Beaver-Driven Peatland Ecotone Dynamics: Impoundment Detection Using Lidar and Geomorphon Analysis
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Major comments:
- Need to improve Introduction. Leave here literature review about beaver. Add some national and global data and reviews on beaver and its interaction with ecosystems.
- Move facts on local bear population and data on protected study area to Methods (Study area).
- Objective and motivation should be rewritten
- Results should be separated from Methods section
- There is no clear Methodology of different RS data comparison between each other and from the point of view of Beaver (dams or ponds identification or quantification? or to evaluate beaver population?)
- My main question is: one can make fast UAV orthophotoplan (300 hectares~ one day) and then identify beaver activity sites with high detail (15-30 cm) during one more day, so why so many datasets and methods, what is scientific novelty? Taking in consideration that you already new old ponds and need to search for new ones or abandoned ones (monitoring).
Minor comments
- 21-29. Would be also reasonable to say about negatibe beaver impact to ecosystems to balance this paragraph.
- It is also necessary to describe conservation status of Beaver as well as impact from human (game, procurement, poaching?) which is partly described in the figure 1.
- 35-45 Looks better in Methods (Study site) neither in Introduction
- 64-75 Better to outline results of these studies relevant to current study.
- 76-79 Under current motivation (RS data - focused), the objective should be like "Feasibility of RS data use for beaver". What was the main idea? to study RS methods and data application for beaver? or to study the beaver itself? (by RS methods)?
- I dont observe "qualitatively evaluation of a multifaceted approach" in current studyÑŽ Sounds like forced argument.
- 98-99 not channels but spectral bands
- 111-112 Reference
- 107-115 need more effort to describe figures. Especially figure 4. Why another image additional to RGB? Why its red? What in NIR band for? Try to calculate NDVI by raster calculator - its simple.
- 125. Product (only one)
- 126 Why only bands. You can calculate a number of spectral indices based on RGB and NIR bands - they help to improve classification.
- Need data on sample plots, etalons or training sample.
- How the classification was verified? did you use verification(test) sample
- Please check the results of classification Fugure 5 (see FIG_A in reviewer files) - the floodplain is not totally covered with Broadleaf/Needleaf forests. They look like bushes/shrubland on orthophoto and on photograph too.
- 133 hillshade and slope for BEM?
- 134-125 Reference ot method of strategy
- 135-139 need to know the point density of LAS and size of raster cell
- Incorrect colours on figure 6. Areas marked on my FIG_b look like steep slopes while they are not.
- Figure 7. Forests seem to be 38 meter high. This looks like really very high. Check please.
- 163 Soulds like introduction
- Figure 10 some noise removal may be applicable
- Please provide which dams were successfully or unsuccessfully validated?
- 168-170 where is TR-253 on the figures?
- Figure 11 need GPS location of photographs and on map too
- 175 The text is the Discussion. there are some minor results provided in Methods. Results section should be provided.
- Well I dont see the process and result of Geomorphon "qualitative use" of Geomorphon. I understand that you already knew the sites and just found them on RS image.
- 187 Some quantification for such ranking?
- 181-278 this is somewhy a-lot-of-text descriprion of RS sources and their applicability, enlistment of some pros and cons of different RS data. This enlistment is not structured, it has no quantitative evaluations, some qualitative evaluations are heterogenous and thus different RS data can not be compared to each other. May be packed into simple table but need methodology "how you planned to compare RS data, better with some crossvalidation approaches etc".
- 279 -298 this is somewhy compressed significant Results. Need more data - 1990, 2000, 2010 RS data and process and results of beaver sites detection on them.
- 282-286 Beaver activity may significantly vary within decadal period.
Comments for author File: Comments.rar
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Review of the manuscript ID land-1425260 entitled: Beaver-driven peatland ecotone dynamics: impoundment detection using Lidar and Geomorphon analysis
The paper addresses the important issue of remote detection of beaver reservoirs and dams along the boreal peatland ecotones surrounding Cranberry Glades Botanical Area (a National Natural Landmark, mountainous West Virginia). The Authors developed a new method for detecting ponds and dams, based on high resolution LiDAR and orthophoto data and geomorphon analysis. This novel approach allowed them to identify and reconstruct variable patterns of surface hydrology associated with beaver ponds and dams. The problem addressed is important from an ecological point of view. Beaver activity regulates local hydrological conditions, and the rise in water level due to dam construction affects important climatic parameters such as carbon retention and methanogenesis, and acts as a buffer against drought and fire. The study determined the dynamics of beaver activity in the last three decades on the naturally unique and endangered "Arctic Island" in the southern High Alleghenies. This is a very well conceptualized and implemented study. However, I found some shortcomings that should have been corrected before publishing this study.
General comments.
Introduction. The introduction should lead the reader step by step to justify the research problem undertaken by referring to the known state of the art. In general, this introduction is well written, but it lacks reference to the geomorphons method used by the Authors (except for one reference in the last paragraph of the introduction). Although the way they used it in their study is novel, the method itself has been in use for more than a decade and there are already many papers describing the use of both macro-, meso- and micro landforms. I am convinced that in the introduction, the Authors should refer to this method and its applications to date at different scales and in different environments (also Arctic river valleys).
Method: The method involves a multi-step process and uses a variety of data sources. Therefore, in my opinion, the description of the methodology should be supported by a flowchart showing graphically step by step all the stages of the research procedure.
Results and Discussion. Firstly, I am in favour of splitting the Results and Discussion as separate chapters. This organizes the study conducted and gives the reader a clear insight into what the authors' contribution to the state of the art is.
Secondly, again there is no reference to the use of geomorphons. This method was used not only by its authors (to whom the authors refer [28]) but also, among others, for analyses of changes in river valley environments. Neither in the introduction nor in the discussion is there any reference to this work. This should be supplemented.
Specific comments.
Figure 6. elevations in the legend are probably in metres above sea level (a.s.l.). Abbreviation should be added after Elevation m a.s.l. The altitude difference is 34 m, but the colour scale adopted means that the highest parts are represented by white planes suggesting flattening. Hillshade visualization (Figure 8.) does not show that they are flat at all. This colour scale is not very well chosen. The troughs, on several passages have very similar colour to the peaks.
I would like to emphasize the applicability of this study and its importance for scientists involved in restoring natural conditions in river valley environments. I believe that this manuscript fits well within the scope of LAND and will be an interesting contribution to the readers of this journal.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
