92 datasets found
  1. u

    Data from: GIS Clipping and Summarization Toolbox

    • verso.uidaho.edu
    • data.nkn.uidaho.edu
    Updated Mar 9, 2022
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Justin Welty; Michelle Jefferies; Robert Arkle; David Pilliod; Susan Kemp (2022). GIS Clipping and Summarization Toolbox [Dataset]. https://verso.uidaho.edu/esploro/outputs/dataset/GIS-Clipping-and-Summarization-Toolbox/996762913201851
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Mar 9, 2022
    Dataset provided by
    Idaho EPSCoR, EPSCoR GEM3
    Authors
    Justin Welty; Michelle Jefferies; Robert Arkle; David Pilliod; Susan Kemp
    Time period covered
    Mar 9, 2022
    Description

    Geographic Information System (GIS) analyses are an essential part of natural resource management and research. Calculating and summarizing data within intersecting GIS layers is common practice for analysts and researchers. However, the various tools and steps required to complete this process are slow and tedious, requiring many tools iterating over hundreds, or even thousands of datasets. USGS scientists will combine a series of ArcGIS geoprocessing capabilities with custom scripts to create tools that will calculate, summarize, and organize large amounts of data that can span many temporal and spatial scales with minimal user input. The tools work with polygons, lines, points, and rasters to calculate relevant summary data and combine them into a single output table that can be easily incorporated into statistical analyses. These tools are useful for anyone interested in using an automated script to quickly compile summary information within all areas of interest in a GIS dataset.

    Toolbox Use
    License
    Creative Commons-PDDC
    Recommended Citation
    Welty JL, Jeffries MI, Arkle RS, Pilliod DS, Kemp SK. 2021. GIS Clipping and Summarization Toolbox: U.S. Geological Survey Software Release. https://doi.org/10.5066/P99X8558

  2. d

    Geodatabase of the available top and bottom surface datasets that represent...

    • catalog.data.gov
    • data.usgs.gov
    • +3more
    Updated Oct 8, 2025
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Geological Survey (2025). Geodatabase of the available top and bottom surface datasets that represent the Mississippian aquifer, Alabama, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/geodatabase-of-the-available-top-and-bottom-surface-datasets-that-represent-the-mississipp
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Oct 8, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    United States Geological Surveyhttp://www.usgs.gov/
    Area covered
    Illinois, West Virginia, Virginia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Alabama, Iowa, Maryland
    Description

    This geodatabase includes spatial datasets that represent the Mississippian aquifer in the States of Alabama, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia. The aquifer is divided into three subareas, based on the data availability. In subarea 1 (SA1), which is the aquifer extent in Iowa, data exist of the aquifer top altitude and aquifer thickness. In subarea 2 (SA2), which is the aquifer extent in Missouri, data exist of the aquifer top and bottom aquifer surface altitudes. In subarea 3 (SA3), which is the aquifer area of the remaining States, no altitude or thickness data exist. Included in this geodatabase are: (1) a feature dataset "ds40MSSPPI_altitude_and_thickness_contours that includes aquifer altitude and thickness contours used to generate the surface rasters for SA1 and SA2, (2) a feature dataset "ds40MSSPPI_extents" that includes a polygon dataset that represents the subarea extents, a polygon dataset that represents the combined overall aquifer extent, and a polygon dataset of the Ft. Dodge Fault and Manson Anomaly, (3) raster datasets that represent the altitude of the top and the bottom of the aquifer in SA1 and SA2, and (4) georeferenced images of the figures that were digitized to create the aquifer top- and bottom-altitude contours or aquifer thickness contours for SA1 and SA2. The images and digitized contours are supplied for reference. The extent of the Mississippian aquifer for all subareas was produced from the digital version of the HA-730 Mississippian aquifer extent, (USGS HA-730). For the two Subareas with vertical-surface information, SA1 and SA2, data were retrieved from the sources as described below. 1. The aquifer-altitude contours for the top and the aquifer-thickness contours for the top-to-bottom thickness of SA1 were received in digital format from the Iowa Geologic Survey. The URL for the top was ftp://ftp.igsb.uiowa.edu/GIS_Library/IA_State/Hydrologic/Ground_Waters/ Mississippian_aquifer/mississippian_topography.zip. The URL for the thickness was ftp://ftp.igsb.uiowa.edu/GIS_Library/IA_State/Hydrologic/Ground_Waters/ Mississippian_aquifer/mississippian_isopach.zip Reference for the top map is Altitude and Configuration, in feet above mean sea level, of the Mississipian Aquifer modified from a scanned image of Map 1, Sheet 1, Miscellaneous Map Series 3, Mississippian Aquifer of Iowa by P.J. Horick and W.L. Steinhilber, Iowa Geological Survey, 1973; IGS MMS-3, Map 1, Sheet 1 Reference for the thickness map is Distribution and isopach thickness, in feet, of the Mississipian Aquifer, modified from a scanned image of Map 1, Sheet 2, Miscellaneous Map Series 3, Mississippian Aquifer of Iowa by P.J. Horick and W.L. Steinhilber, Iowa Geological Survey, 1973; IGS MMS-3, Map 1, Sheet 2 The altitude contours for the top and bottom of SA2 were digitized from georeferenced figures of altitude contours in U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1305 (USGS PP1305), figure 6 (for the top surface) and figure 9 (for the bottom surface). The altitude contours for SA1 and SA2 were interpolated into surface rasters within a GIS using tools that create hydrologically correct surfaces from contour data, derive the altitude from the thickness (depth from the land surface), and merge the subareas into a single surface. The primary tool was an enhanced version of "Topo to Raster" used in ArcGIS, ArcMap, Esri 2014. ArcGIS Desktop: Release 10.2 Redlands, CA: Environmental Systems Research Institute. The raster surfaces were corrected in areas where the altitude of the top of the aquifer exceeded the land surface, and where the bottom of an aquifer exceeded the altitude of the corrected top of the aquifer.

  3. e

    Global - Annual Average Methane Concentration - Dataset - ENERGYDATA.INFO

    • energydata.info
    Updated Oct 16, 2025
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    (2025). Global - Annual Average Methane Concentration - Dataset - ENERGYDATA.INFO [Dataset]. https://energydata.info/dataset/global-annual-average-methane-concentration-2016
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Oct 16, 2025
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Description

    This raster maps average atmospheric methane concentrations in 2016. The data used to create it is from the NASA Aqua satellite (specifically the AIRS instrument) that records monthly average atmospheric methane concentrations. AIRS collects methane data at different pressure levels. The raster depicts data at the 400 hPa level because that is where the instrument is most sensitive to methane concentration. The monthly data was consolidated using the NASA tool, Giovanni https://giovanni.gsfc.nasa.gov/giovanni/, to create a raster with annual average methane concentrations. Giovanni output two rasters: one for daytime averaged data and one for nighttime averaged data. ArcGIS was then used to combine the two rasters to create a single annual raster. A conversion factor of 1.0e+9 was multiplied to convert the final raster from mole fractions to parts per billion. The results are attached. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace would like to eventually incorporate a methane raster as a new layer in the Oil Climate Index (OCI) web tool http://oci.carnegieendowment.org/. Carnegie is currently updating the OCI, adding greenhouse gas comparisons of global gas fields and visualizing their methane emissions. Carnegie is planning to work with our OCI partners at Stanford to further analyze the methane concentration raster to separate out signal from noise and to identify potential methane concentration hot spots associated with oil and gas operations. This raster is useful when studying short term climate risks, especially when it comes to Arctic oil and gas resources.

  4. d

    Spring Season Habitat Suitability Index Raster

    • catalog.data.gov
    • data.usgs.gov
    • +3more
    Updated Nov 12, 2025
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Geological Survey (2025). Spring Season Habitat Suitability Index Raster [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/spring-season-habitat-suitability-index-raster
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Nov 12, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    United States Geological Surveyhttp://www.usgs.gov/
    Description

    This raster represents a continuous surface of sage-grouse habitat suitability index (HSI, created using ArcGIS 10.2.2) values for Nevada during spring, which is a surrogate for habitat conditions during the sage-grouse breeding and nesting period. Summary of steps to create Habitat Categories: HABITAT SUITABILITY INDEX: The HSI was derived from a generalized linear mixed model (specified by binomial distribution) that contrasted data from multiple environmental factors at used sites (telemetry locations) and available sites (random locations). Predictor variables for the model represented vegetation communities at multiple spatial scales, water resources, habitat configuration, urbanization, roads, elevation, ruggedness, and slope. Vegetation data was derived from various mapping products, which included NV SynthMap (Petersen 2008, SageStitch (Comer et al. 2002, LANDFIRE (Landfire 2010), and the CA Fire and Resource Assessment Program (CFRAP 2006). The analysis was updated to include high resolution percent cover within 30 x 30 m pixels for Sagebrush, non-sagebrush, herbaceous vegetation, and bare ground (C. Homer, unpublished; based on the methods of Homer et al. 2014, Xian et al. 2015 ) and conifer (primarily pinyon-juniper, P. Coates, unpublished). The pool of telemetry data included the same data from 1998 - 2013 used by Coates et al. (2014); additional telemetry location data from field sites in 2014 were added to the dataset. The dataset was then split according calendar date into three seasons (spring, summer, winter). Summer included telemetry locations (n = 14,058) from mid-March to June. All age and sex classes of marked grouse were used in the analysis. Sufficient data (i.e., a minimum of 100 locations from at least 20 marked Sage-grouse) for modeling existed in 10 subregions for spring and summer, and seven subregions in winter, using all age and sex classes of marked grouse. It is important to note that although this map is composed of HSI values derived from the seasonal data, it does not explicitly represent habitat suitability for reproductive females (i.e., nesting and with broods). Insufficient data were available to allow for estimation of this habitat type for all seasons throughout the study area extent. A Resource Selection Function (RSF) was calculated using R Software (v 3.13) for each subregion and using generalized linear models to derive model-averaged parameter estimates for each covariate across a set of additive models. Subregional RSFs were transformed into Habitat Suitability Indices, and averaged together to produce an overall statewide HSI whereby a relative probability of occurrence was calculated for each raster cell during the spring. In order to account for discrepancies in HSI values caused by varying ecoregions within Nevada, the HSI was divided into north and south extents using a slightly modified flood region boundary (Mason 1999) that was designed to represent respective mesic and xeric regions of the state. North and south HSI rasters were each relativized according to their maximum value to rescale between zero and one, then mosaicked once more into a state-wide extent. REFERENCES: California Forest and Resource Assessment Program (CFRAP). 2006. Statewide Land Use / Land Cover Mosaic. [Geospatial data.] California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, http://frap.cdf.ca.gov/data/frapgisdata-sw-rangeland-assessment_data.php Census 2010. TIGER/Line Shapefiles. Urban Areas [Geospatial data.] U.S. Census Bureau, Washington D.C., https://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/data/tiger-line.html Census 2014. TIGER/Line Shapefiles. Roads [Geospatial data.] U.S. Census Bureau, Washington D.C., https://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/data/tiger-line.html Census 2015. TIGER/Line Shapefiles. Blocks [Geospatial data.] U.S. Census Bureau, Washington D.C., https://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/data/tiger-line.html Coates, P.S., Casazza, M.L., Brussee, B.E., Ricca, M.A., Gustafson, K.B., Overton, C.T., Sanchez-Chopitea, E., Kroger, T., Mauch, K., Niell, L., Howe, K., Gardner, S., Espinosa, S., and Delehanty, D.J. 2014, Spatially explicit modeling of greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) habitat in Nevada and northeastern California—A decision-support tool for management: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2014-1163, 83 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20141163. ISSN 2331-1258 (online) Comer, P., Kagen, J., Heiner, M., and Tobalske, C. 2002. Current distribution of sagebrush and associated vegetation in the western United States (excluding NM). [Geospatial data.] Interagency Sagebrush Working Group, http://sagemap.wr.usgs.gov Homer, C.G., Aldridge, C.L., Meyer, D.K., and Schell, S.J. 2014. Multi-Scale Remote Sensing Sagebrush Characterization with Regression Trees over Wyoming, USA; Laying a Foundation for Monitoring. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 14, Elsevier, US. LANDFIRE. 2010. 1.2.0 Existing Vegetation Type Layer. [Geospatial data.] U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, http://landfire.cr.usgs.gov/viewer/ Mason, R.R. 1999. The National Flood-Frequency Program—Methods For Estimating Flood Magnitude And Frequency In Rural Areas In Nevada U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 123-98 September, 1999, Prepared by Robert R. Mason, Jr. and Kernell G. Ries III, of the U.S. Geological Survey; and Jeffrey N. King and Wilbert O. Thomas, Jr., of Michael Baker, Jr., Inc. http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-123-98/ Peterson, E. B. 2008. A Synthesis of Vegetation Maps for Nevada (Initiating a 'Living' Vegetation Map). Documentation and geospatial data, Nevada Natural Heritage Program, Carson City, Nevada, http://www.heritage.nv.gov/gis Xian, G., Homer, C., Rigge, M., Shi, H., and Meyer, D. 2015. Characterization of shrubland ecosystem components as continuous fields in the northwest United States. Remote Sensing of Environment 168:286-300. NOTE: This file does not include habitat areas for the Bi-State management area and the spatial extent is modified in comparison to Coates et al. 2014

  5. d

    Geospatial Data from the Alpine Treeline Warming Experiment (ATWE) on Niwot...

    • search.dataone.org
    • knb.ecoinformatics.org
    • +1more
    Updated Jul 7, 2021
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Fabian Zuest; Cristina Castanha; Nicole Lau; Lara M. Kueppers (2021). Geospatial Data from the Alpine Treeline Warming Experiment (ATWE) on Niwot Ridge, Colorado, USA [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.15485/1804896
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 7, 2021
    Dataset provided by
    ESS-DIVE
    Authors
    Fabian Zuest; Cristina Castanha; Nicole Lau; Lara M. Kueppers
    Time period covered
    Jan 1, 2008 - Jan 1, 2012
    Area covered
    Description

    This is a collection of all GPS- and computer-generated geospatial data specific to the Alpine Treeline Warming Experiment (ATWE), located on Niwot Ridge, Colorado, USA. The experiment ran between 2008 and 2016, and consisted of three sites spread across an elevation gradient. Geospatial data for all three experimental sites and cone/seed collection locations are included in this package. ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Geospatial files include cone collection, experimental site, seed trap, and other GPS location/terrain data. File types include ESRI shapefiles, ESRI grid files or Arc/Info binary grids, TIFFs (.tif), and keyhole markup language (.kml) files. Trimble-imported data include plain text files (.txt), Trimble COR (CorelDRAW) files, and Trimble SSF (Standard Storage Format) files. Microsoft Excel (.xlsx) and comma-separated values (.csv) files corresponding to the attribute tables of many files within this package are also included. A complete list of files can be found in this document in the “Data File Organization” section in the included Data User's Guide. Maps are also included in this data package for reference and use. These maps are separated into two categories, 2021 maps and legacy maps, which were made in 2010. Each 2021 map has one copy in portable network graphics (.png) format, and the other in .pdf format. All legacy maps are in .pdf format. .png image files can be opened with any compatible programs, such as Preview (Mac OS) and Photos (Windows). All GIS files were imported into geopackages (.gpkg) using QGIS, and double-checked for compatibility and data/attribute integrity using ESRI ArcGIS Pro. Note that files packaged within geopackages will open in ArcGIS Pro with “main.” preceding each file name, and an extra column named “geom” defining geometry type in the attribute table. The contents of each geospatial file remain intact, unless otherwise stated in “niwot_geospatial_data_list_07012021.pdf/.xlsx”. This list of files can be found as an .xlsx and a .pdf in this archive. As an open-source file format, files within gpkgs (TIFF, shapefiles, ESRI grid or “Arc/Info Binary”) can be read using both QGIS and ArcGIS Pro, and any other geospatial softwares. Text and .csv files can be read using TextEdit/Notepad/any simple text-editing software; .csv’s can also be opened using Microsoft Excel and R. .kml files can be opened using Google Maps or Google Earth, and Trimble files are most compatible with Trimble’s GPS Pathfinder Office software. .xlsx files can be opened using Microsoft Excel. PDFs can be opened using Adobe Acrobat Reader, and any other compatible programs. A selection of original shapefiles within this archive were generated using ArcMap with associated FGDC-standardized metadata (xml file format). We are including these original files because they contain metadata only accessible using ESRI programs at this time, and so that the relationship between shapefiles and xml files is maintained. Individual xml files can be opened (without a GIS-specific program) using TextEdit or Notepad. Since ESRI’s compatibility with FGDC metadata has changed since the generation of these files, many shapefiles will require upgrading to be compatible with ESRI’s latest versions of geospatial software. These details are also noted in the “niwot_geospatial_data_list_07012021” file.

  6. Geospatial data for the Vegetation Mapping Inventory Project of Pictured...

    • catalog.data.gov
    Updated Nov 25, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    National Park Service (2025). Geospatial data for the Vegetation Mapping Inventory Project of Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/geospatial-data-for-the-vegetation-mapping-inventory-project-of-pictured-rocks-national-la
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Nov 25, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    National Park Servicehttp://www.nps.gov/
    Area covered
    Pictured Rocks
    Description

    The files linked to this reference are the geospatial data created as part of the completion of the baseline vegetation inventory project for the NPS park unit. Current format is ArcGIS file geodatabase but older formats may exist as shapefiles. We converted the photointerpreted data into a format usable in a geographic information system (GIS) by employing three fundamental processes: (1) orthorectify, (2) digitize, and (3) develop the geodatabase. All digital map automation was projected in Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM), Zone 16, using the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83). Orthorectify: We orthorectified the interpreted overlays by using OrthoMapper, a softcopy photogrammetric software for GIS. One function of OrthoMapper is to create orthorectified imagery from scanned and unrectified imagery (Image Processing Software, Inc., 2002). The software features a method of visual orientation involving a point-and-click operation that uses existing orthorectified horizontal and vertical base maps. Of primary importance to us, OrthoMapper also has the capability to orthorectify the photointerpreted overlays of each photograph based on the reference information provided. Digitize: To produce a polygon vector layer for use in ArcGIS (Environmental Systems Research Institute [ESRI], Redlands, California), we converted each raster-based image mosaic of orthorectified overlays containing the photointerpreted data into a grid format by using ArcGIS. In ArcGIS, we used the ArcScan extension to trace the raster data and produce ESRI shapefiles. We digitally assigned map-attribute codes (both map-class codes and physiognomic modifier codes) to the polygons and checked the digital data against the photointerpreted overlays for line and attribute consistency. Ultimately, we merged the individual layers into a seamless layer. Geodatabase: At this stage, the map layer has only map-attribute codes assigned to each polygon. To assign meaningful information to each polygon (e.g., map-class names, physiognomic definitions, links to NVCS types), we produced a feature-class table, along with other supportive tables and subsequently related them together via an ArcGIS Geodatabase. This geodatabase also links the map to other feature-class layers produced from this project, including vegetation sample plots, accuracy assessment (AA) sites, aerial photo locations, and project boundary extent. A geodatabase provides access to a variety of interlocking data sets, is expandable, and equips resource managers and researchers with a powerful GIS tool.

  7. Vegetative Differerence Image

    • agriculture.africageoportal.com
    • uneca.africageoportal.com
    • +7more
    Updated Sep 18, 2020
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Esri (2020). Vegetative Differerence Image [Dataset]. https://agriculture.africageoportal.com/content/b7addc908a58486dbc0253b052140d45
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Sep 18, 2020
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Esrihttp://esri.com/
    Area covered
    Description

    Vegetative Difference Image gives an easy to interpret visual representation of vegetative increase/decrease across 2 time periods.This raster function template is used to generate a visual product. The results cannot be used for analysis. This templates generates an NDVI in the backend, hence it requires your imagery to have the red and near infrared bands. In the resulting image, greens indicate increase in vegetation, while the magenta indicates decrease in vegetationReferences:Raster functionsWhen to use this raster function templateThis template is particularly useful when trying to intuitively visualize the increase or decrease in vegetation over two time periods. How to use this raster function templateIn ArcGIS Pro, search ArcGIS Living Atlas for raster function templates to apply them to your imagery layer. You can also download the raster function template, attach it to a mosaic dataset, and publish it as an image service. This index supports many satellite sensors, such as Landsat-8, Sentinel-2, Quickbird, IKONOS, Geoeye-1, and Pleiades-1.Applicable geographiesThe template uses a standard vegetation which is designed to work globally.

  8. a

    Full Range Heat Anomalies - USA 2022

    • hub.arcgis.com
    • giscommons-countyplanning.opendata.arcgis.com
    Updated Mar 11, 2023
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    The Trust for Public Land (2023). Full Range Heat Anomalies - USA 2022 [Dataset]. https://hub.arcgis.com/datasets/26b8ebf70dfc46c7a5eb099a2380ee1d
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Mar 11, 2023
    Dataset authored and provided by
    The Trust for Public Land
    Area covered
    Description

    Notice: this is not the latest Heat Island Anomalies image service.This layer contains the relative degrees Fahrenheit difference between any given pixel and the mean heat value for the city in which it is located, for every city in the contiguous United States, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. This 30-meter raster was derived from Landsat 8 imagery band 10 (ground-level thermal sensor) from the summer of 2022, with patching from summer of 2021 where necessary.Federal statistics over a 30-year period show extreme heat is the leading cause of weather-related deaths in the United States. Extreme heat exacerbated by urban heat islands can lead to increased respiratory difficulties, heat exhaustion, and heat stroke. These heat impacts significantly affect the most vulnerable—children, the elderly, and those with preexisting conditions.The purpose of this layer is to show where certain areas of cities are hotter or cooler than the average temperature for that same city as a whole. This dataset represents a snapshot in time. It will be updated yearly, but is static between updates. It does not take into account changes in heat during a single day, for example, from building shadows moving. The thermal readings detected by the Landsat 8 sensor are surface-level, whether that surface is the ground or the top of a building. Although there is strong correlation between surface temperature and air temperature, they are not the same. We believe that this is useful at the national level, and for cities that don’t have the ability to conduct their own hyper local temperature survey. Where local data is available, it may be more accurate than this dataset. Dataset SummaryThis dataset was developed using proprietary Python code developed at The Trust for Public Land, running on the Descartes Labs platform through the Descartes Labs API for Python. The Descartes Labs platform allows for extremely fast retrieval and processing of imagery, which makes it possible to produce heat island data for all cities in the United States in a relatively short amount of time.In order to click on the image service and see the raw pixel values in a map viewer, you must be signed in to ArcGIS Online, then Enable Pop-Ups and Configure Pop-Ups.Using the Urban Heat Island (UHI) Image ServicesThe data is made available as an image service. There is a processing template applied that supplies the yellow-to-red or blue-to-red color ramp, but once this processing template is removed (you can do this in ArcGIS Pro or ArcGIS Desktop, or in QGIS), the actual data values come through the service and can be used directly in a geoprocessing tool (for example, to extract an area of interest). Following are instructions for doing this in Pro.In ArcGIS Pro, in a Map view, in the Catalog window, click on Portal. In the Portal window, click on the far-right icon representing Living Atlas. Search on the acronyms “tpl” and “uhi”. The results returned will be the UHI image services. Right click on a result and select “Add to current map” from the context menu. When the image service is added to the map, right-click on it in the map view, and select Properties. In the Properties window, select Processing Templates. On the drop-down menu at the top of the window, the default Processing Template is either a yellow-to-red ramp or a blue-to-red ramp. Click the drop-down, and select “None”, then “OK”. Now you will have the actual pixel values displayed in the map, and available to any geoprocessing tool that takes a raster as input. Below is a screenshot of ArcGIS Pro with a UHI image service loaded, color ramp removed, and symbology changed back to a yellow-to-red ramp (a classified renderer can also be used): A typical operation at this point is to clip out your area of interest. To do this, add your polygon shapefile or feature class to the map view, and use the Clip Raster tool to export your area of interest as a geoTIFF raster (file extension ".tif"). In the environments tab for the Clip Raster tool, click the dropdown for "Extent" and select "Same as Layer:", and select the name of your polygon. If you then need to convert the output raster to a polygon shapefile or feature class, run the Raster to Polygon tool, and select "Value" as the field.Other Sources of Heat Island InformationPlease see these websites for valuable information on heat islands and to learn about exciting new heat island research being led by scientists across the country:EPA’s Heat Island Resource CenterDr. Ladd Keith, University of ArizonaDr. Ben McMahan, University of Arizona Dr. Jeremy Hoffman, Science Museum of Virginia Dr. Hunter Jones, NOAA Daphne Lundi, Senior Policy Advisor, NYC Mayor's Office of Recovery and ResiliencyDisclaimer/FeedbackWith nearly 14,000 cities represented, checking each city's heat island raster for quality assurance would be prohibitively time-consuming, so The Trust for Public Land checked a statistically significant sample size for data quality. The sample passed all quality checks, with about 98.5% of the output cities error-free, but there could be instances where the user finds errors in the data. These errors will most likely take the form of a line of discontinuity where there is no city boundary; this type of error is caused by large temperature differences in two adjacent Landsat scenes, so the discontinuity occurs along scene boundaries (see figure below). The Trust for Public Land would appreciate feedback on these errors so that version 2 of the national UHI dataset can be improved. Contact Dale.Watt@tpl.org with feedback.

  9. o

    Data from: Scarps

    • geohub.oregon.gov
    • data.oregon.gov
    • +3more
    Updated Apr 12, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    State of Oregon (2024). Scarps [Dataset]. https://geohub.oregon.gov/datasets/oregon-geo::scarps
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Apr 12, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    State of Oregon
    License

    MIT Licensehttps://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
    License information was derived automatically

    Area covered
    Description

    SLIDO-4.5 is an Esri ArcGIS version 10.7 file geodatabase which can be downloaded here: https://www.oregon.gov/dogami/slido/Pages/data.aspx The geodatabase contains two feature datasets (a group of datasets within the geodatabase) containing six feature classes total, as well as two raster data sets, one individual table, and two individual feature classes. The original studies vary widely in scale, scope and focus which is reflected in the wide range of accuracy, detail, and completeness with which landslides are mapped. In the future, we propose a continuous update of SLIDO. These updates should take place: 1) each time DOGAMI publishes a new GIS dataset that contains landslide inventory or susceptibility data or 2) at the end of each winter season, a common time for landslide occurrences in Oregon, which will include recent historic landslide point data. In order to keep track of the updates, we will use a primary release number such as Release 4.0 along with a decimal number identifying the update such as 4.5.

  10. d

    Composite Management Categories for Greater Sage-grouse in Nevada and...

    • catalog.data.gov
    • data.usgs.gov
    • +4more
    Updated Nov 19, 2025
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Geological Survey (2025). Composite Management Categories for Greater Sage-grouse in Nevada and northeastern California [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/composite-management-categories-for-greater-sage-grouse-in-nevada-and-northeastern-califor
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Nov 19, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    U.S. Geological Survey
    Area covered
    Nevada, California
    Description

    This shapefile represents proposed management categories (Core, Priority, General, and Non-Habitat) derived from the intersection of habitat suitability categories and lek space use. Habitat suitability categories were derived from a composite, continuous surface of sage-grouse habitat suitability index (HSI) values for Nevada and northeastern California formed from the multiplicative product of the spring, summer, and winter HSI surfaces. Summary of steps to create Management Categories: HABITAT SUITABILITY INDEX: The HSI was derived from a generalized linear mixed model (specified by binomial distribution and created using ArcGIS 10.2.2) that contrasted data from multiple environmental factors at used sites (telemetry locations) and available sites (random locations). Predictor variables for the model represented vegetation communities at multiple spatial scales, water resources, habitat configuration, urbanization, roads, elevation, ruggedness, and slope. Vegetation data was derived from various mapping products, which included NV SynthMap (Petersen 2008, SageStitch (Comer et al. 2002, LANDFIRE (Landfire 2010), and the CA Fire and Resource Assessment Program (CFRAP 2006). The analysis was updated to include high resolution percent cover within 30 x 30 m pixels for Sagebrush, non-sagebrush, herbaceous vegetation, and bare ground (C. Homer, unpublished; based on the methods of Homer et al. 2014, Xian et al. 2015 ) and conifer (primarily pinyon-juniper, P. Coates, unpublished). The pool of telemetry data included the same data from 1998 - 2013 used by Coates et al. (2014) as well as additional telemetry location data from field sites in 2014. The dataset was then split according to calendar date into three seasons. Spring included telemetry locations (n = 14,058) from mid-March to June; summer included locations (n = 11,743) from July to mid-October; winter included locations (n = 4862) from November to March. All age and sex classes of marked grouse were used in the analysis. Sufficient data (i.e., a minimum of 100 locations from at least 20 marked Sage-grouse) for modeling existed in 10 subregions for spring and summer, and seven subregions in winter, using all age and sex classes of marked grouse. It is important to note that although this map is composed of HSI values derived from the seasonal data, it does not explicitly represent habitat suitability for reproductive females (i.e., nesting and with broods). Insufficient data were available to allow for estimation of this habitat type for all seasons throughout the study area extent. A Resource Selection Function (RSF) was calculated for each subregion using R software (v 3.13) and season using generalized linear models to derive model-averaged parameter estimates for each covariate across a set of additive models. For each season, subregional RSFs were transformed into Habitat Suitability Indices, and averaged together to produce an overall statewide HSI whereby a relative probability of occurrence was calculated for each raster cell. The three seasonal HSI rasters were then multiplied to create a composite annual HSI. In order to account for discrepancies in HSI values caused by varying ecoregions within Nevada, the HSI was divided into north and south extents using a slightly modified flood region boundary (Mason 1999) that was designed to represent respective mesic and xeric regions of the state. North and south HSI rasters were each relativized according to their maximum value to rescale between zero and one, then mosaicked once more into a state-wide extent. HABITAT CATEGORIZATION: Using the same ecoregion boundaries described above, the habitat classification dataset (an independent data set comprising 10% of the total telemetry location sample) was split into locations falling within respective north and south regions. HSI values from the composite and relativized statewide HSI surface were then extracted to each classification dataset location within the north and south region. The distribution of these values were used to identify class break values corresponding to 0.5 (high), 1.0 (moderate), and 1.5 (low) standard deviations (SD) from the mean HSI. These class breaks were used to classify the HSI surface into four discrete categories of habitat suitability: High, Moderate, Low, and Non-Habitat. In terms of percentiles, High habitat comprised greater than 30.9 % of the HSI values, Moderate comprised 15 – 30.9%, Low comprised 6.7 – 15%, and Non-Habitat comprised less than 6.7%.The classified north and south regions were then clipped by the boundary layer and mosaicked to create a statewide categorical surface for habitat selection. Each habitat suitability category was converted to a vector output where gaps within polygons less than 1.2 million square meters were eliminated, polygons within 500 meters of each other were connected to create corridors and polygons less than 1.2 million square meters in one category were incorporated to the adjacent category. The final step was to mask major roads that were buffered by 50m (Census, 2014), lakes (Peterson, 2008) and urban areas, and place those masked areas into the non-habitat category. The existing urban layer (Census 2010) was not sufficient for our needs because it excluded towns with a population lower than 1,500. Hence, we masked smaller towns (populations of 100 to 1500) and development with Census Block polygons (Census 2015) that had at least 50% urban development within their boundaries when viewed with reference imagery (ArcGIS World Imagery Service Layer). SPACE USE INDEX CALCULATION: Updated lek coordinates and associated trend count data were obtained from the 2015 Nevada Sage-grouse Lek Database compiled by the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW, S. Espinosa, 9/20/2015). Leks count data from the California side of the Buffalo-Skedaddle and Modoc PMU's that contributed to the overall space-use model were obtained from the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA), and included count data up to 2014. We used NDOW data for border leks (n = 12), and WAFWA data for those fully in California and not consistently surveyed by NDOW. We queried the database for leks with a ‘LEKSTATUS’ field classified as ‘Active’ or ‘Pending’. Active leks comprised leks with breeding males observed within the last 5 years (through the 2014 breeding season). Pending leks comprised leks without consistent breeding activity during the prior 3 - 5 surveys or had not been surveyed during the past 5 years; these leks typically trended towards ‘inactive’, or newly discovered leks with at least 2 males. A sage-grouse management area (SGMA) was calculated by buffering Population Management Units developed by NDOW by 10km. This included leks from the Buffalo-Skedaddle PMU that straddles the northeastern California – Nevada border, but excluded leks for the Bi-State Distinct Population Segment. The 5-year average (2011 - 2015) for the number of male grouse (or NDOW classified 'pseudo-males' if males were not clearly identified but likely) attending each lek was calculated. Compared to the 2014 input lek dataset, 36 leks switched from pending to inactive, and 74 new leks were added for 2015 (which included pending ‘new’ leks with one year of counts. A total of 917 leks were used for space use index calculation in 2015 compared to 878 leks in 2014. Utilization distributions describing the probability of lek occurrence were calculated using fixed kernel density estimators (Silverman 1986) with bandwidths estimated from likelihood based cross-validation (CVh) (Horne and Garton 2006). UDs were weighted by the 5-year average (2011 - 2015) for the number of males grouse (or unknown gender if males were not identified) attending leks. UDs and bandwidths were calculated using Geospatial Modelling Environment (Beyer 2012) and the ‘ks’ package (Duong 2012) in Program R. Grid cell size was 30m. The resulting raster was re-scaled between zero and one by dividing by the maximum pixel value. The non-linear effect of distance to lek on the probability of grouse spatial use was estimated using the inverse of the utilization distribution curves described by Coates et al. (2013), where essentially the highest probability of grouse spatial use occurs near leks and then declines precipitously as a non-linear function. Euclidean distance was first calculated in ArcGIS, reclassified into 30-m distance bins (ranging from 0 - 30,000m), and bins reclassified according to the non-linear curve in Coates et al. (2013). The resulting raster was re-scaled between zero and one by dividing by the maximum cell value. A Spatial Use Index (SUI) was calculated by taking the average of the lek utilization distribution and non-linear distance-to-lek rasters in ArcGIS, and re-scaled between zero and one by dividing by the maximum cell value. The volume of the SUI at cumulative at specific isopleths was extracted in Geospatial Modelling Environment (Beyer 2012) with the command ‘isopleth’. Interior polygons (i.e., donuts’ > 1.2 km2) representing no probability of use within a larger polygon of use were erased from each isopleth. The 85% isopleth, which provided greater spatial connectivity and consistency with previously used agency standards (e.g., Doherty et al. 2010), was ultimately recommended by the Sagebrush Ecosystem Technical Team. The 85% SUI isopleth was clipped by the Nevada state boundary. MANAGEMENT CATEGORIES: The process for category determination was directed by the Nevada Sagebrush Ecosystem Technical team. Sage-grouse habitat was categorized into 4 classes: High, Moderate, Low, and Non-Habitat as described above, and intersected with the space use index to form the following management categories . 1) Core habitat: Defined as the intersection between all suitable habitat (High, Moderate, and Low) and the 85% Space Use Index (SUI). 2) Priority habitat: Defined as all high quality habitat

  11. r

    Urban Heat Island Severity for U.S. cities - 2019

    • opendata.rcmrd.org
    • hub.arcgis.com
    • +2more
    Updated Sep 13, 2019
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    The Trust for Public Land (2019). Urban Heat Island Severity for U.S. cities - 2019 [Dataset]. https://opendata.rcmrd.org/datasets/4f6d72903c9741a6a6ee6349f5393572
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Sep 13, 2019
    Dataset authored and provided by
    The Trust for Public Land
    Area covered
    Description

    Notice: this is not the latest Heat Island Severity image service. For 2023 data, visit https://tpl.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=db5bdb0f0c8c4b85b8270ec67448a0b6. This layer contains the relative heat severity for every pixel for every city in the United States. This 30-meter raster was derived from Landsat 8 imagery band 10 (ground-level thermal sensor) from the summers of 2018 and 2019.Federal statistics over a 30-year period show extreme heat is the leading cause of weather-related deaths in the United States. Extreme heat exacerbated by urban heat islands can lead to increased respiratory difficulties, heat exhaustion, and heat stroke. These heat impacts significantly affect the most vulnerable—children, the elderly, and those with preexisting conditions.The purpose of this layer is to show where certain areas of cities are hotter than the average temperature for that same city as a whole. Severity is measured on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being a relatively mild heat area (slightly above the mean for the city), and 5 being a severe heat area (significantly above the mean for the city). The absolute heat above mean values are classified into these 5 classes using the Jenks Natural Breaks classification method, which seeks to reduce the variance within classes and maximize the variance between classes. Knowing where areas of high heat are located can help a city government plan for mitigation strategies.This dataset represents a snapshot in time. It will be updated yearly, but is static between updates. It does not take into account changes in heat during a single day, for example, from building shadows moving. The thermal readings detected by the Landsat 8 sensor are surface-level, whether that surface is the ground or the top of a building. Although there is strong correlation between surface temperature and air temperature, they are not the same. We believe that this is useful at the national level, and for cities that don’t have the ability to conduct their own hyper local temperature survey. Where local data is available, it may be more accurate than this dataset. Dataset SummaryThis dataset was developed using proprietary Python code developed at The Trust for Public Land, running on the Descartes Labs platform through the Descartes Labs API for Python. The Descartes Labs platform allows for extremely fast retrieval and processing of imagery, which makes it possible to produce heat island data for all cities in the United States in a relatively short amount of time.What can you do with this layer?This layer has query, identify, and export image services available. Since it is served as an image service, it is not necessary to download the data; the service itself is data that can be used directly in any Esri geoprocessing tool that accepts raster data as input.Using the Urban Heat Island (UHI) Image ServicesThe data is made available as an image service. There is a processing template applied that supplies the yellow-to-red or blue-to-red color ramp, but once this processing template is removed (you can do this in ArcGIS Pro or ArcGIS Desktop, or in QGIS), the actual data values come through the service and can be used directly in a geoprocessing tool (for example, to extract an area of interest). Following are instructions for doing this in Pro.In ArcGIS Pro, in a Map view, in the Catalog window, click on Portal. In the Portal window, click on the far-right icon representing Living Atlas. Search on the acronyms “tpl” and “uhi”. The results returned will be the UHI image services. Right click on a result and select “Add to current map” from the context menu. When the image service is added to the map, right-click on it in the map view, and select Properties. In the Properties window, select Processing Templates. On the drop-down menu at the top of the window, the default Processing Template is either a yellow-to-red ramp or a blue-to-red ramp. Click the drop-down, and select “None”, then “OK”. Now you will have the actual pixel values displayed in the map, and available to any geoprocessing tool that takes a raster as input. Below is a screenshot of ArcGIS Pro with a UHI image service loaded, color ramp removed, and symbology changed back to a yellow-to-red ramp (a classified renderer can also be used): Other Sources of Heat Island InformationPlease see these websites for valuable information on heat islands and to learn about exciting new heat island research being led by scientists across the country:EPA’s Heat Island Resource CenterDr. Ladd Keith, University of Arizona Dr. Ben McMahan, University of Arizona Dr. Jeremy Hoffman, Science Museum of Virginia Dr. Hunter Jones, NOAADaphne Lundi, Senior Policy Advisor, NYC Mayor's Office of Recovery and ResiliencyDisclaimer/FeedbackWith nearly 14,000 cities represented, checking each city's heat island raster for quality assurance would be prohibitively time-consuming, so The Trust for Public Land checked a statistically significant sample size for data quality. The sample passed all quality checks, with about 98.5% of the output cities error-free, but there could be instances where the user finds errors in the data. These errors will most likely take the form of a line of discontinuity where there is no city boundary; this type of error is caused by large temperature differences in two adjacent Landsat scenes, so the discontinuity occurs along scene boundaries (see figure below). The Trust for Public Land would appreciate feedback on these errors so that version 2 of the national UHI dataset can be improved. Contact Dale.Watt@tpl.org with feedback.

  12. w

    Data from: U.S. Geological Survey Gap Analysis Program- Land Cover Data v2.2...

    • data.wu.ac.at
    • data.globalchange.gov
    • +2more
    esri rest
    Updated Jun 8, 2018
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Department of the Interior (2018). U.S. Geological Survey Gap Analysis Program- Land Cover Data v2.2 [Dataset]. https://data.wu.ac.at/schema/data_gov/MmMzYjljMzQtZmJjMy00NjUwLWE3YmMtNzRlOWRmMTFkZTVj
    Explore at:
    esri restAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Jun 8, 2018
    Dataset provided by
    Department of the Interior
    Area covered
    d8998031d4cf34652dda2763c83c7b599a8a3521
    Description

    This dataset combines the work of several different projects to create a seamless data set for the contiguous United States. Data from four regional Gap Analysis Projects and the LANDFIRE project were combined to make this dataset. In the northwestern United States (Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Washington and Wyoming) data in this map came from the Northwest Gap Analysis Project. In the southwestern United States (Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah) data used in this map came from the Southwest Gap Analysis Project. The data for Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Virginia came from the Southeast Gap Analysis Project and the California data was generated by the updated California Gap land cover project. The Hawaii Gap Analysis project provided the data for Hawaii. In areas of the county (central U.S., Northeast, Alaska) that have not yet been covered by a regional Gap Analysis Project, data from the Landfire project was used. Similarities in the methods used by these projects made possible the combining of the data they derived into one seamless coverage. They all used multi-season satellite imagery (Landsat ETM+) from 1999-2001 in conjunction with digital elevation model (DEM) derived datasets (e.g. elevation, landform) to model natural and semi-natural vegetation. Vegetation classes were drawn from NatureServe's Ecological System Classification (Comer et al. 2003) or classes developed by the Hawaii Gap project. Additionally, all of the projects included land use classes that were employed to describe areas where natural vegetation has been altered. In many areas of the country these classes were derived from the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD). For the majority of classes and, in most areas of the country, a decision tree classifier was used to discriminate ecological system types. In some areas of the country, more manual techniques were used to discriminate small patch systems and systems not distinguishable through topography. The data contains multiple levels of thematic detail. At the most detailed level natural vegetation is represented by NatureServe's Ecological System classification (or in Hawaii the Hawaii GAP classification). These most detailed classifications have been crosswalked to the five highest levels of the National Vegetation Classification (NVC), Class, Subclass, Formation, Division and Macrogroup. This crosswalk allows users to display and analyze the data at different levels of thematic resolution. Developed areas, or areas dominated by introduced species, timber harvest, or water are represented by other classes, collectively refered to as land use classes; these land use classes occur at each of the thematic levels. Raster data in both ArcGIS Grid and ERDAS Imagine format is available for download at http://gis1.usgs.gov/csas/gap/viewer/land_cover/Map.aspx Six layer files are included in the download packages to assist the user in displaying the data at each of the Thematic levels in ArcGIS. In adition to the raster datasets the data is available in Web Mapping Services (WMS) format for each of the six NVC classification levels (Class, Subclass, Formation, Division, Macrogroup, Ecological System) at the following links. http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Class_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Subclass_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Formation_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Division_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Macrogroup_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_Ecological_Systems_Landuse/MapServer

  13. Visualize Urban Sprawl

    • hub.arcgis.com
    • rwanda-africa.hub.arcgis.com
    • +3more
    Updated Sep 12, 2020
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Esri (2020). Visualize Urban Sprawl [Dataset]. https://hub.arcgis.com/content/9d344a720f274f7fb331f8ae00fecdce
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Sep 12, 2020
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Esrihttp://esri.com/
    Area covered
    Description

    This template is used to compute urban growth between two land cover datasets, that are classified into 20 classes based on the Anderson Level II classification system. This raster function template is used to generate a visual representation indicating urbanization across two different time periods. Typical datasets used for this template is the National Land Cover Database. A more detailed blog on the datasets can be found on ArcGIS Blogs. This template works in ArcGIS Pro Version 2.6 and higher. It's designed to work on Enterprise 10.8.1 and higher.References:Raster functionsWhen to use this raster function templateThe template is useful to generate an intuitive visualization of urbanization across two images.Sample Images to test this againstNLCD2006 and NLCD2011How to use this raster function templateIn ArcGIS Pro, search ArcGIS Living Atlas for raster function templates to apply them to your imagery layer. You can also download the raster function template, attach it to a mosaic dataset, and publish it as an image service. The output is a visual representation of urban sprawl across two images. Applicable geographiesThe template is designed to work globally.

  14. U

    Heat Severity - USA 2020

    • data.unep.org
    Updated Dec 9, 2022
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    UN World Environment Situation Room (2022). Heat Severity - USA 2020 [Dataset]. https://data.unep.org/app/dataset/wesr-arcgis-wm-heat-severity---usa-2020
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Dec 9, 2022
    Dataset provided by
    UN World Environment Situation Room
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    This layer contains the relative heat severity for every pixel for every city in the United States. This 30-meter raster was derived from Landsat 8 imagery band 10 (ground-level thermal sensor) from the summers of 2019 and 2020.Federal statistics over a 30-year period show extreme heat is the leading cause of weather-related deaths in the United States. Extreme heat exacerbated by urban heat islands can lead to increased respiratory difficulties, heat exhaustion, and heat stroke. These heat impacts significantly affect the most vulnerable—children, the elderly, and those with preexisting conditions.The purpose of this layer is to show where certain areas of cities are hotter than the average temperature for that same city as a whole. Severity is measured on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being a relatively mild heat area (slightly above the mean for the city), and 5 being a severe heat area (significantly above the mean for the city). The absolute heat above mean values are classified into these 5 classes using the Jenks Natural Breaks classification method, which seeks to reduce the variance within classes and maximize the variance between classes. Knowing where areas of high heat are located can help a city government plan for mitigation strategies.This dataset represents a snapshot in time. It will be updated yearly, but is static between updates. It does not take into account changes in heat during a single day, for example, from building shadows moving. The thermal readings detected by the Landsat 8 sensor are surface-level, whether that surface is the ground or the top of a building. Although there is strong correlation between surface temperature and air temperature, they are not the same. We believe that this is useful at the national level, and for cities that don’t have the ability to conduct their own hyper local temperature survey. Where local data is available, it may be more accurate than this dataset. Dataset SummaryThis dataset was developed using proprietary Python code developed at The Trust for Public Land, running on the Descartes Labs platform through the Descartes Labs API for Python. The Descartes Labs platform allows for extremely fast retrieval and processing of imagery, which makes it possible to produce heat island data for all cities in the United States in a relatively short amount of time.What can you do with this layer?This layer has query, identify, and export image services available. Since it is served as an image service, it is not necessary to download the data; the service itself is data that can be used directly in any Esri geoprocessing tool that accepts raster data as input.In order to click on the image service and see the raw pixel values in a map viewer, you must be signed in to ArcGIS Online, then Enable Pop-Ups and Configure Pop-Ups.Using the Urban Heat Island (UHI) Image ServicesThe data is made available as an image service. There is a processing template applied that supplies the yellow-to-red or blue-to-red color ramp, but once this processing template is removed (you can do this in ArcGIS Pro or ArcGIS Desktop, or in QGIS), the actual data values come through the service and can be used directly in a geoprocessing tool (for example, to extract an area of interest). Following are instructions for doing this in Pro.In ArcGIS Pro, in a Map view, in the Catalog window, click on Portal. In the Portal window, click on the far-right icon representing Living Atlas. Search on the acronyms “tpl” and “uhi”. The results returned will be the UHI image services. Right click on a result and select “Add to current map” from the context menu. When the image service is added to the map, right-click on it in the map view, and select Properties. In the Properties window, select Processing Templates. On the drop-down menu at the top of the window, the default Processing Template is either a yellow-to-red ramp or a blue-to-red ramp. Click the drop-down, and select “None”, then “OK”. Now you will have the actual pixel values displayed in the map, and available to any geoprocessing tool that takes a raster as input. Below is a screenshot of ArcGIS Pro with a UHI image service loaded, color ramp removed, and symbology changed back to a yellow-to-red ramp (a classified renderer can also be used): Other Sources of Heat Island InformationPlease see these websites for valuable information on heat islands and to learn about exciting new heat island research being led by scientists across the country:EPA’s Heat Island Resource CenterDr. Ladd Keith, University of ArizonaDr. Ben McMahan, University of Arizona Dr. Jeremy Hoffman, Science Museum of Virginia Dr. Hunter Jones, NOAA Daphne Lundi, Senior Policy Advisor, NYC Mayor's Office of Recovery and ResiliencyDisclaimer/FeedbackWith nearly 14,000 cities represented, checking each city's heat island raster for quality assurance would be prohibitively time-consuming, so The Trust for Public Land checked a statistically significant sample size for data quality. The sample passed all quality checks, with about 98.5% of the output cities error-free, but there could be instances where the user finds errors in the data. These errors will most likely take the form of a line of discontinuity where there is no city boundary; this type of error is caused by large temperature differences in two adjacent Landsat scenes, so the discontinuity occurs along scene boundaries (see figure below). The Trust for Public Land would appreciate feedback on these errors so that version 2 of the national UHI dataset can be improved. Contact Pete.Aniello@tpl.org with feedback.Terms of UseYou understand and agree, and will advise any third party to whom you give any or all of the data, that The Trust for Public Land is neither responsible nor liable for any viruses or other contamination of your system arising from use of The Trust for Public Land’s data nor for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions arising out of the use of the data. The Trust for Public Land’s data is distributed and transmitted "as is" without warranties of any kind, either express or implied, including without limitation, warranties of title or implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. The Trust for Public Land is not responsible for any claim of loss of profit or any special, direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, and/or punitive damages that may arise from the use of the data. If you or any person to whom you make the data available are downloading or using the data for any visual output, attribution for same will be given in the following format: "This [document, map, diagram, report, etc.] was produced using data, in whole or in part, provided by The Trust for Public Land."

  15. d

    Namoi bore analysis rasters

    • data.gov.au
    • researchdata.edu.au
    zip
    Updated Nov 19, 2019
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Bioregional Assessment Program (2019). Namoi bore analysis rasters [Dataset]. https://data.gov.au/dataset/22932dc2-0015-47db-8b67-6cd4b313ebf6
    Explore at:
    zipAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Nov 19, 2019
    Dataset provided by
    Bioregional Assessment Program
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Area covered
    Namoi River
    Description

    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 …Show full descriptionAbstract 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

  16. a

    Sentinel-2 Views

    • uneca.africageoportal.com
    • pacificgeoportal.com
    • +17more
    Updated May 2, 2018
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Esri (2018). Sentinel-2 Views [Dataset]. https://uneca.africageoportal.com/datasets/fd61b9e0c69c4e14bebd50a9a968348c
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    May 2, 2018
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Esri
    Area covered
    Description

    Sentinel-2 Level-1C imagery with on-the-fly renderings for visualization. This imagery layer pulls directly from the Sentinel-2 on AWS collection and is updated daily with new imagery.Sentinel-2 imagery can be applied across a number of industries, scientific disciplines, and management practices. Some applications include, but are not limited to, land cover and environmental monitoring, climate change, deforestation, disaster and emergency management, national security, plant health and precision agriculture, forest monitoring, watershed analysis and runoff predictions, land-use planning, tracking urban expansion, highlighting burned areas and estimating fire severity.Geographic CoverageGlobalContinental land masses from 65.4° South to 72.1° North, with these special guidelines:All coastal waters up to 20 km from the shoreAll islands greater than 100 km2All EU islandsAll closed seas (e.g. Caspian Sea)The Mediterranean Sea Temporal CoverageThis layer includes a rolling collection of Sentinel-2 imagery acquired within the past 14 months.This layer is updated daily with new imagery.The revisit time for each point on Earth is every 5 days.The number of images available will vary depending on location. Product LevelThis service provides Level-1C Top of Atmosphere imagery.Alternatively, Sentinel-2 Level-2A is also available. Image Selection/FilteringThe most recent and cloud free images are displayed by default.Any image available within the past 14 months can be displayed via custom filtering.Filtering can be done based on attributes such as Acquisition Date, Estimated Cloud Cover, and Tile ID.Tile_ID is computed as [year][month][day]T[hours][minutes][seconds]_[UTMcode][latitudeband][square]_[sequence]. More… Visual RenderingDefault rendering is Natural Color (bands 4,3,2) with Dynamic Range Adjustment (DRA).The DRA version of each layer enables visualization of the full dynamic range of the images.Rendering (or display) of band combinations and calculated indices is done on-the-fly from the source images via Raster Functions.Various pre-defined Raster Functions can be selected or custom functions created.Available renderings include: Agriculture with DRA, Bathymetric with DRA, Color-Infrared with DRA, Natural Color with DRA, Short-wave Infrared with DRA, Geology with DRA, NDMI Colorized, Normalized Difference Built-Up Index (NDBI), NDWI Raw, NDWI - with VRE Raw, NDVI – with VRE Raw (NDRE), NDVI - VRE only Raw, NDVI Raw, Normalized Burn Ratio, NDVI Colormap. Multispectral BandsBandDescriptionWavelength (µm)Resolution (m)1Coastal aerosol0.433 - 0.453602Blue0.458 - 0.523103Green0.543 - 0.578104Red0.650 - 0.680105Vegetation Red Edge0.698 - 0.713206Vegetation Red Edge0.733 - 0.748207Vegetation Red Edge0.773 - 0.793208NIR0.785 - 0.900108ANarrow NIR0.855 - 0.875209Water vapour0.935 - 0.9556010SWIR – Cirrus1.365 - 1.3856011SWIR-11.565 - 1.6552012SWIR-22.100 - 2.28020Additional NotesOverviews exist with a spatial resolution of 150m and are updated every quarter based on the best and latest imagery available at that time.To work with source images at all scales, the ‘Lock Raster’ functionality is available. NOTE: ‘Lock Raster’ should only be used on the layer for short periods of time, as the imagery and associated record Object IDs may change daily.This ArcGIS Server dynamic imagery layer can be used in Web Maps and ArcGIS Desktop as well as Web and Mobile applications using the REST based Image services API.Images can be exported up to a maximum of 4,000 columns x 4,000 rows per request. Data SourceSentinel-2 imagery is the result of close collaboration between the (European Space Agency) ESA, the European Commission and USGS. Data is hosted by the Amazon Web Services as part of their Registry of Open Data. Users can access the imagery from Sentinel-2 on AWS, or alternatively access EarthExplorer or the Copernicus Data Space Ecosystem to download the scenes.For information on Sentinel-2 imagery, see Sentinel-2.

  17. g

    Deposits

    • gimi9.com
    • data.oregon.gov
    • +3more
    Updated Dec 21, 2019
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    (2019). Deposits [Dataset]. https://gimi9.com/dataset/data-gov_deposits/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Dec 21, 2019
    Description

    SLIDO-4.5 is an Esri ArcGIS version 10.7 file geodatabase which can be downloaded here: https://www.oregon.gov/dogami/slido/Pages/data.aspx The geodatabase contains two feature datasets (a group of datasets within the geodatabase) containing six feature classes total, as well as two raster data sets, one individual table, and two individual feature classes. The original studies vary widely in scale, scope and focus which is reflected in the wide range of accuracy, detail, and completeness with which landslides are mapped. In the future, we propose a continuous update of SLIDO. These updates should take place: 1) each time DOGAMI publishes a new GIS dataset that contains landslide inventory or susceptibility data or 2) at the end of each winter season, a common time for landslide occurrences in Oregon, which will include recent historic landslide point data. In order to keep track of the updates, we will use a primary release number such as Release 4.0 along with a decimal number identifying the update such as 4.5.

  18. w

    Appalachian Basin Play Fairway Analysis: Thermal Quality Analysis in...

    • data.wu.ac.at
    zip
    Updated Mar 6, 2018
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    HarvestMaster (2018). Appalachian Basin Play Fairway Analysis: Thermal Quality Analysis in Low-Temperature Geothermal Play Fairway Analysis (GPFA-AB) ThermalQualityAnalysisThermalResourceInterpolationResultsArcGISToolbox.zip [Dataset]. https://data.wu.ac.at/schema/geothermaldata_org/ODcxNmYzNDgtMTM2Zi00MGMxLWJiOTUtMzJhY2U1MTkzMDMz
    Explore at:
    zipAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Mar 6, 2018
    Dataset provided by
    HarvestMaster
    Area covered
    f6cdecf8c561388b831e8b71e301afe86ed90f0d
    Description

    This collection of files are part of a larger dataset uploaded in support of Low Temperature Geothermal Play Fairway Analysis for the Appalachian Basin (GPFA-AB, DOE Project DE-EE0006726). Phase 1 of the GPFA-AB project identified potential Geothermal Play Fairways within the Appalachian basin of Pennsylvania, West Virginia and New York. This was accomplished through analysis of 4 key criteria: thermal quality, natural reservoir productivity, risk of seismicity, and heat utilization. Each of these analyses represent a distinct project task, with the fifth task encompassing combination of the 4 risks factors. Supporting data for all five tasks has been uploaded into the Geothermal Data Repository node of the National Geothermal Data System (NGDS).

    This submission comprises the data for Thermal Quality Analysis (project task 1) and includes all of the necessary shapefiles, rasters, datasets, code, and references to code repositories that were used to create the thermal resource and risk factor maps as part of the GPFA-AB project. The identified Geothermal Play Fairways are also provided with the larger dataset. Figures (.png) are provided as examples of the shapefiles and rasters. The regional standardized 1 square km grid used in the project is also provided as points (cell centers), polygons, and as a raster. Two ArcGIS toolboxes are available: 1) RegionalGridModels.tbx for creating resource and risk factor maps on the standardized grid, and 2) ThermalRiskFactorModels.tbx for use in making the thermal resource maps and cross sections. These toolboxes contain item description documentation for each model within the toolbox, and for the toolbox itself. This submission also contains three R scripts: 1) AddNewSeisFields.R to add seismic risk data to attribute tables of seismic risk, 2) StratifiedKrigingInterpolation.R for the interpolations used in the thermal resource analysis, and 3) LeaveOneOutCrossValidation.R for the cross validations used in the thermal interpolations.

    Some file descriptions make reference to various 'memos'. These are contained within the final report submitted October 16, 2015.

    Each zipped file in the submission contains an 'about' document describing the full Thermal Quality Analysis content available, along with key sources, authors, citation, use guidelines, and assumptions, with the specific file(s) contained within the .zip file highlighted.

    UPDATE: Newer version of the Thermal Quality Analysis has been added here: https://gdr.openei.org/submissions/879 (Also linked below) Newer version of the Combined Risk Factor Analysis has been added here: https://gdr.openei.org/submissions/880 (Also linked below) This is one of sixteen associated .zip files relating to thermal resource interpolation results within the Thermal Quality Analysis task of the Low Temperature Geothermal Play Fairway Analysis for the Appalachian Basin. This file contains an ArcGIS Toolbox with 6 ArcGIS Models: WellClipsToWormsSections, BufferedRasterToClippedRaster, ExtractThermalPropertiesToCrossSection, AddExtraInfoToCrossSection, and CrossSectionExtraction.

    The sixteen files contain the results of the thermal resource interpolation as binary grid (raster) files, images (.png) of the rasters, and toolbox of ArcGIS Models used. Note that raster files ending in “pred” are the predicted mean for that resource, and files ending in “err” are the standard error of the predicted mean for that resource. Leave one out cross validation results are provided for each thermal resource.

    Several models were built in order to process the well database with outliers removed. ArcGIS toolbox ThermalRiskFactorModels contains the ArcGIS processing tools used. First, the WellClipsToWormSections model was used to clip the wells to the worm sections (interpolation regions). Then, the 1 square km gridded regions (see series of 14 Worm Based Interpolation Boundaries .zip files) along with the wells in those regions were loaded into R using the rgdal package. Then, a stratified kriging algorithm implemented in the R gstat package was used to create rasters of the predicted mean and the standard error of the predicted mean. The code used to make these rasters is called StratifiedKrigingInterpolation.R Details about the interpolation, and exploratory data analysis on the well data is provided in 9_GPFA-AB_InterpolationThermalFieldEstimation.pdf (Smith, 2015), contained within the final report.

    The output rasters from R are brought into ArcGIS for further spatial processing. First, the BufferedRasterToClippedRaster tool is used to clip the interpolations back to the Worm Sections. Then, the Mosaic tool in ArcGIS is used to merge all predicted mean rasters into a single raster, and all error rasters into a single raster for each thermal resource.

    A leave one out cross validation was performed on each of the thermal resources. The code used to implement the cross validation is provided in the R script LeaveOneOutCrossValidation.R. The results of the cross validation are given for each thermal resource.

    Other tools provided in this toolbox are useful for creating cross sections of the thermal resource. ExtractThermalPropertiesToCrossSection model extracts the predicted mean and the standard error of predicted mean to the attribute table of a line of cross section. The AddExtraInfoToCrossSection model is then used to add any other desired information, such as state and county boundaries, to the cross section attribute table. These two functions can be combined as a single function, as provided by the CrossSectionExtraction model.

  19. terraceDL: A geomorphology deep learning dataset of agricultural terraces in...

    • figshare.com
    bin
    Updated Mar 22, 2023
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Aaron Maxwell (2023). terraceDL: A geomorphology deep learning dataset of agricultural terraces in Iowa, USA [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.22320373.v2
    Explore at:
    binAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Mar 22, 2023
    Dataset provided by
    figshare
    Figsharehttp://figshare.com/
    Authors
    Aaron Maxwell
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Area covered
    Iowa, United States
    Description

    scripts.zip

    arcgisTools.atbx: terrainDerivatives: make terrain derivatives from digital terrain model (Band 1 = TPI (50 m radius circle), Band 2 = square root of slope, Band 3 = TPI (annulus), Band 4 = hillshade, Band 5 = multidirectional hillshades, Band 6 = slopeshade). rasterizeFeatures: convert vector polygons to raster masks (1 = feature, 0 = background).

    makeChips.R: R function to break terrain derivatives and chips into image chips of a defined size. makeTerrainDerivatives.R: R function to generated 6-band terrain derivatives from digital terrain data (same as ArcGIS Pro tool). merge_logs.R: R script to merge training logs into a single file. predictToExtents.ipynb: Python notebook to use trained model to predict to new data. trainExperiments.ipynb: Python notebook used to train semantic segmentation models using PyTorch and the Segmentation Models package. assessmentExperiments.ipynb: Python code to generate assessment metrics using PyTorch and the torchmetrics library. graphs_results.R: R code to make graphs with ggplot2 to summarize results. makeChipsList.R: R code to generate lists of chips in a directory. makeMasks.R: R function to make raster masks from vector data (same as rasterizeFeatures ArcGIS Pro tool).

    terraceDL.zip

    dems: LiDAR DTM data partitioned into training, testing, and validation datasets based on HUC8 watershed boundaries. Original DTM data were provided by the Iowa BMP mapping project: https://www.gis.iastate.edu/BMPs. extents: extents of the training, testing, and validation areas as defined by HUC 8 watershed boundaries. vectors: vector features representing agricultural terraces and partitioned into separate training, testing, and validation datasets. Original digitized features were provided by the Iowa BMP Mapping Project: https://www.gis.iastate.edu/BMPs.

  20. Sentinel-2 10m Land Use/Land Cover Change from 2018 to 2021

    • pacificgeoportal.com
    • gis-for-secondary-schools-schools-be.hub.arcgis.com
    Updated Feb 10, 2022
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Esri (2022). Sentinel-2 10m Land Use/Land Cover Change from 2018 to 2021 [Dataset]. https://www.pacificgeoportal.com/datasets/30c4287128cc446b888ca020240c456b
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Feb 10, 2022
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Esrihttp://esri.com/
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Area covered
    Description

    Retirement Notice: This item is in mature support as of February 2023 and will be retired in December 2025. A new version of this item is available for your use. Esri recommends updating your maps and apps to use the new version.This layer displays change in pixels of the Sentinel-2 10m Land Use/Land Cover product developed by Esri, Impact Observatory, and Microsoft. Available years to compare with 2021 are 2018, 2019 and 2020. By default, the layer shows all comparisons together, in effect showing what changed 2018-2021. But the layer may be changed to show one of three specific pairs of years, 2018-2021, 2019-2021, or 2020-2021.Showing just one pair of years in ArcGIS Online Map Viewer To show just one pair of years in ArcGIS Online Map viewer, create a filter. 1. Click the filter button. 2. Next, click add expression. 3. In the expression dialogue, specify a pair of years with the ProductName attribute. Use the following example in your expression dialogue to show only places that changed between 2020 and 2021:ProductNameis2020-2021 By default, places that do not change appear as a transparent symbol in ArcGIS Pro. But in ArcGIS Online Map Viewer, a transparent symbol may need to be set for these places after a filter is chosen. To do this: 4. Click the styles button.5. Under unique values click style options. 6. Click the symbol next to No Change at the bottom of the legend. 7. Click the slider next to "enable fill" to turn the symbol off. Showing just one pair of years in ArcGIS Pro To show just one pair of years in ArcGIS Pro, choose one of the layer's processing templates to single out a particular pair of years. The processing template applies a definition query that works in ArcGIS Pro. 1. To choose a processing template, right click the layer in the table of contents for ArcGIS Pro and choose properties. 2. In the dialogue that comes up, choose the tab that says processing templates. 3. On the right where it says processing template, choose the pair of years you would like to display. The processing template will stay applied for any analysis you may want to perform as well. How the change layer was created, combining LULC classes from two yearsImpact Observatory, Esri, and Microsoft used artificial intelligence to classify the world in 10 Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) classes for the years 2017-2021. Mosaics serve the following sets of change rasters in a single global layer: Change between 2018 and 2021Change between 2019 and 2021Change between 2020 and 2021To make this change layer, Esri used an arithmetic operation combining the cells from a source year and 2021 to make a change index value. ((from year * 16) + to year) In the example of the change between 2020 and 2021, the from year (2020) was multiplied by 16, then added to the to year (2021). Then the combined number is served as an index in an 8 bit unsigned mosaic with an attribute table which describes what changed or did not change in that timeframe. Variable mapped: Change in land cover between 2018, 2019, or 2020 and 2021 Data Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM)Mosaic Projection: WGS84Extent: GlobalSource imagery: Sentinel-2Cell Size: 10m (0.00008983152098239751 degrees)Type: ThematicSource: Esri Inc.Publication date: January 2022 What can you do with this layer?Global LULC maps provide information on conservation planning, food security, and hydrologic modeling, among other things. This dataset can be used to visualize land cover anywhere on Earth. This layer can also be used in analyses that require land cover input. For example, the Zonal Statistics tools allow a user to understand the composition of a specified area by reporting the total estimates for each of the classes. Land Cover processingThis map was produced by a deep learning model trained using over 5 billion hand-labeled Sentinel-2 pixels, sampled from over 20,000 sites distributed across all major biomes of the world. The underlying deep learning model uses 6 bands of Sentinel-2 surface reflectance data: visible blue, green, red, near infrared, and two shortwave infrared bands. To create the final map, the model is run on multiple dates of imagery throughout the year, and the outputs are composited into a final representative map. Processing platformSentinel-2 L2A/B data was accessed via Microsoft’s Planetary Computer and scaled using Microsoft Azure Batch. Class definitions1. WaterAreas where water was predominantly present throughout the year; may not cover areas with sporadic or ephemeral water; contains little to no sparse vegetation, no rock outcrop nor built up features like docks; examples: rivers, ponds, lakes, oceans, flooded salt plains.2. TreesAny significant clustering of tall (~15-m or higher) dense vegetation, typically with a closed or dense canopy; examples: wooded vegetation, clusters of dense tall vegetation within savannas, plantations, swamp or mangroves (dense/tall vegetation with ephemeral water or canopy too thick to detect water underneath).4. Flooded vegetationAreas of any type of vegetation with obvious intermixing of water throughout a majority of the year; seasonally flooded area that is a mix of grass/shrub/trees/bare ground; examples: flooded mangroves, emergent vegetation, rice paddies and other heavily irrigated and inundated agriculture.5. CropsHuman planted/plotted cereals, grasses, and crops not at tree height; examples: corn, wheat, soy, fallow plots of structured land.7. Built AreaHuman made structures; major road and rail networks; large homogenous impervious surfaces including parking structures, office buildings and residential housing; examples: houses, dense villages / towns / cities, paved roads, asphalt.8. Bare groundAreas of rock or soil with very sparse to no vegetation for the entire year; large areas of sand and deserts with no to little vegetation; examples: exposed rock or soil, desert and sand dunes, dry salt flats/pans, dried lake beds, mines.9. Snow/IceLarge homogenous areas of permanent snow or ice, typically only in mountain areas or highest latitudes; examples: glaciers, permanent snowpack, snow fields. 10. CloudsNo land cover information due to persistent cloud cover.11. Rangeland Open areas covered in homogenous grasses with little to no taller vegetation; wild cereals and grasses with no obvious human plotting (i.e., not a plotted field); examples: natural meadows and fields with sparse to no tree cover, open savanna with few to no trees, parks/golf courses/lawns, pastures. Mix of small clusters of plants or single plants dispersed on a landscape that shows exposed soil or rock; scrub-filled clearings within dense forests that are clearly not taller than trees; examples: moderate to sparse cover of bushes, shrubs and tufts of grass, savannas with very sparse grasses, trees or other plants.CitationKarra, Kontgis, et al. “Global land use/land cover with Sentinel-2 and deep learning.” IGARSS 2021-2021 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. IEEE, 2021.AcknowledgementsTraining data for this project makes use of the National Geographic Society Dynamic World training dataset, produced for the Dynamic World Project by National Geographic Society in partnership with Google and the World Resources Institute.For questions please email environment@esri.com

Share
FacebookFacebook
TwitterTwitter
Email
Click to copy link
Link copied
Close
Cite
Justin Welty; Michelle Jefferies; Robert Arkle; David Pilliod; Susan Kemp (2022). GIS Clipping and Summarization Toolbox [Dataset]. https://verso.uidaho.edu/esploro/outputs/dataset/GIS-Clipping-and-Summarization-Toolbox/996762913201851

Data from: GIS Clipping and Summarization Toolbox

Related Article
Explore at:
Dataset updated
Mar 9, 2022
Dataset provided by
Idaho EPSCoR, EPSCoR GEM3
Authors
Justin Welty; Michelle Jefferies; Robert Arkle; David Pilliod; Susan Kemp
Time period covered
Mar 9, 2022
Description

Geographic Information System (GIS) analyses are an essential part of natural resource management and research. Calculating and summarizing data within intersecting GIS layers is common practice for analysts and researchers. However, the various tools and steps required to complete this process are slow and tedious, requiring many tools iterating over hundreds, or even thousands of datasets. USGS scientists will combine a series of ArcGIS geoprocessing capabilities with custom scripts to create tools that will calculate, summarize, and organize large amounts of data that can span many temporal and spatial scales with minimal user input. The tools work with polygons, lines, points, and rasters to calculate relevant summary data and combine them into a single output table that can be easily incorporated into statistical analyses. These tools are useful for anyone interested in using an automated script to quickly compile summary information within all areas of interest in a GIS dataset.

Toolbox Use
License
Creative Commons-PDDC
Recommended Citation
Welty JL, Jeffries MI, Arkle RS, Pilliod DS, Kemp SK. 2021. GIS Clipping and Summarization Toolbox: U.S. Geological Survey Software Release. https://doi.org/10.5066/P99X8558

Search
Clear search
Close search
Google apps
Main menu