The Transit Buffer Mask layer represents transit-oriented development (TOD) buffers generated from point-in-time GTFS data extractions of GCTRA data. Using the GTFS model in ArcGIS Pro, "frequent" routes with 30-minute or better peak service are identified. From these routes, 1/2 mile buffers are created. Additionally, 1/4 mile buffers are generated around all rail stops, excluding the waterfront line.Data Sources:GTFS data from GCTRAArcGIS Pro GTFS modelGeographic Coverage: Cuyahoga County, OhioVintage: 2023Update Frequency: StaticLast Update: 2023

This layer is a 45-meter growth buffer surrounding the maximum extent of eelgrass (green layer called "SF Bay Eelgrass") surveyed in San Francisco Bay. Eelgrass beds are highly dynamic and the exact location and extent of eelgrass beds can change across seasons and years. Thus, the purpose of the 45-meter growth buffer, as described in the National Marine Fisheries Service's LTMS Programmatic Essential Fish Habitat consultation is to account for areas between eelgrass patches, temporal variation in bed extent, and potential bed expansion. In cases where a dredge project intersects with the 45-meter growth buffer direct impacts to eelgrass may occur and therefore assessment, minimization, and mitigation measures may be required on a project-by-project basis. A pre-dredge eelgrass area and density survey is required 30 days prior to the start of dredging and should be submitted to the LTMS permitting agencies. Methods for creating this layer are as follows: Downloaded Baywide Eelgrass Surveys for 2003, 2009, and 2014 by Merkel & Associates, Inc. (Merkel) from San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) website. Obtained Richardson Bay 2019 eelgrass survey from Merkel. Loaded all layers into ArcGIS Pro © ESRI and re-projected all data to NAD 1983 UTM Zone 10N. Used Buffer tool to develop a single multipart shapefile with a 45-meter buffer of the input layers. Imported the Pacific Marine and Estuarine Fish Habitat Partnership (PMEP) Estuary Extent layer and clipped the 45-meter buffer over terrestrial areas based on the PEMP Estuary Extent. Some minor adjustments were made where the buffer layer resulted in fragments on land or behind levees.

This orange layer shows a 250-meter turbidity buffer of the blue 45-meter growth buffer (blue layer called "SF Bay Eelgrass 45m Buffer") adjacent to the maximum extent eelgrass survey in the San Francisco Bay. When a dredging project’s footprint overlaps with this 250-meter buffer, indirect impacts to eelgrass are assessed and best management practices are required per the National Marine Fisheries Service's LTMS Programmatic Essential Fish Habitat consultation. Methods for creating this layer are as follows: Downloaded Bay-wide Eelgrass Surveys for 2003, 2009, and 2014 by Merkel & Associates, Inc. (Merkel) from SFEI. Obtained Richardson Bay 2019 eelgrass survey from Merkel. Loaded all layers into ArcGIS Pro © ESRI and re-projected all data to NAD 1983 UTM Zone 10N. Used Buffer tool to develop a single multipart shapefile with a 45-meter buffer of the 2003, 2009, 2014, and 2019 survey data . Imported the Pacific Marine and Estuarine Fish Habitat Partnership (PMEP) Estuary Extent layer and clipped the 45-meter buffer over terrestrial areas based on the PEMP Estuary Extent (this represents the 45-meter eelgrass buffer layer also found in this Web Application). To create the 250-meter turbidity buffer from there, the same methods were used as follows. Used Buffer tool to develop a single multipart shapefile with a 250-meter buffer from the 45-meter buffer layer. Clipped the 250-meter turbidity buffer over terrestrial areas based on the PEMP Estuary Extent. Some minor adjustments were made where the 250-meter turbidity buffer layer resulted in fragments on land or behind levees.

The National Hydrography Dataset Plus (NHDplus) maps the lakes, ponds, streams, rivers and other surface waters of the United States. Created by the US EPA Office of Water and the US Geological Survey, the NHDPlus provides mean annual and monthly flow estimates for rivers and streams. Additional attributes provide connections between features facilitating complicated analyses. For more information on the NHDPlus dataset see the NHDPlus v2 User Guide.Dataset SummaryPhenomenon Mapped: Surface waters and related features of the United States and associated territories not including Alaska.Geographic Extent: The United States not including Alaska, Puerto Rico, Guam, US Virgin Islands, Marshall Islands, Northern Marianas Islands, Palau, Federated States of Micronesia, 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: EPA and USGSUpdate Frequency: There is new new data since this 2019 version, so no updates planned in the futurePublication Date: March 13, 2019Prior to publication, the NHDPlus network and non-network flowline feature classes were combined into a single flowline layer. Similarly, the NHDPlus 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, On or Off Network (flowlines only), Esri Symbology (waterbodies only), and Feature Code Description. All other attributes are from the original NHDPlus dataset. No data values -9999 and -9998 were converted to Null values for many of the flowline fields.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 is limited to scales of approximately 1:1,000,000 or larger but a vector tile layer created from the same data can be used at smaller scales to produce a webmap that displays across the full range of scales. 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 purpose of this project is to determine the most suitable location for a wind farm in 50Kms radius of Calgary. Different criterion need to be considered for choosing the final site, ranging from distance from settlements, water bodies, proximity to power lines to slope and wind speed intensity of the region. Based on the literature review, the areas that did not have the potential for hosting wind turbines were excluded by using the buffer tool in ArcGIS Pro. Afterwards, the wind speed and slope of the remaining regions were analyzed to pick the location with the highest wind speed and the most suitable slope. As can be seen in the final map, the final site is located in the western side of Calgary.

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

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.

The perimeter of the black bee conservatories in Normandy.

There are five conservatories in Normandy: Calvados, Lisieux, Eure, Orne and Seine-Maritime.

The data does not fall within the scope of the Inspire Directive.

Collection context Layer made for the cartographic needs of the department for the valorisation of regional agricultural products in the Normandy Region, making it possible to visualise the municipalities representing the perimeters of conservatories in the region: 3km for the heart zone and an additional 7km from the heart zone.

Collection method Addresses of centroids provided by the Department of Agriculture and Marine Resources of the Normandy Region. Geographic layer created using ArcGis Pro by creating two buffer zones (IGN Admin Express reference) around the designated point.

Attributes | Field | Alias | Type | | --- | --- | --- | | COMPLE_NAME | STRUCTURE NAME | char | | NAME | CONSERVATORY NAME | char | | BUFF_DIST | BUFFER DISTANCE | double | | Shape_Area | SURFACE ZONE | double |

For more information, see the metadata on the Isogeo catalogue.

InstructionsDownload the ArcGIS Pro Package here: Amazon HQ 4 Site Selection Analysis. Open the ArcGIS Prop Package. Expand the project toolbox within the Catalog window. Locate the model, right click, and choose Open. You can use the sample data provided or provide your own inputs.If you choose to use your own data, you will need to set the following required parameters:Scratch Workspace: This is a geodatabase that will store all temporary data created when the model runs.Final Workspace: This is a geodatabase that will store all final output data.Airports: Point feature class of Airports.Airport Buffer Distance: How close to airports do you want your selections to be?Highways: Line feature class of highways.Highway Buffer Distance: How close to highways do you want your selections to be?Stops: Point feature class of bus stops.Mass Transit Buffer Distance: How close to bus stops do you want your selections to be?Internet Corridors: Internet Corridors feature class.Areas with Internet: Polygon feature class of Internet areas.Cell Phone Coverage Areas: Polygon feature class of Cell Phone Coverage Areas.Land Use Parcels: Parcel and/or Land Use polygon feature class.Acreage Calculation Expression: The expression used to convert the shape area to acres or the measurement of your choosing.Parcel Size Selection Expression (Optional): This expressions narrows down your parcels to include only those that match your desired parcel size.Final Parcel Selection: How do you want to name your final parcel selection?

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

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.

Reason for SelectionProtected natural areas in urban environments provide urban residents a nearby place to connect with nature and offer refugia for some species. Because beaches in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands are open to the public, beaches also provide important outdoor recreation opportunities for urban residents, so we include beaches as parks in this indicator.Input DataSoutheast Blueprint 2023 subregions: CaribbeanSoutheast Blueprint 2023 extentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) Coastal Relief Model, accessed 11-22-2022Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) 3.0: VI, PR, and Marine Combined Fee EasementPuerto Rico Protected Natural Areas 2018 (December 2018 update): Terrestrial and marine protected areas (PACAT2018_areas_protegidasPR_TERRESTRES_07052019.shp, PACAT2018_areas_protegidasPR_MARINAS_07052019.shp) 2020 Census Urban Areas from the Census Bureau’s urban-rural classification; download the data, read more about how urban areas were redefined following the 2020 censusOpenStreetMap data “multipolygons” layer, accessed 3-14-2023A polygon from this dataset is considered a park if the “leisure” tag attribute is either “park” or “nature_reserve”, and considered a beach if the value in the “natural” tag attribute is “beach”. OpenStreetMap describes leisure areas as “places people go in their spare time” and natural areas as “a wide variety of physical geography, geological and landcover features”. Data were downloaded in .pbf format and translated ton an ESRI shapefile using R code. OpenStreetMap® is open data, licensed under the Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL) by the OpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF). Additional credit to OSM contributors. Read more on the OSM copyright page. TNC Lands - Public Layer, accessed 3-8-2023U.S. Virgin Islands beaches layer (separate vector layers for St. Croix, St. Thomas, and St. John) provided by Joe Dwyer with Lynker/the NOAA Caribbean Climate Adaptation Program on 3-3-2023 (contact jdwyer@lynker.com for more information)Mapping StepsMost mapping steps were completed using QGIS (v 3.22) Graphical Modeler.Fix geometry errors in the PAD-US PR data using Fix Geometry. This must be done before any analysis is possible.Merge the terrestrial PR and VI PAD-US layers.Use the NOAA coastal relief model to restrict marine parks (marine polygons from PAD-US and Puerto Rico Protected Natural Areas) to areas shallower than 10 m in depth. The deep offshore areas of marine parks do not meet the intent of this indicator to capture nearby opportunities for urban residents to connect with nature.Merge into one layer the resulting shallow marine parks from marine PAD-US and the Puerto Rico Protected Natural Areas along with the combined terrestrial PAD-US parks, OpenStreetMap, TNC Lands, and USVI beaches. Omit from the Puerto Rico Protected Areas layer the “Zona de Conservación del Carso”, which has some policy protections and conservation incentives but is not formally protected.Fix geometry errors in the resulting merged layer using Fix Geometry.Intersect the resulting fixed file with the Caribbean Blueprint subregion.Process all multipart polygons to single parts (referred to in Arc software as an “explode”). This helps the indicator capture, as much as possible, the discrete units of a protected area that serve urban residents.Clip the Census urban area to the Caribbean Blueprint subregion.Select all polygons that intersect the Census urban extent within 1.2 miles (1,931 m). The 1.2 mi threshold is consistent with the average walking trip on a summer day (U.S. DOT 2002) used to define the walking distance threshold used in the greenways and trails indicator. Note: this is further than the 0.5 mi distance used in the continental version of the indicator. We extended it to capture East Bay and Point Udall based on feedback from the local conservation community about the importance of the park for outdoor recreation.Dissolve all the park polygons that were selected in the previous step.Process all multipart polygons to single parts (“explode”) again.Add a unique ID to the selected parks. This value will be used to join the parks to their buffers.Create a 1.2 mi (1,931 m) buffer ring around each park using the multiring buffer plugin in QGIS. Ensure that “dissolve buffers” is disabled so that a single 1.2 mi buffer is created for each park.Assess the amount of overlap between the buffered park and the Census urban area using overlap analysis. This step is necessary to identify parks that do not intersect the urban area, but which lie within an urban matrix. This step creates a table that is joined back to the park polygons using the UniqueID.Remove parks that had ≤2% overlap with the urban areas when buffered. This excludes mostly non-urban parks that do not meet the intent of this indicator to capture parks that provide nearby access for urban residents. Note: In the continental version of this indicator, we used a threshold of 10%. In the Caribbean version, we lowered this to 2% in order to capture small parks that dropped out of the indicator when we extended the buffer distance to 1.2 miles.Calculate the GIS acres of each remaining park unit using the Add Geometry Attributes function.Join the buffer attribute table to the previously selected parks, retaining only the parks that exceeded the 2% urban area overlap threshold while buffered. Buffer the selected parks by 15 m. Buffering prevents very small parks and narrow beaches from being left out of the indicator when the polygons are converted to raster.Reclassify the polygons into 7 classes, seen in the final indicator values below. These thresholds were informed by park classification guidelines from the National Recreation and Park Association, which classify neighborhood parks as 5-10 acres, community parks as 30-50 acres, and large urban parks as optimally 75+ acres (Mertes and Hall 1995).Export the final vector file to a shapefile and import to ArcGIS Pro.Convert the resulting polygons to raster using the ArcPy Polygon to Raster function. Assign values to the pixels in the resulting raster based on the polygon class sizes of the contiguous park areas.Clip to the Caribbean Blueprint 2023 subregion.As a final step, clip to the spatial extent of Southeast Blueprint 2023. Note: For more details on the mapping steps, code used to create this layer is available in the Southeast Blueprint Data Download under > 6_Code. Final indicator valuesIndicator values are assigned as follows:6 = 75+ acre urban park5 = >50 to <75 acre urban park4 = 30 to <50 acre urban park3 = 10 to <30 acre urban park2 = 5 to <10 acre urban park1 = <5 acre urban park0 = Not identified as an urban parkKnown IssuesThis indicator does not include park amenities that influence how well the park serves people and should not be the only tool used for parks and recreation planning. Park standards should be determined at a local level to account for various community issues, values, needs, and available resources. This indicator includes some protected areas that are not open to the public and not typically thought of as “parks”, like mitigation lands, private easements, and private golf courses. While we experimented with excluding them using the public access attribute in PAD, due to numerous inaccuracies, this inadvertently removed protected lands that are known to be publicly accessible. As a result, we erred on the side of including the non-publicly accessible lands.This indicator includes parks and beaches from OpenStreetMap, which is a crowdsourced dataset. While members of the OpenStreetMap community often verify map features to check for accuracy and completeness, there is the potential for spatial errors (e.g., misrepresenting the boundary of a park) or incorrect tags (e.g., labelling an area as a park that is not actually a park). However, using a crowdsourced dataset gives on-the-ground experts, Blueprint users, and community members the power to fix errors and add new parks to improve the accuracy and coverage of this indicator in the future.Other Things to Keep in MindThis indicator calculates the area of each park using the park polygons from the source data. However, simply converting those park polygons to raster results in some small parks and narrow beaches being left out of the indicator. To capture those areas, we buffered parks and beaches by 15 m and applied the original area calculation to the larger buffered polygon, so as not to inflate the area by including the buffer. As a result, when the buffered polygons are rasterized, the final indicator has some areas of adjacent pixels that receive different scores. While these pixels may appear to be part of one contiguous park or suite of parks, they are scored differently because the park polygons themselves are not actually contiguous. The Caribbean version of this indicator uses a slightly different methodology than the continental Southeast version. It includes parks within a 1.2 mi distance from the Census urban area, compared to 0.5 mi in the continental Southeast. We extended it to capture East Bay and Point Udall based on feedback from the local conservation community about the importance of the park for outdoor recreation. Similarly, this indicator uses a 2% threshold of overlap between buffered parks and the Census urban areas, compared to a 10% threshold in the continental Southeast. This helped capture small parks that dropped out of the indicator when we extended the buffer distance to 1.2 miles. Finally, the Caribbean version does not use the impervious surface cutoff applied in the continental Southeast because the landcover data available in the Caribbean does not assess percent impervious in a comparable way.Disclaimer: Comparing with Older Indicator VersionsThere are numerous problems with using Southeast Blueprint

Reason for Selection Protected natural areas in urban environments provide urban residents a nearby place to connect with nature and offer refugia for some species. They help foster a conservation ethic by providing opportunities for people to connect with nature, and also support ecosystem services like offsetting heat island effects (Greene and Millward 2017, Simpson 1998), water filtration, stormwater retention, and more (Hoover and Hopton 2019). In addition, parks, greenspace, and greenways can help improve physical and psychological health in communities (Gies 2006). Urban park size complements the equitable access to potential parks indicator by capturing the value of existing parks.Input DataSoutheast Blueprint 2024 extentFWS National Realty Tracts, accessed 12-13-2023Protected Areas Database of the United States(PAD-US):PAD-US 3.0 national geodatabase -Combined Proclamation Marine Fee Designation Easement, accessed 12-6-20232020 Census Urban Areas from the Census Bureau’s urban-rural classification; download the data, read more about how urban areas were redefined following the 2020 censusOpenStreetMap data “multipolygons” layer, accessed 12-5-2023A polygon from this dataset is considered a beach if the value in the “natural” tag attribute is “beach”. Data for coastal states (VA, NC, SC, GA, FL, AL, MS, LA, TX) were downloaded in .pbf format and translated to an ESRI shapefile using R code. OpenStreetMap® is open data, licensed under theOpen Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL) by theOpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF). Additional credit to OSM contributors. Read more onthe OSM copyright page.2021 National Land Cover Database (NLCD): Percentdevelopedimperviousness2023NOAA coastal relief model: volumes 2 (Southeast Atlantic), 3 (Florida and East Gulf of America), 4 (Central Gulf of America), and 5 (Western Gulf of America), accessed 3-27-2024Mapping StepsCreate a seamless vector layer to constrain the extent of the urban park size indicator to inland and nearshore marine areas <10 m in depth. The deep offshore areas of marine parks do not meet the intent of this indicator to capture nearby opportunities for urban residents to connect with nature. Shallow areas are more accessible for recreational activities like snorkeling, which typically has a maximum recommended depth of 12-15 meters. This step mirrors the approach taken in the Caribbean version of this indicator.Merge all coastal relief model rasters (.nc format) together using QGIS “create virtual raster”.Save merged raster to .tif and import into ArcPro.Reclassify the NOAA coastal relief model data to assign areas with an elevation of land to -10 m a value of 1. Assign all other areas (deep marine) a value of 0.Convert the raster produced above to vector using the “RasterToPolygon” tool.Clip to 2024 subregions using “Pairwise Clip” tool.Break apart multipart polygons using “Multipart to single parts” tool.Hand-edit to remove deep marine polygon.Dissolve the resulting data layer.This produces a seamless polygon defining land and shallow marine areas.Clip the Census urban area layer to the bounding box of NoData surrounding the extent of Southeast Blueprint 2024.Clip PAD-US 3.0 to the bounding box of NoData surrounding the extent of Southeast Blueprint 2024.Remove the following areas from PAD-US 3.0, which are outside the scope of this indicator to represent parks:All School Trust Lands in Oklahoma and Mississippi (Loc Des = “School Lands” or “School Trust Lands”). These extensive lands are leased out and are not open to the public.All tribal and military lands (“Des_Tp” = "TRIBL" or “Des_Tp” = "MIL"). Generally, these lands are not intended for public recreational use.All BOEM marine lease blocks (“Own_Name” = "BOEM"). These Outer Continental Shelf lease blocks do not represent actively protected marine parks, but serve as the “legal definition for BOEM offshore boundary coordinates...for leasing and administrative purposes” (BOEM).All lands designated as “proclamation” (“Des_Tp” = "PROC"). These typically represent the approved boundary of public lands, within which land protection is authorized to occur, but not all lands within the proclamation boundary are necessarily currently in a conserved status.Retain only selected attribute fields from PAD-US to get rid of irrelevant attributes.Merged the filtered PAD-US layer produced above with the OSM beaches and FWS National Realty Tracts to produce a combined protected areas dataset.The resulting merged data layer contains overlapping polygons. To remove overlapping polygons, use the Dissolve function.Clip the resulting data layer to the inland and nearshore extent.Process all multipart polygons (e.g., separate parcels within a National Wildlife Refuge) to single parts (referred to in Arc software as an “explode”).Select all polygons that intersect the Census urban extent within 0.5 miles. We chose 0.5 miles to represent a reasonable walking distance based on input and feedback from park access experts. Assuming a moderate intensity walking pace of 3 miles per hour, as defined by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service’s physical activity guidelines, the 0.5 mi distance also corresponds to the 10-minute walk threshold used in the equitable access to potential parks indicator.Dissolve all the park polygons that were selected in the previous step.Process all multipart polygons to single parts (“explode”) again.Add a unique ID to the selected parks. This value will be used in a later step to join the parks to their buffers.Create a 0.5 mi (805 m) buffer ring around each park using the multiring plugin in QGIS. Ensure that “dissolve buffers” is disabled so that a single 0.5 mi buffer is created for each park.Assess the amount of overlap between the buffered park and the Census urban area using “overlap analysis”. This step is necessary to identify parks that do not intersect the urban area, but which lie within an urban matrix (e.g., Umstead Park in Raleigh, NC and Davidson-Arabia Mountain Nature Preserve in Atlanta, GA). This step creates a table that is joined back to the park polygons using the UniqueID.Remove parks that had ≤10% overlap with the urban areas when buffered. This excludes mostly non-urban parks that do not meet the intent of this indicator to capture parks that provide nearby access for urban residents. Note: The 10% threshold is a judgement call based on testing which known urban parks and urban National Wildlife Refuges are captured at different overlap cutoffs and is intended to be as inclusive as possible.Calculate the GIS acres of each remaining park unit using the Add Geometry Attributes function.Buffer the selected parks by 15 m. Buffering prevents very small and narrow parks from being left out of the indicator when the polygons are converted to raster.Reclassify the parks based on their area into the 7 classes seen in the final indicator values below. These thresholds were informed by park classification guidelines from the National Recreation and Park Association, which classify neighborhood parks as 5-10 acres, community parks as 30-50 acres, and large urban parks as optimally 75+ acres (Mertes and Hall 1995).Assess the impervious surface composition of each park using the NLCD 2021 impervious layer and the Zonal Statistics “MEAN” function. Retain only the mean percent impervious value for each park.Extract only parks with a mean impervious pixel value <80%. This step excludes parks that do not meet the intent of the indicator to capture opportunities to connect with nature and offer refugia for species (e.g., the Superdome in New Orleans, LA, the Astrodome in Houston, TX, and City Plaza in Raleigh, NC).Extract again to the inland and nearshore extent.Export the final vector file to a shapefile and import to ArcGIS Pro.Convert the resulting polygons to raster using the ArcPy Feature to Raster function and the area class field.Assign a value of 0 to all other pixels in the Southeast Blueprint 2024 extent not already identified as an urban park in the mapping steps above. Zero values are intended to help users better understand the extent of this indicator and make it perform better in online tools.Use the land and shallow marine layer and “extract by mask” tool to save the final version of this indicator.Add color and legend to raster attribute table.As a final step, clip to the spatial extent of Southeast Blueprint 2024.Note: For more details on the mapping steps, code used to create this layer is available in theSoutheast Blueprint Data Downloadunder > 6_Code. Final indicator valuesIndicator values are assigned as follows:6= 75+ acre urban park5= 50 to <75 acre urban park4= 30 to <50 acre urban park3= 10 to <30 acre urban park2=5 to <10acreurbanpark1 = <5 acre urban park0 = Not identified as an urban parkKnown IssuesThis indicator does not include park amenities that influence how well the park serves people and should not be the only tool used for parks and recreation planning. Park standards should be determined at a local level to account for various community issues, values, needs, and available resources.This indicator includes some protected areas that are not open to the public and not typically thought of as “parks”, like mitigation lands, private easements, and private golf courses. While we experimented with excluding them using the public access attribute in PAD, due to numerous inaccuracies, this inadvertently removed protected lands that are known to be publicly accessible. As a result, we erred on the side of including the non-publicly accessible lands.The NLCD percent impervious layer contains classification inaccuracies. As a result, this indicator may exclude parks that are mostly natural because they are misclassified as mostly impervious. Conversely, this indicator may include parks that are mostly impervious because they are misclassified as mostly

¿Cuáles son los tramos de carretera más vulnerables en España?El mapa nos muestra información para representar los tramos de carretera de España más vulnerables en base a datos sobre la Intensidad Media Diaria (IMD) de cada tramo, la siniestralidad del municipio por el que transcurren los tramos y la distancia al hospital más cercano.El IMD se representa mediante líneas con diferentes colores y tamaños, morado y de mayor grosor para las más concurridas y amarillo y de menor grosor para las menos transitadas.La siniestralidad por municipios la podemos observar como círculos de diferentes tamaños, según el número total de accidentes en el año en cuestión. También se pintarán de color morado los que hayan sufrido más accidentes y de amarillo los que menos.Los tramos de carretera más vulnerables se han calculado de la siguiente forma: se han descartado aquellos que están a menos de 30 minutos de un hospital y, a su vez, que cruce o esté a menos de 10km de un municipio en el que haya habido al menos un accidente ese año. Los datos usados proceden del Living Atlas: Capa de Hospitales de España, capa de Siniestralidad por Municipios y la capa del Mapa de tráfico de la DGC 2021. El cálculo de los Buffer para hallar los tramos más vulnerables se ha realizado en ArcGIS Pro 3.3.1.