Purpose:This feature layer describes water quality sampling data performed at several operating coal mines in the South Fork of Cherry watershed, West Virginia.Source & Data:Data was downloaded from WV Department of Environmental Protection's ApplicationXtender online database and EPA's ECHO online database between January and April, 2023.There are five data sets here: Surface Water Monitoring Sites, which contains basic information about monitoring sites (name, lat/long, etc.) and NPDES Outlet Monitoring Sites, which contains similar information about outfall discharges surrounding the active mines. Biological Assessment Stations (BAS) contain similar information for pre-project biological sampling. NOV Summary contains locations of Notices of Violation received by South Fork Coal Company from WV Department of Environmental Protection. The Quarterly Monitoring Reports table contains the sampling data for the Surface Water Monitoring Sites, which actually goes as far back as 2018 for some mines. Parameters of concern include iron, aluminum and selenium, among others.A relationship class between Surface Water Monitoring Sites and the Quarterly Monitoring Reports allows access to individual sample results.Processing:Notices of Violation were obtained from the WV DEP AppXtender database for Mining and Reclamation Article 3 (SMCRA) Permitting, and Mining and Reclamation NPDES Permitting. Violation data were entered into Excel and loaded into ArcGIS Pro as a CSV text file with Lat/Long coordinates for each Violation. The CSV file was converted to a point feature class.Water quality data were downloaded in PDF format from the WVDEP AppXtender website. Non-searchable PDFs were converted via Optical Character Recognition, so that data could be copied. Sample results were copied and pasted manually to Notepad++, and several columns were re-ordered. Data was grouped by sample station and sorted chronologically. Sample data, contained in the associated table (SW_QM_Reports) were linked back to the monitoring station locations using the Station_ID text field in a geodatabase relationship class.Water monitoring station locations were taken from published Drainage Maps and from water quality reports. A CSV table was created with station Lat/Long locations and loaded into ArcGIS Pro. It was then converted to a point feature class.Stream Crossings and Road Construction Areas were digitized as polygon feature classes from project Drainage and Progress maps that were converted to TIFF image format from PDF and georeferenced.The ArcGIS Pro map - South Fork Cherry River Water Quality, was published as a service definition to ArcGIS Online.Symbology:NOV Summary - dark blue, solid pointLost Flats Surface Water Monitoring Sites: Data Available - medium blue point, black outlineLost Flats Surface Water Monitoring Sites: No Data Available - no-fill point, thick medium blue outlineLost Flats NPDES Outlet Monitoring Sites - orange point, black outlineBlue Knob Surface Water Monitoring Sites: Data Available - medium blue point, black outlineBlue Knob Surface Water Monitoring Sites: No Data Available - no-fill point, thick medium blue outlineBlue Knob NPDES Outlet Monitoring Sites - orange point, black outlineBlue Knob Biological Assessment Stations: Data Available - medium green point, black outlineBlue Knob Biological Assessment Stations: No Data Available - no-fill point, thick medium green outlineRocky Run Surface Water Monitoring Sites: Data Available - medium blue point, black outlineRocky Run Surface Water Monitoring Sites: No Data Available - no-fill point, thick medium blue outlineRocky Run NPDES Outlet Monitoring Sites - orange point, black outlineRocky Run Biological Assessment Stations: Data Available - medium green point, black outlineRocky Run Biological Assessment Stations: No Data Available - no-fill point, thick medium green outlineRocky Run Stream Crossings: turquoise blue polygon with red outlineRocky Run Haul Road Construction Areas: dark red (40% transparent) polygon with black outlineHaul Road No 2 Surface Water Monitoring Sites: Data Available - medium blue point, black outlineHaul Road No 2 Surface Water Monitoring Sites: No Data Available - no-fill point, thick medium blue outlineHaul Road No 2 NPDES Outlet Monitoring Sites - orange point, black outline

Point feature class and related table containing the Precise Surveys measurement time series. Measurements include elevations, Northings and Eastings, distances, and point-to-point measurements. Northing and Easting measurements are in CA State Plane Coordinate systems, Elevations measurements are provided in NAVD88 or NGVD29. This dataset is for data exploration only. These measurements and point locations are not considered survey-grade since there may be nuances such as epochs, adjustments, and measurement methods that are not fully reflected in the GIS data. These values are not considered authoritative values and should not be used in-lieu of actual surveyed values provided by a licensed land surveyor. Related data and time series are stored in a table connected to the point feature class via a relationship class. There may be multiple table entries and time series associated to a single mark. Data was assembled through an import of Excel tables and import of mark locations in ArcGIS Pro. Records were edited by DOE, Geomatics, GDSS to resolve any non-unique mark names. This dataset was last updated 4/2024.

Description: This dataset consists of field data (arthropods, nematodes and NDVI) collected over the course of 6 field excursions in 2015 and 2016 near TyTy, GA, in a field used for growing Miscanthus x giganteus. It also includes interpolated values of soil measurements collected in 2015 and meteorological data collected on an adjacent farm. Point-in-time measurements include all meteorological, NDVI, arthropod and nematode measurements and their derivatives. Fixed values were measurements that were held constant across all sampling dates, including location, terrain and soils measurements and their derivatives. Dawn Olson and Jason Schmidt collected and processed arthropod count data. Jason Schmidt collected and processed spider count data and computed spider diversity. Richard Davis collected and processed nematode count data. Alisa Coffin collected and processed NDVI data and positional locations. Tim Strickland collected and processed soils data and Alisa Coffin interpolated soils values using kriging to derive values at arthropod sample locations. David Bosch collected and processed meteorological data. Lynne Seymour provided statistical expertise in deriving any estimated values (phloem feeders, parasitoids, spiders, and natural enemies). Alisa Coffin derived terrain data (elevation, slope, aspect, and distances) from publicly available datasets, transformed values (SI, WI, etc), carried out the geographically weighted regression analysis and calculated C:SE values, harmonized the full dataset, and compiled it using Esri's ArcGIS Pro 2.5. Methods for most data are published in the accompanying paper and associated supplements. Questions about dataset development and management should be directed to Alisa Coffin (alisa.coffin@usda.gov). This work was accomplished as a joint USDA and University of Georgia project funded by a cooperative agreement (#6048-13000-026-21S). This research was a contribution from the Long-Term Agroecosystem Research (LTAR) network. LTAR is supported by the United States Department of Agriculture. At request of the author, the data resources are under embargo. The embargo will expire on Fri, Jan 01, 2021. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Spreadsheet of data. File Name: GibbsMisFarm_Arthrop_Env_DepVar_201516_final.xlsxResource Description: This workbook contains all of the data used in this analysis. The first worksheet contains data dictionary information.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel, Office 365,url: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/excel Resource Title: GeoJSON. File Name: MiscanthusXGiganteusGeoJSON.json

Effective pavement maintenance is vital for the economy, optimal performance, and safety, necessitating a thorough evaluation of pavement conditions such as strength, roughness, and surface distress. Pavement performance indicators significantly influence vehicle safety and ride quality. Recent advancements have focused on leveraging data-driven models to predict pavement performance, aiming to optimize fund allocation and enhance Maintenance and Rehabilitation (M&R) strategies through precise assessment of pavement conditions and defects. A critical prerequisite for these models is access to standardized, high-quality datasets to enhance prediction accuracy in pavement infrastructure management. This data article presents a comprehensive dataset compiled to support pavement performance prediction research, focusing on Southeast Texas, particularly the flood-prone region of Beaumont. The dataset includes pavement and traffic data, meteorological records, flood maps, ground deformation, and topographic indices to assess the impact of load-associated and non-load-associated pavement degradation. Data preprocessing was conducted using ArcGIS Pro, Microsoft Excel, and Python, ensuring the dataset is formatted for direct application in data-driven modeling approaches, including Machine Learning methods. Key contributions of this dataset include facilitating the analysis of climatic and environmental impacts on pavement conditions, enabling the identification of critical features influencing pavement performance, and allowing comprehensive data analysis to explore correlations and trends among input variables. By addressing gaps in input variable selection studies, this dataset supports the development of predictive tools for estimating future maintenance needs and improving the resilience of pavement infrastructure in flood-affected areas. This work highlights the importance of standardized datasets in advancing pavement management systems and provides a foundation for future research to enhance pavement performance prediction accuracy.

Version 3 of the Named Landforms of the World (NLWv3) is an update of version 2 of the Named Landforms of the World (NLWv2). NLWv2 will remain available as the compilation that best matches the work of E.M. Bridges and Richard E. Murphy. In NLWv3, we added attributes that describe each landform's volcanism based on data from the Smithsonian Institution's Global Volcanism Program (GVP). We designed NLWv3 layers for two purposes:To label maps with broadly accepted names for physiographic features. To add landform attributes to other layers. For example, species observation data or other small features to enable rich and relevant descriptions for how those features relate to landforms. To accomplish this, typically, we use overlay tools such as Identity. For background, version 2 provided features with the physiographic and geomorphologic characteristics for the world's named landforms. This means it was more than just showing the land versus water or mountains versus plains; it also included the underlying structure and processes that created the landforms. We begin with the largest landform regions, which are continents, followed by tectonic plates, then divisions, provinces, sections, and finally, individual landforms. In adding the GVP volcanic landforms to NLWv3, we learned that volcanoes are relatively short-lived as landforms, with most not enduring for two million years. For context, the age of the rocks in most of the Earth's mountain ranges is in the tens to hundreds of millions of years. The full collection of layers and maps for NLWv3 are available in an ArcGIS Online Group named Named Landforms Of the World v3 (NLWv3) Layers and Maps. The GVP included two inventories--one for the Holocene Epoch, which are the volcanoes that formed during most recent 11,700 years (since the last ice age). The other is for the Pleistocene Epoch, which precedes the Holocene, and lasted about 2.6 million years. While the Pleistocene epoch is 222 times longer than the Holocene, it only has 7.8% more volcanoes. Most of the volcanoes that formed during the Pleistocene have disappeared through natural erosional and depositional processes. In NLWv3, volcanic landforms include calderas, clusters and complexes, shields, stratovolcanoes, and minor volcanic features such as cinder cones, lava domes, and fissure vents. Not all the GVP features, particularly fissure vents and remnants of calderas, are large enough to be mapped as polygons in NLWv3. Similarly, complexes and volcanic fields typically had greater areas and included many individual cinder cones and calderas. ContinentCount of Volcanic LandformsArea km2 of Volcanic Landforms (% of land area)Europe7822,888 (0.23%)Antarctica4234,035 (0.27%)Australia14757,422 (0.65%)South America37081,475 (0.46%)Small Volcanic Islands559124,310 (8.52%)Africa282147,116 (0.50%)Asia698227,486 (0.53%)North America622295,340 (1.23%)Global Totals2,7981,000,073 (0.67%)This table shows the distribution of volcanic landforms and their surface areas. Overview of UpdatesCorresponding landform polygons now include attributes for the GVP's ID, name, province, and region. Details are provided below in the volcanic attributes section. Additionally, a text description of volcanism for each GVP feature was derived from these attributes to provide a reader-friendly characterization of each volcanic landform.Landforms of Antarctica. Given recent analysis of Antarctica and the use of GVP data, rudimentary landform features for Antarctica have been added. See details in the Antarctica section below.Refined the definition of Murphy's Isolated Volcanics classification. If the volcanic landform occurred outside of an orogenic, rifting, or subducting zone, only then did we consider it isolated. The areas along tectonic plate boundaries are where volcanoes typically occur. Only volcanoes occurring in areas with no tectonic activity are considered isolated. These typically occur in mid-continent or mid-tectonic plate. See details in the Isolated Volcanic Areas section.Edits to tectonic process attributes in selected areas. The GVP point locations for volcanoes include an attribute for the underlying tectonic process. The concept matched the existing tectonic process in the NLWv2, and we compared the values. When the values differed, we reviewed research and made changes. See details in the Tectonic Process section below.Minor boundary changes at the province, section, and landform level in the western mountains of North and South America. Details are provided below in the Boundary Change Locations section. Technical CharacteristicsThe NLWv2 and NLWv3 are derived from the same raster datasets used to produce the 2018 version of the World Terrestrial Ecosystems (WTEs), which, when combined, have a lowest-common-denominator resolution (minimum mapping unit) of 1 km. Some features, such as very small islands, were not included in NLWv3, and complex coastlines were simplified and were only included if the 1-km cell contained at least 50% land. Because the coastlines in the raster datasets varied by as much as 3 km from the actual coastline, nearly always due to missing land. Many of the worst such cases in NLWv2 were manually corrected using the 12-30-meter resolution World Hillshade layer as a guide. In NLWv3, we continued this work by adding 247 volcanic islands, some of which were smaller than 1 km in area. We estimate that these islands comprise about one percent of the world's smaller islands. In NLWv3, we also refined the coastlines of volcanic coastal areas, particularly in Oceania and Japan. For NLWv4, we plan to continue this refinement work, intending that future versions of NLW will have a progressively refined, medium-resolution coastline. However, we do not intend to capture the full detail of the Global Islands dataset, which was produced from 30-m Landsat data. Detailed Description of Updates Volcanic AttributesThe GVP Excel spreadsheets for the Holocene and Pleistocene epochs, which contained the coordinates and attributes for each volcano, were combined. A column for the geologic age was added before saving the spreadsheet as a .CSV file and importing into ArcGIS Pro. The XY Table to Points tool was used to create point features. Nearly ten percent of the point locations that lacked sufficient precision to fall within the correct landform polygon were revised manually in order to assign the correct Volcano ID to each polygon.2,394 of the 2,662 GVP volcanic features were assigned to landform polygons. 198 GVP features were not assigned because they represented undersea features, and 75 GVP features did not have apparent corresponding landform polygons because they were either too small or indistinguishable from surrounding topography. Of the 2,394 assigned GVP features, 48% are Holocene Age features and 52% are Pleistocene epoch features. 225 GVP features did not fall within within a landform feature that represented topographically a volcanic landform feature, such as a caldera or stratovolcano. This was usually due to insufficient precision of the GVP coordinates, which sometimes were rounded to the nearest integer of latitude and longitude and could therefore be over 50km away from the landform's location. AttributeDescriptionVolcano ID (SI)The six-digit unique ID for the Global Volcanism Program features.Volcano Name (SI)The Name of the volcanic feature as provided by the Global Volcanism Program. Volcanic Region (SI)The Name of the volcanic region as provided by the Global Volcanism Program. Volcanic Province (SI)The Name of the volcanic province as provided by the Global Volcanism Program. VolcanismA consistently formatted description volcanism for the landform feature based on the age, last eruption, landform type, and type of material. This information was not consistently available from the Global Volcanism Program, and we used a Python script to determine the condition of the Global Volcanism Program"s data and then include whatever information was available. AntarcticaSeveral recent analyses of Antarctica complemented the GVP point features. In particular, the British Antarctic Survey's 2019 Deep glacial troughs and stabilizing ridges unveiled beneath the margins of the Antarctic ice sheet show sufficiently detailed land surface elevation beneath the ice sheets to support identifying topographic landform classes. We georeferenced the elevation image and combined it with Bridge's geomorphological divisions and provinces to divide the continent into different landform polygons. Additional work is needed to make these landform polygons as rich and accurately defined as those in NLWv2. Isolated Volcanic AreasThere are 333 Isolated Volcanic landforms in NLWv2. We intentionally expanded on Murphy"s map which could not show many of the smaller landforms and areas due to the 1:50,000,000 scale (poster sized map of the world). Murphy"s map only included isolated volcanic areas in three locations: north-central Africa, Hawaii, and Iceland. In NLWv2, we used the Global Lithological Map to identify several areas on each continent and used the example of Hawaii to include many other known volcanic islands. In most ways, Isolated Volcanics denoted geographic isolation from other mountain systems. NLWv3 includes 2,798 volcanic landform features, and 185 have been assigned Murphy's Isolated Volcanic structure class because they do not occur within a region with the tectonic process of orogenic, subduction, or rifting. These Isolated Volcanic landform features are located mostly in mid-tectonic plate regions of Africa, the Arabian Peninsula, and on islands, particularly in the southern hemisphere, with a few in North America and Asia. NLWv3 contains 2,603 volcanic landform features, occurring on all continents and on islands within all oceans. Tectonic ProcessThe GVP data included a tectonic setting attribute that was compiled independently of the NLWv2 tectonic setting variable. When these