lib handbooks e10pre

8/14/2019 Lib Handbooks e10pre

1/97

Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands2nd edition, 2004

Handbook 10Wetland inventory

A Ramsar framework for wetland inventory

This 2nd edition of the Ramsar handbooks replaces the seriespublished in January 2000.It includes relevant guidance adopted by several meetings of theConference of the Parties, in particular COP7 (1999) and COP8 (2002), aswell as selected background documents presented at these COPs.

This second edition of the Ramsar handbooks series, like the first, hasbeen made possible through a generous contribution from theGovernment of Spain, this time through the General Directorate forBiodiversity, Ministry of Environment.


2/97

Acknowledgements

The Framework for Wetland Inventory which forms the basis for thisHandbook was prepared by the Scientific and Technical Review PanelsExpert Working Group on Wetland Inventory, led by Max Finlayson(Australia). The Recommended standard metadata record for thedocumentation of wetland inventories provided in Appendix V of theFramework was developed for the Ramsar Convention by John Lowry andMax Finlayson of the Environmental Research Institute of the SupervisingScientist, Australia, with the financial support of the government of theUnited Kingdom, as support for the development of the next phase of theGlobal Review of Wetland Resources and Priorities for Wetland Inventory (GRoWI 2).

Note. This Handbook is based on Resolution VIII.6 and its Annex, but alsobrings together additional information relevant to this issue. The viewsexpressed in this additional information do not necessarily reflect theviews of the Ramsar Secretariat or the Contracting Parties, and suchmaterials have not been endorsed by the Conference of the ContractingParties.

All decisions of the Ramsar COPs are available from the Conventionsweb site at http://www.ramsar.org/index_key_docs.htm#res. Background

documents referred to in these handbooks are available athttp://www.ramsar.org/cop7_docs_index.htm andhttp://www.ramsar.org/cop8_docs_index_e.htm.

2


3/97

Table of ContentsAcknowledgementsForeword

A Framework for Wetland Inventory Background and contextA Framework for Wetland Inventory

1. State the purpose and objective2. Review existing knowledge and information3. Review existing inventory methods4. Determine the scale and resolution5. Establish a core or minimum data set6. Establish a habitat classification7. Choose an appropriate method8. Establish a data management system9. Establish a time schedule and the level of resources thatare required10. Assess the feasibility & cost effectiveness11. Establish a reporting procedure12. Establish a review and evaluation process13. Plan a pilot study

Implementation of the inventory

Appendix I: Inventory methodsAppendix II: Determining the most appropriate remotely sensed

data for a wetland inventoryAppendix III: Summary of remotely sensed data sets applicable towetland inventoryAppendix IV: Wetland classificationsAppendix V: Recommended standard metadata record for the

documentation of wetland inventoriesAppendix VI: Reading list

Additional Appendices

Ramsar COP7 DOC. 19.3: Global Review of Wetland Resources andPriorities for Wetland Inventory - Summary ReportExtract from Ramsar COP8 DOC. 16: A framework for integrated

wetland inventory, assessment and monitoringAn inventory and assessment route-map for Africa

Relevant ResolutionsResolution VIII.6: A Ramsar Framework for Wetland Inventory Resolution VI.12: National Wetland Inventories and candidate sitesfor listing Resolution VII.20: Priorities for wetland inventory Resolution VIII.7: Gaps and harmonization of Ramsar guidance on

wetland ecological character, inventory, assessment and

3


4/97

monitoring

4


5/97

Foreword

The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands has from the start recognised theimportance of national wetland inventories as a key tool for informingpolicies and other actions to achieve the conservation and wise use of wetlands. As early as the 1 st meeting of the Conference of the ContractingParties (COP1, Cagliari, 1980), Parties were convinced that nationalwetland policies should be based on a nationwide inventory of wetlandsand of their resources (Recommendation 1.5). This recognition of thevalue of national wetland inventories has been regularly reiterated bysubsequent COPs, including in the Annex to Recommendation 2.3 (COP2,Groningen, 1984), Recommendation 4.6 (COP4, Montreux, 1990),Resolution 5.3 (COP5, Kushiro, 1993), and Resolution VI.12 (COP6,Brisbane, 1996).

The Convention has recognised that national wetland inventories, as wellas being an essential basis for the formulation of national wetland policy,are also important for inter alia identifying sites suitable for inclusion inthe List of Wetlands of International Importance (the Ramsar List), forquantifying the global wetland resource as the basis for assessment of itsstatus and trends, for identifying wetlands suitable for restoration, and forrisk and vulnerability assessments.

In 1998, in response to Action 6.1.3 of the Conventions Strategic Plan1997-2002, Wetlands International and the Environmental ResearchInstitute of the Supervising Scientist, Australia, undertook for the RamsarConvention a Global Review of Wetland Resources and Priorities for Wetland Inventory (GRoWI) project. This reviewed the extent and status of national wetland inventories. The findings of this analysis were presentedto a Technical Session of COP7 in San Jos in 1999 and are summarised ina COP7 Background Paper (Ramsar COP7 DOC. 19.3) available onhttp://www.ramsar.org/cop7_doc_19.3_e.htm and as an AdditionalAppendix to this Handbook. The full set of global and regional GRoWIreports are available for download in Word format fromhttp://www.wetlands.org/inventory&/GRoWI/welcome.html.

The GRoWI review reported that only 7% of countries had adequate orcomprehensive national wetland inventories, and 25% of countriesappeared to have no national baseline inventory information at all on theirwetlands upon which to base their implementation of wise use under theConvention. The GRoWI reports recommendations, incorporated inResolution VII.20 on Priorities for wetland inventory included: meeting theurgent need for improving inventory coverage; using a standard core dataset to permit comparability; ensuring that each inventory has a clearstatement of purpose and range of information collected; improvingdevelopment and dissemination of models for globally-applicable wetland

inventory; developing accessible repositories for existing inventories;

5


6/97

creating an accessible standard metadata record for each inventory, andfor the GRoWI work to be regularly updated.

To provide the further guidance to Contracting Parties on inventory

methodologies called for in Resolution VII.20, the Conventions Scientificand Technical Review Panel (STRP) prepared A Framework for WetlandInventory for COP8, which was adopted as the Annex to Resolution VIII.6and forms the main part of this Handbook. The framework providesguidance for planning and designing an appropriate wetland inventory,recognising that the actual inventory approach adopted will depend on itspurpose and objectives, as well as the capacity and resourcing forundertaking the inventory. Appendices to the Framework provide furtherinformation on a number of standardised inventory methods which havebeen successfully applied in different parts of the world, additionalguidance on determining appropriate use of remotely sensed data ininventory, information on a range of different wetland classifications whichhave been applied to wetland inventory, and a summary of arecommended standard metadata record for documenting wetlandinventories.

Contracting Parties at COP8 requested the STRP, through Resolution VIII.6,to undertake further work in preparing guidance on certain aspects of wetland inventory, including on remote sensing data, low-costgeographical information systems, and classification systems in wetlandinventory, and, through Resolution VIII.7, to undertake further work toaddress recognised gaps and disharmonies in guidance on ecologicalcharacter, inventory, assessment, monitoring and management of Ramsarsites and other wetlands. This latter Resolution has also requested theSTRP to consider consolidation of the Framework for Wetland Inventory into an integrated framework for wetland inventory, assessment andmonitoring developed from an outline of the approach made available toCOP8 in Ramsar COP8 DOC. 16 (available onhttp://www.ramsar.org/cop8_doc_16_e.doc and as an Additional Appendixto this Handbook).

6


7/97

A Framework for Wetland Inventory

(adopted as the Annex to Resolution VIII.6 by the 8 th Conference of the Contracting Parties, Valencia, Spain, 2002)

Background and context

1. In Resolution VII.20 (1999) the Contracting Parties recognised theimportance of comprehensive national inventory as the vital basis formany activities necessary for achieving the wise use of wetlands,including policy development, identification and designation of Ramsar sites, documentation of wetland losses, and identification of wetlands with potential for restoration (see also Resolutions VII.16and VIII.17). It also encouraged the collection of information for themanagement of shared wetlands, including those within river basinsand/or coastal zones (see also Resolutions VII.18 and VIII.4) asappropriate. Furthermore, Operational Objective 1 of theConventions Strategic Plan 2003-2008 is devoted to wetlandinventory and assessment, with a series of concrete actions toachieve this Operational Objective.

2. The Global Review of Wetland Resources and Priorities for WetlandInventory (GRoWI), prepared in 1999 for the Ramsar Convention byWetlands International and the Environmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist, Australia, indicated that few countries have

comprehensive national inventories of their wetland resources, andlack this essential baseline information on their wetlands. In addition,the National Reports submitted to Ramsar COP8 indicated thatinsufficient progress has been made in wetland inventory.

3. The GRoWI review concluded that a clear identification and statementof purpose and objectives is fundamental to the design andimplementation of effective and cost-efficient inventory, but foundthat the purpose and objectives for many existing inventories werepoorly, if at all, stated.

4. In Resolution VII.20 the COP urged Contracting Parties which had yetto complete national inventories of their wetland resources to givethe highest priority to the compilation of comprehensive wetlandinventories, and requested the Conventions Scientific and TechnicalReview Panel (STRP) to review and further develop existing modelsfor wetland inventory and data management, including the use of remote sensing and low-cost and user-friendly geographic informationsystems.

5. This Framework for Wetland Inventory has been developed by the

STRP, working with the Ramsar Bureau, Wetlands International, theEnvironmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist

7


8/97

(Australia) and others, in response to Resolution VII.20. TheFramework provides guidance on a standard approach to designing awetland inventory program. It includes information on determiningappropriate remote sensing techniques to apply, wetland

classifications and existing standardised inventory methods, andrecommends standards for core data fields and data and metadatarecording.

6. The Framework provides guidance for designing wetland inventory atmultiple scales from site-based to provincial, national and regional.

The extent of detail that can be compiled in the inventory willgenerally decrease as the geographical area of coverage increases,unless large resources can be allocated for the program.

7. The data fields included in any particular inventory will be based onthe specific purpose and scale of the inventory. A core data set isrecommended as a minimum, but with the option of adding furtherdata fields as required.

8. The Framework uses the definition of inventory agreed in Workshop4 on Wetland Inventory, Assessment and Monitoring PracticalTechniques and Identification of Major Issues held during the 2 ndInternational Conference on Wetlands and Development, Dakar,Senegal, 8-14 November 1998 (Finlayson et al. 2001). The definitionis provided below along with those for the inter-connected conceptsof assessment and monitoring:

Wetland inventory : The collection and/or collation of coreinformation for wetland management, including the provision of an information base for specific assessment and monitoringactivities.

Wetland assessment: The identification of the status of, andthreats to, wetlands as a basis for the collection of more specificinformation through monitoring activities.

Wetland monitoring: Collection of specific information for

management purposes in response to hypotheses derived fromassessment activities, and the use of these monitoring results forimplementing management. (Note that the collection of time-series information that is not hypothesis-driven from wetlandassessment should be termed surveillance rather than monitoring,as outlined in Resolution VI.1.)

9. It is important to distinguish between inventory, assessment andmonitoring when designing data gathering exercises, as they requiredifferent categories of information. Wetland inventory provides thebasis for guiding the development of appropriate assessment and

monitoring, but wetland inventories repeated at given time intervalsdo not constitute monitoring.

8


9/97

{See also Handbook 8}

A framework for wetland inventory

10. A structured framework for planning and designing a wetlandinventory is summarized in Table 1. The framework comprises 13steps that provide the basis for making decisions in relation to thepurpose (and objectives), and the available resources, for aninventory.

11. All steps in the Framework are applicable to the planning andimplementation of any wetland inventory, and all steps shouldtherefore be followed during the design and planning process. Theframework does not provide prescriptive guidance on particular

inventory methods; rather it provides guidance to the ContractingParties and others who are planning to undertake wetland inventoryby drawing attention to different methods and wetland classificationsalready in use and of proven utility under different circumstances.

12. The framework should be used as a basis for making decisions forundertaking a wetland inventory under the circumstances particularto each inventory program. Guidance on the application of each stepis provided.

Table 1. A structured framework for planning a wetlandinventory

Step Guidance1. State thepurpose andobjective

State the reason(s) for undertaking the inventory andwhy the information is required, as the basis forchoosing a spatial scale and minimum data set.

2. Reviewexistingknowledgeand

information

Review the published and unpublished literature anddetermine the extent of knowledge and informationavailable for wetlands in the region being considered.

3. Reviewexistinginventorymethods

Review available methods and seek expert technicaladvice to: a) choose the methods that can supply therequired information; and b) ensure that suitable datamanagement processes are established.

4. Determinethe scale andresolution

Determine the scale and resolution required to achievethe purpose and objective defined in Step 1.

9


10/97

5. Establish acore orminimumdata set

Identify the core, or minimum, data set sufficient todescribe the location and size of the wetland(s) and anyspecial features. This can be complemented byadditional information on factors affecting the ecological

character of the wetland(s) and other managementissues, if required.6. Establish ahabitatclassification

Choose a habitat classification that suits the purpose of the inventory, since there is no single classification thathas been globally accepted.

7. Choose anappropriatemethod

Choose a method that is appropriate for a specificinventory based on an assessment of the advantagesand disadvantages, and costs and benefits, of thealternatives.

8. Establish adatamanagementsystem

Establish clear protocols for collecting, recording andstoring data, including archiving in electronic orhardcopy formats. This should enable future users todetermine the source of the data, and its accuracy andreliability.At this stage it is also necessary to identify suitable dataanalysis methods. All data analysis should be done byrigorous and tested methods and all informationdocumented. The data management system shouldsupport, rather than constrain, the data analysis.A meta-database should be used to: a) recordinformation about the inventory datasets; and b) outline

details of data custodianship and access by other users.9. Establish atimeschedule andthe level of resourcesthat arerequired

Establish a time schedule for: a) planning the inventory;b) collecting, processing and interpreting the datacollected; c) reporting the results; and d) regular reviewof the program.Establish the extent and reliability of the resourcesavailable for the inventory. If necessary makecontingency plans to ensure that data is not lost due toinsufficiency of resources.

10. Assessthe feasibility

& costeffectiveness

Assess whether or not the program, including reportingof the results, can be undertaken within under thecurrent institutional, financial and staff situation.Determine if the costs of data acquisition and analysisare within budget and that a budget is available for theprogram to be completed.

11. Establisha reportingprocedure

Establish a procedure for interpreting and reporting allresults in a timely and cost effective manner.

The report should be succinct and concise, indicatewhether or not the objective has been achieved, andcontain recommendations for management action,including whether further data or information is required.

10


11/97

12. Establisha review andevaluationprocess

Establish a formal and open review process to ensurethe effectiveness of all procedures, including reportingand, when required, supply information to adjust or eventerminate the program.

13. Plan apilot study Test and adjust the method and specialist equipmentbeing used, assess the training needs for staff involved,and confirm the means of collating, collecting, entering,analysing and interpreting the data. In particular, ensurethat any remote sensing can be supported byappropriate ground-truth survey.

Step 1 State the purpose and objective

13. Wetland inventory has multiple purposes. These include:

a) listing particular types, or even all, wetlands in an area;b) listing wetlands of local, national and/or internationalimportance;

c) describing the occurrence and distribution of wetland taxa;d) describing the occurrence of natural resources such as peat, fish

or water;e) establishing a baselines for measuring change in the ecological

character of wetlands;f) assessing the extent and rate of wetland loss or degradation;g) promoting awareness of the value of wetlands;h) providing a tool for conservation planning and management; andi) developing networks of experts and cooperation for wetland

conservation and management.

14. An inventory should contain a clear statement of its purpose andobjective. This should identify the habitats that will be considered,the range of information that is required, the time schedule, and whowill make use of the information.

15. A clear statement of the purpose(s) will assist in making decisionsabout the methods and resources needed to undertake the inventory.

Step 2 Review existing knowledge and information

16. Past investigations have resulted in the provision of broad-scalewetland inventory information for many parts of the world. Other,more detailed, but localized inventory may have been undertaken,restricted either geographically or to particular wetland habitats orecosystems in the region under consideration.

17. Valuable information may be held in many different formats and/or bymany different organizations (e.g., waterbird, fisheries, water qualityand agricultural information bases, and local peoples information andknowledge).

11


12/97

18. A comprehensive review of existing data sources may be necessaryand its relevance to the proposed inventory work ascertained.

Step 3 Review existing inventory methods19. A number of established methods for wetland inventory exist. The

characteristics of five examples in current use are summarized inAppendix I. Further sources of information are listed in Appendix VI.

The techniques and habitat classifications used in these methodshave been successfully adapted for use in a number of locations.

20. The review should determine whether or not existing establishedinventory methods are suitable for the specific purpose andobjectives of the inventory being planned.

21. Some inventory methods use a linked hierarchical approach, in whichinventory may be designed at different spatial scales for differentpurposes.

22. Many inventories have been based on ground-survey, often with thesupport of aerial photography and topographical maps and, morerecently, satellite imagery. The development of GeographicInformation Systems (GIS) and the enhanced resolution of satelliteimagery have resulted in greater use of spatial data.

23. A procedure for determining which remotely sensed datasets are themost appropriate for particular purposes, including their use in GIS, isgiven in Appendix II. A summary of currently available remotesensing data sets that can be applicable to wetland inventory isprovided in Appendix III.

Step 4 Determine the scale and resolution

24. The spatial scale used for wetland inventory is inseparable from itsobjective and greatly influences the selection of the method to be

used.25. Wetland inventory has been carried out at a number of spatial scales,

with specific objectives at each scale. When choosing the scale it isnecessary first to determine the objective and then assess how thiscan be achieved through a chosen scale.

26. Suitable scales for wetland inventory within a hierarchical approach

are:

a) wetland regions within a continent, with maps at a scale of 1:1,000,000 250,000

12


13/97

b) wetland aggregations within each region, with maps at a scale of 1:250,000 50,000

c) wetland sites within each aggregation, with maps at a scale of 1:50,000 25,000.

27. The choice of scale is also related to the size of the geographic areainvolved and to the accuracy required and achievable with availableresources.

28. Each of the scales needs a minimum mapping unit that reflects theminimum acceptable accuracy for that scale. This is done by firstdetermining what is the minimum size of feature that can be clearlydelineated at that scale, to acceptable standards, and by thendetermining what measures are required to describe theaccuracy/confidence of defining the unit. For example, a land systemsmap compiled to a scale of 1:250,000 typically involves taking oneon-the-ground site observation for every 600 ha surveyed.

Step 5 Establish a core or minimum data set

29. A core or minimum data set sufficient to describe the wetland(s)should be determined. The specific details of this data set areinseparable from the level of complexity and the spatial scale of theinventory.

30. It is recommended that sufficient information (the core, or minimum,data set) should be collected so as to enable the major wetlandhabitats to be delineated and characterized for at least one point intime.

31. The core data can be divided into two components:

a) that describing the biophysical features of the wetland; andb) that describing the major management features of the wetland.

32. The decision whether to undertake an inventory based only upon core

biophysical data or also to include data on management features willbe based on individual priorities, needs, and resources. The secondcomponent is likely to provide information that can immediately beused for assessment purposes, but it may require more extensivedata collection and analyses. Care should be exercised to ensure thatthe inclusion of this information does not detract from the primarypurpose of obtaining sufficient information to enable the delineationand characterization of the wetland(s).

33. Recommended core data fields for the collection of biophysical andmanagement features of wetlands are listed in Table 2.

13


14/97

Table 2. Core (minimum) data fields for biophysical andmanagement features of wetlands

Biophysical features

Site name (official name of site and catchment) Area and boundary (size and variation, range and average values) * Location (projection system, map coordinates, map centroid,

elevation) * Geomorphic setting (where it occurs within the landscape, linkage

with other aquatic habitat, biogeographical region) * General description (shape, cross-section and plan view) Climate zone and major features Soil (structure and colour) Water regime (periodicity, extent of flooding and depth, source of

surface water and links with groundwater) Water chemistry (salinity, pH, colour, transparency, nutrients) Biota (vegetation zones and structure, animal populations and

distribution, special features including rare/endangered species)Management features Land use local, and in the river basin and/or coastal zone Pressures on the wetland within the wetland and in the river basin

and/or coastal zone Land tenure and administrative authority for the wetland, and for

critical parts of the river basin and/or coastal zone Conservation and management status of the wetland including legalinstruments and social or cultural traditions that influence the

management of the wetland Ecosystem values and benefits (goods and services) derived from the

wetland including products, functions and attributes (see ResolutionVI.1) and, where possible, their services to human well-being (seeResolutions VI.23 and VII.8)

Management plans and monitoring programs in place and plannedwithin the wetland and in the river basin and/or coastal zone (seeResolutions 5.7, VI.1, VII.17, and VIII.14)

* These features can usually be derived from topographical maps or remotely sensedimages, especially aerial photographs.

Step 6 Establish a habitat classification

34. Many national wetland definitions and classifications are in use(Appendix IV). These have been developed in response to differentnational needs and take into account the main biophysical features(generally vegetation, landform and water regime, sometimes alsowater chemistry such as salinity) and the variety and size of wetlandsin the locality or region being considered.

14


15/97

35. The Ramsar Classification System for Wetland Type (Resolution VI.5)is increasingly being used as a classification basis for nationalwetland inventories. However, when it was first developed it was notanticipated that the Ramsar classification would be used for this

inventory purpose, so its usefulness as a habitat classification for anyspecific wetland inventory should be carefully assessed. Whilst theRamsar Classification System has value as a basic habitat descriptionfor sites designated for the Ramsar List of Wetlands of InternationalImportance, it does not readily accommodate description of allwetland habitats in the form and level of description that are nowcommonly included in many wetland inventories.

36. A classification based upon the fundamental features that define awetland the landform and water regime is considered to besuperior to those based on other features (Resolution VII.20). Thebasic landform and water regime categories within such aclassification can be complemented with modifiers that describeother features of the wetland, for example, for vegetation, soils,water quality, and size.

37. As it is unlikely that a single classification can be globally acceptable,not least because different classification systems are required bysome national legislations, a classification should be chosen that suitsthe purpose of the inventory. The core biophysical datarecommended to be collected in an inventory (Table 2) may be usedto derive a classification that suits individual needs.

Step 7 Choose an appropriate method

38. Many inventory methods are available (see Appendices I and IV forexamples). When assessing which method (or methods) isappropriate for an inventory, it is necessary to be aware of theadvantages and disadvantages of the alternatives in relation to thepurpose and objective of the proposed inventory work. This appliesparticularly to the use of remotely sensed data (as listed in AppendixIII).

39. To assist in determining which remote sensing data is most useful fora particular inventory, a simple decision-tree is provided in AppendixII. The decision-tree is also presented pictorially and contains sixsteps to assist in determining which data are most suitable.Importantly, the extent of ground-truth survey required to validatethe remote sense data should be assessed when considering suchtechniques.

15


16/97

40. Physico-chemical and biological sampling should be undertakenwhenever possible by standard laboratory and field methods that arewell documented and readily available in published formats. There isa variety of acceptable methods in use. The bibliographical details of

those used should be recorded and any departures from standardprocedures clearly justified and documented.

41. As a general rule, the inventory method chosen should be sufficientlyrobust to ensure that the required data can be obtained within theconstraints imposed by the terrain, resources, and time periodavailable. Where adequate methods do not exist, well-directedresearch is needed to develop or identify specific techniques.

42. The use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for managingspatial data, in particular, is encouraged, noting that low-cost GISplatforms are increasingly available and widely-used.

Step 8 Establish a data management system

43. Increasing use of databases and Geographic Information Systemsensure that a large amount of data can be stored and displayed, butthese capabilities will be undermined if the data are not wellmanaged and stored in formats that are readily accessible.

44. Potential data management problems can be overcome byestablishing clear protocols for collecting, recording and storing data,including archiving data in electronic and/or hardcopy formats. Theprotocols should enable future users to determine the source of thedata, as well as its accuracy and reliability. The protocols should alsoensure effective recording and reporting of data and information.

45. The data management system should support analysis of the data.Details of all analytical methods should be recorded along with thedata and made available to all users. This includes details of statistical techniques and any assumptions about the data.

46. In addition, a meta-database should be used to record basicinformation about individual inventory data sets. These metadatarecords should include a description of the type of data and details of custodianship and access. A standard metadata format has beendeveloped specifically for recording wetland inventory (Appendix V),and further guidance on the use of this inventory metadata standardwill be issued by the Ramsar Bureau.

47. General good practice guidance on metadata and data custodianship,ownership and access is also available in a handbook produced forthe Biodiversity Conservation Information System (BCIS) (BiodiversityConservation Information System 2000).

16


17/97

48. The metadata records should be an integral part of the datamanagement system and not treated as a separate entity from thedata files, even if these have been archived.

Step 9 Establish a time schedule and the level of resourcesthat are required

49. It is necessary to determine the time schedule for planning theinventory, as well as for collecting, processing and interpreting thedata collected during an inventory. This is particularly important if field sampling is required, in which case a sampling schedule thattakes into account any special features of the terrain and samplingtechniques will be necessary.

50. The schedule should be realistic and based on firm decisions aboutfunding and resources. This will determine the extent and duration of the inventory. The schedule should also include time to prepare forthe inventory, especially if a team of experts needs to be gathered,and extensive background investigation and review has to beundertaken.

51. The extent and reliability of the resources available for the inventorywill eventually determine the nature and duration of the inventory.

The funding to secure and train suitable personnel and obtainappropriate technical resources, such as field equipment and remotesensing data, should be confirmed and steps taken to ensure thatthese are available when required.

Step 10 Assess the feasibility and cost effectiveness of theproject

52. Once a method has been chosen and a time schedule determined, itis necessary to assess whether or not it is feasible and cost effectiveto undertake the project. This assessment is essentially a review of the entire inventory method, including the time schedule and costs.

53. Factors that influence the feasibility and cost effectiveness of theproject include:

availability of trained personnel; access to sampling sites; availability and reliability of specialized equipment for sample

collection or analysis of samples; means of analyzing and interpreting the data; usefulness of the data and information derived from it; means of reporting in a timely manner; and financial and material support for any continuation of the project.

17


18/97

Step 11 Establish a reporting procedure

54. The results obtained in the inventory should be recorded andreported in a timely and cost effective manner. The records should be

concise and readily understood by others involved in the program orsimilar investigations. Where necessary the records should be cross-referenced to other documentation from the inventory.

55. It is important to keep in mind that the data may be useful for furtheranalyses in the future the analysts involved should be able toreadily access and interpret the data records and be aware of anyconstraints on their usefulness for such purposes. In this respect thereporting procedure should incorporate reference to the meta-database and archived data.

56. A report on the inventory should be prepared at pre-determinedintervals. It should be succinct and concise and indicate whether ornot the purpose and objective of the inventory is being achieved, andwhether there are any constraints on using the data (e.g. changes tothe sampling regime such as lack of replication or concerns about itsaccuracy).

57. The core data should be made available to interest groups inappropriate formats along with details of the methods used. Reportsmay present the data collected and/or contain specificrecommendations for further inventory and data collection, or formanagement action.

58. At the same time, a metadata record of the inventory should be madeand added to a centralized file using a standardized format.

59. All reports should be made available to interested parties and other

agencies in the shortest possible time through appropriate electronicand hardcopy formats.

Step 12 Review and evaluate the inventory

60. Throughout the inventory it may be necessary to review progress andmake adjustments to the sampling regime, data management, andprogram implementation. The review and evaluation process shouldbe developed and agreed as part of the planning and design phase of the inventory. The review procedures should establish that whenchanges are made they should be recorded and made known to allinvolved in the inventory.

61. The review procedures should also establish that at the end of theinventory, or after a predetermined time period, the entire processshould be re-examined and necessary modifications made andrecorded. The evaluation procedures should be designed to illustrate

18


19/97

both the strengths and the weaknesses of the inventory, includingnecessary reference to the sampling regime and/or the data quality.

62. The evaluation can also be used to justify a request for ongoing

funding. If the inventory has been a success and achieved its purposeand objective, this should be clearly stated and the program broughtto an end. Conversely, if the inventory has not achieved its purposeand objective, this also should be clearly stated along with arecommendation as to whether it should continue, possibly in arevised form, or halted.

Step 13 Plan a pilot study

63. Before launching an inventory a pilot study is essential. The pilotstudy provides the mechanism through which to confirm or alter thetime schedule and the individual steps within the chosen method. Italso provides the opportunity to develop individual workplans for allpersonnel.

64. The pilot study phase is the time to fine-tune the overall method andindividual steps and test the basic assumptions behind the methodand sampling regime. Specialist field equipment should be testedand, if necessary, modified, based on practical experience. It is alsothe opportunity to assess training needs. The amount of time andeffort required to conduct the pilot study will vary considerably itsimportance will be shown by the improvements made to the scheduleand design of the inventory.

65. The pilot study provides the final step before commencing thewetland inventory itself. Lessons learnt during the pilot study shouldbe incorporated into the inventory method.

19


20/97

Implementation of the inventory

66. Once the method has been agreed by following all steps in the aboveFramework the inventory can be implemented with some confidence.

Importantly, that confidence is dependent upon a suitable pilot studybeing undertaken and confirmation of all individual sampling and datamanagement protocols. Any further changes to the agreed protocolsshould be recorded and, where necessary, discussed and formalized.

67. It should be expected that collection of the data for the full inventorywill consume most of the time and resources available for theinventory. The steps in the Framework are designed to guidedevelopment an overall method and ensure that the inventory can becompetently implemented.

68. All data collected during the inventory should be contained within the

agreed data management system, which may include both hardcopyand electronic files and records. Steps should be taken to ensure thatthe data records are secure and duplicate copies kept in safelocations.

69. Whilst the steps in the Framework provide the basis for designing aninventory project for specific purposes and with specified resourcesavailable, it does not ensure that an inventory will be effective. Thiscan only be done by the personnel engaged to undertake theinventory the Framework provides an outline of the method,including necessary training and contingency in support of themethod.

70. It must be stressed that all steps in the Framework are necessary,with the pilot study step providing an important feedback and anopportunity to refine the inventory before the main sampling effortcommences. Similarly, the review and evaluation step provides animportant check on progress and a formal opportunity to adjust oreven halt the inventory.

20


21/97

Appendix I

Inventory methods

71. Standardized inventory methods are available and have beensuccessfully used in different circumstances, countries or regions.Notable amongst these are the Mediterranean Wetlands Initiative(MedWet) inventory, the United States Fish and Wildlife Servicenational wetland inventory, the Ugandan national wetland inventory,the Asian wetland inventory, and the Ecuador national wetlandinventory.

72. The characteristics of these examples are summarised below in termsof each of the 13 Framework steps. These examples have been

chosen principally as they were considered comprehensive examplesof existing methods, but also because they illustrate differences inapproaches that could be used in different locations, for differentpurposes, and at different scales. The need for different methods andwetland classifications (see also Appendix IV) that enable local andnational needs to be met must be stressed: this is illustrated by therange of examples below.

Mediterranean Wetlands Initiative (MedWet) inventory

73. This is a set of standard but flexible methods and tools, including adatabase for data management, for inventory in the Mediterraneanregion. Although not intended as a pan-Mediterranean wetlandinventory, it has provided a common approach that has beenadopted, and adapted, for use in several Mediterranean countries andelsewhere.

1. Purpose andobjective

To identify where wetlands occur in Mediterraneancountries and ascertain which are priority sites forconservation; to identify the values and functions foreach wetland and provide a baseline for measuring

future change; and to provide a tool for planning andmanagement and permit comparisons between sites.2. Informationreview

A process of consultation with an advisory group of experts from the Mediterranean and elsewhere. Thisgroup considered the experience and knowledgegained from other inventory and various Ramsarguidelines on managing wetlands.

3. Reviewmethods

Considered database methods used elsewhere inEurope, United States and Asia. Compatibility withwetland databases being used in Europe was a keyconsideration, e.g. the CORINE Biotopes program. Themethod was designed to include both a simple and acomplex data format.

21


22/97


23/97


To conduct a natural resource inventory of wetlandsfor use in wetland planning, regulation, managementand conservation.

2. Informationreview Reviewed the extent of wetland survey and inventoryto determine the status of wetland protection and theavailability of maps of wetlands.

3. Reviewmethods

Reviewed existing wetland inventory and consultedwith state and federal agencies to determine whatinventory techniques were being used.

4. Scale andresolution

Maps produced at a scale of 1:80 000 or 1:40 000.

5. Core dataset

Standardized data collection is undertaken in line withthe information required for the habitat classificationand production of standard maps for each state.

6. Habitatclassification

Hierarchical classification developed as an integralpart of the inventory to describe ecological units andprovide uniformity in concepts and terms.

7. Method Based on interpretation of color infrared aerialphotographs, initially at 1:24 000 and more recentlyat 1:40 000 to 1:80 000 scale. The mapping unitvaries according to the region and ease of identifyingwetlands. The method includes field checking andstereoscopic analysis of photographs. Other remotesensing techniques are being tested.

8. Datamanagement Maps and digital data are made available online atwww.nwi.fws.gov . Data is analyzed through GIS usingARC-INFO.

9. Timeschedule andresources

Ongoing program since 1974. Maps are updated asneeded and when funding is available.

10. Feasibility& costeffectiveness

Large scale program was extensively funded and alarge proportion of the country is now mapped. Astatistical design was incorporated to provide validrepresentative figures for selected areas.

11. Reporting National wetland trends are produced periodically,based on statistical sampling. Mapping targets havebeen set through legislation that has periodically beenrevised.

12. Reviewand evaluation

The inventory has been under regular review and itsoutputs evaluated and new targets and prioritiesestablished.

13. Pilot study An extensive phase of method development wasundertaken before the inventory was consideredoperational. The classification system whichunderpins the inventory was extensively tested in the

field.Further Cowardin, Carter, Golet & LaRoe 1979; Cowardin &

23


24/97

information Golet 1995; Wilen & Bates 1995www.nwi.fws.gov

Uganda National Wetlands Programme

75. The inventory is a component of an ongoing National WetlandsProgram. It is largely carried out at the local level, using standardformats, and includes a training component.


To survey, describe, quantify and map all wetlandsand provide decision-makers and planners, especiallyat district level, with information for managementplanning; to support policy implementation; tosupport economic valuation; and to support overallnatural resource management planning.

2. Informationreview

Undertook literature review prior to the onset of theinventory.

3. Reviewmethods

Carried out a review prior to the onset of theinventory process.


Uses SPOT imagery at 1:50 000 to cover the country.

5. Core dataset

Bio-physical data encompassing site name, area,location, general description, seasonality, biota(vegetation types and animals present) andmanagement data covering land-use, land tenure,

conservation status, values, threats.6. Habitatclassification

Derived from landform, water regime and vegetation.

7. Method GIS-based map analyses based on remotely senseddata alongside topographic maps of similar scale(1:50 000) as well as ground surveys. Uses standarddata sheets. All wetlands are coded. Methods aredocumented in a wetland inventory guide. Activity iscarried out on district basis with personnel from thedistrict being designated to carry out the fieldworkand compile reports.

8. Datamanagement

A computerized database using Microsoft Access wasbased on the standardized field data sheets. Thisdatabase will be linked to the ArcView map databaseusing wetland codes. The linkage between the twodatabases forms the National Wetland InformationSystem (NWIS) which is already developed withongoing data entry.


An ongoing process with regular updates. Theinventory is one of the main activities of a donor-funded National Wetlands Program with a number of

partners.10. Feasibility Feasibility assessed through pilot studies. Cost

24


25/97

& costeffectiveness

effectiveness related to the complexity of the wetlandsystems, extent of areas being assessed, availabilityof remotely sensed images and capacity.

11. Reporting Standardized data sheets used for storing information

in a database for ease of reporting. Individual reportsprepared at district level. These will be consolidatedinto a National Wetland Inventory.

12. Reviewand evaluation

Done within the project in consultation with a fewexternal experts.

13. Pilot study Undertaken in a few wetlands and then districts..Furtherinformation

National Wetlands Programme 1999; Pabari, Churie &Howard 2000.www.iucn.org/themes/wetlands/uganda.html

Asian Wetland Inventory (AWI)

76. This approach has been developed in response to therecommendations contained in the Global Review of WetlandResources and Priorities for Wetland Inventory report and presentedin Resolution VII.20. The method is a hierarchy that can beimplemented at four spatial scales. The method is based largely on adraft protocol developed in Australia, and has been tested in a pilotstudy in Japan. The pilot study has resulted in a manual beingproduced.

1. Purposeand objective To provide a hierarchical database on coastal andinland wetlands in Asia2.Informationreview

Undertaken in the extensive global review of wetlandinventory conducted on behalf of the RamsarConvention (see Resolution VII.20)

3. Review of methods

Undertaken in the extensive global review of wetlandinventory conducted on behalf of the RamsarConvention and refined through the development of amanual.


Hierarchical multi-scalar approach with four levels of analysis: level 1 at 1:10 000 000 to 1:5 000 000; level2at 1:1 000 000 to 1:250 000; level 3 at 1: 250 000 to1:100 000; and level 4 at 1:50 000 to 1:25 000.

5. Core dataset

Hierarchical multi-scalar minimum data at each level of analysis:level 1 broad geology, land cover and climate for riverbasins;level 2 geology, landforms, climate for wetlandregions;level 3 hydrological, climate, landform, physico-chemical, and biological detail for wetland complexes;andlevel 4 information on management issues and

25


26/97

procedures included, in addition to site descriptions asper level 3

6. Habitatclassification

Derived from minimum data on landform and waterregimes and possibly supplemented with information

on vegetation, areal size and water quality.7. Method GIS-based map analyses using remotely sensedimagery and maps augmented with ground surveysthat are more intensive at levels 3 and 4. Prescribeddata sheets and fields with agreed codes are availablefor each level of analysis.

8. Datamanagement

The data management system is built on acomputerized database engine with web, user/datainterface and GIS capabilities. This serves as theprimary data management/storage/retrieval componentof the project. The system is based on the Windowsplatform using MS Visual Basic and Access 97 software. The website (www.wetlands.org/awi) serves as the maincommunication node for data collection,announcements and discussions.


An ongoing process with regular updates of informationobtained through national or local analyses. Theprogram has been devolved through the regionalizedstructure of Wetlands International and its partners.

10.Feasibility &

costeffectiveness

Feasibility assessed through project meetings andsubmission of funding applications that required

targeted outputs etc. Cost effectiveness related to theextent of the areas being assessed and the extent of pre-existing inventory information, maps and remotelysensed images. The procedure was based on theRamsar Conventions review of wetland inventory thatfound many inventories did not achieve their purposethrough being over-ambitious and/or not applying tightdata management and reporting procedures allfeatures that have been addressed.

11. Reporting Standardized data sheets provided for storinginformation in a database for ease of reporting.Individual reports are provided through the devolvedprojects and where appropriate copies filed byWetlands International on its web page(www.wetlands.org/awi/).

12. Reviewandevaluation

Provided at the Wetlands International seminarWetlands in a Changing World held in Wageningen,

The Netherlands, 30 November 2001.13. Pilotstudy

Undertaken in Japan Hokkaido and Kushiro Marsh withmaps produced in a GIS format.

Furtherinformation

Finlayson, Howes, Begg & Tagi 2002; Finlayson, Howes,

van Dam, Begg & Tagi 2002www.wetlands.org/awi/

26


27/97

Ecuador wetland inventory

77. This is a national wetland inventory nearing completion that has beendeveloped by the Ministry of the Environment, the Ramsar Bureau,and the EcoCiencia Foundation, and is designed to support Ecuadorsimplementation of the Ramsar Convention and the wise use of wetlands.

1. Purposeand objective

To provide information to assist in the management of globally important biodiversity in Ecuadorian wetlands,supporting Ecuadorian wetlands conservation throughthe identification, characterization and prioritization of wetlands for management and conservation.

2.

Informationreview

Published documents and material on the internet andheld by universities, research organisations and from anational workshop on the identification and status of wetlands was assessed.

3. Review of methods

Inventory methods used in Canada, Venezuela, Braziland parts of Argentina were reviewed. Each methodwas considered to have limitations for application inEcuador, including too resource and capacitydemanding, too little background information availablein Ecuador, lacking an ecosystem (catchment)-scaleapproach, or only reliant on secondary informationsources.


Information was collected at 1:50,000 scale. As somewetlands were too large to use maps at this scale, largeindividual sites are presented at different scales butinformation on them held in the database at 1:50,000scale.

5. Core dataset

The data was collected using a quadratical-basedmatrix that included five selected general criteria, eachvalidated through a series of analysed variables.Information was gathered on social, economic,zoological, botanical, limnological, ecological (including

aquatic and terrestrial) features.6. Habitatclassification

The habitat classification followed two existing systemsbeing used in Ecuador.

27


28/97

7. Method The method includes the following steps: informationcollected using remote sensing; validation anddelineation of zones using a numerical matrix;information on socio-economical and ecological aspects

of wetlands derived from interviews; publishedinformation reviewed; primary information onecological and social aspects of wetlands generated.Data was entered into a GIS containing physiographiclayers so as to permit the production of recommendedland-use strategy and management proposals for thewetlands within their catchments.

8. Datamanagement

Cartographic information is managed by thedepartment of Geographical Information Systems (GIS).Other information is maintained in digital formats byindividual researchers. A database of wetlandphotographs is also maintained.


The project began in 1996 with pilot studies in twoprovinces. Nation-wide coverage was intended to becompleted by July 2002 but has now been extended toearly 2003 for financial reasons. The total project costis US$ 1 million over the seven years of the project,with funding from the Ramsar Bureau, the World Bank,the Global Environment Fund, the MacArthurFoundation and the Ecuadorian Government.

10.

Feasibility &costeffectiveness

Feasibility and cost effectiveness was assessed in theproject development phase through the World Banksincremental costs assessment procedures.

11. Reporting Published reports will be produced, and data heldelectronically in the GIS database.

12. Reviewandevaluation

Six-monthly World Bank evaluation of the process andprogress in achievements of targets. Final report willhave pre-publication review by the Ramsar Bureau. TheEcuador National Wetlands Working Group will considerthe final publication.

13. Pilotstudy

A pilot study was undertaken in 1996 of the lenticwetlands, in the Provinces of Esmeraldas and Manab.

28


29/97

Furtherinformation

Briones, E., Flachier, A., Gmez, J., Tirira, D., Medina, H., Jaramillo, I., & Chiriboga, C. 1997. Inventario deHumedales del Ecuador. Primera parte: HumedalesLnticos de las Provincias de Esmeraldas y Manab.

EcoCiencia/ INEFAN/ Convencin de Ramsar. Quito,Ecuador.Briones, E., Gmez, J., Hidalgo, A., Tirira, D., & Flachier,A. 2001. Inventario de Humedales del Ecuador.Segunda parte: Humedales Interiores de la Provincia deEl Oro. Convencin de Ramsar/ INEFAN/ EcoCiencia.Quito, Ecuador.

29


30/97

Additional Information

Humed A ndes:An initiative for institutional coordination and

cooperation on Andean wetland inventories

An institutional cooperation initiative to promote and carry out inventorieson Andean wetlands was launched in Colombia in February 2003.Currently, Fundacin Humedales, The Alexander von Humboldt Institutefor Research on Biodiversity and Biological Resources, the World WildlifeFund - Colombia, Asociacin Calidris, Fundacin Fuerachoga, theEnvironmental Studies School of Javeriana University, FundacinEcotrpico and Fundacin Ecopar have joined efforts to build a commonconceptual framework for the cooperative development of wetland

inventories in the high Andes, a region encompassing unique andendangered species and habitats.

Humed A ndess contributions to both conceptual and practical inventoryissues have made considerable progress so far through workshops, and avirtual forum (www.fundacionhumedales.org), covering the followingissues:

A hierarchical structure adapted for the inventory of Andean wetlandsfollowing previous proposals from the MedWet/Coast project, the AsianWetland Inventory protocol, Ramsar guidelines and the Cowardin Systemfor the classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats. The levelsproposed are:

Ecoregions (thematic framework, WWF)Biogeographical units for highland aquatic ecosystemsCatchments AreasWetland SiteHabitat

The development of a number of thesauruses for standard

treatment of thematic issues within the framework of the hierarchicallevels. Currently, a thesaurus on human interventions and effects onAndean wetland ecosystems is being discussed in the virtual forum.

A working document on highland biogeographical units for theColombian case, based on current knowledge of the distribution of plantand animal species, will be ready soon for discussion among participants.

A proposal for a classification system for lacustrine and palustrineinland aquatic ecosystems, based on previous work, can already bechecked through the virtual forum.

30


31/97

These developments are enriching the initiative, contributing to thefollowing projects being carried out by the institutions:

Fundacin Humedales is applying the conceptual and practical

frameworks, as well as testing the lacustrine and palustrine proposal forclassification system, in a case study on the Fquene, Cucunub andPalacio wetland complex at an altitude of 2,500 metres in the East Andeanmountain range of Colombia.

Asociacin Calidris is applying the same general approach in a wetlandcomplex at an altitude of 1,000 metres in the River Cauca valley inwestern Colombia, focusing on mapping ecosystems and developingdetailed descriptions of some of them including deep water and wetlandhabitats.

The Environmental School of Javeriana University is advancingwetland mapping at the 1:100,000 scale through the use of satelliteimagery and basic cartographic information, covering the entireCundinamarca and Boyac plateau at an altitude of 2,600 metres in theEastern Colombian mountain range. In this case the proposal for aclassification system made by Fundacin Humedales for wetland and deepwater habitats will be tested.

Fundacin Ecopar , with the participation of partners from a number of Latin-American organizations and with support from the Global PeatlandInitiative, is mapping highland wetlands from Costa Rica to Chile andArgentina at a scale of 1:1,000,000, so far leading to the identification andmapping of several thousand wetlands, some of them forming wetlandcomplexes. They are also developing monitoring tools for wetlandmanagement, and collating and disseminating case studies on therelationships between local communities and highland Andean peatlandsand other wetland ecosystems in the countries involved.

All wetland ecosystems identified and characterized share the commonfeature of being montane Andean wetlands, and the institutionalcollaboration and cooperation established through the Humed A ndes

Initiative is contributing to the evaluation and adaptation of wetlandinventory protocols proposed under the Ramsar Convention.

All interested persons and institutions are kindly invited to contact:

Lorena Franco VidalCoordinatorHumed A ndes InitiativeFundacin HumedalesCalle 97 Nmero 21-42Bogota, ColombiaPhone/fax: +57 (1) 6 16 47 [email protected]

31


32/97

www.fundacionhumedales.org

32


33/97

[Start Box]

Additional information

Inventory for Asian Wetlands A Manual for an Inventory of Asian Wetlands is a product of the AsianWetland Inventory programme (AWI) and represents a significant stepforward in the development of standardised methods for wetland datacollection, collation and storage for Asian wetlands. The AWI programmewas developed in response to the findings of the Global Review of Wetland Inventories presented at a Technical Session at Ramsar COP7,and to Resolution VII.20 on wetland inventory adopted at COP7. The AWIManual also complements and provides direct support to Resolution VIII.6,

A Ramsar Framework for Wetland Inventory .

The 72-page Manual has been built on inventory protocols successfullydeveloped in other parts of the world. It takes the reader through thebasic recommended inventory methods:

a) identifying 13 categories of wetlands that should be used; these aremutually exclusive categories and provide a consistent basis foridentifying wetlands that brings out the underlying similarity of wetlands across a wide range of climatic, geomorphic, soil, andvegetation settings;

b) using a hierarchy of four scales of mapping contained within a GISformat, including major river basins, coastal regions or islands(1:500,000 to 1:1,000,000 scale maps); sub-basins and coastal sub-regions (1:250,000 to 1:500,000 scale maps); wetland complexes(1:100,000 to 1:250,000 scale maps); and finally, wetland habitats(1:10,000 to 1:50,000). These scales provide different information forwetland management;

c) providing data collection sheets that indicate the core data considerednecessary for each level of delineation and description of wetlandswith a standardised format for recording and presenting theinformation.

To enable the extraction, analysis and management of information thathas been collated or created for each level of inventory, an informationsystem has been developed comprising three related but distinctelements:

an interactive, user-friendly, relational database which stores theinventory information for each level;

GIS software and datasets which store the spatial datasets andcan be integrated and updated with information from the

relational database; and

33


34/97

a metadatabase, comprising records describing individualinventory datasets.

Initial funding support for the AWI programme came from the Ministry of

Environment, Japan and the programme was endorsed by the RamsarConventions Standing Committee. Wetlands International, in collaborationwith the Australian National Centre for Tropical Wetland Research(NCTWR), the Wetland Inventory Assessment and Monitoring SpecialistGroup (WIAMSG), and the Japanese National Institute for EnvironmentalStudies (NIES-CGER), has been responsible for the initial development of the project.

A Manual for an Inventory of Asian Wetlands: Version 1.0 , by FinlaysonCM, Begg GW, Howes J, Tagi K. & Lowry J, Wetlands International GlobalSeries 10, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, is available in hard copy [email protected] and includes a CD-ROM with the Manual, a brochure(in English, Chinese and Thai), and an information pack on AWI, all in PDFformat. A special download page for AWI has been created on theWetlands International Web site athttp://www.wetlands.org/awi/default.htm, where the manual as well as thebrochure and information pack are available for download in PDF format.[End box]

34


35/97

[Start Box]Additional information

MedWet Inventory Methodology

The initial steps for the development of the MedWet InventoryMethodology were undertaken jointly in 1992 by the Portuguese Institutoda Conservao da Natureza (ICN) and Wetlands International (WI) onbehalf of the MedWet initiative; subsequently the methodology has beenupdated and complemented with the work of the Greek Wetland/BiotopeCentre (EKBY) and other MedWet partners.

The Methodology in brief

The MedWet Inventory Methodology was conceived not only as a meansto register current knowledge on wetlands in a systematic way, but alsoas a powerful management tool, allowing in-depth understanding of thesituation in each wetland and assessing the impact of managementmeasures. This methodology includes a suite of separate but linked toolswhich allow the gathering of data at a number of different levels(catchment, site and habitat), namely data sheets, a database, a habitatdescription system, and photo-interpretation and cartographicconventions.

The data sheets allow the standardised collection of information oncatchment, site, and habitats, as well as flora, fauna, activities andimpacts, references, and meteorology.

The database is structured to allow direct entry of data from the datasheets for storing, analysing and presenting the data and reports.

The MedWet Habitat Description System is specific for wetlands andsupports a detailed recording of the key characteristics (soil, vegetation,water regime and salinity) and structure of each habitat within a site.

This system defines a number of categories that allows habitatdelineation and the production of precise maps. These groups areorganised in a hierarchical way into subsystems, classes and subclasses.

The photo-interpretation and cartographic conventions provide specificguidelines for mapping wetland habitats and a standard protocol tomaintain consistency of outputs.

The MedWet Inventory Methodology has been used or is currently in usefor the preparation of national inventories in a number of countries(Albania, Croatia, France, Greece, Morocco, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain).Other countries (including Egypt, Italy and Tunisia) are, or will soon be,

using the MedWet Inventory methodology through their participation inthe MedWet/Coast, MedWet/Regions and MedWet/SUDOE projects. In

35


36/97

addition, Algeria, Libya and Turkey have expressed their interest inlaunching national inventories using the MedWet methodology. The long-term goal of MedWet is to achieve a comparable inventory of allMediterranean wetlands by 2010.

Beyond the Mediterranean region, strong interest in the adaptation anduse of the Medwet Inventory Methodology has been shown by severalstates in Africa (Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Niger, SouthAfrica and Togo) and South America (Argentina and Colombia), as well asby Belarus, Malaysia, and Ukraine.

In collaboration with the Regional Activity Centre for Specially ProtectedAreas (RAC/SPA) of the United Nations Mediterranean Action Plan, acomparative list of the habitat types of Mediterranean coastal wetlandshas been developed and adopted by the Member States in an effort toprovide them with a coherent, globally accepted tool.

The way forward for the MedWet Inventory Methodology is to enrich it withnew components involving the use of remote sensing technologies, suchas satellite imaging, in order to allow easier, quicker and less costlyapplications of the methodology. Such components will also permit theMedWet Inventory Methodology to develop into a dynamic monitoringtool, providing a powerful means for the planning of policy and action at anational or regional level.

The MedWet Inventory Working Group (IWG), chaired by ICN and includingrepresentatives from EKBY, Station Biologique de la Tour du Valat, Sedepara los Humedales Mediterraneos (SEHUMED), Wetlands International,and the MedWet Coordination Unit of the Ramsar Secretariat, isresponsible for developing activities that will lead to the furtherdevelopment and use of the MedWet Inventory Methodology, including theupdating of the original suite of inventory manuals.

MedWet inventory manuals and other inventory publications are availableat http://www.wetlands.org/inventory&/medwet/MedWet_pubs.htm.

End Box

36


37/97

Appendix II

Determining the most appropriateremotely sensed data for a wetland

inventory

78. The following steps provide an outline procedure for assessing whichis the most appropriate remote sensing technique for a particularinventory. The procedure is summarized graphically in Figure 1.Available remote sensing data sets applicable to wetland inventoryare listed in Appendix III.

79. Much of the information required for this specific determinationconcerning use of remote sensing can be acquired by following theinventory Framework steps that lead to the choice of an inventorymethod.

I. Define the purpose and objective

80. Explicitly define the purpose and objective for the inventory (e.g.,distribution of specific plant species on a floodplain wetland, baselinedata for areas inundated by floodwaters, type of habitats to bemapped, etc.).

II. Determine if remote sensing data is applicable81. Assess whether remote sensing technology can be applied

successfully as a tool to the wetland issues defined previously. Thisdecision will be based on a combination of wetland habitat structureand sensor characteristics and explicitly relates to the spatial andspectral resolution of the remote-sensing device. Expert advice maybe needed.

III. Define the wetland characteristics within a remote sensingcontext

82. Determine the spatial scale most suitable for the habitat structure,the season for data collection, the spectral characteristics andresolution that are critical to sensor choice, and what data andsensors are already available. If multiple surveys are required,determine at the outset the most appropriate temporal scale (e.g.,annually or over much longer time periods).

IV. Choose appropriate sensor(s)

83. Assess the spatial and spectral resolution of likely sensors and ensurethat they can obtain the environmental information that is requiredfor the defined problem/issue. In some cases several sensors may be

37


38/97

required (e.g., Landsat TM fused with polarimetric AirSAR for theidentification of salt-affected areas on floodplains dominated by treespecies).

84. For each sensor ascertain whether or not it can revisit the site atnecessary intervals and whether its application is dependent onseasonal conditions (e.g. optical or RADAR sensors) and that the costsof the image and its analysis are within the allocated budget.

V. Ground data requirements

85. Determine a ground sampling strategy suitable for the sensorselected, including whether or not the collection of ground datashould be done simultaneously with the acquisition of data from thesensor. Also determine any potential issues that may influenceextrapolation from the ground data, such as scaling-up.

VI. Trade-offs

86. Ascertain if there are any trade-offs when using particular sensors(e.g., what advantages and disadvantages does one data sourceoffer?) and whether these will affect the study (as defined at step Iabove).

Figure 1. Recommended steps in determining the mostappropriate remotely sensed data for use in a wetland inventory.

38

I. Definition of management issue or baseline data requirements

II. Is remote sensing technologyapplicable?

III. Define characteristics of wetlandissue within remote sensing approach

IV. Sensor selection

V. Ground data requirements

VI. Trade-offs


39/97

39


40/97

Start Box.Additional information

Earth Observation technology supportingwetland inventory, assessment and monitoring:

the TESEO Project on wetlands

Over the past few decades, Earth Observation (EO) technology has provedto be an increasingly powerful tool to monitor and assess the Earthssurface and its atmosphere on a regular basis. EO satellites, withincreasing capabilities, allow a more efficient, reliable and affordablemonitoring of the environment over time at global, regional and localscales. In this context, the European Space Agency (ESA), initiated, in2001, the Treaty Enforcement Services using Earth Observation (TESEO)project, aimed at exploring the capabilities of EO technology to supportnational and international bodies involved in the implementation of different international treaties of critical environmental importance suchas the Ramsar Convention, the UN Framework Convention on ClimateChange, the UN Convention to Combat Desertification, and theInternational Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships(MARPOL).

The TESEO project on wetlands addressed the following questions:

How can EO contribute to the achievement of the objectives of theRamsar Convention? What are the information needs of the international and national

bodies involved in the implementation of the Ramsar Convention? How can EO contribute to fulfill those needs?

To answer these questions, ESA contracted an international team led bythe Canadian company Atlantis Scientific, after an open tendercompetition. In addition, a number of key end-user organizations wereactively involved in the project to specify their main needs in terms of

geo-information products and services, to support the TESEO team indefining key EO-based geo-information products, and to validate andassess the final results. The end-user group included the:

National Capital Commission of Canada, managers of Mer Bleue, aRamsar site in Ottawa, Canada.

Estacin Biolgica de Doana, managers of Parque Nacional deDoana, a Ramsar site in southern Spain.

Centre du Suivi cologique, managers of Djoudj, a Ramsar site inSenegal.

World Resources Institute, an international non-governmentalorganization.

40


41/97

The project was carried out in three main phases:

1. Preliminary analysis : an extensive analysis of the end-userrequirements was carried out by directly interviewing end users and

conducting an international web-based user survey. As a result of thisanalysis, three main categories of information requirements wereidentified:

Identification and physical description of wetlands. Thisinventory and assessment information typology involves severalphysical, biological and chemical features ranging fromtopography and geology of the wetland site to water quality andvegetation cover. EO technology may provide a significantcontribution to fulfill these information needs.

Change analysis for monitoring purposes: land cover, landuse, vegetation, water table, or water quality. The frequentacquisition of EO data allows the regular monitoring of wetlandareas. In addition, the existing archive facilities include EO datafrom the early 1970s, represent a unique source of information forassessing and monitoring the temporal evolution of wetlands.

Prevention of, and reaction to, natural and human-madehazards . This involves the identification and monitoring of potential threats upstream in the basin or the catchment area thatmay affect the wetland site. For instance, urban expansion,industrial pollution, urban waste and increasing irrigation mayrepresent some threats to the ecological status of a wetland thatcan be identified and monitored from space. In addition, usersidentified the need for a rapid mapping capability for assessingnatural or human-made hazards such as floods or pollution. EOtechnology may play a key role in the fast provision of maps of theaffected areas.

2. Product and service definition : based on the informationrequirements collected during the preliminary phase, the project exploredthe capabilities of existing and future EO technology to respond to theabove needs. Different EO-based information products (around 48) wereidentified in collaboration with the user organisations.

3. Product and service implementation : these products wereevaluated according to different criteria, ranging from their priority for theuser to their technological constraints. From this evaluation three productswere selected and prototyped for the Mer Bleue, Doana and Djoudj testsites:

seasonal changes in open water and flooded vegetation; land cover and land-cover change; land use.

The final products were validated and assessed by the users involved inthe project. Their feedback confirms the effectiveness of EO technology to

41


42/97

provide valuable, synoptic, reliable and continuous information to wetlandmanagers.

As a result of the promising outcomes of the TESEO project and the

interest of the user community, ESA is devoting increasing resources tosupport the development of efficient user-oriented information services forwetland managers based on space technology. To this end, ESA plans toinitiate a new project, GlobWetland, by the end of 2003, where the resultsof the TESEO project will be consolidated, extended and tested in a largenumber of Ramsar sites of different wetland types around the world.

For further information on the project, readers are referred to RamsarCOP8 DOC. 35 The use of Earth Observation technology to support theimplementation of the Ramsar Convention , available athttp://www.ramsar.org/cop8_doc_35_e.htm on the Secretariats Web site.Information is also available on the TESEO Web site athttp://earth.esa.int/TESEO, or directly from the ESA:EO Science and Applications DepartmentEuropean Space Agency

Tel: +39 06 941 80 676Fax: +39 06 941 80 552E-mail: [email protected], http://www.esa.int.

Image: Bleu_Mb2_bn.tif Detail of the pan-sharpened image used for deriving the land use map.

The urbanization around the Mer Bleue wetland site is clear in the image.

Image: Bleu_Mb_lu_bn.tif:Detail of the land use map generated for Mer Bleu. The different graylevels correspond to different land use types ranging from urban areasand transportation to croplands and farmlands.End Box

42


43/97

Appendix III

Summary of remotely sensed data sets applicable to wetland inventory

SATELLITE DATA

DataType

SpatialResolution

Coverage Spectral Resolution TemporalResolution

Contact

IKONIS 1mpanchromatic4mmultispectral

100km2(minimum)

Band 1 (blue) = 0.45-0.53 mBand 2 (green) = 0.52-0.61 mBand 3 (red) = 0.64-0.72 mBand 4 (NIR) = 0.77-0.88 m

1-3 daysNot routinelycollectedData capturemust beordered

Space Imaging

http://www.spaceimaging.com/

Landsat7 ETM

Bands 1-5 &7

= 30 mBand 6 = 60mBand 8 = 15m

Typical fullscene = 184 x185km(Super scenesup to60,000km2 andsmall scenes 25x 25km areavailable)

Band 1 (blue) = 0.45-0.52 mBand 2 (green) = 0.52-0.60 mBand 3 (red) = 0.63-0.69 mBand 4 (NIR) = 0.76-0.90 m

Band 5 (MIR) = 1.55-1.75 mBand 6 (TIR) = 10.40-12.50 mBand 7 (MIR ) = 2.08-2.35 mBand 8 (pan) = 0.52-0.90 m

Every 16 daysDataavailablesince April1999

EROS Data Center of the U.S.Geological Surveyhttp://landsat7.usgs.gov/

43


44/97

Landsat5 TMDue to bedecomm-issioned

Bands 1-5 & 7= 30mBand 6 =120m

Typical fullscene = 184 x185km(Super scenesup to60,000km2 andsmall scenes 25x 25km areavailable)

Band 1 (blue) = 0.45-0.52 mBand 2 (green) = 0.52-0.60 mBand 3 (red ) = 0.63-0.69 mBand 4 (NIR) = 0.76-0.90 mBand 5 (MIR) = 1.55-1.75 mBand 6 (TIR) = 10.40-12.50 mBand 7 (MIR) = 2.08-2.35 m

U.S. Geological Survey http://edcsns17.cr.usgs.gov/EarthExplorer/

SPOT Multispectral= 20mPAN = 10m

60 x 60km Band 1 (green) = 0.50-0.59 mBand 2 (red) = 0.61-0.68 mBand 3 (NIR) = 0.79-0.89 mBand 4 (SWIR) = 1.58-1.75 m*PAN = 0.51-0.73 m/0.61-0.68**= SPOT4 only

Every 26 daysDataavailablesince 1990

SPOT Imagehttp://www.spot.com/

RADAR-SAT

10 100m(varies withangles and # of looks)

50 x 50km 500x 500km (varieswith angles and #of looks)

Single frequency C Band 56nmHH polarisationvariety of beam selections

Data availablesince 1995revisit timesapprox. 6 daysat mid-latitudes

Canadian Space Agency(CSA)Canadian Center for RemoteSensing (CCRS)distributed by RadarsatInternationalhttp://www.rsi.ca/

44


45/97

JERS8 opticalbandsSAR LbandBands 3and 4providestereocoverage

18m pixels 75 x 75km Eight optical bandsBand 1 (green) = 0.52-0.60 mBand 2 (red) = 0.63-0.69 mBands 3 & 4 (NIR) = 0.76-0.86 mBand 5 (MIR) = 1.60-1.71 mBand 6 (MIR) = 2.01-2.12 mBand 7 (MIR) = 2.13-2.25 mBand 8 (MIR) = 2.27-2.40 mSAR BAND = L band235nmHH polarisation

Data availablecovering years1992-1998

EOC Earth ObservationCentre, National SpaceDevelopment Agency of

Japanhttp://hdsn.eoc.nasda.go.jp/

ALI 10 m PAN30 m MSS

37 km swath PAN 0.48-0.69 mBand 1 0.48 0.69 mBand 2 0.433 0.453 mBand 3 0.45 0.515 mBand 4 0.525 0.606 mBand 5 - 0.63 0.69 mBand 6 0.775 0.805 mBand 7 0.845 0.89 mBand 8 1.2 1.3 mBand 9 1.55 1.75 mBand 10 2.08 2.35 m

Data capturedsinceNovember1990Captures mustbe requestedOperationexpected until2002(?)

GSFC NASAs GoddardSpace Flight Centerhttp://eo1.gsfc.nasa.gov/

45


46/97


47/97

ASTERAdvancedSpaceborne

ThermalEmissionandReflectionRadiometer

VNIR (bands1-3) 15mpixelsSWIR (bands4-9) 30mpixels

TIR (bands 10-14) 90mpixels

60 km swath Band 1 - 0.52 - 0.60 mBand 2 - 0.63 - 0.69 mBand 3N - 0.78 - 0.86 mBand 3V - 0.78 - 0.86 mBand 4 - 1.600 - 1.700 mBand 5 - 2.145 - 2.185 mBand 6 - 2.185 - 2.225 mBand 7 - 2.235 - 2.285 mBand 8 - 2.295 - 2.365 mBand 9 - 2.360 - 2.430 mBand 10 - 8.125 -8.475 mBand 11 - 8.475 -8.825 mBand 12 - 8.925 -

9.275 mBand 13 - 10.25 -10.95 mBand 14 - 10.95 -11.65 m

Coverage issporadicData can bedownloadedfree of charge

NASA / Earth Observing DataGatewayhttp://edcimswww.cr.usgs.gov/pub/imswelcome/

47


48/97

AVHRRAdvancedVeryHighResolutionRadiometer

1.1km pixel 2700km swathwidth

5 bands0.58-12.50um(varying bandwidths)

daily images NOAA: Online requests for these datacan be placed via the U.S. GeologicalSurvey Global Land InformationSystem (GLIS)http://edc.usgs.gov/Webglis/glisbin/glismain.pl

Orbview-4

Due forlaunch in2001

Multispectral 4m pixelHyperspectral 8m pixelPanchromatic 1m pixel

Multispectral8km swath

widthHyperspectral5km swathwidthPanchromatic8km swathwidth

Multispectral 4bands VIS/NIRHyperspectral 200bands0.4-2.5umPanchromatic1 band in VIS

revisit 2-3days

Orbital Science CorporationArmy,Navy,Airforce, NASA

http://www.orbimage.com/

ERS-1SAR

12.5m pixel 100 km x 102km

Single frequency CBand (5.3 GHz), Wavelength: 5.6 cm;VV polarisation

Dataavailablesince 1991to 1999revisit timesapprox.: 3-day, 35-dayand 176-daydepending

on the modeof operation

European Space Agency (ESA)http://www.esa.int

48


49/97

ERS-2SAR

12.5m pixel 100 km x 102km

Single frequency CBand (5.3 GHz), Wavelength: 5.6 cm;VV polarisation

Dataavailablesince 1995revisit timesapprox.: 3-day, 35-dayand 176-daydependingon the modeof operation


ERS-1ATSR 1 km pixel 512 km x 512km 4 bands: 1.6 m(visible) and threethermal bands at 3.7 m, 11 m, and 12 m.

Dataavailablesince 1991to 1999revisit timesapprox.: 3-day, 35-dayand 176-daydependingon the modeof operation


ERS-2ATSR2

1 km pixel 512 km x 512km

7 bands: four bandsin the visible: 0.55 m,0.67 m, 0.87 m; 1.6 m and three thermalbands at 3.7 m, 10.8

m, and 12 m.

Dataavailablesince 1995revisit timesapprox.: 3-

day, 35-dayand 176-daydependingon the modeof operation


49


50/97

ENVISATASAR

30 m, 150 mor 1kmdepending ontheoperationalmode

Swat with of 400km and in5km x 5kmvignette,pedending onthe operationalmode

Single frequency CBand (5.3 GHz), HHand VV polarisation

Dataavailable in2002


ENVISATMERIS

300 m (fullreesulution)

and 1200 m(reducedresolution)

1150km wideswath

15 spectral bands inthe 390 - 1040 nm

range of theelectromagneticspectrum

Dataavailable in

2002


ENVISATAATSR

1 Km 512 km x 512km

7 bands: four bands inthe visible: 0.55 m,0.67 m, 0.87 m; 1.6 m and three thermalbands at 3.7 m, 10.8 m, and 12 m.

Dataavailable in2002


AIRBORNE DATA

HyMap Typically 2.5mor 5m

Varies with pixelsize5m = 2.5kmswath2.5m = ~1.3kmswath

124 bands covering 0.44-2.4 m

Unreliable user definedand sensoravailability

Integrated Spectronics PtyLtdhttp://www.intspec.com/

HyMapMK1(AIS)

Usually 5m Varies with pixelsize5m = 2.5kmswath

98 bands covering 0.50-1.1 m, 1.45-1.80 m, 1.95-2.45 m


Integrated Spectronics PtyLtdhttp://www.intspec.com/

50


51/97

CASICompactAirborne/Spectrograp-hicImager

Typically 1m Depends onspatial resolution1m pixel =~500m swath

Variable bands (~19-288)(~2-12nm wide)0.40-1.0um

Typically 96 bandscovering visible to NIR


Manufactured by ItresResearch Ltd.http://www.itres.com/

BallAIMSwww.ballaerospace.com.au

Daedalus

Spatialresolutiondetermined by

aircraft flyingheight. A 1000metre increasein flying height= 2.5 metrepixel sizeincrease.

Image swath =Flying Height x1.6

Band 1 0.42-0.45 m.Band 2 0.45-0.52 m.Band 3 0.52-0.60 m.Band 4 0.605-0.625 m.Band 5 0.63-0.69

lib handbooks e10pre

Documents