Vegetatio

, Volume 118, Issue 1–2, pp 139–152

US Fish and Wildlife Service 1979 wetland classification: A review

  • Lewis M. Cowardin
  • Francis C. Golet
Article

Abstract

In 1979 the US Fish and Wildlife Service published and adopted a classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. The system was designed for use in a national inventory of wetlands. It was intended to be ecologically based, to furnish the mapping units needed for the inventory, and to provide national consistency in terminology and definition. We review the performance of the classification after 13 years of use. The definition of wetland is based on national lists of hydric soils and plants that occur in wetlands. Our experience suggests that wetland classifications must facilitate mapping and inventory because these data gathering functions are essential to management and preservation of the wetland resource, but the definitions and taxa must have ecological basis. The most serious problem faced in construction of the classification was lack of data for many of the diverse wetland types. Review of the performance of the classification suggests that, for the most part, it was successful in accomplishing its objectives, but that problem areas should be corrected and modification could strengthen its utility. The classification, at least in concept, could be applied outside the United States. Experience gained in use of the classification can furnish guidance as to pitfalls to be avoided in the wetland classification process.

Key words

Classification Definition United States Wetland 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderberg M. R.. Cluster analysis for applications. Academic Press. New York. 359 pp.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, J. R., Hardy, E. E., Roach, J. T. & Witmer, R. E. 1976. A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data. US Geological Survey Professional Paper 964. 28 pp.Google Scholar
  3. Bailey, R. G. 1976. Ecoregions of the United States. US Forest Service. Ogden, UT. (map only; scale 1:7 500 000).Google Scholar
  4. Bailey, R. G. 1978. Ecoregions of the United States. US Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Ogden, UT. 77 pp.Google Scholar
  5. Carter, V., Bedinger, M. S., Novitzki, R. P. & Wilen, W. O. 1979. Water resources and wetlands. Pages 344–376 in P. E. Greeson, J. R. Clark and J. E. Clark, eds. Wetland functions and values: the state of our understanding. American Water Resources Association, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  6. Clairain, E. J.Jr. 1985. National wetland functions and values study plan. Transactions North American Widlife and Natural Resources Conference 30: 485–494.Google Scholar
  7. Cowardin, L. M. & Carter, V. 1975. Tentative classification for wetlands of the United States. US Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Biological Services Washington, DC Rep. 43 pp. (mineo)Google Scholar
  8. Cowardin, L. M., Carter, V., Golet, F. C. & LaRoe, E. T. 1976. Interim Classification of wetlands and aquatic habitats of the United States. Addendum to J. H. Sather, ed. Proceedings of the National Wetland Classification and Inventory Workshop. 1975. US Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS 76/09.Google Scholar
  9. Cowardin, L. M., Carter, V., Golet, F. C. & LaRoe, E. T. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. US Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS 79/31. 103 pp.Google Scholar
  10. Dekker, A. G., Malthus, T. J. & Seyhan, E. 1991. Quantitative modeling of inland water quality for high-resolution MSS systems. IEEE Transactions Geoscience and Remote Sensing 29: 89–95.Google Scholar
  11. Golet, F. C. & Larson, J. S. 1974. Classification of freshwater wetlands in the glaciated Northeast. US Fish and Wildlife Service Resource Publication. 116. 56 pp.Google Scholar
  12. Gosselink, J. G. & Turner, R. E. 1978. The role of hydrology in fresh-water wetland ecosystems. Pages 63–78 in R. E. Good, D. F. Whigham, and R. L. Simpson, eds. Freshwater wetlands: ecological processes and management potential. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  13. Jacobson, J. E., Ritter, R. A. & Koeln, G. T. 1987. Accuracy of Thematic Mapper derived wetlands as based on National Wetland Inventory data. Pages 109–118 in American Society Photogrametry and Remote Sensing Technical Papers, 1987 ASPRS-ACSM Fall Convention, Reno, NV.Google Scholar
  14. Jeglum, J. K., Boissoneau, A. N. & Haavisto, V. F. 1974. Toward a wetland classification for Ontario. Canadian Forest Service Information Report O-X-215. 54 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Koeln, G. T., Jacobson, J. E., Wesley, D. E. & Rempel, R. S. 1988. Wetland inventories derived from LANDSAT data for weterfowl management planning. Transactions North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 53: 303–310.Google Scholar
  16. Kuchler, A. W. 1988. Aspects of maps. Handbook of vegetation science, Vol. 10: 97–1040.Google Scholar
  17. Lyon, J. G., Lunetta, R. S. & Williams, D. C. 1992. Airborne multispectral scanner data for evaluating bottom sediment types and water depths of the St. Marys River, MI. Photogramtric Engineering and Remote Sensing. 58: 951–956.Google Scholar
  18. Martin, A. C., Hotchkiss, N., Uhler, F. M. & Bourn, W. S. 1953. Classification of wetlands of the United States. US Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report Wildlife. 20. 14 pp.Google Scholar
  19. Millar, J. B. 1976. Wetland classification in western Canada: a guide to marshes and shallow open water wetlands in the grasslands and parklands of the Prairie Provinces. Canadian Wildlife Service Report Series 37. 38 pp.Google Scholar
  20. Mitsch, W. J. & Gossolink, J. G. 1993. Wetlands, 2nd ed. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 539 pp.Google Scholar
  21. Odum, H. T., Copeland, B. J. & McMahan, E. A. (eds) 1974. Coastal ecological systems of the United States. The Conservation Foundation, Washington, DC. 4 Vol.Google Scholar
  22. Reed, P. B. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: national summary. US Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report. 88(24). 244 pp.Google Scholar
  23. Sather, J. H. 1976. Proceedings of the National Wetland Classification and Inventory Workshop. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC 248 pp.Google Scholar
  24. Sather, J. H. & Smith, R. D. 1984. An overview of major wetland functions and values. US Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Biological Services. FWS/OBS 84/18. 68 pp.Google Scholar
  25. Scott, M. L., Slauson, W. L., Segelquist, C. A. & Auble, G. T. 1989 Correspondence between vegetation and soils in wetlands and nearby uplands. Wetlands 9: 41–60.Google Scholar
  26. Sculthorpe, C. D. 1967. The biology of aquatic vascular plants. Edward Arnold Ltd., London. 610 pp.Google Scholar
  27. Segelquist, C. A., Slauson, W. L., Scott, M. L. & Auble, G. T. 1990. Synthesis of soil-plant correspondence data from twelve wetland studies throughout the United States. US Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report. 90(19). 24 pp.Google Scholar
  28. Shaw, S. P., Fredine, C. G. 1956. Wetlands of the United States. US Fish and Wildlife Service Circular 39. 67 pp.Google Scholar
  29. Soil Conservation Service. 1982. Hydric soils of the United States. US Department of Agriculture National Bulletin. 430-2-7. (January 4, 1982).Google Scholar
  30. Soil Conservation Service. 1985. Hydric soils of the United States. US Department of Agriculture and National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  31. Soil Conservation Service. 1987. Hydric soils of the United States. US Department of Agriculture, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  32. Soil Conservation Service. 1991. Hydric soils of the United States. US Department of Agriculture Miscellaneous. Publication. 1491, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  33. Soil Survey Staff. 1975. Soil taxonomy: a basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. US Soil Conservation Service Agricultural Handbook 436. 754 pp.Google Scholar
  34. Stewart, R. E. & Kantrud, H. A. 1971. Classification of natural ponds and lakes in the glaciated prairie region. US Fish and Wildlife Service Resource Publication. 92. 57 pp.Google Scholar
  35. Tiner, R. W. 1991. The concept of a hydrophyte for wetland identification. BioSience 41: 236–247.Google Scholar
  36. Welch, P. S. 1952. Limnology, 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York. 538 pp.Google Scholar
  37. Wentworth, T. R. & Johnson, G. P. 1986. Use of vegetation in the designation of wetlands. US Fish and Wildlife Service, National. Wetland Inventory, Washington, DC. 107 pp.Google Scholar
  38. Wilen, B. & Bates, M. K. 1995. The United States national wetlands inventory. Vegetation (in press).Google Scholar
  39. Zhadin, V. I. & Gerd, S. V. 1963. Fauna and flora of the rivers, lakes and reservoirs of the USSR. Oldbourne Press, London. 626 pp.Google Scholar
  40. Zoltai, S. C., Pollett, F. C., Jeglum, J. K. & Adams, G. D. 1975. Developing a wetland classification for Canada. Proceedings North American Forest Soils Conference 4: 497–511.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lewis M. Cowardin
    • 1
  • Francis C. Golet
    • 2
  1. 1.US Fish and Wildlife ServiceNorthern Prairie Wildlife Research CenterJamestownUSA
  2. 2.Department of Natural Resources ScienceUniversity of Rhode IslandKingstonUSA

Personalised recommendations