U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

National Lidar Program Concept

National Geospatial Advisory Committee December 2, 2009

Greg SnyderU.S. Geological SurveyLand Remote Sensing Program

2

Outline

Lidar Overview National Lidar Program Goals Planned Lidar Study Stakeholders and Coordination Next Steps

3

Lidar Capabilities – Bare Earth

Carol Prentice, USGS

4

Canopy H

eight

Crown Width

Length of Live Crow

n

Height toLive Crown

Underestimation

Lidar Capabilities – Vegetation Structure

ModeledVolume

Lidar Cloud Actual Tree

5

Lidar Capabilities – Infrastructure

6

Lidar Capabilities - Intensity

Grass

Trees Roof types

Water

7

Lidar

Orthoimagery

Structures

Bare EarthElevation

Hydrology

Land Cover

Mapping Applications from Lidar

Contours

8

Range of National Applications Range of National Applications

Vegetation / Vegetation / BiomassBiomass

Urban / Suburban Urban / Suburban ResponseResponse Coastal StudiesCoastal Studies Carbon / Carbon /

Disturbance studiesDisturbance studies

Hydrologic StudiesHydrologic Studies

Volcano monitoringVolcano monitoring

Land CoverLand CoverEarthquake faultsEarthquake faults

9

10

Lidar Shoreline Extraction

Edit Lidar Point Cloud

VDatum

Contour Shoreline from DEM QA/QC and perform error analysis

Courtesy of NOAA

Slide 11

• Conservation Planning– Assists in practice alternative selection.

• Conservation compliance– Improved wetland boundary mapping

with 2 foot contour maps.• Emergency Watershed Protection

– Debris and sediment removal LIDAR data provided a pre-storm contour map

Slide 12

What is it?

• Discuss the 1ft contour need from the old soil conservation document.

10 Meter NED 2 Meter LIDAR

Slide 13

We can summarize the proportionof LiDAR returns by various heightstrata (i.e., estimate the amount of veg by height strata)

Estimating Estimating Veg Attributes DirectlyCrown Cover by Height Strata

Courtesy USFS

Slide 14

LiDAR derived productsAshland WatershedRogue River – Siskiyou NF

Summary by stand polygon Crown Closure Overstory Tree Count Overstory Trees Per Acre Average Stand Height Quadratic Mean Diameter (overstory trees) Vegetation density by height strata Structure (multi- versus single- story)

Courtesy USFS

15

How Many Applications ? Mapping confined urban channels vs natural stream In the creation of seamless topo/bathy products Integration of elevation data into the National Elevation

Dataset Derivation of stream channel characteristics Mapping and monitoring coastal hazards Identification of small hydrologic features (ditches, tile

drain studies) Mapping fish habitat Characterizing wildlife habitat Identification of canopy gaps Flood inundation modeling Derivative hydrologic profiling Disaster response Fire science High-resolution floodplain mapping Characterization of canopy structure Defining drainage basins Jokulhaup monitoring Fault-rupture mapping Monitoring sea level rise Natural Hazards Identifying landslide-prone areas Creating topographic maps Glacier changes Carbon sequestration assessments Homeland security scenarios

Delineation of canopy surface and forest metrics Determination of watershed characteristics Delineation of building structures Characterization of urban settings Monitoring long-term shoreline change Mapping land cover and land use Measuring earthquake deformation Delineation of volcanic structure Monitoring volcano hazards Urban mapping Powerline mapping Hydrologic Modeling Bare earth products Monitoring debris flows Wave height surveys Sedimentation into rivers Monitoring geomorphic processes Identification of ponding areas Mapping wetland drainage Creation of synthetic drainage networks Identifying culverts Transportation mapping 3-D visualization of buildings Volume visualization Identifying bird habitats

16

Why is Better Data Needed?

Many applications require it! For example, National Elevation Dataset has an

RMSE of 2meters FEMA guidelines for flood hazard mapping require

a RMSE of .185meters

3D data for above-terrain features (vegetation and built-up) has never been fully utilized

Recent high resolution lidar collections are inconsistent and difficult to integrate

17

2007 NRC Recommendations

“Elevation for the Nation shall employ lidar as the primary technology for digital elevation data acquisition.

“A seamless nationwide elevation model has application beyond the FEMA Map Modernization program … As part of Elevation for the Nation, federal, state, and local mapping partners should have the option to request data that exceed minimum specifications if they pay the additional cost of data collection and processing required to achieve higher accuracies.

“The new data collected in Elevation for the Nation should be disseminated to the public as part of an updated National Elevation Dataset.”

18

2009: 2nd NRC Report

Finding 1: “Topographic data are the most important factor in determining water surface elevations, base flood elevations, and the extent of flooding and, thus, the accuracy of flood maps in riverine areas.”

Recommendation 1: “FEMA should increase collaboration with federal (e.g., USGS, NOAA, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers), state, and local government agencies to acquire high-resolution, high-accuracy topographic and bathymetric data throughout the nation.”

19

Goals and Expectations of a National Lidar Program

Authoritative elevation* data for Federal and State applications, along with derived products, integrated into agency business operations:

Built on partnerships to meet multiple agency needs Using standards to maximize interoperability Conducted in concert with Federal and State programs Balancing requirements, benefits and costs Offering on-demand data coupled with data services Maximizing commercial sector involvement Using best available technologies Spawning new applications and user communities

* Where the term elevation includes measurements of terrain, built features and vegetation canopy (and vegetation structure)

20

Expectations: Data

Nationally consistent 3D measurements of terrain, vegetation and built-up features Point clouds or waveforms Processed data (e.g., classified points), intensity

imagery Raster bare-earth digital elevation model and other

agency-specific derivatives as requirements evolve

21

Expectations: Consistency

Consistent methodology for collecting, handling, processing, formatting and delivering lidar point cloud data

Retention of all collected raw data, intact and complete in geometry and attributes

These attributes enable reliable analysis across projects and wide areas

22

Expectations: Flexibility

Variable point spacing above a base specification determined by agency requirements, topography, land cover

Data update cycle appropriate to rates of landscape or coastal change

Variable data accuracy

23

Expectations: Data Services

Access to minimally processed, authoritative point cloud data

Derivative products and application services including the means to “plug-in” custom algorithms

Data management, computing and archive strategy

24

Scoping a National Lidar Study in 2010

The government is considering a program to improve mapping of terrain and landscape features

A study is being scoped to identify an optimal implementation strategy

Lidar is the technology of focus but study will summarize potential role of alternative technologies

Study funding provided by USGS and Federal partners

25

Candidate Lidar Study Objectives

Indentify core Federal and State lidar applications and requirements

Identify and compare technical approaches (and costs) for systematically meeting requirements

Determine the overall economic value of a national lidar data layer

Weigh benefit-cost ratios and recommend a preferred program alternative

Provide a strategy and cycle for refreshing data Address data management challenges and

potential solutions (may need separate study)

26

Other Study Topics of Interest

Look at current data acquisition, interoperability, exchange and delivery processes

Fusion of lidar with imagery other remote sensing data

Methodologies for evaluating lidar data accuracy over various land-use classes and physiographic extremes

Potential role of cloud computing

27

National Lidar Stakeholders USGS, FEMA, USDA, NOAA, USACE, NASA, NGA and

others States, local and tribal governments Organizations:

Association of American State Geologists National States Geographic Information Council National Association of Counties AmericaView Coastal States Organization ASPRS, AAG, URISA, etc. MAPPS Science consortiums Others…

28

Coordination Options and Approaches

Form a new Federal lidar coordination group Leverage the National Digital Elevation Program (NDEP)

NDEP agencies coordinate operational elevation programs today

Gain executive-level visibility and support from FGDC Regular updates and discussions with FGDC Seek National Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC)

advice and recommendations Interact directly with State and local organizations Interact broadly with stakeholders at public / professional

meetings and individually

29

Summary and Observations

There is strong stakeholder interest in a consistent national lidar layer for topographic and non-topographic applications

There is great benefit and complexity in combining national requirements, funding and priorities

Partner involvement may include data, funding, technology, algorithms, etc.

Need sound business plan to underpin effort (based on Lidar Study)

30

FY 2010

Fund the Lidar Study Step-up stakeholder engagement Enhance cohesion across agencies through

best practices and standards Advance integrated agency lidar program

planning

31

Sample questions for NGAC:

Does lidar study include the right topics? Feedback on conceptual notion of a National

Lidar Program? Other developments, trends or studies that

might improve prospects for a National Lidar Program?

Other constituencies / opportunities?