Portions of the world's interior, such as central Asia are extremely secluded from the ocean and are more than 2,000 km from the nearest coast. Distance to coast can be used in asset management and modeling project costs. Phenomenon Mapped: Distance to coastUnits: KilometersCell Size: 655.9259912 metersSource Type: DiscretePixel Type: Signed integerSpatial Reference: World Equidistant CylindricalMosaic Projection: Web Mercator Auxiliary SphereExtent: GlobalSource: EsriPublication Date: 2015ArcGIS Server URL: https://oceans2.arcgis.com/arcgis/The Distance to Coast layer was calculated by Esri using the Euclidean Distance Tool in ArcMap and the Esri Country Boundaries layer.What can you do with this layer?Visualization: This layer can be used for visualization online in web maps and in ArcGIS Desktop.Analysis: This layer can be used as an input to geoprocessing tools and model builder.Raster Functions: Unit Conversion – kilometers to miles, Unit Conversion - kilometers to nautical miles, Cartographic Renderer, and Classified Renderer.This layer is part of the Living Atlas of the World that provides access to thousands of beautiful and authoritative layers, web maps, and apps.

The arrangement of water in the landscape affects the distribution of many species including the distribution of humans. This layer provides a landscape-scale estimate of the distance from large water bodies. This layer provides access to a 250m cell-sized raster of distance to surface water. To facilitate mapping, the values are in units of pixels. To convert this value to meters multiply by 250. The layer was created by extracting surface water values from the World Lithology and World Land Cover layers to produce a surface water layer. The distance from water was calculated using the ArcGIS Euclidian Distance Tool. The layer was created by Esri in 2014. Dataset SummaryAnalysis: Restricted single source analysis. Maximum size of analysis is 16,000 x 16,000 pixels. What can you do with this layer?This layer is suitable for both visualization and analysis. It can be used in ArcGIS Online in web maps and applications and can be used in ArcGIS Desktop. Restricted single source analysis means this layer has size constraints for analysis and it is not recommended for use with other layers in multisource analysis. This layer has query, identify, and export image services available. This layer is restricted to a maximum area of 16,000 x 16,000 pixels - an area 4,000 kilometers on a side or an area approximately the size of Europe. This layer is part of a larger collection of landscape layers that you can use to perform a wide variety of mapping and analysis tasks. The Living Atlas of the World provides an easy way to explore the landscape layers and many other beautiful and authoritative maps on hundreds of topics. Geonet is a good resource for learning more about landscape layers and the Living Atlas of the World. To get started see the Living Atlas Discussion Group. The Esri Insider Blog provides an introduction to the Ecophysiographic Mapping project.

The Long Distance Trails line data layer represents trails in Massachusetts that are longer than 25 miles. The data were created for the purpose of regional planning and mapping by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management (DEM), now the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) and was modified for the DEM by the University of Massachusetts in 1997. DCR updated most of the trails with more accurate source data in 2015.More details...Map service also available.

1) Use the search tool to find where you go to school or work2) Measure the distance you travel to school or work

Portions of the world's oceans are extremely remote including areas in the South Pacific that are more the 2,500 km from the nearest land. Distance from shore can be used in asset management, modeling project costs, and as an index of human influence. Phenomenon Mapped: Distance from shoreUnits: KilometersCell Size: 655.9259912 metersSource Type: DiscretePixel Type: Signed integerSpatial Reference: World Equidistant CylindricalMosaic Projection: Web Mercator Auxiliary SphereExtent: Global oceansSource: EsriPublication Date: 2015ArcGIS Server URL: https://oceans2.arcgis.com/arcgis/The Distance from Shore layer was calculated by Esri using the Euclidean Distance Tool in ArcMap and the Esri Country Boundaries layer.What can you do with this layer?Visualization: This layer can be used for visualization online in web maps and in ArcGIS Desktop.Analysis: This layer can be used as an input to geoprocessing tools and model builder.Raster Functions: Unit Conversion – kilometers to miles, Unit Conversion - kilometers to nautical miles, Cartographic Renderer, and Classified Renderer see this blog for more information.This layer is part of the Living Atlas of the World that provides access to thousands of beautiful and authoritative layers, web maps, and apps.

The "Create Buffers" analysis tool in ArcGIS Online can be used to identify areas within a given distance of existing features, be those points, lines or polygons.The distance used for the buffers can either be a fixed distance from all features, or could be taken from a numerical value within each features attributes.

Dataset for the textbook Computational Methods and GIS Applications in Social Science (3rd Edition), 2023 Fahui Wang, Lingbo Liu Main Book Citation: Wang, F., & Liu, L. (2023). Computational Methods and GIS Applications in Social Science (3rd ed.). CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003292302 KNIME Lab Manual Citation: Liu, L., & Wang, F. (2023). Computational Methods and GIS Applications in Social Science - Lab Manual. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003304357 KNIME Hub Dataset and Workflow for Computational Methods and GIS Applications in Social Science-Lab Manual Update Log If Python package not found in Package Management, use ArcGIS Pro's Python Command Prompt to install them, e.g., conda install -c conda-forge python-igraph leidenalg NetworkCommDetPro in CMGIS-V3-Tools was updated on July 10,2024 Add spatial adjacency table into Florida on June 29,2024 The dataset and tool for ABM Crime Simulation were updated on August 3, 2023, The toolkits in CMGIS-V3-Tools was updated on August 3rd,2023. Report Issues on GitHub https://github.com/UrbanGISer/Computational-Methods-and-GIS-Applications-in-Social-Science Following the website of Fahui Wang : http://faculty.lsu.edu/fahui Contents Chapter 1. Getting Started with ArcGIS: Data Management and Basic Spatial Analysis Tools Case Study 1: Mapping and Analyzing Population Density Pattern in Baton Rouge, Louisiana Chapter 2. Measuring Distance and Travel Time and Analyzing Distance Decay Behavior Case Study 2A: Estimating Drive Time and Transit Time in Baton Rouge, Louisiana Case Study 2B: Analyzing Distance Decay Behavior for Hospitalization in Florida Chapter 3. Spatial Smoothing and Spatial Interpolation Case Study 3A: Mapping Place Names in Guangxi, China Case Study 3B: Area-Based Interpolations of Population in Baton Rouge, Louisiana Case Study 3C: Detecting Spatiotemporal Crime Hotspots in Baton Rouge, Louisiana Chapter 4. Delineating Functional Regions and Applications in Health Geography Case Study 4A: Defining Service Areas of Acute Hospitals in Baton Rouge, Louisiana Case Study 4B: Automated Delineation of Hospital Service Areas in Florida Chapter 5. GIS-Based Measures of Spatial Accessibility and Application in Examining Healthcare Disparity Case Study 5: Measuring Accessibility of Primary Care Physicians in Baton Rouge Chapter 6. Function Fittings by Regressions and Application in Analyzing Urban Density Patterns Case Study 6: Analyzing Population Density Patterns in Chicago Urban Area >Chapter 7. Principal Components, Factor and Cluster Analyses and Application in Social Area Analysis Case Study 7: Social Area Analysis in Beijing Chapter 8. Spatial Statistics and Applications in Cultural and Crime Geography Case Study 8A: Spatial Distribution and Clusters of Place Names in Yunnan, China Case Study 8B: Detecting Colocation Between Crime Incidents and Facilities Case Study 8C: Spatial Cluster and Regression Analyses of Homicide Patterns in Chicago Chapter 9. Regionalization Methods and Application in Analysis of Cancer Data Case Study 9: Constructing Geographical Areas for Mapping Cancer Rates in Louisiana Chapter 10. System of Linear Equations and Application of Garin-Lowry in Simulating Urban Population and Employment Patterns Case Study 10: Simulating Population and Service Employment Distributions in a Hypothetical City Chapter 11. Linear and Quadratic Programming and Applications in Examining Wasteful Commuting and Allocating Healthcare Providers Case Study 11A: Measuring Wasteful Commuting in Columbus, Ohio Case Study 11B: Location-Allocation Analysis of Hospitals in Rural China Chapter 12. Monte Carlo Method and Applications in Urban Population and Traffic Simulations Case Study 12A. Examining Zonal Effect on Urban Population Density Functions in Chicago by Monte Carlo Simulation Case Study 12B: Monte Carlo-Based Traffic Simulation in Baton Rouge, Louisiana Chapter 13. Agent-Based Model and Application in Crime Simulation Case Study 13: Agent-Based Crime Simulation in Baton Rouge, Louisiana Chapter 14. Spatiotemporal Big Data Analytics and Application in Urban Studies Case Study 14A: Exploring Taxi Trajectory in ArcGIS Case Study 14B: Identifying High Traffic Corridors and Destinations in Shanghai Dataset File Structure 1 BatonRouge Census.gdb BR.gdb 2A BatonRouge BR_Road.gdb Hosp_Address.csv TransitNetworkTemplate.xml BR_GTFS Google API Pro.tbx 2B Florida FL_HSA.gdb R_ArcGIS_Tools.tbx (RegressionR) 3A China_GX GX.gdb 3B BatonRouge BR.gdb 3C BatonRouge BRcrime R_ArcGIS_Tools.tbx (STKDE) 4A BatonRouge BRRoad.gdb 4B Florida FL_HSA.gdb HSA Delineation Pro.tbx Huff Model Pro.tbx FLplgnAdjAppend.csv 5 BRMSA BRMSA.gdb Accessibility Pro.tbx 6 Chicago ChiUrArea.gdb R_ArcGIS_Tools.tbx (RegressionR) 7 Beijing BJSA.gdb bjattr.csv R_ArcGIS_Tools.tbx (PCAandFA, BasicClustering) 8A Yunnan YN.gdb R_ArcGIS_Tools.tbx (SaTScanR) 8B Jiangsu JS.gdb 8C Chicago ChiCity.gdb cityattr.csv ...

This dataset consist of inputs and intermediate results from the coastal scenario modelling. It is an analysis of the bio-physical factors that best explain the changes in QLUMP land use change between 1999 and 2009 along the Queensland coastal region for the classifications used in the future coastal modelling.

Methods:

The input layers (variables etc) were produced using a range of sources as shown in Table 1. Source datasets were edited to produce raster dataset at 50m resolution and reclassified to suit the needs for the analysis.

The analysis was made using the IDRISI Land Use Change Modeler using multi-layer perceptron neural network with explanatory power of bio-physical variables. In this process a range of bio-physical layers such as slope, rainfall, distance to roads etc (see full list in Table 1) are used as potential explanatory variables for the changes in the land use. The neutral network is trained on a subset of the data then tested against the remaining data, thereby giving an estimate of the accuracy of the prediction. This analysis produces suitability maps for each of the transitions between different land use classifications, along with a ranking of the important bio-physical factors for explaining the changes.

The 1999 - 2009 Land use change was analysed with of which 4 were found to be the strongest predictors of the change for various transitions between one land use and another. This dataset includes the rasters of the 4 best predictors along with a sample of the highest accuracy transition probability maps.

Format:

Table 1 (Table 1 NERP 9_4 e-atlas dataset) This table contains the list of names, short descriptions, data source and data manipulation for the input rasters for the land use change model

All GIS files are in GDA 94 Albers Australia coordinate system.

1999.tif This layer shows a rasterised form of the QLUMP land use (clipped to the GBR coastal zone as defined in 9.4) for 1999 used for analysis of bio-physical predictors of land use change. The original QLUMP data was re-classified into 18 classes then rasterised at 50m resolution. This raster was then resampled to a 500m resolution.

2009.tif This layer shows a rasterised form of the QLUMP land use (clipped to the GBR coastal zone as defined in 9.4) for 2009 used for analysis of bio-physical predictors of land use change. The original QLUMP data was re-classified into 18 classes (with addition of tourism land use) then rasterised at 50m resolution. This raster was then resampled to a 500m resolution.

Rainfall.rst This layer shows the average annual rainfall (in mm) sourced from the Average Yearly Rainfall Isohyets Queensland dataset (clipped to the GBR coastal zone as defined in 9.4) used for analysis of bio-physical predictors of land use change. The data was re-classified and resampled at 50m resolution.

Slope.rst This layer shows the slope (in degrees) value at 50m pixel resolution (clipped to the GBR coastal zone as defined in 9.4) used for analysis of bio-physical predictors of land use change. The slope was derived from the Australian Digital Elevation Model in ArcGIS (using the Slope tool of the 3D analyst Tools) at a 200m resolution. The data was resampled at 50m resolution.

SeaDist.rst This layer shows the distance (in m) to the nearest coastline (including estuaries) at 50m pixel resolution used for analysis of bio-physical predictors of land use change. It was created by applying an Euclidean distance function (in ArcGIS in the Spatial Analyst toolbox) to the “Mainland coastline” feature in the GBR features dataset available from GBRMPA.

UrbanDist.rst This layer shows the distance (in m) to the nearest pixel of urban land use at 50m pixel resolution used for analysis of bio-physical predictors of land use change. It was created by applying an Euclidean distance function (in ArcGIS in the Spatial Analyst toolbox) to the QLUMP 2009 dataset on the selected urban polygons.

Transition_potential_Other_to_DryHorticulture.rst This layer shows the probability for each pixel (50m resolution) of the coastal to transition from the land use class Other to Rain-fed Horticulture. Areas originally of a different land use class are given no values. This was produced by analysing the patterns of land use change between 1999 and 2009 in IRDISI as part of the Land Use Change Modeler where the main bio-physical variables affecting the pattern of change were identified. See details in the model results file. A high accuracy rate of 92% was calculated during testing.

Land Change Modeler MLP Model Results_Rain-fed_horticulture.docx This shows the results of the analysis of change from land use Others to rain-fed horticulture between 1999 and 2009 using four variables: Distance to existing horticulture, Rainfall, Soil type and Slope.

Transition_potential_Other_to_Drysugar.rst This layer shows the probability for each pixel (50m resolution) of the coastal to transition from the land use class Other to Rain-fed Sugar cane. Areas originally of a different land use class are given no values. This was produced by analysing the patterns of land use change between 1999 and 2009 in IRDISI as part of the Land Use Change Modeler where the main bio-physical variables affecting the pattern of change were identified. See details in the model results file. A high accuracy rate of 84% was calculated during testing.

Land Change Modeler MLP Model Results_Rain-fed_sugar.docx This shows the results of the analysis of change from land use Others to rain-fed sugar between 1999 and 2009 using three variables: Rainfall, Soil type and Slope.

Transition_potential_Other_to_Forestry.rst This layer shows the probability for each pixel (50m resolution) of the coastal to transition from the land use class Other to Forestry. Areas originally of a different land use class are given no values. This was produced by analysing the patterns of land use change between 1999 and 2009 in IRDISI as part of the Land Use Change Modeler where the main bio-physical variables affecting the pattern of change were identified. See details in the model results file. A good accuracy rate of 73% was calculated during testing.

Land Change Modeler MLP Model Results_Forestry.docx This shows the results of the analysis of change from land use Others to Forestry between 1999 and 2009 using three variables: Rainfall, Soil type and Proximity to existing forestry.

Transition_potential_Other_to_Urban.rst This layer shows the probability for each pixel (50m resolution) of the coastal to transition from the land use class Other to Urban. Areas originally of a different land use class are given no values. This was produced by analysing the patterns of land use change between 1999 and 2009 in IRDISI as part of the Land Use Change Modeler where the main bio-physical variables affecting the pattern of change were identified. See details in the model results file. A good accuracy rate of 75% was calculated during testing.

Land Change Modeler MLP Model Results_Urban.docx This shows the results of the analysis of change from land use Others to Urban between 1999 and 2009 using two variables: Slope and Proximity to existing urban areas.

SPACE USE INDEX CALCULATIONLek coordinates and associated trend count data were obtained from the 2013 Nevada Sage-grouse Lek Database compiled by the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW, S. Espinosa, 9/10/2013). We queried the database for leks with a ‘LEKSTATUS’ field classified as ‘Active’ or ‘Pending’. Active leks comprised leks with breeding males observed within the last 5 years. Pending leks comprised leks without consistent breeding activity during the prior 3 – 5 surveys or had not been surveyed during the past 5 years; these leks typically trended towards ‘inactive’. A sage-grouse management area (SGMA) was calculated by buffering Population Management Units developed by NDOW by 10km. This included leks from the Buffalo-Skedaddle PMU that straddles the northeastern California – Nevada border, but excluded leks for the Bi-State Distinct Population Segment. The 5-year average (2009 – 2013) for the number of males grouse (or unknown gender if males were not identified) attending each lek was calculated. The final dataset comprised 907 leks. Utilization distributions describing the probability of lek occurrence were calculated using fixed kernel density estimators (Silverman 1986) with bandwidths estimated from likelihood based cross-validation (CVh) (Horne and Garton 2006). UDs were weighted by the 5-year average (2009 – 2013) for the number of males grouse (or unknown gender if males were not identified) attending leks. UDs and bandwidths were calculated using Geospatial Modelling Environment (Beyer 2012) and the ‘ks’ package (Duong 2012) in Program R. Grid cell size was 30m. The resulting raster was clipped by the SGMA polygon, and values were re-scaled between zero and one by dividing by the maximum pixel value.The non-linear effect of distance to lek on the probability of grouse spatial use was estimated using the inverse of the utilization distribution curves described by Coates et al. (2013), where essentially the highest probability of grouse spatial use occurs near leks and then declines precipitously as a non-linear function. Euclidean distance was first calculated in ArcGIS, reclassified into 30-m distance bins (ranging from 0 – 30,000m), and bins reclassified according to the non-linear curve in Coates et al. (2013). The resulting raster was clipped by the SGMA polygon, and re-scaled between zero and one by dividing by the maximum pixel value.A Spatial Use Index (SUI) was calculated taking the average of the lek utilization distribution and non-linear distance to lek rasters in ArcGIS, and re-scaled between zero and 1 by dividing by the maximum pixel value.The volume of the SUI at cumulative 5% increments (isopleths) was extracted in Geospatial Modelling Environment (Beyer 2012) with the command ‘isopleth’. Interior polygons (i.e., donuts’ > 1.2 km2) representing no probability of use within a larger polygon of use were erased from each isopleth. The relationship between percent land area within each isopleth and isopleth volume (VanderWal and Rodgers 2012) indicated statistically concentrated use at the 70% isopleth. The 85% isopleth, which provided greater spatial connectivity and consistency with previously used agency standards (e.g., Doherty et al. 2010), was ultimately recommended by the Sagebrush Ecosystem Technical Team. The 85% SUI isopleth was clipped by the SGMA clipped by the Nevada state boundary, which only included habitat within the state of Nevada.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)REFERENCES Beyer HL. 2012. Geospatial Modelling Environment (Version 0.7.2.0). http://www.spatialecology.com/gmeCoates PS, Casazza ML, Blomberg EJ, Gardner SC, Espinosa SP, Yee JL, Wiechman L, Halstead BJ. 2013. “Evaluating greater sage-grouse seasonal space use relative to leks: Implications for surface use designations in sagebrush ecosystems.” The Journal of Wildlife Management 77: 1598-1609.Doherty KE, Tack JD, Evans JS, Naugle DE. 2010. Mapping breeding densities of greater sage-grouse: A tool for range-wide conservation planning. Bureau of Land Management. Report Number: L10PG00911. Accessed at: http://www.conservationgateway.org/ConservationByGeography/NorthAmerica/Pages/sagegrouse.aspx# Duong T. 2012. ks: Kernel smoothing. R package version 1.8.10. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ksHorne JS, Garton EO. 2006. “Likelihood cross-validation versus least squares cross-validation for choosing the smoothing parameter in kernel home-range analysis.” Journal of Wildlife Management 70: 641-648.Silverman BW. 1986. Density estimation for statistics and data analysis. Chapman & Hall, London, United Kingdom.Vander Wal E, Rodgers AR. 2012. “An individual-based quantitative approach for delineating core areas of animal space use.” Ecological Modelling 224: 48-53.NOTE: This file does not include habitat areas for the Bi-State management area.

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

The nine-banded Armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) is the only species of Armadillo in the United States and alters ecosystems by excavating extensive burrows used by many other wildlife species. Relatively little is known about its habitat use or population densities, particularly in developed areas, which may be key to facilitating its range expansion. We evaluated Armadillo occupancy and density in relation to anthropogenic and landcover variables in the Ozark Mountains of Arkansas along an urban to rural gradient. Armadillo detection probability was best predicted by temperature (positively) and precipitation (negatively). Contrary to expectations, occupancy probability of Armadillos was best predicted by slope (negatively) and elevation (positively) rather than any landcover or anthropogenic variables. Armadillo density varied considerably between sites (ranging from a mean of 4.88 – 46.20 Armadillos per km2) but was not associated with any environmental or anthropogenic variables. Methods Site Selection Our study took place in Northwest Arkansas, USA, in the greater Fayetteville metropolitan area. We deployed trail cameras (Spypoint Force Dark (Spypoint Inc, Victoriaville, Quebec, Canada) and Browning Strikeforce XD cameras (Browning, Morgan, Utah, USA) over the course of two winter seasons, December 2020-March 2021, and November 2021-March 2022. We sampled 10 study sites in year one, and 12 study sites in year two. All study sites were located in the Ozark Mountains ecoregion in Northwest Arkansas. Sites were all Oak Hickory dominated hardwood forests at similar elevation (213.6 – 541 m). Devils Eyebrow and ONSC are public natural areas managed by the Arkansas Natural heritage Commission (ANHC). Devil’s Den and Hobbs are managed by the Arkansas state park system. Markham Woods (Markham), Ninestone Land Trust (Ninestone) and Forbes, are all privately owned, though Markham has a publicly accessible trail system throughout the property. Lake Sequoyah, Mt. Sequoyah Woods, Kessler Mountain, Lake Fayetteville, and Millsaps Mountain are all city parks and managed by the city of Fayetteville. Lastly, both Weddington and White Rock are natural areas within Ozark National Forest and managed by the U.S. Forest Service. We sampled 5 sites in both years of the study including Devils Eyebrow, Markham Hill, Sequoyah Woods, Ozark Natural Science Center (ONSC), and Kessler Mountain. We chose our study sites to represent a gradient of human development, based primarily on Anthropogenic noise values (Buxton et al. 2017, Mennitt and Fristrup 2016). We chose open spaces that were large enough to accommodate camera trap research, as well as representing an array of anthropogenic noise values. Since anthropogenic noise is able to permeate into natural areas within the urban interface, introducing human disturbance that may not be detected by other layers such as impervious surface and housing unit density (Buxton et al. 2017), we used dB values for each site as an indicator of the level of urbanization. Camera Placement We sampled ten study sites in the first winter of the study. At each of the 10 study sites, we deployed anywhere between 5 and 15 cameras. Larger study areas received more cameras than smaller sites because all cameras were deployed a minimum of 150m between one another. We avoided placing cameras on roads, trails, and water sources to artificially bias wildlife detections. We also avoided placing cameras within 15m of trails to avoid detecting humans. At each of the 12 study areas we surveyed in the second winter season, we deployed 12 to 30 cameras. At each study site, we used ArcGIS Pro (Esri Inc, Redlands, CA) to delineate the trail systems and then created a 150m buffer on each side of the trail. We then created random points within these buffered areas to decide where to deploy cameras. Each random point had to occur within the buffered areas and be a minimum of 150m from the next nearest camera point, thus the number of cameras at each site varied based upon site size. We placed all cameras within 50m of the random points to ensure that cameras were deployed on safe topography and with a clear field of view, though cameras were not set in locations that would have increased animal detections (game trails, water sources, burrows etc.). Cameras were rotated between sites after 5 or 10 week intervals to allow us to maximize camera locations with a limited number of trail cameras available to us. Sites with more than 25 cameras were active for 5 consecutive weeks while sites with fewer than 25 cameras were active for 10 consecutive weeks. We placed all cameras on trees or tripods 50cm above ground and at least 15m from trails and roads. We set cameras to take a burst of three photos when triggered. We used Timelapse 2.0 software (Greenberg et al. 2019) to extract metadata (date and time) associated with all animal detections. We manually identified all species occurring in photographs and counted the number of individuals present. Because density estimation requires the calculation of detection rates (number of Armadillo detections divided by the total sampling period), we wanted to reduce double counting individuals. Therefore, we grouped photographs of Armadillos into “episodes” of 5 minutes in length to reduce double counting individuals that repeatedly triggered cameras (DeGregorio et al. 2021, Meek et al. 2014). A 5 min threshold is relatively conservative with evidence that even 1-minute episodes adequately reduces double counting (Meek et al. 2014). Landcover Covariates To evaluate occupancy and density of Armadillos based on environmental and anthropogenic variables, we used ArcGIS Pro to extract variables from 500m buffers placed around each camera (Table 2). This spatial scale has been shown to hold biological meaning for Armadillos and similarly sized species (DeGregorio et al. 2021, Fidino et al. 2016, Gallo et al. 2017, Magle et al. 2016). At each camera, we extracted elevation, slope, and aspect from the base ArcGIS Pro map. We extracted maximum housing unit density (HUD) using the SILVIS housing layer (Radeloff et al. 2018, Table 2). We extracted anthropogenic noise from the layer created by Mennitt and Fristrup (2016, Buxton et al. 2017, Table 2) and used the “L50” anthropogenic sound level estimate, which was calculated by taking the difference between predicted environmental noise and the calculated noise level. Therefore, we assume that higher levels of L50 sound corresponded to higher human presence and activity (i.e. voices, vehicles, and other sources of anthropogenic noise; Mennitt and Fristrup 2016). We derived the area of developed open landcover, forest area, and distance to forest edge from the 2019 National Land Cover Database (NLDC, Dewitz 2021, Table 2). Developed open landcover refers to open spaces with less than 20% impervious surface such as residential lawns, cemeteries, golf courses, and parks and has been shown to be important for medium-sized mammals (Gallo et al. 2017, Poessel et al. 2012). Forest area was calculated by combing all forest types within the NLCD layer (deciduous forest, mixed forest, coniferous forest), and summarizing the total area (km2) within the 500m buffer. Distance to forest edge was derived by creating a 30m buffer on each side of all forest boundaries and calculating the distance from each camera to the nearest forest edge. We calculated distance to water by combining the waterbody and flowline features in the National Hydrogeography Dataset (U.S. Geological Survey) for the state of Arkansas to capture both permanent and ephemeral water sources that may be important to wildlife. We measured the distance to water and distance to forest edge using the geoprocessing tool “near” in ArcGIS Pro which calculates the Euclidean distance between a point and the nearest feature. We extracted Average Daily Traffic (ADT) from the Arkansas Department of Transportation database (Arkansas GIS Office). The maximum value for ADT was calculated using the Summarize Within tool in ArcGIS Pro. We tested for correlation between all covariates using a Spearman correlation matrix and removed any variable with correlation greater than 0.6. Pairwise comparisons between distance to roads and HUD and between distance to forest edge and forest area were both correlated above 0.6; therefore, we dropped distance to roads and distance to forest edge from analyses as we predicted that HUD and forest area would have larger biological impacts on our focal species (Kretser et al. 2008). Occupancy Analysis In order to better understand habitat associations while accounting for imperfect detection of Armadillos, we used occupancy modeling (Mackenzie et al. 2002). We used a single-species, single-season occupancy model (Mackenzie et al. 2002) even though we had two years of survey data at 5 of the study sites. We chose to do this rather than using a multi-season dynamic occupancy model because most sites were not sampled during both years of the study. Even for sites that were sampled in both years, cameras were not placed in the same locations each year. We therefore combined all sampling into one single-season model and created unique site by year combinations as our sampling locations and we used year as a covariate for analysis to explore changes in occupancy associated with the year of study. For each sampling location, we created a detection history with 7 day sampling periods, allowing presence/absence data to be recorded at each site for each week of the study. This allowed for 16 survey periods between 01 December 2020, and 11 March 2021 and 22 survey periods between 01 November 2021 and 24 March 2022. We treated each camera as a unique survey site, resulting in a total of 352 sites. Because not all cameras were deployed at the same time and for the same length of time, we used a staggered entry approach. We used a multi-stage fitting approach in which we

To provide an alternative to the native NHD measuring system of percentage of distance along reach length with one that enhances the ability to examine distance relationships along entire stream courses.

Notes: As of June 2020 this dataset has been static for several years. Recent versions of NHD High Res may be more detailed than this dataset for some areas, while this dataset may still be more detailed than NHD High Res in other areas. This dataset is considered authoritative as used by CDFW for particular tracking purposes but may not be current or comprehensive for all streams in the state.National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) high resolution NHDFlowline features for California were originally dissolved on common GNIS_ID or StreamLevel* attributes and routed from mouth to headwater in meters. The results are measured polyline features representing entire streams. Routes on these streams are measured upstream, i.e., the measure at the mouth of a stream is zero and at the upstream end the measure matches the total length of the stream feature. Using GIS tools, a user of this dataset can retrieve the distance in meters upstream from the mouth at any point along a stream feature.** CA_Streams_v3 Update Notes: This version includes over 200 stream modifications and additions resulting from requests for updating from CDFW staff and others***. New locator fields from the USGS Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) have been added for v3 to enhance user's ability to search for or extract subsets of California Streams by hydrologic area. *See the Source Citation section of this metadata for further information on NHD, WBD, NHDFlowline, GNIS_ID and StreamLevel. **See the Data Quality section of this metadata for further explanation of stream feature development. ***Some current NHD data has not yet been included in CA_Streams. The effort to synchronize CA_Streams with NHD is ongoing.

Predator-prey interactions can be profoundly influenced by vegetation conditions, particularly when predator and prey prefer different habitats. Although such interactions have proven challenging to study for small and cryptic predators, recent methodological advances substantially improve opportunities for understanding how vegetation influences prey acquisition and strengthen conservation planning for this group. The California Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis occidentalis) is well-known as an old-forest species of conservation concern, but whose primary prey in many regions – woodrats (Neotoma spp.) – occurs in a broad range of vegetation conditions. Here, we used high-resolution GPS tracking coupled with nest video monitoring to test the hypothesis that prey capture rates vary as a function of vegetation structure and heterogeneity, with emergent, reproductive consequences for Spotted Owls in Southern California. Foraging owls were more successful capturing prey, including woodrats, in taller multilayered forests, in areas with higher heterogeneity in vegetation types, and near forest-chaparral edges. Consistent with these findings, Spotted Owls delivered prey items more frequently to nests in territories with greater heterogeneity in vegetation types and delivered prey biomass at a higher rate in territories with more forest-chaparral edge. Spotted Owls had higher reproductive success in territories with higher mean canopy cover, taller trees, and more shrubby vegetation. Collectively, our results provide additional and compelling evidence that a mosaic of large tree forests with complex canopy and shrubby vegetation increases access to prey with potential reproductive benefits to Spotted Owls in landscapes where woodrats are a primary prey item. We suggest that forest management activities that enhance forest structure and vegetation heterogeneity could help curb declining Spotted Owl populations while promoting resilient ecosystems in some regions. Methods See README DOCUMENT Naming conventions *RSF or prey refers to prey capture analysis *delivery in a file name refers to delivery rate analysis *repro in a filename means that file is for the delivery rate analysis

Setup *files with vegetation data should work with minimal alteration(will need to specify working directory) with associated R code for each analysis *Shapefiles were made in ArcGIS pro but they can be opened with any GIS software such as QGIS.

Locational data files

NOTE LOCATIONAL DATA IS SHIFTED AND ROTATED FROM THE ORIGINAL -due to the sensitive nature of this species. The locational_data includes: * All_2021_owls_shifted * Point file showing all GPS tag locations for prey capture analysis * Attributes include: * TERRITORY ID: Numerical identifier for each bird * Year: year GPS tag was recorded * Month: month GPS tag was recorded * Day: Day GPS tag was recorded * Hour: Hour GPS tag was recorded * Minute: minute GPS tag was recorded * All_linked_polygons_shifted * Polygon file showing capture polygons for prey capture analysis * Attributes include * Territory ID: numerical identifier for each bird * Polygon id: numerical identifier for each capture polygon for each bird * Shape area: area of each polygon * SBNF_camera_nests_shifted * Point file showing spotted owl nests for prey capture analysis * Attributes include * Territory id: numerical identifier for each bird * C95_KDE_2021_socal_shifted * Polygon file of owls 95% kernel density estimate for prey delivery rate analysis * Attributes include * Id: numerical identifier for each territory(bird) * Area: area of each polygon * San_bernardino_territory_centers * Point file showing Territory centers for historical SBNF territories – shifted for repro success analysis * Attributes include * Repro Territory id: unique identifier for each territory in broader set of territories

Besides the sifted locational data we have included - For the Resource selection function vegetation data, for the delivery analysis we have included an overview of prey deliveries by territory and vegetation data used, and for the reproductive analysis we have again included vegetation data as well as an overview of reproductive success. these are labled as follows:

Files for the prey capture analysis

Socal_RSF_data.txt

*description: Text file with vegetation data paired with capture locations both buffered polygons used in prey capture analysis and the unbuffered ones which were not used.(Pair with Socal_rsf_code R script) *format: .txt *Dimensions: 2641 X 35

*Variables: *ORIG_fid: completely unique identifier for each row *unique_id: unique identifier for each capture polygon(shared between a buffered capture location and its unbuffered pair) *territory_id: unique numerical idenifier of territory *Polygon_id: within territory unique prey capture polygon id *buff: bianary buffered or unbuffered (1=buffered, 0=unbuffered) *used: bianary used=1 available=0 *prey_type: prey species associated with polygon unkn:unknown, flsq:flying squirel, wora:woodrat, umou:mouse, pogo:pocketgopher, grsq: grey squirel, ubrd: unknown bird, umol:unknown mole, uvol, unknown vole. *area_sqm: area of polygon in square meters *CanCov_2020_buff: average canopy cover in polygon *CanHeight_2020_buff: average canopy height in polygon *Canlayer_2020_buff: average number of canopy layers in polygon *Understory_density_2020_buff: average brushy vegetation density in polygon *pix_COUNT: count of pixels in polygon (not needed for analysis) *p_chaparral: percent of polygon comprised of chaparral habitat
*p_conifer: percent of polygon comprised of conifer habitat *p_hardwood: percent of polygon comprised of hardwood habitat *p_other: percent of polygon comprised of other habitat types *Calveg_cap_CHt_gt10_CC_30to70_intersect_buff: percent of polygon comprised of trees taller than 10m with 30-70percent canopy cover (used to check data) *Calveg_cap_CHt_gt10_CCgt70_intersect_buff: percent of polygon comprised of trees taller than 10m with greater than 70percent canopy cover (used to check data) *Calveg_cap_CHt_lt10_intersect_buff:percent of polygon comprised of trees less than 10m (used to check data)
*p_sm_conifer: percent of polygon comprised of conifer trees less than 10m (used to calculate diversity)
*p_lrg_conifer_sc: percent of polygon comprised of conifer forests >10m tall with sparse canopy(used to calculate diversity) *p_large_conifer_dc: percent of polygon comprised of conifer forests greater than 10m tall with dense canopy (used to calculate diversity) *p_sm_hard: percent of polygon comprised of hardwood trees less than 10m (used to calculate diversity) *p_lrg_hard_sc: percent of polygon comprised of hardwood forests greater than 10m with sparse canopy(used to calculate diversity)
*p_lrg_hard_dc: percent of polygon comprised of hardwood forests greater than 10m dense canopy (used to calculate diversity) *p_forests_gt10_verysparse_CC: percent of polygon comprised of trees less than 10m with very sparse canopies (used to calculate diversity) *primary_edge: total distance in meters of primary edge in a polygon
*normalized_by_area_primary_edge: total distance in m of primary edge in a polygon divided by the area of the polygon
*secondary_edge: total distance in meters of secondary edge in a polygon *normalized_by_area_secondary_edge:total distance in m of secondary edge in a polygon divided by the area of the polygon *coarse_diversity: shannon diversity in each polygon (see methods below) *fine_diversity: shannon diversity in each polygon (see methods below) *nest_distance: distance from polygon center to nest for each polygon in meters

For the Delivery analysis

note: For information on determining average prey biomass see methods as well as zulla et al 2022 for flying squirels and woodrat masses Zulla CJ, Jones GM, Kramer HA, Keane JJ, Roberts KN, Dotters BP, Sawyer SC, Whitmore SA, Berigan WJ, Kelly KG, Gutiérrez RJ, Peery MZ. Forest heterogeneity outweighs movement costs by enhancing hunting success and fitness in spotted owls. doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1370884/v1. PPR:PPR470028.

prey_deliveries_byterritory.csv *Description: overview file of prey delivered to each nest *format: .csv *dimensions:332 x 8

*Variables: *SITE: Unique numerical identifier for each territory *DATE: date prey was delivered (in UTC) *CAMERA TIME: time in UTC prey was delivered *VIDEO TIME: time on video prey was delivered - unrelated to real time just original file
*PREY ITEM: prey species delivered to nest unkn:unknown, uncr: unknown if delivery(removed from eventual analysis due to

The Riverside Place Profile Story Map is a snapshot of Riverside and its community and includes a range of statistics, maps and graphs. Full details can be found here.Reference can also be made to the Local Living Tool which shows amenities, facilities and services deemed appropriate to meet the majority of residents daily needs within a reasonable distance of their home Stirling Council - Local Living Tool (arcgis.com).

This feature layer was developed by the Central Statistics Office and represents the percentage of Census 2016 population living in settlements of 20,000 persons or more by sex, age and disability who live within 500 metres of a public transport stop.The methodology for this indicator is as follows: The coordinates of all public transport stops (Irish Rail, Luas, Dublin Bus and Bus Eireann) were downloaded from the Transport for Ireland website, link to data. Using the road network from the Tailte Éireann National Map and the ArcGIS Network Analyst tool the shortest distance path was calculated for each dwelling enumerated in the 2016 census to the nearest public transport stop. The resulting output was merged with the main Census of Population 2016 dataset to identify all persons who resided within 500 metres proximity of their nearest public transport stop and to get the relevant breakdowns of the population.Only population within large settlements (e.g. 20,000 or more) were in scope as the metadata for 11.2.1 makes reference to persons having access to public transport facilities with frequent services. The data published for this indicator is based upon the assumption that large settlements would have a greater likelihood of pubic transport services operating on a regular basis during peak times each day.

The site suitability criteria included in the techno-economic land use screens are listed below. As this list is an update to previous cycles, tribal lands, prime farmland, and flood zones are not included as they are not technically infeasible for development. The techno-economic site suitability exclusion thresholds are presented in table 1. Distances indicate the minimum distance from each feature for commercial scale wind developmentAttributes: Steeply sloped areas: change in vertical elevation compared to horizontal distancePopulation density: the number of people living in a 1 km2 area Urban areas: defined by the U.S. Census. Water bodies: defined by the U.S. National Atlas Water Feature Areas, available from Argonne National Lab Energy Zone Mapping Tool Railways: a comprehensive database of North America's railway system from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), available from Argonne National Lab Energy Zone Mapping Tool Major highways: available from ESRI Living Atlas Airports: The Airports dataset including other aviation facilities as of July 13, 2018 is part of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)/Bureau of Transportation Statistics's (BTS's) National Transportation Atlas Database (NTAD). The Airports database is a geographic point database of aircraft landing facilities in the United States and U.S. Territories. Attribute data is provided on the physical and operational characteristics of the landing facility, current usage including enplanements and aircraft operations, congestion levels and usage categories. This geospatial data is derived from the FAA's National Airspace System Resource Aeronautical Data Product. Available from Argonne National Lab Energy Zone Mapping Tool

Spatial predictions of the fractions of mud, sand and gravel as continuous response variables for the north-west European continental shelf. Mud, sand and gravel fractions range from 0-1 (i.e. 0-100%). These fractions were generated from two additive log-ratios (ALR), ALRs and ALRm which are independent, unconstrained response variables. These raw predictions as rasters are also included presented in the attached dataset. Predicted fractions have been combined to predict the likely sediment classification based on the EUNIS level 3 sediment classification for broadscale habitats, Folk 5, Folk 7, Folk 11 and Folk 15 classification schemes. These are available as raster tif files with an ArcGIS layer file indicating the appropriate class for each raster value. For all predictions an accompanying map of the spatial distribution of error/accuracy is also included as a separate raster. For the three components of the sediment fraction a smoothed Root-Mean-Squared-Error layer is available. For the classification maps a smoothed local accuracy map is available. Spatial predictions of mud, sand and gravel were generated for the north-west European continental shelf. Based on these fractions sediment classification maps were also generated for the study site. To support the interpretation of these layers maps of the spatial distribution of error/accuracy were also generated. In short, analysis combined the eight continuous predictive layers (Bathymetry, Bathymetric position index at a 50-pixel radii, Bathymetric position index at a 434-pixel radii, Distance from coast, Current speed at the seabed, Wave peak orbital velocity at the seabed, and suspended inorganic particulate matter for summer and winter as two separate variables) with sediment observation data in a statistical regression model to make spatial predictions of the fractions of mud, sand and gravel. Spatial predictions were generated based on two additive log-ratios that could then be back transformed to produce spatial predictions for each fraction. From these spatial predictions any classification scheme based on the percentages of mud, sand and gravel can be applied. Included here are the five classification shemes generated from these maps. The maps of accuracy were also generated to support interpretation. For the maps of the fractions of mud, sand and gravel map error was calculated based on the Root-Mean-Squared-Error of the observed vs predicted fractions from the test samples. A smoothed surface of local RMSE was then generated using the Inverse Distance Weighted (IDW) technique in ArcGIS. Each pixels’ RMSE was determined based on the closest 50 points (up to a maximum distance of 200 km). A weighting power function was applied in the IDW tool (set at 0.3) so nearer points contributed more to the pixel than distant points. For the classified maps spatial accuracy was calculated using a locally constrained confusion matrix. The IDW technique was applied to calculate a local thematic accuracy value. As above, this was applied based on the closest 50 points (maximum distance of 200 km) with a weighting power function of 0.3.

The Thornhill Place Profile Story Map is a snapshot of Thornhill and its community and includes a range of statistics, maps and graphs. Full details can be found here.Reference can also be made to the Local Living Tool which shows amenities, facilities and services deemed appropriate to meet the majority of residents daily needs within a reasonable distance of their home Stirling Council - Local Living Tool (arcgis.com).

InstructionsDownload the ArcGIS Pro Package here: Amazon HQ 4 Site Selection Analysis. Open the ArcGIS Prop Package. Expand the project toolbox within the Catalog window. Locate the model, right click, and choose Open. You can use the sample data provided or provide your own inputs.If you choose to use your own data, you will need to set the following required parameters:Scratch Workspace: This is a geodatabase that will store all temporary data created when the model runs.Final Workspace: This is a geodatabase that will store all final output data.Airports: Point feature class of Airports.Airport Buffer Distance: How close to airports do you want your selections to be?Highways: Line feature class of highways.Highway Buffer Distance: How close to highways do you want your selections to be?Stops: Point feature class of bus stops.Mass Transit Buffer Distance: How close to bus stops do you want your selections to be?Internet Corridors: Internet Corridors feature class.Areas with Internet: Polygon feature class of Internet areas.Cell Phone Coverage Areas: Polygon feature class of Cell Phone Coverage Areas.Land Use Parcels: Parcel and/or Land Use polygon feature class.Acreage Calculation Expression: The expression used to convert the shape area to acres or the measurement of your choosing.Parcel Size Selection Expression (Optional): This expressions narrows down your parcels to include only those that match your desired parcel size.Final Parcel Selection: How do you want to name your final parcel selection?