The Western Pennsylvania Regional Data Center provides a shared technological and legal infrastructure to support research, analysis, decision making and community engagement. It is managed by the University of Pittsburgh Center for Urban and Social Research in partnership with Allegheny County and the City of Pittsburgh. The data center provides public access to spatial data for the Western Pennsylvania Region.

The Region Acceptance Process (RAP) is a component of the Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Program Guidelines and is used to evaluate and accept an IRWM region into the IRWM grant program. The RAP is not a grant funding application; however, acceptance of the composition of an IRWM region (including the IRWM region’s boundary) into the IRWM grant program is required for DWR IRWM grant funding eligibility.

This dataset includes:

• the boundaries of the most current IRWM Regions (as submitted to DWR by the respective IRWM planning region)

• their RAP status (Accepted, Not Accepted or Conditional) as conferred by DWR the year each entity participated in the RAP

• a descriptive field noting the date of any subsequent IRWM boundary changes submitted and accepted by DWR

Overview

Empower your location data visualizations with our edge-matched polygons, even in difficult geographies.

Our self-hosted GIS data cover administrative and postal divisions with up to 6 precision levels: a zip code layer and up to 5 administrative levels. All levels follow a seamless hierarchical structure with no gaps or overlaps.

The geospatial data shapes are offered in high-precision and visualization resolution and are easily customized on-premise.

Use cases for the Global Boundaries Database (GIS data, Geospatial data)

• In-depth spatial analysis

• Clustering

• Geofencing

• Reverse Geocoding

• Reporting and Business Intelligence (BI)

Product Features

• Coherence and precision at every level

• Edge-matched polygons

• High-precision shapes for spatial analysis

• Fast-loading polygons for reporting and BI

• Multi-language support

For additional insights, you can combine the GIS data with:

• Population data: Historical and future trends

• UNLOCODE and IATA codes

• Time zones and Daylight Saving Time (DST)

Data export methodology

Our geospatial data packages are offered in variable formats, including - .shp - .gpkg - .kml - .shp - .gpkg - .kml - .geojson

All GIS data are optimized for seamless integration with popular systems like Esri ArcGIS, Snowflake, QGIS, and more.

Why companies choose our map data

• Precision at every level

• Coverage of difficult geographies

• No gaps, nor overlaps

Note: Custom geospatial data packages are available. Please submit a request via the above contact button for more details.

Multiple research and management partners collaboratively developed a multiscale approach for assessing the geomorphic sensitivity of streams and ecological resilience of riparian and meadow ecosystems in upland watersheds of the Great Basin to disturbances and management actions. The approach builds on long-term work by the partners on the responses of these systems to disturbances and management actions. At the core of the assessments is information on past and present watershed and stream channel characteristics, geomorphic and hydrologic processes, and riparian and meadow vegetation. In this report, we describe the approach used to delineate Great Basin mountain ranges and the watersheds within them, and the data that are available for the individual watersheds. We also describe the resulting database and the data sources. Furthermore, we summarize information on the characteristics of the regions and watersheds within the regions and the implications of the assessments for geomorphic sensitivity and ecological resilience. The target audience for this multiscale approach is managers and stakeholders interested in assessing and adaptively managing Great Basin stream systems and riparian and meadow ecosystems. Anyone interested in delineating the mountain ranges and watersheds within the Great Basin or quantifying the characteristics of the watersheds will be interested in this report. For more information, visit: https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/61573Metadata and Downloads

An area encompassing all the National Forest System lands administered by a Region. The area encompasses private lands, other governmental agency lands. All National Forest System lands fall within one and only one Administrative Region Area. Metadata

This dataset is a compilation of available oil and gas pipeline data and is maintained by BSEE. Pipelines are used to transport and monitor oil and/or gas from wells within the outer continental shelf (OCS) to resource collection locations. Currently, pipelines managed by BSEE are found in Gulf of Mexico and southern California waters.

© MarineCadastre.gov This layer is a component of BOEMRE Layers.

This Map Service contains many of the primary data types created by both the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) within the Department of Interior (DOI) for the purpose of managing offshore federal real estate leases for oil, gas, minerals, renewable energy, sand and gravel. These data layers are being made available as REST mapping services for the purpose of web viewing and map overlay viewing in GIS systems. Due to re-projection issues which occur when converting multiple UTM zone data to a single national or regional projected space, and line type changes that occur when converting from UTM to geographic projections, these data layers should not be used for official or legal purposes. Only the original data found within BOEM/BSEE’s official internal database, federal register notices or official paper or pdf map products may be considered as the official information or mapping products used by BOEM or BSEE. A variety of data layers are represented within this REST service are described further below. These and other cadastre information the BOEM and BSEE produces are generated in accordance with 30 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 256.8 to support Federal land ownership and mineral resource management.

For more information – Contact: Branch Chief, Mapping and Boundary Branch, BOEM, 381 Elden Street, Herndon, VA 20170. Telephone (703) 787-1312; Email: mapping.boundary.branch@boem.gov

The REST services for National Level Data can be found here: http://gis.boemre.gov/arcgis/rest/services/BOEM_BSEE/MMC_Layers/MapServer

REST services for regional level data can be found by clicking on the region of interest from the following URL: http://gis.boemre.gov/arcgis/rest/services/BOEM_BSEE

Individual Regional Data or in depth metadata for download can be obtained in ESRI Shape file format by clicking on the region of interest from the following URL: http://www.boem.gov/Oil-and-Gas-Energy-Program/Mapping-and-Data/Index.aspx

Currently the following layers are available from this REST location:

OCS Drilling Platforms -Locations of structures at and beneath the water surface used for the purpose of exploration and resource extraction. Only platforms in federal Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) waters are included. A database of platforms and rigs is maintained by BSEE.

OCS Oil and Natural Gas Wells -Existing wells drilled for exploration or extraction of oil and/or gas products. Additional information includes the lease number, well name, spud date, the well class, surface area/block number, and statistics on well status summary. Only wells found in federal Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) waters are included. Wells information is updated daily. Additional files are available on well completions and well tests. A database of wells is maintained by BSEE.

OCS Oil & Gas Pipelines -This dataset is a compilation of available oil and gas pipeline data and is maintained by BSEE. Pipelines are used to transport and monitor oil and/or gas from wells within the outer continental shelf (OCS) to resource collection locations. Currently, pipelines managed by BSEE are found in Gulf of Mexico and southern California waters.

Unofficial State Lateral Boundaries - The approximate location of the boundary between two states seaward of the coastline and terminating at the Submerged Lands Act Boundary. Because most State boundary locations have not been officially described beyond the coast, are disputed between states or in some cases the coastal land boundary description is not available, these lines serve as an approximation that was used to determine a starting point for creation of BOEM’s OCS Administrative Boundaries. GIS files are not available for this layer due to its unofficial status.

BOEM OCS Administrative Boundaries - Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Administrative Boundaries Extending from the Submerged Lands Act Boundary seaward to the Limit of the United States OCS (The U.S. 200 nautical mile Limit, or other marine boundary)For additional details please see the January 3, 2006 Federal Register Notice.

BOEM Limit of OCSLA ‘8(g)’ zone - The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act '8(g) Zone' lies between the Submerged Lands Act (SLA) boundary line and a line projected 3 nautical miles seaward of the SLA boundary line. Within this zone, oil and gas revenues are shared with the coastal state(s). The official version of the ‘8(g)’ Boundaries can only be found on the BOEM Official Protraction Diagrams (OPDs) or Supplemental Official Protraction described below.

Submerged Lands Act Boundary - The SLA boundary defines the seaward limit of a state's submerged lands and the landward boundary of federally managed OCS lands. The official version of the SLA Boundaries can only be found on the BOEM Official Protraction Diagrams (OPDs) or Supplemental Official Protraction Diagrams described below.

Atlantic Wildlife Survey Tracklines(2005-2012) - These data depict tracklines of wildlife surveys conducted in the Mid-Atlantic region since 2005. The tracklines are comprised of aerial and shipboard surveys. These data are intended to be used as a working compendium to inform the diverse number of groups that conduct surveys in the Mid-Atlantic region.The tracklines as depicted in this dataset have been derived from source tracklines and transects. The tracklines have been simplified (modified from their original form) due to the large size of the Mid-Atlantic region and the limited ability to map all areas simultaneously.The tracklines are to be used as a general reference and should not be considered definitive or authoritative. This data can be downloaded from http://www.boem.gov/uploadedFiles/BOEM/Renewable_Energy_Program/Mapping_and_Data/ATL_WILDLIFE_SURVEYS.zip

BOEM OCS Protraction Diagrams & Leasing Maps - This data set contains a national scale spatial footprint of the outer boundaries of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM’s) Official Protraction Diagrams (OPDs) and Leasing Maps (LMs). It is updated as needed. OPDs and LMs are mapping products produced and used by the BOEM to delimit areas available for potential offshore mineral leases, determine the State/Federal offshore boundaries, and determine the limits of revenue sharing and other boundaries to be considered for leasing offshore waters. This dataset shows only the outline of the maps that are available from BOEM.Only the most recently published paper or pdf versions of the OPDs or LMs should be used for official or legal purposes. The pdf maps can be found by going to the following link and selecting the appropriate region of interest. http://www.boem.gov/Oil-and-Gas-Energy-Program/Mapping-and-Data/Index.aspx Both OPDs and LMs are further subdivided into individual Outer Continental Shelf(OCS) blocks which are available as a separate layer. Some OCS blocks that also contain other boundary information are known as Supplemental Official Block Diagrams (SOBDs.) Further information on the historic development of OPD's can be found in OCS Report MMS 99-0006: Boundary Development on the Outer Continental Shelf: http://www.boemre.gov/itd/pubs/1999/99-0006.PDF Also see the metadata for each of the individual GIS data layers available for download. The Official Protraction Diagrams (OPDs) and Supplemental Official Block Diagrams (SOBDs), serve as the legal definition for BOEM offshore boundary coordinates and area descriptions.

BOEM OCS Lease Blocks - Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) lease blocks serve as the legal definition for BOEM offshore boundary coordinates used to define small geographic areas within an Official Protraction Diagram (OPD) for leasing and administrative purposes. OCS blocks relate back to individual Official Protraction Diagrams and are not uniquely numbered. Only the most recently published paper or pdf

Data has been obtained from the National Transportation Database and the National Transit Maphttps://geodata.bts.gov/datasets/80086198b67c456194b064ba21b82326_0/explore?location=38.641901%2C-121.401551%2C12.71https://www.transit.dot.gov/ntd/ntd-dataSACOG provides data as a public service. These data are provided "as-is." While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy or correctness of these data, SACOG makes no warranty, expressed or implied, as to its accuracy or correctness and expressly disclaims liability for the accuracy thereof. In no event shall SACOG become liable to users of these data, or any other party, for any loss or damages, consequential or otherwise, including but not limited to time, money, or goodwill, arising from the use, operation or modification of the data. In using these data, users further agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless SACOG for any and all liability of any nature arising out of or resulting from the lack of accuracy or correctness of the data, or the use of the data. Users will not distribute these data to other potential users. Instead, they will refer those users to SACOG for an independent dataset and documentation. To assist SACOG in the maintenance of the data, users should provide SACOG's GIS staff information concerning errors or discrepancies found in using the data.

This is the public platform for exploring and downloading open data, discovering and building apps, and engaging to solve important local issues in York Region. You can analyze and combine Open datasets using maps, as well as develop new web and mobile applications. [Regional Municipality of York]

As part of the NSTA’s published 2018/19 Activity Plan, the NSTA is publishing a set of regional geological maps for the Engish Channel area of the UKCS. These maps represent the fifth set of deliverables from a 3 year contract with Lloyd’s Register (LR) to produce a series of maps and associated databases for the whole of the UKCS.All data released with this set of geological maps is public domain data. The project has, however, benefited from a number of additional third party data sources which have been used to help inform final maps and/or derive interpreted products. These include the seismic interpretation work carried out by Heriot-Watt University (Rachel Brackenridge), the 21CXRM Palaeozoic project (which is now available in the public domain), CGG’s Target database and relevant products available via the BGS’s Offshore Geoindex. CDA is also kindly acknowledged for their support in downloading and providing much of the released well data to LR as part of this project.Due to the high level, regional nature of the project, the maps are being produced for the main geological time intervals e.g. Paleocene, Lower Cretaceous, Upper Jurassic. Each time interval includes the following products:• Depth structure maps• Isochore maps• Subcrop & supercrop maps• Structural elements maps• Depositional facies maps• Reservoir distribution maps• Source rock maps• Well penetration maps• Hydrocarbon occurrence maps

Through a system of 11 service regions, CCSESA provides the organizational mechanism for the 58 County Superintendents of Schools to design and implement statewide programs to identify and promote quality cost-effective educational practices and services, and provide support to school districts.

This dataset was updated May, 2025.This ownership dataset was generated primarily from CPAD data, which already tracks the majority of ownership information in California. CPAD is utilized without any snapping or clipping to FRA/SRA/LRA. CPAD has some important data gaps, so additional data sources are used to supplement the CPAD data. Currently this includes the most currently available data from BIA, DOD, and FWS. Additional sources may be added in subsequent versions. Decision rules were developed to identify priority layers in areas of overlap.Starting in 2022, the ownership dataset was compiled using a new methodology. Previous versions attempted to match federal ownership boundaries to the FRA footprint, and used a manual process for checking and tracking Federal ownership changes within the FRA, with CPAD ownership information only being used for SRA and LRA lands. The manual portion of that process was proving difficult to maintain, and the new method (described below) was developed in order to decrease the manual workload, and increase accountability by using an automated process by which any final ownership designation could be traced back to a specific dataset.The current process for compiling the data sources includes:* Clipping input datasets to the California boundary* Filtering the FWS data on the Primary Interest field to exclude lands that are managed by but not owned by FWS (ex: Leases, Easements, etc)* Supplementing the BIA Pacific Region Surface Trust lands data with the Western Region portion of the LAR dataset which extends into California.* Filtering the BIA data on the Trust Status field to exclude areas that represent mineral rights only.* Filtering the CPAD data on the Ownership Level field to exclude areas that are Privately owned (ex: HOAs)* In the case of overlap, sources were prioritized as follows: FWS > BIA > CPAD > DOD* As an exception to the above, DOD lands on FRA which overlapped with CPAD lands that were incorrectly coded as non-Federal were treated as an override, such that the DOD designation could win out over CPAD.In addition to this ownership dataset, a supplemental _source dataset is available which designates the source that was used to determine the ownership in this dataset. Data Sources:* GreenInfo Network's California Protected Areas Database (CPAD2023a). https://www.calands.org/cpad/; https://www.calands.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/CPAD-2023a-Database-Manual.pdf* US Fish and Wildlife Service FWSInterest dataset (updated December, 2023). https://gis-fws.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/9c49bd03b8dc4b9188a8c84062792cff_0/explore* Department of Defense Military Bases dataset (updated September 2023) https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/military-bases* Bureau of Indian Affairs, Pacific Region, Surface Trust and Pacific Region Office (PRO) land boundaries data (2023) via John Mosley John.Mosley@bia.gov* Bureau of Indian Affairs, Land Area Representations (LAR) and BIA Regions datasets (updated Oct 2019) https://biamaps.doi.gov/bogs/datadownload.html Data Gaps & Changes:Known gaps include several BOR, ACE and Navy lands which were not included in CPAD nor the DOD MIRTA dataset. Our hope for future versions is to refine the process by pulling in additional data sources to fill in some of those data gaps. Additionally, any feedback received about missing or inaccurate data can be taken back to the appropriate source data where appropriate, so fixes can occur in the source data, instead of just in this dataset.25_1: The CPAD Input dataset was amended to merge large gaps in certain areas of the state known to be erroneous, such as Yosemite National Park, and to eliminate overlaps from the original input. The FWS input dataset was updated in February of 2025, and the DOD input dataset was updated in October of 2024. The BIA input dataset was the same as was used for the previous ownership version.24_1: Input datasets this year included numerous changes since the previous version, particularly the CPAD and DOD inputs. Of particular note was the re-addition of Camp Pendleton to the DOD input dataset, which is reflected in this version of the ownership dataset. We were unable to obtain an updated input for tribral data, so the previous inputs was used for this version.23_1: A few discrepancies were discovered between data changes that occurred in CPAD when compared with parcel data. These issues will be taken to CPAD for clarification for future updates, but for ownership23_1 it reflects the data as it was coded in CPAD at the time. In addition, there was a change in the DOD input data between last year and this year, with the removal of Camp Pendleton. An inquiry was sent for clarification on this change, but for ownership23_1 it reflects the data per the DOD input dataset.22_1 : represents an initial version of ownership with a new methodology which was developed under a short timeframe. A comparison with previous versions of ownership highlighted the some data gaps with the current version. Some of these known gaps include several BOR, ACE and Navy lands which were not included in CPAD nor the DOD MIRTA dataset. Our hope for future versions is to refine the process by pulling in additional data sources to fill in some of those data gaps. In addition, any topological errors (like overlaps or gaps) that exist in the input datasets may thus carry over to the ownership dataset. Ideally, any feedback received about missing or inaccurate data can be taken back to the relevant source data where appropriate, so fixes can occur in the source data, instead of just in this dataset.

All data released with this set of geological maps is public domain data. The project has, however, benefited from a number of additional third-party data sources which have been used to help inform final maps and/or derive interpreted products. These include the 21CXRM Palaeozoic project (which is now available in the public domain),the Southern Permian Basin Atlas (SPBA),PGS’s North Sea Digital Atlas and East Shetland Platform seismic interpretation project, Frogtech’s East Shetland Platform Project, IGI’s Source Rock Evaluation for the East Shetland Platform, research data from the University of Aberdeen, seismic interpretation work and other geological studies carried out by Durham University on the SW Approaches, seismic interpretation work carried out by Heriot-Watt University on the Mid North Sea High, seismic interpretation work carried out by Aberdeen University on the Rockall area CGG’s Target database and relevant products available via the BGS’s Offshore Geoindex. TGS are gratefully acknowledged for providing joined digital log data from LogLinePlus to enable the production of sand flag curves. Schlumberger, TGS and BP are acknowledged for providing additional seismic data to help QC interpretation carried out within the project and CDA are also kindly acknowledged for their support in downloading and providing much of the released well data to LR as part of this project. Due to the high level, regional nature of the project, the depth structure and structural elements maps have been produced for the main geological time intervals, e.g. Paleocene, Lower Cretaceous, Upper Jurassic. Depositional facies maps and reservoir distribution maps were produced for a higher number of stratigraphic intervals such as the Danian, Selandian and Thanetian (Paleocene). The following products are available: •Depth structure maps •Isochore maps •Structural elements maps •Depositional facies maps •Reservoir distribution maps •Well penetration maps •Hydrocarbon occurrence maps •Drill stem tests •Well tops (Groups, Formation and Members) •Sand data (N/G, sand thickness)

Ponds and lakes are abundant in Arctic permafrost lowlands. They play an important role in Arctic wetland ecosystems by regulating carbon, water, and energy fluxes and providing freshwater habitats. However, ponds, i.e., waterbodies with surface areas smaller than 1.0 × 10**4 m**2, have not been inventoried on global and regional scales. The Permafrost Region Pond and Lake (PeRL) database presents the results of a circum-Arctic effort to map ponds and lakes from modern (2002-2013) high-resolution aerial and satellite imagery with a resolution of 5 m or better. The database also includes historical imagery from 1948 to 1965 with a resolution of 6 m or better. PeRL includes 69 maps covering a wide range of environmental conditions from tundra to boreal regions and from continuous to discontinuous permafrost zones. Waterbody maps are linked to regional permafrost landscape maps which provide information on permafrost extent, ground ice volume, geology, and lithology. This paper describes waterbody classification and accuracy, and presents statistics of waterbody distribution for each site. Maps of permafrost landscapes in Alaska, Canada, and Russia are used to extrapolate waterbody statistics from the site level to regional landscape units. PeRL presents pond and lake estimates for a total area of 1.4 × 10**6 km**2 across the Arctic, about 17 % of the Arctic lowland ( < 300 m a.s.l.) land surface area. PeRL waterbodies with sizes of 1.0 × 10**6 m**2 down to 1.0 × 10**2 m**2 contributed up to 21 % to the total water fraction. Waterbody density ranged from 1.0 × 10 to 9.4 × 10**1/km². Ponds are the dominant waterbody type by number in all landscapes representing 45-99 % of the total waterbody number. The implementation of PeRL size distributions in land surface models will greatly improve the investigation and projection of surface inundation and carbon fluxes in permafrost lowlands.

The list of California Transportation Planning Agencies is current as of February, 2014, provided by Division of Transportation Planning, Office of Regional and Interagency Planning. With the exception of Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA*), all of the RTPA boundaries follow county boundaries, some RTPA are multi-county.Data downloaded in December 2022 from https://gisdata-caltrans.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/eade3fe45fa046418063d47846dd4c21_0/about.

As part of the NSTA’s published 2017/18 Activity Plan, the NSTA is publishing a set of regional geological maps for the Central North Sea and Moray Firth areas of the UKCS. These maps represent the first set of deliverables from a 3 year contract with Lloyd’s Register (LR) to produce a series of maps and associated databases for the whole of the UKCS. All data released with this set of geological maps is public domain data. The project has, however, benefited from a number of additional third party data sources which have been used to help inform final maps and/or derive interpreted products. These include the 21st Century Roadmap Palaeozoic project(which is now available in the public domain), PGS’s North Sea Digital Atlas, research data from the University of Aberdeen, CGG’s Target database and relevant products available via the BGS’s Offshore Geoindex. TGS are gratefully acknowledged for providing joined digital log data from LogLinePlus to enable the production of sand flag curves. Schlumberger, TGS and BP are acknowledged for providing additional seismic data to help QC interpretation carried out within the project and CDA are also kindly acknowledged for their support in downloading and providing much of the released well data to LR as part of this project. Due to the high level, regional nature of the project, the maps are being produced for the main geological time intervals e.g. Paleocene, Lower Cretaceous, Upper Jurassic. Each time interval includes the following products: Depth structure maps Isochore maps Subcrop & supercrop maps Structural elements maps Depositional facies maps Reservoir distribution maps Source rock maps Well penetration maps Hydrocarbon occurrence maps The products published here include: a series of layered PDF documents which provide explanations of the various maps and datasets that have been produced plus a set of stratigraphic and petroleum systems charts. an ArcGIS project containing all of the maps and associated data. NSTA web feature services (WFSs) have been included in the map document in this delivery. They replace the use of a shapefile or feature class to represent block, licence and quadrant data. By using a WFS, the data is automatically updated when it becomes available via the NSTA digital copies of the sand flags (.las format) digital copies of the depth and thickness grids produced in the project (.xyz format)

This dataset combines the work of several different projects to create a seamless data set for the contiguous United States. Data from four regional Gap Analysis Projects and the LANDFIRE project were combined to make this dataset. In the northwestern United States (Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Washington and Wyoming) data in this map came from the Northwest Gap Analysis Project. In the southwestern United States (Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah) data used in this map came from the Southwest Gap Analysis Project. The data for Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Virginia came from the Southeast Gap Analysis Project and the California data was generated by the updated California Gap land cover project. The Hawaii Gap Analysis project provided the data for Hawaii. In areas of the county (central U.S., Northeast, Alaska) that have not yet been covered by a regional Gap Analysis Project, data from the Landfire project was used. Similarities in the methods used by these projects made possible the combining of the data they derived into one seamless coverage. They all used multi-season satellite imagery (Landsat ETM+) from 1999-2001 in conjunction with digital elevation model (DEM) derived datasets (e.g. elevation, landform) to model natural and semi-natural vegetation. Vegetation classes were drawn from NatureServe's Ecological System Classification (Comer et al. 2003) or classes developed by the Hawaii Gap project. Additionally, all of the projects included land use classes that were employed to describe areas where natural vegetation has been altered. In many areas of the country these classes were derived from the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD). For the majority of classes and, in most areas of the country, a decision tree classifier was used to discriminate ecological system types. In some areas of the country, more manual techniques were used to discriminate small patch systems and systems not distinguishable through topography. The data contains multiple levels of thematic detail. At the most detailed level natural vegetation is represented by NatureServe's Ecological System classification (or in Hawaii the Hawaii GAP classification). These most detailed classifications have been crosswalked to the five highest levels of the National Vegetation Classification (NVC), Class, Subclass, Formation, Division and Macrogroup. This crosswalk allows users to display and analyze the data at different levels of thematic resolution. Developed areas, or areas dominated by introduced species, timber harvest, or water are represented by other classes, collectively refered to as land use classes; these land use classes occur at each of the thematic levels. Raster data in both ArcGIS Grid and ERDAS Imagine format is available for download at http://gis1.usgs.gov/csas/gap/viewer/land_cover/Map.aspx Six layer files are included in the download packages to assist the user in displaying the data at each of the Thematic levels in ArcGIS. In adition to the raster datasets the data is available in Web Mapping Services (WMS) format for each of the six NVC classification levels (Class, Subclass, Formation, Division, Macrogroup, Ecological System) at the following links. http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Class_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Subclass_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Formation_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Division_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Macrogroup_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_Ecological_Systems_Landuse/MapServer

This data set delineates the boundaries of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service geographic Regions. The dataset was created as a geographic representation of the Regional administrative boundaries of the US Fish and Wildlife Service at a very coarse scale. The boundaries were created using the ArcGIS shoreline dataset from approximately 1995. This dataset should not be used for legal purposes or at small scales and does not accurately denote the shorelines of the united states. The Regional Boundaries data set is managed by the FWS Headquarters Information Resources and Technology Management, Branch of Geospatial Data Management. The complete data and metadata can be accessed here: https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/us-fish-and-wildlife-service-regional-boundaries. This data set is a graphical representation and has limitations of accuracy as determined by, among others, the source, scale and resolution of the data. DOI Interior Regions / Regional Boundaries (https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=309aa728d6c041ceaefc1526a409b5d1).

The Digital Geologic-GIS Map of Guilford Courthouse National Military Park and Vicinity, North Carolina is composed of GIS data layers and GIS tables, and is available in the following GRI-supported GIS data formats: 1.) a 10.1 file geodatabase (guco_geology.gdb), a 2.) Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) geopackage, and 3.) 2.2 KMZ/KML file for use in Google Earth, however, this format version of the map is limited in data layers presented and in access to GRI ancillary table information. The file geodatabase format is supported with a 1.) ArcGIS Pro map file (.mapx) file (guco_geology.mapx) and individual Pro layer (.lyrx) files (for each GIS data layer), as well as with a 2.) 10.1 ArcMap (.mxd) map document (guco_geology.mxd) and individual 10.1 layer (.lyr) files (for each GIS data layer). The OGC geopackage is supported with a QGIS project (.qgz) file. Upon request, the GIS data is also available in ESRI 10.1 shapefile format. Contact Stephanie O'Meara (see contact information below) to acquire the GIS data in these GIS data formats. In addition to the GIS data and supporting GIS files, three additional files comprise a GRI digital geologic-GIS dataset or map: 1.) A GIS readme file (guco_geology_gis_readme.pdf), 2.) the GRI ancillary map information document (.pdf) file (guco_geology.pdf) which contains geologic unit descriptions, as well as other ancillary map information and graphics from the source map(s) used by the GRI in the production of the GRI digital geologic-GIS data for the park, and 3.) a user-friendly FAQ PDF version of the metadata (guco_geology_metadata_faq.pdf). Please read the guco_geology_gis_readme.pdf for information pertaining to the proper extraction of the GIS data and other map files. Google Earth software is available for free at: https://www.google.com/earth/versions/. QGIS software is available for free at: https://www.qgis.org/en/site/. Users are encouraged to only use the Google Earth data for basic visualization, and to use the GIS data for any type of data analysis or investigation. The data were completed as a component of the Geologic Resources Inventory (GRI) program, a National Park Service (NPS) Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Division funded program that is administered by the NPS Geologic Resources Division (GRD). For a complete listing of GRI products visit the GRI publications webpage: For a complete listing of GRI products visit the GRI publications webpage: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/geologic-resources-inventory-products.htm. For more information about the Geologic Resources Inventory Program visit the GRI webpage: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/gri,htm. At the bottom of that webpage is a "Contact Us" link if you need additional information. You may also directly contact the program coordinator, Jason Kenworthy (jason_kenworthy@nps.gov). Source geologic maps and data used to complete this GRI digital dataset were provided by the following: North Carolina Geological Survey. Detailed information concerning the sources used and their contribution the GRI product are listed in the Source Citation section(s) of this metadata record (guco_geology_metadata.txt or guco_geology_metadata_faq.pdf). Users of this data are cautioned about the locational accuracy of features within this dataset. Based on the source map scale of 1:125,000 and United States National Map Accuracy Standards features are within (horizontally) 63.5 meters or 208.3 feet of their actual location as presented by this dataset. Users of this data should thus not assume the location of features is exactly where they are portrayed in Google Earth, ArcGIS, QGIS or other software used to display this dataset. All GIS and ancillary tables were produced as per the NPS GRI Geology-GIS Geodatabase Data Model v. 2.3. (available at: https://www.nps.gov/articles/gri-geodatabase-model.htm).

Boundary of the six county area (Hillsborough, Manatee, Pasco, Pinellas, Hernando, and Citrus counties) which makes up the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council region. This service is for the Open Data Download application for the Southwest Florida Water Management District. This data layer was created for resource management and cartographic purposes.

Regional boundaries established for the purpose of preparing regional master oil and hazardous substance discharge prevention and contingency plans. Product of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation's Spill Prevention and Response Division. This layer was developed by Unioning school district polygons per the descriptions in 18 AAC 75.495.