land use on the island of oahu, hawaii, 1998 - usgs · chical land-use classification system and...
TRANSCRIPT
Land Use on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii, 1998U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological SurveyWater-Resources Investigations Report 02-4301
National Water-Quality Assessment Program
About the Cover: The base image is from Landsat 7 Enhanced Thematic Mapper (ETM), acquired by the U.S. Geological Survey, EROS Data Center http://edc.usgs.gov/ from multiple dates in 2000, georeferenced in an Albers equal area projection. The NOAA National Ocean Service, Coastal Services Center, Coastal Change Analysis Program at http://www.csc.noaa.gov/crs/lca/hi_index.html provided a cloud-reduced composite image of this data (using a band ratio technique to identify clouds and cloud shadow areas and mask them out of the imagery). Overlain on the satellite image are true color aerial photographs, also from 2000, provided by NOAA National Ocean Service, Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment, Biogeography Program at http://biogeo.nos.noaa.gov/. Both imagery sources were used to verify mapped land use (black lines in cover image).
Land Use on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii, 1998
By Frederick L. Klasner and Clinton D. Mikami
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Water-Resources Investigations Report 02-4301
Honolulu, Hawaii2003
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
GALE A. NORTON, Secretary
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Charles G. Groat, Director
The use of firm, trade, and brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey.
For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from:
District Chief U.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Geological Survey Information Services677 Ala Moana Blvd., Suite 415 Box 25286Honolulu, HI 96813 Denver, CO 80225-0286http://hi.water.usgs.gov/
U.S
. DEP
ARTMENT OF THE
INTER
IOR
MARCH 3, 1849
Contents iii
FOREWORD
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is committed to serve the Nation with accurate and timely scientific information that helps enhance and protect the overall quality of life, and facilitates effective management of water, biological, energy, and mineral resources. (http://www.usgs.gov/). Information on the quality of the Nation’s water resources is of critical interest to the USGS because it is so integrally linked to the long-term availability of water that is clean and safe for drinking and recreation and that is suitable for industry, irrigation, and habitat for fish and wildlife. Escalating population growth and increasing demands for the multiple water uses make water availability, now measured in terms of quantity and quality, even more critical to the long-term sustainability of our communities and ecosystems.
The USGS implemented the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program to support national, regional, and local information needs and decisions related to water-quality management and policy. (http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/). Shaped by and coordinated with ongoing efforts of other Federal, State, and local agencies, the NAWQA Program is designed to answer: What is the condition of our Nation’s streams and ground water? How are the conditions changing over time? How do natural features and human activities affect the quality of streams and ground water, and where are those effects most pronounced? By combining information on water chemistry, physical characteristics, stream habitat, and aquatic life, the NAWQA Program aims to provide science-based insights for current and emerging water issues and priorities. NAWQA results can contribute to informed decisions that result in practical and effective water-resource management and strategies that protect and restore water quality.
Since 1991, the NAWQA Program has implemented interdisciplinary assessments in more than 50 of the Nation’s most important river basins and aquifers, referred to as Study Units. (http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/nawqamap.html). Collectively, these Study Units account for more than 60 percent of the overall water use and population served by public water supply, and are representative of the Nation’s major hydrologic landscapes, priority ecological resources, and agricultural, urban, and natural sources of contamination.
Each assessment is guided by a nationally consistent study design and methods of sampling and analysis. The assessments thereby build local knowledge about water-quality issues and trends in a particular stream or aquifer while providing an understanding of how and why water quality varies regionally and nationally. The consistent, multi-scale approach helps to determine if certain types of water-quality issues are isolated or pervasive, and allows direct comparisons of how human activities and natural processes affect water quality and ecological health in the Nation’s diverse geographic and environmental settings. Comprehensive assessments on pesticides, nutrients, volatile organic compounds, trace metals, and aquatic ecology are developed at the national scale through comparative analysis of the Study-Unit findings. (http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/natsyn.html).
The USGS places high value on the communication and dissemination of credible, timely, and relevant science so that the most recent and available knowledge about water resources can be applied in management and policy decisions. We hope this NAWQA publication will provide you the needed insights and information to meet your needs, and thereby foster increased awareness and involvement in the protection and restoration of our Nation’s waters.
The NAWQA Program recognizes that a national assessment by a single program cannot address all water-resource issues of interest. External coordination at all levels is critical for a fully integrated understanding of watersheds and for cost-effective management, regulation, and conservation of our Nation’s water resources. The Program, therefore, depends extensively on the advice, cooperation, and information from other Federal, State, interstate, Tribal, and local agencies, non-government organizations, industry, academia, and other stakeholder groups. The assistance and suggestions of all are greatly appreciated.
Robert M. HirschAssociate Director for Water
iv Land Use on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii, 1998
CONTENTSAbstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Previous Investigations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Description of the Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Methods of Data Compilation and Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Classification System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Source Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Identification and Delineation of Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Field Verification and Adjustments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Accuracy Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Map Accuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Agricultural Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Developed Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Barren Land Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Other Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
References Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix A. Generic Land-Use and Land-Cover Classification System Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Figures1–5. Maps showing:
1. Study area with generalized topography and geographic features, island of Oahu, Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Level 1 land use in 1998: agriculture, developed, and barren/mining, island of Oahu, Hawaii . . . . . . . . . 7
3. Level 2 agriculture land use in 1998, island of Oahu, Hawaii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Level 2 developed land use in 1998, island of Oahu, Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Level 2 barren/mining land use in 1998, island of Oahu, Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Tables1. Land-use classification system and definitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2. Land-use area by classification, Oahu, Hawaii, 1998. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
CONVERSION FACTORS AND DATUMS
DatumsVertical coordinate information is referenced relative to mean sea level.Horizontal coordinate information is referenced relative to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83).
Multiply By To obtain
acre 4,047 square meteracre 0.4047 hectare
foot (ft) 0.3048 metermile (mi) 1.609 kilometeryard (yd) 0.9144 meter
square foot (ft2) 0.09290 square metersquare mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer
Introduction 1
Abstract
A hierarchical land-use classification system for Hawaii was developed and land use on the island of Oahu was mapped in support of the U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality Assess-ment Program. The land-use classification system emphasizes agriculture, developed (urban), and barren/mining uses. Areas with other land uses (conservation, forest reserve, natural areas, wet-lands, water, and barren [sand, rock, or soil] regions, and unmanaged vegetation [native or exotic]) were defined as “other.” Multiple sources of digital orthophotographs from 1998 and 1999 were used as source data. The 1998 island of Oahu land-use data are provided in digital format at http://water.usgs.gov/lookup/getspatial?oahu_lu98 for use in a Geographic Information System (GIS),at 1:24,000-scale with minimum mapping units of 2 hectares (4.9 acres) area and 30-meters (98.4 feet) feature width.
In 1998, a total of 59,195 acres (15.4 percent) of the island of Oahu were classified as agricultural land use; 98,663 acres (25.7 percent) were classi-fied as developed; 1,522 acres (0.4 percent) were classified as barren/mining; and 224,331 acres (58.5 percent) were classified as other. An accu-racy assessment identified 98 percent accuracy for all land-use classes. In windward (moister) areas, dense vegetation and canopy cover along with rapid recolonization by vegetation potentially obscured land use from photo-interpretation. While in leeward (drier) areas, sparse vegetative cover and slower vegetation recolonization may have resulted in more frequent recognition of apparent land-use patterns.
INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water-Quality Assessment program (NAWQA) was designed to evaluate the status and trends in the quality of the island of Oahu’s ground- and surface-water resources. Land use is one of the most influential human activities affecting water quality and natural resources in Hawaii. Land use affects the quality of water through modification of drainage and infiltration patterns, mod-ification of vegetative cover, and the addition of physi-cal and chemical compounds. Knowledge of land-use spatial patterns and change is necessary information for natural and cultural resource management. For exam-ple, soil and agricultural resource management require inventory and monitoring of land resources as identified in land-use maps; water-quality conditions can be com-pared between watersheds with similar or different land uses; and planning for future agriculture and develop-ment activities requires data on existing land use, trends, and resource availability. In Hawaii, there are a range of use intensities and great variability in the scale (areal extent) of these uses. Patterns of land use reflect multiple influences, including land ownership, avail-able water resources, soil type, and economic opportu-nity. A description of land use during 1998 provides a reference for describing the dynamic nature of land use and its influence on resources of the island of Oahu.
Hawaii’s landscape provides a background for jux-tapositions and contrasts in land use. For example, tra-ditional, subsistence agriculture can be found immediately adjacent to industrial areas and resort tour-ist destinations. And because of Hawaii’s tropical loca-tion centered in the Pacific Ocean, many land-use practices are specialized, such as hybrid seed-corn research with a 3 to 4 crop per year rotation and ginger root cultivation by land lease-holders with an approxi-mately 5-year return interval to minimize nematode infestation. Recently, land use has changed rapidly and
Land Use on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii, 1998
By Frederick L. Klasner and Clinton D. Mikami
2 Land Use on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii, 1998
dramatically in Hawaii—evident in the expansion of urban and suburban development and the growth of diversified agriculture—with many of these changes occurring on former sugar and pineapple plantations.
Purpose and Scope
The purpose of this report is to describe a hierar-chical land-use classification system and land use dur-ing 1998 mapped on the island of Oahu. This report and accompanying data set provide a generalized map of land use on the island of Oahu, including developed (sometimes referred to as urban) and agricultural areas, as well as barren areas resulting from mining or similar resource extraction. The land uses identified and mapped from 1998 and 1999 digital orthophotographs (DOQs) document land-use patterns through photo-interpretation. These results may differ from the actual land use.
Appropriate product use. There are a wide variety of appropriate uses for this product, including research, comparative land-use and land-cover analyses, and identification of generalized urban and suburban devel-opment or agricultural practices (including identifica-tion of land-use change and urban encroachment upon agricultural or coastal areas). Although the State tax map key and zoning designations are sometimes referred to as “land use” in Hawaii, the land use identi-fied and delineated in this report reflects the classifica-tion system described. No effort was made to identify or delineate along legal or other boundaries. Accordingly, appropriate use of this product is best limited to appli-cations where remotely sensed imagery is needed for identifying land use restricted to agriculture, developed, and barren/mining areas. The land-use map is intended for use at 1:24,000-scale or smaller.
This product can be used in conjunction with other natural and cultural resource investigations to form a more comprehensive picture of land use and land cover in Hawaii. The Hawaii Natural Heritage Program and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), among others, are identifying and delineating what is here defined as “other” land-use and land-cover types (conservation, forest reserve, natural areas, and naturally or non-maintained barren, wetlands, forested, shrubland, or herbaceous cover types, see appendix A). Developed, agricultural, barren, and other land uses also were mapped using similar techniques during the late 1970s (U.S. Geological Survey, 1979). This and other
previous investigations provide comparable reference materials for investigating land-use change.
Previous Investigations
The USGS described land use in Hawaii as early as the 1880s (Dutton, 1884). The USGS GIRAS (Geo-graphic Information and Analysis System) protocol for collecting land-use and land-cover data (Mitchell and others, 1977) was applied on Oahu and throughout Hawaii (U.S. Geological Survey, 1979; U.S. Geological Survey, 1980), using the land-use and land-cover clas-sification system established by Anderson and others (1976).
Hawaiian land divisions are described by Chinen (1958), with assignment of land ownership in the 1840s “Great Mahele” providing a common reference point for identifying early land ownership, land use, and land-use change in the Hawaiian Islands (see Moffat and Fitzpatrick, 1995). The Hawaiian Government Survey from the late 1800s provides one of the first detailed, comprehensive, and consistent land maps of the main Hawaiian islands. Territorial Planning Board reports for Hawaii provide a general perspective on land use for the first half of the 1900s (see for example, Territorial Plan-ning Board, 1939). The U.S. Department of Agriculture, University of Hawaii, and State of Hawaii, Department of Agriculture produced a variety of reports and maps for documentation and planning purposes, such as “Agricultural Land-Use Planning in the Territory of Hawaii, 1940” (Coulter, 1940) and “Detailed Land Classification - Island of Oahu” (Sahara and others, 1972). The “Inventory of Available Information on Land Use in Hawaii” (Harland Bartholomew and Asso-ciates, 1957) and the University of Hawaii, Land Study Bureau’s (1971) annotated bibliography provide sum-maries of available land-use products for the State of Hawaii.
Description of the Study Area
The study area encompasses the entire island of Oahu and populated islets, using the shoreline identified in the 1999, 1:24,000-scale National Hydrography Dataset. Oahu consists of the eroded remnants of two volcanic mountain ranges, the Waianae Range and the Koolau Range (fig. 1). Weathering, erosion, and slope failure have modified the original domed surfaces of the
Introduction 3
Figu
re 1
. Stu
dy a
rea
with
gen
eral
ized
topo
grap
hy a
nd g
eogr
aphi
c fe
atur
es, i
slan
d of
Oah
u, H
awai
i.
Man
iniGl
Wai
mea
Gl
Huliw
aiGl
Kaloi Gl
Hono
uliuli Gl
Kaunala
Gl
Kam
anan
ui
Str
Malaekahana
Str
KaluanuiStr Punaluu
Str
Kahana
Str
MaunawiliStr
Palo
lo
Str
ManoaStr
Nuuan
uSt
r
KalihiSt
rM
oana
lua
Str
NH
alaw
aSt
r
Wai
mal
uSt
rW
aim
ano
Str
Kipap
aSt
r
Nanakuli
Str
Mailii
liiS
tr
Mak
uaSt
r
Makaleha Str
Kauko
nahu
aStr
Poamoh
oStr
Nor
thF
ork
Opa
e ula
St r
Ana
hulu
Riv
erMakaha
Str
KaupuniStr
Wai
kele
St r
Waiawa
Str
OioStr
Hel
eman
oSt
r
Sou
thF
ork
SH
alaw
aSt
r
Wai
man
alo
Bay
KA
NE
OH
EB
AY
Kah
ana
Bay
Pea
rl
H
arbo
r
MA
MA
LA
B
AY
Mau
nalu
a B
ay
Sand
Isla
nd
Ford
Isla
nd
Mok
auea
Isla
nd
Mok
uolo
eIs
land
HO
NO
LU
LU
Kai
lua
Kan
eohe
Mak
aha W
aian
ae Mai
li
Nan
akul
i
Ew
aB
each
Ew
a
Wai
alua
Hal
eiw
a
Suns
etB
each
Kah
uku L
aie
Kaa
awa
Wai
man
alo
Haw
aii
Kai
Ain
aH
aina
Aie
a
Wai
pahu
Scho
fiel
dB
arra
cks
Wah
iaw
a
158˚
10'
157˚
50'
157˚
40'
21˚4
0'
21˚3
0'
21˚2
0'
158˚
0 0
4 M
ILES
2
24
KILO
MET
ERS
WAIA
NAE
RANGE
KOOLAU
RANGE
Base
mod
ified
from
U.S
. Geo
logi
cal S
urve
y di
gita
l dat
a,
1:24
,000
, 198
3 &
199
9, A
lber
s eq
ual a
rea
proj
ectio
n, s
tand
ard
para
llels
21˚
19'4
0" a
nd 2
1˚38
'20"
, cen
tral m
erid
ian
157˚
58'.
Relie
f fro
m U
.S. G
eolo
gica
l Sur
vey
digi
tal e
leva
tion
mod
els,
1:
24,0
00
Kahu
ku P
oint
Mak
apuu
Poin
t
Barb
ers
Poin
t
Diam
ond
Head
Kaen
a Po
int
22˚
20˚
158˚
156˚
160˚ PA
CIF
ICO
CE
AN
Kaua
iN
iihau
Oahu
Mau
iM
olok
ai
Lana
iKa
hool
awe Ha
wai
i
HAW
AII
TO
POG
RA
PHIC
DIV
IDE
--
W
indw
ard
Oah
u to
the
east
,
leew
ard
to th
e w
est
EXPLANATION
4 Land Use on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii, 1998
volcanoes, dissecting the east and west parts of the island into a landscape of deep valleys and steep ridges. A gently sloping saddle lies between the two mountain ranges, although 45 percent of the land area has a slope 20 percent or greater (State of Hawaii, 1999). A coastal plain surrounds much of the island. The subtropical cli-mate of Oahu is characterized by mild temperatures, moderate humidity, prevailing northeasterly trade-winds, and extreme variation in rainfall over short dis-tances, with rainfall regimes divided into windward (moist catchments) and leeward (dry rain shadows) areas.
Honolulu, one of the 25 largest cities in the Nation, is located in southeastern Oahu. The resident population of Oahu, which has more than doubled since 1950, was about 876,000 in 2000. The actual population, which includes an average number of visitors to the island at any time, was about 923,400 in 1998. The State of Hawaii zoning classification for land use on Oahu in 1999 was about 40 percent conservation, 34 percent agriculture, and 26 percent urban (State of Hawaii, 1999). The principal industry is tourism, followed by military activities and agriculture. Major land use changes are occurring in central Oahu. During the past several decades, plantation agriculture, primarily sugar-cane and pineapple, which dominated for approxi-mately 100 years, has declined and in its place has been an incursion of suburban development and a shift to diversified agriculture, including flowers, vegetables, fruits, and aquaculture.
Acknowledgements
Staff at numerous State and Federal agencies pro-vided invaluable assistance and guidance. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) provided agri-culture land-use data, assistance establishing the classi-fication system, and reviewed the land uses mapped. The NOAA, Coastal Change Analysis Program (C-CAP) shared data resources. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) provided assistance establishing the classification system. The State of Hawaii Department of Agriculture and City and County of Honolulu reviewed mapped land uses. Numerous private land owners also provided cooperation and assistance.
METHODS OF DATA COMPILATION AND CLASSIFICATION
The land-use classification system and map draw on existing USGS, NRCS, and NOAA C-CAP land-use mapping guidelines and recommendations. These exist-ing methodologies and classifications systems were adapted to better reflect land use in Hawaii. These adap-tations, essentially selections among existing methodol-ogies, emphasized consistent use of data sources, establishment of a hierarchical classification system, repeatable land-use identification and delineation tech-niques, field verification, accuracy assessment, and documentation.
Classification System
“National Land Cover Data - Land Cover Class Definitions” (U.S. Geological Survey, 2001) were cus-tomized to better represent tropical Pacific island land uses. Five primary criteria governed the modification of existing land-use classification systems (see Gilliom and Thelin, 1997): (1) relevance to existing land-use management practices, (2) scale of the classification system appropriate for the scale of analysis and collaps-ible to more general classification systems, (3) transfer-able to smaller scales and to remote sensing source data of differing scales, (4) criteria for defining categories are stable over time, (5) classification system is practi-cable and applicable to other areas—particularly other Hawaiian and Pacific islands. This classification system emphasizes human use of land, in general categories of agriculture, developed, and barren/mining. This classi-fication system was not structured for other land uses (defined by land-cover type as water, barren, wetland, forest, shrubland, or herbaceous, see appendix A).
In addition to the National Land Cover Data class definitions, other land-use mapping reports were used to refine the classification system (table 1, at end of report), including: the Middle Rio Grande Basin study (Mladinich, 1999), NOAA C-CAP protocols (Dobson and others, 1995), and Anderson and others (1976). Koterba’s (1998) and Gilliom and Thelin’s (1997) clas-sification systems were adapted to address agriculture and water-quality concerns. Agriculture categories were refined with local NRCS staff, integrating plant morphology, spatial arrangement of fields, and crop types as defined by the State of Hawaii (Hawaii Agri-culture Statistics Service, 1999). Developed categories
Methods of Data Compilation and Classification 5
were refined by Oahu NAWQA Study Unit staff, emphasizing typical development patterns in Hawaii. The classification structure indicates the primary land use interpreted from the source data. For example, com-bined commercial-residential properties are classified according to the majority use.
Agriculture, military, and tourism activity in Hawaii required special attention when classifying land use. For example, diversified agriculture development and promotion programs have resulted in areas with diverse agriculture practices intermixed with residential land uses. Military land uses such as offices, residences, ammunition storage bunkers, communications infra-structure, and other military equipment occupy a signif-icant portion of land on Oahu. These uses are identified as developed, and are segregated by the type and density of development, as opposed to land ownership. Military target and bombing ranges in a natural or semi-natural state are not treated as agriculture or developed land uses.
The hierarchical classification system provides generalized, less precise identification of land use at level 1 or level 2. More precise identification of land use is described in level 3 or level 4. Uncertainty or gener-alization in land-use identification is indicated by the use of only generalized categories; for example, where the type of orchard crop could not be identified, the land use is Agriculture (level 1), Planted/cultivated (level 2), Orchard (level 3), and no crop specific identifier (level 4) is provided. Definitions of land-use levels 1 through 4 for agricultural and developed categories and levels 1 and 2 for barren/mining categories are in table 1.
Source Data
Multiple sources of data were used to identify land use, primarily 1-m (3.3 ft) ground resolution black-and-white DOQs, from 1998 and 1999 (U.S. Geological Survey, 1996). Five meter (16.4 ft) ground resolution color infrared digital orthophotos and non-georectified, true color photographs (1:24,000 nominal scale) also were used. Ancillary sources, including USGS 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle maps, the City and County of Honolulu’s parcel and zoning information database, local road guides, and field observations in March and April 2001 augmented the base data.
Identification and Delineation of Land Use
Land use was identified and delineated through photo-interpretation of DOQs. Recognition elements (observable characteristics) interpreted from the image data included shape, size, pattern, shadow, tone, texture, association, and site (Avery and Berlin, 1985). Photo-interpretation was completed on computer workstations using ESRI’s (Environmental Systems Research Insti-tute) ArcView GIS (version 3.2) software. The DOQ data was displayed in its original datum and projection (Universal Transverse Mercator [UTM] zone 4 projec-tion, North American Datum 1983 [NAD83]). The shoreline identified, the seaward limit of SEA/OCEAN (the approximate line of mean high water) from 1999, 1:24,000-scale National Hydrography Dataset for Oahu, determined the spatial extent of land use.
Minimum mapping units of 2.0 ha (4.9 acres) and a minimum polygon width of 30 m (98.4 ft) were used. Areas (slivers) that did not meet these minimum criteria were evaluated individually and absorbed into the adja-cent polygon as appropriate. Some map-worthy ground features were slightly exaggerated or generalized in area or width to meet the minimum size requirements (see Mladinich, 1999). Some features too small to be collected were collapsed into a single feature. The data was interpreted and compiled in blocks of USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles. Quadrangle land-use data was edge-matched and paneled together in a seam-less unit. All polygons contain one label point, are closed, and adjacent polygons do not have identical attributes.
Agriculture, developed, and barren/mining land uses were identified according to the classification sys-tem. Other areas (water, wetland, forest, shrubland, and herbaceous land uses, appendix A) were identified as “other.” The areal extent of each land use was delin-eated to the most detailed possible category in the clas-sification system—a more general category was used when land use could not be identified to the more detailed category. Ancillary data sources were used to help in interpretation.
Field Verification and Adjustments
Land-use data interpretations were verified through field checking. All areas where photo- interpreters noted uncertainty in the classification were visited. Land-use identification, boundary delineation,
6 Land Use on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii, 1998
and adjacent polygon(s) identifications were verified at regularly spaced point locations (2-km [1.2 mi] inter-vals, at a total of 385 locations). Also, a minimum of one field validation plot was located in each land-use category found in each USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle. Expert assessments were also made, with NRCS field staff identifying local agricultural land uses. Collabora-tors, including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the State of Hawaii Department of Agriculture, helped ensure that remote developed areas were not over-looked. NOAA C-CAP land-cover data were used for verification. On the basis of these procedures, adjust-ments were made to polygon boundaries and land-use categories.
Accuracy Assessment
Accuracy of mapped land use was evaluated using randomly generated locations, stratified by level 1 land use. Within a total of 250 2-ha (4.9 acres) circular poly-gons, the accuracy of the mapped land use was assessed and the boundaries of adjacent land-use polygons veri-fied. Of these 250 accuracy assessment locations, one-fifth (50) were within areas where land use was classi-fied as “other” (level 1), two-fifths (100) of the samples were within areas classified as agriculture (level 1), and the remaining two-fifths (100) were within areas classi-fied as developed or barren/mining (level 1). Accuracy was assessed through review of image data sources for each location. Land use was considered accurate if the same land-use attributes and boundaries were photo-interpreted during the accuracy assessment. Ancillary data sources were used when original image data sources did not provide adequate detail. If uncertainty remained regarding land use after the accuracy assess-ment, site visits were made to the location.
LAND USE
The hierarchical land-use classification system emphasized human use and land surface modification interpreted from digital aerial photographs. The catego-ries presented reflect land use on Oahu. Other Pacific islands may include additional land uses; for example, orchard crops such as lychee (Litchi spp.) are present on the island of Hawaii, but were not found on Oahu in areas large enough to meet the minimum mapping unit criteria. Also, agriculture practices may evolve such that a plant currently cultivated only as horticulture may
some day also be grown as a row crop. Additional land-use studies would likely need to add categories to the hierarchical classification to address such changes.
Land use was identified, in the most general cate-gories, as agriculture, developed, barren/mining, and other. While not intended to be exclusive, these gener-alized categories required interpretive decisions, such as where small-scale farms were mixed with residential areas. Similar decisions were made at more detailed lev-els of the classification system.
The total land area studied for this report was 383,711 acres: 382,711 acres on the island of Oahu, 455 acres on Ford Island, 514 acres on Sand Island, 8 acres on Mokauea Island (near Sand Island), and 23 acres on Mokuoloe Island (also known as Coconut Island) (fig. 2).
Map Accuracy
The land uses mapped are a generalization of con-ditions observed in photographs. These data may not reflect ground conditions actually present at the site. Land use was interpreted from DOQ data and bound-aries may cross natural or artificial features (such as streams or roads) to encompass an entire area where a pattern was interpreted as existing. Additionally, boundaries between distinct land uses must incorporate a natural or artificial feature where the width or area of the intervening feature does not meet the minimum mapping unit requirements. Thus, line work may not always match other digital data, such as land ownership, roads, or streams (see Mladinich, 1999).
An accuracy assessment, repeating the photo-inter-pretation of land use at 250 randomly selected locations, identified 98 percent accuracy for all land uses. Devel-oped and barren/mining areas combined had a 98 per-cent accuracy rate, while agricultural areas also had a 98 percent accuracy rate. No “other” areas identified in the accuracy assessment should have been classified as agricultural, developed, or barren/mining.
Accuracy for windward areas of the island was 100 percent, where under-representation errors were more likely to fail to identify developed, agricultural, or barren/mining land use in areas of dense canopy or vegetative cover. Accuracy in dry, leeward areas of the island was 98 percent, where over-representation errors more likely identified unused land as developed, agri-cultural, or barren/mining when it should not have
Land Use 9
Man
iniGl
Wai
mea
Gl
Huliw
aiG
l
Kaloi Gl
Hono
uliuli G l
Kaunala
Gl
Kam
anan
uiSt
r
MalaekahanaSt
r
KaluanuiStr Punaluu
Str
Kahana
Str
MaunawiliStr
Palo
lo
Str
ManoaStr
Nuuanu
Str
KalihiSt
rM
oana
lua
Str
NH
alaw
aSt
r
Wai
mal
uSt
rW
aim
ano
Str
Kipap
aSt
r
Nanakuli
Str
Mailiilii
Str
Mak
uaSt
r
Makaleha Str
Kauko
nahu
a
Str
Poa
moh
o
Str
Nor
thF
ork
Opa
eula
Str
Ana
hulu
Riv
erMakaha
Str
KaupuniStr
Wai
kele
Str
Waiawa
Str
OioStr
Hel
eman
oSt
r
Sou
thF
ork
SH
alaw
aSt
r
Wai
man
alo
Bay
KA
NE
OH
EB
AY
Kah
ana
Bay
Pea
rl
H
arbo
r
MA
MA
LA
B
AY
Mau
nalu
a B
ay
Sand
Isla
nd
Ford
Isla
nd
Mok
auea
Isla
nd
Mok
uolo
eIs
land
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
bb
b
b
b
bb
bb
b
b
b
b
b
HO
NO
LU
LU
Kai
lua
Kan
eohe
Mak
aha W
aian
ae Mai
li
Nan
akul
i
Ew
aB
each
Ew
a
Wai
alua
Hal
eiw
a
Suns
etB
each
Kah
uku L
aie
Kaa
awa
Wai
man
alo
Haw
aii
Kai
Ain
aH
aina
Aie
a
Wai
pahu
Scho
fiel
dB
arra
cks
Wah
iaw
a
158˚
10'
157˚
50'
157˚
40'
21˚4
0'
21˚3
0'
21˚2
0'
158˚
0 0
4 M
ILES
2
24
KILO
MET
ERS
WAIA
NAERANGE
KOOLAU
RANGE
Base
mod
ified
from
U.S
. Geo
logi
cal S
urve
y di
gita
l dat
a,
1:24
,000
, 198
3 &
199
9, A
lber
s eq
ual a
rea
proj
ectio
n, s
tand
ard
para
llels
21˚
19'4
0" a
nd 2
1˚38
'20"
, cen
tral m
erid
ian
157˚
58'.
Relie
f fro
m U
.S. G
eolo
gica
l Sur
vey
digi
tal e
leva
tion
mod
els,
1:
24,0
00
Kahu
ku P
oint
Mak
apuu
Poin
t
Barb
ers
Poin
t
Diam
ond
Head
Kaen
a Po
int
LA
ND
USE
AR
EA
(ac
res)
A
gric
ultu
re
59,
195
D
evel
oped
9
8,66
3
Bar
ren
(min
ing)
1,5
22
Oth
er
22
4,33
1
TO
POG
RA
PHIC
DIV
IDE
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
Figu
re 2
. Lev
el 1
land
use
in 1
998:
agr
icul
ture
, dev
elop
ed, a
nd b
arre
n/m
inin
g, is
land
of O
ahu,
Haw
aii.
8 Land Use on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii, 1998
been because of sparser vegetation and slower vegeta-tion recolonization rates.
Agricultural Land Use
Hawaii’s isolated, tropical location combined with traditional, diversified, and plantation agriculture has resulted in several unusual land-use patterns compared with the rest of the Nation. The “small-scale rural” (level 2) category is a by-product of diversified agricul-ture programs resulting in areas with intense and diverse agriculture practices intermixed with residential land uses. The State of Hawaii “Agricultural Parks Program” provides an example of how this process occurs, with long-term leases for crop production (and sometimes residences) provided to small farmers (http://www.hawaiiag.org/hdoa/arm_agparks_info.htm accessed 7/11/02). Another unusual category is “grasses, biomass” (level 3, level 4), an experimental bio-energy crop in the early 1990s no longer in cultiva-tion as of 2002. A third unusual agricultural land-use category is “abandoned,” typically dominated by exotic grasses, with clear evidence of previous agricultural practices still apparent. Plantation agriculture in Hawaii has been declining for several decades, with much sugarcane and pineapple land abandoned during this time. Cycles in horticulture and aquaculture industries have also resulted in abandoned agricultural land.
Agricultural land use occupied 59,195 acres (15.4 percent) of the study area in 1998 (fig. 3). Acreages for levels 1 through 4 land-use categories are found in table 2 (at end of report).
Developed Land Use
Several facets of developed land-use patterns are unusual to Hawaii, particularly in regards to the inten-sity and variability of uses, all with political, economic, and cultural influences. Tourist destinations commonly intermix a variety of use types within a single area (such as multi-story resorts, adjacent to golf courses, adjacent to landfills). Local concepts such as “ohana” (extended family) housing in a single family residence are incor-porated through residential density classifications rather than a distinction between single versus multi-family housing. Land areas with combined or interspersed
businesses and residences are classified according to the primary use evident in the imagery, as commercial or residential. Military land uses occupy a significant percentage of land in Hawaii and these uses also are segregated by the density of development. Military ammunition storage bunkers, communications, or other equipment may be disguised to prevent accurate identi-fication from aerial photography sources, which may be reflected in this land-use map.
Developed land use occupied 98,663 acres (25.7 percent) of the study area in 1998 (fig. 4). Acreages for levels 1 through 4 land-use categories are found in table 2.
Barren Land Use
In the barren land-use category, only land use in the level 2 mining category was identified. Hawaii has very little mining or extractive activity, other than extraction, collection, and storage of aggregate and fill materials such as soil, sand, gravel, rock, and dredge spoils. Other barren sub-categories are included as “other” land uses.
Barren/mining land use occupied 1,522 acres (0.4 percent) of the study area in 1998 (fig. 5). Acreages for levels 1 through 4 land-use categories are found in table 2.
Other Land Use
Land uses other than agriculture, developed, and barren/mining were identified as “other” in the photo-interpretation process. These other land uses, described in appendix A on the basis of land cover, include water, barren (other than mining), wetland, forest, shrubland, and herbaceous. The methods used, including the accu-racy assessment, verified the appropriate land-use des-ignations assigned for the entire island, including these areas, and no unique concerns for these land uses were identified beyond what was previously discussed.
Other land use occupied 224,331 acres (58.5 per-cent) of the study area in 1998 (fig. 2).
Land Use 9
Figu
re 3
. Lev
el 2
agr
icul
ture
land
use
in 1
998,
isla
nd o
f Oah
u, H
awai
i.
Man
iniGl
Wai
mea
Gl
Huliw
aiG
l
Kaloi Gl
Hono
uliuli G l
Kaunala
Gl
Kam
anan
uiSt
r
MalaekahanaSt
r
KaluanuiStr Punaluu
Str
Kahana
Str
MaunawiliStr
Palo
lo
Str
ManoaStr
Nuuanu
Str
KalihiSt
rM
oana
lua
Str
NH
alaw
aSt
r
Wai
mal
uSt
rW
aim
ano
Str
Kipap
aSt
r
Nanakuli
Str
Mailii
liiS
tr
Mak
uaSt
r
Makaleha Str
Kauko
nahu
a
Str
Poa
moh
o
Str
Nor
thF
ork
Opa
eula
Str
Ana
hulu
Riv
erMakaha
Str
KaupuniStr
Wai
kele
Str
Waiawa
Str
OioStr
Hel
eman
oSt
r
Sou
thF
ork
SH
alaw
aSt
r
Wai
man
alo
Bay
KA
NE
OH
EB
AY
Kah
ana
Bay
Pea
rl
H
arbo
r
MA
MA
LA
B
AY
Mau
nalu
a B
ay
Sand
Isla
nd
Ford
Isla
nd
Mok
auea
Isla
nd
Mok
uolo
eIs
land
HO
NO
LU
LU
Kai
lua
Kan
eohe
Mak
aha W
aian
ae Mai
li
Nan
akul
i
Ew
aB
each
Ew
a
Wai
alua
Hal
eiw
a
Suns
etB
each
Kah
uku L
aie
Kaa
awa
Wai
man
alo
Haw
aii
Kai
Ain
aH
aina
Aie
a
Wai
pahu
Scho
fiel
dB
arra
cks
Wah
iaw
a
158˚
10'
157˚
50'
157˚
40'
21˚4
0'
21˚3
0'
21˚2
0'
158˚
0 0
4 M
ILES
2
24
KILO
MET
ERS
WAIA
NAERANGE
KOOLAU
RANGE
Base
mod
ified
from
U.S
. Geo
logi
cal S
urve
y di
gita
l dat
a,
1:24
,000
, 198
3 &
199
9, A
lber
s eq
ual a
rea
proj
ectio
n, s
tand
ard
para
llels
21˚
19'4
0" a
nd 2
1˚38
'20"
, cen
tral m
erid
ian
157˚
58'.
Kahu
ku P
oint
Mak
apuu
Poin
t
Barb
ers
Poin
t
Diam
ond
Head
Kaen
a Po
int
LA
ND
USE
A
rea
(acr
es)
A
GR
ICU
LT
UR
E
59,1
95
A
band
oned
20
,884
Aqu
acul
ture
19
2
L
ives
tock
73
0
Pl
ante
d/cu
ltiva
ted
33,4
41
Sm
all-
scal
e ru
ral
3,94
8
TO
POG
RA
PHIC
DIV
IDE
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
10 Land Use on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii, 1998
Figu
re 4
. Lev
el 2
dev
elop
ed la
nd u
se in
199
8, is
land
of O
ahu,
Haw
aii.
Man
iniGl
Wai
mea
Gl
Huliw
aiG
l
Kaloi Gl
Hono
uliuli G l
Kaunala
Gl
Kam
anan
uiSt
r
MalaekahanaSt
r
KaluanuiStr Punaluu
Str
Kahana
Str
MaunawiliStr
Palo
lo
Str
ManoaStr
Nuuanu
Str
KalihiSt
rM
oana
lua
Str
NH
alaw
aSt
r
Wai
mal
uSt
rW
aim
ano
Str
Kipap
aSt
r
Nanakuli
Str
Mailii
liiS
trM
akua
Str
Makaleha Str
Kauko
nahu
a
Str
Poa
moh
o
Str
Nor
thF
ork
Opa
eula
Str
Ana
hulu
Riv
er
Makaha
Str
KaupuniStr
Wai
kele
Str
Waiawa
Str
OioStr
Hel
eman
oSt
r
Sou
thF
ork
SH
alaw
aSt
r
Wai
man
alo
Bay
KA
NE
OH
EB
AY
Kah
ana
Bay
Pea
rl
H
arbo
r
MA
MA
LA
B
AY
Mau
nalu
a B
ay
Sand
Isla
nd
Ford
Isla
nd
Mok
auea
Isla
nd
Mok
uolo
eIs
land
HO
NO
LU
LU
Kai
lua
Kan
eohe
Mak
aha W
aian
ae Mai
li
Nan
akul
i
Ew
aB
each
Ew
a
Wai
alua
Hal
eiw
a
Suns
etB
each
Kah
uku L
aie
Kaa
awa
Wai
man
alo
Haw
aii
Kai
Ain
aH
aina
Aie
a
Wai
pahu
Scho
fiel
dB
arra
cks
Wah
iaw
a
158˚
10'
157˚
50'
157˚
40'
21˚4
0'
21˚3
0'
21˚2
0'
158˚
0 0
4 M
ILES
2
24
KILO
MET
ERS
WAIA
NAERANGE
KOOLAU
RANGE
Base
mod
ified
from
U.S
. Geo
logi
cal S
urve
y di
gita
l dat
a,
1:24
,000
, 198
3 &
199
9, A
lber
s eq
ual a
rea
proj
ectio
n, s
tand
ard
para
llels
21˚
19'4
0" a
nd 2
1˚38
'20"
, cen
tral m
erid
ian
157˚
58'.
Kahu
ku P
oint
Mak
apuu
Poin
t
Barb
ers
Poin
t
Diam
ond
Head
Kaen
a Po
int
LA
ND
USE
Are
a (a
cres
)
D
EV
EL
OPE
D
98
,663
Com
mer
cial
14,5
14
M
anuf
actu
ring
/indu
stri
al
3,8
08
O
pen
spac
e
17,3
28
Pu
blic
infr
astr
uctu
re
12,9
62
R
esid
entia
l
44,9
05
So
cial
ser
vice
s
5,1
45
TO
POG
RA
PHIC
DIV
IDE
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
11
Figu
re 5
. Lev
el 2
bar
ren/
min
ing
land
use
in 1
998,
isla
nd o
f Oah
u, H
awai
i.
Man
iniGl
Wai
mea
Gl
Huliw
aiG
l
Kaloi Gl
Hono
uliuli G l
Kaunala
Gl
Kam
anan
uiSt
r
MalaekahanaSt
r
KaluanuiStr Punaluu
Str
Kahana
Str
MaunawiliStr
Palo
lo
Str
ManoaStr
Nuuanu
Str
KalihiSt
rM
oana
lua
Str
NH
alaw
aSt
r
Wai
mal
uSt
rW
aim
ano
Str
Kipap
aSt
r
Nanakuli
Str
Mailii
liiS
tr
Mak
uaSt
r
Makaleha Str
Kauko
nahu
a
Str
Poa
moh
o
Str
Nor
thF
ork
Opa
eula
Str
Ana
hulu
Riv
erMakaha
Str
KaupuniStr
Wai
kele
Str
Waiawa
Str
OioStr
Hel
eman
oSt
r
Sou
thF
ork
SH
alaw
aSt
r
Wai
man
alo
Bay
KA
NE
OH
EB
AY
Kah
ana
Bay
Pea
rl
H
arbo
r
MA
MA
LA
B
AY
Mau
nalu
a B
ay
Sand
Isla
nd
Ford
Isla
nd
Mok
auea
Isla
nd
Mok
uolo
eIs
land
HO
NO
LU
LU
Kai
lua
Kan
eohe
Mak
aha W
aian
ae Mai
li
Nan
akul
i
Ew
aB
each
Ew
a
Wai
alua
Hal
eiw
a
Suns
etB
each
Kah
uku L
aie
Kaa
awa
Wai
man
alo
Haw
aii
Kai
Ain
aH
aina
Aie
a
Wai
pahu
Scho
fiel
dB
arra
cks
Wah
iaw
a
158˚
10'
157˚
50'
157˚
40'
21˚4
0'
21˚3
0'
21˚2
0'
158˚
0 0
4 M
ILES
2
24
KILO
MET
ERS
WAIA
NAERANGE
KOOLAU
RANGE
Base
mod
ified
from
U.S
. Geo
logi
cal S
urve
y di
gita
l dat
a,
1:24
,000
, 198
3 &
199
9, A
lber
s eq
ual a
rea
proj
ectio
n, s
tand
ard
para
llels
21˚
19'4
0" a
nd 2
1˚38
'20"
, cen
tral m
erid
ian
157˚
58'.
Kahu
ku P
oint
Mak
apuu
Poin
t
Barb
ers
Poin
t
Diam
ond
Head
Kaen
a Po
int
LA
ND
USE
Are
a (a
cres
)
B
arre
n/m
inin
g 1,
522
TO
POG
RA
PHIC
DIV
IDE
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
12 Land Use on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii, 1998
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
A hierarchical classification for identifying and mapping land use (for use throughout the State of Hawaii) was developed emphasizing human modifica-tion of land surfaces.
Agricultural, developed, and barren/mining land use on the island of Oahu and adjacent islets was mapped using DOQs from 1998 and 1999. In 1998, agriculture land use occupied 59,195 acres (15.4 per-cent of total study area), developed land use occupied 98,663 acres (25.7 percent of total study area), barren/mining land use occupied 1,522 acres (0.4 percent of total island area). Other land uses occupied 224,331 acres of total study area of 383,711 acres (58.5 percent). An accuracy assessment of the spatial data (98 percent accuracy for all land uses) permits users to quantify variability when making land use comparisons.
Oahu land-use data and FGDC metadata for 1998 for this report are available at http://water.usgs.gov/ pubs/wri/wri024301, for use in a Geographic Informa-tion System (GIS) accepting Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Spatial Data Transfer Standard (SDTS) or ArcInfo Export file (version 8.0.2) formats.
REFERENCES CITED
Anderson, J.R, Hardy, E.E., Roach, J.T., and Witmer, R.E., 1976, A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 964, 28 p.
Avery, T.E., and Berlin, G.L., 1985, Fundamentals of remote sensing and airphoto interpretation, 5th edition: Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 472 p.
Chinen, J.J., 1958, The Great Mahele: Hawaii's land division of 1848: Honolulu, Hawaii, University of Hawaii Press, 34 p.
Cowardin, L.M., Carter, V., Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C., 49 p.
Coulter, J.W., 1940, Agricultural land-use planning in the ter-ritory of Hawaii, 1940, Extension Bulletin No. 36: Hono-lulu, Hawaii, Agricultural Extension Service, University of Hawaii, 124 p.
Dobson, J.E., Bright, E.A., Ferguson, R.L., Field, D.W., Wood, L.L., Haddad, K.D., Iredale III, H., Jensen, J.R., Klemas, V.V., Orth, R.J., and Thomas, J.P., 1995, NOAA coastal change analysis program (C-CAP): guid-
ance for regional implementation: Department of Com-merce, NOAA Technical Report NMFS 123, 75 p.
Dutton, C.E., 1884, Hawaiian volcanoes: in Powell, J.W., 1884, Fourth annual report of the United States Geolog-ical Survey to the Secretary of Interior 1882–’83: Wash-ington, Government Printing Office, p. 75–219.
Gilliom, R.J., and Thelin, G.P., 1997, Classification and map-ping of agricultural land for national water quality assessment: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1131, 70 p.
Harland Bartholomew and Associates, 1957, An inventory of available information on land use in Hawaii: volume 2: Annotated bibliography and summary of interviews: Honolulu, Hawaii, Harland Bartholomew and Associ-ates, 134 p.
Hawaii Agricultural Statistics Service, 1999, Statistics of Hawaii agriculture, 1999: Honolulu, Hawaii, Hawaii Agricultural Statistics Service.
Koterba, M.T., 1998, Ground-water data-collection protocols and procedures for the national water-quality assessment program: Collection, documentation, and compilation of required site, well, subsurface, and landscape data for wells: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investi-gations Report 98-4107, 91 p.
Land Study Bureau, 1971, Annotated bibliography of reports and other land fact data: Honolulu, Hawaii, University of Hawaii, 11 p.
Mitchell, W.B., Guptill, S.C., Anderson, K.E., Fegeas, R.G, and Hallam, C.A., 1977, GIRAS—A Geographic Infor-mation and Analysis System for handling land use and land cover data: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1059, 16 p.
Mladinich, C.S., 1999, COVERAGE LU90—High resolution land use/land cover 1996/1997 Front Range infrastruc-ture resources project demonstration area: U.S. Geologi-cal Survey Rocky Mountain Mapping Center, http://rockyweb.cr.usgs.gov/html/front-range/ NMD/data/lu90.html (accessed July 11, 2002).
Moffat, R.M., and Fitzpatrick, G.L., 1995, Surveying the mahele: mapping the Hawaiian land revolution: Hono-lulu, Hawaii, Editions Limited, 120 p.
Sahara, T., Murabayashi, E.T., Ching, A.Y., DeVight, G.D., Fujimura, F.N., Awai, E.L., Nishimoto, L.S., Baker, H.L., 1972, Detailed land classification - island of Oahu, Land Study Bureau Bulletin No. 11: Honolulu, Hawaii, Land Study Bureau, University of Hawaii, 314 p.
State of Hawaii, 1999, The State of Hawaii data book 1999, a statistical abstract: v32, State of Hawaii Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism, http://www.hawaii.gov/dbedt/db99/index.html (accessed July 11, 2002).
Territorial Planning Board, 1939, First progress report–an historic inventory of the physical, social and economic and industrial resources of the Territory of Hawaii:
References Cited 13
Honolulu, Hawaii, Advertiser Publishing Co., 322 p. + supplement.
U.S. Geological Survey, 1979, Land use and land cover and associated maps for Honolulu County, Hawaii: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 79-572, 5 map sheets 1:100,000-scale.
U.S. Geological Survey, 1980, Land use and land cover, 1976–78, Honolulu county, Hawaii: U.S. Geological Survey Report L-0122, 1 map sheet 1:100,000-scale.
U.S. Geological Survey, 1996, Standards for digital ortho-photos: U.S. Geological Survey, National Mapping Pro-gram, Technical Instructions, 46 p.
U.S. Geological Survey, 2001, National land characterization data, land cover class definitions: U.S. Geological Sur-vey, http://landcover.usgs.gov/classes.html.
14 Appendix
App
endi
x A
. Gen
eric
land
-use
and
land
-cov
er c
lass
ifica
tion
syst
em fr
amew
ork
[Mod
ified
from
And
erso
n an
d ot
hers
, 197
6, C
owar
din
and
othe
rs, 1
979,
and
U.S
. Geo
logi
cal S
urve
y, 2
001]
Leve
l 1D
escr
iptio
n
Agr
icul
ture
Are
as c
hara
cter
ized
by
hum
an m
odif
icat
ion
used
in c
onne
ctio
n w
ith p
lant
ing,
gro
win
g, a
nd h
arve
stin
g cr
ops;
and
rai
sing
, pas
turi
ng, a
nd f
eedi
ng o
f liv
esto
ck a
nd p
oultr
y. I
nclu
des
herb
aceo
us v
eget
atio
n pl
ante
d or
cul
tivat
ed f
or p
rodu
ctio
n of
foo
d, f
eed,
see
d, o
r fi
ber;
fis
h fa
rms;
fee
dlot
s; h
oldi
ng
pens
; bre
edin
g an
d tr
aini
ng f
acili
ties;
and
gre
enho
uses
. Thi
s la
nd-u
se c
ateg
ory
take
s pr
eced
ence
ove
r ot
her
land
-use
cat
egor
ies
exce
pt f
or d
evel
oped
.
Dev
elop
edA
reas
cha
ract
eriz
ed b
y a
high
per
cent
age
of m
odif
icat
ion
by a
nd f
or h
uman
use
, suc
h as
whe
re th
e la
nd-s
urfa
ce is
cov
ered
by
stru
ctur
es, p
repa
red
mat
eria
ls, o
r ot
herw
ise
urba
n. D
oes
not i
nclu
de a
reas
use
d fo
r ag
ricu
lture
or
barr
en (
such
as
from
sur
face
min
ing)
. Thi
s la
nd-u
se c
ateg
ory
take
s pr
eced
ence
ove
r ot
her
land
-use
cat
egor
ies,
exc
ept f
or a
gric
ultu
re.
Bar
ren
Are
as c
hara
cter
ized
by
rock
, gra
vel,
sand
, silt
, cla
y, o
r ot
her
eart
hen
mat
eria
l, no
t cov
ered
by
wat
er, w
ith le
ss th
an 2
5 pe
rcen
t veg
etat
ive
cove
r or
less
than
5
perc
ent v
eget
ativ
e co
ver
in a
rid
area
s. (
Not
dif
fere
ntia
ted
exce
pt to
iden
tify
min
ing
surf
aces
).
a Wat
er
a Iden
tifie
d as
“ot
her”
All
area
s of
ope
n w
ater
or
perm
anen
t ice
or
snow
cov
er.
a Wet
land
Are
as w
here
the
soil
or s
ubst
rate
is p
erio
dica
lly s
atur
ated
with
or
cove
red
with
wat
er (
as d
efin
ed b
y C
owar
din
and
othe
rs, 1
979)
.
a Fore
stA
reas
cha
ract
eriz
ed b
y tr
ee c
over
(na
tura
l or
sem
i-na
tura
l woo
dy v
eget
atio
n, g
ener
ally
gre
ater
than
6 m
eter
s ta
ll), t
ree
cano
py a
ccou
nts
for
25–1
00 p
erce
nt
of la
nd c
over
.
a Shru
blan
dA
reas
cha
ract
eriz
ed b
y na
tura
l or
sem
i-na
tura
l woo
dy v
eget
atio
n w
ith a
eria
l ste
ms,
gen
eral
ly le
ss th
an 6
met
ers
tall,
cov
ers
25–1
00 p
erce
nt o
f la
nd.
Veg
etat
ion
that
is s
mal
l or
stun
ted
beca
use
of e
nvir
onm
enta
l con
ditio
ns is
incl
uded
.
a Her
bace
ous
Nat
ural
or
sem
i-na
tura
l her
bace
ous
vege
tatio
n is
75–
100
perc
ent o
f la
nd c
over
.
Table 1 15
Ta
ble
1. L
and-
use
clas
sific
atio
n sy
stem
and
def
initi
ons
Leve
l 1Le
vel 2
Leve
l 3Le
vel 4
Land
-use
co
des
Defin
ition
Agr
icul
ture
aA
reas
cha
ract
eriz
ed b
y hu
man
mod
ifica
tion
used
in c
onne
ctio
n w
ith p
lant
ing,
gro
win
g, a
nd h
arve
stin
g cr
ops;
and
rais
ing,
pas
turin
g, a
nd fe
edin
g of
live
stoc
k an
d po
ultry
. Inc
lude
s her
bace
ous v
eget
atio
n pl
ante
d or
cul
tivat
ed fo
r pro
duct
ion
of fo
od, f
eed,
seed
, or f
iber
; fis
h fa
rms;
feed
lots
; hol
ding
pen
s; b
reed
ing
and
train
ing
faci
litie
s; a
nd g
reen
hous
es. T
his l
and-
use
cate
gory
take
s pre
cede
nce
over
oth
er la
nd-u
se c
ateg
orie
s ex
cept
for d
evel
oped
.Pl
ante
d/
culti
vate
dap
Are
as c
hara
cter
ized
by
vege
tatio
n pl
ante
d or
cul
tivat
ed b
y hu
man
s for
pro
duct
ion
of fo
od, f
eed,
fibe
r, pa
s-tu
re, s
eed,
or o
rnam
enta
l pla
nt p
rodu
cts.
Orc
hard
ap-o
Are
as w
ith w
oody
or s
emi-p
eren
nial
her
bace
ous v
eget
atio
n pl
ante
d or
mai
ntai
ned
for p
rodu
ctio
n of
frui
ts,
nuts
, or o
ther
pla
nt p
rodu
cts.
Ban
ana
ap-o
bO
rcha
rds a
nd o
ther
are
as u
sed
for t
he p
rodu
ctio
n of
ban
ana
and
othe
r spe
cies
in th
e ge
nus M
usa.
Cof
fee
ap-o
cO
rcha
rds a
nd o
ther
are
as u
sed
for t
he p
rodu
ctio
n of
cof
fee
and
othe
r spe
cies
in th
e ge
nus C
offe
a.G
uava
ap-o
gO
rcha
rds a
nd o
ther
are
as u
sed
for t
he p
rodu
ctio
n of
gua
va a
nd o
ther
spec
ies i
n th
e ge
nus P
sidi
um.
Mac
adam
ia
nuts
ap-o
mO
rcha
rds a
nd o
ther
are
as u
sed
for t
he p
rodu
ctio
n of
mac
adam
ia a
nd o
ther
spec
ies i
n th
e ge
nus M
acad
amia
.
Papa
yaap
-op
Orc
hard
s and
oth
er a
reas
use
d fo
r the
pro
duct
ion
of p
apay
a an
d ot
her s
peci
es in
the
genu
s Car
ica.
Coc
onut
ap-o
uO
rcha
rds a
nd o
ther
are
as u
sed
for t
he p
rodu
ctio
n of
coc
onut
and
oth
er sp
ecie
s in
the
genu
s Coc
os. I
nclu
des
orch
ard
prod
uctio
n of
tree
s for
orn
amen
tal p
lant
ings
.R
ow c
rops
ap-r
Are
as u
sed
for t
he p
rodu
ctio
n of
her
bace
ous c
rops
or p
lant
s whe
re fi
elds
exh
ibit
row
or s
trip
char
acte
ristic
s si
mila
r to
row
s, in
clud
es p
inea
pple
, sug
arca
ne, c
orn,
and
frui
ts a
nd v
eget
able
s (on
ly th
ose
exhi
bitin
g ro
w
char
acte
ristic
s).
Cor
nap
-rc
Fiel
ds e
xhib
iting
row
cha
ract
eris
tics w
here
cor
n (b
oth
swee
t and
seed
var
ietie
s) a
nd o
ther
spec
ies i
n th
e ge
nus Z
ea a
re c
ultiv
ated
.Pi
neap
ple
ap-r
pFi
elds
exh
ibiti
ng ro
w c
hara
cter
istic
s whe
re p
inea
pple
and
oth
er sp
ecie
s in
the
genu
s Ana
nas a
re c
ultiv
ated
, in
clud
es b
oth
plan
ted
and
fallo
w fi
elds
.M
ixed
frui
t or
veg
etab
leap
-rm
Are
as u
sed
for r
ow c
rop
prod
uctio
n of
frui
ts o
r veg
etab
les,
incl
udin
g eg
gpla
nt, l
ettu
ce, m
elon
s, gi
nger
root
, ca
bbag
e, to
mat
oes,
basi
l, an
d ot
her s
peci
es.
May
incl
ude
smal
l are
as o
f hor
ticul
ture
cro
ps.
Wet
land
ap-r
wA
reas
use
d fo
r pro
duct
ion
of w
etla
nd ro
w c
rops
, inc
ludi
ng ta
ro (C
oloc
asia
spp.
and
oth
ers)
, wat
ercr
ess
(Ror
ippa
spp.
), an
d si
mila
r spe
cies
.H
ortic
ultu
reap
-hA
reas
use
d fo
r the
pro
duct
ion
of h
ortic
ultu
ral c
rops
and
pla
nts.
Com
mon
cro
ps in
clud
e flo
wer
pro
duct
ion,
po
tted
plan
ts, o
rnam
enta
l pla
nts,
turf
gra
ss, t
i, co
mm
unity
gar
dens
, upl
and
taro
(Col
ocas
ia sp
p. a
nd o
ther
s),
cass
ava
(Man
ihot
spp.
), an
d ka
wa.
Als
o in
clud
es a
reas
with
a d
iver
se v
arie
ty o
f cro
p ty
pes,
ofte
n in
terla
ced
with
orc
hard
-ban
anas
or r
ow c
rops
-mix
ed fr
uit o
r veg
etab
le.
Gra
sses
ap-g
Are
as o
f gra
sses
or l
egum
es, u
sed
for p
rodu
ctio
n of
veg
etat
ion
biom
ass,
lives
tock
feed
and
fodd
er, s
eed
or
hay
crop
s, or
as p
astu
re o
r gra
zing
mai
ntai
ned
thro
ugh
fenc
ing,
gra
zing
, har
vest
ing,
or o
ther
land
-sur
face
m
odifi
catio
n. In
clud
es a
reas
with
less
than
25
perc
ent f
ores
t or s
hrub
land
.Pa
stur
e an
d gr
azin
gap
-gy
Are
as u
sed
for p
rodu
ctio
n of
her
bace
ous f
eed
and
fodd
er fo
r liv
esto
ck. I
nclu
des a
reas
use
d fo
r liv
esto
ck
graz
ing
(suc
h as
rang
e la
nd) w
hen
fenc
ed o
r with
land
-sur
face
mod
ifica
tion
and
less
than
25
perc
ent f
ores
t or
shru
blan
d.B
iom
ass
ap-g
bA
reas
of p
lant
ed v
eget
atio
n us
ed fo
r bio
mas
s gen
erat
ion,
such
as t
he e
nerg
y pr
oduc
tion
crop
s ken
af (H
ibis
-cu
s can
nabi
nus)
and
sunn
hem
p (C
rota
lari
a ju
ncea
).
16 Land Use on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii, 1998
Shad
e ho
uses
ap-s
Are
as c
over
ed b
y sh
ade
clot
h or
sim
ilar s
truct
ures
inte
nded
to re
gula
te th
e am
ount
of l
ight
ava
ilabl
e fo
r pl
ant d
evel
opm
ent,
grow
th, a
nd p
rodu
ctio
n. A
lso
incl
udes
cov
ered
are
as fo
r use
in h
ydro
poni
cs.
Live
stoc
kal
Are
as a
nd a
ssoc
iate
d pa
ddoc
ks w
here
live
stoc
k, in
clud
ing
cow
s, ho
rses
, she
ep, g
oats
, hog
s, an
d po
ultry
, ar
e co
nfin
ed, m
anip
ulat
ed, a
nd tr
eate
d. F
ood
and
wat
er a
re p
rovi
ded
from
ext
erna
l sou
rces
, doe
s not
in
clud
e aq
uatic
spec
ies.
Aqu
acul
ture
aqSu
bmer
ged,
rais
ed, a
nd o
ther
ope
n or
cov
ered
are
as u
sed
for c
ultiv
atio
n of
mar
ine
or fr
eshw
ater
pro
duct
s su
ch a
s fis
h, sh
ellfi
sh, s
eaw
eed,
alg
ae, a
nd a
ssoc
iate
d eq
uipm
ent a
nd st
agin
g ar
eas.
Smal
l-sca
le
rura
las
Are
as w
here
agr
icul
ture
land
use
of a
ny ty
pe is
dom
inan
t, an
d re
side
ntia
l lan
d us
es a
re a
lso
a si
gnifi
cant
co
mpo
nent
. Com
mon
ly a
mat
rix o
f com
posi
te la
nd o
wne
rs/le
ssee
's w
ith m
ultip
le re
side
nces
and
agr
icul
-tu
ral p
ract
ices
such
as S
tate
of H
awai
i Agr
icul
tura
l Par
ks, s
ubsi
sten
ce a
gric
ultu
ral a
reas
, or s
mal
l ran
ches
. Ex
tens
ive
back
yard
gar
dens
are
not
incl
uded
.A
band
oned
aaA
reas
whe
re e
vide
nce
of p
ast a
gric
ultu
re o
r aqu
acul
ture
use
is e
vide
nt a
lthou
gh n
ot a
ctiv
ely
prac
ticed
, as
seen
in e
xten
sive
pre
senc
e of
non
-targ
et sp
ecie
s (ty
pica
lly se
mi-n
atur
aliz
ed e
xotic
spec
ies)
that
pro
hibi
t cr
op h
arve
st, u
sual
ly d
omin
ated
by
gras
ses (
com
mon
ly fo
rmer
suga
rcan
e or
pin
eapp
le fi
elds
). Fi
eld
boun
d-ar
ies a
re w
ell d
efin
ed a
lthou
gh c
rop
type
may
not
be
evid
ent.
Doe
s not
incl
ude
area
s cur
rent
ly fa
llow
, be
twee
n cr
op ro
tatio
ns.
Dev
elop
edd
Are
as c
hara
cter
ized
by
a hi
gh p
erce
ntag
e of
mod
ifica
tion
by a
nd fo
r hum
an u
se, s
uch
as w
here
the
land
-su
rfac
e is
cov
ered
by
stru
ctur
es, p
repa
red
mat
eria
ls, o
r oth
erw
ise
urba
n. D
oes n
ot in
clud
e ar
eas u
sed
for
agric
ultu
re o
r bar
ren
(suc
h as
from
surf
ace
min
ing)
. Thi
s lan
d-us
e ca
tego
ry ta
kes p
rece
denc
e ov
er o
ther
la
nd-u
se c
ateg
orie
s, ex
cept
for a
gric
ultu
re.
Man
ufac
tur-
ing/
indu
s-tri
al
dmSt
ruct
ures
and
ass
ocia
ted
grou
nds u
sed
for f
abric
atio
n, st
orag
e, d
istri
butio
n, a
nd fi
nish
ing
of c
omm
erci
al
and
indu
stria
l goo
ds a
nd se
rvic
es. I
nclu
des p
etro
-che
mic
al re
finer
ies a
nd st
orag
e, p
ower
gen
erat
ion,
mill
s, sh
ippi
ng a
nd d
istri
butio
n ce
nter
s, m
ilita
ry b
ases
with
cor
resp
ondi
ng la
nd-u
se p
atte
rns,
and
all h
ighl
y de
vel-
oped
are
as n
ot c
lass
ified
as c
omm
erci
al, r
esid
entia
l, so
cial
serv
ices
, or p
ublic
infr
astru
ctur
e.C
omm
erci
aldc
Are
as c
hara
cter
ized
by
stru
ctur
es a
nd a
ssoc
iate
d gr
ound
s use
d fo
r the
sale
of p
rodu
cts a
nd se
rvic
es, l
ight
in
dust
ry, b
usin
ess,
mili
tary
bas
es w
ith co
rres
pond
ing
land
use
pat
tern
s, am
mun
ition
bun
kers
, and
stru
ctur
es
whe
re m
ilita
ry se
rvic
es a
re p
rovi
ded.
Hig
h de
nsity
dc-h
Gre
ater
than
75
perc
ent o
f lan
d ar
ea d
evel
oped
for c
omm
erci
al u
se.
Low
stor
ydc
-hs
Stru
ctur
es o
f les
s tha
n 5
stor
ies,
or w
here
evi
denc
e of
sim
ilar h
eigh
t bui
ldin
gs is
seen
in im
ager
y.M
ulti-
stor
ydc
-h+
Stru
ctur
es o
f 5 o
r mor
e st
orie
s, or
whe
re e
vide
nce
of si
mila
r hei
ght b
uild
ings
is se
en in
imag
ery.
Mod
erat
e de
nsity
dc-m
25 to
75
perc
ent o
f lan
d ar
ea d
evel
oped
for c
omm
erci
al u
se.
Low
stor
ydc
-ms
Stru
ctur
es o
f les
s tha
n 5
stor
ies,
or w
here
evi
denc
e of
sim
ilar h
eigh
t bui
ldin
gs is
seen
in im
ager
y.M
ulti-
stor
ydc
-m+
Stru
ctur
es o
f 5 o
r mor
e st
orie
s, or
whe
re e
vide
nce
of si
mila
r hei
ght b
uild
ings
is se
en in
imag
ery.
Low
den
sity
dc-l
Less
than
25
perc
ent o
f lan
d ar
ea d
evel
oped
for c
omm
erci
al u
se, i
nclu
des l
ow o
r mul
ti-st
ory,
mili
tary
am
mun
ition
bun
kers
, and
sim
ilarly
spac
ed st
ruct
ures
Res
iden
tial
drA
reas
use
d fo
r hum
an h
abita
tion.
Hig
h de
nsity
dr-h
Gre
ater
than
75
perc
ent o
f lan
d ar
ea d
evel
oped
for h
uman
hab
itatio
n.Lo
w st
ory
dr-h
sSt
ruct
ures
of l
ess t
han
5 st
orie
s, or
whe
re e
vide
nce
of si
mila
r hei
ght b
uild
ings
is se
en in
imag
ery.
Mul
ti-st
ory
dr-h
+St
ruct
ures
of 5
or m
ore
stor
ies,
or w
here
evi
denc
e of
sim
ilar h
eigh
t bui
ldin
gs is
seen
in im
ager
y.
Tabl
e 1.
Lan
d-us
e cl
assi
ficat
ion
syst
em a
nd d
efin
ition
s--C
ontin
ued
Leve
l 1Le
vel 2
Leve
l 3Le
vel 4
Land
-use
co
des
Defin
ition
Table 1 17
Mod
erat
e de
nsity
dr-m
25 to
75
perc
ent o
f lan
d ar
ea d
evel
oped
for h
uman
hab
itatio
n.
Low
stor
ydr
-ms
Stru
ctur
es o
f les
s tha
n 5
stor
ies,
or w
here
evi
denc
e of
sim
ilar h
eigh
t bui
ldin
gs is
seen
in im
ager
y.M
ulti-
stor
ydr
-m+
Stru
ctur
es o
f 5 o
r mor
e st
orie
s, or
whe
re e
vide
nce
of si
mila
r hei
ght b
uild
ings
is se
en in
imag
ery.
Low
den
sity
dr-l
Less
than
25
perc
ent o
f lan
d ar
ea d
evel
oped
for h
uman
hab
itatio
n, in
clud
es lo
w o
r mul
ti-st
ory,
ranc
hette
s, ho
mes
tead
s, ex
tens
ive
yard
land
scap
ing,
etc
.So
cial
se
rvic
esds
Gov
ernm
ent a
nd p
rivat
e ar
eas s
ervi
ng a
s sch
ools
, uni
vers
ities
, gov
ernm
ent a
dmin
istra
tive
offic
es, a
nd
heal
th a
nd w
elfa
re fa
cilit
ies (
hosp
itals
, pub
lic se
rvic
e ve
nues
, and
recr
eatio
n st
ruct
ures
[enc
lose
d st
adiu
ms,
gym
nasi
ums,
swim
min
g po
ol c
ompl
exes
]).
Gov
ernm
ent
ds-g
Publ
ic a
nd p
rivat
e fa
cilit
ies a
nd a
ssoc
iate
d gr
ound
s use
d fo
r gov
ernm
ent a
nd p
ublic
wel
fare
such
as r
eli-
giou
s com
plex
es, m
emor
ials
, hos
pita
ls, g
over
nmen
t fac
ilitie
s, co
mm
unity
cen
ters
, and
enc
lose
d st
adiu
ms.
Doe
s not
incl
ude
vege
tate
d re
crea
tion
area
s (su
ch a
s bal
l fie
lds o
r lar
ge o
pen
spac
es) o
r cem
eter
ies.
Educ
atio
nds
-ePu
blic
and
priv
ate
educ
atio
nal f
acili
ties a
nd a
ssoc
iate
d gr
ound
s suc
h as
scho
ols,
sem
inar
ies,
univ
ersi
ty
cam
puse
s, m
useu
ms,
and
rese
arch
cen
ters
. Inc
lude
s enc
lose
d re
crea
tion
area
s as p
art o
f an
educ
atio
nal
faci
lity;
doe
s not
incl
ude
vege
tate
d ou
tdoo
r rec
reat
ion
area
s (ba
ll fie
lds a
nd la
rge
open
spac
es).
Publ
ic in
fra-
stru
ctur
edu
Are
as u
sed
for t
rans
porta
tion,
com
mun
icat
ion,
and
util
ities
, inc
ludi
ng fa
cilit
ies,
asso
ciat
ed la
nds,
right
-of-
way
s, an
d m
edia
n st
rips f
or ro
ads,
park
ing
faci
litie
s, ra
ilroa
ds, a
irpor
ts, p
orts
, util
ity tr
ansm
issi
on, p
ower
su
bsta
tion,
wat
er su
pply
, and
was
te tr
eatm
ent a
nd st
orag
e.U
tiliti
esdu
-uSt
ruct
ures
, fac
ilitie
s, an
d as
soci
ated
gro
unds
use
d fo
r pow
er tr
ansm
issi
on, c
omm
unic
atio
ns, t
reat
men
t and
st
orag
e of
drin
king
wat
er, a
nd p
umpi
ng st
atio
ns.
Was
te m
an-
agem
ent
du-w
Stru
ctur
es a
nd a
ssoc
iate
d la
nd a
rea
used
for s
olid
and
liqu
id w
aste
trea
tmen
t or d
ispo
sal,
such
as s
ewag
e tre
atm
ent,
solid
was
te tr
ansf
er, d
ispo
sal,
and
recy
clin
g.La
ndfil
ldu
-wl
Stru
ctur
es, f
acili
ties,
and
asso
ciat
ed g
roun
ds a
ctiv
ely
used
for w
aste
man
agem
ent a
nd st
orag
e, in
clud
ing
com
bina
tions
of w
aste
man
agem
ent a
ctiv
ities
. Lan
d pr
evio
usly
use
d fo
r lan
dfill
s, w
here
the
surf
ace
has
been
recl
aim
ed fo
r oth
er u
ses (
such
as d
evel
oped
or v
eget
ated
), ar
e no
t inc
lude
d.Se
wag
e Tr
eatm
ent
du-w
sSt
ruct
ures
, fac
ilitie
s, tra
nsm
issi
on li
nes,
and
settl
ing
pond
s (no
t nat
ural
wet
land
s) u
sed
in tr
eatm
ent o
f liq
-ue
fied
hum
an a
nd a
nim
al w
aste
.A
irpor
tdu
-aM
aint
aine
d ac
tive
and
over
run
area
s of r
unw
ays,
land
ing
strip
s, ta
xiw
ays,
and
inte
rven
ing
land
; alo
ng w
ith
term
inal
s, ha
nger
s, se
rvic
e bu
ildin
gs, o
ffice
s, an
d na
viga
tion
aids
.A
utom
otiv
edu
-cSt
reet
s, ro
ads,
high
way
s, an
d as
soci
ated
faci
litie
s, in
clud
ing
mai
ntai
ned
med
ians
and
shou
lder
s con
side
red
part
of th
e ro
ad p
rism
.Po
rtdu
-pD
ocks
, boa
t ram
ps, v
esse
l sto
rage
are
as, a
nd a
ssoc
iate
d st
ruct
ures
of a
por
t fac
ility
adj
acen
t to
wat
er.
Ope
n sp
ace
doU
rban
par
ks, r
ecre
atio
n ar
eas a
nd a
ssoc
iate
d fa
cilit
ies,
golf
cour
ses,
play
ing
field
s, ce
met
erie
s, an
d ot
her
mai
ntai
ned,
sem
i-mai
ntai
ned,
or v
acan
t lot
s whe
re st
ruct
ures
occ
upy
less
than
25
perc
ent o
f ava
ilabl
e sp
ace.
Rec
reat
ion
do-r
outd
oor r
ecre
atio
n ar
eas w
ith d
emar
cate
d, m
aint
aine
d ve
geta
tion
occu
pyin
g m
ore
than
25
perc
ent o
f lan
d ar
ea, s
uch
as b
aseb
all f
ield
s, an
d fo
otba
ll fie
lds.
Incl
udes
ass
ocia
ted
stru
ctur
es a
nd re
st ro
oms o
ccup
ying
le
ss th
an 2
5 pe
rcen
t of t
otal
dev
elop
ed a
rea.
Doe
s not
incl
ude
mul
ti-pu
rpos
e pa
rks w
ith g
rass
surf
aces
.M
aint
aine
d ve
geta
tion
do-m
vege
tate
d su
rfac
es w
here
cov
er ty
pe is
act
ivel
y m
anag
ed th
roug
h ph
ysic
al o
r che
mic
al m
eans
, inc
ludi
ng
golf
cour
ses a
nd m
ulti-
purp
ose
park
s. In
clud
es a
reas
with
less
than
75
perc
ent t
ree
or sh
rub
cove
r, w
hen
herb
aceo
us g
roun
d co
ver v
eget
atio
n is
act
ivel
y m
aint
aine
d.
Tabl
e 1.
Lan
d-us
e cl
assi
ficat
ion
syst
em a
nd d
efin
ition
s--C
ontin
ued
Leve
l 1Le
vel 2
Leve
l 3Le
vel 4
Land
-use
co
des
Defin
ition
18 Land Use on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii, 1998
Gol
f cou
rses
do-m
ggo
lf co
urse
s and
ass
ocia
ted
serv
ice
faci
litie
s. C
lubh
ouse
s, pa
rkin
g fa
cilit
ies,
and
mul
tipur
pose
faci
litie
s are
co
nsid
ered
as s
epar
ate
cate
gorie
s whe
n ex
ceed
ing
the
min
imum
map
ping
uni
ts.
Mul
ti-
purp
ose
do-m
mm
aint
aine
d he
rbac
eous
veg
etat
ion
incl
udin
g pa
rks,
mul
tipur
pose
ope
n sp
ace,
cem
eter
ies,
faci
lity
grou
nds,
and
othe
r mai
ntai
ned
area
s with
less
than
75
perc
ent t
ree
cano
py a
nd st
ruct
ures
are
less
than
25
perc
ent o
f ar
ea.
Vaca
ntdo
-vla
nd su
rfac
es w
here
the
vege
tatio
n is
occ
asio
nally
or e
rrat
ical
ly m
aint
aine
d to
sust
ain
a va
cant
or o
pen
land
ar
ea su
itabl
e fo
r dev
elop
men
t, an
d bu
ilt st
ruct
ures
occ
upy
less
than
25
perc
ent o
f are
a. In
clud
es b
arre
n ar
eas u
nder
con
stru
ctio
n.a B
arre
nb
Are
as c
hara
cter
ized
by
rock
, gra
vel,
sand
, silt
, cla
y, o
r oth
er e
arth
en m
ater
ial,
not c
over
ed b
y w
ater
, with
le
ss th
an 2
5 pe
rcen
t veg
etat
ive
cove
r or l
ess t
han
5 pe
rcen
t veg
etat
ive
cove
r in
arid
are
as. (
Not
diff
eren
ti-at
ed e
xcep
t to
iden
tify
min
ing
surf
aces
).M
inin
gbm
Are
as o
f ext
ract
ive
min
ing
activ
ities
and
gre
ater
than
25
perc
ent s
urfa
ce d
istu
rban
ce. I
nact
ive
or u
n-re
clai
med
are
as a
re in
clud
ed u
ntil
anot
her c
ateg
ory
is a
pplic
able
, inc
lude
s min
es, g
rave
l pits
, sto
ckpi
les,
dred
ge sp
oils
, and
oth
er e
arth
en a
ggre
gate
.O
ther
othe
rA
ll ar
eas n
ot e
ncom
pass
ed in
the
abov
e cl
ass d
efin
ition
s; in
clud
ing
wat
er, w
etla
nd, f
ores
t, sh
rubl
and,
her
-ba
ceou
s, an
d ba
rren
(oth
er th
an m
inin
g).
aM
inin
g, s
uch
as q
uarr
ies,
str
ip m
ines
, and
gra
vel p
its,
is th
e on
ly B
arre
n ca
tego
ry c
onsi
dere
d, a
ll o
ther
Bar
ren
cate
gori
es a
re in
clud
ed in
“ot
her”
Tabl
e 1.
Lan
d-us
e cl
assi
ficat
ion
syst
em a
nd d
efin
ition
s--C
ontin
ued
Leve
l 1Le
vel 2
Leve
l 3Le
vel 4
Land
-use
co
des
Defin
ition
Table 2 19
Tab
le 2
. Lan
d-us
e ar
ea b
y cl
assi
ficat
ion,
Oah
u, H
awai
i, 19
98
Leve
l 1Le
vel 2
Leve
l 3Le
vel 4
Leve
l 1 a
cres
aLe
vel 2
acr
esLe
vel 3
acr
esLe
vel 4
acr
es
Agr
icul
ture
59,1
95-
--
Plan
ted/
culti
vate
d-
33,4
41-
-O
rcha
rd-
-3,
576
(597
)b
Ban
ana
--
-1,
188
Cof
fee
--
-35
2G
uava
--
-13
Mac
adam
ia n
uts
--
-33
Papa
ya-
--
1,27
2C
ocon
ut-
--
120
Row
cro
ps-
-19
,330
(264
)C
orn
--
-83
5Pi
neap
ple
--
-11
,585
Mix
ed f
ruit
or
vege
tabl
e-
--
6,34
1
Wet
land
--
-30
4H
ortic
ultu
re-
-1,
581
-G
rass
es-
-8,
718
(582
)Pa
stur
e an
d gr
azin
g-
--
7,01
8B
iom
ass
--
-1,
119
Shad
e ho
uses
--
236
-L
ives
tock
-73
0-
-A
quac
ultu
re-
192
--
Smal
l-sc
ale
rura
l-
3,94
8-
-A
band
oned
-20
,884
--
Dev
elop
ed98
,663
--
-M
anuf
actu
ring
/indu
stri
al-
3,80
8-
-C
omm
erci
al-
14,5
14-
-H
igh
dens
ity-
-4,
960
-L
ow s
tory
--
-3,
547
Mul
ti-st
ory
--
-1,
413
Mod
erat
e de
nsity
--
2,44
5-
Low
sto
ry-
--
2,22
6M
ulti-
stor
y-
--
219
Low
den
sity
--
7,10
9-
Res
iden
tial
-44
,905
--
Hig
h de
nsity
--
33,8
03-
Low
sto
ry-
--
32,6
38M
ulti-
stor
y-
--
1,16
4
20 Land Use on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii, 1998
Mod
erat
e de
nsity
--
8,28
5-
Low
sto
ry-
--
8,16
8M
ulti-
stor
y-
--
117
Low
den
sity
--
2,81
8-
Soci
al s
ervi
ces
-5,
145
--
Gov
ernm
ent
--
1,60
9-
Edu
catio
n-
-3,
537
-Pu
blic
infr
astr
uctu
re-
12,9
62-
-U
tilit
ies
--
566
-W
aste
man
agem
ent
--
784
-L
andf
ill-
--
530
Sew
age
trea
tmen
t-
--
254
Air
port
--
7,30
6-
Aut
omot
ive
--
3,20
1-
Port
--
1,10
5-
Ope
n sp
ace
-17
,328
--
Rec
reat
ion
--
1,35
3-
Mai
ntai
ned
vege
tatio
n-
-11
,277
-G
olf
cour
ses
--
-6,
386
Mul
ti-pu
rpos
e-
--
4,89
1V
acan
t-
-4,
698
-c B
arre
n1,
522
--
-M
inin
g-
1,52
2-
-O
ther
224,
331
--
-
aW
hole
acr
eage
s may
not
add
pre
cise
ly d
ue to
roun
ding
bFo
r cat
egor
ies w
here
mor
e sp
ecifi
c la
nd u
ses w
ere
not a
lway
s ass
igne
d th
e ge
neric
acr
eage
por
tion
is in
clud
ed in
par
enth
eses
(), f
or e
xam
ple,
a g
ener
ic A
gric
ultu
re, P
lant
ed/c
ulti-
vate
d, g
rass
es c
ateg
ory
was
use
d in
add
ition
to th
e sp
ecifi
c bi
omas
s and
pas
ture
and
gra
zing
cat
egor
ies
cM
inin
g, su
ch a
s qua
rrie
s, st
rip m
ines
, and
gra
vel p
its, i
s the
onl
y Ba
rren
cat
egor
y in
clud
ed, a
ll ot
her B
arre
n ca
tego
ries a
re in
clud
ed in
“ot
her”
Tab
le 2
. Lan
d-us
e ar
ea b
y cl
assi
ficat
ion,
Oah
u, H
awai
i, 19
98--C
ontin
ued
Leve
l 1Le
vel 2
Leve
l 3Le
vel 4
Leve
l 1 a
cres
aLe
vel 2
acr
esLe
vel 3
acr
esLe
vel 4
acr
es