This digital dataset was created as part of a U.S. Geological Survey study, done in cooperation with the Monterey County Water Resource Agency, to conduct a hydrologic resource assessment and develop an integrated numerical hydrologic model of the hydrologic system of Salinas Valley, CA. As part of this larger study, the USGS developed this digital dataset of geologic data and three-dimensional hydrogeologic framework models, referred to here as the Salinas Valley Geological Framework (SVGF), that define the elevation, thickness, extent, and lithology-based texture variations of nine hydrogeologic units in Salinas Valley, CA. The digital dataset includes a geospatial database that contains two main elements as GIS feature datasets: (1) input data to the 3D framework and textural models, within a feature dataset called “ModelInput”; and (2) interpolated elevation, thicknesses, and textural variability of the hydrogeologic units stored as arrays of polygonal cells, within a feature dataset called “ModelGrids”. The model input data in this data release include stratigraphic and lithologic information from water, monitoring, and oil and gas wells, as well as data from selected published cross sections, point data derived from geologic maps and geophysical data, and data sampled from parts of previous framework models. Input surface and subsurface data have been reduced to points that define the elevation of the top of each hydrogeologic units at x,y locations; these point data, stored in a GIS feature class named “ModelInputData”, serve as digital input to the framework models. The location of wells used a sources of subsurface stratigraphic and lithologic information are stored within the GIS feature class “ModelInputData”, but are also provided as separate point feature classes in the geospatial database. Faults that offset hydrogeologic units are provided as a separate line feature class. Borehole data are also released as a set of tables, each of which may be joined or related to well location through a unique well identifier present in each table. Tables are in Excel and ascii comma-separated value (CSV) format and include separate but related tables for well location, stratigraphic information of the depths to top and base of hydrogeologic units intercepted downhole, downhole lithologic information reported at 10-foot intervals, and information on how lithologic descriptors were classed as sediment texture. Two types of geologic frameworks were constructed and released within a GIS feature dataset called “ModelGrids”: a hydrostratigraphic framework where the elevation, thickness, and spatial extent of the nine hydrogeologic units were defined based on interpolation of the input data, and (2) a textural model for each hydrogeologic unit based on interpolation of classed downhole lithologic data. Each framework is stored as an array of polygonal cells: essentially a “flattened”, two-dimensional representation of a digital 3D geologic framework. The elevation and thickness of the hydrogeologic units are contained within a single polygon feature class SVGF_3DHFM, which contains a mesh of polygons that represent model cells that have multiple attributes including XY location, elevation and thickness of each hydrogeologic unit. Textural information for each hydrogeologic unit are stored in a second array of polygonal cells called SVGF_TextureModel. The spatial data are accompanied by non-spatial tables that describe the sources of geologic information, a glossary of terms, a description of model units that describes the nine hydrogeologic units modeled in this study. A data dictionary defines the structure of the dataset, defines all fields in all spatial data attributer tables and all columns in all nonspatial tables, and duplicates the Entity and Attribute information contained in the metadata file. Spatial data are also presented as shapefiles. Downhole data from boreholes are released as a set of tables related by a unique well identifier, tables are in Excel and ascii comma-separated value (CSV) format.

This layer contains the fire perimeters from the previous calendar year, and those dating back to 1878, for California. Perimeters are sourced from the Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP) and are updated shortly after the end of each calendar year. Information below is from the FRAP web site. There is also a tile cache version of this layer.About the Perimeters in this LayerInitially CAL FIRE and the USDA Forest Service jointly developed a fire perimeter GIS layer for public and private lands throughout California. The data covered the period 1950 to 2001 and included USFS wildland fires 10 acres and greater, and CAL FIRE fires 300 acres and greater. BLM and NPS joined the effort in 2002, collecting fires 10 acres and greater. Also in 2002, CAL FIRE’s criteria expanded to include timber fires 10 acres and greater in size, brush fires 50 acres and greater in size, grass fires 300 acres and greater in size, wildland fires destroying three or more structures, and wildland fires causing $300,000 or more in damage. As of 2014, the monetary requirement was dropped and the damage requirement is 3 or more habitable structures or commercial structures.In 1989, CAL FIRE units were requested to fill in gaps in their fire perimeter data as part of the California Fire Plan. FRAP provided each unit with a preliminary map of 1950-89 fire perimeters. Unit personnel also verified the pre-1989 perimeter maps to determine if any fires were missing or should be re-mapped. Each CAL FIRE Unit then generated a list of 300+ acre fires that started since 1989 using the CAL FIRE Emergency Activity Reporting System (EARS). The CAL FIRE personnel used this list to gather post-1989 perimeter maps for digitizing. The final product is a statewide GIS layer spanning the period 1950-1999.CAL FIRE has completed inventory for the majority of its historical perimeters back to 1950. BLM fire perimeters are complete from 2002 to the present. The USFS has submitted records as far back as 1878. The NPS records date to 1921.About the ProgramFRAP compiles fire perimeters and has established an on-going fire perimeter data capture process. CAL FIRE, the United States Forest Service Region 5, the Bureau of Land Management, and the National Park Service jointly develop the fire perimeter GIS layer for public and private lands throughout California at the end of the calendar year. Upon release, the data is current as of the last calendar year.The fire perimeter database represents the most complete digital record of fire perimeters in California. However it is still incomplete in many respects. Fire perimeter database users must exercise caution to avoid inaccurate or erroneous conclusions. For more information on potential errors and their source please review the methodology section of these pages.The fire perimeters database is an Esri ArcGIS file geodatabase with three data layers (feature classes):A layer depicting wildfire perimeters from contributing agencies current as of the previous fire year;A layer depicting prescribed fires supplied from contributing agencies current as of the previous fire year;A layer representing non-prescribed fire fuel reduction projects that were initially included in the database. Fuels reduction projects that are non prescribed fire are no longer included.All three are available in this layer. Additionally, you can find related web maps, view layers set up for individual years or decades, and tile layers here.Recommended Uses There are many uses for fire perimeter data. For example, it is used on incidents to locate recently burned areas that may affect fire behavior (see map left).Other uses include:Improving fire prevention, suppression, and initial attack success.Reduce and track hazards and risks in urban interface areas.Provide information for fire ecology studies for example studying fire effects on vegetation over time. Download the Fire Perimeter GIS data hereDownload a statewide map of Fire Perimeters hereSource: Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP)

This is 2017 DFIRM Data for cross section lines. New to the DFIRM data is the coastal flood study, that adds Velocity Zones (VE) along Puget Sound and the Seclusion Boundary. Seclusion areas are located where floodplains are affected by non-accredited levees and retain 1970s modeled flood hazards. These lines show the locations of channel surveys used to calculate flood elevations in the hydraulic models. The Cross Sections are also shown on the Flood Profiles in the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report and can be used to cross reference the Flood Profiles to the planimetric depiction of the flood hazards. All cross sections for which a spatial location is available should be included in the S_XS table. The Cross Sections are lines generally extending from outside the floodplain, across the entire floodplain and out the other side. In this data set the cross sections have been trimmed to include only the areas show to be in a flood hazard area. Each cross section is represented by a line feature. The line has been split where the modeling shows a different base flood elevation than the stream center on the left or right bank (reference 2017 FIS Volume 2). The Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) Database depicts flood risk information and supporting data used to develop the risk data. The primary risk classifications used are the 1-percent-annual-chance flood event (Zones A & V), the 0.2-percent-annual- chance flood event (Zone X shaded), areas of undetermined flood risk (Zone X shaded) and areas of minimal flood risk (Zone X unshaded). The DFIRM Database is derived from Flood Insurance Studies (FISs), previously published Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), flood hazard analyses performed in support of the FISs and FIRMs, and new mapping data, where available. The FISs and FIRMs are published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The file is georeferenced to earth's surface using the UTM projection and coordinate system. The specifications for the horizontal control of DFIRM data files are consistent with those required for mapping at a scale of 1:12,000.

Please read metadata for additional information(https://matterhorn.co.pierce.wa.us/GISmetadata/pdbswm_regulated_floodplain_x_sections.html). Any data download constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use (https://matterhorn.co.pierce.wa.us/Disclaimer/PierceCountyGISDataTermsofUse.pdf).

Digital data from VG09-6 Springston, G. and Wright, S., 2009,�Surficial geologic map of Charlotte, Vermont: Vermont Geological Survey Open-File Report VG09-6, 1 plate, scale 1:24,000. Data may include surficial geologic contacts, isopach contours lines, bedrock outcrop polygons, bedrock geologic contacts, hydrogeologic units and more. The surficial geologic materials data at a scale of 1:24,000 depict types of unconsolidated surficial and glacial materials overlying bedrock in Vermont. Data is created by mapping on the ground using standard geologic pace and compass techniques and/or GPS on a USGS 1:24000 topographic base map. The materials data is selected from the Vermont Geological Survey Open File Report (OFR) publication (https://dec.vermont.gov/geological-survey/publication-gis/ofr). The OFR contains more complete descriptions of map units, cross-sections, isopach maps and other information that may not be included in this digital data set.

In 2001, the Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey (the Bureau) released the Digital Bedrock Geology of Pennsylvania. This dataset was based on Map 1, Geologic Map of Pennsylvania, by T. M. Berg and others.

In 2004, the Bureau released Water Resource Report 69 (W69), Hydrogeologic and Well-Construction Characteristics of the Rocks of Pennsylvania by Gary M. Fleeger, Thomas A. McElroy, and Michael E. Moore. This report is mainly a Microsoft Access database, which can be purchased from the Bureau. These aquifer characteristics data are from selected water wells that could be field verified.

The digital aquifer characteristics dataset provides selected water-well construction and groundwater statistics for bedrock geologic units by the 23 physiographic sections of Pennsylvania, as shown on the Bureau’s Map 13. The dataset represents a derivative product of the two datasets mentioned above. Namely, it is a merger of the digital bedrock geology dataset and selected water well and groundwater data from W69. The derivative data are available for downloading below in “geodatabase” and shapefile formats. Files containing metadata (information about the datasets and how they were prepared) are included within the files.

The datasets were partitioned based on an unpublished dataset of the physiographic sections of the state. In the compilation process, the digital bedrock geology layer was clipped to the boundaries of each physiographic section. Because the physiographic boundaries were based on topography only, they tend to separate small portions of geologic formations that occur predominantly in certain physiographic sections. In W69, a few physiographic section boundaries had been modified to coincide with the boundaries of some geologic units. Therefore, some geologic units clipped by physiographic section are “missing” from the W69 summaries for a particular physiographic section. In the current dataset, the source of the data (that is, the physiographic section) from W69 is indicated to clarify this. Most often, slivers of polygons in one section are assigned data from an adjacent physiographic section where that unit predominantly occurs. Geologic formations that are small in areal extent and have no information were included but were not assigned any aquifer characteristics.

The groundwater data are water-well statistics for most geologic units in the state and include the following parameters:

•well depth (feet below ground surface) •casing length (feet including any extension above the ground surface) •static water level (feet below ground surface) •well yield (gallons per minute) •specific capacity (gallons per minute per foot of drawdown) •water-bearing zones (in 50-foot depth intervals)

For the first five parameters, statistical summaries include number of water-well records, minimum and maximum values, and 10th, 25th, 50th (median), 75th, and 90th percentiles of values. Tallies of water-bearing zones and their densities by depth intervals are added as well.

See the metadata for more information. In addition, users will benefit from reading background information on the datasets contained in W69 and the state’s digital bedrock geology.

W69 was based on approximately 50,000 water wells. The areal distribution of the wells is an important factor in determining the amount of confidence to place in the information. The density of water wells per geologic unit along with the water wells locations are provided so that the user can judge data representativeness. In some areas, wells occur at a concentration of less than one per 100 mi2 so limited confidence in data representativeness should be given. In other areas with more information, geologic units legitimately exhibit a natural amount of variance in their data values; here the statistical data should be considered more reliable.

We welcome feedback from users regarding these datasets. Please contact Stuart Reese with your comments, recommendations, and suggestions.

Digital Data from VG2018-1 Surficial Geologic Map of the Barre East 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Vermont. Data may include surficial geologic contacts, isopach contours lines, bedrock outcrop polygons, bedrock geologic contacts, hydrogeologic units and more. The surficial geologic materials data at a scale of 1:24,000 depict types of unconsolidated surficial and glacial materials overlying bedrock in Vermont. Data are created by mapping on the ground using standard geologic pace and compass techniques and/or GPS on a USGS 1:24,000 topographic or Lidar-drived base map. The OFR contains more complete descriptions of map units, cross-sections, isopach maps and other information that may not be included in this digital data set.

Digital Data from VG2017-6 Surficial Geologic Map of the Joes Pond Quadrangle, Vermont. Data may include surficial geologic contacts, isopach contours lines, bedrock outcrop polygons, bedrock geologic contacts, hydrogeologic units and more. The surficial geologic materials data at a scale of 1:24,000 depict types of unconsolidated surficial and glacial materials overlying bedrock in Vermont. Data are created by mapping on the ground using standard geologic pace and compass techniques and/or GPS on a USGS 1:24,000 topographic or Lidar-drived base map. The OFR contains more complete descriptions of map units, cross-sections, isopach maps and other information that may not be included in this digital data set.

This abstract contains links to public ArcGIS maps that include locations of carbonate springs and some of their characteristics. Information for accessing and navigating through the maps are included in a PowerPoint presentation IN THE FILE UPLOAD SECTION BELOW. Three separate data sets are included in the maps:

1. Geochemistry data from the US Water Quality Portal (WQP), which compiles geochemistry data from the USGS and other federal agencies.
2. Discharge data from WoKaS, a world wide spring discharge data set (Olarinoye et al., 2020).
3. Regional karst data from selected US state agencies.

Several base maps are included in the links. The US carbonate map describes and categorizes carbonates (e.g., depth from surface, overlying geology/ice, climate). The carbonate springs map categorizes springs as being urban, specifically within 1000 ft of a road, or rural. The basis for this categorization was that the heat island effect defines urban as within a 1000 ft of a road. There are other methods for defining urban versus rural to consider. Map links and details of the information they contain are listed below.

Map set 1: The WQP map provides three mapping options separated by the parameters available at each spring site. These maps summarize discrete water quality samples, but not data logger availability. Information at each spring provides links for where users can explore further data.

Option 1: WQP data with urban and rural springs labeled, with highlight of springs with or without NWIS data https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=2ce914ec01f14c20b58146f5d9702d8a

Options 2: WQP data by major ions and a few other solutes https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=5a114d2ce24c473ca07ef9625cd834b8

Option 3:WQP data by various carbon species https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=ae406f1bdcd14f78881905c5e0915b96

Map 2: The worldwide carbonate map in the WoKaS data set (citation below) includes a description of carbonate purity and distribution of urban and rural springs, for which discharge data are available: https://www.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?webmap=5ab43fdb2b784acf8bef85b61d0ebcbe.

Reference: Olarinoye, T., Gleeson, T., Marx, V., Seeger, S., Adinehvand, R., Allocca, V., Andreo, B., Apaéstegui, J., Apolit, C., Arfib, B. and Auler, A., 2020. Global karst springs hydrograph dataset for research and management of the world’s fastest-flowing groundwater. Scientific Data, 7(1), pp.1-9.

Map 3: Karst and spring data from selected states: This map includes sites that members of the RCN have suggested to our group.

https://uageos.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?webmap=28ed22a14bb749e2b22ece82bf8a8177

This data set is incomplete (as of October 13, 2022 it includes Florida and Missouri). We are looking for more information. You can share data links to additional data by typing them into the hydroshare page created for our group. Then new sites will periodically be added to the map: https://www.hydroshare.org/resource/0cf10e9808fa4c5b9e6a7852323e6b11/

Acknowledgements: These maps were created by Michael Jones, University of Arkansas and Shishir Sarker, University of Kentucky with help from Laura Toran and Francesco Navarro, Temple University.

TIPS FOR NAVIGATING THE MAPS ARE IN THE POWERPOINT DOCUMENT IN THE FILE UPLOAD SECTION BELOW.

The High Resolution Digital Elevation Model (HRDEM) product is derived from airborne LiDAR data (mainly in the south) and satellite images in the north. The complete coverage of the Canadian territory is gradually being established. It includes a Digital Terrain Model (DTM), a Digital Surface Model (DSM) and other derived data. For DTM datasets, derived data available are slope, aspect, shaded relief, color relief and color shaded relief maps and for DSM datasets, derived data available are shaded relief, color relief and color shaded relief maps. The productive forest line is used to separate the northern and the southern parts of the country. This line is approximate and may change based on requirements. In the southern part of the country (south of the productive forest line), DTM and DSM datasets are generated from airborne LiDAR data. They are offered at a 1 m or 2 m resolution and projected to the UTM NAD83 (CSRS) coordinate system and the corresponding zones. The datasets at a 1 m resolution cover an area of 10 km x 10 km while datasets at a 2 m resolution cover an area of 20 km by 20 km. In the northern part of the country (north of the productive forest line), due to the low density of vegetation and infrastructure, only DSM datasets are generally generated. Most of these datasets have optical digital images as their source data. They are generated at a 2 m resolution using the Polar Stereographic North coordinate system referenced to WGS84 horizontal datum or UTM NAD83 (CSRS) coordinate system. Each dataset covers an area of 50 km by 50 km. For some locations in the north, DSM and DTM datasets can also be generated from airborne LiDAR data. In this case, these products will be generated with the same specifications as those generated from airborne LiDAR in the southern part of the country. The HRDEM product is referenced to the Canadian Geodetic Vertical Datum of 2013 (CGVD2013), which is now the reference standard for heights across Canada. Source data for HRDEM datasets is acquired through multiple projects with different partners. Since data is being acquired by project, there is no integration or edgematching done between projects. The tiles are aligned within each project. The product High Resolution Digital Elevation Model (HRDEM) is part of the CanElevation Series created in support to the National Elevation Data Strategy implemented by NRCan. Collaboration is a key factor to the success of the National Elevation Data Strategy. Refer to the “Supporting Document” section to access the list of the different partners including links to their respective data.

This collection of eelgrass data has been collated to produce a national map of the location and distribution of eelgrass beds across Canada. The data providers collaborating in this initiative include Federal, Provincial and Municipal government departments and agencies, academia, non-governmental organizations, community groups, private sector, Indigenous groups and independent science organizations. The National Eelgrass Task Force (NETForce) is a collaborative, diverse and inclusive partnership of scientists, managers, and stakeholders working towards a concrete vision which is to create a national map of eelgrass distribution in Canada that is publicly accessible, dynamic, and useful for monitoring and collective decision-making. The eelgrass data were collected using various mapping techniques including species distribution models, benthic sonar, field measurements of habitat presence or absence, video transects, aerial photography, field validation, literature review, satellite imageries, LiDAR, Airborne spectrographic imaging, and Unoccupied Aerial Vehicle (UAV). The metadata provided by the partners relevant for their own projects and the field names were made similar for the compiled dataset. We also created additional fields that differentiated the datasets, and these include data provider, institution code, water body, mapping techniques, province, biogeographic region, eelgrass observation... Other fields are included depending on the original metadata provided by the data provider (i.e. eelgrass percentage cover, eelgrass density, map reference, image classification technique). The data span from 1987 to present, with some eelgrass beds being surveyed only once while others were sampled across several years. Uncertainty information associated with a dataset is included in the metadata when available. This map is intended to be evergreen and more eelgrass data will be added when available. This compiled dataset has been collected by many organizations for different purposes, using different survey techniques and different methodologies and, therefore, considerable care must be taken when using these data. For further information concerning specific datasets contact the data provider/institution and/or see the associated technical report (if available) included in the Report folder under the ‘Data and Resources’ section. This group of eelgrass data has been divided using the geographic boundaries of the Federal Marine Bioregions (https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/23eb8b56-dac8-4efc-be7c-b8fa11ba62e9). The title of each geodatabase (FGDB/GDB) contains the name of the bioregion. The Data Dictionary guide provides the fields description (English and French) from each layer included in the geodatabases. For additional information please see: Gomez C., Guijarro-Sabaniel J., Wong M. 2021. National Eelgrass Task (NET) Force: engagement in support of a dynamic map of eelgrass distribution in Canada to support monitoring, research and decision making. Can. Tech. Rep. Aquat. Sci. 3437: vi + 48 p. https://waves-vagues.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/library-bibliotheque/4098218x.pdf Guijarro-Sabaniel, J., Thomson, J. A., Vercaemer, B. and Wong, M. C. 2024. National Eelgrass Task Force (NETForce): Building a dynamic, open eelgrass map for Canada. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 3583: v + 31 p. https://waves-vagues.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/library-bibliotheque/41223147.pdf

The Unpublished Digital Post-Hurricane Sandy Geomorphological-GIS Map of the Gateway National Recreation Area: Sandy Hook, Jamaica Bay and Staten Island Units, New Jersey and New York is composed of GIS data layers and GIS tables in a 10.1 file geodatabase (gate_geomorphology.gdb), a 10.1 ArcMap (.MXD) map document (gate_geomorphology.mxd), individual 10.1 layer (.LYR) files for each GIS data layer, an ancillary map information (.PDF) document (gate_geomorphology.pdf) which contains source map unit descriptions, as well as other source map text, figures and tables, metadata in FGDC text (.TXT) and FAQ (.HTML) formats, and a GIS readme file (gate_gis_readme.pdf). Please read the gate_gis_readme.pdf for information pertaining to the proper extraction of the file geodatabase and other map files. To request GIS data in ESRI 10.1 shapefile format contact Stephanie O’Meara (stephanie.omeara@colostate.edu; see contact information below). The data is also available as a 2.2 KMZ/KML file for use in Google Earth, however, this format version of the map is limited in data layers presented and in access to GRI ancillary table information. Google Earth software is available for free at: http://www.google.com/earth/index.html. Users are encouraged to only use the Google Earth data for basic visualization, and to use the GIS data for any type of data analysis or investigation. 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). Source geologic maps and data used to complete this GRI digital dataset were provided by the following: Rutgers University Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences. Detailed information concerning the sources used and their contribution the GRI product are listed in the Source Citation section(s) of this metadata record (gate_metadata_faq.html; available at http://nrdata.nps.gov/geology/gri_data/gis/gate/gate_metadata_faq.html). Users of this data are cautioned about the locational accuracy of features within this dataset. Based on the source map scale of 1:6,000 and United States National Map Accuracy Standards features are within (horizontally) 5.08 meters or 16.67 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 Google Earth, ArcGIS 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: http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/inventory/geology/GeologyGISDataModel.cfm). The GIS data projection is NAD83, UTM Zone 18N, however, for the KML/KMZ format the data is projected upon export to WGS84 Geographic, the native coordinate system used by Google Earth. The data is within the area of interest of Gateway National Recreation Area.

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

Digital data from VG08-2 De Simone, D., and Gale, M., 2008,�Surficial geology and hydrogeology of the Town Londonderry, Vermont: Vermont Geological Survey Open-File Report VG08-2, 7 color plates, scale 1:24,000 Data may include surficial geologic contacts, isopach contours lines, bedrock outcrop polygons, bedrock geologic contacts, hydrogeologic units and more. The surficial geologic materials data at a scale of 1:24,000 depict types of unconsolidated surficial and glacial materials overlying bedrock in Vermont. Data is created by mapping on the ground using standard geologic pace and compass techniques and/or GPS on a USGS 1:24000 topographic base map. The materials data is selected from the Vermont Geological Survey Open File Report (OFR) publication (https://dec.vermont.gov/geological-survey/publication-gis/ofr). The OFR contains more complete descriptions of map units, cross-sections, isopach maps and other information that may not be included in this digital data set.

Digital data from VG09-3 De Simone, D. and Gale, M., 2009,�Surficial geology and hydrogeology of Dorset, Vermont: Vermont Geological Survey Open-File Report VG09-3, 9 color plates, scale 1:24,000 Data may include surficial geologic contacts, isopach contours lines, bedrock outcrop polygons, bedrock geologic contacts, hydrogeologic units and more. The surficial geologic materials data at a scale of 1:24,000 depict types of unconsolidated surficial and glacial materials overlying bedrock in Vermont. Data is created by mapping on the ground using standard geologic pace and compass techniques and/or GPS on a USGS 1:24000 topographic base map. The materials data is selected from the Vermont Geological Survey Open File Report (OFR) publication (https://dec.vermont.gov/geological-survey/publication-gis/ofr). The OFR contains more complete descriptions of map units, cross-sections, isopach maps and other information that may not be included in this digital data set.

This nowCOAST™ time-enabled map service provides maps depicting the geographic coverage of the latest NOAA/National Weather Service (NWS) WATCHES, WARNINGS, ADVISORIES, and STATEMENTS for long-duration hazardous weather, marine weather, hydrological, oceanographic, wildfire, air quality, and ecological conditions which may or are presently affecting inland, coastal, and maritime areas. A few examples include Gale Watch, Gale Warning, High Surf Advisory, High Wind Watch, Areal Flood Warning, Coastal Flood Watch, Winter Storm Warning, Wind Chill Advisory, Frost Advisory, Tropical Storm Watch, Red Flag Warning, Air Stagnation Warning, and Beach Hazards Statement. (A complete list is given in the Background Information section below.) The coverage areas of these products are usually defined by county or sub-county boundaries. The colors used to identify the different watches, advisories, warnings, and statements are the same colors used by the NWS on their map at weather.gov. The NWS products for long-duration hazardous conditions are updated in the nowCOAST map service approximately every 10 minutes. For more detailed information about the update schedule, please see: http://new.nowcoast.noaa.gov/help/#section=updateschedule. The coverage areas of these products are usually defined by county or sub-county boundaries, but for simplicity and performance reasons, adjacent WWAs of the same type, issuance, and expiration are depicted in this service as unified (merged/dissolved) polygons in the layers indicated with the suffix "(Dissolved Polygons)". However, a set of equivalent layers containing the original individual zone geometries are also included for querying purposes, and are indicated with the suffix "(Zone Polygons)". Corresponding zone polygon and dissolved polygon layers are matched together in group layers for each WWA category. The zone polygon layers are included in this service only to support query/identify operations (e.g., in order to retrieve the original zone geometry or other attributes such as a URL to the warning text bulletin) and thus will not be drawn when included in a normal map image request. Thus, the dissolved polygon layers should be used when requesting a map image (e.g. WMS GetMap or ArcGIS REST export operations), while the zone polygon layers should be used when performing a query (e.g. WMS GetFeatureInfo or ArcGIS REST query or identify operations). The colors used to identify the different watches, advisories, warnings, and statements are the same colors used by the NWS on their map at http://www.weather.gov. The NWS products for long-duration hazardous conditions are updated in the nowCOAST™ map service approximately every 10 minutes. For more detailed information about layer update frequency and timing, please reference the nowCOAST™ Dataset Update Schedule. Background Information NWS watches depict the geographic areas where the risk of hazardous weather or hydrologic events has increased significantly, but their occurrence, location, and/or timing is still uncertain. A warning depicts where a hazardous weather or hydrologic event is occurring, is imminent, or has a very high probability of occurring. A warning is used for conditions posing a threat to life or property. Advisories indicate where special weather conditions are occurring, imminent, or have a very high probability of occurring but are less serious than a warning. They are for events that may cause significant inconvenience, and if caution is not exercised, could lead to situations that may threaten life and/or property. Statements usually contain updated information on a warning and are used to let the public know when a warning is no longer in effect. NWS issues over 75 different types of watches, warnings, and advisories (WWAs). WWAs are issued by the NWS regional Weather Forecast Offices (WFOs) and also the NWS Ocean Prediction Center, National Hurricane Center, Central Pacific Hurricane Center, and Storm Prediction Center. The NWS WWAs are organized on the nowCOAST™ map viewer and within this map service by hazardous condition/threat layer groups and then by the geographic area (i.e. coastal & inland, immediate coast or maritime) for which the WWA product is targeted. This was done to allow users to select WWAs for hazardous conditions that are important to their operations or activities. Please note that the Tropical Storm and Hurricane Warnings are provided in both the High Wind Hazards: Maritime Areas and Coastal & Inland Areas layer groups and the Flooding Hazards: Coastal Areas layer group. These warnings are included in the Flooding Hazards/Coastal Areas layer group because the NWS uses those warnings to inform the public that tropical storm or hurricane winds may be accompanied by significant coastal flooding but below the thresholds required for the issuance of a storm surge warning. In addition, a tropical storm or hurricane warning may remain in effect when dangerously high water or a combination of dangerously high water and waves continue, even though the winds may be less than hurricane or tropical storm force. The NWS does not issue a Coastal Flood Warning or Advisory when a tropical storm or hurricane warning is in effect; however that does not mean that there is not a significant coastal flooding threat. High Wind Hazards (Associated with Non-Tropical & Tropical Cyclones) Maritime Areas Brisk Wind Advisory Small Craft Advisory Small Craft Advisory for Winds Gale Watch Gale Warning Storm Watch Storm Warning Hurricane Force Wind Watch Hurricane Force Wind Warning Tropical Storm Watch Tropical Storm Warning Hurricane Watch Hurricane Warning Coastal & Inland Areas High Wind Watch Wind Advisory Lake Wind Advisory High Wind Warning Tropical Storm Watch Tropical Storm Warning Hurricane Watch Hurricane Warning Hazardous Seas, Surf, and Beach Conditions Maritime Areas Small Craft Advisory for Hazardous Seas Small Craft Advisory for Rough Bar Hazardous Seas Watch Hazardous Seas Warning Immediate Coast Beach Hazards Statement High Surf Advisory High Surf Warning Low Water Advisory Rip Current Statement Flooding Hazards Coastal Areas Coastal Flood Statement Coastal Flood Watch Coastal Flood Advisory Coastal Flood Warning Lakeshore Flood Watch Lakeshore Flood Advisory Lakeshore Flood Warning Lakeshore Flood Statement Storm Surge Watch Storm Surge Warning Tsunami Watch Tsunami Warning Tropical Storm Warning Hurricane Warning Inland Areas Flood Watch (Point) (also called River Flood Watch) Flood Watch (Areal) Flood Advisory (Point) (also called River Flood Advisory) Flood Advisory (Areal) Flood Warning (Point) (also called River Flood Warning) Flood Warning (Areal) Hydrologic Outlook Hydrologic Statement Reduced Visibility Hazards Maritime Areas Dense Fog Advisory Coastal & Inland Areas Ashfall Advisory Ashfall Warning Blowing Dust Advisory Blowing Dust Warning Dense Fog Advisory Dense Smoke Advisory Freezing Spray Hazards Maritime Areas Heavy Freezing Spray Watch Freezing Spray Advisory Heavy Freezing Spray Advisory Snow, Sleet, Freezing Rain, and Freezing Fog Hazards Coastal & Inland Areas Blizzard Watch Blizzard Warning Freezing Fog Advisory Freezing Rain Advisory Ice Storm Warning Lake-Effect Snow Watch Lake-Effect Snow Advisory Lake-Effect Snow Warning Winter Storm Watch Winter Weather Advisory Winter Storm Warning Cold and Heat Hazards Coastal & Inland Areas Excessive Cold Watch Excessive Cold Warning Excessive Heat Watch Heat Advisory Excessive Heat Warning Frost Advisory Freeze Watch Freeze Warning Wind Chill Advisory Wind Chill Warning Critical Wildfire Conditions Coastal & Inland Areas Fire Weather Watch Red Flag Warning Unhealthy Air Quality Coastal & Inland Areas Air Stagnation Advisory Air Quality Alerts from states are NOT available For descriptions of individual NWS watches, warnings, and advisories please see Section 2 of the NWS Reference Guide available at http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/guide/Section2.pdf. Time Information This map service is time-enabled, meaning that each individual layer contains time-varying data and can be utilized by clients capable of making map requests that include a time component. In addition to ArcGIS Server REST access, time-enabled OGC WMS 1.3.0 access is also provided by this service. This particular service can be queried with or without the use of a time component. If the time parameter is specified in a request, the data or imagery most relevant to the provided time value, if any, will be returned. If the time parameter is not specified in a request, the latest data or imagery valid for the present system time will be returned to the client. If the time parameter is not specified and no data or imagery is available for the present time, no data will be returned. This service is configured with time coverage support, meaning that the service will always return the most relevant available data, if any, to the specified time value. For example, if the service contains data valid today at 12:00 and 12:10 UTC, but a map request specifies a time value of today at 12:07 UTC, the data valid at 12:10 UTC will be returned to the user. This behavior allows more flexibility for users, especially when displaying multiple time-enabled layers together despite slight differences in temporal resolution or update frequency. When interacting with this time-enabled service, only a single instantaneous time value should be specified in each request. If instead a time range is specified in a request (i.e. separate start time and end time values are given), the data returned may be different than what was intended. Care must be taken to ensure the time value specified in each request falls within the current time coverage of the service. Because this service is frequently updated as new data becomes available, the user must periodically determine the service's time extent. However, due to software limitations, the time extent of the service and

Digital data from VG11-1 Van Hoesen, J., 2011,�Surficial Geologic Map of the Town of Dover,�Vermont: Vermont Geological Survey Open-File Report VG11-1, 1 color plate, scale 1:24,000. Data may include surficial geologic contacts, isopach contours lines, bedrock outcrop polygons, bedrock geologic contacts, hydrogeologic units and more. The surficial geologic materials data at a scale of 1:24,000 depict types of unconsolidated surficial and glacial materials overlying bedrock in Vermont. Data is created by mapping on the ground using standard geologic pace and compass techniques and/or GPS on a USGS 1:24000 topographic base map. The materials data is selected from the Vermont Geological Survey Open File Report (OFR) publication (https://dec.vermont.gov/geological-survey/publication-gis/ofr). The OFR contains more complete descriptions of map units, cross-sections, isopach maps and other information that may not be included in this digital data set.

Digital Data from VG2018-5 Surficial Geology and Hydrogeology of the Jeffersonville Quadrangle, Vermont. Data may include surficial geologic contacts, isopach contours lines, bedrock outcrop polygons, bedrock geologic contacts, hydrogeologic units and more. The surficial geologic materials data at a scale of 1:24,000 depict types of unconsolidated surficial and glacial materials overlying bedrock in Vermont. Data are created by mapping on the ground using standard geologic pace and compass techniques and/or GPS on a USGS 1:24,000 topographic or Lidar-drived base map. The OFR contains more complete descriptions of map units, cross-sections, isopach maps and other information that may not be included in this digital data set.

Digital data from VG2017-1 DeSimone, D. J., 2017, Surficial Geology of the Bennington Area, Vermont: VGS Open File report VG2017-1, scale 1:12,000. Data may include surficial geologic contacts, isopach contours lines, bedrock outcrop polygons, bedrock geologic contacts, hydrogeologic units and more. The surficial geologic materials data at a scale of 1:12,000 depict types of unconsolidated surficial and glacial materials overlying bedrock in Vermont. Data are created by mapping on the ground using standard geologic pace and compass techniques and/or GPS on a USGS 1:24000 topographic base map. The materials data is selected from the Vermont Geological Survey Open File Report (OFR) publication (https://dec.vermont.gov/geological-survey/publication-gis/ofr). The OFR may contain more complete descriptions of map units, cross-sections, isopach maps and other information that may not be included in this digital data set.

Digital data from VG13-2 Springston, G, and Kim, J, 2013, Surficial Geologic Map of the Bristol Quadrangle, Vermont: Vermont Geological Survey Open File Report VG13-2., scale 1:24,000. Data may include surficial geologic contacts, isopach contours lines, bedrock outcrop polygons, bedrock geologic contacts, hydrogeologic units and more. The surficial geologic materials data at a scale of 1:24,000 depict types of unconsolidated surficial and glacial materials overlying bedrock in Vermont. Data is created by mapping on the ground using standard geologic pace and compass techniques and/or GPS on a USGS 1:24000 topographic base map. The materials data is selected from the Vermont Geological Survey Open File Report (OFR) publication (https://dec.vermont.gov/geological-survey/publication-gis/ofr). The OFR contains more complete descriptions of map units, cross-sections, isopach maps and other information that may not be included in this digital data set.

Maps at a scale of 1:24,000 are used to identify surficial geologic materials and resources, to identify and evaluate physical hazards, and to evaluate groundwater resources. Digital data from VG2020-1 Wright, S., 2020-1, Surficial geology and groundwater hydrology of the Stowe 7.5 minute quadrangle, Vermont: Vermont Geological Survey Open File Report VG2020-1, scale 1:24,000. Data may include surficial geologic contacts, isopach contours lines, bedrock outcrop polygons, bedrock geologic contacts, hydrogeologic units and more. The surficial geologic materials data at a scale of 1:24,000 depict types of unconsolidated surficial and glacial materials overlying bedrock in Vermont. Data is created by mapping on the ground using standard geologic pace and compass techniques and/or GPS on a LiDAR or USGS 1:24000 topographic base map. The materials data is selected from the Vermont Geological Survey Open File Report (OFR) publication (http://dec.vermont.gov/geological-survey/publication-gis/ofr). The OFR contains more complete descriptions of map units, cross-sections, isopach maps and other information that may not be included in this digital data set.