Progress Needed on Identifying Expenditures, Building and Utilizing a Data Infrastructure, and Reducing Duplicative Efforts The federal government collects, maintains, and uses geospatial information—data linked to specific geographic locations—to help support varied missions, including national security and natural resources conservation. To coordinate geospatial activities, in 1994 the President issued an executive order to develop a National Spatial Data Infrastructure—a framework for coordination that includes standards, data themes, and a clearinghouse. GAO was asked to review federal and state coordination of geospatial data. GAO’s objectives were to (1) describe the geospatial data that selected federal agencies and states use and how much is spent on geospatial data; (2) assess progress in establishing the National Spatial Data Infrastructure; and (3) determine whether selected federal agencies and states invest in duplicative geospatial data. To do so, GAO identified federal and state uses of geospatial data; evaluated available cost data from 2013 to 2015; assessed FGDC’s and selected agencies’ efforts to establish the infrastructure; and analyzed federal and state datasets to identify duplication. What GAO Found Federal agencies and state governments use a variety of geospatial datasets to support their missions. For example, after Hurricane Sandy in 2012, the Federal Emergency Management Agency used geospatial data to identify 44,000 households that were damaged and inaccessible and reported that, as a result, it was able to provide expedited assistance to area residents. Federal agencies report spending billions of dollars on geospatial investments; however, the estimates are understated because agencies do not always track geospatial investments. For example, these estimates do not include billions of dollars spent on earth-observing satellites that produce volumes of geospatial data. The Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) have started an initiative to have agencies identify and report annually on geospatial-related investments as part of the fiscal year 2017 budget process. FGDC and selected federal agencies have made progress in implementing their responsibilities for the National Spatial Data Infrastructure as outlined in OMB guidance; however, critical items remain incomplete. For example, the committee established a clearinghouse for records on geospatial data, but the clearinghouse lacks an effective search capability and performance monitoring. FGDC also initiated plans and activities for coordinating with state governments on the collection of geospatial data; however, state officials GAO contacted are generally not satisfied with the committee’s efforts to coordinate with them. Among other reasons, they feel that the committee is focused on a federal perspective rather than a national one, and that state recommendations are often ignored. In addition, selected agencies have made limited progress in their own strategic planning efforts and in using the clearinghouse to register their data to ensure they do not invest in duplicative data. For example, 8 of the committee’s 32 member agencies have begun to register their data on the clearinghouse, and they have registered 59 percent of the geospatial data they deemed critical. Part of the reason that agencies are not fulfilling their responsibilities is that OMB has not made it a priority to oversee these efforts. Until OMB ensures that FGDC and federal agencies fully implement their responsibilities, the vision of improving the coordination of geospatial information and reducing duplicative investments will not be fully realized. OMB guidance calls for agencies to eliminate duplication, avoid redundant expenditures, and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the sharing and dissemination of geospatial data. However, some data are collected multiple times by federal, state, and local entities, resulting in duplication in effort and resources. A new initiative to create a national address database could potentially result in significant savings for federal, state, and local governments. However, agencies face challenges in effectively coordinating address data collection efforts, including statutory restrictions on sharing certain federal address data. Until there is effective coordination across the National Spatial Data Infrastructure, there will continue to be duplicative efforts to obtain and maintain these data at every level of government.https://www.gao.gov/assets/d15193.pdfWhat GAO Recommends GAO suggests that Congress consider assessing statutory limitations on address data to foster progress toward a national address database. GAO also recommends that OMB improve its oversight of FGDC and federal agency initiatives, and that FGDC and selected agencies fully implement initiatives. The agencies generally agreed with the recommendations and identified plans to implement them.
Open Government Licence - Canada 2.0https://open.canada.ca/en/open-government-licence-canada
License information was derived automatically
Have you ever wanted to create your own maps, or integrate and visualize spatial datasets to examine changes in trends between locations and over time? Follow along with these training tutorials on QGIS, an open source geographic information system (GIS) and learn key concepts, procedures and skills for performing common GIS tasks – such as creating maps, as well as joining, overlaying and visualizing spatial datasets. These tutorials are geared towards new GIS users. We’ll start with foundational concepts, and build towards more advanced topics throughout – demonstrating how with a few relatively easy steps you can get quite a lot out of GIS. You can then extend these skills to datasets of thematic relevance to you in addressing tasks faced in your day-to-day work.
The Surface Management Agency (SMA) Geographic Information System (GIS) dataset depicts Federal land for the United States and classifies this land by its active Federal surface managing agency. The SMA feature class covers the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands. A Federal SMA agency refers to a Federal agency with administrative jurisdiction over the surface of Federal lands. Jurisdiction over the land is defined when the land is either: Withdrawn by some administrative or legislative action, or Acquired or Exchanged by a Federal Agency. This layer is a dynamic assembly of spatial data layers maintained at various federal and local government offices. The GIS data contained in this dataset represents the polygon features that show the boundaries for Surface Management Agency and the surface extent of each Federal agency’s surface administrative jurisdiction. SMA data depicts current withdrawn areas for a particular agency and (when appropriate) includes land that was acquired or exchanged and is located outside of a withdrawal area for that agency. The SMA data do not illustrate land status ownership pattern boundaries or contain land ownership attribute details. The SMA Withdrawals feature class covers the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands. A Federal SMA Withdrawal is defined by formal actions that set aside, withhold, or reserve Federal land by statute or administrative order for public purposes. A withdrawal creates a title encumbrance on the land. Withdrawals must accomplish one or more of the following: A. Transfer total or partial jurisdiction of Federal land between Federal agencies. B. Close (segregate) Federal land to operation of all or some of the public land laws and/or mineral laws. C. Dedicate Federal land to a specific public purpose. There are four major categories of formal withdrawals: (1) Administrative, (2) Presidential Proclamations, (3) Congressional, and (4) Federal Power Act (FPA) or Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Withdrawals. These SMA Withdrawals will include the present total extent of withdrawn areas rather than all of the individual withdrawal actions that created them over time. A Federal SMA agency refers to a Federal agency with administrative jurisdiction over the surface of Federal lands. Jurisdiction over the land is defined when the land is either: Withdrawn by some administrative or legislative action, or Acquired or Exchanged by a Federal Agency. This layer is a dynamic assembly of spatial data layers maintained at various federal and local government offices. The GIS data contained in this dataset represents the polygon features that show the boundaries for Surface Management Agency and the surface extent of each Federal agency’s surface administrative jurisdiction. SMA data depicts current withdrawn areas for a particular agency and (when appropriate) includes land that was acquired or exchanged and is located outside of a withdrawal area for that agency. The SMA data do not illustrate land status ownership pattern boundaries or contain land ownership attribute details.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Landmarks and Government BuildingsThis feature layer, utilizing National Geospatial Data Asset (NGDA) data from the U.S. Geological Survey, displays Cemeteries, Post Offices, City/Town Halls, Courthouses, State Capitols, State Supreme Courts, The White House, U.S. Capitol, U.S. Supreme Court, Historic Sites/Points of Interest, and National Symbols/Monuments in the U.S. Per the USGS, "Structures data are designed to be used in general mapping and in the analysis of structure related activities using geographic information system technology. The National Map structures data is commonly combined with other data themes, such as boundaries, elevation, hydrography, and transportation, to produce general reference base maps. The types of structures collected are largely determined by the needs of disaster planning and emergency response, and homeland security organizations."Supreme Court of WyomingData currency: This cached Esri federal service is checked weekly for updates from its enterprise federal source (Landmarks & Government Buildings) and will support mapping, analysis, data exports and OGC API – Feature access.NGDAID: 135 (USGS National Structures Dataset - USGS National Map Downloadable Data Collection)OGC API Features Link: (Landmark Structures - OGC Features) copy this link to embed it in OGC Compliant viewersFor more information, please visit: The National MapFor feedback please contact: Esri_US_Federal_Data@esri.comNGDA Data SetThis data set is part of the NGDA Real Property Theme Community. Per the Federal Geospatial Data Committee (FGDC), Real Property is defined as "the spatial representation (location) of real property entities, typically consisting of one or more of the following: unimproved land, a building, a structure, site improvements and the underlying land. Complex real property entities (that is "facilities") are used for a broad spectrum of functions or missions. This theme focuses on spatial representation of real property assets only and does not seek to describe special purpose functions of real property such as those found in the Cultural Resources, Transportation, or Utilities themes."For other NGDA Content: Esri Federal Datasets
Overview The Office of the Geographer and Global Issues at the U.S. Department of State produces the Large Scale International Boundaries (LSIB) dataset. The current edition is version 11.4 (published 24 February 2025). The 11.4 release contains updated boundary lines and data refinements designed to extend the functionality of the dataset. These data and generalized derivatives are the only international boundary lines approved for U.S. Government use. The contents of this dataset reflect U.S. Government policy on international boundary alignment, political recognition, and dispute status. They do not necessarily reflect de facto limits of control. National Geospatial Data Asset This dataset is a National Geospatial Data Asset (NGDAID 194) managed by the Department of State. It is a part of the International Boundaries Theme created by the Federal Geographic Data Committee. Dataset Source Details Sources for these data include treaties, relevant maps, and data from boundary commissions, as well as national mapping agencies. Where available and applicable, the dataset incorporates information from courts, tribunals, and international arbitrations. The research and recovery process includes analysis of satellite imagery and elevation data. Due to the limitations of source materials and processing techniques, most lines are within 100 meters of their true position on the ground. Cartographic Visualization The LSIB is a geospatial dataset that, when used for cartographic purposes, requires additional styling. The LSIB download package contains example style files for commonly used software applications. The attribute table also contains embedded information to guide the cartographic representation. Additional discussion of these considerations can be found in the Use of Core Attributes in Cartographic Visualization section below. Additional cartographic information pertaining to the depiction and description of international boundaries or areas of special sovereignty can be found in Guidance Bulletins published by the Office of the Geographer and Global Issues: https://hiu.state.gov/data/cartographic_guidance_bulletins/ Contact Direct inquiries to internationalboundaries@state.gov. Direct download: https://data.geodata.state.gov/LSIB.zip Attribute Structure The dataset uses the following attributes divided into two categories: ATTRIBUTE NAME | ATTRIBUTE STATUS CC1 | Core CC1_GENC3 | Extension CC1_WPID | Extension COUNTRY1 | Core CC2 | Core CC2_GENC3 | Extension CC2_WPID | Extension COUNTRY2 | Core RANK | Core LABEL | Core STATUS | Core NOTES | Core LSIB_ID | Extension ANTECIDS | Extension PREVIDS | Extension PARENTID | Extension PARENTSEG | Extension These attributes have external data sources that update separately from the LSIB: ATTRIBUTE NAME | ATTRIBUTE STATUS CC1 | GENC CC1_GENC3 | GENC CC1_WPID | World Polygons COUNTRY1 | DoS Lists CC2 | GENC CC2_GENC3 | GENC CC2_WPID | World Polygons COUNTRY2 | DoS Lists LSIB_ID | BASE ANTECIDS | BASE PREVIDS | BASE PARENTID | BASE PARENTSEG | BASE The core attributes listed above describe the boundary lines contained within the LSIB dataset. Removal of core attributes from the dataset will change the meaning of the lines. An attribute status of “Extension” represents a field containing data interoperability information. Other attributes not listed above include “FID”, “Shape_length” and “Shape.” These are components of the shapefile format and do not form an intrinsic part of the LSIB. Core Attributes The eight core attributes listed above contain unique information which, when combined with the line geometry, comprise the LSIB dataset. These Core Attributes are further divided into Country Code and Name Fields and Descriptive Fields. County Code and Country Name Fields “CC1” and “CC2” fields are machine readable fields that contain political entity codes. These are two-character codes derived from the Geopolitical Entities, Names, and Codes Standard (GENC), Edition 3 Update 18. “CC1_GENC3” and “CC2_GENC3” fields contain the corresponding three-character GENC codes and are extension attributes discussed below. The codes “Q2” or “QX2” denote a line in the LSIB representing a boundary associated with areas not contained within the GENC standard. The “COUNTRY1” and “COUNTRY2” fields contain the names of corresponding political entities. These fields contain names approved by the U.S. Board on Geographic Names (BGN) as incorporated in the ‘"Independent States in the World" and "Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty" lists maintained by the Department of State. To ensure maximum compatibility, names are presented without diacritics and certain names are rendered using common cartographic abbreviations. Names for lines associated with the code "Q2" are descriptive and not necessarily BGN-approved. Names rendered in all CAPITAL LETTERS denote independent states. Names rendered in normal text represent dependencies, areas of special sovereignty, or are otherwise presented for the convenience of the user. Descriptive Fields The following text fields are a part of the core attributes of the LSIB dataset and do not update from external sources. They provide additional information about each of the lines and are as follows: ATTRIBUTE NAME | CONTAINS NULLS RANK | No STATUS | No LABEL | Yes NOTES | Yes Neither the "RANK" nor "STATUS" fields contain null values; the "LABEL" and "NOTES" fields do. The "RANK" field is a numeric expression of the "STATUS" field. Combined with the line geometry, these fields encode the views of the United States Government on the political status of the boundary line. A value of “1” in the “RANK” field corresponds to an "International Boundary" value in the “STATUS” field. Values of ”2” and “3” correspond to “Other Line of International Separation” and “Special Line,” respectively. The “LABEL” field contains required text to describe the line segment on all finished cartographic products, including but not limited to print and interactive maps. The “NOTES” field contains an explanation of special circumstances modifying the lines. This information can pertain to the origins of the boundary lines, limitations regarding the purpose of the lines, or the original source of the line. Use of Core Attributes in Cartographic Visualization Several of the Core Attributes provide information required for the proper cartographic representation of the LSIB dataset. The cartographic usage of the LSIB requires a visual differentiation between the three categories of boundary lines. Specifically, this differentiation must be between: - International Boundaries (Rank 1); - Other Lines of International Separation (Rank 2); and - Special Lines (Rank 3). Rank 1 lines must be the most visually prominent. Rank 2 lines must be less visually prominent than Rank 1 lines. Rank 3 lines must be shown in a manner visually subordinate to Ranks 1 and 2. Where scale permits, Rank 2 and 3 lines must be labeled in accordance with the “Label” field. Data marked with a Rank 2 or 3 designation does not necessarily correspond to a disputed boundary. Please consult the style files in the download package for examples of this depiction. The requirement to incorporate the contents of the "LABEL" field on cartographic products is scale dependent. If a label is legible at the scale of a given static product, a proper use of this dataset would encourage the application of that label. Using the contents of the "COUNTRY1" and "COUNTRY2" fields in the generation of a line segment label is not required. The "STATUS" field contains the preferred description for the three LSIB line types when they are incorporated into a map legend but is otherwise not to be used for labeling. Use of the “CC1,” “CC1_GENC3,” “CC2,” “CC2_GENC3,” “RANK,” or “NOTES” fields for cartographic labeling purposes is prohibited. Extension Attributes Certain elements of the attributes within the LSIB dataset extend data functionality to make the data more interoperable or to provide clearer linkages to other datasets. The fields “CC1_GENC3” and “CC2_GENC” contain the corresponding three-character GENC code to the “CC1” and “CC2” attributes. The code “QX2” is the three-character counterpart of the code “Q2,” which denotes a line in the LSIB representing a boundary associated with a geographic area not contained within the GENC standard. To allow for linkage between individual lines in the LSIB and World Polygons dataset, the “CC1_WPID” and “CC2_WPID” fields contain a Universally Unique Identifier (UUID), version 4, which provides a stable description of each geographic entity in a boundary pair relationship. Each UUID corresponds to a geographic entity listed in the World Polygons dataset. These fields allow for linkage between individual lines in the LSIB and the overall World Polygons dataset. Five additional fields in the LSIB expand on the UUID concept and either describe features that have changed across space and time or indicate relationships between previous versions of the feature. The “LSIB_ID” attribute is a UUID value that defines a specific instance of a feature. Any change to the feature in a lineset requires a new “LSIB_ID.” The “ANTECIDS,” or antecedent ID, is a UUID that references line geometries from which a given line is descended in time. It is used when there is a feature that is entirely new, not when there is a new version of a previous feature. This is generally used to reference countries that have dissolved. The “PREVIDS,” or Previous ID, is a UUID field that contains old versions of a line. This is an additive field, that houses all Previous IDs. A new version of a feature is defined by any change to the feature—either line geometry or attribute—but it is still conceptually the same feature. The “PARENTID” field
The site suitability criteria included in the techno-economic land use screens are listed below. As this list is an update to previous cycles, tribal lands, prime farmland, and flood zones are not included as they are not technically infeasible for development. The techno-economic site suitability exclusion thresholds are presented in table 1. Distances indicate the minimum distance from each feature for commercial scale wind developmentAttributes: Steeply sloped areas: change in vertical elevation compared to horizontal distancePopulation density: the number of people living in a 1 km2 area Urban areas: defined by the U.S. Census. Water bodies: defined by the U.S. National Atlas Water Feature Areas, available from Argonne National Lab Energy Zone Mapping Tool Railways: a comprehensive database of North America's railway system from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), available from Argonne National Lab Energy Zone Mapping Tool Major highways: available from ESRI Living Atlas Airports: The Airports dataset including other aviation facilities as of July 13, 2018 is part of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)/Bureau of Transportation Statistics's (BTS's) National Transportation Atlas Database (NTAD). The Airports database is a geographic point database of aircraft landing facilities in the United States and U.S. Territories. Attribute data is provided on the physical and operational characteristics of the landing facility, current usage including enplanements and aircraft operations, congestion levels and usage categories. This geospatial data is derived from the FAA's National Airspace System Resource Aeronautical Data Product. Available from Argonne National Lab Energy Zone Mapping Tool Active mines: Active Mines and Mineral Processing Plants in the United States in 2003Military Lands: Land owned by the federal government that is part of a US military base, camp, post, station, yard, center, or installation. Table 1 Wind Steeply sloped areas >10o Population density >100/km2 Capacity factor <20% Urban areas <1000 m Water bodies <250 m Railways <250 m Major highways <125 m Airports <5000 m Active mines <1000 m Military Lands <3000m For more information about the processes and sources used to develop the screening criteria see sources 1-7 in the footnotes. Data updates occur as needed, corresponding to typical 3-year CPUC IRP planning cyclesFootnotes:[1] Lopez, A. et. al. “U.S. Renewable Energy Technical Potentials: A GIS-Based Analysis,” 2012. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/51946.pdf[2] https://greeningthegrid.org/Renewable-Energy-Zones-Toolkit/topics/social-environmental-and-other-impacts#ReadingListAndCaseStudies[3] Multi-Criteria Analysis for Renewable Energy (MapRE), University of California Santa Barbara. https://mapre.es.ucsb.edu/[4] Larson, E. et. al. “Net-Zero America: Potential Pathways, Infrastructure, and Impacts, Interim Report.” Princeton University, 2020. https://environmenthalfcentury.princeton.edu/sites/g/files/toruqf331/files/2020-12/Princeton_NZA_Interim_Report_15_Dec_2020_FINAL.pdf.[5] Wu, G. et. al. “Low-Impact Land Use Pathways to Deep Decarbonization of Electricity.” Environmental Research Letters 15, no. 7 (July 10, 2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab87d1.[6] RETI Coordinating Committee, RETI Stakeholder Steering Committee. “Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative Phase 1B Final Report.” California Energy Commission, January 2009.[7] Pletka, Ryan, and Joshua Finn. “Western Renewable Energy Zones, Phase 1: QRA Identification Technical Report.” Black & Veatch and National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2009. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy10osti/46877.pdf.[8]https://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/geo/shapefiles/index.php?year=2019&layergroup=Urban+Areas[9]https://ezmt.anl.gov/[10]https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=fc870766a3994111bce4a083413988e4[11]https://mrdata.usgs.gov/mineplant/Credits Title: Techno-economic screening criteria for utility-scale wind energy installations for Integrated Resource Planning Purpose for creation: These site suitability criteria are for use in electric system planning, capacity expansion modeling, and integrated resource planning. Keywords: wind energy, resource potential, techno-economic, IRP Extent: western states of the contiguous U.S. Use Limitations The geospatial data created by the use of these techno-economic screens inform high-level estimates of technical renewable resource potential for electric system planning and should not be used, on their own, to guide siting of generation projects nor assess project-level impacts.Confidentiality: Public ContactEmily Leslie Emily@MontaraMtEnergy.comSam Schreiber sam.schreiber@ethree.com Jared Ferguson Jared.Ferguson@cpuc.ca.govOluwafemi Sawyerr femi@ethree.com
The feature class indicates the specific types of motorized vehicles allowed on the designated routes and their seasons of use. The feature class is designed to be consistent with the MVUM (Motor Vehicle Use Map). It is compiled from the GIS Data Dictionary data and NRM Infra tabular data that the administrative units have prepared for the creation of their MVUMs. Only roads with a SYMBOL attribute value of 1, 2, 3, 4, 11, and 12 are Forest Service System roads and contain data concerning their availability for OHV (Off Highway Vehicle) use. This data is published and refreshed on a unit by unit basis as needed. Data for each individual unit must be verified and proved consistent with the published MVUMs prior to publication.The Forest Service's Natural Resource Manager (NRM) Infrastructure (Infra) is the agency standard for managing and reporting information about inventory of constructed features and land units as well as the permits sold to the general public and to partners. Metadata
A layer showing District of Columbia government related properties (owned, operated, and or managed) to be used by many DC Government agencies, private companies and the public. It supports the daily business process of District agencies that originate and manage land records. Transfers of Jurisdiction (TOJ) are also in this layer. This map should not be considered comprehensive as District agencies continuously work to update properties as transactions occur.
BY USING THIS WEBSITE OR THE CONTENT THEREIN, YOU AGREE TO THE TERMS OF USE. This point feature class was created by geocoding the facility address, as provided by various sources, to Oakland County's Road Centerline feature class. The resulting points were then georeferenced to the facility structure using Oakland County's 2002 orthoimagery at a reference scale of 1:1200. The key attributes include the facility Name, Address, and Type (Administrative, Police, Fire, etc.).
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Corporate Master Table (CMT) is the official source of Service organization codes and related information. Information in the CMT includes, but is not limited to, organization codes, organization names, Federal Budget Management System (FBMS), cost center codes, fire unit identifiers, program names, mailing and physical/shipping addresses, telephone and fax numbers as well as latitude and longitude coordinates. The CMT enables all Service automated systems to utilize a corporate data set of known quality, eliminating the workload required to maintain each system's data set, and thereby facilitating data sharing. Other customers for the CMT are Service personnel who maintain directories, communicate with Congress and with the Public, maintain World Wide Web sites, etc. These spatial data were created using the information in the CMT. The CMT contains location information on all the offices within the Service that have an organization code. Unstaffed offices and some other facilities may not be included. The latitude and longitude points used are usually the location of the main administrative site. The latitude and longitude data is not completely verified but is the best we have at this time. This data set is intended to give an overview of where USFWS has stations across the United States and Territories, including locations outside the 50 states. It is not intended to be the exact location of every USFWS office. The CMT is primarily used for accounting purposes and therefore one location in the CMT can represent many different offices. Some points are duplicates where a station, most usually an Ecological Field Office, may be associated with more than one USFWS program. This data is updated from an internal authoritative source every night at 2:30am EST.For a direct link to the official Enterprise Geospatial dataset and metadata: https://ecos.fws.gov/ServCat/Reference/Profile/60076.Dataset contact: fwsgis@fws.gov
Administered Lands is a BLM Alaska GIS dataset that combines publicly available borough, municipality, state, federal, and other entity management and ownership GIS data. This is the basis for BLM’s national Surface Management Agency GIS dataset that was developed to fulfill the public and Government’s need to know what agency is managing Federal land in a given area. This data set is comprised of various sources of geospatial information that have been acquired from local, state and federal agencies in order to assemble a comprehensive representation of current land surface manager. There are many land managing agencies and branches of government and this dataset attempts to classify these entities into general categories. This data does not demonstrate or infer land ownership. The business need for this data includes, but is not limited to, land use planning, permitting, recreation, and emergency response. Due to the nature of assembling geospatial information from multiple sources, integration of features into a single layer may introduce inaccurate artifacts. Acquired datasets have been cross-walked to a standardized schema to aid in the depiction of land surface manager across the state of Alaska. This dataset will contain errors. For the most up to date and accurate information, please contact the surface manager agency for the area in which you are interested.
https://www.verifiedmarketresearch.com/privacy-policy/https://www.verifiedmarketresearch.com/privacy-policy/
Cloud GIS Market size was valued at USD 890.81 Million in 2023 and is projected to reach USD 2298.38 Million by 2031, growing at a CAGR of 14.5% from 2024 to 2031.
Key Market Drivers
• Increased Adoption of Cloud Computing: Cloud computing provides scalable resources that can be adjusted based on demand, making it easier for organizations to manage and process large GIS datasets. The pay-as-you-go pricing models of cloud services reduce the need for significant upfront investments in hardware and software, making GIS more accessible to small and medium-sized enterprises.
• Growing Need for Spatial Data Integration: The ability to integrate and analyze large volumes of spatial and non-spatial data helps organizations make more informed decisions. The proliferation of Internet of Things (IoT) devices generates massive amounts of spatial data that can be processed and analyzed using Cloud GIS.
• Advancements in GIS Technology: User-friendly interfaces and visualization tools make it easier for non-experts to use GIS applications. Advanced analytical tools and machine learning algorithms available in cloud platforms enhance the capabilities of traditional GIS.
• Increased Demand for Real-Time Data: Industries like disaster management, transportation, and logistics require real-time data processing and analysis, which is facilitated by Cloud GIS. The need for up-to-date maps and spatial data drives the adoption of cloud-based GIS solutions.
• Collaboration and Sharing Needs: The ability to access GIS data and collaborate from anywhere enhances productivity and supports remote work environments. Cloud GIS supports simultaneous access by multiple users, facilitating better teamwork and data sharing.
• Urbanization and Smart Cities Initiatives: Cloud GIS is crucial for smart city initiatives, urban planning, and infrastructure development, providing the tools needed for efficient resource management. Supports planning and monitoring of sustainable development projects by providing comprehensive spatial analysis capabilities.
• Government and Policy Support: Increased government investment in geospatial technologies and smart infrastructure projects drives the adoption of Cloud GIS. Compliance with regulatory requirements for environmental monitoring and land use planning necessitates the use of advanced GIS tools.
• Industry-Specific Applications: Precision farming and land management benefit from the advanced analytics and data integration capabilities of Cloud GIS. Epidemiology and public health monitoring rely on spatial data analysis for tracking disease outbreaks and resource allocation.
Government Land Office maps (GLOs) are a result of the effort to survey all United States public lands before settlement. Starting in 1812 land was divided into square six mile blocks called townships, then subdivided into sections and ranges. Each subdivided area was surveyed and given its own map or GLO. During this process surveyors were required to indicate cultural resources such as roads and Indian trails and standardized symbols were used to represent geographic features. These GLOs are now maintained by the Bureau of Land Management as part of the official Land Status and Cadastral Survey records. As land was divided into parcels of individual ownership additional cadastral survey maps were created over time. For this reason there are often multiple GLOs or "cadastral survey maps" for one township / range, generally numbered one through four. For this seamless GLO layer, DAHP focused solely on the more historical GLOs which were usually listed as image number one or two for that specific township / range in the BLM Cadastral Survey records. In some cases no GLOs were available for review. Such areas included National Forest Lands, National Parks, Indian Reservations, and remote wilderness areas.
This geodatabase reflects the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) ongoing commitment to its mission of understanding the nature and distribution of global mineral commodity supply chains by updating and publishing the georeferenced locations of mineral commodity production and processing facilities, mineral exploration and development sites, and mineral commodity exporting ports in Africa. The geodatabase and geospatial data layers serve to create a new geographic information product in the form of a geospatial portable document format (PDF) map. The geodatabase contains data layers from USGS, foreign governmental, and open-source sources as follows: (1) mineral production and processing facilities, (2) mineral exploration and development sites, (3) mineral occurrence sites and deposits, (4) undiscovered mineral resource tracts for Gabon and Mauritania, (5) undiscovered mineral resource tracts for potash, platinum-group elements, and copper, (6) coal occurrence areas, (7) electric power generating facilities, (8) electric power transmission lines, (9) liquefied natural gas terminals, (10) oil and gas pipelines, (11) undiscovered, technically recoverable conventional and continuous hydrocarbon resources (by USGS geologic/petroleum province), (12) cumulative production, and recoverable conventional resources (by oil- and gas-producing nation), (13) major mineral exporting maritime ports, (14) railroads, (15) major roads, (16) major cities, (17) major lakes, (18) major river systems, (19) first-level administrative division (ADM1) boundaries for all countries in Africa, and (20) international boundaries for all countries in Africa.
ODC Public Domain Dedication and Licence (PDDL) v1.0http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
This dataset is OBSOLETE as of 12/3/2024 and will be removed from ArcGIS Online on 12/3/2025.An updated version of this dataset is available at Land Use FY2024.This data set derives from several sources, and is updated annually with data current through July 1 of the reported year. The primary source is a data dump from the VISION assessing data system, which provided data up to date as of January 1, 2012, and is supplemented by information from subsequent building permits and Development Logs. (Use codes provided by this system combine aspects of land use, tax status, and condominium status. In an effort to clarify land use type the data has been cleaned and subdivided to break the original use code into several different fields.) The data set has further been supplemented and updated with development information provided by building permits issued by the Inspectional Services Department and from data found in the Development Log publication. Information from these sources is added to the data set periodically. Land use status is up to date as of the Last Modified date.Differences From “Official” Parcel LayerThe Cambridge GIS system maintains a separate layer of land parcels reflecting up to date subdivision and ownership. The parcel data associated with the Land Use Data set differs from the “official” parcel layer in a number of cases. For that reason this separate parcel layer is provided to work with land use data in a GIS environment. See the Assessing Department’s Parcel layer for the most up-to-date land parcel boundaries.Table of Land Use CodesThe following table lists all land use code found in the data layer:Land Use CodeLand Use DescriptionCategory0101MXD SNGL-FAM-REMixed Use Residential0104MXD TWO-FAM-RESMixed Use Residential0105MXD THREE-FM-REMixed Use Residential0111MXD 4-8-UNIT-APMixed Use Residential0112MXD >8-UNIT-APTMixed Use Residential0121MXD BOARDING-HSMixed Use Residential013MULTIUSE-RESMixed Use Residential031MULTIUSE-COMMixed Use Commercial0340MXD GEN-OFFICEMixed Use Commercial041MULTIUSE-INDMixed Use Industrial0942Higher Ed and Comm MixedMixed Use Education101SNGL-FAM-RESResidential1014SINGLE FAM W/AUResidential104TWO-FAM-RESResidential105THREE-FM-RESResidential106RES-LAND-IMPTransportation1067RES-COV-PKGTransportation1114-8-UNIT-APTResidential112>8-UNIT-APTResidential113ASSISTED-LIVAssisted Living/Boarding House121BOARDING-HSEAssisted Living/Boarding House130RES-DEV-LANDVacant Residential131RES-PDV-LANDVacant Residential132RES-UDV-LANDVacant Residential1322RES-UDV-PARK (OS) LNVacant Residential140CHILD-CARECommercial300HOTELCommercial302INN-RESORTCommercial304NURSING-HOMEHealth316WAREHOUSECommercial323SH-CNTR/MALLCommercial324SUPERMARKETCommercial325RETAIL-STORECommercial326EATING-ESTBLCommercial327RETAIL-CONDOCommercial330AUTO-SALESCommercial331AUTO-SUPPLYCommercial332AUTO-REPAIRCommercial334GAS-STATIONCommercialLand Use CodeLand Use DescriptionCategory335CAR-WASHCommercial336PARKING-GARTransportation337PARKING-LOTTransportation340GEN-OFFICEOffice341BANKCommercial342MEDICAL-OFFCHealth343OFFICE-CONDOOffice345RETAIL-OFFICOffice346INV-OFFICEOffice353FRAT-ORGANIZCommercial362THEATRECommercial370BOWLING-ALLYCommercial375TENNIS-CLUBCommercial390COM-DEV-LANDVacant Commercial391COM-PDV-LANDVacant Commercial392COM-UDV-LANDVacant Commercial3922CRMCL REC LNDVacant Commercial400MANUFACTURNGIndustrial401WAREHOUSEIndustrial404RES-&-DEV-FCOffice/R&D406HIGH-TECHOffice/R&D407CLEAN-MANUFIndustrial409INDUST-CONDOIndustrial413RESRCH IND CNDIndustrial422ELEC GEN PLANTUtility424PUB UTIL REGUtility428GAS-CONTROLUtility430TELE-EXCH-STAUtility440IND-DEV-LANDVacant Industrial442IND-UDV-LANDVacant Industrial920ParklandsPublic Open Space930Government OperationsGovernment Operations934Public SchoolsEducation940Private Pre & Elem SchoolEducation941Private Secondary SchoolEducation942Private CollegeHigher Education9421Private College Res UnitsEducation Residential943Other Educ & Research OrgHigher EducationLand Use CodeLand Use DescriptionCategory953CemeteriesCemetery955Hospitals & Medical OfficHealth956MuseumsHigher Education957Charitable ServicesCharitable/Religious960ReligiousCharitable/Religious971Water UtilityUtility972Road Right of WayTransportation975MBTA/RailroadTransportation9751MBTA/RailroadTransportation995Private Open SpacePrivately-Owned Open SpaceExplore all our data on the Cambridge GIS Data Dictionary.Attributes NameType DetailsDescription ML type: Stringwidth: 16precision: 0 Map-Lot: This a unique parcel identifier found in the deed and used by the Assessing data system. In a few cases, where parcels have been subdivided subsequent to January 1, 2012, a placeholder Map-Lot number is assigned that differs from that used elsewhere.
MAP type: Stringwidth: 5precision: 0 This Map portion of the unique parcel identifier found in the deed and used by the Assessing data system. In a few cases, where parcels have been subdivided subsequent to January 1, 2012, a placeholder Map-Lot number is assigned that differs from that used elsewhere.
LOT type: Stringwidth: 5precision: 0 This is the Lot portion of the unique parcel identifier found in the deed and used by the Assessing data system. In a few cases, where parcels have been subdivided subsequent to January 1, 2012, a placeholder Map-Lot number is assigned that differs from that used elsewhere.
Location type: Stringwidth: 254precision: 0 In the great majority of cases this is the street address of the parcel as it is recorded in the Registry of Deed record. In instances where edits were made to the base parcel layer the best address available at the time is employed.
LandArea type: Doublewidth: 8precision: 15
LUCode type: Stringwidth: 254precision: 0 The four digit text string in this field indicates the primary usage of a parcel. While the codes are based on the standard Massachusetts assessing land use classification system, they differ in a number of cases; the coding system used here is unique to this data set. Note that other minor uses may occur on a property and, in some cases, tenants may introduce additional uses not reflected here (eg, office space used as a medical office, home based businesses).
LUDesc type: Stringwidth: 254precision: 0 The short description gives more detail about the specific use indicated by the Land Use Code. Most descriptions are taken from the standard Massachusetts assessing land use classification system.
Category type: Stringwidth: 254precision: 0 This broader grouping of land uses can be used to map land use data. You can find the land use data mapped at: https://www.cambridgema.gov/CDD/factsandmaps/mapgalleries/othermaps
ExistUnits type: Doublewidth: 8precision: 15 This value indicates the number of existing residential units as of July 1 of the reported year. A residential unit may be a house, an apartment, a mobile home, a group of rooms or a single room that is occupied (or, if vacant, intended for occupancy) as separate living quarters. This includes units found in apartment style graduate student housing residences and rooms in assisted living facilities and boarding houses are treated as also housing units. The unit count does not include college or graduate student dormitories, nursing home rooms, group homes, or other group quarters living arrangements.
MixedUseTy type: Stringwidth: 254precision: 0 Two flags are used for this field. “Groundfloor” indicates that a commercial use is found on the ground floor of the primary building, and upper floors are used for residential purposes. “Mixed” indicates that two or more uses are found throughout the structure or multiple structures on the parcel, one of which is residential.
GQLodgingH type: Stringwidth: 254precision: 0 A value of “Yes” indicates that the primary use of the property is as a group quarters living arrangement. Group quarters are a place where people live or stay, in a group living arrangement, that is owned or managed by an entity or organization providing housing and/or services for the residents. Group quarters include such places as college residence halls, residential treatment centers, skilled nursing facilities, group homes, military barracks, correctional facilities, and workers’ dormitories.
Most university dormitories are included under the broader higher education land use code, as most dormitories are included in the larger parcels comprising the bulk of higher education campuses.
GradStuden type: Stringwidth: 254precision: 0 A value of “Yes” indicates the parcel is used to house graduate students in apartment style units. Graduate student dormitories are treated as a higher education land use.
CondoFlag type: Stringwidth: 254precision: 0 “Yes” indicates that the parcel is owned as a condominium. Condo properties can include one or more uses, including residential, commercial, and parking. The great majority of such properties in Cambridge are residential only.
TaxStatus type: Stringwidth: 254precision: 0 A value indicates that the parcel is not subject to local property taxes. The following general rules are employed to assign properties to subcategories, though special situations exist in a number of cases.
o Authority: Properties owned the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority and Cambridge Housing Authority. o City: Properties owned by the City of Cambridge or cemetery land owned by the Town of Belmont. o Educ: Includes properties used for education purposes, ranging from pre-schools to university research facilities. (More detail about the level of education can be found using the Land Use Code.) o Federal: Properties owned by the federal government, including the Post Office. Certain properties with assessing data indicating Cambridge Redevelopment Authority ownership are in fact owned by the federal government as part of the Volpe Transportation Research Center and are so treated here. o Other: Nontaxable properties owned by a nonprofit organization and not
This spatial data contains Surface Management Agency (SMA, also sometimes called Land Status) information for Idaho from the Idaho Bureau of Land Management (BLM). For federal government lands, this data displays the managing agency of the surface of the land, which does not mean the agency "owns" the land. SMA is sometimes referred to as "ownership", although this term is inaccurate when describing public lands. This Surface Management Agency data should not be used to depict boundaries (for example National Forest, National Park, National Wildlife Refuge, or Indian Reservation boundaries among others). Attribute information for the federal and private lands are from the BLM Master Title Plats (MTPs), the BLM case files, the BLM Legacy Rehost 2000 (LR2000) database, and corresponding federal Orders and official documents. Please note that because these official sources are strictly used, OTHER NON-BLM FEDERAL AGENCY LANDS MAY NOT BE ATTRIBUTED CORRECTLY unless the proper documents have been filed with the BLM and the land actions have been noted on the MTPs and in LR2000. Starting in the spring of 2011 a field called AGNCY_NAME is present in the data. The AGNCY_NAME field is intended to indicate the managing agency for polygons coded as OTHER in the MGMT_AGNCY field. The AGNCY_NAME field will not be used for the 100K Map Series published by the BLM for use by the public as all agencies in this field are not included in H-1553 Publication Standards Manual Handbook and, therefore, have no BLM Cartographic Standard. Except for polygons coded as OTHER in the MGMT_AGNCY field, all managing agency information in the AGNCY_NAME field should be the same as that of the MGMT_AGNCY field. The only intended difference between the AGNCY_NAME field and the MGMT_AGNCY field is where the MGMT_AGNCY is OTHER. In this case, the AGNCY_NAME will contain an abbreviation for an agency that is not represented in the H-1553 Publication Standards Manual Handbook. Examples of the agencies there are BIA (Bureau of Indian Affairs), USGS (United States Geological Survey), and FAA (Federal Aviation Administration). Attribute information for the State lands is received primarily through cooperation with the Idaho Department of Lands. This information might not reflect all State agency lands completely. A detailed analysis of State owned lands has not been done since June 2011; therefore, recent changes in ownership of State lands may not be reflected. Inclusion of State land information into this dataset is supplemental and should not be viewed as the authoritative source of State lands; please contact State agencies for questions about State lands. This data does not depict land management arrangements between government agencies such as Memorandums of Understanding or other similar agreements. When this data was originally generated in the early 2000's, the primary source of the geometry was the BLM Geographic Coordinate Database (GCDB), if it was available. In areas where GCDB was/is unavailable, the spatial features are taken from a variety of sources including the BLM Idaho Resource Base Data collection, BLM Idaho Master Title Plat AutoCad files, US Geological Survey Digital Line Graphs (DLGs), and US Forest Service Cartographic Feature Files (CFFs), among others (see Process Steps). It should be stressed that the geometry of a feature may not be GCDB-based in the first place, the geometry may shift away from GCDB due to a variety of reasons (topology procedures, automated software processes such as projections, etc.), and the GCDB-based features are not necessarily currently being edited to match improved GCDB. Therefore this data should NOT be considered actual GCDB data. For the latest Idaho GCDB spatial data, please contact the BLM Idaho State Office Cadastral Department at 208-373-4000. The BLM in Idaho creates and maintains this spatial data. This dataset is derived by dissolving based on the "MGMT_AGNCY" field from the master SMA GIS dataset (which is edited often) kept by the BLM Idaho State Office. Please get a fresh copy of this data a couple times a year as the SMA data is continually changing. Official actions that affect the managing agency happen often and changes to correct errors are always being made. Nevada SMA data was acquired from the BLM Nevada web site and clipped to the area that is managed by Idaho BLM Boise District. The data steward approved this dataset in October 2023. For more information contact us at blm_id_stateoffice@blm.gov.
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 (CC BY-NC 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Please note that this dataset is not an official City of Toronto land use dataset. It was created for personal and academic use using City of Toronto Land Use Maps (2019) found on the City of Toronto Official Plan website at https://www.toronto.ca/city-government/planning-development/official-plan-guidelines/official-plan/official-plan-maps-copy, along with the City of Toronto parcel fabric (Property Boundaries) found at https://open.toronto.ca/dataset/property-boundaries/ and Statistics Canada Census Dissemination Blocks level boundary files (2016). The property boundaries used were dated November 11, 2021. Further detail about the City of Toronto's Official Plan, consolidation of the information presented in its online form, and considerations for its interpretation can be found at https://www.toronto.ca/city-government/planning-development/official-plan-guidelines/official-plan/ Data Creation Documentation and Procedures Software Used The spatial vector data were created using ArcGIS Pro 2.9.0 in December 2021. PDF File Conversions Using Adobe Acrobat Pro DC software, the following downloaded PDF map images were converted to TIF format. 9028-cp-official-plan-Map-14_LandUse_AODA.pdf 9042-cp-official-plan-Map-22_LandUse_AODA.pdf 9070-cp-official-plan-Map-20_LandUse_AODA.pdf 908a-cp-official-plan-Map-13_LandUse_AODA.pdf 978e-cp-official-plan-Map-17_LandUse_AODA.pdf 97cc-cp-official-plan-Map-15_LandUse_AODA.pdf 97d4-cp-official-plan-Map-23_LandUse_AODA.pdf 97f2-cp-official-plan-Map-19_LandUse_AODA.pdf 97fe-cp-official-plan-Map-18_LandUse_AODA.pdf 9811-cp-official-plan-Map-16_LandUse_AODA.pdf 982d-cp-official-plan-Map-21_LandUse_AODA.pdf Georeferencing and Reprojecting Data Files The original projection of the PDF maps is unknown but were most likely published using MTM Zone 10 EPSG 2019 as per many of the City of Toronto's many datasets. They could also have possibly been published in UTM Zone 17 EPSG 26917 The TIF images were georeferenced in ArcGIS Pro using this projection with very good results. The images were matched against the City of Toronto's Centreline dataset found here The resulting TIF files and their supporting spatial files include: TOLandUseMap13.tfwx TOLandUseMap13.tif TOLandUseMap13.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap13.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap14.tfwx TOLandUseMap14.tif TOLandUseMap14.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap14.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap15.tfwx TOLandUseMap15.tif TOLandUseMap15.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap15.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap16.tfwx TOLandUseMap16.tif TOLandUseMap16.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap16.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap17.tfwx TOLandUseMap17.tif TOLandUseMap17.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap17.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap18.tfwx TOLandUseMap18.tif TOLandUseMap18.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap18.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap19.tif TOLandUseMap19.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap19.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap20.tfwx TOLandUseMap20.tif TOLandUseMap20.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap20.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap21.tfwx TOLandUseMap21.tif TOLandUseMap21.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap21.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap22.tfwx TOLandUseMap22.tif TOLandUseMap22.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap22.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap23.tfwx TOLandUseMap23.tif TOLandUseMap23.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap23.tif.ov Ground control points were saved for all georeferenced images. The files are the following: map13.txt map14.txt map15.txt map16.txt map17.txt map18.txt map19.txt map21.txt map22.txt map23.txt The City of Toronto's Property Boundaries shapefile, "property_bnds_gcc_wgs84.zip" were unzipped and also reprojected to EPSG 26917 (UTM Zone 17) into a new shapefile, "Property_Boundaries_UTM.shp" Mosaicing Images Once georeferenced, all images were then mosaiced into one image file, "LandUseMosaic20211220v01", within the project-generated Geodatabase, "Landuse.gdb" and exported TIF, "LandUseMosaic20211220.tif" Reclassifying Images Because the original images were of low quality and the conversion to TIF made the image colours even more inconsistent, a method was required to reclassify the images so that different land use classes could be identified. Using Deep learning Objects, the images were re-classified into useful consistent colours. Deep Learning Objects and Training The resulting mosaic was then prepared for reclassification using the Label Objects for Deep Learning tool in ArcGIS Pro. A training sample, "LandUseTrainingSamples20211220", was created in the geodatabase for all land use types as follows: Neighbourhoods Insitutional Natural Areas Core Employment Areas Mixed Use Areas Apartment Neighbourhoods Parks Roads Utility Corridors Other Open Spaces General Employment Areas Regeneration Areas Lettering (not a land use type, but an image colour (black), used to label streets). By identifying the letters, it then made the reclassification and vectorization results easier to clean up of unnecessary clutter caused by the labels of streets. Reclassification Once the training samples were created and saved, the raster was then reclassified using the Image Classification Wizard tool in ArcGIS Pro, using the Support...
National Address DatabaseThis National Geospatial Data Asset (NGDA) dataset, shared as a U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) feature layer, displays address data in the United States. Per USDOT, "The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) and its partners from all levels of government recognize the need for a National Address Database (NAD). Accurate and up-to-date addresses are critical to transportation safety and are a vital part of Next Generation 9-1-1. They are also essential for a broad range of government services, including mail delivery, permitting, and school siting. To meet this need, USDOT partners with address programs from state, local, and tribal governments to compile their authoritative data into the NAD."District of Columbia (DC) Residential AddressesData currency: Current federal service (Address Points from National Address Database)NGDAID: 196 (National Address Database (NAD))For more information: Getting to know the National Address Database (NAD); National Address DatabaseFor feedback, please contact: Esri_US_Federal_Data@esri.comNGDA Data SetThis data set is part of the NGDA Transportation Theme Community. Per the Federal Geospatial Data Committee (FGDC), Transportation is defined as the "means and aids for conveying persons and/or goods. The transportation system includes both physical and non-physical components related to all modes of travel that allow the movement of goods and people between locations".For other NGDA Content: Esri Federal Datasets
Important Note: This item is in mature support as of September 2023 and will be retired in December 2025. A new version of this item is available for your use. Esri recommends updating your maps and apps to use the new version.
The USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) is the official inventory of public parks and other protected open space. The spatial data in PAD-US represents public lands held in trust by thousands of national, state and regional/local governments, as well as non-profit conservation organizations.Manager Type provides a coarse level land manager description from the PAD-US "Agency Type" Domain, "Manager Type" Field (for example, Federal, State, Local Government, Private).PAD-US is published by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Science Analytics and Synthesis (SAS), Gap Analysis Project (GAP). GAP produces data and tools that help meet critical national challenges such as biodiversity conservation, recreation, public health, climate change adaptation, and infrastructure investment. See the GAP webpage for more information about GAP and other GAP data including species and land cover.Dataset SummaryPhenomenon Mapped: This layer displays protected areas symbolized by manager type.Coordinate System: Web Mercator Auxiliary SphereExtent: 50 United States plus Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands and other Pacific Ocean IslandsVisible Scale: 1:1,000,000 and largerSource: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Science Analytics and Synthesis (SAS), Gap Analysis Project (GAP) PAD-US version 3.0Publication Date: July 2022Attributes included in this layer are: CategoryOwner TypeOwner NameLocal OwnerManager TypeManager NameLocal ManagerDesignation TypeLocal DesignationUnit NameLocal NameSourcePublic AccessGAP Status - Status 1, 2, 3 or 4GAP Status DescriptionInternational Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Description - I: Strict Nature Reserve, II: National Park, III: Natural Monument or Feature, IV: Habitat/Species Management Area, V: Protected Landscape/Seascape, VI: Protected area with sustainable use of natural resources, Other conservation area, UnassignedDate of EstablishmentThe source data for this layer are available here. What can you do with this Feature Layer?Feature layers work throughout the ArcGIS system. Generally your work flow with feature layers will begin in ArcGIS Online or ArcGIS Pro. Below are just a few of the things you can do with a feature service in Online and Pro.ArcGIS OnlineAdd this layer to a map in the map viewer. The layer is limited to scales of approximately 1:1,000,000 or larger but a vector tile layer created from the same data can be used at smaller scales to produce a webmap that displays across the full range of scales. The layer or a map containing it can be used in an application.Change the layer’s transparency and set its visibility rangeOpen the layer’s attribute table and make selections and apply filters. Selections made in the map or table are reflected in the other. Center on selection allows you to zoom to features selected in the map or table and show selected records allows you to view the selected records in the table.Change the layer’s style and filter the data. For example, you could set a filter for Gap Status Code = 3 to create a map of only the GAP Status 3 areas.Add labels and set their propertiesCustomize the pop-upArcGIS ProAdd this layer to a 2d or 3d map. The same scale limit as Online applies in ProUse as an input to geoprocessing. For example, copy features allows you to select then export portions of the data to a new feature class. Note that many features in the PAD-US database overlap. For example wilderness area designations overlap US Forest Service and other federal lands. Any analysis should take this into consideration. An imagery layer created from the same data set can be used for geoprocessing analysis with larger extents and eliminates some of the complications arising from overlapping polygons.Change the symbology and the attribute field used to symbolize the dataOpen table and make interactive selections with the mapModify the pop-upsApply Definition Queries to create sub-sets of the layerThis layer is part of the Living Atlas of the World that provides an easy way to explore the landscape layers and many other beautiful and authoritative maps on hundreds of topics.
Progress Needed on Identifying Expenditures, Building and Utilizing a Data Infrastructure, and Reducing Duplicative Efforts The federal government collects, maintains, and uses geospatial information—data linked to specific geographic locations—to help support varied missions, including national security and natural resources conservation. To coordinate geospatial activities, in 1994 the President issued an executive order to develop a National Spatial Data Infrastructure—a framework for coordination that includes standards, data themes, and a clearinghouse. GAO was asked to review federal and state coordination of geospatial data. GAO’s objectives were to (1) describe the geospatial data that selected federal agencies and states use and how much is spent on geospatial data; (2) assess progress in establishing the National Spatial Data Infrastructure; and (3) determine whether selected federal agencies and states invest in duplicative geospatial data. To do so, GAO identified federal and state uses of geospatial data; evaluated available cost data from 2013 to 2015; assessed FGDC’s and selected agencies’ efforts to establish the infrastructure; and analyzed federal and state datasets to identify duplication. What GAO Found Federal agencies and state governments use a variety of geospatial datasets to support their missions. For example, after Hurricane Sandy in 2012, the Federal Emergency Management Agency used geospatial data to identify 44,000 households that were damaged and inaccessible and reported that, as a result, it was able to provide expedited assistance to area residents. Federal agencies report spending billions of dollars on geospatial investments; however, the estimates are understated because agencies do not always track geospatial investments. For example, these estimates do not include billions of dollars spent on earth-observing satellites that produce volumes of geospatial data. The Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) have started an initiative to have agencies identify and report annually on geospatial-related investments as part of the fiscal year 2017 budget process. FGDC and selected federal agencies have made progress in implementing their responsibilities for the National Spatial Data Infrastructure as outlined in OMB guidance; however, critical items remain incomplete. For example, the committee established a clearinghouse for records on geospatial data, but the clearinghouse lacks an effective search capability and performance monitoring. FGDC also initiated plans and activities for coordinating with state governments on the collection of geospatial data; however, state officials GAO contacted are generally not satisfied with the committee’s efforts to coordinate with them. Among other reasons, they feel that the committee is focused on a federal perspective rather than a national one, and that state recommendations are often ignored. In addition, selected agencies have made limited progress in their own strategic planning efforts and in using the clearinghouse to register their data to ensure they do not invest in duplicative data. For example, 8 of the committee’s 32 member agencies have begun to register their data on the clearinghouse, and they have registered 59 percent of the geospatial data they deemed critical. Part of the reason that agencies are not fulfilling their responsibilities is that OMB has not made it a priority to oversee these efforts. Until OMB ensures that FGDC and federal agencies fully implement their responsibilities, the vision of improving the coordination of geospatial information and reducing duplicative investments will not be fully realized. OMB guidance calls for agencies to eliminate duplication, avoid redundant expenditures, and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the sharing and dissemination of geospatial data. However, some data are collected multiple times by federal, state, and local entities, resulting in duplication in effort and resources. A new initiative to create a national address database could potentially result in significant savings for federal, state, and local governments. However, agencies face challenges in effectively coordinating address data collection efforts, including statutory restrictions on sharing certain federal address data. Until there is effective coordination across the National Spatial Data Infrastructure, there will continue to be duplicative efforts to obtain and maintain these data at every level of government.https://www.gao.gov/assets/d15193.pdfWhat GAO Recommends GAO suggests that Congress consider assessing statutory limitations on address data to foster progress toward a national address database. GAO also recommends that OMB improve its oversight of FGDC and federal agency initiatives, and that FGDC and selected agencies fully implement initiatives. The agencies generally agreed with the recommendations and identified plans to implement them.