C-CAP Land Cover, Erie County, Ohio, 2015

The NOAA Coastal Change Analysis Program (C-CAP) produces national standardized land cover and change products for the coastal regions of the U.S. C-CAP products inventory coastal intertidal areas, wetlands, and adjacent uplands with the goal of monitoring changes in these habitats. The timeframe for this metadata is summer 2016. These maps are developed utilizing high resolution National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) imagery, and can be used to track changes in the landscape through time. This trend information gives important feedback to managers on the success or failure of management policies and programs and aid in developing a scientific understanding of the Earth system and its response to natural and human-induced changes. This understanding allows for the prediction of impacts due to these changes and the assessment of their cumulative effects, helping coastal resource managers make more informed regional decisions. NOAA C-CAP is a contributing member to the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics consortium and C-CAP products are included as the coastal expression of land cover within the National Land Cover Database.

C-CAP is dedicated to the development, distribution, and application of land cover and change data for the coastal regions of the U.S. This effort is being conducted in close coordination with state coastal management agencies, the interagency Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) consortium, and the National Land Cover Database (NLCD).

Attributes for this product are as follows:

0 Background,

1 Unclassified (Cloud, Shadow, etc),

2 Impervious,

3

4

5 Developed Open Space,

6 Cultivated Land,

7 Pasture/Hay,

8 Grassland,

9

10

11 Upland Forest,

12 Scrub/Shrub,

13 Palustrine Forested Wetland,

14 Palustrine Scrub/Shrub Wetland,

15 Palustrine Emergent Wetland,

16 Estuarine Forested Wetland,

17 Estuarine Scrub/Shrub Wetland,

18 Estuarine Emergent Wetland,

19 Unconsolidated Shore,

20 Bare Land,

21 Open Water,

22 Palustrine Aquatic Bed,

23 Estuarine Aquatic Bed,

24 Tundra,

25 Snow/Ice,

Recommended Citation. NOAA Coastal Change Analysis Program (C-CAP) Regional Land Cover Database. Data collected 1995-present. Charleston, SC: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Office for Coastal Management. Data accessed at coast.noaa.gov/landcover.

5 years

Users must assume responsibility to determine the usability of these data.

None

Data set is not for use in litigation. While efforts have been made to ensure that these data are accurate and reliable within the state of the art, NOAA, cannot assume liability for any damages, or misrepresentations, caused by any inaccuracies in the data, or as a result of the data to be used on a particular system. NOAA makes no warranty, expressed or implied, nor does the fact of distribution constitute such a warranty.

Microsoft Windows XP Version 5.1 (Build 2600) Service Pack 3; ESRI ArcCatalog 9.2.2.1350

According to the accuracy assessment performed by NOAA Office for Coastal Management staff, the overall accuracy of this product is 92.3%. There were 270 total sample units distributed across the county. The accuracy of each class is as follows (Producer's, User's accuracies):

Impervious (98.8%, 94.1%)

Open Space Developed (80.8%, 89.1%)

Cultivated (93.5%, 99.3%)

Pasture/Hay (98.6%, 86.9%)

Grassland (92.3%, 60.4%)

Upland Forest (73.5%, 83.5%)

Shrub/Scrub (87.5%, 83.4%)

Palustrine Forested Wetland (84.9%, 100%)

Palustrine Shrub/Scrub Wetland (63.5%, 79.4)

Palustrine Emergent Wetland (89.2%, 81.7%)

Unconsolidated Shore (N/A, N/A)

Bare Land (100%, 100%)

Water (100%, 99.0%)

Palustrine Aquatic Bed (N/A, N/A)

Overall accuracy (92.3%)

Sample units were located using a stratified random distribution across the area with a minimum target number of 20. A few of the rare classes did not meet this threshold number. Unconsolidated Shore and Palustrine Aquatic Bed each received only one sample unit, not allowing for accuracy assessment calculations. Sample unit locations were initially established as a single coordinate. These locations were then used in eCognition software to generate image objects of homogenous land cover (based on the final map). The correct land cover call for the image objects were then determined through analyst interpretation of the imagery and ancillary data used to create the map. All sample units were interpreted by two analysts, plus a third who made the final determination when there was not agreement on the call. The accuracy assessment statistics were determined using area-weighted calculations (size of individual objects were factored into the calculations) as described in Congalton and Green (2019).

Congalton, Russell G., and Kass Green. Assessing the Accuracy of Remotely Sensed Data: Principles and Practices. CRC Press, 2019.

Data does not exist for all classes.

There are no pixels representing class 9 (Deciduous Forest), 10 (Evergreen Forest), 24 (Tundra), 25 (Perennial Ice/Snow), 26 (Dwarf Scrub - Alaska specific class), 27 (Sedge/Herbaceous), and 28 (Moss - Alaska specific). Developed classes have been altered to exclude the percentage breakdown of impervious surfaces as the breakdown is not appropriate for high resolution mapping (Developed High Intensity (2), Developed Medium Intensity (3), and Developed Low Intensity (4) are reduced to Impervious (Class 2)).

Tests for logical consistency indicate that all row and column positions in the selected latitude/longitude window contain data. Conversion and integration with vector files indicates that all positions are consistent with earth coordinates covering the same area. Attribute files are logically consistent.