Northeastern United States Town Boundary data are intended for geographic display of state, county and town (municipal) boundaries at statewide and regional levels. Use it to map and label towns on a map. These data are derived from Northeastern United States Political Boundary Master layer. This information should be displayed and analyzed at scales appropriate for 1:24,000-scale data. The State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection (CTDEP) assembled this regional data layer using data from other states in order to create a single, seamless representation of political boundaries within the vicinity of Connecticut that could be easily incorporated into mapping applications as background information. More accurate and up-to-date information may be available from individual State government Geographic Information System (GIS) offices. Not intended for maps printed at map scales greater or more detailed than 1:24,000 scale (1 inch = 2,000 feet.)

Background and Data Limitations The Massachusetts 1830 map series represents a unique data source that depicts land cover and cultural features during the historical period of widespread land clearing for agricultural. To our knowledge, Massachusetts is the only state in the US where detailed land cover information was comprehensively mapped at such an early date. As a result, these maps provide unusual insight into land cover and cultural patterns in 19th century New England. However, as with any historical data, the limitations and appropriate uses of these data must be recognized: (1) These maps were originally developed by many different surveyors across the state, with varying levels of effort and accuracy. (2) It is apparent that original mapping did not follow consistent surveying or drafting protocols; for instance, no consistent minimum mapping unit was identified or used by different surveyors; as a result, whereas some maps depict only large forest blocks, others also depict small wooded areas, suggesting that numerous smaller woodlands may have gone unmapped in many towns. Surveyors also were apparently not consistent in what they mapped as ‘woodlands’: comparison with independently collected tax valuation data from the same time period indicates substantial lack of consistency among towns in the relative amounts of ‘woodlands’, ‘unimproved’ lands, and ‘unimproveable’ lands that were mapped as ‘woodlands’ on the 1830 maps. In some instances, the lack of consistent mapping protocols resulted in substantially different patterns of forest cover being depicted on maps from adjoining towns that may in fact have had relatively similar forest patterns or in woodlands that ‘end’ at a town boundary. (3) The degree to which these maps represent approximations of ‘primary’ woodlands (i.e., areas that were never cleared for agriculture during the historical period, but were generally logged for wood products) varies considerably from town to town, depending on whether agricultural land clearing peaked prior to, during, or substantially after 1830. (4) Despite our efforts to accurately geo-reference and digitize these maps, a variety of additional sources of error were introduced in converting the mapped information to electronic data files (see detailed methods below). Thus, we urge considerable caution in interpreting these maps. Despite these limitations, the 1830 maps present an incredible wealth of information about land cover patterns and cultural features during the early 19th century, a period that continues to exert strong influence on the natural and cultural landscapes of the region.

    Acknowledgements
    Financial support for this project was provided by the BioMap Project of the Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, the National Science Foundation, and the Andrew Mellon Foundation. This project is a contribution of the Harvard Forest Long Term Ecological Research Program.

Data layers in this child item include high-water mark and storm-sensor data collected by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) New England Water Science Center following the January 4, 2018, and March 2-4, 2018, winter-storm events in New England. High-water marks and continuous water-level sensor data range from Portland, Maine, to Provincetown, Massachusetts, and reference the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88). For more information about these storm events and the data collection, please see Bent, G.C., and Taylor, N.J., 2020, Total water level data from the January and March 2018 nor’easters for coastal areas of New England: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2020–5048, 47 p., accessed June 3, 2021, at https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20205048 Flood-inundation map layers and interim products used to create them also are included in this child item. The USGS polygon of the stillwater-inundation map reflects a statistical storm with a 1-percent annual exceedance probability from Portland, Maine, to Provincetown, Massachusetts, based on coastal tide-gage data. The January and March 2018 inundation maps are polygon shapefiles of estimated flood extent derived from the high-water mark and storm-sensor data following the storm events. The flood extents and water-surface elevations were derived from simplified estimations of high-water mark and storm-sensor data and delineated using 2-meter-resolution lidar digital-elevation models. Interim data layers that were used to create the flood-inundation polygons include a coastal flood-profile line and coastal watershed boundaries. The compressed zip files contain ESRI shapefiles that include xml metadata files. Detailed processing steps are documented in the metadata for each layer. See the Scientific Investigation Report associated with this data release for more information.

NOTE: Due to the higher resolution of this data, it may be slow to load or require the user to zoom to a smaller area of interest.Date of Images:7/12/2023Date of Next Image:UnknownSummary:This PlanetScope imagery captured by Planet Labs Inc. in July 2023 shows the impacts from flooding in Vermont and New England.The true Color RGB provides a product of how the surface would look to the naked eye from space. The True Color RGB is produced using the 3 visible wavelength bands (red, green, and blue) from the respective sensor. Some minor atmospheric corrections have occurred.Suggested Use:True Color RGB provides a product of how the surface would look to the naked eye from space. The True Color RGB is produced using the 3 visible wavelength bands (red, green, and blue) from the respective sensor. Some minor atmospheric corrections have occurred.Satellite/Sensor:PlanetScopeResolution:3 metersCredits:NASA Disasters Program, Includes copyrighted material of Planet Labs PBC. All rights reserved.Esri REST Endpoint:See URL section on right side of pageWMS Endpoint:https://maps.disasters.nasa.gov/ags04/services/vermont_flooding_202307/planet_truecolor/MapServer/WMSServer

The Maine Silver Jackets team developed a set of coastal flood risk data layers to support local resilience planning. The USACE New England District modeled three different storm intensities (10-yr, 25-yr, and 100-yr) based on historic analogues (Patriot's Day Storm of April 15-17, 2007; Bomb Cyclone of Jan 4-6, 2018; and the Blizzard of Feb 4-10, 1978), and four different sea level heights (0, 1.5, 3.0, 3.9, and 8.8 feet above current mean higher-high water, NTDE 1983-2001). Tides, sea level rise scenarios, and riverine discharges were added as boundary conditions to the Coastal Modeling System framework (CMS-Flow), a hydrodynamic model solving for depth-averaged circulation. This was coupled with a spectral wave transformation model, CMS-Wave, to compute wave statistics and account for wave setup within the model domain. The resulting model information was provided as sets of nodes, or points, representing grid cell centroids (easting and northing) and maximum water level values referenced to NAVD88. These sets of model nodes were post-processed by NOAA to generate a single set of clean, consistent, merged, and spatially-referenced points. The points were used to interpolate raster-based water surface elevation data which became the basis for inundation mapping. High resolution lidar-derived elevation data were compiled with breaklines representing shorelines and waterfront infrastructure to generate a physical representation against which the storm-generated water surface elevation data were compared. Inundation depth grids and flood extent polygons were produced as final data layers.

The USGS, in cooperation with NOAA, is producing detailed maps of the seafloor off southern New England. The current phase of this cooperative research program is directed toward analyzing how bathymetric relief relates to the distribution of sedimentary environments and benthic communities. As part of this program, digital terrain models (DTMs) from bathymetry collected as part of NOAA's hydrographic charting activities are converted into ESRI raster grids and imagery, verified with bottom sampling and photography, and used to produce interpretations of seabed geology and hydrodynamic processes. Although each of the 7 continuous-coverage, completed surveys individually provides important benthic environmental information, many applications require a geographically broader perspective. For example, the usefulness of individual surveys is limited for the planning and construction of cross-Sound infrastructure, such as cables and pipelines, or for the testing of regional circulation models. To address this need, we integrated the 7 contiguous multibeam bathymetric DTMs into one dataset that covers much of Block Island Sound. The new dataset is adjusted to mean lower low water, is provided in UTM Zone 19 NAD83 and geographic WGS84 projections, and is gridded to 4-m resolution. This resolution is adequate for seafloor-feature and process interpretation, but small enough to be queried and manipulated with standard GIS programs and to allow for future growth. Natural features visible in the grid include boulder lag deposits of submerged moraines, sand-wave fields, and scour depressions that reflect the strength of the oscillating tidal currents. Bedform asymmetry allows interpretations of net sediment transport. Together the merged data reveal a larger, more continuous perspective of bathymetric topography than previously available, providing a fundamental framework for research and resource management activities off this portion of the Rhode Island coast.

description: The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), is producing detailed geologic maps of the coastal sea floor. Bathymetry, originally collected by NOAA for charting purposes, provides a fundamental framework for research and management activities off southern New England, shows the composition and terrain of the seabed, and provides information on sediment transport and benthic habitat. During July-August 2008 NOAA completed hydrographic survey H11922 west of Gay Head, Massachusetts, in Rhode Island Sound and during July and September 2010 bottom photographs and surficial sediment data were acquired as part of ground-truth reconnaissance surveys of this area. Interpretations were derived from the multibeam echo-sounder data and the ground-truth data used to verify them. For more information on the ground-truth surveys see http://quashnet.er.usgs.gov/data/2010/10033/ and http://quashnet.er.usgs.gov/data/2010/10005/; abstract: The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), is producing detailed geologic maps of the coastal sea floor. Bathymetry, originally collected by NOAA for charting purposes, provides a fundamental framework for research and management activities off southern New England, shows the composition and terrain of the seabed, and provides information on sediment transport and benthic habitat. During July-August 2008 NOAA completed hydrographic survey H11922 west of Gay Head, Massachusetts, in Rhode Island Sound and during July and September 2010 bottom photographs and surficial sediment data were acquired as part of ground-truth reconnaissance surveys of this area. Interpretations were derived from the multibeam echo-sounder data and the ground-truth data used to verify them. For more information on the ground-truth surveys see http://quashnet.er.usgs.gov/data/2010/10033/ and http://quashnet.er.usgs.gov/data/2010/10005/

The Maine Silver Jackets team developed a set of coastal flood risk data layers to support local resilience planning. The USACE New England District modeled three different storm intensities (10-yr, 25-yr, and 100-yr) based on historic analogues (Patriot's Day Storm of April 15-17, 2007; Bomb Cyclone of Jan 4-6, 2018; and the Blizzard of Feb 4-10, 1978), and four different sea level heights (0, 1.5, 3.0, 3.9, and 8.8 feet above current mean higher-high water, NTDE 1983-2001). Tides, sea level rise scenarios, and riverine discharges were added as boundary conditions to the Coastal Modeling System framework (CMS-Flow), a hydrodynamic model solving for depth-averaged circulation. This was coupled with a spectral wave transformation model, CMS-Wave, to compute wave statistics and account for wave setup within the model domain. The resulting model information was provided as sets of nodes, or points, representing grid cell centroids (easting and northing) and maximum water level values referenced to NAVD88. These sets of model nodes were post-processed by NOAA to generate a single set of clean, consistent, merged, and spatially-referenced points. The points were used to interpolate raster-based water surface elevation data which became the basis for inundation mapping. High resolution lidar-derived elevation data were compiled with breaklines representing shorelines and waterfront infrastructure to generate a physical representation against which the storm-generated water surface elevation data were compared. Inundation depth grids and flood extent polygons were produced as final data layers.

This high-level metadata data document will be supplemented with detailed regional metadata at a later date. The NHDPlusV2 is an integrated suite of application-ready geospatial data sets that incorporate many of the best features of the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and the National Elevation Dataset (NED). Interest in estimating stream flow volume and velocity to support pollutant fate-and-transport modeling was the driver behind the joint USEPA and USGS effort to develop the initial NHDPlus, referenced in this document as NHDPlusV1. NHDPlusV1 has been used in a wide variety of applications since its initial release in the fall of 2006. This widespread positive response prompted the multi-agency NHDPlus team to develop NHDPlus Version 2 (NHDPlusV2). The NHDPlusV2 includes a stream network (based on the 1:100,000-scale NHD), improved networking, naming, and "value-added attributes" (VAA's). NHDPlusV2 also includes elevation-derived catchments (drainage areas) produced using a drainage enforcement technique first broadly applied in New England, and thus dubbed "The New-England Method". This technique involves "burning-in" the 1:100,000-scale NHD and building "walls" using the national Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD). The hydro-enforced digital elevation model (DEM) is used to produce hydrologic derivatives that agree with the NHD and WBD. An interdisciplinary team from the USGS, USEPA and contractors, has found this method to produce the best quality NHD catchments using an automated process. The VAAs include greatly enhanced capabilities for upstream and downstream navigation, analysis and modeling. Examples include: retrieve all flowlines (predominantly confluence-to-confluence stream segments) and catchments upstream of a given flowline using queries rather than by slower flowline-by-flowline navigation; retrieve flowlines by stream order; select a stream level path sorted in hydrologic order for stream profile mapping, analysis and plotting; and, calculate cumulative catchment attributes using streamlined VAA hydrologic sequencing routing attributes. The VAAs include results from the use of these cumulative routing techniques, including cumulative drainage areas, precipitation, temperature, and runoff distributions. Several of these cumulative attributes are used to estimate mean annual flow and velocity as part of the VAAs. NHDPlusV2 contains a snapshot (2012) of the 1:100,000-scale NHD that has been extensively improved over the snapshot used in NHDPlusV1. While these updates will eventually be stored in the central NHD repository at USGS, this will not be accomplished prior to distribution of NHDPlusV2. NHDPlusV2 users may not make updates to the NHD portions of NHDPlusV2 with the intent of sending these updates back to the USGS. Updates to the 1:100,000-scale NHD snapshot in NHDPlusV2 should be sent to the USEPA as the primary steward. Purpose: The geospatial data sets included in NHDPlusV2 are intended to support a variety of water-related applications. They already have been used in an application to develop estimates of mean annual streamflow and velocity for each NHDFlowline feature in the conterminous United States. The results of these analyses are included with the NHDPlusV2 data. NHDPlusV2 serves as the sample frame for the stream and lake surveys conducted by the USEPA under the National Aquatic Resources Surveys program. A water-quality model developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) called SPARROW (Spatially Referenced Regressions on Watershed Attributes), can utilizes the NHDPlusV2 network functionality to track the downstream transport of nutrients, sediments, or other substances. NHDPlusV2 water bodies and estimates of streamflow and velocity are used in SPARROW to identify reservoir retention and in-stream loss factors. NHDPlusV2 climatic and land surface attributes can be used in SPARROW to identify potential factors in the delivery of nutrients from the land surface to streams. NHDPlusV2 data is also being used in select areas for a USGS Web-based application, called StreamStats. StreamStats provides tools to interactively select any point in the implemented areas, delineate watersheds, and to obtain streamflow and watershed characteristics for the selected point. NHDPlusV2 has been designed to accommodate many users' needs for future applications. NHDPlusV2 provides the framework and tools necessary to customize the behavior of the network relationships as well as building upon the attribute database, for which the user can assign their own data to the network.

description: The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), is producing detailed geologic maps of the coastal sea floor. Bathymetry, originally collected by NOAA for charting purposes, provides a fundamental framework for research and management activities off southern New England, shows the composition and terrain of the seabed, and provides information on sediment transport and benthic habitat. During July-August 2008 NOAA completed hydrographic survey H11922 west of Gay Head, Massachusetts, in Rhode Island Sound and during July and September 2010 bottom photographs and surficial sediment data were acquired as part of ground-truth reconnaissance surveys of this area. Interpretations were derived from the multibeam echo-sounder data and the ground-truth data used to verify them. For more information on the ground-truth surveys see http://quashnet.er.usgs.gov/data/2010/10033/ and http://quashnet.er.usgs.gov/data/2010/10005/; abstract: The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), is producing detailed geologic maps of the coastal sea floor. Bathymetry, originally collected by NOAA for charting purposes, provides a fundamental framework for research and management activities off southern New England, shows the composition and terrain of the seabed, and provides information on sediment transport and benthic habitat. During July-August 2008 NOAA completed hydrographic survey H11922 west of Gay Head, Massachusetts, in Rhode Island Sound and during July and September 2010 bottom photographs and surficial sediment data were acquired as part of ground-truth reconnaissance surveys of this area. Interpretations were derived from the multibeam echo-sounder data and the ground-truth data used to verify them. For more information on the ground-truth surveys see http://quashnet.er.usgs.gov/data/2010/10033/ and http://quashnet.er.usgs.gov/data/2010/10005/