Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Field Verification of Original and Updated National Wetlands Inventory Maps in three Metropolitan Areas in Illinois, USA

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Wetlands Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps are the most comprehensive wetland maps in the U.S., but NWI maps are now outdated in many regions. A consortium led by Ducks Unlimited is updating the NWI for the Great Lakes/Atlantic Region. Updates are complete for several states but have not been verified extensively with field data. We used wetland maps from 129 on-site wetland delineation projects in three Illinois regions to assess accuracy of original and updated NWI maps. We used ancillary spatial data to characterize areas that were incorrectly classified and identify potential sources of error. Across the three regions, the original NWI omitted 49 % of total wetland area for wetlands greater than 0.2 ha, and 57 % of the area mapped by the NWI was non-wetland. The updated NWI omitted less wetland area (40 % omitted for wetlands larger than 0.2 ha), but only slightly improved errors of commission (55 % of mapped area was non-wetland). Polygons mapped as forested wetlands were less likely to be truly wetlands. Small (<0.06 ha) wetlands were often omitted. Errors reflect ambiguity in the definition of wetlands and technical limitations of the NWI methodology. Due to the high error rates, we recommend further refinement of regional wetland inventories.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ACOE [U.S. Army Corps of Engineers] (2010) Regional supplement to the Corps of Engineers wetland delineation manual: Midwest Region (Version 2.0). Wakely JS, Lichvar RW, Noble CV (eds). ERDC/EL TR-10-16. United States Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS, USA

  • Augusteijn MF, Warrender CE (2010) Wetland classification using optical and radar data and neural network classification. International Journal of Remote Sensing 19:1545–1560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breiman L, Friedman JH, Olshen RA, Stone CJ (1984) Classification and regression trees. Wadsworth, Belmont, CA

  • Calsyn DE (2001) Soil survey of McHenry County, Illinois. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station, US Government Printing Office, Washington DC, USA

  • Calsyn DE (2005) Soil survey of Lake County, Illinois. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station, US Government Printing Office, Washington DC, USA

  • Christensen J, Nash M, Chaloud D, Pitchford A (2016) Spatial distributions of small water body types in modified landscapes: lessons from Indiana, USA. Ecohydrology 9:122–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowardin LM, Golet FC (1995) US fish and wildlife service 1979 wetland classification: a review. Vegetatio 118:139–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowardin LM, Carter V, Golet FC, LaRoe ET (1979) Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-29-31. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, USA

  • De’ath G, Fabricius KE (2000) Classification and regression trees: a powerful yet simple technique for ecological data analysis. Ecology 81:3178–3192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2013) A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna

  • DU [Ducks Unlimited] (2010) Updating the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) for Illinois. State Wildlife Grant Program, Project #T-52-D-1. Report submitted to the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Springfield, IL, USA

  • Dvorett D, Bidwell J, Davis C, DuBois C (2012) Developing a hydrogeomorphic wetland inventory: reclassifying National Wetlands Inventory polygons in geographic information systems. Wetlands 32:83–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elmer S (2004) Soil survey of Rock Island county, Illinois. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station, US Government Printing Office, Washington DC, USA

  • Environmental Laboratory (1987) Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, USA

  • FGDC [Federal Geographic Data Committee] (2009) Wetlands mapping standard. FGDC Document Number FGDC-STD-015-2009. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA, USA

  • Garris HW, Mitchell RJ, Fraser LH, Barrett LR (2015) Forecasting climate change impacts on the distribution of wetland habitat in the Midwestern United States. Global Change Biology 21:766–776

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs JP (1993) Importance of small wetlands for the persistence of local populations of wetland-associated animals. Wetlands 13:25–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Indorante SJ, Leeper RA (2000) Soil survey of St. Clair County, Illinois. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station, US Government Printing Office, Washington DC, USA

  • Johnston CA (2013) Wetland losses due to row crop expansion in the Dakota prairie pothole region. Wetlands 33:175–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston CA, Meysembourg P (2002) Comparison of the Wisconsin and National Wetlands Inventories. Wetlands 22:386–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kentula ME, Gwin SE, Pierson SM (2004) Tracking changes in wetlands with urbanization: sixteen years of experience in Portland, Oregon, USA. Wetlands 24:734–743

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kloiber SM, Macleod RD, Smith AJ, Knight JF, Huberty BJ (2015) A semi-automated, multi-source data fusion update of a wetland inventory for east-Central Minnesota, USA. Wetlands 35:335–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kudray GM, Gale MR (2000) Evaluation of National Wetland Inventory maps in a heavily forested region in the upper Great Lakes. Wetlands 20:581–587

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuzila MS, Rundquist DC, Green JA (1991) Methods for estimating wetland loss: the Rainbasin region of Nebraska, 1927-1981. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 46:441–446

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang M, McCarty G, Oesterling R, Yeo I-Y (2013) Topographic metrics for improved mapping of forested wetlands. Wetlands 33:141–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leeper RA (2004) Soil survey of Madison County, Illinois. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station, US Government Printing Office, Washington DC, USA

  • Maxa M, Bolstad P (2009) Mapping northern wetlands with high resolution satellite images and LiDAR. Wetlands 29:248–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naugle DE, Johnson RR, Estey ME, Higgins KF (2001) A landscape approach to conserving wetland bird habitat in the prairie pothole region of eastern South Dakota. Wetlands 21:1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newbold S, Eadie JM (2004) Using species-habitat models to target conservation: a case study with breeding mallards. Ecological Applications 14:1384–1393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols C (1994) Map accuracy of National Wetlands Inventory maps for areas subject to land use regulation commission jurisdiction. Ecological Services Report R5–96/6. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC

  • Oslund FT, Johnson RR, Hertel DR (2010) Assessing wetland changes in the prairie pothole region of Minnesota from 1980 to 2007. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management 1:131–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton D, Bergstrom JC, Moore R, Covich AP (2015) Economic value of carbon storage in U.S. National Wildlife Refuge wetland ecosystems. Ecosystem Services 16:94–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semlitsch RD, Bodie JR (1998) Are small, isolated wetlands expendable? Conservation Biology 12:1129–1133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snodgrass JW, Komoroski MJ, Bryan AL, Burger J (2000) Relationships among isolated wetland size, hydroperiod, and amphibian species richness: implications for wetland regulation. Conservation Biology 14:414–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stelk M (2013) National Wetland Inventory at risk. Wetland News, July 2013. Association of State Wetland Managers, Windham, ME, USA

  • Stolt MH, Baker JC (1995) Evaluation of National Wetland Inventory maps to inventory wetlands in the southern blue ridge of Virginia. Wetlands 15:346–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suloway L, Hubbell M (1994) Wetland resources of Illinois: an analysis and atlas. Illinois Natural History Survey Special Publication 15. Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, IL, USA

  • Tang Z, Gu Y, Dai Z, Li Y, LaGrange T, Bishop A, Drahota J (2015) Examining playa wetland inundation conditions for National Wetland Inventory, soil survey geographic database and LiDAR data. Wetlands 35:641–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Therneau TM, Atkinson EJ (1997) An introduction to recursive partitioning using RPART routines. Technical Report, Mayo Foundation, Rochester, MN, USA

  • Tiner RW (1997) NWI maps: what they tell us. National Wetlands Newsletter 19:7–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiner RW (1999) Wetland indicators: a guide to wetland identification, delineation, classification, and mapping. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL

  • Tiner RW (2005) Assessing cumulative loss of wetland functions in the Nanticoke River watershed using enhanced National Wetlands Inventory data. Wetlands 25:405–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiner RW (ed) (2009) Status report for the National Wetlands Inventory Program: 2009. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Habitat and Resource Conservation, Branch of Resource and Mapping Support, Arlington, VA

  • Troy A, Wilson MA (2006) Mapping ecosystem services: practical challenges and opportunities in linking GIS and value transfer. Ecological Economics 60:435–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Meter KJ, Basu NB (2015) Signatures of human impact: size distributions and spatial organization of wetlands in the prairie pothole landscape. Ecological Applications 25:451–465

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wright C, Gallant A (2007) Improved wetland remote sensing in Yellowstone National Park using classification trees to combine TM imagery and ancillary environmental data. Remote Sensing of Environment 107:582–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu Q, Lane CR (2016) Delineation and quantification of wetland depressions in the prairie pothole region of North Dakota. Wetlands 36:215–227

  • Wu M, Kalma D, Treadwell-Steitz C (2014) Differential assessment of designations of wetland status using two delineation methods. Environmental Management 54:23–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a grant from the Illinois Department of Natural Resources. The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency funded NWI updates within Illinois. Thanks to Tom Heavisides for facilitating the project, and to the Wetland Science Program of the Illinois Natural History Survey for wetland delineation data. Thanks to two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA

    Jeffrey W. Matthews, Dennis Skultety & Michael P. Ward

  2. Illinois Natural History Survey, Prairie Research Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA

    Dennis Skultety, Bradley Zercher, Michael P. Ward & Thomas J. Benson

Authors
  1. Jeffrey W. Matthews
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dennis Skultety
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bradley Zercher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael P. Ward
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Thomas J. Benson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey W. Matthews.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Matthews, J.W., Skultety, D., Zercher, B. et al. Field Verification of Original and Updated National Wetlands Inventory Maps in three Metropolitan Areas in Illinois, USA. Wetlands 36, 1155–1165 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-016-0836-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-016-0836-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation