The ACT Vegetation Map classifies native and derived vegetation across the ACT at 1:10,000 scale into 64 plant communities. Vegetation communities are geographical units with similar association of plant species. The product also includes canopy cover and height variables based on 2015 ACT LiDAR data. Vegetation maps are important tools for characterising the landscape, informing policy and providing information for land and habitat management plans, including to help identify threats and risks to biodiversity and help prioritise protection of important ecological values in our landscape.This product will enable evidence-based decision-making at a broad regional, local and property planning scale in the ACT. It will also formulate a new baseline for future change detection in the landscape.Method: In the ACT Vegetation Map, native and derived vegetation across the entire ACT was classified into 64 plant communities using the classification described by Armstrong et al 2013, in addition to three newly described ACT specific communities (Baines et al 2013). Mapping was completed using aerial imagery and stereo pair interpretation (2012-2015), extensive field work, collation of consultant reports and supplemental structural and canopy height datasets extracted from the 2015 ACT LiDAR capture at 1-5m grid resolution(van Dijk et al 2017 - in draft). The work expands on the vegetation mapping completed for the Kowen, Majura and Jerrabomberra districts of the ACT (Baines et al 2013). This product should be used in conjunction with ACT Soil Landscapes, Hydrogeology and Land hazard mapping available on ACTMapi, geological mapping provided by Geoscience Australia, and ACT derived LiDAR products including digital elevation model (DEM), slope and aspect (available CCBY 4.0).The product includes the following attributes :umcID – Upper Murrumbidgee Catchment vegetation community ID (unique vegetation code) after Armstrong et al 2013vegCommunity – vegetation community name after Armstrong et al 2013 and Baines et al 2013treesp-3 – dominant tree speciesshrubsp-3 – dominant shrub speciesgroundsp-3 – dominant ground cover speciescanopyCover– canopy cover %(based on 1m 2015 LiDAR canopy cover model)height_mean – mean canopy height (>3m) (based on 1m 2015 LiDAR canopy height model)underCover – understory/shrub cover % (1-3m) (based on 5m LiDAR understory fractional cover modelstructure – overall vegetation community structure – e.g. woodland, forest, grasslandformation – Keith Formation - broad classification of native vegetation type in NSW and ACT. Formation can be further divided into Keith Class (Keith 2004)class – Keith Class- vegetation class (Keith 2004).hectares – area of polygon unit in hectares.Fit for purpose: Mapped at 1:10,000. Temporal coverage 2018. This scale is for use at scales ranging from broad regional planning to local planning and property planning. Please see ACT Vegetation Map 2023 for updates to urban expansion. Updates planned every 1-2 years. Please note the species listed as dominants can be out of date or not ground checked, thus may require ground truthing prior to use.References: Armstrong et al (2013). Plant communities of the upper Murrumbidgee catchment in New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory. Cunninghamia13(1): 125-265 (2013).Baines et al (2013). The vegetation of the Kowen, Majura and Jerrabomberra Districts of the Australian Capital Territory. Technical Report 28 prepared for Conservation Planning and Research, ACT Government.van Dijk (2017in draft). Landscape Observatory. TERN & Fenner School of Environment & Society, Australian National University 2017.Keith (2004). Ocean Shores to Desert Dunes. The Native Vegetation of the New South Wales and the ACT. NSW Department of Environment and Conservation.

This layer contains information on the distribution and vegetation types of High Country Sphagnum Bogs and Fens in the ACT as defined by Nature Conservation (High Country Bogs and Associated Fens) Conservation Advice 2019 (Nature Conservation Act). The dataset includes areas of RAMSAR significance. The threatened Northern Corroboree Frogs are also associated with these ecosystems. Veg mapping was undertaken by Geoff Hope et al in 2009 and later revisited during mapping of ACT Vegetation Communities in 2015-2018 (Baines et al 2018).The ACT Scientific Committee determined that the ecological community High Country Bogs and Associated Fens is eligible for inclusion in the ACT Threatened Ecological Communities List in 2019. Most ACT High Country Bogs and Associated Fens communities are consistent with the nationally listed Alpine Sphagnum Bogs and Associated Fens ecological community.The mountains of the Australian Capital Territory support substantial areas of peat-forming mires in interfluves and valley heads, as well as areas of riparian fen vegetation along streams. While similar fens and bogs occur in the Snowy Mountains, the ACT represents a significant outlier of major biogeographic significance because the mires are near their climatic limits and hence sensitive to climate change.Mapping of the mires was originally completed by Hope et al 2009. The mapping was developed in three stages using orthorectified aerial photography and satellite imagery and extensive field checking. More information can be found at: Hope, G., Nanson, R. and Flett, I. 2009. Technical Report 19. The peat-forming mires of the Australian Capital Territory. Territory and Municipal Services, Canberra. https://www.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/2539595/19-peat-forming-mires-of-the-act-2009.pdfKey plant communities of ACT Bogs and Fens (Armstrong et al. 2012):• a2: Baeckea gunniana – Epacris paludosa – Richea continentis – Sphagnum cristatum Wet Heathland of the Australian Alps Bioregion (Alpine/subalpine Bog).• a7: Ranunculus pimpinellifolius – Gonocarpus micranthus herbfield of wetland heathland of the Australian Alps bioregion (Bog).• a8: Carex gaudichaudiana – Myriophyllum pedunculatum – Deschampsia caespitosa Sedgeland of the Australian Alps Bioregion (Alpine/subalpine Fen).• a9: Carex gaudichaudiana – Ranunculus amphitrichus – Phragmites australis Aquatic Herbfield of waterways in the Australian Alps and South-Eastern Highlands Bioregion (Montane Bogs and Fens).Other key plant communities (Hope et al. 2009):• Empodisma minus restiad Fen.• Phragmites – Typha tall sedgelands (Fen).Associated plant communities (Armstrong et al. 2012):• a14: Poa costiniana – Carex gaudichaudiana Subalpine Valley Grassland of the Australian Alps Bioregion (Alpine/subalpine Grasslands/Herbfields).• e59: Hakea microcarpa – Baeckea utilis – Leptospermum myrtifolium Subalpine Wet Heathland on Escarpment and Eastern Tableland Ranges of the South-Eastern Highlands Bioregion.• u193: Hakea microcarpa – Epacris breviflora – Epacris paludosa Montane Wet Heathland of the Australian Alps and western South-Eastern Highlands Bioregions.Note this product includes some areas of a33 vegetation community, which is formally considered to be associated with the threatened community (see ACT High Country Bogs and Fens Action Plan 2024, ACT Government). However, these areas were originally mapped by Hope et al 2009 with high altitude sphagnum bog (HSB) present.For more information on ACT High Country Bogs and Fens, visit https://www.act.gov.au/environment/animals-and-plants/act-threatened-species/high-country-bogs-and-associated-fensUpdates: Majority of the mapping was completed post 2003 fires. However, the dataset is was updated using Near Infrared Imagery 2015 and LiDAR data in 2019. Further updates will be implemented as required if new or better mapping of bog and fen areas become available.Fit for purpose: This dataset was captured at 1:3,000 scale. This dataset is fit for use

The ACT Vegetation Map 2023 classifies native and derived vegetation across the ACT at 1:10,000 scale into 64 plant communities. Vegetation communities are geographical units with similar association of plant species. The product also includes canopy cover and height variables based on 2015 ACT LiDAR data. Vegetation maps are important tools for characterising the landscape, informing policy and providing information for land and habitat management plans, including to help identify threats and risks to biodiversity and help prioritise protection of important ecological values in our landscape. This 2023 map is an update of the ACT Vegetation Map 2018. Updates have been made to the urban fringe only where development has occurred, or knowledge has increased due to field inspection.This product will enable evidence-based decision-making at a broad regional, local and property planning scale in the ACT. It will also formulate a new baseline for future change detection in the landscape.Method: In the ACT Vegetation Map, native and derived vegetation across the entire ACT was classified into 64 plant communities using the classification described by Armstrong et al 2013, in addition to three newly described ACT specific communities (Baines et al 2013). Mapping was completed using aerial imagery and stereo pair interpretation (2012-2015), extensive field work, collation of consultant reports and supplemental structural and canopy height datasets extracted from the 2015 ACT LiDAR capture at 1-5m grid resolution (van Dijk et al 2017 - in draft). The work expands on the vegetation mapping completed for the Kowen, Majura and Jerrabomberra districts of the ACT (Baines et al 2013). The 2023 update used visual desktop inspection and manual vectorization of 2023 <10cm aerial imagery of Canberra and ACTGOV Cadastral information to update the urban fringe area where development has occurred.The product includes the following attributes :umcID – Upper Murrumbidgee Catchment vegetation ID (unique vegetation code)(after Armstrong et al 2013)vegCommunity – vegetation community name (after Armstrong et al 2013 and Baines et al 2013)tecACT - listing name of the ACT threatened ecological community (may require field inspection to verify)tecEPBC - listing name of the EPBC threatened ecological community (may require field inspection to verify)tecID - ID of ACT threatened ecological communityactConservationStatus - listing status of the vegetation community under the Nature Conservation ActepbcConservationStatus - listing status of the vegetation community under the EPBC ActpctCode - ACT plant community type codetreesp1-3 – dominant tree speciesshrubsp1-3 – dominant shrub speciesgroundsp1-3 – dominant ground cover speciescanopyCover – canopy cover % (based on 1m 2020 LiDAR canopy cover model)height_mean canopy height (>3m) (based on 1m 2020 LiDAR canopy height model)underCover – understory/shrub cover % (1-3m) (based on 1m 2020 LiDAR shrub model)structure – overall vegetation community structure – e.g. woodland, forest, grasslandformation – Keith Formation - broad classification of native vegetation type in NSW and ACT. Formation can be further divided into Keith Class (Keith 2004)class – Keith Class- vegetation class (Keith 2004).hectares - area of polygon unit in hectares.lastVegCommunity - community as it was last mapped (ACT Veg Map 2018)landscape - upland or lowlandgrassyStructure - whether the community is associated with a grass woodland, derived (other) or grassland community in its reference state e.g. secondary grassland associated with box gum woodland, exotic grassland that occurs within the original temperate grasslands.This product should be used in conjunction with ACT Soil Landscapes, Hydrogeology and Land hazard mapping available on ACTMapi, geological mapping provided by Geoscience Australia, and ACT derived LiDAR products including digital elevation model (DEM), slope and aspect (available CCBY 4.0).Updates: The product will be

The focus of this dataset is the Australian Capital Territory (ACT). It contains digital spatial data developed to assist in land management decision making in the ACT. The dataset contains hazard ratings for land salinity, stream salt load and stream EC as well as overall salinity hazard for each HGL unit. Information about landscape functions and appropriate salinity management strategies are also listed. Hyperlinks to full management descriptions for each HGL unit are provided. The Hydrogeological Landscape (HGL) concept provides a structure for understanding how differences in salinity are expressed across the landscape. A HGL spatially differentiates areas with similar salt stores and pathways for salt mobilisation. The process of delineating a HGL relies on the integration of a number of causative factors: geology, soils, slope, regolith thickness, and climate; an understanding of the different modes of salinity development; and the impacts of salinity within landscapes (land salinity, salt load and salt concentration in streams due to salt contributions from base flow and runoff ). Information sources such as soil landscape maps, site characterisation, salinity occurrence maps, hydrogeological data, surface water and groundwater data are incorporated into standardised unit descriptions.Fit for purpose: This dataset was captured at 1:25,000 scale. This dataset is fit for use as a tool for assessing land management issues at the paddock-scale in the ACT, but this does not negate the need for site assessment at a scale suitable to any potential land use or development under consideration. The mapping was mapped in 'GDA1994 MGA Zone 55s' and transformed to GDA2020 MGA Zone 55s.Credits: Rob Muller (NSW OEH), Wayne Cook (NSW OEH), Allan Nicholson (NSW DPI), Alie Cowood (UC)Disclaimer: While all care is taken to ensure accuracy, the ACT Government does not warrant that the map is free from error.

This dataset shows the modelled regional connectivity links for generalist species (birds and small mammals). Based local corridor values based on least cost paths through a local links dataset (see Barrett and Love 2012) at 2012. Categories indicate quality of regional connectivity between larger high value habitat patches. Dataset has been re-categorised from the original raster data source to eliminate "no value" cells and converted to a vector.Regional Linkage Value: This layer is derived from a two-step process. The first process is a “join the dots” links analysis using 550,000 paths between point pairs selected at random. Points were grouped in high value woodland habitat patches only. This least cost pathway analysis was then run through the local links paths, that is regional links were preferentially routed along paths that did not have a canopy gap of >100m. High values indicate that more paths were found, i.e. more important for regional connectivity between high value habitat patches.connectivityLinkageValue:Represents the categorisation of the "accumulated least cost pathway" value for each linkage between habitat patches. Least cost pathway indicates the a combination of habitat suitability of nodes along the path, and a the barriers to migration along that pathway.The ACT connectivity mapping was undertaken by the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage. A full study report has been produced, and is entitled Fine Scale Modelling of Fauna Habitat and Connectivity Values in the ACT Region. This study built upon an earlier report entitled the Ecological Connectivity for Climate Change in the ACT and surrounding region, commissioned by the ACT Government as part of Weathering the Change Action Plan 1. The report was undertaken by the Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University (Manning et al 2010). It is recommended that both reports be consulted when use is being made of the connectivity mapping available. Reports can be downloaded from the EPSDD website at https://www.act.gov.au/environment/research-and-data/conservation-research-and-technical-reports (Technical reports 21 and 27).Updates: This dataset is static. Fit for purpose: 2012 temporal coverage. This dataset should be used as a modelled tool for aiding landuse, strategic town planning, and conservation planning in the ACT including revegetation targets and informing environmental impacts of infrastructure and building projects. Cell size 15x15m.Disclaimer: While all care is taken to ensure accuracy, the ACT Government does not warrant that the map is free from errors.

OverviewPCTs are spatial polygons that define the type and extent of known vegetation communities within the ACT. PCTs have been further stratified into'zones', which reflect the ecological condition of PCTs relative to benchmark thresholds. The ecological condition of a vegetation community, or a'zone', is assessed using the attributes that define Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs) under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) and the ACT Nature Conservation Act 2014 (NC Act). Condition zones can be used to identify sites of high quality for conservation protection (e.g. nature reserve) and candidate sites for offsetting. PCTs can also be used to interrogate the spatial distribution and condition of all mapped vegetation areas across the ACT, and are employed as stocktake, planning and on-ground management units to inform the delivery of conservation, restoration and land development programs.ACT plant community typesNaturally occurring native plant community types in the ACT are drawn from Sharp (2007), as implemented in the ACT Vegetation Database (2015), and Armstrong (2013). Each community type is identified by a number, e.g., ACT01, ACT25, known as native vegetation codes. Non-naturally occurring plant communities such as exotic plantations and native plantings have been assigned numbers not present in Sharp (2007), e.g., ACT65, ACT66, ACT 99. Vegetation communities from Armstrong have been assigned an ACT prefix, while retaining the Armstrong numbering, e.g., ACT152 = u152, ACT118 = u118. Refer to Appendix A for the current list of plant communities in the ACT.Determining pre-1750 plant community typePCTs reflect the most likely plant community found prior to European colonisation, except for where they are plantings or plantations. Disturbances caused by agricultural practices and abandonment of land practices can obscure the pre-colonised state. The determination of the most likely pre-European plant community found at a present-day site is informed by signs such as the presence and type of native species; the growth form and density of remnant canopy trees; the presence of stags or stumps; the presence and species of midstorey shrubs and trees; the floristic composition of the groundstorey; landscape position and other geographical features such as elevation, aspect, soils, apparent hydrology etc.Mapping PCTs and ecological condition zonesThe boundaries of each PCT at a site are accurately mapped on-ground by walking the boundaries and recording them using hand-held GPS and marking directly on to high resolution orthorectified aerial photograph field maps. Once PCTs are mapped, a further assessment of condition is undertaken by dividing a PCT into homogenous'zones'based on the structure (presence or absence of mature canopy and regeneration), floristic composition (ground story dominance and forb diversity) and overall quality('intactness') of the vegetation. A simple matrix based on the criteria for conservation protection under the EPBC or NC Acts is used to categorise the condition of PCTs of grasslands (Table 1) and woodlands (Table 2 and 3). Although initially used to identify TECs for protection and/or offsetting, PCT zoning has been extended to other plant communities in the ACT and is considered a general measure of condition. There are currently 32 recognised ACT PCTs. To date, not all have been spatially mapped, with efforts focused on TECs facing higher threats at lower elevations, which are more likely to meet EPBC and NC Act status.Grasslands and woodland/forest PCTs are assessed using different zone criteria. Two components are used to assess the condition of grasslands: ground layer nativeness and forbs; whereas woodlands have four components, due to the additional components of mature trees and regeneration of tree species. The highest condition scores end in the numeral one (e.g. PCT 1.1 or PCT 25.1.1). Table 4 contains a worked example to