GEOG 413: Advanced GIS R. Wheate and P. Bai Landslide Susceptibility Mapping of Highway 16 Area East of Terrace, B.C.

Adam Simons April. 2, 2012

Introduction: On May 29, 2007 an estimated 30,000 cubic meter landslide occured covering a stretch of Highway 16 roughly 37km east of Terrace, British Columbia; this being the second slide in the area in three years (CTV News, 2007). Landslides are a serious natural hazard that can cause enormous amounts of property damage and, when located near human infrastructure, often fatalities as it did in the case near Terrace. The purpose of this study was to examine and analyze the terrain surrounding a stretch of Highway 16 just east of Terrace for its likelihood to fail via landslide. For this analysis, spatial data for slope, which controls gravitational force s effect, aspect, which controls solar energy and water regimes, distance to water such as streams and rivers, which acts to cut into slopes weakening them and supplying moisture and sediment in high flows, and bedrock geology, which is the main structural control, were used. Data Implemented: Vector topographic data were gathered for the 103I09 BC mapsheet at 1:50,000 scale from Geogratis.ca; this being the area containing a large section of Highway 16 just east of Terrace, B.C.. These data used for this analysis include the line features streams and roads, and the polygon feature water bodies which contains rivers and lakes. Vector polygon geological data were gathered from the B.C. Ministry of Energy and Mines website for the region including Queen Charlotte Islands and the North Coast at a 1:250,000 scale, and a 25m DEM was downloaded from the UNBC download directory for the 103I 1:250,000 mapsheet. Methods, Data Analysis, and Results: The idea for this study originated from an article by Cevik and Topal (2003) reviewed earlier in the year for the Geography 413 class, whereby a landslide susceptibility map was generated for terrain around a natural gas pipeline in Turkey using weights for each factor to assign priority, or influence on the event likelihood. Some of the methodology must be credited to Vikki St-Hilaire and her similar project from a previous years class, who did a great job with her landslide hazard mapping in the southwestern B.C. region. Information used to determine the weights applied to the aspect, slope, and distance to stream/water layers was gathered from a paper by Dai et al. (2001) which analyzed landslide susceptibility in Hong-Kong, and for the geological weighting, a government publication entitled, Chapter 4: Intrusive Igneous Rocks, was used along with Dai et al. I did not have significant geological knowledge to apply to this problem, but I used basic knowledge in assigning priority for which type is most likely to fail. For example, the geological data contained three types of intrusive rock types for the study area,

and I determined the least likely to fail were the types with the most quartz mineral content in them, which was determined from the government article. Limestone and calcareous sedimentary rocks were deemed the most likely to fail, followed by volcanic, then sedimentary. The factors used in the analysis and the priority values assigned to each class within them are shown below, with the highest value equalling the most likely to contribute to landsliding, and the lowest equalling the least likely. Other factors that could have been included are vegetation type cover, elevation, soil moisture, land use, previous landslide events, and others (Cevik and Topal, 2003).
Table 1: The four factors that contribute to landslide events and the priority values assigned to each class within the factor. Higher values = more influence on slide.

Factor Bedrock Geology

Class Quartz dioritic intrusive rocks Rhyolite,felsic volcanic rocks Granodioritic intrusive rocks Limestone,marble,calcareous sedimentary rocks Volcanoclastic rocks Calc-alkaline volcanic rocks Intrusive rocks, undivided Undivided sedimentary rocks <50m 50-100m 100-150 150-200 >200m 0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 >50 N NE E SE S SW W NW

Priority 1 5 2 8 6 7 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 6 5 4 1 2 5 7 8 6 4 3

Distance to Streams/Rivers (2 layers)

Slope ()

Aspect

The following steps were followed to generate the final landslide susceptibility map output: Gathered data from the three sources mentioned earlier for geology, elevation, roads, streams, and water bodies. Converted the ASCII DEM to an ESRI Grid and re-projected each of the vectors to the DEM projection- NAD83 UTM Zone 9- except for the geology layer which was already in the correct projection. Coordinate system: GCS North American 1983. Clipped the geology layer and DEM to the study area extent given by the streams layer. Generated the slope (degrees) and aspect rasters from the DEM layer and classified/symbolized them based on the classes shown above. The DEM and the resulting two layers are shown below:

Figure 1: Digital Elevation Model.

Figure 2: Slope.

Figure 3: Aspect.

Generated a straight-line distance raster from both the stream layer (containing all small mountain streams) and the water body layer (containing the main Skeena River which the highway follows and small mountain lakes) and classified/symbolized as shown in table 1 (i.e., <50m, 50-100m, etc.). These layers are shown below:

Figure 4: Distance to streams.

Figure 5: Distance to rivers and lakes.

Converted the geology vector polygon layer (shown below in figure 6) into a raster based on the rock type field, and cut out all rock types that were not present in the study area.

Figure 6: Geological data from BC Ministry of Energy and Mines.

Each raster was then reclassified so that each class reflected the weights shown in table 1. For example, the areas classified as intrusive rocks, undivided were changed to a 3, as this rock type is the third least-likely to cause a landslide.

After the five raster layers were generated and reclassified to show weights (priority), they were input to the raster calculator in ArcMap with the expression: landslide_susceptibility = 0.20*[geology] + 0.20*[slope] + 0.20*[aspect] + 0.20*[distance_water] + 0.20*[distance_streams], the initial output of which is shown in figure 7. For the final map output, the resulting classes created by the summation of each layer were reclassified/symbolized to a fiveclass system from Very High susceptibility to Very Low, as shown in figure 9. A second map was generated using information from Cevik and Topal (2003) whereby each factor themselves, not the classes within each factor, were ranked on likelihood to trigger an event. The authors rank geology as the most important factor, followed by slope, distance to streams, with aspect being the least important. The raster calulator equation is shown here: landslide_susceptibility = 0.35*[geology] + 0.25*[slope] + 0.10*[aspect] + 0.15*[distance_water] + 0.15*[distance_streams]. This result was not used because of the odd patterns caused by the over-weighting of the geology polygons, but the rough output is shown in figure 8.

Figure 7: Rough output of landslide susceptibility using constant weights. Lighter areas represent more susceptible terrain; dark, less susceptible.

Figure 8: Rough output of landslide susceptibility using varied weights from Cevik and Topal (2003).

Figure 9: Final map result with overlying vector layers roads, streams, and water bodies. Further information is provided in the formal PDF map.

Conclusion: As shown in the final PDF map attached with this report, as well as in the rough picture provided above, the majority of the highly landslide susceptible terrain (shown in red and orange) is located along the south-facing stream gullies running down the valley walls which lead towards the Skeena River and Highway 16. This also happens to be how the landslide in 2007 occured; forming in an upper valley and running a few kilometers down-slope to the highway. While the area immediately adjacent to the main road does not appear at risk of sliding, this map clearly shows there is risk in the nearby mountains that could affect transportation, and even river flow if large enough.

References:
Literature:

Cevik, E. and Topal, T. (2003). GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping for a problematic segment of the natural gas pipeline, Hendek (Turkey). Environmental Geology, 44: 949962. DOI 10.1007/s00254-003-0838-6. Chapter 4: Intrusive igneous rocks. Retrieved April 1, 2012. http://www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/publications/sheet/doc/g4_chapter_4.pdf CTV.ca News Staff (2007, May 29). Northern B.C. town still cut off after landslide. Retrieved April 2, 2012, from CTV News website. http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20070529/bc_mudslide_070529/ Dai, F.et al. (2001). Assessment of landslide susceptibility on the natural terrain of Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Environmental Geology, 40, 381-391. doi: 10.1007/s002540000163.
Digital Data Sources:

British Columbia Ministry of Energy and Mines. File directory: GeoFile 2005-5: Digital Geology Map of B.C.- Tile NN8-9 North Coast and Queen Charlotte Islands/ Haida Gwaii. http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geoscience/PublicationsCatalogue/DigitalGeologyMaps/Pag es/DigitalGeologyMapCoverage.aspx. Geogratis.ca. National Topographic Data Base. File directory: bndt_103i09_shp_en.zip. http://ftp2.cits.rncan.gc.ca/pub/bndt/50k_shp_en/103/i/. UNBC GIS Lab Data Download. http://www.gis.unbc.ca/resources/data_download/get_data.php.

Landslide Susceptibility Map for Highway 16 East of Terrace, B.C.

By Adam Simons

Hi

gh wa y1 6

Sk e en

a River

2.5

10 Kilometers

Legend
Streams Roads Rivers and Lakes

Landslide Susceptibility
Very High High Low Moderate Very Low

Created April 2, 2012 UNBC, Prince George, CA. Data from 103I09 1:50,000 mapsheet NAD83 UTM Zone 9 projection