This dataset is a series of digital map-posters accompanying the AdaptNRM Guide: Helping Biodiversity Adapt: supporting climate adaptation planning using a community-level modelling approach.

These represent supporting materials and information about the community-level biodiversity models applied to climate change. Map posters are organised by four biological groups (vascular plants, mammals, reptiles and amphibians), two climate change scenario (1990-2050 MIROC5 and CanESM2 for RCP8.5), and five measures of change in biodiversity.

The map-posters present the nationally consistent data at locally relevant resolutions in eight parts – representing broad groupings of NRM regions based on the cluster boundaries used for climate adaptation planning (http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/adaptation) and also Nationally.

Map-posters are provided in PNG image format at moderate resolution (300dpi) to suit A0 printing. The posters were designed to meet A0 print size and digital viewing resolution of map detail. An additional set in PDF image format has been created for ease of download for initial exploration and printing on A3 paper. Some text elements and map features may be fuzzy at this resolution.

Each map-poster contains four dataset images coloured using standard legends encompassing the potential range of the measure, even if that range is not represented in the dataset itself or across the map extent.

Most map series are provided in two parts: part 1 shows the two climate scenarios for vascular plants and mammals and part 2 shows reptiles and amphibians. Eight cluster maps for each series have a different colour theme and map extent. A national series is also provided. Annotation briefly outlines the topics presented in the Guide so that each poster stands alone for quick reference.

An additional 77 National maps presenting the probability distributions of each of 77 vegetation types – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroups (NVIS subgroups) - are currently in preparation.

Example citations:

Williams KJ, Raisbeck-Brown N, Prober S, Harwood T (2015) Generalised projected distribution of vegetation types – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroups (1990 and 2050), A0 map-poster 8.1 - East Coast NRM regions. CSIRO Land and Water Flagship, Canberra. Available online at www.AdaptNRM.org and https://data.csiro.au/dap/.

Williams KJ, Raisbeck-Brown N, Harwood T, Prober S (2015) Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050), A0 map-poster 9.1 - East Coast NRM regions. CSIRO Land and Water Flagship, Canberra. Available online at www.AdaptNRM.org and https://data.csiro.au/dap/.

This dataset has been delivered incrementally. Please check that you are accessing the latest version of the dataset. Lineage: The map posters show case the scientific data. The data layers have been developed at approximately 250m resolution (9 second) across the Australian continent to incorporate the interaction between climate and topography, and are best viewed using a geographic information system (GIS). Each data layers is 1Gb, and inaccessible to non-GIS users. The map posters provide easy access to the scientific data, enabling the outputs to be viewed at high resolution with geographical context information provided.

Maps were generated using layout and drawing tools in ArcGIS 10.2.2

A check list of map posters and datasets is provided with the collection.

Map Series: 7.(1-77) National probability distribution of vegetation type – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroup pre-1750 #0x

8.1 Generalised projected distribution of vegetation types (NVIS subgroups) (1990 and 2050)

9.1 Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for plants and mammals (1990-2050)

9.2 Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

10.1 Need for assisted dispersal for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

10.2 Need for assisted dispersal for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

11.1 Refugial potential for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

11.1 Refugial potential for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

12.1 Climate-driven future revegetation benefit for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

12.2 Climate-driven future revegetation benefit for vascular reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

The establishment of a BES Multi-User Geodatabase (BES-MUG) allows for the storage, management, and distribution of geospatial data associated with the Baltimore Ecosystem Study. At present, BES data is distributed over the internet via the BES website. While having geospatial data available for download is a vast improvement over having the data housed at individual research institutions, it still suffers from some limitations. BES-MUG overcomes these limitations; improving the quality of the geospatial data available to BES researches, thereby leading to more informed decision-making. BES-MUG builds on Environmental Systems Research Institute's (ESRI) ArcGIS and ArcSDE technology. ESRI was selected because its geospatial software offers robust capabilities. ArcGIS is implemented agency-wide within the USDA and is the predominant geospatial software package used by collaborating institutions. Commercially available enterprise database packages (DB2, Oracle, SQL) provide an efficient means to store, manage, and share large datasets. However, standard database capabilities are limited with respect to geographic datasets because they lack the ability to deal with complex spatial relationships. By using ESRI's ArcSDE (Spatial Database Engine) in conjunction with database software, geospatial data can be handled much more effectively through the implementation of the Geodatabase model. Through ArcSDE and the Geodatabase model the database's capabilities are expanded, allowing for multiuser editing, intelligent feature types, and the establishment of rules and relationships. ArcSDE also allows users to connect to the database using ArcGIS software without being burdened by the intricacies of the database itself. For an example of how BES-MUG will help improve the quality and timeless of BES geospatial data consider a census block group layer that is in need of updating. Rather than the researcher downloading the dataset, editing it, and resubmitting to through ORS, access rules will allow the authorized user to edit the dataset over the network. Established rules will ensure that the attribute and topological integrity is maintained, so that key fields are not left blank and that the block group boundaries stay within tract boundaries. Metadata will automatically be updated showing who edited the dataset and when they did in the event any questions arise. Currently, a functioning prototype Multi-User Database has been developed for BES at the University of Vermont Spatial Analysis Lab, using Arc SDE and IBM's DB2 Enterprise Database as a back end architecture. This database, which is currently only accessible to those on the UVM campus network, will shortly be migrated to a Linux server where it will be accessible for database connections over the Internet. Passwords can then be handed out to all interested researchers on the project, who will be able to make a database connection through the Geographic Information Systems software interface on their desktop computer. This database will include a very large number of thematic layers. Those layers are currently divided into biophysical, socio-economic and imagery categories. Biophysical includes data on topography, soils, forest cover, habitat areas, hydrology and toxics. Socio-economics includes political and administrative boundaries, transportation and infrastructure networks, property data, census data, household survey data, parks, protected areas, land use/land cover, zoning, public health and historic land use change. Imagery includes a variety of aerial and satellite imagery. See the readme: http://96.56.36.108/geodatabase_SAL/readme.txt See the file listing: http://96.56.36.108/geodatabase_SAL/diroutput.txt

The Geopspatial Fabric provides a consistent, documented, and topologically connected set of spatial features that create an abstracted stream/basin network of features useful for hydrologic modeling.The GIS vector features contained in this Geospatial Fabric (GF) data set cover the lower 48 U.S. states, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. Four GIS feature classes are provided for each Region: 1) the Region outline ("one"), 2) Points of Interest ("POIs"), 3) a routing network ("nsegment"), and 4) Hydrologic Response Units ("nhru"). A graphic showing the boundaries for all Regions is provided at http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.5066/F7542KMD. These Regions are identical to those used to organize the NHDPlus v.1 dataset (US EPA and US Geological Survey, 2005). Although the GF Feature data set has been derived from NHDPlus v.1, it is an entirely new data set that has been designed to generically support regional and national scale applications of hydrologic models. Definition of each type of feature class and its derivation is provided within the

Geographic Information System (GIS) Software Market Outlook

The global Geographic Information System (GIS) software market size is projected to grow from USD 9.1 billion in 2023 to USD 18.5 billion by 2032, reflecting a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 8.5% over the forecast period. This growth is driven by the increasing application of GIS software across various sectors such as agriculture, construction, transportation, and utilities, along with the rising demand for location-based services and advanced mapping solutions.

One of the primary growth factors for the GIS software market is the widespread adoption of spatial data by various industries to enhance operational efficiency. In agriculture, for instance, GIS software plays a crucial role in precision farming by aiding in crop monitoring, soil analysis, and resource management, thereby optimizing yield and reducing costs. In the construction sector, GIS software is utilized for site selection, design and planning, and infrastructure management, making project execution more efficient and cost-effective.

Additionally, the integration of GIS with emerging technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Internet of Things (IoT) is significantly enhancing the capabilities of GIS software. AI-driven data analytics and IoT-enabled sensors provide real-time data, which, when combined with spatial data, results in more accurate and actionable insights. This integration is particularly beneficial in fields like smart city planning, disaster management, and environmental monitoring, further propelling the market growth.

Another significant factor contributing to the market expansion is the increasing government initiatives and investments aimed at improving geospatial infrastructure. Governments worldwide are recognizing the importance of GIS in policy-making, urban planning, and public safety, leading to substantial investments in GIS technologies. For example, the U.S. governmentÂ’s Geospatial Data Act emphasizes the development of a cohesive national geospatial policy, which in turn is expected to create more opportunities for GIS software providers.

Geographic Information System Analytics is becoming increasingly pivotal in transforming raw geospatial data into actionable insights. By employing sophisticated analytical tools, GIS Analytics allows organizations to visualize complex spatial relationships and patterns, enhancing decision-making processes across various sectors. For instance, in urban planning, GIS Analytics can identify optimal locations for new infrastructure projects by analyzing population density, traffic patterns, and environmental constraints. Similarly, in the utility sector, it aids in asset management by predicting maintenance needs and optimizing resource allocation. The ability to integrate GIS Analytics with other data sources, such as demographic and economic data, further amplifies its utility, making it an indispensable tool for strategic planning and operational efficiency.

Regionally, North America holds the largest share of the GIS software market, driven by technological advancements and high adoption rates across various sectors. Europe follows closely, with significant growth attributed to the increasing use of GIS in environmental monitoring and urban planning. The Asia Pacific region is anticipated to witness the highest growth rate during the forecast period, fueled by rapid urbanization, infrastructure development, and government initiatives in countries like China and India.

Component Analysis

The GIS software market is segmented into software and services, each playing a vital role in meeting the diverse needs of end-users. The software segment encompasses various types of GIS software, including desktop GIS, web GIS, and mobile GIS. Desktop GIS remains the most widely used, offering comprehensive tools for spatial analysis, data management, and visualization. Web GIS, on the other hand, is gaining traction due to its accessibility and ease of use, allowing users to access GIS capabilities through a web browser without the need for extensive software installations.

Mobile GIS is another crucial aspect of the software segment, providing field-based solutions for data collection, asset management, and real-time decision making. With the increasing use of smartphones and tablets, mobile GIS applications are becoming indispensable for sectors such as utilities, transportation, and

GIS dataset includes surveyed shoreline positions for most of the larger beach systems along the southern to mid-coast Maine coastline in York, Cumberland, and Sagadahoc counties. Data were collected using a Leica GS-15 network Real Time Kinematic Global Positioning System (RTK-GPS), and in areas with poor cellular coverage, an Ashtech Z-Xtreme RTK-GPS. Both systems typically have horizontal and vertical accuracies of less than 5 cm. In general, surveys are attempted to be repeated at approximately the same month in each consecutive survey year, however this is not always possible. As a result, the number of available shoreline positions may vary by beach.The line feature class includes the following attributes:BEACH_NAME: The name of the beach where a shoreline was surveyed.SURVEY_DATE: The date (year, month, day; for example 20160901 would be September 1, 2016) upon which a shoreline was surveyed.SURVEY_YEAR: The year (e.g., 2016) within which a shoreline was surveyed.SHAPE_LENGTH: The length, in meters, of the surveyed shoreline.

This file contains the 65 cities and towns in Massachusetts for which MBTA bus or rapid transit service is provided. This data is based off of the 2010 census. The legislative intent for some boundaries could not be mapped. Boundaries where that is true are identified in the attribute information. Name Description Data Type Example town_name Full name for the MA town or city identification. String Boston town_id MassGIS Town-ID Code (alphabetical, 1-351) Numeric 34 sum_acres Area covered by the town or city in acres. Double 31304.22 sum_square Area covered by the town or city in square miles. Double 48.91 Use constraints: This data set, like all other cartographic products may contain inherent aberrations in geography or thematical errors. The boundaries included in this data set were developed using accepted GIS methodology. Cartographic products can never truly represent real-world conditions due to several factors. These factors can include, but are not limited to: human error upon digitizing, computational tolerance of the computer, or the distortion of map symbology. Because of these factors MassGIS cannot be held legally responsible for personal or property damages resulting from any type of use of the data set. These boundaries are suitable for map display and planning purposes. They cannot be used as a substitute for the work of a professional land surveyor.MassDOT/MBTA shall not be held liable for any errors in this data. This includes errors of omission, commission, errors concerning the content of the data, and relative and positional accuracy of the data. This data cannot be construed to be a legal document. Primary sources from which this data was compiled must be consulted for verification of information contained in this data.

The dataset and the validation are fully described in a Nature Scientific Data Descriptor https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-019-0265-5

If you want to use this dataset in an interactive environment, then use this link https://mybinder.org/v2/gh/GeographerAtLarge/TravelTime/HEAD

The following text is a summary of the information in the above Data Descriptor.

The dataset is a suite of global travel-time accessibility indicators for the year 2015, at approximately one-kilometre spatial resolution for the entire globe. The indicators show an estimated (and validated), land-based travel time to the nearest city and nearest port for a range of city and port sizes.

The datasets are in GeoTIFF format and are suitable for use in Geographic Information Systems and statistical packages for mapping access to cities and ports and for spatial and statistical analysis of the inequalities in access by different segments of the population.

These maps represent a unique global representation of physical access to essential services offered by cities and ports.

The datasets travel_time_to_cities_x.tif (where x has values from 1 to 12) The value of each pixel is the estimated travel time in minutes to the nearest urban area in 2015. There are 12 data layers based on different sets of urban areas, defined by their population in year 2015 (see PDF report).

travel_time_to_ports_x (x ranges from 1 to 5)

The value of each pixel is the estimated travel time to the nearest port in 2015. There are 5 data layers based on different port sizes.

Format Raster Dataset, GeoTIFF, LZW compressed Unit Minutes

Data type Byte (16 bit Unsigned Integer)

No data value 65535

Flags None

Spatial resolution 30 arc seconds

Spatial extent

Upper left -180, 85

Lower left -180, -60 Upper right 180, 85 Lower right 180, -60 Spatial Reference System (SRS) EPSG:4326 - WGS84 - Geographic Coordinate System (lat/long)

Temporal resolution 2015

Temporal extent Updates may follow for future years, but these are dependent on the availability of updated inputs on travel times and city locations and populations.

Methodology Travel time to the nearest city or port was estimated using an accumulated cost function (accCost) in the gdistance R package (van Etten, 2018). This function requires two input datasets: (i) a set of locations to estimate travel time to and (ii) a transition matrix that represents the cost or time to travel across a surface.

The set of locations were based on populated urban areas in the 2016 version of the Joint Research Centre’s Global Human Settlement Layers (GHSL) datasets (Pesaresi and Freire, 2016) that represent low density (LDC) urban clusters and high density (HDC) urban areas (https://ghsl.jrc.ec.europa.eu/datasets.php). These urban areas were represented by points, spaced at 1km distance around the perimeter of each urban area.

Marine ports were extracted from the 26th edition of the World Port Index (NGA, 2017) which contains the location and physical characteristics of approximately 3,700 major ports and terminals. Ports are represented as single points

The transition matrix was based on the friction surface (https://map.ox.ac.uk/research-project/accessibility_to_cities) from the 2015 global accessibility map (Weiss et al, 2018).

Code The R code used to generate the 12 travel time maps is included in the zip file that can be downloaded with these data layers. The processing zones are also available.

Validation The underlying friction surface was validated by comparing travel times between 47,893 pairs of locations against journey times from a Google API. Our estimated journey times were generally shorter than those from the Google API. Across the tiles, the median journey time from our estimates was 88 minutes within an interquartile range of 48 to 143 minutes while the median journey time estimated by the Google API was 106 minutes within an interquartile range of 61 to 167 minutes. Across all tiles, the differences were skewed to the left and our travel time estimates were shorter than those reported by the Google API in 72% of the tiles. The median difference was −13.7 minutes within an interquartile range of −35.5 to 2.0 minutes while the absolute difference was 30 minutes or less for 60% of the tiles and 60 minutes or less for 80% of the tiles. The median percentage difference was −16.9% within an interquartile range of −30.6% to 2.7% while the absolute percentage difference was 20% or less in 43% of the tiles and 40% or less in 80% of the tiles.

This process and results are included in the validation zip file.

Usage Notes The accessibility layers can be visualised and analysed in many Geographic Information Systems or remote sensing software such as QGIS, GRASS, ENVI, ERDAS or ArcMap, and also by statistical and modelling packages such as R or MATLAB. They can also be used in cloud-based tools for geospatial analysis such as Google Earth Engine.

The nine layers represent travel times to human settlements of different population ranges. Two or more layers can be combined into one layer by recording the minimum pixel value across the layers. For example, a map of travel time to the nearest settlement of 5,000 to 50,000 people could be generated by taking the minimum of the three layers that represent the travel time to settlements with populations between 5,000 and 10,000, 10,000 and 20,000 and, 20,000 and 50,000 people.

The accessibility layers also permit user-defined hierarchies that go beyond computing the minimum pixel value across layers. A user-defined complete hierarchy can be generated when the union of all categories adds up to the global population, and the intersection of any two categories is empty. Everything else is up to the user in terms of logical consistency with the problem at hand.

The accessibility layers are relative measures of the ease of access from a given location to the nearest target. While the validation demonstrates that they do correspond to typical journey times, they cannot be taken to represent actual travel times. Errors in the friction surface will be accumulated as part of the accumulative cost function and it is likely that locations that are further away from targets will have greater a divergence from a plausible travel time than those that are closer to the targets. Care should be taken when referring to travel time to the larger cities when the locations of interest are extremely remote, although they will still be plausible representations of relative accessibility. Furthermore, a key assumption of the model is that all journeys will use the fastest mode of transport and take the shortest path.

Soil_Samples_BACI Available only by request on a case by case basis. Contact rthe author, David Nowak, at dnowak@fs.fed.us Tags Biophysical Resources, Land, Social Institutions, Health, BES, Soil, Lead, Sample, UFORE Summary Samples were taken to relate soil data to vegetation data obtained for the Urban Forestry Effects Model (UFORE). Description The data is soil concentrations and characteristics of the following: land use, bulk density, sand, silt, clay, pH, organic matter, nitrogen, Al, P, S, Ti, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu Zn, Mo, Pb, Cd, Na, Mg, K, Ca, and V. Soils were sampled in 125 plots located within the City of Baltimore in the summer of 2000. The plots were randomly stratified by Anderson Land Cover Classification System Level II, which included commercial, industrial, institutional, transportation right-of-ways, high and medium density residential (there were no low density residential areas identified within the city boundaries), golf course, park, urban open, forest, and wetland land-use types. The number of plots situated in each land-use type was weighted to their proportion of spatial area within the City. The resultant number of plots sampled for soil by land-use type was: commercial (n = 2); industrial (n = 3); institutional (n = 10); transportation right-of-ways (n = 7); high density residential (n = 19); medium density residential (n = 33); golf course (n = 3); riparian (n=2); park (n = 10); urban open (n = 10); and forest (n = 26) land-use types, respectively. The distribution of plots represents the proportion of area covered by impervious surfaces. Credits Rich Pouyat, USDA Forest Service Use limitations Not for profit use only Extent West -76.711030 East -76.530612 North 39.371355 South 39.200686 Scale Range There is no scale range for this item. The data is soil concentrations and characteristics of the following: land use, bulk density, sand, silt, clay, pH, organic matter, nitrogen, Al, P, S, Ti, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu Zn, Mo, Pb, Cd, Na, Mg, K, Ca, and V. Soils were sampled in 125 plots located within the City of Baltimore in the summer of 2000. The plots were randomly stratified by Anderson Land Cover Classification System Level II, which included commercial, industrial, institutional, transportation right-of-ways, high and medium density residential (there were no low density residential areas identified within the city boundaries), golf course, park, urban open, forest, and wetland land-use types. The number of plots situated in each land-use type was weighted to their proportion of spatial area within the City. The resultant number of plots sampled for soil by land-use type was: commercial (n = 2); industrial (n = 3); institutional (n = 10); transportation right-of-ways (n = 7); high density residential (n = 19); medium density residential (n = 33); golf course (n = 3); riparian (n=2); park (n = 10); urban open (n = 10); and forest (n = 26) land-use types, respectively. The distribution of plots represents the proportion of area covered by impervious surfaces.

These data show the sampling locations for the consumer datasets at Konza Prairie. Record type 1 defines the starting points for sweep samples of grasshoppers across Konza Prairie (GIS400). These data may be used in conjunction with the sweep sample datasets (CGR02). Record type 2 defines the starting points for sweep samples of grasshoppers across Konza Prairie (GIS401), focusing on grazing impact. These data may be used in conjunction with the sweep sample datasets (CGR02Z). Record type 6 defines the trap locations for small mammal sampling across Konza Prairie (GIS405). These data may be used in conjunction with CSM0X. Record type 11 defines the stream stretches for fish sampling across Konza Prairie (GIS410). These data may be used in conjunction with CFC01.

These data show locations of samples and research areas at Konza that do not fit under our standard classifications. Record type 1 (GIS 600) contains the locations of the Hulbert plots on Konza Prairie. Record type 6 (GIS605) contains locations for rainfall shelters, ramps, experimental streams, restoration plots, the weather station, grasshopper cages, the climate extremes project. Currently no associated LTER datasets exist for these locations. Record type 11 (GIS 610) provides a record of the historic Konza gridded location system. Older datasets may reference these locations with a column letter and row number. Record type 16 (GIS615) contains the location for the Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET) site on Konza Prairie. For more information, visit the following link: http://www.epa.gov/castnet/javaweb/site_pages/KNZ184.html. Record type 21 (GIS620) contains the location for the USGS gauging station. These data may be used in conjunction with the Stream Discharge for Kings Creek Measured at USGS Gauging Station (ASD01) dataset. For more information, visit the following link: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/nwisman/?site_no=06879650. Record types 31 (GIS630) and 36 (GIS635) contain the location and treatment information for two bison grant grazing experiments. Currently, no associated LTER datasets exist for these data.

The USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) is the nation's inventory of protected areas, including public land and voluntarily provided private protected areas, identified as an A-16 National Geospatial Data Asset in the Cadastre Theme ( https://communities.geoplatform.gov/ngda-cadastre/ ). The PAD-US is an ongoing project with several published versions of a spatial database including areas dedicated to the preservation of biological diversity, and other natural (including extraction), recreational, or cultural uses, managed for these purposes through legal or other effective means. The database was originally designed to support biodiversity assessments; however, its scope expanded in recent years to include all open space public and nonprofit lands and waters. Most are public lands owned in fee (the owner of the property has full and irrevocable ownership of the land); however, permanent and long-term easements, leases, agreements, Congressional (e.g. 'Wilderness Area'), Executive (e.g. 'National Monument'), and administrative designations (e.g. 'Area of Critical Environmental Concern') documented in agency management plans are also included. The PAD-US strives to be a complete inventory of U.S. public land and other protected areas, compiling “best available” data provided by managing agencies and organizations. The PAD-US geodatabase maps and describes areas using thirty-six attributes and five separate feature classes representing the U.S. protected areas network: Fee (ownership parcels), Designation, Easement, Marine, Proclamation and Other Planning Boundaries. An additional Combined feature class includes the full PAD-US inventory to support data management, queries, web mapping services, and analyses. The Feature Class (FeatClass) field in the Combined layer allows users to extract data types as needed. A Federal Data Reference file geodatabase lookup table (PADUS3_0Combined_Federal_Data_References) facilitates the extraction of authoritative federal data provided or recommended by managing agencies from the Combined PAD-US inventory. This PAD-US Version 3.0 dataset includes a variety of updates from the previous Version 2.1 dataset (USGS, 2020, https://doi.org/10.5066/P92QM3NT ), achieving goals to: 1) Annually update and improve spatial data representing the federal estate for PAD-US applications; 2) Update state and local lands data as state data-steward and PAD-US Team resources allow; and 3) Automate data translation efforts to increase PAD-US update efficiency. The following list summarizes the integration of "best available" spatial data to ensure public lands and other protected areas from all jurisdictions are represented in the PAD-US (other data were transferred from PAD-US 2.1). Federal updates - The USGS remains committed to updating federal fee owned lands data and major designation changes in annual PAD-US updates, where authoritative data provided directly by managing agencies are available or alternative data sources are recommended. The following is a list of updates or revisions associated with the federal estate: 1) Major update of the Federal estate (fee ownership parcels, easement interest, and management designations where available), including authoritative data from 8 agencies: Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Census Bureau (Census Bureau), Department of Defense (DOD), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Forest Service (USFS), and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The federal theme in PAD-US is developed in close collaboration with the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Federal Lands Working Group (FLWG, https://communities.geoplatform.gov/ngda-govunits/federal-lands-workgroup/ ). 2) Improved the representation (boundaries and attributes) of the National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service lands, in collaboration with agency data-stewards, in response to feedback from the PAD-US Team and stakeholders. 3) Added a Federal Data Reference file geodatabase lookup table (PADUS3_0Combined_Federal_Data_References) to the PAD-US 3.0 geodatabase to facilitate the extraction (by Data Provider, Dataset Name, and/or Aggregator Source) of authoritative data provided directly (or recommended) by federal managing agencies from the full PAD-US inventory. A summary of the number of records (Frequency) and calculated GIS Acres (vs Documented Acres) associated with features provided by each Aggregator Source is included; however, the number of records may vary from source data as the "State Name" standard is applied to national files. The Feature Class (FeatClass) field in the table and geodatabase describe the data type to highlight overlapping features in the full inventory (e.g. Designation features often overlap Fee features) and to assist users in building queries for applications as needed. 4) Scripted the translation of the Department of Defense, Census Bureau, and Natural Resource Conservation Service source data into the PAD-US format to increase update efficiency. 5) Revised conservation measures (GAP Status Code, IUCN Category) to more accurately represent protected and conserved areas. For example, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Waterfowl Production Area Wetland Easements changed from GAP Status Code 2 to 4 as spatial data currently represents the complete parcel (about 10.54 million acres primarily in North Dakota and South Dakota). Only aliquot parts of these parcels are documented under wetland easement (1.64 million acres). These acreages are provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and are referenced in the PAD-US geodatabase Easement feature class 'Comments' field. State updates - The USGS is committed to building capacity in the state data-steward network and the PAD-US Team to increase the frequency of state land updates, as resources allow. The USGS supported efforts to significantly increase state inventory completeness with the integration of local parks data in the PAD-US 2.1, and developed a state-to-PAD-US data translation script during PAD-US 3.0 development to pilot in future updates. Additional efforts are in progress to support the technical and organizational strategies needed to increase the frequency of state updates. The PAD-US 3.0 included major updates to the following three states: 1) California - added or updated state, regional, local, and nonprofit lands data from the California Protected Areas Database (CPAD), managed by GreenInfo Network, and integrated conservation and recreation measure changes following review coordinated by the data-steward with state managing agencies. Developed a data translation Python script (see Process Step 2 Source Data Documentation) in collaboration with the data-steward to increase the accuracy and efficiency of future PAD-US updates from CPAD. 2) Virginia - added or updated state, local, and nonprofit protected areas data (and removed legacy data) from the Virginia Conservation Lands Database, provided by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation's Natural Heritage Program, and integrated conservation and recreation measure changes following review by the data-steward. 3) West Virginia - added or updated state, local, and nonprofit protected areas data provided by the West Virginia University, GIS Technical Center. For more information regarding the PAD-US dataset please visit, https://www.usgs.gov/gapanalysis/PAD-US/. For more information about data aggregation please review the PAD-US Data Manual available at https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/science-analytics-and-synthesis/gap/pad-us-data-manual . A version history of PAD-US updates is summarized below (See https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/science-analytics-and-synthesis/gap/pad-us-data-history for more information): 1) First posted - April 2009 (Version 1.0 - available from the PAD-US: Team pad-us@usgs.gov). 2) Revised - May 2010 (Version 1.1 - available from the PAD-US: Team pad-us@usgs.gov). 3) Revised - April 2011 (Version 1.2 - available from the PAD-US: Team pad-us@usgs.gov). 4) Revised - November 2012 (Version 1.3) https://doi.org/10.5066/F79Z92XD 5) Revised - May 2016 (Version 1.4) https://doi.org/10.5066/F7G73BSZ 6) Revised - September 2018 (Version 2.0) https://doi.org/10.5066/P955KPLE 7) Revised - September 2020 (Version 2.1) https://doi.org/10.5066/P92QM3NT 8) Revised - January 2022 (Version 3.0) https://doi.org/10.5066/P9Q9LQ4B Comparing protected area trends between PAD-US versions is not recommended without consultation with USGS as many changes reflect improvements to agency and organization GIS systems, or conservation and recreation measure classification, rather than actual changes in protected area acquisition on the ground.

This file contains the 176 cities and towns in Massachusetts for which MBTA bus, rapid transit, or commuter rail service is provided. This data is based off of the 2010 census. The legislative intent for some boundaries could not be mapped. Boundaries where that is true are identified in the attribute information. Name Description Data Type Example town Full name for the MA town or city identification. String Boston town_id MassGIS Town-ID Code (alphabetical, 1-351) Numeric 34 sum_acres Area covered by the town or city in acres. Double 31304.22 sum_square Area covered by the town or city in square miles. Double 48.91 MassDOT/MBTA shall not be held liable for any errors in this data. This includes errors of omission, commission, errors concerning the content of the data, and relative and positional accuracy of the data. This data cannot be construed to be a legal document. Primary sources from which this data was compiled must be consulted for verification of information contained in this data.

Update information can be found within the layer’s attributes and in a table on the Utah Parcel Data webpage under LIR Parcels.In Spring of 2016, the Land Information Records work group, an informal committee organized by the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget’s State Planning Coordinator, produced recommendations for expanding the sharing of GIS-based parcel information. Participants in the LIR work group included representatives from county, regional, and state government, including the Utah Association of Counties (County Assessors and County Recorders), Wasatch Front Regional Council, Mountainland and Bear River AOGs, Utah League of Cities and Towns, UDOT, DNR, AGRC, the Division of Emergency Management, Blue Stakes, economic developers, and academic researchers. The LIR work group’s recommendations set the stage for voluntary sharing of additional objective/quantitative parcel GIS data, primarily around tax assessment-related information. Specifically the recommendations document establishes objectives, principles (including the role of local and state government), data content items, expected users, and a general process for data aggregation and publishing. An important realization made by the group was that ‘parcel data’ or ‘parcel record’ products have a different meaning to different users and data stewards. The LIR group focused, specifically, on defining a data sharing recommendation around a tax year parcel GIS data product, aligned with the finalization of the property tax roll by County Assessors on May 22nd of each year. The LIR recommendations do not impact the periodic sharing of basic parcel GIS data (boundary, ID, address) from the County Recorders to AGRC per 63F-1-506 (3.b.vi). Both the tax year parcel and the basic parcel GIS layers are designed for general purpose uses, and are not substitutes for researching and obtaining the most current, legal land records information on file in County records. This document, below, proposes a schedule, guidelines, and process for assembling county parcel and assessment data into an annual, statewide tax parcel GIS layer. gis.utah.gov/data/sgid-cadastre/ It is hoped that this new expanded parcel GIS layer will be put to immediate use supporting the best possible outcomes in public safety, economic development, transportation, planning, and the provision of public services. Another aim of the work group was to improve the usability of the data, through development of content guidelines and consistent metadata documentation, and the efficiency with which the data sharing is distributed.GIS Layer Boundary Geometry:GIS Format Data Files: Ideally, Tax Year Parcel data should be provided in a shapefile (please include the .shp, .shx, .dbf, .prj, and .xml component files) or file geodatabase format. An empty shapefile and file geodatabase schema are available for download at:At the request of a county, AGRC will provide technical assistance to counties to extract, transform, and load parcel and assessment information into the GIS layer format.Geographic Coverage: Tax year parcel polygons should cover the area of each county for which assessment information is created and digital parcels are available. Full coverage may not be available yet for each county. The county may provide parcels that have been adjusted to remove gaps and overlaps for administrative tax purposes or parcels that retain these expected discrepancies that take their source from the legally described boundary or the process of digital conversion. The diversity of topological approaches will be noted in the metadata.One Tax Parcel Record Per Unique Tax Notice: Some counties produce an annual tax year parcel GIS layer with one parcel polygon per tax notice. In some cases, adjacent parcel polygons that compose a single taxed property must be merged into a single polygon. This is the goal for the statewide layer but may not be possible in all counties. AGRC will provide technical support to counties, where needed, to merge GIS parcel boundaries into the best format to match with the annual assessment information.Standard Coordinate System: Parcels will be loaded into Utah’s statewide coordinate system, Universal Transverse Mercator coordinates (NAD83, Zone 12 North). However, boundaries stored in other industry standard coordinate systems will be accepted if they are both defined within the data file(s) and documented in the metadata (see below).Descriptive Attributes:Database Field/Column Definitions: The table below indicates the field names and definitions for attributes requested for each Tax Parcel Polygon record.FIELD NAME FIELD TYPE LENGTH DESCRIPTION EXAMPLE SHAPE (expected) Geometry n/a The boundary of an individual parcel or merged parcels that corresponds with a single county tax notice ex. polygon boundary in UTM NAD83 Zone 12 N or other industry standard coordinates including state plane systemsCOUNTY_NAME Text 20 - County name including spaces ex. BOX ELDERCOUNTY_ID (expected) Text 2 - County ID Number ex. Beaver = 1, Box Elder = 2, Cache = 3,..., Weber = 29ASSESSOR_SRC (expected) Text 100 - Website URL, will be to County Assessor in most all cases ex. webercounty.org/assessorBOUNDARY_SRC (expected) Text 100 - Website URL, will be to County Recorder in most all cases ex. webercounty.org/recorderDISCLAIMER (added by State) Text 50 - Disclaimer URL ex. gis.utah.gov...CURRENT_ASOF (expected) Date - Parcels current as of date ex. 01/01/2016PARCEL_ID (expected) Text 50 - County designated Unique ID number for individual parcels ex. 15034520070000PARCEL_ADD (expected, where available) Text 100 - Parcel’s street address location. Usually the address at recordation ex. 810 S 900 E #304 (example for a condo)TAXEXEMPT_TYPE (expected) Text 100 - Primary category of granted tax exemption ex. None, Religious, Government, Agriculture, Conservation Easement, Other Open Space, OtherTAX_DISTRICT (expected, where applicable) Text 10 - The coding the county uses to identify a unique combination of property tax levying entities ex. 17ATOTAL_MKT_VALUE (expected) Decimal - Total market value of parcel's land, structures, and other improvements as determined by the Assessor for the most current tax year ex. 332000LAND _MKT_VALUE (expected) Decimal - The market value of the parcel's land as determined by the Assessor for the most current tax year ex. 80600PARCEL_ACRES (expected) Decimal - Parcel size in acres ex. 20.360PROP_CLASS (expected) Text 100 - Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Mixed, Agricultural, Vacant, Open Space, Other ex. ResidentialPRIMARY_RES (expected) Text 1 - Is the property a primary residence(s): Y'(es), 'N'(o), or 'U'(nknown) ex. YHOUSING_CNT (expected, where applicable) Text 10 - Number of housing units, can be single number or range like '5-10' ex. 1SUBDIV_NAME (optional) Text 100 - Subdivision name if applicable ex. Highland Manor SubdivisionBLDG_SQFT (expected, where applicable) Integer - Square footage of primary bldg(s) ex. 2816BLDG_SQFT_INFO (expected, where applicable) Text 100 - Note for how building square footage is counted by the County ex. Only finished above and below grade areas are counted.FLOORS_CNT (expected, where applicable) Decimal - Number of floors as reported in county records ex. 2FLOORS_INFO (expected, where applicable) Text 100 - Note for how floors are counted by the County ex. Only above grade floors are countedBUILT_YR (expected, where applicable) Short - Estimated year of initial construction of primary buildings ex. 1968EFFBUILT_YR (optional, where applicable) Short - The 'effective' year built' of primary buildings that factors in updates after construction ex. 1980CONST_MATERIAL (optional, where applicable) Text 100 - Construction Material Types, Values for this field are expected to vary greatly by county ex. Wood Frame, Brick, etc Contact: Sean Fernandez, Cadastral Manager (email: sfernandez@utah.gov; office phone: 801-209-9359)

The ability to analyze and classify three-dimensional (3D) biological morphology has lagged behind the analysis of other biological data types such as gene sequences. Here, we introduce the techniques of data mining to the study of 3D biological shapes to bring the analyses of phenomes closer to the efficiency of studying genomes. We compiled five training sets of highly variable morphologies of mammalian teeth from the MorphoBrowser database. Samples were labeled either by dietary class or by conventional dental types (e.g. carnassial, selenodont). We automatically extracted a multitude of topological attributes using Geographic Information Systems (GIS)-like procedures that were then used in several combinations of feature selection schemes and probabilistic classification models to build and optimize classifiers for predicting the labels of the training sets. In terms of classification accuracy, computational time and size of the feature sets used, non-repeated best-first search combined with 1-nearest neighbor classifier was the best approach. However, several other classification models combined with the same searching scheme proved practical. The current study represents a first step in the automatic analysis of 3D phenotypes, which will be increasingly valuable with the future increase in 3D morphology and phenomics databases.

Matrix sites are large contiguous areas whose size and natural condition allow for the maintenance of ecological processes, viable occurrences of matrix forest communities, embedded large and small patch communities, and embedded species populations. The goal of the matrix forest selection was to identify viable examples of the dominant forest types that, if protected and allowed to regain their natural condition, would serve as critical source areas for all species requiring interior forest conditions or associated with the dominant forest types.

It includes all heavy rail and light rail rapid transit lines. These events are used to calculate travel times, dwell times, and headways. Due to track circuit or other data issues, data is not guaranteed to be complete for any stop or date. Data Dictionary:

Name
Description
Data Type
Example


service_date
Date for which events should be returned. 
Date
2019-12-31


route_id
GTFS-compatible route for which events should be returned. 
String
Orange


trip_id
GTFS-compatible trip for which events should be returned. 
String
461_1


direction_id
GTFS-compatible direction for which events should be returned. 
Integer
0


stop_id
 GTFS-compatible stop for which ridership should be returned.
String
place-wlsta


stop_sequence
 GTFS-compatible order of stops on a route for which events should be returned.
Integer
590


vehicle_id
Property of “events”. The identifier for the vehicle performing the trip for which events are returned. 
String
R-545A9644


vehicle_label
Property of “events”. Human-readable, publicly visible identifier for the vehicle. 
String
3830-3652


event_type
The type of event: ‘ARR’ for arrival, ‘DEP’ for departure, ‘PRA’ for predicted arrival, and ‘PRD’ for predicted departure.PRA and PRD events occur when the Performance system is relatively sure that a train actually made the indicated movement at the indicated station, but the system did not observe an "actual" event from the realtime system. In that case, we use the last available prediction for the given event as a reasonable proxy. We often lack actual ARR events at terminals because the realtime system is designed for tracking trains that passengers want to board, not necessarily trains that have already arrived at a terminal station. The instant a train arrives at a terminal station (e.g. arriving northbound at Oak Grove), the MBTA-performance system may no longer be able to track its location. In some cases, we are not able to fill in a PRA event at all, so some types of analysis are less accurate at terminals. Depending on your objectives, you may wish to use the second-to-last station as a proxy
String
DEP


event_time
The time of the event, in epoch time. 
Integer
1546349755


event_time_sec
The time of the event, in seconds after midnight. 
Integer
30955

MassDOT/MBTA shall not be held liable for any errors in this data. This includes errors of omission, commission, errors concerning the content of the data, and relative and positional accuracy of the data. This data cannot be construed to be a legal document. Primary sources from which this data was compiled must be consulted for verification of information contained in this data.

Permit records from the City of Seattle permitting system for building permits that create or demolish detached accessory dwelling units (DADU). Records begin in 1990 and are through the current year quarter.

The permits in this layer are those that have either been completed or are currently issued. This data does not contain records for those permits that were issued but were not completed so are therefore not comparable to statistics that report permit issuance.

Each record represents the number of units added or demolished for each housing type in the project. Therefore a single building permit may appear multiple times if there are a mix of unit types in the project.

Housing unit types reflect the unit types regulated by the building codes and change through time. There has been no attempt to standardize these types and therefore reflect the unit types that existed at the time the permit was issued. Unit types will be visible only for the time period they were in the code. For example, small efficiency dwelling units were not created in the code until 2016 and so will not appear as a type until that year.

There may be multiple permits at any given address.

This file contains the most up-to-date calculations for the MBTA's passenger comfort metric as defined by the Service Delivery Policy.

Data Dictionary:

Name
Description
Data Type
Example


Season
Season and year of when passenger comfort was calculated
String
Fall 2019


route_id
GTFS-compatible route
String
10


passenger_minutes_total
The estimated number of total passenger minutes spent inside a vehicle for a given route
Double
12946564.4


sdp_uncomfortable_minutes_total
The estimated number of passenger minutes spent in crowded/uncomfortable conditions (defined by the SDP) inside a vehicle for a given route
Double
1769978.838


crowding
sdp_uncomfortable_minutes_total/passenger_minutes_total; time spent in uncomfortable conditons
Double
0.14


comfort_measure
1 - crowding; time spent in comfortable conditions
Double
0.86

MassDOT/MBTA shall not be held liable for any errors in this data. This includes errors of omission, commission, errors concerning the content of the data, and relative and positional accuracy of the data. This data cannot be construed to be a legal document. Primary sources from which this data was compiled must be consulted for verification of information contained in this data.