The ArcGIS Pro Permitting and Environmental Information Tool (APPEIT) Project Package includes all of the layers that are in the NTIA Permitting and Environmental Information Application as well as the APPEIT Tool which will allow users to input a project area and determine what layers from the application overlap with it. An overview of the project package and the APPEIT tool is provided below. User instructions on how to use the tool are available here. Instructions now include how to customize the tool by adding your own data. A video explaining how to use the Project Package is also available here. Project Package OverviewThis map package includes all of the layers from the NTIA Permitting and Environmental Information Application. The layers included are all feature services from various Federal and State agencies. The map package was created with ArcGIS Pro 3.4.0. The map package was created to allow users easy access to all feature services including symbology. The map package will allow users to avoid downloading datasets individually and easily incorporate into their own GIS system. The map package includes three maps.1. Permitting and Environmental Information Application Layers for GIS Analysis - This map includes all of the map tabs shown in the application, except State Data which is provided in another tab. This map includes feature services that can be used for analysis with other project layers such as a route or project area. 2. Permitting and Environmental Information Application Layers – For Reference Only - This map includes layers that cannot be used for analysis since they are either imagery or tile layers.3. State Data - Reference Only - This map includes all relevant state data that is shown in the application.The NTIA Permitting and Environmental Information Application was created to help with your permitting planning and environmental review preparation efforts by providing access to multiple maps from publicly available sources, including federal review, permitting, and resource agencies. The application should be used for informational purposes only and is intended solely to assist users with preliminary identification of areas that may require permits or planning to avoid potentially significant impacts to environmental resources subject to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other statutory requirements. Multiple maps are provided in the application which are created from public sources. This application does not have an exhaustive list of everything you need for permitting or environmental review for a project but is an initial starting point to see what might be required.APPEIT Tool OverviewThe Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) is providing the ArcGIS Pro Permitting and Environmental Information Tool (APPEIT) to help federal broadband grant recipients and subgrantees identify permits and environmental factors as they plan routes for their broadband deployments. Identifying permit requirements early, initiating pre-application coordination with permitting agencies, and avoiding environmental impacts help drive successful infrastructure projects. NTIA’s public release of the APPEIT tool supports government-wide efforts to improve permitting and explore how online and digital technologies can promote efficient environmental reviews. This Esri ArcGIS Pro tool is included in the map package and was created to support permitting, planning, and environmental review preparation efforts by providing access to data layers from publicly available sources, including federal review, permitting, and resource agencies. An SOP on how to use the tool is available here. For the full list of APPEIT layers, see Appendix Table 1 in the SOP. The tool is comprised of an ArcGIS Pro Project containing a custom ArcGIS Toolbox tool, linked web map shared by the NTIA’s National Broadband Map (NBAM), a report template, and a Tasks item to guide users through using the tool. This ArcGIS Pro project and its contents (maps and data) are consolidated into this (.ppkx) project file. To use APPEIT, users will input a project area boundary or project route line in a shapefile or feature class format. The tool will return as a CSV and PDF report that lists any federal layers from the ArcGIS Pro Permitting and Environmental Information Web Map that intersect the project. Users may only input a single project area or line at a time; multiple projects or project segments will need to be screened separately. For project route lines, users are required to specify a buffer distance. The buffer distance that is used for broadband projects should be determined by the area of anticipated impact and should generally not exceed 500 feet. For example, the State of Maryland recommends a 100-foot buffer for broadband permitting. The tool restricts buffers to two miles to ensure relevant results. DisclaimerThis document is intended solely to assist federal broadband grant recipients and subgrantees in better understanding Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) broadband grant programs and the requirements set forth in the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) for this program. This document does not and is not intended to supersede, modify, or otherwise alter applicable statutory or regulatory requirements, the terms and conditions of the award, or the specific application requirements set forth in the NOFO. In all cases, statutory and regulatory mandates, the terms and conditions of the award, the requirements set forth in the NOFO, and follow-on policies and guidance, shall prevail over any inconsistencies contained in this document. NTIA’s ArcGIS Pro Permitting and Environmental Information Tool (APPEIT) should be used for informational purposes only and is intended solely to assist users with preliminary identification of broadband deployments that may require permits or planning to avoid potentially significant impacts to environmental resources subject to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other statutory requirements. The tool is not an exhaustive or complete resource and does not and is not intended to substitute for, supersede, modify, or otherwise alter any applicable statutory or regulatory requirements, or the specific application requirements set forth in any NTIA NOFO, Terms and Conditions, or Special Award Condition. In all cases, statutory and regulatory mandates, and the requirements set forth in NTIA grant documents, shall prevail over any inconsistencies contained in these templates. The tool relies on publicly available data available on the websites of other federal, state, local, and Tribal agencies, and in some instances, private organizations and research institutions. Layers identified with a double asterisk include information relevant to determining if an “extraordinary circumstance” may warrant more detailed environmental review when a categorical exclusion may otherwise apply. While NTIA continues to make amendments to its websites to comply with Section 508, NTIA cannot ensure Section 508 compliance of federal and non-federal websites or resources users may access from links on NTIA websites. All data is presented “as is,” “as available” for informational purposes. NTIA does not warrant the accuracy, adequacy, or completeness of this information and expressly disclaims liability for any errors or omissions. Please e-mail NTIAanalytics@ntia.gov with any questions.

This seminar covers essential concepts to effectively manage your geospatial data using ArcGIS Pro. You will get familiar with the ArcGIS Pro editing environment, including the user interface and key options and settings that increase accuracy and efficiency while editing. The presenters highlight new capabilities in ArcGIS Pro that will streamline your editing workflows.

The nine-banded Armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) is the only species of Armadillo in the United States and alters ecosystems by excavating extensive burrows used by many other wildlife species. Relatively little is known about its habitat use or population densities, particularly in developed areas, which may be key to facilitating its range expansion. We evaluated Armadillo occupancy and density in relation to anthropogenic and landcover variables in the Ozark Mountains of Arkansas along an urban to rural gradient. Armadillo detection probability was best predicted by temperature (positively) and precipitation (negatively). Contrary to expectations, occupancy probability of Armadillos was best predicted by slope (negatively) and elevation (positively) rather than any landcover or anthropogenic variables. Armadillo density varied considerably between sites (ranging from a mean of 4.88 – 46.20 Armadillos per km2) but was not associated with any environmental or anthropogenic variables. Methods Site Selection Our study took place in Northwest Arkansas, USA, in the greater Fayetteville metropolitan area. We deployed trail cameras (Spypoint Force Dark (Spypoint Inc, Victoriaville, Quebec, Canada) and Browning Strikeforce XD cameras (Browning, Morgan, Utah, USA) over the course of two winter seasons, December 2020-March 2021, and November 2021-March 2022. We sampled 10 study sites in year one, and 12 study sites in year two. All study sites were located in the Ozark Mountains ecoregion in Northwest Arkansas. Sites were all Oak Hickory dominated hardwood forests at similar elevation (213.6 – 541 m). Devils Eyebrow and ONSC are public natural areas managed by the Arkansas Natural heritage Commission (ANHC). Devil’s Den and Hobbs are managed by the Arkansas state park system. Markham Woods (Markham), Ninestone Land Trust (Ninestone) and Forbes, are all privately owned, though Markham has a publicly accessible trail system throughout the property. Lake Sequoyah, Mt. Sequoyah Woods, Kessler Mountain, Lake Fayetteville, and Millsaps Mountain are all city parks and managed by the city of Fayetteville. Lastly, both Weddington and White Rock are natural areas within Ozark National Forest and managed by the U.S. Forest Service. We sampled 5 sites in both years of the study including Devils Eyebrow, Markham Hill, Sequoyah Woods, Ozark Natural Science Center (ONSC), and Kessler Mountain. We chose our study sites to represent a gradient of human development, based primarily on Anthropogenic noise values (Buxton et al. 2017, Mennitt and Fristrup 2016). We chose open spaces that were large enough to accommodate camera trap research, as well as representing an array of anthropogenic noise values. Since anthropogenic noise is able to permeate into natural areas within the urban interface, introducing human disturbance that may not be detected by other layers such as impervious surface and housing unit density (Buxton et al. 2017), we used dB values for each site as an indicator of the level of urbanization. Camera Placement We sampled ten study sites in the first winter of the study. At each of the 10 study sites, we deployed anywhere between 5 and 15 cameras. Larger study areas received more cameras than smaller sites because all cameras were deployed a minimum of 150m between one another. We avoided placing cameras on roads, trails, and water sources to artificially bias wildlife detections. We also avoided placing cameras within 15m of trails to avoid detecting humans. At each of the 12 study areas we surveyed in the second winter season, we deployed 12 to 30 cameras. At each study site, we used ArcGIS Pro (Esri Inc, Redlands, CA) to delineate the trail systems and then created a 150m buffer on each side of the trail. We then created random points within these buffered areas to decide where to deploy cameras. Each random point had to occur within the buffered areas and be a minimum of 150m from the next nearest camera point, thus the number of cameras at each site varied based upon site size. We placed all cameras within 50m of the random points to ensure that cameras were deployed on safe topography and with a clear field of view, though cameras were not set in locations that would have increased animal detections (game trails, water sources, burrows etc.). Cameras were rotated between sites after 5 or 10 week intervals to allow us to maximize camera locations with a limited number of trail cameras available to us. Sites with more than 25 cameras were active for 5 consecutive weeks while sites with fewer than 25 cameras were active for 10 consecutive weeks. We placed all cameras on trees or tripods 50cm above ground and at least 15m from trails and roads. We set cameras to take a burst of three photos when triggered. We used Timelapse 2.0 software (Greenberg et al. 2019) to extract metadata (date and time) associated with all animal detections. We manually identified all species occurring in photographs and counted the number of individuals present. Because density estimation requires the calculation of detection rates (number of Armadillo detections divided by the total sampling period), we wanted to reduce double counting individuals. Therefore, we grouped photographs of Armadillos into “episodes” of 5 minutes in length to reduce double counting individuals that repeatedly triggered cameras (DeGregorio et al. 2021, Meek et al. 2014). A 5 min threshold is relatively conservative with evidence that even 1-minute episodes adequately reduces double counting (Meek et al. 2014). Landcover Covariates To evaluate occupancy and density of Armadillos based on environmental and anthropogenic variables, we used ArcGIS Pro to extract variables from 500m buffers placed around each camera (Table 2). This spatial scale has been shown to hold biological meaning for Armadillos and similarly sized species (DeGregorio et al. 2021, Fidino et al. 2016, Gallo et al. 2017, Magle et al. 2016). At each camera, we extracted elevation, slope, and aspect from the base ArcGIS Pro map. We extracted maximum housing unit density (HUD) using the SILVIS housing layer (Radeloff et al. 2018, Table 2). We extracted anthropogenic noise from the layer created by Mennitt and Fristrup (2016, Buxton et al. 2017, Table 2) and used the “L50” anthropogenic sound level estimate, which was calculated by taking the difference between predicted environmental noise and the calculated noise level. Therefore, we assume that higher levels of L50 sound corresponded to higher human presence and activity (i.e. voices, vehicles, and other sources of anthropogenic noise; Mennitt and Fristrup 2016). We derived the area of developed open landcover, forest area, and distance to forest edge from the 2019 National Land Cover Database (NLDC, Dewitz 2021, Table 2). Developed open landcover refers to open spaces with less than 20% impervious surface such as residential lawns, cemeteries, golf courses, and parks and has been shown to be important for medium-sized mammals (Gallo et al. 2017, Poessel et al. 2012). Forest area was calculated by combing all forest types within the NLCD layer (deciduous forest, mixed forest, coniferous forest), and summarizing the total area (km2) within the 500m buffer. Distance to forest edge was derived by creating a 30m buffer on each side of all forest boundaries and calculating the distance from each camera to the nearest forest edge. We calculated distance to water by combining the waterbody and flowline features in the National Hydrogeography Dataset (U.S. Geological Survey) for the state of Arkansas to capture both permanent and ephemeral water sources that may be important to wildlife. We measured the distance to water and distance to forest edge using the geoprocessing tool “near” in ArcGIS Pro which calculates the Euclidean distance between a point and the nearest feature. We extracted Average Daily Traffic (ADT) from the Arkansas Department of Transportation database (Arkansas GIS Office). The maximum value for ADT was calculated using the Summarize Within tool in ArcGIS Pro. We tested for correlation between all covariates using a Spearman correlation matrix and removed any variable with correlation greater than 0.6. Pairwise comparisons between distance to roads and HUD and between distance to forest edge and forest area were both correlated above 0.6; therefore, we dropped distance to roads and distance to forest edge from analyses as we predicted that HUD and forest area would have larger biological impacts on our focal species (Kretser et al. 2008). Occupancy Analysis In order to better understand habitat associations while accounting for imperfect detection of Armadillos, we used occupancy modeling (Mackenzie et al. 2002). We used a single-species, single-season occupancy model (Mackenzie et al. 2002) even though we had two years of survey data at 5 of the study sites. We chose to do this rather than using a multi-season dynamic occupancy model because most sites were not sampled during both years of the study. Even for sites that were sampled in both years, cameras were not placed in the same locations each year. We therefore combined all sampling into one single-season model and created unique site by year combinations as our sampling locations and we used year as a covariate for analysis to explore changes in occupancy associated with the year of study. For each sampling location, we created a detection history with 7 day sampling periods, allowing presence/absence data to be recorded at each site for each week of the study. This allowed for 16 survey periods between 01 December 2020, and 11 March 2021 and 22 survey periods between 01 November 2021 and 24 March 2022. We treated each camera as a unique survey site, resulting in a total of 352 sites. Because not all cameras were deployed at the same time and for the same length of time, we used a staggered entry approach. We used a multi-stage fitting approach in which we

Retirement Notice: This item is in mature support as of February 2023 and will be retired in December 2025. A new version of this item is available for your use. Esri recommends updating your maps and apps to use the new version.This layer displays change in pixels of the Sentinel-2 10m Land Use/Land Cover product developed by Esri, Impact Observatory, and Microsoft. Available years to compare with 2021 are 2018, 2019 and 2020. By default, the layer shows all comparisons together, in effect showing what changed 2018-2021. But the layer may be changed to show one of three specific pairs of years, 2018-2021, 2019-2021, or 2020-2021.Showing just one pair of years in ArcGIS Online Map Viewer To show just one pair of years in ArcGIS Online Map viewer, create a filter. 1. Click the filter button. 2. Next, click add expression. 3. In the expression dialogue, specify a pair of years with the ProductName attribute. Use the following example in your expression dialogue to show only places that changed between 2020 and 2021:ProductNameis2020-2021 By default, places that do not change appear as a transparent symbol in ArcGIS Pro. But in ArcGIS Online Map Viewer, a transparent symbol may need to be set for these places after a filter is chosen. To do this: 4. Click the styles button.5. Under unique values click style options. 6. Click the symbol next to No Change at the bottom of the legend. 7. Click the slider next to "enable fill" to turn the symbol off. Showing just one pair of years in ArcGIS Pro To show just one pair of years in ArcGIS Pro, choose one of the layer's processing templates to single out a particular pair of years. The processing template applies a definition query that works in ArcGIS Pro. 1. To choose a processing template, right click the layer in the table of contents for ArcGIS Pro and choose properties. 2. In the dialogue that comes up, choose the tab that says processing templates. 3. On the right where it says processing template, choose the pair of years you would like to display. The processing template will stay applied for any analysis you may want to perform as well. How the change layer was created, combining LULC classes from two yearsImpact Observatory, Esri, and Microsoft used artificial intelligence to classify the world in 10 Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) classes for the years 2017-2021. Mosaics serve the following sets of change rasters in a single global layer: Change between 2018 and 2021Change between 2019 and 2021Change between 2020 and 2021To make this change layer, Esri used an arithmetic operation combining the cells from a source year and 2021 to make a change index value. ((from year * 16) + to year) In the example of the change between 2020 and 2021, the from year (2020) was multiplied by 16, then added to the to year (2021). Then the combined number is served as an index in an 8 bit unsigned mosaic with an attribute table which describes what changed or did not change in that timeframe. Variable mapped: Change in land cover between 2018, 2019, or 2020 and 2021 Data Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM)Mosaic Projection: WGS84Extent: GlobalSource imagery: Sentinel-2Cell Size: 10m (0.00008983152098239751 degrees)Type: ThematicSource: Esri Inc.Publication date: January 2022 What can you do with this layer?Global LULC maps provide information on conservation planning, food security, and hydrologic modeling, among other things. This dataset can be used to visualize land cover anywhere on Earth. This layer can also be used in analyses that require land cover input. For example, the Zonal Statistics tools allow a user to understand the composition of a specified area by reporting the total estimates for each of the classes. Land Cover processingThis map was produced by a deep learning model trained using over 5 billion hand-labeled Sentinel-2 pixels, sampled from over 20,000 sites distributed across all major biomes of the world. The underlying deep learning model uses 6 bands of Sentinel-2 surface reflectance data: visible blue, green, red, near infrared, and two shortwave infrared bands. To create the final map, the model is run on multiple dates of imagery throughout the year, and the outputs are composited into a final representative map. Processing platformSentinel-2 L2A/B data was accessed via Microsoft’s Planetary Computer and scaled using Microsoft Azure Batch. Class definitions1. WaterAreas where water was predominantly present throughout the year; may not cover areas with sporadic or ephemeral water; contains little to no sparse vegetation, no rock outcrop nor built up features like docks; examples: rivers, ponds, lakes, oceans, flooded salt plains.2. TreesAny significant clustering of tall (~15-m or higher) dense vegetation, typically with a closed or dense canopy; examples: wooded vegetation, clusters of dense tall vegetation within savannas, plantations, swamp or mangroves (dense/tall vegetation with ephemeral water or canopy too thick to detect water underneath).4. Flooded vegetationAreas of any type of vegetation with obvious intermixing of water throughout a majority of the year; seasonally flooded area that is a mix of grass/shrub/trees/bare ground; examples: flooded mangroves, emergent vegetation, rice paddies and other heavily irrigated and inundated agriculture.5. CropsHuman planted/plotted cereals, grasses, and crops not at tree height; examples: corn, wheat, soy, fallow plots of structured land.7. Built AreaHuman made structures; major road and rail networks; large homogenous impervious surfaces including parking structures, office buildings and residential housing; examples: houses, dense villages / towns / cities, paved roads, asphalt.8. Bare groundAreas of rock or soil with very sparse to no vegetation for the entire year; large areas of sand and deserts with no to little vegetation; examples: exposed rock or soil, desert and sand dunes, dry salt flats/pans, dried lake beds, mines.9. Snow/IceLarge homogenous areas of permanent snow or ice, typically only in mountain areas or highest latitudes; examples: glaciers, permanent snowpack, snow fields. 10. CloudsNo land cover information due to persistent cloud cover.11. Rangeland Open areas covered in homogenous grasses with little to no taller vegetation; wild cereals and grasses with no obvious human plotting (i.e., not a plotted field); examples: natural meadows and fields with sparse to no tree cover, open savanna with few to no trees, parks/golf courses/lawns, pastures. Mix of small clusters of plants or single plants dispersed on a landscape that shows exposed soil or rock; scrub-filled clearings within dense forests that are clearly not taller than trees; examples: moderate to sparse cover of bushes, shrubs and tufts of grass, savannas with very sparse grasses, trees or other plants.CitationKarra, Kontgis, et al. “Global land use/land cover with Sentinel-2 and deep learning.” IGARSS 2021-2021 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. IEEE, 2021.AcknowledgementsTraining data for this project makes use of the National Geographic Society Dynamic World training dataset, produced for the Dynamic World Project by National Geographic Society in partnership with Google and the World Resources Institute.For questions please email environment@esri.com

This dynamic image service provides float values representing ground heights in meters, based on 3DEP seamless 1 arc-second data from USGS 3D Elevation Program (3DEP). Heights are orthometric (sea level = 0), and water bodies that are above sea level have approximated nominal water heights.Height units: MetersUpdate Frequency: AnnuallyCoverage: conterminous United States, Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico, Territorial Islands of the United States; Canada and Mexico.Data Source: The data for this layer comes from 3DEP seamless 1 arc-second dataset from the USGS's 3D Elevation Program with original source data in its native coordinate system.What can you do with this layer?Use for Visualization: This layer is generally not optimal for direct visualization. By default, 32 bit floating point values are returned, resulting in higher bandwidth requirements. Therefore, usage should be limited to applications requiring elevation data values. Alternatively, client applications can select from numerous additional functions, applied on the server, that return rendered data. For visualizations such as hillshade, slope, consider using the appropriate server-side function defined on this service.

Use for Analysis: Yes. This layer provides data as floating point elevation values suitable for use in analysis. The layer is restricted to a 24,000 x 24,000 pixel limit.

NOTE: The image service uses North America Albers Equal Area Conic projection (WKID: 102008) and resamples the data dynamically to the requested projection, extent and pixel size. For analyses requiring the highest accuracy, when using ArcGIS Desktop, you will need to use native coordinates (GCS_North_American_1983, WKID: 4269) and specify the native resolutions (0.0002777777777779 degrees) as the cell size geoprocessing environment setting and ensure that the request is aligned with the source pixels.

Server Functions: This layer has server functions defined for the following elevation derivatives. In ArcGIS Pro, server function can be invoked from Layer Properties - Processing Templates. Slope Degrees Slope Percentage Aspect Hillshade Slope Degrees MapThis layer has query, identify, and export image services available. The layer is restricted to a 24,000 x 24,000 pixel limit.

This layer is part of a larger collection of elevation layers that you can use to perform a variety of mapping analysis tasks.

This folder contains the calibrationstatistics from DK-model2019. Grid files and .shp files are assembled in ArcGIS Pro v.3.0.1. DKmodel2019 setup and calibration is described in GEUS report 2019/31.

Retirement Notice: This beta item will be retired in December 2026. A new version of this item is available for your use. Esri recommends updating your maps and apps to use the new version.This layer represents CMIP6 future projections of temperature variation over an entire year. This layer can be used to compare with recent climate histories to better understand the potential impacts of future climate change.WorldClim produced this projection as part of a series of 19 bioclimate variables identified by the USGS and provides this description:"Bioclimatic variables are derived from the monthly temperature and rainfall values in order to generate more biologically meaningful variables. These are often used in species distribution modeling and related ecological modeling techniques. The bioclimatic variables represent annual trends (e.g., mean annual temperature, annual precipitation) seasonality (e.g., annual range in temperature and precipitation) and extreme or limiting environmental factors (e.g., temperature of the coldest and warmest month, and precipitation of the wet and dry quarters). A quarter is a period of three months (1/4 of the year)."Time Extent: averages from 2021-2040, 2041-2060, 2061-2080, 2081-2100Units: deg CCell Size: 2.5 minutes (~5 km)Source Type: StretchedPixel Type: 32 Bit FloatData Projection: GCS WGS84Mosaic Projection: GCS WGS84Extent: GlobalSource: WorldClim CMIP6 Bioclimate Climate ScenariosThe CMIP6 climate experiments use Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) to model future climate scenarios. Each SSP pairs a human/community behavior component with the traditional RCP greenhouse gas forcing from the previous CMIP5. Three SSPs were chosen by Esri to be included in the service based on user requests: SSP2 4.5, SSP3 7.0 and SSP5 8.5.SSPScenarioEstimated warming(2041–2060)Estimated warming(2081–2100)Very likely range in °C(2081–2100)SSP2-4.5intermediate GHG emissions:CO2 emissions around current levels until 2050, then falling but not reaching net zero by 21002.0 °C2.7 °C2.1 – 3.5SSP3-7.0high GHG emissions:CO2 emissions double by 21002.1 °C3.6 °C2.8 – 4.6SSP5-8.5very high GHG emissions:CO2 emissions triple by 20752.4 °C4.4 °C3.3 – 5.7While the 8.5 scenario is no longer generally considered likely, SSP3 7.0 has been included and is considered the high end of possibilities. SSP5 8.5 has been retained since many organizations report to this threshold. The warming associated with SSP2 4.5 is equivalent to the global targets set at the 2021 United Nations COP26 meetings in Glasgow. Processing the Climate DataWorldClim provides 20-year averaged outputs for the various SSPs from 24 global climate models. A selection of 13 models were averaged for each variable and time based on Mahony et al 2022. These models included ACCESS-ESM1-5, BCC-CSM2-MR, CanESM5, CNRM-ESM2-1, EC-Earth3-Veg, GFDL-ESM4, GISS-E2-1-G, INM-CM5-0, IPSL-CM6A-LR, MIROC6, MPI-ESM1-2-HR, MRI-ESM2-0, UKESM1-0-LL. GFDL-ESM4 was not available for SSP2 4.5 or SSP5 8.5. Accessing the Multidimensional InformationThe time and SSP scenario are built into the layer using a multidimensional raster. Enable the time slider to move across the 20-year average periods. In ArcGIS Online and Pro, use the Multidimensional Filter to select the SSP (SSP2 4.5 is the default). What can you do with this layer?These multidimensional imagery tiles support analysis using ArcGIS Online or Pro. Use the Bioclimate Baseline layer to see the difference in pixels and calculate change from the historic period into the future. Use the Multidimensional tab in ArcGIS Pro to access a variety of useful tools. Each layer or variable can be styled using the Image Display options. Known Quality IssuesEach model is downscaled from ~100km resolution to ~5km resolution by WorldClim. Some artifacts are inevitable, especially at a global scale. Some variables have distinct transitions, especially in Greenland. Also, SSP2 4.5 has missing data for several variables in Antarctica.Related LayersBioclimate 1 Annual Mean TemperatureBioclimate 2 Mean Diurnal RangeBioclimate 3 IsothermalityBioclimate 4 Temperature SeasonalityBioclimate 5 Max Temperature of Warmest MonthBioclimate 6 Min Temperature Of Coldest MonthBioclimate 7 Temperature Annual RangeBioclimate 8 Mean Temperature Of Wettest QuarterBioclimate 9 Mean Temperature Of Driest QuarterBioclimate 10 Mean Temperature Of Warmest QuarterBioclimate 11 Mean Temperature Of Coldest QuarterBioclimate 12 Annual PrecipitationBioclimate 13 Precipitation Of Wettest MonthBioclimate 14 Precipitation Of Driest MonthBioclimate 15 Precipitation SeasonalityBioclimate 16 Precipitation Of Wettest QuarterBioclimate 17 Precipitation Of Driest QuarterBioclimate 18 Precipitation Of Warmest QuarterBioclimate 19 Precipitation Of Coldest QuarterBioclimate Baseline 1970-2000

Measure and Map Access to Grocery StoresFrom the perspective of the people living in each neighborhood How do people in your city get to the grocery store? The answer to that question depends on the person and where they live. This collection of layers, maps and apps help answer the question.Some live in cities and stop by a grocery store within a short walk or bike ride of home or work. Others live in areas where car ownership is more prevalent, and so they drive to a store. Some do not own a vehicle, and rely on a friend or public transit. Others rely on grocery delivery for their needs. And, many live in rural areas far from town, so a trip to a grocery store is an infrequent event involving a long drive.This map from Esri shows which areas are within a ten minute walk (in green) or ten minute drive (in blue) of a grocery store in the United States and Puerto Rico. Darker color indicates access to more stores. Summarizing this data shows that 20% of U.S. population live within a 10 minute walk of a grocery store, and 90% of the population live within a 10 minute drive of a grocery store. Click on the map to see a summary for each state.Every census block is scored with a count of walkable and drivable stores nearby, making this a map suitable for a dashboard for any city, or any of the 50 states, DC and Puerto Rico. Two colorful layers visualize this definition of access, one for walkable access (suitable for looking at a city neighborhood by neighborhood) and one for drivable access (suitable for looking across a city, county, region or state).On the walkable layer, shades of green define areas within a ten minute walk of one or more grocery stores. The colors become more intense and trend to a blue-green color for the busiest neighborhoods, such as downtown San Francisco. As you zoom in, a layer of Census block points visualizes the local population with or without walkable access. As you zoom out to see the entire city, the map adds a light blue - to dark blue layer, showing which parts of the region fall within ten minutes' drive of one or more grocery stores. As a result, the map is useful at all scales, from national to regional, state and local levels. It becomes easier to spot grocery stores that sit within a highly populated area, and grocery stores that sit in a shopping center far away from populated areas. This view of a city begins to hint at the question: how many people have each type of access to grocery stores? And, what if they are unable to walk a mile regularly, or don't own a car? How to Use This MapUse this map to introduce the concepts of access to grocery stores in your city or town. This is the kind of map where people will want to look up their home or work address to validate what the map is saying against their own experiences. The map was built with that use in mind. Many maps of access use straight-line, as-the-crow-flies distance, which ignores real-world barriers to walkability like rivers, lakes, interstates and other characteristics of the built environment. Block analysis using a network data set and Origin-Destination analysis factors these barriers in, resulting in a more realistic depiction of access. There is data behind the map, which can be summarized to show how many people have walkable access to local grocery stores. The map includes a feature layer of population in Census block points, which are visible when you zoom in far enough. This feature layer of Census block centroids can be plugged into an app like this one that summarizes the population with/without walkable or drivable access. Lastly, this map can serve as backdrop to other community resources, like food banks, farmers markets (example), and transit (example). Add a transit layer to immediately gauge its impact on the population's grocery access. You can also use this map to see how it relates to communities of concern. Add a layer of any block group or tract demographics, such as Percent Senior Population (examples), or Percent of Households with Access to 0 Vehicles (examples). The map is a useful visual and analytic resource for helping community leaders, business and government leaders see their town from the perspective of its residents, and begin asking questions about how their community could be improved. Data sourcesPopulation data is from the 2020 U.S. Census blocks. Each census block has a count of stores within a 10 minute walk, and a count of stores within a ten minute drive. Census blocks known to be unpopulated are given a score of 0. The layer is available as a hosted feature layer. Grocery store locations are from SafeGraph, reflecting what was in the data as of September 2024. For this project, ArcGIS StreetMap Premium was used for the street network in the origin-destination analysis work, because it has the necessary attributes on each street segment to identify which streets are considered walkable, and supports a wide variety of driving parameters. The walkable access layer and drivable access layers are rasters, whose colors were chosen to allow the drivable access layer to serve as backdrop to the walkable access layer. Data PreparationArcGIS Network Analyst was used to set up a network street layer for analysis. ArcGIS StreetMap Premium was installed to a local hard drive and selected in the Origin-Destination workflow as the network data source. This allows the origins (Census block centroids) and destinations (SafeGraph grocery stores) to be connected to that network, to allow origin-destination analysis. The Census blocks layer contains the centroid of each Census block. The data allows a simple popup to be created. This layer's block figures can be summarized further, to tract, county and state levels. The SafeGraph grocery store locations were provided by SafeGraph. The source data included NAICS code 445110 and 452311 as an initial screening. The CSV file was imported using the Data Interoperability geoprocessing tools in ArcGIS Pro, where a definition query was applied to the layer to exclude any records that were not grocery stores. The final layer used in the analysis had approximately 63,000 records. In this map, this layer is included as a vector tile layer. MethodologyEvery census block in the U.S. was assigned two access scores, whose numbers are simply how many grocery stores are within a 10 minute walk and a 10 minute drive of that census block. Every census block has a score of 0 (no stores), 1, 2 or more stores. The count of accessible stores was determined using Origin-Destination Analysis in ArcGIS Network Analyst, in ArcGIS Pro. A set of Tools in this ArcGIS Pro package allow a similar analysis to be conducted for any city or other area. The Tools step through the data prep and analysis steps. Download the Pro package, open it and substitute your own layers for Origins and Destinations. Parcel centroids are a suggested option for Origins, for example. Origin-Destination analysis was configured, using ArcGIS StreetMap Premium as the network data source. Census block centroids with population greater than zero were used as the Origins, and grocery store locations were used as the Destinations. A cutoff of 10 minutes was used with the Walk Time option. Only one restriction was applied to the street network: Walkable, which means Interstates and other non-walkable street segments were treated appropriately. You see the results in the map: wherever freeway overpasses and underpasses are present near a grocery store, the walkable area extends across/through that pass, but not along the freeway. A cutoff of 10 minutes was used with the Drive Time option. The default restrictions were applied to the street network, which means a typical vehicle's access to all types of roads was factored in. The results for each analysis were captured in a Lines layer, which shows which origins are within the 10 minute cutoff of each destination over the street network, given the assumptions about that network (walking, or driving a vehicle). The Lines layer is not published but is used to count how many stores each origin has access to over the road network. The Lines layer was then summarized by census block ID to capture the Maximum value of the Destination_Rank field. A census block within 10 minutes of 3 stores would have 3 records in the Lines layer, but only one value in the summarized table, with a MAX_Destination_Rank field value of 3. This is the number of stores accessible to that census block in the 10 minutes measured, for walking and driving. These data were joined to the block centroids layer and given unique names. At this point, all blocks with zero population or null values in the MAX_Destination_Rank fields were given a store count of 0, to help the next step. Walkable and Drivable areas are calculated into a raster layer, using Nearest Neighbor geoprocessing tool on the count of stores within a 10 minute walk, and a count of stores within a ten minute drive, respectively. This tool used a 100 meter grid and interpolates the values between each census block. A census tracts layer containing all water polygons "erased" from the census tract boundaries was used as an environment setting, to help constrain interpolation into/across bodies of water. The same layer use used to "shoreline" the Nearest Neighbor results, to eliminate any interpolation into the ocean or Great Lakes. This helped but was not perfect. Notes and LimitationsThe map provides a baseline for discussing access to grocery stores in a city. It does not presume local population has the desire or means to walk or drive to obtain groceries. It does not take elevation gain or loss into account. It does not factor time of day nor weather, seasons, or other variables that affect a person's commute choices. Walking and driving are just two ways people get to a grocery store. Some people ride a bike, others take public transit, have groceries delivered, or rely on a friend with a vehicle.

This webmap is a subset of Global Urban Density Footprint in 2020 Tile Image Layer. This layer represents an estimate of the footprint of urban settings in 2020. It is intended as a fast-drawing cartographic layer to augment base maps and to focus a map reader's attention on the location of human population. This layer is not intended for analysis. This layer was derived from the 2020 slice of the WorldPop Population Density 2000-2020 100m and 1km layers.Also see the Populated Footprint layer, which like this layer, is intended to provide a fast-drawing cartographic context for the footprint of total population.The following processing steps were used to produce this layer in ArcGIS Pro:1. Int tool (Spatial Analyst) to truncate double precision values; all values less than 0.99 become 0.2. Reclassify tool (Spatial Analyst) to set values 0 through 1499 to NoData (Null) and all other values become 1.3. Copy Raster tool with Output Coordinate System environment set to Web Mercator, bit depth to 1 bit, and NoData Value to 0.Source:WorldPop Population Density 2000-2020 100m, which is created from WorldPop (www.worldpop.org - School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton; Department of Geography and Geosciences, University of Louisville; Departement de Geographie, Universite de Namur) and Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), Columbia University (2018). Global High Resolution Population Denominators Project - Funded by The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The DOI for the original WorldPop.org total population population data is 10.5258/SOTON/WP00645.

Predator-prey interactions can be profoundly influenced by vegetation conditions, particularly when predator and prey prefer different habitats. Although such interactions have proven challenging to study for small and cryptic predators, recent methodological advances substantially improve opportunities for understanding how vegetation influences prey acquisition and strengthen conservation planning for this group. The California Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis occidentalis) is well-known as an old-forest species of conservation concern, but whose primary prey in many regions – woodrats (Neotoma spp.) – occurs in a broad range of vegetation conditions. Here, we used high-resolution GPS tracking coupled with nest video monitoring to test the hypothesis that prey capture rates vary as a function of vegetation structure and heterogeneity, with emergent, reproductive consequences for Spotted Owls in Southern California. Foraging owls were more successful capturing prey, including woodrats, in taller multilayered forests, in areas with higher heterogeneity in vegetation types, and near forest-chaparral edges. Consistent with these findings, Spotted Owls delivered prey items more frequently to nests in territories with greater heterogeneity in vegetation types and delivered prey biomass at a higher rate in territories with more forest-chaparral edge. Spotted Owls had higher reproductive success in territories with higher mean canopy cover, taller trees, and more shrubby vegetation. Collectively, our results provide additional and compelling evidence that a mosaic of large tree forests with complex canopy and shrubby vegetation increases access to prey with potential reproductive benefits to Spotted Owls in landscapes where woodrats are a primary prey item. We suggest that forest management activities that enhance forest structure and vegetation heterogeneity could help curb declining Spotted Owl populations while promoting resilient ecosystems in some regions. Methods See README DOCUMENT Naming conventions *RSF or prey refers to prey capture analysis *delivery in a file name refers to delivery rate analysis *repro in a filename means that file is for the delivery rate analysis

Setup *files with vegetation data should work with minimal alteration(will need to specify working directory) with associated R code for each analysis *Shapefiles were made in ArcGIS pro but they can be opened with any GIS software such as QGIS.

Locational data files

NOTE LOCATIONAL DATA IS SHIFTED AND ROTATED FROM THE ORIGINAL -due to the sensitive nature of this species. The locational_data includes: * All_2021_owls_shifted * Point file showing all GPS tag locations for prey capture analysis * Attributes include: * TERRITORY ID: Numerical identifier for each bird * Year: year GPS tag was recorded * Month: month GPS tag was recorded * Day: Day GPS tag was recorded * Hour: Hour GPS tag was recorded * Minute: minute GPS tag was recorded * All_linked_polygons_shifted * Polygon file showing capture polygons for prey capture analysis * Attributes include * Territory ID: numerical identifier for each bird * Polygon id: numerical identifier for each capture polygon for each bird * Shape area: area of each polygon * SBNF_camera_nests_shifted * Point file showing spotted owl nests for prey capture analysis * Attributes include * Territory id: numerical identifier for each bird * C95_KDE_2021_socal_shifted * Polygon file of owls 95% kernel density estimate for prey delivery rate analysis * Attributes include * Id: numerical identifier for each territory(bird) * Area: area of each polygon * San_bernardino_territory_centers * Point file showing Territory centers for historical SBNF territories – shifted for repro success analysis * Attributes include * Repro Territory id: unique identifier for each territory in broader set of territories

Besides the sifted locational data we have included - For the Resource selection function vegetation data, for the delivery analysis we have included an overview of prey deliveries by territory and vegetation data used, and for the reproductive analysis we have again included vegetation data as well as an overview of reproductive success. these are labled as follows:

Files for the prey capture analysis

Socal_RSF_data.txt

*description: Text file with vegetation data paired with capture locations both buffered polygons used in prey capture analysis and the unbuffered ones which were not used.(Pair with Socal_rsf_code R script) *format: .txt *Dimensions: 2641 X 35

*Variables: *ORIG_fid: completely unique identifier for each row *unique_id: unique identifier for each capture polygon(shared between a buffered capture location and its unbuffered pair) *territory_id: unique numerical idenifier of territory *Polygon_id: within territory unique prey capture polygon id *buff: bianary buffered or unbuffered (1=buffered, 0=unbuffered) *used: bianary used=1 available=0 *prey_type: prey species associated with polygon unkn:unknown, flsq:flying squirel, wora:woodrat, umou:mouse, pogo:pocketgopher, grsq: grey squirel, ubrd: unknown bird, umol:unknown mole, uvol, unknown vole. *area_sqm: area of polygon in square meters *CanCov_2020_buff: average canopy cover in polygon *CanHeight_2020_buff: average canopy height in polygon *Canlayer_2020_buff: average number of canopy layers in polygon *Understory_density_2020_buff: average brushy vegetation density in polygon *pix_COUNT: count of pixels in polygon (not needed for analysis) *p_chaparral: percent of polygon comprised of chaparral habitat
*p_conifer: percent of polygon comprised of conifer habitat *p_hardwood: percent of polygon comprised of hardwood habitat *p_other: percent of polygon comprised of other habitat types *Calveg_cap_CHt_gt10_CC_30to70_intersect_buff: percent of polygon comprised of trees taller than 10m with 30-70percent canopy cover (used to check data) *Calveg_cap_CHt_gt10_CCgt70_intersect_buff: percent of polygon comprised of trees taller than 10m with greater than 70percent canopy cover (used to check data) *Calveg_cap_CHt_lt10_intersect_buff:percent of polygon comprised of trees less than 10m (used to check data)
*p_sm_conifer: percent of polygon comprised of conifer trees less than 10m (used to calculate diversity)
*p_lrg_conifer_sc: percent of polygon comprised of conifer forests >10m tall with sparse canopy(used to calculate diversity) *p_large_conifer_dc: percent of polygon comprised of conifer forests greater than 10m tall with dense canopy (used to calculate diversity) *p_sm_hard: percent of polygon comprised of hardwood trees less than 10m (used to calculate diversity) *p_lrg_hard_sc: percent of polygon comprised of hardwood forests greater than 10m with sparse canopy(used to calculate diversity)
*p_lrg_hard_dc: percent of polygon comprised of hardwood forests greater than 10m dense canopy (used to calculate diversity) *p_forests_gt10_verysparse_CC: percent of polygon comprised of trees less than 10m with very sparse canopies (used to calculate diversity) *primary_edge: total distance in meters of primary edge in a polygon
*normalized_by_area_primary_edge: total distance in m of primary edge in a polygon divided by the area of the polygon
*secondary_edge: total distance in meters of secondary edge in a polygon *normalized_by_area_secondary_edge:total distance in m of secondary edge in a polygon divided by the area of the polygon *coarse_diversity: shannon diversity in each polygon (see methods below) *fine_diversity: shannon diversity in each polygon (see methods below) *nest_distance: distance from polygon center to nest for each polygon in meters

For the Delivery analysis

note: For information on determining average prey biomass see methods as well as zulla et al 2022 for flying squirels and woodrat masses Zulla CJ, Jones GM, Kramer HA, Keane JJ, Roberts KN, Dotters BP, Sawyer SC, Whitmore SA, Berigan WJ, Kelly KG, Gutiérrez RJ, Peery MZ. Forest heterogeneity outweighs movement costs by enhancing hunting success and fitness in spotted owls. doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1370884/v1. PPR:PPR470028.

prey_deliveries_byterritory.csv *Description: overview file of prey delivered to each nest *format: .csv *dimensions:332 x 8

*Variables: *SITE: Unique numerical identifier for each territory *DATE: date prey was delivered (in UTC) *CAMERA TIME: time in UTC prey was delivered *VIDEO TIME: time on video prey was delivered - unrelated to real time just original file
*PREY ITEM: prey species delivered to nest unkn:unknown, uncr: unknown if delivery(removed from eventual analysis due to

This layer represents an estimate of the footprint of human settlement in 2020. It is intended as a fast-drawing cartographic layer to augment base maps and to focus a map reader's attention on the location of human population. This layer is not intended for analysis.This layer was derived from the 2020 slice of the WorldPop Population Density 2000-2020 100m and 1km layers. WorldPop modeled this population footprint based on imagery datasets and population data from national statistical organizations and the United Nations. Zooming in to very large scales will often show discrepancies between reality and this or any model. Like all data sources imagery and population counts are subject to many types of error, thus this gridded footprint contains errors of omission and commission. The imagery base maps available in ArcGIS Online were not used in WorldPop's model. Imagery only informs the model of characteristics that indicate a potential for settlement, and cannot intrinsically indicate whether any or how many people live in a building. Also see the Urban Density Footprint layer, which like this layer, is intended to provide a fast-drawing cartographic context for urban populations.The following processing steps were used to produce this layer in ArcGIS Pro:1. Int tool (Spatial Analyst) to truncate double precision values; all values less than 0.99 become 0.2. Reclassify tool (Spatial Analyst) to set values 0 through 14 to NoData (Null) and all other values become 1. The figure of 14 was empirically derived as a good balance between reducing errors of commission, i.e., false-positive cells with lower values, while not introducing errors of omission by eliminating obviously populated cells.3. Copy Raster tool with Output Coordinate System environment set to Web Mercator, bit depth to 1 bit, and NoData Value to 0.Source:WorldPop Population Density 2000-2020 100m, which is created from WorldPop (www.worldpop.org - School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton; Department of Geography and Geosciences, University of Louisville; Departement de Geographie, Universite de Namur) and Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), Columbia University (2018). Global High Resolution Population Denominators Project - Funded by The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The DOI for the original WorldPop.org total population population data is 10.5258/SOTON/WP00645.

Homeowners in coastal environments often augment their access to estuarine ecosystems by building private docks on their personal property. Despite the commonality of docks, particularly in the Southeastern United States, few works have investigated their historical development, their distribution across the landscape, or the environmental justice dimensions of this distribution. In this study, we used historic aerial photography to track the abundance and size of docks across six South Carolina counties from the 1950s to 2016. Across our roughly 60-year study period, dock abundance grew by two orders of magnitude, the mean length of newly constructed docks doubled, and the cumulative length of docks ballooned from 34 to 560 km. Additionally, we drew on census data interpolated into consistent 2010 tract boundaries to analyze the racial and economic distribution of docks in 1994, 1999, 2011, and 2016. Racial composition, measured as the percentage of a tract’s population that was White,..., Dock data was collected via historic aerial imagery of the South Carolina coast. Pre-1990 imagery was obtained from the University of South Carolina library, 1994 and 1999 imagery was obtained from the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, and 2011 imagery was obtained from the US Department of Agriculture National Agriculture Imagery Program’s Geospatial Data Gateway (https://nrcs.app.box.com/v/gateway/folder/19350726983). Census data was obtained from the NHGIS and Historical Housing Unit and Urbanization Database at the tract level using their crosswalk files to interpolate 1990 and 2000 data to 2010 tract geographies. Docks were tracked across decades in ArcGIS Pro and statistical models were run using R. Greater methodological detail is provided in the "Historic Infrastructure Methodology" file in the "Historic_Dock_Supplemental" folder on Zenodo. All pre-1990 images therein are reproduced with permission of the University of South Carolina library., R, ArcGIS Pro Version 2.9 or greater., # Exponential growth of private coastal infrastructure influenced by geography and race in South Carolina, USA

This data set contains ArcGIS Pro files and a CSV of every structure identified in the study. The code used to run the models can be found on the associated Zenodo page in the "Historic_Dock_Code" folder. Additional methodological information and model diagnostics can be found in the "Historic_Dock_Supplemental" folder on the associated Zenodo page. If you have any questions or requests please email Jeffrey Beauvais (he/him) at beauvais.work@gmail.com

Description of the Data and file structure

Parent folder: Historic_Dock_ArcPro_Files

Contains a geodatabase (.gdb file) with final point layers used in the analysis for dock counts, lengths, and geographic boundaries. Intermediate files were redundant and excluded but available upon request. Some folders within are empty and automatically generated by ArcGIS Pro when loading the p...

Standardized data on large-scale and long-term patterns of species richness are critical for understanding the consequences of natural and anthropogenic changes in the environment. The North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) is one of the largest and most widely used sources of such data, but so far, little is known about the degree to which BBS data provide accurate estimates of regional richness. Here we test this question by comparing estimates of regional richness based on BBS data with spatially and temporally matched estimates based on state Breeding Bird Atlases (BBA). We expected that estimates based on BBA data would provide a more complete (and therefore, more accurate) representation of regional richness due to their larger number of observation units and higher sampling effort within the observation units. Our results were only partially consistent with these predictions: while estimates of regional richness based on BBA data were higher than those based on BBS data, estimates of local richness (number of species per observation unit) were higher in BBS data. The latter result is attributed to higher land-cover heterogeneity in BBS units and higher effectiveness of bird detection (more species are detected per unit time). Interestingly, estimates of regional richness based on BBA blocks were higher than those based on BBS data even when differences in the number of observation units were controlled for. Our analysis indicates that this difference was due to higher compositional turnover between BBA units, probably due to larger differences in habitat conditions between BBA units and a larger number of geographically restricted species. Our overall results indicate that estimates of regional richness based on BBS data suffer from incomplete detection of a large number of rare species, and that corrections of these estimates based on standard extrapolation techniques are not sufficient to remove this bias. Future applications of BBS data in ecology and conservation, and in particular, applications in which the representation of rare species is important (e.g., those focusing on biodiversity conservation), should be aware of this bias, and should integrate BBA data whenever possible.

Methods Overview

This is a compilation of second-generation breeding bird atlas data and corresponding breeding bird survey data. This contains presence-absence breeding bird observations in 5 U.S. states: MA, MI, NY, PA, VT, sampling effort per sampling unit, geographic location of sampling units, and environmental variables per sampling unit: elevation and elevation range from (from SRTM), mean annual precipitation & mean summer temperature (from PRISM), and NLCD 2006 land-use data.

Each row contains all observations per sampling unit, with additional tables containing information on sampling effort impact on richness, a rareness table of species per dataset, and two summary tables for both bird diversity and environmental variables.

The methods for compilation are contained in the supplementary information of the manuscript but also here:

Bird data

For BBA data, shapefiles for blocks and the data on species presences and sampling effort in blocks were received from the atlas coordinators. For BBS data, shapefiles for routes and raw species data were obtained from the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center (https://databasin.org/datasets/02fe0ebbb1b04111b0ba1579b89b7420 and https://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/BBS/RawData).

Using ArcGIS Pro© 10.0, species observations were joined to respective BBS and BBA observation units shapefiles using the Join Table tool. For both BBA and BBS, a species was coded as either present (1) or absent (0). Presence in a sampling unit was based on codes 2, 3, or 4 in the original volunteer birding checklist codes (possible breeder, probable breeder, and confirmed breeder, respectively), and absence was based on codes 0 or 1 (not observed and observed but not likely breeding). Spelling inconsistencies of species names between BBA and BBS datasets were fixed. Species that needed spelling fixes included Brewer’s Blackbird, Cooper’s Hawk, Henslow’s Sparrow, Kirtland’s Warbler, LeConte’s Sparrow, Lincoln’s Sparrow, Swainson’s Thrush, Wilson’s Snipe, and Wilson’s Warbler. In addition, naming conventions were matched between BBS and BBA data. The Alder and Willow Flycatchers were lumped into Traill’s Flycatcher and regional races were lumped into a single species column: Dark-eyed Junco regional types were lumped together into one Dark-eyed Junco, Yellow-shafted Flicker was lumped into Northern Flicker, Saltmarsh Sparrow and the Saltmarsh Sharp-tailed Sparrow were lumped into Saltmarsh Sparrow, and the Yellow-rumped Myrtle Warbler was lumped into Myrtle Warbler (currently named Yellow-rumped Warbler). Three hybrid species were removed: Brewster's and Lawrence's Warblers and the Mallard x Black Duck hybrid. Established “exotic” species were included in the analysis since we were concerned only with detection of richness and not of specific species.

The resultant species tables with sampling effort were pivoted horizontally so that every row was a sampling unit and each species observation was a column. This was done for each state using R version 3.6.2 (R© 2019, The R Foundation for Statistical Computing Platform) and all state tables were merged to yield one BBA and one BBS dataset. Following the joining of environmental variables to these datasets (see below), BBS and BBA data were joined using rbind.data.frame in R© to yield a final dataset with all species observations and environmental variables for each observation unit.

Environmental data

Using ArcGIS Pro© 10.0, all environmental raster layers, BBA and BBS shapefiles, and the species observations were integrated in a common coordinate system (North_America Equidistant_Conic) using the Project tool. For BBS routes, 400m buffers were drawn around each route using the Buffer tool. The observation unit shapefiles for all states were merged (separately for BBA blocks and BBS routes and 400m buffers) using the Merge tool to create a study-wide shapefile for each data source. Whether or not a BBA block was adjacent to a BBS route was determined using the Intersect tool based on a radius of 30m around the route buffer (to fit the NLCD map resolution). Area and length of the BBS route inside the proximate BBA block were also calculated. Mean values for annual precipitation and summer temperature, and mean and range for elevation, were extracted for every BBA block and 400m buffer BBS route using Zonal Statistics as Table tool. The area of each land-cover type in each observation unit (BBA block and BBS buffer) was calculated from the NLCD layer using the Zonal Histogram tool.

Impervious surfaces are surfaces that do not allow water to pass through. Examples of these surfaces include highways, parking lots, rooftops, and airport runways. Instead of allowing rain to pass into the soil, impervious surfaces cause water to collect at the surface, then run off. An increase in impervious surface area causes an increase of water volume which needs to be managed by stormwater systems. With the flow come pollutants, which collect on impervious surfaces then discharge with the runoff into streams and the ocean. Runoff water does not enter the water table, and that can cause other management issues, such as interruptions in baseline stream flow.The NLCD imperviousness layer represents urban impervious surfaces as a percentage of developed surface over every 30-meter pixel in the United States. Phenomenon Mapped: The proportion of the landscape that is impervious to water.Time Extent: 2001, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2011, 2013, 2016, 2019, and 2021 for the lower 48 conterminous US states. A small portion of Alaska around Anchorage displays a time series of 2001, 2011, and 2016. Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands unfortunately only have data for 2001 so there is only one image in the series. This information may be used in conjunction with the USA NLCD Land Cover layer.Units: PercentCell Size: 30 metersSource Type: DiscretePixel Type: Unsigned integerData Coordinate System: North America Albers Equal Area Conic (102008)Mosaic Projection: North America Albers Equal Area Conic (102008)Extent: CONUS, Hawaii, A portion of Alaska around Anchorage, District of Columbia, Puerto RicoNoData Value: 127Source: Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics ConsortiumPublication Date: June 30, 2023ArcGIS Server URL: https://landscape10.arcgis.com/arcgis/Time SeriesBy default, this layer will appear in your client with a time slider which allows you to play the series as an animation. The animation will advance year by year, but the layer only changes appearance every few years in the lower 48 states, in 2001, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2011, 2013, 2016, 2019, and 2021. To select just one year in the series, first turn the time series off on the time slider, then create a definition query on the layer which selects only the desired year.Time Series DescriptorMRLC issued a set of companion rasters with this impervious surface layer showing the reason why each pixel is impervious. This companion layer, called the Developed Imperviousness Descriptor, is not currently available in this map service. The descriptor layer identifies types of roads, core urban areas, and energy production sites for each impervious pixel to allow deeper analysis of developed features. The descriptor layer may be downloaded directly from MRLC and added to ArcGIS Pro.Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto RicoAt this time Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico are produced with a different methodology, and are not set up to be directly compared the way the CONUS time series is. To analyze change between the latest two data years for this portion of Alaska, be sure to use the NLCD 2011 to 2016 Developed Impervious Change raster. For Hawaii and Puerto Rico, only the year 2001 is available for download at the MRLC.North America Albers ProjectionAll NLCD layers in the Living Atlas are projected into the North America Albers Projection before serving in the Living Atlas. This allows the coterminous USA, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, and Alaska to be served from a common projection and analyzed together. In tests performed by esri, the NLCD land cover classes after projection to North America Albers had the exact same number of pixels in input as output, but pixels had been slightly rearranged after projection. Processing TemplatesThis layer comes with two color schemes, cool and warm. The default is a cool gray color scheme, designed to look good on light and dark gray web maps. To choose a warm color scheme which was the default until 2021, change the processing template to the Impervious Surface Warm Renderer in your map client.Dataset SummaryThe National Land Cover Database products are created through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (MRLC). The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of federal agencies, consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Forest Service, the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.What can you do with this layer?This layer can be used to create maps and to visualize the underlying data. This layer can be used as an analytic input in ArcGIS Desktop.This layer is part of a larger collection of landscape layers that you can use to perform a wide variety of mapping and analysis tasks.The Living Atlas of the World provides an easy way to explore the landscape layers and many other beautiful and authoritative maps on hundreds of topics.

The human footprint is rapidly expanding, and wildlife habitat is continuously being converted to human residential properties. Surviving wildlife that reside in developing areas are displaced to nearby undeveloped areas. However, some animals can co-exist with humans and acquire the necessary resources (food, water, shelter) within the human environment. This may be particularly true when development is low intensity, as in residential suburban yards. Yards are individually managed “greenspaces” that can provide a range of food (e.g., bird feeders, compost, gardens), water (bird baths and garden ponds), and shelter resources (e.g., brush-piles, outbuildings) and are surrounded by varying landscape cover. To evaluate which residential landscape and yard features influence the richness and diversity of mammalian herbivores and mesopredators; we deployed wildlife game cameras in 46 residential yards in summer 2021 and 96 yards in summer 2022. We found that mesopredator diversity had a negative relationship with fences and was positively influenced by the number of bird feeders present in a yard. Mesopredator richness increased with the amount of forest within 400m of the camera. Herbivore diversity and richness were positively correlated to the area of forest within 400m surrounding yard and by garden area within yards, respectively. Our results suggest that while landscape does play a role in the presence of wildlife in a residential area, homeowners also have agency over the richness and diversity of mammals occurring in their yards based on the features they create or maintain on their properties. Methods 2.1 Study Sites Our study took place from 4 April to 4 August 2021 and 2022 within an 80.5 km radius of downtown Fayetteville, Arkansas USA. Northwest Arkansas is a rapidly developing area with a current population of approximately 349,000 people. Fayetteville is located in the Ozark Highlands ecoregion and the landscape is primarily forested by mixed hardwood trees with open areas used for cattle pastures and some scattered agriculture. Our study took place in residential yards ranging from downtown Fayetteville to yards situated in more rural areas. We solicited volunteers from the Arkansas Master Naturalist Program and the University of Arkansas Department of Biological Sciences who allowed us to place cameras in their yards. We attempted to choose yards that represented the continuum of urban to rural settings and provided a range of yard features to which wildlife was likely to respond to. 2.2 Camera Setup To document the presence of wildlife in residential yards, we deployed motion-triggered wildlife cameras (Browning StrikeForce or Spypoint ForceDark) in numerous residential yards (46 yards in 2021 and 96 yards in 2022). We placed cameras approximately 0.95 m above the ground on either a tripod or a tree and at least 5 m from houses and at most 100 m from houses. When possible, we positioned cameras near features such as compost piles, water sources (natural or man-made), and fence lines to maximize detections of wildlife. We coordinated with homeowners to choose locations that would not interfere with yard maintenance or compromise homeowner privacy. We placed cameras in both front and back yards, although most cameras were placed in backyards. Backyards often had more features predicted to be of interest to wildlife (Belaire et al., 2015) and cameras placed in backyards were less likely to have false triggers associated with vehicular traffic or be vulnerable to theft. When necessary, we removed small amounts of vegetation that may have blocked the view of the camera or triggered the camera although this was always done on such a small scale as not alter the environment but just to clear the view of the camera. We set cameras to trigger with motion and take bursts of 3 photographs per trigger with a 5 s reset time. We did not use any bait or lures. We checked and downloaded cameras every 2 weeks to check batteries and download data. We moved cameras around the same yard upwards of 3 times within the season to ensure we captured the full range of wildlife present in each yard. At each yard, we recorded eight variables associated with food, water, or shelter features in the yard area surrounding the camera, these variables were recorded in both front and backyard (Table 1). First, we recorded the area of maintained gardens occurring in each yard. Next, we recorded the volume of potential den sites available in each yard. Potential denning sites included the total available area under sheds and outbuildings as well as decking that was less than 0.3 meters off the ground and provided opportunities for wildlife to burrow beneath and be sheltered. Similarly, we also measured the volume of all brush and firewood piles present in each yard that could be used by smaller wildlife species for shelter or foraging. We counted the number of bird feeders in each yard that were regularly maintained during the study period. We also counted the number of water sources available including bird baths and garden ponds (any human subsidized water source on the ground usually within a lined basin or container). We distinguished between these types of water sources in analyses because bird baths were likely not available to all wildlife because of their height. We also categorized the presence and type of natural water source present in each yard including vernal streams, permanent streams or ponds, rivers, or lakes. We also recorded the presence of agricultural animals (such as chickens or ducks) and pets (type and indoor/outdoor) present in each yard (although we ultimately excluded the presence of pets from analyses – see below). We documented whether the part of the yard where each camera was deployed was surrounded by a fence and if so, we categorized the fence type based upon its permeability to wildlife. We categorized fences into one of four categories ranging from those that posed little barrier to wildlife movement to those that were impassable to most species. For example, fences in our first category presented relatively little resistance to wildlife movement (i.e., barbed wire). A second category of fence consisted of fences made of semi-spaced wood slats or beams that offered enough room for most animals to squeeze through but that may have prevented passage of the largest bodied of the species. Fences that were about at least 1 m in height, but were closed off on the bottom (i.e., privacy or chain-link), meaning that few wildlife would be able to pass through without climbing or jumping over were placed in a third category. Finally, the fourth category of fences were those that were 1.8 m or greater in height and were made from a solid material that would prevent all wildlife except capable climbers from entering. 2.3 Landscape Variables We used a GIS (ArcGIS Pro 10.2; ESRI, Inc. Redlands Inc) to plot the location of all cameras and to quantify the composition of the surrounding landscape. We first created 400m buffers around each camera, to encompass the average home range area of most wildlife species likely to occur in suburban yards (e.g., Trent and Rongtad, 1974; Hoffman and Gotschang, 1977; Atkins and Stott, 1998). Within each buffer, we calculated the amount of forest cover, developed open land (e.g., cemeteries, parks, and grass lawns), agriculture, and development using the 2016 National Land Cover Database (Dewitz 2019). We also quantified the maximum housing unit density (HUD) around each camera using the SILVIS Housing Data Layer (Hammer et al., 2004). Finally, we calculated the straight-line distance from each camera to the nearest downtown city center (Fayetteville, Rogers, Bentonville, or Eureka Springs). Distance to downtown is an additional index of urbanization and human activity that has been correlated with animal behavior in this area (DeGregorio et al. 2021). Table 1 Description of all variables predicted to affect diversity and richness of mammals in residential yards within 80km of downtown Fayetteville, Arkansas USA during the April- August of 2021 and 2022.

Landscape Variables

Variable Statistics

Range

Average ( 1 SD)

Forest Cover

Area of forest cover within 400m buffer

0-0.45

0.18 0.13

Open Land

Area of open land, (parks, cemeteries, and lawns) within 400m buffer

0.003-0.31

0.09 0.06

Agricultural Land

Area of land used for agricultural purposes within 400m buffer

0-0.43

0.08 0.11

Developed Land

Area of developed land within 400m buffer

0-0.47

0.13

Housing Unit Density (HUD)

Maximum Housing Unit Density within 400m buffer of camera (houses/ )

1-5095

657

Yard Variables

Volume of Denning Sites

Volume under sheds/outbuildings and under decks less than 1m off the ground ( )

0-700

27.3

Volume of Brush/Firewood Piles

Total volume of denning sites including brush and firewood piles ( )

0-335.94

42.99 69.16

Water Source

Number of human-maintained water sources

0-7

1

• Bird Bath

Water source that is raised off the ground, so much so that animals that cannot climb or jump cannot access it

0-7

• Garden Pond

Water source on or embedded within the ground

0-3

0 1

Bird Feeder

Number of bird feeders present in yard

0-19

4

Garden

Area of total maintained gardens ( )

0-525

46.13 85.13

Compost Pile

Area of compost pile

0-12

0.64

Fence Type

If a camera was within a fence, it was given a score between 1-4, 1 being the most permeable fence and 4 being the most impassable to terrestrial mammals. 0: not in a fence 1: Barbed wire 2: Open slat fence 3: 1.2 m Chain-link or Privacy 4: 1.8 m chain-link or Privacy

NA

NA

Poultry Presence

Presence or absence of poultry being kept in yard

NA

NA

Water

Score of presence or absence of natural water source. 0: No natural water source 1: Vernal

Want to keep the data in your Hosted Feature Service current? Not interested in writing a lot of code?Leverage this Python Script from the command line, Windows Scheduled Task, or from within your own code to automate the replacement of data in an existing Hosted Feature Service. It can also be leveraged by your Notebook environment and automatically managed by the MNCD Tool!See the Sampler Notebook that features the OverwriteFS tool run from Online to update a Feature Service. It leverages MNCD to cache the OverwriteFS script for import to the Notebook. A great way to jump start your Feature Service update workflow! RequirementsPython v3.xArcGIS Python APIStored Connection Profile, defined by Python API 'GIS' module. Also accepts 'pro', to specify using the active ArcGIS Pro connection. Will require ArcGIS Pro and Arcpy!Pre-Existing Hosted Feature ServiceCapabilitiesOverwrite a Feature Service, refreshing the Service Item and DataBackup and reapply Service, Layer, and Item properties - New at v2.0.0Manage Service to Service or Service to Data relationships - New at v2.0.0Repair Lost Service File Item to Service Relationships, re-enabling Service Overwrite - New at v2.0.0'Swap Layer' capability for Views, allowing two Services to support a View, acting as Active and Idle role during Updates - New at v2.0.0Data Conversion capability, able to invoke following a download and before Service update - New at v2.0.0Includes 'Rss2Json' Conversion routine, able to read a RSS or GeoRSS source and generate GeoJson for Service Update - New at v2.0.0Renamed 'Rss2Json' to 'Xml2GeoJSON' for its enhanced capabilities, 'Rss2Json' remains for compatability - Revised at v2.1.0Added 'Json2GeoJSON' Conversion routine, able to read and manipulate Json or GeoJSON data for Service Updates - New at v2.1.0Can update other File item types like PDF, Word, Excel, and so on - New at v2.1.0Supports ArcGIS Python API v2.0 - New at v2.1.2RevisionsSep 29, 2021: Long awaited update to v2.0.0!Sep 30, 2021: v2.0.1, Patch to correct Outcome Status when download or Coversion resulted in no change. Also updated documentation.Oct 7, 2021: v2.0.2, workflow Patch correcting Extent update of Views when Overwriting Service, discovered following recent ArcGIS Online update. Enhancements to 'datetimeUtil' Support script.Nov 30, 2021: v2.1.0, added new 'Json2GeoJSON' Converter, enhanced 'Xml2GeoJSON' Converter, retired 'Rss2Json' Converter, added new Option Switches 'IgnoreAge' and 'UpdateTarget' for source age control and QA/QC workflows, revised Optimization logic and CRC comparison on downloads.Dec 1, 2021: v2.1.1, Only a patch to Conversion routines: Corrected handling of null Z-values in Geometries (discovered immediately following release 2.1.0), improve error trapping while processing rows, and added deprecation message to retired 'Rss2Json' conversion routine.Feb 22, 2022: v2.1.2, Patch to detect and re-apply case-insensitive field indexes. Update to allow Swapping Layers to Service without an associated file item. Added cache refresh following updates. Patch to support Python API 2.0 service 'table' property. Patches to 'Json2GeoJSON' and 'Xml2GeoJSON' converter routines.Sep 5, 2024: v2.1.4, Patch service manager refresh failure issue. Added trace report to Convert execution on exception. Set 'ignore-DataItemCheck' property to True when 'GetTarget' action initiated. Hardened Async job status check. Update 'overwriteFeatureService' to support GeoPackage type and file item type when item.name includes a period, updated retry loop to try one final overwrite after del, fixed error stop issue on failed overwrite attempts. Removed restriction on uploading files larger than 2GB. Restores missing 'itemInfo' file on service File items. Corrected false swap success when view has no layers. Lifted restriction of Overwrite/Swap Layers for OGC. Added 'serviceDescription' to service detail backup. Added 'thumbnail' to item backup/restore logic. Added 'byLayerOrder' parameter to 'swapFeatureViewLayers'. Added 'SwapByOrder' action switch. Patch added to overwriteFeatureService 'status' check. Patch for June 2024 update made to 'managers.overwrite' API script that blocks uploads > 25MB, API v2.3.0.3. Patch 'overwriteFeatureService' to correctly identify overwrite file if service has multiple Service2Data relationships.Includes documentation updates!

This data publication includes spatial data for 119 contemporary reference sites within the yellow pine and mixed-conifer zone of the western Sierra Nevada ecoregion as of 2018-2020. This ecoregion encompasses eastern and central California. Fire occurrence, fire severity, and management history datasets were used to identify and delineate the contemporary reference site polygons. We provide a set of spatially explicit forest structure metrics derived from high fidelity airborne lidar data for reference sites where concurrent lidar data were available. We also provide a set of forest structure metrics developed by the California Forest Observatory (CFO) to ensure reference data were available for all sites regardless of lidar availability. Vector spatial datasets are provided individually as shapefiles and combined as an OGC geopackage. Raster layers are provided individually as GeoTIFFs. All data are available in an ArcGIS Pro Package file which also includes a file geodatabase of the spatial data and author-defined layers. Also included is a document containing site descriptions (i.e., size, ownership, climatic setting, etc.) and a set of figures showing the distribution of climatic, topographic, and forest structure metrics for all reference sites grouped by dominant climate class as well as for each individual site.Contemporary reference sites in California’s Sierra Nevada represent areas where a low-intensity and frequent fire regime - an integral ecological process in temperate dry forests - has been mostly restored after more than a century of fire suppression. Forest structural patterns in these sites are likely more resilient to future disturbances and climate change since key ecological processes are intact. Forest structure metrics provide descriptions of horizontal and vertical structural patterns that are relevant to managers and ecologists working in the Sierra Nevada ecoregion. Forest structure metrics within reference sites can be used to guide management treatments or support ecological analyses.These data were published on 05/04/2023. On 05/15/2023 we updated the data downloads to include the SNRC_summaries.pdf file. Minor metadata updates, to include reference to newly published articles, were made on 01/17/2024.

• These data are also available as a web map: https://uw.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=c692d81e11254edc97a0d9d4a81f148e

Data on aggregated radon test results in residential properties from January 1994 to December 2024 within each Vermont municipality. Radon data can inform public health outreach, educate stakeholders and the public, and encourage testing and mitigation. View this data in the Department of Health's radon risk map.Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas that is estimated to kill 50 Vermonters a year due to lung cancer. Radon can only be detected by testing and buildings with elevated radon levels (≥4 pCi/L (picocuries per Liter)) are found throughout the state. The average level of radon in Vermont homes is 2.4 pCi/L compared with the national average of 1.3 pCi/L. The EPA recommends that homes testing at or above 4 pCi/L be fixed, but as there is no known safe level of radon, the EPA suggests that homes testing between 2-4 pCi/L should also be fixed.This data set contains the Environmental Health Radon program’s radon in-air long term test data from 1994-2024, and the Vermont Department of Health Laboratory’s radon in-air short, medium, and long-term test data for 2020-2024. Data have been geocoded and aggregated to the town level to display the number and percent of residences tested by town and the number and percent of residences tested that exceed 4 pCi/L by town.Data SourceSource data for these maps comes from the highest radon test result ever found at a residence (many residences test more than once). Results are provided by the Radon Program long term test data (1994-2024) and the Vermont Department of Health Laboratory, short, medium, and long term test data (2020-2024). Radon results are aggregated by town based on whether the result was elevated (≥4.0 pCi/L) or not elevated (<4.0 pCi/L).Data LimitationsPrison, institutional residence, and nursing home E911 locations are not included in the aggregation of residences by town or geological area. For areas of low population density or low number of tests, data extremes carry more weight and can distort analytic results. Therefore, in the Rates of Radon Testing by Town, data for towns with fewer than 7 tested residences are not displayed; and in Elevated Radon Results, data for towns with fewer than 20 tested residences are not displayed.MethodologyRecord level radon in indoor air test results were extracted from the VDH-EH Radon database by Radon Program staff and from the LIMS system at the VDHL by laboratory staff. The Tracking analyst used SAS version 9.4 and ArcGIS Pro version 2.4.1 to process the data. Geocoded data from the Tracking program were used for the Radon Risk Maps. GIS work to populate the final maps was done collaboratively with partners from the Agency of Digital Services using ArcGIS Pro version 2.4.1.The residential data are from the VT Data – E911 Site Locations (address points) where the following were selected from the SITETYPE variable: mobile home, multi-family dwelling, other residential, single-family dwelling, residential farm, seasonal home, commercial with residence, condominium, and camp. The residential data in these maps is aggregated by town and geological area to provide the denominator for calculations.

Retirement Notice: This beta item will be retired in December 2026. A new version of this item is available for your use. Esri recommends updating your maps and apps to use the new version.This layer represents CMIP6 future projections of total annual precipitation. This layer can be used to compare with recent climate histories to better understand the potential impacts of future climate change.WorldClim produced this projection as part of a series of 19 bioclimate variables identified by the USGS and provides this description:"Bioclimatic variables are derived from the monthly temperature and rainfall values in order to generate more biologically meaningful variables. These are often used in species distribution modeling and related ecological modeling techniques. The bioclimatic variables represent annual trends (e.g., mean annual temperature, annual precipitation) seasonality (e.g., annual range in temperature and precipitation) and extreme or limiting environmental factors (e.g., temperature of the coldest and warmest month, and precipitation of the wet and dry quarters). A quarter is a period of three months (1/4 of the year)."Time Extent: averages from 2021-2040, 2041-2060, 2061-2080, 2081-2100Units: mmCell Size: 2.5 minutes (~5 km)Source Type: StretchedPixel Type: 32 Bit FloatData Projection: GCS WGS84Mosaic Projection: GCS WGS84Extent: GlobalSource: WorldClim CMIP6 Bioclimate Climate ScenariosThe CMIP6 climate experiments use Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) to model future climate scenarios. Each SSP pairs a human/community behavior component with the traditional RCP greenhouse gas forcing from the previous CMIP5. Three SSPs were chosen by Esri to be included in the service based on user requests: SSP2 4.5, SSP3 7.0 and SSP5 8.5.SSPScenarioEstimated warming(2041–2060)Estimated warming(2081–2100)Very likely range in °C(2081–2100)SSP2-4.5intermediate GHG emissions:CO2 emissions around current levels until 2050, then falling but not reaching net zero by 21002.0 °C2.7 °C2.1 – 3.5SSP3-7.0high GHG emissions:CO2 emissions double by 21002.1 °C3.6 °C2.8 – 4.6SSP5-8.5very high GHG emissions:CO2 emissions triple by 20752.4 °C4.4 °C3.3 – 5.7While the 8.5 scenario is no longer generally considered likely, SSP3 7.0 has been included and is considered the high end of possibilities. SSP5 8.5 has been retained since many organizations report to this threshold. The warming associated with SSP2 4.5 is equivalent to the global targets set at the 2021 United Nations COP26 meetings in Glasgow. Processing the Climate DataWorldClim provides 20-year averaged outputs for the various SSPs from 24 global climate models. A selection of 13 models were averaged for each variable and time based on Mahony et al 2022. These models included ACCESS-ESM1-5, BCC-CSM2-MR, CanESM5, CNRM-ESM2-1, EC-Earth3-Veg, GFDL-ESM4, GISS-E2-1-G, INM-CM5-0, IPSL-CM6A-LR, MIROC6, MPI-ESM1-2-HR, MRI-ESM2-0, UKESM1-0-LL. GFDL-ESM4 was not available for SSP2 4.5 or SSP5 8.5. Accessing the Multidimensional InformationThe time and SSP scenario are built into the layer using a multidimensional raster. Enable the time slider to move across the 20-year average periods. In ArcGIS Online and Pro, use the Multidimensional Filter to select the SSP (SSP2 4.5 is the default). What can you do with this layer?These multidimensional imagery tiles support analysis using ArcGIS Online or Pro. Use the Bioclimate Baseline layer to see the difference in pixels and calculate change from the historic period into the future. Use the Multidimensional tab in ArcGIS Pro to access a variety of useful tools. Each layer or variable can be styled using the Image Display options. Known Quality IssuesEach model is downscaled from ~100km resolution to ~5km resolution by WorldClim. Some artifacts are inevitable, especially at a global scale. Some variables have distinct transitions, especially in Greenland. Also, SSP2 4.5 has missing data for several variables in Antarctica. Related LayersBioclimate 1 Annual Mean TemperatureBioclimate 2 Mean Diurnal RangeBioclimate 3 IsothermalityBioclimate 4 Temperature SeasonalityBioclimate 5 Max Temperature of Warmest MonthBioclimate 6 Min Temperature Of Coldest MonthBioclimate 7 Temperature Annual RangeBioclimate 8 Mean Temperature Of Wettest QuarterBioclimate 9 Mean Temperature Of Driest QuarterBioclimate 10 Mean Temperature Of Warmest QuarterBioclimate 11 Mean Temperature Of Coldest QuarterBioclimate 12 Annual PrecipitationBioclimate 13 Precipitation Of Wettest MonthBioclimate 14 Precipitation Of Driest MonthBioclimate 15 Precipitation SeasonalityBioclimate 16 Precipitation Of Wettest QuarterBioclimate 17 Precipitation Of Driest QuarterBioclimate 18 Precipitation Of Warmest QuarterBioclimate 19 Precipitation Of Coldest QuarterBioclimate Baseline 1970-2000

Generalised version at 1:100:000 scale with the LGA boundaries dissolved of the BUSHFIRE_PRONE_AREA dataset. Polygon features identify designated Bushfire Prone Areas where specific bushfire building construction requirements apply. The municipal areas of Melbourne, Yarra, Maribyrnong, Moonee Valley, Darebin, Boroondara, Stonnington, Glen Eira, Moreland, Port Phillip and Bayside do not have any designated bushfire prone areas. The original boundaries were gazetted on 7 Sep 2011. Changes to the boundaries have been gazetted on 25 Oct 2012, 8 Oct 2013, 30 Dec 2013, 3 June 2014, 22 Oct 2014, 19 August 2015, 21 April 2016, 18 October 2016, 02 June 2017, 06 November 2017, 16 May 2018, 16 Oct 2018 and 4 Apr 2019, 24 March 2020, 7 September 2020, 1 Feburary 2021, 6 July 2021.

Bushfire prone areas (BPA) of Victoria review 18, gazetted 06/07/2021. The BPA map depicts locations where new buildings, alterations and/or additions must meet the `bushfire prone area¿ requirements of the National Construction Code and a minimum Bushfire Attack Level (BAL) 12.5 construction standard (Section 192A Building Act 1993 - Bushfire Prone Areas determination, and construction requirements of the Building Regulations 2018). This data set has been simplified using ArcGIS Pro 2.5.0 - Generalize Tool with a 50m tolerance