What is the ASPRS height standards for low, med and high vegetation

[David Grant]

Hi,

Could someone please send me the link to the ASPRS standard that details the specified heights of low, medium and high vegetation. 

I am currently manually classifying points and want to attached the correct classification to the vegetation.

Thanks in advance!

Dave 

[Blake Scott]

Did you ever get an answer?

[Irf]

Hi David,

Khosravipour et al., 2014, pp 866, mentions it as follows:

"The American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ASPRS) classifies lidar points into three layers:

low vegetation (0.5 m <height<= 2.0 m), medium vegetation (2.0 <height<= 5.0 m), high vegetation (5.0 <height)

(ASPRS, 2008) "

BUT I haven't been lucky to find any vegetation classification criteria in the document (ASPRS, 2008). Intergovernmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping’s(ICSM) refers to a 'modified ASPRS classification scheme' in this document (page 9 or 33), which closely follows Khosravipour et al., 2014. I would assume that the scheme given in Khosravipour et al., 2014 is ASPRS's classification criteria until I read the original ASPRS document/report. Please share if you happened to find it.

Kind regards,

Irf

[Terje Mathisen]

Irf wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Khosravipour et al., 2014

> <http://www.asprs.org/a/publications/pers/2014journals/PE&RS_Sept_2014_Flipping/HTML/files/assets/basic-html/page53.html>, pp

> 866, mentions it as follows:
>

> /"The American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing
> (ASPRS) classifies lidar points into three layers:/
>
> /low vegetation (0.5 m <height<= 2.0 m), //medium vegetation (2.0
> <height<= 5.0 m), //high vegetation (5.0 <height)/
>
> /(ASPRS, 2008)/ "

>
>
> BUT I haven't been lucky to find any vegetation classification
> criteria in the document (ASPRS, 2008)

> <http://www.asprs.org/a/society/committees/standards/asprs_las_format_v12.pdf>. Intergovernmental
> Committee on Surveying and Mapping’s(ICSM <http://www.icsm.gov.au/>)
> refers to a '/modified ASPRS classification scheme'/ in this document
> <http://www.icsm.gov.au/elevation/NZ-LiDAR_Specifications_and_Tender_Template.pdf> (page

> 9 or 33), which closely follows Khosravipour et al., 2014. I would

> *assume *that the scheme given in Khosravipour et al., 2014 is ASPRS's

> classification criteria until I read the original ASPRS
> document/report. Please share if you happened to find it.

The height boundaires probably should depend on local conditions if the
resulting numbers are going to be useful:

A forest in northern Norway will have most trees 3-6 m tall (mostly
mountain birch), while a California redwood forest has pretty much
nothing in the medium range.

For my orienteering mapping here in mountain and coastal areas in Norway
I've settled on 0.3 < low < 1.3 < medium < 3 < high.

In areas with better soil and growing conditions I raise the medium vs
high boundary to 4 m.

Terje

>
>
> Kind regards,
> Irf
>
>
>
> On Thursday, January 14, 2016 at 5:03:55 AM UTC+11, Blake Scott wrote:
>
> Did you ever get an answer?
>
> On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 3:16:51 AM UTC-5, David Grant wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Could someone please send me the link to the ASPRS standard
> that details the specified heights of low, medium and high
> vegetation.
>
> I am currently manually classifying points and want to
> attached the correct classification to the vegetation.
>
> Thanks in advance!
> Dave
>

> --
> Download LAStools at
> http://lastools.org
> http://rapidlasso.com
> Be social with LAStools at
> http://facebook.com/LAStools
> http://twitter.com/LAStools
> http://linkedin.com/groups/LAStools-4408378
> Manage your settings at
> http://groups.google.com/group/lastools/subscribe


--
- <Terje.M...@tmsw.no>
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"