Environmental Management

, 34:S89 | Cite as

Using an Ecoregion Framework to Analyze Land-Cover and Land-Use Dynamics

  • Alisa L. Gallant
  • Thomas R. Loveland
  • Terry L. Sohl
  • Darrell E. Napton


The United States has a highly varied landscape because of wide-ranging differences in combinations of climatic, geologic, edaphic, hydrologic, vegetative, and human management (land use) factors. Land uses are dynamic, with the types and rates of change dependent on a host of variables, including land accessibility, economic considerations, and the internal increase and movement of the human population. There is a convergence of evidence that ecoregions are very useful for organizing, interpreting, and reporting information about land-use dynamics. Ecoregion boundaries correspond well with patterns of land cover, urban settlement, agricultural variables, and resource-based industries. We implemented an ecoregion framework to document trends in contemporary land-cover and land-use dynamics over the conterminous United States from 1973 to 2000. Examples of results from six eastern ecoregions show that the relative abundance, grain of pattern, and human alteration of land-cover types organize well by ecoregion and that these characteristics of change, themselves, change through time.

Land cover Land use Ecoregions Landscape patterns Change analysis Disturbance 

Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    Anderson, J. R., Hardy, E. E., Roach, J. T., Witmer, R. E. 1976A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data. Professional Paper 964US Geological SurveyReston, VirginiaGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bailey, R.G. 1976. Ecoregions of the United States. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Ogden, Utah. Map, scale 1: 7,500,000.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bailey, R. G. 1983Delineation of ecosystem regionsEnvironmental Management7365373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bailey, R. G. 1994Global Ecosystems Database, Global View CD-ROM. Ecosystem and Global Change ProgramNational Geophysical Data CenterBoulder, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bascom, J. 2000Revisiting the rural revolution in east CarolinaGeographical Review90432445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bogue, D. J., Beale, C. L. 1961Economic areas of the United StatesThe Free Press of GlencoeNew York 1348Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Borchert, J. R. 1967American metropolitan evolutionGeographical Review57301332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Borchert, J. R. 1987Maps, geography, and geographersThe Professional Geographer39387389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bryce, S. A., Omernik, J. M., Larsen, D. P. 1999Ecoregions: A geographic framework to guide risk characterization and ecosystem managementEnvironmental Practice1141155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bryce, S.A., J.M. Omernik, D.E. Pater, M. Ulmer, J. Schaar, J. Freeouf, R. Johnson, P. Kuck, and S.H. Azevedo. 1998. Ecoregions of North Dakota and South Dakota. US Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia. Map, scale 1:500,000.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Clay, J. W., Escott, P. D., Orr, D. M. Jr., Stuart, A. W. 1989Land of the SouthOxmoor HouseBirmingham, Alabama 320Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Commission for Environmental Cooperation1997Ecological regions of North America: Toward a common perspectiveCommission for Environmental CooperationMontreal, QuebecGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cronon, W. 1992Nature’s metropolis: Chicago and the Great WestW. W. NortonNew York 530Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dorfman, D. 2001. Ecoregions of the United States of America. Western Conservation Science Center, The Nature Conservancy, Boulder, Colorado. Map, scale 1: 6,000,000.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dorsett, M. W., McCarthy, M. 1986The Queen City: A History of Denver, 2nd edPruett PublishingBoulder, Colorado 382Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Elvidge, C. D., Baught, K. E., Kihn, E. A., Kroehl, H. W., Davis, E. R. 1997Mapping of city lights using DMSP Operational Linescan System dataPhotogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing63727734Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fedkiw, J. 1989. The evolving use and management of the nation’s forests, grasslands, croplands, and related resources. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report RM-175, Fort Collins, Colorado.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gottmann, J. 1969Virginia in our CenturyUniversity of Virginia PressCharlottesville, Virginia 656Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Greene, R. P., Stager, J. 2001Rangeland to cropland conversion as replacement land for prime farmland lost to urban developmentThe Social Science Journal38543555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, S. Lawrence, G. Martin, A. Goddard, V.J. Hulcher, and T. Foster. 2001. Ecoregions of Alabama and Georgia. US Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia. Map, scale 1:700,000.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F. MacPherson, J.B. Glover, and V.B. Shelburne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina. US Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia. Map, scale 1:500,000.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Griffith, J. A., Stehman, S. V., Loveland, T. R. 2003Landscape trends in Mid-Atlantic and southeastern United States ecoregionsEnvironmental Management32572588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hammond, E. H. 1970

    Classes of land surface form

    The National Atlas of the United States of AmericaUS Geological SurveyWashington, DC6264
    Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hargrove, W. W., Hoffman, F. M. 1999Using multivariate clustering to characterize ecoregion bordersComputing in Science & Engineering11825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hart, J. F. 1996Turmoil in tobaccolandThe Geographical Review86550572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hart, J. F. 1980Land use change in a Piedmont countyAnnals of the Association of American Geographers70492527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Heiskary, S. A., Wilson, C. B., Larsen, D. P. 1987Analysis of regional patterns in lake water quality. using ecoregions for lake management in MinnesotaLake and Reservoir Management3337344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hudson, J. C. 2001Across This Land: A Regional Geography of the United States and CanadaThe Johns Hopkins University PressBaltimore, MarylandGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Larsen, D. P., Dudley, D. R., Hughes, R. M. 1988A regional approach to assess attainable water quality: an Ohio case studyJournal of Soil and Water Conservation.43171176Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Leathers, N., Harrington, M. B. 2000Effectiveness of conservation reserve programs and land “slippage” in southwestern KansasProfessional Geographer528393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Little, J.R. 2003. Part IV, Department of Agriculture, 7 CFR part 1410: 2002 farm bill—Conservation Reserve Program—long-term policy; interim rule. Federal Register, v. 68, no. 89, Thursday, May 8, 2003, FR Doc. 03-11405, 17 pp.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lord, J. D. 2001Globalization forces and the industrial restructuring of Greenwood county, South CarolinaSoutheastern Geographer41184205Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Loveland, T. R., Merchant, J. W., Ohlen, D. O., Brown, J. F. 1991Development of a land cover characteristics database for the conterminous U.SPhotogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing5714531463Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Loveland, T. R., Sohl, T., Sayler, K., Gallant, A., Dwyer, J., Vogelmann, J., Zylstra, G., Wade, T. G., Edmonds, C. M. 1999Land cover trends: rates, causes, and consequences of late-twentieth century U.S. land cover change. NERL-LV-00-026, EPA/600/R-99/005U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and DevelopmentLas Vegas, NevadaGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Loveland, T. R., Sohl, T. L., Stehman, S. V., Gallant, A. L., Sayler, K. L., Napton, D. E. 2002A strategy for estimating the rates of recent United States land cover changesPhotogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing6810911099Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lugo, A. E., Brown, S. L., Dodson, R., Smith, T. S., Shugart, H. H. 1999The Holdridge life zones of the conterminous United States in relation to ecosystem mappingJournal of Biogeography2610251038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Marschner, F. J. 1959Land Use and its Patterns in the United States. Agricultural Handbook No. 153US Department of AgricultureWashington, DCGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    McGarigal, K., S.A. Cushman, M.C. Neel, and E. Ene. 2002. FRAGSTATS spatial pattern analysis program for categorical maps. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts. http://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Omernik, J. M. 1987Ecoregions of the conterminous United StatesAnnals of the Association of American Geographers77118125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Omernik, J. M. 1994

    Ecoregions: A spatial framework for environmental management:

    Davis, W. S.Simon, T. P. eds. Biological Assessment and Criteria, Tools for Water Resource Planning and Decision MakingLewis PublishersBoca Raton, Florida4962
    Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Omernik, J. M. 1995Level III Ecoregions of the ContinentUS Environmental Protection Agency, National Health and Environment Effects Research LaboratoryCorvallis, OregonGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Omernik, J. M., Rohm, C. M., Clarke, S. E., Larsen, D. P. 1988Summer total phosphorus in lakes: a map of Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan, U.S.AEnvironmental Management12815825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Power, T. M. 1996Lost Landscapes and Failed Economies: The Search for a Value of PlaceIsland PressWashington, DC 350Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ramsey, R. D., Falconer, A., Jensen, J. R. 1995The relationship between NOAA-AVHRR NDVI and ecoregions in UtahPhotogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing53188198Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ricketts, T. H., Dinerstein, E., Olson, D. M., Loucks, C. J., Eichbaum, W., DellaSala, D., Kavanagh, K., Hedao, P., Hurley, P. T., Carney, K. M., Abell, R., Walters, S. 1999Terrestrial Ecoregions of North America: A Conservation AssessmentIsland PressWashington, DC 508Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Rogers, W. W., Flynt, W., Ward, R. D. 1994Alabama: The History of a Deep South StateUniversity of Alabama PressTuscaloosa, Alabama 768Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Rubenstein, J. M. 1992The Changing US auto Industry: A Geographical AnalysisRoutledgeNew York 336Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Sohl, T.L., Gallant, A.L., and Loveland, T.R. (2004) The characteristics and interpretability of land surface change and implications for project design. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing. 70: 439–448Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Trimble, S. W. 1983Commentary on “Land use change in a Piedmont County,” by John Fraser HartAnnals of the Association of American Geographers73285288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Turner, B. L., II, Meyer, W. B. 1991Land use and land cover in global environmental change: Considerations for studyInternational Social Science Journal130669677Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Twedt, D. J., Loesch, C. R. 1999Forest area and distribution in the Mississippi alluvial valley: implications for breeding bird conservationJournal of Biogeography2612151224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    US Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service19991997 Census of Agriculture. Volume 1. Geographic Area Series, Part 51. AC97-A-51US Department of AgricultureWashington, DC629 ppGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    US Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service1981Land Resource Regions and Major Land Resource Areas of the United States. Agriculture Handbook 296US Government Printing OfficeWashington, DCGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    US Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Level III Ecoregions of the Continental United States. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency–National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory Corvallis, Oregon. Digital map, scale 1:250,000.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Vogelmann, J. E., Howard, S. M., Yang, L., Larson, C. R., Wylic, B. K., Van Driel, J. N. 2001Completion of the 1990’s national land cover data set for the conterminous United StatesPhotogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing67650662Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Woods, A. J., Omernik, J. M., Brown, D. D., Kiilsgaard, C. W. 1996Level III and IV ecoregions of Pennsylvania and the Blue Ridge Mountains, the ridge and valley, and the central Appalachians of Virginia, West Virginia, and Maryland. EPA/600/R-96/077US Environmental Protection Agency, National Health and Environmental Effects Research LaboratoryCorvallis, OregonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alisa L. Gallant
    • 1
  • Thomas R. Loveland
    • 1
  • Terry L. Sohl
    • 2
  • Darrell E. Napton
    • 3
  1. 1.US Geological SurveyEROS Data CenterSouth DakotaUSA
  2. 2.Science Applications International CorporationUS Geological Survey, EROS Data CenterSouth DakotaUSA
  3. 3.Department of GeographySouth Dakota State UniversitySouth DakotaUSA

Personalised recommendations