Landcover attribute table

[Mark Blair]

Shannon,

As I took a quick look at the attribute table for the landcover file, I'm having the same issue that I did in an earlier lab -- there is no option to view the attribute table, so I don't know what "value" corresponds to what type of landcover. Is there another reference file or list that I could get/access/etc in case I need the information for the lab?

This has got to be a Windows 8 thing -- it only seems to happen with the landcover files to this point. All of the other files in this and previous labs displayed the attribute table!?

Thanks,

Mark

[Shannon Wing Belmont]

Hi Mark,

This is great feedback. ESRI is about to release version 10.2 (wow was that fast!) and maybe there is a fix in there to deal with these Windows 8 issues.

Just so you have it, Value 62 is equal to the Inter-montane sage brush steppe landcover type. (I think I'm referring to the same dataset you are asking about.) When I get back to my office tomorrow I'll send you a CSV file or spreadsheet with the information you need.

Thanks to all of you using Windows 8 for being patient with these processes and instructions that don't match your operating systems.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USU NR 6910 GIS" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usu-nr-6910-g...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to usu-nr-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/usu-nr-6910-gis?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
Shannon Belmont

Quinney College of Natural Resources
Utah State University
5210 Old Main Hill
Logan, UT 84322-5210

[Sean Spencer]

I have everything done for this lab except for figuring out how to combine the "zonal statistics as a table" information to the attribute table for the suitable polygons? Intuitively i understand that we need to catagorize the suitable polygons according to the variety of landcover but when I run the zonal statistics as a table it outputs one line of information and I "joined" it to the attribute table by the related field "id" but that field is 0 for all the selected sites so it just entered the same values from the "zonal statistics as a table" into all 14 sites on the attribute table? Hope that makes sense but I tried several ways and can't figure out how to rank the sites according to landcover variety?

[Ingrid Campbell]

You shouldn't need to look at the attribute table for landcover... just run the zonal statistics on it for "variety" :)

On Monday, April 15, 2013 12:30:54 PM UTC-6, Mark Blair wrote:

[Jason D Jones]

I'm not sure I'm running the focal statistics for variety tool correctly, which cell resolution do we use 30 x 30? etc

--

[Shannon Wing Belmont]

Sean,

So when you ran zonal statistics, did you run it on a shapefile containing all the possible choices for suitable yurt sites (there should be more than one polygon). These yurt site polygons are the "areas" or "zones" in which you want to summarize the varietal landcover statistics.  If you input your suitable yurt sites polygon, the zonal statistics tool prompts you to define the field - should auto fill to ID.

Your output table should have a record corresponding to each yurt polygon with a unique identifier field that can be used to join the zonal statistics output back to the suitable yurt polygon shapefile.

Does that help?

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USU NR 6910 GIS" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usu-nr-6910-g...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to usu-nr-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/usu-nr-6910-gis?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Jason D Jones]

So I'm thinking you input the  landcover raster, but then you have to figure variety within 1000 meters of each cell, I'm a little confused

[Shannon Wing Belmont]

Jason,

You are right on the money.

Remember that focal statistics can be set using cells or map units.  You can use a rectangle or a circle to define the 1000m around each cell.

[Jason D Jones]

but you have to think about the cell resolution being 30 X 30 = 900?

[Shannon Wing Belmont]

Not if you are using Map Units as your measurement and not cells. If you are using cells, use 33.3 of them... right?

[Jason D Jones]

I don't know, but if you say so, I believe you

[Jason D Jones]

I don't really know  what I'm doing all the sudden, I'm not sure  I've added the right cell  value, and also the focal statistics just runs and  runs, with no results, maybe I should have clipped  the  landcover to  within the 2.5 km boundary so it goes quicker?

[Jason D Jones]

and it wouldn't let me enter 33.3/ no decimal places allowed it seems

[Shannon Wing Belmont]

Are you working with Weber county? It should only take a matter of seconds, if so. Point taken about the decimals. With the courseness of the mapping involved, here, I don't think a third of a cell will impact the results that much! :)

[Jason D Jones]

I only saw one option to download from the website I went to  and it was the whole state, I'll  look again

[Shannon Belmont]

Just do the data mgmt clip using buffer like you suggested before, too. Quicker? 

Sent from my sub-optimal and adversely antiquated iPhone

[Jason D Jones]

I joined my Zonal Statistics with my yurt location that are 2 acres or greater, I have 9 locations, I joined ID, everything looks good, except there was an extra polygon that wasn't there before, and all the data said NULL, so I deleted it, now the next row of data, that did have values moved up to the top, and it says NULL???

[Sean Spencer]

Yep I have a shapefile with multiple suitable polygons. So do I run the zonal statistics or zonal statistics as a table? I attatched a file showing what Ive been doing.

[Sean Spencer]

I just tried something different, I created 14 different shapefiles, one for each of the suitable sites, and then ran an individual "zonal statistics as a table" on each of them. Not the most efficient way but I think it got me the info I needed? All we are needed to compare and evaluate each site is the mean number right? And the site with the highest mean number is most preferable?

[Shannon Belmont]

Sean,

Great work around, but yes, not plausible for larger efforts, for sure. 

You had it right, zonal statistics as table on your shapefile that contained the 14 resulting yurt polygons... Should have output 14 records. 

As long as the attribute table of the 14 suitable yurt site shapefile had 14 individual records and when you select one- they arent all selected...

Glad you got it to work!

Sent from my sub-optimal and adversely antiquated iPhone

[Aaron Sisson]

I cant find any land cover data. Where is it?