The global Navigation Electronic Map market is experiencing robust growth, projected to reach a market size of $14,750 million in 2025. While the exact CAGR isn't provided, considering the rapid advancements in technology, increasing adoption of GPS-enabled devices, and the expanding use of navigation systems across personal, commercial, and military sectors, a conservative estimate of the CAGR between 2025 and 2033 would be around 8%. This translates to substantial market expansion over the forecast period. Key drivers include the proliferation of smartphones with integrated navigation capabilities, the rising demand for precise location-based services, and the increasing sophistication of mapping technologies, such as the transition from 2D to 3D mapping. The market is segmented by map type (2D and 3D) and application (personal, commercial, and military). The commercial segment is expected to dominate due to its widespread use in logistics, fleet management, and ride-sharing services. Growth is further fueled by the integration of navigation maps with augmented reality (AR) and artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance user experience. However, factors such as data security concerns, licensing costs, and the need for continuous map updates pose challenges to the market's growth. The competitive landscape is marked by a mix of established players like Google, TomTom, and HERE, and regional players catering to specific geographic needs. Geographical expansion, particularly in emerging economies with increasing smartphone penetration, presents significant opportunities for market expansion. The market's strong growth is fueled by several factors. The integration of advanced features like real-time traffic updates, voice guidance, and offline map access significantly enhances user experience and drives adoption. The increasing use of navigation systems in autonomous vehicles is also a significant factor driving market expansion. The commercial sector, encompassing logistics, transportation, and delivery services, shows high growth potential due to the need for efficient route optimization and fleet management. Government initiatives promoting smart city development and infrastructure projects also contribute positively. Furthermore, continuous innovations in mapping technologies, such as high-resolution satellite imagery and improved data processing techniques, ensure the continued relevance and sophistication of navigation electronic maps. The competitive landscape is dynamic, with companies focusing on developing advanced features, strategic partnerships, and geographic expansion to secure market share.

This mapping tool provides a representation of the general watershed boundaries for stream systems declared fully appropriated by the State Water Board. The boundaries were created by Division of Water Rights staff by delineating FASS critical reaches and consolidating HUC 12 sub-watersheds to form FASS Watershed boundaries. As such, the boundaries are in most cases conservative with respect to the associated stream system. However, users should check neighboring FASS Watersheds to ensure the stream system of interest is not restricted by other FASS listings. For more information regarding the Declaration of Fully Appropriated Stream Systems, visit the Division of Water Rights’ Fully Appropriated Streams webpage. How to Use the Interactive Mapping Tool: If it is your first time viewing the map, you will need to click the “OK” box on the splash screen and agree to the disclaimer before continuing. Navigate to your point of interest by either using the search bar or by zooming in on the map. You may enter a stream name, street address, or watershed ID in the search bar. Click on the map to identify the location of interest and one or more pop-up boxes may appear with information about the fully appropriated stream systems within the general watershed boundaries of the identified location. The information provided in the pop-up box may include: (a) stream name, (b) tributary, (c) season declared fully appropriated, (d) Board Decisions/Water Right Orders, and/or (e) court references/adjudications. You may toggle the FAS Streams reference layer on and off to find representative critical reaches associated with the FASS Watershed layer. Please note that this layer is for general reference purposes only and ultimately the critical reach listed in Appendix A of Water Rights Order 98-08 and Appendix A together with any associated footnotes controls. Note: A separate FAS Watershed boundary layer was created for the Bay-Delta Watershed. The Bay-Delta Watershed layer should be toggled on to check if the area of interest is fully appropriated under State Water Board Decision 1594.

Last Rev. 01/24/08 - E.Foster, P.E. - FSU/BSRCThe Historic Shoreline Database on the Web contains many directories of related types of information about beach changes in Florida over the past 150 or so years. The historic shoreline map images (see the Drawings directory) show precision-digitized approximate mean high water (mhw) shorelines, from the US government coastal topographic maps listed in the associated map bibliography files (see the Sourcebibs directory). These generally show data extending from the mid to late 1800’s to the mid to late 1970’s. The mhw positions have been extracted and tabulated (see the MWHfiles directory) relative to fixed reference “R” points along the beach, spaced approximately 1000 feet (300 meters) apart. Reference points not actually corresponding to actual “in the ground” survey markers are virtual “V” points. Mean high water positions have been and continue to be extracted from FDEP beach profile surveys from the 1970’s through the present and added to the tables. The beach profile data files from which mhw data have been extracted and added into the mhw tables can be found in the ProfileData directory and visually (for many areas) in the ClickOnProfiles directory. The beach profile files include elevation information along the entire length of the profiles. This profile data set has undergone up to fifteen additional quality control checks to ensure accuracy, reliability, and consistency with the historic database coordinate and bearing set. Note that any data deeper than wading depth have not yet undergone any extra quality control checks. Note also that there are *.cod text files of notes associated with the review of the profile data files.The digital historic shoreline map image files are given in a DWG autocad-based format, which should be usable on most versions, as well as many GIS systems. The Florida State Plane 1927/79-adjusted and 1983/90 horizontal coordinate systems are used. These are not metric systems, but with the proper software can be converted to whatever systems you may need. Each map image DWG file contains many layers, documented in an ASCII layer list archived with the DWG file.The database has been maintained and greatly expanded by E. Foster since approximately 1987 and by N. Nguyen since 1995. The initial map digitizing effort was done for FDEP at Florida State University, primarily by S. Demirpolat. Final processing and editing of the original map files to make them user-friendly was performed by N. Nguyen and E. Foster in 1995-7. Extensive quality control and update work has been performed by E. Foster since 1987, and by N. Nguyen since 1995. Field profile surveys have been performed by the FDEP Coastal Data Acquisition section since the early 1970’s, and by a number of commercial surveyors in recent years.The formats of the mhw tables and profile files are explained in text files included in the respective directories.Note that the digitized map image files were originally created in the UTM coordinate system on Intergraph equipment. The translation from UTM to the State Plane coordinate systems has resulted in some minor textual and other visual shifts in the northwest Florida area map image files.The dates in the map legends in the map images are generally composite dates. It is necessary to use the mhw data tables and map bibliographies for accurate dates for any specific location. The date ranges in the data tables relate to specific information given in the map bibliography files.2Generally it may be assumed that the historic shorelines have been digitized as carefully as possible from the source maps. If a historic shoreline does not contain a systematic position error and is feasible in a physical sense, the accuracy of the mhw position is estimated at plus or minus 15 to 50 feet (5 to 15 m), depending on the source and scale. This is as a position in time, NOT as an average mhw position. Data added from field surveys are estimated at plus or minus 10 feet (3 m) or better.It is to be noted that from the 1920’s onward, aerial photographs have usually been the basis of the US government’s coastal topographic maps. Prior to that, the method was plane table surveying. Along higher wave energy coasts, especially the Florida east coast, if there was significant wave activity in the source photography, it is very possible that the mhw was mapped in a more landward location than was probably correct. Alternatively, the use of photography sets with excessive sun glare may have caused the mhw to be mapped in a more seaward location than was probably correct. These effects have been frequently observed in comparisons of close-in-time FDEP controlled aerial photography with FDEP profile surveys. The use of some photography sets containing high wave uprush or sun glare is probable within the historic data. For example, on the east coast the 1940’s series maps tend to show the mhw more seaward than expected, possibly due to sun glare, and the 1960’s series tend to show the mhw more landward than expected. In the latter case, the effect may be due to the 1960’s being a decade of frequent storms. It is recommended that the analyst be aware that some of these effects may exist in the historic data. A questionable historic shoreline is NOT necessarily one to be discarded, just considered with allowance for its’ potential limitations.Using this database, it can readily be observed that the historic trends in shoreline evolution are very consistent with behavior expected from the longshore transport equation, well known to coastal engineers. This is a non-linear equation. Shoreline change can be expected to be linear or constant only in certain situations. It is NOT recommended that any analyst arbitrarily assume constant or linear shoreline change rates over long periods of time, which is often done but not supported by the evidence. The three primary factors controlling shoreline change are sand supply, wave climate, and local geographic features. In some parts of Florida, major storms since 1995 have also become important factors.

The digital map market is experiencing robust growth, projected to reach a market size of $9.05 billion in 2025 and expanding at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 26.06%. This significant expansion is driven by several key factors. The increasing adoption of location-based services (LBS) across various sectors, including automotive, logistics, and e-commerce, fuels demand for accurate and comprehensive digital maps. Advancements in technologies like AI and machine learning are enhancing map accuracy, functionality, and personalization, further stimulating market growth. Furthermore, the rising penetration of smartphones and connected devices provides a readily available platform for digital map usage. The integration of digital maps into autonomous vehicle technology is another major driver, promising substantial future growth. Competition is fierce, with established players like Google, TomTom, and HERE Technologies vying for market share alongside emerging innovative companies offering specialized solutions. Market segmentation reveals a strong emphasis on navigation applications, reflecting the pervasive use of digital maps for route planning and guidance. Geocoding services, which convert addresses into geographical coordinates, also constitute a substantial market segment. While North America currently holds a significant market share due to early adoption and technological advancements, the Asia-Pacific region is expected to witness the fastest growth, propelled by rapid urbanization and increasing smartphone penetration in countries like India and China. However, challenges remain, including data privacy concerns, the need for continuous map updates to maintain accuracy, and the high cost of data acquisition and processing. Despite these restraints, the long-term outlook for the digital map market remains positive, with continued technological innovation and expanding applications promising sustained growth throughout the forecast period (2025-2033).

This record is maintained in the National Geologic Map Database (NGMDB). The NGMDB is a Congressionally mandated national archive of geoscience maps, reports, and stratigraphic information, developed according to standards defined by the cooperators, i.e., the USGS and the Association of American State Geologists (AASG). Included in this system is a comprehensive set of publication citations, stratigraphic nomenclature, downloadable content, unpublished source information, and guidance on standards development. The NGMDB contains information on more than 90,000 maps and related geoscience reports published from the early 1800s to the present day, by more than 630 agencies, universities, associations, and private companies. For more information, please see http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.

This research project aimed to fill a major lacuna militating against the effective exploitation of many post-medieval to mid-Victorian historical sources collected by local administrative areas: the lack of information on the boundaries of those administrative areas, the so-called 'historic' or 'ancient' parishes of England and Wales. It is known that these districts came into being during the Middle Ages, that the map of these ecclesiastical parishes was essentially complete by the fifteenth century, that these ecclesiastical boundaries were adopted during the early modern period for secular and judicial purposes, and that boundaries remained essentially unchanged until a number of reforms from the mid-nineteenth century onwards reorganised the local administrative geography of the country. The project aimed to reconstruct those boundaries as they were before the post-nineteenth century changes.
Main Topics:

The digitised maps cover the whole of England and Wales, and are organised by Ordnance Survey Sheet number. The maps contain a scanned bitmap image of the Ordnance Survey one inch to one mile (1:63,360) New Popular Edition maps (1945-8) with National Grid. They contain the boundaries of some 18,233 places, and are arranged as three electronic 'layers'. The first is a scan of the Ordnance Survey maps stored as grey tone sheet images. This enables Ordnance Survey physical, cultural and place-name content to be readily visible in the background for orientation and general location purposes, while not obscuring the added boundary and reference number material. The second layer consists of the boundaries, stored as solid red lines; and the third layer contains the reference numbers that link places on the map to the gazetteer/metadata dataset that accompanies the maps.

The maps are available on CD-ROM in Adobe Illustrator (ISBN:0-9540032-2-5) or Adobe Acrobat (ISBN:0-9540032-1-7) PDF formats. We recommend using the Adobe Illustrator format if you already have the software (as it enables you to edit the maps and select the layers to view). However, the Adobe Acrobat PDF format is perfectly suitable for viewing the maps, and we will supply the necessary reader software.

An accompanying book Historic Parishes of England and Wales: An Electronic Map of Boundaries before 1850 with a Gazetteer and Metadata by Roger Kain and Richard Oliver (ISBN:0-9540032-0-9) provides an introduction to the provenance of the maps. It also includes an abbreviated version of the gazetteer/metadata dataset, and a discussion of historical boundaries.

This unique combination publication is set to become a standard reference resource and is an invaluable tool for all those interested in plotting local area-based data from the past (population, agricultural, statistics, tax data etc.) from the fourteenth to the nineteenth centuries.

Please note: this study does not include information on named individuals and would therefore not be useful for personal family history research.

USGS developed The National Map Gazetteer as the Federal and national standard (ANSI INCITS 446-2008) for geographic nomenclature based on the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS). The National Map Gazetteer contains information about physical and cultural geographic features, geographic areas, and locational entities that are generally recognizable and locatable by name (have achieved some landmark status) and are of interest to any level of government or to the public for any purpose that would lead to the representation of the feature in printed or electronic maps and/or geographic information systems. The dataset includes features of all types in the United States, its associated areas, and Antarctica, current and historical, but not including roads and highways. The dataset holds the federally recognized name of each feature and defines the feature location by state, county, USGS topographic map, and geographic coordinates. Other attributes include names or spellings other than the official name, feature classification, and historical and descriptive information. The dataset assigns a unique, permanent feature identifier, the Feature ID, as a standard Federal key for accessing, integrating, or reconciling feature data from multiple data sets. This dataset is a flat model, establishing no relationships between features, such as hierarchical, spatial, jurisdictional, organizational, administrative, or in any other manner. As an integral part of The National Map, the Gazetteer collects data from a broad program of partnerships with federal, state, and local government agencies and other authorized contributors. The Gazetteer provides data to all levels of government and to the public, as well as to numerous applications through a web query site, web map, feature and XML services, file download services, and customized files upon request. The National Map download client allows free downloads of public domain geographic names data by state in a pipe-delimited text format. For additional information on the GNIS, go to https://www.usgs.gov/tools/geographic-names-information-system-gnis. See https://apps.nationalmap.gov/help/ for assistance with The National Map viewer, download client, services, or metadata.

This map is one of 18 produced for the final open-file report: An Investigation of Potential Geothermal Energy Sources in Mississippi, DoE Contract No. EG-77-S-05-5361; Edwin E. Luper, Principal Investigator; Mississippi Geological, Economic and Topographical Survey; Jackson, Mississippi; 1978. Maps produced include areas of central and southern Mississippi, including all or portions of Adams, Amite, Attala, Calhoun, Carroll, Claiborne, Clarke, Copiah, Covington, Forrest, Franklin, George, Greene, Hancock, Harrison, Hinds, Holmes, Humphreys, Issaquena, Jackson, Jasper, Jefferson, Jefferson Davis, Jones, Lamar, Lauderdale, Lawrence, Leake, Leflore, Lincoln, Madison, Marion, Newton, Pearl River, Perry, Pike, Rankin, Scott, Sharkey, Simpson, Smith, Stone, Sunflower, Walthall, Warren, Washington, Wayne, Wilkinson, and Yazoo Counties. Each map is contoured along a single isothermal surface: Maps 1-A through 1-E: 158F (70C) Maps 2-A through 2-E: 212F (100C) Maps 3-A through 3-E: 248F (120C) Map 4: 302F (150C) Map 5: 356F (180C) Finally, a location map of the 401F (205C) isotherm well is labeled Map 6. Maps 1, 2 and 3 were constructed at approximate scale of 1:250,000. These were broken into 5 sections each. The remaining maps were constructed at approximate scale of 1:500,000. These maps were contoured manually by the staff of the MGS in 1978. Many of the reference marks appear to be incorrectly drawn, so a best-fit methodology was used on the scanned maps to attempt to place them in their appropriate relative location in georeferencing.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Electronic Navigational Charts (ENC), found in the A-16 National Geospatial Data Asset Portfolio, support real-time navigation as well as collision and grounding avoidance needs of the mariner, and accommodate a real-time tide and current display capability that is essential for large vessel navigation. The NOAA ENC will support all types of marine navigation by providing the official database for electronic charting systems, including the Electronic Chart Display and Information System. NOAA ENCs will also provide fully integrated vector base maps for use in geographic information systems that are used for coastal management or other purposes. The NOAA ENCs are in the International Hydrographic Office S-57 international exchange format and comply with the ENC product specification. The ENC Harbor map service displays data compiled for ENC products with a scale range from street level (1:5,000) to town level (1:50,000).The ENC data used within this application will be updated weekly. This map layer is not intended for navigation purpose.Thumbnail image courtesy of: Kartverket

This map is one of 18 produced for the final open-file report: An Investigation of Potential Geothermal Energy Sources in Mississippi, DoE Contract No. EG-77-S-05-5361; Edwin E. Luper, Principal Investigator; Mississippi Geological, Economic and Topographical Survey; Jackson, Mississippi; 1978. Maps produced include areas of central and southern Mississippi, including all or portions of Adams, Amite, Attala, Calhoun, Carroll, Claiborne, Clarke, Copiah, Covington, Forrest, Franklin, George, Greene, Hancock, Harrison, Hinds, Holmes, Humphreys, Issaquena, Jackson, Jasper, Jefferson, Jefferson Davis, Jones, Lamar, Lauderdale, Lawrence, Leake, Leflore, Lincoln, Madison, Marion, Newton, Pearl River, Perry, Pike, Rankin, Scott, Sharkey, Simpson, Smith, Stone, Sunflower, Walthall, Warren, Washington, Wayne, Wilkinson, and Yazoo Counties. Each map is contoured along a single isothermal surface: Maps 1-A through 1-E: 158F (70C) Maps 2-A through 2-E: 212F (100C) Maps 3-A through 3-E: 248F (120C) Map 4: 302F (150C) Map 5: 356F (180C) Finally, a location map of the 401F (205C) isotherm well is labeled Map 6. Maps 1, 2 and 3 were constructed at approximate scale of 1:250,000. These were broken into 5 sections each. The remaining maps were constructed at approximate scale of 1:500,000. These maps were contoured manually by the staff of the MGS in 1978. Many of the reference marks appear to be incorrectly drawn, so a best-fit methodology was used on the scanned maps to attempt to place them in their appropriate relative location in georeferencing.

Notes-Rock Name: V-Series Samples, Bedrock Geol., MGS Maps M-85, M-86, V.564-V.624-

AquaMaps are computer-generated predictions of natural occurrence of marine species, based on the environmental tolerance of a given species with respect to depth, salinity, temperature, primary productivity, and its association with sea ice or coastal areas. These 'environmental envelopes' are matched against an authority file which contains respective information for the Oceans of the World. Independent knowledge such as distribution by FAO areas or bounding boxes are used to avoid mapping species in areas that contain suitable habitat, but are not occupied by the species. Maps show the color-coded likelihood of a species to occur in a half-degree cell, with about 50 km side length near the equator. Experts are able to review, modify and approve maps.

Environmental envelopes are created in part (FAO areas, bounding boxes, depth ranges) from respective information in species databases such as FishBase and in part from occurrence records available from OBIS or GBIF. AquaMaps predictions have been validated successfully for a number of species using independent data sets and the model was shown to perform equally well or better than other standard species distribution models, when faced with the currently existing suboptimal input data sets (Ready et al. 2010).

The creation of AquaMaps is supported by the following projects: MARA, Pew Fellows Program in Marine Conservation, INCOFISH, Sea Around Us, and Biogeoinformatics of Hexacorals.

Kaschner, K., D.P. Tittensor, J. Ready, T Gerrodette and B. Worm (2011). Current and Future Patterns of Global Marine Mammal Biodiversity. PLoS ONE 6(5): e19653. PDF

Ready, J., K. Kaschner, A.B. South, P.D Eastwood, T. Rees, J. Rius, E. Agbayani, S. Kullander and R. Froese (2010). Predicting the distributions of marine organisms at the global scale. Ecological Modelling 221(3): 467-478. PDF

Copyright Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. (CC-BY-NC) You are welcome to include maps from www.aquamaps.org in your own web sites for non-commercial use, given that such inserts are clearly identified as coming from AquaMaps, with a backward link to the respective source page.

Contacts Rainer Froese, GEOMAR, Coordinator rfroese@geomar.de Kristin Kaschner, Uni Freiburg, model development Kristin.Kaschner@biologie.uni-freiburg.de Ma. Lourdes D. Palomares, UBC, extension to non-fish marine organisms m.palomares@fisheries.ubc.ca Sven Kullander, NRM, extension to freshwater ve-sven@nrm.se Jonathan Ready, NRM, implementation jonathan.ready@gmail.com Tony Rees, formerly with CSIRO, mapping tools Tony.Rees@marinespecies.org Paul Eastwood, SOPAC, validation Paul.Eastwood@sopac.org Andy South, CEFAS, validation andy.south@cefas.co.uk Josephine Rius-Barile, Q-quatics, database programming / data collection j.barile@q-quatics.org Cristina Garilao, GEOMAR, web programming cgarilao@geomar.de Kathleen Kesner-Reyes, Q-quatics, map validation k.reyes@q-quatics.org Elizabeth Bato, Q-quatics, map validation (non-fish) e.david@q-quatics.org

Citing AquaMaps

General citation Kaschner, K., K. Kesner-Reyes, C. Garilao, J. Rius-Barile, T. Rees, and R. Froese. 2019. AquaMaps: Predicted range maps for aquatic species. World wide web electronic publication, www.aquamaps.org, version 10/2019.

Cite individual maps as, e.g., Computer Generated Map for Gadus morhua (Atlantic cod). www.aquamaps.org, version 10/2019 (accessed 01 Oct 2019).

Reviewed Native Distribution Map for Gadus morhua (Atlantic cod). www.aquamaps.org, version 10/2019 (accessed 01 Oct 2019).

Cite biodiversity maps as, e.g., Shark and Ray Biodiversity Map. www.aquamaps.org, version 10/2019 (accessed 01 Oct 2019).

Cite the environmental dataset as, e.g., Kesner-Reyes, K., Segschneider, J., Garilao, C., Schneider, B., Rius-Barile, J., Kaschner, K., and Froese, R.(editors). AquaMaps Environmental Dataset: Half-Degree Cells Authority File (HCAF). World Wide Web electronic publication, www.aquamaps.org/main/envt_main.php, ver. 7, 10/2019.

Using Full or Large Sets of AquaMaps Data We encourage partnering with the AquaMaps team for larger research projects or publications that would make intensive use of AquaMaps to ensure that you have access to the latest version and/or reviewed maps, the limitations of the data set are clearly understood and addressed, and that critical maps and/or unlikely results are recognized as such and double-checked for correctness prior to drawing conclusions and/or subsequent publication.

The AquaMaps team can be contacted through Rainer Froese (rfroese@geomar.de) or Kristin Kaschner (Kristin.Kaschner@biologie.uni-freiburg.de).

Privacy Policy AquaMaps uses log data generate usage statistics. Like most websites, AquMaps gathers information about internet protocol (IP) addresses, browser, referring pages, operating system, date/time, clicks, and visited pages, and store it in log files. This information is used to find errors in our website, analyze trends, and determine country of origin of our users. The log files are stored indefinitely. Only the administrators of the AquaMaps server has direct access to the log files. The information is used to inform further development of AquaMaps. Usage statistics may be shared with third parties for non-commercial purposes.

Disclaimer AquaMaps generates standardized computer-generated and fairly reliable large scale predictions of marine and freshwater species. Although the AquaMaps team and their collaborators have obtained data from sources believed to be reliable and have made every reasonable effort to ensure its accuracy, many maps have not yet been verified by experts and we strongly suggest you verify species occurrences with independent sources before usage. We will not be held responsible for any consequence from the use or misuse of these data and/or maps by any organization or individual.

Copyright This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-NC). You are welcome to include text, numbers and maps from AquaMaps in your own web sites for non-commercial use, given that such inserts are clearly identified as coming from AquaMaps, with a backward link to the respective source page. Note that although species photos and drawings draw mainly from FishBase and SeaLifeBase, they belong to the indicated persons or organizations and have their own copyright statements.

On October 1, 2022, a new law called the Flavored Tobacco Product Prohibition Amendment Act of 2021 took effect in the District of Columbia. This law: Prohibits the sale of all flavored tobacco—including flavored synthetic nicotine products.Prohibits the sale of all electronic smoking devices within a quarter mile of any middle or high school in the District.The prohibition on flavored tobacco includes any flavor other than tobacco, including “menthol.” The law presumes that a tobacco product is a flavored tobacco product if there are any texts, images, statements, or actions by the manufacturer that suggests the product has a flavor other than tobacco. Electronic smoking devices include any device that uses a heating element to deliver a vapor or aerosol with nicotine or any other substance in it for human consumption. It includes “vapes,” “vape pens,” “e-cigarettes,” “e-cigars,” “e-hookahs,” or any other product with that function, regardless of what it is called. The distance from a school is determined from the closest point between the school grounds and the property containing the retail space. Schools with combined campuses qualify if any students at that location are in grades 6 – 12. District of Columbia Public Schools, District of Columbia Charter Schools, and private schools all qualify. Penalties for violations begin at $25 for individuals and range up to $10,000 for businesses. In addition, violations may be prosecuted as unfair or deceptive trade practices and may result in the suspension or revocation of any applicable business license. Civil penalties increase with each violation of the law; further details concerning civil penalties are listed in the law. There is an exception for the on-site consumption of flavored tobacco products at hookah bars that were doing business in the District as of September 30, 2021 or previously. Hookah bars are defined within the Act to be a restaurant, tavern, brew pub, club or nightclub that does not admit patrons under the age of 21 and that generates revenue from the onsite consumption of tobacco products used by hookah. A hookah bar doing business in the District as of September 30, 2021, will not need to relocate to be in compliance with this section.Violations may be reported to the DLCP Consumer Protection Unit (CPU) form.In most cases, an investigator is assigned within 3 business days. Investigations are typically completed within 30 business days.Remove any potentially prohibited products immediately. Contact DLCP at dlcp@dc.gov or 202-671-4500 if you have questions or for more information.The sale of electronic smoking device within one quarter mile of any middle or high school is prohibited. This DLCP E-Cigarette Enforcement Map shows the spatial relationship between school and licenses e-tobacco businesses in DC. Please report any violations to dlcp@dc.gov or 202-671-4500.

*The minimum scoring function was used is each category.†The detection accuracy is highly overestimated since 85.87% of the PS pairs in the BioGRID were extracted from the E-MAP dataset.‡The detection accuracy is highly overestimated since 94.14% of the PS pairs in the BioGRID were extracted from the E-MAP dataset.aTrue positive rate (TPR, or sensitivity) at 10% false positive rate (FPR).b1-FPR (or specificity) at 70% TPR.cArea under the curve (AUC) at 50% FPR.dAUC at 100% FPR.

Post-Eocene (predominantly Pliocene) continental sedimentary rocks of the Sacramento Valley, CA are up to 1,200 m thick beneath the valley. These rocks contain most of the fresh ground water in the valley, forming a key component of the total water budget for the valley. A 1974 study by the U.S. Geological Survey was an early attempt to develop detailed knowledge of the subsurface geology of the Sacramento Valley. The study delineated the configuration of the base post-Eocene continental sedimentary rocks of the Sacramento Valley and mapped the thickness of those deposits. This digital dataset contains spatial datasets corresponding to the contoured base and thickness of the post-Eocene continental sedimentary rocks as mapped by the U.S. Geological Survey's study of the Sacramento Valley. The structure contour and thickness maps were digitized and attributed as GIS data sets so that these data could be used in digital form as part of U.S. Geological Survey and other studies of the basin.

USGS developed The National Map (TNM) Gazetteer as the Federal and national standard (ANSI INCITS 446-2008) for geographic nomenclature based on the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS). The National Map Gazetteer contains information about physical and cultural geographic features, geographic areas, and locational entities that are generally recognizable and locatable by name (have achieved some landmark status) and are of interest to any level of government or to the public for any purpose that would lead to the representation of the feature in printed or electronic maps and/or geographic information systems. The dataset includes features of all types in the United States, its associated areas, and Antarctica, current and historical, but not including roads and highways. The dataset holds the federally recognized name of each feature and defines the feature location by state, county, USGS topographic map, and geographic coordinates. Other attributes include names or spellings other than the official name, feature classification, and historical and descriptive information. The dataset assigns a unique, permanent feature identifier, the Feature ID, as a standard Federal key for accessing, integrating, or reconciling feature data from multiple data sets. This dataset is a flat model, establishing no relationships between features, such as hierarchical, spatial, jurisdictional, organizational, administrative, or in any other manner. As an integral part of The National Map, the Gazetteer collects data from a broad program of partnerships with federal, state, and local government agencies and other authorized contributors. The Gazetteer provides data to all levels of government and to the public, as well as to numerous applications through a web query site, web map, feature and XML services, file download services, and customized files upon request. The National Map viewer allows free downloads of public domain geographic names data by state in a pipe-delimited text format. For additional information on the GNIS, go to http://nationalmap.gov/gnis.html.

The e-Maps 2.0 website was developed to serve residents and visitors of the City of Peterborough. Users can do a variety of things such as search addresses, find points of interest, and view aerial photos.

This map is one of 18 produced for the final open-file report: An Investigation of Potential Geothermal Energy Sources in Mississippi, DOE Contract No. EG-77-S-05-5361; Edwin E. Luper, Principal Investigator; Mississippi Geological, Economic and Topographical Survey; Jackson, Mississippi; 1978. Maps produced include areas of central and southern Mississippi, including all or portions of Adams, Amite, Attala, Calhoun, Carroll, Claiborne, Clarke, Copiah, Covington, Forrest, Franklin, George, Greene, Hancock, Harrison, Hinds, Holmes, Humphreys, Issaquena, Jackson, Jasper, Jefferson, Jefferson Davis, Jones, Lamar, Lauderdale, Lawrence, Leake, Leflore, Lincoln, Madison, Marion, Newton, Pearl River, Perry, Pike, Rankin, Scott, Sharkey, Simpson, Smith, Stone, Sunflower, Walthall, Warren, Washington, Wayne, Wilkinson, and Yazoo Counties. Each map is contoured along a single isothermal surface: Maps 1-A through 1-E: 158F (70C) Maps 2-A through 2-E: 212F (100C) Maps 3-A through 3-E: 248F (120C) Map 4: 302F (150C) Map 5: 356F (180C) Finally, a location map of the 401F (205C) isotherm well is labeled Map 6. Maps 1, 2 and 3 were constructed at approximate scale of 1:250,000. These were broken into 5 sections each. The remaining maps were constructed at approximate scale of 1:500,000. These maps were contoured manually by the staff of the MGS in 1978. Many of the reference marks appear to be incorrectly drawn, so a best-fit methodology was used on the scanned maps to attempt to place them in their appropriate relative location in georeferencing.

The 2014 update of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the conterminous United States (2014 NSHM; Petersen and others, 2014; https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1128/) included probabilistic ground motion maps for 2 percent and 10 percent probabilities of exceedance in 50 years, derived from seismic hazard curves for peak ground acceleration (PGA) and 0.2 and 1.0 second spectral accelerations (SAs) with 5 percent damping for the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) site class boundary B/C (time-averaged shear wave velocity in the upper 30 meters [VS30]=760 meters per second [m/s]). This data release provides 0.1 degree by 0.1 degree gridded seismic hazard curves, 0.1 degree by 0.1 degree gridded probabilistic ground motions, and seismic hazard maps calculated for additional periods and additional uniform NEHRP site classes using the 2014 NSHM. For both the central and eastern U.S. (CEUS) and western U.S. (WUS), data and maps are provided for PGA, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 second SAs with 5% damping for the NEHRP site class boundary B/C for 2, 5, and 10% probabilities of exceedance in 50 years. The WUS additionally includes data and maps for 0.75, 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0 SAs. The use of region-specific suites of weighted ground motion models (GMMs) in the 2014 NSHM precluded the calculation of ground motions for a uniform set of periods and site classes for the conterminous U.S. At the time of development of the 2014 NSHM, there was no consensus in the CEUS on an appropriate site-amplification model to use, therefore, we calculated hazard curves and maps for NEHRP Site Class A (VS30 = 2000 m/s), for which most stable continental GMMs were original developed, based on simulations for hard rock conditions. In the WUS, however, the GMMs allow amplification based on site class (defined by VS30), so we calculated hazard curves and maps for NEHRP site classes B (VS30 = 1080 m/s), C (VS30 = 530 m/s), D (VS30 = 260 m/s), and E (VS30 = 150 m/s) and site class boundaries A/B (VS30 = 1500 m/s), B/C (VS30 = 760 m/s), C/D (VS30 = 365 m/s), and D/E (VS30 = 185 m/s). Further explanation about how the data and maps were generated can be found in the accompanying U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2018-1111 (https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20181111). First Posted - July 18, 2018 Revised - February 20, 2019 (ver. 1.1)

This layer shows the location of the PedNBikeLineAnno_E of iB5000 in Hong Kong. It is a subset of Digital Topographic Map made available by Lands Department under the Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (the "Government") at https://www.hkmapservice.gov.hk/ ("HKMS 2.0"). The source data is in Esri File Geodatabase format and uploaded to Esri's ArcGIS Online platform for sharing and referencing purpose. The objectives are to facilitate our Hong Kong ArcGIS Online users to use the data in a spatial ready format and save their data conversion effort.