HBRC feedback on NZLUC

[aceaves]

Nice work on the Land Use Classification system. I have started implementing it as you will see in the attached concordance spreadsheet. Some issues I have found so far are:

1. All LINZ category codes need to be mapped to the new system as this is a foundation dataset. Some do not align well, for example, Specialist Livestock and Intensive Animal Production/Pastoral Farming.
2. Biodiversity Protection is an odd classification as we do not hold information on its degree. This is also very subjective or intrinsic.
3. Land In Transition is under the 3 headings which makes it difficult as we do not know what the future use may be. So do we define it on previous use?
4. Education seems to fall through the cracks as it is generally not commercial in nature unless you are a private or charter school.
5. Waterbodies for our purposes need to be separated out.
   Concordance.xlsx

[alpha-beta-soup]

I'll leave this open for overall remarks from HBRC, until the sub-issues are addressed. Feel free to add more here by referencing this issue in another issue.

Could you please expand on HBRC's use of land use information? For instance, it seems that there is perhaps more attention on the urban classes (going by #43) than we at MWLR tend to give as a matter of course.