Class I and II surface water classification. The Clean Water Act requires that the surface waters of each state be classified according to designated uses. Florida has six classes with associated designated uses, which are arranged in order of degree of protection required: Class I - Potable Water Supplies Fourteen general areas throughout the state including: impoundments and associated tributaries, certain lakes, rivers, or portions of rivers, used as a drinking water supply. Class II - Shellfish Propagation or Harvesting Generally coastal waters where shellfish harvesting occurs. For a more detailed description of classes and specific waterbody designations, see 62-302.400.
Class I and II surface water classification boundaries. The Clean Water Act requires that the surface waters of each state be classified according to designated uses. Florida has six classes with associated designated uses, which are arranged in order of degree of protection required: Class I - Potable Water Supplies Fourteen general areas throughout the state including: impoundments and associated tributaries, certain lakes, rivers, or portions of rivers, used as a drinking water supply. Class II - Shellfish Propagation or Harvesting Generally coastal waters where shellfish harvesting occurs. For a more detailed description of classes and specific waterbody designations, see 62-302.400.
The 2014 update of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the conterminous United States (2014 NSHM; Petersen and others, 2014; https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1128/) included probabilistic ground motion maps for 2 percent and 10 percent probabilities of exceedance in 50 years, derived from seismic hazard curves for peak ground acceleration (PGA) and 0.2 and 1.0 second spectral accelerations (SAs) with 5 percent damping for the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) site class boundary B/C (time-averaged shear wave velocity in the upper 30 meters [VS30]=760 meters per second [m/s]). This data release provides 0.1 degree by 0.1 degree gridded seismic hazard curves, 0.1 degree by 0.1 degree gridded probabilistic ground motions, and seismic hazard maps calculated for additional periods and additional uniform NEHRP site classes using the 2014 NSHM. For both the central and eastern U.S. (CEUS) and western U.S. (WUS), data and maps are provided for PGA, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 second SAs with 5% damping for the NEHRP site class boundary B/C for 2, 5, and 10% probabilities of exceedance in 50 years. The WUS additionally includes data and maps for 0.75, 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0 SAs. The use of region-specific suites of weighted ground motion models (GMMs) in the 2014 NSHM precluded the calculation of ground motions for a uniform set of periods and site classes for the conterminous U.S. At the time of development of the 2014 NSHM, there was no consensus in the CEUS on an appropriate site-amplification model to use, therefore, we calculated hazard curves and maps for NEHRP Site Class A (VS30 = 2000 m/s), for which most stable continental GMMs were original developed, based on simulations for hard rock conditions. In the WUS, however, the GMMs allow amplification based on site class (defined by VS30), so we calculated hazard curves and maps for NEHRP site classes B (VS30 = 1080 m/s), C (VS30 = 530 m/s), D (VS30 = 260 m/s), and E (VS30 = 150 m/s) and site class boundaries A/B (VS30 = 1500 m/s), B/C (VS30 = 760 m/s), C/D (VS30 = 365 m/s), and D/E (VS30 = 185 m/s). Further explanation about how the data and maps were generated can be found in the accompanying U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2018-1111 (https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20181111). First Posted - July 18, 2018 Revised - February 20, 2019 (ver. 1.1)
Class I and II surface water classification. The Clean Water Act requires that the surface waters of each state be classified according to designated uses. Florida has six classes with associated designated uses, which are arranged in order of degree of protection required: Class I - Potable Water Supplies Fourteen general areas throughout the state including: impoundments and associated tributaries, certain lakes, rivers, or portions of rivers, used as a drinking water supply. Class II - Shellfish Propagation or Harvesting Generally coastal waters where shellfish harvesting occurs. For a more detailed description of classes and specific waterbody designations, see 62-302.400.
Cities, Towns and Villages dataset current as of 2010. City Limits feature class located within the boundary data geodatabase.
GDB Version: ArcGIS Pro 3.3Additional Resources:Shapefile DownloadShapefile Download (Clipped to VIMS shoreline)Administrative Boundary Data Standard REST Endpoint (Unclipped) - REST Endpoint (Clipped)The Administrative Boundary feature classes represent the best available boundary information in Virginia. VGIN initially sought to develop an improved city, county, and town boundary dataset in late 2013, spurred by response of the Virginia Administrative Boundaries Workgroup community. The feature class initially started from an extraction of features from the Census TIGER dataset for Virginia. VGIN solicited input from localities in Virginia through the Road Centerlines data submission process as well as through public forums such as the Virginia Administrative Boundaries Workgroup and VGIN listservs. Data received were analyzed and incorporated into the appropriate feature classes where locality data were a superior representation of boundaries. Administrative Boundary geodatabase and shapefiles are unclipped to hydrography features by default. The clipped to hydro dataset is included as a separate shapefile download below.
This data series presents the last statistics on tuberculosis (TB) in cattle (i.e. bovine TB) in Great Britain prior to the change to the edge boundaries in January 2018. The statistics are obtained from the Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) work management IT support system, which is used for the administration of TB testing in GB. They are a snapshot of the position on the date on which the data were extracted. The information is subject to regular revision until all test results are available.
In late 1996, the Dept of Conservation (DOC) surveyed state and federal agencies about the county boundary coverage they used. As a result, DOC adopted the 1:24,000 (24K) scale U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) data set (USGS source) for their Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) but with several modifications. Detailed documentation of these changes is provided by FMMP and included in the Process Step section of the Feature Class metadata. A data set named cnty24k97_1 was made available (approximately 2004) through the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection - Fire and Resource Assessment Program (CDF - FRAP) and the California Spatial Information Library (CaSIL). In late 2006, the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) reviewed cnty24k97_1. Comparisons were made to a high-quality 100K dataset (co100a/county100k from the former Teale Data Center GIS Solutions Group) and legal boundary descriptions from ( http://www.leginfo.ca.gov ). The cnty24k97_1 data set was missing Anacapa and Santa Barbara islands. DFG added the missing islands using previously-digitized coastline data (coastn27 of State Lands Commission origin), corrected a few county boundaries, built region topology, added additional attributes, and renamed the data set to county24k. In 2007, the California Mapping Coordinating Committee (CMCC) requested that the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) resume stewardship of the statewide county boundaries data. CAL FIRE adopted the changes made by DFG and collected additional suggestions for the county data from DFG, DOC, and local government agencies. CAL FIRE incorporated these suggestions into the latest revision, which has been renamed cnty24k09_1. Detailed documentation of changes is included in the Process Step section of the Feature Class metadata. This Geo database contains 3 feature classes representing California county boundaries (arc, polygon, and multipart-polygon feature classes) and also contains a polygon feature class representing the state boundary: 1. Line - can be useful for cartographic purposes, especially when different line symbology is needed for different boundaries (e.g. Coastline, Mexico, Nevada, etc). 2. Multipart - features from a common county are combined into a single record (equivalent to a region feature class in a coverage). May be useful for selections and overlays when all parts of a county are needed. 3. Poly - all county features are represented as individual polygons. 4. State Poly - state boundary polygon to be used for cartography or overlay analysis that requires a state polygon.
The VA_TOWN dataset is a feature class component of the Virginia Administrative Boundaries dataset from the Virginia Geographic Information Network (VGIN). VA_TOWN represents the best available town boundary information to VGIN.VGIN initially sought to develop an improved locality and town boundary dataset in late 2013, spurred by response of the Virginia Administrative Boundaries Workgroup community. The feature class initially started from an extraction of town features from the Census TIGER dataset for Virginia. VGIN solicited input from localities in Virginia through the Road Centerlines data submission process as well as through public forums such as the Virginia Administrative Boundaries Workgroup and VGIN listservs. Data received were analyzed and incorporated into the VA_TOWN feature class where locality data were a superior representation of town boundaries.
© Virginia Geographic Information Network (VGIN), and the Census and Localities and Towns submitting data to the project This layer is a component of Feature classes representing locality (county, city, and town) boundaries in the Commonwealth of Virginia..
Data represents the best available city, county, and town boundary information provided to VGIN. VGIN initially sought to develop an improved locality and town boundary dataset in late 2013, spurred by response of the Virginia Administrative Boundaries Workgroup community. The feature class initially started from the locality boundaries from the Census TIGER dataset for Virginia. VGIN solicited input from localities in Virginia through the Road Centerlines data submission process as well as through public forums such as the Virginia Administrative Boundaries Workgroup and VGIN listservs. Data received were analyzed and incorporated into the included feature classes where locality data were a superior representation of the city or county boundary.
© Virginia Geographic Information Network (VGIN)
This polygon files contains 2015-2016 school-year data delineating school attendance boundaries. These data were collected and processed as part of the School Attendance Boundary Survey (SABS) project which was funded by NCES to create geography delineating school attendance boundaries. Original source information that was used to create these boundary files were collected were collected over a web-based self-reporting system, through e-mail, and mailed paper maps. The web application provided instructions and assistance to users via a user guide, a frequently asked questions document, and instructional videos. Boundaries supplied outside of the online reporting system typically fell into one of six categories: a digital geographic file, such as a shapefile or KML file; digital image files, such as jpegs and pdfs; narrative descriptions; an interactive web map; Excel or pdf address lists; and paper maps. 2015 TIGER/line features (that consist of streets, hydrography, railways, etc.) were used to digitize school attendance boundaries and was the primary source of information used to digitize analog information. This practice works well as most school attendance boundaries align with streets, railways, water bodies and similar line features included in the 2015 TIGER/line "edges" files. In those few cases in which a portion of a school attendance boundary serves both sides of a street contractor staff used Esri’s Imagery base map to estimate the property lines of parcels. The data digitized from analog maps and verbal descriptions do not conform to cadastral data (and many of the original GIS files created by school districts do not conform with cadastral or parcel data).The SABS 2015-2016 file uses the WGS 1984 Web Mercator Auxiliary Sphere coordinate system.Additional information about SABS can be found on the EDGE website.The SABS dataset is intended for research purposes only and reflects a single snapshot in time. School boundaries frequently change from year to year. To verify legal descriptions of boundaries, users must contact the school district directly.All information contained in this file is in the public domain. Data users are advised to review NCES program documentation and feature class metadata to understand the limitations and appropriate use of these data.
MIT Licensehttps://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
License information was derived automatically
(Link to Metadata) The BNDHASH dataset depicts Vermont village, town, county, and Regional Planning Commission (RPC) boundaries. It is a composite of generally 'best available' boundaries from various data sources (refer to ARC_SRC and SRC_NOTES attributes). However, this dataset DOES NOT attempt to provide a legally definitive boundary. The layer was originally developed from TBHASH, which was the master VGIS town boundary layer prior to the development and release of BNDHASH. By integrating village, town, county, RPC, and state boundaries into a single layer, VCGI has assured vertical integration of these boundaries and simplified maintenance. BNDHASH also includes annotation text for town, county, and RPC names. BNDHASH includes the following feature classes: 1) BNDHASH_POLY_VILLAGES = Vermont villages 2) BNDHASH_POLY_TOWNS = Vermont towns 3) BNDHASH_POLY_COUNTIES = Vermont counties 4) BNDHASH_POLY_RPCS = Vermont's Regional Planning Commissions 5) BNDHASH_POLY_VTBND = Vermont's state boundary 6) BNDHASH_LINE = Lines on which all POLY feature classes are built The master BNDHASH data is managed as an ESRI geodatabase feature dataset by VCGI. The dataset stores village, town, county, RPC, and state boundaries as seperate feature classes with a set of topology rules which binds the features. This arrangement assures vertical integration of the various boundaries. VCGI will update this layer on an annual basis by reviewing records housed in the VT State Archives - Secretary of State's Office. VCGI also welcomes documented information from VGIS users which identify boundary errors. NOTE - VCGI has NOT attempted to create a legally definitive boundary layer. Instead the idea is to maintain an integrated village/town/county/RPC/state boundary layer which provides for a reasonably accurate representation of these boundaries (refer to ARC_SRC and SRC_NOTES). BNDHASH includes all counties, towns, and villages listed in "Population and Local Government - State of Vermont - 2000" published by the Secretary of State. BNDHASH may include changes endorsed by the Legislature since the publication of this document in 2000 (eg: villages merged with towns). Utlimately the Vermont Secratary of State's Office and the VT Legislature are responsible for maintaining information which accurately describes the locations of these boundaries. BNDHASH should be used for general mapping purposes only. * Users who wish to determine which boundaries are different from the original TBHASH boundaries should refer to the ORIG_ARC field in the BOUNDARY_BNDHASH_LINE (line feature with attributes). Also, updates to BNDHASH are tracked by version number (ex: 2003A). The UPDACT field is used to track changes between versions. The UPDACT field is flushed between versions.
This layer shows workers by employer type (private sector, government, etc.) in Austin, Texas. This is shown by censustract and place boundaries. Tract data contains the most currently released American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year data for all tracts within Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, and Williamson Counties in Texas. Place data contains the most recent ACS 1-year estimate for the City of Austin, Texas. Data contains estimates and margins of error. There are also additional calculated attributes related to this topic, which can be mapped or used within analysis.To see the full list of attributes available in this service, go to the "Data" tab, and choose "Fields" at the top right. Current Vintage: 2019-2023 (Tract), 2023 (Place)ACS Table(s): C24060 Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community Survey Date of API call: February 12, 2025National Figures: data.census.govThe United States Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS):About the SurveyGeography & ACSTechnical DocumentationNews & UpdatesThis ready-to-use layer can be used within ArcGIS Pro, ArcGIS Online, its configurable apps, dashboards, Story Maps, custom apps, and mobile apps. Data can also be exported for offline workflows. For more information about ACS layers, visit the FAQ. Please cite the Census and ACS when using this data.Data Note from the Census:Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see Accuracy of the Data). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables.Data Processing Notes:This layer is updated automatically when the most current vintage of ACS data is released each year, usually in December. The layer always contains the latest available ACS 5-year estimates. It is updated annually within days of the Census Bureau's release schedule. Click here to learn more about ACS data releases.Boundaries come from the US Census TIGER geodatabases, specifically, the National Sub-State Geography Database (named tlgdb_(year)_a_us_substategeo.gdb). Boundaries are updated at the same time as the data updates (annually), and the boundary vintage appropriately matches the data vintage as specified by the Census. These are Census boundaries with water and/or coastlines erased for cartographic and mapping purposes. For census tracts, the water cutouts are derived from a subset of the 2020 Areal Hydrography boundaries offered by TIGER. Water bodies and rivers which are 50 million square meters or larger (mid to large sized water bodies) are erased from the tract level boundaries, as well as additional important features. For state and county boundaries, the water and coastlines are derived from the coastlines of the 2020 500k TIGER Cartographic Boundary Shapefiles. These are erased to more accurately portray the coastlines and Great Lakes. The original AWATER and ALAND fields are still available as attributes within the data table (units are square meters). The States layer contains 52 records - all US states, Washington D.C., and Puerto RicoCensus tracts with no population that occur in areas of water, such as oceans, are removed from this data service (Census Tracts beginning with 99).Percentages and derived counts, and associated margins of error, are calculated values (that can be identified by the "_calc_" stub in the field name), and abide by the specifications defined by the American Community Survey.Field alias names were created based on the Table Shells file available from the American Community Survey Summary File Documentation page.Negative values (e.g., -4444...) have been set to null, with the exception of -5555... which has been set to zero. These negative values exist in the raw API data to indicate the following situations:The margin of error column indicates that either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute a standard error and thus the margin of error. A statistical test is not appropriate.Either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute an estimate, or a ratio of medians cannot be calculated because one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or upper interval of an open-ended distribution.The median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution, or in the upper interval of an open-ended distribution. A statistical test is not appropriate.The estimate is controlled. A statistical test for sampling variability is not appropriate.The data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small.
MIT Licensehttps://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
License information was derived automatically
The prison boundary feature class contains secure detention facilities. These facilities range in jurisdiction from federal(excluding military) to local governments. Polygon geometry is used to describe the extent of where the incarcerated population is located (fence lines or building footprints). This feature class's attribution describes many physical and social characteristics of detention facilities in the United States and some of its territories. The attribution for this feature class was populated by open source search methodologies of authoritative sources. Changes from the previous version include 80 records added, 132 closed, 30 reopened, and 363 removed.
This feature class depicts the boundaries of Operable Unit 1 (OU1) within the Carson River Mercury Site (CRMS), including the four Area of Investigation boundaries. NDEP lead an initiative to refine the boundaries shown on maps identifying the Carson River Mercury Superfund Site (CRMS) from the initial site identification and description as the Carson River hydrographic basin beginning in Carson City, NV to its terminal points in Churchill County, NV. This description of the CRMS was used in many of the early site investigation studies and reports and continued to be used in all public education and long-term site management controls until approximately 2012. Using site contaminant fate and transport determinations from the CRMS OU1 Remedial Investigation (RI) and Conceptual Site Model (CSM), it seemed inappropriate to include the much larger area of the hydrographic basin as being potentially impacted by site contaminants of concern (CoC). NDEP created protocols to estimate areas that are likely to have been impacted by CoCs and created maps using these protocols to redraw the CRMS boundary limits. In the development of these protocols, NDEP used: Historic records and documentation of probable source areas; The 2012 archaeological mill site research and field study conducted by Broadbent and Associates to locate the historic source areas; Soil and sediment transport mechanisms identified in the CSM and general soil transport and sedimentology principals to predict areas where CoCs have likely been located at and downstream of the historic sources. The overall area of transport was estimated to be reasonably large to include possible anthropogenic activity as well as historic and future natural events such as flooding and channel migration. Additionally, NDEP added a "buffer” to extend the potential areas beyond the conservatively defined primary areas of potential contamination to further address unknown and future effects. These buffers have been identified separately from the primary areas of concern and labeled as such on maps using these protocols. These revisions were formalized in the 2013 Explanation of Significant Differences to the OU-1 Record of Decision (RoD) to adopt the new site definition and boundaries identified by NDEP as new estimates of the CRMS extents. NDEP identified four geographic areas of prime importance to the CRMS. Originally labeled by NDEP as "Risk Areas”, the intent of this terminology was to indicate these were the areas understood to have the most likely "risk” of contamination. Under consultation with EPA R9 risk assessment staff, the term has been changed to "Area of Investigation” to avoid confusion that any actual quantitative level of human or ecological risk has been determined for these areas. They are only estimates of potential contamination and new or additional information that contradicts these boundaries as being insufficient will be used to adopt new boundaries as appropriate. The four Areas of Investigation have become the foundation for the residential soil sampling program mandated by the OU-1 RoD. Summarized briefly; Investigation Area 1 (IA 1)- This includes all areas in the Carson River drainage basin from about the area of the historic settlement of Empire in Carson City, NV downstream to the existing or historic terminal points of the river at Carson Lake, Carson Sink, Indian Lakes and the Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge that lie outside the buffer zones of the other three Investigation Areas. It is least probable that CRMS CoCs will be located in these areas. It is unlikely that any sampling will be requested on areas developed within IA 1, but it might be requested in special circumstances, especially near and around the source areas of the contamination where historic activities could potentially have caused contamination beyond the typical boundaries as identified by the CSM. Investigation Area 2 (IA 2)- This area is defined as a buffer that lies 100 feet along a normal horizontal to the Investigation Area 3 boundary. For Comstock-era mill sites and isolated tailings piles, this translates to the area between 350 feet and 450 feet from the center point of the historic feature. For the 100-year FEMA floodplain and areas of irrigation, this is the area beginning at the limit of the flood plain boundary or irrigated land along a normal to 100 feet. Investigation Area 3 (IA 3)- This area is defined as a buffer that lies 100 feet along a normal horizontal to the Investigation Area 4 boundary for Comstock-era mills or isolated tailings piles. For Comstock-era mill sites and isolated tailings piles, this translates to the area between 250 feet and 350 feet from the center point of the historic feature. It is also defined as the limits of the FEMA 100-year floodplain or past or current flood irrigation practices. A tributary of the Carson River must have a Comstock-era mill site or tailings pile located along it to be mapped in IA3 and only the portion of the tributary downstream of the historic feature is included, not including the IA3 area and buffer drawn around the historic feature itself. If a tributary does not have FEMA 100-year flood plain defined, then IA3 has been defined as the area 100 feet along a normal to Investigation Area 4 boundary of that tributary. Investigation Area 4 (IA 4)- This area represents the highest likelihood of mercury contamination. Multiple steps were used to define the extent of this area, described below: The area within a 250 feet radius from the center point of a Comstock-era mill Comstock-era tailings pile polygon with a 250 ft buffer The centerline of the current channel of the Carson River enclosed in a polygon 100-feet wide (50 feet either side). Tributaries to the Carson River, where Comstock-era mills and tailings piles were located are enclosed in a polygon 50-feet wide (25 feet either side) from the approximate center of the tributary channel. Irrigation canals are enclosed in a polygon 20 feet wide (10 feet either side) from the approximate center of the ditch.
https://www.ine.es/aviso_legalhttps://www.ine.es/aviso_legal
European Health Survey: Type of problem that limits daily activities by sex and social class based on reference person's occupation. Population aged 15 years old and over with limitations to perform daily activities in the last 6 months. National.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Population by sex and social class by NUTS3. (Census 2022 Theme 9 Table 1 )Census 2022 table 9.1 is population aged 15+ by sex and social class. Attributes include population breakdown by social class and sex. Census 2022 theme 9 is Social Class and Socio-Economic Group. The methodology has changed for SOC and SEG so comparisons cannot be made with 2016 data. See Background Notes - CSO - Central Statistics Officehttps://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cpp7/census2022profile7-employmentoccupationsandcommuting/backgroundnotes/ The Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS) were created by Eurostat in order to define territorial units for the production of regional statistics across the European Union. In 2003 the NUTS classification was established within a legal framework (Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003).Changes made under the 2014 Local Government Act prompted a revision of the Irish NUTS 2 and NUTS 3 Regions. The main changes at NUTS 3 level were the transfer of South Tipperary from the South-East into the Mid-West NUTS 3 region and the movement of Louth from the Border to the Mid-East NUTS 3 Region. NUTS 3 Regions are grouped into three NUTS 2 Regions (Northern and Western, Southern, Eastern and Midland) which correspond to the Regional Assemblies established in the 2014 Local Government Act. The revisions made to the NUTS boundaries have been given legal status under Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/2066.Coordinate reference system: Irish Transverse Mercator (EPSG 2157). These boundaries are based on 20m generalised boundaries sourced from Tailte Éireann Open Data Portal. NUTS3 Regions 2015This dataset is provided by Tailte Éireann
A feature class describing the spatial location of the administrative boundary of the lands managed by the Forest Supervisor's office. An area encompassing all the National Forest System lands administered by an administrative unit. The area encompasses private lands, other governmental agency lands, and may contain National Forest System lands within the proclaimed boundaries of another administrative unit. All National Forest System lands fall within one and only one Administrative Forest Area. This dataset is derived from the USFS Southwestern Region ALP (Automated Lands Program) data Project. This is one of six layers derived from ALP for the purpose of supplying data layers for recourse GIS analysis and data needs within the Forest Service. The six layers are Surface Ownership, Administrative Forest Boundary, District Boundary, Townships, Sections, and Wilderness. There were some gapes in the ALP data so a small portion of this dataset comes from CCF (Cartographic Feature Files) datasets and the USFS Southwestern Region Core Data Project. ALP data is developed from data sources of differing accuracy, scales, and reliability. Where available it is developed from GCDB (Geographic Coordinate Data Base) data. GCDB data is maintained by the Bureau of Land Management in their State Offices. GCDB data is mostly corner data. Not all corners and not all boundaries are available in GCDB so ALP also utilizes many other data sources like CFF data to derive its boundaries. GCDB data is in a constant state of change because land corners are always getting resurveyed. The GCDB data used in this dataset represents a snapshot in time at the time the GCDB dataset was published by the BLM and may not reflect the most current GCDB dataset available. The Forest Service makes no expressed or implied warranty with respect to the character, function, or capabilities of these data. These data are intended to be used for planning and analyses purposes only and are not legally binding with regards to title or location of National Forest System lands.
This feature class contains boundaries for Tennessee State Natural Areas. The boundaries represented within do not constitute a survey product and are not legally binding. Limited attributes include natural area name and designation, where applicable. The data are updated weekly on Wednesdays to reflect the most up-to-date boundary information. For more information about Tennessee State Natural Areas, visit the Division of Natural Areas online at TN.gov.
Local authority and Local Enterprise Partnership data sets for key economic data by rural and urban breakdown.
<p class="gem-c-attachment_metadata"><span class="gem-c-attachment_attribute">MS Excel Spreadsheet</span>, <span class="gem-c-attachment_attribute">211 KB</span></p>
<p class="gem-c-attachment_metadata">This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.</p>
<details data-module="ga4-event-tracker" data-ga4-event='{"event_name":"select_content","type":"detail","text":"Request an accessible format.","section":"Request an accessible format.","index_section":1}' class="gem-c-details govuk-details govuk-!-margin-bottom-0" title="Request an accessible format.">
Request an accessible format.
If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email <a href="mailto:defra.helpline@defra.gov.uk" target="_blank" class="govuk-link">defra.helpline@defra.gov.uk</a>. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.
Spatial analysis and statistical summaries of the Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) provide land managers and decision makers with a general assessment of management intent for biodiversity protection, natural resource management, and outdoor recreation access across the nation. This data release presents results from statistical summaries of the PAD-US 4.0 protection status (by GAP Status Code) and public access status for various land unit boundaries (PAD-US 4.0 Vector Analysis and Summary Statistics). Summary statistics are also available to explore and download from the PAD-US Statistics Dashboard ( https://www.usgs.gov/programs/gap-analysis-project/science/pad-us-statistics ). The vector GIS analysis file, source data used to summarize statistics for areas of interest to stakeholders (National, State, Department of the Interior Region, Congressional District, County, EcoRegions I-IV, Urban Areas, Landscape Conservation Cooperative), and complete Summary Statistics Tabular Data (CSV) are included in this data release. Raster analysis files are also available for combination with other raster data (PAD-US 4.0 Raster Analysis). The PAD-US Combined Fee, Designation, Easement feature class in the Full Inventory Database, with Military Lands and Tribal Areas from the Proclamation and Other Planning Boundaries feature class, was modified to prioritize and remove overlapping management designations, limiting overestimation in protection status or public access statistics and to support user needs for vector and raster analysis data. Analysis files in this data release were clipped to the Census State boundary file to define the extent and fill in areas (largely private land) outside the PAD-US, providing a common denominator for statistical summaries.
Class I and II surface water classification. The Clean Water Act requires that the surface waters of each state be classified according to designated uses. Florida has six classes with associated designated uses, which are arranged in order of degree of protection required: Class I - Potable Water Supplies Fourteen general areas throughout the state including: impoundments and associated tributaries, certain lakes, rivers, or portions of rivers, used as a drinking water supply. Class II - Shellfish Propagation or Harvesting Generally coastal waters where shellfish harvesting occurs. For a more detailed description of classes and specific waterbody designations, see 62-302.400.