This EnviroAtlas dataset addresses the tree buffer along heavily traveled roads. The roads are interstates, arterials, and collectors within the EnviroAtlas community boundary. In this community, tree cover is defined as Trees & Forest, and Woody Wetlands. Sufficient tree bufferage is defined as 25% coverage within the circular moving window with a radius of 14.5m at any given point along the roadway. There are potential negative health effects for those living in a location without a sufficient tree buffer. This dataset was produced by the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) allows the user to interact with a web-based, easy-to-use, mapping application to view and analyze multiple ecosystem services for the contiguous United States. The dataset is available as downloadable data (https://edg.epa.gov/data/Public/ORD/EnviroAtlas) or as an EnviroAtlas map service. Additional descriptive information about each attribute in this dataset can be found in its associated EnviroAtlas Fact Sheet (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas/enviroatlas-fact-sheets).

Forest resources in Washington and Oregon were surveyed in the 1930s by employees of the USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest Experiment Station. As part of this process, forest cover maps were created on paper at an original scale of 1:253,440. Forest and land cover types recorded include classifications such as: agricultural, balsam fir mountain hemlock, cedar-redwood, deforested burns, Douglas-fir, hardwood, juniper, lodgepole pine, non-forest pine mix, ponderosa pine, recent cutover, spruce-hemlock, subalpine and non-commercial, water, etc. An additional subcategory classification is also provided which gives additional insight into tree size classes for conifers or species group for hardwoods. These forest and land cover types are provided as a shapefile. Citation for original report: Harrington, Constance A., comp. 2003. The 1930s survey of forest resources in Washington and Oregon. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-584. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 123 p. plus CD-ROM. https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-584.

This EnviroAtlas dataset describes the percentage of a 15-m riparian buffer that is forested. In this community, tree cover is defined as Trees & Forest, and Woody Wetlands. There is a potential for decreased water quality in areas where the riparian buffer is less forested. The displayed line represents the center of the analyzed riparian buffer. The water bodies analyzed include hydrologically connected streams, rivers, connectors, reservoirs, lakes/ponds, ice masses, washes, locks, and rapids within the EnviroAtlas community area. This dataset was produced by the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) allows the user to interact with a web-based, easy-to-use, mapping application to view and analyze multiple ecosystem services for the contiguous United States. The dataset is available as downloadable data (https://edg.epa.gov/data/Public/ORD/EnviroAtlas) or as an EnviroAtlas map service. Additional descriptive information about each attribute in this dataset can be found in its associated EnviroAtlas Fact Sheet (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas/enviroatlas-fact-sheets).

Forest resources in Washington and Oregon were surveyed in the 1930s by employees of the USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest Experiment Station. As part of this process, forest cover maps were created on paper at an original scale of 1:253,440. Forest and land cover types recorded include classifications such as: agricultural, balsam fir mountain hemlock, cedar-redwood, deforested burns, Douglas-fir, hardwood, juniper, lodgepole pine, non-forest pine mix, ponderosa pine, recent cutover, spruce-hemlock, subalpine and non-commercial, water, etc. An additional subcategory classification is also provided which gives additional insight into tree size classes for conifers or species group for hardwoods. These forest and land cover types are provided as both a shapefile and geopackage for Washington and Oregon combined.The 1928 McSweeney-McNary Forestry Research Act (P.L. 70-466, 45 Stat. 699-702) directed the Secretary of Agriculture to make and keep current a comprehensive inventory and analysis of the nation's forest resources. The decision was made to begin the nationwide survey with the Douglas-fir region and shortly thereafter to expand to the other forested lands of Washington and Oregon. Surveys were conducted between 1930 and 1936. Results of these surveys were reported in many formats including quarter state maps (4 maps per state) as well as many printed reports.The history of this project and copies of some of the early results as well, were published in Harrington (2003) which included a CD with a digital map (an ArcView GIS shapefile) for all of Washington and Oregon.

Click to downloadClick for metadataService URL: https://gis.dnr.wa.gov/site2/rest/services/Public_Forest_Practices/WADNR_PUBLIC_FP_Unstable_Slopes/MapServer/3The siteclass data layer was created for use in implementing Forest Practices' Riparian Management Rules. (See WAC 222-30-021 and 222-30-022.)

The siteclass data layer was derived from the DNR soils data layer's site index codes and major tree species codes for western and eastern Washington soils contained in the layer's Soils-Main table and Soils-Pflg (private forest land grade) table. Site index ranges in the Soils_PFLG took precedence over site index ranges in the Soils-Main table where data existed.The siteclass data layer was created for use in implementing new ForestPractices' Riparian Management Rules. (See WAC 222-30-021 and 222-30-022.) The siteclass information was derived from the DNR soils data layer's site indexcodes and major tree species codes for western and eastern Washington soilscontained in the layer's Soils-Main table and Soils-Pflg (private forest landgrade) table. Site index ranges in the Soils_PFLG took precedence over siteindex ranges in the Soils-Main table where data existed.Siteclass codes as derived from the soil survey:For Western Washington, the 50 year site index is used SITECLASS SITE INDEX RANGE I 137+ II 119-136 III 97-118 IV 76-96 V 1-75For Eastern Washington, the 100 year site index is used SITECLASS SITE INDEX RANGE I 120+ II 101-120 III 81-100 IV 61-80 V 1-60In addition to the coding scheme above, the following codes were added forrule compliance: SITECLASS DESCRIPTION 6 (Red Alder) The soils major species code indicated Red Alder 7 (ND/GP) No data), NA, or gravel pit 8 (NC/MFP) Non-commercial or marginal commercial forest land 9 (WAT) Water body(Rule note: If the site index does not exist or indicates red alder,noncommercial, or marginally commercial species, the following apply:If the whole RMZ width is within those categories, use site class V.If those categories occupy only a portion of the RMZ width, then use thesite index for conifer in the adjacent soil polygon.)WADNR SOILS LAYER INFORMATION LAYER: SOILS GEN.SOURCE: State soils mapping program CODE DOCUMENT: State soil surveys CONTACT: NA COVER TYPE: Spatial polygon coverage DATA TYPE: Primary data Information for the SOILS data layer was derived from the Private Forest Land Grading system (PFLG) and subsequent soil surveys. PFLG was a five year mapping program completed in 1980 for the purpose of forest land taxation. It was funded by the Washington State Department of Revenue in cooperation with the Department of Natural Resources, Soil Conservation Service (SCS), USDA Forest Service and Washington State University. State and private lands which had the potential of supporting commercial forest stands were surveyed. Some Indian tribal and federal lands were surveyed. Because this was a cooperative soil survey project, agricultural and non- commercial forest lands were also included within some survey areas. After the Department of Natural Resources originally developed its geographic information system, digitized soils delineations and a few soil attributes were transferred to the system. Remaining PFLG soil attributes were added at a later time and are now available through associated lookup tables. SCS soils data on agricultural lands also have subsequently been added to this data layer. Approximately 1100 townships wholly or partially contain digitized soils data (2101 townships would provide complete coverage of the state of Washington). SOILS data are currently stored in the Polygon Attribute Table (.PAT) and INFO expansion files. COORDINATE SYSTEM: WA State Plane South Zone (5626) (N. zone converted to S. zone) COORDINATE UNITS: Feet HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD27 PROJECTION NAME: Lambert Conformal Conic **** MAJOR CODES USED FOR SITECLASS DATA*****PFLG DATA: ITEM: PFLG.MAJ.SPEC TITLE: Potential major tree species for given soil FORMAT: INPUT OUTPUT DATA DECIMAL ARRAY ARRAY WIDTH WIDTH TYPE PLACES OCCUR. INDEX ------------------------------------------------- 3 3 C 0 0 0 CODE TABLE OR VALUE RANGE: SOIL.MAJ.SPEC.CODE DESCRIPTION: Potentially major tree species for a given soil type. The data carried by this item describes a major commercial tree species that could potentially grow on a specific soil type as identified in the Private Forest Land Grading program (PFLG). Non-tree codes are also included to map non-soil ground cover, e.g. water, gravel pits. ITEM: PFLG.SITE.INDEX TITLE: Mean site index calc.from trees on given soil FORMAT: INPUT OUTPUT DATA DECIMAL ARRAY ARRAY WIDTH WIDTH TYPE PLACES OCCUR. INDEX ------------------------------------------------- 3 3 I 0 0 0 CODE TABLE OR VALUE RANGE: 0-200 DESCRIPTION: Site index data collected for the Private Forest Land Grading soils program (PFLG). It is a designation of the quality of a forest site based on the height of of the tallest trees (dominant and co-dominant trees) in a stand at an arbitrarily chosen age. Usually the age chosen is 50 or 100 years. For example, if the average height attained by the tallest trees in a fully stocked stand at the age of 50 years is 75 feet, the site index is 75 feet. Westside site conditions are estimated by using an index age of 50 years, while eastside site conditions are estimated by using an index age of 100 years.--------------------------------------------------------------------SOILS-MAIN DATA: CODE TABLE NAME: SOIL.MAJ.SPEC.CODE ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- CODE MAP/REPORT MAP CODE DESCRIPTION LABEL SYMB --------- ------------ ---- -------------------------------------------------- AF ALPINE FIR 0 Subalpine fir DF DOUGLAS FIR 0 Douglas fir GF GRAND FIR 0 Grand fir GP GRAVEL PIT 0 Gravel pit LP LODGEPOLE PN 0 Lodgepole pine MFP MAR FOR PROD 0 Marginal forest productivity NA N/A 0 Not applicable NC NON-COMMERC 0 Non-commercial ND NO DATA 0 No data PP PONDEROSA PN 0 Ponderosa pine RA RED ALDER 0 Red alder WAT WATER 0 Water WH W HEMLOCK 0 Western hemlock WL W LARCH 0 Western larch WP W WHITE PINE 0 Western white pine ITEM: SITE.INDEX.SIDE TITLE: Indicates 100 yr or 50 yr soil site index FORMAT: INPUT OUTPUT DATA DECIMAL ARRAY ARRAY WIDTH WIDTH TYPE PLACES OCCUR. INDEX ------------------------------------------------- 1 1 C 0 0 0 CODE FILE OR VALUE RANGE: SITE.INDEX.SIDE.CODE DESCRIPTION: Code used to indicate whether 100 year or 50 year site index tables are used to calculate the site index of a soil type. Note that some site indexes for "eastside" soils are based on the 50 year index table. SITE.INDEX.SIDE Indicates 100 yr or 50 yr soil site index CODE FILE SITE.INDEX.SIDE.CODE IS NOT USED BY OTHER ITEMS CODE MAP/REPORT MAP CODE DESCRIPTION LABEL SYMB --------- ------------ ---- -------------------------------------------------- E 100 YR SITE 0 Soil site index based on 100 year table W 50 YR SITE 0 Soil site index based on 50 year table------------------------------------------------------------------

This EnviroAtlas dataset describes the percentage of a 51-m riparian buffer that is forested. In this community, tree cover is defined as Trees & Forest, and Woody Wetlands. There is a potential for decreased water quality in areas where the riparian buffer is less forested. The displayed line represents the center of the analyzed riparian buffer. The water bodies analyzed include hydrologically connected streams, rivers, connectors, reservoirs, lakes/ponds, ice masses, washes, locks, and rapids within the EnviroAtlas community area. This dataset was produced by the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) allows the user to interact with a web-based, easy-to-use, mapping application to view and analyze multiple ecosystem services for the contiguous United States. The dataset is available as downloadable data (https://edg.epa.gov/data/Public/ORD/EnviroAtlas) or as an EnviroAtlas map service. Additional descriptive information about each attribute in this dataset can be found in its associated EnviroAtlas Fact Sheet (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas/enviroatlas-fact-sheets).

This EnviroAtlas dataset categorizes forest land cover into structural elements (e.g. core, edge, connector, etc.). In this community, tree cover is defined as Trees & Forest, and Woody Wetlands. Water was considered background (value 129) during the analysis to create this dataset, however it has been converted into value 10 to distinguish it from land area background. This dataset was produced by the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) allows the user to interact with a web-based, easy-to-use, mapping application to view and analyze multiple ecosystem services for the contiguous United States. The dataset is available as downloadable data (https://edg.epa.gov/data/Public/ORD/EnviroAtlas) or as an EnviroAtlas map service. Additional descriptive information about each attribute in this dataset can be found in its associated EnviroAtlas Fact Sheet (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas/enviroatlas-fact-sheets).

This EnviroAtlas dataset addresses the tree buffer along heavily traveled roads. The roads are interstates, arterials, and collectors within the EnviroAtlas community boundary. In this community, tree cover is defined as Trees & Forest, and Woody Wetlands. Sufficient tree bufferage is defined as 25% coverage within the circular moving window with a radius of 14.5m at any given point along the roadway. There are potential negative health affects for those living in a location without a sufficient tree buffer. Those populations are estimated here using dasymetric data calculated for the EnviroAtlas. There are potential negative health effects for those living in a location without a sufficient tree buffer. This dataset was produced by the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) allows the user to interact with a web-based, easy-to-use, mapping application to view and analyze multiple ecosystem services for the contiguous United States. The dataset is available as downloadable data (https://edg.epa.gov/data/Public/ORD/EnviroAtlas) or as an EnviroAtlas map service. Additional descriptive information about each attribute in this dataset can be found in its associated EnviroAtlas Fact Sheet (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas/enviroatlas-fact-sheets).

Click to downloadClick for metadataService URL: https://gis.dnr.wa.gov/site2/rest/services/Public_Forest_Practices/WADNR_PUBLIC_FP_Water_Type/MapServer/4For large areas, like Washington State, download as a file geodatabase. Large data sets like this one, for the State of Washington, may exceed the limits for downloading as shape files, excel files, or KML files. For areas less than a county, you may use the map to zoom to your area and download as shape file, excel or KML, if that format is desired.The DNR Forest Practices Wetlands Geographic Information System (GIS) Layer is based on the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). In cooperation with the Washington State Department of Ecology, DNR Forest Practices developed a systematic reclassification of the original USFWS wetlands codes into WAC 222-16-035 types. The reclassification was done in 1995 according to the Forest Practice Rules in place at the time. The WAC's for defining wetlands are 222-16-035 and 222-16-050.The DNR Forest Practices Wetlands Geographic Information System (GIS) Layer is based on the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). In cooperation with the Washington State Department of Ecology, DNR Forest Practices developed a systematic reclassification of the original USFWS wetlands codes into WAC 222-16-035 types. The reclassification was done in 1995 according to the Forest Practice Rules in place at the time. The WAC's for defining wetlands are 222-16-035 and 222-16-050.It is intended that these data be only a first step in determining whether or not wetland issues have been or need to be addressed in an area. The DNR Forest Practices Division and the Department of Ecology strongly supports the additional use of hydric soils (from the GIS soils layer) to add weight to the call of 'wetland'. Reports from the Department of Ecology indicate that these data may substantially underestimate the extent of forested wetlands. Various studies show the NWI data is 25-80% accurate in forested areas. Most of these data were collected from stereopaired aerial photos at a scale of 1:58,000. The stated accuracy is that of a 1:24,000 map, or plus or minus 40 feet. In addition, some parts of the state have data that are 30 years old and only a small percentage have been field checked. Thus, for regulatory purposes, the user should not rely solely on these data. On-the-ground checking must accompany any regulatory call based on these data.The reclassification is based on the USFWS FWS_CODE. The FWS_CODE is a concatenation of three subcomponents: Wetland system, class, and water regime. Forest Practices further divided the components into system, subsystem, class, subclass, water regime, special modifiers, xclass, subxclass, and xsystem. The last three items (xsomething) are for wetland areas which do not easily lend themselves to one class alone. The resulting classification system uses two fields: WLND_CLASS and WLND_TYPE. WLND_CLASS indicates whether the polygon is a forested wetland (F), open water (O), or a vegetated wetland (W). WLND_TYPE, indicates whether the wetland is a type A (1), type B (2), or a generic wetland (3) that doesn't fit the categories for A or B type wetlands. WLND_TYPE = 0 (zero) is used where WLND_CLASS = O (letter "O").

The wetland polygon is classified as F, forested wetland; O, open water; or W, vegetated wetland depending on the following FWS_CODE categories: F O W --------------------------------------------------- Forested Open Vegetated Wetland Water Wetland --------------------------------------------PFO* POW PUB5 E2FO PRB* PML2 PUB1-4 PEM* PAB* L2US5 PUS1-4 L2EM2 PFL* PSS* L1RB* PML1 L1UB*
L1AB* L1OW L2RB* L2UB* L2AB* L2RS* L2US1-4 L2OW

• indicates inclusion of the subcategory (ie. PEM* includes PEM1F, PEM1FB, etc.).

DNR FOREST PRACTICES WETLANDS DATASET ON FPARS Internet Mapping Website: The FPARS Resource Map and Water Type Map display Forested, Type A, Type B, and "other" wetlands. Open water polygons are not displayed on the FPARS Resource Map and Water Type Map in an attempt to minimize clutter. The following code combinations are found in the DNR Forest Practices wetlands dataset:

WLND_CLASS WLND_TYPE wetland polygon classification F 3 Forested wetland as defined in WAC 222-16-035 O 0 *NWI open water (not displayed on FPARS Resource or Water Type Maps) W 1 Type A Wetland as defined in WAC 222-16-035 W 2 Type B Wetland as defined in WAC 222-16-035 W 3 other wetland

• NWI open water polygons are indicated by WLND_CLASS = O and WLND_TYPE = 0. Open water is used in the USFWS and WAC 222-16-035 classification system. These open water polygons are not included in the FPARS Resource Map and Water Type Map views of this dataset in an attempt to minimize clutter on the FPARS maps.

The USDA Forest Service has conducted aerial surveys annually to produce a rich geospatial data set that includes damage severity, year and location of damage, damage agent, and tree species. We used the data from the western United States (1997-2023) and from Washington and Oregon (1947-2023) to produce Version 4.1 of a gridded mortality area data set. Mortality area is the canopy area of killed trees. We converted the polygons of damage into 1-km resolution annual rasters by damage agent-host tree species combinations. The methods are described in Andrus et al., Forest Ecology and Management, 2025.

WBDHU12: This geospatial dataset represents the 6th level (12-digit) hydrologic unit boundaries from the Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) layer for Washington. Hydrologic units within the WBDHUC12 represent drainage areas delineated to the 6th level drainage systems. Their boundaries are defined by hydrographic and topographic criteria that delineate an area of land upstream from a specific point on a river, stream, or similar surface waters. Hydrologic units within the WBDHUC12 can accept surface water directly from upstream drainage areas, and indirectly from associated surface areas such as remnant, non-contributing, and diversions to form a drainage area with single or multiple outlet points. Boundaries within the HU_BOUNDARY_WBD_WA_HUC_12 were delineated by Pacific Northwest (PNW) Hydrography Framework Partners and Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to meet state requirements and to contribute to the national WBD repository. To meet these goals, the WBD must adhere to the "Federal Standards for Delineation of Hydrologic Unit Boundaries", dated October, 2004. These HUC12 boundaries were made from the Washington dataset that has been nationally certified by Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Prior to submission the dataset was subjected to an iterative review and edit process to ensure that the hydrologic boundaries fully satisfy the federal standards. This work was completed under a Memorandum of Understanding between the Pacific Northwest Hydrography Framework Partnership, NRCS and the US Geological Survey (USGS). The current dataset includes all 6th level boundaries that are in all 4th level (8-digit) subbasins that fall within or intersect the Washington state boundary. USGS Federal Standards and Procedures for the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) located here: http://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/11/a3/pdf/tm11-a3.pdfWater areas removed. Clipped to Area of Interest.

This map depicts the forested regions in the western United States. Data was obtained from the the Sagestitch map and other state-level GAP landcover maps and merged into 90m raster dataset.

This Feature Service displays the boundaries and types of the Forest Management Prescription areas within the Monongahela, George Washington and Jefferson National Forests. The data reflects that shown in their respective Forest Management Plans.Source and Date:GW and JNF prescriptions received from James O'Hear of GWJNF in Feb of 2015.MNF prescriptions received from Rick Webb in a FOIA package he received from MNF, also in Feb of 2015.Purpose:Management prescriptions detail the intended land use of National Forests. The goal is typically for conservation, ecosystem health, biodiversity, recreation, and more. By detailing these areas, protecting land is more organized and efficient.Processing:The received shapefiles were Merged into a single shapefile (native fields preserved), and imported into ArcGIS to create this feature service.Symbolization:MonongahelaMP 3.0: teal polygonMP 4.1: greenish yellow polygonMP 5.0: dark green polygonMP 6.1: gray polygon MP 6.2: light blue polygonMP 8.0: green polygonGeorge Washington1A - Designated Wilderness: dark green polygon1B - Recommended Wilderness: green polygon2C2 - Scenic River: blue polygon2C3 - Recreational River: blue polygon4A - Appalachian Trail Corridor: yellow polygon4B - Research Natural Area: beige polygon4C1 - Geologic Area: beige polygon4D - Special Biological Area: beige polygon4D1 - Peters Mountain Old Growth: beige polygon4F - National Scenic Area: muted dark green polygon4FA - Proposed National Scenic Area: muted light green polygon5A - Administrative Site: red-orange polygon5B - Communication Site: red-orange polygon5C - Special Use/Utility: red-orange polygon7A1 - Scenic Byway: orange polygon7B - Scenic Corridor and Viewshed: orange polygon7C - ATV/OHV Area: pink polygon7D - Concentrated Recreation: light green polygon7E1 - Dispersed Recreation (Unsuitable): light green polygon7E2 - Dispersed Recreation (Suitable): yellowish green polygon7F - Blue Ridge Parkway: orange polygon7G - Pastoral Landscape: neon green polygon8E4a - Indiana Bat Primary: light gray polygon8E4b - Indiana Bat Secondary: light gray polygon8E7 - Cow Knob Salamander: beige polygon12D - Remote Backcountry: muted light green polygon13 - Mosaics of Habitat (Suitable): light brown polygonJefferson0.B - Custodial - Small Areas: light green polygon1.A - Designated Wilderness: green polygon1.B - Recommended Wilderness Study: dark brown polygon2.C.1 - Eligible Wild River: dark blue polygon2.C.3 - Eligible Recreational River: bright, dark blue polygon4.A - Appalachian Trail Corridor: yellow polygon4.B.2 - Proposed Research Natural Area: pink polygon4.C.1 - Geological Area - Unsiutable: striped pink polygon4.C.2 - Geological Area - Suitable: light pink polygon4.D - Botanical and Zoological Area: neon pink polygon4.E.1.a - Cultural Area - Unsuitable: striped purple polygon4.E.1.b - Cultural Area - Suitable: purple polygon4.F - Scenic Area: dark purple polygon4.J - Urban/Suburban Interface: light purple polygon4.K.1 - North Creek Special Area: yellowish green polygon4.K.2 - Hoop Hole Special Area: yellowish green polygon4.K.3 - Crest Zone Special Area: yellowish green polygon4.K.4 - Whitetop Mountain Special Area: yellowish green polygon4.K.5 - Whitetop Laurel Special Area: yellowish green polygon4.K.6 - North Fork Pound Special Area: yellowish green polygon5.A - Administrative Site: dark gray polygon5.B - Designated Communication Site: orange polygon5.C - Designated Utility Corridor: red polygon6.A - Old Growth Natural Processes: beige polygon6.B - Old Growth Fire Dependant: dark beige polygon6.C - Old Growth with Disturbance: light orange polygon7.A - Scenic Byway Corridor: very light green polygon7.B - Scenic Corridor: neon green polygon7.C - OHV Use Area: horizontally striped pink polygon7.D - Concentrated Recreation Area: diagonally striped pink polygon7.E.1 - Dispersed Rec Areas - Unsuitable: diagonally striped brown polygon7.E.2 - Dispersed Rec Areas - Suitable: light green polygon7.F - Blue Ridge Parkway Corridor: purple-blue polygon7.G - Pastoral Landscapes: camouflage polygon8.A.1 - Mix of Successional Habitats: light blue polygon8.A.2 - Area Sensitive, Mid to Late Sucessional Forest: light purple polygon8.B - Early Successional Habitats: bright blue polygon8.C - Black Bear Habitat: muted teal polygon8.E.1 - Ruffed Grouse Habitat: horizontally striped blue polygon8.E.2.a - Peaks of Otter Salamander Primary: blue polygon8.E.2.b - Peaks of Otter Salamander Secondary: blue polygon8.E.4.a - Indiana Bat Primary: blue polygon8.E.4.b - Indiana Bat Secondary: blue polygon8.E.5 - Watchable Wildlife: blue patterned polygon8.E.6 - Old Field Habitats: green patterned polygon9.A.1 - Source Water Protection: light orange polygon9.A.3 - Watershed Restoration: diagonally striped orange polygon9.A.4 - Aquatic T/E/S Habitats: diagonally striped light orange polygon9.B.3 - High-Elevation Balds: neon teal polygon9.B.2 - High-Elevation Spruce-Fir/Northern Hardwoods: neon polygon9.F - Rare Communities: neon purple polygon9.G.1 - Bottomland Hardwoods: dotted light blue patterned polygon9.H - Maintenance/Restoration of Forest Communities: dotted light blue patterned polygon10.A - Sustained Yield Timber Management: blue polygon10.B - High Quality Forest Products: blue polygon10.D - Grazing and Forage: light blue polygon10.E - Timber Management with Recreation: blue polygon11 - Riparian Area: dotted blue patterns polygon12.A - Backcountry - Few Roads: bright green polygon12.B - Backcountry - Non-Motorized: brown-green polygon12.C - Backcountry - Natural Processes: dark green polygonNational Forest Boundary: transparent interior polygon, black outlineCity or Town: gray shaded polygon, gray dashed outlineCounty Boundary: transparent polygon, gray dotted outline

This EnviroAtlas dataset describes the percentage of a 51-m riparian buffer that is forested. In this community, tree cover is defined as Trees & Forest, and Woody Wetlands. There is a potential for decreased water quality in areas where the riparian buffer is less forested. The displayed line represents the center of the analyzed riparian buffer. The water bodies analyzed include hydrologically connected streams, rivers, connectors, reservoirs, lakes/ponds, ice masses, washes, locks, and rapids within the EnviroAtlas community area. This dataset was produced by the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. This dataset was produced the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. This dataset was produced the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) allows the user to interact with a web-based, easy-to-use, mapping application to view and analyze multiple ecosystem services for the contiguous United States. The dataset is available as downloadable data (https://edg.epa.gov/data/Public/ORD/EnviroAtlas) or as an EnviroAtlas map service. Additional descriptive information about each attribute in this dataset can be found in its associated EnviroAtlas Fact Sheet (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas/enviroatlas-fact-sheets).

This EnviroAtlas dataset estimates tree cover along walkable roads. The road width is estimated for each road and percent tree cover is calculated in a 8.5 meter strip beginning at the estimated road edge. Percent tree cover is calculated for each block between road intersections. In this community, tree cover is defined as Trees & Forest, and Woody Wetlands. Tree cover provides valuable benefits to neighborhood residents and walkers by providing shade, improved aesthetics, and outdoor gathering spaces. This dataset was produced by the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) allows the user to interact with a web-based, easy-to-use, mapping application to view and analyze multiple ecosystem services for the contiguous United States. The dataset is available as downloadable data (https://edg.epa.gov/data/Public/ORD/EnviroAtlas) or as an EnviroAtlas map service. Additional descriptive information about each attribute in this dataset can be found in its associated EnviroAtlas Fact Sheet (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas/enviroatlas-fact-sheets).

For large areas, like Washington State, download as a file geodatabase. Large data sets like this one, for the State of Washington, may exceed the limits for downloading as shape files, excel files, or KML files. For areas less than a county, you may use the map to zoom to your area and download as shape file, excel or KML, if that format is desired.Abstract:The FP_GIS_FPA_ shapefiles represents Forest Practices Application/Notification (FPA/N) harvest unit boundaries, FPA/N specific tabular data, FPA/N specific Office Checklist tabular data and FPA/N specific stakeholder tabular data. An FPA/N may include harvest activity, forest road activity and aerial chemical spray activity. FPA/N harvest units include timber harvest and salvage sites. FPA/N harvest unit polygons are captured from FPA/N Activity Maps. Attribute data is captured from the FPA/N and associated documents, and may be compiled from many sources.Supplemental_Information: From July 1996 through October 2002, FPSPOLY data was collected in Oracle using the Mapping and Planning System (MAPS). From October 28, 2002 to July 10, 2009, data was collected in Oracle using the Forest Practices Application Review System (FPARS). From July 13, 2009, to the present data is collected in dotNET using FPARSv3.Washington State is divided into two State Plane Zones, north and south. For this data set, north zone data coordinates have been converted to south zone coordinates.

Forests in Washington State generate substantial economic revenue from commercial timber harvesting on private lands. To investigate the rates, causes, and spatial and temporal patterns of forest harvest on private tracts throughout the central Cascade Mountain area, we relied on a new generation of annual land-use/land-cover (LULC) products created from the application of the Continuous Change Detection and Classification (CCDC) algorithm to Landsat satellite imagery collected from 1985 to 2014. We calculated metrics of landscape pattern using patches of intact and harvested forest patches identified in each annual layer to identify changes throughout the time series. Patch dynamics revealed four distinct eras of logging trends that align with prevailing regulations and economic conditions. We used multiple logistic regression to determine the biophysical and anthropogenic factors that influence fine-scale selection of harvest stands in each time period. Results show that private forestland became significantly reduced and more fragmented from 1985 to 2014. Variables linked to parameters of site conditions, location, climate, and vegetation greenness consistently distinguished harvest selection for each distinct era. This study demonstrates the utility of annual LULC data for investigating the underlying factors that influence land cover change.

This forest patch layer was created by Dr. Matthew Baker, UMBC; Dr. Michael Alonzo, American University, and Dr. Nancy Sonti, USDA Forest Service Northern Research Station using a high-resolution urban tree canopy map derived from 2019 orthoimagery and LiDAR data. To identify forest area, tree canopy over impervious surfaces was first subtracted from the canopy layer, including buildings and roads identified from planimetric data available from the District of Columbia. Morphological spatial pattern analysis (MSPA; Vogt et al. 2007) was then used to distinguish forest patches from remaining tree canopy using an edge parameter of 15 m based on observed changes in vegetation composition and structure (Baker, unpublished data). MSPA applies the edge parameter to distinguish interiors (i.e. ‘cores’) from surrounding edges, as well as five other morphometric primitives (i.e. branches, bridges, loops, and islets) that reflect how canopy is or is not connected to cores. Patches always include core areas and their surrounding edges, as well as any perforations. Patches are separated into two size classes: Forested Natural Areas are patches with greater core area and thickness than Groves. More detail on methods and analysis can be found in: Alonzo, M., Baker, M. E., Gao, Y., & Shandas, V. (2021). Spatial configuration and time of day impact the magnitude of urban tree canopy cooling. Environmental Research Letters, 16(8), 084028.Vogt P, Riitters K H, Estreguil C, Kozak J, Wade T G and Wickham J D 2007 Mapping spatial patterns with morphological image processing Landsc. Ecol. 22 171–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-006-9013-2

This data publication contains tabular data of overstory and understory vegetation composition collected from the mid-1950s to early 2000s in relatively undisturbed, mostly mature stands across forested federal lands of Oregon, Washington, and California. Most plots are on National Forest System lands, with some on Bureau of Land Management or Tribal land. Plots were distributed to represent the diversity of vegetation types across each National Forest or other management unit. These Ecology plots are not, and were never intended to be, permanent plots. Data include vegetation cover data such as lifeform, scientific name, and species cover for 38,560 plots. The longitude, latitude, and Regional ID number are also provided for each plot, with a supplemental file relating Regional IDs to land management units.These data were used to create typologies of potential vegetation ("Plant Associations") or ecological types (plant communities) that would allow forest managers to infer site conditions (topographic, climatic, edaphic, etc.) from the existing overstory and understory composition. Plant Association or Ecological Type (Plant Community) Guides were developed for groups of National Forests and adjacent lands across Forest Service Regions 5 and 6. Supplemental information includes a list of citations of these Plant Association and Ecological Type Guides, most of which were developed based on these plot data.

These data represent DC Boundary in Washington, DC. Urban tree canopy (UTC) and possible planting area (PPA) metrics have been calculated for DC Boundary within the study area. UTC results provided in vector format with attribute fields (area/percent metrics/percent change metrics) for each land cover class and UTC type (UTC, PPA, Unsuitable UTC, UTC Change).