Landcover dataset created for the agricultural portion of Saskatchewan. Download: here A satellite imagery classification of Southern Saskatchewan based mainly on 1994 Landsat5 imagery. Developed by the Saskatchewan Research Council after 1997. Background: A group of Provincial and Federal Agencies formed a partnership in March of 1997 to share the cost of obtaining satellite imagery and interpreting this imagery to create a landcover dataset for the agricultural portion of Saskatchewan. The partnership included Saskatchewan Research Council (SRC), Saskatchewan Agriculture and Food (SAF), Saskatchewan Crop Insurance (SCI), Saskatchewan Property Management Corporation (SPMC), Environment Canada, the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration (PFRA) and Saskatchewan Environment Resource Management (SERM). The University of Regina was also involved as an 'in kind' partner providing research services in the area of land cover classifications, accuracy assessment and data conversions. The Partnership Agreement required SRC (partner doing the bulk of data processing) to provide digital files for each of 328 1:50,000 NTS map sheets. The digital files included not only raw imagery, but also one file for each map sheet where the imagery was classified into 24 landcover types. The accuracy of this classification was to be demonstrated by SRC to be at least 90 per cent correct. In addition to the data processing done by SRC, SPMC provided the necessary positional control data (road intersection coordinates) and verified the positional accuracy of the final product. The other partners provided feedback to SRC on classification errors, which improved the overall accuracy of the final product. Classification Value No Data 0 Crop Land 1 Hay Crops (Forage) 2 Native Dominant Grass Lands 3 Tall Shrubs 4 Pasture (Seeded Grass Lands) 5 Hardwoods (Open Canopy) 6 Hardwoods (Closed Canopy) 7 Jack Pine (Closed Canopy) 8 Jack Pine (Open Canopy) 9 Spruce (Close Canopy) 10 Treed Rock 13 Recent Burns 14 Revegetating Burns 15 Cutovers 16 Water Bodies 17 Marsh 18 Herbaceous Fen 19 Mud/Sand/Saline 20 Shrub Fen (Treed Swamp) 21 Treed Bog 22 Open Bog 23 Slopes 25 Slopes 26 0. No Data 1. Crop Land - All lands dedicated to the production of annual cereal, oil seed and other specialty crops, and typically cultivated on an annual basis.  2. Hay Crops (Forage) - Alfalfa and alfalfa/tame grass mixtures.  3. Native Dominant Grass Lands - Native dominant grasslands/may contain tame grasses and herbs.  4. Tall Shrubs - Communities containing both low and tall shrub, snowberry, saskatoon, chokecherry, buffaloberry, and willow.  5. Pasture (Seeded Grass Lands) - Grassland dominated by tame grass species.  6. Hardwoods (Open Canopy) - Corresponds to Provincial Forest Inventory: over 75% hardwoods; 10-30% crown closure.  7. Hardwoods (Closed Canopy) - Corresponds to Provincial Forest Inventory: over 75% hardwoods; 30-100% crown closure.  8. Jack Pine (Closed Canopy) - Similar to Provincial Forest Inventory: 75% or greater Jack Pine; 30-100% crown closure.  9. Jack Pine (Open Canopy) - Similar to Provincial Forest Inventory: 75% or greater Jack Pine; 10-30% crown closure.  10. Spruce (Close Canopy) - Similar to Provincial Forest Inventory: 75% or greater Black and White Spruce; 10-30% crown closure. 11. Spruce: Open Canopy - Similar to Provincial Forest Inventory: 75% or greater Black and White Spruce; 10-30% crown closure. 12. Mixed Woods - All softwood/hardwood mixtures.  13. Treed Rock - Areas of exposed bedrock with generally less then 10% tree cover. Dominant species are Jack Pine and Black Spruce.  14. Recent Burns - All areas that have been recently burned over by wildfires.  15. Revegetating Burns - Burns with a regrowth of commercial timber generally 1-5 metres in height.  16. Cutovers - Areas where commercial timber has been completely or partially removed by logging operations.  17. Water Bodies - Consists of all open water - lakes, rivers, streams, ponds, and lagoons.  18. Marsh - Dominated by sedge and wetland grasses.  19. Herbaceous Fen - Fens dominated by herbaceous species.  20. Mud/Sand/Saline  21. Shrub Fen (Treed Swamp) - Fens dominated by shrubby species.  22. Treed Bog - Peat-covered or peat-filled depressions with a high water table and a surface carpet of moss, chiefly sphagnum. The bogs have 25% or more canopy by trees greater than one metre tall. The primary species is black spruce.  23. Open Bog - Peat-covered or peat-filled depressions with a high water table and a surface carpet of moss, chiefly sphagnum. 24. Farmstead - Farmstead types, towns, cities, Exposed areas with little or no vegetation or Cloud coverage.  25. Slopes - Steep Valley slopes or hill slopes where aspect and slope prohibit classification. 26. Slopes - Steep Valley slopes or hill slopes where aspect and slope prohibit classification.

Leaf area index (LAI) quantified the density of vegetation irrespective of land cover. LAI quantifies the total foliage surface area per groud surface area. LAI has been identified by the Global Climate Observing System as an essential climate variable required for ecosystem,weather and climate modelling and monitoring. This product consists of annual maps of the maximum LAI during a grownig season (June-July-August) at 100m resolution covering Canada's land mass.

Data include a collection of annual land cover maps derived from MODIS 250 m spatial resolution remotely sensed imagery for the period 2000 to 2011. Processing of the time series was designed to reduce the occurrence of false change between maps. The method was based on change updating as described in Pouliot et al. (2011, 2013). Change detection accounted for both abrupt changes such as forest harvesting and more gradual changes such as recurrent insect defoliation. To determine the new label for a pixel identified as change, an evidential reasoning approach was used to combine spectral and contextual information. The 2005 MODIS land cover of Canada at 250 m spatial resolution described in Latifovic et al. (2012) was used as the base map. It contains 39 land cover classes, which for time series development was considered too detailed and was reduced to 25 and 19 class versions. The 19 class version corresponds to the North America Land Change Monitoring System (NALCMS) Level 2 legend as described in Latifovic et al. (2012). Accuracy assessment of time series is difficult due to the need to assess many maps. For areas of change in the time series accuracy was found to be 70% based on the 19 class thematic legend. This time series captures the spatial distribution of dominant land cover transitions. It is intended for use in modeling, development of remote sensing products such as leaf area index or land cover based albedo retrievals, and other exploratory analysis. It is not appropriate for use in any rigorous reporting or inventory assessments due to the accuracy of the land cover classification and uncertainty as to the capture of all relevant changes for an application. NOTE: To see this entire product in the map viewer, use a base map in the "World" section (EPSG: 3857).

The 2005 AAFC Land Use is a culmination and curated metaanalysis of several high-quality spatial datasets produced between 1990 and 2021 using a variety of methods by teams of researchers as techniques and capabilities have evolved. The information from the input datasets was consolidated and embedded within each 30m x 30m pixel to create consolidated pixel histories, resulting in thousands of unique combinations of evidence ready for careful consideration. Informed by many sources of high-quality evidence and visual observation of imagery in Google Earth, we apply an incremental strategy to develop a coherent best current understanding of what has happened in each pixel through the time series.

FCOVER corresponds to the amount of the ground surface that is covered by vegetation, including the understory, when viewed vertically (from nadir). FCOVER is an indicator of the spatial extent of vegetation independent of land cover class. It is a dimensionless quantity that varies from 0 to 1, and as an intrinsic property of the canopy, is not dependent on satellite observation conditions.This product consists of FCOVER indicator during peak-season (June-July-August) at 100m resolution covering Canada's land mass.

The AAFC Infrastructure Flood Mapping in Saskatchewan 20 centimeter colour orthophotos is a collection of georeferenced color digital orthophotos with 20 cm pixel size. The imagery was delivered in GeoTIF and ECW formats. The TIF and ECW mosaics were delivered in the same 1 km x 1 km tiles as the LiDAR data, and complete mosaics for each area in MrSID format were also provided. The digital photos were orthorectified using the ground model created from the DTM Key Points. With orthorectification, only features on the surface of the ground are correctly positioned in the orthophotos. Objects above the surface of the ground, such as building rooftops and trees, may contain horizontal displacement due to image parallax experienced when the photos were captured. This is sometimes apparent along the cut lines between photos. For positioning of above-ground structures it is recommended to use the LiDAR point clouds for accurate horizontal placement.

Land cover classification image for the Aspen Parkland ecoregion of Saskatchewan with a spatial resolution of 10m. The goal of this land cover classification was to distinguish native from tame grasslands. The classification was based on Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 imagery using machine learning analysis in the Google Earth Engine platform. The classification was conducted on imagery acquired in 2022, and the classification model was built with field data collected in 2020 - 2022. There are eight classes in total: native grassland, tame grassland, mixed/altered grassland, cropland, shrubs, trees, water, and urban area. Download: here The Prairie Landscape Inventory (PLI) aims to develop improved methods of assessing land cover and land use for conservation. Native grassland has historically been one of the hardest to map at-risk ecosystems because of the challenges in distinguishing native grassland from tame grassland land cover using remotely sensed imagery. This classification distinguishes native grassland from tame grassland and will provide valuable information for habitat suitability for native grassland species, identifying high biodiversity potential and invasion risk potential. The classification map has eight (8) classes:  1. Cropland This class represents all cultivated areas with crop commodities, including corn, pulse, soybeans, canola, grains, and summer-fallow. 2. Native grassland This class represents the native grassland areas that are composed of at least 75% native grass, sedge and forb species, such as the needle grasses and wheatgrasses along with June grass and blue grama grass. Unbroken grassland that is invaded by species like Kentucky bluegrass, crested wheatgrass or smooth brome, such that native cover is less than 75%, is not considered native for the purpose of this project.  3. Mixed/altered grassland This class represents a grassland with a mix of less than 75% native grass, sedge and forb species or less than 75% tame species. These are grassland areas that do not fit into either of the native or tame grassland definitions.  4. Tame grassland This class represents the tame grassland areas that are composed of at least 75% seeded or planted species with introduced grasses and forb species such as crested wheatgrass, smooth brome, Kentucky bluegrass, alfalfa, and sweet clover. 5. Water This class represents permanent water locations such as lakes and rivers. 6. Shrubs This class represents the sites dominated by woody vegetation of relatively low height (generally +/-2 meters) with shrub canopy typically >20% of total vegetation cover. 7. Trees This class represents the coniferous/deciduous trees, mixed-wood area, and other trees >2 meters height with tree canopy typically >20% of total vegetation cover. 9. Urban area This class represents both urban municipalities and buffered roads. Urban municipalities was used to mask the urban/developed area class of the Annual Crop Inventory 2021 (Agriculture Agri-Food Canada).   Colour Classes: Value Label Red Green Blue 1 Cropland 255 255 190 2 Native grassland 168 168 0 3 Mixed/altered grassland 199 215 158 4 Tame grassland 245 202 122 5 Water 190 232 255 6 Shrubs 205 102 153 7 Trees 66 128 53 9 Urban area 128 128 128 Accuracy metrics This model has an overall accuracy of 73 per cent. The table below summarizes the user’s accuracy, producer’s accuracy, and F1-score of the model on the validation dataset. Class User’s accuracy (%) Producer’s accuracy (%) F1-score Cropland 91.2 94.5 0.93 Native grassland 74.8 73.1 0.74 Mixed grassland 44.7 44.1 0.44 Tame grassland 67.9 72.8 0.70 Water 94.8 91.3 0.93 Shrubs 61.2 51.1 0.56 Trees 89.7 94.6 0.92

Organic soils in the boreal forest commonly store as much carbon as the vegetation above ground. While recent efforts through the National Forest Inventory has yielded new spatial datasets of forest structure across the vast area of Canada’s boreal forest, organic soils are poorly mapped. In this geospatial dataset, we produce a map primarily of forested and treed peatlands, those with more than 40 cm of peat accumulation and over 10% tree canopy cover. National Forest Inventory ground plots were used to identify the range of forest structure that corresponds to the presence of over 40 cm of peat soils. Areas containing that range of forest cover were identified using the National Forest Inventory k-NN forest structure maps and assigned a probability (0-100% as integer) of being a forested or treed peatland according to a statistical model. While this mapping product captures the distribution of forested and treed peatlands at a 250 m resolution, open, completely treeless peatlands are not fully captured by this mapping product as forest cover information was used to create the maps. The methodology used in the creation of this product is described in: Thompson DK, Simpson BN, Beaudoin A. 2016. Using forest structure to predict the distribution of treed boreal peatlands in Canada. Forest Ecology and Management, 372, 19-27. https://cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/publications?id=36751 This distribution uses an updated forest attribute layer current to 2011 from: Beaudoin A, Bernier PY, Villemaire P, Guindon L, Guo XJ. 2017. Species composition, forest properties and land cover types across Canada’s forests at 250m resolution for 2001 and 2011. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Laurentian Forestry Centre, Quebec, Canada. https://doi.org/10.23687/ec9e2659-1c29-4ddb-87a2-6aced147a990 Additionally, this distribution varies slightly from the original published in 2016 in that here slope data is derived from the CDEM: https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/7f245e4d-76c2-4caa-951a-45d1d2051333 The above peatland probability map was further processed to delineate bogs vs fens (based on mapped Larix content via the k-NN maps), as well as an approximation of the extent of open peatlands using EOSD data. The result is a 9-type peatland map with a more complete methodology as detailed in: Webster, K. L., Bhatti, J. S., Thompson, D. K., Nelson, S. A., Shaw, C. H., Bona, K. A., Hayne, S. L., & Kurz, W. A. (2018). Spatially-integrated estimates of net ecosystem exchange and methane fluxes from Canadian peatlands. Carbon Balance and Management, 13(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13021-018-0105-5 In plain text, the legend for the 9-class map is as follows: value="0" label="not peat" alpha="0" value="1" label="Open Bog" alpha="255" color="#0a4b32" value="2" label="Open Poor Fen" alpha="255" color="#5c5430" value="3" label="Open Rich Fen" alpha="255" color="#792652" value="4" label="Treed Bog" alpha="255" color="#6a917b" value="5" label="Treed Poor Fen" alpha="255" color="#aba476" value="6" label="Treed Rich Fen" alpha="255" color="#af7a8f" value="7" label="Forested Bog" alpha="255" color="#aad7bf" value="8" label="Forested Poor Fen" alpha="255" color="#fbfabc" value="9" label="Forested Rich Fen" alpha="255" color="#ffb6db" This colour scale is given in qml/xml format in the resources below. The 9-type peatland map from Webster et al 2018 was further refined slightly following two simple conditions: (1) any 250-m raster cell with greater than 40% pine content is classified as upland (non-peat); (2) all 250-m raster cells classified as water or agriculture via the NRCan North American Land Cover Monitoring System (https://doi.org/10.3390/rs9111098) is also classified as non-peatland (value of zero in the 9-class map. This mapping scheme was used at a regional scale in the following paper: Thompson, D. K., Simpson, B. N., Whitman, E., Barber, Q. E., & Parisien, M.-A. (2019). Peatland Hydrological Dynamics as A Driver of Landscape Connectivity and Fire Activity in the Boreal Plain of Canada. Forests, 10(7), 534. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10070534 And is reproduced here at a national scale. Note that this mapping product does not fully capture all permafrost peatland features covered by open canopy spruce woodland with lichen ground cover. Nor are treeless peatlands near the northern treeline captured in the training data, resulting in unknown mapping quality in those regions.

The 1 cm resolution vegetation digital height model was extracted using a bare earth model and digital surface model (DSM) derived from unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) imagery acquired from a single day survey on July 28th 2016, in Cambridge Bay, Nunavut. The mapping product covers 525m2 and was produced by Canada Centre for Remote Sensing /Canada Centre for Mapping and Earth Observation. The UAV survey was completed in collaboration with the Canadian High Arctic Research Station (CHARS) for northern vegetation monitoring research. For more information, refer to our current Arctic vegetation research: Fraser et al; "UAV photogrammetry for mapping vegetation in the low-Arctic" Arctic Science, 2016, 2(3): 79-102. http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/AS-2016-0008

Röð uppréttra loftmynda úr loftmyndasafni Náttúrufræðistofnunar sem unnar voru á árunum 2013 til 2018 hjá Jarðvísindastofnun HÍ, sem partur af tveimur verkefnum: 1 - Mælingar á jöklabreytingum úr sögulegum loftmyndum. Þetta verkefni var unnið af Joaquín M.C. Belart í M.Sc. og Ph.D. hjá Jarðvísindastofnun. Útvaldar loftmyndir frá 1945 til 1994 voru skannaðar hjá Landmælingum Íslands sérstaklega fyrir þetta verkefni. Vinnsla þessara loftmynda fór fram með því að nota "Ground Control Points" (GCP) sem teknir voru úr lidarmælingum á íslenskum jöklum. Úrvinnsla gagna úr Drangajökli fór fram með ERDAS hugbúnaðinum. Nánari upplýsingar um vinnsluna er að finna í Magnússon o.fl., 2016 (https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/10/159/2016/tc-10-159-2016.html). Úrvinnsla gagna frá öðrum jöklum var unnin með MicMac hugbúnaðinum, einnig með GCP teknir af lidar. Nánari upplýsingar um vinnsluna eru fáanlegar í Belart o.fl., 2019 (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-glaciology/article/geodetic-mass-balance-of-eyjafjallajokull-ice-cap -for-19452014-processing-guidelines-and-relation-to-climate/9B715A9E0413A6345C2B151B1173E71D) og Belart o.fl., 2020 (https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.31630/feart/full.316390/feart. 2 - Mælingar á hraunmagni Heklugosanna á 20. öld. Þetta verkefni var unnið af Gro B.M. Pedersen sem hluti af verkefni þar sem unnið var að umhverfiskortlagningu og vöktun Íslands með fjarkönnun "Environmental Mapping and Monitoring of Iceland by Remote Sensing" (EMMIRS, fjármagnað af Rannís) á árunum 2015-2018. Loftmyndirnar af Heklu frá 1945 til 1992 voru skannaðar af Landmælingum Íslands. Vinnsla þessara mynda var gerð með ERDAS hugbúnaðinum og nánari upplýsingar um vinnsluna er hægt að nálgast í Pedersen o.fl., 2018 (https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2017GL076887) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A series of orthomosaics using the archives of aerial photographs from Náttúrufræðistofnun (Loftmyndasafn) created between 2013 and 2018 at the Institute of Earth Sciences, as part of two projects: 1 - Measurements of glacier changes from historical aerial photographs. This project was conducted by Joaquín M.C. Belart during his M.Sc. and his Ph.D. at the Institute of Earth Sciences. A selection of aerial photographs from 1945 to 1994 were scanned at Náttúrufræðistofnun specifically for this project. The processing of these aerial photographs was done using Ground Control Points (GCPs) extracted from lidar surveys of Icelandic glaciers. The processing of the data from Drangajökull ice cap was done using the ERDAS software. Further details on the processing are available in Magnússon et al., 2016 (https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/10/159/2016/tc-10-159-2016.html). The processing of the data from other glaciers was done using the MicMac software, also with GCPs extracted from lidar. Further details of the processing are available in Belart et al., 2019 (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-glaciology/article/geodetic-mass-balance-of-eyjafjallajokull-ice-cap-for-19452014-processing-guidelines-and-relation-to-climate/9B715A9E0413A6345C2B151B1173E71D) and Belart et al., 2020 (https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feart.2020.00163/full) 2 - Measurements of the lava volumes of the Hekla eruptions in the 20th century. This project was conducted by Gro B.M. Pedersen as part of the Environmental Mapping and Monitoring of Iceland by Remote Sensing (EMMIRS, financed by Rannís) project between 2015-2018. The aerial photographs of Hekla from 1945 to 1992 were scanned by Náttúrufræðistofnun. The processing of these photographs was done using the ERDAS software, and further details of the processing are available in Pedersen et al., 2018 (https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2017GL076887) References: Belart J.M.C., Magnússon E., Berthier E., Pálsson, F., Aðalgeirsdóttir, G., & Jóhannesson, T. (2019). The geodetic mass balance of Eyjafjallajökull ice cap for 1945–2014: Processing guidelines and relation to climate. Journal of Glaciology, 65(251), 395-409. doi:10.1017/jog.2019.16 Belart J.M.C., Magnússon E., Berthier E., Gunnlaugsson Á.Þ., Pálsson F., Aðalgeirsdóttir G., Jóhannesson T, Thorsteinsson T and Björnsson H (2020) Mass Balance of 14 Icelandic Glaciers, 1945–2017: Spatial Variations and Links With Climate. Front. Earth Sci. 8:163. doi: 10.3389/feart.2020.00163 Magnússon, E., Belart, J.M.C., Pálsson, F., Ágústsson, H., and Crochet, P.: Geodetic mass balance record with rigorous uncertainty estimates deduced from aerial photographs and lidar data – Case study from Drangajökull ice cap, NW Iceland, The Cryosphere, 10, 159–177, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-159-2016, 2016. Pedersen, G. B. M., Belart, J. M. C., Magnússon, E., Vilmundardóttir, O. K., Kizel, F., Sigurmundsson, F. S., et al. (2018). Hekla volcano, Iceland, in the 20th century: Lava volumes, production rates, and effusion rates. Geophysical Research Letters, 45, 1805–1813. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076887