This web map service contains mapping data that will assist you to work through the vegetation management framework. It details areas of regulation, and outlines rules and values that must be considered when clearing native vegetation.It also includes mapping layers to assist with determining land suitability for high value agriculture.Due to the complex nature of some data layers, the service display scale ranges from 1:577792 to 1:1.

Napa County has used a 2004 edition vegetation map produced using the Manual of California Vegetation classification system (Thorne et al. 2004) as one of the input layers for land use decision and policy. The county decided to update the map because of its utility. A University of California, Davis (UCD) group was engaged to produce the map. The earlier map used black and white digital orthophoto quadrangles from 1993, with a pixel resolution of 3 meters. This image was delineated using a heads up digitization technique produced by ASI (Aerial Services Incorporated). The resulting polygons were the provided vegetation and landcover attributes following the classification system used by California State Department of Fish and Wildlife mappers in the Manual of California Vegetation. That effort included a brief field campaign in which surveyors drove accessible roads and verified or corrected the dominant vegetation of polygons adjacent to roadways or visible using binoculars. There were no field relevé or rapid assessment plots conducted. This update version uses a 2016 edition of 1 meter color aerial imagery taken by the National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) as the base imagery. In consultation with the county we decided to use similar methods to the previous mapping effort, in order to preserve the capacity to assess change in the county over time. This meant forgoing recent data and innovations in remote sensing such as the use LiDAR and Ecognition’s segmentation of imagery to delineate stands, which have been recently used in a concurrent project mapping of Sonoma County. The use of such technologies would have made it more difficult to track changes in landcover, because differences between publication dates would not be definitively attributable to either actual land cover change or to change in methodology. The overall cost of updating the map in the way was approximately 20% of the cost of the Sonoma vegetation mapping program.Therefore, we started with the original map, and on-screen inspections of the 2004 polygons to determine if change had occurred. If so, the boundaries and attributes were modified in this new edition of the map. We also used the time series of imagery available on Google Earth, to further inspect many edited polygons. While funding was not available to do field assessments, we incorporated field expertise and other map data from four projects that overlap with parts of Napa Count: the Angwin Experimental Forest; a 2014 vegetation map of the Knoxville area; agricultural rock piles were identified by Amber Manfree; and parts of a Sonoma Vegetation Map that used 2013 imagery.The Angwin Experimental Forest was mapped by Peter Lecourt from Pacific Union College. He identified several polygons of redwoods in what are potentially the eastern-most extent of that species. We reviewed those polygons with him and incorporated some of the data from his area into this map.The 2014 Knoxville Vegetation map was developed by California Department of Fish and Wildlife. It was made public in February of 2019, close to the end of this project. We reviewed the map, which covers part of the northeast portion of Napa County. We incorporated polygons and vegetation types for 18 vegetation types including the rare ones, we reviewed and incorporated some data for another 6 types, and we noted in comments the presence of another 5 types. There is a separate report specifically addressing the incorporation of this map to our map.Dr Amber Manfree has been conducting research on fire return intervals for parts of Napa County. In her research she identified that large piles of rocks are created when vineyards are put in. These are mapable features. She shared the locations of rock piles she identified, which we incorporated into the map. The Sonoma Vegetation Map mapped some distance into the western side of Napa County. We reviewed that map’s polygons for coast redwood. We then examined our imagery and the Google imagery to see if we could discern the whorled pattern of tree branches. Where we could, we amended or expanded redwood polygons in our map.The Vegetation classification systems used here follows California’s Manual of California Vegetation and the National Vegetation Classification System (MCV and NVCS). We started with the vegetation types listed in the 2004 map. We predominantly use the same set of species names, with modifications/additions particularly from the Knoxville map. The NVCS uses Alliance and Association as the two most taxonomically detailed levels. This map uses those levels. It also refers to vegetation types that have not been sampled in the field and that has 3-6 species and a site descriptor as Groups, which is the next more general level in the NVCS classification. We conducted 3 rounds of quality assessment/quality control exercises.

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. Remotely-sensed imagery provides the foundation for mapping vegetation types and other land cover classes. Imagery taken by the GeoEye-1 satellite/sensor was acquired from LandInfo Worldwide Mapping, LLC. The product was delivered as bundled 50 cm panchromatic and 2 meter 4-band multispectral (R, G, B, and NIR) images. The imagery has a positional accuracy of <3 m. Specifications for the GeoEye acquisition included the following: Total area for new collection of 372 square kilometers, 10% or less cloud cover , 0-20 off-nadir angle guarantee, Acquisition dates between late May and late June, 2011 Imagery satisfying the requirements was successfully acquired for the BICA project area on June 15, 2011 and delivered to CSU in July 2011. Each image was delivered as a geo-referenced product mosaicked as a single scene/image. We created a 50 cm resolution pan-sharpened set of multispectral bands to use for interpretation of vegetation. The acquisition provided 4-band imagery during the peak growing season. Additional imagery supplementing interpretation included 30 cm true-color Google Earth/Bing imagery imported to ArcGIS using Arc2Earth™ software and older true-color imagery viewed using the Google Earth online viewer.

VegMachine is an online tool that uses satellite imagery to summarise decades of change in Australia’s landscape. It’s simple to operate, easy to understand, and free to use.

With VegMachine you can: view satellite image land cover products; measure land cover change and fire scars; generate comprehensive ground cover monitoring reports and better understand the links between management, climate and vegetation cover.

The State Vegetation Type Map (SVTM) is a regional-scale map of NSW Plant Community Types. This map represents the current extent of each Plant Community Type, Vegetation Class and Vegetation Formation, across all tenures in NSW. This map is updated periodically as part of the Integrated BioNet Vegetation Data program to improve quality and alignment to the NSW vegetation classification hierarchy. An SVTM pre-clearing PCT map is available here. Further information about the mapping methods is available from the State Vegetation Type Mapping Program Page Current Release C2.0.M2.1 (November2024) This release includes revisions, using the most recent NSW PCT Classification Master list (represented by “C2.0” in the version release number). PCT spatial distributions were manually edited based on user and community feedback since the previous C2.0.M2.0 release. In addition, changes were made to the Native Vegetation Extent mask which is used to create the Native Extent map. Detailed technical information is available here.

This dataset is a series of digital map-posters accompanying the AdaptNRM Guide: Helping Biodiversity Adapt: supporting climate adaptation planning using a community-level modelling approach.

These represent supporting materials and information about the community-level biodiversity models applied to climate change. Map posters are organised by four biological groups (vascular plants, mammals, reptiles and amphibians), two climate change scenario (1990-2050 MIROC5 and CanESM2 for RCP8.5), and five measures of change in biodiversity.

The map-posters present the nationally consistent data at locally relevant resolutions in eight parts – representing broad groupings of NRM regions based on the cluster boundaries used for climate adaptation planning (http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/adaptation) and also Nationally.

Map-posters are provided in PNG image format at moderate resolution (300dpi) to suit A0 printing. The posters were designed to meet A0 print size and digital viewing resolution of map detail. An additional set in PDF image format has been created for ease of download for initial exploration and printing on A3 paper. Some text elements and map features may be fuzzy at this resolution.

Each map-poster contains four dataset images coloured using standard legends encompassing the potential range of the measure, even if that range is not represented in the dataset itself or across the map extent.

Most map series are provided in two parts: part 1 shows the two climate scenarios for vascular plants and mammals and part 2 shows reptiles and amphibians. Eight cluster maps for each series have a different colour theme and map extent. A national series is also provided. Annotation briefly outlines the topics presented in the Guide so that each poster stands alone for quick reference.

An additional 77 National maps presenting the probability distributions of each of 77 vegetation types – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroups (NVIS subgroups) - are currently in preparation.

Example citations:

Williams KJ, Raisbeck-Brown N, Prober S, Harwood T (2015) Generalised projected distribution of vegetation types – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroups (1990 and 2050), A0 map-poster 8.1 - East Coast NRM regions. CSIRO Land and Water Flagship, Canberra. Available online at www.AdaptNRM.org and https://data.csiro.au/dap/.

Williams KJ, Raisbeck-Brown N, Harwood T, Prober S (2015) Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050), A0 map-poster 9.1 - East Coast NRM regions. CSIRO Land and Water Flagship, Canberra. Available online at www.AdaptNRM.org and https://data.csiro.au/dap/.

This dataset has been delivered incrementally. Please check that you are accessing the latest version of the dataset. Lineage: The map posters show case the scientific data. The data layers have been developed at approximately 250m resolution (9 second) across the Australian continent to incorporate the interaction between climate and topography, and are best viewed using a geographic information system (GIS). Each data layers is 1Gb, and inaccessible to non-GIS users. The map posters provide easy access to the scientific data, enabling the outputs to be viewed at high resolution with geographical context information provided.

Maps were generated using layout and drawing tools in ArcGIS 10.2.2

A check list of map posters and datasets is provided with the collection.

Map Series: 7.(1-77) National probability distribution of vegetation type – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroup pre-1750 #0x

8.1 Generalised projected distribution of vegetation types (NVIS subgroups) (1990 and 2050)

9.1 Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for plants and mammals (1990-2050)

9.2 Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

10.1 Need for assisted dispersal for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

10.2 Need for assisted dispersal for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

11.1 Refugial potential for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

11.1 Refugial potential for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

12.1 Climate-driven future revegetation benefit for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

12.2 Climate-driven future revegetation benefit for vascular reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

The map of potential natural vegetation of eastern Africa (V4A) gives the distribution of potential natural vegetation in Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Malawi and Zambia.

The map is based on national and local vegetation maps constructed from botanical field surveys - mainly carried out in the two decades after 1950 - in combination with input from national botanical experts. Potential natural vegetation (PNV) is defined as “vegetation that would persist under the current conditions without human interventions”. As such, it can be considered a baseline or null model to assess the vegetation that could be present in a landscape under the current climate and edaphic conditions and used as an input to model vegetation distribution under changing climate.

Vegetation types are defined by their tree species composition, and the documentation of the maps thus includes the potential distribution for more than a thousand tree and shrub species, see the documentation (https://vegetationmap4africa.org/species.html)

The map distinguishes 48 vegetation types, divided in four main vegetation groups: 16 forest types, 15 woodland and wooded grassland types, 5 bushland and thicket types and 12 other types. The map is available in various formats. The online version (https://vegetationmap4africa.org/vegetation_map.html) and for PDF versions of the map, see the documentation (https://vegetationmap4africa.org/documentation.html). Version 2.0 of the potential natural vegetation map and the woody species selection tool was published in 2015 (https://vegetationmap4africa.org/docs/versionhistory/). The original data layers include country-specific vegetation types to maintain the maximum level of information available. This map might be most suitable when carrying out analysis at the national or sub-national level.

When using V4A in your work, cite the publication: Lillesø, J-P.B., van Breugel, P., Kindt, R., Bingham, M., Demissew, S., Dudley, C., Friis, I., Gachathi, F., Kalema, J., Mbago, F., Minani, V., Moshi, H., Mulumba, J., Namaganda, M., Ndangalasi, H., Ruffo, C., Jamnadass, R. & Graudal, L. 2011, Potential Natural Vegetation of Eastern Africa (Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia). Volume 1: The Atlas. 61 ed. Forest & Landscape, University of Copenhagen. 155 p. (Forest & Landscape Working Papers; 61 - as well as this repository using the DOI <https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11125645>.

The development of V4A was mainly funded by the Rockefeller Foundation and supported by University of Copenhagen

If you want to use the potential natural vegetation map of eastern Africa for your analysis, you can download the spatial data layers in raster format as well as in vector format from this repository <https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11125645>

A simplified version of the map can be found on Figshare <https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1306936.v1>. That version aggregates country specific vegetation types into regional types. This might be the better option when doing regional-level assessments.

The Sonoma County fine scale vegetation and habitat map is an 82-class vegetation map of Sonoma County with 212,391 polygons. The fine scale vegetation and habitat map represents the state of the landscape in 2013 and adheres to the National Vegetation Classification System (NVC). The map was designed to be used at scales of 1:5,000 and smaller. This dataset is also available as a layer package and a file geodatabase.The full datasheet for this product is available here: https://sonomaopenspace.egnyte.com/dl/qOm3JEb3tD The final report for the fine scale vegetation map, containing methods and an accuracy assessment, is available here: https://sonomaopenspace.egnyte.com/dl/1SWyCSirE9Class definitions, as well as a dichotomous key for the map classes, can be found in the Sonoma Vegetation and Habitat Map Key (https://sonomaopenspace.egnyte.com/dl/xObbaG6lF8)The fine scale vegetation and habitat map was created using semi-automated methods that include field work, computer-based machine learning, and manual aerial photo interpretation. The vegetation and habitat map was developed by first creating a lifeform map, an 18-class map that served as a foundation for the fine-scale map. The lifeform map was created using “expert systems” rulesets in Trimble Ecognition. These rulesets combine automated image segmentation (stand delineation) with object based image classification techniques. In contrast with machine learning approaches, expert systems rulesets are developed heuristically based on the knowledge of experienced image analysts. Key data sets used in the expert systems rulesets for lifeform included: orthophotography (’11 and ’13), the LiDAR derived Canopy Height Model (CHM), and other LiDAR derived landscape metrics. After it was produced using Ecognition, the preliminary lifeform map product was manually edited by photo interpreters. Manual editing corrected errors where the automated methods produced incorrect results. Edits were made to correct two types of errors: 1) unsatisfactory polygon (stand) delineations and 2) incorrect polygon labels.The mapping team used the lifeform map as the foundation for the finer scale and more floristically detailed Fine Scale Vegetation and Habitat map. For example, a single polygon mapped in the lifeform map as forest might be divided into four polygons in the in the fine scale map including redwood forest, Douglas-fir forest, Oregon white oak forest, and bay forest. The fine scale vegetation and habitat map was developed using a semi-automated approach. The approach combines Ecognition segmentation, extensive field data collection, machine learning, manual editing, and expert review. Ecognition segmentation results in a refinement of the lifeform polygons. Field data collection results in a large number of training polygons labeled with their field-validated map class. Machine learning relies on the field collected data as training data and a stack of GIS datasets as predictor variables. The resulting model is used to create automated fine-scale labels countywide. Machine learning algorithms for this project included both Random Forests and Support Vector Machines (SVMs). Machine learning is followed by extensive manual editing, which is used to 1) edit segment (polygon) labels when they are incorrect and 2) edit segment (polygon) shape when necessary.The map classes in the fine scale vegetation and habitat map generally correspond to the alliance level of the National Vegetation Classification, but some map classes - especially riparian vegetation and herbaceous types - correspond to higher levels of the hierarchy (such as group or macrogroup).

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. Final products included a seamless GIS database in Arc/Info coverage and ArcView shapefile formats of detailed overstory and understory vegetation communities for the entire park, along with hardcopy maps plotted at 1:15,000 scale corresponding to the area covered by 25 individual USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles (Figures 11 and 12). Each map sheet contains a color-coded legend and brief description of all vegetation classes found in GRSM. A demonstration of additional digital/hardcopy products that can be created for particular areas of interest as a result of the vegetation database development include color orthophoto mosaics and drapes of maps/images on the DEM to enhance visualization of vegetation patterns with respect to the terrain. Applications of the GRSM map/database products include: 1) vegetation assessment for general resource management tasks; and 2) utilization of the overstory and understory vegetation structure for classifying fuels and the associated risk of forest fire.

The Mendocino Pygmy Forest is one of the best-known examples of a rare natural community in California. The unique soil and climatic attributes and the resulting vegetation of the Mendocino coastal terraces described by Jenny et al (1969), Westman (1975), Westman and Whittaker (1975), Sholars (1979), Sholars (1982), Sholars (1984) and others are well- known in the scientific and conservation literature.The mapping and classification process assumed that the unique and biologically significant elements of the pygmy forest ecosystem were definable without a complete inventory of the surrounding regional vegetation and land-use patterns. The boundary of the mapped areas was created using existing geographic information on soils, topography, land use, along with fieldwork from previous efforts. Within that area, an array of vegetation samples were collected and classified representing the full array of vegetation patterns within it. The boundary was refined as part of the mapping process. It was later expanded to include property owned by the Mendocino Coast Park and Recreation District after receiving permission to conduct surveys as part of this project. (Polygons that would not have been mapped for the original project but are within the MCPRD property are marked “MCPRD Additional” in the Notes field.)The map was produced using a classification based on an analysis of surveys taken throughout the range of the oligotrophic areas supporting Pygmy Forest vegetation. This classification has been incorporated into the Manual of California Vegetation Online Database. The map classification is mostly at the Association Level of the NVCS hierarchy (12 types), with some at the Alliance Level (5 types) and Group Level (3 types), and 4 land use and water classes. It was hand-digitized using photointerpretation based on the 2014 NAIP Imagery, with other ancillary data used to help with the identification of vegetation types. The minimum mapping unit was 1 acre for vegetation types, and 0.25 acres for water, developed and agricultural type. The total area mapped was 9782 acres.An accuracy assessment performed on the map. The overall accuracy of each of the 5 most reliably sampled types was between 82 and 92 percent accuracy, meeting minimum accuracy standards.For more information, see the supplemental information below and the report for the map cited in the references. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=161736ReferencesCalifornia Department of Fish and Wildlife, Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program. Classification and Mapping of Pygmy Forest and Related Mendocino Cypress (Hesperocyparis pygmaea) Vegetation, Mendocino and Sonoma Counties, California. CDFW; 11/2018. A Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition. http://www.cnps.org/cnps/vegetation/. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA.USNVC [United States National Vegetation Classification]. http://usnvc.org/. 2017. United States National Vegetation Classification Database, V2.01. Federal Geographic Data Committee, Vegetation Subcommittee, Washington DCJenny, H. R.J. Arkley, and A.M. Schultz. 1969. The pygmy forest-podsol ecosystem and its dune associates of the Mendocino coast. Madroño20:60-74.Westman, W.E. 1975. Edaphic climax pattern of the pygmy forest region of California. Ecological Monographs30:279-338.Westman, W.E. and R.H. Whittaker. 1975. The pygmy forest region of northern California: studies on biomass and primary productivity. Journal of Ecology63:493-520.Sholars, R.E. 1979. Water relations in the pygmy forest of Mendocino County. Ph.D. diss. University of California, Davis.Sholars, R.E. 1982. The pygmy forest and associated plant communities of coastal Mendocino County, California; genesis, soils, vegetation. Black Bear Press, Mendocino, CA.Sholars, R.E. 1984. The pygmy forest of Mendocino. Fremontia12(3): 3-8.Bowles, C.J. and E. Cowgill. 2012. Discovering marine terraces using airborne LiDAR along the Mendocino-Sonoma coast, northern California. Geosphere8(2):386''402.Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available online at https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed [October 13, 2014].National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP), United States Department of Agriculture. https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/aerial-photography/imagery-programs/naip-imagery/index

This web map contains information on vegetation type classes, tree canopy cover, tall shrub canopy cover, and tree size from four existing vegetation mapping projects. These maps were prepared for the Chugach National Forest to provide up-to-date and more complete information about vegetative communities, structure and patterns across the Forest. The Copper River Delta vegetation dominance type product was completed in 2013; the Kenai Peninsula data products were completed in 2017; Cordova was completed in 2021; and the Glacier project area was completed in 2022.Nearly 11 million terrestrial acres were mapped through a partnership between the Geospatial Technology and Applications Center (GTAC), Chugach National Forest, the Alaska Regional Office, and other State, Tribal and Federal agencies. The Chugach National Forest and their partners prepared the regional classification system and identified the desired map units (map classes) that characterized the existing vegetation. GTAC served as the technical lead for developing the mapping methodology that produced the final data products. A combination of field and image interpreted reference data were used to inform the map models. Federal, State, and contracted staff collected plot data on the ground, while Ducks Unlimited and GTAC personnel collected reference information from a helicopter. Classification and regression models were used to characterize modeling units (mapping polygons) with the following vegetation attributes: 1) vegetation type; 2) tree canopy cover; 3) tree size; and 4) tall shrub canopy cover. The minimum map feature depicted is 0.25 acres. Map products were designed according to National Forest Service vegetation mapping standards and are stored in Federal databases.For more detailed information on mapping methodology please see the individual project reports and the Chugach Regional Vegetation Mapping Report.

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

This metadata layer shows the footprint of vegetation mapping projects completed in California that have used the Manual California of Vegetation (MCV 1st edition) or the National Vegatation Classification Standards (MCV 2nd edition/online) as a basis for vegetation classification. It provides basic information about each project. It is current as of October 2024. A second dataset, Vegetation (MCV / NVCS) Sampling Projects - California ds3103, shows information about sampling-only project areas that currently have no mapping projects associated with them.

Countywide vegetation classes based on definitions found in the Napa County Water Quality & Tree Protection Ordinance (WQTPO).More information related to the WQTPO and these classes can be found in the following documents:Final Ordinance, approved 4/9/2019 Implementation Guide to the WQTPOThis layer is a view of the original Vegetation layer. The description from the source layer follows:Napa County has used a 2004 edition vegetation map produced using the Manual of California Vegetation classification system (Thorne et al. 2004) as one of the input layers for land use decision and policy. The county decided to update the map because of its utility. A University of California, Davis (UCD) group was engaged to produce the map.The earlier map used black and white digital orthophoto quadrangles from 1993, with a pixel resolution of 3 meters. This image was delineated using a heads up digitization technique produced by ASI (Aerial Services Incorporated). The resulting polygons were the provided vegetation and landcover attributes following the classification system used by California State Department of Fish and Wildlife mappers in the Manual of California Vegetation. That effort included a brief field campaign in which surveyors drove accessible roads and verified or corrected the dominant vegetation of polygons adjacent to roadways or visible using binoculars. There were no field relevé or rapid assessment plots conducted.This update version uses a 2016 edition of 1 meter color aerial imagery taken by the National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) as the base imagery. In consultation with the county we decided to use similar methods to the previous mapping effort, in order to preserve the capacity to assess change in the county over time. This meant forgoing recent data and innovations in remote sensing such as the use LiDAR and Ecognition’s segmentation of imagery to delineate stands, which have been recently used in a concurrent project mapping of Sonoma County. The use of such technologies would have made it more difficult to track changes in landcover, because differences between publication dates would not be definitively attributable to either actual land cover change or to change in methodology. The overall cost of updating the map in the way was approximately 20% of the cost of the Sonoma vegetation mapping program.Therefore, we started with the original map, and on-screen inspections of the 2004 polygons to determine if change had occurred. If so, the boundaries and attributes were modified in this new edition of the map. We also used the time series of imagery available on Google Earth, to further inspect many edited polygons. While funding was not available to do field assessments, we incorporated field expertise and other map data from four projects that overlap with parts of Napa Count: the Angwin Experimental Forest; a 2014 vegetation map of the Knoxville area; agricultural rock piles were identified by Amber Manfree; and parts of a Sonoma Vegetation Map that used 2013 imagery.The Angwin Experimental Forest was mapped by Peter Lecourt from Pacific Union College. He identified several polygons of redwoods in what are potentially the eastern-most extent of that species. We reviewed those polygons with him and incorporated some of the data from his area into this map.The 2014 Knoxville Vegetation map was developed by California Department of Fish and Wildlife. It was made public in February of 2019, close to the end of this project. We reviewed the map, which covers part of the northeast portion of Napa County. We incorporated polygons and vegetation types for 18 vegetation types including the rare ones, we reviewed and incorporated some data for another 6 types, and we noted in comments the presence of another 5 types. There is a separate report specifically addressing the incorporation of this map to our map.Dr Amber Manfree has been conducting research on fire return intervals for parts of Napa County. In her research she identified that large piles of rocks are created when vineyards are put in. These are mapable features. She shared the locations of rock piles she identified, which we incorporated into the map.The Sonoma Vegetation Map mapped some distance into the western side of Napa County. We reviewed that map’s polygons for coast redwood. We then examined our imagery and the Google imagery to see if we could discern the whorled pattern of tree branches. Where we could, we amended or expanded redwood polygons in our map.The Vegetation classification systems used here follows California’s Manual of California Vegetation and the National Vegetation Classification System (MCV and NVCS). We started with the vegetation types listed in the 2004 map. We predominantly use the same set of species names, with modifications/additions particularly from the Knoxville map. The NVCS uses Alliance and Association as the two most taxonomically detailed levels. This map uses those levels. It also refers to vegetation types that have not been sampled in the field and that has 3-6 species and a site descriptor as Groups, which is the next more general level in the NVCS classification.We conducted 3 rounds of quality assessment/quality control exercises.

Important Note: This item is in mature support as of February 2023 and will be retired in December 2025. A new version of this item is available for your use. Esri recommends updating your maps and apps to use the new version. This layer displays change in pixels of the Sentinel-2 10m Land Use/Land Cover product developed by Esri, Impact Observatory, and Microsoft. Available years to compare with 2021 are 2018, 2019 and 2020. By default, the layer shows all comparisons together, in effect showing what changed 2018-2021. But the layer may be changed to show one of three specific pairs of years, 2018-2021, 2019-2021, or 2020-2021.Showing just one pair of years in ArcGIS Online Map ViewerTo show just one pair of years in ArcGIS Online Map viewer, create a filter. 1. Click the filter button. 2. Next, click add expression. 3. In the expression dialogue, specify a pair of years with the ProductName attribute. Use the following example in your expression dialogue to show only places that changed between 2020 and 2021:ProductNameis2020-2021By default, places that do not change appear as a transparent symbol in ArcGIS Pro. But in ArcGIS Online Map Viewer, a transparent symbol may need to be set for these places after a filter is chosen. To do this:4. Click the styles button. 5. Under unique values click style options. 6. Click the symbol next to No Change at the bottom of the legend. 7. Click the slider next to "enable fill" to turn the symbol off.Showing just one pair of years in ArcGIS ProTo show just one pair of years in ArcGIS Pro, choose one of the layer's processing templates to single out a particular pair of years. The processing template applies a definition query that works in ArcGIS Pro. 1. To choose a processing template, right click the layer in the table of contents for ArcGIS Pro and choose properties. 2. In the dialogue that comes up, choose the tab that says processing templates. 3. On the right where it says processing template, choose the pair of years you would like to display. The processing template will stay applied for any analysis you may want to perform as well.How the change layer was created, combining LULC classes from two yearsImpact Observatory, Esri, and Microsoft used artificial intelligence to classify the world in 10 Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) classes for the years 2017-2021. Mosaics serve the following sets of change rasters in a single global layer: Change between 2018 and 2021Change between 2019 and 2021Change between 2020 and 2021To make this change layer, Esri used an arithmetic operation combining the cells from a source year and 2021 to make a change index value. ((from year * 16) + to year) In the example of the change between 2020 and 2021, the from year (2020) was multiplied by 16, then added to the to year (2021). Then the combined number is served as an index in an 8 bit unsigned mosaic with an attribute table which describes what changed or did not change in that timeframe. Variable mapped: Change in land cover between 2018, 2019, or 2020 and 2021 Data Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM)Mosaic Projection: WGS84Extent: GlobalSource imagery: Sentinel-2Cell Size: 10m (0.00008983152098239751 degrees)Type: ThematicSource: Esri Inc.Publication date: January 2022What can you do with this layer?Global LULC maps provide information on conservation planning, food security, and hydrologic modeling, among other things. This dataset can be used to visualize land cover anywhere on Earth. This layer can also be used in analyses that require land cover input. For example, the Zonal Statistics tools allow a user to understand the composition of a specified area by reporting the total estimates for each of the classes. Land Cover processingThis map was produced by a deep learning model trained using over 5 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 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. Processing platformSentinel-2 L2A/B data was accessed via Microsoft’s Planetary Computer and scaled using Microsoft Azure Batch.Class definitions1. WaterAreas 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.2. TreesAny significant clustering of tall (~15-m 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).4. Flooded 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.5. CropsHuman planted/plotted cereals, grasses, and crops not at tree height; examples: corn, wheat, soy, fallow plots of structured land.7. Built 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.8. Bare 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.9. Snow/IceLarge homogenous areas of permanent snow or ice, typically only in mountain areas or highest latitudes; examples: glaciers, permanent snowpack, snow fields. 10. CloudsNo land cover information due to persistent cloud cover.11. Rangeland Open 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.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.For questions please email environment@esri.com

Landmark Ecological Services Pty Ltd (Landmark) was engaged by the Nature Conservation Council (NCC) to conduct fine-scale mapping of vegetation, at Ngunya Jargoon, an Indigenous Protected Area (IPA) on the NSW far north coast. Initial air photo interpretation (API) had previously been undertaken by the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) for Ngunya Jargoon, including identification of recommended ground truthing points. The OEH mapping provided a base-map with linework based on obvious patterns in vegetation detected during API. The imagery used to map the communities included Land and Property Information high resolution digital photography (ADS40, Sept 2009) and Nearmap online high resolution aerial imagery. NCC then contracted Landmark to undertake the ground-truthing, further air interpretation and final production of the maps for this project. Ngunya Jargoon is approximately 850 ha in area and is located approximately 1km to the west of Wardell, a small village on the Richmond River in Ballina Shire. The landscape comprises a level to gently undulating sand plain with two small sandstone hills in the south-east of the IPA. The soils at Ngunya Jargoon are mapped as Warners Bay Coastal Sandplains with the exception of a small area to the south mapped as Birdsview Variant a Sedimentary High quartz and a small area mapped as Disturbed Terrain in the northwest. VIS_ID 4693\r \r NOTE: Footprint only is available for download. Please contact the data custodian (NCC) for access to the vegetation map:\r Email: ncc@nature.org.au\r Phone: (02) 9516 1488\r https://www.nature.org.au/about/contact-us/\r \r VIS_ID 4693\r

This file contains vector digital data for vegetation groupings in New Mexico at a 1:1,000,000 scale. The source software was ARC/INFO 5.0.1 and the conversion software was ARC/INFO 7.0.3.

Dataset representing vegetation mapping performed by the U.S. Forest Service for the South Coast region of California. This dataset, commonly referred to as CALVEG, provides comprehensive spatial and tabular data for existing vegetation. Map attributes consist of vegetation types using the CALVEG classification system and forest structural characteristics such as tree and shrub canopy cover and tree stem diameters. Two vegetation classifications are referenced within CALVEG, “vegetation alliances,” the most detailed classification thatemphasizes species composition, and “wildlife habitat relationships” (WHR), which emphasizes vegetation structure characteristics. CITY-OWNED DATAEvery reasonable effort has been made to assure the accuracy of the data provided; nevertheless, some information may not be accurate. The City of Los Angeles assumes no responsibility arising from use of this information. THE MAPS AND ASSOCIATED DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to, the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. INVASIVE PLANT DATAUse limitationsThe USDA Forest Service makes no warranty, expressed or implied, including the warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, nor assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, reliability, completeness or utility of these geospatial data, or for the improper or incorrect use of these geospatial data. These geospatial data and related maps or graphics are not legal documents and are not intended to be used as such. The data and maps may not be used to determine title, ownership, legal descriptions or boundaries, legal jurisdiction, or restrictions that may be in place on either public or private land. Natural hazards may or may not be depicted on the data and maps, and users should exercise due caution. The data are dynamic and may change over time. The user is responsible to verify the limitations of the geospatial data and to use the data accordingly.EXISTING VEGETATION DATAUse limitationsThis product is reproduced from geospatial information prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. By removing the contents of this package or taking receipt of these files via electronic file transfer methods, you understand that the data stored on this media is in draft condition. Represented features may not be in an accurate geographic location. The Forest Service makes no expressed or implied warranty, including warranty of merchantability and fitness, with respect to the character, function, or capabilities of the data or their appropriateness for any user's purposes. The Forest Service reserves the right to correct, update, modify, or replace this geospatial information without notification. For more information, contact the Remote Sensing Lab, 916-640-1256.The Forest Service uses the most current and complete data available. GIS data and product accuracy may vary. They may be developed from sources of differing accuracy; accurate only at certain scales; based on modeling or interpretation; incomplete while being created or revised; etc. Using GIS products for purposes other than those for which they were created, may yield inaccurate or misleading results. The Forest Service reserves the right to correct, update, modify or replace GIS products without notification.TERM OF USECALVEG DATADisclaimer: The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, has prepared this geospatial information. By taking receipt of these files via electronic file transfer methods, you understand that the data stored on this media is in draft condition. Represented features may not be in an accurate geographic location. The Forest Service makes no expressed or implied warranty, including warranty of merchantability and fitness, with respect to the character, function, or capabilities of the data or their appropriateness for any user's purposes. The Forest Service reserves the right to correct, update, modify, or replace this geospatial information without notification. For more information, contact the Regional Geospatial Data Manager, (707) 562-9106.

This metadata layer shows the footprint of areas included in vegetation sampling projects without associated mapping projects. These projects are collecting surveys that can be used to create regional classifications consistent with the Manual California of Vegetation (online) and are consistent with National Vegetation Classification Standards. It provides basic information about each project. It is current as of July 2023. A second dataset, Vegetation (MCV / NVCS) Mapping Projects - California ds515, shows information about fine-scaled mapping projects that use the MCV / NVCS as the basis of classification.