This dataset contains the boundaries of conservation areas from Historic England, as well as other data found on data.gov.uk and currently contains a number of duplicate areas we are working to remove. It can be used for informing developers if their prospective development is going to be in a conservation area.

Spatial representation of DOC's land management units defined by various acts of parliament and legislation. The attributes in this dataset are derived from the National Property and Land Information System (NaPALIS), which is a centralised database for all Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) and Department of Conservation (DOC) administered land. Public Conservation Land (abbreviated to PCL) parcels are defined geographically, recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values.New Zealand's Public Conservation Land is managed under four main laws.Conservation Act 1987National Parks Act 1980Reserves Act 1977Wildlife Act 1953These manifest in numerous different types of protected area, the most important of which are:National ParksConservation ParksNature ReservesScientific ReservesScenic ReservesRecreation (and other) ReservesN.B. Combining Public Conservation Land, with Marine Reserves and Sanctuaries to Protect Marine Mammals is collectively known as Public Conservation Areas (PCA).*****LICENCE*****This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA.*****DISCLAIMER***** 1. DOC makes no express or implied warranties as to the accuracy or completeness of the data or information, nor its suitability for any purpose. Errors are inevitably part of any database, and can arise by a number of means, from errors during field data collection, to errors during data entry. 2. DOC makes no warranties or representations as to possible infringement upon copyrights or other intellectual property rights of others in the data or information. 3. DOC will not accept liability for any direct, indirect, special or consequential damages, losses or expenses howsoever arising and relating to use, or lack of use, of the data or information supplied.*****GUIDELINES FOR THE USE OF THE INFORMATION***** 4. Care should be taken in deriving conclusions from any data or information supplied. 5. Any use of the data or information supplied should state when the data or information was acquired and that it may now be out-of-date.*****COPYRIGHT OBLIGATIONS***** 6. All proprietary rights to the intellectual property in the data or information remain with the Crown as its sole property. 7. Modification of the data and information or the addition of the information does not confer copyright or any other form of property of the original material to a user. 8. All maps or reports that are derived from the data or information must acknowledge the Crown copyright, in the following way: Crown Copyright: Department of Conservation Te Papa Atawhai [year]. 9. This information resource may be passed onto another party, in either hard copy or electronic form. If a user does this, then it is recommended that they also supply this metadata record with the information resource.

Nature-based solutions is a leading policy option for mitigating climate change. We mapped areas of potential restoration and conservation opportunities in the conterminous U.S. (CONUS). The potential for five scenarios were examined: increasing forest cover in urban centers, restoring historically forested areas that have been converted to grasslands, conserving pristine grasslands, rewetting peatlands, and conserving vulnerable tidal wetlands.

This hosted feature layer has been published in RI State Plane Feet NAD 83. Non-State Conservation lands are real property permanently protected from future development by fee simple ownership, conservation or other restrictive easements, or deed restrictions held or enforceable by recognized land protection organizations other than the State of Rhode Island. These include, but are not limited to, the Audubon Society of Rhode Island, The Nature Conservancy, RI municipal governments, The United States Fish & Wildlife Service, private land trusts and other conservation groups. In addition to permanent legally conserved land, a number of properties documented in this dataset are included in a category called "Conservation Intent." This designation applies to areas such as local parks, recreation areas, or lands associated with cluster sub-division developments that are not strictly protected by a fee simple or easement interest held by a recognized conservation organization. Instead they are considered protected by the good-will of the owners (both municipal and private) to prevent or restrict future development beyond the existing use.

This data is a spatial representation of the areas managed by the Missouri Department of Conservation as of January 2011.

The dataset contains polygons for conservation areas within the London Borough of Barnet. Conservation areas are those areas identified by the Local Planning Authority as having special architectural or historic interest which merits designation. Conservation area character appraisals, boundary maps and guidance notes can be downloaded from the Council’s website. This data is an active and changing record of conservation area boundaries in the London Borough of Barnet. Conservation Areas were introduced through the Civic Amenities Act 1967. They are ‘areas of special architectural or historic interest, the character and appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance’ (Section 69(1)(a) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990). Conservation Area status acknowledges the importance of an area, highlighting its real and potential attractiveness. It also means that the council’s efforts in the area are geared to preserving and enhancing its special character. **Footnote - Barnet is one of the Local Planning Authorities that received Government funding to improve their planning services through the Local Digital Fund. This aims to digitise Planning to make land and housing data easier to find, understand, use and trust. This data is also available on View planning and housing datasets with geographic location data on an interactive map here. Map of planning data for England | Planning Data (Conservation Areas) The maps also show statutory listed buildings (the data being provided by Barnet) Licence This dataset has been published by the London Borough of Barnet under the Open Government Licence (OGL) (v3). The licence has been applied following the Public Sector Geospatial Agreement 'presumption to publish' process in December 2022. Acknowledgements Please acknowledge the Information Provider through the following attribution statement: © London Borough of Barnet, 2025, OGL v3.0 Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right, 2025

Wildlands in New England is the first U.S. study to map and characterize within one region all conserved lands that, by design, allow natural processes to unfold with no active management or intervention. These “forever wild lands” include federal Wilderness areas along with diverse public and private natural areas and reserves. Knowing the precise locations of Wildlands, their characteristics, and their protection status is important as both a baseline for advancing conservation initiatives and an urgent call to action for supporting nature and society. Wildlands play a unique role in the integrated approach to conservation and land planning advanced by the Wildlands, Woodlands, Farmlands & Communities (WWF&C) initiative, which calls for: at least 70 percent of the region to be protected forest; Wildlands to occupy at least 10 percent of the land; and all existing farmland to be permanently conserved. This research was conducted by WWF&C partners Harvard Forest (Harvard University), Highstead Foundation, and Northeast Wilderness Trust, in collaboration with over one hundred conservation organizations and municipal, state, and federal agencies. This dataset contains the Geographical Information System (GIS) polygon layer of Wildlands created by this project and used in all analyses for the 2023 report. Another GIS layer will be updated as new Wildlands are brought to our attention or created and will be available at https://wildlandsandwoodlands.org/ for researchers.

Conservation planning in the Great Plains often depends on understanding the degree of fragmentation of the various types of grasslands and savannas that historically occurred in this region. To define ecological subregions of the Great Plains, we used a revised version of Kuchler’s (1964) map of the potential natural vegetation of the United States. The map was digitized from the 1979 physiographic regions map produced by the Bureau of Land Management, which added 10 physiognomic types. All analyses are based on data sources specific to the United States; hence, we only analyze the portion of the Great Plains occurring in the United States.We sought to quantify the current amount of rangeland in the US Great Plains converted due to 1) woody plant encroachment; 2) urban, exurban, and other forms of development (e.g., energy infrastructure); and 3) cultivation of cropland. At the time of this analysis, the most contemporary measure of land cover across the United States was the 2011 NLCD (Homer et al. 2015). One limitation of the NLCD is that some grasslands with high rates of productivity, such as herbaceous wetlands or grasslands along riparian zones, are misclassified as cropland. A second limitation is the inability to capture cropland conversion occurring after 2011 (Lark et al. 2015). Beginning in 2009 (and retroactively for 2008), the US Department of Agriculture - NASS has annually produced a Cropland Data Layer (CDL) for the United States from satellite imagery, which maps individual crop types at a 30-m spatial resolution. We used the annual CDLs from 2011 to 2017 to map the distribution of cropland in the Great Plains. We merged this map with the 2011 NLCD to evaluate the degree of fragmentation of grasslands and savannas in the Great Plains as a result of conversion to urban land, cropland, or woodland. We produced two maps of fragmentation (best case and worst case scenarios) that quantify this fragmentation at a 30 x 30 m pixel resolution across the US Great Plains, and make them available for download here. Resources in this dataset: Resource title: Data Dictionary for Figure 2 derived land cover of the US portion of the North American Great Plains File name: Figure2_Key for landcover classes.csv Resource title: Figure 1. Potential natural vegetation of US portion of the North American Great Plains, adapted from Kuchler (1964). File name: Figure1_Kuchler_GPRangelands.zip Resource description: Extracted grassland, shrubland, savanna, and forest communities in the US Great Plains from the revised Kuchler natural vegetation map Resource title: Figure 2. Derived land cover of the US portion of the North American Great Plains. File name: Figure2_Key for landcover classes.zip Resource description: The fNLCD-CDL product estimates that 43.7% of the Great Plains still consists of grasslands and shrublands, with the remainder consisting of 40.6% cropland, 4.4% forests, 3.0% UGC, 3.0% developed open space, 2.9% improved pasture or hay fields, 1.2% developed land, 1.0% water, and 0.2% barren land, with important regional and subregional variation in the extent of rangeland loss to cropland, forests, and developed land. Resource title: Figure 3. Variation in the degree of fragmentation of Great Plains measured in terms of distance to cropland, forest, or developed lands. File name: Figure3_bestcase_disttofrag.zip Resource description: This map depicts a “best case” scenario in which 1) croplands are mapped based only on the US Department of AgricultureNational Agricultural Statistics Service Cropland Data Layers (2011e2017), 2) all grass-dominated cover types including hay fields and improved pasture are considered rangelands, and 3) developed open space (as defined by the National Land Cover Database) are assumed to not be a fragmenting land cover type. Resource title: Figure 4. Variation in the degree of fragmentation of Great Plains measured in terms of distances to cropland, forest, or developed lands. File name: Figure4_worstcase_disttofrag.zip Resource description: This map depicts a ‘worst case’ scenario in which 1) croplands are mapped based on the US Department of AgricultureNational Agricultural Statistics Service Cropland Data Layers (2011e2017) and the 2011 National Land Cover Database (NLCD), 2) hay fields and improved pasture are not included as rangelands, and 3) developed open space (as defined by NLCD) is included as a fragmenting land cover type.

A Special Area of Conservation (SAC) is the land designated under Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora. Data supplied has the status of "Candidate". The data does not include "Possible" Sites. Boundaries are mapped against Ordnance Survey MasterMap.Full metadata can be viewed on data.gov.uk.

TDEC is continuously striving to create better business practices through GIS and one way that we have found to provide information and answer some question is utilizing an interactive map. An interactive map is a display of geospatial data that allows you to manipulate and query the contents to get the information needed using a set of provided tools. Interactive maps are created using GIS software, and then distributed to users, usually over a computer network. The TDEC Land and Water interactive map will allow you to do simple tasks such as pan, zoom, measure and find a lat/long, while also giving you the capability of running simple queries to locate land and waters by name, entity, and number. With the ability to turn off and on back ground images such as aerial imagery (both black and white as well as color), we hope that you can find much utility in the tools provided.

This data set shows point locations of Bird Conservation Areas. Bird Conservation Areas are New York State lands that have been officially designated for their value to bird conservation. Points are approximate locations and may represent large areas. To drill down to a smaller geographic area, click directly on the area of the map or click the plus sign to zoom in on the map. For more information check out http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/30935.html, or go to the "About" section.

The Terrestrial 30x30 Conserved Areas map layer was developed by the CA Nature working group, providing a statewide perspective on areas managed for the protection or enhancement of biodiversity. Understanding the spatial distribution and extent of these durably protected and managed areas is a vital aspect of tracking and achieving the “30x30” goal of conserving 30% of California's lands and waters by 2030.

Terrestrial and Freshwater Data
• The California Protected Areas Database (CPAD), developed and managed by GreenInfo Network, is the most comprehensive collection of data on open space in California. CPAD data consists of Holdings, a single parcel or small group of parcels which comprise the spatial features of CPAD, generally corresponding to ownership boundaries.

• The California Conservation Easement Database (CCED), managed by GreenInfo Network, aggregates data on lands with easements. Conservation Easements are legally recorded interests in land in which a landholder sells or relinquishes certain development rights to their land in perpetuity.
Easements are often used to ensure that lands remain as open space, either as working farm or ranch lands, or areas for biodiversity protection. Easement restrictions typically remain with the land through changes in ownership.

•The Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US), hosted by the United States Geological Survey (USGS), is developed in coordination with multiple federal, state, and non-governmental organization (NGO) partners. PAD-US, through the Gap Analysis Project (GAP), uses a numerical coding system in which GAP codes 1 and 2 correspond to management strategies with explicit emphasis on protection and enhancement of biodiversity. PAD-US is not specifically aligned to parcel boundaries and as such,
boundaries represented within it may not align with other data sources.

• Numerous datasets representing designated boundaries for entities such as
National Parks and Monuments, Wild and Scenic Rivers, Wilderness Areas,
and others, were downloaded from publicly available sources, typically
hosted by the managing agency.

Methodology
1.CPAD and CCED represent the most accurate location and ownership information for
parcels in California which contribute to the preservation of open space
and cultural and biological resources.

2. Superunits are collections of parcels (Holdings) within CPAD which share a name,
manager, and access policy. Most Superunits are also managed with a
generally consistent strategy for biodiversity conservation. Examples of
Superunits include Yosemite National Park, Giant Sequoia National
Monument, and Anza-Borrego Desert State Park.

3. Some Superunits, such as those owned and managed by the Bureau of Land
Management, U.S. Forest Service, or National Park Service , are
intersected by one or more designations, each of which may have a
distinct management emphasis with regards to biodiversity. Examples of
such designations are Wilderness Areas, Wild and Scenic Rivers, or
National Monuments.

4. CPAD Superunits and CCED easements were
intersected with all designation boundary files to create the operative
spatial units for conservation analysis, henceforth 'Conservation
Units,' which make up the Terrestrial 30x30 Conserved Areas map layer. Each easement was functionally considered to be a Superunit.

5. Each Conservation Unit was intersected with the PAD-US dataset in order to
determine the management emphasis with respect to biodiversity, i.e.,
the GAP code. Because PAD-US is national in scope and not specifically
parcel aligned with California assessors' surveys, a direct spatial
extraction of GAP codes from PAD-US would leave tens of thousands of GAP
code data slivers within the 30x30 Conserved Areas map. Consequently, a generalizing approach was adopted, such that any Conservation Unit with greater than 80% areal overlap with a single
GAP code was uniformly assigned that code. Additionally, the total area
of GAP codes 1 and 2 were summed for the remaining uncoded Conservation
Units. If this sum was greater than 80% of the unit area, the Conservation Unit was coded as GAP 2.

6.Subsequent to this stage of analysis, certain Conservation Units remained uncoded,
either due to the lack of a single GAP code (or combined GAP codes 1&2) overlapping 80% of the area, or because the area was not sufficiently represented in the PAD-US dataset.

7.These uncoded Conservation Units were then broken down into their
constituent, finer resolution Holdings, which were then analyzed
according to the above workflow.

8. Areas remaining uncoded following the two-step process of coding at the Superunit and
then Holding levels were assigned a GAP code of 4. This is consistent
with the definition of GAP Code 4: areas unknown to have a biodiversity
management focus.

9. Greater than 90% of all areas in the Terrestrial 30x30 Conserved
Areas map layer were GAP coded at the level of CPAD Superunits intersected by designation boundaries, the coarsest land units of analysis. By adopting these coarser analytical units, the Terrestrial 30X30 Conserved Areas map layer avoids hundreds of thousands of spatial slivers that result from intersecting designations with smaller, more numerous parcel records. In most cases, individual parcels reflect the management scenario and GAP status of the umbrella Superunit and other spatially coincident designations.

10. PAD-US is a principal data source for understanding the spatial distribution of GAP coded lands, but it is national in scope, and may not always be the most current source of data with respect to California holdings. GreenInfo Network, which develops and maintains the CPAD and CCED datasets, has taken a lead role in establishing communication with land stewards across California in order to make GAP attribution of these lands as current and accurate as possible. The tabular attribution of these datasets is analyzed in addition to PAD-US in order to understand whether a holding may be considered conserved.

Tracking Conserved Areas
The total acreage of conserved areas will increase as California works towards its 30x30 goal. Some changes will be due to shifts in legal protection designations or management status of specific lands and waters. However, shifts may also result from new data representing
improvements in our understanding of existing biodiversity conservation
efforts. The California Nature Project is expected to generate a great deal of excitement regarding the state's trajectory towards achieving the 30x30 goal. We also expect it to spark discussion about how to shape that trajectory, and how to strategize and optimize outcomes. We encourage landowners, managers, and stakeholders to investigate how their lands are represented in the Terrestrial 30X30 Conserved Areas Map Layer. This can be accomplished by using the Conserved Areas Explorer web application, developed by the CA Nature working group. Users can zoom into the locations they understand best and share their expertise with us to improve the data representing the status of conservation efforts at these sites. The Conserved Areas Explorer presents a tremendous opportunity to strengthen our existing data infrastructure and the channels of communication between land stewards and data curators, encouraging the transfer of knowledge and improving the quality of data.

CPAD, CCED, and PAD-US are built from the ground up. Data is derived from available parcel information and submissions from those who own and manage the land. So better data starts with you. Do boundary lines require updating? Is the GAP code inconsistent with a Holding’s conservation status? If land under your care can be better represented in the Terrestrial 30X30 Conserved Areas map layer, please use this link to initiate a review.The results of these reviews will inform updates to the California Protected Areas Database, California Conservation Easement Database, and PAD-US as appropriate for incorporation into future updates to CA Nature and tracking progress to 30x30.

Provides 110-year 42 district specific soil and water conservation area map shp download file, including OBJECTID_1 (object code), CLASS (type), SWCB_Name (specific soil and water conservation area name), County01 (location of county and city 01), Town01 (location of township and town 01) ), Vill01 (Village 01), County02 (County and City 02), Town02 (Town 02), Vill02 (Village 02), TWD97_X (X coordinate), TWD97_Y (Y coordinate), Administrator (management agency code), P_Date (delineation announcement date), P_HA (delineated area), DEBRISNO (landslide potential stream number), Risk (risk level), Length (stream length (km)), R_area (catchment area (ha)), Mapid01 (located in map number 01), Mapid02 (located in map number 02), Twpark (located in the national park), TWscenic (located in the national scenic area), Basin (located in the catchment area), Sub_basin (located in the sub-catchment area), Date ( Editing date), SWCB_Plan (name of specific soil and water conservation area), Shape_Leng (perimeter of specific soil and water conservation area), Shape_Area (area of specific soil and water conservation area) and other fields

This map provides access to information concerning environmental conditions and management in the Cowpasture River watershed in the James River headwaters region of western Virginia. Map categories include:

Environmental Permits and Related Data

Environmental Data Collection & Analysis

Species Distributions

County Boundaries, Parcels, & Zoning

Conservation LandsGeology, Water, & Landcover

Watershed Boundaries

Provide the download file for the complete Taiwan-specific soil and water conservation area layer_TWD97shp, including fields such as TYPES, SCALE, LEG_NAME, DATE, AREA, NAME, ORGAN, TIME, etc.

Polygon geometry with attributes displaying conservation areas as defined by the comprehensive plan, FUTUREBR, in East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana.Metadata

Provide shp download file of the specific soil and water conservation area map of 36 districts in 111, including OBJECTID_1 (object code), CLASS (type), SWCB_Name (name of specific soil and water conservation area), County01 (location of county and city 01), Town01 (location of township and town 01) ), Vill01 (Village 01), County02 (County and City 02), Town02 (Town 02), Vill02 (Village 02), TWD97_X (X coordinate), TWD97_Y (Y coordinate), Administrator (management agency code), P_DATE (delineation announcement date), P_HA (delineated area), DEBRISNO (landslide potential stream number), Risk (risk level), Length (stream length (km)), R_area (catchment area (ha)), Mapid01 (located in map number 01), Mapid02 (located in map number 02), Twpark (located in the national park), TWscenic (located in the national scenic area), Basin (located in the catchment area), Sub_basin (located in the sub-catchment area), Date ( Editing date), SWCB_Plan (name of specific soil and water conservation area), Shape_Leng (perimeter of specific soil and water conservation area), Shape_Area (area of specific soil and water conservation area) and other fields

Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (1972) and the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (1990) direct the State Geologist to delineate regulatory "Zones of Required Investigation" to reduce the threat to public health and safety and to minimize the loss of life and property posed by earthquake-triggered ground failures. Cities and counties affected by the zones must regulate certain development "projects" within them. These Acts also require sellers of real property (and their agents) within a mapped hazard zone to disclose at the time of sale that the property lies within such a zone.

NOTE: Fault Evaluation Reports are available for those areas covered by a Regulatory Map however there are reports available for areas outside the Regulatory map boundary. For a complete set of maps available for purchase on CD please contact the CGS Library.

[Metadata] Description: Conservation District Subzones as of 2011. Source - DLNR/DOFAW, State Land Use CommissionSource: The Conservation District Subzones were extracted from the LUD95 layers. Subzones are administered by the Department of Land and Natural Resources Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL). The Conservation Districts are administered by the State Land Use Commission. The Conservation District Subzone boundaries depicted in these files are not official and are representations for presentation purposes only. A determination of the official subzone boundaries should be obtained through the Dept. of Land and Natural Resources. Revised, Feb. 2011 by the State Land Use Commission.Apr. 2024: Hawaii Statewide GIS Program staff removed extraneous fields that had been added as part of the 2016 GIS database conversion and were no longer needed.For additional information, please refer to complete metadata at https://files.hawaii.gov/dbedt/op/gis/data/cdsubzn.txt or contact Hawaii Statewide GIS Program, Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, State of Hawaii; PO Box 2359, Honolulu, Hi. 96804; (808) 587-2846; email: gis@hawaii.gov; Website: https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis.

The U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) Airborne Height Finder (AHF) system was used to perform topographic surveys in Water Conservation Areas 2 and 3A. The AHF is a helicopter-based instrument that uses a GPS receiver, a computer, and a mechanized plumb bob to make measurements.