PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING & REMOTE SENSING
August 2016
617
Future Landsat Data Needs at the Local and
State Levels: An AmericaView Perspective
Ramesh Sivanpillai and Russell G. Congalton
Abstract
Earth observation imagery collected by the series of Landsat
satellites constitutes the longest and most consistent collec-
tion of moderate spatial resolution remotely sensed data.
Feedback from the Landsat user community has played an
important role in assessing its utility and making improve-
ments to future Landsat missions. The United States Geolog-
ical Survey (
USGS
) and the National Aeronautical and Space
Administration (
NASA
) continue to solicit from user commu-
nities. This paper describes the outcome of soliciting input
from experts associated with AmericaView (
AV
), a non-profit
organization aimed at promoting remote sensing applica-
tions in the
US
. The
AV
community identified the importance
of rigorously calibrated Landsat data for
LULC
applications
at the state level and made several recommendations for
future Landsat missions. Recommendations suggested by the
community of
AV
experts provide extremely valuable insights
to
USGS
and
NASA
to further their discussions about the design
and operation of future Landsat missions.
Introduction
Earth Observation (
EO
) imagery collected by Landsat satel-
lites 1-5, 7, and 8 constitutes the longest and most consistent
collection of moderate spatial resolution remotely sensed data
for the entire world. Landsat data are unique in many ways
due to their characteristics (e.g., multispectral wavelengths,
swath width, and moderate spatial resolution), and repeat
global coverage (Loomis
et al
., 2015). New data collected
by Landsat-7 and -8 are continuously being added to this
archive.
EO
data collected by other satellites are often com-
pared and calibrated against Landsat data (Hill and Aifado-
poulou, 1990; van Wagtendonk
et al
., 2004; Chander
et al
.,
2008). Landsat data are widely used for mapping land cover
(e.g., Gong
et al
., 2013; Homer
et al
., 2015), and monitoring/
mapping changes in the Earth surface phenomena (e.g., Ma-
cLean and Congalton, 2013 and Sleeter
et al
. 2013), and the
number of such applications have vastly increased since the
US Geological Survey (
USGS
) opened the Landsat Data archive
to users for no-cost (Wulder
et al
., 2012). This availability of
no-cost Landsat data has also led to impressive developments
such as the Global Forest Cover Change project (Hansen
et
al
., 2013), Global Food Security-Support Analysis Data at
30m Project (
/
index.html
) and LandsatLook Viewer (
landsatlook.usgs.gov
).
Additional information about the Landsat program, imagery,
and applications are available at
USGS
(
landsat.usgs.gov
) and
NASA
(
landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov
) websites.
Since the launch of first Landsat in 1972, both minor and
major changes have been made to the sensor design and the
characteristics of
EO
data collected by subsequent Landsat
missions (Loveland and Dwyer, 2012). For example, the
spatial resolution of data collected by sensors (excluding the
thermal band) onboard Landsat-4, -5 and -7 was improved
from 80 m to 30 m. Similarly, the recently launched Land-
sat-8 collects data in two additional spectral bands (coastal
blue and cirrus). Finally, radiometric resolution has increased
from 6 to 7 bits in early Landsat sensors to 8 bit for Landsat-4,
-5, and 7 to 12-bit for Landsat-8. Input provided by the user
community has also resulted in additional minor and major
modifications. Both
USGS
and
NASA
continue to solicit input
from the user community to ensure that data collected by
future Landsat missions meets their needs and requirements.
Currently, discussions are underway regarding future
Landsat satellites (Loveland and Dwyer, 2012; Kelly and
Holm, 2014), and the
USGS
and
NASA
are actively soliciting
input from the Landsat user community. With the exponential
increase in the number of users and applications involving
Landsat data (Wulder
et al.
, 2012), input provided by various
user communities are of the utmost importance. These inputs
can be in the form of (1) what has worked well for past and
current Landsat missions, and (2) improvements that should
be made to future missions that will enhance the overall value
of the Landsat program and the
EO
data collected by them.
However, soliciting input from this vast user community
is a monumental task given their large number, geographic
spread, and data needs. Users are affiliated with academia,
research organizations, government agencies, non-profits, and
private companies and work on applications ranging from
global, continental, national, regional, state, and local levels.
It is difficult to obtain input from such a diverse group of
users using a single methodology/survey instrument. Hence,
it is necessary to obtain inputs from smaller, more focused
or targeted groups. This manuscript describes the outcome
of soliciting input on future Landsat needs from the remote
sensing experts and practitioners from academic institutions
associated with an organization called AmericaView (
AV
).
AmericaView
AV
is a non-profit organization consist-
ing of a “nationally coordinated network of remote sensing
scientists and practitioners who work with the
USGS
Land
Remote Sensing program (Landenberger
et al
., 2011)”.
AV
operates as a network of 41 StateView (
SV
) consortia such as
WisconsinView, TexasView, etc. Each
SV
is headed by an aca-
demic institution from that state and is designated as the lead
institution for that
SV
. Other academic institutions, govern-
ment agencies, non-profit organizations, and private com-
panies in that state can be part of the
SV
consortia. A remote
sensing expert from the lead institution serves as the Principal
Investigator (
PI
). One or more experts from the lead or other
Ramesh Sivanpillai is with the Department of Botany & Wyo-
ming GIS Center, University of Wyoming, 1000 E. University
Ave., Laramie, WY 82071, USA (
).
Russell G. Congalton is with the Department of Natural
Resources & the Environment, University of New Hampshire,
114 James Hall, 56 College Road, Durham, NH 03824 USA.
Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing
Vol. 82, No. 8, August 2016, pp. 617–623.
0099-1112/16/617–623
© 2016 American Society for Photogrammetry
and Remote Sensing
doi: 10.14358/PERS.82.8.617
