This is an exercise on the use of Postal Code Conversion Files (PCCF) with GIS. (Note: Data associated with this exercise is available on the DLI FTP site under folder 1873-299.)

To achieve true data interoperability is to eliminate format and data model barriers, allowing you to seamlessly access, convert, and model any data, independent of format. The ArcGIS Data Interoperability extension is based on the powerful data transformation capabilities of the Feature Manipulation Engine (FME), giving you the data you want, when and where you want it.In this course, you will learn how to leverage the ArcGIS Data Interoperability extension within ArcCatalog and ArcMap, enabling you to directly read, translate, and transform spatial data according to your independent needs. In addition to components that allow you to work openly with a multitude of formats, the extension also provides a complex data model solution with a level of control that would otherwise require custom software.After completing this course, you will be able to:Recognize when you need to use the Data Interoperability tool to view or edit your data.Choose and apply the correct method of reading data with the Data Interoperability tool in ArcCatalog and ArcMap.Choose the correct Data Interoperability tool and be able to use it to convert your data between formats.Edit a data model, or schema, using the Spatial ETL tool.Perform any desired transformations on your data's attributes and geometry using the Spatial ETL tool.Verify your data transformations before, after, and during a translation by inspecting your data.Apply best practices when creating a workflow using the Data Interoperability extension.

This project maps the conversion from mid-20th century flood (and sprinkler irrigation) to sprinkler irrigation (center-pivot and other sprinkler), and other land types (fallow, crop, and flood remaining flood) in Montana, by 2019. This file contains results of mapping the conversion from mid-20th century flood (and sprinkler irrigation) to sprinkler irrigation (center-pivot and other sprinkler), and other land types (to cropland—C, hayland--H, fallow –FA, and sprinkler remaining sprinkler) in Montana, by 2019.Over the past 50 years, many producers in Montana have made changes to their irrigation practice and infrastructure in an effort to increase irrigation efficiency, defined as the ratio of water consumed by crops to water diverted or pumped (consumed water ÷ diverted water). Changes in the method of irrigation, especially conversion from flood to sprinkler irrigation, may have significant on-farm benefits such as reduced labor and increased production. Conversion can have both beneficial and adverse impacts on streamflow and aquatic ecosystems depending on local site-specific hydrogeologic conditions and how irrigation water is managed. As part of the Montana Water Center’s effort to better understand the effects of increased irrigation efficiency in Montana (Lonsdale et al. 2020), historic conversion from flood to sprinkler irrigation was analyzed using available agricultural statistics, maps from state and federal sources, and an independent Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis. This project presents the GIS analysis and maps the amount and spatial distribution of conversion from flood to sprinkler irrigation, between the mid-20th century and 2019. Historic mid-20th century irrigation was mapped in detail from 1943-1965 by the State Engineer’s Office and from 1966-1971 by the Montana Water Resources Board—the predecessor of the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC). A scanned and georeferenced version of the Water Resources Surveys (WRS) was compared with maps of contemporary irrigated land (Montana Department of Revenue’s 2019 Final Land Unit Classification—DORFLU2019) to estimate the area of land converted from flood to sprinkler irrigation. Prior to GIS analysis, both datasets were edited to ensure valid comparison between irrigated field mapping conducted at the two points in time. To estimate the amount of conversion from flood to sprinkler irrigation, and other uses, the GIS layers (WRS flood and sprinkler 1946-1971 and DOR-FLU 2019) were overlain in ArcGIS; then the clipping erase functions were used to select the WRS flood and sprinkler parcels that were shown as sprinkler irrigated in 2019. Additional conversion classes were also mapped that represent the changes from WRS flood and sprinkler to cropland, hayland and fallow, and WRS sprinkler remaining sprinkler.

Please see the main project report: "Montana Conversion from Flood to Sprinkler Irrigation between Mid 20th Century and 2019.pdf" and Appendix C. "Methods and data for GIS mapping of conversion from flood to sprinkler irrigation.pdf" for details of the analysis and results. https://www.hydroshare.org/resource/15392cb3617b4519af6ae8972f603502/data/contents/Appendix_C._Methods_and_data_for_GIS_mapping_of_conversion_from_flood_to_sprinkler_irrigation.pdf

The Raster Based GIS Coverage of Mexican Population is a gridded coverage (1 x 1 km) of Mexican population. The data were converted from vector into raster. The population figures were derived based on available point data (the population of known localities - 30,000 in all). Cell values were derived using a weighted moving average function (Burrough, 1986), and then calculated based on known population by state. The result from this conversion is a coverage whose population data is based on square grid cells rather than a series of vectors. This data set is produced by the Columbia University Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) in collaboration with the Instituto Nacional de Estadistica Geografia e Informatica (INEGI).

Building information modeling (BIM) allows representation of detailed information regarding building elements while geographic information system (GIS) allows representation of spatial information about buildings and their surroundings. Overlapping these domains will combine their individual features and provide support to important activities such as building emergency response, construction site safety, construction supply chain management, and sustainable urban design. Interoperability through open data standards is one method of connecting software tools from BIM and GIS domains. However, no single open data standard available today can support all information from the two domains. As a result, many researchers have been working to overlap or connect different open data standards to enhance interoperability. An overview of these studies will help identify the different approaches used and determine the approach with the most potential to enhance interoperability. This paper adopted a strong definition of interoperability using information technology (IT) based standard documents. Based on this definition, previous approaches towards improving interoperability between BIM and GIS applications through open data standards were studied. The result shows previous approaches have implemented data conversion, data integration, and linked data approaches. Between these methods, linked data emerged as having the most potential to connect open data standards and expand interoperability between BIM and GIS applications because it allows information exchange without editing the original data. The paper also identifies the main challenges in implementing linked data technologies for interoperability and provides directions for future research.

Want to keep the data in your Hosted Feature Service current? Not interested in writing a lot of code?Leverage this Python Script from the command line, Windows Scheduled Task, or from within your own code to automate the replacement of data in an existing Hosted Feature Service. It can also be leveraged by your Notebook environment and automatically managed by the MNCD Tool!See the Sampler Notebook that features the OverwriteFS tool run from Online to update a Feature Service. It leverages MNCD to cache the OverwriteFS script for import to the Notebook. A great way to jump start your Feature Service update workflow! RequirementsPython v3.xArcGIS Python APIStored Connection Profile, defined by Python API 'GIS' module. Also accepts 'pro', to specify using the active ArcGIS Pro connection. Will require ArcGIS Pro and Arcpy!Pre-Existing Hosted Feature ServiceCapabilitiesOverwrite a Feature Service, refreshing the Service Item and DataBackup and reapply Service, Layer, and Item properties - New at v2.0.0Manage Service to Service or Service to Data relationships - New at v2.0.0Repair Lost Service File Item to Service Relationships, re-enabling Service Overwrite - New at v2.0.0'Swap Layer' capability for Views, allowing two Services to support a View, acting as Active and Idle role during Updates - New at v2.0.0Data Conversion capability, able to invoke following a download and before Service update - New at v2.0.0Includes 'Rss2Json' Conversion routine, able to read a RSS or GeoRSS source and generate GeoJson for Service Update - New at v2.0.0Renamed 'Rss2Json' to 'Xml2GeoJSON' for its enhanced capabilities, 'Rss2Json' remains for compatability - Revised at v2.1.0Added 'Json2GeoJSON' Conversion routine, able to read and manipulate Json or GeoJSON data for Service Updates - New at v2.1.0Can update other File item types like PDF, Word, Excel, and so on - New at v2.1.0Supports ArcGIS Python API v2.0 - New at v2.1.2RevisionsSep 29, 2021: Long awaited update to v2.0.0!Sep 30, 2021: v2.0.1, Patch to correct Outcome Status when download or Coversion resulted in no change. Also updated documentation.Oct 7, 2021: v2.0.2, workflow Patch correcting Extent update of Views when Overwriting Service, discovered following recent ArcGIS Online update. Enhancements to 'datetimeUtil' Support script.Nov 30, 2021: v2.1.0, added new 'Json2GeoJSON' Converter, enhanced 'Xml2GeoJSON' Converter, retired 'Rss2Json' Converter, added new Option Switches 'IgnoreAge' and 'UpdateTarget' for source age control and QA/QC workflows, revised Optimization logic and CRC comparison on downloads.Dec 1, 2021: v2.1.1, Only a patch to Conversion routines: Corrected handling of null Z-values in Geometries (discovered immediately following release 2.1.0), improve error trapping while processing rows, and added deprecation message to retired 'Rss2Json' conversion routine.Feb 22, 2022: v2.1.2, Patch to detect and re-apply case-insensitive field indexes. Update to allow Swapping Layers to Service without an associated file item. Added cache refresh following updates. Patch to support Python API 2.0 service 'table' property. Patches to 'Json2GeoJSON' and 'Xml2GeoJSON' converter routines.Sep 5, 2024: v2.1.4, Patch service manager refresh failure issue. Added trace report to Convert execution on exception. Set 'ignore-DataItemCheck' property to True when 'GetTarget' action initiated. Hardened Async job status check. Update 'overwriteFeatureService' to support GeoPackage type and file item type when item.name includes a period, updated retry loop to try one final overwrite after del, fixed error stop issue on failed overwrite attempts. Removed restriction on uploading files larger than 2GB. Restores missing 'itemInfo' file on service File items. Corrected false swap success when view has no layers. Lifted restriction of Overwrite/Swap Layers for OGC. Added 'serviceDescription' to service detail backup. Added 'thumbnail' to item backup/restore logic. Added 'byLayerOrder' parameter to 'swapFeatureViewLayers'. Added 'SwapByOrder' action switch. Patch added to overwriteFeatureService 'status' check. Patch for June 2024 update made to 'managers.overwrite' API script that blocks uploads > 25MB, API v2.3.0.3. Patch 'overwriteFeatureService' to correctly identify overwrite file if service has multiple Service2Data relationships.Includes documentation updates!

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. Converting delineations to a digital format involved four main procedures: a) preparation of manuscript maps b) input of the spatial data: c) populating of the attribute tables, and d) conversion to GIS. Each step included many quality control steps. Maps were prepared by pin-registering a clean sheet of mylar to each photo and transferring delineations to the new overlay in ink. Each manuscript map was edgematched to the adjoining sheet. Each photo was numbered, and each polygon on the photo was numbered in sequence. An attribute table was created containing a field each for the photo number, polygon sequence number, land use code, layer number, stature type, height, density, and floristic composition attributes.

This project maps the conversion from mid-20th century (1946-71) flood and sprinkler irrigation to sprinkler irrigation (center-pivot and other sprinkler), and other land types (fallow, crop, and flood remaining flood) in Montana, by 2019.

Over the past 50 years, many producers in Montana have made changes to their irrigation practice and infrastructure in an effort to increase irrigation efficiency, defined as the ratio of water consumed by crops to water diverted or pumped (consumed water ÷ diverted water). Changes in the method of irrigation, especially conversion from flood to sprinkler irrigation, may have significant on-farm benefits such as reduced labor and increased production. Conversion can have both beneficial and adverse impacts on streamflow and aquatic ecosystems depending on local site-specific hydrogeologic conditions and how irrigation water is managed. As part of the Montana Water Center’s effort to better understand the effects of increased irrigation efficiency in Montana (Lonsdale et al. 2020), historic conversion from flood to sprinkler irrigation was analyzed using available agricultural statistics, maps from state and federal sources, and an independent Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis.

The first Resource in this HydroShare Collection, "Conversion from Flood to Sprinkler Irrigation in Montana between Mid-20th Century and 2019", presents the GIS analysis and maps the amount and spatial distribution of conversion from flood to sprinkler irrigation, between the mid-20th century and 2019. Historic mid-20th century irrigation was mapped in detail from 1943-1965 by the State Engineer’s Office and from 1966-1971 by the Montana Water Resources Board—the predecessor of the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC). A scanned and georeferenced version of the Water Resources Surveys (WRS) was compared with maps of contemporary irrigated land (Montana Department of Revenue’s 2019 Final Land Unit Classification—DORFLU2019) to estimate the area of land converted from flood to sprinkler irrigation. Prior to GIS analysis, both datasets were edited to ensure valid comparison between irrigated field mapping conducted at the two points in time. To estimate the amount of conversion from flood to sprinkler irrigation, and other uses, the GIS layers (WRS flood and sprinkler 1946-1971 and DOR-FLU 2019) were overlain in ArcGIS; then the clipping erase functions were used to select the WRS flood and sprinkler parcels that were shown as sprinkler irrigated in 2019. Additional conversion classes were also mapped that represent the changes from WRS flood and sprinkler to cropland, hayland and fallow, and WRS sprinkler- remaining- sprinkler and flood remaining flood. Details of the analysis are provided in Appendix C. of the main report and which is located within HydroShare Resource: https://www.hydroshare.org/resource/15392cb3617b4519af6ae8972f603502/data/contents/Appendix_C._Methods_and_data_for_GIS_mapping_of_conversion_from_flood_to_sprinkler_irrigation.pdf

The second Resource in this Collection," Uncertainty analysis of irrigation conversion polygon areas", provides files used in the uncertainty analysis of polygon areas resulting from overlaying/clipping/erase GIS operations that map the irrigation system conversions from mid-20th century to 2019.There are several sources of uncertainty in the conversion mapping results. The first is that the analysis only accounts for changes that occurred between the WRS 1946-71 and DORFLU2019; it is possible that additional flood irrigation developed between the two points in time may have also been converted to sprinkler. Another source of uncertainty is due to GIS processing and overlay/clip/erase functions that create “sliver” polygons of apparent change due to misalignment of the WRS 1946-71 and DORFLU2019 layers (i.e., co-registration error). This was evaluated using the spatially distributed probabilistic (SDP) method of Leonard and others (2020) and found to be small—generally less than one percent of the area of conversion polygons. Digitizing error was evaluated indirectly and found to be about ±12 percent of the reported area values. The values sum in quadrature to provide an overall estimate of error in polygon area of 12%. Conversion from flood to sprinkler polygon areas presented in the main report, and associated error statistics, apply to the whole dataset at the statewide scale. For use at the basin scale (for example, HUC4 Upper Yellowstone, the end user should review the uncertainty estimate for specific conversion polygons and refine if necessary. Please see Appendix D. Uncertainty analysis.pdf for details of the analysis. All citations are included in the References.txt file and in the main report.

Introduction

Geographical scale, in terms of spatial extent, provide a basis for other branches of science. This dataset contains newly proposed geographical and geological GIS boundaries for the Pan-Tibetan Highlands (new proposed name for the High Mountain Asia), based on geological and geomorphological features. This region comprises the Tibetan Plateau and three adjacent mountain regions: the Himalaya, Hengduan Mountains and Mountains of Central Asia, and boundaries are also given for each subregion individually. The dataset will benefit quantitative spatial analysis by providing a well-defined geographical scale for other branches of research, aiding cross-disciplinary comparisons and synthesis, as well as reproducibility of research results.

The dataset comprises three subsets, and we provide three data formats (.shp, .geojson and .kmz) for each of them. Shapefile format (.shp) was generated in ArcGIS Pro, and the other two were converted from shapefile, the conversion steps refer to 'Data processing' section below. The following is a description of the three subsets:

(1) The GIS boundaries we newly defined of the Pan-Tibetan Highlands and its four constituent sub-regions, i.e. the Tibetan Plateau, Himalaya, Hengduan Mountains and the Mountains of Central Asia. All files are placed in the "Pan-Tibetan Highlands (Liu et al._2022)" folder.

(2) We also provide GIS boundaries that were applied by other studies (cited in Fig. 3 of our work) in the folder "Tibetan Plateau and adjacent mountains (Others’ definitions)". If these data is used, please cite the relevent paper accrodingly. In addition, it is worthy to note that the GIS boundaries of Hengduan Mountains (Li et al. 1987a) and Mountains of Central Asia (Foggin et al. 2021) were newly generated in our study using Georeferencing toolbox in ArcGIS Pro.

(3) Geological assemblages and characters of the Pan-Tibetan Highlands, including Cratons and micro-continental blocks (Fig. S1), plus sutures, faults and thrusts (Fig. 4), are placed in the "Pan-Tibetan Highlands (geological files)" folder.

Note: High Mountain Asia: The name ‘High Mountain Asia’ is the only direct synonym of Pan-Tibetan Highlands, but this term is both grammatically awkward and somewhat misleading, and hence the term ‘Pan-Tibetan Highlands’ is here proposed to replace it. Third Pole: The first use of the term ‘Third Pole’ was in reference to the Himalaya by Kurz & Montandon (1933), but the usage was subsequently broadened to the Tibetan Plateau or the whole of the Pan-Tibetan Highlands. The mainstream scientific literature refer the ‘Third Pole’ to the region encompassing the Tibetan Plateau, Himalaya, Hengduan Mountains, Karakoram, Hindu Kush and Pamir. This definition was surpported by geological strcture (Main Pamir Thrust) in the western part, and generally overlaps with the ‘Tibetan Plateau’ sensu lato defined by some previous studies, but is more specific.

More discussion and reference about names please refer to the paper. The figures (Figs. 3, 4, S1) mentioned above were attached in the end of this document.

Data processing

We provide three data formats. Conversion of shapefile data to kmz format was done in ArcGIS Pro. We used the Layer to KML tool in Conversion Toolbox to convert the shapefile to kmz format. Conversion of shapefile data to geojson format was done in R. We read the data using the shapefile function of the raster package, and wrote it as a geojson file using the geojson_write function in the geojsonio package.

Version

Version 2022.1.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Strategic Priority Research Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences (XDB31010000), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41971071), the Key Research Program of Frontier Sciences, CAS (ZDBS-LY-7001). We are grateful to our coauthors insightful discussion and comments. We also want to thank professors Jed Kaplan, Yin An, Dai Erfu, Zhang Guoqing, Peter Cawood, Tobias Bolch and Marc Foggin for suggestions and providing GIS files.

Citation

Liu, J., Milne, R. I., Zhu, G. F., Spicer, R. A., Wambulwa, M. C., Wu, Z. Y., Li, D. Z. (2022). Name and scale matters: Clarifying the geography of Tibetan Plateau and adjacent mountain regions. Global and Planetary Change, In revision

Jie Liu & Guangfu Zhu. (2022). Geographical and geological GIS boundaries of the Tibetan Plateau and adjacent mountain regions (Version 2022.1). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6432940

Contacts

Dr. Jie LIU: E-mail: liujie@mail.kib.ac.cn;

Mr. Guangfu ZHU: zhuguangfu@mail.kib.ac.cn

Institution: Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences

Address: 132# Lanhei Road, Heilongtan, Kunming 650201, Yunnan, China

Copyright

This dataset is available under the Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0).

Status: COMPLETED 2010. The data was converted from the most recent (2010) versions of the adopted plans, which can be found at https://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/planning/plans/ Supplemental Information: In March 2010, Pima Association of Governments (PAG), in cooperation with the City of Tucson (City), initiated the Planned Land Use Data Conversion Project. This 9-month effort involved evaluating mapped land use designations and selected spatially explicit policies for nearly 50 of the City's adopted neighborhood, area, and subregional plans and converting the information into a Geographic Information System (GIS) format. Further documentation for this file can be obtained from the City of Tucson Planning and Development Services Department or Pima Association of Governments Technical Services. A brief summary report was provided, as requested, to the City of Tucson which highlights some of the key issues found during the conversion process (e.g., lack of mapping and terminology consistency among plans). The feature class "Plan_boundaries" represents the boundaries of the adopted plans. The feature class "Plan_mapped_land_use" represents the land use designations as they are mapped in the adopted plans. Some information was gathered that is implicit based on the land use designation or zones (see field descriptions below). Since this information is not explicitly stated in the plans, it should only be viewed by City staff for general planning purposes. The feature class "Plan_selected_policies" represents the spatially explicit policies that were fairly straightforward to map. Since these policies are not represented in adopted maps, this feature class should only be viewed by City staff for general planning purposes only. 2010 - created by Jamison Brown, working as an independent contractor for Pima Association of Governments, created this file in 2010 by digitizing boundaries as depicted (i.e. for the mapped land use) or described in the plans (i.e. for the narrative policies). In most cases, this involved tracing based on parcel (paregion) or street center line (stnetall) feature classes. Snapping was used to provide line coincidence. For some map conversions, freehand sketches were drawn to mimick the freehand sketches in the adopted plan. Field descriptions for the "Plan_mapped_land_use" feature class: Plan_Name: Plan name Plan_Type: Plan type (e.g., Neighborhood Plan) Plan_Num: Plan number LU_DES: Land use designation (e.g., Low density residential) LISTED_ALLOWABLE_ZONES: Allowable zones as listed in the Plan LISTED_RAC_MIN: Minimum residences per acre (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_RAC_TARGET: Target residences per acre (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_RAC_MAX: Maximum residences per acre (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_FAR_MIN: Minimum Floor Area Ratio (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_FAR_TARGET: Target Floor Area Ratio (if applicable), as listed in the Plan LISTED_FAR_MAX: Maximum Floor Area Ratio (if applicable), as listed in the Plan BUILDING_HEIGHT_MAX Building height maximum (ft.) if determined by Plan policy IMPORTANT: A disclaimer about the data as it is unofficial. URL: Uniform Resource Locator IMPLIED_ALLOWABLE_ZONES: Implied (not listed in the Plan) allowable zones IMPLIED_RAC_MIN: Implied (not listed in the Plan) minimum residences per acre (if applicable) IMPLIED_RAC_TARGET: Implied (not listed in the Plan) target residences per acre (if applicable) IMPLIED_RAC_MAX: Implied (not listed in the Plan) maximum residences per acre (if applicable) IMPLIED_FAR_MIN: Implied (not listed in the Plan) minimum Floor Area Ratio (if applicable) IMPLIED_FAR_TARGET: Implied (not listed in the Plan) target Floor Area Ratio (if applicable) IMPLIED_FAR_MAX: Implied (not listed in the Plan) maximum Floor Area Ratio (if applicable) IMPLIED_LU_CATEGORY: Implied (not listed in the Plan) general land use category. General categories used include residential, office, commercial, industrial, and other.PurposeLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Dataset ClassificationLevel 0 - OpenKnown UsesLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Known ErrorsLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Data ContactJohn BeallCity of Tucson Development Services520-791-5550John.Beall@tucsonaz.govUpdate FrequencyLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

LANDISVIEW is a tool, developed at the Knowledge Engineering Laboratory at Texas A&M University, to visualize and animate 8-bit/16-bit ERDAS GIS format (e.g., LANDIS and LANDIS-II output maps). It can also convert 8-bit/16-bit ERDAS GIS format into ASCII and batch files. LANDISVIEW provides two major functions: 1) File Viewer: Files can be viewed sequentially and an output can be generated as a movie file or as an image file. 2) File converter: It will convert the loaded files for compatibility with 3rd party software, such as Fragstats, a widely used spatial analysis tool. Some available features of LANDISVIEW include: 1) Display cell coordinates and values. 2) Apply user-defined color palette to visualize files. 3) Save maps as pictures and animations as video files (*.avi). 4) Convert ERDAS files into ASCII grids for compatibility with Fragstats. (Source: http://kelab.tamu.edu/)

GIS and concepts, tools and data. Why would anyone want a Postal Code Conversion File (PCCF) or PCCFRF? How do you create your neighbourhood using DLI data and postal codes using SPSS and a few handy steps that will make you look and sound like a genius to your students, director and president?

[Metadata] Description: Land Use Land Cover of main Hawaiian Islands as of 1976

For the automated workflows, we create Jupyter notebooks for each state. In these workflows, GIS processing to merge, extract and project GeoTIFF data was the most important process. For this process, we used ArcPy which is a python package to perform geographic data analysis, data conversion, and data management in ArcGIS (Toms, 2015). After creating state-scale LSS datasets in GeoTIFF format, we convert GeoTIFF to NetCDF using xarray and rioxarray Python packages. Xarray is a Python package to work with multi-dimensional arrays and rioxarray is rasterio xarray extension. Rasterio is a Python library to read and write GeoTIFF and other raster formats. We used xarray to manipulate data type and add metadata in NetCDF file and rioxarray to save GeoTIFF to NetCDF format. Through these procedures, we created three composite HyddroShare resources to share state-scale LSS datasets. Due to the limitation of ArcGIS Pro license which is a commercial GIS software, we developed this Jupyter notebook on Windows OS.

Tool and data set of road networks for 80 of the most populated urban areas in the world. The data consist of a graph edge list for each city and two corresponding GIS shapefiles (i.e., links and nodes).Make your own data with our ArcGIS, QGIS, and python tools available at: http://csun.uic.edu/codes/GISF2E.htmlPlease cite: Karduni,A., Kermanshah, A., and Derrible, S., 2016, "A protocol to convert spatial polyline data to network formats and applications to world urban road networks", Scientific Data, 3:160046, Available at http://www.nature.com/articles/sdata201646

In support of the proposed Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project, the Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys (DGGS) developed a Geographic Information System (GIS)-based geologic compilation of published and unpublished maps for twelve, inch-to-mile (1:63,360-scale) quadrangles encompassing the proposed hydroelectric project footprint, including the anticipated reservoir and surrounding area. DGGS geologists reviewed and analyzed existing geologic mapping for quality and completeness, and the maps were converted for use in GIS. The conversion process included scanning and georeferencing the original hard-copy map documents, creating a geodatabase, digitizing the geologic data, assigning attributes, and producing a digital data product for public release. The best available geologic mapping was synthesized into a single compilation data layer, and is packaged along with georeferenced scans and digitized vector files of the original geologic source maps. Bedrock geology was reviewed and revised by an independent contractor to ensure consistency with current geologic interpretations of the area. This geodatabase product will be a valuable reference resource for developers, planners, and scientists working on the hydroelectric project, as well as for any other projects in the area.

The USDA-ARS Southwest Watershed Research Center (SWRC) operates the Walnut Gulch Experimental Watershed (WGEW) in southeastern Arizona as an outdoor laboratory for studying semiarid rangeland hydrologic, ecosystem, climate, and erosion processes. Since its establishment in 1953, the SWRC in Tucson, Arizona, has collected, processed, managed, and disseminated high-resolution, spatially distributed hydrologic data in support of the center’s mission. Data management at the SWRC has evolved through time in response to new computing, storage, and data access technologies. In 1996, the SWRC initiated a multiyear project to upgrade rainfall and runoff sensors and convert analog systems to digital electronic systems supported by data loggers. This conversion was coupled with radio telemetry to remotely transmit recorded data to a central computer, thus greatly reducing operational overhead by reducing labor, maintenance, and data processing time. A concurrent effort was initiated to improve access to SWRC data by creating a system based on a relational database supporting access to the data via the Internet. An SWRC team made up of scientists, IT specialists, programmers, hydrologic technicians, and instrumentation specialists was formed. This effort is termed the Southwest Watershed Research Center Data Access Project (DAP). The goal of the SWRC DAP is to efficiently disseminate data to researchers; land owners, users, and managers; and to the public. Primary access to the data is provided through a Web-based user interface. In addition, data can be accessed directly from within the SWRC network. The first priority for the DAP was to assimilate and make available rainfall and runoff data collected from two instrumented field sites, the WGEW near Tombstone, Arizona, and the Santa Rita Experimental Range (SRER) south of Tucson, Arizona. This web map describes the associated GIS layers. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: GeoData catalog record. File Name: Web Page, url: https://geodata.nal.usda.gov/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/fe4ac74f13484a169899b166159e0bb5