NCALM Project. PI: Vinton Valentine, Woods Hole Marine Biological Laboratory. The survey area is an irregular polygon (148 square kilometers) at the Plum Island River in northeast Massachusetts. The eastern third of the polygon was flown on Monday April 18, 2005. The central third was flown early Tuesday morning April 19, 2005 and the last third (the Parker River area) was flown on the afternoon of the 19th.

Town of East Brookfield, MA GIS Viewer

This map service contains boundaries for the following types of public school districts:Local School - administered by a city or town school committee.Regional Academic - administered by a regional school committee.Regional Vocational Technical - administered by a regional vocational school committee.Independent Vocational and County Agricultural - administered by a board of trustees.Independent Public, including Commonwealth Charter Schools and Horace Mann Charter SchoolsDistrict information as of December 2, 2014, was obtained from the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (ESE).For full metadata see https://www.mass.gov/info-details/massgis-data-public-school-districtsMap service also available.

The four adjacent Outer Cape communities of Eastham, Truro, Provincetown, and Wellfleet have built an intermunicipal partnership to pursue a regional approach to shoreline management. This partnership promotes short- and long-term science-based decisions that will maximize the effectiveness and efficiency of community responses to the increased threat of coastal hazards. This map set is a product of that partnership, the Intermunicipal Shoreline Management Project, a project first initiated in 2019 with funding from CZM's Coastal Resilience Grant Program.Maps showing the general location of littoral cells, the sediment transport system and ISM management cells along the eastern shoreline of Cape Cod Bay.Management Cells: The spatial base map upon which to implement a regional shoreline management framework for the ISM planning area. Recognizing that nearshore and shoreline characteristics drive coastal change, management cells are organized around the concept of littoral cells or natural coastal compartments that contain a complete cycle of sedimentation including sources, transport paths, and sinks. Management cells can be used to determine a shoreline project’s location within the littoral cell and to aid in the identification of key management considerations for a given project. Ignoring municipal boundaries should enhance each town’s ability to work with the natural processes of coastal change and help facilitate a uniform, science-based regional shoreline management approach. Littoral Cells / Sediment Transport System: Although represented as discrete points and lines, features are not intended to imply point specific locations. Rather the information provided is intended to visualize generally the areas of sediment sources and sinks, the locations of null points, and the directions of net sediment transport along the eastern shore of Cape Cod Bay.DefinitionsLittoral Cell: A coastal compartment that contains a complete cycle of sedimentation including sources, transport paths, and sinks. Net Longshore Sediment Transport (Q): Annual net flow of sediment along the coast expressed as the volume rate of wave-produced sediment transport. Null Point: A point along the shore that defines the updrift or down drift boundary of a littoral cell, (Q=0). Sediment Sink: An area where sediment is removed from a littoral cell (an area of deposition). Sediment Source: An area where sediment in added to a littoral cell (an area of erosion). For more information seeBerman, G.A., 2011, Longshore Sediment Transport, Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Marine Extension Bulletin, Woods Hole Sea Grant & Cape Cod Cooperative Extension. 48 p.Giese, G.S., Borrelli, M., Mague, S.T., Barger, P., McFarland, S., 2018. Assessment of the Century-Scale Sediment Budget for the Eastham and Wellfleet Coasts of Cape Cod Bay. A Report Submitted to the Towns of Eastham and Wellfleet, Center for Coastal Studies, Provincetown, MA. 32p. Giese, G.S., M. Borrelli, S.T. Mague, T. Smith and P. Barger, 2014, Assessment of Multi- Decadal Coastal Change: Provincetown Harbor to Jeremy Point, Wellfleet. A Report Submitted to the Massachusetts Bays Program, .Center for Coastal Studies, Provincetown, MA. 23 p. Giese, G.S., Borrelli, M., Mague, S.T., Smith, T.L., Barger, P., Hughes, P., 2013. Evaluating century-scale coastal change: Provincetown/Truro line to Provincetown Harbor. No. 14- 1, Center for Coastal Studies. 11p.

This data release presents geologic map data for the surficial geology of the Aztec 1-degree by 2-degree quadrangle. The map area lies within two physiographic provinces of Fenneman (1928): the Southern Rocky Mountains province, and the Colorado Plateau province, Navajo section. Geologic mapping is mostly compiled from published geologic map data sources ranging from 1:24,000 to 1:250,000 scale, with limited new interpretive contributions. Gaps in map compilation are related to a lack of published geologic mapping at the time of compilation, and not necessarily a lack of surficial deposits. Much of the geology incorporated from published geologic maps is adjusted based on digital elevation model and natural-color image data sources to improve spatial resolution of the data. Spatial adjustments and new interpretations also eliminate mismatches at source map boundaries. This data set represents only the surficial geology, defined as generally unconsolidated to moderately consolidated sedimentary deposits that are Quaternary or partly Quaternary in age, and faults that have documented Quaternary offset. Bedrock and sedimentary material directly deposited as a result of volcanic activity are not included in this database, nor are faults that are not known to have moved during the Quaternary. Map units in the Aztec quadrangle include alluvium, glacial, eolian, mass-wasting, colluvium, and alluvium/colluvium deposit types. Alluvium map units, present throughout the map area, range in age from Quaternary-Tertiary to Holocene and form stream-channel, floodplain, terrace, alluvial-fan, and pediment deposits. Along glaciated drainages terraces are commonly made up of glacial outwash. Glacial map units are concentrated in the northeast corner of the map area and are mostly undifferentiated till deposited in mountain valleys during Pleistocene glaciations. Eolian map units are mostly middle Pleistocene to Holocene eolian sand deposits forming sand sheets and dunes. Mass-wasting map units are concentrated in the eastern part of the map area, and include deposits formed primarily by slide, slump, earthflow, and rock-fall processes. Colluvium and alluvium/colluvium map units form hillslope and undifferentiated valley floor/hillslope deposits, respectively. The detail of geologic mapping varies from about 1:50,000- to 1:250,000-scale depending on the scale of published geologic maps available at the time of compilation, and for new mapping, the resolution of geologic features on available basemap data. Map units are organized within geologic provinces as described by the Seamless Integrated Geologic Mapping (SIGMa) (Turner and others, 2022) extension to the Geologic Map Schema (GeMS) (USGS, 2020). For this data release, first order geologic provinces are the physiographic provinces of Fenneman (1928), which reflect the major geomorphological setting affecting depositional processes. Second order provinces are physiographic sections of Fenneman (1928) if present. Third and fourth order provinces are defined by deposit type. Attributes derived from published source maps are recorded in the map unit polygons to preserve detail and allow database users the flexibility to create derivative map units. Map units constructed by the authors are based on geologic province, general deposit type and generalized groupings of minimum and maximum age to create a number of units typical for geologic maps of this scale. Polygons representing map units were assigned a host of attributes to make that geology easily searchable. Each polygon contains a general depositional process (‘DepositGeneral’) as well as three fields that describe more detailed depositional processes responsible for some deposition in that polygon (‘LocalGeneticType1’ – ‘LocalGeneticType3’). Three fields describe the materials that make up the deposit (‘LocalMaterial1’ – ‘LocalMaterial3’) and the minimum and maximum chronostratigraphic age of a deposit is stored in the ‘LocalAgeMin’ and ‘LocalAgeMax’ fields, respectively. Where a polygon is associated with a prominent landform or a formal stratigraphic name the ‘LocalLandform’ and ‘LocalStratName’ fields are populated. The field ‘LocalThickness’ provides a textual summary of how thick a source publication described a deposit to be. Where three fields are used to describe the contents of a deposit, we attempt to place descriptors in a relative ordering such that the first field is most prominent, however for remotely interpreted deposits and some sources that provide generalized descriptions this was not possible. Values within these searchable fields are generally taken directly from source maps, however we do perform some conservative adjustments of values based on observations from the landscape and/or adjacent source maps. Where new features were interpreted from remote observations, we derive polygon attributes based on a conservative correlation to neighboring maps. Detail provided at the polygon level is simplified into a map unit by matching its values to the DescriptionOfMapUnits_Surficial table. Specifically, we construct map units within each province based on values of ‘DepositGeneral’ and a set of chronostratigraphic age bins that attempt to capture important aspects of Quaternary landscape evolution. Polygons are assigned to the mapunit with a corresponding ‘DepositGeneral’ and the narrowest chronostratigraphic age bin that entirely contains the ‘LocalAgeMin’ and ‘LocalAgeMax’ values of that polygon. Therefore, users may notice some mismatch between the age range of a polygon and the age range of the assigned map unit, where ‘LocalAgeMin’ and ‘LocalAgeMax’ (e.g., Holocene – Holocene) may define a shorter temporal range than suggested by the map unit (e.g., Holocene – late Pleistocene). This apparent discrepancy allows for detailed information to be preserved in the polygons, while also allowing for an integrated suite of map units that facilitate visualization over a large region.

description: These data were collected under a cooperative agreement between the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management (CZM) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Coastal and Marine Geology Program, Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center (WHCMSC). Initiated in 2003, the primary objective of this program is to develop regional geologic framework information for the management of coastal and marine resources. Accurate data and maps of seafloor geology are important first steps toward protecting fish habitat, delineating marine resources, and assessing environmental changes due to natural or human impacts. The project is focused on the inshore waters of coastal Massachusetts, primarily in water depths of 2-30 meters. Data collected for the mapping cooperative have been released in a series of USGS Open-File Reports (https://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/project-pages/coastal_mass/). The data collected in this study area are located in both Buzzards Bay and Vineyard Sound and are primarily in the shallow water areas around the eastern Elizabeth Islands and Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts. The data include high resolution bathymetry, acoustic-backscatter intensity, sound velocity in water, seismic-reflection profiles, and navigation data. These data were collected during several cruises between 2007 and 2011 onboard the R/V Rafael using the following equipment: an SEA Ltd SwathPlus interferometric sonar (234 kHz), Klein 3000 dual frequency sidescan sonar, a boomer source and Geometrics 8-channel GeoEel streamer, a Knudsen 3200 subbottom profiling system, and 4 GPS antennae. More information about the cruises conducted as part of the project: Geologic Mapping of the Seafloor Offshore of Massachusetts can be found on the Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center Field Activity webpages: https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2011-013-FA, https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2009-068-FA, https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2007-039-FA, https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2010-100-FA, and https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2010-047-FA.; abstract: These data were collected under a cooperative agreement between the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management (CZM) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Coastal and Marine Geology Program, Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center (WHCMSC). Initiated in 2003, the primary objective of this program is to develop regional geologic framework information for the management of coastal and marine resources. Accurate data and maps of seafloor geology are important first steps toward protecting fish habitat, delineating marine resources, and assessing environmental changes due to natural or human impacts. The project is focused on the inshore waters of coastal Massachusetts, primarily in water depths of 2-30 meters. Data collected for the mapping cooperative have been released in a series of USGS Open-File Reports (https://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/project-pages/coastal_mass/). The data collected in this study area are located in both Buzzards Bay and Vineyard Sound and are primarily in the shallow water areas around the eastern Elizabeth Islands and Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts. The data include high resolution bathymetry, acoustic-backscatter intensity, sound velocity in water, seismic-reflection profiles, and navigation data. These data were collected during several cruises between 2007 and 2011 onboard the R/V Rafael using the following equipment: an SEA Ltd SwathPlus interferometric sonar (234 kHz), Klein 3000 dual frequency sidescan sonar, a boomer source and Geometrics 8-channel GeoEel streamer, a Knudsen 3200 subbottom profiling system, and 4 GPS antennae. More information about the cruises conducted as part of the project: Geologic Mapping of the Seafloor Offshore of Massachusetts can be found on the Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center Field Activity webpages: https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2011-013-FA, https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2009-068-FA, https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2007-039-FA, https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2010-100-FA, and https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2010-047-FA.

Study ObjectivesThe primary objective of this study was to generate projections of changes in stream temperature and thermal habitat (i.e., cold water fish habitat) due to climate change across the state of Massachusetts. To achieve this, statistical and machine learning models were developed for predicting stream temperatures based on air temperature and various landscape metrics (e.g., land use, elevation, drainage area). The model was then used in conjunction with climate change projections of air temperature increases to estimate the potential changes in stream temperatures and thermal habitat across the state. The results of this study are made available through this web-based tool to inform conservation and management decisions related to the protection of coldwater fish habitat in MassachusettsModeling MethodologyA regional model was developed for predicting stream temperatures in all streams and rivers across the state, excluding the largest rivers such as the Connecticut and Merrimack. The model was comprised of two components: 1) a non-linear regression model representing the functional relationship between air and water temperatures at a single location, and 2) a machine learning model (boosted decision trees) for estimating the parameters of the air-water temperature model spatially based on landscape characteristics. Together, these models demonstrated strong performance in predicting weekly water temperatures with an RMSE of 1.3 degC and Nash Sutcliffe Efficiency (NSE) of 0.97 based on an independent subset of the observed data that was excluded from model development and training.ResultsUnder historical baseline conditions (average air temperatures over 1971-2000), the model results showed more abundant cold water habitat in the western part of the state compared to the eastern and coastal areas. Forest and tree canopy cover were among the most important predictors of the relationship between air and water temperatures. The amount of impounded water due to dams upstream of each reach was also important. The majority of cold water habitat (82% of all river miles) were found in first order streams (i.e., headwaters), which are also the most abundant accounting for 60% of all river miles overall. The Deerfield and Hudson-Hoosic drainage basins had the most cold water habitat, which accounted for 80% or more of the total river miles within each basin. Coastal basins such as Narragansett, Piscataqua-Salmon Falls, Charles River, and Cape Code each had less than 5% cold water habitat.Using a series of projected air temperature increases for the RCP 8.5 emissions scenario, the model predicted a reduction in cold water habitat (mean July temp < 18.45 °C) from 30% to 8.5% (a 72% reduction) statewide by the 2090 averaging period (2080-2100). Furthermore, projections for larger streams (orders 3–5) were projected to shift from predominately cool-water (18.45–22.30 °C) to the majority (> 50%) of river miles being classified as warm-water habitat (> 22.30 °C).ConclusionsThe projected stream temperatures and thermal classifications generated by this project will be a valuable dataset for researchers and resource managers to assess potential climate change impacts on thermal habitats across the state. With this spatially continuous dataset, researchers and managers can identify specific reaches or basins projected to be the most resilient to climate change, and prioritize them for protection or restoration. As more datasets become available, this model can be readily extended and adapted to increase its spatial extent and resolution, and to incorporate flow data for assessing the impacts of not only rising air temperatures but also changing precipitation patterns.AcknowledgementsI would like to thank Jenn Fair (USGS) for her technical review of the model report and assistance in data gathering at the beginning of the project. I would also like to thank Ben Letcher (USGS) for his feedback and long-term collaboration on EcoSHEDS, which led to this project; Matt Fuller (USDA FS), Jenny Rogers (UMass Amherst), Valerie Ouellet (NOAA NMFS), and Aimee Fullerton (NOAA NMFS) for taking the time to discuss their experience, insights, and ideas regarding regional stream temperature modeling; Lisa Kumpf (CRWA) and Ryan O’Donnell (IRWA) for sharing their data directly; and Sean McCanty (NRWA), Julia Blatt (Mass Rivers Alliance), and Sarah Bower (Mass Rivers Alliance) for their assistance in sending out a request to the Mass Rivers Alliance for stream temperature data. Lastly, I am grateful for the countless individuals who collected the temperature data and without whom this project would not have been possible.FundingThis study was performed by Jeffrey D Walker, PhD of Walker Environmental Research LLC in collaboration with MA Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (MassWildlife). Funding was provided by the 2018 State Hazard Mitigation and Climate Adaptation Plan (SHMCAP) for Massachusetts.

This map service from MassGIS contains points for the limited access highway exit and interchange locations in Massachusetts. The exit numbers include the updates from the 2020-21 mileage-based exit renumbering project.The two statewide point feature classes in the service are:Exits - One point at each off-ramp, located approximately at the "gore point" (the triangular area of space between the through travel lanes and the off-ramp) or where the exit lane begins. Includes the letter ('A' and 'B', e.g.) designations for north/south, east/west.Interchanges - One point for each junction where there is a unique exit number. The points are located at the approximate midpoint of the interchange and represent all the ramps with that exit number. In most cases these include only the numeric portion of the exit number.See layer metadata.Map service also available.

These data were collected under a cooperative agreement between the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management (CZM) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Coastal and Marine Geology Program, Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center (WHCMSC). Initiated in 2003, the primary objective of this program is to develop regional geologic framework information for the management of coastal and marine resources. Accurate data and maps of seafloor geology are important first steps toward protecting fish habitat, delineating marine resources, and assessing environmental changes due to natural or human impacts. The project is focused on the inshore waters of coastal Massachusetts, primarily in water depths of 2-30 meters. Data collected for the mapping cooperative have been released in a series of USGS Open-File Reports (https://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/project-pages/coastal_mass/). The data collected in this study area are located in both Buzzards Bay and Vineyard Sound and are primarily in the shallow water areas around the eastern Elizabeth Islands and Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts. The data include high resolution bathymetry, acoustic-backscatter intensity, sound velocity in water, seismic-reflection profiles, and navigation data. These data were collected during several cruises between 2007 and 2011 onboard the R/V Rafael using the following equipment: an SEA Ltd SwathPlus interferometric sonar (234 kHz), Klein 3000 dual frequency sidescan sonar, a boomer source and Geometrics 8-channel GeoEel streamer, a Knudsen 3200 subbottom profiling system, and 4 GPS antennae. More information about the cruises conducted as part of the project: Geologic Mapping of the Seafloor Offshore of Massachusetts can be found on the Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center Field Activity webpages: https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2011-013-FA, https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2009-068-FA, https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2007-039-FA, https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2010-100-FA, and https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2010-047-FA.

New multidisciplinary data collected as part of the Exploring for the Future (EFTF) Program has changed our understanding of the basement geology of the East Tennant region in the Northern Territory, and its potential to host mineralisation. To ensure this understanding is accurately reflected in geological maps, we undertake a multidisciplinary interpretation of the basement geology in East Tennant. For the purposes of this product, basement comprises polydeformed and variably metamorphosed rocks of the pre-1800 Ma Warramunga Province, which are exposed in outcrop around Tennant Creek, to the west. In the East Tennant region, these rocks are entirely covered by younger flat-lying strata of the Georgina Basin, and locally covered by the Kalkarindji Suite, and South Nicholson Basin (Ahmad 2000).

The data from this solid geology map are designed to be included in mineral potential models and future updates to Geoscience Australia’s chronostratigraphic solid geology maps.

This interpretation comprises a Geographic Information System (GIS) dataset containing basement geology polygons, faults and contacts. Geological units are consistent with the Australian Stratigraphic Units Database and faults utilise existing conventions followed by Geoscience Australia’s chronostratigraphic solid geology products (Stewart et al. 2020). To aid in understanding the data, we have added a three-stage fault hierarchy. Basement geology was interpreted at 1:100000 scale (but is intended for display at 1:250000 scale) using geophysical imagery, namely total magnetic intensity and vertical derivatives of these data, and gravity. The interpretation makes use of numerous new datasets collected as part of the EFTF program. These include a new 2-km spaced gravity grid over most of East Tennant, drill-core lithology from new boreholes drilled as part of the MinEx CRC National Drilling Initiative, airborne electromagnetic data collected under the AusAEM program, new active seismic data, and geochronology from legacy boreholes. These data are available to view and download from the Geoscience Australia portal (https://portal.ga.gov.au).

We interpret that basement in the East Tennant region does represent the eastern continuation of the Warramunga Province. There is no obvious geophysical or geological boundary between Tennant Creek and East Tennant. However, the East Tennant region mostly lacks stratigraphy equivalent to the Ooradidgee Group, which overlies and postdates mineralisation in turbiditic rocks of the Warramunga Formation at Tennant Creek. Instead, East Tennant is underlain by a widespread succession of clastic metapelitic rocks that bear many lithological and geochronological similarities to the Warramunga Formation (Cross et al. 2020). Other important outcomes of this work include the documentation of significant regional faults and shear zones and abundant intrusive rocks at East Tennant. Geophysical and geochronological data suggest that this deformation and magmatism is the eastern continuation of ~1850 Ma tectonism preserved at Tennant Creek (e.g. Cross et al. 2020).

NOTE: Specialised (GIS) software is required to view this data.

References: Ahmad M, 2000. Geological map of the Northern Territory. 1:2 500 000 scale. Northern Territory Geological Survey, Darwin.

Cross AJ, Clark AD, Schofield A and Kositcin N, 2020. New SHRIMP U-Pb zircon and monazite geochronology of the East Tennant region: a possible undercover extension of the Warramunga Province, Tennant Creek. In: Czarnota K, Roach I, Abbott S, Haynes M, Kositcin N, Ray A and Slatter E (eds.) Exploring for the Future: Extended Abstracts, Geoscience Australia, Canberra, 1–4.

Stewart AJ, Liu SF, Bonnardot M-A, Highet LM, Woods M, Brown C, Czarnota K and Connors K, 2020. Seamless chronostratigraphic solid geology of the North Australian Craton. In: Czarnota K, Roach I, Abbott S, Haynes M, Kositcin N, Ray A and Slatter E (eds.) Exploring for the Future: Extended Abstracts, Geoscience Australia, Canberra, 1–4.

Abstract: The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management (CZM) and Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) have developed a mapping methodology utilizing high-resolution coastal elevation data (LIDAR) and aerial photography to map the top of coastal banks along predominantly ocean-facing shorelines of Massachusetts. These data present the occurrence and distribution of the top of coastal banks circa 2000-2002 that lie within the same geographic extent covered by the CZM-USGS Massachusetts Shoreline Change Mapping and Analysis Project, 2013 Update.

Purpose: These data were created to provide a historical position benchmark from which change in the position of the top of coastal banks can be monitored. The data were developed for research and general planning to provide advisory information on the location of coastal banks, and in combination with other data sets, highlight those areas in Massachusetts that are potentially at risk from coastal erosion, and have the potential to affect existing and future land use. The features shown have been determined by remote sensing, and thus should not be used for project planning or permitting. They do not necessarily represent nor should they be used as boundary delineation under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act.Attribute Accuracy Report: The attribute data were checked for valid values and logical consistency.

Logical Consistency Report: All vector data are presumed to be topologically clean based on a validation of relevant topology rule(s) and visual inspection. No duplicate features exist. The data were visually inspected for missing and misplaced features.

Completeness Report: This dataset contains all coastal banks that fall within the footprint of the Massachusetts Shoreline Change Mapping and Analysis Project, 2013 Update (i.e., ocean-facing shoreline of Massachusetts). Within that defined spatial extent, presence/absence of coastal banks using 2000-2002 LIDAR was guided by the Top of Current Coastal Bank (2013-2014) dataset for Massachusetts. This dataset represents one temporal delineation of coastal bank and is part of the larger Massachusetts Coastal Bank Erosion Hazard Mapping project.

These data differ from Top of Current Coastal Bank (2013-2014) in that coastal bank type representing rocky ledges (e.g., mapped coastal bank comprised of elevated rocky cliffs, headlands, or ledges) were omitted. These rocky ledge areas were not found to be eroding based on visual inspection and are not well captured by the delineation methodology utilized in the Massachusetts Coastal Bank Erosion Hazard Mapping project. These data have not been ground truthed.

Horizontal Positional Accuracy: A positional accuracy report was not conducted for these data. The 2000 Fall East Coast NOAA/USGS/NASA Airborne LiDAR Assessment of Coastal Erosion (ALACE) Project for the US Coastline dataset reports a horizontal positional accuracy of 0.8 meters. The 2002 Boston Area dataset (including coastal banks in Lynn, Revere, Winthrop, Boston, Quincy, Weymouth, and Hull), from which the top of coastal bank features are partially derived, reports horizontal accuracy of 0.5 meters.

Humanity’s role in changing the face of the earth is a long-standing concern, as is the human domination of ecosystems. Geologists are debating the introduction of a new geological epoch, the ‘anthropocene’, as humans are ‘overwhelming the great forces of nature’. In this context, the accumulation of artefacts, i.e., human-made physical objects, is a pervasive phenomenon. Variously dubbed ‘manufactured capital’, ‘technomass’, ‘human-made mass’, ‘in-use stocks’ or ‘socioeconomic material stocks’, they have become a major focus of sustainability sciences in the last decade. Globally, the mass of socioeconomic material stocks now exceeds 10e14 kg, which is roughly equal to the dry-matter equivalent of all biomass on earth. It is doubling roughly every 20 years, almost perfectly in line with ‘real’ (i.e. inflation-adjusted) GDP. In terms of mass, buildings and infrastructures (here collectively called ‘built structures’) represent the overwhelming majority of all socioeconomic material stocks.

This dataset features a detailed map of material stocks in the CONUS on a 10m grid based on high resolution Earth Observation data (Sentinel-1 + Sentinel-2), crowd-sourced geodata (OSM) and material intensity factors.

Spatial extent This subdataset covers the North East CONUS, i.e.

CT

DC

DE

MA

MD

ME

NH

NJ

NY

PA

RI

VA

For the remaining CONUS, see the related identifiers.

Temporal extent The map is representative for ca. 2018.

Data format The data are organized by states. Within each state, data are split into 100km x 100km tiles (EQUI7 grid), and mosaics are provided.

Within each tile, images for area, volume, and mass at 10m spatial resolution are provided. Units are m², m³, and t, respectively. Each metric is split into buildings, other, rail and street (note: In the paper, other, rail, and street stocks are subsumed to mobility infrastructure). Each category is further split into subcategories (e.g. building types).

Additionally, a grand total of all stocks is provided at multiple spatial resolutions and units, i.e.

t at 10m x 10m

kt at 100m x 100m

Mt at 1km x 1km

Gt at 10km x 10km

For each state, mosaics of all above-described data are provided in GDAL VRT format, which can readily be opened in most Geographic Information Systems. File paths are relative, i.e. DO NOT change the file structure or file naming.

Additionally, the grand total mass per state is tabulated for each county in mass_grand_total_t_10m2.tif.csv. County FIPS code and the ID in this table can be related via FIPS-dictionary_ENLOCALE.csv.

Material layers Note that material-specific layers are not included in this repository because of upload limits. Only the totals are provided (i.e. the sum over all materials). However, these can easily be derived by re-applying the material intensity factors from (see related identifiers):

A. Baumgart, D. Virág, D. Frantz, F. Schug, D. Wiedenhofer, Material intensity factors for buildings, roads and rail-based infrastructure in the United States. Zenodo (2022), doi:10.5281/zenodo.5045337.

Further information For further information, please see the publication. A web-visualization of this dataset is available here. Visit our website to learn more about our project MAT_STOCKS - Understanding the Role of Material Stock Patterns for the Transformation to a Sustainable Society.

Publication D. Frantz, F. Schug, D. Wiedenhofer, A. Baumgart, D. Virág, S. Cooper, C. Gomez-Medina, F. Lehmann, T. Udelhoven, S. van der Linden, P. Hostert, H. Haberl. Weighing the US Economy: Map of Built Structures Unveils Patterns in Human-Dominated Landscapes. In prep

Funding This research was primarly funded by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (MAT_STOCKS, grant agreement No 741950). Workflow development was funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation)—Project-ID 414984028-SFB 1404.

Acknowledgments We thank the European Space Agency and the European Commission for freely and openly sharing Sentinel imagery; USGS for the National Land Cover Database; Microsoft for Building Footprints; Geofabrik and all contributors for OpenStreetMap.This dataset was partly produced on EODC - we thank Clement Atzberger for supporting the generation of this dataset by sharing disc space on EODC.

Accurate data and maps of sea-floor geology are important first steps toward protecting habitat, delineating marine resources, and assessing environmental changes due to natural or human effects. Initiated in 2003, the primary objective of the Geologic Mapping of the Massachusetts Sea Floor program is to develop regional geologic framework information for the management of coastal and marine resources. The project is focused on the inshore waters (5–30 meters deep) of Massachusetts. This dataset is from U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) sampling survey 2011-015-FA (September 9–16, 2011) by the USGS Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center and the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management with partners from the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency aboard the ocean survey vessel Bold. During the survey, surficial sediment samples and bottom still and video imagery were collected in Cape Cod Bay, Buzzards Bay, and Vineyard Sound; south of Martha's Vineyard; and south and east of Nantucket, Massachusetts.

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Marine Sanctuary Program, has conducted seabed mapping and related research in the Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary region since 1993. The area is approximately 3,700 square kilometers (km2) and is subdivided into 18 quadrangles. Seven maps, at a scale of 1:25,000, of quadrangle 6 (211 km2) depict seabed topography, backscatter, ruggedness, geology, substrate mobility, mud content, and areas dominated by fine-grained or coarse-grained sand. Interpretations of bathymetric and seabed backscatter imagery, photographs, video, and grain-size analyses were used to create the geology-based maps. In all, data from 420 stations were analyzed, including sediment samples from 325 locations. The seabed geology map shows the distribution of 10 substrate types ranging from boulder ridges to immobile, muddy sand to mobile, rippled sand. Substrate types are defined on the basis of sediment grain-size composition, surficial morphology, sediment layering, and the mobility or immobility of substrate surfaces. This map series is intended to portray the major geological elements (substrates, features, processes) of environments within quadrangle 6. Additionally, these maps will be the basis for the study of the ecological requirements of invertebrate and vertebrate species that utilize these substrates and guide seabed management in the region.

Street map with index for Dedham, MASize: 36" X 48" Last updated: April 22, 2024

Humanity's role in changing the face of the earth is a long-standing concern, as is the human domination of ecosystems. Geologists are debating the introduction of a new geological epoch, the 'anthropocene', as humans are 'overwhelming the great forces of nature'. In this context, the accumulation of artefacts, i.e., human-made physical objects, is a pervasive phenomenon. Variously dubbed 'manufactured capital', 'technomass', 'human-made mass', 'in-use stocks' or 'socioeconomic material stocks', they have become a major focus of sustainability sciences in the last decade. Globally, the mass of socioeconomic material stocks now exceeds 10e14 kg, which is roughly equal to the dry-matter equivalent of all biomass on earth. It is doubling roughly every 20 years, almost perfectly in line with 'real' (i.e. inflation-adjusted) GDP. In terms of mass, buildings and infrastructures (here collectively called 'built structures') represent the overwhelming majority of all socioeconomic material stocks. This dataset features a detailed map of material stocks in the CONUS on a 10m grid based on high resolution Earth Observation data (Sentinel-1 + Sentinel-2), crowd-sourced geodata (OSM) and material intensity factors. Spatial extentThis dataset covers the whole CONUS. Due to upload constraints, detailed data were split into 7 regions and were uploaded into sub-repositories - see related identifiers. (This repository holds aggregated values for the whole CONUS)

Great Plains Mid West North East Rocky Mountains South South West West Coast Temporal extentThe map is representative for ca. 2018. Data formatThe data are organized by states. Within each state, data are split into 100km x 100km tiles (EQUI7 grid), and mosaics are provided. Within each tile, images for area, volume, and mass at 10m spatial resolution are provided. Units are m², m³, and t, respectively. Each metric is split into buildings, other, rail and street (note: In the paper, other, rail, and street stocks are subsumed to mobility infrastructure). Each category is further split into subcategories (e.g. building types). Additionally, a grand total of all stocks is provided at multiple spatial resolutions and units, i.e.

t at 10m x 10m kt at 100m x 100m Mt at 1km x 1km Gt at 10km x 10km For each state, mosaics of all above-described data are provided in GDAL VRT format, which can readily be opened in most Geographic Information Systems. File paths are relative, i.e. DO NOT change the file structure or file naming. Additionally, the grand total mass per state is tabulated for each county in mass_grand_total_t_10m2.tif.csv. County FIPS code and the ID in this table can be related via FIPS-dictionary_ENLOCALE.csv. Material layersNote that material-specific layers are not included in this repository because of upload limits. Only the totals are provided (i.e. the sum over all materials). However, these can easily be derived by re-applying the material intensity factors from (see related identifiers): A. Baumgart, D. Virág, D. Frantz, F. Schug, D. Wiedenhofer, Material intensity factors for buildings, roads and rail-based infrastructure in the United States. Zenodo (2022), doi:10.5281/zenodo.5045337. Further informationFor further information, please see the publication.A web-visualization of this dataset is available here.Visit our website to learn more about our project MAT_STOCKS - Understanding the Role of Material Stock Patterns for the Transformation to a Sustainable Society. PublicationD. Frantz, F. Schug, D. Wiedenhofer, A. Baumgart, D. Virág, S. Cooper, C. Gómez-Medina, F. Lehmann, T. Udelhoven, S. van der Linden, P. Hostert, and H. Haberl (2023): Unveiling patterns in human dominated landscapes through mapping the mass of US built structures. Nature Communications 14, 8014. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-43755-5 FundingThis research was primarly funded by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (MAT_STOCKS, grant agreement No 741950). Workflow development was funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation)—Project-ID 414984028-SFB 1404. AcknowledgmentsWe thank the European Space Agency and the European Commission for freely and openly sharing Sentinel imagery; USGS for the National Land Cover Database; Microsoft for Building Footprints; Geofabrik and all contributors for OpenStreetMap.This dataset was partly produced on EODC - we thank Clement Atzberger for supporting the generation of this dataset by sharing disc space on EODC, and Wolfgang Wagner for granting access to preprocessed Sentinel-1 data.

Map shows 3W for: Eastern Visayas Please be advised that datasets may not be complete, based on the 3W data as reported twice weekly.

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the National Marine Sanctuary Program of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), has conducted seabed mapping and related research in the Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary (SBNMS) region since 1993. The interpretive datasets and source information presented here are for quadrangle 5, which is one of 18 similarly sized segments of the 3,700 square kilometer (km2) SBNMS region. The seabed of the SBNMS region is a glaciated terrain that is topographically and texturally diverse. Quadrangle 5 includes the shallow, rippled, coarse-grained sandy crest and upper eastern and western flanks of southern Stellwagen Bank, its fine-grained sandy lower western flank, and the muddy seabed in Stellwagen Basin. Water depths range from <25 m on the bank crest to ~100 m in the basin. The data presented here for quadrangle 5 are the foundation for Scientific Investigations Map 3515 (Valentine and Cross, 2024), which presents maps of seabed topography, ruggedness, backscatter intensity, distribution of geologic substrates, sediment mobility, distribution of fine- and coarse-grained sand, and substrate mud content. The maps of quadrangle 5 show the distribution of substrates across the southern part of Stellwagen Bank and the adjacent basins. Bathymetric and seabed backscatter imagery, photographs, video, and grain-size analyses were used to create the geologic interpretations presented here and have been reprocessed and released in segments to supports these interpretations. For the quadrangle 5 interpretations, data from 729 stations were analyzed, including 620 sediment samples. The seabed geology map of quadrangle 5 shows the distribution of 20 substrate types ranging from boulder ridges to mobile and rippled sand, to mud. Substrate types are defined or inferred through sediment grain-size composition, surface morphology, sediment layering, the mobility or immobility of substrate surfaces, and water depth range. Scientific Investigations Map 3515 portrays the major geological elements (substrates, topographic features, processes) of environments within quadrangle 5. It is intended to be a basis for the study of sediment transport processes that affect a shallow, offshore bank, for the study of the ecological requirements of invertebrate and vertebrate species that use these substrates, and to support seabed management in the region.

This spring, MassWildlife will stock brook, brown, rainbow, and tiger trout in over 450 lakes, ponds, rivers, and streams in 264 towns across Massachusetts!