The statewide dataset contains a combination of land cover mapping from 2016 aerial imagery and land use derived from standardized assessor parcel information for Massachusetts. The data layer is the result of a cooperative project between MassGIS and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Office of Coastal Management (OCM). Funding was provided by the Mass. Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs.

This land cover/land use dataset does not conform to the classification schemes or polygon delineation of previous land use data from MassGIS (1951-1999; 2005).In this map service layer hosted at MassGIS' ArcGIS Server, all impervious polygons are symbolized by their generalized use code; all non-impervious land cover polygons are symbolized by their land cover category. The idea behind this method is to use both cover and use codes to provide a truer picture of how land is being used: parcel use codes may indicate allowed or assessed, not actual use; land cover alone (especially impervious) does not indicate actual use.

See the full datalayer description for more details.This map service is best displayed at large (zoomed in) scales. Also available are a Feature Service and a Tile Service (cache). The tile cache will display very quickly in in ArcGIS Online, ArcGIS Desktop, and other applications that can consume tile services.

This dataset (2020-2023) is a compilation of the Land Use/Land Cover datasets created by the 5 Water Management Districts in Florida based on imagery -- Northwest Florida Water Management District (NWFWMD) 2022.Bay (1/4/2022 – 3/24/2022), Calhoun (1/7/2022 – 1/18/2022), Escambia (11/13/2021 – 1/15/2021), Franklin (1/7/2022 – 1/18/2022), Gadsden (1/7/2022 – 1/16/2022), Gulf (1/7/2022 – 1/14/2022), Holmes (1/8/2022 – 1/18/2022), Jackson (1/7/2022 – 1/14/2022), Jefferson (1/7/2022 – 2/16/2022), Leon (February 2022), Liberty (1/7/2022 – 1/16/2022), Okaloosa (10/31/2021 – 2/13/2022), Santa Rosa (10/26/2021-1/17/2022), Wakulla (1/7/2022 – 1/14/2022), Walton (1/7/2022-1/14/2022), Washington (1/13/2022 – 1/19/2022).Suwannee River Water Management District (SRWMD) 2022-2023.(Alachua (12/27/2022-12/28/2022, Baker (1/6/2023-1/15/2023), Bradford (11/9/2021-11/16/2021), Columbia (12/17/2021-1/29/2022), Gilchrist (12/17/2021-1/29/2022), Levy (12/17/2021-1/29/2022), Suwannee (12/17/2021-1/29/2022), Union (11/9/2021-11/9/2021).(Dixie 12/17/2021-01/29/2022), (Hamilton 12/17/2021-01/29/2022), (Jefferson 01/07/2022-02/16/2022), (Lafayette 12/17/2021-01/29/2022), (Madison 12/17/2021-01/29/2022), (Taylor 12/17/2021-01/29/2022).Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) 2023. South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) 2021-2023.St. John's River Water Management District (SJRWMD) 2020.Year Flight Season Counties:2020 (Dec. 2019 - Mar 2020) Alachua, Baker, Clay, Flagler, Lake, Marion, Osceola, Polk, Putnam.2021 (Dec. 2020 - Mar 2021) Brevard, Indian River, Nassau, Okeechobee, Orange, St. Johns, Seminole, Volusia. 2022 (Dec. 2021 - Mar 2022) Bradford, Union. Codes are derived from the Florida Land Use, Cover, and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS-DOT 1999) but may have been altered to accommodate region differences by each of the Water Management Districts.

The Land Cover dataset demarcates 14 land cover types by area; such as Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Forest, Agriculture, etc.

If viewing this description on the Western Pennsylvania Regional Data Center’s open data portal (http://www.wprdc.org), this dataset is harvested on a weekly basis from Allegheny County’s GIS data portal (http://openac.alcogis.opendata.arcgis.com/). The full metadata record for this dataset can also be found on Allegheny County’s GIS portal. You can access the metadata record and other resources on the GIS portal by clicking on the “Explore” button (and choosing the “Go to resource” option) to the right of the “ArcGIS Open Dataset” text below.

Category: Geography

Organization: Allegheny County

Department: Geographic Information Systems Group; Department of Administrative Services

Temporal Coverage: 1994

Data Notes:

Coordinate System: Pennsylvania State Plane South Zone 3702; U.S. Survey Foot

Development Notes: The dataset was created by Chester Environmental through combined image processing and GIS analysis of Landsat TM imagery of October 2, 1992, existing aerial photography, hardcopy and digital mapping sources and Census Bureau demographic data. The original dataset was created in 1993, then updated by Chester in 1994.

Other: none

Related Document(s): Data Dictionary (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VfUflfki42mpLSkr1R-up_OXGD3mHnv8tqeXf6XS9O0/edit?usp=sharing)

Frequency - Data Change: As needed

Frequency - Publishing: As needed

Data Steward Name: Eli Thomas

Data Steward Email: gishelp@alleghenycounty.us

This dataset combines the work of several different projects to create a seamless data set for the contiguous United States. Data from four regional Gap Analysis Projects and the LANDFIRE project were combined to make this dataset. In the northwestern United States (Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Washington and Wyoming) data in this map came from the Northwest Gap Analysis Project. In the southwestern United States (Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah) data used in this map came from the Southwest Gap Analysis Project. The data for Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Virginia came from the Southeast Gap Analysis Project and the California data was generated by the updated California Gap land cover project. The Hawaii Gap Analysis project provided the data for Hawaii. In areas of the county (central U.S., Northeast, Alaska) that have not yet been covered by a regional Gap Analysis Project, data from the Landfire project was used. Similarities in the methods used by these projects made possible the combining of the data they derived into one seamless coverage. They all used multi-season satellite imagery (Landsat ETM+) from 1999-2001 in conjunction with digital elevation model (DEM) derived datasets (e.g. elevation, landform) to model natural and semi-natural vegetation. Vegetation classes were drawn from NatureServe's Ecological System Classification (Comer et al. 2003) or classes developed by the Hawaii Gap project. Additionally, all of the projects included land use classes that were employed to describe areas where natural vegetation has been altered. In many areas of the country these classes were derived from the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD). For the majority of classes and, in most areas of the country, a decision tree classifier was used to discriminate ecological system types. In some areas of the country, more manual techniques were used to discriminate small patch systems and systems not distinguishable through topography. The data contains multiple levels of thematic detail. At the most detailed level natural vegetation is represented by NatureServe's Ecological System classification (or in Hawaii the Hawaii GAP classification). These most detailed classifications have been crosswalked to the five highest levels of the National Vegetation Classification (NVC), Class, Subclass, Formation, Division and Macrogroup. This crosswalk allows users to display and analyze the data at different levels of thematic resolution. Developed areas, or areas dominated by introduced species, timber harvest, or water are represented by other classes, collectively refered to as land use classes; these land use classes occur at each of the thematic levels. Raster data in both ArcGIS Grid and ERDAS Imagine format is available for download at http://gis1.usgs.gov/csas/gap/viewer/land_cover/Map.aspx Six layer files are included in the download packages to assist the user in displaying the data at each of the Thematic levels in ArcGIS. In adition to the raster datasets the data is available in Web Mapping Services (WMS) format for each of the six NVC classification levels (Class, Subclass, Formation, Division, Macrogroup, Ecological System) at the following links. http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Class_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Subclass_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Formation_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Division_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Macrogroup_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_Ecological_Systems_Landuse/MapServer

NOTICE TO PROVISIONAL 2023 LAND USE DATA USERS: Please note that on December 6, 2024 the Department of Water Resources (DWR) published the Provisional 2023 Statewide Crop Mapping dataset. The link for the shapefile format of the data mistakenly linked to the wrong dataset. The link was updated with the appropriate data on January 27, 2025. If you downloaded the Provisional 2023 Statewide Crop Mapping dataset in shapefile format between December 6, 2024 and January 27, we encourage you to redownload the data. The Map Service and Geodatabase formats were correct as posted on December 06, 2024.

Thank you for your interest in DWR land use datasets.

The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) has been collecting land use data throughout the state and using it to develop agricultural water use estimates for statewide and regional planning purposes, including water use projections, water use efficiency evaluations, groundwater model developments, climate change mitigation and adaptations, and water transfers. These data are essential for regional analysis and decision making, which has become increasingly important as DWR and other state agencies seek to address resource management issues, regulatory compliances, environmental impacts, ecosystem services, urban and economic development, and other issues. Increased availability of digital satellite imagery, aerial photography, and new analytical tools make remote sensing-based land use surveys possible at a field scale that is comparable to that of DWR’s historical on the ground field surveys. Current technologies allow accurate large-scale crop and land use identifications to be performed at desired time increments and make possible more frequent and comprehensive statewide land use information. Responding to this need, DWR sought expertise and support for identifying crop types and other land uses and quantifying crop acreages statewide using remotely sensed imagery and associated analytical techniques. Currently, Statewide Crop Maps are available for the Water Years 2014, 2016, 2018- 2022 and PROVISIONALLY for 2023.

Historic County Land Use Surveys spanning 1986 - 2015 may also be accessed using the CADWR Land Use Data Viewer: https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/CADWRLandUseViewer.

For Regional Land Use Surveys follow: https://data.cnra.ca.gov/dataset/region-land-use-surveys.

For County Land Use Surveys follow: https://data.cnra.ca.gov/dataset/county-land-use-surveys.

For a collection of ArcGIS Web Applications that provide information on the DWR Land Use Program and our data products in various formats, visit the DWR Land Use Gallery: https://storymaps.arcgis.com/collections/dd14ceff7d754e85ab9c7ec84fb8790a.

Recommended citation for DWR land use data: California Department of Water Resources. (Water Year for the data). Statewide Crop Mapping—California Natural Resources Agency Open Data. Retrieved “Month Day, YEAR,” from https://data.cnra.ca.gov/dataset/statewide-crop-mapping.

The 2020 Generalized Land Use Inventory dataset encompasses the seven county Twin Cities (Minneapolis and St. Paul) Metropolitan Area in Minnesota. The dataset was developed by the Metropolitan Council, a regional governmental organization that deals, in part, with regional issues and long range planning for the Twin Cities area. The data were interpreted from April 2020 air photos, with additional assistance from county parcel data and assessor's information, Internet information, field checks , and community review.

The following generalized land use classes are used (some of which have subclasses):

Single Family Residential
Multifamily Residential
Office
Retail and Other Commercial
Mixed Use
Industrial and Utility
Extractive
Institutional
Park, Recreational, or Preserve
Golf Course
Major Highway
Railway
Airport
Agriculture
Undeveloped
Water

See Section 5 of the metadata for a detailed description of each of these land use categories and available subcategories.

Note: Although this dataset does contain an 'Undeveloped' land category, this dataset does not attempt to delineate what lands might be considered developable. The definition of that category can be found in Section 5 of this metadata.

More information about the Metropolitan Council's generalized land use data can be found here Landuse Notes

This series of three-period land use land cover (LULC) datasets (1975, 2000, and 2013) aids in monitoring change in West Africa’s land resources (exception is Tchad at 4 kilometers). To monitor and map these changes, a 26 general LULC class system was used. The classification system that was developed was primarily inspired by the “Yangambi Classification” (Trochain, 1957). This fairly broad class system for LULC was used because the classes can be readily identified on Landsat satellite imagery. A visual photo-interpretation approach was used to identify and map the LULC classes represented on Landsat images. The Rapid Land Cover Mapper (RLCM) was used to facilitate the photo-interpretation using Esri’s ArcGIS Desktop ArcMap software. Citation: Trochain, J.-L., 1957, Accord interafricain sur la définition des types de végétation de l’Afrique tropicale: Institut d’études centrafricaines.

A Geographic Information System (GIS) shapefile and summary tables of irrigated agricultural land-use are provided for Glades, Highlands, Martin, Okeechobee, and St. Lucie Counties, Florida. These files were compiled through a cooperative project between the U.S. Geological Survey and the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Office of Agricultural Water Policy. Information provided in the shapefile includes the location of irrigated lands that were verified during field surveying that started in November 2023 and concluded in July 2024. Field data collected included crop type, irrigation system type, and primary water source used. A map image of the shapefile is also provided. Previously published estimates of irrigation acreage for years since 1992 are included in summary tables.

The Land Use (2005) datalayer is a Massachusetts statewide, seamless digital dataset of land cover / land use, created using semi-automated methods, and based on 0.5 meter resolution digital ortho imagery captured in April 2005.The classification scheme is based on the coding schema used for previous Massachusetts land use datasets, with modifications.These data were prepared by Sanborn. The minimum mapping unit (MMU) is generally 1 acre, but a MMU as low as ¼ acre may be found in some areas, e.g. in urban areas where assessor parcels were used to enhance the mapping of multi-family residential areas.The formerly used “MacConnell” schema combined land cover and land use categories, and was designed for manual interpretation of aerial photos. In this project, that protocol was modified so that it was useful in an automated environment, but it still maintains much compatibility with the older system. The spatial accuracy of the current method is excellent, since the land use map is derived directly from the ortho image.Please see https://www.mass.gov/info-details/massgis-data-land-use-2005 for more details.Feature service also available.

[Metadata] Description: Land Use Land Cover of main Hawaiian Islands as of 1976

A set of three estimates of land-cover types and annual transformations of land use are provided on a global 0.5 x0.5 degree lat/lon grid at annual time steps. The longest of the three estimates spans 1770-2010. The dataset presented here takes into account land-cover change due to four major land-use/management activities: (1) cropland expansion and abandonment, (2) pastureland expansion and abandonment, (3) urbanization, and (4) secondary forest regrowth due to wood harvest. Due to uncertainties associated with estimating historical agricultural (crops and pastures) land use, the study uses three widely accepted global reconstruction of cropland and pastureland in combination with common wood harvest and urban land data set to provide three distinct estimates of historical land-cover change and underlying land-use conversions. Hence, these distinct historical reconstructions offer a wide range of plausible regional estimates of uncertainty and extent to which different ecosystem have undergone changes. The three estimates use a consistent methodology, and start with a common land-cover map during pre-industrial conditions (year 1765), taking different courses as determined by the land-use/management datasets (cropland, pastureland, urbanization and wood harvest) to attain forest area distributions close to satellite estimates of forests for contemporary period. The satellite based estimates of forest area are based on MODIS sensor. All data uses the WGS84 spatial coordinate system for mapping.

This layer displays a global map of land use/land cover (LULC) derived from ESA Sentinel-2 imagery at 10m resolution. Each year is generated with Impact Observatory’s deep learning AI land classification model, trained using billions of human-labeled image pixels from the National Geographic Society. The global maps are produced by applying this model to the Sentinel-2 Level-2A image collection on Microsoft’s Planetary Computer, processing over 400,000 Earth observations per year.The algorithm generates LULC predictions for nine classes, described in detail below. The year 2017 has a land cover class assigned for every pixel, but its class is based upon fewer images than the other years. The years 2018-2024 are based upon a more complete set of imagery. For this reason, the year 2017 may have less accurate land cover class assignments than the years 2018-2024. Key Properties Variable mapped: Land use/land cover in 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024Source Data Coordinate System: Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) WGS84Service Coordinate System: Web Mercator Auxiliary Sphere WGS84 (EPSG:3857)Extent: GlobalSource imagery: Sentinel-2 L2ACell Size: 10-metersType: ThematicAttribution: Esri, Impact ObservatoryAnalysis: Optimized for analysisClass Definitions: ValueNameDescription1WaterAreas where water was predominantly present throughout the year; may not cover areas with sporadic or ephemeral water; contains little to no sparse vegetation, no rock outcrop nor built up features like docks; examples: rivers, ponds, lakes, oceans, flooded salt plains.2TreesAny significant clustering of tall (~15 feet or higher) dense vegetation, typically with a closed or dense canopy; examples: wooded vegetation, clusters of dense tall vegetation within savannas, plantations, swamp or mangroves (dense/tall vegetation with ephemeral water or canopy too thick to detect water underneath).4Flooded vegetationAreas of any type of vegetation with obvious intermixing of water throughout a majority of the year; seasonally flooded area that is a mix of grass/shrub/trees/bare ground; examples: flooded mangroves, emergent vegetation, rice paddies and other heavily irrigated and inundated agriculture.5CropsHuman planted/plotted cereals, grasses, and crops not at tree height; examples: corn, wheat, soy, fallow plots of structured land.7Built AreaHuman made structures; major road and rail networks; large homogenous impervious surfaces including parking structures, office buildings and residential housing; examples: houses, dense villages / towns / cities, paved roads, asphalt.8Bare groundAreas of rock or soil with very sparse to no vegetation for the entire year; large areas of sand and deserts with no to little vegetation; examples: exposed rock or soil, desert and sand dunes, dry salt flats/pans, dried lake beds, mines.9Snow/IceLarge homogenous areas of permanent snow or ice, typically only in mountain areas or highest latitudes; examples: glaciers, permanent snowpack, snow fields.10CloudsNo land cover information due to persistent cloud cover.11RangelandOpen areas covered in homogenous grasses with little to no taller vegetation; wild cereals and grasses with no obvious human plotting (i.e., not a plotted field); examples: natural meadows and fields with sparse to no tree cover, open savanna with few to no trees, parks/golf courses/lawns, pastures. Mix of small clusters of plants or single plants dispersed on a landscape that shows exposed soil or rock; scrub-filled clearings within dense forests that are clearly not taller than trees; examples: moderate to sparse cover of bushes, shrubs and tufts of grass, savannas with very sparse grasses, trees or other plants.NOTE: Land use focus does not provide the spatial detail of a land cover map. As such, for the built area classification, yards, parks, and groves will appear as built area rather than trees or rangeland classes.Usage Information and Best PracticesProcessing TemplatesThis layer includes a number of preconfigured processing templates (raster function templates) to provide on-the-fly data rendering and class isolation for visualization and analysis. Each processing template includes labels and descriptions to characterize the intended usage. This may include for visualization, for analysis, or for both visualization and analysis. VisualizationThe default rendering on this layer displays all classes.There are a number of on-the-fly renderings/processing templates designed specifically for data visualization.By default, the most recent year is displayed. To discover and isolate specific years for visualization in Map Viewer, try using the Image Collection Explorer. AnalysisIn order to leverage the optimization for analysis, the capability must be enabled by your ArcGIS organization administrator. More information on enabling this feature can be found in the ‘Regional data hosting’ section of this help doc.Optimized for analysis means this layer does not have size constraints for analysis and it is recommended for multisource analysis with other layers optimized for analysis. See this group for a complete list of imagery layers optimized for analysis.Prior to running analysis, users should always provide some form of data selection with either a layer filter (e.g. for a specific date range, cloud cover percent, mission, etc.) or by selecting specific images. To discover and isolate specific images for analysis in Map Viewer, try using the Image Collection Explorer.Zonal Statistics is a common tool used for understanding the composition of a specified area by reporting the total estimates for each of the classes. GeneralIf you are new to Sentinel-2 LULC, the Sentinel-2 Land Cover Explorer provides a good introductory user experience for working with this imagery layer. For more information, see this Quick Start Guide.Global land use/land cover maps provide information on conservation planning, food security, and hydrologic modeling, among other things. This dataset can be used to visualize land use/land cover anywhere on Earth. Classification ProcessThese maps include Version 003 of the global Sentinel-2 land use/land cover data product. It is produced by a deep learning model trained using over five billion hand-labeled Sentinel-2 pixels, sampled from over 20,000 sites distributed across all major biomes of the world.The underlying deep learning model uses 6-bands of Sentinel-2 L2A surface reflectance data: visible blue, green, red, near infrared, and two shortwave infrared bands. To create the final map, the model is run on multiple dates of imagery throughout the year, and the outputs are composited into a final representative map for each year.The input Sentinel-2 L2A data was accessed via Microsoft’s Planetary Computer and scaled using Microsoft Azure Batch. CitationKarra, Kontgis, et al. “Global land use/land cover with Sentinel-2 and deep learning.” IGARSS 2021-2021 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. IEEE, 2021.AcknowledgementsTraining data for this project makes use of the National Geographic Society Dynamic World training dataset, produced for the Dynamic World Project by National Geographic Society in partnership with Google and the World Resources Institute.

This dataset shows specific areas of land use/cover conversion in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed during the period 2013/14 to 2017/18. Change in land use/cover from 2013/14 to 2017/18 was interpreted by translating changes in land cover to changes in land use consistent with the 54 unique land use/cover classes in the 2017/18 land use dataset. Changes in land cover were primarily based on multi-date LiDAR imagery if available followed by multi-date NAIP imagery (available for all counties). Similar rules and logic used to classify the 2013/14 land cover data were applied to the change objects to produce a comparable land cover dataset for 2017/18. While some changes in land cover translate directly into changes in land use (e.g., impervious structures), others had to be interpreted based on context (e.g., small fragmented patches of tree canopy reconstituted as forest in 2013/14; turf grass in a newly developed parcel interpreted as cropland prior to development in 2013/14). Transitions between turf grass, cropland, pasture, and natural succession are not evident in the land cover data but are evident in the land use data. For this reason, the extent of land use change is greater than the extent of land cover change. For more information on input data please see: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1e0Uy7DVUe_bXY4jJ1TUPUFvwNs9QbyHrSRY8JQs5GxE/edit?usp=sharing For detailed methods and documentation, please see: https://www.chesapeakeconservancy.org/conservation-innovation-center/high-resolution-data/lulc-data-project-2022/

Every five years, since 1990, the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission has produced a GIS Land Use layer for its 9-county region. As it was in 2000, digital orthophotography was flown by DVRPC in 2005. Digitizing was done using these 2005 true-color aerials on the ESRI ArcGIS software platform at a 1:2400 (1 inch = 200 feet) scale.

A 6-in resolution 8-class land cover dataset derived from the 2017 Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data capture. This dataset was developed as part of an updated urban tree canopy assessment and therefore represents a ''top-down" mapping perspective in which tree canopy overhanging features is assigned to the tree canopy class. The eight land cover classes mapped were: (1) Tree Canopy, (2) Grass\Shrubs, (3) Bare Soil, (4) Water, (5) Buildings, (6) Roads, (7) Other Impervious, and (8) Railroads. The primary sources used to derive this land cover layer were 2017 LiDAR (1-ft post spacing) and 2016 4-band orthoimagery (0.5-ft resolution). Object based image analysis was used to automate land-cover features using LiDAR point clouds and derivatives, orthoimagery, and vector GIS datasets -- City Boundary (2017, NYC DoITT) Buildings (2017, NYC DoITT) Hydrography (2014, NYC DoITT) LiDAR Hydro Breaklines (2017, NYC DoITT) Transportation Structures (2014, NYC DoITT) Roadbed (2014, NYC DoITT) Road Centerlines (2014, NYC DoITT) Railroads (2014, NYC DoITT) Green Roofs (date unknown, NYC Parks) Parking Lots (2014, NYC DoITT) Parks (2016, NYC Parks) Sidewalks (2014, NYC DoITT) Synthetic Turf (2018, NYC Parks) Wetlands (2014, NYC Parks) Shoreline (2014, NYC DoITT) Plazas (2014, NYC DoITT) Utility Poles (2014, ConEdison via NYCEM) Athletic Facilities (2017, NYC Parks) For the purposes of classification, only vegetation > 8 ft were classed as Tree Canopy. Vegetation below 8 ft was classed as Grass/Shrub. To learn more about this dataset, visit the interactive "Understanding the 2017 New York City LiDAR Capture" Story Map -- https://maps.nyc.gov/lidar/2017/ Please see the following link for additional documentation on this dataset -- https://github.com/CityOfNewYork/nyc-geo-metadata/blob/master/Metadata/Metadata_LandCover.md

This hosted feature layer has been published in RI State Plane Feet NAD 83.A statewide, seamless, vector-formatted geospatial dataset depicting 2020 land use and land cover ground conditions. The product was developed by comparing high resolution 2020 and 2011 leaf-off aerial orthoimagery and employing both automated and manual processes to detect, delineate and photointerpret changes since 2011. The project area encompasses the State of Rhode Island and also extends 1/2 mile into the neighboring states of Connecticut and Massachusetts, or to the limits of the source orthoimagery. The minimum mapping unit for this dataset is 0.5 acre.The classification scheme is based on the same RI-modified Anderson Level III scheme used in previous classifications (1988, 1995, 2003/2004, and 2011) with the addition of two new classes (148) Ground-mounted Solar Energy Systems and (149) Wind Energy Systems. If data are used for change detection using the 2003/2004 edition be aware that marinas were coded from other transportation and developed recreation to commercial in the 2020 data to more accurately fit the classification system. The RI classification is based upon Anderson Level III coding described in the United States Geological Survey Publication: "A Land Use And Land Cover Classification System for Use With Remote Sensor Data, Geological Survey Professional Paper 964" Available Online at: https://landcover.usgs.gov/pdf/anderson.pdfPlease consider the source, spatial accuracy, attribute accuracy, and scale of these data before incorporating them into your project. These data were derived from both automated and manual photointerpretation processes and should be used for planning purposes only. The wetland areas contained in this dataset do not include all wetlands previously identified in other RIGIS land use and land cover datasets or in other separate GIS wetland datasets and interpretation of wetland areas should lean toward the side of caution. Wetland areas previously classified as forested wetlands are shown as forested areas in this dataset. Statistical comparisons with RIGIS land use and land cover data prior to 2003 should be treated with caution since some differences in the methodologies used to delineate features were employed

The 2015 LU/LC data set is the sixth in a series of land use mapping efforts that was begun in 1986. Revisions and additions to the initial baseline layer were done in subsequent years from imagery captured in 1995/97, 2002, 2007, 2012 and 2015. This present 2015 update was created by comparing the 2012 LU/LC layer from NJDEP's Geographic Information Systems (GIS) database to 2015 color infrared (CIR) imagery and delineating and coding areas of change. Work for this data set was done by Aerial Information Systems, Inc., Redlands, CA, under direction of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), Bureau of Geographic Information System (BGIS). LU/LC changes were captured by adding new line work and attribute data for the 2015 land use directly to the base data layer. All 2012 LU/LC polygons and attribute fields remain in this data set, so change analysis for the period 2012-2015 can be undertaken from this one layer. The classification system used was a modified Anderson et al., classification system. An impervious surface (IS) code was also assigned to each LU/LC polygon based on the percentage of impervious surface within each polygon as of 2015. Minimum mapping unit (MMU) is 1 acre. ADVISORY: This metadata file contains information for the 2015 Land Use/Land Cover (LU/LC) data sets, which were mapped by USGS Subbasin (HU8). There are additional reference documents listed in this file under Supplemental Information which should also be examined by users of these data sets. As stated in this metadata record's Use Constraints section, NJDEP makes no representations of any kind, including, but not limited to, the warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular use, nor are any such warranties to be implied with respect to the digital data layers furnished hereunder. NJDEP assumes no responsibility to maintain them in any manner or form. By downloading this data, user agrees to the data use constraints listed within this metadata record.

This is collection of DWR County Land Use Surveys. You may scroll the list below to download any individual survey of interest. Historic County Land Use Surveys spanning 1986 - 2015 may also be accessed using the CADWR Land Use Data Viewer. For Statewide Crop Mapping follow the link below : https://data.cnra.ca.gov/dataset/statewide-crop-mapping For Region Land Use Surveys follow link below: https://data.cnra.ca.gov/dataset/region-land-use-surveys Questions about the survey data may be directed to Landuse@water.ca.gov.

The GIS shapefile and summary tables provide irrigated agricultural land-use for Citrus, Hernando, Pasco, and Sumter Counties, Florida through a cooperative project between the U.S Geological Survey (USGS) and the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS), Office of Agricultural Water Policy. Information provided in the shapefile includes the location of irrigated land field verified for 2019, crop type, irrigation system type, and primary water source used in Citrus, Hernando, Pasco, and Sumter Counties, Florida. A map image of the shapefile is provided in the attachment.

This is a dataset download, not a document. The Open button will start the download.This data layer is an element of the Oregon GIS Framework and has been clipped to the Oregon boundary and reprojected to Oregon Lambert (2992). The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in partnership with several federal agencies, has developed and released four National Land Cover Database (NLCD) products over the past two decades: NLCD 1992, 2001, 2006, and 2011. These products provide spatially explicit and reliable information on the Nation’s land cover and land cover change. To continue the legacy of NLCD and further establish a long-term monitoring capability for the Nation’s land resources, the USGS has designed a new generation of NLCD products named NLCD 2016. The NLCD 2016 design aims to provide innovative, consistent, and robust methodologies for production of a multi-temporal land cover and land cover change database from 2001 to 2016 at 2–3-year intervals. Comprehensive research was conducted and resulted in developed strategies for NLCD 2016: a streamlined process for assembling and preprocessing Landsat imagery and geospatial ancillary datasets; a multi-source integrated training data development and decision-tree based land cover classifications; a temporally, spectrally, and spatially integrated land cover change analysis strategy; a hierarchical theme-based post-classification and integration protocol for generating land cover and change products; a continuous fields biophysical parameters modeling method; and an automated scripted operational system for the NLCD 2016 production. The performance of the developed strategies and methods were tested in twenty World Reference System-2 path/row throughout the conterminous U.S. An overall agreement ranging from 71% to 97% between land cover classification and reference data was achieved for all tested area and all years. Results from this study confirm the robustness of this comprehensive and highly automated procedure for NLCD 2016 operational mapping. Questions about the NLCD 2016 land cover product can be directed to the NLCD 2016 land cover mapping team at USGS EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov. See included spatial metadata for more details.