results and discussion

APPLIED REMOTE SENSING TECHNOLOGYTO ANALYZETHE LAND COVER/LAND USE CHANGEAT TISZA LAKEByYudhi Gunawan * and Tamás János *** Department of Land Use and Region Development** Department of Water and Environmental ManagementUNIVERSITY OF DEBRECEN

CONTENTS• INTRODUCTION• STUDY AREA• ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES• MATERIALS AND METHOD• RESULTS AND DISCUSSION• CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

INTRODUCTIONOBJECTIVEto study the land cover change andfluctuation of the environmental conditionsat the Tisza Lake and surrounding areausing satellite imagery

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES• After the collapse of the command economyand industrial structures, because of thechange of energy source to nuclear power,the rising need of natural protection and theincreasing purposes of tourism, theobjectives of this lake have grown andtherefore there are urgent demands forappropriate strategies to avoid contradictionamong purposes.

MATERIALS AND METHODMATERIALS• Landsat TM5, 08-0707-1987• Landsat ETM7, 20-0808-2000• Orthophoto• Topography Map• CLC100

METHODOLOGY• Preprocessing- Image rectification and co-registration-Making subset• Unsupervised Classification- Using ISODATA method- Applied to 7 LC/LU classes based on CLC100• Classification Comparison- Using accuracy assessment with > 250 points

METHODOLOGY• Change Detection- Multi-date compositeimage method- Image differencingtechnique for modeling• Investigation ofthe ChangesFigure 2. Model maker to perform change detection

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION• Image Rectification and Restoration- Landsat TM, The RMSE is 13 mFigure 3 : Control pointerrors for Landsat TM co-registration- Landsat ETM, The RMSE 14 mFigure 4 : Control pointerrors for Landsat ETMco-registration

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION• ClassificationFigure 5: Unsupervisedclassification of Landsat TM

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONFigure 6: Unsupervisedclassification of Landsat ETM

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION• Classification ComparisonFigure 7: Location of the 256 random sampling points shown inthe Landsat ETM viewer (left) and CLC100 viewer (right)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONTable 1. Error Matrix Resulting from Classifying Training SetPixels at Landsat TM

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONTable 2. Error Matrix Resulting from Classifying Training SetPixels at Landsat ETM

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION• The overall accuracy of TM (26%) and ETM(38%) indicates a fairly low agreement withthe reference CLC100 classification;- Paper based interpretation was applied inCLC100, Hungary and then it was transformedto digital form by scanning (Maucha(Maucha, , 2004)- Assessing 2 levels of LC/LU categoriesCLC100 was not representative enough- The gap over 3 or 10 years

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION• Table 3. Kappa Index of Landsat ETM unsupervisedclassification

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION• Table 4. Kappa Index of Landsat TM unsupervisedclassification

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION• Change DetectionTable 5. The summary matrix of the change detection betweenLandsat TM 1987 and Landsat ETM 2000

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONWetlands- Water-body (15%)relatively big drought duringthe 1990’s and then when thenormal precipitation returned,most of the wetlands werecovered back by water- Forested Area (13%)due to the new environmentalprotection policy in Hungary

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONExcept Water bodyForest (26%), Wetlands (14%)Arable landSince the Hungarian agriculturalproduction exceeds the limits of the EUregulations, the less fertile soils arereannexed to natural conservation or theprocess of forestation has startedSettlements;19%(Recreational Area, Closed Garden)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONMisinterpretation on Settlements• Environmental analysisThe mixed pixelsFor the moment it could not be carried out due totime limitation, missing data or difficulties to obtaindata of total suspended solids, heavy metals,sediment quality, etc related to land cover change.

CONCLUSION ANDSUGGESTION• The accuracy assessment was fairly low;- Other classification method should be applied forinstance Supervised Classification• The mixed pixels have to be overcome by applying SpectralMixture Analysis and Fuzzy classification• Increase the natural protection area (e.g wetlands, forest)• The CLC100 is not representative enough;- Therefore further study has to be done using CLC50that has been updated to the geographic condition ofHungary• The environmental analysis has not been carried out asplanned but further research is still going on

KÖSZÖNÖM A FIGYELMET !