[vc_row][vc_column][vc_empty_space][breadcrumb-shortcode][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/3″ el_class=”sticky-top”][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1667240518103{border-bottom-width: 4px !important;border-bottom-color: #5b9bd5 !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;}”]

In This Report:

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1667240918115{border-bottom-width: 4px !important;border-bottom-color: #5b9bd5 !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;}”]

Contact Us:

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=””]

Land Use and Land Cover – Updated 1/2026
Environmental Trends Report
NJDEP, Division of Science and Research

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”2/3″][vc_column_text css=””][/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1768579665710{border-bottom-width: 4px !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;border-color: #5b9bd5 !important;}”]

Land Use and Land Cover

Background

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=””]The conversion of land from a natural to a developed or disturbed condition is well documented as causing direct, as well as secondary and cumulative, environmental impacts. Environmental impacts associated with land conversion and alteration include habitat loss, fragmentation, and the introduction of invasive species. Such impacts have led to a reduction of ecosystem services, biodiversity, and habitat quality within several of the state’s ecosystems.1 Indirect negative impacts of land use change also include traffic congestion, air pollution, and water-quality impacts.

Water resources are vulnerable to direct and/or indirect impacts resulting from land use change. Impervious cover is a useful indicator of land development impacts on water resources. There is ample scientific evidence that relates increased land use impacts from developed land, associated impervious cover, and agriculture to specific changes in hydrology, habitat structure, water quality, and biodiversity of aquatic systems.2,3,4,5,6 It is clear that water quality declines as the intensity of developed and agricultural land increases.7

New Jersey’s current water quality assessment identifies hydrologic areas that either support, do not support, or have insufficient information to report on various designated uses. Designated uses include waters to be available for public water supply, recreation, and fish consumption, among others. The spatial extent and cause of use impairments varies across the state. However, both short and long-term data show correlations between impairment and density of development, particularly for aquatic life uses. The largest concentrations of high-quality waters are located in the least developed regions of the state, specifically the upper northwest and the Pinelands region.8 Some water-quality impacts of land-use change are transitory, including road or building construction that increases the release of sediments into nearby waterways. Other conditions are more permanent, such as the impacts of increased impervious cover and the loss of natural vegetation and riparian corridors caused by land development.

New Jersey is the most densely populated state in the country, resulting in a major challenge in accommodating the State’s economic development while protecting land, air, and water resources. Much of the State’s ecological diversity depends on the preservation of critical habitat, especially wetlands. Wetlands provide breeding grounds and nesting sites for a variety of fish and wildlife species and offer unique habitat for many threatened and endangered plants and animals.9

One sign of stress to the state’s ecological diversity is the increasing number of species listed as rare or endangered. More than 42 percent of the native vascular plant species in the state are considered rare, and approximately 17 percent of New Jersey’s plant species are listed as endangered (see Endangered Plants chapter of this Environmental Trends series).10 In addition to plant species listings, nearly one-fourth of New Jersey’s native vertebrate animal species are classified as rare or endangered.11

In addition to the traditional on-the-ground surveys and analyses, the state has routinely relied on aerial photography and satellite imagery to accurately monitor and assess land use and land cover. Changes, such as a transition from undeveloped land (e.g., forests or wetlands) to developed land (e.g., residential), are monitored as new aerial photography and satellite data become available. Other changes, such as type or size of trees in a forest, are more subtle and continue to rely upon routine surveys and inventories for assessment.[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1667232268417{border-bottom-width: 4px !important;border-bottom-color: #5b9bd5 !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;}”]

Status and Trends

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=””]Land Use and Land Cover

Land use describes the way in which we utilize the landscape. An important parameter of land use is the amount of developed and agricultural land in the state. Developed, or urban, land includes land with houses, buildings, and pavement. Agriculture is an important classification because it may impair waterways if best management practices are not maintained. In addition, barren land, or land that has been stripped of vegetation or other cover, may represent ongoing construction activities, but may also represent open sandy areas and beaches. Land cover, on the other hand, is representative of areas that generally retain natural cover, such as forests, water, and wetlands.

There are two valuable datasets that allow for regular monitoring of changes in land use and land cover (LULC) over time in New Jersey. Each utilizes different technologies: aerial photography and satellite imagery. Beginning in 1986, the NJ Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) began a rigorous and detailed mapping of New Jersey land use and land cover (NJ LULC) using aerial images and photo-interpretation. Updates to the 1986 data have been completed using 1995, 2002, 2007, 2012, 2015, and 2020 aerial imagery. These data are mapped to a one-acre minimum mapping unit and most recently used one-foot resolution digital imagery. The presented assessment of change over time is based on these data. Aerial imagery was collected again in 2025 and will be used for the development of updated data products and maps.

The other available dataset is the National Land Cover Database (NLCD), produced by the Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center, a branch of the US Geological Survey.12 The NLCD is developed from remotely-sensed LANDSAT satellite data and classifies the surface using 30-meter pixels into categories similar to the NJ LULC data. The NLCD is available on an annual basis back to 1985, allowing for high-level LULC change assessments for the past 40 years. A categorical summary of the 2020 NLCD is presented with the NJ LULC data in Figure 1 to highlight the strong agreement in these datasets. The NLCD is a valuable resource for years in between the NJ LULC assessments and can also accommodate studies that extend outside of New Jersey’s boundaries. Examples where such land use inputs are of interest include watershed studies of the Delaware River or other waterways.

Figure 1. Comparison of the Land Use Land Cover and National Land Cover Database classifications as a percentage of statewide area.

Changes in the state’s overall land use and land cover are best measured using the NJ LULC dataset due to its higher resolution and sub-classification detail. Figure 2 below summarizes the changes in LULC classification types between 1986 and 2020. The 1986 data indicates that 49% of the State was either forest or wetland, while 22% was developed or urban.  The recent 2020 data show that 45% of the state was either forest or wetland, while 29% of the state was developed. This represents a loss in both forest and wetland land and an increase in urban land over time. During the 34-year period of 1986 to 2020, the NJDEP data show an increase of over 377,000 acres of development, over 30 acres per day on average.

The same data indicate a decrease in agricultural area from 14% to 9%. The increase in urban land is largely due to losses of agricultural and forested lands. The noted increase in open water is likely an artifact of mapping resolution over time and the timing of when the aerial photography was captured, especially along the coast where tidal exposure determines the water line. Variability in open water is also caused, in part, by the amount of mapped Atlantic Ocean and Delaware Bay area included as part of the state boundary.

 

Figure 2.  Summary of land use/land cover data for 1986 and 2020.

The NJ LULC data have also been used to show changes by land use category. The acreage of land in each category for the years 1986, 1995, 2002, 2007, 2012, 2015, and 2020 is shown in Figure 3. This figure shows a continued decrease in the acreage of agriculture, forested land, and wetlands with a subsequent increase in acres of urban (i.e., developed) land. The NJ LULC dataset’s modified classification system13 is based on the Anderson et al. scheme,14 which provides additional detail on the particular use or cover organized under each of the six higher level (Level 1) classes (see Figure 1). The inclusion of Level 2 subclassifications allows for more detailed evaluation of general trends or changes to the extent of each cover type.

Figure 3.  Annual comparison of the total acreage for four land-use/land-cover classes.

A recent study by Lathrop and Douthat15 highlights detailed changes in the NJ LULC since 1986. For example, between the years 2015 and 2020 developed land in New Jersey grew by more than 18,000 acres, a rate equivalent to about 3,700 acres per year. In comparison, developed land grew at a pace of 16,852 acres per year in the late 1990’s. This reduced rate of land-use conversion is also reflected in the rate of farmland conversion, which has declined from a rate of 10,277 acres per year between 1986 and 1995 to 1,590 acres per year between 2015 and 2020. A considerable amount of farmland conversion is from agriculture to urbanization, but some agricultural land has also been abandoned and allowed to regenerate to forests. This study also evaluated the change in land cover within the State’s Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), showing that developed land within the SFHA has increased by 7% between 1986 and 2020, and now covers 16.7% of this regulated area.

Forests

The Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) United States Forest Service (USFS), in cooperation with NJDEP, conducts inventories of the State’s forested lands through the Forest Inventory Analysis (FIA) program, using a series of permanent plots and remote sensing techniques. Since 2006, data has been collected annually with the entire State’s monitored sites being remeasured every five years.16 Data from these surveys are now made available via the USDA’s EVALIDator tool (https://apps.fs.usda.gov/fiadb-api/evalidator). The data reveal significant details about the State’s forests that are not observable via satellite or aerial photos alone.  The average size of trees in New Jersey’s forests is changing. Forest stand structures today are typically more mature and contain larger trees than they have in the past. Since 1972, areas characterized as nonstocked (any sized trees in a stand with less than 10 percent canopy cover), saplings/seedlings (small; less than 5-inch diameter at breast height [DBH]) and poletimber (medium; from 5-inches and up to 11-inches DBH) have declined, while the areas of sawtimber (large; greater than 9-inch DBH for softwoods and 11-inch DBH for hardwoods) have increased and remained stable (Figure 4).

Figure 4.  Estimated acreage of forest land by stand size class.  Note the uneven breaks in annual stock estimates between 1972 to 1987, 1987 to 1999, and 1999 to 2006.  Estimates have been available annually since 2006.  The data compiled herein are available from the EVALIDator tool except for the 1972 values.

Overall, the woody biomass of New Jersey’s forests has increased in recent years. While the net volume of growing stock trees with a diameter greater than five inches has increased over time17, there are concerns that forest regeneration has declined so much that there are virtually no young seedlings to be found in some areas.18 At least some of the decline in regeneration can be traced to white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) foraging (see the White-tailed Deer Environmental Trend Report). For example, a project to restore acreage of the Atlantic white-cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides) has found regeneration is only successful where deer browsing is controlled.19 Another reason for less regeneration is forest succession, where the thick canopy of mature trees limits establishment and growth of some species of seedlings.

As forested area is lost to development, existing contiguous forests are fragmented into smaller tracts. This fragmentation, combined with habitat loss, degrades watersheds, reduces habitat quality, increases site disturbances, and increases the opportunity for invasion by exotic plant species and predators.  Fragmentation is believed to be a contributing factor in the decline of numerous species, including some bird, mammal, insect, and plant species.20,21,22

There are also indications that New Jersey’s forests are troubled by an increase in insects and disease. Insects that are especially problematic include the emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis), the gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar), the hemlock woolly adelgid (Adelges tsugae), the southern pine beetle (Dendroctonus frontalis), and the spotted lantern fly (Lycorma delicatula).22,23,24 Tree diseases that require careful monitoring include bacterial leaf scorch and sudden oak death.

Invasive species are also a problem in forested areas in the State.  An initial survey of invasive plants by the USDA showed that invasive plants are widely distributed in the state.25  Currently, multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and Japanese barberry (Berberis thunbergii) are the most frequently encountered invasive plants statewide, but the abundance is greatest in the northern part of the state.22 It is not yet clear to what degree these and other invasive species cause harm.  However, it is likely that as invasive species spread, the number and abundance of native plant species will decline, resulting in a loss of native species diversity and a reduction in the value and health of New Jersey’s forests.  For a discussion of threatened and endangered plants in the State, see the Endangered Plants Environmental Trends Report.

Wetlands and other prime wildlife habitat

Certain areas of the state are especially important in maintaining biodiversity. The NJDEP’s Division of Fish and Wildlife’s Endangered and Nongame Species Program (ENSP) adopted geographic information system (GIS) approaches to imperiled species protection called the Landscape Project26 and Connecting Habitat Across NJ (CHANJ).20 These projects use GIS to identify and delineate habitat critical to the long-term survival of New Jersey’s wildlife. Comparisons between the satellite imagery used to track changes in land use and land cover between 1986 and 2015 reveal that forested areas that can serve as prime wildlife habitat – habitat for listed endangered and threatened species, as well as priority wildlife species – have been lost to development.27

Residential and non-residential construction

The change in the amount of developed land in the State can also be tracked through building permits.  Information from these permits and certificates provide useful indicators on the level of construction activity in the State; the type of structures that are built; the number of dwelling units authorized for construction and completed; and the square footage of non-residential space.  This information is submitted monthly to the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs by municipal construction officials.28

There are two broad categories of construction: residential and non-residential.  Residential construction is measured by unit and divided further into new construction and redevelopment.  An increase in the issuance of building permits for residential construction from 1996 to 2000 is evident in Figure 5. After this period, there was an overall decline in permits, with a general increase in permits for redevelopment and alterations.  Issuance of residential permits again began to rise in 2004 and peaked in 2005.  After that, a significant decline continued until 2009. Since then, the number of residential construction permits has generally increased.

Figure 5. Number of residential construction permits by development type granted between 1996 and 2024.

The geographic distribution of residential construction permits highlights a shift from suburban sprawl to the recentralization of metropolitan areas.  This regional transformation to a growing urban core is linked to changes in age demographics and economic changes.29,30  Specifically, a large portion of the workforce is favoring more sustainable, urban living and working arrangements. The 2008 economic recession is also suspected to have had an influence on these changing community preferences.28 As seen in Figure 6, there is a significant increase in the relative percentage of residential construction permits by development type over time, with a shift from single-family houses and duplexes (one and two family permits) to multifamily and mixed-use buildings (Kendall Tau P-value < 0.001).  Examples of multifamily and mixed-use buildings can include college dormitories, assisted living facilities, and multi-level buildings with a mix of apartments and commercial use.  The shift to more concentrated dwellings is geographically apparent based on a recent five-year snapshot of the State.   The map below (Figure 7) highlights that residential construction permits over the period of 2014 to 2018 were issued predominantly for multifamily dwellings in more highly-populated counties (such as Hudson, Essex, and Passaic Counties) relative to less urbanized counties (such as Cumberland, Salem, and Cape May) in the State.  Collectively, these data suggest that the rate of conversion of undeveloped land has likely slowed in recent years as urban areas are being revitalized to meet changing needs.

Figure 6. Residential construction permits as a percentage of total units by use category (one & two family versus multifamily and mixed-use) granted between 1996 and 2024.

Figure 7. Proportion of multifamily and mixed-use residential permits by county (2020 – 2024).

Non-residential construction is measured by square footage.  The three major categories of non-residential construction are retail, office, and other. This last category includes construction of hotels/motels, educational institutions, and storage facilities. During the period of 1996 – 2018, non-residential building permit issuance peaked in 2001. From 2001 to 2011, non-residential building permits largely decreased, followed by a general increase since 2012 (Figure 8).

Figure 8. Area of non-residential building permits granted annually from 1996-2024.[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1667238567308{border-bottom-width: 4px !important;border-bottom-color: #5b9bd5 !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;}”]

Outlook and Implications

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1768581479775{border-bottom-width: 4px !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;border-color: #5b9bd5 !important;}”]The State continues to undertake initiatives to prevent environmentally damaging land-use change and encourage sustainable growth. Specifically, the NJDEP continues to work towards planning that reflects existing water supply and wastewater demands, as these two needs are fast becoming the limiting factor with respect to development. For example, the DEP Water Quality Management Planning (WQMP) rules at N.J.A.C. 7:1531 give local planners more flexibility regarding wastewater infrastructure decisions.  The proposed rules focus new sewer infrastructure projects on areas of targeted growth while remaining protective of environmentally sensitive areas and cognizant of local zoning efforts. Significant efforts are also directed at managing storm water to reduce runoff and flooding and protecting riparian areas to reduce flood impacts and maintain the health of surface waters.  Additions to the State’s Category One (C1) waterways will provide additional protections to waterbodies and help prevent water-quality degradation by discouraging development where it would impair or destroy natural resources and environmental quality.  The State is also increasing the amount of open space preserved by expanding and improving the State and local park system and restoring and expanding urban forests and open space.  For additional trend information please see the individual Open Space Preservation, State Parks and Forests, and Urban and Community Forests chapters in this Environmental Trends series.[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1667238851975{border-bottom-width: 4px !important;border-bottom-color: #5b9bd5 !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;}”]

More Information

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1768581539384{border-bottom-width: 4px !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;border-color: #5b9bd5 !important;}”]

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1731606736158{border-bottom-width: 4px !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;border-color: #5b9bd5 !important;}”]

Suggested Citation

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=””]NJDEP. “Land Use and Land Cover.” Environmental Trends Report, NJDEP, Division of Science and Research. Last modified January 2026. Accessed [month day, year]. https://deptest.nj.gov/dsr/environmental-trends/lulc/.[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1731606802996{border-bottom-width: 4px !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;border-color: #5b9bd5 !important;}”]

Download the Data

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=””]

The data used in Figures 1-8 are available to download here.

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1667239733696{border-bottom-width: 4px !important;border-bottom-color: #5b9bd5 !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;}”]

References

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1768581909970{border-bottom-width: 4px !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;border-color: #5b9bd5 !important;}”]1NJ Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). 2004. New Jersey Comparative Risk Project, NJDEP, Trenton, NJ.  Available at http://www.state.nj.us/dep/dsr/njcrp/. Also named as important stressors to the environment in the study were indoor air pollution, invasive species, and outdoor air pollution.

2Wieben, C.M., Baker, R.J., and Nicholson, R.S. 2013. Nutrient concentrations in surface water and groundwater, and nitrate source identification using stable isotope analysis, in the Barnegat Bay-Little Egg Harbor watershed, New Jersey, 2010–11: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5287, 44 p.  pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2012/5287/support/sir2012-5287.pdf

3Conway, TM.  2007.  Impervious surface as an indicator of pH and specific conductance in the urbanizing coastal zone of New Jersey, USA. Journal of Environmental Management 85, 308-316.

4Zampella, et al. 2007, Relationship of land use/ land cover patterns and surface water quality in the Mullica River Basin.  Journal of the American Water Resources Association 43, 594-604.

5Beach, Dana, 2002.  Coastal Sprawl: The Effects of Urban Design on Aquatic Ecosystems in the United States.  South Carolina Coastal Conservation League.

6Kaplan, Marjorie and Mark Ayes.  2000 Impervious Surface Cover Concepts and Thresholds.  New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and United States Geological Survey.  10p.

7Procopio, N.A. and Zampella, R.A., 2023. Assessing land‐use/water‐quality relationships across contrasting geologic areas in New Jersey. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 59: 146-160. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1752-1688.13074

8NJDEP.  2022.  New Jersey Integrated Water Quality Assessment Report.  NJDEP Division of Water Monitoring and Standards, Bureau of Environmental Analysis, Restoration and Standards. https://deptest.nj.gov/bears/integrated-wq-assessment-report-2022/. Accessed on 12/18/2025.

9Welsch et al.  1995.  Forested Wetlands: Functions, Benefits and the Use of Best Management Practices U.S. Forest Service NA-PR-01-95.

10NJDEP. “Endangered Plants.” Environmental Trends Report, NJDEP, Division of Science and Research. Last modified August 2021. Accessed on 12/18/2025. https://deptest.nj.gov/dsr/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/trends-endangered-plants.pdf.

11NatureServe. 2024. NatureServe Network Biodiversity Location Data accessed through NatureServe Explorer [web application]. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available https://explorer.natureserve.org/. Accessed on 12/18/2025.

12U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 2024, Annual NLCD Collection 1 Science Products (ver. 1.1, June 2025): U.S. Geological Survey data release. https://doi.org/10.5066/P94UXNTS.

13See Land Use/Land Cover Classification (2020), NJDEP Modified Anderson System at https://www.nj.gov/dep/gis/digidownload/metadata/lulc20/anderson2020.htm.

14Anderson, J.R. E.E. Hardy, J.T. Roach, and R.E. Witmer. 1976. A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data. Professional Paper 964. https://doi.org/10.3133/pp964.

15Lathrop, R., & Douthat, K. (2025). Changing Landscapes in the Garden State: Land Use Change in NJ 1986 through 2020. Rutgers University. https://doi.org/10.7282/00000565

16Refer to the NJ Forest Inventory and Analysis data available at https://apps.fs.usda.gov/fiadb-api/evalidator.

17USDA Forest Service. 2019. Forests of New Jersey, 2018. Resource Update FS-218. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2p. https://doi.org/10.2737/FS-RU-218. Accessed 12/18/2025.

18Lempicki, Edward, NJDEP Bureau of Forest Management, Trenton, personal communication, 12/16/04.

19Zimmermann, George, 1995, The Atlantic White-Cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides) Regeneration Experiments: Years Three and Four (Final Reports). Trenton, NJ: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.

20NJDEP. Connecting Habitat Across New Jersey (CHANJ). See https://www.njfishandwildlife.com/ensp/chanj.htm. Accessed on 12/15/2025.

21Haddad, N.M., Brudvig, L.A., Clobert, J., Davies, K.F., Gonzalez, A., Holt, R.D., Lovejoy, T.E., Sexton, J.O., Austin, M.P., Collins, C.D. and Cook, W.M., 2015. Habitat fragmentation and its lasting impact on Earth’s ecosystems. Science advances, 1(2), p.e1500052.

22NJDEP, 2020. New Jersey State Forest Action Plan. See https://nj.gov/dep/parksandforests/forest/njsfap/docs/njsfap-final-12312020.pdf

23NJDEP.  Forest Health Program in New Jersey.  See https://deptest.nj.gov/parksandforests/conservation/forest-health/.

24Spotted Lanternfly. New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station https://njaes.rutgers.edu/spotted-lanternfly/

25Crocker et al, 2011, New Jersey’s Forests, 2008.  Available at https://doi.org/10.2737/NRS-RB-59.

26NJDEP.  New Jersey’s Landscape Project. See http://www.state.nj.us/dep/fgw/ensp/landscape/index.htm.

27Lathrop, R. G., & Hasse, J. E. (2020). Changing landscapes in the Garden State: land use change in New Jersey 1986 through 2015. Rutgers University. https://doi.org/10.7282/t3-x1yc-dh86.

28Department of Community Affairs.  Building Permits Yearly Summary Data available at https://www.nj.gov/dca/codes/reporter/building_permits.shtml.

29Hughes, J. & Seneca, J. 2014. The Receding Metropolitan Perimeter:  A New Postsuburban Demographic Normal. Rutgers University Community Repository. 16 p.

30Hughes, J. & Seneca, J. 2012. Reinventing the New Jersey Economy:  New Metropolitan and Regional Employment Dynamics. Rutgers Regional Report, 331-12.

31Please see http://www.nj.gov/dep/wrm/wqmprule.html.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]