Have you ever wanted to create your own maps, or integrate and visualize spatial datasets to examine changes in trends between locations and over time? Follow along with these training tutorials on QGIS, an open source geographic information system (GIS) and learn key concepts, procedures and skills for performing common GIS tasks – such as creating maps, as well as joining, overlaying and visualizing spatial datasets. These tutorials are geared towards new GIS users. We’ll start with foundational concepts, and build towards more advanced topics throughout – demonstrating how with a few relatively easy steps you can get quite a lot out of GIS. You can then extend these skills to datasets of thematic relevance to you in addressing tasks faced in your day-to-day work.

Through the Department of the Interior-Bureau of Indian Affairs Enterprise License Agreement (DOI-BIA ELA) program, BIA employees and employees of federally-recognized Tribes may access a variety of geographic information systems (GIS) online courses and instructor-led training events throughout the year at no cost to them. These online GIS courses and instructor-led training events are hosted by the Branch of Geospatial Support (BOGS) or offered by BOGS in partnership with other organizations and federal agencies. Online courses are self-paced and available year-round, while instructor-led training events have limited capacity and require registration and attendance on specific dates. This dataset does not any training where the course was not completed by the participant or where training was cancelled or otherwise not able to be completed. Point locations depict BIA Office locations or Tribal Office Headquarters. For completed trainings where a participant _location was not provided a point locations may not be available. For more information on the Branch of Geospatial Support Geospatial training program, please visit:https://www.bia.gov/service/geospatial-training.

Abstract Aims: This paper sought to evaluate the infrastructure of public swimming pools in a countryside municipality of the state of São Paulo and to present the Geographic Information System (GIS) as a tool capable of assisting in the management of sports facilities and programs. Methods: This is a descriptive study since it intends to expose the characteristics of a certain context. First, documentary research was performed to map the facilities and their respective projects. After that, a field survey was conducted seeking to evaluate the infrastructure of public pools and their surroundings through observation. Lastly, using georeferencing software, the population, and socioeconomic data around these pools were obtained and analyzed. Results: It was identified ten public swimming pools, and in seven the offer of swimming projects was foreseen. The infrastructure of the pools is mainly unsatisfactory, making necessary the improvement of the installation itself and in its surroundings. According to the results of the GIS, each pool has its specific public target concerning the characteristics of the profile of the residents surrounding these facilities. Conclusion: Information regarding the public profile around sports facilities generated from a tool such as GIS showed it is possible to determine which sports projects should be prioritized in each facility, leading to improvement in the management of sports-related public policies.

In 2007, the California Ocean Protection Council initiated the California Seafloor Mapping Program (CSMP), designed to create a comprehensive seafloor map of high-resolution bathymetry, marine benthic habitats, and geology within California’s State Waters. The program supports a large number of coastal-zone- and ocean-management issues, including the California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) (California Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2008), which requires information about the distribution of ecosystems as part of the design and proposal process for the establishment of Marine Protected Areas. A focus of CSMP is to map California’s State Waters with consistent methods at a consistent scale. The CSMP approach is to create highly detailed seafloor maps through collection, integration, interpretation, and visualization of swath sonar data (the undersea equivalent of satellite remote-sensing data in terrestrial mapping), acoustic backscatter, seafloor video, seafloor photography, high-resolution seismic-reflection profiles, and bottom-sediment sampling data. The map products display seafloor morphology and character, identify potential marine benthic habitats, and illustrate both the surficial seafloor geology and shallow (to about 100 m) subsurface geology. It is emphasized that the more interpretive habitat and geology data rely on the integration of multiple, new high-resolution datasets and that mapping at small scales would not be possible without such data. This approach and CSMP planning is based in part on recommendations of the Marine Mapping Planning Workshop (Kvitek and others, 2006), attended by coastal and marine managers and scientists from around the state. That workshop established geographic priorities for a coastal mapping project and identified the need for coverage of “lands” from the shore strand line (defined as Mean Higher High Water; MHHW) out to the 3-nautical-mile (5.6-km) limit of California’s State Waters. Unfortunately, surveying the zone from MHHW out to 10-m water depth is not consistently possible using ship-based surveying methods, owing to sea state (for example, waves, wind, or currents), kelp coverage, and shallow rock outcrops. Accordingly, some of the data presented in this series commonly do not cover the zone from the shore out to 10-m depth. This data is part of a series of online U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) publications, each of which includes several map sheets, some explanatory text, and a descriptive pamphlet. Each map sheet is published as a PDF file. Geographic information system (GIS) files that contain both ESRI ArcGIS raster grids (for example, bathymetry, seafloor character) and geotiffs (for example, shaded relief) are also included for each publication. For those who do not own the full suite of ESRI GIS and mapping software, the data can be read using ESRI ArcReader, a free viewer that is available at http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arcreader/index.html (last accessed September 20, 2013). The California Seafloor Mapping Program is a collaborative venture between numerous different federal and state agencies, academia, and the private sector. CSMP partners include the California Coastal Conservancy, the California Ocean Protection Council, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the California Geological Survey, California State University at Monterey Bay’s Seafloor Mapping Lab, Moss Landing Marine Laboratories Center for Habitat Studies, Fugro Pelagos, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA, including National Ocean Service–Office of Coast Surveys, National Marine Sanctuaries, and National Marine Fisheries Service), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Geological Survey. These web services for the Offshore of Point Conception map area includes data layers that are associated to GIS and map sheets available from the USGS CSMP web page at https://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/mapping/csmp/index.html. Each published CSMP map area includes a data catalog of geographic information system (GIS) files; map sheets that contain explanatory text; and an associated descriptive pamphlet. This web service represents the available data layers for this map area. Data was combined from different sonar surveys to generate a comprehensive high-resolution bathymetry and acoustic-backscatter coverage of the map area. These data reveal a range of physiographic including exposed bedrock outcrops, large fields of sand waves, as well as many human impacts on the seafloor. To validate geological and biological interpretations of the sonar data, the U.S. Geological Survey towed a camera sled over specific offshore locations, collecting both video and photographic imagery; these “ground-truth” surveying data are available from the CSMP Video and Photograph Portal at https://doi.org/10.5066/F7J1015K. The “seafloor character” data layer shows classifications of the seafloor on the basis of depth, slope, rugosity (ruggedness), and backscatter intensity and which is further informed by the ground-truth-survey imagery. The “potential habitats” polygons are delineated on the basis of substrate type, geomorphology, seafloor process, or other attributes that may provide a habitat for a specific species or assemblage of organisms. Representative seismic-reflection profile data from the map area is also include and provides information on the subsurface stratigraphy and structure of the map area. The distribution and thickness of young sediment (deposited over the past about 21,000 years, during the most recent sea-level rise) is interpreted on the basis of the seismic-reflection data. The geologic polygons merge onshore geologic mapping (compiled from existing maps by the California Geological Survey) and new offshore geologic mapping that is based on integration of high-resolution bathymetry and backscatter imagery seafloor-sediment and rock samplesdigital camera and video imagery, and high-resolution seismic-reflection profiles. The information provided by the map sheets, pamphlet, and data catalog has a broad range of applications. High-resolution bathymetry, acoustic backscatter, ground-truth-surveying imagery, and habitat mapping all contribute to habitat characterization and ecosystem-based management by providing essential data for delineation of marine protected areas and ecosystem restoration. Many of the maps provide high-resolution baselines that will be critical for monitoring environmental change associated with climate change, coastal development, or other forcings. High-resolution bathymetry is a critical component for modeling coastal flooding caused by storms and tsunamis, as well as inundation associated with longer term sea-level rise. Seismic-reflection and bathymetric data help characterize earthquake and tsunami sources, critical for natural-hazard assessments of coastal zones. Information on sediment distribution and thickness is essential to the understanding of local and regional sediment transport, as well as the development of regional sediment-management plans. In addition, siting of any new offshore infrastructure (for example, pipelines, cables, or renewable-energy facilities) will depend on high-resolution mapping. Finally, this mapping will both stimulate and enable new scientific research and also raise public awareness of, and education about, coastal environments and issues. Web services were created using an ArcGIS service definition file. The ArcGIS REST service and OGC WMS service include all Offshore of Point Conception map area data layers. Data layers are symbolized as shown on the associated map sheets.

Free and reduced lunch data for each participating public school in Alaska. This data set includes the number of students receiving free lunches and reduced price lunches, and the percentage of the students enrolled in either of these programs. Students qualify for free and reduced meals under the National School Lunch Program.Where possible the data is mapped at the location of School that is associated with the program - however some data rows represent non-school entities. See source DEED data center https://education.alaska.gov/cnp/nslp for source dataSource: Alaska Department of Education & Early Development, School Nutrition Programs

This data has been visualized in a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) format and is provided as a service in the DCRA Information Portal by the Alaska Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development Division of Community and Regional Affairs (SOA DCCED DCRA), Research and Analysis section. SOA DCCED DCRA Research and Analysis is not the authoritative source for this data. For more information and for questions about this data, see: Alaska Department of Education & Early Development Data Center.

This is a MD iMAP hosted service layer. Find more information at http://imap.maryland.gov. These data map hub and corridor elements within the green infrastructure. The Green Infrastructure Assessment was developed to provide decision support for Maryland's Department of Natural Resources land conservation programs. Methods used to identify and rank green infrastructure lands are intended soley for this use. Other applications are at the discretion of the user. The Maryland Department of Natural Resources is not responsible for any inaccuracies in the data and does not necessarily endorse any uses or products derived from the data other than those for which the data were originally intended. Maryland's green infrastructure is a network of undeveloped lands that provide the bulk of the state's natural support system. Ecosystem services - such as cleaning the air - filtering water - storing and cycling nutrients - conserving soils - regulating climate - and maintaining hydrologic function - are all provided by the existing expanses of forests - wetlands - and other natural lands. These ecologically valuable lands also provide marketable goods and services - like forest products - fish and wildlife - and recreation. The Green Infrastructure serves as vital habitat for wild species and contributes in many ways to the health and quality of life for Maryland residents. To identify and prioritize Maryland's green infrastructure - we developed a tool called the Green Infrastructure Assessment (GIA). The GIA was based on principles of landscape ecology and conservation biology - and provides a consistent approach to evaluating land conservation and restoration efforts in Maryland. It specifically attempts to recognize: a variety of natural resource values (as opposed to a single species of wildlife - for example) - how a given place fits into a larger system - the ecological importance of natural open space in rural and developed areas - the importance of coordinating local - state and even interstate planning - and the need for a regional or landscape-level view for wildlife conservation. The GIA identified two types of important resource lands - hubs"" and ""corridors."" Hubs typically large contiguous areas - separated by major roads and/or human land uses - that contain one or more of the following: Large blocks of contiguous interior forest (containing at least 250 acres - plus a transition zone of 300 feet) Large wetland complexes - with at least 250 acres of unmodified wetlands; Important animal and plant habitats of at least 100 acres - including rare - threatened - and endangered species locations - unique ecological communities - and migratory bird habitats; relatively pristine stream and river segments (which - when considered with adjacent forests and wetlands - are at least 100 acres) that support trout - mussels - and other sensitive aquatic organisms; and existing protected natural resource lands which contain one or more of the above (for example - state parks and forests - National Wildlife Refuges - locally owned reservoir properties - major stream valley parks - and Nature Conservancy preserves). In the GIA model - the above features were identified from Geographic Information Systems (GIS) spatial data that covered the entire state. Developed areas and major roads were excluded - areas less than 100 contiguous acres were dropped - adjacent forest and wetland were added to the remaining hubs - and the edges were smoothed. The average size of all hubs in the state is approximately 2200 acres. Corridors are linear features connecting hubs together to help animals and plant propagules to move between hubs. Corridors were identified using many sets of data - including land cover - roads - streams - slope - flood plains - aquatic resource data - and fish blockages. Generally speaking - corridors connect hubs of similar type (hubs containing forests are connected to one another; while those consisting primarily of wetlands are connected to others containing wetlands). Corridors generally follow the best ecological or ""most natural"" routes between hubs. Typically these are streams with wide riparian buffers and healthy fish communities. Other good wildlife corridors include ridge lines or forested valleys. Developed areas - major roads - and other unsuitable features were avoided. Please to the Green Infrastructure web site (http://www.dnr.state.md.us/greenways/gi/gi.html) for additional information. Last Updated: Feature Service Layer Link: https://mdgeodata.md.gov/imap/rest/services/Biota/MD_GreenInfrastructure/MapServer ADDITIONAL LICENSE TERMS: The Spatial Data and the information therein (collectively the ""Data"") is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind either expressed implied or statutory. The user assumes the entire risk as to quality and performance of the Data. No guarantee of accuracy is granted nor is any responsibility for reliance thereon assumed. In no event shall the State of Maryland be liable for direct indirect incidental consequential or special damages of any kind. The State of Maryland does not accept liability for any damages or misrepresentation caused by inaccuracies in the Data or as a result to changes to the Data nor is there responsibility assumed to maintain the Data in any manner or form. The Data can be freely distributed as long as the metadata entry is not modified or deleted. Any data derived from the Data must acknowledge the State of Maryland in the metadata.

Federation University Australia ’s Centre for eCommerce and Communications were engaged by
DIIRD to assist in researching the business case for a GIS application as part of the GippsLink Project, 2010.

The project stakeholders across six LGAs -Bass Coast Shire; Baw Baw Shire; East Gippsland Shire; Latrobe City; South Gippsland Shire, Wellington Shire participated in an online survey to gauge current usage of online GIS systems and to obtain feedback to ascertain priorities. The results of that survey form this dataset which is stored using Lime survey software. 23 responses were obtained.

USGS Topo is a tile cache base map service that combines the most current data in The National Map (TNM), and other public-domain data, into a multi-scale topographic reference map. Data themes included are Boundaries, Geographic Names, Transportation, Contours, Hydrography, Land Cover, Shaded Relief, and Bathymetry. This service is designed to provide a seamless view of TNM data in a geographic information system (GIS) accessible format.USGS The National Map: National Boundaries Dataset, 3DEP Elevation Program, Geographic Names Information System, National Hydrography Dataset, National Land Cover Database, National Structures Dataset, and National Transportation Dataset; USGS Global Ecosystems; U.S. Census Bureau TIGER/Line data; USFS Road Data; Natural Earth Data; U.S. Department of State Humanitarian Information Unit; and NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information, U.S. Coastal Relief Model. Data refreshed May, 2020.

Snow, glaciers and permafrost in cold mountain areas such as the Swiss Alps are especially sensitive to changes in environmental conditions due to their proximity to melting conditions. In addition, mass wasting is most intensive in those mountain areas with high relief energy. Environmental changes in high mountain regions substantially influence the potential for glacial and periglacial hazards. Ice- and moraine-dammed lakes represent a widespread hazard potential closely related to glacier fluctuations. Magnitude and frequency of ice avalanches from steep glaciers - in principle a normal expression of mass exchange under such topographic conditions - are coupled with stability conditions affected by glacier advance/retreat and, hence, with long-term atmospheric impacts. Steep and unstable reservoirs of loose debris, a potential source of debris flows, are often the result of glacier shrinkage. In a similar way, changes in the stress regime due to vanishing glaciers lead to potential destabilization of adjacent valley flanks.

 Since the Alps are among the most densely populated high mountain areas in the
 world, Switzerland is particularly impacted by glacial and periglacial hazards
 but, on the other hand, also has an extensive and well-recognized tradition in
 investigating such processes. A number of specific monitoring and modeling
 studies related to single hazardous situations have been performed, mainly
 based on recent catastrophes or imminent hazard situations. An urgent need
 exists for area-wide modeling of glacier hazard potentials with a view to
 establishing an integrated and adequate information base for planning and
 detailed monitoring, but a corresponding systematic approach is, for the
 present, still lacking.

 The proposed project aims at closing this gap in several ways: Work Package
 (WP) (1): By developing techniques for detection of glacier hazard potentials
 based on optical spaceborne remote sensing data which rarely has been used to
 date in Swiss glacier monitoring; multispectral analyses and multitemporal and
 multiscale fusion will play a major role in this, with a special focus on
 recent or upcoming high resolution sensors. WP (2): By integrating empirical
 models for glacier hazard assessment into geographical information systems
 (GIS) which have proven to be successful for hazard simulation but have not
 been used yet for determining glacier hazard potentials; GIS modeling
 especially allows for the fusion of remote sensing and elevation data for
 spatial (3D) analyses. To ensure high synergy, WPs (1) and (2) will be closely
 related to the ongoing SNF project "The Swiss Glacier Inventory 2000" (SWI
 2000) (no. 21-54073.98) and the international project "Global Land Ice
 Monitoring from Space" (GLIMS). WP (3): By applying the methods from WPs (1)
 and (2), an initial attempt will be undertaken to implement an area-wide model
 for integrating glacier hazard potentials of extensive regions in the Swiss
 Alps following a downscaling strategy with varying resolution and accuracy
 levels, both with respect to data and to models. As hazard management in
 Switzerland is the domain of local and regional authorities, the proposed
 project does not aim at preparing detailed local hazard maps (Gefahrenkarten),
 but rather will provide new remote sensing and modeling techniques for
 decision support. It should demonstrate the usefulness of these techniques for
 overview mapping (Gefahrenhinweiskarten) as a basis for decision-making and for
 scenario simulations in connection with climate change effects. The efforts
 made in this project will contribute to handle economically complex
 mathematical and physical models and represent a decision basis for the
 specific need of further detailed case studies. A further outcome will be a
 documentation of historical glacier catastrophes in the Swiss Alps, which will
 - among others - be used for model calibration and verification.

 [Summary provided by Christian Huggel, University of Zurich.]

description: Information on VMS deposits from around the world. It also presents new grade and tonnage models for three subtypes of VMS deposits and a text file allowing locations of all deposits to be plotted in geographic information system (GIS) programs. The data are presented in FileMaker Pro and text files to make the information available to a wider audience.; abstract: Information on VMS deposits from around the world. It also presents new grade and tonnage models for three subtypes of VMS deposits and a text file allowing locations of all deposits to be plotted in geographic information system (GIS) programs. The data are presented in FileMaker Pro and text files to make the information available to a wider audience.

The University of Ballarat through its Centre for eCommerce and Communications (CeCC) was engaged by the Golden Plains Shire and the City of Ballarat to review the extent to which key objectives of past Geographic Information System (GIS) strategies have been achieved and also to gather information which can assist with future planning during.

This dataset contains interviews to gauge current usage of online GIS systems and to obtain feedback to ascertain priorities which were conducted online and face-to-face in January 2011.

This study is an investigation of the agrarian landscape in the western part of Ostergotland County (in Sweden). The study was published in the form of a dissertation in Human Geography written (in German) by Steffan Helmfrid, and defended in 1962. Two maps were produced as a part of the dissertation, based on historical material. These maps show the agrarian landscape as it was around 1640. Helmfrid's analogue process for producing these maps was unique for the 1960s. These two maps are made available here.

Two maps are made available here:

1) Name: No Title (Working version) scale: 1:50,000 coordinate system: no coordinates file format: tiff (.tif) file size: 198 MB file name: helmfrid_orginal_photoshop.tif

2) Name: "The Agrarian Landscape on the Vadstena plains around the year 1640" scale: 1:100,000 coordinate system: RT 90 2.5 gon V (EPSG 3021) file format: geotiff (.tif) file size: 40 MB file name: helmfrid_rectify.tif

The first map is an unpublished working version that was used as the basis for the second map which is the published version contained in Helmfrid's dissertation. The working version has a larger-scale, which means it is more detailed than the second map.

The second map was digitized and rectified in 2009 by Johan Berg, also from Stockholm University. This was done as part of a project on land relations during the Younger Iron Age in western Ostergotland. (See link to separate data , 2019-102, in SND's catalog). The working version (the first map) was digitized in 2019 when it was decided to publish Helmfrid's maps via the Swedish National Data Service.

The working version was based on a compilation of 400 smaller village and farm maps, all from the 1640s. These sources can be found in the following historical property maps (in Swedish: geometriska jordeböcker): D5, D6, D7, D8 and D10 (See https://riksarkivet.se/visa-kartsamlingar -- "D" refers to maps from Ostergotland county). All the original historical maps were signed by one surveyor -- Larson Groth.

The rectified map can be opened in most Geographic Information System (GIS) programs. The map can also be opened in image editing software, but without coordinates. The working version (the first map) is also a raster file, but because the working version was never rectified, it has been saved as a normal tiff file (.tif), not a geotiff. It can be opened in image editing programs like Photoshop or opensource Gimp.

More information on how Helmfrid produced these maps and a link and reference to his dissertation can be found (in Swedish) in the attached documentation file.

BackgroundNeural tube defects (NTDs) are congenital birth defects that occur in the central nervous system, and they have the highest incidence among all birth defects. Shanxi Province in China has the world’s highest rate of NTDs. Since the 1990s, China’s government has worked on many birth defect prevention programs to reduce the occurrence of NTDs, such as pregnancy planning, health education, genetic counseling, antenatal ultrasonography and serological screening. However, the rate of NTDs in Shanxi Province is still higher than the world’s average morbidity rate after intervention. In addition, Shanxi Province has abundant coal reserves, and is the largest coal production province in China. The objectives of this study are to determine the temporal and spatial variation of the NTD rate in rural areas of Shanxi Province, China, and identify geographical environmental factors that were associated with NTDs in the risk area.MethodsIn this study, Heshun County and Yuanping County in Shanxi Province, which have high incidence of NTDs, were selected as the study areas. Two paired sample T test was used to analyze the changes in the risk of NTDs from the time dimension. Ripley’s k function and spatial filtering were combined with geographic information system (GIS) software to study the changes in the risk of NTDs from the spatial dimension. In addition, geographical detectors were used to identify the risk geographical environmental factors of NTDs in the study areas, especially the areas close to the coal sites and main roads.ResultsIn both Heshun County and Yuanping County, the incidence of NTDs was significantly (P

Terms of UseData Limitations and DisclaimerThe user’s use of and/or reliance on the information contained in the Document shall be at the user’s own risk and expense. MassDEP disclaims any responsibility for any loss or harm that may result to the user of this data or to any other person due to the user’s use of the Document.This is an ongoing data development project. Attempts have been made to contact all PWS systems, but not all have responded with information on their service area. MassDEP will continue to collect and verify this information. Some PWS service areas included in this datalayer have not been verified by the PWS or the municipality involved, but since many of those areas are based on information published online by the municipality, the PWS, or in a publicly available report, they are included in the estimated PWS service area datalayer.Please note: All PWS service area delineations are estimates for broad planning purposes and should only be used as a guide. The data is not appropriate for site-specific or parcel-specific analysis. Not all properties within a PWS service area are necessarily served by the system, and some properties outside the mapped service areas could be served by the PWS – please contact the relevant PWS. Not all service areas have been confirmed by the systems.Please use the following citation to reference these data:MassDEP, Water Utility Resilience Program. 2025. Community and Non-Transient Non-Community Public Water System Service Area (PubV2025_3).IMPORTANT NOTICE: This MassDEP Estimated Water Service datalayer may not be complete, may contain errors, omissions, and other inaccuracies and the data are subject to change. This version is published through MassGIS. We want to learn about the data uses. If you use this dataset, please notify staff in the Water Utility Resilience Program (WURP@mass.gov).

This GIS datalayer represents approximate service areas for Public Water Systems (PWS) in Massachusetts. In 2017, as part of its “Enhancing Resilience and Emergency Preparedness of Water Utilities through Improved Mapping” (Critical Infrastructure Mapping Project ), the MassDEP Water Utility Resilience Program (WURP) began to uniformly map drinking water service areas throughout Massachusetts using information collected from various sources. Along with confirming existing public water system (PWS) service area information, the project collected and verified estimated service area delineations for PWSs not previously delineated and will continue to update the information contained in the datalayers. As of the date of publication, WURP has delineated Community (COM) and Non-Transient Non-Community (NTNC) service areas. Transient non-community (TNCs) are not part of this mapping project.

Layers and Tables:

The MassDEP Estimated Public Water System Service Area data comprises two polygon feature classes and a supporting table. Some data fields are populated from the MassDEP Drinking Water Program’s Water Quality Testing System (WQTS) and Annual Statistical Reports (ASR).

The Community Water Service Areas feature class (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_COMM_POLY) includes polygon features that represent the approximate service areas for PWS classified as Community systems.The NTNC Water Service Areas feature class (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_NTNC_POLY) includes polygon features that represent the approximate service areas for PWS classified as Non-Transient Non-Community systems.The Unlocated Sites List table (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_USL) contains a list of known, unmapped active Community and NTNC PWS services areas at the time of publication.

Production

Data Universe

Public Water Systems in Massachusetts are permitted and regulated through the MassDEP Drinking Water Program. The WURP has mapped service areas for all active and inactive municipal and non-municipal Community PWSs in MassDEP’s Water Quality Testing Database (WQTS). Community PWS refers to a public water system that serves at least 15 service connections used by year-round residents or regularly serves at least 25 year-round residents.

All active and inactive NTNC PWS were also mapped using information contained in WQTS. An NTNC or Non-transient Non-community Water System refers to a public water system that is not a community water system and that has at least 15 service connections or regularly serves at least 25 of the same persons or more approximately four or more hours per day, four or more days per week, more than six months or 180 days per year, such as a workplace providing water to its employees.

These data may include declassified PWSs. Staff will work to rectify the status/water services to properties previously served by declassified PWSs and remove or incorporate these service areas as needed.

Maps of service areas for these systems were collected from various online and MassDEP sources to create service areas digitally in GIS. Every PWS is assigned a unique PWSID by MassDEP that incorporates the municipal ID of the municipality it serves (or the largest municipality it serves if it serves multiple municipalities). Some municipalities contain more than one PWS, but each PWS has a unique PWSID. The Estimated PWS Service Area datalayer, therefore, contains polygons with a unique PWSID for each PWS service area.

A service area for a community PWS may serve all of one municipality (e.g. Watertown Water Department), multiple municipalities (e.g. Abington-Rockland Joint Water Works), all or portions of two or more municipalities (e.g. Provincetown Water Dept which serves all of Provincetown and a portion of Truro), or a portion of a municipality (e.g. Hyannis Water System, which is one of four PWSs in the town of Barnstable).

Some service areas have not been mapped but their general location is represented by a small circle which serves as a placeholder. The location of these circles are estimates based on the general location of the source wells or the general estimated location of the service area - these do not represent the actual service area.

Service areas were mapped initially from 2017 to 2022 and reflect varying years for which service is implemented for that service area boundary. WURP maintains the dataset quarterly with annual data updates; however, the dataset may not include all current active PWSs. A list of unmapped PWS systems is included in the USL table PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_USL available for download with the dataset. Some PWSs that are not mapped may have come online after this iteration of the mapping project; these will be reconciled and mapped during the next phase of the WURP project. PWS IDs that represent regional or joint boards with (e.g. Tri Town Water Board, Randolph/Holbrook Water Board, Upper Cape Regional Water Cooperative) will not be mapped because their individual municipal service areas are included in this datalayer.

Some PWSs that are not mapped may have come online after this iteration of the mapping project; these will be reconciled and mapped during the next phase of the WURP project. Those highlighted (e.g. Tri Town Water Board, Randolph/Holbrook Water Board, Upper Cape Regional Water Cooperative) represent regional or joint boards that will not be mapped, because their individual municipal service areas are included in this datalayer.

PWSs that do not have corresponding sources, may be part of consecutive systems, may have been incorporated into another PWSs, reclassified as a different type of PWS, or otherwise taken offline. PWSs that have been incorporated, reclassified, or taken offline will be reconciled during the next data update.

Methodologies and Data Sources

Several methodologies were used to create service area boundaries using various sources, including data received from the systems in response to requests for information from the MassDEP WURP project, information on file at MassDEP, and service area maps found online at municipal and PWS websites. When provided with water line data rather than generalized areas, 300-foot buffers were created around the water lines to denote service areas and then edited to incorporate generalizations. Some municipalities submitted parcel data or address information to be used in delineating service areas.

Verification Process

Small-scale PDF file maps with roads and other infrastructure were sent to every PWS for corrections or verifications. For small systems, such as a condominium complex or residential school, the relevant parcels were often used as the basis for the delineated service area. In towns where 97% or more of their population is served by the PWS and no other service area delineation was available, the town boundary was used as the service area boundary. Some towns responded to the request for information or verification of service areas by stating that the town boundary should be used since all or nearly all of the municipality is served by the PWS.

Sources of information for estimated drinking water service areas

The following information was used to develop estimated drinking water service areas:

EOEEA Water Assets Project (2005) water lines (these were buffered to create service areas)Horsely Witten Report 2008Municipal Master Plans, Open Space Plans, Facilities Plans, Water Supply System Webpages, reports and online interactive mapsGIS data received from PWSDetailed infrastructure mapping completed through the MassDEP WURP Critical Infrastructure InitiativeIn the absence of other service area information, for municipalities served by a town-wide water system serving at least 97% of the population, the municipality’s boundary was used. Determinations of which municipalities are 97% or more served by the PWS were made based on the Percent Water Service Map created in 2018 by MassDEP based on various sources of information including but not limited to:The Winter population served submitted by the PWS in the ASR submittalThe number of services from WQTS as a percent of

Location of special curriculum schools and programs in Los Angeles CountyThis dataset is maintained through the County of Los Angeles Location Management System. The Location Management System is used by the County of Los Angeles GIS Program to maintain a single, comprehensive geographic database of locations countywide. For more information on the Location Management System, visit http://egis3.lacounty.gov/lms/.

Locations of environmental programs in Los Angeles CountyThis dataset is maintained through the County of Los Angeles Location Management System. The Location Management System is used by the County of Los Angeles GIS Program to maintain a single, comprehensive geographic database of locations countywide. For more information on the Location Management System, visit http://egis3.lacounty.gov/lms/.

Location of guidance and tutoring programs in Los Angeles CountyThis dataset is maintained through the County of Los Angeles Location Management System. The Location Management System is used by the County of Los Angeles GIS Program to maintain a single, comprehensive geographic database of locations countywide. For more information on the Location Management System, visithttp://egis3.lacounty.gov/lms/.

The Oregon Department of Forestry's (ODF) GIS goal is to support the stewardship of Oregon's forests through the acquisition, analysis, distribution and display of geographic information. We are using ArcGIS Online as tool to help our state agency upload, collaborate, and expose geospatial data online. ODF was established in 1911. It is under the direction of the State Forester who is appointed by the State Board of Forestry. The statutes direct the state forester to act on all matters pertaining to forestry, including collecting and sharing information about the conditions of Oregon's forests, protecting forestlands and conserving forest resources.Our Agency tasks include: Fire protection for 16 million acres of private, state and federal forests.Regulation of forest practices (under the Oregon Forest Practices Act) and promotion of forest stewardship.The implementation of the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds.Detection and control of harmful forest insect pests and forest tree diseases on 12 million acres of state and private lands.Management of 818,800 acres of state-owned forestlands.Forestry assistance to Oregon's 166,000 non-industrial private woodland owners.Forest resource planning.Community and urban forestry assistance.Contact:Contact:Steve TimbrookGIS Data AdministratorAdministrative BranchInformation Technology Program - GIS UnitOregon Department of Forestrysteve.timbrook@odf.oregon.gov503.931.2755

Terms of UseData Limitations and DisclaimerThe user’s use of and/or reliance on the information contained in the Document shall be at the user’s own risk and expense. MassDEP disclaims any responsibility for any loss or harm that may result to the user of this data or to any other person due to the user’s use of the Document.This is an ongoing data development project. Attempts have been made to contact all PWS systems, but not all have responded with information on their service area. MassDEP will continue to collect and verify this information. Some PWS service areas included in this datalayer have not been verified by the PWS or the municipality involved, but since many of those areas are based on information published online by the municipality, the PWS, or in a publicly available report, they are included in the estimated PWS service area datalayer.Please note: All PWS service area delineations are estimates for broad planning purposes and should only be used as a guide. The data is not appropriate for site-specific or parcel-specific analysis. Not all properties within a PWS service area are necessarily served by the system, and some properties outside the mapped service areas could be served by the PWS – please contact the relevant PWS. Not all service areas have been confirmed by the systems.Please use the following citation to reference these data:MassDEP, Water Utility Resilience Program. 2025. Community and Non-Transient Non-Community Public Water System Service Area (PubV2025_3).IMPORTANT NOTICE: This MassDEP Estimated Water Service datalayer may not be complete, may contain errors, omissions, and other inaccuracies and the data are subject to change. This version is published through MassGIS. We want to learn about the data uses. If you use this dataset, please notify staff in the Water Utility Resilience Program (WURP@mass.gov).This GIS datalayer represents approximate service areas for Public Water Systems (PWS) in Massachusetts. In 2017, as part of its “Enhancing Resilience and Emergency Preparedness of Water Utilities through Improved Mapping” (Critical Infrastructure Mapping Project ), the MassDEP Water Utility Resilience Program (WURP) began to uniformly map drinking water service areas throughout Massachusetts using information collected from various sources. Along with confirming existing public water system (PWS) service area information, the project collected and verified estimated service area delineations for PWSs not previously delineated and will continue to update the information contained in the datalayers. As of the date of publication, WURP has delineated Community (COM) and Non-Transient Non-Community (NTNC) service areas. Transient non-community (TNCs) are not part of this mapping project.Layers and Tables:The MassDEP Estimated Public Water System Service Area data comprises two polygon feature classes and a supporting table. Some data fields are populated from the MassDEP Drinking Water Program’s Water Quality Testing System (WQTS) and Annual Statistical Reports (ASR).The Community Water Service Areas feature class (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_COMM_POLY) includes polygon features that represent the approximate service areas for PWS classified as Community systems.The NTNC Water Service Areas feature class (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_NTNC_POLY) includes polygon features that represent the approximate service areas for PWS classified as Non-Transient Non-Community systems.The Unlocated Sites List table (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_USL) contains a list of known, unmapped active Community and NTNC PWS services areas at the time of publication.ProductionData UniversePublic Water Systems in Massachusetts are permitted and regulated through the MassDEP Drinking Water Program. The WURP has mapped service areas for all active and inactive municipal and non-municipal Community PWSs in MassDEP’s Water Quality Testing Database (WQTS). Community PWS refers to a public water system that serves at least 15 service connections used by year-round residents or regularly serves at least 25 year-round residents.All active and inactive NTNC PWS were also mapped using information contained in WQTS. An NTNC or Non-transient Non-community Water System refers to a public water system that is not a community water system and that has at least 15 service connections or regularly serves at least 25 of the same persons or more approximately four or more hours per day, four or more days per week, more than six months or 180 days per year, such as a workplace providing water to its employees.These data may include declassified PWSs. Staff will work to rectify the status/water services to properties previously served by declassified PWSs and remove or incorporate these service areas as needed.Maps of service areas for these systems were collected from various online and MassDEP sources to create service areas digitally in GIS. Every PWS is assigned a unique PWSID by MassDEP that incorporates the municipal ID of the municipality it serves (or the largest municipality it serves if it serves multiple municipalities). Some municipalities contain more than one PWS, but each PWS has a unique PWSID. The Estimated PWS Service Area datalayer, therefore, contains polygons with a unique PWSID for each PWS service area.A service area for a community PWS may serve all of one municipality (e.g. Watertown Water Department), multiple municipalities (e.g. Abington-Rockland Joint Water Works), all or portions of two or more municipalities (e.g. Provincetown Water Dept which serves all of Provincetown and a portion of Truro), or a portion of a municipality (e.g. Hyannis Water System, which is one of four PWSs in the town of Barnstable).Some service areas have not been mapped but their general location is represented by a small circle which serves as a placeholder. The location of these circles are estimates based on the general location of the source wells or the general estimated location of the service area - these do not represent the actual service area.Service areas were mapped initially from 2017 to 2022 and reflect varying years for which service is implemented for that service area boundary. WURP maintains the dataset quarterly with annual data updates; however, the dataset may not include all current active PWSs. A list of unmapped PWS systems is included in the USL table PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_USL available for download with the dataset. Some PWSs that are not mapped may have come online after this iteration of the mapping project; these will be reconciled and mapped during the next phase of the WURP project. PWS IDs that represent regional or joint boards with (e.g. Tri Town Water Board, Randolph/Holbrook Water Board, Upper Cape Regional Water Cooperative) will not be mapped because their individual municipal service areas are included in this datalayer.PWSs that do not have corresponding sources, may be part of consecutive systems, may have been incorporated into another PWSs, reclassified as a different type of PWS, or otherwise taken offline. PWSs that have been incorporated, reclassified, or taken offline will be reconciled during the next data update.Methodologies and Data SourcesSeveral methodologies were used to create service area boundaries using various sources, including data received from the systems in response to requests for information from the MassDEP WURP project, information on file at MassDEP, and service area maps found online at municipal and PWS websites. When provided with water line data rather than generalized areas, 300-foot buffers were created around the water lines to denote service areas and then edited to incorporate generalizations. Some municipalities submitted parcel data or address information to be used in delineating service areas.Verification ProcessSmall-scale PDF file maps with roads and other infrastructure were sent to every PWS for corrections or verifications. For small systems, such as a condominium complex or residential school, the relevant parcels were often used as the basis for the delineated service area. In towns where 97% or more of their population is served by the PWS and no other service area delineation was available, the town boundary was used as the service area boundary. Some towns responded to the request for information or verification of service areas by stating that the town boundary should be used since all or nearly all of the municipality is served by the PWS.Sources of information for estimated drinking water service areasThe following information was used to develop estimated drinking water service areas:EOEEA Water Assets Project (2005) water lines (these were buffered to create service areas)Horsely Witten Report 2008Municipal Master Plans, Open Space Plans, Facilities Plans, Water Supply System Webpages, reports and online interactive mapsGIS data received from PWSDetailed infrastructure mapping completed through the MassDEP WURP Critical Infrastructure InitiativeIn the absence of other service area information, for municipalities served by a town-wide water system serving at least 97% of the population, the municipality’s boundary was used. Determinations of which municipalities are 97% or more served by the PWS were made based on the Percent Water Service Map created in 2018 by MassDEP based on various sources of information including but not limited to:The Winter population served submitted by the PWS in the ASR submittalThe number of services from WQTS as a percent of developed parcelsTaken directly from a Master Plan, Water Department Website, Open Space Plan, etc. found onlineCalculated using information from the town on the population servedMassDEP staff estimateHorsely Witten Report 2008Calculation based on Water System Areas Mapped through MassDEP WURP Critical Infrastructure Initiative, 2017-2022Information found in publicly available PWS planning documents submitted to MassDEP or as part of infrastructure planningMaintenanceThe

A County Geologic Atlas (CGA) project is a study of a county's geology, and its mineral and ground-water resources. The information collected during the project is used to develop maps, data-base files, and reports. This same information is also produced as digital files. The map information is formatted as geographic information system (GIS) files with associated data bases. The maps and reports are also reproduced as portable document files (PDFs) that can be opened on virtually any computer using the free Acrobat Reader from Adobe.com. All of the digital files for the CGA's can be downloaded from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy. The majority of the files can also be viewed and queried through the use of this Story Map.Atlas information is commonly used in planning and environmental protection programs, as an educational resource, and by industries involved in water and mineral resources. It represents a comprehensive, detailed compilation of geologic data and interpretations within a county. The distribution and character of geologic materials determine how and where water enters the earth, and where it is stored in aquifers that can supply our needs. Geologic maps are a key element in delineating those flow paths and in relating land use to water quality. The atlas also provides a framework and terminology to support more detailed, site-specific studies. The records of water wells drilled in the area are an important source of data for constructing the maps and for understanding the distribution and use of ground water in the county. A data base of the information from those wells is one of the atlas products, and it can be queried with the GIS files to yield valuable insights for managing the ground-water resource.The atlas is also useful to non-professionals who simply wish to learn more about the geology of the county. It is a one-stop, comprehensive collection of information in a variety of forms and styles that should be useful to anyone with an interest in earth science or the county.The geologic data and maps are produced and distributed by the Minnesota Geological Survey (MGS) as Part A of an Atlas. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources follows with an investigation of the quantity, quality, and pollution sensitivity of ground water. Their products are distributed as Part B of the atlas, at a later date. If necessary, a report with additional information that was not possible to include on the limited space of the printed maps is produced by MGS as Part C of, or included as a supplement to, an atlas. The Atlas CD or DVD, which is available online at the Digital Conservancy, includes all the atlas products developed by the Minnesota Geological Survey.