In this seminar, you will learn about the spatial analysis tools built directly into the ArcGIS.com map viewer. You will learn of the spatial analysis capabilities in ArcGIS Online for Organizations, whether for analyzing your own data, data that's publicly available on ArcGIS Online, or a combination of both. You will learn the overall features and benefits of ArcGIS Online Analysis, how to get started, and how to choose the right approach in order to solve a specific spatial problem.

Mapping Layer Data Released: 06/15/2023, | Last Updated 01/20/2024Data Currency: This data is checked semi-annually from it's enterprise federal source fo 2010 CENSUS Data and will support mapping, analysis, data exports and the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) Application Programming Interface (API).Data Update Frequency: Twice, YearlyData Cycle | History (as required below)QA/QC Performed: December, 2024Next Scheduled Data QA/QC: July, 2024TRACT 10 (2010 CENSUS) CONNECT LAYERData Requester: Rhode Island Executive Office of Health and Human Service (OHHS) via Health Equity Institute (HEI).Data Requester: Rhode Island Department of Health, Maternal Child Health via Health Equity Institute (HEI).Data Request: Provide a database deliverable via download that contains both US CENSUS tracts and USPS Zip Code Tabulation Areas (ZCTA).HEALTH EQUITY INSTITUTE DATA CONNECT RI Using Modern GIS (Mapping)🡅 Click IT 🡅Facilitate transformative mapping visualizations that engage constituents and measure the impact of real-world solutions.Instructions to Join Your Data Provided Below STEP 1: Video (Pending)STEP 2: Video (Pending)STEP 3: Video (Pending)There are twenty-two U.S. CENSUS fields (download here) that you can join to your datasets. For additional insight, please contact the Center for Health Data and Analysis (CHDA) Rhode Island Department of Health (GIS) Mapping Department for assistance.Database Enhancement: This database contains two (2) additional data fields for consideration to be added to the existing 2020 State of Rhode Island Health Equity Map.Zip Code Tabulation Area (ZCTA)ZCTA/Tract Relationship (Singular ZCTAs per Tract, versus Multiple ZCTAs per Tract)Additional Information: While ZCTAs can be useful for certain qualitative purposes, such as broad or general high level analysis, they may not provide the level of granularity and accuracy required for in-depth demographic research which is required for policy mapping. ZCTAs can change frequently as the US Postal Service (USPS) adjusts postal routes and boundaries. These changes can lead to inconsistencies and challenges in tracking demographic trends and making accurate comparisons over time.RIDOH GIS encourages analysts to make the appropriate choice of using census based data, with their consistent boundaries readily available for suitability for spatial analysis when conducting detailed demographic research.Here are a few reasons why you might want to consider using census based data (tracts, block groups, and blocks) instead of ZCTAs:1. Inaccurate Representations: ZCTAs are not designed for statistical analysis or demographic research. They are created by the United States Postal Service (USPS) for efficient mail delivery and can often span multiple cities, counties, or even states. As a result, ZCTAs may not accurately represent the actual geographic boundaries or demographic characteristics of a specific area.2. Lack of Granularity: ZCTAs are typically larger than census tracts, which are smaller, more homogeneous geographic units defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. Census tracts are designed to be relatively consistent in terms of population size, allowing for more detailed analysis at a local level. ZCTAs, on the other hand, can vary significantly in terms of population size, making it challenging to draw precise conclusions about specific neighborhoods or communities.3. Data Availability and Compatibility: Census tracts are used by the U.S. Census Bureau to collect and report demographic data. Consequently, a wide range of demographic information, such as population counts, age distribution, income levels, and education levels, is readily available at the census tract level. In contrast, data specifically tailored to ZCTAs may be more limited, making it difficult to obtain comprehensive and consistent data for demographic analysis.4. Changes Over Time: Census tracts are relatively stable over time, allowing for consistent longitudinal analysis. ZCTAs, however, can change frequently as the USPS adjusts postal routes and boundaries. These changes can lead to inconsistencies and challenges in tracking demographic trends and making accurate comparisons over time.5. Spatial Analysis: Census tracts are designed to maintain a level of spatial proximity, adjacency, or connectedness of these data containers while providing consistency and continuity over time - making them useful for spatial analysis. Mapping. ZCTAs, on the other hand, may not exhibit the same level of spatial coherence due to their primary purpose being mail delivery efficiency rather than geographic representation.State Agencies - Contact RIDOH GIS - Learn More About Mapping Data Available at the Census Tract LevelRIDOH GIS releases this database with the caveats noted above and that the researcher can accurately align the ZCTAs with the corresponding census tracts. Careful consideration should be given to the comparability and compatibility of the data collected at different geographic levels to ensure valid and meaningful statistical conclusions. Data Dictionary: 2010 Decennial CensusOBJECT ID - the count of each census tract entity.GEOID (10) STATE,COUNTY,TRACT - Numeric US CENSUS Tract Description (2010) HEZ (10) - Health Equity Zone (2020)LOCATION (10) - Plain Language Census Tract Descriptor (2010)COUNTY (10) NAME - County Name (2010)STATE (10) NAME - State Name (2010)ZCTA (23) - Zip Code Tabulation Area - Numeric US CENSUS ZCTA Description (2023)ZCTA/TRACT CONTEXT - Number of ZCTAs (Singular/Multiple) that reside within a US CENSUS TractST (10) - Numeric US CENSUS Tract Description (2010) CO (10) - Numeric US CENSUS Tract Description (2010)ST (10) CO (10) - Numeric US CENSUS Tract Description (2010)TRACT (10) - Numeric US CENSUS Tract Description (2010)GEOID (10) - Numeric US CENSUS Tract Description (2010)TRIBAL TRACT (10) - Numeric US CENSUS Tract Description (2010)Additional Mapping DataThe user is provided authoritative Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) such as numeric descriptions of state, county and tract identification, in addition to shape and length measurements of each census tract for data joining purposes.STATE (10) - Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)COUNTY (10) - Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)STATE (10), COUNTY (10) - Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)TRACT (10) - Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)TRIBAL TRACT (10) - Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)ST ABBRV (10) - State AbbreviationShape_Length - Total length of the polygon's (census tract) perimeter, in the units used by the feature class' coordinate system.Shape_Area - Total area of the polygon's (census tract) in the units used by the feature class' coordinate system.Data Source: Series Information for 2020 Census 5-Digit ZIP Code Tabulation Area (ZCTA5) National TIGER/Line Shapefiles, Current Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) Application Programming Interface (API) Census ZIP Code Tabulation Areas - OGC Features copy this link to embed it in OGC Compliant viewers. For more information, please visit: ZIP Code Tabulation Areas (ZCTAs)To Report Data Discrepancies Contact the Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH) GIS (mapping) OfficePlease Be Certain To --Provide a Brief Description of What the Discrepancy IsInclude Your, Name, Organization, Telephone NumberAttach the Complete .xlsx with the Discrepancy Highlighted

ArcGIS is a system that provides an integrated collection of GIS software products that provides a standards-based platform for spatial analysis, data management, and mapping. ArcGIS mapping tools are used so that WebEOC can make and share maps during emergency response. WebEOC sends the geological characteristics of the area such as the address, latitude and longitude information for mapping development. This a llows users to have access to real-time information simultaneously without having to purchase the product.

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

Mapping Layer Data Released: 06/15/2017, | Last Updated 04/20/2024Data Currency: This data is checked semi-annually from it's enterprise federal source fo 2010 CENSUS Data and will support mapping, analysis, data exports and the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) Application Programming Interface (API).Data Update Frequency: Twice, YearlyData Cycle | History (as required below)QA/QC Performed: December, 2024Next Scheduled Data QA/QC: July, 2024CDC PLACES (2010 CENSUS) FEATURE LAYERData Requester: Rhode Island Executive Office of Health and Human Service (OHHS) via Health Equity Institute (HEI).Data Requester: Rhode Island Department of Health, Maternal Child Health via Health Equity Institute (HEI).Data Request: Provide a database deliverable via download that contains both US CENSUS tracts and USPS Zip Code Tabulation Areas (ZCTA).HEALTH EQUITY INSTITUTE DATA CONNECT RI Using Modern GIS (Mapping)🡅 Click IT 🡅Facilitate transformative mapping visualizations that engage constituents and measure the impact of real-world solutions.Instructions to Join Your Data Provided Below STEP 1: Video (Pending)STEP 2: Video (Pending)STEP 3: Video (Pending)There are twenty-two U.S. CENSUS fields (download here) that you can join to your datasets. For additional insight, please contact the Center for Health Data and Analysis (CHDA) Rhode Island Department of Health (GIS) Mapping Department for assistance.Database Enhancement: This database contains two (2) additional data fields for consideration to be added to the existing 2020 State of Rhode Island Health Equity Map.Zip Code Tabulation Area (ZCTA)ZCTA/Tract Relationship (Singular ZCTAs per Tract, versus Multiple ZCTAs per Tract)Additional Information: While ZCTAs can be useful for certain qualitative purposes, such as broad or general high level analysis, they may not provide the level of granularity and accuracy required for in-depth demographic research which is required for policy mapping. ZCTAs can change frequently as the US Postal Service (USPS) adjusts postal routes and boundaries. These changes can lead to inconsistencies and challenges in tracking demographic trends and making accurate comparisons over time.RIDOH GIS encourages analysts to make the appropriate choice of using census based data, with their consistent boundaries readily available for suitability for spatial analysis when conducting detailed demographic research.Here are a few reasons why you might want to consider using census based data (tracts, block groups, and blocks) instead of ZCTAs:1. Inaccurate Representations: ZCTAs are not designed for statistical analysis or demographic research. They are created by the United States Postal Service (USPS) for efficient mail delivery and can often span multiple cities, counties, or even states. As a result, ZCTAs may not accurately represent the actual geographic boundaries or demographic characteristics of a specific area.2. Lack of Granularity: ZCTAs are typically larger than census tracts, which are smaller, more homogeneous geographic units defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. Census tracts are designed to be relatively consistent in terms of population size, allowing for more detailed analysis at a local level. ZCTAs, on the other hand, can vary significantly in terms of population size, making it challenging to draw precise conclusions about specific neighborhoods or communities.3. Data Availability and Compatibility: Census tracts are used by the U.S. Census Bureau to collect and report demographic data. Consequently, a wide range of demographic information, such as population counts, age distribution, income levels, and education levels, is readily available at the census tract level. In contrast, data specifically tailored to ZCTAs may be more limited, making it difficult to obtain comprehensive and consistent data for demographic analysis.4. Changes Over Time: Census tracts are relatively stable over time, allowing for consistent longitudinal analysis. ZCTAs, however, can change frequently as the USPS adjusts postal routes and boundaries. These changes can lead to inconsistencies and challenges in tracking demographic trends and making accurate comparisons over time.5. Spatial Analysis: Census tracts are designed to maintain a level of spatial proximity, adjacency, or connectedness of these data containers while providing consistency and continuity over time - making them useful for spatial analysis. Mapping. ZCTAs, on the other hand, may not exhibit the same level of spatial coherence due to their primary purpose being mail delivery efficiency rather than geographic representation.State Agencies - Contact RIDOH GIS - Learn More About Mapping Data Available at the Census Tract LevelRIDOH GIS releases this database with the caveats noted above and that the researcher can accurately align the ZCTAs with the corresponding census tracts. Careful consideration should be given to the comparability and compatibility of the data collected at different geographic levels to ensure valid and meaningful statistical conclusions. Data Dictionary: 2010 Decennial CensusOBJECT ID - the count of each census tract entity.GEOID (10) STATE,COUNTY,TRACT - Numeric US CENSUS Tract Description (2010) HEZ (10) - Health Equity Zone (2020)LOCATION (10) - Plain Language Census Tract Descriptor (2010)COUNTY (10) NAME - County Name (2010)STATE (10) NAME - State Name (2010)ZCTA (23) - Zip Code Tabulation Area - Numeric US CENSUS ZCTA Description (2023)ZCTA/TRACT CONTEXT - Number of ZCTAs (Singular/Multiple) that reside within a US CENSUS TractST (10) - Numeric US CENSUS Tract Description (2010) CO (10) - Numeric US CENSUS Tract Description (2010)ST (10) CO (10) - Numeric US CENSUS Tract Description (2010)TRACT (10) - Numeric US CENSUS Tract Description (2010)GEOID (10) - Numeric US CENSUS Tract Description (2010)TRIBAL TRACT (10) - Numeric US CENSUS Tract Description (2010)Additional Mapping DataThe user is provided authoritative Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) such as numeric descriptions of state, county and tract identification, in addition to shape and length measurements of each census tract for data joining purposes.STATE (10) - Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)COUNTY (10) - Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)STATE (10), COUNTY (10) - Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)TRACT (10) - Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)TRIBAL TRACT (10) - Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)ST ABBRV (10) - State AbbreviationShape_Length - Total length of the polygon's (census tract) perimeter, in the units used by the feature class' coordinate system.Shape_Area - Total area of the polygon's (census tract) in the units used by the feature class' coordinate system.Data Source: Series Information for 2020 Census 5-Digit ZIP Code Tabulation Area (ZCTA5) National TIGER/Line Shapefiles, Current Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) Application Programming Interface (API) Census ZIP Code Tabulation Areas - OGC Features copy this link to embed it in OGC Compliant viewers. For more information, please visit: ZIP Code Tabulation Areas (ZCTAs)To Report Data Discrepancies Contact the Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH) GIS (mapping) OfficePlease Be Certain To --Provide a Brief Description of What the Discrepancy IsInclude Your, Name, Organization, Telephone NumberAttach the Complete .xlsx with the Discrepancy Highlighted

ArcGIS Map Packages and GIS Data for Gillreath-Brown, Nagaoka, and Wolverton (2019)

**When using the GIS data included in these map packages, please cite all of the following:

Gillreath-Brown, Andrew, Lisa Nagaoka, and Steve Wolverton. A Geospatial Method for Estimating Soil Moisture Variability in Prehistoric Agricultural Landscapes, 2019. PLoSONE 14(8):e0220457. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220457

Gillreath-Brown, Andrew, Lisa Nagaoka, and Steve Wolverton. ArcGIS Map Packages for: A Geospatial Method for Estimating Soil Moisture Variability in Prehistoric Agricultural Landscapes, Gillreath-Brown et al., 2019. Version 1. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2572018

OVERVIEW OF CONTENTS

This repository contains map packages for Gillreath-Brown, Nagaoka, and Wolverton (2019), as well as the raw digital elevation model (DEM) and soils data, of which the analyses was based on. The map packages contain all GIS data associated with the analyses described and presented in the publication. The map packages were created in ArcGIS 10.2.2; however, the packages will work in recent versions of ArcGIS. (Note: I was able to open the packages in ArcGIS 10.6.1, when tested on February 17, 2019). The primary files contained in this repository are:

• Raw DEM and Soils data
  • Digital Elevation Model Data (Map services and data available from U.S. Geological Survey, National Geospatial Program, and can be downloaded from the National Elevation Dataset)
    • DEM_Individual_Tiles: Individual DEM tiles prior to being merged (1/3 arc second) from USGS National Elevation Dataset.
    • DEMs_Merged: DEMs were combined into one layer. Individual watersheds (i.e., Goodman, Coffey, and Crow Canyon) were clipped from this combined DEM.
  • Soils Data (Map services and data available from Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture)
    • Animas-Dolores_Area_Soils: Small portion of the soil mapunits cover the northeastern corner of the Coffey Watershed (CW).
    • Cortez_Area_Soils: Soils for Montezuma County, encompasses all of Goodman (GW) and Crow Canyon (CCW) watersheds, and a large portion of the Coffey watershed (CW).
• ArcGIS Map Packages
  • Goodman_Watershed_Full_SMPM_Analysis: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the full Goodman Watershed (GW).
  • Goodman_Watershed_Mesa-Only_SMPM_Analysis: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the mesa-only Goodman Watershed.
  • Crow_Canyon_Watershed_SMPM_Analysis: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the Crow Canyon Watershed (CCW).
  • Coffey_Watershed_SMPM_Analysis: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the Coffey Watershed (CW).

For additional information on contents of the map packages, please see see "Map Packages Descriptions" or open a map package in ArcGIS and go to "properties" or "map document properties."

LICENSES

Code: MIT year: 2019
Copyright holders: Andrew Gillreath-Brown, Lisa Nagaoka, and Steve Wolverton

CONTACT

Andrew Gillreath-Brown, PhD Candidate, RPA
Department of Anthropology, Washington State University
andrew.brown1234@gmail.com – Email
andrewgillreathbrown.wordpress.com – Web

Contains:World HillshadeWorld Street Map (with Relief) - Base LayerLarge Scale International Boundaries (v11.3)World Street Map (with Relief) - LabelsDoS Country Labels DoS Country LabelsCountry (admin 0) labels that have been vetted for compliance with foreign policy and legal requirements. These labels are part of the US Federal Government Basemap, which contains the borders and place names that have been vetted for compliance with foreign policy and legal requirements.Source: DoS Country Labels - Overview (arcgis.com)Large Scale International BoundariesVersion 11.3Release Date: December 19, 2023DownloadFor more information on the LSIB click here: https://geodata.state.gov/ A direct link to the data is available here: https://data.geodata.state.gov/LSIB.zipAn ISO-compliant version of the LSIB metadata (in ISO 19139 format) is here: https://geodata.state.gov/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/3bdb81a0-c1b9-439a-a0b1-85dac30c59b2 Direct inquiries to internationalboundaries@state.govOverviewThe Office of the Geographer and Global Issues at the U.S. Department of State produces the Large Scale International Boundaries (LSIB) dataset. The current edition is version 11.3 (published 19 December 2023). The 11.3 release contains updates to boundary lines and data refinements enabling reuse of the dataset. These data and generalized derivatives are the only international boundary lines approved for U.S. Government use. The contents of this dataset reflect U.S. Government policy on international boundary alignment, political recognition, and dispute status. They do not necessarily reflect de facto limits of control.National Geospatial Data AssetThis dataset is a National Geospatial Data Asset managed by the Department of State on behalf of the Federal Geographic Data Committee's International Boundaries Theme.DetailsSources for these data include treaties, relevant maps, and data from boundary commissions and national mapping agencies. Where available and applicable, the dataset incorporates information from courts, tribunals, and international arbitrations. The research and recovery process involves analysis of satellite imagery and elevation data. Due to the limitations of source materials and processing techniques, most lines are within 100 meters of their true position on the ground.Attribute StructureThe dataset uses thefollowing attributes:Attribute NameCC1COUNTRY1CC2COUNTRY2RANKSTATUSLABELNOTES These attributes are logically linked:Linked AttributesCC1COUNTRY1CC2COUNTRY2RANKSTATUS These attributes have external sources:Attribute NameExternal Data SourceCC1GENCCOUNTRY1DoS ListsCC2GENCCOUNTRY2DoS ListsThe eight attributes listed above describe the boundary lines contained within the LSIB dataset in both a human and machine-readable fashion. Other attributes in the release include "FID", "Shape", and "Shape_Leng" are components of the shapefile format and do not form an intrinsic part of the LSIB."CC1" and "CC2" fields are machine readable fields which contain political entity codes. These codes are derived from the Geopolitical Entities, Names, and Codes Standard (GENC) Edition 3 Update 18. The dataset uses the GENC two-character codes. The code ‘Q2’, which is not in GENC, denotes a line in the LSIB representing a boundary associated with an area not contained within the GENC standard.The "COUNTRY1" and "COUNTRY2" fields contain human-readable text corresponding to the name of the political entity. These names are names approved by the U.S. Board on Geographic Names (BGN) as incorporated in the list of Independent States in the World and the list of Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty maintained by the Department of State. To ensure the greatest compatibility, names are presented without diacritics and certain names are rendered using commonly accepted cartographic abbreviations. Names for lines associated with the code ‘Q2’ are descriptive and are not necessarily BGN-approved. Names rendered in all CAPITAL LETTERS are names of independent states. Other names are those associated with dependencies, areas of special sovereignty, or are otherwise presented for the convenience of the user.The following fields are an intrinsic part of the LSIB dataset and do not rely on external sources:Attribute NameMandatoryContains NullsRANKYesNoSTATUSYesNoLABELNoYesNOTESNoYesNeither the "RANK" nor "STATUS" field contains null values; the "LABEL" and "NOTES" fields do.The "RANK" field is a numeric, machine-readable expression of the "STATUS" field. Collectively, these fields encode the views of the United States Government on the political status of the boundary line.Attribute NameValueRANK123STATUSInternational BoundaryOther Line of International Separation Special Line A value of "1" in the "RANK" field corresponds to an "International Boundary" value in the "STATUS" field. Values of "2" and "3" correspond to "Other Line of International Separation" and "Special Line", respectively.The "LABEL" field contains required text necessarily to describe the line segment. The "LABEL" field is used when the line segment is displayed on maps or other forms of cartographic visualizations. This includes most interactive products. The requirement to incorporate the contents of the "LABEL" field on these products is scale dependent. If a label is legible at the scale of a given static product a proper use of this dataset would encourage the application of that label. Using the contents of the "COUNTRY1" and "COUNTRY2" fields in the generation of a line segment label is not required. The "STATUS" field is not a line labeling field but does contain the preferred description for the three LSIB line types when lines are incorporated into a map legend. Using the "CC1", "CC2", or "RANK" fields for labeling purposes is prohibited.The "NOTES" field contains an explanation of any applicable special circumstances modifying the lines. This information can pertain to the origins of the boundary lines, any limitations regarding the purpose of the lines, or the original source of the line. Use of the "NOTES" field for labeling purposes is prohibited.External Data SourcesGeopolitical Entities, Names, and Codes Registry: https://nsgreg.nga.mil/GENC-overview.jspU.S. Department of State List of Independent States in the World: https://www.state.gov/independent-states-in-the-world/U.S. Department of State List of Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty: https://www.state.gov/dependencies-and-areas-of-special-sovereignty/The source for the U.S.—Canada international boundary (NGDAID97) is the International Boundary Commission: https://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/en/maps-coordinates/coordinates.phpThe source for the “International Boundary between the United States of America and the United States of Mexico” (NGDAID82) is the International Boundary and Water Commission: https://catalog.data.gov/dataset?q=usibwcCartographic UsageCartographic usage of the LSIB requires a visual differentiation between the three categories of boundaries. Specifically, this differentiation must be between:- International Boundaries (Rank 1);- Other Lines of International Separation (Rank 2); and- Special Lines (Rank 3).Rank 1 lines must be the most visually prominent. Rank 2 lines must be less visually prominent than Rank 1 lines. Rank 3 lines must be shown in a manner visually subordinate to Ranks 1 and 2. Where scale permits, Rank 2 and 3 lines must be labeled in accordance with the “Label” field. Data marked with a Rank 2 or 3 designation does not necessarily correspond to a disputed boundary.Additional cartographic information can be found in Guidance Bulletins (https://hiu.state.gov/data/cartographic_guidance_bulletins/) published by the Office of the Geographer and Global Issues.ContactDirect inquiries to internationalboundaries@state.gov.CreditsThe lines in the LSIB dataset are the product of decades of collaboration between geographers at the Department of State and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency with contributions from the Central Intelligence Agency and the UK Defence Geographic Centre.Attribution is welcome: U.S. Department of State, Office of the Geographer and Global Issues.Changes from Prior ReleaseThe 11.3 release is the third update in the version 11 series.This version of the LSIB contains changes and accuracy refinements for the following line segments. These changes reflect improvements in spatial accuracy derived from newly available source materials, an ongoing review process, or the publication of new treaties or agreements. Notable changes to lines include:• AFGHANISTAN / IRAN• ALBANIA / GREECE• ALBANIA / KOSOVO• ALBANIA/MONTENEGRO• ALBANIA / NORTH MACEDONIA• ALGERIA / MOROCCO• ARGENTINA / BOLIVIA• ARGENTINA / CHILE• BELARUS / POLAND• BOLIVIA / PARAGUAY• BRAZIL / GUYANA• BRAZIL / VENEZUELA• BRAZIL / French Guiana (FR.)• BRAZIL / SURINAME• CAMBODIA / LAOS• CAMBODIA / VIETNAM• CAMEROON / CHAD• CAMEROON / NIGERIA• CHINA / INDIA• CHINA / NORTH KOREA• CHINA / Aksai Chin• COLOMBIA / VENEZUELA• CONGO, DEM. REP. OF THE / UGANDA• CZECHIA / GERMANY• EGYPT / LIBYA• ESTONIA / RUSSIA• French Guiana (FR.) / SURINAME• GREECE / NORTH MACEDONIA• GUYANA / VENEZUELA• INDIA / Aksai Chin• KAZAKHSTAN / RUSSIA• KOSOVO / MONTENEGRO• KOSOVO / SERBIA• LAOS / VIETNAM• LATVIA / LITHUANIA• MEXICO / UNITED STATES• MONTENEGRO / SERBIA• MOROCCO / SPAIN• POLAND / RUSSIA• ROMANIA / UKRAINEVersions 11.0 and 11.1 were updates to boundary lines. Like this version, they also contained topology fixes, land boundary terminus refinements, and tripoint adjustments. Version 11.2 corrected a few errors in the attribute data and ensured that CC1 and CC2 attributes are in alignment with an updated version of the Geopolitical Entities, Names, and Codes (GENC) Standard, specifically Edition 3 Update 17.LayersLarge_Scale_International_BoundariesTerms of

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. To produce the digital map, a combination of 1:12,000-scale color infrared digital ortho-imagery acquired in 2003, 1:12,000-scale true color ortho-rectified imagery acquired in 2005, and all of the GPS referenced ground data were used to interpret the complex patterns of vegetation and land-use. All imagery was acquired from the U.S. Department of Agriculture - Farm Service Agency’s Aerial Photography Field Office and the National Agriculture Imagery Program. In the end, 27 map units (14 vegetated and 13 land-use) were developed and directly cross-walked or matched to corresponding plant associations and land-use classes. All of the interpreted and remotely sensed data were converted to Geographic Information System (GIS) databases using ArcGIS© software. Draft maps were printed, field tested, reviewed, and revised. One hundred and thirty three accuracy assessment (AA) data points were collected in 2006 and used to determine the map’s accuracy. GIS Database 2002-2005: Project Size = 4,600 acres Lyndon B. Johnson National Historical Park = 674 acres Lyndon B. Johnson State Park and Historic Site = 418 acres Base Imagery acquired from the USDA FSA Aerial Photography Field Office acquired through the National Agriculture Imagery Program: 2005 - 1:12,000-scale true color ortho-rectified imagery, compressed county mosaic,2 meter pixel resolution 2003 - 1:12,000-scale color infrared digital ortho-imagery, compressed county mosaic,1 meter pixel resolution 27 Map Classes 14 Vegetated 13 Non-vegetated Minimum Mapping Unit = ½ hectare is the program standard but this was modified at LYJO to ¼ acre. Total Size = 1,080 Polygons Average Polygon Size = 4.3 acres Overall Thematic Accuracy = 92%

This spatial polygon dataset displays the footprint location for each map product created by this department. This index provides access to download map products as a PDF. The index is regularly updated. Each record in the index dataset contains details for the map including; - link to download the map as a PDF - map name, map description, coverage location area and date created - link to the project metadata record All map products can be viewed and downloaded as a PDF via NR Maps. https://nrmaps.nt.gov.au/nrmaps.html See Layers: Map Products \ All Map Products. - Tick the layer to display the map footprint area in the map screen. - Right mouse click to make the layer active. - Select a feature on the map screen in your area of interest or; - Use the search panel to enter details and filter the records. - Review map details in the data panel (below the map screen) to download a map product (PDF).

Spatial information about the seafloor is critical for decision-making by marine resource science, management and tribal organizations. Coordinating data needs can help organizations leverage collective resources to meet shared goals. To help enable this coordination, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) developed a spatial framework, process and online application to identify common data collection priorities for seafloor mapping, sampling and visual surveys off the US Caribbean territories of Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands. Fifteen participants from local federal, state, and academic institutions entered their priorities in an online application, using virtual coins to denote their priorities in 2.5x2.5 kilometer (nearshore) and 10x10 kilometer (offshore) grid size. Grid cells with more coins were higher priorities than cells with fewer coins. Participants also reported why these locations were important and what data types were needed. Results were analyzed and mapped using statistical techniques to identify significant relationships between priorities, reasons for those priorities and data needs. Fifteen high priority locations were broadly identified for future mapping, sampling and visual surveys. These locations include: (1) a coastal location in northwest Puerto Rico (Punta Jacinto to Punta Agujereada), (2) a location approximately 11 km off Punta Agujereada, (3) coastal Rincon, (4) San Juan, (5) Punta Arenas (west of Vieques Island), (6) southwest Vieques, (7) Grappler Seamount, (8) southern Virgin Passage, (9) north St. Thomas, (10) east St. Thomas, (11) south St. John, (12) west offshore St. Croix, (13) west nearshore St. Croix, (14) east nearshore St. Croix, and (15) east offshore St. Croix. Participants consistently selected (1) Biota/Important Natural Area, (2) Commercial Fishing and (3) Coastal/Marine Hazards as their top reasons (i.e., justifications) for prioritizing locations, and (1) Benthic Habitat Map and (2) Sub-bottom Profiles as their top data or product needs. This ESRI shapefile summarizes the results from this spatial prioritization effort. This information will enable US Caribbean organization to more efficiently leverage resources and coordinate their mapping of high priority locations in the region.

This effort was funded by NOAA’s NCCOS and supported by CRCP. The overall goal of the project was to systematically gather and quantify suggestions for seafloor mapping, sampling and visual surveys in the US Caribbean territories of Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands. The results are will help organizations in the US Caribbean identify locations where their interests overlap with other organizations, to coordinate their data needs and to leverage collective resources to meet shared goals.

There were four main steps in the US Caribbean spatial prioritization process. The first step was to identify the technical advisory team, which included the 4 CRCP members: 2 from each the Puerto Rico and USVI regions. This advisory team recommended 33 organizations to participate in the prioritization. Each organization was then requested to designate a single representative, or respondent, who would have access to the web tool. The respondent would be responsible for communicating with their team about their needs and inputting their collective priorities. Step two was to develop the spatial framework and an online application. To do this, the US Caribbean was divided into 4 sub regions: nearshore and offshore for both Puerto Rico and USVI. The total inshore regions had 2,387 square grid cells approximately 2.5x2.5 km in size. The total offshore regions consisted of 438 square grid cells 10x10 km in size. Existing relevant spatial datasets (e.g., bathymetry, protected area boundaries, etc.) were compiled to help participants understand information and data gaps and to identify areas they wanted to prioritize for future data collections. These spatial datasets were housed in the online application, which was developed using Esri’s Web AppBuilder. In step three, this online application was used by 15 participants to enter their priorities in each subregion of interest. Respondents allocated virtual coins in the grid cells to denote their priorities for each region. Respondents were given access to all four regions, despite which territory they represented, but were not required to provide input into each region. Grid cells with more coins were higher priorities than cells with fewer coins. Participants also reported why these locations were important and what data types were needed. Coin values were standardized across the nearshore and offshore zones and used to identify spatial patterns across the US Caribbean region as a whole. The number of coins were standardized because each subregion had a different number of grid cells and participants. Standardized coin values were analyzed and mapped using statistical techniques, including hierarchical cluster analysis, to identify significant relationships between priorities, reasons for those priorities and data needs. This ESRI shapefile contains the 2.5x2.5 km and 10x10 km grid cells used in this prioritization effort and associated the standardized coin values overall, as well as by organization, justification and product. For a complete description of the process and analysis please see: Kraus et al. 2020.

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. To produce the digital map, a combination of 1:12,000-scale ortho imagery acquired in 2003, 2004, and 2005 and all of the GPS-referenced ground data were used to interpret the complex patterns of vegetation and land-use. All imagery was acquired from the U.S. Department of Agriculture - Farm Service Agency’s Aerial Photography Field Office and the National Agriculture Imagery Program. In the end, 32 map units (13 vegetated and 19 land-use) were developed and directly cross-walked or matched to corresponding plant associations and land-use classes. All of the interpreted and remotely sensed data were converted to Geographic Information System (GIS) databases using ArcGIS© software. Draft maps were printed, field tested, reviewed, and revised. One hundred-twenty four accuracy assessment (AA) data points were collected in 2006 and used to determine the map’s accuracy. After final revisions, the accuracy assessment revealed an overall thematic accuracy of 89%. Project Size = 6,784 acres San Antonio Missions National Historical Park = 844 acres Map Classes = 32 13 Vegetated 19 Non-vegetated Minimum Mapping Unit = ½ hectare is the program standard but this was modified at SAAN to ¼ acre. Total Size = 1,122 Polygons Average Polygon Size = 6 acres Overall Thematic Accuracy = 89%

Polygon shapefiles that comprise levels of six environmental variables are used in conjunction with downed trees to inform the spatial analysis. A census of downed trees is created in each region within each environmental variable. Four environmental variables (elevation, generalized slope, Euclidean Distance From River [EDFR], Inundation Probability) were generated by classification of raster maps that have a resolution (1.0m) and pixel locations coincident to the topography raster map that is input into HEC-RAS and featured in Castillo et al. (under revew). Two classified variables (vegetation community, soil type) are informed by data form Ecological Mapping Systems of Texas (Elliott et.al., 2014) Castillo, C. R., Güneralp, I, Hales, B. U., Güneralp, B. (in review). Scale-Free Structure of Surface-Water Connectivity within a Lowland River-Floodplain Landscape. Geophysical Research Letters. Elliott, L.F., Treuer-Kuehn, A., Blodgett, C.F., True. C.D., German, D. Diamond, D.D. (2014). Ecological System of Texas: 391 Mapped Types, edited by Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and Texas Water Development Board, Austin, TX. url: https://tpwd.texas.gov/landwater/land/programs/landscape-ecology/ems/ Zevenbergen, L.W. and C.R. Thorne. (1987), Quantitative analysis of land surface topography. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 12, 47-56.

The Regional Crime Analysis GIS (RCAGIS) is an Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) MapObjects-based system that was developed by the United States Department of Justice Criminal Division Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Staff, in conjunction with the Baltimore County Police Department and the Regional Crime Analysis System (RCAS) group, to facilitate the analysis of crime on a regional basis. The RCAGIS system was designed specifically to assist in the analysis of crime incident data across jurisdictional boundaries. Features of the system include: (1) three modes, each designed for a specific level of analysis (simple queries, crime analysis, or reports), (2) wizard-driven (guided) incident database queries, (3) graphical tools for the creation, saving, and printing of map layout files, (4) an interface with CrimeStat spatial statistics software developed by Ned Levine and Associates for advanced analysis tools such as hot spot surfaces and ellipses, (5) tools for graphically viewing and analyzing historical crime trends in specific areas, and (6) linkage tools for drawing connections between vehicle theft and recovery locations, incident locations and suspects' homes, and between attributes in any two loaded shapefiles. RCAGIS also supports digital imagery, such as orthophotos and other raster data sources, and geographic source data in multiple projections. RCAGIS can be configured to support multiple incident database backends and varying database schemas using a field mapping utility.

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.

Aerial digital ortho-photography was the foundation imagery for map development. For Abó, the photography was acquired on April May 15, 2002 at a scale of approximately 1:3,000; for Quarai and Gran Quivira it was flown on April 2, 2003 at scales of 1:3,600 and 1:3000, respectively. The 2002-03 digital imagery has a base pixel resolution of 1.0 m. We also made use of statewide 1-meter resolution, true-color imagery from 2005 that became available in 2006 through the New Mexico Resource Geographic Information System. A 10 m spatial resolution USGS Digital Elevation Model (DEM) was used, in conjunction with ground data, to help discriminate between vegetation types based on elevation gradients and terrain. All imagery and other spatial data layers were compiled into a geodatabase and GIS using ArcGIS 9.3 (ESRI 2008).

The present dataset provides necessary indicators of the climate change vulnerability of Bangladesh in raster form. Geospatial databases have been created in Geographic Information System (GIS) environment mainly from two types of raw data; socioeconomic data from the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS) and biophysical maps from various government and non-government agencies. Socioeconomic data have been transformed into a raster database through the Inverse Distance Weighted (IDW) interpolation method in GIS. On the other hand, biophysical maps have been directly recreated as GIS feature classes and eventually, the biophysical raster database has been produced. 30 socioeconomic indicators have been considered, which has been obtained from the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. All socioeconomic data were incorporated into the GIS database to generate maps. However, the units of some variables have been adopted directly from BBS, some have been normalized based on population, and some have been adopted as percentages. 12 biophysical system indicators have also been classified based on the collected information from different sources and literature. Biophysical maps are mainly classified in relative scales according to the intensity. These geospatial datasets have been analyzed to assess the spatial vulnerability of Bangladesh to climate change and extremes. The analysis has resulted in a climate change vulnerability map of Bangladesh with recognized hotspots, significant vulnerability factors, and adaptation measures to reduce the level of vulnerability.

This dataset is designed to represent and identify the boundaries of public school facilities within Lexington-Fayette County. The dataset is created by leveraging the appropriate boundaries in the GIS parcel dataset. The location of the public school facilities is updated through public record and coordination with the Fayette County Public School. The location for the certified private schools is updated through public record for certified private schools from the Kentucky Department of Education. The public school facilities are continuously updated. This dataset participates in a topology with the parcel dataset to assure coincident geometry during parcel editing.As part of the basemap data layers, the school boundary map layer is an integral part of the Lexington Fayette-Urban County Government Geographic Information System. Basemap data layers are accessed by personnel in most LFUCG divisions for basic applications such as viewing, querying, and map output production. More advanced user applications may focus on thematic mapping, summarization of data by geography, or planning purposes (including defining boundaries, managing assets and facilities, integrating attribute databases with geographic features, spatial analysis, and presentation output).

The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is organized into 10 Regions where each Region is managed by a Regional Administrator, who also oversees the Regional Office. Each Field Office within a Region is managed by a Field Office Director, who reports to the Regional Administrator. There is at least one HUD Field Office in every State and a total of 10 Regional Offices. Staff who answer the main office telephone will be able to respond to or direct your calls to the appropriate person. Data Current As Of: 11/1/2012

The Military Bases dataset was last updated on October 23, 2024 and are defined by Fiscal Year 2023 data, from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment and is part of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)/Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) National Transportation Atlas Database (NTAD). The dataset depicts the authoritative locations of the most commonly known Department of Defense (DoD) sites, installations, ranges, and training areas world-wide. These sites encompass land which is federally owned or otherwise managed. This dataset was created from source data provided by the four Military Service Component headquarters and was compiled by the Defense Installation Spatial Data Infrastructure (DISDI) Program within the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment. Only sites reported in the BSR or released in a map supplementing the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (FIRRMA) Real Estate Regulation (31 CFR Part 802) were considered for inclusion. This list does not necessarily represent a comprehensive collection of all Department of Defense facilities. For inventory purposes, installations are comprised of sites, where a site is defined as a specific geographic location of federally owned or managed land and is assigned to military installation. DoD installations are commonly referred to as a base, camp, post, station, yard, center, homeport facility for any ship, or other activity under the jurisdiction, custody, control of the DoD. While every attempt has been made to provide the best available data quality, this data set is intended for use at mapping scales between 1:50,000 and 1:3,000,000. For this reason, boundaries in this data set may not perfectly align with DoD site boundaries depicted in other federal data sources. Maps produced at a scale of 1:50,000 or smaller which otherwise comply with National Map Accuracy Standards, will remain compliant when this data is incorporated. Boundary data is most suitable for larger scale maps; point locations are better suited for mapping scales between 1:250,000 and 1:3,000,000. If a site is part of a Joint Base (effective/designated on 1 October, 2010) as established under the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure process, it is attributed with the name of the Joint Base. All sites comprising a Joint Base are also attributed to the responsible DoD Component, which is not necessarily the pre-2005 Component responsible for the site. A data dictionary, or other source of attribute information, is accessible at https://doi.org/10.21949/1529039

Update Frequency:
This dataset is updated on a weekly basis.

HEPGIS is a web-based interactive geographic map server that allows users to navigate and view geo-spatial data, print maps, and obtain data on specific features using only a web browser. It includes geo-spatial data used for transportation planning. HEPGIS previously received ARRA funding for development of Economically distressed Area maps. It is also being used to demonstrate emerging trends to address MPO and statewide planning regulations/requirements , enhanced National Highway System, Primary Freight Networks, commodity flows and safety data . HEPGIS has been used to help implement MAP-21 regulations and will help implement the Grow America Act, particularly related to Ladder of Opportunities and MPO reforms.