Remote Sensing Assessment of Forest Fire Damage Degree in Bilahe Forest Farm,Inner Mongolia

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2018.01.013

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to evaluate the forest fire loss occurred on May 2,2017 in Bilahe Forest Form in Inner Mongolia,the Landsat8 satellite images which were pictured pro and post the fire were selected as the study data,the difference Normalized Burn Ratio(dNBR) was calculated by means of the two images.Through the combination of visual interpretation and mathematical statistics,the fire severity evaluation index was constructed.The damage of forest fire in Bilahe forest was quantitatively evaluated.By using the field survey GPS data and GF-2 satellite data to verify the damage degree of the forest fire,the grading accuracy was 86.39%.The results show that the moderate damage area is the largest in Bilahe Forest Farm in Inner Mongonlia,which is 4 685.09 hm²,accounting for 40.35% of the total burned area,followed by low damage area of 4 213.1hm²,accounting for 36.28% of the total burned area,high damage area is 1 031.03hm²,accounting for 8.88% of the total burned area,and the unburned damage area is 906.57hm²,accounting for 7.81% of the total burned area.The affected forest of the typical vegetation is mainly distributed in the moderate damage and low damage area.The affected grassland is mainly distributed in the low damage area.

Key words: forest fire, difference Normalized Burn Ratio, remote sensing, evaluation index, loss assessment

CLC Number:

LIU Shuchao, CHEN Xiaozhong, QIN Xianlin, SUN Guifen, LI Xiaotong. Remote Sensing Assessment of Forest Fire Damage Degree in Bilahe Forest Farm,Inner Mongolia[J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2018, (1): 90-95.

Figures/Tables 10

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Tab.1

Tab.2

Fig.4

Tab.3

Fig.5

Tab.4

Fig.6

References 18

[1]	贾振虎. 中条山林区一场森林火灾的损失评估[J]. 陕西林业科技, 2017(1):35-37.
[2]	Odion D C, Hanson C T. Fire severity in conifer forests of the Sierra Nevada,California[J]. Ecosystems, 2006,9(7):1177-1189.
[3]	常禹, 陈宏伟, 胡远满, 等. 林火烈度评价及其空间异质性研究进展[J]. 自然灾害学报, 2012,21(2):28-34.
[4]	Key C H, Benson N C. Landscape assessment:sampling and analysis methods[C]// USDA Forest Service,Rocky Mountain Research Station General Technical Report.Ogden,Utah:United States Department of Agriculture, 2006.
[5]	Maria Jose Lopez Garcia, V . Caselles . Mapping burns and natural reforestation using thematic mapper data[J]. Geocarto International, 1991,6(1):31-37.
[6]	Wimberly M C, Reilly M J. Assessment of fire severity and species diversity in the Southern Appalachians using Landsat TM and ETM + imagery[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2007,108:189-197.
[7]	朱曦. 基于环境减灾小卫星数据的森林火灾灾情监测方法研究[D]. 北京:中国林业科学研究院, 2013.
[8]	张春桂, 黄朝法, 潘卫华, 等. MODIS数据在南方丘陵地区局地森林火灾面积评估中的应用研究[J]. 应用气象学报, 2007,18(1):119-123.
[9]	张凌峰. 内蒙古毕拉河林业局森林资源现状及分布特点[J]. 内蒙古林业调查设计, 2013,36(1):52-54.
[10]	王婷婷, 李山山, 李安, 等. 基于Landsat8卫星影像的北京地区土地覆盖分类[J]. 中国图像图形学报, 2015,20(9):1275-1284.
[11]	David P.Roy, Luigi Boschetti, Simon N. Trigg . Remote sensing of fire severity:assessing the performance of the normalized burn ratio[J]. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 2006,3(1):112-116 doi: 10.1109/LGRS.2005.858485
[12]	覃先林. 林火卫星遥感监测[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2016.
[13]	Hoy E E, French N H F, Turetsky M R, et al. Evaluating the potential of Landsat TM/ETM + imagery for assessing fire severity in alaskan Black Spruce Forests[J]. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 2008,17:500-514. doi: 10.1071/WF08107
[14]	Soverel N O, Perrakis D D B, Coops N C. Estimating burn severity from Landsat dNBR and RdNBR Indices across Western Canada[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2010,114(9):1896-1909. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2010.03.013
[15]	Allen J L, Sorbel B. Assessing the differenced normalized burn ratio’s ability to map burn severity in the boreal forest and tundra ecosystems of Alaska’s National Parks[J]. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 2008,17(4):463-475. doi: 10.1071/WF08034
[16]	Veraverbeke S, Lhermitte S, Verstraeten W W, et al. Evalution of pre/post-fire differenced spectral indices for assessing burn severity in a mediterranean environment with Landsat thematic mapper[J]. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 2011,32:3521-3537. doi: 10.1080/01431161003752430
[17]	杨达, 吴志伟, 梁宇, 等. 林火烈度的量化指标构建[J]. 林业资源管理, 2014(6):140-145.
[18]	杨伟. 基于遥感的黑龙江流域火烧迹地及其植被恢复研究[D]. 北京:中国科学院大学, 2013.

受害程度分级	最小值	最大值	平均值	标准差	像元数
未受害	-0.1278	0.0602	-0.0341	0.0488	30
轻度受害	0.1796	0.3844	0.2661	0.0623	30
中度受害	0.3975	0.7243	0.5681	0.0771	30
重度受害	0.7696	0.9494	0.8807	0.0402	30

受害程度分级	dNBR值
未受害	≤0.1
轻度受害	0.1~0.38
中度受害	0.38~0.72
重度受害	≥0.72

受害程度分级	面积/hm²
未受害	906.57
轻度受害	4213.10
中度受害	4685.09
重度受害	1031.03

受害程度分级	森林			草地
受害程度分级	正确像元数	错分像元数	正确率/%	正确像元数	错分像元数	正确率/%
未受害	45	5	90	44	6	88
轻度受害	40	10	80	41	9	82
中度受害	45	5	90	46	4	92
重度受害	41	9	82	9	1	90
总计	171	29	85.5	140	20	87.5