The Coast Guard Sectors are delineated in the description in the 33 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) for each Sector Boundary and Area of Responsibility where latitude and longitude coordinates, as well as county/state/national boundaries are included to describe the boundaries for each zone. In addition, whenever the Area of Responsibility boundary is over water, the EEZ shapefile is referenced for those occurrences. This layer displays the Coast Guard Sector Boundaries for the following sectorsAnchorage, Baltimore, Boston, Buffalo, Charleston, Columbia River, Corpus Christi, Delaware Bay, Detroit, Guam, Hampton Roads, Honolulu, Houston - Galveston, Humboldt Bay, Jacksonville, Juneau, Key West, Lake Michigan, Long Island Sound, Los Angeles - Long Beach, Lower Mississippi, Miami, Mobile, New Orleans, New York, North Bend, North Carolina, Northern New England, Ohio Valley, Puget Sound, San Diego, San Francisco, San Juan, Sault Ste Marie, Southeastern New England, St. Petersburg, and Upper Mississippi.

This is a seven-category land-cover map of North Andover, Massachusetts. The seven categories are: bare soil, coniferous trees, decidous trees, grass, impervious surface, water, and wetlands. Note: Complete metadata is available within the downloaded zip file. This metadata can be viewed with ESRI ArcGIS software, and can be exported to FGDC and ISO metadata formats.

This is a seven-category land-cover map of North Reading, Massachusetts. The seven categories are: bare soil, coniferous trees, decidous trees, grass, impervious surface, water, and wetlands. Note: Complete metadata is available within the downloaded zip file. This metadata can be viewed with ESRI ArcGIS software, and can be exported to FGDC and ISO metadata formats.

A variety of alternative reconstructions are considered for the northern margins of the Australian plate. The simplest solution involves Hall's (2002) configuration for the microplates in the Greater Birds Head. Prior to the early Permian, the Greater Birds Head is thought to have lain adjacent to northern Australia from Timor to the Kai islands. After Meso-Tethys breakup in the Sakmarian, it then rotated away during the Permian to Middle Triassic to form the proto-Banda Sea and the spreading centre was then abandoned. From the Middle Triassic to the Oligocene, the Greater Birds Head was probably a relatively stable promontory of northern Australia and was then fragmented, tectonised and incorporated into the SE Asian island arc system during the late Oligocene to Holocene.

The palaeogeographic maps are updated to incorporate these new plate models. The tectonostratigraphic evolution of northern Australia is divided into several phases. During the Carboniferous to Sakmarian pre-breakup phase, the Westralian Superbasin was characterised by rifting, deltas and various types of glacial sedimentation. After the Sakmarian Meso-Tethys breakup, there were large amounts of deltaic clastic sedimentation, lasting until Argoland drifted away in the Late Jurassic. The New England Orogeny overlapped with the first part of this phase on the NE margin until the Middle Triassic. There was a long period of post-breakup marine rift basin formation in NW Australia from the Oxfordian to the Valanginian. Indian Ocean breakup then led to rapid thermal subsidence. The rest of the Cretaceous was characterised by passive tectonics with largely fine-grained sedimentation on the NW margin, and increasing volcanicity and rifting on the NE side of the continent. Shifting areas of rifting and breakup, largely in a backarc setting affected the NE margins in the latest Cretaceous to early Eocene. Carbonate progradation started in the Westralian Superbasin in the Paleocene. The Eocene to Holocene history has been marked by passive carbonate progradation on the NW margin and multiple collisions in the N and NE.

Many of the tectonic models put forward in this study are very difficult to substantiate using the data currently available and alternative scenarios are a strong possibility. The way forward is now to formulate research programmes that would help to narrow down these alternatives and better document the history of this very complex margin.

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. Mapping vegetation of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail (APPA, also referred to as the “AT corridor” for the Appalachian Trail corridor) involved the following six primary steps: (1) preliminary map classification with a vegetation primer for each APPA project area, (2) field reconnaissance for each APPA project area, (3) map classification by each APPA project area, (4) aerial image interpretation and mapping by each APPA project area, (5) compilation of a final classification and map layer covering the entire AT corridor following accuracy assessment (AA), and (6) database development of the map layer. Although these steps proceeded sequentially, they overlap to some degree. Steps 1–4 proceeded sequentially by APPA project area starting in the Southern Blue Ridge (SBR) project area in 2010, moving north to the Central Appalachian (CAP) project area in 2011, then to the Lower New England (LNE) project area in 2012, and ending in the Northern Appalachian (NAP) project area in 2013. (See Figures 6–9 in the “Introduction and Project Overview” section of this report for detailed locations of the four APPA project areas.) Steps 5 and 6 compiled all APPA project areas into a contiguous map classification and map layer. Summary reports generated from the vegetation map layer of the map classes representing USNVC natural (including ruderal) vegetation types apply to 28,242 polygons (92.9% of polygons) and cover 106,413.0 ha (95.9%) of the map extent for APPA. The map layer indicates APPA to be 92.4% forest and woodland (102,480.8 ha), 1.7% shrubland (1866.3 ha), and 1.8% herbaceous cover (2,065.9 ha). Map classes representing park-special vegetation (undefined in the USNVC) apply to 58 polygons (0.2% of polygons) and cover 404.3 ha (0.4%) of the map extent. Map classes representing USNVC cultural types apply to 1,777 polygons (5.8% of polygons) and cover 2,516.3 ha (2.3%) of the map extent. Map classes representing nonvegetated water (non-USNVC) apply to 332 polygons (1.1% of polygons) and cover 1,586.2 ha (1.4%) of the map extent.

A variety of alternative reconstructions are considered for the northern margins of the Australian plate. The simplest solution involves Hall's (2002) configuration for the microplates in the …Show full descriptionA variety of alternative reconstructions are considered for the northern margins of the Australian plate. The simplest solution involves Hall's (2002) configuration for the microplates in the Greater Birds Head. Prior to the early Permian, the Greater Birds Head is thought to have lain adjacent to northern Australia from Timor to the Kai islands. After Meso-Tethys breakup in the Sakmarian, it then rotated away during the Permian to Middle Triassic to form the proto-Banda Sea and the spreading centre was then abandoned. From the Middle Triassic to the Oligocene, the Greater Birds Head was probably a relatively stable promontory of northern Australia and was then fragmented, tectonised and incorporated into the SE Asian island arc system during the late Oligocene to Holocene. The palaeogeographic maps are updated to incorporate these new plate models. The tectonostratigraphic evolution of northern Australia is divided into several phases. During the Carboniferous to Sakmarian pre-breakup phase, the Westralian Superbasin was characterised by rifting, deltas and various types of glacial sedimentation. After the Sakmarian Meso-Tethys breakup, there were large amounts of deltaic clastic sedimentation, lasting until Argoland drifted away in the Late Jurassic. The New England Orogeny overlapped with the first part of this phase on the NE margin until the Middle Triassic. There was a long period of post-breakup marine rift basin formation in NW Australia from the Oxfordian to the Valanginian. Indian Ocean breakup then led to rapid thermal subsidence. The rest of the Cretaceous was characterised by passive tectonics with largely fine-grained sedimentation on the NW margin, and increasing volcanicity and rifting on the NE side of the continent. Shifting areas of rifting and breakup, largely in a backarc setting affected the NE margins in the latest Cretaceous to early Eocene. Carbonate progradation started in the Westralian Superbasin in the Paleocene. The Eocene to Holocene history has been marked by passive carbonate progradation on the NW margin and multiple collisions in the N and NE. Many of the tectonic models put forward in this study are very difficult to substantiate using the data currently available and alternative scenarios are a strong possibility. The way forward is now to formulate research programmes that would help to narrow down these alternatives and better document the history of this very complex margin.

These data represent a digital form of the geologic map of Cape Cod and the islands.

A regional scale structural and stratigraphic 3D model has been developed for the western
Tamworth Belt within the New England Orogen in northeastern New South Wales.
The western Tamworth Belt is bound by the crustal scale Hunter-Mooki and Peel-Manning Fault
systems, which together form a wedge of deformed Devonian to Permian rocks.
The model consists of broad lithological volumes representing Devonian, Devonian-Carboniferous,
Carboniferous and Permian rocks that are folded and offset by numerous second and third
order fault systems with minor intrusion by Permian granitoids.
The model is based on a
series of 2 dimensional cross sections developed based on the integration of surface mapping,
16 reflection seismic profiles as well as magnetic and gravity data.
Interpretation confidence volumes are provided with the model to visually represent constraint
location and constraint quality. The results of the modelling provide a basis for understanding
the regional structural architecture and controls on mineral systems. The model illustrates
the contrast in deformation style from the northern Tamworth Belt, relative to the southeast of
the belt that is more structurally complex in terms of folding and faulting. The distribution of
known hydrothermal mineral systems in the Tamworth Belt appear closely linked to the fault-architecture,
with most occurring around steep west-dipping fault zones that intersect or splay from the
Hunter-Mooki Fault at depth. Faults of this style are more common in the southeastern Tamworth Belt
than they are to the north.

Map of ACJV bird focus AreasThese are ALL BIRD FOCUS areas from BCR plans. These areas are now primarily used for NAWCA grantsPartners in the Atlantic Coast Joint Venture (ACJV) have identified 13 planning areas and 136 waterfowl specific focus areas. Through this process more than 45 million hectares (>113 million acres) are targeted for conservation actions that will benefit waterfowl and other wetland dependent wildlife. Members of the ACJV Waterfowl Technical Committee (now the Gamebird Technical Committee) were provided hard copy maps of areas thought to be important to migrating or wintering waterfowl showing existing wetland resources (available NWI data) and USGS DRG land use. Individuals were asked to modify previous focus area boundaries (unpublished). Where major changes were proposed, ACJV staff worked with committee members to provide the appropriate spatial data needed to delineate new focal areas. The update process took place between November 2003 and February 2005 with the exception of Puerto Rico. Minor revisions were accepted through June 2005. T. Jones and K. Luke worked with personnel from Puerto Rico's Department of Natural & Environmental Resources in 2006 and 2007 to revise waterfowl focus areas for the Commonwealth. These focus areas were meant to be interim products for the period 2005 - 2010. The first meeting of the South Atlantic Migratory Bird Initiative (SAMBI) occurred in June 1999. Biologists, managers, etc. from the five state area met to build the framework of SAMBI. Focus area maps for each major bird group by state were derived from expert opinion and drawn on to 1:250,000 topographic maps provided to the experts. These experts represented federal, state, and non-governmental organizations with expertise in each of the bird groups. The specific dates of the meeting where these maps were derived were June 22-23, 1999, and were held at the Webb Wildlife Center near Garnett, South Carolina. At this time, focus area maps for Florida and Virginia were not delineated, as the appropriate experts were not present at this meeting to do so. The maps delineated during this meeting were digitized by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s Coastal Program in the Charleston Ecological Services Office in Charleston, South Carolina. The focus area maps came to be known at “all bird” focus areas under the framework of the North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI) and SAMBI (the first attempt at BCR planning within the ACJV). The purpose of this first meeting was to initiate bird conservation planning for “all birds across all habitats” under the framework of NABCI. The Management Board of the ACJV had recently met in Orlando, Florida and voted unanimously for the ACJV to become an “all bird” Joint Venture and begin the process of integrated bird conservation planning, that is integrating all the planning efforts of major bird conservation initiatives currently under way in North America. Those currently under way in the south Atlantic region were Partners In Flight, United States Shorebird Conservation Plan, Waterbirds for the Americas, and the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. To develop “all bird” focus area maps for the South Atlantic Coastal Plain geographies of Virginia and Florida, ACJV staff traveled to and met with the appropriate bird experts to delineate similar areas for these states in 2004. In the exercise with Florida, nearshore and offshore focus areas were also delineated, something that the other states did not attempt. Additionally, as some states developed initiatives and produced focus areas for Northern Bobwhite and other early successional/grassland species, these maps were incorporated into the SAMBI Implementation Plan. In 2002, the South Carolina SAMBI Working Group recognized that some of their “all bird” focus areas were not consistent with other states in the SAMBI planning area and initiated an effort to revise focus areas to be consistent with other SAMBI states and to reflect new knowledge and data sources to assist in revising SAMBI “all bird” focus areas. This meeting occurred in 2007. No changes were made to the waterfowl focus area for South Carolina. However, changes were made to the landbird, shorebird, waterbird, and early successional/grassland bird focus areas. Again, new knowledge, better land cover data, and input from other bird conservation organizations were used to revise these maps. Data used were the latest from SE ReGap land cover data, and Audubon SC focus area maps were used for input into the revision. The landbird map was made into four maps from the initial one map, being broke out my four major habitat types: forested wetlands, open pine, maritime forest, and early successional/grassland. These new focus areas were digitized by GIS staff for the ACJV. The result was South Carolina having 7 “all bird” focus areas, one for shorebirds, waterbirds, and waterfowl, and four habitat based focus areas for landbirds. Discussions were held to determine if other states should use this process to update focus areas for their state. It was decided that states could pursue this with the assistance of the ACJV, but the ACJV’s Designing Sustainable Landscapes Project would most likely provide a priority surface for conservation for priority species in all the major bird groups, and therefore, decided not to expend additional effort to follow the process that South Carolina followed. Finally, the waterfowl focus areas in the SAMBI Implementation Plan are identical to those in the ACJV Waterfowl Implementation Plan (WIP). During the process of writing the ACJV WIP, adjustments were made to waterfowl focus areas for the SAMBI states. States had previously identified focus areas, but under new guidance for what a waterfowl focus area should be in the new ACJV WIP, adjustments were made in many states, including those in the SAMBI region.The development of continental bird conservation plans set the stage for implementation at smaller geographic scales and led to the development of implementation plans specific to species groups and BCRs. Within the New England/Mid-Atlantic Coast Bird Conservation Region (BCR 30), the Partners in Flight initiative, the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan, the Waterbird Conservation of the Americas initiative, the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, and the Northern Bobwhite Conservation Initiative have identified bird conservation priorities by setting population goals at the either the continental, national, or regional scales. States have developed State Wildlife Action Plans that identify what needs to be done to conserve wildlife and the natural lands and waters where they live, including species management needs and priorities. The purpose of the BCR 30 Plan is to bring the common goals of these plans together into one format that can be used by state agencies, NGOs, and other bird conservation interests to coordinate and implement bird conservation activities. This plan merges material from numerous plans and workshops, including Partners in Flight physiographic plans and BCR 30 Plan, Atlantic Coast Joint Venture Waterfowl Implementation Plan, Northern Atlantic Shorebird conservation Plan, Mid-Atlantic New England Maritimes Regional Waterbird Plan, State Wildlife Action Plans, and the results of the BCR 30 Coordinated Monitoring Workshop and the December 2004 BCR 30 All-Bird Conservation Workshop (summary in Appendix F of BCR 30 Plan at: https://www.acjv.org/bcr30.htm).Data were derived from hand drawn maps, with focus areas delineated by 65 bird conservation experts, representing governmental and non-governmental organizations from the United States and Canada, at a workshop in Alexandria Bay, NY, April 17-19, 2001. The purpose of the workshop was to review the status of each of the migratory bird initiative plans developed at that point, in each country, in order to identify priority migratory bird species, and the priority habitats needed by these priority species, begin discussion on the process for setting population and habitat goals, and define new or revise existing focus areas for the Lower Great Lakes / St. Lawrence Plain Bird Conservation Region (i.e., BCR 13). The preliminary data were collated, presented, reviewed, and refined at another workshop, November 28-29 in Montreal, Quebec, attended by forty-five biologists from the U.S. and Canada, including some land managers who had not attended the previous workshop. Final maps were produced by Chuck Hayes of the ACJV, who worked with biologists in every state and province in BCR 13 to refine polygon shapes, sizes, and exact boundaries.

This data set is part of a larger set of data called the Multibeam Bathymetry Database (MBBDB) where other similar data can be found at https://maps.ngdc.noaa.gov/viewers/bathymetry/NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) is the U.S. national archive for multibeam bathymetric data and presently holds over 2400 surveys received from sources worldwide, including the U.S. academic fleet via the Rolling Deck to Repository (R2R) program. In addition to deep-water data, the multibeam database also includes hydrographic multibeam survey data from the National Ocean Service (NOS). This map service shows navigation for multibeam bathymetric surveys in NCEI's archive. Older surveys are colored orange, and more recent recent surveys are green.

This data set is part of a larger set of data called the Multibeam Bathymetry Database (MBBDB) where other similar data can be found at https://maps.ngdc.noaa.gov/viewers/bathymetry/NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) is the U.S. national archive for multibeam bathymetric data and presently holds over 2400 surveys received from sources worldwide, including the U.S. academic fleet via the Rolling Deck to Repository (R2R) program. In addition to deep-water data, the multibeam database also includes hydrographic multibeam survey data from the National Ocean Service (NOS). This map service shows navigation for multibeam bathymetric surveys in NCEI's archive. Older surveys are colored orange, and more recent recent surveys are green.

The 2020 TIGER/Line Shapefiles contain current geographic extent and boundaries of both legal and statistical entities (which have no governmental standing) for the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Island areas. This vintage includes boundaries of governmental units that match the data from the surveys that use 2020 geography (e.g., 2020 Population Estimates and the 2020 American Community Survey). In addition to geographic boundaries, the 2020 TIGER/Line Shapefiles also include geographic feature shapefiles and relationship files. Feature shapefiles represent the point, line and polygon features in the MTDB (e.g., roads and rivers). Relationship files contain additional attribute information users can join to the shapefiles. Both the feature shapefiles and relationship files reflect updates made in the database through September 2020. To see how the geographic entities, relate to one another, please see our geographic hierarchy diagrams here.Census Urbanized Areashttps://www2.census.gov/geo/tiger/TIGER2020/UACCensus Urban/Rural Census Block Shapefileshttps://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/geo/shapefiles/index.php2020 TIGER/Line and Redistricting shapefiles:https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files/time-series/geo/tiger-line-file.2020.htmlTechnical documentation:https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/maps-data/data/tiger/tgrshp2020/TGRSHP2020_TechDoc.pdfTIGERweb REST Services:https://tigerweb.geo.census.gov/tigerwebmain/TIGERweb_restmapservice.htmlTIGERweb WMS Services:https://tigerweb.geo.census.gov/tigerwebmain/TIGERweb_wms.htmlThe legal entities included in these shapefiles are:American Indian Off-Reservation Trust LandsAmerican Indian Reservations – FederalAmerican Indian Reservations – StateAmerican Indian Tribal Subdivisions (within legal American Indian areas)Alaska Native Regional CorporationsCongressional Districts – 116th CongressConsolidated CitiesCounties and Equivalent Entities (except census areas in Alaska)Estates (US Virgin Islands only)Hawaiian Home LandsIncorporated PlacesMinor Civil DivisionsSchool Districts – ElementarySchool Districts – SecondarySchool Districts – UnifiedStates and Equivalent EntitiesState Legislative Districts – UpperState Legislative Districts – LowerSubminor Civil Divisions (Subbarrios in Puerto Rico)The statistical entities included in these shapefiles are:Alaska Native Village Statistical AreasAmerican Indian/Alaska Native Statistical AreasAmerican Indian Tribal Subdivisions (within Oklahoma Tribal Statistical Areas)Block Groups3-5Census AreasCensus BlocksCensus County Divisions (Census Subareas in Alaska)Unorganized Territories (statistical county subdivisions)Census Designated Places (CDPs)Census TractsCombined New England City and Town AreasCombined Statistical AreasMetropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas and related statistical areasMetropolitan DivisionsNew England City and Town AreasNew England City and Town Area DivisionsOklahoma Tribal Statistical AreasPublic Use Microdata Areas (PUMAs)State Designated Tribal Statistical AreasTribal Designated Statistical AreasUrban AreasZIP Code Tabulation Areas (ZCTAs)Shapefiles - Features:Address Range-FeatureAll Lines (called Edges)All RoadsArea HydrographyArea LandmarkCoastlineLinear HydrographyMilitary InstallationPoint LandmarkPrimary RoadsPrimary and Secondary RoadsTopological Faces (polygons with all geocodes)Relationship Files:Address Range-Feature NameAddress RangesFeature NamesTopological Faces – Area LandmarkTopological Faces – Area HydrographyTopological Faces – Military Installations

Integrated population models (IPMs) provide a unified framework for simultaneously analyzing data sets of different types to estimate vital rates, population size, and dynamics; assess contributions of demographic parameters to population changes; and assess population viability. Strengths of an IPM include the ability to estimate latent parameters and improve the precision of parameter estimates. We present a hierarchical IPM that combines two broad-scale avian monitoring data sets; count data from the North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) and capture-recapture data from the Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship (MAPS) program. These data sets are characterized by large numbers of sample sites and observers, factors capable of inducing error in the sampling and observation processes. The IPM integrates the data sets by modeling the population abundance as a first-order autoregressive function of the previous year's population abundance and vital rates. BBS counts were modeled as a log-linear function of the annual index of population abundance, observation effects (observer identity and first-survey-year), and overdispersion. Vital rates modeled included adult apparent survival, estimated from a transient Cormack-Jolly-Seber model using MAPS data, and recruitment (surviving hatched birds from the previous season + dispersing adults) estimated as a latent parameter. An assessment of the IPM demonstrated it could recover true parameter values from 200 simulated data sets. The IPM was applied to data sets (1992-2008) of two bird species, gray catbird (Dumetella carolinensis) and wood thrush (Hylocichla mustelina) in the New England/Mid-Atlantic coastal Bird Conservation Region of the USA. The gray catbird population was relatively stable (trend 0.4% yr−1), while the wood thrush population nearly halved (trend -4.5% yr−1) over the 17-yr study period. IPM estimates of population growth rates, adult survival, and detection and residency probabilities were similar and as precise as estimates from the stand-alone BBS and CJS models. A benefit of using the IPM was its ability to estimate the latent recruitment parameter. Annual growth rates for both species correlated more with recruitment than survival, and the relationship for wood thrush was stronger than for gray catbird. The IPM's unified modeling framework facilitates integration of these important data sets.

Booroolong Nature Reserve vegetation mapping was undertaken by Dr John T. Hunter in 2014 by contract for the NPWS Northern Tableland Region. Booroolong Nature Reserve lies approximately 30 km by road north west of Armidale within the Northern Tablelands Botanical District and New England Tablelands Bioregion. The reserve contains approximately 967 ha of lands and was originally dedicated in 1999. Previously the reserve was a State Forest.\r \r The vegetation of Booroolong Nature Reserve is described and mapped (scale 1:10000) based on ADS40 Imagery (2012). Nine floristic communities are defined based on classification (Kulczynski association). These nine communities were mapped based on ground truthing, air photo interpretation and landform. In addition ten Plant Community Types (VIS PCT) are also mapped along with four Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs).\r \r VIS_ID 4718

description: This summer, with the help of the Alvin submersible, a multidisciplinary team of scientists and educators visited several little known seamounts in the North Atlantic, along with at least one previously unexplored seamount, to study various aspects of deep-sea octocorals and other organisms living on and around the seamounts. The primary objective was to map, collect, and identify deepwater corals, fishes, and miscellaneous invertebrates from the seamounts, with special attention to whether corals are most abundant at the crest of the seamount and whether they form important habitat for other species, such as benthic fishes, when the corals are particularly abundant.; abstract: This summer, with the help of the Alvin submersible, a multidisciplinary team of scientists and educators visited several little known seamounts in the North Atlantic, along with at least one previously unexplored seamount, to study various aspects of deep-sea octocorals and other organisms living on and around the seamounts. The primary objective was to map, collect, and identify deepwater corals, fishes, and miscellaneous invertebrates from the seamounts, with special attention to whether corals are most abundant at the crest of the seamount and whether they form important habitat for other species, such as benthic fishes, when the corals are particularly abundant.

Abstract

This dataset and its metadata statement were supplied to the Bioregional Assessment Programme by a third party and is presented here as originally supplied.

The Database of Species of National Environmental Significance stores maps and point distribution information about Species of National Environmental Significance as listed in the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999, and, also weeds and feral species. Species covered include:

• threatened species

• migratory species

• marine species

• cetaceans

• non-native species that threaten biodiversity

• species in other countries covered by international agreements that Australia is a party to.

Threatened and migratory species data is available in a generalised gridded form for public download as the Species of National Environmental Significance Map Summary Version.

Dataset History

The Spatial information is stored in a geographic information system and links to the Taxon and Species Profile tables through the taxon identifier.

Source data were provided from a range of government, industry and non-government organisations.

Testing is carried out using expert opinion, and/or through reference to published information.

The lineage of each species map is detailed in the stored item.

The map summary version consists of polygons of threatened or migratory species extracted from the database using a python script, gridded to 0.1 degree and converted to asc format. The gridded data is then placed in a map template and saved as a png format map with the extraction date and taxon id indicated. A summary table in csv format is appended as each identifier is extracted.

Source data acknowledgements:

Department of Environment and Heritage Protection, Queensland

Department of Environment and Primary Industries, Victoria

Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, South Australia

Department of Land Resource Management, Northern Territory

Department of Parks and Wildlife, Western Australia

Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, Tasmania

Office of Environment and Heritage, New South Wales

The Environment and Sustainable Development Directorate, Australian Capital Territory

Australian Museum

Museum Victoria

Queensland Museum

South Australian Museum

Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery

Western Australian Museum

Online Zoological Collections of Australian Museums

Australian National Herbarium, Atherton and Canberra

National Herbarium of NSW

Northern Territory Herbarium

Queensland Herbarium

Royal Botanic Gardens and National Herbarium of Victoria

State Herbarium of South Australia

Tasmanian Herbarium

Western Australian Herbarium

Australian Bird and Bat Banding Scheme

Australian National Wildlife Collection

Birdlife Australia

Ocean Biogeographic Information System

Australian Government, Department of Defence

Forestry Corporation of NSW

University of New England

Geoscience Australia

CSIRO

Other groups and individuals

 Data quality report - Absolute external positional accuracy: 

The maps represent best available information and comprise a range of scales and reliability. Map summary species distributions have been generalised to 0.1° (\~10km) grid cells.

 Data quality report - Attribute accuracy: 

Tests are undertaken to ensure that there are no errors for the following attributes:

• TAXON identifiers are unique, valid and within the allocated range

• Presence categories in the database are one of:

• Species or species habitat is likely to occur within area

• Breeding recorded within area

• Breeding or breeding habitat likely to occur within area

• Roosting recorded within area

• Foraging recorded within area

• Listed Critical Habitat

Generalised presence categories in the map summary version are one of:

2- Species or species habitat is likely to occur within area

1- Species or species habitat may occur within area

Where additional areas have been added to a distribution through the use of an automated modelling tool at a higher level of presence than existing mapped areas, they have been altered to the existing minimum values

 Data quality report - Conceptual consistency: 

Scripts ensure that each map has consistent fields, and standard codes are used throughout.

 Data quality report - Completeness: 

The database is being updated as the lists of species on schedules of the EPBC Act are amended, and new information on distribution becomes available. Updates are undertaken when new data becomes available and resources permit.

Based on sensitive species policies, the maps of these species are withheld from the map summary version : Wollemi Pine Wollemia nobilis (NSW); Spotted Handfish Brachionichthys hirsutus (Tas); Ziebell's Handfish, Waterfall Bay Handfish Brachiopsilus ziebelli (Tas); Red Handfish Thymichthys politus (Tas); Swan Galaxias Galaxias fontanus (Tas); Kings Lomatia Lomatia tasmanica (Tas). The distributions of migratory species such as shore birds may not reflect the total distribution within Australia but only show breeding sites, sites of significance or known locations.

For more information on individual species distributions, please contact the relevant state agency.

Dataset Citation

Department of the Environment (1998) Australia - Species of National Environmental Significance Database. Bioregional Assessment Source Dataset. Viewed 13 March 2019, http://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/dataset/4eff885b-0d68-45e8-b4b1-e3e5448354eb.

Coastal erosion is a widespread process along most open-ocean shores of the United States that affects both developed and natural coastlines. As the coast changes, there are a wide range of ways that change can affect coastal communities, habitats, and the physical characteristics of the coast-including beach erosion, shoreline retreat, land loss, and damage to infrastructure. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is responsible for conducting research on coastal change hazards, understanding the processes that cause coastal change, and developing models to forecast future change. To understand and adapt to shoreline change, accurate information regarding the past and present configurations of the shoreline is essential. A comprehensive, nationally consistent analysis of shoreline movement is needed. To meet this national need, the USGS is conducting an analysis of historical shoreline changes along open-ocean coasts of the United States and parts of the Great Lakes. As more data are gathered, periodic updates are made, which provide information that can be used in multidisciplinary assessments of global change impacts.

Spatial data supporting the England Woodland Creation Offer (EWCO) additional contribution targeting for Nature Recovery. This layer is identical to that titled ‘CS WCM Biodiversity - Priority Species - Red Squirrel - Woodland Creation’ also visible on the Forestry Commission Map Browser.Data inputs:Red Squirrels Northern England (RSNE) red squirrel reserves and buffer boundaries and the OS Boundary-Line features for the Isle of Wight and Brownsea, Green and Furzey Islands.Attributes: ‘sitename’ – name of the red squirrel reserve/stronghold and it’s buffer ‘cat’ – title of the targeting use for this feature ‘cswcm_pnts’ – scoring values relating to Countryside Stewardship schemes ‘ewco_val’ - EWCO £ value the additional contribution provides per Ha if awardedLineage:First published to support the woodland creation grant under Countryside Stewardship (CS), launched in 2015. The layers attributes were updated in 2021 to cater for the new England Woodland Creation Offer (EWCO) scheme.

The surficial geologic map of the Eastern and Central United States depicts the areal distribution of surficial geologic deposits and other materials that accumulated or formed during the past 2+ million years, the period that includes all activities of the human species. These materials are at the surface of the earth. They make up the "ground" on which we walk, the "dirt" in which we dig foundations, and the “soil” in which we grow crops. Most of our human activity is related in one way or another to these surface materials that are referred to collectively by many geologists as regolith, the mantle of fragmental and generally unconsolidated material that overlies the bedrock foundation of the continent. The map is based on 31 published maps in the U.S. Geological Survey's Quaternary Geologic Atlas of the United States map series (U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series I-1420). It was compiled at 1:1,000,000 scale, to be viewed as a digital map at 1:2,000,000 nominal scale and to be printed as a conventional paper map at 1:2,500,000 scale. This map is not a map of soils as recognized and classified in agriculture. Rather, it is a generalized map of soils as recognized in engineering geology, or of substrata or parent materials in which agricultural, agronomic, or pedologic soils are formed. Where surficial deposits or materials are thick, agricultural soils are developed only in the upper part of the engineering soils. Where they are very thin, agricultural soils are developed through the entire thickness of a surficial deposit or material. The surficial geologic map provides a broad overview of the areal distribution of surficial deposits and materials. It identifies and depicts more than 150 types of deposits and materials. In general, the map units are divided into two major categories, surface deposits and residual materials. Surface deposits are materials that accumulated or were emplaced after component particles were transported by ice, water, wind, or gravity. The glacial sediments that cover the surface in much of the northern United States east of the Rocky Mountains are in this category, as are the gravel, sand, silt, and clay that were deposited in past and present streams, lakes, and oceans. In contrast, residual materials formed in place, without significant transport of component particles by ice, water, wind, or gravity. They are products of modification or alteration of pre-existing surficial deposits, surficial materials, or bedrock. For example, intense weathering of solid rock, or even stream deposits, by chemical processes may produce a residual surficial material that is greatly transformed from its original physical and chemical state. In recent years, surficial deposits and materials have become the focus of much interest by scientists, environmentalists, governmental agencies, and the general public. They are the foundations of ecosystems, the materials that support plant growth and animal habitat, and the materials through which travels much of the water required for our agriculture, our industry, and our general well being. They also are materials that easily can become contaminated by pesticides, fertilizers, and toxic wastes. In this context, the value of the surficial geologic map is evident The map and its digital database provide information about four major aspects of the surficial materials, through description of more than 150 types of materials and depiction of their areal distribution. The map unit descriptions provide information about (1) genesis (processes of origin) or environments of deposition (for example, deposits related to glaciation (glacial deposits), flowing water (alluvial deposits), lakes (lacustrine deposits), wind (eolian deposits), or gravity (mass-movement deposits)), (2) age (for example, how long ago the deposits accumulated or were emplaced or how long specific processes have been acting on the materials), (3) properties (the chemical, physical, and mechanical or engineering characteristics of the materials), and (4) thickness or depth to underlying deposits or materials or to bedrock. This approach provides information appropriate for a broad user base. The map is useful to national, state, and other governmental agencies, to engineering and construction companies, to environmental organizations and consultants, to academic scientists and institutions, and to the layman who merely wishes to learn more about the materials that conceal the bedrock. The map can facilitate regional and national overviews of (1) geologic hazards, including areas of swelling clay and areas of landslide deposits and landslide-prone materials, (2) natural resources, including aggregate for concrete and road building, peat, clay, and shallow sources for groundwater, and (3) areas of special environmental concern, i... Visit https://dataone.org/datasets/d863e647-d00d-4994-89bc-be4be9d4adf0 for complete metadata about this dataset.

The USGS, in cooperation with NOAA, is producing detailed maps of the seafloor off southern New England. The current phase of this cooperative research program is directed toward analyzing how bathymetric relief relates to the distribution of sedimentary environments and benthic communities. As part of this program, digital terrain models (DTMs) from bathymetry collected as part of NOAA's hydrographic charting activities are converted into ESRI raster grids and imagery, verified with bottom sampling and photography, and used to produce interpretations of seabed geology and hydrodynamic processes. Although each of the 7 continuous-coverage, completed surveys individually provides important benthic environmental information, many applications require a geographically broader perspective. For example, the usefulness of individual surveys is limited for the planning and construction of cross-Sound infrastructure, such as cables and pipelines, or for the testing of regional circulation models. To address this need, we integrated the 7 contiguous multibeam bathymetric DTMs into one dataset that covers much of Block Island Sound. The new dataset is adjusted to mean lower low water, is provided in UTM Zone 19 NAD83 and geographic WGS84 projections, and is gridded to 4-m resolution. This resolution is adequate for seafloor-feature and process interpretation, but small enough to be queried and manipulated with standard GIS programs and to allow for future growth. Natural features visible in the grid include boulder lag deposits of submerged moraines, sand-wave fields, and scour depressions that reflect the strength of the oscillating tidal currents. Bedform asymmetry allows interpretations of net sediment transport. Together the merged data reveal a larger, more continuous perspective of bathymetric topography than previously available, providing a fundamental framework for research and resource management activities off this portion of the Rhode Island coast.