datasets and image archive is mainly by DSITIA and DNRM, while funding for the

applications is mainly from DNRM (including the Regional NRM Investment Program for Reef Plan),

DEHP and other external grants. A comparison of the funding in Table 4 with the uses by agencies in

Table 3 shows DSDIP and DAFF are major uses that do not provide direct funding of core datasets.

In summary there are multiple agencies using a range of products that are derived from each of the

core RSC datasets and that this use is not reflected in the breakdown of funding sources. The risk with

the current bilateral (between DSITIA and individual Departments) negotiations for funding of RSC

products and services is that the withdrawal of funding by one department for one component of the

RSC program may impact on a range of products and associated users. While a detailed consideration

of how funding is currently allocated is outside the scope of this report, in broad terms the approach to

funding the RSC programme should include:

The $1.9 million annual funding for the enabling functions (image archive and processing

systems) should be shared across the whole of government. This should be negotiated on a

multilateral/whole of government basis in recognition that these services underpin a wide range

of interconnected uses and users and it is difficult to allocate a proportion of their use to a

specific department.

The $1.7 million annual funding for the landscape monitoring programs (woody vegetation,

ground cover, and land use) should be proportioned across agencies by relative use. This

should still be negotiated on a multilateral/whole of government basis, in recognition that these

services underpin a wide range of interconnected uses and uses.

The funding and delivery of specific products and uses, which is currently $1.3 million/annum,

should continue to be negotiated on a bilateral basis.

An alternative is to allocate the cost of the core monitoring programs and enabling functions as

overheads across all products. Apart from raising the costs of individuals products this would still be

subject to variations associated with the year to year level of funding from individual departments and

may stop some products being delivered for what essential programs such as the Reef Plan Reporting.



Table 3 Summary of major RSC datasets by department use

Major Datasets and Image archive

DNRM DEHP DAFF DSDIP DPC (Reef Plan)

NPRSR PSBA

Image archive and support systems

Woody vegetation extent and change

Ground cover

Land Use

Fire scar

major or critical requirement. = minor or potential requirement.

Table 4 Indicative annual funding of the RSC program

Item Total Cost

($ mill/year)

Cost ($ mill/year) by funding source

DNRM DSITIA NRM

regional (reef)

DEHP OTHER

Enabling functions

Image archive/processing and system development

0.9 0.9

computing infrastructure – hardware

1

0.3 0.3

AARNet 0.2 0.08 0.15

computing infrastructure – personal FTE

1

0.5 0.5

Landscape monitoring datasets

Woody vegetation 0.7 0.6 0.2

Land use 0.3

0.3

Ground cover 0.4

0.1 0.1

0.2

Fire scar 0.1

0.1

AussieGRASS 0.2

0.2

Other products

Vegetation management compliance support

0.1 0.1

CSG compliance support 0.5

0.5

GBR riparian monitoring 0.6

0.6

NRM spatial hub 0.1

0.1

Total 4.9 1.7 1.2 0.7 0.5 0.3

1 90% of total costs as usage is shared with climate modelling group.



Figure 11: RSC program funding arrangements

1 Based on 2013/14 indicative figures



8 Business continuity

Business continuity is traditionally concerned with ensuring that critical business functions will be

maintained, or at least recovered to an operational state within a reasonably short period, when faced

with serious incidents or disasters. The RSC has a draft business continuity plan addressing risks

posed by short term disasters, to the functioning of the High Performance Computing that facilitates

most of the services delivered by the RSC.

The business continuity assessment carried out here focuses on medium term risks to the critical

computing infrastructure needed to maintain the current RSC products and options for updates to the

Landsat imagery that underpin many of the current RSC products. Other factors are also important to

ongoing supply of products including ongoing Research and Development (addressed under section

10) and ongoing funding of products (not addressed in this report).

This DSITIA owned equipment is secured in a Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

(DAFF) managed computer room with process air-conditioning and uninterruptible power supply backup

power. DAFF’s Information Technology Partners (ITP) maintain other equipment and network switches

in the same room which also houses some CSIRO computing and network equipment. Facilities

management of the HPC resources is undertaken by specialists employed by the Land and Spatial

Information Group (LSI), Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM).

DSITIA contracts with SGI and Oracle specify response times for general hardware faults. DAFF and

DNRM have service level agreements (SLAs) with DSITIA for network and computing issue response

times. Copies of backup tapes and duplicates of mass storage tapes are held off-site at a commercial

Iron Mountain Australia repository.

The Ecosciences Precinct computer room also houses a 5 gigabit per second network gateway to

AARNet. This network linkage provides high speed and tariff-free capacity to exchange very large

datasets with collaborators and to acquire new satellite imagery from the USA, Europe and Asia

systems. Satellite imagery files tend to be in the 100s of megabytes to gigabyte size range. DAFF’s ITP

maintain the operation and security of the AARNet gateway. Only DSITIA’s Science Division staff and

DNRM’s LSI staff, based at the Ecosciences Precinct, may use the AARNet network.

This system allows multi-petabyte image volumes to be stored and with 10-100, 000 individual requests that are many terabytes in size per day.

HPC continuity opt ions 8.1

Funding for the HPC and associated operational staff is in place until 2017. However, medium term

risks include the ability to maintain funding to support this infrastructure, the maintenance of specialist

skills required to run the system and the facility becoming redundant in the face of rapidly changing

technology.

A final stable solution would be the development of another replacement HPC facility or a full move to

cloud based computing4 from an external provider. Substitute sites such as the Amazon Web Services

4 “Cloud” computing is the delivery of IT resources and applications via the internet, generally with pay-as-you-go pricing.



(AWS) are being considered and actively investigated by the RSC. Preliminary conclusions are that

some of the data processing software can be run on cloud based systems and are worth investigating

further. However, these systems are not currently able to cope with the extremely large amount of data

(image) storage and processing requirements of the RSC. The volumes of data stored on the HPC, the

need to access dispersed internal intra-government network natural resource and environmental

databases, and network latency issues between cloud storage and image processing workstations

indicates this will be both technically demanding and /or expensive.

It seems more likely that alternatives to an in house HPC might stem from current proposals for future

national coordination programs that will enable a more coordinated, integrated and effective approach

to developing infrastructure and sharing resources (Space Science and Earth Observations Working

Group, 2009). Given similar remote sensing programs to those delivered by RSC are operating

elsewhere in Australia (e.g. NSW, VIC and at the national level by GA), it would seem there will be a

national need for the continuing development of appropriate infrastructure.

Initiatives to address computing infrastructure are currently being developed at the national level under

the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS) which includes the Terrestrial

Ecosystem Research Network (TERN) and the National Computational Infrastructure (NCI). Many of the

RSC products are currently stored and available to users on the TERN AusCover facility (see section

9.1.2.2). However while these facilities can store remote sensing products or possess high data

processing capabilities they are not yet able to cope with the very high data storage requirements of

remote sensing applications. There are no clear alternatives for the current HPC arrangements currently

available and the RSC needs to continue investigation into cloud based options in combination with

HPC either in house or in collaboration with emerging national computing infrastructure.

National Computational Infrastructure

The National Computational Infrastructure (NCI) is part of the National Collaborative Research

Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS) and is Australia’s national research computing facility, providing world-

class services to Australian researchers, industry and government. NCI provides high performance

computer based research, with a focus in the environment, climate change and earth system science.

NCI is home to the Southern Hemisphere’s fastest supercomputer and file systems, It houses a new 1.2

petaflop HPC system, a 3,200 core high-performance compute cloud, persistent disk storage of more

than 10 PBytes (as at July 2013, and growing), and a new purpose-built data centre. This facility has

the ability to process ‘big data’ sometimes associated with remote sensing and also houses a range of

remote sensing data products.

The RSC has time allocated to and has been actively investigating the ability of cloud based systems to

support its needs. These investigations have found that although there may be some potential in using

hybrid systems which combine in house computing with cloud based systems, there are currently major

constraints to using this technology, particularly from latency issues associated with accessing the

extremely large RSC data sets across remote networks.

It is recommended that the RSC conduct an in-house review to build on the current work in this area

and develop a medium to long term strategy to ensure their needs are met into the future.



Landsat platform 8.2

Many of the state-wide datasets are based on the Landsat imagery that is currently made freely

available. While this platform has delivered a stable supply of ongoing data, a contingency plan for

replacement imagery needs to be considered.

Options that could be considered include:

The substitution of state-wide SPOT data for Landsat. The NSW remote sensing program uses

SPOT as the basis for the woody extent and change in extent analysis. Therefore the methods

to adapt to this imagery are available.

Use of other imagery such as European Space Agency supported Sentinel Satellite 1 & 2.

However this would require investment from the Australian Government to obtain access to the

imagery.

Using and combing multiple data sources such as combining MODIS with Rapideye, Skybox or

other new launched imagery.



9 Current and future product communication

Web delivery of appl icat ions/visualisation tools 9.1

Current tools 9.1.1

A range of RSC products can currently be viewed and interpreted on a number of web based

applications and visualisation tools including:

Many of RSC products are available via the Queensland Globe which allows such products to

be viewed inside the GoogleEarthTM

application.

Static (pdf format) annual reports of woody cover change are available on the RSC web site

(e.g. DSITIA 2014).

Other applications which are currently available, or in development, that allow for visualisation and

interpretation of RSC products include:

AusCover which includes a portal for visualising and downloading data (Figure 12, Figure 13).

Open source tool which accesses the RSC products on AusCover including:

CHOPPER which produced a subset time series datasets (Figure 14)

PAST which provides a time-series graph and summary statistics for the fractional cover

datasets.

FORAGE which currently uses RSC ground cover and woody FPC extent data to produce

reports and provides RSC imagery.

VegMachine which is widely used in extension programs including Grazing Best Management

Practice (BMP). This provides ground cover reports and comparisons for user defined areas.

AussieGRASS is a RSC product that includes climate and pasture modelling tools as well as

ground and woody cover information. The Longpaddock web site where AussieGRASS is

available and has a large number of visualization tools (e.g. Figure 15).

NRM Spatial Information Hub (the Hub - part of the CRC for Spatial Information. The aim of the

Hub is to provide land managers with systems, tools, data, and skills needed to dramatically

improve access to farm-scale information and knowledge. These tools may include ground

cover and other RSC products.

Further developments 9.1.2

9.1.2.1 Web version of VegMachine

There is a proposal to develop a web based version of VegMachine. This could be developed to

complement the similar regional comparison report on FORAGE. It could also be developed with a view

to eventually serving similar applications such as Dynamic Reference cover (Bastin et al. 2012) and

other vegetation condition applications.

9.1.2.2 AusCover visualisation tools

RSC should build on the visualisation tools already available for RSC products on the AusCover portal.

This could be achieved by setting up a similar portal using served data to reflect specific Queensland

Government branded products or by making direct links from Queensland Government web sites to the

AusCover portal.

An alternative is the custom development of a portal for the main datasets (e.g. QLUMP) using ArcGIS

online (available with current ESRI licencing that is currently used to deliver WetlandInfo and similar

http://www.dnrm.qld.gov.au/mapping-data/queensland-globe

http://www.auscover.org.au/

https://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/forage/



products) Such portals will allow branding as well as flexibility to provide specific use cases /

applications that make use of RSC data (including mashing with other available data sources) and can

also provide some geoprocessing abilities (i.e. geocoding, route selection, simple spatial analysis etc.)

and report production (i.e. ground cover report). However, the latter case is best provided and

developed by, or at least in partnership with, users and other third parties to ensure the products are

developed to meet specific user defined needs.

Development of web delivery applications and associated data visualisation tools will make RSC

products more accessible to users. The development of these tools is not necessarily the prime

responsibility of RSC. However, RSC should facilitate these developments by making data available

(via web services etc. listed above) and also be involved in partnerships with government and non-

governments agencies to develop and deliver such tools. This will allow RSC to work to the data

limitations and potential best use case scenario.

Statistics reporting 9.1.3

The current SLATS report is produced as a static pdf document. This could be replaced with an on line

web delivery system, similar to the Summary tool on the Queensland Government WetlandInfo web site

(Figure 16). The user needs analysis indicated that the next SOE report is considering a similar

approach and may be an avenue to producing such a summary tool for woody extent and woody extent

change.



Figure 12: AusCover product download, visualisation portal

Source: http://www.auscover.org.au/data/product-list

http://www.auscover.org.au/data/product-list



Figure 13: AusCover portal visualisation tool - seasonal fractional cover

Landsat, QLD DSITIA algorithm, QLD coverage. Source: http://www.auscover.org.au/data/product-list

Figure 14 The chopper tool

Source: http://vegcover.com/chopper

http://www.auscover.org.au/data/product-list

http://vegcover.com/chopper

http://vegcover.com/chopper



Figure 15: Example of data visualisation available on the AussieGRASS web site

Figure 16: Wetland extent summary tool

Source: WetlandInfo web site http://wetlandinfo.ehp.qld.gov.au/wetlands/facts-maps/queensland/

http://wetlandinfo.ehp.qld.gov.au/wetlands/facts-maps/queensland/



Data delivery 9.1.4

Many of the RSC spatial (GIS shapefiles) products can be downloaded from the Queensland

Government Information Service (QGIS) web site. This is part of the Queensland Government’s recently

introduced (late 2013) open data strategy, which aims to share data to drive innovation, growth and job

creation within the private sector and direct benefit the community. Data are provided freely and openly,

allowing reuse by the public for virtually any purpose.

RSC products include some of the most downloaded datasets on QGIS (Table 5). Datasets are

downloaded by a broad range of users with at least 65% of QGIS data accessed by the private sector.

Uses outside government include Regional NRM groups, industry bodies, consultants, research

agencies and increasingly by landholders.

Table 5: Downloads for some RSC datasets for 2013 from QGIS web site.

RSC Datasets No. downloads

Land use mapping 1714

Foliage Projective Cover (FPC; woody vegetation canopy density

measure) 1316*

SLATS tree clearing layers 192

Fire scar mapping 462

Satellite image footprints and dates for SLATS analysis 68

* The FPC dataset is very large and is divided into satellite footprints across Queensland. To cover any particular region a number

of datasets have to be downloaded. As a result the FPC download number is always very high.

This latter dataset, and other RSC products, are currently made available via the AusCover portal

(Figure 12). This includes some products that cannot be made available on QGIS due to limitations of

that site. AusCover is part of the Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network (TERN), which delivers

critical research infrastructure needed to improve understanding and management of Australia’s

ecosystems. TERN is part of the National Collaborate Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS).

AusCover is also developing a consolidated repository and meta-database, including standard

processing and validation methods for specific biophysical land cover products and basic processed

time-series biophysical image maps. This will involve processing of medium resolution satellite data

from national archives, as well as data from current and future satellite acquisition, supported by a

national system of instrumented field validation sites.

The AusCover facility has established and implements a range of data management principles attached

to products including:

Naming and versioning conventions

Identified distributed data serving hubs

Appropriate metadata standards (for data discovery)

Copyright & custodian restrictions

Nominated data managers



The AusCover portal includes advanced server protocols that enable the data to be delivered via web

services. There is no doubt advanced sever protocols will be required to effectively deliver data and

data processing for high level users and RSC staff if cloud computing is used to house data. There is a

lot of excitement generated about these technologies including predictions that cloud computing will

revolutionise remote sensing (also see box below).

The RSC needs to continue to investigate these areas, mindful that this is a rapidly growing area and

that implementation should only proceed when there is an appropriate level of confidence with the

maturity and reliability of the technology. Making data available on the web via web services and other

cloud based technology will facilitate the development of applications and visualisation tools by

Queensland Government Departments and third parties, consistent with the Queensland Governments

open data strategy. RSC should continue to utilise the AusCover portal, particularly where the datasets

cannot be delivered on the QGIS portal due to limitations of that site. However RSC should consider

making explicit links to the AusCover portal from the Queensland Government web site to promote RSC

branding.

THREDDS is an application that enables metadata and datasets to be stored on computers or clusters

of computers and delivered via web services such as WMS, WCS and OPeNDAP. OPeNDAP is able to

subset very large files into small windows. These applications are currently used on the AusCover

portal.

Apache HadoopTM

is a framework for managing large distributed datasets. It includes a distributed file-

system and the MapReduce programming model for large scale distributed processing.

These (and similar) software:

Enable data to be served via web mapping (and other similar) services.

Allows direct data access via URLs, which enables users to build value-adding services and

applications.

Has solid uptake in the remote sensing and spatial/GIS (GeoServer) communities.

Are freely available, open source and have a strong development community that facilitates

collaboration and makes them relatively easy to deploy and maintain.

Allow processing across multiple-sites without the need to (fully) download copies of the data.

Facilitate processing, collaboration with other R&D groups and promote a more innovative

environment (this is relevant to separate scope item on R&D).

Predications about cloud based computing impacts on remote sensing

High-performance cloud computing products and services are claimed (by providers) to open the

geospatial industry to a global market at reduced costs and allow for large volumes of data to be stored,

accessed and manipulated without being ingested into users’ systems. The companies developing

cloud computing are proven entities, such as Google and Amazon, as well as their developer

communities, and already have proved themselves capable of supporting a global audience and

working with governments as technology partners.

Cloud-based, multisensor intelligence networks will emerge. High-performance cloud computing

products and services will become a key enabler to global multisensor intelligence networks. The

following enabling technologies will drive the evolution of such cloud-based networks

Network transport, with lower latencies and higher traffic volumes (100Gbps), will be required to

support multisensor intelligence networks.



Cloud-based storage and data access will bring 1,000x improvements in input/output data

access, using global file systems that limit the need to move or replicate data.

Object/cloud databases will have the ability to manage trillions of data transactions.

Cloud-based encryption and security will allow secure multidomain data and user access

Source: Earth Imaging Journal (2014)



10 Research and Development resourcing

Criteria to determine the balance between R&D and delivery of operational products are not clear cut.

The approach taken in this report is to firstly benchmark R&D with some available quantitative data from

the private sector, then undertake a qualitative assessment of the R&D by the RSC.

Budgets and outputs 10.1

Table 6 lists R&D budgets as a proportion of the total budget for some private companies found online.

The total R&D budgets in this list vary between 3-16% of the total budget (or revenue). Companies with

small R&D budgets, such as Apple and IBM, deal with consumer goods in highly competitive markets,

where the stated (in the case of Apple) company strategy is not to develop the ‘best’ product, but to

produce a ‘good’ product with support from a relatively high marketing budget to ensure sales. This

contrasts with pharmaceutical companies, where higher R&D budgets are required as the development

of innovative and new products that are key to their business. While the relevance of private company

R&D to the RSC activities may be limited, the situation applying to pharmaceutical companies would

appear to be more similar to the RSC than companies such as Apple and IBM.

The current RSC R&D budget is about 15.9% of the total budget5. This R&D is generally embedded

within operational project work and therefore closely aligned to applied natural resource and agricultural

issues and real-world user problems. Technology selection for new satellites, laser, radar, UAVs is

cautious. The RSC has an excellent track record in the development of operational state wide products

that are well regarded by stakeholders and that are also improved over time. For example the

measurement of ground cover has evolved from the bare ground/ground cover index to an improved

measure derived from fractional cover and to measuring ground cover under denser woody vegetation

(DSITIA 2014). Many users are well aware of this evolution and reported that the new products better

met their needs.

There are many reasons why the RSC requires a significant proportion of its budget to be allocated to

R&D. Substantial R&D is required in the remote sensing field, to stay abreast of rapidly developing

technologies such as new satellites, aerial capture techniques and computer processing. Therefore,

while it is of prime importance for the RSC to continue to deliver operational products that meet user’s

needs, for this to continue to occur over the medium to long term an adequate level of R&D needs to be

invested to ensure products evolve and improve both with changing user needs and changes in

technology. In the user interviews one comment was made about the frustration of RSC product

delivery being delayed while an improved product was developed. However, generally users seemed

satisfied that the RSC is able to produce useful operational products within acceptable timeframes while

at the same time allowing for continuous improvement in product quality.

Most of the RSC datasets are made freely available to public and private users. There is very little

restriction imposed on the use of this data facilitating the development of new products by third parties.

Therefore the RSC’s R&D around innovation/ideas/research contributes to external parties creating

tertiary products.

5 In 2013/14 it was estimated about $640,000 of the total RSC budget of $4 million was spent on R&D, although the total and

R&D budgets vary from year to year (Christian Witte pers. comm.).



The RSC is also required to act as a knowledge broker across government, advising on the latest and

best technologies that support agency service delivery (such as broad scale policy development,

environmental management and planning). An example of this is the advice on cost effective imagery

the RSC was able to provide to DEHP for the oil spill investigation in western Queensland (section

4.2.3). Another example is the development of new techniques to map CSG infrastructure followed by

innovation and improvements that have resulted in substantial reductions in the costs of imagery

(section 4.1.7).

R&D by the RSC is not a standalone activity but is embedded within the delivery of operational

products. This ensures R&D is applied and focused on user needs. In addition the RSC is an active

participant in the Joint Remote Sensing Research Program with the University of Queensland and other

organisations. This enables the R&D investment by the RSC to be leveraged by receiving additional

input from the university and state collaborators. The embedded applied and collaborative nature of the

R&D is a strength that clearly needs to be maintained into the future.

The RSC currently delivers operational products that meet user needs while at the same time making a

significant R&D investment to enable continuous improvement in product quality and cost effectiveness

and also develop new products to meet new user needs. It is difficult to define an optimal proportion of

R&D required to ensure that this situation continues into the medium and long term. The user needs

analysis indicate users require more products but also faster processing and product turn around and

improvements in existing products. The current 16% R&D proportion would appear to be the minimum

level of R&D budget required. Monitoring future progress against the criteria of supply and improvement

of ongoing and new products is required. R&D investment may need to be increased particularly where

new products using new technology are required.

Table 6: Proportion of R&D budget for some private companies

Company R&D as % of total budget

Apple 3%

Microsoft 14%

Google 13%

Oracle 13%

IBM 6%

10 largest Pharmaceutical companies 16%

Merk (pharmaceuticals) 17%

Europe computing and electronics 11%

The Joint Remote Sensing Research Program (JRSRP) 10.2

The JRSRP was founded in 2007 and is collaboration between The Queensland RSC and the remote

sensing groups at the University of Queensland’s Centre for Spatial Environmental Research, and, the

New South Wales Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) and the Victorian Department of



Environment and Primary Industries (DEPI). The JRSRP also functions as the Terrestrial Ecosystem

Research Network’s (TERN) AusCover Brisbane Node.

The program incorporates researchers, government scientists, environmental managers and significant

computing and data storage capacity from within these agencies. Principles of operating are to develop

and implement scientifically sound approaches that contribute to national and international sciences,

and are open and publicly accessible, for use in public good activities. Engaging in evidence based

decision making through employing a solid scientific approach leads to well informed policy decisions

and effective environmental outcomes because decisions are based on accurate information. This, in

turn, will lead to policies addressing the immediate and long term needs of our environment.

The major benefits for the JRSRP participants include:

Cost effectiveness: the cost of research has been reduced through sharing, re-use and

improvement as well as avoiding duplication of activities. Because programs participants’ share

common interests, research related activities and new products can be targeted based on what

is relevant to the operational requirements of each organisation.

Sharing of knowledge of industry and networking.

Access to new technologies and field instruments e.g. terrestrial laser scanner.

Providing a single point of contact for other government agencies to engage and collaborate.

Producing assured high quality science through international peer review of models, collective

field data and information sharing.

Combined capacity to address strategic problems common across agencies, e.g. loss of access

to Landsat sensors and need for consistent national calibration and validation.

Increased skills and capability within partner organisations.

Calibrating and validating algorithms and remote sensing indices (e.g. fractional ground cover

index) across a wider range of ecological and climatic zones improving robustness of science.



11 Future research, programs and products

A list of potential R&D projects for the RSC is provided in Table 7. This is derived mainly from issues

raised in the user needs interviews. Many of the areas listed involve ongoing continuous improvement

of existing products with major new areas in water, which has previously been identified as an area

outside the traditional focus of the RSC on terrestrial vegetation.

The total annual costs of the in the table is $880,000 which is $140,000 more than the current R&D

expenditure. The projects are listed in an indicative order of decreasing priority with higher priority

projects determined as meeting identified user needs and/or high chance of success. Indicative costs

are listed with an indication of how many years this research would be expected to take and if the

research is already part of the RSC R&D program.

Much of the current R&D is delivered through the Joint Remote Sensing Research Program (JRSRP)

where priorities are agreed with the partner organisations. This enables the RSC research investment to

be leveraged by collaboration with other partners. The list in the should be incorporated into the

development of JRSRP priorities.

Table 7: List of future R&D projects

Area of R&D topic Comment

Funding

($,000/annum)

and years to

complete

Investigate ways to improve

SLATS method for woody change

mapping

Improve ability to detect changes based on Landsat

time-series and radar imagery. Aim to improve

detection accuracy to reduce editing. If successful

this creates an opportunity to undertake SLATS

change detection with similar resources. More

automated processes are required to further reduce the

reporting time lag. This may include investigation of

replacing current SLATS method with products derived

from the fractional cover dataset and quantifying

differences between interim and final datasets.

70

in progress,

review in 6 –

12 months

Release and enhance persistent

green trend product.

This was identified by many users as a need such as for

woody increase/decrease for development of vegetation

management policy, vegetation condition in relation to

grazing management (woodland thickening) but also

biodiversity, carbon sequestration. Could include

improved use of FPC time series and other

approaches.

70

3 years




Funding

($,000/annum)

and years to

complete

Continue incremental

improvements in - Land Use

mapping.

The current land use products are fundamental and

support a wide range of government legislation and

policy. Minor improvements to the processes are

required to ensure products are continuously

improved and made accessible.

20

Continue incremental

improvements to the ground

cover monitoring program

The current ground cover products are fundamental

and underpin a number of government legislation

and policy initiatives. Significant R&D is required to

ensure products are continuously improved, updated

and user-friendly access is provided to these large

datasets.

100

3 years

Develop a system to deliver

standard Lidar vegetation and

contour products. Continue to

collate available Lidar imagery.

This was identified by many users as useful information.

50

1 year,

currently not

funded)

Enhance Queensland archive

of satellite imagery, lidar and

field data and ability to utilise

the data.

Developing importers and corrections/masking for

new imagery (Sentinel-2, radar, RapidEye) and lidar

data; improve data management and analysis tools

including statistical time-series algorithms.

50

On-going

On-going Maintenance and

Development of Core System

Tools (Software)

Maintain and update libraries and source code

repository (maintaining and enhancing big data

processing capability).

50

On-going

Continue watching brief on new

remote sensing products and

communicate new developments

to users.

RSC should continue to be a knowledge broker to advice

other departments and help them become “informed

purchases” for remote sensing products.

part of ongoing

management

and operations

Further research the Landsat time

series data from 1972 – present.

This will include further development of vegetation cover

and densities changes over time and continued integration

of ground based measurements (from the large field

dataset build up over many years but also new

measurements from technology such as the Terrestrial

Laser Scanner with remote sensed imagery.

50

3 years

currently not

funded

Automate CSG infrastructure

change mapping.

To provide more cost-effective option taking advantage of

tie series data provided by panchromatic Landsat archive.

50

review in 3

years




Funding

($,000/annum)

and years to

complete

Continue to investigate storage

and processing of large datasets

across multiple processors and

sites.

This is required to facilitate the exploration of cloud based

and other options to the current in-house HPC.

50

ongoing

Investigate improved ground cover

products particularly in relation to

pasture biomass and quality.

These measures are relevant to grazing assessments but

not included in current ground cover product.

Appropriate areas of investigation include modeling with

AussieGRASS in conjunction with remote sensing

100

review in 3

years largely

unfunded apart

from a small

pilot project

Develop improved and new

measures of landscape health and

condition.

Participate in work lead by users to develop new

applications.

100

review in 3

years,

currently not

funded

Investigate ways to map gully and

stream-bank erosion and other

needs identified for reef modelling

(rock cover, land management

practices)

Identified as a need for Reef Plan modeling. Requires

development of an appropriate method such as a cost

effective delivery mechanisms for Lidar or measurements

using radar based satellites (section 4.2.2).

70

review in 2

years

Investigate remote sensing

solutions to issues relating to

management of ground and

surface hydrology.

Work with Office of Ground Water Impact Assessment

/relevant DNRM to detail R&D requirements. This includes

methane detection, vegetation greenness and surface and

ground water monitoring and requires more detailed

assessment of specific issues to be investigated

as required

Further research the Landsat time

series data from 1972 – present.

This will include further development of vegetation

cover and densities changes over time and

continued integration of ground based

measurements (from the large field dataset build up

over many years but also new measurements from

technology such as the Terrestrial Laser Scanner

with remote sensed imagery.

50

3 years,

currently not

funded



12 Recommendations

Key recommendations from this study are summarised below.

1.Unexplained clearing assessment

Further refine the delivery of this product including quantification of changes that occur between the

interim and final woody change cover products to make appropriate allowances for systemic errors and

consider prioritising specific areas or issues (nominated by DNRM) for finalisation of data.

Investigate processes that can prioritise specific areas or issues (nominated by DNRM) for finalisation

of data to enable more real-time monitoring for auditing self-assessable codes under the Vegetation

Management Act 1999.

2.Compliance support

Review the level of compliance support for vegetation matters provided to DNRM.

3.Reporting

Include a breakdown of total area cleared by clearing type (fodder, thinning etc.) in the clearing report to

provide fuller context for the tree clearing figures.

Replace the current pdf type format for reporting with an online web-based reporting tool, possibly in

partnership with the State of the Environment reporting, that provides users with statistics for their area

of interest derived directly from the data.

4.Woody extent and change in extent datasets

Continue to deliver this costs effective core dataset to meet the wide range of uses currently provided

for.

Further development of the method including using the persistent green products from the fractional

ground cover dataset and methods to further improvement automation and timeliness to increase utility

for DNRM purposes.

The creation of a state-wide woody extent layer from the SPOT imagery would be a useful additional

tool for users, if it could be produced and funded in a cost effective way.

5.Ground cover


for. Continue the development of the method and products such as the below tree ground cover.

6.Land use


for. More frequent and/or consistent updates are required, preferably at least every 5 years where land

use change frequency and with a forward schedule so users can see when areas will be updated.



7.Fire scars

Engage with users and potential users of this data set to clarify the role of the RSC fire scar mapping in

relation to other products available and its application in specific situations.

8.Lidar

Continue to capture all Queensland Government available Lidar data onto the RSC high performance

computer system.

Develop standard products that can be used for vegetation and land assessments.

Make these products discoverable and accessible to users.

9.Hydrology

Work with users to develop new applications and products and associated resourcing to meet the wide

range of needs identified in this study.

10. Funding of the RSC program

The $1.9 million annual funding for the enabling functions (image archive and processing systems)

should be shared across the whole of government. The $1.7 million annual funding for the key

landscape monitoring programs (woody vegetation, ground cover, and land use) should be proportioned

across agencies by relative use. This should be negotiated on a multilateral/whole of government basis,

in recognition that these services underpin a wide range of interconnected uses and users.

The funding and delivery of specific products for specific uses (currently $1.3 million per annum) should

continue to be negotiated on a bilateral basis.

11. Business continuity

Conduct an in-house review to build on the current work by the RSC in this area and develop a medium

to long term strategy that sets out how to meet the centre’s HPC needs into the future.

12. Web delivery of data and appl icat ions

Build on the visualisation tools already available for RSC products on the AusCover portal by setting up

a similar portal using served data to reflect specific Queensland Government branded products or by

making direct links from Queensland Government web site to the AusCover portal.

Work in partnership with users to develop specific web based applications to deliver interpreted data to

meet specific needs (e.g. VegMachine online).

Continue to investigate the use of cloud based delivery of datasets and the use of advanced server

protocols that enables the data to be delivered via web services and processed across multiple

platforms.

13. Research and Development

Maintain the current level of R&D investment in the RSC program and evaluate the effectiveness of this

investment against the criteria of being able to supply products that meet user need over the medium to

long term.



13 References

Australian Government 2014. Australian Collaborative Land Use Mapping Program. Department of

Agriculture, Canberra. Available: http://www.daff.gov.au/abares/aclump/pages/about-aclump.aspx [3

November 2014].

Australian Research Council 2014. Measurement of paddock scale pasture biomass using synthetic

aperture radar remote sensing, Available: http://researchdata.ands.org.au/measurement-paddock-

scale-remote-sensing/65001 [29 October 2014].

Bastin, G., Scarth, P. Chewings, P., Sparrow A., Denham R. Schmidt M. O'Reagain P, Shepherd R,

Abbott B. 2012. ‘Separating grazing and rainfall effects at regional scale using remote sensing imagery:

A dynamic reference-cover method’ Remote Sensing of Environment 121, 443-457.

Bendig, A., Bolten, G. and Bareth, A. 2012. ‘Introducing a low-cost mini-UAV for thermal- and

multispectral-imaging’ Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inform. Sci., 345–349

Beutel, T.S., Karfs, R.A., Bull, A.L., Peel, L. and Wallace, J.F. 2004. ‘VegMachine – putting pastoralists

in the picture’ Agricultural Science 17(3), 18-20.

Colomina, I and Molina, P. 2014. ‘Unmanned aerial systems for photogrammetry and remote sensing: A

review’ Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Vol 92, 79-97.

Costa, F.G., Ueyama, J., Braun, T., Pessin, G., Osorio, F.S., and Vargas, P.A., 2012. The use of

unmanned aerial vehicles and wireless sensor network in agricultural applications. In: Geoscience and

Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), pp. 5045–5048.

Cox, T., Somers, I., and Fratello, S., 2006. Earth Observation and Role of UAVs: A Capabilities

Assessment, Version 1.1. Technical Report. Civil UAV Team, NASA.

Danaher, T. and Collett, L. 2006. ‘Development, optimisation, and multi-temporal application of a simple

Landsat based water index’ Proceedings of the 13th Australasian Remote Sensing and

Photogrammetry Conference, Canberra, 2006.

Delacourt, C., Allemand, P., Jaud, M., Grandjean, P., Deschamps, A.,Ammann, J., Cuq, V. and Suanez,

S. 2009. ‘DRELIO: An unmanned helicopter for imaging coastal areas’ J. Coast. Res., 2, 1489–1493.

DSITIA 2014. Land cover change in Queensland 2011 –12: A Statewide Landcover and Trees Study

(SLATS) report. DSITIA, Brisbane Available:

https://www.qld.gov.au/environment/land/vegetation/mapping/slats-reports

DSITIA (2012), The Long Paddock – FORAGE, Available: http://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/forage/ [9

October 2014].

DSITIA 2014. Water Planning Science Plan 2014–2019. DSITIA and DNRM, Brisbane.

DSITIA 2014. Cover Under Trees. Final Report. DSITIA, Brisbane.

http://www.daff.gov.au/abares/aclump/pages/about-aclump.aspx

http://researchdata.ands.org.au/measurement-paddock-scale-remote-sensing/65001

http://researchdata.ands.org.au/measurement-paddock-scale-remote-sensing/65001

http://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/forage/



DSITIA 2014a. Guide to Using FORAGE: Version 1.4. The State of Queensland, Brisbane, Available:


DSITIA 2014b. Australian Grassland And Rangeland Assessment by Spatial Simulation, The State of

Queensland, Brisbane. Available:

https://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/about/researchprojects/aussiegrass/index.html [15 October 2014].

Earth Imaging Journal 2014. State of the Industry Report. Tracking the Trends Shaping the Remote

Sensing Industry. February 14 2014. Available: http://eijournal.com/print/articles/state-of-the-industry

[December 10 2014]

ESA, 2014. ESA EO Missions: Sentinal-1, Available https://earth.esa.int/web/guest/missions/esa-

operational-eo-missions/sentinel-1 [29 October 2014]

Frish et al. 2014. date, Low-cost lightweight airborne laser-based sensors for pipeline leak detection

and reporting, Physical Sciences Inc., Andover, Massachusetts.

Frish, M. 2012. Laser-based Standoff Methane Detectors, ARPA_E Workshop on Ubiquitous Methane

Leak Detection through Novel Sensors and Sensing Platforms, 29 March 2012, Washing DC.

Geoimage 2014. WorldView-3, viewed online 27 October 214, available at

http://www.geoimage.com.au/satellite/worldview-3

Gini, R., Passoni, D., Pinto L., and Sona, G. 2012. ‘Aerial images from a UAV system: 3D modelling

and tree species classification in a park area’ Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inform.

Sci., 361–366.

Goodwin, N.R. and Collett, L.J. 2014. ‘Development of an automated method for mapping fire history

captured in Landsat TM and ETM+ time series across Queensland, Australia.’ Remote Sensing of

Environment 148: 206-221.

Greenfield, P. and Riches, J. 2014. Science Capability Audit – Water. Office of Queensland Chief

Scientists. DSITIA, Brisbane.

Grenzdörffer, G., 2013. ‘UAS-based automatic bird count of a common gull colony’ Int. Arch.

Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inform. Sci, 169–174

Guanter et al. 2013. ‘Using field spectroscopy to assess the potential of statistical approaches for the

retrieval of sun-induced chlorophyll fluorescence from ground and space’ Remote Sensing of

Environment, 133, 52-61.

Guanter et al., 2014. ‘Global and time-resolved monitoring of crop photosynthesis with chlorophyll

fluorescence’ Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(14).

Hansen, M. C., P. V. Potapov, R. Moore, M. Hancher, S. A. Turubanova, A. Tyukavina, D. Thau, S. V.

Stehman, S. J. Goetz, T. R. Loveland, A. Kommareddy, A. Egorov, L. Chini, C. O. Justice, and J. R. G.

Townshend. 2013. “High-Resolution Global Maps of 21st-Century Forest Cover Change.” Science 342

(15 November): 850–53. Data available on-line from:http://earthenginepartners.appspot.com/science-

2013-global-forest.

Jensen, A.M., Neilson, B.T., McKee, M., Chen, Y. 2012. ‘Thermal remote sensing with an autonomous

unmanned aerial remote sensing platform for surface stream temperatures’ IGARSS 5049–5052


https://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/about/researchprojects/aussiegrass/index.html

http://eijournal.com/print/articles/state-of-the-industry

https://earth.esa.int/web/guest/missions/esa-operational-eo-missions/sentinel-1

https://earth.esa.int/web/guest/missions/esa-operational-eo-missions/sentinel-1

http://www.geoimage.com.au/satellite/worldview-3

http://earthenginepartners.appspot.com/science-2013-global-forest

http://earthenginepartners.appspot.com/science-2013-global-forest



Khan et al., 2012. ‘Low power greenhouse gas sensors for unmanned aerial vehicle’ Journal of Remote

Sensing, 4, 1355-1368.

Khan, A., David Schaefer, D, Tao, L., Miller, D.J., Sun, K., Zondlo, M.A., Harrison, W.A., Roscoe, B,

Lary, D.J. 2012. ‘Low Power Greenhouse Gas Sensors for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles’ Remote Sens.,

4, 1355

Kitchen, J., Armstone J., Clark, A., Danaher T. and Scarth P. .2010. Operational use of annual Landsat

-5 TM and Landsat-7 ETM+ image time-series for mapping wooded extent and foliage projective cover

in noth-eastern Australia. In Proceedings of the 15th Australasian Remote Sensting and

Photogrammetry Conference, Alice Springs, Australia, 13-17 September 2010.

Koehn, J.D., Brierley, G.J., Cant B.L. and Lucas, A.M. 2001. River Restoration Framework. Land and

Water Australia Occasional Paper 01/01.

Lucieer, A., S. Robinson, D. Turner, S. Harwin, and J. Kelcey 2012. ‘Using a micro-UAV for ultra-high

resolution multi-sensor observations of antarctic moss beds’ Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens.

Spatial Inform. Sci., 429–433

Ludwig J., Tongway D., Hodgkinson K., Freudenberger D., & Noble J. 1996. Landscape Ecology,

Function and Management: Principles from Australia’s Rangelands. CSIRO Publishing,

McNeill,S., Parman, D., Belliss, S., Dalley, D., and Dynes, R. 2010. Robust estimation of pasture

biomass using dual-polarisation TerrASAR-X imagery, Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium

(IGARSS), 25-30 July 2010. Honolulu, Hawaii.

NASA, 2014, Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2), Available

http://oco.jpl.nasa.gov/science/ProductInfo/# [28 October 2014]

NSW DEH (2014). Native Vegetation Monitoring. Office of Environment and Heritage web site.

Available: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/projects/NativeVegetationMapping.htm. [October 27

2014]

NRM Alliance 2014. The NRM Spatial Information Hub Available:

http://www.crcsi.com.au/getattachment/7af84617-d187-4239-b305-3e7da5bd9e07/.aspx [9 October

2014]

Queensland Government 2014. Web-based Agricultural Land Information(WALI) On line mapping tool.

Queensland Government Brisbane. Available: http://www.daff.qld.gov.au/environment/ag-land-

audit/web-mapping-tool [9 October 2014]

Queensland Government 2013. Queensland Agricultural Land Audit. Queensland Government

Brisbane. Available: http://www.daff.qld.gov.au/environment/ag-land-audit [9 October 2014]

RWQPPS - Reef Water Quality Protection Plan Secretariat (2014), Great Barrier Reef Report Card

2012-2013 Reef Water Quality Protection Plan, Queensland Government, Available:

http://www.reefplan.qld.gov.au/measuring-success/report-cards/2012-2013-report-card.aspx

RWQPPS - Reef Water Quality Protection Plan Secretariat (2013) Reef Water Quality Protection Plan

2009. Queensland Department of Premier and Cabinet, Brisbane.

http://oco.jpl.nasa.gov/science/ProductInfo/

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/projects/NativeVegetationMapping.htm.%20%5bOctober%2027%202014

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/projects/NativeVegetationMapping.htm.%20%5bOctober%2027%202014

http://www.crcsi.com.au/getattachment/7af84617-d187-4239-b305-3e7da5bd9e07/.aspx

http://www.daff.qld.gov.au/environment/ag-land-audit/web-mapping-tool

http://www.daff.qld.gov.au/environment/ag-land-audit/web-mapping-tool

http://www.daff.qld.gov.au/environment/ag-land-audit

http://www.reefplan.qld.gov.au/measuring-success/report-cards/2012-2013-report-card.aspx



Reeves, J.A., Knight R., Zebker H.A., Kitanidis P.K. and Schreüder W.A. 2014. Estimating temporal

changes in hydraulic head using InSAR data in the San Luis Valley, Colorado. Water Resources

Research Volume 50, Issue 5, 4459–4473

Riegl 2014a. The Riegl USA Newsroom. Available https://rieglusa.wordpress.com/ [28 October 2014]

Riegl 2014b. The new fully integrated RiCOPTER UAV in flight!, Available:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mqHQZ39O14&list=UUI1fudzgTI-Ga59aCCGnyRA [28 October

2014]

Robertson, K. 1989. Spatial transformation for rapid scan-line surface shadowing, IEEE Computer

Graphics and Applications.

RPS .2014. 2013 Landcover Mapping Update for South East Queensland Catchment Area Project

Report TP 100038. Report prepared from SEQ Catchments. Ltd.

Rufino G. and A. Moccia 2005. Integrated VIS-NIR Hyperspectral/thermal-IR Electro-optical Payload

System for a Mini-UAV, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Arlington, VA, USA, 647–

664.

Richardson, S., Irvine, E., Froend, R., Boon, P., Barber, S. and Bonneville, B. 2011. Australian

groundwater-dependent ecosystems toolbox part 2: assessment tools, Waterlines report, National

Water Commission, Canberra.

Satellite Imaging Corporation 2014. SkySat-2, Available: http://www.satimagingcorp.com/satellite-

sensors/skysat-2/ [27 October 2014]

Scarth P, Gillingham S, Muir J 2008b. ‘Assimilation of spectral information and temporal history into a

statewide woody cover change classification’. Proceedings of the 14th Australasian Remote Sensing

and Photogrammetry Conference.

Scarth P., Roder A., & Schmidt M. (2010) ‘Tracking grazing pressure and climate interaction , the role of

Landsat fractional cover in time series analysis’ 15th Australasian Remote Sensing and

Photogrammetry Conference.

SKM 2014. Developing an Improved Monitoring Approach for Springs in the Surat CMA Stage 1 & 2.

Progress Report QE06812. A report prepared for Office of Groundwater Impact Assessment, Brisbane.

Skybox Imaging .2013. Skybox Imaging Captures World's First High-Resolution, HD Video of Earth from

Space, Available: http://www.skyboximaging.com/news/FirstHigh-ResolutionHDVideoofEarth [27

October 2014]

SSEO Working Group - Space Science and Earth Observations Working Group 2009. Australian

Strategic Plan for Earth Observations from Space. Australian Academy of Science, Canberra.

https://www.science.org.au//sites/default/files/user-content/eosfinal.pdf

State of Queensland 2014. SLATS: Reports and Spatial Products, Available:

https://www.qld.gov.au/environment/land/vegetation/mapping/slats-reports/ [9 October 2014]

Tregoining, P., McClusky, S., van Dijk, A.IJ.M., Crosbie, R.S. and Pena-Arancibia, J.L. 2012.

Assessment of GRACE satellites for groundwater in Australia. Waterlines report Series No 71. National

Water Commission, Canberra. Available:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wrcr.v50.5/issuetoc

https://rieglusa.wordpress.com/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mqHQZ39O14&list=UUI1fudzgTI-Ga59aCCGnyRA

http://www.satimagingcorp.com/satellite-sensors/skysat-2/

http://www.satimagingcorp.com/satellite-sensors/skysat-2/

http://www.skyboximaging.com/news/FirstHigh-ResolutionHDVideoofEarth

https://www.science.org.au/sites/default/files/user-content/eosfinal.pdf

https://www.qld.gov.au/environment/land/vegetation/mapping/slats-reports/



http://archive.nwc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/21468/71-Assessment-of-GRACE-satellites-for-

groundwater-estimation-in-Australia.pdf [October 24 2014]

University of Maryland 2014. UMD Right now: UMD/NASA Goddard Instrument to Fly on Space Station,

Available: http://www.umdrightnow.umd.edu/news/umdnasa-goddard-instrument-fly-space-station [28

October 2014]

Wang, X., Ge, L., and L. and X. Li 2013. ‘Pasture Monitoring Using SAR with COSMO-SkyMed,

ENVISAT ASAR, and ALOS PALSAR in Otway, Australia.’ Journal of Remote Sensing, 5(7), 3611-

3636.

Wang, X., Ge, L., Li, X., and S. Gherardi 2014. ‘The feasibility of using ENVISAT ASAR and ALOS

PALSAR to monitor pastures in western Australia.’ Journal of Photogrammetric Engineering and

Remote Sensing, 80(1), 43-57.

Waters, D.K., Carroll, C., Ellis, C., Hateley, R., McCloskey, L., Packett, G.L., Dougall, R., Fentie, C.

2014. Modelling reductions of pollutant loads due to improved management practices in the Great

Barrier Reef catchments – Whole of GBR. Technical Report, Volume 1, Queensland Department of

Natural Resources and Mines, Toowoomba, Queensland (ISBN: 978-1-7423-0999).

Whitehead, K and Hugenholtz, C. 2014. ‘Remote sensing of the environment with small unmanned

aircraft systems (UASs), part 1: a review of progress and challenges.’ Journal of Unmanned Vehicle

System, 2(3).

Whitehead, K., Hugenholtz, C., Myshak, S., Brown., O., LeClair, A., Tamminga, A., Barchyn, T.,

Moorman, B., and Eaton, B. 2014. ‘Remote sensing of the environment with small unmanned aircraft

systems (UASs), part 2: scientific and commercial applications’ Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems,

2(3): 86-102.

Wich, S. and L. Koh, L. 2012. ‘Conservation drones: the use of unmanned aerial vehicles by ecologists’

GIM International, 26, 29–33

Zarco-Tejada, P., Berni, J., (2012) ‘Vegetation monitoring using a micro-hyperspectral imaging sensor

onboard an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)’ In: Proceedings of the EuroCOW 2012, European Spatial

Data Research (EuroSDR), Castelldefels, Spain

Zhu, Z. and Woodcock, C. E. 2012. ‘Object-based cloud and cloud shadow detection in Landsat

imagery.’ Remote Sensing of Environment. 118, 83–94.

http://archive.nwc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/21468/71-Assessment-of-GRACE-satellites-for-groundwater-estimation-in-Australia.pdf

http://archive.nwc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/21468/71-Assessment-of-GRACE-satellites-for-groundwater-estimation-in-Australia.pdf

http://www.umdrightnow.umd.edu/news/umdnasa-goddard-instrument-fly-space-station



Appendix A User Needs Questionnaire

Person interviewed and position

Position, Unit, Organisation

Detailed description of activity

References (web sites, etc.)

Remote sensing products used (from List)

How is remote sensing used

Drivers/uses

Importance of remote sensing to activities

Existing limitations to remote sensing products

Existing method of access/ Preferred method of access

Preferred accuracy/scale/improvements

Related/derived products used

Future developments/related needs



Appendix B List of Interviewees

Name Title Agency/Group

Bob Karfs Science Leader, Animal Science DAFF

Lea Diffey General Manager, Resources Planning DAFF

Lew Markey Climate Risk State Coordinator DAFF

Rebecca Paine Principal Policy Officer , Resources and Planning DAFF

Steve Potts Principal Policy Officer , Resources and Planning DAFF

Terry Beutel Senior Scientist, Spatial Data & Mapping DAFF

Brian Smith Senior Investigator, Investigations DNRM - compliance

Chris Holeszko Senior Investigator, Compliance & Systems DNRM - compliance

John Forcier Team Leader, Compliance & Systems DNRM - compliance

Ken Murray Manager, Land Services DNRM - compliance

Lloyd Taylor Exec Dir, Operations Support DNRM - compliance

Ray Fitzsimon CIRAN administrator, Compliance & Systems DNRM - compliance

Tanya Bartlett Director, Compliance & Systems DNRM - compliance

Warren Raddatz Senior Investigator, Compliance & Systems DNRM - compliance

Jim Walls Senior Scientist, Spatial Data & Mapping DNRM - IT coordination

Lindsay Brebber Principal IT Officer DNRM - IT coordination

Paul Brown Spatial Imagery Coordinator DNRM - IT coordination

Peter Lennon Director - Land & Spatial Information DNRM - IT coordination

Amanda Stones Rehabilitation Scientist DNRM - mining

Daniel Gillender Rehabilitation Scientist DNRM - mining

Jason Webber Rehabilitation Scientist DNRM - mining

Oskar Kadletz Abandoned Mines Coordinator DNRM - mining

Paul Donchak Manager Mineral DNRM - mining

Ross Carruthers Acting Chief Hydr-geologist DNRM - mining

Russell Dann Rehabilitation Scientist DNRM - mining

Dave Waters Principal Scientist (Modelling) DNRM - reef plan

Mark Silburn Principal Scientist, Water Planning DNRM - reef plan

Andrew Biggs Senior Scientist, Technical Support DNRM - resource assessment

Angela Pollet

Senior Spatial Analysis, Resource Assessment and

Information DNRM - resource assessment

David Calland,

Acting Manager, Land Services. Resource

Assessment and Information DNRM - resource assessment

Earl Barry Natural Resources Management Officer DNRM - resource assessment

Janice Jackson Natural Resource Management Officer DNRM - resource assessment

Jeff Pickering

Senior project officer, Resource Assessment and

Information DNRM - resource assessment

Mike Cannon Senior Land Officer, North Region DNRM - resource assessment

Paul Harris Manager, Land Services DNRM - resource assessment

Rob Hassett Senior Natural Resources Management Officer, DNRM - resource assessment



Name Title Agency/Group

Operations Support

Sue Ellen-Dear

Senior Land Resource Officer, Resource Assessment

and Information DNRM - resource assessment

Andrew Collins Senior Natural Resource Management Officer DNRM - vegetation assessment

Clynton Wells Team Leader DNRM - vegetation assessment

George Bourne Senior Natural Resource Management Officer DNRM - vegetation assessment

Ken Sherwood Regional Manager, South Region DNRM - vegetation assessment

Peter Burton Director, Lands and Mine Policy DNRM - vegetation policy

Peter Lazzarini Manager, Vegetation Management DNRM - vegetation policy

Ian Gordon Regional Manager, Central Region DNRM - water

Steven Flook

Principal Project Officer, Office of Groundwater Impact

Assessment DNRM - water

Nyssa Henry Principal Project Officer, Reef Water Quality DPC - reef plan

Rob Preston Principal Strategy Advisor PSBA

Colin Wade Spatial Analyst/Planner DSDIP

Bruce Goulevitch Principal Scientist, Remote Sensing DSITIA - RSC

Christian Witte Science Leader, Remote Sensing DSITIA - RSC

Craig Shephard Principal Scientist, QLUMP DSITIA - RSC

Dan Tindall Principal Scientist, Remote Sensing DSITIA - RSC

Dave Harris Principal Scientist, SLATS DSITIA - RSC

John Armiston Principal Scientist, LIDAR DSITIA - RSC

John Carter Principal Scientist, AussieGRASS DSITIA - RSC

Ken Brook Director, Land Surface Sciences DSITIA - RSC

Peter Scarth Principal Scientist, Remote Sensing DSITIA - RSC

Paul Lawrence Director - Landscape Sciences DSITIA - soils

Craig Hempel Principal Project Officer, Biodiversity DEHP - biodiversity

Lindsey Jones Acting Manager, Biodiversity Planning DEHP - biodiversity

Sel Saltman Principal Coastal Scientist, Environmental Planning

Unit, Environmental Planning and Policy Division DEHP - coastal

Jean Erbacher Project Manager, Reef Water Quality DEHP - healthy waterways/reef

Kari-Ann West Environmental Planning, Planning and Policy Division DEHP - SOE

Ken Horrigan State of the Environment Report, Planning and Policy

Division DEHP - SOE

Nicole Polzi Environmental Planning, Planning and Policy Division DEHP - SOE

Mark Venz Director, Energy Assessment DEHP CSG

Dan Beard Ranger NPRSR - fire management

Peter Leeson Principal Conservation Officer NPRSR - fire management

Shaun Kolomeit Team Leader – Spatial and Information Systems NPRSR - fire management

Lee Blacklock Spatial Imagery Coordinator Regional bodies

Mik Petter GIS special projects, SEQ Catchments Regional bodies

Shannon Mooney GIS and Information Manager, SEQ Catchments Regional bodies

Stuart Phinn Associate. Science Director UQ - research



Appendix C List of Non-respondents

This lists individuals that were recommended for interview that could not be contacted or made a

referral to an alternative contact.

Name Status Title Agency/grouping

Mitzi Venn Referred to Colin Wade Acting Director, Planning & Property DSDIP

Bill Date Referred to Ross Carruthers ED CSG Compliance DNRM - mining

Anne Lenz Referred to Mark Venz Executive Director DEHP - CSG compliance

Steve Jacoby Referred to Paul Lennon Executive Director, Land & Spatial Info

DNRM - Land and Spatial coordination

Claire Anderson On leave Program Leader

DEHP - healthy waterways/reef

Michael McDougall On leave Senior Valuer

DNRM - vegetation assessment

Scott Robinson

On leave referred to Jean Erbacher

Director, Reef Water Quality DEHP - reef

Brad John Referred to Paul Donchak Chief Geologist DNRM - mining

Rob Ellis Did not respond Principal Scientist (Modeling) DNRM - reef plan

Grahame Wise Referred to Oskar Kadletz

Executive Director Statewide Operations DNRM - mining

Graham Nicholas

Not available covered by Peter Burton

Director, Vegetation Management DNRM - vegetation policy

Robert Hughes Referred to Craig Hempl

Director, Biodiversity Policy DEHP - biodiversity

Scott Buchanan Referred to Craig Hempl

Director, Biodiversity Implementation DEHP - biodiversity

Steven Howell Referred to Lindsey Jones

Manager, Biodiversity Assessment DEHP - biodiversity

Joshua Bull

Did not respond content addressed by Mike Canon

Team Leader, State Land Assessment

DNRM - resource assessment

Chris Carroll On leave Theme Leader, Reef Science DNRM - reef plan

Dan Murphy Referred to Oskar Kadletz Deputy Chief Inspector DNRM - mining

Martin Land Referred to Oskar Kadletz Principal Inspector of Explosives DNRM - mining

Noel Erichsen Referred to Oskar Kadletz Deputy Chief Inspector of Explosives DNRM - mining

Phil Goode Referred to Oskar Kadletz Chief Inspector of Mines DNRM - mining

Greg Payne Referred to Oskar Kadletz Manager, Management Solutions DNRM - IT coordination

Vern Rudwick Referred to Rebecca Paine

Director, Land Management DAFF

Eugene Immisch

Did not respond content addressed by Mark Venz

Prin. Project Officer, Regional Compliance DEHP - compliance

Paul Horrocks Referred to Janice Taylor Manager DNRM - vegetation assessment

Daniel Brough Referred to Paul Lawrence

Science Leader - Land Resource Assessment DSITIA - soils



Appendix D RSC Product List

Product Level: 1 = Image archive (1a = process imagery) 2 = datasets (2a specific areas/issues), 3 = derived products

Product type

Product Level

Imagery Products Imagery

used Availability Description Function Format

Spatial Resolution (pixel/site)

Temporal Resolution

Spatial Extent /

Coverage Temporal Extent

Raw

Imag

ery

1 Imagery - Landsat - Single date (Surface Reflectance)

Multispectral satellite imagery (30m resolution) for all of Queensland. Repeat coverage every 8 - 16 days from Landsat 5 Thematic Mapper (TM) Landsat 7 Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus (ETM+) sensors. Landsat 8 (the Landsat Data Continuity Mission - LDCM) to become operational in 2013). Imagery has been georeferenced to within 15m and corrected to top of atmosphere reflectance.

Monitoring and mapping land cover change. Either single date mapping or time-series analysis and change detection. Derived products are used to map, monitor and report on fractional cover, ground cover, foliage projective cover, water bodies, fire and weeds.

Raster Image (Imagine file ".img")

30m 16 days All of QLD 1986 - 2013 (every 8 or 16 days)

1 Imagery - SPOT 5 Multispectral satellite imagery (10 m) for all of Queensland at three time periods (2006, 2009 and 2012 - soon to be acquired).

Monitoring and mapping land cover change. Derived products include foliage projective cover, water bodies, cloud and cloud shadow, water hyacinth mapping, and woody vegetation extent for South East Queensland.


10m Multispectral;

2.5m Pan-sharpened

2-3 days All of QLD 2005/2006; 2009; 2012

1 Imagery - RapidEye

Multispectral satellite imagery captured at 6.5m resolution and resampled to 5m for specific study sites in Queensland. Imagery is georeferenced and corrected to at sensor reflectance.

The majority of Rapideye imagery at RSC was captured for pre and post cyclone Yasi mapping and coal seam gas infrastructure compliance monitoring.


5m Daily off-nadir; 5.5 days nadir

Specified study areas

Single date captures

1 Imagery - Quickbird

High resolution multispectral satellite imagery. Captured at approximately 2.5m multispectral resolution and pan sharpened to 0.6m resolution.

Quickbird imagery has been acquired for a number of small scale projects including weeds mapping and compliance.


2.5m Multispectral;

0.6m Pan-sharpened

1-3.5 days, depending on latitude

(30° off-nadir)

Specified study areas

Single date captures

1 Imagery - DMC

Multispectral satellite imagery captured by a variety of satellites in the Disaster Monitoring Satellite Constellation. Rsc holdings include imagery from Deimos-1 and UK-DMC2, both of which use the instrument SLIM-6-22. Images are georeferenced and corrected to top-of-atmosphere radiance.

Geoscience Australia purchased a complete coverage of Australia, as an alternative to Landsat captured by the satellite UK-DMC2. RSC has obtained these: single to multiple dates of imagery for the majority of Australia from 2010 to 2012. Four Deimos-1 images were also acquired in 2013 to map flooding extent in Queensland.


22m

Daily by at least one

of the DMC

satellites

All of Australia

Various dates from 2010 - 2013

1 Aerial Imagery Various aerial imagery, either in hard copy or digital form.

Aerial imagery for a variety of tasks. The majority is captured over urban areas.

Various 5cm - 50cm? Tasked capture

All of QLD (various dates)

Various dates (pre 1960s - current)

1 Imagery - Airborne LiDAR

Point Cloud (LAS file ".las")

1 ~ 5m

1 Imagery - Icesat (Satellite LiDAR)



Product type

Product Level




Temporal Resolution

Spatial Extent /


1 Imagery - ALOS PALSAR (Radar) - Scenes


15m

1 Imagery - ALOS PALSAR (Radar) - Strips


50m

1 Cosmo Sky Med

1 Radarsat

1 Multiple Sensors Imagery from multiple sensors used to map or monitor particular landscape features

Surf

ace

Ref

lect

ance

Pro

du

cts

1a Seasonal Composite (Surface Reflectance) - Single Date

Landsat on request Raster Image (Imagine file ".img")

30m

8-16 days according to landsat image availability

All of Qld 1986-current

1a Imagery - Landsat - Seasonal Composite (Surface Reflectance)

Landsat

Available through Open Data/TERN-AusCover

A seasonal composite of Landsat multispectral imagery, with the most representative pixel value from each band used in the output image.

Used to produce a cloud free, continuous image, robust against outliers and Landsat-7 SLC-off gaps. This product can be used as a starting point for time series analysis, removing the need for a number of the pre-processing stages while capturing the majority of the variation in the time series and reducing the computing power needed for time series analysis. Four composite products are produced for each year corresponding to summer, autumn, winter and spring.

Raster Image (BigTiff)

30m 4 per year All of Qld 1986-current

Mas

ks

1a Time series Cloud and cloud shadow Landsat on request

Cloud and shadow masks for each date of landsat imagery derived from time series change detection and classification

masking cloud and shadow from imagery for subsequent applications

Raster Image (Imagine file ".img") 30m

8-16 days according to landsat

image availability

whole of Qld currently 2000-2012

1a Fmask Cloud and Shadow Landsat on request

Cloud and shadow masks for each date of landsat imagery derived from the published Fmask algorithm. Zhu, Z.; Woodcock, C.E. Object-based cloud and cloud shadow detection in Landsat imagery. Remote Sensing of Environment 2012, 118, 83–94.

masking cloud and shadow from imagery for subsequent applications



image availability

whole of Qld 1986 - current

1a Topographic Mask Landsat on request


1a Water Index - Water Bodies (Landsat) Landsat on request

A water index developed using canonical variants analysis of Landsat 5 TM imagery. The index is threshold to perform mapping of water body extent and persistence in Queensland.

Detect the presence of new farm dams, to show flooding extent and as a water mask used when classifying other imagery features.

Raster Image (".img") and ESRI shapefile 30m


image availability All of QLD 1986 - current

Frac

tio

nal

Co

ver

Pro

du

cts

2

Fractional Cover - Single Date - Single Date Landsat By request

Statewide monitoring of vegetation fractions (bare, green, dry) at 16 day intervals

Reporting of fractional cover on state-wide, regional and lot and plan basis. Used in Forage and VegMachine. 30m


image availability All of QLD 1986-current



Product type

Product Level




Temporal Resolution

Spatial Extent /


2 Fractional Cover - Seasonal - Seasonal Landsat


Seasonal composite of single date fractional cover fractions, giving most representative value for the season (per-pixel).

Gives a robust time series of cover fractions, on a regular time interval, suitable for time series analysis. Raster Image 30m 4 per year All of Qld 1986-current

3 Ground Cover - Single Date Landsat By request

Statewide monitoring of vegetation fractions (bare, green, dry) at 16 day intervals. Produced on request only. To produce the ground cover product, the fractional cover product is adjusted using an estimate of the proportion of the pixel obscured by mid- and over-story foliage. This estimate of cover is an estimate of the combined persistent dry and persistent green layers. That is, all vegetation in the mid- and upper- storeys. The mid and upper storage foliage is effectively removed from the estimates of cover and the ground cover estimate is therefore based only on the proportion of ground that was visible by the satellite.

Reporting of fractional cover on state-wide, regional and lot and plan basis. Used in Forage and VegMachine. Raster Image 30 m All of QLD 1986-current

3 Persistent Green - Seasonal Landsat On request

Spline fit to minimum of green cover fraction seasonal composites tiff 30m Seasonal Qld 1988-2012

3 Ground Cover - Seasonal Landsat


Seasonal composite of single date ground cover fractions, giving most representative value for the season (per-pixel).

Gives a robust time series of cover fractions, on a regular time interval, suitable for time series analysis. tiff 30m Seasonal Qld 1986-current

3

Fractional Cover Deciles - Green and Non-Green Landsat


Two fractional cover decile products, green cover and total cover, are currently produced. These products compare, at the per-pixel level, the level of cover for the specific season of interest against the long term cover for that same season. For each pixel all cover values over the entire time-series of seasonal images are classified into deciles. The cover value for the pixel in the season of interest is then classified according to the decile in which it falls. tiff 30m Seasonal Qld 1986-current

3

Ground Cover - Long Term Seasonal - Min/Med/Max/SD/No Observations (Bare, Green and Non-Green) Landsat

Available through Open Data/TERN-AusCover and QGIS tiff 30m

Once only baseline product Qld 1986-current

3

Ground Cover - Long Term Annual - Min/Med/Max/SD/No Observations (Bare, Green and Non-Green) Landsat

Available through Open Data/TERN-AusCover and QGIS tiff 30m

Once only baseline product Qld 1986-current



Product type

Product Level




Temporal Resolution

Spatial Extent /


3

Total Cover - Seasonal - Regional Comparison Landsat

Through Forage

Provide some ability to compare cover taking into account climatic conditions 30m seasonal All of Qld 1986-present

3 Total Cover - Dynamic Reference Landsat On request

Bastin et al. (2012) provides information for change in delta groundcover Comparison of condition between dry periods

Raster Image (Imagine file ".img") 30m annual Qld

produced for dry years only at this stage, i.e. 1988,

1989, 1994, 2003, 2004, 2005

3 Persistent Green - Trend Landsat On request

Maps the trend in woody vegetation based on seasonal fractional cover imagery for all of Queensland. Based on the persistent green product (time-series trend of the green fraction) and accounts for rainfall/climate variability.

SLA

TS P

rod

uct

s

2

Land cover change (SLATS) - individual era

Multiple sensors

QGIS and QLD Globe (prior to and including 2010). On request after 2010.

Statewide vegetation and land cover change detected from landsat time series analysis for finite eras from 1988- 2011. Eras have been reported annually since 2003.

Identify where vegetation has changed in each era and identify the replacement land cover is. Monitor tree clearing to aid in compliance

Thematic raster. Vector on QGIS. Report on RSC website 25m

Annually since 1999

all of Queensland

currently 1988-2011 (2011-2012 eta Dec 2013)

2

Land cover change (SLATS) - composited eras

Multiple sensors on request

Compilation of all landcover change eras since 1988, with Most recent vegetation change era records where multiple events exist.

Compile all vegetation change that has been reported.

Raster Image. 25m

all of Queensland 1988-2011

Cro

ps

2 Crop Monitoring Landsat Forage Biannual crop maps for broad acre cropping Report based on 30 m Landsat

Bi-Annually

all of Queensland

Gu

llie

s

2 Gully Presence Mapping

Multiple sensors QGIS

The gully presence assessment is based on several methods including visual observation, output from previous modeling work, bioregion membership, and the output of a mean of predictive model.

In this product the Burdekin is divided into 5,521 5km x 5km cells. The main feature in this layer is the 'GullyPres' field, which provides a semi-quantitative gully presence value to each cell, ranging from Very Low to Very High. The method of mapping is provided in the 'SubMethod' field. The 'Confidence' field provides the source used to assign the 'GullyPres' field value Vector 30m

Burdekin Catchment 2011/2012

Fire

2

Fire Scar Mapping - Fire Scars (Single Date) Landsat On request

Single date maps of detected burnt vegetation derived from time series based Landsat change detection and thermal classification. Edited single date maps for 2013. Unedited prior.

identifying where and when and how often fires have occurred, identifying inappropriate fire regimes, fire risk assessment, fire management, vegetation change, exploration of fire-climate-management interactions


8-16 days dependent

on cloud cover




Product type

Product Level




Temporal Resolution

Spatial Extent /


3

Fire Scar Mapping - Fire Scars (Annual Composite) Landsat

On QGIS and TERN-AusCover

Annual composites of above single date burnt vegetation maps encoded by day of year that fire was first detected

Raster Image (Imagine file ".img" and BigTiff) 30m annual


3 Fire Scar Mapping - No. times burnt Landsat On request

Frequency of fire detection through time (1986-present) 30m

3 Fire Scar Mapping - Time since burnt Landsat On request Time since fire detected (1986-present) 30m

3 Potential Grassfire Risk AussieGRASS

Long Paddock Risk of grass fire (high/medium/low) GIF,IMG 5km X 5km Monthly Australia

3 Curing Index (Percentiles) AussieGRASS

Long Paddock

Based on simulated green and dead pasture and a Potential Grassfire Risk where the curing index is combined with information of fuel mass. These data apply to the last day of each calendar month. GIF,IMG 5km X 5km Monthly Australia

Lan

d U

se

2 Land Use Multiple sensors QGIS Catchment scale land use mapping

QLUMP maps and assesses patterns of land use and land use change across the State in accordance with the Australian Land Use and Management (ALUM) classification.

ESRI Geodatabase NA

Baseline for 1999 is state-wide, various catchment updated since.

2 Land Use Change Multiple sensors QGIS Catchment scale land use change mapping

QLUMP maps and assesses patterns of land use and land use change across the State in accordance with the Australian Land Use and Management (ALUM) classification.

ESRI Geodatabase NA

Varies at catchment scale.

Fiel

d D

ata 2

Field Data - Fractional Cover

Field Collection


Point intersect transects used to calibrate and validate products derived from satellite imagery

Used as training and validation of foliage projective cover and fractional cover products derived from Landsat imagery (RSC Qld based products, JRSPS products for NSW,VIC and NT, national Fractional Cover Products produced under Auscover) and MODIS based fractional cover (MODIS).

shapefiles, field photos ~1 ha

Sites Australia-wide

2 Field Data - Terrestrial Laser Scanning

Field Collection

Available through Open Data/TERN-AusCover Riegl VZ400 waveform TLS.

To derive canopy and stem biophysical variables. Mapping of gully and beach erosion.

shapefiles, field photos, scans ~1 ha

2

Field Data - Hemispherical Photography

Field Collection On request

Canon EOS cameras with 8mm Sigma fisheye lenses

Used as a cheap, rapid alternative to point-intercept transected for some applications (e.g. riparian). Estimation of LAI/PAI/clumping.

shapefiles, hemispheric photographs ~1 ha



Product type

Product Level




Temporal Resolution

Spatial Extent /


Co

al S

eam

Gas

2

Baseline mapping of coal seam gas infrastructure in Surat and Bowen basins.

Multiple sensors On request

This was based on visual analysis of RapidEye imagery captured late 2012 – mid 2013.We are progressing with the monitoring stage so new infrastructure installed between the RapidEye capture and mid-2014 will be progressively available. vector

Surat and Bowen basins 2012/2013

Veg

etat

ion

Str

uct

ure

/FP

C

2

Foliage Projective Cover - Landsat - Annual Landsat


Field calibrated spectrally derived estimate of overstorey FPC, which maps of the extent and cover of woody vegetation based on Landsat reflectance imagery for all of Queensland. Tiff

25 m (SLATS); 30 m (USGS)

1999, 2001 and 2004-2011

3

Wooded Extent and Foliage Projective Cover - Landsat Landsat On request

Wooded extent classification from annual time-series. Wooded areas have a modeled FPC value for each pixel.

This is a Level 3 product used as input for numerous applications (SLATS reporting, RE revision, fire risk, riparian) Tiff

25 m (SLATS); 30 m (USGS) Annual Qld/NSW 2000-2012

3

Foliage Projective Cover - Landsat- Forest Fragmentation Landsat

State-wide forest fragmentation/connectivity analysis

An analysis of every forest patch in Queensland Vector (shp) 30m 4 years All of QLD 2011

2 Foliage Projective Cover - SPOT SPOT SPOT derived FPC 10m

3 Foliage Projective Cover - LiDAR

Airborne LiDAR Lidar derived FPC

Calibration and validation of satellite derived products. Tiff 1-5m Variable Variable

3 Vegetation Extent SPOT

Woody vegetation extent mapping in South Eastern Queensland for 2012 derived from SPOT 5 10m imagery and manually edited.

Mapping completed to update bushland extent in existing Department of Environment and Heritage Koala Habitat Mapping.

Raster Image (Imagine file ".img"); Updated GIS vector (".shp") for Koala Habitat Mapping 10m 2012 SEQ 2012



Product type

Product Level




Temporal Resolution

Spatial Extent /


Rip

aria

n V

eget

atio

n

2

Foliage Projective Cover, SLATS & ground cover - Landsat & SPOT - Riparian Vegetation


Defining riparian areas and mapping vegetation extent

Reporting on forest extent, forest connectivity, forest loss and ground cover within riparian areas for Reef and QMDB

Vector (shp), csv, report 30/15m 4 years

Reef Catchments, QMDB 2009

Bio

mas

s

2 Wooded Biomass Allometric relationship between field measured AGB and L-band HV BigTIFF 15m/50m Annual Qld/NSW 2007-2010

Gra

zin

g

2 Total Standing Dry Matter (kg DM/ha) AussieGRASS

Long Paddock

TSDM is the product of pasture growth and pasture removal processes. TSDM includes: green leaf, dead leaf, green stem, dead stem, reproductive material that is attached to tussock bases and standing. Both annual and perennial species (palatable and un-palatable) are included but not shrub canopy biomass GIF,IMG 5km X 5km Monthly Australia

3

TSDM Relative to Historical Records (Percentiles) AussieGRASS

Long Paddock

GIF,IMG 5km X 5km Monthly Australia

2 Total Pasture Growth (kg/ha) AussieGRASS

Long Paddock

Pasture growth is defined as new plant material produced during the period being considered. Calculated daily and summed to give monthly and annual totals. reported on a dry matter basis in the units kg/ha. Growth is dynamic and calculated daily. Growth includes palatable and unpalatable species. GIF,IMG 5km X 5km Monthly Australia

3

Pasture Growth Relative to Historical Records from 1957 (Percentiles) AussieGRASS

Long Paddock

GIF,IMG 5km X 5km

Various (monthly, quarterly,

6-monthly,

12-monthly, annually,

24-monthly) Australia

3 Chance of Exceeding Median Growth AussieGRASS

Long Paddock High/medium/low risk map of chance GIF,IMG 5km X 5km Monthly Australia



Product type

Product Level




Temporal Resolution

Spatial Extent /


3 LEPS Forecast Skill – Pasture Growth AussieGRASS

Long Paddock

GIF,IMG 5km X 5km Monthly Australia

Rai

nfa

ll an

d S

trea

mfl

ow

2

Potential Flow to Stream, Relative to Historical Records from 1957 SILO

Long Paddock

PFTS runs a continental scale daily water balance (tree transpiration, grass transpiration, soil evaporation, run-off and drainage) GIF,IMG 5km X 5km

Various (monthly, quarterly,

6-monthly,

12-monthly, annually,

24-monthly) Australia

3

Chance of Exceeding Potential Flow to Stream SILO

Long Paddock High/medium/low risk map of chance GIF,IMG 5km X 5km Monthly Australia

2 Total Rainfall (mm) SILO Long Paddock

Rainfall maps are produced by interpolating point data from rain gauges recorded at BoM registered rainfall station sites GIF,IMG 5km X 5km Monthly Australia

3

Rainfall Relative to Historical Records (Percentiles) SILO

Long Paddock

Rainfall percentiles compare the period (i.e. 1, 3, 6, 12, 24 months) with data from the corresponding period over the recorded history (1890). GIF,IMG 5km X 5km Monthly Australia

Veg

Hei

ght 3

Vegetation Height (Airborne LiDAR)

Airborne LiDAR On request

Multiple height metrics derived from lidar point clouds at a user specified resolution Tiff 1-5m

3 Vegetation Height (Icesat) Icesat On request

Aggregation of Icesat pulses using Regional Ecosystem mapping Vector RE

Input data spans 7-9

years Qld

Dis

aste

r M

app

ing 2

Water - Flood Extents - High Resolution


Flood water extents from high resolution imagery at selected sites

Mapping of flood extent for various rainfall events throughout QLD. A variety of imagery has been used for this mapping including radar (Radarsat, Cosmo SkyMed and Aerial Imagery)

ESRI shapefile (".shp") and Raster Image (".img") 30cm - 10m Various Various

2

Water - Flood Extents - Medium/Low Resolution


Flood water extents from medium/low resolution imagery at selected sites

Mapping of flood extent for various rainfall events throughout QLD. A variety of imagery has been used for this mapping including radar (DMC and Landsat Imagery)

ESRI shapefile (".shp") and Raster Image (".img") 22m - 30m Various Various

2a Cyclone Yasi Mapping RapidEye On request

Mapping of wooded vegetation affected by tropical cyclone Yasi (i.e. canopy loss, tree fall) using Rapideye imagery (5m).

Change detection pre and post tropical cyclone Yasi.

Raster Image (".img") 5m

Area impacted by Yasi near Innisfail 2010 - 2011

Wee

ds

2a Weeds - Prickly Acacia On request

Mapping of prickly acacia extent and change in extent in the Mitchell Grass Downs bioregion

Prickly acacia mapping was completed for the years 1987, 1999 and 2008. This mapping shows the change in extent over time, within the Mitchell Grass Downs Bioregion of QLD. This mapping can be used to determine effects of management, as well as target areas of infestation.

ESRI shapefile (".shp") and Raster Image (".img") 30m

Mitchel Grass Downs Bioregion 1987, 1999 and 2008



Product type

Product Level




Temporal Resolution

Spatial Extent /


2a Weeds - Lantana On request

Mapping of Lantana infestation probability of occurrence along the eastern coast of Australia

Delineation of likely areas infested by lantana for targeting by weed management authorities

Raster Image (".img") 30m

Eastern Coast of Australia (QLD, NSW, VIC) 2006/2007

2a Weeds - Rubber Vine On request Mapping of rubber vine at selected locations using high resolution imagery

Mapping using pan-sharpened Quickbird imagery for 2008 at selected sites in central and western Queensland. Location of rubber vine for targeting of weed management activities. Research to determine the accuracy of using remote sensing to map rubber vine.

ESRI shapefile (".shp") and Raster Image (".img") 0.6m

Cloncurry, Richmond, Hughenden 2008

2a Weeds - Water Hyacinth On request

Mapping of water hyacinth in the Brisbane River

Mapping to show change and existence of water hyacinth infestations for targeting by weed management authorities

ESRI shapefile (".shp") and Raster Image (".img") 10m

Brisbane River

2005, 2006, 2011, 2012 (?)



Appendix E New and Developing Technologies

Developments in satellite technology and their remote sensing applications

In recent decades there has been a significant increase in the number of missions deploying remote

sensing satellites into space. Advances in technology has also increased sensitivity, resolution,

operability and reduced the price of products. The below sections outline some recent advances in

remote sensing satellite technology.

High resolution, High-definition Video

A company called Skybox Imaging owns two satellites (SkySat -1 and 2) which can collect high

resolution, high-definition video of the Earth’s surface. Video remote sensing is a developing

technology, and the company claims that it is the world’s first video of this quality (Skybox Imaging,

2013).

Videos are full motion black and white 30 frames per second, duration up to 90 seconds, field of view 2

km by 1.1 km, resolution 1.1 m at nadir (Satellite Imaging Corporation, 2014).

WorldView-3 high resolution imagery

WorldView-3 is a commercial satellite owned by Digital Globe that was launched in mid-2014. It

provides the highest resolution panchromatic imagery commercially available in the world via satellite,

up to 31cm resolution.

It also has several other capabilities, including:

Eight-band multispectral imagery with 1.24m accuracy at nadir.

Eight SWIR bands at 3.7m resolution

12 VACIS bands at 30m resolution

The minimum area of purchase is 25 square kilometres from the archive, and 100 square kilometres for

tasking. Minimum widths and segments of 5km also apply (Geoimage, 2014).



Figure 17: WorldView-3 imagery

Nasa’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO2)

OCO2 was launched in mid-2014. It is dedicated to studying sources and sinks of carbon dioxide and

how they change over time. It measures the intensity of sunlight reflected from the presence of CO2 in a

column of air. Once fully operational, OCO2 will provide a variety of products to the public, including

vertical atmospheric profiles of temperature, CO2 and water vapour as well as aerosol content (NASA,

2014).

The A-Train

The Afternoon Constellation of Satellites (A-Train) is a constellation of satellites that allows for synergy

between the missions. This means that more remotely sensed information about the condition of the

Earth can be obtained from the combined observations than would be possible from the sum of the

observations taken independently. For instance, measurements taken by the lead satellite (which is the

OCO-2) can be supported by measurements from other satellites that follow close behind (such as

CALIPSO, which collects information on the role of clouds and aerosols on the Earth’s climate).

The A-Train Data Depot has been developed to process, archive, visualise, analyse and correlate

distributed atmospheric measures from A-Train instruments. It provides on-line access and services for

science, applications and education uses. Data is usually provided free or charge. A summary of

satellites in the A Train constellation is provided in Table 8.



Table 8: A –Train Satellites (from NASA 2014)

Figure 18: The A-Train



The Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation

The Global Ecosystems Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) Lidar was developed by the University of

Maryland and the NASA Goddard Space Flight Centre. It is a Lidar system that will be deployed on the

International Space Station (ISS) to map the three dimensional structure of vegetation, including canopy

heights, over a range of biomes. It aims to provide data to support the assessment of how deforestation

has contributed to atmospheric CO2 concentrations; how much carbon forests will absorb in the future;

and how habitat degradation could affect global biodiversity.

GEDI will be completed in 2018 for a cost of $94 million. Upon deployment on the ISS, data from GEDI

will be used to create a variety of products, including canopy height and structure, forest carbon and its

changes. In addition, these data will be used to drive global ecosystem models to assess the impacts of

changes in land use on atmospheric CO2 under various future climate scenarios (University of

Maryland, 2014).

European Space Agency’s Sentinel-1

Sentinel-1 is a two satellite constellation with the prime objectives of Land and Ocean monitoring.

Sentinal-1A was launched in April 2014, with Sentinal-1B scheduled to be launched in 2016. The goal of

the mission is to provide C-Band Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data continuity following the

retirement of ERS-2 and the end of the Envisat mission (ESA, 2014), and the program represents the

latest in radar technology. The six day revisit frequency and coverage of Sentinel-1 is an improvement

with respect to ERS and Envisat.

Resolution is provided in four modes:

Strip Map Mode: 80 km Swath, 5 x 5 m spatial resolution

Interferometric Wide Swath: 250 km Swath, 5x20 m spatial resolution

Extra-Wide Swath Mode: 400 km Swath, 25 x 100 m spatial resolution

Wave-Mode: 20 km x 20 km, 5 x 20 m spatial resolution

This represents medium resolution (to increase swath width), as high resolution SAR is

available from TerraSAR-X and Cosmo-SkyMed albeit with lower swath widths.

Radar-measured Pasture Biomass

Information of pasture cover and biomass is derived from Landsat imagery for VegMachine, FORAGE

and AussieGRASS, whilst other programs such as ‘pastures from space’ in Western Australia uses

MODIS NDVI at coarser scales (250m) (Wang et al., 2014). Radar is an alternative method to

understand pasture coverage and biomass, although it has been studied more in the context of crop

and forest biomass.

Reflections of microwaves produced by radar are sensitive to variations in grass height, moisture

content and structure. Wang et al. (2014) demonstrates that ENVI-SAT ASAR and ALOS PALSAR are

able to monitor pasture biomass, with their ability varying due to sensor parameters (such as

wavelength, polarisation and incidence angle) and field properties (soil moisture, vegetation type,

biomass level). C-Band was demonstrated to be suitable for grass biomass and L-band for water

content of grass in drying stage.

Additionally, McNeill et al. (2010) demonstrated that dual-polarisation X-band TerraSAR-X imagery can

be used to estimate pasture biomass independent of surface environment conditions with a standard

error of 7.7-17.8%.



Radar provides some benefit over use of other methods as it is sensitive to biomass and moisture, and

is unhindered by rain and cloud cover or pasture dynamics (whether green or dry) (Australian Research

Council, no date; Wang et al 2013). It can also be deployed at higher spatial (pasture and paddock

scales) and temporal resolutions than Landsat and MODIS.

Monitoring of terrestrial sun-induced chlorophyll fluorescence from space

Sun-induced chlorophyll fluorescence (SiCF) is an electromagnetic signal emitted in the 650–800 nm

spectral window by the chlorophyll-a of green leaves (Guanter et al, 2013a). Recent advances in remote

sensing have enabled space-based monitoring of sun-induced chlorophyll fluorescence from terrestrial

plants. Guanter et al. (2014) has shown that gross primary productivity (the output from photosynthesis)

can be measured more accurately than for traditional methods such as remotely sensed vegetation

indices or complex carbon cycle modes. This has applications to measure crop, forest and ocean

productivity, plant stress (e.g. drought due to climate change) and carbon cycles.

Guanter et al (2013a) has used high spectral resolution measurements by the Fourier Transform

Spectrometer (FTS) on board the greenhouse gases observing satellite (GOSAT) to obtain SiCF. The

OCO-2 also has capacity to obtain SiCF data, with improved spatial resolution and coverage (~100x

more measurements that GOSAT). Upcoming missions also have potential for improved SiCF coverage

and resolution, including (Guanter et al, 2013b):

Sentinel-5 Precursor TROPOMI, due to be launched in January 2015 with global coverage and

improved spatial resolution.

Sentinel-5 due to be launched around 2019, which is similar to TROPOMI

Sentinel-4, due to be launched around 2020

ESA Earth Explorer 8th: FLEX or CarbonSat.

Developments in Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs)

UAVs, otherwise known as Unmanned Aerial Systems, Drones, and aerial robots, were developed in a

military context, though the benefits of civilian use in remote sensing has been realised since the 1970’s

(Colomina and Molina, 2014). In an agricultural and environmental management context, they have

been known to provide benefits over aerial photography and/or satellite imagery when fine resolution

data is required.

Conventional satellite mounted remote sensing platforms post several tradeoffs, including high cost,

lack of operational flexibility, limited versatility and/or poor spatial and temporal resolutions (Whitehead

and Hugenholtz, 2014). To overcome some of these challenges UAV are emerging as a technology to

replace, compliment or supplement remote sensing data acquired from satellites.

UAVs are usually fixed or rotary wing system, with the fixed wings having greater speed, ranges and

flight durations. Rotary wing systems tend to have greater manoeuvrability however. Common remote

sensing applications in use or in development include (Whitehead and Hugenholtz, 2014):

Photogrammetry. Data quality is usually less than that collected with manned aircraft due to

platform stability and the use of nonmetric cameras (Whitehead and Hugenholtz, 2014). Despite

this they usually provide greater resolution (sub-cm). It is often an attractive option for users due

to the low costs, flexibility in the timing of image acquisition and short turnaround times

(Whitehead and Hugenholtz, 2014).

Multispectral and hyperspectral data capture. Payload weight restrictions and the cost of high

end miniaturised imaging devices means that UAVs are often restricted to carrying consumer

grade cameras that are typically designed to record spectral reflectances between 400-700 nm



(the visible region). This is particularly a problem for vegetation health, which utilised Near-

infrared reflectance usually between 750 and 1250 nm. Nonetheless, advances are being made

to fit multispectral and hyperspectral sensors to UAVs.

Thermal. UAVs are well suited to carry new generation thermal imaging devices, which are both

smaller and less expensive than traditional (cooled) thermal imaging sensors. This has practical

application with vegetation monitoring, wildlife counts and real time bushfire monitoring.

SAR and Lidar. SAR systems for UAVs appear to be in the development phase while Lidar is

further advanced.

Future developments include improvements to platform stability, ease of operation/deployment, greater

operating ranges, and automated sense and avoid systems to mitigate any safety concerns (Whitehead

and Hugenholtz, 2014) making them more attractive to users.

Examples of UAV application is provided in Table 9 below, which has been adapted from Colomina and

Molina (2014) and Khan et al. (2014). Applications are usually for mapping, feature detection (including

solid, gas and water), wildlife management or the study of landscape dynamics (Whitehead et al. 2014;

Khan et al. 2012).

Table 9: Example UAV Applications

System Application Reference

Radio-controlled fixed-wing model with

thermal imager and hyperspectral

sensor in visible NIR hands

Forest fire monitoring Rufino and Moccia

(2005)

Miniaturised hyperspectral camera

mounted on a fixed-wing auto-piloted

platform of 6 kg Max take-off weight

Vegetation monitoring Zarco-Tejada, and

Berni (2012)

Mini-UAS MK-Okto by HiSystems

GmbH equipped with either a NEC

F30 IS thermal imaging system or a

tetracam Mini MCA-4.

Thermal- and multispectral-imaging

Normalized Difference Vegetation

Index (NDVI) computation

Bendig et al. (2012)

Pentax Optio A40 for RGB photos and

a Sigma DP1 modified to acquire the

NIR band, on-board a Microdrones

md4-200

Tree species classification based on

different vegetation indices in a park

area

Gini et al. (2012)

Oktokopter with optical and

hyperspectral cameras. Extremely

dense 3D point cloud and ultra-high

resolution spatial data.

Analysis of Antarctic moss beds as

indicators for the regional effects of

climate change. Output: 2 cm

resolution digital terrain model

(DTM).

Lucieer et al. (2012)

Low-cost high-resolution thermal

imagery using AggieAir UAS. RGB,

NIR and thermal-vision.

Stream temperature monitoring for

aquatic ecosystem health. The

thermal image provided 30cm×30cm

resolution stream temperatures.

Jensen et al. (2012)




A combination of UAV and a ground

wireless sensor network.

Crop fertilizing missions. The UAS

route is modified depending on the

inputs from the ground network,

which detects the amount of fertiliser

applied on the ground.

Costa et al. (2012)

Small fixed-wing UAS carrying photo-

or video-cameras are

Used in missions in Switzerland, the

Netherlands, Indonesia, Malaysia

and Nepal, to perform detection of

several species such as orangutans,

elephants or rhinos and provide

information on density and circulation

of animals.

Wich and Koh (2012)

Fixed wing UAV with high resolution

imagery - no detail on remote sensing

system employed.

Bird counts in a common gull colony.

Resolution: 1.5cm. Grenzdörffer (2013)

Rotary-wing platform carrying a

commercial digital reflex camera to

generate a DEM for hydrodynamics

numerical modelling

Coastal management application,

related to the quantification of

morpho-sedimentary changes of the

coastal fringe

Delacourt et al.

(2009),

High-resolution 3-axis magnetic

sensor, mounted on an autonomous

Scout B1-100 helicopter

To generate detailed magnetic maps

and identify various ferrous objects in

the soil.

Eck and Imbach

(2011)

Low power, lightweight (1-2kg) laser

based sensor for trace gas species.

Battery operated.

Attached to T-Rex Align 700E robotic

helicopter

The sensors were developed to

measure greenhouse gas

concentrations (CO2, water vapour

and methane). 1% precision in

measurement for all three gases.

Khan et al (2012)

Remote Methane Leak Detection laser

on UAV. Battery powered. The

underlying technology is near-infrared

Standoff Tunable Diode Laser

Absorption Spectroscopy (STDLAS)

Laser detection of methane leaks.

Scanning soil surface from above

enables mapping methane

concentration contours and locate

hot spots. Can detect leaks as low as

1.0m3/hr

Frish (2012); Frish et

al. (no date)




Other hazardous gas detection via

STDLAS mounted on UAV.

Gas leak detection of gases such as

HF, H2S, NH3, H2O, HCl using near-

infrared wavelengths. Can be used

for inspecting CSG facilities,

chemical production or containment

facilities, illicit drug factors or

surveying for hazardous gases prior

to human entry.

Frish et al. (no date)

Cox et al. (2006) further describes missions undertaken by NASA since 1995. Applications include clear

air radiation measurements, cumulus electrification, harvest optimisation, coastal mapping and

atmospheric chemistry, amongst many others. Whitehead et al. (2014) also describes several recent

case studies. Examples of recently developed UAVs are given below.

Riegl RiCOPTER UAV

Riegl is a company specialising in laser scanning. They have recently released the RiCOPTER UAV,

which is a remotely piloted airborne laser scanning octo-copter equipped with a survey grade VUX-1

LiDAR sensor (Figure 19). The VUX-1 provides 500,000 measurements/sec and is accurate to up to

10mm, depending on height. The RiCOPTER also includes:

Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU)/ Global Navigation Satellite System unit with antenna

Up to 4 optional cameras providing 330deg Field of View

Maximum operating altitude of 550m

Maximum flight time of 30 minutes.

Max. take off mass of up to 25kg with a max payload of 16kg

Figure 19 3D LiDAR vegetation height data from the Riegl RiCOPTER for a corridor study (from Riegl, 2014b)



C-ASTRAL BRAMOR rTK UAV

The BRAMOR rTK is a UAV produced by C-Astral, an aerospace company based on Slovenia (Figure

20). It carries a system that includes 24.3 Megapixel colour, infrared, NDVI, hyperspectral, multispectral

or GAS Spectronometer sensor. Accuracy is sub-cm at 70m AGL.

It also includes a high rate GPS and IMU precision data-logging electronics. The whole system fits into

two transport cases or a single backpack to enable field use. The UAV has a maximum flight time of 2.5

hours and has a 30km datalink range.

Figure 20: the BRAMOR rTK and launch system

UAV Regulation

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) regulates the use of UAVs. CASA is currently reviewing Civil

Aviation Safety Regulations for UAVs and a complete re-write of regulations is expected by 2016.

The current regulations were developed in 2002. In general, there are requirements for:

UAVs to operate in accordance with rules governing flights of manned aircraft in controlled

airspace

Operating Area Approval from CASA for operations in designated airspace areas

Restrictions of use over populous areas as per conditions stated within specific CASA approval

Operator certification and training

Approval of aircraft for airworthiness.

Equipment requirements

At the moment any machine used for commercial purposes required a licenced operator.



HEAD OFFICE

Suite 4, Level 1

2-4 Merton Street

Sutherland NSW 2232

T 02 8536 8600

F 02 9542 5622

SYDNEY

Level 6

299 Sussex Street

Sydney NSW 2000

T 02 8536 8650

F 02 9264 0717

ST GEORGES BASIN

8/128 Island Point Road

St Georges Basin NSW 2540

T 02 4443 5555

F 02 4443 6655

CANBERRA

Level 2

11 London Circuit

Canberra ACT 2601

T 02 6103 0145

F 02 6103 0148

NEWCASTLE

Suites 28 & 29, Level 7

19 Bolton Street

Newcastle NSW 2300

T 02 4910 0125

F 02 4910 0126

NAROOMA

5/20 Canty Street

Narooma NSW 2546

T 02 4476 1151

F 02 4476 1161

COFFS HARBOUR

35 Orlando Street

Coffs Harbour Jetty NSW 2450

T 02 6651 5484

F 02 6651 6890

ARMIDALE

92 Taylor Street

Armidale NSW 2350

T 02 8081 2681

F 02 6772 1279

MUDGEE

Unit 1, Level 1

79 Market Street

Mudgee NSW 2850

T 02 4302 1230

F 02 6372 9230

PERTH

Suite 1 & 2

49 Ord Street

West Perth WA 6005

T 08 9227 1070

F 08 9322 1358

WOLLONGONG

Suite 204, Level 2

62 Moore Street

Austinmer NSW 2515

T 02 4201 2200

F 02 4268 4361

GOSFORD

Suite 5, Baker One

1-5 Baker Street

Gosford NSW 2250

T 02 4302 1220

F 02 4322 2897

DARWIN

16/56 Marina Boulevard

Cullen Bay NT 0820

T 08 8989 5601

F 08 8941 1220

BRISBANE

Suite 1 Level 3

471 Adelaide Street

Brisbane QLD 4000 T 07 3503 7191 F 07 3854 0310

1300 646 131 www.ecoaus.com.au

http://www.ecoaus.com.au/

Documents

Review of Remote Sensing Applications for Natural Resource ... · Review of Remote Sensing Applications for Natural Resource Management © ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA PTY LTD iv 3.8 Regional