279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3: "Agriculture and Irrigation Solutions". Contech Engineered Solutions

279 Glenridge Avenue, St.
Catharines ON, LST 3K3
Agriculture and Irrigation Solutions. Contech Engineered Solutions.

http://www.conteches.com/markets/agriculture.aspx, March 27, 2014
E: adamtomlin20@gmail.com P: 905-758-2326
06/13/2014
279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3
June 13, 2014

Brett Ruck
Executive Director, Drainage Investment Group
4617 Crysler Avenue
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 3V6
Dear Mr. Ruck,
RE: Project Final Report for Drainage Impacts on Agricultural Land Quantities
Surrounding the Point Abino Drain in Fort Erie, Ontario
Please accept the enclosed report as the final deliverable for your project regarding the
Point Abino drains spatial/temporal impacts on agricultural land-value within the
watershed. This report outlines project management throughout the complete project tasks
as well as methodology walkthroughs and results/findings.
Initial research was conducted to estimate the time of the original Point Abino drain
development to assess the temporal progression of agriculture. Using extensive
interpretations and analysis of satellite and aerial imagery land-use classifications
throughout the duration of the 20th century, it has been concluded that the quantity of
agricultural land has decreased by approximately 33% from 57% in 1934, the earliest aerial
image acquired that displayed the existence of the drain, to 24% in 2010. The drain has
therefore not had any positive effect on agriculture in the study area. The total cost of the
project was approximately $8,700 with a cost variance of approximately $9,700 and a
schedule variance of $0 from the planned value of roughly $21,100. Please observe the
contents of the report for full details on the projects completion.
Kindest Regards,
Adam Joseph Tomlin

Project Manager
Geospatial Operations
AJT/
Enclosures:
1) Project Final Report outlining major accomplishments, findings, conclusions, and
recommendations.
Executive Summary
The report outlines the final phases of the project upon successful completion of the initial
proposed date June 13, 2014. The goal of the project was to discover how the quantity of
agriculture in the Point Abino watershed had shifted since the earliest date of known drain
implementation. Research was conducted to discover a temporal period related to the
drains initial development to perform a spatial and temporal assessment on the
agricultural land-use quantity from that point forward. The methodology for the project
assessment resulted in an observed 33% decline in agricultural land-use from 1934 to
2010. Several procedures were used to attain these results.
As stated above, the first procedure involved traveling to the Brock University Map Library
to research topographic maps to discover the initial development of the Point Abino drain in
order assess the subsequent agricultural land-use progression.
The second procedure for involved land-use classifications of digital images acquired by
two NASA satellites. The first satellite was a NASA Landsat series satellite covering the Point
Abino study area 1992, 1999, 2003, and 2011. The second type of satellite was the NASA
ASTER satellite that acquired an image of the area in 2013.
The third procedure to support the satellite image land-use classifications was to create
digital representations of major land-uses observed in aerial imagery covering the study
area. Research highlighting the initial development of the drain advised 1934 to be the
earliest point to assess agricultural land-use changes since the initial development of the
drain.
In terms of the project management, the actual cost proved to be significantly lower than
the proposed cost at exactly $8,608.67 from $18,272.94. The cost variance of the project
was $9,664.27 with a schedule variance of $0, meaning the project was finished on time and
under budget.
The report closes with conclusions and recommendations on the matter.
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT GOAL OVERVIEW

1.2 OBJECTIVES AND DELIVERABLES
1.3 PROJECT PERSONNEL
1
1
1
2 STUDY AREA OVERVIEW
3 PROJECT METHODOLOGY
3.1 INITIAL DRAIN IMPLEMENTATION RESEARCH

3.2 PRELIMINARY SATELLITE DATA ARRANGEMENT: PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS
3.2.1 BACKGROUND SATELLITE IMAGE CLASSIFICATION INFORMATION
3.3 LANDSAT SATELLITE IMAGE LAND-USE/COVER CLASSIFICATIONS
3.3.1 UNSUPERVISED CLASSIFICATIONS
3.3.2 SUPERVISED CLASSIFICATIONS
3.4 AERIAL IMAGE DIGITIZED LAND-USE CLASSIFICATIONS
5
7
7
10
10
12
16
4 RESULTS AND FINDINGS
17
4.1 SUPERVISED CLASSIFICATIONS

4.2 RECTIFIED SUPERVISED CLASSIFICATIONS
4.2.1 RECTIFIED VECTOR POLYGON SATELLITE IMAGE CLASSIFICATION LAND-USE PERCENTAGE TABLES
4.3 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH DIGITIZED LAND-USE CLASSIFICATIONS
4.3.1 DIGITIZED LAND-USE CLASSIFICATION OVER 1934 AERIAL IMAGERY
4.3.8 AERIAL IMAGE DIGITIZED LAND-USE CLASSIFICATION PERCENTAGE TABLES
17
18
19
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
31
5 PROJECT MANAGEMENT
37
5.1 PROJECT TASKS: PROPOSED VERSUS ACTUAL COSTS

5.2 EARNED VALUE MANAGEMENT
38
39
6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
40
7 BIBLIOGRAPHY
41
ii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Study Area ................................................................................................................................................2
Figure 2: Topographic Map Displaying No Drain In 1907 .......................................................................5
Figure 3: Energy Overlap amongst Contrasting Features ........................................................................8
Figure 4: Principal Component Analysis .........................................................................................................9
Figure 5: Unsupervised Classification ........................................................................................................... 11
Figure 6: Water Sample Pixels from a River ............................................................................................... 13
Figure 7: Water Sample Pixels from a Body of Water ............................................................................ 13
Figure 8: Forest Sample Pixels ......................................................................................................................... 14
Figure 9: Agriculture Sample Pixels ............................................................................................................... 14
Figure 10: Urban Pixels from a Highway ..................................................................................................... 15
Figure 11: Rangeland Sample Pixels from a Golf Course....................................................................... 15
Figure 12: Example of Aerial Imagery Land-Use Digitizing (1934 and 2010) ............................. 16
Figure 13: Initial Supervised Classification Results ................................................................................ 17
Figure 14: Supervised Classification Rectified Vector Polygon Results .......................................... 18
Figure 15: Graph of Supervised Classification Results ........................................................................... 21
Figure 16: Digitized Land-Use Classification Results Over 1934 Aerial Imagery ....................... 23
Figure 23: Overall Continuous Changes in Agricultural Land-Use Visualization ........................ 30
Figure 24: Land-Use Percentage Progression From 1934-2010 ....................................................... 34
Figure 25: Overall Spatial Agricultural Land-Use Decline .................................................................... 36
Figure 26: Project Management and Earned Value ................................................................................ 39
iii
List of Tables
Table 1: Landsat 1992 Land-Use Classification Percentages .............................................................. 19
Table 6: Satellite Image Classification Agricultural Land-Use Percentages .................................. 21
Table 7: Digitized 1934 Land-Use Classification Percentages ............................................................ 31
Table 10: Digitized 1989 Land-Use Classification Percentages.......................................................... 32
Table 14: Aerial Image Digitized Agricultural Land-Use Percentages 1934-2010.................... 34
Table 15: Project Cost and Schedule Variance........................................................................................... 38
List of Appendices
Appendix 1: Original Terms of Reference ................................................................................................... 44
Appendix 2: Gantt Chart..................................................................................................................................... 46
iv
1 Introduction
1.1 Project Goal Overview
The goal of the project was to determine the impact of the Point Abino drain on agricultural
land-value within the drains watershed since the implementation of the drain.
1.2 Objectives and Deliverables

The objectives that support the above noted goal are:
To identify land-use changes over time,

To identify temporal trends in agricultural land-value,
To determine possible variables causing the changes in land-use, and
To highlight the impact of the municipal drain in the area.
The deliverables that serve as milestones for the above noted objectives are:
1. Land-use classification maps (unsupervised and supervised) of Fort Erie, Ontario
outlining land-use changes,
2. Map highlighting municipal drain networks impact on these changes, and
3.
A final report with conclusions and recommendations for future actions.
1.3 Project Personnel

1. Adam Tomlin (Project Manager)
Adam Tomlin is an undergraduate student at Brock University, majoring in human
geography with a concentration in geomatics from Niagara College as part of a collaborative
four-year degree program, which has provided him with sufficient knowledge in remote
sensing, GIS, and digital image processing to complete the project; as well he has acquired
additional experience through geography courses at Brock University.
2. Ian Smith (Project Advisor)
Ian Smith is a fluvial geomorphologist as well as a geomatics professor at Niagara College.
Ian has sufficient experience in geospatial applications in drainage to provide additional
support to the project manager when managing the project tasks.
2 Study Area Overview

Figure 1 displays a map of the Point Abino watershed, the study area for the project, stated
previously in the proposal and progress report. The watershed also crosses the municipal
boundaries of Port Colborne and Fort Erie in the Niagara Region.
Figure 1: Study Area
As noted in the proposal and progress report, aerial imagery and satellite imagery covering
the study area was collected in order to classify the types of land-use/cover within the
watershed for each time period observed, to ultimately discover if agriculture has increased
or decreased since the drain has been implemented.
The aerial imagery covers the years 1934, 1955, 1968, 1989, 1994, 2000, and 2010. The
satellite imagery covers the years 1992, 1999, 2003, 2011, and 2013. Each format of
imagery was analyzed separately instead of assessing both the aerial imagery and satellite
image classifications together because this may cause data interpretation errors since each
classification methodology is different and produces results that must be interpreted
separately in order to extract the necessary information. This was a result of the
computers inability to qualitatively classify land-use, whereas the aerial images were
classified using human judgment as to what is urban, agricultural, successional
agriculture/forest, and etcetera. More details on this matter are discussed in in the next
section of the report, detailing the methodology for the project.
3 Project Methodology
This segment of the report outlines the methodologies for the main objectives of the project.
First, research observing the time of the drains initial implementation will be overviewed
to establish a base point to assess the agricultural land changes. Second, the Landsat
satellite image land-use/cover classifications will be explained followed by the aerial image
digitized land-use classifications.
The following page displays a topographic map from Brock Universitys Map Library
showing the drains status in 1907.
3.1 Initial Drain Implementation Research

Figure 2 displays a topographic map retrieved from the Brock University Map Library
surveyed in 1907. Additional discussions on the drains implementation are on the
following page.
Figure 2: Topographic Map Displaying No Drain In 1907
The map in Figure 2 was retrieved in order to gather insight to the approximate time period
the drain was originally dug. It can be seen that there was no immediate evidence of the
Point Abino drain existing in 1907. The year the drain was first seen in the study area in
any mapping or aerial imagery was from the 1934 aerial photograph series. Since 1934 was
the year of the earliest aerial photograph displaying the drain with no other topographic
maps found to georeference that displayed the drain, 1934 was used as the base point to
assess the agricultural land progression in the subsequent aerial imagery. Agricultural landuse percentages calculated from each temporal period of land-use/cover classification were
assessed to determine if this drain has been a factor in the increase or decrease of
agricultural land-use in the watershed.
3.2
3.2.1
Preliminary Satellite Data Arrangement: Principal Component Analysis

Background Satellite Image Classification Information
In remote sensing and digital image interpretation/analysis, the foundation for classifying
the images lay on the distribution of radiation reflected and emitted by the features in the
study area. In the case of the Point Abino watershed, many types of land-uses desired to be
classified, including agriculture, forest, and successional agriculture, reflect and emit very
similar types of energy, which will decrease the quality of the supervised and unsupervised
classifications. For example, the diverse range of colours we see in everyday life are a
reflection of some visible types of energy into our eyes, where the only difference is our
eyes cannot record and quantify this energy information. Invisible energy can also be
sensed and displayed within digital image processing software such as ERDAS Imagine.
Types of visible and invisible energy are divided into layers containing quantitative
information about a specific energy distribution in the area acquired by the satellite. These
layers are plugged into ERDAS Imagine to divide and classify the image based on types of
energy reflections and emissions.
Since this satellite image data contained a large range of energy types, these data cause
significant overlaps when classifying land-use classes. This is because certain types of landuse/cover are separated in terms of the energy they emit or reflect, but the same features
may simultaneously emit/reflect another type of energy, visible or invisible. Since the
classification is based upon quantitative data, the computer will not take qualitative
judgments into account. The software would not be able to interpret a land-use that humans
know to be successional agriculture because it has almost identical energy reflection and
emission properties as forest and healthy agriculture. Bare/unhealthy agriculture also has
energy values similar to a traditionally grey concrete urbanized area.
The following page displays an example of features containing energy overlap.
Figure 3 displays a false-colour composite image of Fort Erie. This is referred to as a

false-colour composite image because the energy data layers have been re-aligned to
show how bare agriculture and urban areas reflect/emit a type of invisible energy, we are
normally unable to see (near infra-red or NIR). These energy overlaps amongst different
types of land-uses will negatively impact the accuracy of the classification and may produce
a single class containing two types of land-use.
Subset images of Fort Erie for each year of collected imagery were made in order to more
accurately interpret the features in the study area based on the surrounding features. This
will be useful for part of the supervised classification process discussed in section 3.3.2 on
page 12.
Figure 3: Energy Overlap amongst Contrasting Features
A principal component analysis (PCA) was undertaken in ERDAS Imagine in order to

redistribute and group the initial energy data into groups of uncorrelated data. The original
image possessed six layers of data called bands. The principal component analysis will
condense and re-distribute the data into three channels that each contains uncorrelated
energy information.
Figure 4 displays an example of the PCA done on the 1999 subset for unsupervised and
supervised classifications
Figure 4: Principal Component Analysis
The changed colour scheme throughout the image demonstrates the re-distributed energy
values throughout the image. Each colour represents a different type of energy being
emitted/reflected. This analysis was useful in aiding in the segregation of bare agricultural
land and urban land. Unsupervised and supervised classifications were conducted using the
principal component images. Even though this PCA was successful, some small areas may
still possess energy that is similar to the different land-use/cover types that need to be
assessed, which means the classification will not be 100% accurate but will still be able to
provide a good sense of the distribution of land types over the study area and how these
types of land have shifted.
The following page introduces the unsupervised method of satellite image classification on
the 1992 Landsat satellite image PCA.
3.3
Landsat Satellite Image Land-Use/Cover Classifications
This section will discuss the methodology and findings for the unsupervised and supervised
classifications of the PCA Landsat satellite images acquired for years 1992, 1999, 2003,
2011, and an ASTER satellite image covering the area in 2013.
3.3.1 Unsupervised Classifications

The following page displays the 1992 unsupervised classification compared to the PCA
image to the left and original image to the right.
10
Figure 5 displays the unsupervised classification results.
Figure 5: Unsupervised Classification
Unsupervised classifications deal with the computer classifying the image into a number of
classes defined by the user. The classes are all based upon the natural energy values of
certain features. As discussed previously in this report, the image is classified into
overlapping land-use classes. In other words, one colour could equal two land-uses. All of
the years that were classified under no user supervision gave an insight in to how the initial
energy reflection values were distributed across the study area. Supervised classification
uses the opposite method of classification by allowing the user to select sample pixels to
represent a certain land-use class. This methodology is discussed in the following section.
11
3.3.2 Supervised Classifications

As discussed above, Figure 6, Figure 7, Figure 8, Figure 9, Figure 10, and Figure 11 on pages
13, 14, and 15 display the sample pixels taken from areas interpreted to represent the
desired land-use/cover. These interpretations were made using elements of image
interpretation such as interpreting the shape, size, tone, patterns, textures and shadows
presented within the images pixels.
12
Figure 6 and Figure 7 display some of the chosen water class sample pixels.
Figure 6: Water Sample Pixels from a River
Figure 7: Water Sample Pixels from a Body of Water
13
Figure 8 and Figure 9 display some of the chosen forest and agriculture class sample pixels.
Figure 8: Forest Sample Pixels
Figure 9: Agriculture Sample Pixels
14
Figure 10 and Figure 11 display some of the chosen urban and rangeland class sample
pixels. Rangeland was chosen as a class to account for the red pixels that were found
throughout the image that did not seem to represent any alternative land-use that was
already being used. Samples for rangeland were taken from what was interpreted to be a
golf course since it is known that Fort Erie contains golf courses, as well as double-checking
Google Maps.
Figure 10: Urban Pixels from a Highway
Figure 11: Rangeland Sample Pixels from a Golf Course
15
3.4 Aerial Image Digitized Land-Use Classifications

The process of digitizing deals with making digital representation of the land seen in the
aerial imagery, as polygons, lines or points (vector data). The aerial imagery and the
polygon classifications are both using the same coordinate system, which means the area of
coverage for each land-use will be recorded. The aerial images include 1934, 1955, 1968,
1989, 1994, 2000, and 2010. This task was executed after the initial classification of the
satellite images in order to provide maximum supervision over the classification of the
image. This means there is more control over what areas are classified as agriculture and
what areas can be classified as successional agriculture, since these two types of land-cover
look generally the same in terms of their spatial orientation on the satellite imagery because
of the satellites low resolution. Figure 12 displays an example of aerial image land-use
digitizing.
Figure 12: Example of Aerial Imagery Land-Use Digitizing (1934 and 2010)
16
4 Results and Findings

4.1 Supervised Classifications
Figure 13 displays the temporal progression of the initial supervised classification results.
Figure 13: Initial Supervised Classification Results
17
4.2 Rectified Supervised Classifications

Figure 14 displays the temporal progression of the rectified supervised classifications as
vector polygons (digital images are also called raster images). Using ArcGIS Raster to
Polygon tool, the initial classifications were converted into polygons and reclassified by
interpreting the pixel tones and spatial orientations in the original satellite images before
the classification process.
Figure 14: Supervised Classification Rectified Vector Polygon Results
18
Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, Table 4, and Table 5 display the satellite image classification data
tables generated within ArcMap 10.1, from the rectified polygon vector polygons discussed
on the previous page. The linear measurements are in meters and the areal measurements
in m2, since the coordinate system (NAD 83 UTM Zone 17) is projected in meters. Each landuse area was broken down into a percentage of the study area for each year.
4.2.1 Rectified Vector Polygon Satellite Image Classification Land-Use Percentage Tables
Table 1 introduces the 1992 land-use classification polygon attribute table information with
the land-use polygons expressed as percentages.
Table 1: Landsat 1992 Land-Use Classification Percentages
OBJECTID *
2
1
5
3
4
Shape *
Polygon
Polygon
Polygon
Polygon
Polygon
1992
LandUse
Agriculture
Forest
Rangeland/Clear-Cut
Urban
Water
Shape_Length
60761.13623
63076.62472
51205.34824
38104.81633
11698.911
Shape_Area
2612581.831
3951652.656
731374.4588
1405800.296
239130.7836
Percentage (%)
29
44
8
16
3
Table 2 introduces the 1999 land-use classification polygon attribute table information
with the land-use polygons expressed as percentages.
1999
OBJECTID *
Shape *
LandUse
Shape_Length
Shape_Area
Percentage (%)
Polygon
Agriculture
83393.35956
3177958.782
35
Polygon
Forest
65400.51883
3305981.64
37
5
3
2
Polygon
Polygon
Polygon
Rangeland/Clear-Cut
Urban
Water
68912.31611
43703.47503
31649.45173
776655.1105
1279586.567
401324.8968
9
14
4
19
2003
OBJECTID *
Shape *
LandUse
Shape_Length
Shape_Area
Percentage (%)
Polygon
Agriculture
61699.20456
3070282.057
35
Polygon
Forest
41274.63713
2879477.477
32
5
3
1
Polygon
Polygon
Polygon
Rangeland
Urban
Water
85052.56673
38725.7151
12731.7987
1695541.468
1073008.605
218226.9506
13
12
2
2011
OBJECTID *
Shape *
LandUse
Shape_Length
Shape_Area
Percentage (%)
Polygon
Agriculture
34916.12482
1396782.931
16
Polygon
Forest
84400.54331
4792298.697
53
2
1
3
Polygon
Polygon
Polygon
Rangeland/Clear-Cut
Urban
Water
39676.82479
59437.58813
20625.77627
862358.6983
1549877.493
335846.5604
10
17
4
2013
OBJECTID *
Shape *
LandUse
Shape_Length
Shape_Area
Percentage (%)
Polygon
Agriculture
102175.722
3676064.978
41
Polygon
Forest
91440.9113
3639059.029
40
Polygon
Rangeland
55315.62374
523426.9776
4
5
Polygon
Polygon
Urban
Water
50133.71378
2000.694253
1021983.49
107740.4512
11
1
20
Table 6 introduces the progression of agricultural land-use percentage for the satellite
image years.
Table 6: Satellite Image Classification Agricultural Land-Use Percentages
Agriculture
Percentage
Year
(%)
1992
29%
1999
35%
2003
34%
2011
16%
2013
41%
Figure 15 displays a graph of the land-use percentages throughout the observed time
period. The following page explains the graph further.
Land-Use Percentage
Land-Use Percentage Progression From 1992-2013

Via Landsat and ASTER Satellite Supervised
Classification Polygons
60%
50%
Agriculture
Forest
40%
Water
30%
20%
Urban
10%
0%
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Rangeland
2015
Year
Figure 15: Graph of Supervised Classification Results
21
Judging from the percentage calculated from the supervised classifications, it looks as
though the agriculture has increased from 1992 to 2013. Although this looks simple, certain
factors need to be considered when judging a satellite image classification. Even though
there was some supervision over what kind of pixels were to be classified as a certain landuse, certain features may still have an energy signature that presents the same data values,
that people would otherwise know to be separate land-use types. For example, agricultural
land may have similar overlapping energy reflectance values as successional agricultural
land and even some forest no matter how much supervision is placed over the data. In other
words, the type of data that is being worked with and the methodology for the classification
leaves a great amount of room for qualitative error when classifying the image.
The accuracy of the classification depends greatly on the quality of the four types of
resolution of the satellite sensor, and this quality is also a reflection of the year the image
was acquired and the type of satellite that acquired the image. The four types of satellite
sensor resolutions are:
1. Spatial (number of pixels in the image),
2. Spectral (refers to energy reflectance/emissions and how many variations can be
sensed),
3. Temporal (how long it takes for the satellite to re-visit the area of interest), and
4. Radiometric (the range of information that can be acquired regarding a certain type
of energy reflectance of the earths surface).
4.3 Aerial Photograph Digitized Land-Use Classifications

This section on the following page outlines the results of the aerial image digitized land-use
classifications. Digitizing (raster to vector) of the land-uses interpreted in the aerial imagery
will produce more accurate representations of the land-uses in the area since the spatial
resolution is higher (has more pixels) than the satellite imagery, which makes it easier to
differentiate successional agriculture from healthy agriculture and forest, as well as bare
agriculture from urban areas. Figure 16, Figure 17, Figure 18, Figure 19, Figure 20, Figure
21, and Figure 22 in this section all display the results for the aerial imagery digitized landuse classifications.
22
4.3.1 Digitized Land-Use Classification Over 1934 Aerial Imagery

Figure 16 displays the results for the digitized land-use classification over the 1934 aerial
imagery.
Figure 16: Digitized Land-Use Classification Results Over 1934 Aerial Imagery
23

Figure 17 displays the results for the digitized land-use classifications over the 1955 aerial
imagery.
24

Figure 18 displays the results for the digitized land-use over the 1968 aerial imagery.
25

Figure 19 displays the results for the digitized land-use classification over the 1989 aerial
imagery.
26

Figure 20 displays the results for the digitized land-use classification over 1994 aerial
imagery.
27

Figure 21 displays the results for the digitized land-use classification over 2000 aerial
imagery.
28

Figure 22 displays the digitized land-use classification results over the 2010 aerial imagery.
29
Figure 23 below displays a visualization of the overall temporal changes in agricultural

land-use.
Figure 23: Overall Continuous Changes in Agricultural Land-Use Visualization
The following section presents tables outlining the area values and percentages of land-use
in each year of digitization.
30
4.3.8
Aerial Image Digitized Land-Use Classification Percentage Tables
Table 7, Table 8, Table 9, Table 10, Table 11, Table 12, and Table 13 display the land-use
classification information from the attribute tables in ArcGIS. The area of a certain land-use
was divided by the total area of the watershed, thus giving the percentage value.
Table 7 introduces the digitized 1934 land-use classification feature class attribute table
information with the land-use polygons expressed as percentages.
Table 7: Digitized 1934 Land-Use Classification Percentages
OBJECTID *
1
2
3
4
5
SHAPE *
Polygon
Polygon
Polygon
Polygon
Polygon
1934
LandUse
Agriculture
Forest
Succession
Urban
Water
SHAPE_Length
30905.99723
25239.53264
15477.94555
23132.09717
1218.768817
SHAPE_Area
5168810.721
2161822.718
903868.2234
665743.0193
102845.2015
Percentage (%)
57
24
10
7
1
OBJECTID *
SHAPE *
Polygon
1955
LandUse
SHAPE_Length
SHAPE_Area
Percentage (%)
Agriculture
26731.92343
5112294.884
57
Polygon
Urban
20902.34332
619571.0668
Polygon
Succession
10243.39999
966404.8038
11
Polygon
Forest
24903.65775
2172873.177
24
Polygon
Water
2104.274071
131948.6188
31
OBJECTID *
SHAPE *
Polygon
1968
LandUse
SHAPE_Length
SHAPE_Area
Percentage (%)
Agriculture
34427.75022
4535425.97
50
Polygon
Succession
11120.14895
340121.6184
Polygon
Urban
37629.97927
1208098.56
13
Polygon
Water
2489.374732
134253.6907
Polygon
Forest
34009.26887
2785267.416
31
OBJECTID *
SHAPE *
Polygon
1989
LandUse
SHAPE_Length
SHAPE_Area
Percentage (%)
Agriculture
32797.63466
4069328.289
45
Polygon
Urban
23344.59013
878401.6998
10
Polygon
Water
3056.290993
145308.7353
Polygon
Succession
7828.136718
699910.8271
Polygon
Forest
24217.20927
3210056.89
36
OBJECTID *
SHAPE *
Polygon
1994
LandUse
SHAPE_Length
SHAPE_Area
Percentage (%)
Agriculture
33047.50812
4040136.468
45
Polygon
Urban
32608.4346
1322856.887
15
Polygon
Succession
8147.145844
338056.1107
Polygon
Water
2160.146371
130555.8358
Polygon
Forest
36407.41697
3171371.606
35
32
OBJECTID *
SHAPE *
Polygon
2000
LandUse
SHAPE_Length
SHAPE_Area
Percentage (%)
Agriculture
38813.24709
2742329.51
30
Polygon
Succession
29833.20821
1815969.773
20
Polygon
Urban
51322.70311
1721551.094
19
Polygon
Water
3744.007803
143943.3467
Polygon
Forest
31245.73316
2579349.503
23
OBJECTID *
SHAPE *
Polygon
2010
LandUse
SHAPE_Length
SHAPE_Area
Percentage (%)
Agriculture
29649.64206
2169624.033
24
Polygon
Succession
29016.88449
2505345.401
28
Polygon
Water
3149.738697
149555.9044
Polygon
Urban
45055.91214
2004940.157
22
Polygon
Forest
21329.11547
2173597.808
24
33
Figure 24 displays the progression of agricultural land percentage in each of the aerial
image years. The black line indicates that agriculture is negatively correlated with the
temporal progression, which means the agricultural land quantity in the watershed has
been decreasing from 1934 to 2010.
Land-Use Percentage Progression Via Aerial Image

Digitizing
Land-Use Percentage
70%
Agriculture
60%
50%
Forest
40%
30%
Water
20%
Urban
10%
0%
1920
1940
1960
1980
2000
2020
Succession
Year
Figure 24: Land-Use Percentage Progression From 1934-2010
Table 14 introduces the progression of agricultural land-use percentages shown in the

above feature class attribute tables.
Table 14: Aerial Image Digitized Agricultural Land-Use Percentages 1934-2010
Year
1934
1955
1968
1989
1994
2000
2010
Agriculture
Percentage (%)
57
57
50
45
45
30
24
34
Digitizing the aerial images grants more qualitative judgment when classifying the land-use
in the image, which the satellite images could not provide. The spatial resolution is also
higher in the aerial images, which is evident due to the increased clarity of the images. This
allows for greater interpretation of what is agriculture and what is only successional
agriculture, which is harder to interpret in the satellite imagery since the spatial resolution
is lower, seen through the blurriness of the satellite images. The rectified supervised
classifications were reclassified based on the shape of the features that were interpreted to
be agricultural land, when in reality it was a successional piece of agricultural land that had
no reason to not be classified as agriculture seen through the spatial resolution of the
satellite imagery.
The following page displays a map outlining the direct agricultural change from 1934 to
2010.
35
Figure 25 below displays the overall 33% spatial change of agriculture from 1934 2010.
Figure 25: Overall Spatial Agricultural Land-Use Decline
36
5 Project Management
This section will overview the major cost fluctuations of each proposed tasks implemented
to conduct the project. The following page presents a table summarizing these differences
with a graph displaying the cost and schedule progression of the project.
37
5.1 Project Tasks: Proposed Versus Actual Costs

Table 15: Project Cost and Schedule Variance
Task ID
Task Name
Proposed
Cost
Actual Cost
Duration
Proposed Work
Hours
Actual Work
Hours
1.1
Literature and Data

Review
$396.12
$66.02
2014/02/10
2014/02/28
1.2
Data Collection
$3,315
$682.50
2014/03/03
2014/03/07
51
10.5
1.3
Create Base Maps
$3850.80
$1,540.32
2014/03/10
2014/03/28
40
16
1.4
Classify Digital
Images
$1711.25
$1,026.75
2014/03/31
2014/04/11
25
15
1.5
Classification
Analysis
$3656.72
$1,009.86
2014/04/14
2014/05/02
48
14
1.6
Final Deliverable
Compilation
$4143.05
$3,083.20
2014/05/05
2014/06/13
43
32
1.7
Project Management
(Advisor Meetings)
$1200
$1200
2014/02/10
2014/05/30
38
5.2
Earned Value Management
Figure 26 below displays the overall cost progression of the project. When the (green)
earned value line falls below the (blue) proposed cost line, the project has fallen behind in
terms of the amount of budget that should have been spent at that point in time. The
situation is the opposite when the earned value line is above the proposed cost line. The
green arrows point out the fluctuations in the project scheduling. The project progress
report outlined the incomplete mosaics of the aerial image coverage for the study area
across the observed time periods. Time spent georeferencing the remaining aerial photos
caused the decline in earned value, but the project became ahead of schedule during the
final phases of the project to finish on time and on budget. Overall, the cost of the project
was brought down to exactly $8,608.67 from $18,272.94. The cost variance is $9,664.27
below budget and the schedule variance is $0 at this point in time, which means the project
has finished on time.
Project Management
$20,000
$18,272.94
$18,000
$16,000
$14,000
Cost
$12,000
$10,000
Planned Value
(PV)
Earned Value
(EV)
Actual Cost
(AC)
Final Presentation
Spatial/Temporal
Interpretations/Analysis
Progress Presentation
$8,608.67
$8,000
$6,000
Georeferenced Remaining
Aerial Imagery
$4,000
$2,000
Cost Variance: $9,664.27< On Budget

Schedule Variance: $0 < On Schedule
$0
Feb 10 21
Feb 24 Mar 7
Mar 10 - Mar 24 - Apr 7 - 18 Apr 21 21

Apr 4
May 2
May 5 16
May 19 - June 1 30
13
Bi-Weekly Report Period

Figure 26: Project Management and Earned Value
39
6 Conclusions and Recommendations

In conclusion, it is seen through the satellite image classifications that some areas classified
as agriculture and forest in the satellite image classifications are evidently seen to be
successional and that there has been an overall decline in agriculture since the initial drain
operation. It is easier to classify the aerial images accurately due to the higher spatial
resolutions of the aerial imagery for a more accurate qualitative classification, rather than
basing the classifications purely on quantitative data derived from the physical properties
of earths features that cannot be classified into qualitative categories like successional
agriculture, since succession, agriculture, and forest are all vegetation that contain the same
physical properties used to classify the image.
The satellite image classifications were useful for developing a sense of the
spatial/temporal behaviors of the vegetation in the image across a large span of time in the
20th century, while the aerial images granted the opportunity to qualitatively digitize landuse within the watershed.
Recommendations for the Drainage Investment Group would be to study more data on the
matter in different watersheds in order to broaden the spectrum of sample data on the
analysis of drainage impacts on agricultural land value. An analysis on one drain alone in
the Niagara Region is not enough of a sample to make any accurate claims as to whether
drainage is a positive or negative influence for agricultural land. All that can be said from
the current collected data is that agriculture has declined in the Point Abino watershed
since the earliest date of known implementation, which is thought to be 1934.
40
7 Bibliography
Canadian Government Air Photo Division Energy, Mines, & Resources. [Point Abino] [Air
Photo]. N/A. A4856. 92. N/A: Government of Canada, 1934.
Photo]. N/A. 55-4239. 4-107. Government of Canada, 1955.
Photo]. N/A. AF25689. L15 15. N/A: Government of Canada, 1989.
41

Photo] N/A. 003. L15 277.: Government of Canada, 1994.
Geographical Section, Topographic Map, 30 L/14 [map]. N/A. Scale 1:63,360. Canada 1 Inch
to 1 Mile. Welland, ON Department of National Defense, 1907
Land Information Ontario, Ministry of Natural Resources. 2000 SWOOP Orthoimagery.
14654.sid, 15652.sid, 15654.sid[Six Mile Creek area, Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON]. [CD].
Generated by Adam Tomlin; using ArcMap 10.1 (April 21, 2014)
Land Information Ontario, Ministry of Natural Resources. 2010 SWOOP Orthoimagery.
1km176520474702010MAPCON.tif,1km176520474802010MAPCON.tif,
1km176520474902010MAPCON.tif, 1km176550474402010MAPCON.tif,
1km176540474602010MAPCON.tif, 1km176540474502010MAPCON.tif[Six Mile Creek area,
Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON]. [CD]. Generated by Adam Tomlin; using ArcMap 10.1 (April 21, 2014)
Municipal Boundaries [shapefile]. Niagara Region, ON: Niagara Region, 2012. Available:
Niagara Region Open Data http://www.niagararegion.ca/government/opendata/datacatalogue.aspx#search=Municipal Boundaries (Accessed December 6, 2014)
NASA ASTER Program, 2013, ASTER scene
AST_L1B_00309252013162121_20130926115241_252391, SLC-Off, USGS, Niagara Region,
2013 09 25.
NASA Landsat Program, 1992, Landsat TM scene p017r30_5t19920612, SLC-Off, USGS, Niagara
Region, 1992 06 12.
NASA Landsat Program, 2003, Landsat TM scene LT50170302003194GNC02, SLC-Off, USGS,
Niagara Region, 2003 07 13.
NASA Landsat Program, 2011, Landsat TM scene LT50170302011152EDC00, SLC-Off, USGS,
42

NASA Landsat Program, 1999, Landsat TM scene L71018030_03019990903, SLC-Off, USGS,
Ruck, B. (2013). DIG Drainage Investment Group Temporal Change of Agricultural Land
Values in the Niagara Region. Terms of Reference. Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada
USGS.(1976), A Land Use and Land Cover Classification System for Use With Remote Sensor
Data. Washington, Virginia, United States.
43
Appendix 1: Original Terms of Reference

Contact Person & Organization Details
Contact Person
Name:
Title:
Telephone:
Brett Ruck
Executive Director
905-321-9963
Fax:
Organization
Email:
DIG@cogeco.ca
Name:
Drainage Investment Group (DIG)
Address:
4321 Queen Street, Unit 6 Niagara Falls, ON L2E 2K9
Website:
n/a
Date:
September 3, 2013
Temporal Change of Agricultural Land Values in the Niagara Region

Project Details
Project Background
Project Problem/Opportunity:
The value of agricultural land in the Niagara region is reported to have changed greatly over time. There is also
a marked difference in the value of land compared to areas outside of the region. How have these prices
changed over time? What underlying causes appear to be driving the change? Do lands adjacent to municipal
drains show a different value or change pattern when compared to other agricultural areas? Has the amount of
agricultural land available changed?
An opportunity exists to examine the changes in property values spatially within the Niagara Region and how
they have changed over time. Identifying trends and causal factors could allow for adjustments to be made to
increase future prospects. Particular focus should be given to lands serviced by municipal drains in order to
determine their effect on land value.
Business Goal:
To identify trends in the changing value of agricultural lands, both spatially and over time, with emphasis on
the effect of municipal drainage systems.
44
Primary Project Objectives [Provide a list of the project objectives.]
To identify land use changes over time in the Niagara Region.

To identify temporal trends in agricultural land value.
To determine possible variables causing the value of land to increase or decrease.
To highlight the impact of municipal drains in these areas.
Primary Project Deliverables [Provide a list of the project objectives.]
Land use classification (supervised or unsupervised) of the Niagara Region over several different time
periods and analysis of the changes observed (historical aerial images will be provided).
ArcGIS Online Web Map visualizing the time-aware land value data reflecting how property prices have
shifted.
A map highlighting the location of municipal drains and their effect on land value.
A report with combined property value data, analysis and conclusions regarding apparent trends and
causes, along with a prediction for future expectations.
Requirements
Number of students required to
complete the project:
Equipment required (if any):
None
Data required (if any):
Data will be provided by Drainage Investment Group (DIG)
Software required (if any):
ArcGIS, Office Suite
Confidentiality
None providing property values are generalized
45
Appendix 2: Gantt Chart
Drainage Impacts on Agricultural Land Quantity Project Gantt Chart
11-22-13
12-12-13
1-1-14
1-21-14
2-10-14
3-2-14
3-22-14
4-11-14
5-1-14
5-21-14
6-10-14
6-30-14
Date
46

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3: "Agriculture and Irrigation Solutions". Contech Engineered Solutions

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3: "Agriculture and Irrigation Solutions". Contech Engineered Solutions

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

279 Glenridge Avenue, St.

Catharines ON, LST 3K3

Agriculture and Irrigation Solutions. Contech Engineered Solutions.

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

June 13, 2014

Adam Joseph Tomlin

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

1.1 PROJECT GOAL OVERVIEW

2 STUDY AREA OVERVIEW

3.1 INITIAL DRAIN IMPLEMENTATION RESEARCH

4 RESULTS AND FINDINGS

4.1 SUPERVISED CLASSIFICATIONS

5.1 PROJECT TASKS: PROPOSED VERSUS ACTUAL COSTS

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

1.2 Objectives and Deliverables

To identify land-use changes over time,

A final report with conclusions and recommendations for future actions.

1.3 Project Personnel

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

2 Study Area Overview

Figure 1: Study Area

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

3.1 Initial Drain Implementation Research

Figure 2: Topographic Map Displaying No Drain In 1907

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

Preliminary Satellite Data Arrangement: Principal Component Analysis

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

Figure 3 displays a false-colour composite image of Fort Erie. This is referred to as a

Figure 3: Energy Overlap amongst Contrasting Features

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

A principal component analysis (PCA) was undertaken in ERDAS Imagine in order to

Figure 4: Principal Component Analysis

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

Landsat Satellite Image Land-Use/Cover Classifications

3.3.1 Unsupervised Classifications

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

Figure 5 displays the unsupervised classification results.

Figure 5: Unsupervised Classification

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

3.3.2 Supervised Classifications

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

Figure 6: Water Sample Pixels from a River

Figure 7: Water Sample Pixels from a Body of Water

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

Figure 8: Forest Sample Pixels

Figure 9: Agriculture Sample Pixels

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

Figure 10: Urban Pixels from a Highway

Figure 11: Rangeland Sample Pixels from a Golf Course

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

3.4 Aerial Image Digitized Land-Use Classifications

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3

4 Results and Findings

Figure 13: Initial Supervised Classification Results

279 Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines ON, LST 3K3