IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i5p655-d804985.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Practical Assessment of Using sUASs (Drones) to Detect and Quantify Wright Fishhook Cactus ( Sclerocactus wrightiae L.D. Benson) Populations in Desert Grazinglands

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas H. Bates

    (Tuscarora Field Office, Bureau of Land Management, Elko District 3900 E Idaho Street, Elko, NV 89801, USA)

  • Val J. Anderson

    (Department of Plant and Wildlife Sciences, Brigham Young University, 4105 LSB, Provo, UT 84602, USA)

  • Robert L. Johnson

    (Department of Biology, Brigham Young University, 4102 LSB, Provo, UT 84602, USA)

  • Loreen Allphin

    (Department of Plant and Wildlife Sciences, Brigham Young University, 4105 LSB, Provo, UT 84602, USA)

  • Dustin Rooks

    (Richfield Field Office, Bureau of Land Management, 150 E 900 N, Richfield, UT 84701, USA)

  • Steven L. Petersen

    (Department of Plant and Wildlife Sciences, Brigham Young University, 4105 LSB, Provo, UT 84602, USA)

Abstract

Obtaining accurate plant population estimates has been integral in listing, recovery, and delisting species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973 and for monitoring vegetation in response to livestock grazing. Obtaining accurate population estimates remains a daunting and labor-intensive task. Small unmanned aircraft systems (sUASs or drones) may provide an effective alternative to ground surveys for rare and endangered plants. The objective of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of sUASs (DJI Phantom 4 Pro) for surveying the Wright fishhook cactus ( Sclerocactus wrightiae ), a small (1–8 cm diameter) endangered species endemic to grazinglands in the southwest desert of Utah, USA. We assessed sUAS-based remotely sensed imagery to detect and count individual cacti compared to ground surveys and estimated optimal altitudes (10 m, 15 m, or 20 m) for collecting imagery. Our results demonstrated that low altitude flights provided the best detection rates ( p < 0.001) and counts ( p < 0.001) compared to 15 m and 20 m. We suggest that sUASs can effectively locate cactus within grazingland areas, but should be coupled with ground surveys for higher accuracy and reliability. We also acknowledge that these technologies may have limitations in effectively detecting small, low-growing individual plants such as the small and obscure fishhook cactus species.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas H. Bates & Val J. Anderson & Robert L. Johnson & Loreen Allphin & Dustin Rooks & Steven L. Petersen, 2022. "A Practical Assessment of Using sUASs (Drones) to Detect and Quantify Wright Fishhook Cactus ( Sclerocactus wrightiae L.D. Benson) Populations in Desert Grazinglands," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-13, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:5:p:655-:d:804985
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/5/655/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/5/655/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Julien Martin & Holly H Edwards & Matthew A Burgess & H Franklin Percival & Daniel E Fagan & Beth E Gardner & Joel G Ortega-Ortiz & Peter G Ifju & Brandon S Evers & Thomas J Rambo, 2012. "Estimating Distribution of Hidden Objects with Drones: From Tennis Balls to Manatees," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-8, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Coşku Kasnakoğlu, 2016. "Investigation of Multi-Input Multi-Output Robust Control Methods to Handle Parametric Uncertainties in Autopilot Design," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-36, October.
    2. Bonneau, Mathieu & Martin, Julien & Peyrard, Nathalie & Rodgers, Leroy & Romagosa, Christina M. & Johnson, Fred A., 2019. "Optimal spatial allocation of control effort to manage invasives in the face of imperfect detection and misclassification," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 392(C), pages 108-116.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:5:p:655-:d:804985. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.