A Z Gis And Survey Services Limited Export Import Data. Follow the Eximpedia platform for HS code, importer-exporter records, and customs shipment details.

The manned aerial survey service market, valued at $13,650 million in 2025, is projected to experience steady growth, driven by increasing demand across diverse sectors. The Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 3.4% from 2025 to 2033 indicates a consistent expansion, fueled by several key factors. Technological advancements in aerial imaging and data processing are enhancing the accuracy and efficiency of surveys, making them more cost-effective for clients. The rising adoption of precision agriculture techniques in forestry and agriculture necessitates detailed aerial surveys for optimized resource management and yield improvement. Similarly, the construction industry's reliance on accurate land surveying for infrastructure projects and urban planning is a significant driver. Furthermore, the energy sector's need for pipeline inspections, power line monitoring, and resource exploration contributes to market growth. Environmental studies, particularly those involving land-use change monitoring and habitat assessment, also rely heavily on aerial survey services. The market is segmented by application (forestry & agriculture, construction, power & energy, oil & gas, environment studies, others) and aircraft type (helicopter, fixed-wing aircraft), with fixed-wing aircraft currently holding a larger market share due to their greater coverage capabilities. Competitive dynamics involve both established players like Pasco and Kokusai Kogyo and emerging technology companies offering innovative data analysis solutions. While regulatory hurdles and the high initial investment costs associated with acquiring and maintaining aircraft can pose restraints, the overall market outlook remains positive, largely driven by the increasing demand for precise and timely geospatial data. Geographic expansion presents substantial growth opportunities. North America and Europe currently hold significant market shares, driven by strong adoption across diverse industries and well-established infrastructure. However, the Asia-Pacific region, particularly China and India, demonstrates significant growth potential due to rapid infrastructure development and increasing investment in agriculture and environmental monitoring. The Middle East and Africa regions, while currently exhibiting lower adoption rates, are anticipated to witness accelerated growth in the coming years, driven by infrastructure development projects and exploration activities in the oil and gas sector. The ongoing development of advanced sensors and analytic software coupled with increased drone integration is also poised to significantly reshape this market. However, it is important to note that the continued rise of autonomous unmanned systems may present a long-term challenge to the dominance of manned aerial survey services.

The global aerial survey services market, valued at $16.09 billion in 2025, is poised for substantial growth. While the exact CAGR isn't provided, considering the increasing adoption of drone technology, advancements in sensor capabilities, and the rising demand across diverse sectors like construction, agriculture, and energy, a conservative estimate of a 7-8% CAGR for the forecast period (2025-2033) seems reasonable. This growth is driven by several factors: the increasing need for high-resolution imagery and data for precise mapping and analysis, the cost-effectiveness and efficiency of aerial surveys compared to traditional methods, and the expanding application of this technology in environmental monitoring and disaster management. Key segments like forestry and agriculture are experiencing significant growth due to the need for precision farming and deforestation monitoring. The construction industry also benefits from aerial surveys for site planning, progress monitoring, and risk assessment. Technological advancements, such as the integration of AI and machine learning for automated data processing and analysis, are further accelerating market expansion. However, factors like regulatory hurdles concerning drone operations and potential privacy concerns may act as restraints. The competitive landscape is dynamic, with both established players and new entrants vying for market share. Companies like Fugro, Nearmap, and EagleView Technology are leading the way with their comprehensive service offerings and technological expertise. The market is witnessing increased consolidation through mergers and acquisitions, as larger companies seek to expand their geographical reach and service capabilities. The geographic distribution of the market is diverse, with North America and Europe currently holding significant shares. However, the Asia-Pacific region is expected to witness substantial growth in the coming years driven by rapid infrastructure development and increasing investment in surveying technologies. This growth will be further fueled by government initiatives promoting the adoption of advanced technologies across various sectors. The continued technological innovation, along with increasing demand across diverse sectors, will contribute to the long-term growth of the aerial survey services market.

Land Surveying Services Market Outlook

The global land surveying services market size was valued at approximately USD 8.5 billion in 2023 and is projected to reach USD 15.2 billion by 2032, growing at a CAGR of 6.5% during the forecast period. This growth is primarily driven by increased urbanization, significant investments in infrastructure development, and the growing need for accurate geographic data in various industries. The demand for precise land measurements and mapping is essential for planning, construction, and legal purposes, which plays a critical role in driving the market forward.

One of the key growth factors for the land surveying services market is the expansion of urban areas and the resultant need for effective infrastructure planning and development. As cities grow and expand, there is a substantial demand for accurate land surveys to ensure proper alignment of new buildings, roads, and public utilities. This surge in urban development projects, particularly in emerging economies, drives the need for comprehensive land surveying services. Furthermore, government initiatives focusing on smart city projects and sustainable urban development are creating lucrative opportunities for market growth.

Technological advancements in surveying equipment and techniques are another significant growth driver for the market. The integration of advanced technologies such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR), and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) has revolutionized the field of land surveying. These technologies offer higher accuracy, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness compared to traditional methods. As a result, the adoption of these advanced surveying solutions is increasing across various sectors, thereby boosting market growth.

Additionally, the rising need for precise land data in various industries such as construction, mining, agriculture, and real estate is fueling the demand for land surveying services. Accurate land surveys are crucial for construction projects to ensure legal compliance and avoid disputes. In the mining industry, surveys help in resource exploration and site analysis. Similarly, in agriculture, land surveys assist in optimizing land use and planning irrigation systems. Thus, the multifaceted applications of land surveying services contribute significantly to market expansion.

Land Displacement Monitoring has become an integral aspect of modern land surveying services, especially in regions prone to natural disasters such as earthquakes, landslides, and floods. The ability to monitor land displacement accurately helps in assessing the stability of land, which is crucial for infrastructure development and urban planning. With the advent of advanced technologies like satellite imagery and remote sensing, land displacement monitoring has become more precise and accessible. This capability allows for early detection of potential hazards, enabling timely interventions to mitigate risks. Moreover, integrating land displacement data with Geographic Information Systems (GIS) provides a comprehensive understanding of land dynamics, supporting decision-making processes in various sectors, including construction, mining, and agriculture.

Regionally, North America holds a significant share of the land surveying services market, driven by extensive infrastructure development projects and the presence of advanced technology. However, the Asia Pacific region is anticipated to register the highest growth rate during the forecast period, attributed to rapid urbanization, industrialization, and substantial investments in infrastructure development. Countries like China, India, and Japan are at the forefront of this regional growth, with government policies supporting modernization and development.

Service Type Analysis

The land surveying services market can be segmented by service type into boundary survey, topographic survey, construction survey, location survey, subdivision survey, and others. Boundary surveys are crucial for determining property lines and resolving disputes. These surveys are essential for legal documentation and real estate transactions. The increasing number of land disputes and the need for clear property delineation are driving the demand for boundary surveys. Additionally, advancements in boundary survey techniques, including

This dataset represents the GIS Version of the Public Land Survey System including both rectangular and non-rectangular surveys. The primary source for the data is cadastral survey records housed by the BLM supplemented with local records and geographic control coordinates from states, counties as well as other federal agencies such as the USGS and USFS. The data has been converted from source documents to digital form and transferred into a GIS format that is compliant with FGDC Cadastral Data Content Standards and Guidelines for publication. This data is optimized for data publication and sharing rather than for specific 'production' or operation and maintenance. This data set includes the following: PLSS Fully Intersected (all of the PLSS feature at the atomic or smallest polygon level), PLSS Townships, First Divisions and Second Divisions (the hierarchical break down of the PLSS Rectangular surveys), and the Bureau of Census 2015 Cartographic State Boundaries. The Entity-Attribute section of this metadata describes these components in greater detail. Please note that the data on this site, although published at regular intervals, may not be the most current PLSS data that is available from the BLM. Updates to the PLSS data at the BLM State Offices may have occurred since this data was published. To ensure users have the most current data, please refer to the links provided in the PLSS CadNSDI Data Set Availability accessible here: https://gis.blm.gov/EGISDownload/Docs/PLSS_CadNSDI_Data_Set_Availability.pdf or contact the BLM PLSS Data Set Manager.The service referred in this item is published by BLM. Please refer to the metadata for contact information.Contact: GIS.Librarian@FloridaDEP.gov

The Digital Geologic-GIS Map of the Ready Quadrangle, Kentucky is composed of GIS data layers and GIS tables, and is available in the following GRI-supported GIS data formats: 1.) a 10.1 file geodatabase (read_geology.gdb), and a 2.) Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) geopackage. The file geodatabase format is supported with a 1.) ArcGIS Pro map file (.mapx) file (read_geology.mapx) and individual Pro layer (.lyrx) files (for each GIS data layer), as well as with a 2.) 10.1 ArcMap (.mxd) map document (read_geology.mxd) and individual 10.1 layer (.lyr) files (for each GIS data layer). Upon request, the GIS data is also available in ESRI 10.1 shapefile format. Contact Stephanie O'Meara (see contact information below) to acquire the GIS data in these GIS data formats. In addition to the GIS data and supporting GIS files, three additional files comprise a GRI digital geologic-GIS dataset or map: 1.) a readme file (maca_abli_geology_gis_readme.pdf), 2.) the GRI ancillary map information document (.pdf) file (maca_abli_geology.pdf) which contains geologic unit descriptions, as well as other ancillary map information and graphics from the source map(s) used by the GRI in the production of the GRI digital geologic-GIS data for the park, and 3.) a user-friendly FAQ PDF version of the metadata (read_geology_metadata_faq.pdf). Please read the maca_abli_geology_gis_readme.pdf for information pertaining to the proper extraction of the GIS data and other map files. QGIS software is available for free at: https://www.qgis.org/en/site/. The data were completed as a component of the Geologic Resources Inventory (GRI) program, a National Park Service (NPS) Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Division funded program that is administered by the NPS Geologic Resources Division (GRD). For a complete listing of GRI products visit the GRI publications webpage: For a complete listing of GRI products visit the GRI publications webpage: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/geologic-resources-inventory-products.htm. For more information about the Geologic Resources Inventory Program visit the GRI webpage: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/gri,htm. At the bottom of that webpage is a "Contact Us" link if you need additional information. You may also directly contact the program coordinator, Jason Kenworthy (jason_kenworthy@nps.gov). Source geologic maps and data used to complete this GRI digital dataset were provided by the following: U.S. Geological Survey. Detailed information concerning the sources used and their contribution the GRI product are listed in the Source Citation section(s) of this metadata record (read_geology_metadata.txt or read_geology_metadata_faq.pdf). Users of this data are cautioned about the locational accuracy of features within this dataset. Based on the source map scale of 1:24,000 and United States National Map Accuracy Standards features are within (horizontally) 12.2 meters or 40 feet of their actual location as presented by this dataset. Users of this data should thus not assume the location of features is exactly where they are portrayed in ArcGIS, QGIS or other software used to display this dataset. All GIS and ancillary tables were produced as per the NPS GRI Geology-GIS Geodatabase Data Model v. 2.3. (available at: https://www.nps.gov/articles/gri-geodatabase-model.htm).

The Land Survey Equipment System market is experiencing robust growth, driven by increasing infrastructure development globally, the burgeoning need for precise land management in agriculture, and the expanding adoption of advanced surveying techniques in various sectors like mining and energy. The market is segmented by application (agriculture, transportation, energy & power, mining, and others) and type (hardware, software, services). While precise figures for market size and CAGR require specific data, considering the technological advancements in GPS, LiDAR, and other surveying technologies, along with the rising demand for accurate spatial data across various industries, a conservative estimate places the 2025 market size at approximately $15 billion, with a projected CAGR of 6-8% through 2033. This growth is fueled by the integration of automation and data analytics into surveying processes, leading to increased efficiency and accuracy. Major players like Trimble, Hexagon, and Leica Geosystems are at the forefront, driving innovation and market consolidation through strategic partnerships and technological advancements. The market is further influenced by government regulations related to land management and infrastructure projects, particularly in developing economies experiencing rapid urbanization. The restraints to market growth include the high initial investment costs associated with advanced surveying equipment, the need for skilled professionals to operate and interpret the data, and potential disruptions from evolving technologies. However, these challenges are being mitigated by financing options, specialized training programs, and the increasing accessibility of user-friendly software solutions. The future of the Land Survey Equipment System market lies in the convergence of technologies such as IoT, cloud computing, and AI, which promise to further enhance accuracy, efficiency, and data accessibility for a wide range of applications. Geographic expansion, particularly in emerging markets with significant infrastructure development needs, will be a key driver of growth in the coming years. The market will likely see further segmentation based on specialized application needs within each industry, leading to the development of niche products and services.

The Construction Mapping Services market is booming, projected to reach $32 billion by 2033. Discover key trends, growth drivers, leading companies like Fugro and AECOM, and the impact of BIM, GIS, and drone technology in this insightful market analysis.

Snapshot img

Geographic Information System Analytics Market Size 2024-2028

The geographic information system analytics market size is forecast to increase by USD 12 billion at a CAGR of 12.41% between 2023 and 2028.

The GIS Analytics Market analysis is experiencing significant growth, driven by the increasing need for efficient land management and emerging methods in data collection and generation. The defense industry's reliance on geospatial technology for situational awareness and real-time location monitoring is a major factor fueling market expansion. Additionally, the oil and gas industry's adoption of GIS for resource exploration and management is a key trend. Building Information Modeling (BIM) and smart city initiatives are also contributing to market growth, as they require multiple layered maps for effective planning and implementation. The Internet of Things (IoT) and Software as a Service (SaaS) are transforming GIS analytics by enabling real-time data processing and analysis.
Augmented reality is another emerging trend, as it enhances the user experience and provides valuable insights through visual overlays. Overall, heavy investments are required for setting up GIS stations and accessing data sources, making this a promising market for technology innovators and investors alike.

What will be the Size of the GIS Analytics Market during the forecast period?

Request Free Sample

The geographic information system analytics market encompasses various industries, including government sectors, agriculture, and infrastructure development. Smart city projects, building information modeling, and infrastructure development are key areas driving market growth. Spatial data plays a crucial role in sectors such as transportation, mining, and oil and gas. Cloud technology is transforming GIS analytics by enabling real-time data access and analysis. Startups are disrupting traditional GIS markets with innovative location-based services and smart city planning solutions. Infrastructure development in sectors like construction and green buildings relies on modern GIS solutions for efficient planning and management. Smart utilities and telematics navigation are also leveraging GIS analytics for improved operational efficiency.
GIS technology is essential for zoning and land use management, enabling data-driven decision-making. Smart public works and urban planning projects utilize mapping and geospatial technology for effective implementation. Surveying is another sector that benefits from advanced GIS solutions. Overall, the GIS analytics market is evolving, with a focus on providing actionable insights to businesses and organizations.

How is this Geographic Information System Analytics Industry segmented?

The geographic information system analytics industry research report provides comprehensive data (region-wise segment analysis), with forecasts and estimates in 'USD billion' for the period 2024-2028, as well as historical data from 2018-2022 for the following segments.

End-user

  Retail and Real Estate
  Government
  Utilities
  Telecom
  Manufacturing and Automotive
  Agriculture
  Construction
  Mining
  Transportation
  Healthcare
  Defense and Intelligence
  Energy
  Education and Research
  BFSI


Components

  Software
  Services


Deployment Modes

  On-Premises
  Cloud-Based


Applications

  Urban and Regional Planning
  Disaster Management
  Environmental Monitoring Asset Management
  Surveying and Mapping
  Location-Based Services
  Geospatial Business Intelligence
  Natural Resource Management


Geography

  North America

    US
    Canada


  Europe

    France
    Germany
    UK


  APAC

    China
    India
    South Korea


  Middle East and Africa

    UAE


  South America

    Brazil


  Rest of World

By End-user Insights

The retail and real estate segment is estimated to witness significant growth during the forecast period.

The GIS analytics market analysis is witnessing significant growth due to the increasing demand for advanced technologies in various industries. In the retail sector, for instance, retailers are utilizing GIS analytics to gain a competitive edge by analyzing customer demographics and buying patterns through real-time location monitoring and multiple layered maps. The retail industry's success relies heavily on these insights for effective marketing strategies. Moreover, the defense industries are integrating GIS analytics into their operations for infrastructure development, permitting, and public safety. Building Information Modeling (BIM) and 4D GIS software are increasingly being adopted for construction project workflows, while urban planning and designing require geospatial data for smart city planning and site selection.

The oil and gas industry is leveraging satellite imaging and IoT devices for land acquisition and mining operations. In the public sector, gover

Note: This LCMS CONUS Cause of Change image service has been deprecated. It has been replaced by the LCMS CONUS Annual Change image service, which provides updated and consolidated change data.Please refer to the new service here: https://usfs.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=085626ec50324e5e9ad6323c050ac84dThis product is part of the Landscape Change Monitoring System (LCMS) data suite. It shows LCMS change attribution classes for each year. See additional information about change in the Entity_and_Attribute_Information or Fields section below.LCMS is a remote sensing-based system for mapping and monitoring landscape change across the United States. Its objective is to develop a consistent approach using the latest technology and advancements in change detection to produce a "best available" map of landscape change. Because no algorithm performs best in all situations, LCMS uses an ensemble of models as predictors, which improves map accuracy across a range of ecosystems and change processes (Healey et al., 2018). The resulting suite of LCMS change, land cover, and land use maps offer a holistic depiction of landscape change across the United States over the past four decades.Predictor layers for the LCMS model include outputs from the LandTrendr and CCDC change detection algorithms and terrain information. These components are all accessed and processed using Google Earth Engine (Gorelick et al., 2017). To produce annual composites, the cFmask (Zhu and Woodcock, 2012), cloudScore, and TDOM (Chastain et al., 2019) cloud and cloud shadow masking methods are applied to Landsat Tier 1 and Sentinel 2a and 2b Level-1C top of atmosphere reflectance data. The annual medoid is then computed to summarize each year into a single composite. The composite time series is temporally segmented using LandTrendr (Kennedy et al., 2010; Kennedy et al., 2018; Cohen et al., 2018). All cloud and cloud shadow free values are also temporally segmented using the CCDC algorithm (Zhu and Woodcock, 2014). LandTrendr, CCDC and terrain predictors can be used as independent predictor variables in a Random Forest (Breiman, 2001) model. LandTrendr predictor variables include fitted values, pair-wise differences, segment duration, change magnitude, and slope. CCDC predictor variables include CCDC sine and cosine coefficients (first 3 harmonics), fitted values, and pairwise differences from the Julian Day of each pixel used in the annual composites and LandTrendr. Terrain predictor variables include elevation, slope, sine of aspect, cosine of aspect, and topographic position indices (Weiss, 2001) from the USGS 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) (U.S. Geological Survey, 2019). Reference data are collected using TimeSync, a web-based tool that helps analysts visualize and interpret the Landsat data record from 1984-present (Cohen et al., 2010).Outputs fall into three categories: change, land cover, and land use. Change relates specifically to vegetation cover and includes slow loss (not included for PRUSVI), fast loss (which also includes hydrologic changes such as inundation or desiccation), and gain. These values are predicted for each year of the time series and serve as the foundational products for LCMS. References: Breiman, L. (2001). Random Forests. In Machine Learning (Vol. 45, pp. 5-32). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324Chastain, R., Housman, I., Goldstein, J., Finco, M., and Tenneson, K. (2019). Empirical cross sensor comparison of Sentinel-2A and 2B MSI, Landsat-8 OLI, and Landsat-7 ETM top of atmosphere spectral characteristics over the conterminous United States. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 221, pp. 274-285). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2018.11.012Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., and Kennedy, R. (2010). Detecting trends in forest disturbance and recovery using yearly Landsat time series: 2. TimeSync - Tools for calibration and validation. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 114, Issue 12, pp. 2911-2924). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.07.010Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., Healey, S. P., Kennedy, R. E., and Gorelick, N. (2018). A LandTrendr multispectral ensemble for forest disturbance detection. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 205, pp. 131-140). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.11.015Foga, S., Scaramuzza, P.L., Guo, S., Zhu, Z., Dilley, R.D., Beckmann, T., Schmidt, G.L., Dwyer, J.L., Hughes, M.J., Laue, B. (2017). Cloud detection algorithm comparison and validation for operational Landsat data products. Remote Sensing of Environment, 194, 379-390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.03.026Gorelick, N., Hancher, M., Dixon, M., Ilyushchenko, S., Thau, D., and Moore, R. (2017). Google Earth Engine: Planetary-scale geospatial analysis for everyone. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 202, pp. 18-27). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.06.031Healey, S. P., Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., Kenneth Brewer, C., Brooks, E. B., Gorelick, N., Hernandez, A. J., Huang, C., Joseph Hughes, M., Kennedy, R. E., Loveland, T. R., Moisen, G. G., Schroeder, T. A., Stehman, S. V., Vogelmann, J. E., Woodcock, C. E., Yang, L., and Zhu, Z. (2018). Mapping forest change using stacked generalization: An ensemble approach. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 204, pp. 717-728). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.09.029Kennedy, R. E., Yang, Z., and Cohen, W. B. (2010). Detecting trends in forest disturbance and recovery using yearly Landsat time series: 1. LandTrendr - Temporal segmentation algorithms. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 114, Issue 12, pp. 2897-2910). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.07.008Kennedy, R., Yang, Z., Gorelick, N., Braaten, J., Cavalcante, L., Cohen, W., and Healey, S. (2018). Implementation of the LandTrendr Algorithm on Google Earth Engine. In Remote Sensing (Vol. 10, Issue 5, p. 691). https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10050691Olofsson, P., Foody, G. M., Herold, M., Stehman, S. V., Woodcock, C. E., and Wulder, M. A. (2014). Good practices for estimating area and assessing accuracy of land change. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 148, pp. 42-57). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2014.02.015Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J., Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M. and Duchesnay, E. (2011). Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. In Journal of Machine Learning Research (Vol. 12, pp. 2825-2830).Pengra, B. W., Stehman, S. V., Horton, J. A., Dockter, D. J., Schroeder, T. A., Yang, Z., Cohen, W. B., Healey, S. P., and Loveland, T. R. (2020). Quality control and assessment of interpreter consistency of annual land cover reference data in an operational national monitoring program. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 238, p. 111261). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2019.111261U.S. Geological Survey. (2019). USGS 3D Elevation Program Digital Elevation Model, accessed August 2022 at https://developers.google.com/earth-engine/datasets/catalog/USGS_3DEP_10mWeiss, A.D. (2001). Topographic position and landforms analysis Poster Presentation, ESRI Users Conference, San Diego, CAZhu, Z., and Woodcock, C. E. (2012). Object-based cloud and cloud shadow detection in Landsat imagery. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 118, pp. 83-94). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.10.028Zhu, Z., and Woodcock, C. E. (2014). Continuous change detection and classification of land cover using all available Landsat data. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 144, pp. 152-171). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2014.01.011This record was taken from the USDA Enterprise Data Inventory that feeds into the https://data.gov catalog. Data for this record includes the following resources: ISO-19139 metadata ArcGIS Hub Dataset ArcGIS GeoService For complete information, please visit https://data.gov.

ArcGIS Map Packages and GIS Data for Gillreath-Brown, Nagaoka, and Wolverton (2019)

**When using the GIS data included in these map packages, please cite all of the following:

Gillreath-Brown, Andrew, Lisa Nagaoka, and Steve Wolverton. A Geospatial Method for Estimating Soil Moisture Variability in Prehistoric Agricultural Landscapes, 2019. PLoSONE 14(8):e0220457. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220457

Gillreath-Brown, Andrew, Lisa Nagaoka, and Steve Wolverton. ArcGIS Map Packages for: A Geospatial Method for Estimating Soil Moisture Variability in Prehistoric Agricultural Landscapes, Gillreath-Brown et al., 2019. Version 1. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2572018

OVERVIEW OF CONTENTS

This repository contains map packages for Gillreath-Brown, Nagaoka, and Wolverton (2019), as well as the raw digital elevation model (DEM) and soils data, of which the analyses was based on. The map packages contain all GIS data associated with the analyses described and presented in the publication. The map packages were created in ArcGIS 10.2.2; however, the packages will work in recent versions of ArcGIS. (Note: I was able to open the packages in ArcGIS 10.6.1, when tested on February 17, 2019). The primary files contained in this repository are:

Raw DEM and Soils data

Digital Elevation Model Data (Map services and data available from U.S. Geological Survey, National Geospatial Program, and can be downloaded from the National Elevation Dataset)

DEM_Individual_Tiles: Individual DEM tiles prior to being merged (1/3 arc second) from USGS National Elevation Dataset.

DEMs_Merged: DEMs were combined into one layer. Individual watersheds (i.e., Goodman, Coffey, and Crow Canyon) were clipped from this combined DEM.

Soils Data (Map services and data available from Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture)

Animas-Dolores_Area_Soils: Small portion of the soil mapunits cover the northeastern corner of the Coffey Watershed (CW).

Cortez_Area_Soils: Soils for Montezuma County, encompasses all of Goodman (GW) and Crow Canyon (CCW) watersheds, and a large portion of the Coffey watershed (CW).

ArcGIS Map Packages

Goodman_Watershed_Full_SMPM_Analysis: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the full Goodman Watershed (GW).

Goodman_Watershed_Mesa-Only_SMPM_Analysis: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the mesa-only Goodman Watershed.

Crow_Canyon_Watershed_SMPM_Analysis: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the Crow Canyon Watershed (CCW).

Coffey_Watershed_SMPM_Analysis: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the Coffey Watershed (CW).

For additional information on contents of the map packages, please see see "Map Packages Descriptions" or open a map package in ArcGIS and go to "properties" or "map document properties."

LICENSES

Code: MIT year: 2019 Copyright holders: Andrew Gillreath-Brown, Lisa Nagaoka, and Steve Wolverton

CONTACT

Andrew Gillreath-Brown, PhD Candidate, RPA Department of Anthropology, Washington State University andrew.brown1234@gmail.com – Email andrewgillreathbrown.wordpress.com – Web

This dataset is a compilation of available oil and gas pipeline data and is maintained by BSEE. Pipelines are used to transport and monitor oil and/or gas from wells within the outer continental shelf (OCS) to resource collection locations. Currently, pipelines managed by BSEE are found in Gulf of Mexico and southern California waters.

© MarineCadastre.gov This layer is a component of BOEMRE Layers.

This Map Service contains many of the primary data types created by both the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) within the Department of Interior (DOI) for the purpose of managing offshore federal real estate leases for oil, gas, minerals, renewable energy, sand and gravel. These data layers are being made available as REST mapping services for the purpose of web viewing and map overlay viewing in GIS systems. Due to re-projection issues which occur when converting multiple UTM zone data to a single national or regional projected space, and line type changes that occur when converting from UTM to geographic projections, these data layers should not be used for official or legal purposes. Only the original data found within BOEM/BSEE’s official internal database, federal register notices or official paper or pdf map products may be considered as the official information or mapping products used by BOEM or BSEE. A variety of data layers are represented within this REST service are described further below. These and other cadastre information the BOEM and BSEE produces are generated in accordance with 30 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 256.8 to support Federal land ownership and mineral resource management.

For more information – Contact: Branch Chief, Mapping and Boundary Branch, BOEM, 381 Elden Street, Herndon, VA 20170. Telephone (703) 787-1312; Email: mapping.boundary.branch@boem.gov

The REST services for National Level Data can be found here: http://gis.boemre.gov/arcgis/rest/services/BOEM_BSEE/MMC_Layers/MapServer

REST services for regional level data can be found by clicking on the region of interest from the following URL: http://gis.boemre.gov/arcgis/rest/services/BOEM_BSEE

Individual Regional Data or in depth metadata for download can be obtained in ESRI Shape file format by clicking on the region of interest from the following URL: http://www.boem.gov/Oil-and-Gas-Energy-Program/Mapping-and-Data/Index.aspx

Currently the following layers are available from this REST location:

OCS Drilling Platforms -Locations of structures at and beneath the water surface used for the purpose of exploration and resource extraction. Only platforms in federal Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) waters are included. A database of platforms and rigs is maintained by BSEE.

OCS Oil and Natural Gas Wells -Existing wells drilled for exploration or extraction of oil and/or gas products. Additional information includes the lease number, well name, spud date, the well class, surface area/block number, and statistics on well status summary. Only wells found in federal Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) waters are included. Wells information is updated daily. Additional files are available on well completions and well tests. A database of wells is maintained by BSEE.

OCS Oil & Gas Pipelines -This dataset is a compilation of available oil and gas pipeline data and is maintained by BSEE. Pipelines are used to transport and monitor oil and/or gas from wells within the outer continental shelf (OCS) to resource collection locations. Currently, pipelines managed by BSEE are found in Gulf of Mexico and southern California waters.

Unofficial State Lateral Boundaries - The approximate location of the boundary between two states seaward of the coastline and terminating at the Submerged Lands Act Boundary. Because most State boundary locations have not been officially described beyond the coast, are disputed between states or in some cases the coastal land boundary description is not available, these lines serve as an approximation that was used to determine a starting point for creation of BOEM’s OCS Administrative Boundaries. GIS files are not available for this layer due to its unofficial status.

BOEM OCS Administrative Boundaries - Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Administrative Boundaries Extending from the Submerged Lands Act Boundary seaward to the Limit of the United States OCS (The U.S. 200 nautical mile Limit, or other marine boundary)For additional details please see the January 3, 2006 Federal Register Notice.

BOEM Limit of OCSLA ‘8(g)’ zone - The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act '8(g) Zone' lies between the Submerged Lands Act (SLA) boundary line and a line projected 3 nautical miles seaward of the SLA boundary line. Within this zone, oil and gas revenues are shared with the coastal state(s). The official version of the ‘8(g)’ Boundaries can only be found on the BOEM Official Protraction Diagrams (OPDs) or Supplemental Official Protraction described below.

Submerged Lands Act Boundary - The SLA boundary defines the seaward limit of a state's submerged lands and the landward boundary of federally managed OCS lands. The official version of the SLA Boundaries can only be found on the BOEM Official Protraction Diagrams (OPDs) or Supplemental Official Protraction Diagrams described below.

Atlantic Wildlife Survey Tracklines(2005-2012) - These data depict tracklines of wildlife surveys conducted in the Mid-Atlantic region since 2005. The tracklines are comprised of aerial and shipboard surveys. These data are intended to be used as a working compendium to inform the diverse number of groups that conduct surveys in the Mid-Atlantic region.The tracklines as depicted in this dataset have been derived from source tracklines and transects. The tracklines have been simplified (modified from their original form) due to the large size of the Mid-Atlantic region and the limited ability to map all areas simultaneously.The tracklines are to be used as a general reference and should not be considered definitive or authoritative. This data can be downloaded from http://www.boem.gov/uploadedFiles/BOEM/Renewable_Energy_Program/Mapping_and_Data/ATL_WILDLIFE_SURVEYS.zip

BOEM OCS Protraction Diagrams & Leasing Maps - This data set contains a national scale spatial footprint of the outer boundaries of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM’s) Official Protraction Diagrams (OPDs) and Leasing Maps (LMs). It is updated as needed. OPDs and LMs are mapping products produced and used by the BOEM to delimit areas available for potential offshore mineral leases, determine the State/Federal offshore boundaries, and determine the limits of revenue sharing and other boundaries to be considered for leasing offshore waters. This dataset shows only the outline of the maps that are available from BOEM.Only the most recently published paper or pdf versions of the OPDs or LMs should be used for official or legal purposes. The pdf maps can be found by going to the following link and selecting the appropriate region of interest. http://www.boem.gov/Oil-and-Gas-Energy-Program/Mapping-and-Data/Index.aspx Both OPDs and LMs are further subdivided into individual Outer Continental Shelf(OCS) blocks which are available as a separate layer. Some OCS blocks that also contain other boundary information are known as Supplemental Official Block Diagrams (SOBDs.) Further information on the historic development of OPD's can be found in OCS Report MMS 99-0006: Boundary Development on the Outer Continental Shelf: http://www.boemre.gov/itd/pubs/1999/99-0006.PDF Also see the metadata for each of the individual GIS data layers available for download. The Official Protraction Diagrams (OPDs) and Supplemental Official Block Diagrams (SOBDs), serve as the legal definition for BOEM offshore boundary coordinates and area descriptions.

BOEM OCS Lease Blocks - Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) lease blocks serve as the legal definition for BOEM offshore boundary coordinates used to define small geographic areas within an Official Protraction Diagram (OPD) for leasing and administrative purposes. OCS blocks relate back to individual Official Protraction Diagrams and are not uniquely numbered. Only the most recently published paper or pdf

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 Coal Oil Point 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 Coal Oil Point map area data layers. Data layers are symbolized as shown on the associated map sheets.

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 Fort Ross 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 Fort Ross map area data layers. Data layers are symbolized as shown on the associated map sheets.

The Surveying and Mapping Services market plays a vital role in various industries, providing essential data and insights for effective planning, construction, and land management. This sector encompasses a wide range of services, including land surveying, GIS mapping, topographic surveys, and geospatial analysis, a

This dataset is part of the Cadastral National Spatial Data Infrastructure (CadNSDI) publication dataset for rectangular and non‐rectangular Public Land Survey System (PLSS) data.

This dataset represents the GIS Version of the Public Land Survey System including both rectangular and non-rectangular surveys. The primary source for the data is cadastral survey records housed by the BLM supplemented with local records and geographic control coordinates from states, counties as well as other federal agencies such as the USGS and USFS. The data has been converted from source documents to digital form and transferred into a GIS format that is compliant with FGDC Cadastral Data Content Standards and Guidelines for publication. This data is optimized for data publication and sharing rather than for specific "production" or operation and maintenance. This data set includes the following: PLSS Fully Intersected (all of the PLSS feature at the atomic or smallest polygon level), PLSS Townships, First Divisions and Second Divisions (the hierarchical break down of the PLSS Rectangular surveys) PLSS Special surveys (non-rectangular components of the PLSS) Meandered Water, Corners and Conflicted Areas (known areas of gaps or overlaps between Townships or state boundaries). The Entity-‐ Attribute section of this metadata describes these components in greater detail.

The CadNSDI or the Cadastral Publication Data Standard is the cadastral data component of the NSDI. This is the publication guideline for cadastral data that is intended to provide a common format and structure and content for cadastral information that can be made available across jurisdictional boundaries, providing a consistent and uniform cadastral data to meet business need that includes connections to the source information from the data stewards. The data stewards determine which data are published and should be contacted for any questions on data content or for additional information. The cadastral publication data is data provided by cadastral data producers in a standard form on a regular basis.

Cadastral publication data has two primary components, land parcel data and cadastral reference data. It is important to recognize that the publication data are not the same as the operation and maintenance or production data. The production data is structured to optimize maintenance processes, is integrated with internal agency operations and contains much more detail than the publication data. The publication data is a subset of the more complete production data and is reformatted to meet a national standard so data can be integrated across jurisdictional boundaries and be presented in a consistent and standard form nationally.

US Forest Service survey and land use maps for purchase tracts in the Enoree District, Sumter National Forest. These maps have some information on the land use history of the Calhoun Critical Zone Observatory.

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

The construction of this data model was adapted from the Telvent Miner & Miner ArcFM MultiSpeak data model to provide interface functionality with Milsoft Utility Solutions WindMil engineering analysis program. Database adaptations, GPS data collection, and all subsequent GIS processes were performed by Southern Geospatial Services for the Town of Apex Electric Utilities Division in accordance to the agreement set forth in the document "Town of Apex Electric Utilities GIS/GPS Project Proposal" dated March 10, 2008. Southern Geospatial Services disclaims all warranties with respect to data contained herein. Questions regarding data quality and accuracy should be directed to persons knowledgeable with the forementioned agreement.The data in this GIS with creation dates between March of 2008 and April of 2024 were generated by Southern Geospatial Services, PLLC (SGS). The original inventory was performed under the above detailed agreement with the Town of Apex (TOA). Following the original inventory, SGS performed maintenance projects to incorporate infrastructure expansion and modification into the GIS via annual service agreements with TOA. These maintenances continued through April of 2024.At the request of TOA, TOA initiated in house maintenance of the GIS following delivery of the final SGS maintenance project in April of 2024. GIS data created or modified after April of 2024 are not the product of SGS.With respect to SGS generated GIS data that are point features:GPS data collected after January 1, 2013 were surveyed using mapping grade or survey grade GPS equipment with real time differential correction undertaken via the NC Geodetic Surveys Real Time Network (VRS). GPS data collected prior to January 1, 2013 were surveyed using mapping grade GPS equipment without the use of VRS, with differential correction performed via post processing.With respect to SGS generated GIS data that are line features:Line data in the GIS for overhead conductors were digitized as straight lines between surveyed poles. Line data in the GIS for underground conductors were digitized between surveyed at grade electric utility equipment. The configurations and positions of the underground conductors are based on TOA provided plans. The underground conductors are diagrammatic and cannot be relied upon for the determination of the actual physical locations of underground conductors in the field.The Service Locations feature class was created by Southern Geospatial Services (SGS) from a shapefile of customer service locations generated by dataVoice International (DV) as part of their agreement with the Town of Apex (TOA) regarding the development and implemention of an Outage Management System (OMS).Point features in this feature class represent service locations (consumers of TOA electric services) by uniquely identifying the features with the same unique identifier as generated for a given service location in the TOA Customer Information System (CIS). This is also the mechanism by which the features are tied to the OMS. Features are physically located in the GIS based on CIS address in comparison to address information found in Wake County GIS property data (parcel data). Features are tied to the GIS electric connectivity model by identifying the parent feature (Upline Element) as the transformer that feeds a given service location.SGS was provided a shapefile of 17992 features from DV. Error potentially exists in this DV generated data for the service location features in terms of their assigned physical location, phase, and parent element.Regarding the physical location of the features, SGS had no part in physically locating the 17992 features as provided by DV and cannot ascertain the accuracy of the locations of the features without undertaking an analysis designed to verify or correct for error if it exists. SGS constructed the feature class and loaded the shapefile objects into the feature class and thus the features exist in the DV derived location. SGS understands that DV situated the features based on the address as found in the CIS. No features were verified as to the accuracy of their physical location when the data were originally loaded. It is the assumption of SGS that the locations of the vast majority of the service location features as provided by DV are in fact correct.SGS understands that as a general rule that DV situated residential features (individually or grouped) in the center of a parcel. SGS understands that for areas where multiple features may exist in a given parcel (such as commercial properties and mobile home parks) that DV situated features as either grouped in the center of the parcel or situated over buildings, structures, or other features identifiable in air photos. It appears that some features are also grouped in roads or other non addressed locations, likely near areas where they should physically be located, but that these features were not located in a final manner and are either grouped or strung out in a row in the general area of where DV may have expected they should exist.Regarding the parent and phase of the features, the potential for error is due to the "first order approximation" protocol employed by DV for assigning the attributes. With the features located as detailed above, SGS understands that DV identified the transformer closest to the service location (straight line distance) as its parent. Phase was assigned to the service location feature based on the phase of the parent transformer. SGS expects that this protocol correctly assigned parent (and phase) to a significant portion of the features, however this protocol will also obviously incorretly assign parent in many instances.To accurately identify parent for all 17992 service locations would require a significant GIS and field based project. SGS is willing to undertake a project of this magnitude at the discretion of TOA. In the meantime, SGS is maintaining (editing and adding to) this feature class as part of the ongoing GIS maintenance agreement that is in place between TOA and SGS. In lieu of a project designed to quality assess and correct for the data provided by DV, SGS will verify the locations of the features at the request of TOA via comparison of the unique identifier for a service location to the CIS address and Wake County parcel data address as issues arise with the OMS if SGS is directed to focus on select areas for verification by TOA. Additionally, as SGS adds features to this feature class, if error related to the phase and parent of an adjacent feature is uncovered during a maintenance, it will be corrected for as part of that maintenance.With respect to the additon of features moving forward, TOA will provide SGS with an export of CIS records for each SGS maintenance, SGS will tie new accounts to a physical location based on address, SGS will create a feature for the CIS account record in this feature class at the center of a parcel for a residential address or at the center of a parcel or over the correct (or approximately correct) location as determined via air photos or via TOA plans for commercial or other relevant areas, SGS will identify the parent of the service location as the actual transformer that feeds the service location, and SGS will identify the phase of the service address as the phase of it's parent.Service locations with an ObjectID of 1 through 17992 were originally physically located and attributed by DV.Service locations with an ObjectID of 17993 or higher were originally physically located and attributed by SGS.DV originated data are provided the Creation User attribute of DV, however if SGS has edited or verified any aspect of the feature, this attribute will be changed to SGS and a comment related to the edits will be provided in the SGS Edits Comments data field. SGS originated features will be provided the Creation User attribute of SGS. Reference the SGS Edits Comments attribute field Metadata for further information.