One important reason for performing GIS analysis is to determine proximity. Often, this type of analysis is done using vector data and possibly the Buffer or Near tools. In this course, you will learn how to calculate distance using raster datasets as inputs in order to assign cells a value based on distance to the nearest source (e.g., city, campground). You will also learn how to allocate cells to a particular source and to determine the compass direction from a cell in a raster to a source.What if you don't want to just measure the straight line from one place to another? What if you need to determine the best route to a destination, taking speed limits, slope, terrain, and road conditions into consideration? In cases like this, you could use the cost distance tools in order to assign a cost (such as time) to each raster cell based on factors like slope and speed limit. From these calculations, you could create a least-cost path from one place to another. Because these tools account for variables that could affect travel, they can help you determine that the shortest path may not always be the best path.After completing this course, you will be able to:Create straight-line distance, direction, and allocation surfaces.Determine when to use Euclidean and weighted distance tools.Perform a least-cost path analysis.

Abstract

The dataset was derived by the Bioregional Assessment Programme from multiple source datasets. The source datasets are identified in the Lineage field in this metadata statement. The processes undertaken to produce this derived dataset are described in the History field in this metadata statement.

This resource contains raster datasets created using ArcGIS to analyse groundwater levels in the Namoi subregion.

Purpose

These data layers were created in ArcGIS as part of the analysis to investigate surface water - groundwater connectivity in the Namoi subregion. The data layers provide several of the figures presented in the Namoi 2.1.5 Surface water - groundwater interactions report.

Dataset History

Extracted points inside Namoi subregion boundary. Converted bore and pipe values to Hydrocode format, changed heading of 'Value' column to 'Waterlevel' and removed unnecessary columns then joined to Updated_NSW_GroundWaterLevel_data_analysis_v01\NGIS_NSW_Bore_Join_Hydmeas_unique_bores.shp clipped to only include those bores within the Namoi subregion.

Selected only those bores with sample dates between >=26/4/2012 and <31/7/2012. Then removed 4 gauges due to anomalous ref_pt_height values or WaterElev values higher than Land_Elev values.

Then added new columns of calculations:

WaterElev = TsRefElev - Water_Leve

DepthWater = WaterElev - Ref_pt_height

Ref_pt_height = TsRefElev - LandElev

Alternatively - Selected only those bores with sample dates between >=1/5/2006 and <1/7/2006

2012_Wat_Elev - This raster was created by interpolating Water_Elev field points from HydmeasJune2012_only.shp, using Spatial Analyst - Topo to Raster tool. And using the alluvium boundary (NAM_113_Aquifer1_NamoiAlluviums.shp) as a boundary input source.

12_dw_olp_enf - Select out only those bores that are in both source files.

Then using depthwater in Topo to Raster, with alluvium as the boundary, ENFORCE field chosen, and using only those bores present in 2012 and 2006 dataset.

2012dw1km_alu - Clipped the 'watercourselines' layer to the Namoi Subregion, then selected 'Major' water courses only. Then used the Geoprocessing 'Buffer' tool to create a polygon delineating an area 1km around all the major streams in the Namoi subregion.

selected points from HydmeasJune2012_only.shp that were within 1km of features the WatercourseLines then used the selected points and the 1km buffer around the major water courses and the Topo to Raster tool in Spatial analyst to create the raster.

Then used the alluvium boundary to truncate the raster, to limit to the area of interest.

12_minus_06 - Select out bores from the 2006 dataset that are also in the 2012 dataset. Then create a raster using depth_water in topo to raster, with ENFORCE field chosen to remove sinks, and alluvium as boundary. Then, using Map Algebra - Raster Calculator, subtract the raster just created from 12_dw_olp_enf

Dataset Citation

Bioregional Assessment Programme (2017) Namoi bore analysis rasters. Bioregional Assessment Derived Dataset. Viewed 10 December 2018, http://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/dataset/7604087e-859c-4a92-8548-0aa274e8a226.

Dataset Ancestors

• Derived From Bioregional Assessment areas v02

• Derived From Gippsland Project boundary

• Derived From Bioregional Assessment areas v04

• Derived From Upper Namoi groundwater management zones

• Derived From Natural Resource Management (NRM) Regions 2010

• Derived From Bioregional Assessment areas v03

• Derived From Victoria - Seamless Geology 2014

• Derived From GIS analysis of HYDMEAS - Hydstra Groundwater Measurement Update: NSW Office of Water - Nov2013

• Derived From Bioregional Assessment areas v01

• Derived From GEODATA TOPO 250K Series 3, File Geodatabase format (.gdb)

• Derived From GEODATA TOPO 250K Series 3

• Derived From NSW Catchment Management Authority Boundaries 20130917

• Derived From Geological Provinces - Full Extent

• Derived From Hydstra Groundwater Measurement Update - NSW Office of Water, Nov2013

RS-FRIS is a remote-sensing based forest inventory for WA DNR State Trust lands. RS-FRIS predicts forest conditions using statistical models that relate field measurements to three-dimensional remotely-sensed data (DAP and LiDAR point clouds). Forest metrics are predicted at a scale of 1/10th acre and stored as rasters.The attributes of each RIU are calculated as the mean of the raster cell values that fall within each polygon. Note: origin year and age are exceptions, and are based on the median value.RS-FRIS 5.3 was constructed using remote-sensing data collected in 2021 and 2022. Version 5.3 incorporates depletions for selected completed harvest types through 2025-03-31.Last edit date: 2025-02-12 NameDescriptionUnitsRIU_IDUnique identifier for each inventory unit.n/aLAND_COV_CDLand cover code.n/aLAND_COV_NMLand cover name.n/aAGENumber of years since the stand was initiated; a composite of known dates (where recorded in inventory data) and predicted dates (where not recorded in historical inventory data). Calculated as CURRENT YEAR - ORIGIN_YEAR.yearsORIGIN_YEARYear at which a stand was re-initiated, a composite of known dates (where recorded in inventory data) and predicted dates (where not recorded in historical inventory data). Based on the median of raster cell values.yearBAPredicted basal area.square feet / acreBA_4Predicted basal area of trees > 4" DBH.square feet / acreBA_4_CONIFERPredicted basal area of trees > 4" DBH which are of a conifer species.square feet / acreBA_4_HWDPredicted basal area of trees > 4" DBH which are of a hardwood species.square feet / acreBA_6Predicted basal area of trees > 6" DBH.square feet / acreBA_T100Predicted basal area of the 100 largest trees per acre.square feet / acreBAP_HWDPredicted percent of trees which are of a hardwood species.percent (0-100)BFVOL_GROSSPredicted gross board-foot volume. Values do not account for defect deductions.board feet / acreBFVOL_NETPredicted net board-foot volume.board feet / acreBIOMASS_ALLPredicted above-ground biomass (live and dead).metric tonnes / acBIOMASS_LIVEPredicted above-ground biomass (live).metric tonnes / acCANOPY_LAYERSPredicted count of distinct canopy layers. Units are continuous despite measurements being ordinal.countCARBON_ALLPredicted above-ground carbon (live and dead).metric tonnes / acCARBON_LIVEPredicted above-ground carbon (live).metric tonnes / acCFVOL_DDWMPredicted cubic foot volume of down and dead woody materials.cubic feet / acreCFVOL_TOTALPredicted total cubic-foot volume. This value does not account for merchantability or defect.cubic feet / acreCLOSUREPredicted canopy closure.percent (0-100)COVERPredicted canopy cover.percent (0-100)HT_LOREYPredicted Lorey height. Lorey height is basal-area weighted mean height.feetHT_T40Predicted height of the 40 largest trees per acre.feetHT_T100Predicted mean height of the 100 largest trees per acre.feetHTMAXPredicted maximum tree height.feetQMDPredicted quadratic mean diameter.inchesQMD_6Predicted quadratic mean diameter for trees > 6" DBH.inchesQMD_T100Predicted quadratic mean diameter for top 100 trees per acre.inchesRDPredicted Curtis relative density (RD)unitlessRD_6Predicted Curtis relative density (RD) for trees > 6" DBHunitlessRD_SUMPredicted Curtis relative density (RD), summation methodunitlessSDI_SUMPredicted Reineke's Stand Density Index (SDI), summation methodtrees / acreSDI_SUM_4Predicted Reineke's Stand Density Index (SDI), summation method, for trees > 4" DBH.trees / acreSDI_DF_EModeled maximum stand density index, Douglas-fir, eastern WA. 10" qmd.trees / acreSDI_GF_EModeled maximum stand density index, Grand-fir, eastern WA. 10" qmd.trees / acreSDI_LP_EModeled maximum stand density index, Lodgepole pine, eastern WA. 10" qmd.trees / acreSDI_PP_EModeled maximum stand density index, Ponderosa pine, eastern WA. 10" qmd.trees / acreSDI_WL_EModeled maximum stand density index,Western larch, eastern WA. 10" qmd.trees / acreSDI_DF_WModeled maximum stand density index, Douglas-fir, western WA. 10" qmd.trees / acreSDI_WH_WModeled maximum stand density index, Western hemlock, western WA. 10" qmd.trees / acreSNAG_ACRE_15Predicted number of snags per acre > 15" DBH.count / acreSNAG_ACRE_20Predicted number of snags per acre > 20" DBH.count / acreSNAG_ACRE_21Predicted number of snags per acre > 21" DBH.count / acreSNAG_ACRE_30Predicted number of snags per acre > 30" DBH.count / acreSPECIES1Primary speciesn/aSPECIES2Secondary speciesn/aTREE_ACREPredicted number of trees per acre.count / acreTREE_ACRE_4Predicted number of trees per acre > 4" DBH.count / acreTREE_ACRE_4_CONIFERPredicted number of trees per acre > 4" DBH which are conifer.count / acreTREE_ACRE_6Predicted number of trees per acre > 6" DBH.count / acreTREE_ACRE_8Predicted number of trees per acre > 8" DBH.count / acreTREE_ACRE_11Predicted number of trees per acre > 11" DBH.count / acreTREE_ACRE_20Predicted number of trees per acre > 20" DBH.count / acreTREE_ACRE_21Predicted number of trees per acre > 21" DBH.count / acreTREE_ACRE_30Predicted number of trees per acre > 30" DBH.count / acreTREE_ACRE_31Predicted number of trees per acre > 31" DBH.count / acreRS_COVEREDDescription of the extent of RS-FRIS raster coverage within inventory unit (NONE, PARTIAL, or FULL).n/aRS_COVERED_PCTPercent (0 to 100) of the inventory unit with RS-FRIS raster coverage.percent (0-100)RS_FRIS_POLY_ACRESAcres of RS-FRIS polygon.acres

Flood Hatch ShapefilesIn addition to the three sets of rasters (Maximum Wave Heights, Water Surface Elevations, and DFEs) provided, separate shapefiles were also created to overlap and highlight special areas within the raster datasets produced for calculating DFEs. A flood hatch shapefile is not provided for every ACFEP level or for every region, but when it is provided, it encompasses the special areas for that level and region. The same hatch shapefile is applicable for all datatypes for the particular level and region. Flood hatch shapefiles encompass all areas of special values within the data rasters (including areas of 9999, 9998, and 9997 values). All regions have a 0.1% ACFEP level flood hatch shapefile because all 0.1% ACFEP rasters contain 9999 values.The flood hatch shapefiles contain individual polygons that describe the type of special area underlying that polygon’s spatial extent. For 9999 and 9998 values in the value rasters (water surface elevations, waves, and DFEs), the special hatched polygons will have the same extent of those values within those rasters. For 9997 values in the value rasters, the hatch polygon will always encompass the 9997 values, but may be larger in extent than just the location of those value cells. For these areas, water surface elevation, wave heights, and DFEs values may be provided, but they still represent a special zone.The Hatch polygons have 5 fields (Column headers) that describe each polygon within the shapefile. These fields include FID, Shape, Hatch_Type, Zones_txt, Hatch, and Hatch_Txt. The FID field contains an ID number for each polygon within that shapefile, while the Shape fieldlists the type of shapefile contained (polygon in all cases). The Hatch_Type field contains the numerical value that can be found within the value rasters (wave height, water surface, and DFE) underlying that polygon. Zones_txt and Hatch_txt are string type fields that contain descriptors of the polygon type, while the Hatch Field contains a numerical value for the type of hatching (1 for 0.1% Edge Zone, 2 for Wave Overtopping Zones, 3 for Dynamic Zone). The following table is an example of what a flood hatch file’s attribute table might look like.FIDShapeHatch_TypeZones_TxtHatchHatch_Txt0Polygon9999Shallow water flooding during extreme storms10.1% Edge Zone1Polygon9997Influenced by wave overtopping (incl. 9997 areas)2Wave Overtopping Zone2Polygon9998Dynamic Landform Areas3Dynamic ZoneSpecifically, the various hatch shapefiles can be defined as follows:• FID 0 Hatch Type – These represent areas of shallow water flooding during extreme storms. These are locations where flooding can only be expected during the most extreme events (> 1000-year return period) or where there are only minor flood depths (shallow flooding) during 1000-year return period AEP. These values only appear in 0.1% ACFEP level since they only occur at the very upper extent of extreme flooding. Water surface elevation values in these regions can be set to 0.1 foot above the site-specific land elevation to provide an estimate of the water surface elevation. Site-specific survey information may be needed to determine the land elevation. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9999 values within the rasters.• FID 1 Hatch Type – These represent wave overtopping zones. These hatch layers encompass the 9997 areas, but also include areas that have known values. Hatched areas of this type covering 9997 values would be expected to experience flooding caused by intermittent wave spray and overtopping only. Hatched areas of this type covering locations with values indicate that the flooding is caused by both direct sheet flow and wave overtopping. These hatched zones are provided for informational purposes by identifying zones that may require special design considerations for wave overtopping. Site-specific coastal processes analysis may also be required in these areas.• FID 2 Hatch Type – These represent areas where geomorphology is extremely dynamic and as such expected flooding may vary drastically. These values can appear in any ACFEP level. There are minimal locations of this type. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9998 values within the rasters.

Rising sea levels (SLR) will cause coastal groundwater to rise in many coastal urban environments. Inundation of contaminated soils by groundwater rise (GWR) will alter the physical, biological, and geochemical conditions that influence the fate and transport of existing contaminants. These transformed products can be more toxic and/or more mobile under future conditions driven by SLR and GWR. We reviewed the vulnerability of contaminated sites to GWR in a US national database and in a case comparison with the San Francisco Bay region to estimate the risk of rising groundwater to human and ecosystem health. The results show that 326 sites in the US Superfund program may be vulnerable to changes in groundwater depth or flow direction as a result of SLR, representing 18.1 million hectares of contaminated land. In the San Francisco Bay Area, we found that GWR is predicted to impact twice as much coastal land area as inundation from SLR alone, and 5,297 state-managed sites of contamination may be vulnerable to inundation from GWR in a 1-meter SLR scenario. Increases of only a few centimeters of elevation can mobilize soil contaminants, alter flow directions in a heterogeneous urban environment with underground pipes and utility trenches, and result in new exposure pathways. Pumping for flood protection will elevate the salt water interface, changing groundwater salinity and mobilizing metals in soil. Socially vulnerable communities are more exposed to this risk at both the national scale and in a regional comparison with the San Francisco Bay Area. Methods Data Dryad This data set includes data from the California State Water Resources Control Board (WRCB), the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the USGS, the US EPA, and the US Census. National Assessment Data Processing: For this portion of the project, ArcGIS Pro and RStudio software applications were used. Data processing for superfund site contaminants in the text and supplementary materials was done in RStudio using R programming language. RStudio and R were also used to clean population data from the American Community Survey. Packages used include: Dplyr, data.table, and tidyverse to clean and organize data from the EPA and ACS. ArcGIS Pro was used to compute spatial data regarding sites in the risk zone and vulnerable populations. DEM data processed for each state removed any elevation data above 10m, keeping anything 10m and below. The Intersection tool was used to identify superfund sites within the 10m sea level rise risk zone. The Calculate Geometry tool was used to calculate the area within each coastal state that was occupied by the 10m SLR zone and used again to calculate the area of each superfund site. Summary Statistics were used to generate the total proportion of superfund site surface area / 10m SLR area for each state. To generate population estimates of socially vulnerable households in proximity to superfund sites, we followed methods similar to that of Carter and Kalman (2020). First, we generated buffers at the 1km, 3km, and 5km distance of superfund sites. Then, using Tabulate Intersection, the estimated population of each census block group within each buffer zone was calculated. Summary Statistics were used to generate total numbers for each state. Bay Area Data Processing: In this regional study, we compared the groundwater elevation projections by Befus et al (2020) to a combined dataset of contaminated sites that we built from two separate databases (Envirostor and GeoTracker) that are maintained by two independent agencies of the State of California (DTSC and WRCB). We used ArcGIS to manage both the groundwater surfaces, as raster files, from Befus et al (2020) and the State’s point datasets of street addresses for contaminated sites. We used SF BCDC (2020) as the source of social vulnerability rankings for census blocks, using block shapefiles from the US Census (ACS) dataset. In addition, we generated isolines that represent the magnitude of change in groundwater elevation in specific sea level rise scenarios. We compared these isolines of change in elevation to the USGS geological map of the San Francisco Bay region and noted that groundwater is predicted to rise farther inland where Holocene paleochannels meet artificial fill near the shoreline. We also used maps of historic baylands (altered by dikes and fill) from the San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) to identify the number of contaminated sites over rising groundwater that are located on former mudflats and tidal marshes. The contaminated sites' data from the California State Water Resources Control Board (WRCB) and the Department of Toxic Substances (DTSC) was clipped to our study area of nine-bay area counties. The study area does not include the ocean shorelines or the north bay delta area because the water system dynamics differ in deltas. The data was cleaned of any duplicates within each dataset using the Find Identical and Delete Identical tools. Then duplicates between the two datasets were removed by running the intersect tool for the DTSC and WRCB point data. We chose this method over searching for duplicates by name because some sites change names when management is transferred from DTSC to WRCB. Lastly, the datasets were sorted into open and closed sites based on the DTSC and WRCB classifications which are shown in a table in the paper's supplemental material. To calculate areas of rising groundwater, we used data from the USGS paper “Projected groundwater head for coastal California using present-day and future sea-level rise scenarios” by Befus, K. M., Barnard, P., Hoover, D. J., & Erikson, L. (2020). We used the hydraulic conductivity of 1 condition (Kh1) to calculate areas of rising groundwater. We used the Raster Calculator to subtract the existing groundwater head from the groundwater head under a 1-meter of sea level rise scenario to find the areas where groundwater is rising. Using the Reclass Raster tool, we reclassified the data to give every cell with a value of 0.1016 meters (4”) or greater a value of 1. We chose 0.1016 because groundwater rise of that little can leach into pipes and infrastructure. We then used the Raster to Poly tool to generate polygons of areas of groundwater rise.

This data set represents a series of 502 mixed-species bird flock compositions, and derived taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity indices, that were gathered along a gradient of forest fragment sizes (range = 10-173 ha) in the Colombian Western Andes. We sampled mixed-species flocks using transect surveys along 14 transects in 8 fragments and a continuous forest reference site in the same landscape and at the same elevation (~1900-2200 m.a.s.l.). We also used buffer analysis to quantify the proportion of forest cover and forest edge within 1 km of each transect, and calculated local vegetation density and complexity, as well as distance from edge, for each 100-meter transect segment (n = 70 segments). Flock composition data observed on a transect were used to calculate overall species richness and flock size as well as two indices of functional and phylogenetic diversity; we calculated the stadardized effect size (SES) of each measure to account for the correlation between these measures and species richness. We also provide the raw counts of each species for each flock composition. These data were used for the analyses in Jones and Robinson (2020).

Methods Study System and Sites

We conducted all fieldwork in subtropical humid forests located within the municipality of El Cairo, Valle del Cauca department in Colombia. The study region is part of the Serrania de los Paraguas in the Western Andes mountain range, a center of avian threatened species diversity and endemism within Colombia. The study landscape in this municipality consists of a patchwork of forest fragments embedded in a matrix of cattle pasture, regenerating scrub, and coffee farms. Within this landscape, we selected eight fragments representing a gradient in patch sizes (range 10 to 170 ha). Sites are in the same altitudinal belt (1900-2200 m.a.s.l.) and matrix type (cattle pasture) to control for effects of altitude and matrix type on flock size and composition. Within-patch disturbance is common in fragmented Andean forests in Colombia, particularly illegal selective logging, which in our landscape typically occurred as removal of select old-growth trees for lumber by landowners; logging histories varied considerably from historical to ongoing, and extensive to limited, both within and between patches. We established 500-meter transects through forest interior (n = 14 total transects) which were opportunistically placed on existing trails, at variable distances from the edge of the fragments. We further divided each transect into 100-meter segments to account for heterogeneity in vegetation structure within transects. We accounted for edge effects by measuring the distance to forest edge of each transect segment.

We stratified forest fragments into large (≥ 100 ha), medium (~30-50 ha), and small (≤ 20 ha) size categories and selected a minimum of two replicates of each; these represent the range of fragment sizes available in our study landscape. We also included a non-fragmented reference site (Reserva Natural Comunitária Cerro El Inglés, ~750 ha) connected to over 10,000 ha of continuous forest to the north and west along the spine of the Serranía de los Paraguas. We only selected fragments with primary or late-successional secondary forest; vegetation structure and canopy height varied substantially between patches based on intensities of selective logging and land-use histories (see above). Fragments were all separated by ≥ 100 meters to minimize among-patch movement of birds, and all transects in different fragments were at least 250 meters apart.

Transect Surveys for Mixed-species Flocks

We performed transect surveys for mixed-species flocks, adapted from Goodale et al. (2014), in forest fragments from June-August 2017 (boreal migrants absent) and January-March 2018 (boreal migrants present). Both sampling periods corresponded to a dry season in the Western Andes, which has a bimodal two-dry, two-wet seasonality pattern. For each transect, we spent two and a half sequential field days performing continuous transect surveys; we conducted surveys in small fragments, large fragments, and continuous forest sites in random order to avoid a temporal bias in sampling. Surveys were distributed across the morning (7:30-11:30) and evening (15:00-17:30) hours. Transects were walked slowly and continuously by 2-3 observers, including local birdwatchers familiar with all species (Harrison Jones present for all surveys); flocking birds were identified by both sight and sound. When we encountered a flock, we noted the time of day and transect segment in which it was observed and spent up to a maximum of 45 minutes characterizing it with 10x binoculars. At least 5 minutes were spent with each flock, following it if possible. Because detection of species in flocks was imperfect, we only included a flock observation in the analysis if we felt that at least 80% of the individuals were observed (e.g. after spending several minutes of continuous observation at the end of the survey period without observing a new species or individual); incomplete flock observations were not included in analyses. We feel that our survey methodology accurately described flock composition because birds moved and called frequently in flocks, leading to high detectability. We noted the start and end time of each survey, and the presence of incomplete flocks to calculate flock encounter rate. We also supplemented the transect surveys with data from flocks opportunistically observed on a transect while performing other fieldwork. Some flocks in the data set represent flock compositions recorded near but not on a transect; these compositions have no associated transect segment.

Calculation of Landscape-level Variables

    We obtained landscape-level variables for analyses using geographic information software (GIS) analysis in ArcGIS (ArcMap 10.3.1; Esri; Redlands, CA). To quantify landscape composition and configuration, we buffered each transect (n = 14) by 1 km; buffers extended from the entire length of the transect. We then calculated measures of landscape composition and configuration using a recent land-cover/use categorization made by the Corporación Autónoma Regional del Valle del Cauca, converted to a 25-m cell-size raster. To quantify landscape composition, we calculated percentages of the forest-cover type within each buffer using the ‘isectpolyrst’ tool in Geospatial Modelling Environment (version 0.7.4.0). We measured landscape configuration for each transect as edge density, or length of all forest edges (in meters) divided by total buffer area (in hectares). The distance to edge was calculated in meters for each 100-meter transect segment (n = 70) as the shortest straight-line distance between the center point of the segment and the nearest edge of the fragment. 

Vegetation Measurements and Principal Component Analysis

    We measured vegetation structure in each 100-m transect segment used for flock sampling. Vegetation measurements were made from June-August 2017; based on our observations of vegetation, we assumed variation between the two sampling periods was minimal. We used the sampling methodology of James and Shugart (1970), following the modifications made by Stratford and Stouffer (2013), and further modified to be used with belt transects. Broadly, the methodology comprises two components for every 100-meter transect segment: (1) the quantification of canopy cover, ground cover, canopy height, and foliage height diversity of vegetation using point sampling every 10 meters and (2) the quantification of shrub, vine, fern, palm, and tree fern and tree density using 3 meter-wide belt sampling.

For the point sampling, we measured eight variables at ten-meter intervals, for 10 points per 100-meter segment. As a measure of foliage height diversity along the transect, we noted the presence or absence of live vegetation at five heights: <0.5 m, >0.5–3 m, >3–10 m, >10–20 m, and >20 m. Above 3 meters, we used a rangefinder to determine heights while sighting through a tube with crosshairs. Canopy and ground cover were calculated to the nearest 1/8th of the field of view by sighting through a vertical canopy densiometer (GRS Densiometer, Geographic Resource Solutions, Arcata, CA). For each segment, we averaged values for canopy cover, and ground cover, and calculated the proportion of points at which vegetation was present for each height category. For the belt transect sampling, we surveyed vegetation along the same transects and calculated densities for each 100-m transect interval. We counted all shrubs, vines, ferns, tree ferns, and palms encountered on 1.5 meters to either side. Secondly, we counted all trees (woody vegetation > 2 m in height) within 1.5 meters of the transect and measured their diameter at breast height (DBH). Trees were later categorized into six DBH size classes for analysis: 1-7 cm, 8-15 cm, 16-23 cm, 24-30 cm, 31-50 cm, and > 50 cm. We additionally recorded the largest tree’s DBH.

    To quantify foliage height diversity, we calculated the Shannon Diversity Index of the proportion of points with vegetation present in each of the five height bands for each segment (n = 70 segments). To reduce redundancy and minimize correlation between variables, we (separately) ordinated our tree DBH and understory plant density data using principal component analysis (PCA: McGarigal et al. 2000) for each 100-meter transect segment. We column (Z score) standardized data prior to ordination to account for differences in the units of measurement and used the covariance matrix to run the PCA. The principal components were interpreted using the significance of the principal component loadings. The PCA was run in R (version 3.5.1) using the princomp function in the stats package. The Shannon Index was calculated using the diversity function of the vegan package

Flood Hatch ShapefilesIn addition to the three sets of rasters (Maximum Wave Heights, Water Surface Elevations, and DFEs) provided, separate shapefiles were also created to overlap and highlight special areas within the raster datasets produced for calculating DFEs. A flood hatch shapefile is not provided for every ACFEP level or for every region, but when it is provided, it encompasses the special areas for that level and region. The same hatch shapefile is applicable for all datatypes for the particular level and region. Flood hatch shapefiles encompass all areas of special values within the data rasters (including areas of 9999, 9998, and 9997 values). All regions have a 0.1% ACFEP level flood hatch shapefile because all 0.1% ACFEP rasters contain 9999 values.The flood hatch shapefiles contain individual polygons that describe the type of special area underlying that polygon’s spatial extent. For 9999 and 9998 values in the value rasters (water surface elevations, waves, and DFEs), the special hatched polygons will have the same extent of those values within those rasters. For 9997 values in the value rasters, the hatch polygon will always encompass the 9997 values, but may be larger in extent than just the location of those value cells. For these areas, water surface elevation, wave heights, and DFEs values may be provided, but they still represent a special zone.The Hatch polygons have 5 fields (Column headers) that describe each polygon within the shapefile. These fields include FID, Shape, Hatch_Type, Zones_txt, Hatch, and Hatch_Txt. The FID field contains an ID number for each polygon within that shapefile, while the Shape fieldlists the type of shapefile contained (polygon in all cases). The Hatch_Type field contains the numerical value that can be found within the value rasters (wave height, water surface, and DFE) underlying that polygon. Zones_txt and Hatch_txt are string type fields that contain descriptors of the polygon type, while the Hatch Field contains a numerical value for the type of hatching (1 for 0.1% Edge Zone, 2 for Wave Overtopping Zones, 3 for Dynamic Zone). The following table is an example of what a flood hatch file’s attribute table might look like.FIDShapeHatch_TypeZones_TxtHatchHatch_Txt0Polygon9999Shallow water flooding during extreme storms10.1% Edge Zone1Polygon9997Influenced by wave overtopping (incl. 9997 areas)2Wave Overtopping Zone2Polygon9998Dynamic Landform Areas3Dynamic ZoneSpecifically, the various hatch shapefiles can be defined as follows:• FID 0 Hatch Type – These represent areas of shallow water flooding during extreme storms. These are locations where flooding can only be expected during the most extreme events (> 1000-year return period) or where there are only minor flood depths (shallow flooding) during 1000-year return period AEP. These values only appear in 0.1% ACFEP level since they only occur at the very upper extent of extreme flooding. Water surface elevation values in these regions can be set to 0.1 foot above the site-specific land elevation to provide an estimate of the water surface elevation. Site-specific survey information may be needed to determine the land elevation. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9999 values within the rasters.• FID 1 Hatch Type – These represent wave overtopping zones. These hatch layers encompass the 9997 areas, but also include areas that have known values. Hatched areas of this type covering 9997 values would be expected to experience flooding caused by intermittent wave spray and overtopping only. Hatched areas of this type covering locations with values indicate that the flooding is caused by both direct sheet flow and wave overtopping. These hatched zones are provided for informational purposes by identifying zones that may require special design considerations for wave overtopping. Site-specific coastal processes analysis may also be required in these areas.• FID 2 Hatch Type – These represent areas where geomorphology is extremely dynamic and as such expected flooding may vary drastically. These values can appear in any ACFEP level. There are minimal locations of this type. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9998 values within the rasters.

Flood Hatch ShapefilesIn addition to the three sets of rasters (Maximum Wave Heights, Water Surface Elevations, and DFEs) provided, separate shapefiles were also created to overlap and highlight special areas within the raster datasets produced for calculating DFEs. A flood hatch shapefile is not provided for every ACFEP level or for every region, but when it is provided, it encompasses the special areas for that level and region. The same hatch shapefile is applicable for all datatypes for the particular level and region. Flood hatch shapefiles encompass all areas of special values within the data rasters (including areas of 9999, 9998, and 9997 values). All regions have a 0.1% ACFEP level flood hatch shapefile because all 0.1% ACFEP rasters contain 9999 values.The flood hatch shapefiles contain individual polygons that describe the type of special area underlying that polygon’s spatial extent. For 9999 and 9998 values in the value rasters (water surface elevations, waves, and DFEs), the special hatched polygons will have the same extent of those values within those rasters. For 9997 values in the value rasters, the hatch polygon will always encompass the 9997 values, but may be larger in extent than just the location of those value cells. For these areas, water surface elevation, wave heights, and DFEs values may be provided, but they still represent a special zone.The Hatch polygons have 5 fields (Column headers) that describe each polygon within the shapefile. These fields include FID, Shape, Hatch_Type, Zones_txt, Hatch, and Hatch_Txt. The FID field contains an ID number for each polygon within that shapefile, while the Shape fieldlists the type of shapefile contained (polygon in all cases). The Hatch_Type field contains the numerical value that can be found within the value rasters (wave height, water surface, and DFE) underlying that polygon. Zones_txt and Hatch_txt are string type fields that contain descriptors of the polygon type, while the Hatch Field contains a numerical value for the type of hatching (1 for 0.1% Edge Zone, 2 for Wave Overtopping Zones, 3 for Dynamic Zone). The following table is an example of what a flood hatch file’s attribute table might look like.FIDShapeHatch_TypeZones_TxtHatchHatch_Txt0Polygon9999Shallow water flooding during extreme storms10.1% Edge Zone1Polygon9997Influenced by wave overtopping (incl. 9997 areas)2Wave Overtopping Zone2Polygon9998Dynamic Landform Areas3Dynamic ZoneSpecifically, the various hatch shapefiles can be defined as follows:• FID 0 Hatch Type – These represent areas of shallow water flooding during extreme storms. These are locations where flooding can only be expected during the most extreme events (> 1000-year return period) or where there are only minor flood depths (shallow flooding) during 1000-year return period AEP. These values only appear in 0.1% ACFEP level since they only occur at the very upper extent of extreme flooding. Water surface elevation values in these regions can be set to 0.1 foot above the site-specific land elevation to provide an estimate of the water surface elevation. Site-specific survey information may be needed to determine the land elevation. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9999 values within the rasters.• FID 1 Hatch Type – These represent wave overtopping zones. These hatch layers encompass the 9997 areas, but also include areas that have known values. Hatched areas of this type covering 9997 values would be expected to experience flooding caused by intermittent wave spray and overtopping only. Hatched areas of this type covering locations with values indicate that the flooding is caused by both direct sheet flow and wave overtopping. These hatched zones are provided for informational purposes by identifying zones that may require special design considerations for wave overtopping. Site-specific coastal processes analysis may also be required in these areas.• FID 2 Hatch Type – These represent areas where geomorphology is extremely dynamic and as such expected flooding may vary drastically. These values can appear in any ACFEP level. There are minimal locations of this type. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9998 values within the rasters.

Flood Hatch ShapefilesIn addition to the three sets of rasters (Maximum Wave Heights, Water Surface Elevations, and DFEs) provided, separate shapefiles were also created to overlap and highlight special areas within the raster datasets produced for calculating DFEs. A flood hatch shapefile is not provided for every ACFEP level or for every region, but when it is provided, it encompasses the special areas for that level and region. The same hatch shapefile is applicable for all datatypes for the particular level and region. Flood hatch shapefiles encompass all areas of special values within the data rasters (including areas of 9999, 9998, and 9997 values). All regions have a 0.1% ACFEP level flood hatch shapefile because all 0.1% ACFEP rasters contain 9999 values.The flood hatch shapefiles contain individual polygons that describe the type of special area underlying that polygon’s spatial extent. For 9999 and 9998 values in the value rasters (water surface elevations, waves, and DFEs), the special hatched polygons will have the same extent of those values within those rasters. For 9997 values in the value rasters, the hatch polygon will always encompass the 9997 values, but may be larger in extent than just the location of those value cells. For these areas, water surface elevation, wave heights, and DFEs values may be provided, but they still represent a special zone.The Hatch polygons have 5 fields (Column headers) that describe each polygon within the shapefile. These fields include FID, Shape, Hatch_Type, Zones_txt, Hatch, and Hatch_Txt. The FID field contains an ID number for each polygon within that shapefile, while the Shape fieldlists the type of shapefile contained (polygon in all cases). The Hatch_Type field contains the numerical value that can be found within the value rasters (wave height, water surface, and DFE) underlying that polygon. Zones_txt and Hatch_txt are string type fields that contain descriptors of the polygon type, while the Hatch Field contains a numerical value for the type of hatching (1 for 0.1% Edge Zone, 2 for Wave Overtopping Zones, 3 for Dynamic Zone). The following table is an example of what a flood hatch file’s attribute table might look like.FIDShapeHatch_TypeZones_TxtHatchHatch_Txt0Polygon9999Shallow water flooding during extreme storms10.1% Edge Zone1Polygon9997Influenced by wave overtopping (incl. 9997 areas)2Wave Overtopping Zone2Polygon9998Dynamic Landform Areas3Dynamic ZoneSpecifically, the various hatch shapefiles can be defined as follows:• FID 0 Hatch Type – These represent areas of shallow water flooding during extreme storms. These are locations where flooding can only be expected during the most extreme events (> 1000-year return period) or where there are only minor flood depths (shallow flooding) during 1000-year return period AEP. These values only appear in 0.1% ACFEP level since they only occur at the very upper extent of extreme flooding. Water surface elevation values in these regions can be set to 0.1 foot above the site-specific land elevation to provide an estimate of the water surface elevation. Site-specific survey information may be needed to determine the land elevation. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9999 values within the rasters.• FID 1 Hatch Type – These represent wave overtopping zones. These hatch layers encompass the 9997 areas, but also include areas that have known values. Hatched areas of this type covering 9997 values would be expected to experience flooding caused by intermittent wave spray and overtopping only. Hatched areas of this type covering locations with values indicate that the flooding is caused by both direct sheet flow and wave overtopping. These hatched zones are provided for informational purposes by identifying zones that may require special design considerations for wave overtopping. Site-specific coastal processes analysis may also be required in these areas.• FID 2 Hatch Type – These represent areas where geomorphology is extremely dynamic and as such expected flooding may vary drastically. These values can appear in any ACFEP level. There are minimal locations of this type. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9998 values within the rasters.

These methods describe the steps taken to calculate the attribute columns in the associated database. Compilations were done on publicly available data such as digital elevation models, climate data and others. For references to the public base data used, please see references in Table 1. There are two sections a. How we processed material into the hexagon framework b. The sequence of steps for each of the analyses presented in the results section of the main report a. How we processed material into the hexagon framework We created a geodatabase of 10 ha hexagons for the region in order to summarize the spatial data in this study into spatial units that are comparable across the region but that also represent an area size that is relevant for site-level plans such as landscape connectivity or forest conservation. The hexagon geodatabase covers 28,269 km2 in within the 5 watersheds in northern California, and 40,895 km2 in the 5 watersheds plus a 10 km buffer area. Integrating data into the hexes Data from a variety of grid scales, including 10, 30, 90, and 270m was added using the ArcGIS sample tool with the Hexagon centroids to sample the 270m resolution data, and the zonal statistics tool within Hexagon boundaries for raster data with smaller grid cell sizes. This study used four types of data (Table 1): Air temperature & topographic – Topographic data was used to calculate microrefugia buffering capacity for each hexagon. Temperature data was used to evaluate the effect of historical and projected future warming on the ability of local sites to retain baseline temperature conditions. Habitats / Dominant Vegetation Types – Habitat data was used to profile the presence and extent of microrefugia by habitat type for the region Landscape Connectivity Models – were used to find microrefugia in areas that are highly ranked for landscape connectivity Forest Structure data – was used to identify where large, late seral trees occupy microrefugia sites. Microrefugia – Air temperature & topographic National Elevation Dataset www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/tnm-delivery Raster - 10m Solar Radiation Model Developed at UC Davis for this study from 25m DEM Raster - 25m Environmental Lapse Rate Model Developed at UC Davis for this study from 10m DEM Raster - 10m Linking Temperature to Hexagons Downscaled PRISM Tmax & Tmin – BCM – current & historical http://climate.calcommons.org/dataset/2014-CA-BCM Raster – 270 m Downscaled future climate projections MIROC & CNRM RCP8.5 http://climate.calcommons.org/dataset/2014-CA-BCM Raster – 270 m Habitats / Dominant Vegetation Types FVEG - CalFire (FRAP) https://frap.fire.ca.gov/mapping/gis-data/ Raster - 30m Vegetation and Climate Refugia Vegetative Climate Exposure (UCD Modeling) Raster - 270m Landscape Connectivity Models California Essential Connectivity https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Planning/Connectivity/CEHC Polygon Omniscape Climate Connectivity https://omniscape.codefornature.org/ 90 m Forest Structure Canopy Height - SALO Sciences https://forestobservatory.com/ Raster - 10m Table 1: Data sources b. The sequence of steps for each of the analyses presented in the results section of the main report Microrefugia – thermal buffering capacity Thermal buffering capacity combined two metrics that represent potential modifications to the air temperature in each 10-ha hexagon. First, a 10m digital elevation model was used to calculate the variation in air temperature within each hexagon due to variations in elevation, using a standard environmental lapse rate. Second, the influence of solar radiation on air temperature was calculated. These two metrics were combined. Elevational Effect on Air Temperature Column: ElevLR_NegEff2 Zonal Statistics was performed on a 10m DEM for each hex. The range of elevation was used with environmental lapse rate to calculate “buffering capacity” within each Hexagon. We used an environmental lapse rate of 0.00649606 C⁰/ meter (International Civil Aviation Organization, 1993) to calculate the range of temperatures within the hexagon. To calculate the effect of elevation on air temperature within each hexagon we used the following equation: (Average Elevation – Maximum Elevation) x 0.00649606 Solar Radiation Effect on Air Temperature: – Column: SRtemp_min We ran the analysis on a 25 m-resolution DEM. We calculated annualized solar radiation via the r.sun model available in GRASS 7.8 (https://grass.osgeo.org/grass70/manuals/r.sun.html) which calculates direct, diffuse, and reflected solar irradiation for a given day, location, topography, and atmospheric conditions. We assumed clear-sky conditions to run this model, and ran the model for 2 days in each month, from which we calculated solar radiation as a yearly total in watt-hours/m2. We converted the output to megajoules as follows. Convert yearly watt-hours to daily megajoules We used a regionally calibrated conversion...

Flood Hatch ShapefilesIn addition to the three sets of rasters (Maximum Wave Heights, Water Surface Elevations, and DFEs) provided, separate shapefiles were also created to overlap and highlight special areas within the raster datasets produced for calculating DFEs. A flood hatch shapefile is not provided for every ACFEP level or for every region, but when it is provided, it encompasses the special areas for that level and region. The same hatch shapefile is applicable for all datatypes for the particular level and region. Flood hatch shapefiles encompass all areas of special values within the data rasters (including areas of 9999, 9998, and 9997 values). All regions have a 0.1% ACFEP level flood hatch shapefile because all 0.1% ACFEP rasters contain 9999 values.The flood hatch shapefiles contain individual polygons that describe the type of special area underlying that polygon’s spatial extent. For 9999 and 9998 values in the value rasters (water surface elevations, waves, and DFEs), the special hatched polygons will have the same extent of those values within those rasters. For 9997 values in the value rasters, the hatch polygon will always encompass the 9997 values, but may be larger in extent than just the location of those value cells. For these areas, water surface elevation, wave heights, and DFEs values may be provided, but they still represent a special zone.The Hatch polygons have 5 fields (Column headers) that describe each polygon within the shapefile. These fields include FID, Shape, Hatch_Type, Zones_txt, Hatch, and Hatch_Txt. The FID field contains an ID number for each polygon within that shapefile, while the Shape fieldlists the type of shapefile contained (polygon in all cases). The Hatch_Type field contains the numerical value that can be found within the value rasters (wave height, water surface, and DFE) underlying that polygon. Zones_txt and Hatch_txt are string type fields that contain descriptors of the polygon type, while the Hatch Field contains a numerical value for the type of hatching (1 for 0.1% Edge Zone, 2 for Wave Overtopping Zones, 3 for Dynamic Zone). The following table is an example of what a flood hatch file’s attribute table might look like.FIDShapeHatch_TypeZones_TxtHatchHatch_Txt0Polygon9999Shallow water flooding during extreme storms10.1% Edge Zone1Polygon9997Influenced by wave overtopping (incl. 9997 areas)2Wave Overtopping Zone2Polygon9998Dynamic Landform Areas3Dynamic ZoneSpecifically, the various hatch shapefiles can be defined as follows:• FID 0 Hatch Type – These represent areas of shallow water flooding during extreme storms. These are locations where flooding can only be expected during the most extreme events (> 1000-year return period) or where there are only minor flood depths (shallow flooding) during 1000-year return period AEP. These values only appear in 0.1% ACFEP level since they only occur at the very upper extent of extreme flooding. Water surface elevation values in these regions can be set to 0.1 foot above the site-specific land elevation to provide an estimate of the water surface elevation. Site-specific survey information may be needed to determine the land elevation. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9999 values within the rasters.• FID 1 Hatch Type – These represent wave overtopping zones. These hatch layers encompass the 9997 areas, but also include areas that have known values. Hatched areas of this type covering 9997 values would be expected to experience flooding caused by intermittent wave spray and overtopping only. Hatched areas of this type covering locations with values indicate that the flooding is caused by both direct sheet flow and wave overtopping. These hatched zones are provided for informational purposes by identifying zones that may require special design considerations for wave overtopping. Site-specific coastal processes analysis may also be required in these areas.• FID 2 Hatch Type – These represent areas where geomorphology is extremely dynamic and as such expected flooding may vary drastically. These values can appear in any ACFEP level. There are minimal locations of this type. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9998 values within the rasters.

Feature Classes are loaded onto tablet PCs and Field crews are sent to label the crop or land cover type and irrigation method for a subset of select fields or polygons. Each tablet PC is attached to a GPS unit for real-time tracking to continuously update the field crew’s location during the field labeling process.Digitizing is done as Geodatabase feature classes using ArcPro 3.1.0 with Sentinel imagery as a background with other layers added for reference. Updates to existing field boundaries of individual agricultural fields, urban areas and more are precisely digitized. Changes in irrigation type and land use are noted during this process.Cropland Data Layer (CDL) rasters from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) are downloaded for the appropriate year. https://nassgeodata.gmu.edu/CropScape/Zonal Statistics geoprocessing tools are used to attribute the polygons with updated crop types from the CDL. The data is then run through several stages of comparison to historical inventories and quality checking in order to determine and produce the final attributes.LUID - Unique ID number for each polygon in the final dataset, not consistent between yearly datasets.Landuse - A general land cover classification differentiating how the land is used.Agriculture: Land managed for crop or livestock purposes.Other: A broad classification of wildland.Riparian/Wetland: Wildland influenced by a high water table, often close to surface water.Urban: Developed areas, includes urban greenspace such as parks.Water: Surface water such as wet flats, streams, and lakes.CropGroup - Groupings of broader crop categories to allow easy access to or query of all orchard or grain types etc.Description - Attribute that describes/indicates the various crop types and land use types determined by the GIS process.IRR_Method - Crop Irrigation Method carried over from statewide field surveys ending in 2015 and updated based on imagery and yearly field checks.Drip: Water is applied through lines that slowly release water onto the surface or subsurface of the crop.Dry Crop: No irrigation method is applied to this agricultural land, the crop is irrigated via natural processes.Flood: Water is diverted from ditches or pipes upland from the crop in sufficient quantities to flood the irrigated plot.None: Associated with non-agricultural landSprinkler: Water is applied above the crop via sprinklers that generally move across the field.Sub-irrigated: This land does not have irrigation water applied, but due to a high water table receives more water, and is generally closely associated with a riparian area.Acres - Calculated acreage of the polygon.State - State where the polygons are found.Basin - The hydrologic basin where the polygons are found, closely related to HUC 6. These basin boundaries were created by DWRe to include portions of other basins that have inter-basin flows for management purposes.SubArea - The subarea where the polygons are found, closely related to the HUC 8. Subareas are subdivisions of the larger hydrologic basins created by DWRe.Label_Class - Combination of Label and Class_Name fields created during processing that indicates the specific crop, irrigation, and whether the CDL classified the land as a similar crop or an “Other” crop.LABEL - A shorthand descriptive label for each crop description and irrigation type.Class_Name - The majority pixel value from the USDA CDL Cropscape raster layer within the polygon, may differ from final crop determination (Description).OldLanduse - Similar to Landuse, but splits the agricultural land further depending on irrigation. Pre-2017 datasets defined this as Landuse.LU_Group - These codes represent some in-house groupings that are useful for symbology and other summarizing.Field_Check - Indicates the year the polygon was last field checked. *New for 2019SURV_YEAR - Indicates which year/growing season the data represents.

Flood Hatch ShapefilesIn addition to the three sets of rasters (Maximum Wave Heights, Water Surface Elevations, and DFEs) provided, separate shapefiles were also created to overlap and highlight special areas within the raster datasets produced for calculating DFEs. A flood hatch shapefile is not provided for every ACFEP level or for every region, but when it is provided, it encompasses the special areas for that level and region. The same hatch shapefile is applicable for all datatypes for the particular level and region. Flood hatch shapefiles encompass all areas of special values within the data rasters (including areas of 9999, 9998, and 9997 values). All regions have a 0.1% ACFEP level flood hatch shapefile because all 0.1% ACFEP rasters contain 9999 values.The flood hatch shapefiles contain individual polygons that describe the type of special area underlying that polygon’s spatial extent. For 9999 and 9998 values in the value rasters (water surface elevations, waves, and DFEs), the special hatched polygons will have the same extent of those values within those rasters. For 9997 values in the value rasters, the hatch polygon will always encompass the 9997 values, but may be larger in extent than just the location of those value cells. For these areas, water surface elevation, wave heights, and DFEs values may be provided, but they still represent a special zone.The Hatch polygons have 5 fields (Column headers) that describe each polygon within the shapefile. These fields include FID, Shape, Hatch_Type, Zones_txt, Hatch, and Hatch_Txt. The FID field contains an ID number for each polygon within that shapefile, while the Shape fieldlists the type of shapefile contained (polygon in all cases). The Hatch_Type field contains the numerical value that can be found within the value rasters (wave height, water surface, and DFE) underlying that polygon. Zones_txt and Hatch_txt are string type fields that contain descriptors of the polygon type, while the Hatch Field contains a numerical value for the type of hatching (1 for 0.1% Edge Zone, 2 for Wave Overtopping Zones, 3 for Dynamic Zone). The following table is an example of what a flood hatch file’s attribute table might look like.FIDShapeHatch_TypeZones_TxtHatchHatch_Txt0Polygon9999Shallow water flooding during extreme storms10.1% Edge Zone1Polygon9997Influenced by wave overtopping (incl. 9997 areas)2Wave Overtopping Zone2Polygon9998Dynamic Landform Areas3Dynamic ZoneSpecifically, the various hatch shapefiles can be defined as follows:• FID 0 Hatch Type – These represent areas of shallow water flooding during extreme storms. These are locations where flooding can only be expected during the most extreme events (> 1000-year return period) or where there are only minor flood depths (shallow flooding) during 1000-year return period AEP. These values only appear in 0.1% ACFEP level since they only occur at the very upper extent of extreme flooding. Water surface elevation values in these regions can be set to 0.1 foot above the site-specific land elevation to provide an estimate of the water surface elevation. Site-specific survey information may be needed to determine the land elevation. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9999 values within the rasters.• FID 1 Hatch Type – These represent wave overtopping zones. These hatch layers encompass the 9997 areas, but also include areas that have known values. Hatched areas of this type covering 9997 values would be expected to experience flooding caused by intermittent wave spray and overtopping only. Hatched areas of this type covering locations with values indicate that the flooding is caused by both direct sheet flow and wave overtopping. These hatched zones are provided for informational purposes by identifying zones that may require special design considerations for wave overtopping. Site-specific coastal processes analysis may also be required in these areas.• FID 2 Hatch Type – These represent areas where geomorphology is extremely dynamic and as such expected flooding may vary drastically. These values can appear in any ACFEP level. There are minimal locations of this type. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9998 values within the rasters.

Flood Hatch ShapefilesIn addition to the three sets of rasters (Maximum Wave Heights, Water Surface Elevations, and DFEs) provided, separate shapefiles were also created to overlap and highlight special areas within the raster datasets produced for calculating DFEs. A flood hatch shapefile is not provided for every ACFEP level or for every region, but when it is provided, it encompasses the special areas for that level and region. The same hatch shapefile is applicable for all datatypes for the particular level and region. Flood hatch shapefiles encompass all areas of special values within the data rasters (including areas of 9999, 9998, and 9997 values). All regions have a 0.1% ACFEP level flood hatch shapefile because all 0.1% ACFEP rasters contain 9999 values.The flood hatch shapefiles contain individual polygons that describe the type of special area underlying that polygon’s spatial extent. For 9999 and 9998 values in the value rasters (water surface elevations, waves, and DFEs), the special hatched polygons will have the same extent of those values within those rasters. For 9997 values in the value rasters, the hatch polygon will always encompass the 9997 values, but may be larger in extent than just the location of those value cells. For these areas, water surface elevation, wave heights, and DFEs values may be provided, but they still represent a special zone.The Hatch polygons have 5 fields (Column headers) that describe each polygon within the shapefile. These fields include FID, Shape, Hatch_Type, Zones_txt, Hatch, and Hatch_Txt. The FID field contains an ID number for each polygon within that shapefile, while the Shape fieldlists the type of shapefile contained (polygon in all cases). The Hatch_Type field contains the numerical value that can be found within the value rasters (wave height, water surface, and DFE) underlying that polygon. Zones_txt and Hatch_txt are string type fields that contain descriptors of the polygon type, while the Hatch Field contains a numerical value for the type of hatching (1 for 0.1% Edge Zone, 2 for Wave Overtopping Zones, 3 for Dynamic Zone). The following table is an example of what a flood hatch file’s attribute table might look like.FIDShapeHatch_TypeZones_TxtHatchHatch_Txt0Polygon9999Shallow water flooding during extreme storms10.1% Edge Zone1Polygon9997Influenced by wave overtopping (incl. 9997 areas)2Wave Overtopping Zone2Polygon9998Dynamic Landform Areas3Dynamic ZoneSpecifically, the various hatch shapefiles can be defined as follows:• FID 0 Hatch Type – These represent areas of shallow water flooding during extreme storms. These are locations where flooding can only be expected during the most extreme events (> 1000-year return period) or where there are only minor flood depths (shallow flooding) during 1000-year return period AEP. These values only appear in 0.1% ACFEP level since they only occur at the very upper extent of extreme flooding. Water surface elevation values in these regions can be set to 0.1 foot above the site-specific land elevation to provide an estimate of the water surface elevation. Site-specific survey information may be needed to determine the land elevation. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9999 values within the rasters.• FID 1 Hatch Type – These represent wave overtopping zones. These hatch layers encompass the 9997 areas, but also include areas that have known values. Hatched areas of this type covering 9997 values would be expected to experience flooding caused by intermittent wave spray and overtopping only. Hatched areas of this type covering locations with values indicate that the flooding is caused by both direct sheet flow and wave overtopping. These hatched zones are provided for informational purposes by identifying zones that may require special design considerations for wave overtopping. Site-specific coastal processes analysis may also be required in these areas.• FID 2 Hatch Type – These represent areas where geomorphology is extremely dynamic and as such expected flooding may vary drastically. These values can appear in any ACFEP level. There are minimal locations of this type. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9998 values within the rasters.

Flood Hatch ShapefilesIn addition to the three sets of rasters (Maximum Wave Heights, Water Surface Elevations, and DFEs) provided, separate shapefiles were also created to overlap and highlight special areas within the raster datasets produced for calculating DFEs. A flood hatch shapefile is not provided for every ACFEP level or for every region, but when it is provided, it encompasses the special areas for that level and region. The same hatch shapefile is applicable for all datatypes for the particular level and region. Flood hatch shapefiles encompass all areas of special values within the data rasters (including areas of 9999, 9998, and 9997 values). All regions have a 0.1% ACFEP level flood hatch shapefile because all 0.1% ACFEP rasters contain 9999 values.The flood hatch shapefiles contain individual polygons that describe the type of special area underlying that polygon’s spatial extent. For 9999 and 9998 values in the value rasters (water surface elevations, waves, and DFEs), the special hatched polygons will have the same extent of those values within those rasters. For 9997 values in the value rasters, the hatch polygon will always encompass the 9997 values, but may be larger in extent than just the location of those value cells. For these areas, water surface elevation, wave heights, and DFEs values may be provided, but they still represent a special zone.The Hatch polygons have 5 fields (Column headers) that describe each polygon within the shapefile. These fields include FID, Shape, Hatch_Type, Zones_txt, Hatch, and Hatch_Txt. The FID field contains an ID number for each polygon within that shapefile, while the Shape fieldlists the type of shapefile contained (polygon in all cases). The Hatch_Type field contains the numerical value that can be found within the value rasters (wave height, water surface, and DFE) underlying that polygon. Zones_txt and Hatch_txt are string type fields that contain descriptors of the polygon type, while the Hatch Field contains a numerical value for the type of hatching (1 for 0.1% Edge Zone, 2 for Wave Overtopping Zones, 3 for Dynamic Zone). The following table is an example of what a flood hatch file’s attribute table might look like.FIDShapeHatch_TypeZones_TxtHatchHatch_Txt0Polygon9999Shallow water flooding during extreme storms10.1% Edge Zone1Polygon9997Influenced by wave overtopping (incl. 9997 areas)2Wave Overtopping Zone2Polygon9998Dynamic Landform Areas3Dynamic ZoneSpecifically, the various hatch shapefiles can be defined as follows:• FID 0 Hatch Type – These represent areas of shallow water flooding during extreme storms. These are locations where flooding can only be expected during the most extreme events (> 1000-year return period) or where there are only minor flood depths (shallow flooding) during 1000-year return period AEP. These values only appear in 0.1% ACFEP level since they only occur at the very upper extent of extreme flooding. Water surface elevation values in these regions can be set to 0.1 foot above the site-specific land elevation to provide an estimate of the water surface elevation. Site-specific survey information may be needed to determine the land elevation. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9999 values within the rasters.• FID 1 Hatch Type – These represent wave overtopping zones. These hatch layers encompass the 9997 areas, but also include areas that have known values. Hatched areas of this type covering 9997 values would be expected to experience flooding caused by intermittent wave spray and overtopping only. Hatched areas of this type covering locations with values indicate that the flooding is caused by both direct sheet flow and wave overtopping. These hatched zones are provided for informational purposes by identifying zones that may require special design considerations for wave overtopping. Site-specific coastal processes analysis may also be required in these areas.• FID 2 Hatch Type – These represent areas where geomorphology is extremely dynamic and as such expected flooding may vary drastically. These values can appear in any ACFEP level. There are minimal locations of this type. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9998 values within the rasters.

Flood Hatch ShapefilesIn addition to the three sets of rasters (Maximum Wave Heights, Water Surface Elevations, and DFEs) provided, separate shapefiles were also created to overlap and highlight special areas within the raster datasets produced for calculating DFEs. A flood hatch shapefile is not provided for every ACFEP level or for every region, but when it is provided, it encompasses the special areas for that level and region. The same hatch shapefile is applicable for all datatypes for the particular level and region. Flood hatch shapefiles encompass all areas of special values within the data rasters (including areas of 9999, 9998, and 9997 values). All regions have a 0.1% ACFEP level flood hatch shapefile because all 0.1% ACFEP rasters contain 9999 values.The flood hatch shapefiles contain individual polygons that describe the type of special area underlying that polygon’s spatial extent. For 9999 and 9998 values in the value rasters (water surface elevations, waves, and DFEs), the special hatched polygons will have the same extent of those values within those rasters. For 9997 values in the value rasters, the hatch polygon will always encompass the 9997 values, but may be larger in extent than just the location of those value cells. For these areas, water surface elevation, wave heights, and DFEs values may be provided, but they still represent a special zone.The Hatch polygons have 5 fields (Column headers) that describe each polygon within the shapefile. These fields include FID, Shape, Hatch_Type, Zones_txt, Hatch, and Hatch_Txt. The FID field contains an ID number for each polygon within that shapefile, while the Shape fieldlists the type of shapefile contained (polygon in all cases). The Hatch_Type field contains the numerical value that can be found within the value rasters (wave height, water surface, and DFE) underlying that polygon. Zones_txt and Hatch_txt are string type fields that contain descriptors of the polygon type, while the Hatch Field contains a numerical value for the type of hatching (1 for 0.1% Edge Zone, 2 for Wave Overtopping Zones, 3 for Dynamic Zone). The following table is an example of what a flood hatch file’s attribute table might look like.FIDShapeHatch_TypeZones_TxtHatchHatch_Txt0Polygon9999Shallow water flooding during extreme storms10.1% Edge Zone1Polygon9997Influenced by wave overtopping (incl. 9997 areas)2Wave Overtopping Zone2Polygon9998Dynamic Landform Areas3Dynamic ZoneSpecifically, the various hatch shapefiles can be defined as follows:• FID 0 Hatch Type – These represent areas of shallow water flooding during extreme storms. These are locations where flooding can only be expected during the most extreme events (> 1000-year return period) or where there are only minor flood depths (shallow flooding) during 1000-year return period AEP. These values only appear in 0.1% ACFEP level since they only occur at the very upper extent of extreme flooding. Water surface elevation values in these regions can be set to 0.1 foot above the site-specific land elevation to provide an estimate of the water surface elevation. Site-specific survey information may be needed to determine the land elevation. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9999 values within the rasters.• FID 1 Hatch Type – These represent wave overtopping zones. These hatch layers encompass the 9997 areas, but also include areas that have known values. Hatched areas of this type covering 9997 values would be expected to experience flooding caused by intermittent wave spray and overtopping only. Hatched areas of this type covering locations with values indicate that the flooding is caused by both direct sheet flow and wave overtopping. These hatched zones are provided for informational purposes by identifying zones that may require special design considerations for wave overtopping. Site-specific coastal processes analysis may also be required in these areas.• FID 2 Hatch Type – These represent areas where geomorphology is extremely dynamic and as such expected flooding may vary drastically. These values can appear in any ACFEP level. There are minimal locations of this type. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9998 values within the rasters.

Flood Hatch ShapefilesIn addition to the three sets of rasters (Maximum Wave Heights, Water Surface Elevations, and DFEs) provided, separate shapefiles were also created to overlap and highlight special areas within the raster datasets produced for calculating DFEs. A flood hatch shapefile is not provided for every ACFEP level or for every region, but when it is provided, it encompasses the special areas for that level and region. The same hatch shapefile is applicable for all datatypes for the particular level and region. Flood hatch shapefiles encompass all areas of special values within the data rasters (including areas of 9999, 9998, and 9997 values). All regions have a 0.1% ACFEP level flood hatch shapefile because all 0.1% ACFEP rasters contain 9999 values.The flood hatch shapefiles contain individual polygons that describe the type of special area underlying that polygon’s spatial extent. For 9999 and 9998 values in the value rasters (water surface elevations, waves, and DFEs), the special hatched polygons will have the same extent of those values within those rasters. For 9997 values in the value rasters, the hatch polygon will always encompass the 9997 values, but may be larger in extent than just the location of those value cells. For these areas, water surface elevation, wave heights, and DFEs values may be provided, but they still represent a special zone.The Hatch polygons have 5 fields (Column headers) that describe each polygon within the shapefile. These fields include FID, Shape, Hatch_Type, Zones_txt, Hatch, and Hatch_Txt. The FID field contains an ID number for each polygon within that shapefile, while the Shape fieldlists the type of shapefile contained (polygon in all cases). The Hatch_Type field contains the numerical value that can be found within the value rasters (wave height, water surface, and DFE) underlying that polygon. Zones_txt and Hatch_txt are string type fields that contain descriptors of the polygon type, while the Hatch Field contains a numerical value for the type of hatching (1 for 0.1% Edge Zone, 2 for Wave Overtopping Zones, 3 for Dynamic Zone). The following table is an example of what a flood hatch file’s attribute table might look like.FIDShapeHatch_TypeZones_TxtHatchHatch_Txt0Polygon9999Shallow water flooding during extreme storms10.1% Edge Zone1Polygon9997Influenced by wave overtopping (incl. 9997 areas)2Wave Overtopping Zone2Polygon9998Dynamic Landform Areas3Dynamic ZoneSpecifically, the various hatch shapefiles can be defined as follows:• FID 0 Hatch Type – These represent areas of shallow water flooding during extreme storms. These are locations where flooding can only be expected during the most extreme events (> 1000-year return period) or where there are only minor flood depths (shallow flooding) during 1000-year return period AEP. These values only appear in 0.1% ACFEP level since they only occur at the very upper extent of extreme flooding. Water surface elevation values in these regions can be set to 0.1 foot above the site-specific land elevation to provide an estimate of the water surface elevation. Site-specific survey information may be needed to determine the land elevation. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9999 values within the rasters.• FID 1 Hatch Type – These represent wave overtopping zones. These hatch layers encompass the 9997 areas, but also include areas that have known values. Hatched areas of this type covering 9997 values would be expected to experience flooding caused by intermittent wave spray and overtopping only. Hatched areas of this type covering locations with values indicate that the flooding is caused by both direct sheet flow and wave overtopping. These hatched zones are provided for informational purposes by identifying zones that may require special design considerations for wave overtopping. Site-specific coastal processes analysis may also be required in these areas.• FID 2 Hatch Type – These represent areas where geomorphology is extremely dynamic and as such expected flooding may vary drastically. These values can appear in any ACFEP level. There are minimal locations of this type. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9998 values within the rasters.

Flood Hatch ShapefilesIn addition to the three sets of rasters (Maximum Wave Heights, Water Surface Elevations, and DFEs) provided, separate shapefiles were also created to overlap and highlight special areas within the raster datasets produced for calculating DFEs. A flood hatch shapefile is not provided for every ACFEP level or for every region, but when it is provided, it encompasses the special areas for that level and region. The same hatch shapefile is applicable for all datatypes for the particular level and region. Flood hatch shapefiles encompass all areas of special values within the data rasters (including areas of 9999, 9998, and 9997 values). All regions have a 0.1% ACFEP level flood hatch shapefile because all 0.1% ACFEP rasters contain 9999 values.The flood hatch shapefiles contain individual polygons that describe the type of special area underlying that polygon’s spatial extent. For 9999 and 9998 values in the value rasters (water surface elevations, waves, and DFEs), the special hatched polygons will have the same extent of those values within those rasters. For 9997 values in the value rasters, the hatch polygon will always encompass the 9997 values, but may be larger in extent than just the location of those value cells. For these areas, water surface elevation, wave heights, and DFEs values may be provided, but they still represent a special zone.The Hatch polygons have 5 fields (Column headers) that describe each polygon within the shapefile. These fields include FID, Shape, Hatch_Type, Zones_txt, Hatch, and Hatch_Txt. The FID field contains an ID number for each polygon within that shapefile, while the Shape fieldlists the type of shapefile contained (polygon in all cases). The Hatch_Type field contains the numerical value that can be found within the value rasters (wave height, water surface, and DFE) underlying that polygon. Zones_txt and Hatch_txt are string type fields that contain descriptors of the polygon type, while the Hatch Field contains a numerical value for the type of hatching (1 for 0.1% Edge Zone, 2 for Wave Overtopping Zones, 3 for Dynamic Zone). The following table is an example of what a flood hatch file’s attribute table might look like.FIDShapeHatch_TypeZones_TxtHatchHatch_Txt0Polygon9999Shallow water flooding during extreme storms10.1% Edge Zone1Polygon9997Influenced by wave overtopping (incl. 9997 areas)2Wave Overtopping Zone2Polygon9998Dynamic Landform Areas3Dynamic ZoneSpecifically, the various hatch shapefiles can be defined as follows:• FID 0 Hatch Type – These represent areas of shallow water flooding during extreme storms. These are locations where flooding can only be expected during the most extreme events (> 1000-year return period) or where there are only minor flood depths (shallow flooding) during 1000-year return period AEP. These values only appear in 0.1% ACFEP level since they only occur at the very upper extent of extreme flooding. Water surface elevation values in these regions can be set to 0.1 foot above the site-specific land elevation to provide an estimate of the water surface elevation. Site-specific survey information may be needed to determine the land elevation. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9999 values within the rasters.• FID 1 Hatch Type – These represent wave overtopping zones. These hatch layers encompass the 9997 areas, but also include areas that have known values. Hatched areas of this type covering 9997 values would be expected to experience flooding caused by intermittent wave spray and overtopping only. Hatched areas of this type covering locations with values indicate that the flooding is caused by both direct sheet flow and wave overtopping. These hatched zones are provided for informational purposes by identifying zones that may require special design considerations for wave overtopping. Site-specific coastal processes analysis may also be required in these areas.• FID 2 Hatch Type – These represent areas where geomorphology is extremely dynamic and as such expected flooding may vary drastically. These values can appear in any ACFEP level. There are minimal locations of this type. These hatch areas directly match areas with 9998 values within the rasters.

Reason for Selection Low-urban historic landscapes indicate significant cultural landscapes whose cultural context has been less impacted by urban development. Cultural landscapes are “properties [that] represent the combined works of nature and of man” (UNESCO 2012). Loss of natural habitat within these cultural landscapes reduces their overall historic and cultural value. Input Data

Southeast Blueprint 2023 subregions: Caribbean
Southeast Blueprint 2023 extent
2020 LANDFIRE Existing Vegetation Type (EVT) (v2.2.0) for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands; access the data for U.S. Insular Areas
The following The National Register of Historic Places data for Puerto Rico provided by Eduardo Cancio, Information Systems Specialist with the Puerto Rico State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on 2-21-2023 (contact ecancio@prshpo.pr.gov for more information):NRHP_PR_individual_properties.shp
    NRHP_PR_lineal_districts.shp
    NRHP_PR_polygonal_districts.shp 

The National Register of Historic Places reflects what Americans value in their historic built environment. It is the collection of our human imprint on the landscape that records through time our changing relationship with the landscape, bridging between modern life and our history by providing, as closely as possible, experiences that evoke our empathy and understanding of previous eras.

  OpenStreetMap data “multipolygons” layer, accessed 3-14-2023 

A polygon from this dataset is considered a historic site if the “historic” tag is not null. In OpenStreetMap, a historic feature refers to “features that still exist or of which traces are observable, and that are of historic interest, or where the feature class is generally of historical interest”. We only used historic polygons if the name tag is also not null. 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.

  Select USVI historic districts: Polygon boundaries for the Christiansted National Historic District on St. Thomas and Charlotte Amalie Historic and Architectural Historic District on St. Croix, provided by Nikita Beck with the University of the Virgin Islands on 3-6-2023 (contact nikita.beck@uvi.edu for more information)

Mapping Steps

Identify urban areas using the following classes from 2020 LANDFIRE EVT: Developed-High Intensity, Developed-Low Intensity, Developed-Medium Intensity, Developed-Open Space, Developed-Roads. Classify all urban pixels as 1 and all other pixels as 0.
Calculate the percent urban in a 270 m radius circle for each pixel using the Focal Statistics tool in ArcGIS. Since the LANDFIRE data resolution is 30 m, 270 m (9 pixels) approximates a 250 m radius. Retain all pixels that are <50% urban within a 270 m radius. 
Create a historic places layer by combining the following vector datasets as follows:Buffer National Register point data from the Puerto Rico SHPO by 100 m.
    Combine National Register polygons from the Puerto Rico SHPO, select USVI historic districts, and OpenStreetMap polygons. Only use OpenStreetMap polygons if both the historic and name columns are null. Buffer the polygons by 30 m.
    Buffer line data from the Puerto Rico SHPO by 30 m.
    Merge all buffered point, polygon, and line data into one layer and convert to a 30 m raster representing historic places.

Use the historic places raster to remove areas that fall outside of the historic places.
Reclassify the above raster into 3 classes, seen in the final indicator values below.
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 values Indicator values are assigned as follows: 2 = Historic place with nearby low-urban buffer 1 = Historic place with nearby high-urban buffer 0 = Not identified as a historic place Known Issues

There are likely spatial mapping errors for some of the historic areas. 
Some historic areas with cultural importance are not captured in the National Register of Historic Places.
The approach to measuring urban development doesn’t capture degradation to historic places that were historically in larger cities (e.g., courthouses and other downtown buildings). It also doesn’t distinguish between historic places that have always been urban and historic places that used to be low-urban.
This layer likely underrepresents some historic areas in the U.S. Virgin Islands compared to Puerto Rico because we were unable to incorporate historic places data from the USVI SHPO during the timeline of this Blueprint update. As a result, some sites on the National Register of Historic Places are not depicted in this indicator.
OpenStreetMap 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 historic site) or incorrect tags (e.g., labelling an area as a historic site that does not have historic value). However, using a crowdsourced dataset gives on-the-ground experts, Blueprint users, and community members the power to fix errors and add new historic sites to improve the accuracy and coverage of this indicator in the future.
Because open water is considered a non-urban landcover for the purposes of this analysis, this indicator is likely overprioritizing some urbanized historic areas that are close to water, such as marinas and bridges.

Disclaimer: Comparing with Older Indicator Versions There are numerous problems with using Southeast Blueprint indicators for change analysis. Please consult Blueprint staff if you would like to do this (email hilary_morris@fws.gov). Literature Cited OpenStreetMap. Historic. Data extracted through Geofabrik downloads. Accessed March 14, 2023. [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:historic].

LANDFIRE, Earth Resources Observation and Science Center (EROS), U.S. Geological Survey. Published August 1, 2022. LANDFIRE 2020 Existing Vegetation Type (EVT) Puerto Rico US Virgin Islands. LF 2020, raster digital data. Sioux Falls, SD. [https://www.landfire.gov].UNESCO (2012) Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention [1]. UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Paris. Page 14. [https://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide12-en.pdf].