The DNR bluff mapping tool is intended to help local governments identify bluffs in the administration of shoreland and river-related ordinances that regulate placement of structures, vegetation management and land alteration activities in bluff areas. The tool is intended to show the general locations of bluffs. A field survey is necessary to specifically locate the toe and top of bluffs and bluff impact zones for building purposes.

Technical Requirements
The user will need the following to run this tool:
System Requirements:
- ArcGIS 10.x
- Spatial Analyst
Input Data Requirements:
- LiDAR or similar data that can be used or converted into a DEM for elevation data (You can download 1-meter and 3-meter DEMs from MnTOPO: http://arcgis.dnr.state.mn.us/maps/mntopo )

For step-by-step instructions on how to use the tool, please view MN DNR Bluff Mapping Tool Guidance.pdf

The global network mapping software market size was valued at USD 2,325.4 million in 2025 and is projected to grow at a CAGR of 12.3% during the forecast period (2025-2033). The rapid growth of cloud-based, on-premises, and hybrid IT environments, coupled with the increasing adoption of network management best practices, are some of the key factors driving market growth. Furthermore, the need to enhance network visibility and control, improve performance, and simplify network troubleshooting is also contributing to the growing demand for network mapping software. Cloud-based and on-premises solutions held a significant market share in 2025. However, the cloud-based segment is expected to witness faster growth during the forecast period. The growing adoption of cloud-based services, the need for remote network management, and the cost-effectiveness of cloud-based solutions are driving the growth of this segment. In terms of application, the small and medium enterprises (SMEs) segment dominated the market in 2025, and it is expected to maintain its dominance throughout the forecast period. The increasing number of SMEs, the need for cost-effective network management solutions, and the growing awareness of network security are driving the growth of this segment. Network mapping software is a tool that helps businesses visualize and manage their networks. It can be used to create diagrams of the network, identify potential problems, and track down performance issues. The software can also be used to automate tasks such as device discovery and configuration.

This tool was created by The Nature Conservancy to quantitatively assess marine life and habitats based on best available data. It is intended to support environmental impact assessments related to wind energy development offshore or other activities. Funding was provided by the Southeast Coastal Ocean Observing Regional Association.This tool was completed in January 2023, and the data reflects the most up-to-date data available at that point in time.This tool was prepared, as a result of work sponsored by the Southeast Coastal Ocean Observing Regional Association (SECOORA) with NOAA financial assistance award number NA16NOS0120028. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of SECOORA or NOAA

In 2023, Google Maps was the most downloaded map and navigation app in the United States, despite being a standard pre-installed app on Android smartphones. Waze followed, with 9.89 million downloads in the examined period. The app, which comes with maps and the possibility to access information on traffic via users reports, was developed in 2006 by the homonymous Waze company, acquired by Google in 2013.

Usage of navigation apps in the U.S. As of 2021, less than two in 10 U.S. adults were using a voice assistant in their cars, in order to place voice calls or follow voice directions to a destination. Navigation apps generally offer the possibility for users to download maps to access when offline. Native iOS app Apple Maps, which does not offer this possibility, was by far the navigation app with the highest data consumption, while Google-owned Waze used only 0.23 MB per 20 minutes.

Usage of navigation apps worldwide In July 2022, Google Maps was the second most popular Google-owned mobile app, with 13.35 million downloads from global users during the examined month. In China, the Gaode Map app, which is operated along with other navigation services by the Alibaba owned AutoNavi, had approximately 730 million monthly active users as of September 2022.

ADOT has 27 interactive maps, dashboards, PDF reports, and instructional materials available to our customers, including ADOT staff, State Representatives, local and tribal government agencies, private agencies, and the public. Even with recent efforts to reorganize our ADOT Maps website, it has been difficult for our customers to find the product that has the information they need.

This experience builder app includes links to all of our products and includes filters that help people locate the product that would be the most useful to them. The backend of this app is a single table with information and links to each product.This app is now available on the newly redesigned ADOT Maps website (https://azdot.gov/maps).

Global Network Mapping Software Market Report 2022 comes with the extensive industry analysis of development components, patterns, flows and sizes. The report also calculates present and past market values to forecast potential market management through the forecast period between 2022-2028. The report may be the best of what is a geographic area which expands the competitive landscape and industry perspective of the market.

The global Curriculum Mapping Software market is projected to reach USD XX million by 2033, exhibiting a CAGR of XX% during the forecast period (2025-2033). Growing demand for educational software to enhance teaching and learning, increasing need for curriculum alignment, and government initiatives to improve educational standards are the key factors driving market growth. Additionally, the cloud-based deployment model is gaining popularity due to its scalability, cost-effectiveness, and ease of access. The competitive landscape of the Curriculum Mapping Software market is characterized by a mix of established and emerging players. Top players in the market include Top Hat, Kiddom, PlanbookEdu, LearnZillion, Eduphoria!, OnCourse Systems for Education, Skyward, LessonWriter, Workday, School Software Group, Leepfrog Technologies, and currIQūnet. Companies are focusing on strategic partnerships, new product launches, and technological advancements to gain a competitive edge. The market is segmented based on application (higher education institutions, K-12 schools, and others), deployment type (cloud-based and on-premise), and region (North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, Middle East & Africa, and South America). North America holds the largest market share, followed by Europe.

The Digital Geomorphic-GIS Map of Gulf Islands National Seashore (5-meter accuracy and 1-foot resolution 2006-2007 mapping), Mississippi and Florida 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 (guis_geomorphology.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 (guis_geomorphology.mapx) and individual Pro layer (.lyrx) files (for each GIS data layer), as well as with a 2.) 10.1 ArcMap (.mxd) map document (guis_geomorphology.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 (guis_geology_gis_readme.pdf), 2.) the GRI ancillary map information document (.pdf) file (guis_geomorphology.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 (guis_geomorphology_metadata_faq.pdf). Please read the guis_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: U.S. 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 (guis_geomorphology_metadata.txt or guis_geomorphology_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 1:26,000 and United States National Map Accuracy Standards features are within (horizontally) 13.2 meters or 43.3 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).

These are products of the Soil and Landscape Grid of Australia Facility generated through disaggregation of the Western Australian soil mapping. There are 9 soil attribute products available from the Soil Facility: Available Water Holding Capacity - Volumetric (AWC); Bulk Density - Whole Earth (BDw); Bulk Density - Fine Earth (BDf); Clay (CLY); Course Fragments (CFG); Electrical Conductivity (ECD); pH Water (pHw); Sand (SND); Silt (SLT).

Each soil attribute product is a collection of 6 depth slices. Each depth raster has an upper and lower uncertainty limit raster associated with it. The depths provided are 0-5cm, 5-15cm, 15-30cm, 30-60cm, 60-100cm & 100-200cm, consistent with the Specifications of the GlobalSoilMap.

The DSMART tool (Odgers et al. 2014) tool was used in a downscaling process to translate legacy soil landscape mapping to 3” resolution (approx. 100m cell size) raster predictions of soil classes (Holmes et al. Submitted). The soil class maps were then used to produce corresponding soil property surfaces using the PROPR tool (Odgers et al. 2015; Odgers et al. Submitted). Legacy mapping was compiled for the state of WA from surveys ranging in map scale from 1:20,000 to 1:2,000,000 (Schoknecht et al., 2004). The polygons are attributed with the soils and proportions of soils within polygons however individual soils were not explicitly spatially defined. These new disaggregated map products aim to incorporate expert soil surveyor knowledge embodied in legacy polygon soil maps, while providing re-interpreted soil spatial information at a scale that is more suited to on-ground decision making.

Note: The DSMART-derived dissagregated legacy soil mapping products provide different spatial predictions of soil properties to the national TERN Soil Grid products derived by Cubist (data mining) and kriging based on site data by Viscarra Rossel et al. (Submitted). Where they overlap, the national prediction layers and DSMART products can be considered complementary predictions. They will offer varying spatial reliability (/ uncertainty) depending on the availability of representative site data (for national predictions) and the scale and expertise of legacy mapping. The national predictions and DSMART disaggregated layers have also been merged as a means to present the best available (lowest statistical uncertainty) data from both products (Clifford et al. In Prep).

Previous versions of this collection contained Depths layers. These have been removed as the units do not comply with Global Soil Map specifications. Lineage: The soil attribute maps are generated using novel spatial modelling and digital soil mapping techniques to disaggregate legacy soil mapping.

Legacy soil mapping: Polygon-based soil mapping for Western Australia’s agricultural zone was developed via WA’s Department of Agriculture and Food (Schoknecht et al., 2004). Seventy-three soil classes (termed ‘WA soil groups’ Schoknecht and Pathan, 2013) have been defined to capture the range of variation in soil profiles across this area. While legacy soil mapping does not explicitly map the distribution of these soil classes, estimates of their percentage composition and associated soil properties are available for each soil landscape map unit (polygon).

Disaggregation of soil classes: The DSMART algorithm (version 1, described in Odgers et al. 2014) was used to produce fine-resolution raster predictions for the probability of occurrence of each soil class. This uses random virtual sampling within each map unit (with sampling weighted by the expected proportions of each soil class) to build predictions for the distribution of soil classes based on relationships with environmental covariate layers (e.g. elevation, terrain attributes, climate, remote sensing vegetation indices, radiometrics). The algorithm was run 100 times then averaged to create probabilistic estimates for soil class spatial distributions.

Soil property predictions: The PROPR algorithm (Odgers et al. 2015) was used to generate soil property maps (and their associated uncertainty) using reference soil property data and the soil class probability maps create through the above DSMART disaggregation step.

Western Australia’s expert defined typical range of soil properties by soil class was used to provide reference soil properties to PROPR. These estimates were made separately for each physiographic zone across WA, and are based on available profile data and surveyor experience. Uncertainty bounds were determined by the minimum and maximum soil properties at the ‘qualified soil group’ level, and the property value of the most common soil in the map unit was used to define the typical soil property. This methodology was previously developed to meet the specifications of McKenzie et al. (2012) and provides expert soil surveyor estimates for map unit area composition and representative profile properties. Depth averaging was applied to the regional variant profile data to obtain property values at the specified GlobalSoilMap depth intervals. Then area-weighted soil property averages were calculated for each subgroup soil class. This process is documented further in Odgers et al. (Submitted).

This dataset is a series of digital map-posters accompanying the AdaptNRM Guide: Helping Biodiversity Adapt: supporting climate adaptation planning using a community-level modelling approach.

These represent supporting materials and information about the community-level biodiversity models applied to climate change. Map posters are organised by four biological groups (vascular plants, mammals, reptiles and amphibians), two climate change scenario (1990-2050 MIROC5 and CanESM2 for RCP8.5), and five measures of change in biodiversity.

The map-posters present the nationally consistent data at locally relevant resolutions in eight parts – representing broad groupings of NRM regions based on the cluster boundaries used for climate adaptation planning (http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/adaptation) and also Nationally.

Map-posters are provided in PNG image format at moderate resolution (300dpi) to suit A0 printing. The posters were designed to meet A0 print size and digital viewing resolution of map detail. An additional set in PDF image format has been created for ease of download for initial exploration and printing on A3 paper. Some text elements and map features may be fuzzy at this resolution.

Each map-poster contains four dataset images coloured using standard legends encompassing the potential range of the measure, even if that range is not represented in the dataset itself or across the map extent.

Most map series are provided in two parts: part 1 shows the two climate scenarios for vascular plants and mammals and part 2 shows reptiles and amphibians. Eight cluster maps for each series have a different colour theme and map extent. A national series is also provided. Annotation briefly outlines the topics presented in the Guide so that each poster stands alone for quick reference.

An additional 77 National maps presenting the probability distributions of each of 77 vegetation types – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroups (NVIS subgroups) - are currently in preparation.

Example citations:

Williams KJ, Raisbeck-Brown N, Prober S, Harwood T (2015) Generalised projected distribution of vegetation types – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroups (1990 and 2050), A0 map-poster 8.1 - East Coast NRM regions. CSIRO Land and Water Flagship, Canberra. Available online at www.AdaptNRM.org and https://data.csiro.au/dap/.

Williams KJ, Raisbeck-Brown N, Harwood T, Prober S (2015) Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050), A0 map-poster 9.1 - East Coast NRM regions. CSIRO Land and Water Flagship, Canberra. Available online at www.AdaptNRM.org and https://data.csiro.au/dap/.

This dataset has been delivered incrementally. Please check that you are accessing the latest version of the dataset. Lineage: The map posters show case the scientific data. The data layers have been developed at approximately 250m resolution (9 second) across the Australian continent to incorporate the interaction between climate and topography, and are best viewed using a geographic information system (GIS). Each data layers is 1Gb, and inaccessible to non-GIS users. The map posters provide easy access to the scientific data, enabling the outputs to be viewed at high resolution with geographical context information provided.

Maps were generated using layout and drawing tools in ArcGIS 10.2.2

A check list of map posters and datasets is provided with the collection.

Map Series: 7.(1-77) National probability distribution of vegetation type – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroup pre-1750 #0x

8.1 Generalised projected distribution of vegetation types (NVIS subgroups) (1990 and 2050)

9.1 Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for plants and mammals (1990-2050)

9.2 Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

10.1 Need for assisted dispersal for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

10.2 Need for assisted dispersal for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

11.1 Refugial potential for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

11.1 Refugial potential for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

12.1 Climate-driven future revegetation benefit for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

12.2 Climate-driven future revegetation benefit for vascular reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

World Imagery provides one meter or better satellite and aerial imagery for most of the world’s landmass and lower resolution satellite imagery worldwide. The map is currently comprised of the following sources: Worldwide 15-m resolution TerraColor imagery at small and medium map scales.Maxar imagery basemap products around the world: Vivid Premium at 15-cm HD resolution for select metropolitan areas, Vivid Advanced 30-cm HD for more than 1,000 metropolitan areas, and Vivid Standard from 1.2-m to 0.6-cm resolution for the most of the world, with 30-cm HD across the United States and parts of Western Europe. More information on the Maxar products is included below. High-resolution aerial photography contributed by the GIS User Community. This imagery ranges from 30-cm to 3-cm resolution. You can contribute your imagery to this map and have it served by Esri via the Community Maps Program. Maxar Basemap ProductsVivid PremiumProvides committed image currency in a high-resolution, high-quality image layer over defined metropolitan and high-interest areas across the globe. The product provides 15-cm HD resolution imagery.Vivid AdvancedProvides committed image currency in a high-resolution, high-quality image layer over defined metropolitan and high-interest areas across the globe. The product includes a mix of native 30-cm and 30-cm HD resolution imagery.Vivid StandardProvides a visually consistent and continuous image layer over large areas through advanced image mosaicking techniques, including tonal balancing and seamline blending across thousands of image strips. Available from 1.2-m down to 30-cm HD. More on Maxar HD. Imagery UpdatesYou can use the Updates Mode in the World Imagery Wayback app to learn more about recent and pending updates. Accessing this information requires a user login with an ArcGIS organizational account. CitationsThis layer includes imagery provider, collection date, resolution, accuracy, and source of the imagery. With the Identify tool in ArcGIS Desktop or the ArcGIS Online Map Viewer you can see imagery citations. Citations returned apply only to the available imagery at that location and scale. You may need to zoom in to view the best available imagery. Citations can also be accessed in the World Imagery with Metadata web map.UseYou can add this layer to the ArcGIS Online Map Viewer, ArcGIS Desktop, or ArcGIS Pro. To view this layer with a useful reference overlay, open the Imagery Hybrid web map.FeedbackHave you ever seen a problem in the Esri World Imagery Map that you wanted to report? You can use the Imagery Map Feedback web map to provide comments on issues. The feedback will be reviewed by the ArcGIS Online team and considered for one of our updates.

This product is part of the Landscape Change Monitoring System (LCMS) data suite. It supplies LCMS Change classes for each year that are a refinement of the modeled LCMS Change classes (Slow Loss, Fast Loss, and Gain) and provide information on the cause of landscape change. See additional information about Change in the Entity_and_Attribute_Information or Fields section below.LCMS is a remote sensing-based system for mapping and monitoring landscape change across the United States. Its objective is to develop a consistent approach using the latest technology and advancements in change detection to produce a "best available" map of landscape change. Because no algorithm performs best in all situations, LCMS uses an ensemble of models as predictors, which improves map accuracy across a range of ecosystems and change processes (Healey et al., 2018). The resulting suite of LCMS Change, Land Cover, and Land Use maps offer a holistic depiction of landscape change across the United States over the past four decades.Predictor layers for the LCMS model include outputs from the LandTrendr and CCDC change detection algorithms and terrain information. These components are all accessed and processed using Google Earth Engine (Gorelick et al., 2017). To produce annual composites, the cFmask (Zhu and Woodcock, 2012), cloudScore, Cloud Score + (Pasquarella et al., 2023), and TDOM (Chastain et al., 2019) cloud and cloud shadow masking methods are applied to Landsat Tier 1 and Sentinel 2a and 2b Level-1C top of atmosphere reflectance data. The annual medoid is then computed to summarize each year into a single composite. The composite time series is temporally segmented using LandTrendr (Kennedy et al., 2010; Kennedy et al., 2018; Cohen et al., 2018). All cloud and cloud shadow free values are also temporally segmented using the CCDC algorithm (Zhu and Woodcock, 2014). LandTrendr, CCDC and terrain predictors can be used as independent predictor variables in a Random Forest (Breiman, 2001) model. LandTrendr predictor variables include fitted values, pair-wise differences, segment duration, change magnitude, and slope. CCDC predictor variables include CCDC sine and cosine coefficients (first 3 harmonics), fitted values, and pairwise differences from the Julian Day of each pixel used in the annual composites and LandTrendr. Terrain predictor variables include elevation, slope, sine of aspect, cosine of aspect, and topographic position indices (Weiss, 2001) from the USGS 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) (U.S. Geological Survey, 2019). Reference data are collected using TimeSync, a web-based tool that helps analysts visualize and interpret the Landsat data record from 1984-present (Cohen et al., 2010).Outputs fall into three categories: Change, Land Cover, and Land Use. At its foundation, Change maps areas of Disturbance, Vegetation Successional Growth, and Stable landscape. More detailed levels of Change products are available and are intended to address needs centered around monitoring causes and types of variations in vegetation cover, water extent, or snow/ice extent that may or may not result in a transition of land cover and/or land use. Change, Land Cover, and Land Use are predicted for each year of the time series and serve as the foundational products for LCMS. References: Breiman, L. (2001). Random Forests. In Machine Learning (Vol. 45, pp. 5-32). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324Chastain, R., Housman, I., Goldstein, J., Finco, M., and Tenneson, K. (2019). Empirical cross sensor comparison of Sentinel-2A and 2B MSI, Landsat-8 OLI, and Landsat-7 ETM top of atmosphere spectral characteristics over the conterminous United States. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 221, pp. 274-285). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2018.11.012Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., and Kennedy, R. (2010). Detecting trends in forest disturbance and recovery using yearly Landsat time series: 2. TimeSync - Tools for calibration and validation. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 114, Issue 12, pp. 2911-2924). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.07.010Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., Healey, S. P., Kennedy, R. E., and Gorelick, N. (2018). A LandTrendr multispectral ensemble for forest disturbance detection. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 205, pp. 131-140). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.11.015Foga, S., Scaramuzza, P.L., Guo, S., Zhu, Z., Dilley, R.D., Beckmann, T., Schmidt, G.L., Dwyer, J.L., Hughes, M.J., Laue, B. (2017). Cloud detection algorithm comparison and validation for operational Landsat data products. Remote Sensing of Environment, 194, 379-390. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.03.026Gorelick, N., Hancher, M., Dixon, M., Ilyushchenko, S., Thau, D., and Moore, R. (2017). Google Earth Engine: Planetary-scale geospatial analysis for everyone. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 202, pp. 18-27). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.06.031Healey, S. P., Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., Kenneth Brewer, C., Brooks, E. B., Gorelick, N., Hernandez, A. J., Huang, C., Joseph Hughes, M., Kennedy, R. E., Loveland, T. R., Moisen, G. G., Schroeder, T. A., Stehman, S. V., Vogelmann, J. E., Woodcock, C. E., Yang, L., and Zhu, Z. (2018). Mapping forest change using stacked generalization: An ensemble approach. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 204, pp. 717-728). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.09.029Helmer, E. H., Ramos, O., del MLopez, T., Quinonez, M., and Diaz, W. (2002). Mapping the forest type and Land Cover of Puerto Rico, a component of the Caribbean biodiversity hotspot. Caribbean Journal of Science, (Vol. 38, Issue 3/4, pp. 165-183)Kennedy, R. E., Yang, Z., and Cohen, W. B. (2010). Detecting trends in forest disturbance and recovery using yearly Landsat time series: 1. LandTrendr - Temporal segmentation algorithms. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 114, Issue 12, pp. 2897-2910). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.07.008Kennedy, R., Yang, Z., Gorelick, N., Braaten, J., Cavalcante, L., Cohen, W., and Healey, S. (2018). Implementation of the LandTrendr Algorithm on Google Earth Engine. In Remote Sensing (Vol. 10, Issue 5, p. 691). https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10050691Olofsson, P., Foody, G. M., Herold, M., Stehman, S. V., Woodcock, C. E., and Wulder, M. A. (2014). Good practices for estimating area and assessing accuracy of land change. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 148, pp. 42-57). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2014.02.015Pasquarella, V. J., Brown, C. F., Czerwinski, W., and Rucklidge, W. J. (2023). Comprehensive Quality Assessment of Optical Satellite Imagery Using Weakly Supervised Video Learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (pp. 2124-2134)Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J., Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M. and Duchesnay, E. (2011). Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. In Journal of Machine Learning Research (Vol. 12, pp. 2825-2830).Pengra, B. W., Stehman, S. V., Horton, J. A., Dockter, D. J., Schroeder, T. A., Yang, Z., Cohen, W. B., Healey, S. P., and Loveland, T. R. (2020). Quality control and assessment of interpreter consistency of annual Land Cover reference data in an operational national monitoring program. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 238, p. 111261). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2019.111261Pesaresi, M. and Politis P. (2023): GHS-BUILT-S R2023A - GHS built-up surface grid, derived from Sentinel2 composite and Landsat, multitemporal (1975-2030). European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC) PID: http://data.europa.eu/89h/9f06f36f-4b11-47ec-abb0-4f8b7b1d72ea doi:10.2905/9F06F36F-4B11-47EC-ABB0-4F8B7B1D72EAStehman, S.V. (2014). Estimating area and map accuracy for stratified random sampling when the strata are different from the map classes. In International Journal of Remote Sensing (Vol. 35, pp. 4923-4939). https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2014.930207USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service Cropland Data Layer (2023). Published crop-specific data layer [Online]. Available at https://nassgeodata.gmu.edu/CropScape/ (accessed 2024). USDA-NASS, Washington, DC.U.S. Geological Survey (2019). USGS 3D Elevation Program Digital Elevation Model, accessed August 2022 at https://developers.google.com/earth-engine/datasets/catalog/USGS_3DEP_10mU.S. Geological Survey (2023). Landsat Collection 2 Known Issues, accessed March 2023 at https://www.usgs.gov/landsat-missions/landsat-collection-2-known-issuesWeiss, A.D. (2001). Topographic position and landforms analysis Poster Presentation, ESRI Users Conference, San Diego, CAYang, L., Jin, S., Danielson, P., Homer, C., Gass, L., Case, A., Costello, C., Dewitz, J., Fry, J., Funk, M., Grannemann, B., Rigge, M., and Xian, G. (2018). A New Generation of the United States National Land Cover Database: Requirements, Research Priorities, Design, and Implementation Strategies (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S092427161830251X), (pp. 108-123)Zhu, Z., and Woodcock, C. E. (2012). Object-based cloud and cloud shadow detection in Landsat imagery. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 118, pp. 83-94). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.10.028Zhu, Z., and Woodcock, C. E. (2014). Continuous change detection and classification of Land Cover using all available Landsat data. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 144, pp. 152-171). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2014.01.011 This record was taken from the USDA Enterprise Data Inventory that feeds into the https://data.gov catalog. Data for this record includes the following resources: ISO-19139 metadata ArcGIS Hub Dataset ArcGIS GeoService For complete information, please visit https://data.gov.

OVERVIEWThis site is dedicated to raising the level of spatial and data literacy used in public policy. We invite you to explore curated content, training, best practices, and datasets that can provide a baseline for your research, analysis, and policy recommendations. Learn about emerging policy questions and how GIS can be used to help come up with solutions to those questions.EXPLOREGo to your area of interest and explore hundreds of maps about various topics such as social equity, economic opportunity, public safety, and more. Browse and view the maps, or collect them and share via a simple URL. Sharing a collection of maps is an easy way to use maps as a tool for understanding. Help policymakers and stakeholders use data as a driving factor for policy decisions in your area.ISSUESBrowse different categories to find data layers, maps, and tools. Use this set of content as a driving force for your GIS workflows related to policy. RESOURCESTo maximize your experience with the Policy Maps, we’ve assembled education, training, best practices, and industry perspectives that help raise your data literacy, provide you with models, and connect you with the work of your peers.

This product is part of the Landscape Change Monitoring System (LCMS) data suite. It shows LCMS change attribution classes for each year. See additional information about change in the Entity_and_Attribute_Information or Fields section below.LCMS is a remote sensing-based system for mapping and monitoring landscape change across the United States. Its objective is to develop a consistent approach using the latest technology and advancements in change detection to produce a "best available" map of landscape change. Because no algorithm performs best in all situations, LCMS uses an ensemble of models as predictors, which improves map accuracy across a range of ecosystems and change processes (Healey et al., 2018). The resulting suite of LCMS change, land cover, and land use maps offer a holistic depiction of landscape change across the United States over the past four decades.Predictor layers for the LCMS model include outputs from the LandTrendr and CCDC change detection algorithms and terrain information. These components are all accessed and processed using Google Earth Engine (Gorelick et al., 2017). To produce annual composites, the cFmask (Zhu and Woodcock, 2012), cloudScore, and TDOM (Chastain et al., 2019) cloud and cloud shadow masking methods are applied to Landsat Tier 1 and Sentinel 2a and 2b Level-1C top of atmosphere reflectance data. The annual medoid is then computed to summarize each year into a single composite. The composite time series is temporally segmented using LandTrendr (Kennedy et al., 2010; Kennedy et al., 2018; Cohen et al., 2018). All cloud and cloud shadow free values are also temporally segmented using the CCDC algorithm (Zhu and Woodcock, 2014). LandTrendr, CCDC and terrain predictors can be used as independent predictor variables in a Random Forest (Breiman, 2001) model. LandTrendr predictor variables include fitted values, pair-wise differences, segment duration, change magnitude, and slope. CCDC predictor variables include CCDC sine and cosine coefficients (first 3 harmonics), fitted values, and pairwise differences from the Julian Day of each pixel used in the annual composites and LandTrendr. Terrain predictor variables include elevation, slope, sine of aspect, cosine of aspect, and topographic position indices (Weiss, 2001) from the USGS 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) (U.S. Geological Survey, 2019). Reference data are collected using TimeSync, a web-based tool that helps analysts visualize and interpret the Landsat data record from 1984-present (Cohen et al., 2010).Outputs fall into three categories: change, land cover, and land use. Change relates specifically to vegetation cover and includes slow loss (not included for PRUSVI), fast loss (which also includes hydrologic changes such as inundation or desiccation), and gain. These values are predicted for each year of the time series and serve as the foundational products for LCMS. References: Breiman, L. (2001). Random Forests. In Machine Learning (Vol. 45, pp. 5-32). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324Chastain, R., Housman, I., Goldstein, J., Finco, M., and Tenneson, K. (2019). Empirical cross sensor comparison of Sentinel-2A and 2B MSI, Landsat-8 OLI, and Landsat-7 ETM top of atmosphere spectral characteristics over the conterminous United States. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 221, pp. 274-285). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2018.11.012Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., and Kennedy, R. (2010). Detecting trends in forest disturbance and recovery using yearly Landsat time series: 2. TimeSync - Tools for calibration and validation. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 114, Issue 12, pp. 2911-2924). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.07.010Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., Healey, S. P., Kennedy, R. E., and Gorelick, N. (2018). A LandTrendr multispectral ensemble for forest disturbance detection. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 205, pp. 131-140). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.11.015Foga, S., Scaramuzza, P.L., Guo, S., Zhu, Z., Dilley, R.D., Beckmann, T., Schmidt, G.L., Dwyer, J.L., Hughes, M.J., Laue, B. (2017). Cloud detection algorithm comparison and validation for operational Landsat data products. Remote Sensing of Environment, 194, 379-390. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.03.026Gorelick, N., Hancher, M., Dixon, M., Ilyushchenko, S., Thau, D., and Moore, R. (2017). Google Earth Engine: Planetary-scale geospatial analysis for everyone. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 202, pp. 18-27). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.06.031Healey, S. P., Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., Kenneth Brewer, C., Brooks, E. B., Gorelick, N., Hernandez, A. J., Huang, C., Joseph Hughes, M., Kennedy, R. E., Loveland, T. R., Moisen, G. G., Schroeder, T. A., Stehman, S. V., Vogelmann, J. E., Woodcock, C. E., Yang, L., and Zhu, Z. (2018). Mapping forest change using stacked generalization: An ensemble approach. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 204, pp. 717-728). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.09.029Kennedy, R. E., Yang, Z., and Cohen, W. B. (2010). Detecting trends in forest disturbance and recovery using yearly Landsat time series: 1. LandTrendr - Temporal segmentation algorithms. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 114, Issue 12, pp. 2897-2910). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.07.008Kennedy, R., Yang, Z., Gorelick, N., Braaten, J., Cavalcante, L., Cohen, W., and Healey, S. (2018). Implementation of the LandTrendr Algorithm on Google Earth Engine. In Remote Sensing (Vol. 10, Issue 5, p. 691). https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10050691Olofsson, P., Foody, G. M., Herold, M., Stehman, S. V., Woodcock, C. E., and Wulder, M. A. (2014). Good practices for estimating area and assessing accuracy of land change. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 148, pp. 42-57). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2014.02.015Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J., Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M. and Duchesnay, E. (2011). Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. In Journal of Machine Learning Research (Vol. 12, pp. 2825-2830).Pengra, B. W., Stehman, S. V., Horton, J. A., Dockter, D. J., Schroeder, T. A., Yang, Z., Cohen, W. B., Healey, S. P., and Loveland, T. R. (2020). Quality control and assessment of interpreter consistency of annual land cover reference data in an operational national monitoring program. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 238, p. 111261). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2019.111261U.S. Geological Survey. (2019). USGS 3D Elevation Program Digital Elevation Model, accessed August 2022 at https://developers.google.com/earth-engine/datasets/catalog/USGS_3DEP_10mWeiss, A.D. (2001). Topographic position and landforms analysis Poster Presentation, ESRI Users Conference, San Diego, CAZhu, Z., and Woodcock, C. E. (2012). Object-based cloud and cloud shadow detection in Landsat imagery. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 118, pp. 83-94). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.10.028Zhu, Z., and Woodcock, C. E. (2014). Continuous change detection and classification of land cover using all available Landsat data. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 144, pp. 152-171). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2014.01.011This record was taken from the USDA Enterprise Data Inventory that feeds into the https://data.gov catalog. Data for this record includes the following resources: ISO-19139 metadata ArcGIS Hub Dataset ArcGIS GeoService For complete information, please visit https://data.gov.

NCED is currently involved in researching the effectiveness of anaglyph maps in the classroom and are working with educators and scientists to interpret various Earth-surface processes. Based on the findings of the research, various activities and interpretive information will be developed and available for educators to use in their classrooms. Keep checking back with this website because activities and maps are always being updated. We believe that anaglyph maps are an important tool in helping students see the world and are working to further develop materials and activities to support educators in their use of the maps.

This website has various 3-D maps and supporting materials that are available for download. Maps can be printed, viewed on computer monitors, or projected on to screens for larger audiences. Keep an eye on our website for more maps, activities and new information. Let us know how you use anaglyph maps in your classroom. Email any ideas or activities you have to ncedmaps@umn.edu

Anaglyph paper maps are a cost effective offshoot of the GeoWall Project. Geowall is a high end visualization tool developed for use in the University of Minnesota's Geology and Geophysics Department. Because of its effectiveness it has been expanded to 300 institutions across the United States. GeoWall projects 3-D images and allows students to see 3-D representations but is limited because of the technology. Paper maps are a cost effective solution that allows anaglyph technology to be used in classroom and field-based applications.

Maps are best when viewed with RED/CYAN anaglyph glasses!

A note on downloading: "viewable" maps are .jpg files; "high-quality downloads" are .tif files. While it is possible to view the latter in a web-browser in most cases, the download may be slow. As an alternative, try right-clicking on the link to the high-quality download and choosing "save" from the pop-up menu that results. Save the file to your own machine, then try opening the saved copy. This may be faster than clicking directly on the link to open it in the browser.

World Map: 3-D map that highlights oceanic bathymetry and plate boundaries.

Continental United States: 3-D grayscale map of the Lower 48.

Western United States: 3-D grayscale map of the Western United States with state boundaries.

Regional Map: 3-D greyscale map stretching from Hudson Bay to the Central Great Plains. This map includes the Western Great Lakes and the Canadian Shield.

Minnesota Map: 3-D greyscale map of Minnesota with county and state boundaries.

Twin Cities: 3-D map extending beyond Minneapolis and St. Paul.

Twin Cities Confluence Map: 3-D map highlighting the confluence of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers. This map includes most of Minneapolis and St. Paul.

Minneapolis, MN: 3-D topographical map of South Minneapolis.

Bassets Creek, Minneapolis: 3-D topographical map of the Bassets Creek watershed.

North Minneapolis: 3-D topographical map highlighting North Minneapolis and the Mississippi River.

St. Paul, MN: 3-D topographical map of St. Paul.

Western Suburbs, Twin Cities: 3-D topographical map of St. Louis Park, Hopkins and Minnetonka area.

Minnesota River Valley Suburbs, Twin Cities: 3-D topographical map of Bloomington, Eden Prairie and Edina area.

Southern Suburbs, Twin Cities: 3-D topographical map of Burnsville, Lakeville and Prior Lake area.

Southeast Suburbs, Twin Cities: 3-D topographical map of South St. Paul, Mendota Heights, Apple Valley and Eagan area.

Northeast Suburbs, Twin Cities: 3-D topographical map of White Bear Lake, Maplewood and Roseville area.

Northwest Suburbs, Mississippi River, Twin Cities: 3-D topographical map of North Minneapolis, Brooklyn Center and Maple Grove area.

Blaine, MN: 3-D map of Blaine and the Mississippi River.

White Bear Lake, MN: 3-D topographical map of White Bear Lake and the surrounding area.

Maple Grove, MN: 3-D topographical mmap of the NW suburbs of the Twin Cities.

In 2024, Market Research Intellect valued the Customer Experience Cx Journey Mapping Tools Market Report at USD 1.5 billion, with expectations to reach USD 4.5 billion by 2033 at a CAGR of 12.5%.Understand drivers of market demand, strategic innovations, and the role of top competitors.

The National Hydrography Dataset Plus High Resolution (NHDplus High Resolution) maps the lakes, ponds, streams, rivers and other surface waters of the United States. Created by the US Geological Survey, NHDPlus High Resolution provides mean annual flow and velocity estimates for rivers and streams. Additional attributes provide connections between features facilitating complicated analyses.For more information on the NHDPlus High Resolution dataset see the User’s Guide for the National Hydrography Dataset Plus (NHDPlus) High Resolution.Dataset SummaryPhenomenon Mapped: Surface waters and related features of the United States and associated territoriesGeographic Extent: The Contiguous United States, Hawaii, portions of Alaska, Puerto Rico, Guam, US Virgin Islands, Northern Marianas Islands, and American SamoaProjection: Web Mercator Auxiliary Sphere Visible Scale: Visible at all scales but layer draws best at scales larger than 1:1,000,000Source: USGSUpdate Frequency: AnnualPublication Date: July 2022This layer was symbolized in the ArcGIS Map Viewer and while the features will draw in the Classic Map Viewer the advanced symbology will not. Prior to publication, the network and non-network flowline feature classes were combined into a single flowline layer. Similarly, the Area and Waterbody feature classes were merged under a single schema.Attribute fields were added to the flowline and waterbody layers to simplify symbology and enhance the layer's pop-ups. Fields added include Pop-up Title, Pop-up Subtitle, Esri Symbology (waterbodies only), and Feature Code Description. All other attributes are from the original dataset. No data values -9999 and -9998 were converted to Null values.What can you do with this layer?Feature layers work throughout the ArcGIS system. Generally your work flow with feature layers will begin in ArcGIS Online or ArcGIS Pro. Below are just a few of the things you can do with a feature service in Online and Pro.ArcGIS OnlineAdd this layer to a map in the map viewer. The layer or a map containing it can be used in an application. Change the layer’s transparency and set its visibility rangeOpen the layer’s attribute table and make selections. Selections made in the map or table are reflected in the other. Center on selection allows you to zoom to features selected in the map or table and show selected records allows you to view the selected records in the table.Apply filters. For example you can set a filter to show larger streams and rivers using the mean annual flow attribute or the stream order attribute.Change the layer’s style and symbologyAdd labels and set their propertiesCustomize the pop-upUse as an input to the ArcGIS Online analysis tools. This layer works well as a reference layer with the trace downstream and watershed tools. The buffer tool can be used to draw protective boundaries around streams and the extract data tool can be used to create copies of portions of the data.ArcGIS ProAdd this layer to a 2d or 3d map.Use as an input to geoprocessing. For example, copy features allows you to select then export portions of the data to a new feature class.Change the symbology and the attribute field used to symbolize the dataOpen table and make interactive selections with the mapModify the pop-upsApply Definition Queries to create sub-sets of the layerThis layer is part of the ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World that provides an easy way to explore the landscape layers and many other beautiful and authoritative maps on hundreds of topics.Questions?Please leave a comment below if you have a question about this layer, and we will get back to you as soon as possible.

The following of best practices of Software Engineering (SE) is something that provides many advantages for software companies. In this scenario SWEBOK is a guideline that supports these companies with information about the core of knowledge of SE, including a list of Best Practices (BP) to adopt. For small companies, however, some restrictions such as limited budget, short schedule, reduced number of employees, can hinder the advantages of the adoption of these practices. In this scenario, it is necessary to have useful information about which BPs have been adopted in small companies. Therefore, this paper describes the planning and execution of a quasi-systematic mapping study in order to report the adopting scenario of SWEBOK BPs in small companies during the last decade. It was possible to observe that the most prominent BP adopted is “Test application”, followed by the using of “Software Process Model” where the tests’ execution is already contemplated by. On the other hand, “Budget Limitation” and “Staff Size” were cited as motivations for avoid the adoption of BPs in small companies.

These Soil Mapping Data Packages include 1. a Soil Map dataset which includes the equivalents to Soil Project Boundaries, Soil Survey Spatial View mapping polygons with attributes from the Soil Name and Layer Files, plus + A Soil Site dataset which includes soil pit site information and detailed soil pit descriptions and any associated lab analyses, and + The Soil Data Dictionary which documents the fields and allowable codes within the data. The Soil Map geodatabase contains the 'best available' data ranging from 1:20,000 scale to 1:250,000 scale with overlapping data removed. The choice of the datasets that remain is based on connectivity to the soil attributes (soil name and layer files), map scale and survey date. (Note: the BC Soil Landscapes of Canada (BCSLC) 1:1,000,000 data has not been included in the Soil_Map or SIFT, but is available from: CANSIS. (A complete soils data package with overlapping soil survey mapping and BCSLC is available on request. Note that the soil survey data with attributes can also be viewed interactively in the [Soil Information Finder Tool](The Soil Map dataset is also available for interactive map viewing or as KMZs from the Soil Information Finder Tool website.