The National Aerial Photography Program (NAPP) was coordinated by the USGS as an interagency project to acquire cloud-free aerial photographs at an altitude of 20,000 feet above mean terrain elevation. The photographs were taken with a 6-inch focal length lens at a scale of 1:40,000. Coverage over the conterminous United States includes both black-and-white (BW) and color infrared (CIR) aerial photographs. Film type and extent of coverage were determined by available funds and operational requirements. The NAPP program, which was operational from 1987 to 2007, consists of more than 1.3 million images. Photographs were acquired on 9-inch film and were centered over quarters of USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles.To view historical imagery availability by county please visit the Historical Availability of Imagery map.To view more NAPP imagery visit the NAPP Historical Imagery Portfolio app.For ordering information please contact the GEO Customer Service Section at geo.sales@usda.gov.

April 2001, April 2003

January 2002

This reference contains the imagery data used in the completion of the baseline vegetation inventory project for the NPS park unit. Orthophotos, raw imagery, and scanned aerial photos are common files held here. High-quality existing photography developed by MassGIS was used as the base for the vegetation map (MassGIS 2007). A true color orthophoto mosaic was developed from a set of digital 1:5,000 scale medium resolution true color aerial images that are considered the new "base map" for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts by MassGIS and the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (EOEA). The photography for the entire commonwealth was captured in April 2005 when deciduous trees were mostly bare and the ground was generally free of snow. The image type is 4-band (RGBN) natural color (Red, Green, Blue) and Near infrared in 8 bits (values ranging 0–255) per band format. Key information for the mosaic is summarized in Table 1. Appendix A contains additional detailed information regarding the aerial photography acquired from MASS GIS.

This collection of geo-referenced photos vary with regards to spatial accuracy and resolution. Use the hotlinks below to learn the details of each collection or review MassGIS's new story map explaining all the vintages of aerial photos. Tip: Reviewing that story map might be an easier way to digest the information rather than reviewing the more formal/standard metadata accessible via the hotlinks below.Within the web map certain layers will only be visible at particular zoom extents. If a layer is unavailable to turn on/off, then zoom in or out as needed until the layer becomes active.All photos, except year 1938, are captured during leaf-off (typically late winter/early spring). With the exception of the 1938 & 1990s collection, all photos are in true color. The 1938 & 1990s are in black and white. With regards to Dukes County (which includes the Islands of Martha's Vineyard and the Elizabeth Islands) these are the applicable years of acquisition for those State-wide collections that span multiple years: "1990s collection" -- Only year 1999 for Dukes County"2001-2003 collection" -- Only year 2003 for Dukes County"2008-2009 collection" - Only year 2009 for Dukes County"2011-2012 collection" - Only year 2011 for Dukes County"2013-2014 collection" - Only year 2014 for Dukes CountyPhoto Details (Metadata)1938 Black & White Aerials (georeferenced & hosted by Harvard Forest)1990s Black & White Aerials2001-2003 Color Aerials2005 Color Aerials2008-2009 Color Aerials2011-2012 Color Aerials2013-2014 Color Aerials2015 Satellite Images - Extra Details2019 Color Aerials2021 Color Aerials2023 Color AerialsParcel Lines -- These data are NOT survey grade and are intended for general reference only. The parcel data comply with the MassGIS Level 3 parcel data standard. Each town in Dukes County hires a GIS Consultant to prepare their digital parcel lines and to link the properties to the respective records from the town's assessing database. The linkage is static and not updated in real-time - it is only 'as current' as the day the data was exported from the assessing database. The Martha's Vineyard Commission does not edit nor maintain any assessing data or parcel lines/property bounds. Each town within Dukes County updates their digital parcel data when they see fit (most, typically, update annually). Click on a specific town in this map to see when their parcel data was updated and by whom. Similarly, clicking on a parcel in this "MA Aerial Photos Since 1990s web map" will show you the applicable Fiscal Year the assessing info was exported.

These data represent tree cover for two cities (Chelsea and the urban core of Holyoke) in Massachusetts. Tree cover was manually delineated on aerial imagery from 1952, 1971, 2003 and 2014. Also included are neighborhood boundaries for both of these study locations.Urban foresters assess urban tree canopy cover trends using remotely sensed imagery as a way to provide data for municipalities to set or maintain goals for tree canopy. However, these assessments typically do not take into account historical and socioeconomical dynamics of tree cover change over many decades. These land cover change data were collected to assess the rates and drivers of tree canopy cover change, using Holyoke and Chelsea to investigate the processes of tree cover change in post-industrial cities. Understanding historical drivers of tree canopy cover change can be used to inform multi-decadal urban tree canopy assessments and the creation of targeted, feasible urban tree canopy goals at neighborhood and city scales. These historical analyses can help urban natural resource managers to better understand how to protect and expand their cities’ urban tree canopy over time.For more information about these data see Healy et al. (2022).

These data were published on 02/22/2022. Minor metadata updates were made on 04/25/2023.

1. Body mass is a key life history trait in animals. Despite being the largest animals on the planet, no method currently exists to estimate body mass of free-living whales. 2. We combined aerial photographs and historical catch records to estimate the body mass of free-living right whales (Eubalaena sp.). First, aerial photogrammetry from unmanned aerial vehicles was used to measure the body length, width (lateral distance) and height (dorso-ventral distance) of free-living southern right whales (E. australis; 48 calves, 7 juveniles and 31 lactating females). From these data, body volume was estimated by modelling the whales as a series of infinitely small ellipses. The body girth of the whales was next calculated at three measurement sites (across the pectoral fin, the umbilicus and the anus) and a linear model was developed to predict body volume from the body girth and length data. To obtain a volume-to-mass conversion factor, this model was then used to estimate the body volume of eight lethally caught North Pacific right whales (E. japonica), for which body mass was measured. This conversion factor was consequently used to predict the body mass of the free-living whales. 3. The cross-sectional body shape (height-width ratio) of the whales was slightly flattened dorso-ventrally at the anterior end of the body, almost circular in the mid region, and significantly flattened in the lateral plane across the posterior half of the body. Compared to a circular cross-sectional model, our body mass model incorporating body length, width and height improved mass estimates by up to 23.6% (mean=6.1%, SD=5.27). Our model had a mean error of only 1.6% (SD=0.012), compared to 9.5% (SD=7.68) for a simpler body length-to-mass model. The volume-to-mass conversion factor was estimated at 754.63kg m-3 (SD=50.03). Predicted body mass estimates were within a close range of existing body mass measurements. 4. We provide a non-invasive method to accurately estimate body mass of free-living whales while accounting for both their structural size (body length) and relative body condition (body width). Our approach can be directly applied to other marine mammals by adjusting the model parameters (body mass model script provided).

February 2005

This data set contains true color (RGB) ortho-rectified mosaic tiles, created as a product from the NOAA Integrated Ocean and Coastal Mapping (IOCM) initiative. The source imagery was acquired from 20090810 - 20091021. The images were acquired with an Applanix Digital Sensor System (DSS). The original images were acquired at a higher resolution than the final ortho-rectified mosaic. Ortho-rectified mosaic tiles are an ancillary product of NOAA's Coastal Mapping Program (CMP), created through a wider Integrated Ocean and Coastal Mapping initiative to increase support for multiple uses of the data. The ground sample distance (GSD) for each pixel is 0.50 m.

The data set includes Geotiff (.TIF) images with associated HIStory (.HIS) files and .JPG format browse images. Metadata in Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) format is included as ASCII and .HTML files.

DATA SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR NAVIGATION.

This project illustrates how the shoreline of Massachusetts has shifted between the mid-1800s and 2018. Using data from historical and modern sources, up to ten shorelines depicting the local high water line (i.e., the landward limit of wave runup at the time of local high tide) have been generated with transects at 50-meter (approximately 164-feet) intervals predominantly along the ocean-facing shore. For each of these more than 26,000 transects, data are provided on shoreline change rates and uncertainty values. CZM has incorporated these shoreline change data into the Massachusetts Ocean Resource Information System (MORIS).To interpret and apply the shoreline change data, both general shoreline trends and long- and short-term rates must be analyzed and evaluated in light of current shoreline conditions, recent changes in shoreline uses, and the effects of human-induced alterations to natural shoreline movement. In areas that show shoreline change reversals (i.e., where the shoreline fluctuates between erosion and accretion) and areas that have been extensively altered by human activities (e.g., seawalls and jetties), professional judgment and knowledge of natural and human impacts are typically required for proper data interpretation and incorporation of the data into project planning and design.For example, a group of 10 transects along Sankaty Head on Nantucket indicate a generally stable (close to zero) long-term trend of shoreline change from 1846 to 2009. The beach is not stable, however, as illustrated by the short-term erosion rates of approximately -9.5 feet per year and the approximately 300-feet of erosion experienced in this area from 1978 to 2009. In this particular example, the beach was accreting up until the 1950s, when it began to erode rapidly. The accretion and erosion in essence mathematically "cancel each other out," leaving a long-term shoreline change rate of around zero.Where the shoreline has been armored with sea walls, revetments, and other structures, the shoreline change data must be looked at very closely to determine the effects of the structures. The natural sources of beach sand for North Scituate Beach were severely diminished by seawall and revetment construction during the 1940s through the 1970s. Consequently, the trend of erosion is not only continuing in this area—it is increasing from approximately -0.5 to -2.5 feet per year. Transects on Scusset Beach in Bourne show long-term accretion rates of more than seven feet per year. However, the short-term accretion rates of approximately five feet per year are more reflective of the current shoreline trend. The north jetty of the Cape Cod Canal was constructed in the early 1900s and resulted in an initial rapid growth of Scusset Beach, contributing to the higher long-term rates that have since leveled off.In addition, the shorelines were derived from different historical maps, aerial photographs, and LIDAR (light detection and ranging) topographic data sources. Each shoreline was assigned an uncertainty value based on an estimate of errors inherent in the source material and method used to delineate the local high water line. These estimates of total shoreline position uncertainty, which ranged from 11.6 meters (38.1 feet) for 1800s shorelines to 1.27 meters (4.17 feet) for LIDAR-derived shorelines, should be considered when analyzing shoreline movement over time and were included in the calculation of uncertainty at each transect. Each transect has values for long- and short-term rates, as well as estimated uncertainty values for those rates. The shoreline change rates should be looked at as a range, particularly for transects with uncertainty values that are greater than the shoreline change rate. For example, for a transect with an erosion rate of -1.0 feet per year with an uncertainty range of ±2.5 feet per year, the range for the shoreline change rate would be +1.5 to -3.5 feet per year—meaning that the area may be either eroding or accreting. To best protect coastal properties in the long term, the most aggressive rate of erosion over the expected life of the building or structure should be used for project design.See the USGS Open-File Report, Massachusetts Shoreline Change Mapping and Analysis Project, 2013 Update, for an in-depth explanation of the shoreline change project and data interpretation.