Land Use and Land Cover

Summary Report

And Recommendations

Prepared by:

Land Use and Land Cover (LULC) Study Group

Subcommittee of the

NYS GIS Standards and Data Coordination Work Group

February 26, 2003

Version 2.2


Table of Contents

1.       Executive Summary.................................................................................................................................................... 3

2.       Introduction................................................................................................................................................................ 4

3.       LULC in New York State.......................................................................................................................................... 5

3.1     Background................................................................................................................................................................... 5

3.2     Update on LULC Activities and Needs in New York State................................................................. 6

4.       Recommendations:.................................................................................................................................................... 9

5.  References........................................................................................................................................................................... 11

Appendix A: Principle Data Set Assessment Charts..................................................................................... 12

NYS Principle Data Set Assessment - Land Use.......................................................................................... 12

NYS Principle Data Set Assessment - Land Cover.......................................................................................... 13

Appendix B: Anderson’s LULC Classification System.................................................................................. 14

Appendix C: Land Use and Land Cover Activities in NY................................................................................ 15

Appendix D: Outreach and Response....................................................................................................................... 16


1.     Executive Summary

A Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) Study Group was convened in the summer of 2002, as a subgroup of the NYS GIS Standards and Data Coordination (S/DC) Work Group.  The purpose of this subgroup was to explore potential for coordination of Land Use and Land Cover (LULC) activities within New York State. This report represents a summary of the findings of that group; the primary recommendation is that a Land Use and Land Cover Work Group be established under the auspices of the NYS GIS Coordinating Body to receive direction from and advise the Coordinating Body on matters concerning LULC in NYS and the region.  Establishing a LULC Work Group can assist in promoting and coordinating LULC mapping, management and modeling efforts within the state.  This can result in better LULC information for national, state, private and research agencies across New York State at greatly reduced costs in efforts, data and program resources.

Through surveys and phone outreach activities the LULC Study Group identified nearly 60 projects that generate, utilize or will soon require LULC information for the NY state region.  Additional projects are being added to the list weekly.  Information content of these varying projects is broad, and spans many topics such as:

·        Homeland security and emergency management

·        Public health studies

·        Natural resource management

·        Urban planning

·        Water quality protection

Accurate, current, high resolution LULC was identified as a priority by this Study Group.  Detailed needs of NY's LULC community, however, are not fully understood.  Defining, coordinating and helping to integrate these needs are valuable services that a LULC Work Group could provide.  The LULC Study Group recommends establishment of a LULC Work Group, potentially modeled after the Digital Orthoimagery Work Group, with the following goals and tasks:

·        Coordinate data development with national programs and other states

·        Foster partnerships among LULC developers and users

·        Ensure that data are made available in readily usable forms  

·        Facilitate collection and exchange of information regarding LULC-related projects, methodologies, data sources and events

·        Promote technical interchange and development

·        Identify and synthesize LULC-related needs and requirements

The proposed Work Group can result in better LULC data made available to national, state, private and research agencies across New York State.  Better LULC data will enable New York’s homeland security, public health, natural resource, commerce, conservation, real estate, and transportation communities to integrate and advance the limits of science and technology through leading edge applications and up-to-date information technology systems.


2.     Introduction

One of the first tasks of the Data Coordination Work Group, predecessor to the Standards and Data Coordination (S/DC) Work Group, was “identifying areas where current [data development] efforts are duplicative or where changes can make data maintenance and sharing more efficient.”1 The Work Group identified nine priority datasets as fundamental base map needs for New York State; two of these are land use and land cover data. The Principle Data Set Assessment Charts (Appendix A, Tables 1 and 2) summarized the state of existing land use and land cover data including:

·        Current data set needs

·        Agencies involved

·        Completeness

·        Attributes included

·        Continued maintenance issues

·        Resource or institutional obstacles to data creation 

 S/DC Work Group meeting notes of July 1997 state:

“An important statewide need is the determination of the State's needs for land use and land cover data.  This is related to the larger issue of handling digital imagery. There is a need to analyze the trade-offs between [the] cost of data production and [the] resolution necessary to meet agency needs…  It is important to note the possibility of cost sharing opportunities, as there may be federal, state, private funds that can be used for well-defined needs. State agencies must identify common needs for imagery (S/DC Work Group 1997).”

In a step to address a common need for imagery, the New York State GIS Coordinating Body created the Digital Orthoimagery (DO) Work Group.  This group developed New York State’s successful Digital Orthoimagery Program.  Looking to this program as a model, the S/DC Work Group hosted several fact-finding presentations on LULC, and decided to form a LULC Study Group.  The LULC Study Group was tasked to investigate LULC data coordination needs in New York State and determine whether the process used to promote development of digital orthoimagery in New York could be successfully applied to development of a statewide LULC program.  As proposed, this process would be promoted and directed by a separate LULC Work Group, similar to the DO Work Group. 

The case for the LULC Work Group was premised on three conditions:

1.      Current lack of LULC coordination

2.      Opportunities exist to provide up to date statewide coverage

3.      LULC developers and users support creation of a LULC Work Group

The LULC Study Group was charged to gather evidence related to these premises, formulate recommendations and present findings to the S/DC Work Group. Findings approved by the S/DC Work Group would be forwarded to the GIS Coordinating Body for consideration.  The LULC Study Group gathered information from LULC developers, data producers, users and interested parties on a large number of LULC data development and research activities in New York and surrounding regions.  Varying institutional needs, overlapping LULC applications, data development, and areas of interest confirm a need for LULC coordination and integration within New York. Survey respondents offered many ideas for ways that a LULC Work Group could be of assistance. This report is a summary of LULC Study Group’s activities.  Active outreach and survey efforts are described in Appendix D, and results of the outreach are reported in following sections of this report.

3.     LULC in New York State

3.1     Background

“Land Use” refers to human activities that take place on the earth’s surface (how the land is being used) such as residential housing or agricultural cropping.  “Land Cover” refers to natural or man-made physical properties of the land surface (what the land is covered with) such as coniferous forest or impervious surfaces. Both systems utilize multiple and varying classification schema with distinct overlaps and important differences.

Several of the taxonomic systems more commonly used in federal and national land cover mapping efforts include NOAA’s Coastal Change Analysis Program (C-CAP), US Geological Survey’s (USGS) Gap Analysis Program (GAP) and National Land Cover Database (NLCD), and the recently developed National Vegetation Classification System (NVCS). Many of these current systems are variants of the hierarchical classification system developed by Anderson et al, in 1976 (Appendix B).2  Anderson considered and developed this system so that features within a more detailed land use study could be considered both up and downward, across scales. New and more demanding applications emerge every year.  These range from transportation considerations for mass population evacuations to surface water assessments in the face of changing annual climatologies.  More accurate and precise data (spatially, thematically and temporally) and easily integrated classification units are required by organizations to fit specific project needs.

Satellite and airborne imaging systems are among the enabling technologies for current land cover data development.  Without them, much of the information that users require simply would not exist (Jensen and Cowen, 1999).3 As imaging technology improves, the capability for producing improved classification schemes and LULC maps increases. For example, the Anderson classification was created at a time when 60-meter, 5-band LandSat multi-spectral imagery was the best publicly available satellite imagery. Today, 4-meter, color-infrared multi-spectral imagery is widely available, and an imaging sensor can obtain hundreds of spectral bands, allowing for the delineation of individual tree species by unique composition of foliar lignin and nitrogen. In addition, greatly reduced costs, improved accuracy and improved spatial and spectral resolution of airborne image data have enabled many more organizations and agencies to depend on these data as a primary source for LULC mapping exercises. These developing digital technologies greatly enhance our ability to assess patterns and processes across wider and deeper dimensions (X, Y, Z and time).

In addition to satellite and aerial image data, accurate and reliable ground control and ancillary reference data are essential to LULC classifications. GIS data sets are invaluable, as image data alone are rarely sufficient for landscape characterizations. In addition, error metrics determined through accuracy assessment are required to establish the ultimate usability of a LULC map or data set.   Accuracy assessment, in turn, requires ground control or ancillary reference data that has greater spatial accuracy and/or spatial resolution than the source data. This is an important aspect of LULC mapping that will become increasingly significant as more data types are integrated and analyzed in coincident geographic space.

Some sources for ancillary and reference data have been identified in the NYS GIS Coordination Program’s Land Use Principle Data Set Assessment, generated by the S/DC Work Group in 2002  (Appendix A).  The S/DC Work Group produced a Principle Data Set Assessment for land cover data sources which can also be used in LULC production (Appendix A, Table 2).  Equally as important, the historic land use and land cover data in the Principle Data Set Assessments can potentially be used in change analysis.  Other historic LULC data, such as the Land Use Natural Resource (LUNR) should be made available for analyses as well.

3.2     Update on LULC Activities and Needs in New York State

While the Land Use and Land Cover Principle Data Set Assessments primarily inventoried the known statewide LULC data sets, the LULC Study Group sought to identify as many LULC data sets in New York State as possible, regardless of extent or completeness.  The LULC Study Group identified a wide range of uses for LULC in New York State including:

·        Homeland security and emergency management – emergency response, consequence modeling and situation awareness

·        Public health studies – West Nile virus, Lyme disease and other epidemiological studies

·        Natural resource management – habitat protection, biodiversity, agricultural dynamics and forestry

·        Urban planning – urban sprawl, build out modeling and real property trends

·        Water quality protection – watershed modeling  and land acquisition

Table 1 summarizes some of the major LULC activities identified and profiled by the LULC Study Group, though it is not intended to be comprehensive.  It includes organizations that have been identified as having an interest in developing or utilizing LULC information in New York, as well as the organizations that reported on their mapping and research activities.  An approximate geographic representation of the LULC activities that were reported to the Study Group can be found in Appendix C.  Details on the LULC Study Group’s outreach and response are included in Appendix D.

Scope

Geographic Region

Project/Interest

Agency

National

National

NLCD 1992, 2000

USGS, USEPA, USFS, others

National

MRLC, Chesapeake Bay, LULC Coordination, I-Teams

US EPA

National, Multiple States

Cropland Data Layer, crop forecasts

USDA NASS

Interstate Regional

Coastal US; Long  Is., Great Lake Watersheds

Coastal Change Analysis Program (C-CAP), Non-point Source

NOAA, NYS Dept. of State

Northeastern US

Ecological Land Unit derivation

The Nature Conservancy

Northeastern US

LULC, neural networks, impervious surface, Non-point Source

UCONN RESAC and NEMO, and NASA

Northeastern Area

LTA Assessment, State and Private Forestry

USFS

Northeastern US, NYS

LULC, Change Detection, Non-point Source

The Institute for the Application of Geospatial Technology, NASA

Lower New England

Fine scale vegetation delineation

Columbia University

NY\NJ Highlands

LULC, ecological functions

Rutgers, USFS, NYS DEC

Interstate, NYS

West Nile Virus, Lyme Disease

NYS Department of Health

Interstate, NYS

Homeland Security/Emergency Management - consequence assessment, situation awareness

NYS Emergency Management Office

New York State

NY State

NY GAP – Habitat Modeling

Cornell, NYS DEC

NY State

NYS LULC Coordination

NYS CSCIC, NYS DEC, NYS DOT

NY State

LUNR, Imagery Collections

Cornell IRIS

NY State Forests

Forest Inventory, Ground Truth, Change Detection

NYS DEC

NYS Wildlife Mgmt Areas and Parks

Habitat Inventory, Ground Truth, Change Detection

NYS DEC

Intrastate Regional

Adirondacks

LULC Coordination

Adirondack Park Agency

NYC Watershed

Watershed Protection, Change Detection, Non-point Source

NYC Dept. of Environmental Protection

Lake George Watershed

Non-point Source Reduction

NYS Dept. of State

Shawangunk Ridge Program

Biodiversity and ecological communities

Mohonk Preserve, Inc.

Catskills

Hyperspectral Vegetation

UNH - Complex Systems Lab

NYC Metro Area

Urban Forestry

NYC OASIS, NYPIRG, USFS, Brooklyn Botanic Garden

NYC Metro Area

Vegetative Fraction

NYC Parks, USFS, CIESIN\LDEO

NYC Metro Area

Climate Impact Assessment

Montclair State University

NYS Metro Areas

Urban Forestry

USFS, USGS, SUNY-ESF

Hudson River

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation, GAP

NYS DEC, Cornell IRIS, NOAA, Others

County

Peconic Bay Watershed

LULC and Change Detection

Suffolk County, USGS

Westchester County

LULC and Change Detection

Westchester GIS, CIESIN

Ulster County

LULC

Ulster County Information Services

Table 1 LULC Activities in NYS

Through the LULC Study Group’s outreach effort a growing database is being compiled with these and many more known LULC mapping projects that generate, utilize or will soon need LULC information within New York State. Additional projects are being added to the list weekly.  It is clear that active interest in LULC mapping has increased markedly since the S/DC Work Group’s original Principle Data Set Assessment. Among the current needs identified during the LULC Study Group’s outreach are:

·        Improving resolution, including:

o       Spatial detail

o       Temporal frequency

o       Class granularity

·        Quality issues, including:

o       Spatial and classification accuracy

o       Metadata standards

·        Coordination and product interoperability

o       Resource pooling (imagery, ground control)

o       Taxonomic cross-walks

Many of these topics are areas of active research.  Identifying user demand in these areas will help justify investments in new technology, and the need for further development. 

Determining the need for coordination and increasing LULC product interoperability in New York should be a primary goal of the LULC Work Group.  Improving interoperability standards will allow the products and supporting materials from one project to be reused in another project, saving time and money.  Interoperability can be achieved through:

·        Fostering partnerships between agencies and projects

·        Improving the understanding of and crosswalks between classification schemes

·        Sharing and reusing source data, ground truth, and intermediate products

·        Improving metadata and using process-oriented production tools

·        Modifying project goals to take advantage of existing resources

The need for readily accessible LULC data in commonly used formats and projections was identified as a current need. A LULC Work Group could serve data developers by coordinating Clearinghouse access to imagery as well as ground control and ground truth data.  Several activities newly emerging in this area were noted by the LULC Study Group:

·        The NYS Department of Environmental Conservation and other organizations have offered to make inventory data from areas such as state forests, parks and wildlife management areas available for ground truthing

·        Researchers at SUNY Syracuse ESF are developing a prototype, on-line, field reference plot database

·        The Institute for Applied Geospatial Technology, in conjunction with NASA Goddard Space Flight Center has been developing software for searching multiple sources of public domain imagery

Other suggested examples of how a LULC Work Group could facilitate improved access to data include:

·        Assisting the US Department of Agriculture’s Farm Service Agency (USDA FSA) in achieving more complete coverage over New York of their National Aerial Imagery Program (NAIP). This effort makes rectified imagery rapidly available for annual crop compliance assessments and could be a valuable asset for ground truthing.

·        Investigating the availability of LUNR dataset from Cornell University and determining whether it could be distributed for land use change analysis.  The LUNR dataset developed approximately 50 categories of land use information derived from hand-drafted maps. 

These and other significant resources could be developed and coordinated through regular work group meetings, periodic technical exchange meetings and through a dedicated list-server. 

LULC Study Group activities have already increased LULC coordination in New York.  The EPA and USGS landscape characterization groups have begun to review the integration of multiple Federal efforts within the region, and the US Forest Service has identified coordination opportunities within their urban forest cover projects.  Opportunities also exist to bring additional national programs and LULC development dollars to New York.  This approach has been used very successfully by New York’s Department of State with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Coastal Change Analysis Program (NOAA C-CAP). An LULC Work Group could similarly work to bring the USDA National Agricultural Statistical Service’s Cropland Data Layer Program to New York.  The Cropland Data Layer annually classifies crops per field using Landsat imagery.  This information can be particularly valuable for watershed management.

Another option that should be explored is the development of a regional LULC I-Team.  I‑Teams are a Federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and Federal Geographic Data Committee initiative (FGDC http://www.fgdc.gov/I-Team/) created to promote digital data applications, collaborations, and interoperability across political and regional boundaries. This initiative seeks to break down organizational stovepipes and reduce individual agency burdens by illustrating common challenges, examining best practices, and improving available data quality across a given region.

4.     Recommendations:

The LULC Study Group recommends establishment of an LULC Work Group under the NYS GIS Coordinating Body that receives direction from and advises the Coordinating Body on matters concerning LULC in NYS.

The following goals and tasks were identified by the LULC Study Group for the LULC Work Group’s consideration:

·        Coordinate data development with national programs and other states, including:

o       National Land Cover Dataset 2000 (NLCD 2000) Program

o       US EPA Multi-Resolution Land Cover (MRLC)

o       USGS Urban Dynamics Program

o       USDA Cropland Data Layer Program and National Aerial Imagery Program (NAIP)

o       OMB I-Team – Investigate establishment of a regional LULC I-Team

o       FGDC, OGC, Geospatial One Stop

o       Determine what programs in other states are doing to coordinate LULC activities

·        Foster partnerships among LULC developers and users

·        Ensure that existing data is made available to users in formats they can use.  This includes:

o       Existing and upcoming LULC data

o       Raw and processed imagery (satellite and airborne)

o       Data from ground truth resources and field calibration sites

o       LUNR data

·        Facilitate collection and exchange of information regarding LULC-related projects, methodologies, data sources,

o       Sponsor technical exchange meetings, forums, and workshops, as well as hold regular meetings

o       Continue to develop and maintain a mailing list and list-serve of interested people, projects, agencies and firms

o       Develop and maintain a database of projects and events

o       Utilize the existing GIS-NY list serve, and NYS GIS Clearinghouse as appropriate

·        Promote technical interchange and development.  This could include:

o       Metadata specifications and classification systems that promote compatibility and integration among multiple LULC datasets

o       Improvements in atmospheric calibration, ground truthing, accuracy assessment, and automated feature identification and image segmentation

o       Classification system crosswalks between existing LULC datasets

o       Remote sensing technology and classification techniques and algorithms

o       Working with multi-resolution imagery and LULC datasets

o       Fostering the adoption and support for interoperability standards and open source systems

·        Identify and synthesize needs and requirements for

o       Land use, land cover, and LULC data, particularly at high temporal, spatial, and classification resolutions

o       LULC metadata and data archiving standards

o       Data distribution (e.g. Internet map services), particularly for higher resolutions or data volumes

o       Use of remote sensing technology in other areas of New York State government


5.  References

(1)        February 1997 Data Coordination Work Group Meeting Report

(2)        A Land Use and Land Cover Classification System for Use with Remote Sensor Data by

            JAMES R. ANDERSON, ERNEST E. HARDY, JOHN T. ROACH, and RICHARD

            E. WITMER Geological Survey Professional Paper 964. A revision of the land use

            classification system as presented in U.S. Geological Survey Circular 671 United States

            Government Printing Office, Washington: 1976 United States Department of the Interior

            James G. Watt, Secretary Geological Survey Dallas L. Peck Director First Printing 1976

            Conversion to Digital 2001.

(3)        Remote Sensing of Urban/Suburban Infrastructure and Socio-Economics Attributes,

            John R. Jensen and Dave C. Cowen, Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing

            Vol. 65, No. 5, May 1999, pp. 611-622.


Appendix A: Principle Data Set Assessment Charts


NYS Principle Data Set Assessment - Land Use

Table 1

(revised 06/02)

File

Agency

Scale

Completeness

Attributes

Needs

Metadata Information

Parcel Centroids - Land Use Attributes

ORPS

1:600
1:1200
1:2400
1:4800
1:9600

98% continually updated by local government. Westchester partially approved. NYC totally separate system.

Property Use

Annual accuracy verification.

Metadata:

http://gis.ny.gov/gis3/data/orps.rpsdata00.html

Issues: Land use categories are detailed (approx. 200 categories identified; grouped into 9 "super" categories). These may not meet various state agency needs. Property use is determined by local assessors based on each parcel’s highest taxable use. This method may not reflect all major uses of each parcel.

**Note: The entire Parcel Centroids data set is also listed on the CADASTRAL Needs Assessment chart.

Natural Resources Inventory

NRCS

N/A

Statewide

Land Use and Cover, Soil Type,
Erosion, Geographic Location

NONE

NRI Site:
http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/NRI

Issues: Statewide point data based on scientifically selected sample points. The 1997 Natural Resources Inventory (NRI) database has been designed for use in detecting significant changes in resource conditions relative to the years 1982, 1987, 1992, and 1997. All comparisons for two points in time should be made using the new 1997 NRI database. Comparisons made using data published for the 1982, 1987 or 1992 NRI may produce erroneous results, because of changes in statistical estimation protocols and because all data collected prior to 1997 were simultaneously reviewed (edited) as 1997 NRI data were collected.

LULC** - Land Use and Land Cover

USGS

1:250,000

Statewide

Anderson Land Use and Land Cover Classification Code

NONE

LULC Site:

http://edcwww.cr.usgs.gov/

/products/landcover/lulc.html

Issues: Historical polygon data based primarily on manual interpretation of late 1970's and early 1980's aerial photography.  Includes associated maps on political units, hydrologic units, census county subdivisions and Federal and State land ownership.  Available in Geographic Information

Retrieval Analysis System (GIRAS) format.   Also available in ArcInfo export format from EPA.

**Note: This information is also listed on the LAND COVER Needs Assessment chart.

NLCD** - National Land Cover Data

Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium

30 Meter Pixel

1992 NLCD completed and available; 2000 NLCD is under development, with a targeted completion in 2004.

National Land Cover Classification Code

NONE

NLCD Site:

http://landcover.usgs.gov/nationallandcover.html

MRLC Consortium Site:

http://www.epa.gov/mrlc/about.html

Issues: Not a field data product.  Uses other ancillary data sources for refinement.  It is designed for use in regional studies.  Not as vegetation based as Gap Analysis Program product.

**Note: This information is also listed on the LAND COVER Needs Assessment chart.

Parcel Boundaries

Counties

1:600
1:1200
1:2400
1:4800
1:9600

15-20%; county effort which is starting to move more quickly.

Varies by County

County and local gov’ts need technical and financial support and training. No resources available.

Not Available On-line

Issues: This is a county responsibility; ORPS is not responsible for parcel boundaries. Not a statewide layer.


**Note: This information is also listed on the CADASTRAL Needs Assessment chart.


NYS Principle Data Set Assessment - Land Cover

Table 2

(revised 06/02)

FILE

AGENCY

SCALE

COMPLETENESS

ATTRIBUTES

NEEDS

METADATA
INFORMATION

GAP - Gap Analysis Program

USGS, Cornell, DEC

30 Meter Pixel

Continuing

N/A

National effort to develop land cover protocol.

Not Available
On-line

Issues: LandSat imagery. New York is 1991 base.

NLCD**- National Land Cover Data

Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium

30 Meter Pixel

1992 NLCD completed and available; 2000 NLCD is under development, with a targeted completion in 2004.

National Land Cover Classification Code

NONE

NLCD Site:

http://landcover.usgs.gov/

nationallandcover.html

MRLC Consortium Site:

http://www.epa.gov/mrlc/about.html

Issues: Not a field data product.  Uses other ancillary data sources for refinement.  It is designed for use in regional studies.  Not as vegetation based as Gap Analysis Program product.

**Note: This information is also listed on the LAND USE Needs Assessment chart.

C-CAP - Coastal Change Analysis Program

NOAA, DOS, SUNY Albany

25 Meter pixel

Statewide

N/A

Distribution and usage methods. Change analysis against archived and new imagery.

Not Available On-line

NOAA, DOS, SUNY Albany

5 - 10 Meter pixel

Long Island*

N/A

Change Analysis against archived and new imagery.

Not Available On-line

NOAA & DOS

25 Meter pixel

Great Lakes Watershed area of New York plus additional Counties outside watershed**

N/A

Change Analysis against archived and new imagery.

Not Available On-line

Issues: No funding for follow-up imagery required for land cover change analysis.

 *Note: Long Island imagery is from 1994 LandSat images.

**Note: Great Lakes imagery is from 2001 LandSat images.

LULC** - Land Use and Land Cover

USGS

1:250,000

Statewide

Anderson Land Use and Land Cover Classification Code

NONE

LULC Site:

http://edcwww.cr.usgs.gov/

/products/landcover/lulc.html

Issues: Historical polygon data based primarily on manual interpretation of late 1970's and early 1980's aerial photography.  Includes associated maps on political units, hydrologic units, census county subdivisions and Federal and State land ownership.  Available in Geographic Information

Retrieval Analysis System (GIRAS) format.   Also available in ArcInfo export format from EPA.

**Note: This information is also listed on the LAND USE Needs Assessment chart.

Appendix B: Anderson’s LULC Classification System

Levels I and II of Anderson's 1976 LULC Classification System

Table 1



Level I

Level II

1 Urban or Built-up Land

11 Residential

12 Commercial and Services

13 Industrial

14 Transportation, Communications, and Utilities

15 Industrial and Commercial Complexes

16 Mixed Urban or Built-up Land

17 Other Urban or Built-up Land

2 Agricultural Land

21 Cropland and Pasture

22 Orchards, Groves, Vineyards, Nurseries, Ornamental Horticultural Areas

23 Confined Feeding Operations

24 Other Agricultural Land

3 Rangeland

31 Herbaceous Rangeland

32 Shrub and Brush Rangeland

33 Mixed Rangeland

4 Forest Land

41 Deciduous Forest Land

42 Evergreen Forest Land

43 Mixed Forest Land

5 Water

51 Streams and Canals

52 Lakes

53 Reservoirs

54 Bays and Estuaries

6 Wetland

61 Forested Wetland

62 Nonforested Wetland

7 Barren Land

71 Dry Salt Flats.

72 Beaches

73 Sandy Areas other than Beaches

74 Bare Exposed Rock

75 Strip Mines Quarries, and Gravel Pits

76 Transitional Areas

77 Mixed Barren Land

8 Tundra

81 Shrub and Brush Tundra

82 Herbaceous Tundra

83 Bare Ground Tundra

84 Wet Tundra

85 Mixed Tundra

9 Perennial Snow or Ice

91 Perennial Snowfields

92 Glaciers


Appendix C: Land Use and Land Cover Activities in NY

       (The extents of the activities are estimated from the descriptions provided.)

Figure 1


Appendix D: Outreach and Response

The study group used two primary outreach techniques to complete its charge:

1.      Develop a list of parties interested in LULC in NY and ask them about their activities, primarily through email and contacts; and

2.      Public outreach through the NYS GIS Conference.

An initial mailing list of 38 interested parties was developed in the S/DC Work Group.  24 responses were received which included 23 respondents who wanted to be kept informed of LULC coordination activities in NY.  The LULC Coordination session at the NYS GIS Conference resulted in 3 more interested parties signing up, for a total outreach of 41.  Table 1 shows the response to the study group outreach. 

Outreach

Initial Mailing List

No Response

14

38

Responding

24

Interested

23

No longer involved with GIS and LULC

1

NYS GIS Conference Sign-up

3

Total Number in Outreach

41

Table 1 Outreach Totals

The study group developed a spreadsheet (Figure 1) that allowed respondents to report their project information.   22 project descriptions were received from the 24 respondents.  Several projects included more than one respondent, and several respondents provided multiple project descriptions.  The breakout is summarized in Table 2.  The final summary of inputs was solicited through conversations and e-mail, and filled in manually.

Response to LULC Study Group Request for Information

No longer involved with GIS and LULC

1

Interested in LULC WG activities

23

 

Maintain on Mailing list

4

Involved with Projects

19

   

Other Team member sent in response

5

Sent in one or more project description

14

A) Number of respondents

B) Number of Projects per respondent

Number of Projects

(AxB)

   

10

1

10

1

2

2

2

3

6

1

4

4

Total Number of LULC Projects

22

Total number of respondents

24

Table 2 Breakdown of Responses


               Figure 1  Project Information Survey