Minnesota's original public land survey plat maps were created between 1848 and 1907 during the first government land survey of the state by the U.S. Surveyor General's Office. This collection of more than 3,600 maps includes later General Land Office (GLO) and Bureau of Land Management maps up through 2001. Scanned images of the maps are available in several digital formats and most have been georeferenced.

The survey plat maps, and the accompanying survey field notes, serve as the fundamental legal records for real estate in Minnesota; all property titles and descriptions stem from them. They also are an essential resource for surveyors and provide a record of the state's physical geography prior to European settlement. Finally, they testify to many years of hard work by the surveying community, often under very challenging conditions.

The deteriorating physical condition of the older maps (drawn on paper, linen, and other similar materials) and the need to provide wider public access to the maps, made handling the original records increasingly impractical. To meet this challenge, the Office of the Secretary of State (SOS), the State Archives of the Minnesota Historical Society (MHS), the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), MnGeo and the Minnesota Association of County Surveyors collaborated in a digitization project which produced high quality (800 dpi), 24-bit color images of the maps in standard TIFF, JPEG and PDF formats - nearly 1.5 terabytes of data. Funding was provided by MnDOT.

In 2010-11, most of the JPEG plat map images were georeferenced. The intent was to locate the plat images to coincide with statewide geographic data without appreciably altering (warping) the image. This increases the value of the images in mapping software where they can be used as a background layer.

The United States Public Land Survey (PLS) divided land into one square mile units, termed sections. Surveyors used trees to locate section corners and other locations of interest (witness trees). As a result, a systematic ecological dataset was produced with regular sampling over a large region of the United States, beginning in Ohio in 1786 and continuing westward.
We digitized and georeferenced archival hand drawn maps of these witness trees for 27 counties in Ohio. This dataset consists of a GIS point shapefile with 11,925 points located at section corners, recording 26,028 trees (up to four trees could be recorded at each corner). We retain species names given on each archival map key, resulting in 70 unique species common names. PLS records were obtained from hand-drawn archival maps of original witness trees produced by researchers at The Ohio State University in the 1960’s. Scans of these maps are archived as “The Edgar Nelson Transeau Ohio Vegetation Survey” at The Ohio State University: http://hdl.handle.net/1811/64106.
The 27 counties are: Adams, Allen, Auglaize, Belmont, Brown, Darke, Defiance, Gallia, Guernsey, Hancock, Lawrence, Lucas, Mercer, Miami, Monroe, Montgomery, Morgan, Noble, Ottawa, Paulding, Pike, Putnam, Scioto, Seneca, Shelby, Williams, Wyandot. Coordinate Reference System: North American Datum 1983 (NAD83). This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under grants #DEB-1241874, 1241868, 1241870, 1241851, 1241891, 1241846, 1241856, 1241930.

This dataset includes high quality (800 Dots Per Inch - DPI), 24 bit color images of Minnesota's original Public Land Survey (PLS) plats created during the first government land survey of the state from 1848 to 1907. Currently housed at the Office of the Secretary of State, these plats were created by the U.S. Surveyor General's Office. This collection of more than 3,600 maps also includes later General Land Office (GLO) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) maps - up to the year 2001.

Minnesota's survey plat maps serve as the fundamental legal records for real estate in the state; all property titles and descriptions stem from them. They also serve as an essential resource for surveyors and as an analytical tool for the state's physical geography prior to European settlement. Finally, they serve as a testimony to years and years of hard work by the surveying community, often under challenging conditions.

In recent years the deteriorating physical condition of the older maps and the needs of technologically more sophisticated researchers, who require access to the maps, have made handling the original paper records increasingly less practical. To meet this challenge, the Office of the Secretary of State, the State Archives of the Minnesota Historical Society, the Minnesota Department of Transportation, MnGeo (formerly the Land Management Information Center - LMIC) and the Minnesota Association of County Surveyors collaborated in a digitization project which produced images of the maps in standard TIFF, JPEG and PDF formats - nearly 1.5 terabytes worth of data. Funding was provided by the Minnesota Department of Transportation.

The Public Land Survey System (PLSS) forms the foundation of Cook County's cadastral system for identifying and locating land records. Tax parcels are identified using township and section notation, in a modified format. The PLSS serves as a way for users to navigate the parcel geodatabase. This PLSS feature data set is intended to correspond to tax pages in the Cook County Assessor's Tax Map book (current as of tax year 2000 for 66% of the County and as of tax year 2001 for the remaining 33% of the County), and should not be used for measurement or surveyor purposes. In addition, the parcel attributes PINA (area/township) and PINSA (subarea/section) do not necessarily correspond to the PLSS township and section polygon in which a given parcel resides. The PLSS data is modeled as a single composite network coverage that encompasses townships (area), sections (subarea), quarter sections, and half quarter section. Tax map pages, which typically correspond to half quarter sections (in an east-west split), are modeled as a region subclass in the LANDFABRIC layer. If an indigenous people's reserve was present on the tax map, it was digitized to create subpolygons of the half-quarter section, and those polygons were attributed with the name of the reserve. Within this PLSS data set, a half-quarter section is the smallest polygon unit, except in cases where an Indigenous People's Reserve line is present. The cadastral data for Cook County have previously not been digital nor automated. This project is the initial automation for this information. This database was designed to represent a continuous, non-overlapping spatial database accounting for all land area in Cook County.

This Quarter Section feature class depicts PLSS Second Divisions . PLSS townships are subdivided in a spatial hierarchy of first, second, and third division. These divisions are typically aliquot parts ranging in size from 640 acres to 160 to 40 acres, and subsequently all the way down to 2.5 acres. The data in this feature class was translated from the PLSSSecondDiv feature class in the original production data model, which defined the second division for a specific parcel of land. MetadataThis record was taken from the USDA Enterprise Data Inventory that feeds into the https://data.gov catalog. Data for this record includes the following resources: ISO-19139 metadata ArcGIS Hub Dataset ArcGIS GeoService OGC WMS CSV Shapefile GeoJSON KML For complete information, please visit https://data.gov.

USGS Structures from The National Map (TNM) consists of data to include the name, function, location, and other core information and characteristics of selected manmade facilities across all US states and territories. The types of structures collected are largely determined by the needs of disaster planning and emergency response, and homeland security organizations. Structures currently included are: School, School:Elementary, School:Middle, School:High, College/University, Technical/Trade School, Ambulance Service, Fire Station/EMS Station, Law Enforcement, Prison/Correctional Facility, Post Office, Hospital/Medical Center, Cabin, Campground, Cemetery, Historic Site/Point of Interest, Picnic Area, Trailhead, Vistor/Information Center, US Capitol, State Capitol, US Supreme Court, State Supreme Court, Court House, Headquarters, Ranger Station, White House, and City/Town Hall. Structures data are designed to be used in general mapping and in the analysis of structure related activities using geographic information system technology. Included is a feature class of preliminary building polygons provided by FEMA, USA Structures. The National Map structures data is commonly combined with other data themes, such as boundaries, elevation, hydrography, and transportation, to produce general reference base maps. The National Map viewer allows free downloads of public domain structures data in either Esri File Geodatabase or Shapefile formats. For additional information on the structures data model, go to https://www.usgs.gov/ngp-standards-and-specifications/national-map-structures-content.

An area defined by the Public Lands Survey System Grid. Normally, 36 sections make up a township. Metadata

Tags soil survey, soils, Soil Survey Geographic, SSURGO Summary SSURGO depicts information about the kinds and distribution of soils on the landscape. The soil map and data used in the SSURGO product were prepared by soil scientists as part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Description This data set is a digital soil survey and generally is the most detailed level of soil geographic data developed by the National Cooperative Soil Survey. The information was prepared by digitizing maps, by compiling information onto a planimetric correct base and digitizing, or by revising digitized maps using remotely sensed and other information. This data set consists of georeferenced digital map data and computerized attribute data. The map data are in a 3.75 minute quadrangle format and include a detailed, field verified inventory of soils and nonsoil areas that normally occur in a repeatable pattern on the landscape and that can be cartographically shown at the scale mapped. A special soil features layer (point and line features) is optional. This layer displays the location of features too small to delineate at the mapping scale, but they are large enough and contrasting enough to significantly influence use and management. The soil map units are linked to attributes in the National Soil Information System relational database, which gives the proportionate extent of the component soils and their properties. Credits There are no credits for this item. Use limitations The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, should be acknowledged as the data source in products derived from these data. This data set is not designed for use as a primary regulatory tool in permitting or citing decisions, but may be used as a reference source. This is public information and may be interpreted by organizations, agencies, units of government, or others based on needs; however, they are responsible for the appropriate application. Federal, State, or local regulatory bodies are not to reassign to the Natural Resources Conservation Service any authority for the decisions that they make. The Natural Resources Conservation Service will not perform any evaluations of these maps for purposes related solely to State or local regulatory programs. Photographic or digital enlargement of these maps to scales greater than at which they were originally mapped can cause misinterpretation of the data. If enlarged, maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a larger scale. The depicted soil boundaries, interpretations, and analysis derived from them do not eliminate the need for onsite sampling, testing, and detailed study of specific sites for intensive uses. Thus, these data and their interpretations are intended for planning purposes only. Digital data files are periodically updated. Files are dated, and users are responsible for obtaining the latest version of the data. Extent West -76.713689 East -76.526117 North 39.374398 South 39.194856 Scale Range There is no scale range for this item.

LAND_COVER_2006_USGS_IN is a grid (30-meter cell size) showing 2006 Land Cover data in Indiana. This grid is a subset of the National Land Cover Data (NLCD 2006) data set. There are 15 categories of land use shown in this data set when the associated layer file (LAND_COVER_2006_USGS_IN.LYR) is loaded. The following is excerpted from metadata provided by the USGS for the NLCD 2006: "The National Land Cover Database products are created through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of federal agencies (www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Previously, NLCD consisted of three major data releases based on a 10-year cycle. These include a circa 1992 conterminous U.S. land cover dataset with one thematic layer (NLCD 1992), a circa 2001 50-state/Puerto Rico updated U.S. land cover database (NLCD 2001) with three layers including thematic land cover, percent imperviousness, and percent tree canopy, and a 1992/2001 Land Cover Change Retrofit Product. With these national data layers, there is often a 5-year time lag between the image capture date and product release. In some areas, the land cover can undergo significant change during production time, resulting in products that may be perpetually out of date. To address these issues, this circa 2006 NLCD land cover product (NLCD 2006) was conceived to meet user community needs for more frequent land cover monitoring (moving to a 5-year cycle) and to reduce the production time between image capture and product release. NLCD 2006 is designed to provide the user both updated land cover data and additional information that can be used to identify the pattern, nature, and magnitude of changes occurring between 2001 and 2006 for the conterminous United States at medium spatial resolution. For NLCD 2006, there are 3 primary data products: 1) NLCD 2006 Land Cover map; 2) NLCD 2001/2006 Change Pixels labeled with the 2006 land cover class; and 3) NLCD 2006 Percent Developed Imperviousness. Four additional data products were developed to provide supporting documentation and to provide information for land cover change analysis tasks: 4) NLCD 2001/2006 Percent Developed Imperviousness Change; 5) NLCD 2001/2006 Maximum Potential Change derived from the raw spectral change analysis; 6) NLCD 2001/2006 From-To Change pixels; and 7) NLCD 2006 Path/Row Index vector file showing the footprint of Landsat scene pairs used to derive 2001/2006 spectral change with change pair acquisition dates and scene identification numbers included in the attribute table. In addition to the 2006 data products listed in the paragraph above, two of the original release NLCD 2001 data products have been revised and reissued. Generation of NLCD 2006 data products helped to identify some update issues in the NLCD 2001 land cover and percent developed imperviousness data products. These issues were evaluated and corrected, necessitating a reissue of NLCD 2001 data products (NLCD 2001 Version 2.0) as part of the NLCD 2006 release. A majority of NLCD 2001 updates occur in coastal mapping zones where NLCD 2001 was published prior to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Change Analysis Program (C-CAP) 2001 land cover products. NOAA C-CAP 2001 land cover has now been seamlessly integrated with NLCD 2001 land cover for all coastal zones. NLCD 2001 percent developed imperviousness was also updated as part of this process. As part of the NLCD 2011 project, NLCD 2006 data products have been revised and reissued (2011 Edition) to provide full compatibility with all other NLCD 2011 Edition products. The 2014 amended version corrects for the over-elimination of small areas of the four developed classes. Land cover maps, derivatives and all associated documents are considered "provisional" until a formal accuracy assessment can be conducted. The NLCD 2006 is created on a path/row basis and mosaicked to create a seamless national product. Questions about the NLCD 2006 land cover product can be directed to the NLCD 2006 land cover mapping team at the USGS/EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov."

The National Land Cover Database 2001 land cover layer for The Hawaiian mapping zone was produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of federal agencies (www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). One of the primary goals of the project is to generate a current, consistent, seamless, and accurate National Land cover Database (NLCD) circa 2001 for the United States at medium spatial resolution. This landcover map and all documents pertaining to it are considered "provisional" until a formal accuracy assess ...

Australia's Land Borders is a product within the Foundation Spatial Data Framework (FSDF) suite of datasets. It is endorsed by the ANZLIC - the Spatial Information Council and the Intergovernmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping (ICSM) as a nationally consistent and topologically correct representation of the land borders published by the Australian states and territories.

The purpose of this product is to provide: (i) a building block which enables development of other national datasets; (ii) integration with other geospatial frameworks in support of data analysis; and (iii) visualisation of these borders as cartographic depiction on a map. Although this dataset depicts land borders, it is not nor does it suggests to be a legal definition of these borders. Therefore it cannot and must not be used for those use-cases pertaining to legal context.

This product is constructed by Geoscience Australia (GA), on behalf of the ICSM, from authoritative open data published by the land mapping agencies in their respective Australian state and territory jurisdictions. Construction of a nationally consistent dataset required harmonisation and mediation of data issues at abutting land borders. In order to make informed and consistent determinations, other datasets were used as visual aid in determining which elements of published jurisdictional data to promote into the national product. These datasets include, but are not restricted to: (i) PSMA Australia's commercial products such as the cadastral (property) boundaries (CadLite) and Geocoded National Address File (GNAF); (ii) Esri's World Imagery and Imagery with Labels base maps; and (iii) Geoscience Australia's GEODATA TOPO 250K Series 3. Where practical, Land Borders do not cross cadastral boundaries and are logically consistent with addressing data in GNAF.

It is important to reaffirm that although third-party commercial datasets are used for validation, which is within remit of the licence agreement between PSMA and GA, no commercially licenced data has been promoted into the product. Australian Land Borders are constructed exclusively from published open data originating from state, territory and federal agencies.

This foundation dataset consists of edges (polylines) representing mediated segments of state and/or territory borders, connected at the nodes and terminated at the coastline defined as the Mean High Water Mark (MHWM) tidal boundary. These polylines are attributed to convey information about provenance of the source. It is envisaged that land borders will be topologically interoperable with the future national coastline dataset/s, currently being built through the ICSM coastline capture collaboration program. Topological interoperability will enable closure of land mass polygon, permitting spatial analysis operations such as vector overly, intersect, or raster map algebra. In addition to polylines, the product incorporates a number of well-known survey-monumented corners which have historical and cultural significance associated with the place name.

This foundation dataset is constructed from the best-available data, as published by relevant custodian in state and territory jurisdiction. It should be noted that some custodians - in particular the Northern Territory and New South Wales - have opted out or to rely on data from abutting jurisdiction as an agreed portrayal of their border. Accuracy and precision of land borders as depicted by spatial objects (features) may vary according to custodian specifications, although there is topological coherence across all the objects within this integrated product. The guaranteed minimum nominal scale for all use-cases, applying to complete spatial coverage of this product, is 1:25 000. In some areas the accuracy is much better and maybe approaching cadastre survey specification, however, this is an artefact of data assembly from disparate sources, rather than the product design. As the principle, no data was generalised or spatially degraded in the process of constructing this product.

Some use-cases for this product are: general digital and web map-making applications; a reference dataset to use for cartographic generalisation for a smaller-scale map applications; constraining geometric objects for revision and updates to the Mesh Blocks, the building blocks for the larger regions of the Australian Statistical Geography Standard (ASGS) framework; rapid resolution of cross-border data issues to enable construction and visual display of a common operating picture, etc.

This foundation dataset will be maintained at irregular intervals, for example if a state or territory jurisdiction decides to publish or republish their land borders. If there is a new version of this dataset, past version will be archived and information about the changes will be made available in the change log.

Note: The schema changed in February 2025 - please see below. We will post a roadmap of upcoming changes, but service URLs and schema are now stable. For deployment status of new services beginning in February 2025, see https://gis.data.ca.gov/pages/city-and-county-boundary-data-status. Additional roadmap and status links at the bottom of this metadata.This dataset is regularly updated as the source data from CDTFA is updated, as often as many times a month. If you require unchanging point-in-time data, export a copy for your own use rather than using the service directly in your applications. PurposeCounty boundaries along with third party identifiers used to join in external data. Boundaries are from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA). These boundaries are the best available statewide data source in that CDTFA receives changes in incorporation and boundary lines from the Board of Equalization, who receives them from local jurisdictions for tax purposes. Boundary accuracy is not guaranteed, and though CDTFA works to align boundaries based on historical records and local changes, errors will exist. If you require a legal assessment of boundary location, contact a licensed surveyor.This dataset joins in multiple attributes and identifiers from the US Census Bureau and Board on Geographic Names to facilitate adding additional third party data sources. In addition, we attach attributes of our own to ease and reduce common processing needs and questions. Finally, coastal buffers are separated into separate polygons, leaving the land-based portions of jurisdictions and coastal buffers in adjacent polygons. This feature layer is for public use. Related LayersThis dataset is part of a grouping of many datasets:Cities: Only the city boundaries and attributes, without any unincorporated areasWith Coastal BuffersWithout Coastal BuffersCounties: Full county boundaries and attributes, including all cities within as a single polygonWith Coastal Buffers (this dataset)Without Coastal BuffersCities and Full Counties: A merge of the other two layers, so polygons overlap within city boundaries. Some customers require this behavior, so we provide it as a separate service.With Coastal BuffersWithout Coastal BuffersCity and County AbbreviationsUnincorporated Areas (Coming Soon)Census Designated PlacesCartographic CoastlinePolygonLine source (Coming Soon) Working with Coastal Buffers The dataset you are currently viewing includes the coastal buffers for cities and counties that have them in the source data from CDTFA. In the versions where they are included, they remain as a second polygon on cities or counties that have them, with all the same identifiers, and a value in the COASTAL field indicating if it"s an ocean or a bay buffer. If you wish to have a single polygon per jurisdiction that includes the coastal buffers, you can run a Dissolve on the version that has the coastal buffers on all the fields except OFFSHORE and AREA_SQMI to get a version with the correct identifiers. Point of ContactCalifornia Department of Technology, Office of Digital Services, odsdataservices@state.ca.gov Field and Abbreviation DefinitionsCDTFA_COUNTY: CDTFA county name. For counties, this will be the name of the polygon itself. For cities, it is the name of the county the city polygon is within.CDTFA_COPRI: county number followed by the 3-digit city primary number used in the Board of Equalization"s 6-digit tax rate area numbering system. The boundary data originate with CDTFA's teams managing tax rate information, so this field is preserved and flows into this dataset.CENSUS_GEOID: numeric geographic identifiers from the US Census BureauCENSUS_PLACE_TYPE: City, County, or Town, stripped off the census name for identification purpose.GNIS_PLACE_NAME: Board on Geographic Names authorized nomenclature for area names published in the Geographic Name Information SystemGNIS_ID: The numeric identifier from the Board on Geographic Names that can be used to join these boundaries to other datasets utilizing this identifier.CDT_COUNTY_ABBR: Abbreviations of county names - originally derived from CalTrans Division of Local Assistance and now managed by CDT. Abbreviations are 3 characters.CDT_NAME_SHORT: The name of the jurisdiction (city or county) with the word "City" or "County" stripped off the end. Some changes may come to how we process this value to make it more consistent.AREA_SQMI: The area of the administrative unit (city or county) in square miles, calculated in EPSG 3310 California Teale Albers.OFFSHORE: Indicates if the polygon is a coastal buffer. Null for land polygons. Additional values include "ocean" and "bay".PRIMARY_DOMAIN: Currently empty/null for all records. Placeholder field for official URL of the city or countyCENSUS_POPULATION: Currently null for all records. In the future, it will include the most recent US Census population estimate for the jurisdiction.GlobalID: While all of the layers we provide in this dataset include a GlobalID field with unique values, we do not recommend you make any use of it. The GlobalID field exists to support offline sync, but is not persistent, so data keyed to it will be orphaned at our next update. Use one of the other persistent identifiers, such as GNIS_ID or GEOID instead. Boundary AccuracyCounty boundaries were originally derived from a 1:24,000 accuracy dataset, with improvements made in some places to boundary alignments based on research into historical records and boundary changes as CDTFA learns of them. City boundary data are derived from pre-GIS tax maps, digitized at BOE and CDTFA, with adjustments made directly in GIS for new annexations, detachments, and corrections.Boundary accuracy within the dataset varies. While CDTFA strives to correctly include or exclude parcels from jurisdictions for accurate tax assessment, this dataset does not guarantee that a parcel is placed in the correct jurisdiction. When a parcel is in the correct jurisdiction, this dataset cannot guarantee accurate placement of boundary lines within or between parcels or rights of way. This dataset also provides no information on parcel boundaries. For exact jurisdictional or parcel boundary locations, please consult the county assessor's office and a licensed surveyor. CDTFA's data is used as the best available source because BOE and CDTFA receive information about changes in jurisdictions which otherwise need to be collected independently by an agency or company to compile into usable map boundaries. CDTFA maintains the best available statewide boundary information. CDTFA's source data notes the following about accuracy: City boundary changes and county boundary line adjustments filed with the Board of Equalization per Government Code 54900. This GIS layer contains the boundaries of the unincorporated county and incorporated cities within the state of California. The initial dataset was created in March of 2015 and was based on the State Board of Equalization tax rate area boundaries. As of April 1, 2024, the maintenance of this dataset is provided by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration for the purpose of determining sales and use tax rates. The boundaries are continuously being revised to align with aerial imagery when areas of conflict are discovered between the original boundary provided by the California State Board of Equalization and the boundary made publicly available by local, state, and federal government. Some differences may occur between actual recorded boundaries and the boundaries used for sales and use tax purposes. The boundaries in this map are representations of taxing jurisdictions for the purpose of determining sales and use tax rates and should not be used to determine precise city or county boundary line locations. Boundary ProcessingThese data make a structural change from the source data. While the full boundaries provided by CDTFA include coastal buffers of varying sizes, many users need boundaries to end at the shoreline of the ocean or a bay. As a result, after examining existing city and county boundary layers, these datasets provide a coastline cut generally along the ocean facing coastline. For county boundaries in northern California, the cut runs near the Golden Gate Bridge, while for cities, we cut along the bay shoreline and into the edge of the Delta at the boundaries of Solano, Contra Costa, and Sacramento counties. In the services linked above, the versions that include the coastal buffers contain them as a second (or third) polygon for the city or county, with the value in the COASTAL field set to whether it"s a bay or ocean polygon. These can be processed back into a single polygon by dissolving on all the fields you wish to keep, since the attributes, other than the COASTAL field and geometry attributes (like areas) remain the same between the polygons for this purpose. SliversIn cases where a city or county"s boundary ends near a coastline, our coastline data may cross back and forth many times while roughly paralleling the jurisdiction"s boundary, resulting in many polygon slivers. We post-process the data to remove these slivers using a city/county boundary priority algorithm. That is, when the data run parallel to each other, we discard the coastline cut and keep the CDTFA-provided boundary, even if it extends into the ocean a small amount. This processing supports consistent boundaries for Fort Bragg, Point Arena, San Francisco, Pacifica, Half Moon Bay, and Capitola, in addition to others. More information on this algorithm will be provided soon. Coastline CaveatsSome cities have buffers extending into water bodies that we do not cut at the shoreline. These include South Lake Tahoe and Folsom, which extend into neighboring lakes, and San Diego and surrounding cities that extend into San Diego Bay, which our shoreline encloses. If you have feedback on the exclusion of these items, or others, from the shoreline

The French National Mapping Agency (Institut National de l'Information Géographique et Forestière - IGN) is responsible for producing and maintaining the spatial data sets for all of France. At the same time, they must satisfy the needs of different stakeholders who are responsible for decisions at multiple levels from local to national. IGN produces many different maps including detailed road networks and land cover/land use maps over time. The information contained in these maps is crucial for many of the decisions made about urban planning, resource management and landscape restoration as well as other environmental issues in France. Recently, IGN has started the process of creating a high-resolution land use land cover (LULC) maps, aimed at developing smart and accurate monitoring services of LULC over time. To help update and validate the French LULC database, citizens and interested stakeholders can contribute using the Paysages mobile and web applications. This approach presents an opportunity to evaluate the integration of citizens in the IGN process of updating and validating LULC data.

Dataset 1: Change detection validation 2019

This dataset contains web-based validations of changes detected by time series (2016 – 2019) analysis of Sentinel-2 satellite imagery. Validation was conducted using two high resolution orthophotos from respectively 2016 and 2019 as reference data. Two tools have been used: Paysages web application and LACO-Wiki. Both tools used the same validation design: blind validation and the same options. For each detected change, contributors are asked to validate if there is a change and if it is the case then to choose a LU or LC class from a pre-defined list of classes.

The dataset has the following characteristics:

Time period of the change detection: 2016-2019.

Time period of data collection: February 2019-December 2019

Total number of contributors: 105

Number of validated changes: 1048; each change was validated by between 1 to 6 contributors.

Region of interest: Toulouse and surrounding areas

Associated files: 1- Change validation locations.png, 1-Change validation 2019 – Attributes.csv, 1-Change validation 2019.csv, 1-Change validation 2019.geoJSON

This dataset is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International. It is attributed to the LandSense Citizen Observatory, IGN-France, and GeoVille.

Dataset 2: Land use classification 2019

The aim of this data collection campaign was to improve the LU classification of authoritative LULC data (OCS-GE 2016 ©IGN) for built-up area. Using the Paysages web platform, contributors are asked to choose a land use value among a list of pre-defined values for each location.

The dataset has the following characteristics:

Time period of data collection: August 2019

Types of contributors: Surveyors from the production department of IGN

Total number of contributors: 5

Total number of observations: 2711

Data specifications of the OCS-GE ©IGN

Region of interest: Toulouse and surrounding areas

Associated files: 2- LU classification points.png, 2-LU classification 2019 – Attributes.csv, 2-LU classification 2019.csv, 2-LU classification 2019.geoJSON

This dataset is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International. It is attributed to the LandSense Citizen Observatory, IGN-France and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

Dataset 3: In-situ validation 2018

The aim of this data collection campaign was to collect in-situ (ground-based) information, using the Paysages mobile application, to update authoritative LULC data. Contributors visit pre-determined locations, take photographs, of the point location and in the four cardinal directions away from the point and answer a few questions with respect with the task. Two tasks were defined:

Classify the point by choosing a LU class between three classes: industrial (US2), commercial (US3) or residential (US5).

Validate changes detected by the LandSense Change Detection Service: for each new detected change, the contributor was requested to validate the change and choose a LU and LC class from a pre-defined list of classes.

The dataset has the following characteristics

Time period of data collection: June 2018 – October 2018

Types of contributors: students from the School of Agricultural and Life Sciences and citizens

Total number of contributors: 26

Total number of observations: 281

Total number of photos: 421

Region of interest: Toulouse and surrounding areas

Associated files: 3- Insitu locations.png, 3- Insitu validation 2018 – Attributes.csv, 3- Insitu validation 2018.csv, 3- Insitu validation 2018.geoJSON

This dataset is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International. It is attributed to the LandSense Citizen Observatory, IGN-France.

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no 689812.

This dataset combines the work of several different projects to create a seamless data set for the contiguous United States. Data from four regional Gap Analysis Projects and the LANDFIRE project were combined to make this dataset. In the northwestern United States (Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Washington and Wyoming) data in this map came from the Northwest Gap Analysis Project. In the southwestern United States (Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah) data used in this map came from the Southwest Gap Analysis Project. The data for Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Virginia came from the Southeast Gap Analysis Project and the California data was generated by the updated California Gap land cover project. The Hawaii Gap Analysis project provided the data for Hawaii. In areas of the county (central U.S., Northeast, Alaska) that have not yet been covered by a regional Gap Analysis Project, data from the Landfire project was used. Similarities in the methods used by these projects made possible the combining of the data they derived into one seamless coverage. They all used multi-season satellite imagery (Landsat ETM+) from 1999-2001 in conjunction with digital elevation model (DEM) derived datasets (e.g. elevation, landform) to model natural and semi-natural vegetation. Vegetation classes were drawn from NatureServe's Ecological System Classification (Comer et al. 2003) or classes developed by the Hawaii Gap project. Additionally, all of the projects included land use classes that were employed to describe areas where natural vegetation has been altered. In many areas of the country these classes were derived from the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD). For the majority of classes and, in most areas of the country, a decision tree classifier was used to discriminate ecological system types. In some areas of the country, more manual techniques were used to discriminate small patch systems and systems not distinguishable through topography. The data contains multiple levels of thematic detail. At the most detailed level natural vegetation is represented by NatureServe's Ecological System classification (or in Hawaii the Hawaii GAP classification). These most detailed classifications have been crosswalked to the five highest levels of the National Vegetation Classification (NVC), Class, Subclass, Formation, Division and Macrogroup. This crosswalk allows users to display and analyze the data at different levels of thematic resolution. Developed areas, or areas dominated by introduced species, timber harvest, or water are represented by other classes, collectively refered to as land use classes; these land use classes occur at each of the thematic levels. Raster data in both ArcGIS Grid and ERDAS Imagine format is available for download at http://gis1.usgs.gov/csas/gap/viewer/land_cover/Map.aspx Six layer files are included in the download packages to assist the user in displaying the data at each of the Thematic levels in ArcGIS. In adition to the raster datasets the data is available in Web Mapping Services (WMS) format for each of the six NVC classification levels (Class, Subclass, Formation, Division, Macrogroup, Ecological System) at the following links. http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Class_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Subclass_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Formation_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Division_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Macrogroup_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_Ecological_Systems_Landuse/MapServer

Gap Analysis Project (GAP) habitat maps are predictions of the spatial distribution of suitable environmental and land cover conditions within the United States for individual species. Mapped areas represent places where the environment is suitable for the species to occur (i.e. suitable to support one or more life history requirements for breeding, resting, or foraging), while areas not included in the map are those predicted to be unsuitable for the species. While the actual distributions of many species are likely to be habitat limited, suitable habitat will not always be occupied because of population dynamics and species interactions. Furthermore, these maps correspond to midscale characterizations of landscapes, but individual animals may deem areas to be unsuitable because of presence or absence of fine-scale features and characteristics that are not represented in our models (e.g. snags, vernal pools, shrubby undergrowth). These maps are intended to be used at a 1:100,000 or smaller map scale. These habitat maps are created by applying a deductive habitat model to remotely-sensed data layers within a species’ range. The deductive habitat models are built by compiling information on species’ habitat associations and entering it into a relational database. Information is compiled from the best available characterizations of species’ habitat, which included species accounts in books and databases, primary peer-reviewed literature. The literature references for each species are included in the "Species Habitat Model Report" and "Machine Readable Habitat Database Parameters" files attached to each habitat map item in the repository. For all species, the compiled habitat information is used by a biologist to determine which of the ecological systems and land use classes represented in the National Gap Analysis Project’s (GAP) Land Cover Map Ver. 1.0 that species is associated with. The name of the biologist who conducted the literature review and assembled the modeling parameters is shown as the "editor" type contact for each habitat map item in the repository. For many species, information on other mapped factors that define the environment that is suitable is also entered into the database. These factors included elevation (i.e. minimum, maximum), proximity to water features, proximity to wetlands, level of human development, forest ecotone width, and forest edge; and each of these factors corresponded to a data layer that is available during the map production. The individual datasets used in the modeling process with these parameters are also made available in the ScienceBase Repository (see the end of this Summary section for details). The "Machine Readable Habitat Database Parameters" JSON file attached to each species habitat map item has an "input_layers" object that contains the specific parameter names and references (via Digital Object Identifier) to the input data used with that parameter. The specific parameters for each species were output from the database used in the modeling and mapping process to the "Species Habitat Model Report" and "Machine Readable Habitat Database Parameters" files attached to each habitat map item in the repository. The maps are generated using a python script that queries the model parameters in the database; reclassifies the GAP Land Cover Ver 1.0 and ancillary data layers within the species’ range; and combines the reclassified layers to produce the final 30m resolution habitat map. Map output is, therefore, not only a reflection of the ecological systems that are selected in the habitat model, but also any other constraints in the model that are represented by the ancillary data layers. Modeling regions were used to stratify the conterminous U.S. into six regions (Northwest, Southwest, Great Plains, Upper Midwest, Southeast, and Northeast). These regions allowed for efficient processing of the species distribution models on smaller, ecologically homogenous extents. The 2008 start date for the models represents the shift in focus from state and regional project efforts to a national one. At that point all of the datasets needed to be standardized across the national extent and the species list derived based on the current understanding of the taxonomy. The end date for the individual models represents when the species model was considered complete, and therefore reflects the current knowledge related to that species concept and the habitat requirements for the species. Versioning, Naming Conventions and Codes: A composite version code is employed to allow the user to track the spatial extent, the date of the ground conditions, and the iteration of the data set for that extent/date. For example, CONUS_2001v1 represents the spatial extent of the conterminous US (CONUS), the ground condition year of 2001, and the first iteration (v1) for that extent/date. In many cases, a GAP species code is used in conjunction with the version code to identify specific data sets or files (i.e. Cooper’s Hawk Habitat Map named bCOHAx_CONUS_2001v1_HabMap). This collection represents the first complete compilation of terrestrial vertebrate species models for the conterminous U.S. based on 2001 ground conditions. The taxonomic concept for the species model being presented is identified through the Integrated Taxonomic Information System – Taxonomic Serial Number. To provide a link to the NatureServe species information the NatureServe Element Code is provided for each species. The identifiers included for each species habitat map item in the repository include references to a vocabulary system in ScienceBase where definitions can be found for each type of identifier. Source Datasets Uses in Species Habitat Modeling: Gap Analysis Project Species Range Maps - Species ranges were used as model delimiters in predicted distribution models. https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5951527de4b062508e3b1e79 Hydrologic Units - Modified 12-digit hydrologic units were used as the spatial framework for species ranges. https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/56d496eee4b015c306f17a42 Modeling regions - Used to stratify the conterminous U.S. into six ecologically homogeneous regions to facilitate efficient processing. https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/58b9b8cee4b03b285c07ddef Land Cover - Species were linked to individual map units to document habitat affinity in two ways. Primary map units are those land cover types critical for nesting, rearing young, and/or optimal foraging. Secondary or auxiliary map units are those land cover types generally not critical for breeding, but are typically used in conjunction with primary map units for foraging, roosting, and/or sub-optimal nesting locations. These map units are selected only when located within a specified distance from primary map units. https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5540e2d7e4b0a658d79395db Human Impact Avoidance - Buffers around urban areas and roads were used to identify areas that would be suitable for urban exploitative species and unsuitable for urban avoiding species. https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5540e099e4b0a658d79395d6 Forest & Edge Habitats - The land cover map was used to derive datasets of forest interior and ecotones between forest and open habitats. Forest edge https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5540e3fce4b0a658d79395fe Forest/Open Woodland/Shrubland https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5540e48fe4b0a658d7939600 Elevation Derivatives - Slope and aspect were used to constrain some of the southwestern models where those variables are good indicators of microclimates (moist north facing slopes) and local topography (cliffs, flats). For species with a documented relationship to altitude the elevation data was used to constrain the mapped distribution. Aspect https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5540ec40e4b0a658d7939628 Slope https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5540ebe2e4b0a658d7939626 Elevation https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5540e111e4b0a658d79395d9 Hydrology - https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5540eb44e4b0a658d7939624: A number of water related data layers were used to refine the species distribution including: water type (i.e. flowing, open/standing), distance to and from water, and stream flow and underlying gradient. The source for this data was the USGS National Hydrography Dataset (NHD)(USGS 2007). Hydrographic features were divided into three types: flowing water, open/standing water, and wet vegetation. Canopy Cover - Some species are limited to open woodlands or dense forest, the National Land Cover’s Canopy Cover dataset was used to constrain the species models based on canopy density. https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5540eca9e4b0a658d793962b

The pan-European land cover map of 2015 was produced by combining the large European-wide land survey LUCAS (Land Use/Cover Area frame Survey) and Landsat-8 data. We used annual and seasonal spectral-temporal metrics and environmental features to map 12 land cover and land use classes across Europe (artificial land, seasonal cropland, perennial cropland, broadleaved forest, coniferous forest, mixed forest, shrubland, grassland, barren, water, wetland, and permanent snow/ice). The classification was based on Landsat-8 data acquired over three years (2014-2016). Overall map accuracy was 75.1%. The spatial resolution and minimum mapping unit is 30 x 30 m. The map can be downloaded as a single GeoTiff file of 874Mbyte.The produced pan-European land cover map compared favourably to the existing CORINE (Coordination of Information on the Environment) 2012 land cover dataset. The mapped country-wide area proportions strongly correlated with LUCAS-estimated area proportions (r=0.98). Differences between mapped and LUCAS sample-based area estimates were highest for broadleaved forest (map area was 9% higher). Grassland and seasonal cropland areas were 7% higher than the LUCAS estimate, respectively. In comparison, the correlation between LUCAS and CORINE area proportions was weaker (r=0.84) and varied strongly by country. CORINE substantially overestimated seasonal croplands by 63% and underestimated grassland proportions by 37%. Our study shows that combining current state-of-the-art remote sensing methods with the large LUCAS database imporves pan-European land cover mapping.

This data publication contains a shapefile of points created from 1930s maps of the first land grants within the Monongahela National Forest (MNF) proclamation boundary. Corner or witness trees are those trees listed in a land survey to describe the survey corner for future re-establishment of the corner or property line. Witness trees listed in the deeds were added as attributes to the digital point locations. Deed dates range from 1752 to 1899. If no trees were listed in the deed to witness the corner, the corner was created in the point file, but no species was assigned. The deeds and surveys were created under the metes and bounds method of land survey common in the colonial era. The entire area was not surveyed in any systematic method as is found in the Western United States so there are areas of the MNF with no witness trees. Also included are the scanned images of the maps used to create the database of corner points. Each map covers a portion of the Monongahela National Forest, WV and includes latitude and longitude reference lines. On each map are the individual parcels of land drawn by draftsmen in the 1930s from the original deeds or grants. With each tract is the name of the grantee, the data of the deed or grant, the size of the tract of land (in acres), and a unique identification number that references the deed/grant from which the sketch was made. This data publication also includes two location maps (north and south) showing the location and area covered by the individual map sheets. The base map is a 1936 map of the Monongahela National Forest, WV produced by the USDA Forest Service.This database was developed to help characterize the forest at the time of European settlement.Original metadata date was 10/09/2014. Scanned images of the maps used to create the database of corner points were added on 09/15/2016 along with a few minor metadata updates.

Minor metadata updates on 12/13/2016 and 09/16/2024 (which included URL updates for related articles).

This data set replaces the 2010 edition (Edition 1.0) of the 2005 Land Cover of North America. Following the release of the first 2005 land cover data, several errors were identified in the data, including both errors in labeling and misinterpretation of thematic classes. To correct the labeling errors, each country focused on its national territory and corrected the errors which it considered most critical or misleading. For the continental data sets (including surrounding water fringe) 17440830 pixels (4.33% of the area) changed in the update. The following national counts exclude the water fringe: Canada, 10223412 pixels changed (6.44%); Mexico, 141142 pixels changed (0.45%), and U.S., 6878656 pixels changed (4.54%). The countries worked together to produce a definitive list of land cover classifications for the 2005 data; this document is available for download from the same site as the data and is entitled: North American Land Cover Classifications (2005). Version 1 of the 2005 North American Land Cover data set was produced as part of the North American Land Change Monitoring System (NALCMS), a trilateral effort between the Canada Centre for Remote Sensing, the United States Geological Survey, and three Mexican organizations including the National Institute of Statistics and Geography (Instituto Nacional de Estadistica y Geografia), National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of the Biodiversity (Comisión Nacional Para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad) and the National Forestry Commission of Mexico (Comisión Nacional Forestal). The collaboration is facilitated by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation, an international organization created by the Canada, Mexico, and United States governments under the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation to promote environmental collaboration between the three countries. The general objective of NALCMS is to devise, through collective effort, a harmonized multi-scale land cover monitoring approach which ensures high accuracy and consistency in monitoring land cover changes at the North American scale and which meets each country’s specific requirements. The data set of 2005 Land Cover of North America at a resolution of 250 meters is the first step toward this goal. The initial data set used to generate land cover information over North America was produced by the Canada Centre for Remote Sensing from observations acquired by the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS/Terra). All seven land spectral bands were processed from Level 1 granules into top-of-atmosphere reflectance covering North America at a 250-meter spatial and 10-day temporal resolution. In order to generate a seamless and consistent land cover map of North America, national maps were generated for Canada by the CCRS; for Mexico by INEGI, CONABIO, and CONAFOR; and for the United States by the USGS. Each country used specific training data and land cover mapping methodologies to create national data sets. This North America data set was produced by combining the national land cover data sets.