Property lines mapped as parcel polygons within Langley Township. The data includes the following information: Folio, PID, and civic address of existing parcels Description The Township uses two survey systems. The first was 1859 District Lot system which still describes many properties near the Fraser River. The District Lot system was superseded in 1873 with the New Westminster Township Section system which covers the bulk of the municipality and is used to the present day. The cadastral data set originated as hand drawn township-section maps in imperial scales. The lot lines were compiled from historical community maps, registered legal plans surveyed with astronomic bearings and legal descriptions where no surveys exist.

In the late 1970’s the Township's maps were converted to metric scales and all dimension annotation was converted manually to metric. In 1982 parcels BC GAS manually digitized the hand drawn township-section maps and assembled them into a single continuous cadastral fabric encompassing the entire township. The lot line data was rubber sheeted to fit the higher accuracy mapping of neighbouring municipalities, no interior control points were used. In 1983 Langley Township obtains BC GAS Intergraph format lot line data and translated it into Terrasoft format for the Township's GIS.In 1986 the lot lines were converted to parcel polygons linked to BCAA folio numbers and Tempest. In 1987 map annotation was converted to digital. In 1999 the GIS data was converted from Terrasoft to AutoCAD Map format. In 2000 the digital base was again rubber sheeted with a township wide grid pattern of survey monuments used for control. In 2003 lot links were converted from BCAA folio numbers to Township property numbers. In 2004 GIS data is converted from AutoCAD Map format to Munsys Oracle format. In 2005 Langley Township adopts DIGITAL LEGAL SURVEY PLAN STANDARDS and new cadastral is entered directly from high accuracy UTM projected surveys. In 2009 GIS data was converted from Munsys Oracle format to ESRI ArcSDE format.

Public Land Survey System (PLSS) reference grid serves as base map information and may be used for planning and analytical purposes.Sections lines are approximate, except for those adjusted to verified section corners. Section lines adjusted to verified section corners as corners recovery sheets are received from registered surveyor.Converted from Intergraph to Graphic Data Systems (GDS) circa 1989, GDS to ESRI's SDE circa 1999. Section lines (polygons) periodically adjusted to reflect on-going section corner recovery. See Section Corners dataset for certified section and quarter corner locations, coordinates, recovery date and surveyor.

BLM NV PLSSTownship: This dataset represents the GIS Version of the Public Land Survey System including both rectangular and non-rectangular surveys. The primary source for the data is cadastral survey records housed by the BLM supplemented with local records and geographic control coordinates from states, counties as well as other federal agencies such as the USGS and USFS. The data has been converted from source documents to digital form and transferred into a GIS format that is compliant with FGDC Cadastral Data Content Standards and Guidelines for publication. This data is optimized for data publication and sharing rather than for specific "production" or operation and maintenance. This data set includes the following: PLSS Fully Intersected (all of the PLSS feature at the atomic or smallest polygon level), PLSS Townships, First Divisions and Second Divisions (the hierarchical break down of the PLSS Rectangular surveys) PLSS Special surveys (non rectangular components of the PLSS) Meandered Water, Corners and Conflicted Areas (known areas of gaps or overlaps between Townships or state boundaries). The Entity-Attribute section of this metadata describes these components in greater detail.

Data set for providing cadastral maps in digital form in DXF format. The data comes from the ISKN database (Cadastre Information System). The cadastral map includes a semi-final and descriptive folder. The location contains the boundaries of plots, cadastral areas and administrative units, building perimeters and point fields. The descriptive elements include text inscriptions (par-customs numbers, geographical nomenclature, etc.), map marks (marks of land types, etc.) and lines (borders of protected areas, etc.). When converting data into DXF format, some digital map data (information about point number and position point quality code, symbols on lines, etc.) are lost. The data set is provided as open data (CC-BY 4.0 license). The data is based on ISKN (Cadastre Information System). The cadastral map is provided along the cadastral territories in the JTSK coordinate system (EPSG:5514). There are only areas with a cadastral map in digital form (to 10. 01. 2022 is 97.82 % of the territory of the Czech Republic, i.e. 77 150.84 km²). Data is provided in DXF format. Data is compressed for download (ZIP). More cadastral Act 256/2013 Coll., Decree on the Land Registry No 357/2013 Coll., Decree on the Provision of Data No. 358/2013 Coll., as amended.

Status: COMPLETED 2010. The data was converted from the most recent (2010) versions of the adopted plans, which can be found at http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/planning/plans/Contact: John Beall, City of Tucson Development Services, 520-791-5550, John.Beall@tucsonaz.gov. Jamie Brown, City of Tucson, 520-837-6934. Jamie.Brown@tucsonaz.govIntended Use: For mappingSupplemental Information: In March 2010, Pima Association of Governments (PAG), in cooperation with the City of Tucson (City), initiated the Planned Land Use Data Conversion Project. This 9-month effort involved evaluating mapped land use designations and selected spatially explicit policies for nearly 50 of the City's adopted neighborhood, area, and subregional plans and converting the information into a Geographic Information System (GIS) format. Further documentation for this file can be obtained from the City of Tucson Planning and Development Services Department or Pima Association of Governments Technical Services. A brief summary report was provided, as requested, to the City of Tucson which highlights some of the key issues found during the conversion process (e.g., lack of mapping and terminology consistency among plans). The feature class "Plan_boundaries" represents the boundaries of the adopted plans. The feature class "Plan_mapped_land_use" represents the land use designations as they are mapped in the adopted plans. Some information was gathered that is implicit based on the land use designation or zones (see field descriptions below). Since this information is not explicitly stated in the plans, it should only be viewed by City staff for general planning purposes. The feature class "Plan_selected_policies" represents the spatially explicit policies that were fairly straightforward to map. Since these policies are not represented in adopted maps, this feature class should only be viewed by City staff for general planning purposes only. 2010 - created by Jamison Brown, working as an independent contractor for Pima Association of Governments, created this file in 2010 by digitizing boundaries as depicted (i.e. for the mapped land use) or described in the plans (i.e. for the narrative policies). In most cases, this involved tracing based on parcel (paregion) or street center line (stnetall) feature classes. Snapping was used to provide line coincidence. For some map conversions, freehand sketches were drawn to mimick the freehand sketches in the adopted plan. Field descriptions for the "Plan_mapped_land_use" feature class: Plan_Name: Plan name Plan_Type: Plan type (e.g., Neighborhood Plan) Plan_Num: Plan number LU_DES: Land use designation (e.g., Low density residential) LISTED_ALLOWABLE_ZONES: Allowable zones as listed in the Plan LISTED_RAC_MIN: Minimum residences per acre (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_RAC_TARGET: Target residences per acre (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_RAC_MAX: Maximum residences per acre (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_FAR_MIN: Minimum Floor Area Ratio (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_FAR_TARGET: Target Floor Area Ratio (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_FAR_MAX: Maximum Floor Area Ratio (if applicable), as listed in the Plan BUILDING_HEIGHT_MAX Building height maximum (ft.) if determined by Plan policy IMPORTANT: A disclaimer about the data as it is unofficial. URL: Uniform Resource Locator IMPLIED_ALLOWABLE_ZONES: Implied (not listed in the Plan) allowable zones IMPLIED_RAC_MIN: Implied (not listed in the Plan) minimum residences per acre (if applicable) IMPLIED_RAC_TARGET: Implied (not listed in the Plan) target residences per acre (if applicable) IMPLIED_RAC_MAX: Implied (not listed in the Plan) maximum residences per acre (if applicable) IMPLIED_FAR_MIN: Implied (not listed in the Plan) minimum Floor Area Ratio (if applicable) IMPLIED_FAR_TARGET: Implied (not listed in the Plan) target Floor Area Ratio (if applicable) IMPLIED_FAR_MAX: Implied (not listed in the Plan) maximum Floor Area Ratio (if applicable) IMPLIED_LU_CATEGORY: Implied (not listed in the Plan) general land use category. General categories used include residential, office, commercial, industrial, and other.

Background and Data Limitations The Massachusetts 1830 map series represents a unique data source that depicts land cover and cultural features during the historical period of widespread land clearing for agricultural. To our knowledge, Massachusetts is the only state in the US where detailed land cover information was comprehensively mapped at such an early date. As a result, these maps provide unusual insight into land cover and cultural patterns in 19th century New England. However, as with any historical data, the limitations and appropriate uses of these data must be recognized: (1) These maps were originally developed by many different surveyors across the state, with varying levels of effort and accuracy. (2) It is apparent that original mapping did not follow consistent surveying or drafting protocols; for instance, no consistent minimum mapping unit was identified or used by different surveyors; as a result, whereas some maps depict only large forest blocks, others also depict small wooded areas, suggesting that numerous smaller woodlands may have gone unmapped in many towns. Surveyors also were apparently not consistent in what they mapped as ‘woodlands’: comparison with independently collected tax valuation data from the same time period indicates substantial lack of consistency among towns in the relative amounts of ‘woodlands’, ‘unimproved’ lands, and ‘unimproveable’ lands that were mapped as ‘woodlands’ on the 1830 maps. In some instances, the lack of consistent mapping protocols resulted in substantially different patterns of forest cover being depicted on maps from adjoining towns that may in fact have had relatively similar forest patterns or in woodlands that ‘end’ at a town boundary. (3) The degree to which these maps represent approximations of ‘primary’ woodlands (i.e., areas that were never cleared for agriculture during the historical period, but were generally logged for wood products) varies considerably from town to town, depending on whether agricultural land clearing peaked prior to, during, or substantially after 1830. (4) Despite our efforts to accurately geo-reference and digitize these maps, a variety of additional sources of error were introduced in converting the mapped information to electronic data files (see detailed methods below). Thus, we urge considerable caution in interpreting these maps. Despite these limitations, the 1830 maps present an incredible wealth of information about land cover patterns and cultural features during the early 19th century, a period that continues to exert strong influence on the natural and cultural landscapes of the region. Acknowledgements Financial support for this project was provided by the BioMap Project of the Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, the National Science Foundation, and the Andrew Mellon Foundation. This project is a contribution of the Harvard Forest Long Term Ecological Research Program.

LANDISVIEW is a tool, developed at the Knowledge Engineering Laboratory at Texas A&M University, to visualize and animate 8-bit/16-bit ERDAS GIS format (e.g., LANDIS and LANDIS-II output maps). It can also convert 8-bit/16-bit ERDAS GIS format into ASCII and batch files. LANDISVIEW provides two major functions: 1) File Viewer: Files can be viewed sequentially and an output can be generated as a movie file or as an image file. 2) File converter: It will convert the loaded files for compatibility with 3rd party software, such as Fragstats, a widely used spatial analysis tool. Some available features of LANDISVIEW include: 1) Display cell coordinates and values. 2) Apply user-defined color palette to visualize files. 3) Save maps as pictures and animations as video files (*.avi). 4) Convert ERDAS files into ASCII grids for compatibility with Fragstats. (Source: http://kelab.tamu.edu/)

The LULC HRL Map is produced from a combination of multi-sources data: the French national topographic database; the Land Parcel Identification System (LPIS) database; and Corine Land Cover. The LULC HRL classification contains 11 land cover categories: 11 Industrial or Commercial buildings and other Facilities 12 Agricultural buildings 13 Low-rise Residential or Mixed buildings 14 High-rise Residential or Mixed buildings 2 Fields 3 Meadows/Grassy plots 4 Bushes/Shrubs 5 Trees/Forest 6 Vineyards 7 Water bodies 8 Others artificial surfaces The LULC HRL Map is produced from a combination of multi-sources data: the French national topographic database (Institut national de l’information géographique et forestière, the French national geographic institute); the Land Parcel Identification System (LPIS) database (Agency for Services and Payment, French public institution responsible for the implementation of national and European public policies; Integrated Administration and Control System, European Union); and Corine Land Cover (European Environment Agency, Joint Research Center, European Union). The topographic database contains a land cover description employed for topographic map production at a scale of 1:25 000, with a minimum unit of collection of approximately 8 ha. The information is relatively precise on the contours of urban areas (buildings), road and rail infrastructures, hydrography, and trees and shrubs; however, it does not make it possible to distinguish the land uses within the agricultural, forested, or natural areas. The LPIS database, which draws on the digital cadastral database (1:500–1:5000), allows us to identify those agricultural areas for which subsidies are sought under the European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). It was used to determine the agricultural land-use (grass-like vegetation and arable land) on the scale of cadastral parcels. Corine Land Cover (CLC) is thematically much richer, in particular in agri- cultural areas, but its spatial resolution, which is rather coarse (approximately 1:100 000), means it cannot identify the nature of a polygon of less than 25 ha. Despite its rather coarse resolution, CLC has a thematically richer land-use nomenclature than can be used to refine plant cover. The land-cover information layer was constructed in two steps. The first was to generate a simplified geometry of land use in vector form (polygons and lines). The operation begins by detecting the “polygonal skeleton” that integrates roads, railways, and the hydrographic network attributing to them a footprint proportional to their width. Next are added (1) agricultural surface features from the LPIS (field, meadow, orchard, other agriculture use); (2) plant-covered areas, mostly forest and orchard; and (3) artificialized surfaces (buildings, quarries, parking areas, etc.). Each addition is made by masking and expansion so as to approximate the “polygonal skeleton”. The features not described in the topographic database and the LPIS are categorized as “unidentified polygons”. Some of this class is marked down as grassland-lawn using CLC classes “321” (Natural grasslands) and “231” (Pastures). Processing is done with the PostGIS functionalities: intersection, union, dilation, erosion, etc. of polygons or lines (PostGIS, 2018). This stage enables eight land-use categories to be defined: (1) urban footprints, (2) fields, (3) meadows, (4) forests, (5) orchards, (6) rivers and water bodies, (7) road and rail infrastructure footprints, (8) unidentified polygons. This first vectorial geometric model is changed into a 5m resolution raster layer and then supplemented to produce a land-use layer com- patible with the landscape analysis contemplated. Categories (4), (6) and (7) describing relatively homogeneous and straightforward landscape features were kept unchanged. The improvement described below was primarily for heterogeneous and complex landscape features (categories (1), (2), (3) and (5)) that are replaced by simple landscape objects (buildings, mineral surfaces, copses, fields, grass-covered areas, etc.). The improvement also covers pixels in category (8). Pixels of the urban footprint (1) are differentiated into three types of landscape items: the built area, parking areas, and urban plant cover. The built area is incrusted by distinguishing its height and function: (11, LRM) Low-rise Residential or Mixed buildings (< 12m∼1–2 storeys); (12, HRM) High-rise Residential or Mixed buildings (≥12m∼3 storeys and more); (13, ICF) Industrial or Commercial buildings and other Facilities; (14) agricultural buildings. Parking areas were also created around some buildings and classified as category (7): a 5m (1 pixel) buffer around HRM polygons and ICF polygons between 50 and 999m2; a 25m buffer for ICF polygons of 1000m2 (5 pixels) and more. The buffer sizes were established from existing planning and building codes. Non-built and non-parking areas in the urban footprint are converted into plant cover in the following proportions: grass 50% of pixels; Trees 25%; shrubs and bushes 25%. These proportions are based on the visual identification and quantification of green areas/ expanses in built the environment using orthophoto images. This is done by first converting non-built and non-parking areas into grass pixels and then drawing tree pixels and shrub and bush pixels at random. For the field (2) and meadow (3) categories identified with tree cover (presence of trees in CLC), 10% of randomly drawn pixels are converted into trees. The pixels classified as orchards (5) and that are within a polygon classified as vineyard (221) in CLC are reclassified as vineyard. The remaining pixels are first converted into grass and then into shrubs and bushes by randomly drawing 70% of the pixels. Pixels in category (8), “unidentified polygons”, are reclassified by comparison with the CLC polygons.

Internal view of the parcel layer. This view contains all the attributes that can be seen by County employees.There are approximately 51,300 real property parcels in Napa County. Parcels delineate the approximate boundaries of property ownership as described in Napa County deeds, filed maps, and other source documents. GIS parcel boundaries are maintained by the Information Technology Services GIS team. Assessor Parcel Maps are created and maintained by the Assessor Division Mapping Section. Each parcel has an Assessor Parcel Number (APN) that is its unique identifier. The APN is the link to various Napa County databases containing information such as owner name, situs address, property value, land use, zoning, flood data, and other related information. Data for this map service is sourced from the Napa County Parcels dataset which is updated nightly with any recent changes made by the mapping team. There may at times be a delay between when a document is recorded and when the new parcel boundary configuration and corresponding information is available in the online GIS parcel viewer.From 1850 to early 1900s assessor staff wrote the name of the property owner and the property value on map pages. They began using larger maps, called “tank maps” because of the large steel cabinet they were kept in, organized by school district (before unification) on which names and values were written. In the 1920s, the assessor kept large books of maps by road district on which names were written. In the 1950s, most county assessors contracted with the State Board of Equalization for board staff to draw standardized 11x17 inch maps following the provisions of Assessor Handbook 215. Maps were originally drawn on linen. By the 1980’s Assessor maps were being drawn on mylar rather than linen. In the early 1990s Napa County transitioned from drawing on mylar to creating maps in AutoCAD. When GIS arrived in Napa County in the mid-1990s, the AutoCAD images were copied over into the GIS parcel layer. Sidwell, an independent consultant, was then contracted by the Assessor’s Office to convert these APN files into the current seamless ArcGIS parcel fabric for the entire County. Beginning with the 2024-2025 assessment roll, the maps are being drawn directly in the parcel fabric layer.Parcels in the GIS parcel fabric are drawn according to the legal description using coordinate geometry (COGO) drawing tools and various reference data such as Public Lands Survey section boundaries and road centerlines. The legal descriptions are not defined by the GIS parcel fabric. Any changes made in the GIS parcel fabric via official records, filed maps, and other source documents are uploaded overnight. There is always at least a 6-month delay between when a document is recorded and when the new parcel configuration and corresponding information is available in the online parcel viewer for search or download.Parcel boundary accuracy can vary significantly, with errors ranging from a few feet to several hundred feet. These distortions are caused by several factors such as: the map projection - the error derived when a spherical coordinate system model is projected into a planar coordinate system using the local projected coordinate system; and the ground to grid conversion - the distortion between ground survey measurements and the virtual grid measurements. The aim of the parcel fabric is to construct a visual interpretation that is adequate for basic geographic understanding. This digital data is intended for illustration and demonstration purposes only and is not considered a legal resource, nor legally authoritative.SFAP & CFAP DISCLAIMER: Per the California Code, RTC 606. some legal parcels may have been combined for assessment purposes (CFAP) or separated for assessment purposes (SFAP) into multiple parcels for a variety of tax assessment reasons. SFAP and CFAP parcels are assigned their own APN number and primarily result from a parcel being split by a tax rate area boundary, due to a recorded land use lease, or by request of the property owner. Assessor parcel (APN) maps reflect when parcels have been separated or combined for assessment purposes, and are one legal entity. The goal of the GIS parcel fabric data is to distinguish the SFAP and CFAP parcel configurations from the legal configurations, to convey the legal parcel configurations. This workflow is in progress. Please be advised that while we endeavor to restore SFAP and CFAP parcels back to their legal configurations in the primary parcel fabric layer, SFAP and CFAP parcels may be distributed throughout the dataset. Parcels that have been restored to their legal configurations, do not reflect the SFAP or CFAP parcel configurations that correspond to the current property tax delineations. We intend for parcel reports and parcel data to capture when a parcel has been separated or combined for assessment purposes, however in some cases, information may not be available in GIS for the SFAP/CFAP status of a parcel configuration shown. For help or questions regarding a parcel’s SFAP/CFAP status, or property survey data, please visit Napa County’s Surveying Services or Property Mapping Information. For more information you can visit our website: When a Parcel is Not a Parcel | Napa County, CA

To access parcel information:Enter an address or zoom in by using the +/- tools or your mouse scroll wheel. Parcels will draw when zoomed in.Click on a parcel to display a popup with information about that parcel.Click the "Basemap" button to display background aerial imagery.From the "Layers" button you can turn map features on and off. Check on 'Download Parcel Data by City/Town' and click in the map for links to download all parcel data for that municipality.Complete Help (PDF)Parcel Legend:Full Map LegendAbout this ViewerThe map displays land property boundaries from assessor parcel maps across Massachusetts. Parcel information is from local assessor databases. More...Read about and download parcel dataAlso available: an accessible, non-map-based Property Information FinderDISCLAIMER: Assessor’s parcel mapping is a representation of property boundaries, not an authoritative source. The authoritative record of property boundaries is recorded at the registries of deeds. A legally authoritative map of property boundaries can only be produced by a professional land surveyor.V 1.4 MassGIS, EOTSS 2021

Digital line graph (DLG) data are digital representations of cartographic information. DLGs of map features are converted to digital form from maps and related sources. Intermediate-scale DLG data are derived from USGS 1:100,000-scale 30- by 60-minute quadrangle maps. If these maps are not available, Bureau of Land Management planimetric maps at a scale of 1:100,000 are used. Intermediate-scale DLGs are sold in five categories: (1) Public Land Survey System; (2) boundaries; (3) transportation; (4) hydrography; and (5) hypsography. All DLG data distributed by the USGS are DLG-Level 3 (DLG-3), which means the data contain a full range of attribute codes, have full topological structuring, and have passed certain quality-control checks.

These are the cadastral reference features that provide the basis and framework for parcel mapping and for other mapping. This feature data set contains PLSS and Other Survey System data. The other survey systems include subdivision plats and those types of survey reference systems. This feature data set also include feature classes to support the special conditions in Ohio. This data set represents the GIS Version of the Public Land Survey System including both rectangular and non-rectangular surveys. The primary source for the data is cadastral survey records housed by the BLM supplemented with local records and geographic control coordinates from states, counties as well as other federal agencies such as the USGS and USFS. The data has been converted from source documents to digital form and transferred into a GIS format that is compliant with FGDC Cadastral Data Content Standards and Guidelines for publication. This data is optimized for data publication and sharing rather than for specific "production" or operation and maintenance. This data set includes the following: PLSS Fully Intersected (all of the PLSS feature at the atomic or smallest polygon level), PLSS Townships, First Divisions and Second Divisions (the hierarchical break down of the PLSS Rectangular surveys) PLSS Special surveys (non rectangular components of the PLSS) Meandered Water, Corners and Conflicted Areas (known areas of gaps or overlaps between Townships or state boundaries). The Entity-Attribute section of this metadata describes these components in greater detail.

Abstract The Catchment Scale Land Use of Australia – Update December 2023 dataset is the national compilation of catchment scale land use data available for Australia (CLUM), as of December 2023. It replaces the Catchment Scale Land Use of Australia – Update December 2020. It is a seamless raster dataset that combines land use data for all state and territory jurisdictions, compiled at a resolution of 50 metres by 50 metres. The CLUM data shows a single dominant land use for a given area, based on the primary management objective of the land manager (as identified by state and territory agencies). Land use is classified according to the Australian Land Use and Management Classification version 8. It has been compiled from vector land use datasets collected as part of state and territory mapping programs and other authoritative sources, through the Australian Collaborative Land Use and Management Program. Catchment scale land use data was produced by combining land tenure and other types of land use information including, fine-scale satellite data, ancillary datasets, and information collected in the field. The date of mapping (2008 to 2023) and scale of mapping (1:5,000 to 1:250,000) vary, reflecting the source data, capture date and scale. Date and scale of mapping are provided in supporting datasets.

Currency Date modified: December 2023 Date Published: June 2024 Modification frequency: As needed (approximately annual) Data Extent Coordinate reference: WGS84 / Mercator Auxiliary Sphere Spatial Extent North: -9.995 South: -44.005 East: 154.004 West: 112.505 Source information Data, Metadata, Maps and Interactive views are available from Catchment Scale Land Use of Australia - Update 2023 Catchment Scale Land Use of Australia - Update 2023 – Descriptive metadata The data was obtained from Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (ABARES). ABARES is providing this data to the public under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. Lineage Statement This catchment scale land use dataset provides the latest compilation of land use mapping information for Australia’s regions as at December 2023. It is used by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, state agencies and regional natural resource management groups to address issues such as agricultural productivity and sustainability, biodiversity conservation, biosecurity, land use planning, natural disaster management and natural resource monitoring and investment. The data vary in date of mapping (2008 to 2023) and scale (1:5,000 to 1:250,000). 2023 updates include more current data and/or reclassification of existing data. The following areas have updated data since the December 2020 version:

New South Wales (2017 v1.5 from v1.2). Northern Territory (2022 from 2020). Tasmania (2021 from 2019). Victoria (2021 from 2017). Data were also added from the Great Barrier Reef Natural Resource Management (NRM) regions in Queensland (2021 from a variety of dates 2009 to 2017). the Australian Tree Crops. Australian Protected Cropping Structures and Queensland Soybean Crops maps as downloaded on 30 November 2023. The capital city of Adelaide was updated using 2021 mesh block information from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Minor reclassifications were made for Western Australia and mining area within mining tenements more accurately delineated in South Australia.

Links to land use mapping datasets and metadata are available at the ACLUMP data download page at agriculture.gov.au. State and territory vector catchment scale land use data were produced by combining land tenure and other types of land use information, fine-scale satellite data and information collected in the field, as outlined in 'Guidelines for land use mapping in Australia: principles, procedures and definitions, 4th edition' (ABARES 2011). The Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria and Western Australia were mapped to version 8 of the ALUM classification (‘The Australian Land Use and Management Classification Version 8’, ABARES 2016). The Australian Capital Territory was mapped to version 7 of the ALUM classification and converted to version 8 using a look-up table based on Appendix 1 of ABARES (2016). Purpose for which the material was obtained: This catchment scale land use dataset provides the latest compilation of land use mapping information for Australia’s regions as at December 2023. It is used by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, state agencies and regional natural resource management groups to address issues such as agricultural productivity and sustainability, biodiversity conservation, biosecurity, land use planning, natural disaster management and natural resource monitoring and investment. The data vary in date of mapping (2008 to 2023) and scale (1:5,000 to 1:250,000). Do not use this data to:

Derive national statistics. The Land use of Australia data series should be used for this purpose. Calculate land use change. The Land use of Australia data series should be used for this purpose.

It is not possible to calculate land use change statistics between annual CLUM national compilations as not all regions are updated each year; land use mapping methodologies, precision, accuracy and source data and satellite imagery have improved over the years; and the land use classification has changed over time. It is only possible to calculate change when earlier land use datasets have been revised and corrected to ensure that changes detected are real change and not an artefact of the mapping process. Note: The Digital Atlas of Australia downloaded and created a copy of the source data in October 2024 that was suitable to be hosted through ArcGIS Image Server & Image Dedicated. A copy of the raster was created with RGB fields as a colour map with Geoprocessing tools in ArcPro. Note: The Digital Atlas of Australia downloaded and created a copy of the source data in February 2025 that was suitable to be hosted through ArcGIS Image Server & Image Dedicated. A copy of the raster dataset was created with RGB fields as a colour map with Geoprocessing tools in ArcPro, and the raster dataset was re-projected from 1994 Australia Albers to WGS 1984 Web Mercator (Auxiliary Sphere). Data dictionary

Attribute name Description

OID Internal feature number that uniquely identifies each row.

Service Pixel value (Scale) The scale at which land use was mapped in the vector catchment scale land use data provided by state and territory agencies or others:1:5,000, 1:10,000, 1:20,000, 1:25,000, 1:50,000, 1:100,000 or 1:250,000

Count Count of the number of raster cells in each class of VALUE.

Label Reflecting the scale of the source data ranges from 1:5,000 to 1:250,000

Contact Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (ABARES), info.ABARES@aff.gov.au

The following data is provided as a public service, for informational purposes only. This data should not be construed as legal advice. Users of this data should independently verify its determinations prior to taking any action under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or any other law. The State of California makes no warranties as to accuracy of this data. General plan land use element data was collected from 532 of California's 539 jurisdictions. An effort was made to contact each jurisdiction in the state and request general plan data in whatever form available. In the event that general plan maps were not available in a GIS format, those maps were converted from PDF or image maps using geo-referencing techniques and then transposing map information to parcel geometries sourced from county assessor data. Collection efforts began in late 2021 and were mostly finished in late 2022. Some data has been updated in 2023. Sources and dates are documented in the "Source" and "Date" columns with more detail available in the accompanying sources table. Data from a CNRA funded project, performed at UC Davis was used for 7 jurisdictions that had no current general plan land use maps available. Information about that CNRA funded project is available here: https://databasin.org/datasets/8d5da7200f4c4c2e927dafb8931fe75dIndividual general plan maps were combined for this statewide dataset. As part of the aggregation process, contiguous areas with identical use designations, within jurisdictions, were merged or dissolved. Some features representing roads with right-of-way or Null zone designations were removed from this data. Features less than 4 square meters in area were also removed.

COMPLETED 2010. The data was converted from the most recent (2010) versions of the adopted plans, which can be found at https://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/planning/plans/Supplemental Information: In March 2010, Pima Association of Governments (PAG), in cooperation with the City of Tucson (City), initiated the Planned Land Use Data Conversion Project. This 9-month effort involved evaluating mapped land use designations and selected spatially explicit policies for nearly 50 of the City's adopted neighborhood, area, and subregional plans and converting the information into a Geographic Information System (GIS) format. Further documentation for this file can be obtained from the City of Tucson Planning and Development Services Department or Pima Association of Governments Technical Services. A brief summary report was provided, as requested, to the City of Tucson which highlights some of the key issues found during the conversion process (e.g., lack of mapping and terminology consistency among plans). The feature class "Plan_boundaries" represents the boundaries of the adopted plans. The feature class "Plan_mapped_land_use" represents the land use designations as they are mapped in the adopted plans. Some information was gathered that is implicit based on the land use designation or zones (see field descriptions below). Since this information is not explicitly stated in the plans, it should only be viewed by City staff for general planning purposes. The feature class "Plan_selected_policies" represents the spatially explicit policies that were fairly straightforward to map. Since these policies are not represented in adopted maps, this feature class should only be viewed by City staff for general planning purposes only.2010 - created by Jamison Brown, working as an independent contractor for Pima Association of Governments, created this file in 2010 by digitizing boundaries as depicted (i.e. for the mapped land use) or described in the plans (i.e. for the narrative policies). In most cases, this involved tracing based on parcel (paregion) or street center line (stnetall) feature classes. Snapping was used to provide line coincidence. For some map conversions, freehand sketches were drawn to mimick the freehand sketches in the adopted plan. Field descriptionsField descriptions for the "Plan_boundaries" feature class: Plan_Name: Plan name Plan_Type: Plan type (e.g., Neighborhood Plan) Plan_Num: Plan number ADOPT_DATE: Date of Plan adoption IMPORTANT: A disclaimer about the data as it is unofficial. URL: Uniform Resource Locator Field descriptions for the "Plan_mapped_land_use" feature class: Plan_Name: Plan name Plan_Type: Plan type (e.g., Neighborhood Plan) Plan_Num: Plan number LU_DES: Land use designation (e.g., Low density residential) LISTED_ALLOWABLE_ZONES: Allowable zones as listed in the Plan LISTED_RAC_MIN: Minimum residences per acre (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_RAC_TARGET: Target residences per acre (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_RAC_MAX: Maximum residences per acre (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_FAR_MIN: Minimum Floor Area Ratio (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_FAR_TARGET: Target Floor Area Ratio (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_FAR_MAX: Maximum Floor Area Ratio (if applicable), as listed in the Plan BUILDING_HEIGHT_MAX Building height maximum (ft.) if determined by Plan policy IMPORTANT: A disclaimer about the data as it is unofficial. URL: Uniform Resource Locator IMPLIED_ALLOWABLE_ZONES: Implied (not listed in the Plan) allowable zones IMPLIED_RAC_MIN: Implied (not listed in the Plan) minimum residences per acre (if applicable) IMPLIED_RAC_TARGET: Implied (not listed in the Plan) target residences per acre (if applicable) IMPLIED_RAC_MAX: Implied (not listed in the Plan) maximum residences per acre (if applicable) IMPLIED_FAR_MIN: Implied (not listed in the Plan) minimum Floor Area Ratio (if applicable) IMPLIED_FAR_TARGET: Implied (not listed in the Plan) target Floor Area Ratio (if applicable) IMPLIED_FAR_MAX: Implied (not listed in the Plan) maximum Floor Area Ratio (if applicable) IMPLIED_LU_CATEGORY: Implied (not listed in the Plan) general land use category. General categories used include residential, office, commercial, industrial, and other.PurposeLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Dataset ClassificationLevel 0 - OpenKnown UsesLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Known ErrorsLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Data ContactJohn BeallCity of Tucson Development Services520-791-5550John.Beall@tucsonaz.govUpdate FrequencyLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

Boundaries show on this map are derived from legal descriptions contained in petitions to the Kansas Secretary of State for the creation or extension of watershed districts and in petitions to the Chief Engineer of the Division of Water Resources, Kansas Board of Agriculture, for transfers or mergers between adjacent watersheds. These petitions and other records relating to watershed districts in Kansas are maintained by the Division of Water Resources in the Kansas Department of Agriculture. Most of the legal descriptions were converted to digital geographic coordinates of longitude and latitude using the KGS's LEO II software. Exterior boundaries of the lands included in each watershed were compiled using the Dpoly software, also developed at the KGS. Portions of some boundaries were digitized directly from 1:24,000 scale topographic maps, from the United States Geological Survey. Some incorporated cities are explicitly excluded from watersheds in the legal descriptions. The digital representation of the boundaries of these cities, as used in this coverage, were extracted from the 1990 Pre-Census TIGER files distributed by the U.S. Census Bureau.

This webmap is a subset of Global Landcover 1992 - 2020 Image Layer. You can access the source data from here. This layer is a time series of the annual ESA CCI (Climate Change Initiative) land cover maps of the world. ESA has produced land cover maps for the years 1992-2020. These are available at the European Space Agency Climate Change Initiative website.Time Extent: 1992-2020Cell Size: 300 meterSource Type: ThematicPixel Type: 8 Bit UnsignedData Projection: GCS WGS84Mosaic Projection: Web Mercator Auxiliary SphereExtent: GlobalSource: ESA Climate Change InitiativeUpdate Cycle: Annual until 2020, no updates thereafterWhat can you do with this layer?This layer may be added to ArcGIS Online maps and applications and shown in a time series to watch a "time lapse" view of land cover change since 1992 for any part of the world. The same behavior exists when the layer is added to ArcGIS Pro.In addition to displaying all layers in a series, this layer may be queried so that only one year is displayed in a map. This layer can be used in analysis. For example, the layer may be added to ArcGIS Pro with a query set to display just one year. Then, an area count of land cover types may be produced for a feature dataset using the zonal statistics tool. Statistics may be compared with the statistics from other years to show a trend.To sum up area by land cover using this service, or any other analysis, be sure to use an equal area projection, such as Albers or Equal Earth.Different Classifications Available to MapFive processing templates are included in this layer. The processing templates may be used to display a smaller set of land cover classes.Cartographic Renderer (Default Template)Displays all ESA CCI land cover classes.*Forested lands TemplateThe forested lands template shows only forested lands (classes 50-90).Urban Lands TemplateThe urban lands template shows only urban areas (class 190).Converted Lands TemplateThe converted lands template shows only urban lands and lands converted to agriculture (classes 10-40 and 190).Simplified RendererDisplays the map in ten simple classes which match the ten simplified classes used in 2050 Land Cover projections from Clark University.Any of these variables can be displayed or analyzed by selecting their processing template. In ArcGIS Online, select the Image Display Options on the layer. Then pull down the list of variables from the Renderer options. Click Apply and Close. In ArcGIS Pro, go into the Layer Properties. Select Processing Templates from the left hand menu. From the Processing Template pull down menu, select the variable to display.Using TimeBy default, the map will display as a time series animation, one year per frame. A time slider will appear when you add this layer to your map. To see the most current data, move the time slider until you see the most current year.In addition to displaying the past quarter century of land cover maps as an animation, this time series can also display just one year of data by use of a definition query. For a step by step example using ArcGIS Pro on how to display just one year of this layer, as well as to compare one year to another, see the blog called Calculating Impervious Surface Change.Hierarchical ClassificationLand cover types are defined using the land cover classification (LCCS) developed by the United Nations, FAO. It is designed to be as compatible as possible with other products, namely GLCC2000, GlobCover 2005 and 2009.This is a heirarchical classification system. For example, class 60 means "closed to open" canopy broadleaved deciduous tree cover. But in some places a more specific type of broadleaved deciduous tree cover may be available. In that case, a more specific code 61 or 62 may be used which specifies "open" (61) or "closed" (62) cover.Land Cover ProcessingTo provide consistency over time, these maps are produced from baseline land cover maps, and are revised for changes each year depending on the best available satellite data from each period in time. These revisions were made from AVHRR 1km time series from 1992 to 1999, SPOT-VGT time series between 1999 and 2013, and PROBA-V data for years 2013, 2014 and 2015. When MERIS FR or PROBA-V time series are available, changes detected at 1 km are re-mapped at 300 m. The last step consists in back- and up-dating the 10-year baseline LC map to produce the 24 annual LC maps from 1992 to 2015.Source dataThe datasets behind this layer were extracted from NetCDF files and TIFF files produced by ESA. Years 1992-2015 were acquired from ESA CCI LC version 2.0.7 in TIFF format, and years 2016-2018 were acquired from version 2.1.1 in NetCDF format. These are downloadable from ESA with an account, after agreeing to their terms of use. https://maps.elie.ucl.ac.be/CCI/viewer/download.phpCitationESA. Land Cover CCI Product User Guide Version 2. Tech. Rep. (2017). Available at: maps.elie.ucl.ac.be/CCI/viewer/download/ESACCI-LC-Ph2-PUGv2_2.0.pdfMore technical documentation on the source datasets is available here:https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/cdsapp#!/dataset/satellite-land-cover?tab=doc*Index of all classes in this layer:10 Cropland, rainfed11 Herbaceous cover12 Tree or shrub cover20 Cropland, irrigated or post-flooding30 Mosaic cropland (>50%) / natural vegetation (tree, shrub, herbaceous cover) (<50%)40 Mosaic natural vegetation (tree, shrub, herbaceous cover) (>50%) / cropland (<50%)50 Tree cover, broadleaved, evergreen, closed to open (>15%)60 Tree cover, broadleaved, deciduous, closed to open (>15%)61 Tree cover, broadleaved, deciduous, closed (>40%)62 Tree cover, broadleaved, deciduous, open (15-40%)70 Tree cover, needleleaved, evergreen, closed to open (>15%)71 Tree cover, needleleaved, evergreen, closed (>40%)72 Tree cover, needleleaved, evergreen, open (15-40%)80 Tree cover, needleleaved, deciduous, closed to open (>15%)81 Tree cover, needleleaved, deciduous, closed (>40%)82 Tree cover, needleleaved, deciduous, open (15-40%)90 Tree cover, mixed leaf type (broadleaved and needleleaved)100 Mosaic tree and shrub (>50%) / herbaceous cover (<50%)110 Mosaic herbaceous cover (>50%) / tree and shrub (<50%)120 Shrubland121 Shrubland evergreen122 Shrubland deciduous130 Grassland140 Lichens and mosses150 Sparse vegetation (tree, shrub, herbaceous cover) (<15%)151 Sparse tree (<15%)152 Sparse shrub (<15%)153 Sparse herbaceous cover (<15%)160 Tree cover, flooded, fresh or brakish water170 Tree cover, flooded, saline water180 Shrub or herbaceous cover, flooded, fresh/saline/brakish water190 Urban areas200 Bare areas201 Consolidated bare areas202 Unconsolidated bare areas210 Water bodies

The files linked to this reference are the geospatial data created as part of the completion of the baseline vegetation inventory project for the NPS park unit. Current format is ArcGIS file geodatabase but older formats may exist as shapefiles. GIS Database 2002-2005: Project Size = 1,898 acres Fort Larned National Historic Site (including the Rut Site) = 705 acres 16 Map Classes 11 Vegetated 5 Non-vegetated Minimum Mapping Unit = ½ hectare is the program standard but this was modified at FOLS to ¼ acre. Total Size = 229 Polygons Average Polygon Size = 8.3 acres Overall Thematic Accuracy = 92% To produce the digital map, a combination of 1:8,500-scale (0.75 meter pixels) color infrared digital ortho-imagery acquired on October 26, 2005 by the Kansas Applied Remote Sensing Program and 1:12,000-scale true color ortho-rectified imagery acquired in 2005 by the U.S. Department of Agriculture - Farm Service Agency’s Aerial Photography Field Office, and all of the GPS referenced ground data were used to interpret the complex patterns of vegetation and land-use. In the end, 16 map units (11 vegetated and 5 land-use) were developed and directly cross-walked or matched to corresponding plant associations and land-use classes. All of the interpreted and remotely sensed data were converted to Geographic Information System (GIS) databases using ArcGIS© software. Draft maps were printed, field tested, reviewed and revised. One hundred and six accuracy assessment (AA) data points were collected in 2006 by KNSHI and used to determine the map’s accuracy. After final revisions, the accuracy assessment revealed an overall thematic accuracy of 92%.

This dataset is designed to represent and identify the property boundaries in Lexington-Fayette County. The original dataset was created in late 1990's by a third party that converted existing paper maps to digital GIS files. The data has since been updated by georeferencing recorded plats for corrections and new additions. In cases where the plats do not appear accurate, aerial photos are utilized in attempt to properly locate the property lines. The only except for this process are changes to highway right-of-way in which calls are run from deeds. The geometry of this data is not of survey quality and should not be used for survey purposes. The data is intended for general reference purposes only.As part of the basemap data layers, the parcel boundary map layer is an integral part of the Lexington Fayette-Urban County Government Geographic Information System. Basemap data layers are accessed by personnel in most LFUCG divisions for basic applications such as viewing, querying, and map output production. More advanced user applications may focus on thematic mapping, summarization of data by geography, or planning purposes (including defining boundaries, managing assets and facilities, integrating attribute databases with geographic features, spatial analysis, and presentation output).

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.