Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Erikkson, M.

Publications and source records attributed to Erikkson, M..

Estimation of irrigated land using Landsat digital data

Techniques developed by the University of California and NASA for the utilization of multitemporal Landsat digital data in estimating and mapping irrigated land are presented. Three dates of Landsat were registered to each other and to a USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle map base for approximately 1.9 million acres of land. Other data registered include county boundaries, land use stratification, and digitized ground data. To identify irrigated land, an indicator was used which consisted of the ratio of MSS Band 7 to MSS Band 5 (the 7/5 ratio). A threshold 7/5 irrigated land value was determined for each date, as actively growing land generally has a higher 7/5 ratio than other cover classes. An estimate of irrigated land was determined by Landsat classification with ground data, at a relative standard error of + or - 7.98% at the 95% confidence interval. Mapping evaluation reveals a 94% accuracy, a 7.4% omission rate, and a 6.3% commission rate. In addition, a sample unit size evaluation recommends a 1-1 1/2 square mile sample range.

Brown, C. E.↗

Landsat-based estimation of California's irrigated land

The procedure developed uses two-phase sampling, stratification and multidate Landsat imagery to produce the estimate. Maximizing the advantages of both spectral data and field patterns available from Landsat, three dates of Landsat imagery are interpreted to provide county-wide estimates of the proportion of land irrigated. Ground data, collected on a subset of the area interpreted on Landsat, are used to calibrate the satellite estimate. The satellite and ground measurements are reduced to proportion data and linked using a regression estimator to produce the estimate of irrigated land. It is estimated that 3.99 million hectares were irrigated with a relative standard error of + or - 1.18% at the 99% confidence level. Acreage tabulations provided by the Department of Water Resources show that the Landsat-based estimate differed by less than 0.4% at the state level.

Wall, S. L.↗