This feature class is updated every business day using Python scripts and the WellNet database. Please disregard the "Date Updated" field as it does not keep in sync with DWR's internal enterprise geodatabase updates.The NDWR's water monitoring database contains information related to sites for surface water measurements. These data are used by NDWR to assess the condition of the groundwater and surface water systems over time and are available to the public on NDWR’s website. Surface water measurement sites are chosen based on physical location and access considerations, permit terms, and to maximize the distribution of measurement points in a given basin.Surface water monitoring sites are typically chosen based on spatial location, access, and period of record considerations. When possible NDWR tries to have a distribution of monitoring locations within a given hydrographic area. The entity that does the monitoring depends on the site – for example, some mines have well fields where they collect data and submit those data to NDWR as a condition of their monitoring plan – and some sites are monitored by NDWR staff annually or more frequently. While people can volunteer to have their site monitored, more often the NDWR staff who measure flow rates recommend an additional site or staff in the office recommend alternate sites. The Chief of the Hydrology Section will review the recommendations and make a final decision on adding/changing a site. This dataset is updated every business day from a non-spatial SQL Server database using lat/long coordinates to display location. This feature class participates in a relationship class with a surface water measure table joined using the sitename field. This dataset contains both active and inactive sites. Measurement data is provided by reporting agencies and by regular site visits from NDWR staff. For website access, please see the Spring and Stream Flow site at water.nv.gov/SpringAndStreamFlow.aspx.

This feature class is updated every business day using Python scripts and the TCID databases. Please disregard the "Date Updated" field as it does not keep in sync with DWR's internal enterprise geodatabase updates.A Water Right change is a transaction that either adds or removes water from the original water right. The dataset covers surface water rights in the Fernley and Fallon areas of Nevada. This change layer does not show where water is used if the manner of use is converted from irrigation to another manner of use such as commercial, wildlife, or municipal. Some examples of water right changes are boundary lines to delineate where water can be used, how much water can be used, and manner of use.The dataset is used to track water right changes over time and to update the water righted dataset which shows the result of the place of use for water rights. Representation:The OnOff field indicates if a change added or removed water to a specific area. The Action Date field indicates when the change took place.The Map Used field identifies which map record was used to generate the place of use area (polygon).Date of Creation – 2015This dataset is updated whenever there is a change to a water right within the Newlands Mapping Project. The water right place of use change is plotted to add or remove acreage from an existing water right.

The Central Valley Flood Protection Plan (CVFPP) recommends that the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) develop a system for tracking performance of the flood system, including the following actions:• Track the outcomes from flood investments to demonstrate value.• Monitor and track outcomes of multi-benefit projects over time.• Create a tracking system of operations and maintenance investments and outcomes to demonstrate the value that Local Maintaining Agencies attain for their investments.• Track and report changes in the hydrologic and sea level rise conditions and subsidence over time through updates to the Flood System Status Report (FSSR)These recommendations stem from progressive work during the development of the 2012 CVFPP and subsequent 2017 CVFPP update. The DWR Flood Performance Tracking System tracks the CVFPP outcomes related to: (1) improving flood risk management and (2) enhancing ecosystem vitality. This tracking system has the ability to track the status, trends, and changes over time of the ecosystem (including the Conservation Strategy’s Measurable Objectives [CSMOs] as of 2016) outlined in the Conservation Strategy document here: https://cawaterlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/ConservStrat-Nov2016.pdf along with the Flood System metrics outlined in the Flood System Status Report here: https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Flood-Management/Flood-Planning-and-Studies/Central-Valley-Flood-Protection-Plan.The associated data are considered DWR enterprise GIS data, which meet all appropriate requirements of the DWR Spatial Data Standards, specifically the DWR Spatial Data Standard version 3.1, dated September 11, 2019.This data set was not produced by DWR. Data were originally developed and supplied by ESA, under contract to California Department of Water Resources. DWR makes no warranties or guarantees — either expressed or implied — as to the completeness, accuracy, or correctness of the data. DWR neither accepts nor assumes liability arising from or for any incorrect, incomplete, or misleading subject data.Comments, problems, improvements, updates, or suggestions should be forwarded to gis@water.ca.gov.

GEOGLOWS is the Group on Earth Observation's Global Water Sustainability Program. It coordinates efforts from public and private entities to make application ready river data more accessible and sustainably available to underdeveloped regions. The GEOGLOWS Hydrological Model provides a retrospective and daily forecast of global river discharge at 7 million river sub-basins. The stream network is a hydrologically conditioned subset of the TDX-Hydro streams and basins data produced by the United State's National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. The daily forecast provides 3 hourly average discharge in a 51 member ensemble and 15 day lead time derived from the ECMWF Integrated Forecast System (IFS). The retrospective simulation is derived from ERA5 climate reanalysis data and provides daily average streamflow beginning on 1 January 1940. New forecasts are uploaded daily and the retrospective simulation is updated weekly on Sundays to keep the lag time between 5 and 12 days.

The geoglows-v2 bucket contains: (1) model configuration files used to generate the simulations, (2) the GIS streams datasets used by the model, (3) the GIS streams datasets optimized for visualizations used by Esri's Living Atlas layer, (4) several supporting table of metadata including country names, river names, hydrological properties used for modeling.

The geoglows-v2-forecasts bucket contains: (1) daily 15 forecasts in zarr format optimized for time series queries of all ensemble members in the prediction, (2) CSV formatted summary files optimized for producing time series animated web maps for the entire global streams dataset.

The geoglows-v2-retrospective bucket contains: (1) the model retrospective outputs in (1a) zarr format optimized for time series queries of up to a few hundred rivers on demand as well as (1b) in netCDF format best for bulk downloading the dataset, (2) estimated return period flows for all 7 million million rivers (2a) in zarr format optimized for reading subsets of the dataset as well as (2b) in netCDF format best for bulk downloading. (3) The initialization files produced at the end of each incremental simulation useful for restarting the model from a specific date.

The Australian Antarctic Data Centre's Casey Station GIS data were originally mapped from Aerial photography (January 4 1994). Refer to the metadata record 'Casey Station GIS Dataset'. Since then various features have been added to these data as structures have been removed, moved or established. Some of these features have been surveyed. These surveys have metadata records from which the report describing the survey can be downloaded. However, the locations of other features have been obtained from a variety of sources. The data are included in the data available for download from the provided URLs. The data conforms to the SCAR Feature Catalogue which includes data quality information. See the provided URL. Data described by this metadata record has Dataset_id = 17. Each feature has a Qinfo number which, when entered at the 'Search datasets and quality' tab, provides data quality information for the feature.

NOAA's Continually Updated Shoreline Product, a dataset which emphasizes the most current temporal positioning versus the most accurately acquired data. Individual national shoreline projects and high-resolution LiDAR-derived shoreline were merged to form the framework of this product. Individual projects are edge matched using contemporary imagery as a guide. Single-line alongshore features and alongshore features where water passes underneath are not included in in this shoreline data set. The current attributes include source id, data source, horizontal accuracy, information field, attribute name, image verification date, source resolution, data source, extraction method (mono versus stereo), and source citation. The shoreline will be updated without regard to maintaining versions. Limited shoreline updates to existing vectors may be edited using verification imagery when the vectors and the imagery register well together, or when the updated vectors can be shifted to existing accurate vectors. Once verification imagery meets the accuracy criteria stated above, the decision to compile features is based on the ability to extract a proxy mean high water line considering water level, image date, resolution, accuracy, and shoreline slope. New shoreline compilation from contemporary commercial satellite and othomosaic imagery may be used to compile new shoreline based on those same considerations. CUSP shoreline emphasizes the most current temporal positioning versus the most accurately acquired data. The mapping of the most current temporal positioning of the proxy mean high water for this product excludes the effects of seasonal (summer versus winter beaches) and storm response (northeasters and hurricanes) on spatial variability of beach morphology. This dataset was created to deliver continuous shoreline with frequent updates to support various GIS applications including coastal and marine spatial planning, tsunami and storm surge modeling, hazard delineation and mitigation, environmental studies and may assist in nautical chart updates.View Dataset on the Gateway

This dataset displays the locations of wastewater facilities within the State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES). The purpose of the State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Program is to protect human health and the environment. The SPDES permit program in the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation's Division of Water regulates municipal, industrial, private, commercial and institutional wastewater treatment facilities that discharge to the groundwaters as well as surface waters of New York State. Service layer is updated as needed and was last updated August 2022. For more information see http://gis.ny.gov:80/gisdata/inventories/details.cfm?DSID=1010 and http://gis.ny.gov/gisdata/metadata/nysdec.spdes.xml View Dataset on the Gateway

The Los Angeles County Storm Drain System is a geometric network model representing the storm drain infrastructure within Los Angeles County. The long term goal of this network is to seamlessly integrate the countywide drainage infrastructure, regardless of ownership or jurisdiction. Current uses by the Department of Public Works (DPW) include asset inventory, operational maintenance, and compliance with environmental regulations.

GIS DATA DOWNLOADS: (More information is in the table below)

File geodatabase: A limited set of feature classes comprise the majority of this geometric network. These nine feature classes are available in one file geodatabase (.gdb). ArcMap versions compatible with the .gdb are 10.1 and later. Read-only access is provided by the open-source software QGIS. Instructions on opening a .gdb file are available here, and a QGIS plugin can be downloaded here.

Acronyms and Definitions (pdf) are provided to better understand terms used.

ONLINE VIEWING: Use your PC’s browser to search for drains by street address or drain name and download engineering drawings. The Web Viewer link is: https://dpw.lacounty.gov/fcd/stormdrain/

MOBILE GIS: This storm drain system can also be viewed on mobile devices as well as your PC via ArcGIS Online. (As-built plans are not available with this mobile option.)

More About these Downloads All data added or updated by Public Works is contained in nine feature classes, with definitions listed below. The file geodatabase (.gdb) download contains these eleven feature classes without network connectivity. Feature classes include attributes with unabbreviated field names and domains.

ArcMap versions compatible with the .gdb are 10.1 and later.

Feature Class Download Description

CatchBasin In .gdb Catch basins collect urban runoff from gutters

Culvert In .gdb A relatively short conduit that conveys storm water runoff underneath a road or embankment. Typical materials include reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) and corrugated metal pipe (CMP). Typical shapes are circular, rectangular, elliptical, or arched.

ForceMain In .gdb Force mains carry stormwater uphill from pump stations into gravity mains and open channels.

GravityMain In .gdb Underground pipes and channels.

LateralLine In .gdb Laterals connect catch basins to underground gravity mains or open channels.

MaintenanceHole In .gdb The top opening to an underground gravity main used for inspection and maintenance.

NaturalDrainage In .gdb Streams and rivers that flow through natural creek beds

OpenChannel In .gdb Concrete lined stormwater channels.

PumpStation In .gdb Where terrain causes accumulation, lift stations are used to pump stormwater to where it can once again flow towards the ocean

Data Field Descriptions

Most of the feature classes in this storm drain geometric network share the same GIS table schema. Only the most critical attributes are listed here per LACFCD operations.

Attribute Description

ASBDATE The date the design plans were approved “as-built” or accepted as “final records”.

CROSS_SECTIN_SHAPE The cross-sectional shape of the pipe or channel. Examples include round, square, trapezoidal, arch, etc.

DIAMETER_HEIGHT The diameter of a round pipe or the height of an underground box or open channel.

DWGNO Drain Plan Drawing Number per LACFCD Nomenclature

EQNUM Asset No. assigned by the Department of Public Works’ (in Maximo Database).

MAINTAINED_BY Identifies, to the best of LAFCD’s knowledge, the agency responsible for maintaining the structure.

MOD_DATE Date the GIS features were last modified.

NAME Name of the individual drainage infrastructure.

OWNER Agency that owns the drainage infrastructure in question.

Q_DESIGN The peak storm water runoff used for the design of the drainage infrastructure.

SOFT_BOTTOM For open channels, indicates whether the channel invert is in its natural state (not lined).

SUBTYPE Most feature classes in this drainage geometric nature contain multiple subtypes.

UPDATED_BY The person who last updated the GIS feature.

WIDTH Width of a channel in feet.

The datasets - Uganda Lakes, are sourced from the Ugandan Energy Sector GIS Working Group Open Data Site, developed and maintained by the Ugandan Energy Sector GIS Working Group.

The Ugandan Energy Sector GIS Working Group’s mission is to develop a high quality GIS for the Energy Sector of Uganda in order to drive informed decision-making. As such, it brings datasets together in one place, organize them, keep them updated, and make public data available to all stakeholders.

Link: http://data-energy-gis.opendata.arcgis.com/

The dataset is published on October 23, 2014

Layer was originally created using best available paper documentation for Bedford Regional Water Authority (BRWA) GIS use. The Bedford County iGIS site (ParcelViewer replacement), which is shared publicly, is a dependency of this layer. BRWA is responsible for maintaining the data, which is updated on as-needed basis. This layer is expected to be maintained indefinitely.

This feature class is updated every business day using Python scripts and the Permit database. Please disregard the "Date Updated" field as it does not keep in sync with DWR's internal enterprise geodatabase updates. This dataset contains the points of diversion (POD) for water rights based on the coordinate location (XY) provided in the NDWR’s Permit Database. Since there can be multiple permits on the same POD site, this dataset contains duplicate point features where several permits may be stacked on top of each other spatially. The advantage to using this dataset is that all permits in NDWR’s Permit database are available. Use a filter or definition query to restrict the permits needed.Background:NDWR’s Permit Database was created in 1992. Water Right applications are entered into the database with the Township Range and Section (TRS) of the proposed place of use). The Permit Database was designed to automatically create the point of diversion (POD) based on the centroid of the TRS provided.Starting in 2007, the Hydrology section began mapping PODs by the permit application description. Water rights points of diversion are mapped that contain one of the following: coordinate location (XY), bearing/distance based on a monument tie, application map that can be georeferenced, parcel number, or location description that can be identified on a topo map. The workflow for mapping PODs includes updating the auto-generated POD in the Permit Database to the location coordinates derived from mapping the application description. Some older water rights including Vested or Decreed Water Rights may not be mapped due to lack of sufficient location information.The Water Rights Section of NDWR is responsible for reviewing and approving water rights applications, for new appropriations and for changes to existing water rights, as well as evaluating and responding to protests of applications, approving subdivision dedications for water quantity, evaluating domestic well credits and relinquishments, issuing certificates for permitted water rights, conducting field investigations, and processing requests for extensions of time for filing proofs of completion and proofs of beneficial use.Please note that this POD feature class may not contain all water right information on a site or permit. The GIS datasets do not replace the need to review the Permit database and hard copy permit files and are intended for convenience in sharing information on a map, finding a location, seeing spatial patterns, and planning.Code Descriptions:app_status app_status_nameABN ABANDONED (inactive)ABR ABROGATED (inactive)APP APPLICATION (pending)CAN CANCELLED (inactive)CER CERTIFICATE (active)CUR CURTAILED (inactive)DEC DECREED (active)DEN DENIED (inactive)EXP EXPIRED (inactive)FOR FORFEITED (inactive)PER PERMIT (active)REJ REJECTED (inactive)REL RELINQUISHED (inactive)RES RESERVED (pending)RFA READY FOR ACTION (pending)RFP READY FOR ACTION PROTESTED (pending)RLP RELINQUISH A PORTION (active)RSC RESCINDED (inactive)RVK REVOKED (inactive)RVP REVOCABLE PERMIT (active)SUP SUPERSEDED (inactive)SUS SUSPENDED (inactive)VST VESTED RIGHT (pending)WDR WITHDRAWN (inactive)manner of use (mou) use_nameCOM COMMERCIALCON CONSTRUCTIONDEC AS DECREEDDOM DOMESTICDWR DEWATERINGENV ENVIRONMENTALIND INDUSTRIALIRC IRRIGATION-CAREY ACTIRD IRRIGATION-DLEIRR IRRIGATIONMM MINING AND MILLINGMUN MUNICIPALOTH OTHERPWR POWERQM QUASI-MUNICIPALREC RECREATIONALSTK STOCKWATERINGSTO STORAGEUKN UNKNOWNWLD WILDLIFEMMD MINING, MILLING AND DEWATERINGEVP EVAPORATIONsource source_nameEFF EFFLUENTGEO GEOTHERMALLAK LAKEOGW OTHER GROUND WATEROSW OTHER SURFACE WATERRES RESERVOIRSPR SPRINGSTO STORAGESTR STREAMUG UNDERGROUNDDate Field Descriptions:Permit Date—Date the permit was issued.File Date—Date application was filed at the Division.Sent for Publication—Date the notice that the application was filed was sent to the newspaper of record for publication.Last Publication—The last date of publication of said notice in the paper; 30 days from this date is the last day for filing a protest to an application.POC Filed Date—When a Proof of Completion of Work is accepted by this office, it becomes “filed” rather than just received. The filed date is the same as the received date.

Data type: point dataA basin is digitized from paper or scanned imagery.Subtypes:Cistern: A watertight, enclosed basin used to catch storm water runoff and precipitation. It is used for pollution control, volume reduction, and peak flow reduction of storm water runoff.Debris Basin: A basin that captures sediment, gravel, boulders, and vegetative debris washed out of canyons during storms. Debris is caught, allowing water to flow downstream through the storm drain system.Detention/Retarding Basin: A basin used to store storm water runoff for a limited period of time by allowing large inflows with limited outflows. These basins are also referred to as dry ponds, holding ponds, or dry detention basins.Reservoir: A basin designed to accommodate the storage of water for supply purposes, typically confined by a dam.Retention Basin: A basin including a permanent pool of water. They typically appear as artificial lakes with perimeter vegetation. They are also referred to as wet ponds, wet detention basins, or lake fails.Temporary Dam: A basin designed to be used for a limited period of time.Attributes: Most of the feature classes in this storm drain geometric network share the same GIS table schema. Only the most critical attributes per operations of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District are listed below:AttributeDescriptionASBDATEThe date the design plans were approved "as-built" or accepted as "final records".CROSS_SECTION_SHAPEThe cross-sectional shape of the pipe or channel. Examples include round, square, trapezoidal, arch, etc.DIAMETER_HEIGHTThe diameter of a round pipe or the height of an underground box or open channel.DWGNODrain Plan Drawing Number per LACFCD NomenclatureEQNUMAsset No. assigned by the Department of Public Works (in Maximo Database).MAINTAINED_BYIdentifies, to the best of LAFCD's knowledge, the agency responsible for maintaining the structure.MOD_DATEDate the GIS features were last modified.NAMEName of the individual drainage infrastructure.OWNERAgency that owns the drainage infrastructure in question.Q_DESIGNThe peak storm water runoff used for the design of the drainage infrastructure.SOFT_BOTTOMFor open channels, indicates whether the channel invert is in its natural state (not lined).SUBTYPEMost feature classes in this drainage geometric nature contain multiple subtypes.UPDATED_BYThe person who last updated the GIS feature.WIDTHWidth of a channel in feet.This Storm Drain Dataset is a work in progress, and all users of this data are STRONGLY ENCOURAGED to obtain the most current copy, available for download at theegis LA County HUBTerms of UseThis data is derived from the County Cadastral Landbase and features are typically added to this dataset per recorded 'as-built' drawings. Accurate facility locations on the ground must be determined by qualified field personnel. If any errors are found, or if there are general questions, please contact the individuals listed in the Credits.This product is for information purposes and should not be used for legal, engineering, or survey purposes. County assumes no liability for any errors or omissions.

Update date: from GISP repository on 2/6/25. This is a static dataset.Data Type: polyline dataAn open channel is digitized from paper or scanned imagery.Subtypes:Improved: An open drainage course confined with lined or unlined embankments.Unimproved: A natural drainage course graded to channelize storm water.Swale: A graded depression with relatively low slope to channelize storm water. Ditch: A trench provided to channelize storm water. Attributes: Most of the feature classes in this storm drain geometric network share the same GIS table schema. Only the most critical attributes per operations of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District are listed below:AttributeDescriptionASBDATEThe date the design plans were approved "as-built" or accepted as "final records".CROSS_SECTION_SHAPEThe cross-sectional shape of the pipe or channel. Examples include round, square, trapezoidal, arch, etc.DIAMETER_HEIGHTThe diameter of a round pipe or the height of an underground box or open channel.DWGNODrain Plan Drawing Number per LACFCD NomenclatureEQNUMAsset No. assigned by the Department of Public Works (in Maximo Database).MAINTAINED_BYIdentifies, to the best of LAFCD's knowledge, the agency responsible for maintaining the structure.MOD_DATEDate the GIS features were last modified.NAMEName of the individual drainage infrastructure.OWNERAgency that owns the drainage infrastructure in question.Q_DESIGNThe peak storm water runoff used for the design of the drainage infrastructure.SOFT_BOTTOMFor open channels, indicates whether the channel invert is in its natural state (not lined).SUBTYPEMost feature classes in this drainage geometric nature contain multiple subtypes. 1 = Improved, 2 = Unimproved, 3 = Ditch, 4 = SwaleUPDATED_BYThe person who last updated the GIS feature.WIDTHWidth of a channel in feet.This Storm Drain Dataset is a work in progress, and all users of this data are STRONGLY ENCOURAGED to obtain the most current copy, available for download at the LA County eGIS Hub site.Terms of UseThis data is derived from the County Cadastral Landbase and features are typically added to this dataset per recorded 'as-built' drawings. Accurate facility locations on the ground must be determined by qualified field personnel. If any errors are found, or if there are general questions, please contact the individuals listed in the Credits.This product is for information purposes and should not be used for legal, engineering, or survey purposes. County assumes no liability for any errors or omissions.

This shows the urban areas where upgrade works are needed to protect against impact on shellfish waters. Further areas may be added pending outcome of on-going impact assessments.

Further information about urban areas impacting on shellfish waters can be found in the EPA’s Annual Urban Waste Water Report on the EPA website www.epa.ie.

Abstract

The dataset was derived by the Bioregional Assessment Programme from multiple source datasets. The source datasets are identified in the Lineage field in this metadata statement. The processes undertaken to produce this derived dataset are described in the History field in this metadata statement.

This Galilee dataset contains v13+V12 of the GAL Asset database (GAL_asset_database_20160104.mdb), a Geodatabase version for GIS mapping purposes (GAL_asset_database_20160104_GISONLY.gdb), the draft Water Dependent Asset Register spreadsheet (BA-LEB-GAL-130-WaterDependentAssetRegister-AssetList-v20160104.xlsx), the draft Receptor Register spreadsheet (BA-LEB-GAL-140-ReceptorRegister-v20160104.xlsx), a data dictionary (GAL_asset_database_doc_20160104.doc), a folder (Indigenous_doc) containing documentation associated with Indigenous water asset project, and a folder (NRM_DOC) containing documentation associated with the Water Asset Information Tool (WAIT) process as outlined below

This database supersedes Asset database for the Galilee subregion on 10 September 2015 (GUID: c22a13bf-07ea-4eaa-960d-79d488a50496).

The updating in this V13+V12 GAL asset database 201600104 includes:

(1) Total number of registered water assets was increased by 79 due to: (a) The 9 assets changed their M2 test to "Yes" from the review done by Ecologist group. (b) 69 indigenous water assets from OWS were added.

(2) GAL receptor was included

The Asset database is registered to the BA repository as an ESRI personal goedatabase (.mdb - doubling as a MS Access database) that can store, query, and manage non-spatial data while the spatial data is in a separated file geodatabase joined by AID/Element ID/BARID. Assets are the spatial features used by project teams to model scenarios under the BA program. Detailed attribution does not exist at the asset level. Asset attribution includes only the core set of BA-derived attributes reflecting the BA classification hierarchy, as described in Appendix A of "GAL_asset_database_doc_20160104.doc", located in the zip file as part of this dataset. The "Element_to_Asset" table contains the relationships and identifies the elements that were grouped to create each asset. Detailed information describing the database structure and content can be found in the document "GAL_asset_database_doc_20160104.doc" located in the zip file.

The public version of this asset database can be accessed via the following dataset: Asset database for the Galilee subregion on 04 January 2016 Public (https://data.gov.au/data/dataset/eb4cf797-9b8f-4dff-9d7a-a5dfbc8d2bed)

Purpose

For creation of asset list for bioregional assessment

The public version of this asset database can be accessed via the following dataset: Asset database for the Galilee subregion on 04 January 2016 Public (https://data.gov.au/data/dataset/eb4cf797-9b8f-4dff-9d7a-a5dfbc8d2bed)

Dataset History

VersionID\tDate\tNotes

1.0\t23/12/2013\tInitial database

1.01\t3/02/2014\tupdated 207 Names in table AssetList using AssetName in table NRM_Water_Asset for those recodes from source WAIT_Burdekin

1.01\t3/02/2014\tremoved the space at the beginning of Unnamed)_South Australian Arid Lands_66329 and (Unnamed)_South Australian Arid Lands_57834

1.01\t20/02/2014\tThe database is not changed. About 36 self intersect polygons in spatial data were fixed. New shapefile name for polygon is Galilee_AssetList_geoPolygon20140220.shp

3.0\t23/04/2014\t"Updated universally changing ""AssetID"" to ""ElementID"" and changing the name of the ""AssetList"" table to ""ElementList"". A table to include Queensland threatened species data has also been added, and ElementIDs added to the ""ElementList"" table."

2.0\t23/04/2014\tErrors found after handover to CSIRO. Updated immediately to v3.0.

4.0\t24/04/2014\tQueensland threatened species data updated to new sequence of ElementIDs. New spatial data provided \[NAME\]

8\t5/05/2014\tIt is generally ready except calcification and asset area

9.0\t28/11/2014\t"Add additional datasets such as QLD_DERM PR Waterbodies, QLD_DERM PR Waterbodies QLD RegionalEcosystems as request

Update GDEsub, GDEsur, QLD_ DNRM_ECON_GW QLD_ DNRM_ECON_SW as request"

10\t22/05/2015\tUpdated database tables of AssetDecisions and AssetList for M2 and M3 test results

11 10/09/2015

(1) AID 70360 added for potential distribution of Largetooth Sawfish (Pristis pristis (Pristis microdon)). Attributes in additional attribute look-up table tbl_Species_EPBC_PristisPristis.

(2) The (brief) explanation for M2 decisions has been updated based on advice from the project team, replacing detailed explanations which were truncated in the Assetlist and AssetDecisions tables. The detailed explanation is retained in the DecisionReason field of the AssetDecisions table. Note there are no changes to decision outcomes or numbers of assets on the asset register;

(3) The draft BA-LEB-GAL-130-WaterDependentAssetRegister-AssetList-V20150910.xlsx as has been updated as an output of this database. The brief M2_decision replaces the extended decision rationale that was included in the last version of the spreadsheet.

(4) x15 elements associated with the (single) asset named "No_Asset" (AID = 0) were removed from the database (deleted from the AssetList, Element_to_asset and ElementList tables, and also from the element and asset polygon layers). These polygons were exact duplicates of other elements from the same source dataset and had been previously grouped as "No_Asset". This action will not affect the asset count for the asset list or the water dependent asset register.

12\t24/12/2015\t"Area calculations were removed from the spatial data and added to the assetList and elementList tables in

                    this .mdb database. Area calculations were included for assets and elementlist line features.

                    A total of 69 Indigenous elements were added to the ElementList table in the database, translating into an 

                     additional 69 indigenous assets which were added to the AssetList table. 

                     Of these 69 indigenous assets: 

                         40 intersect the PAE and are included in the ""asset list"".

                         5 did not intersect the PAE, so did not pass ""M1"". These are retained in the AssetList table but 

                          are ""switched off"" at M1 (i.e. M1 = 'No'). These are not considered part of the ""asset list"".

                         24 have no meaningful spatial component. These were added to the AssetList table, but ""switched 

                          off"" at ""M0"" (i.e. not fit for purpose, M0 = 'No') and therefore are not consodered part of 

                          the ""asset list""."

13\t4/01/2016\t"(1)(a) Added table ReceptorList in GAL_asset_database_20160104.mdb, using the data file from GAL project

                      team (b) Created draft BA-LEB-GAL-140-ReceptorRegister-v20160104.xlsx (c) Added table 

                       tbl_Receptors in GAL_asset_database_20160104.mdb and GM_GAL_ReceptorList_pt (created by ERIN 

                       using the location data from GAL project team) in GAL_asset_database_20160104_GISONLY.gdb,; (d)

                       Add SQL query "Find_used_Receptor_a" and "Find_used_Receptor_b" for extracting all used receptor for 

                        the register.

                     (2)(a)Updated M2 test for GAL from GAL_Species_TEC_decisions_reveiw_23112015.(b) Created draftBA-

                        LEB-GAL-130-WaterDependentAssetRegister-AssetList-v20160104.xlsx"

Dataset Citation

Bioregional Assessment Programme (2013) Asset database for the Galilee subregion on 04 January 2016. Bioregional Assessment Derived Dataset. Viewed 12 December 2018, http://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/dataset/12ff5782-a3d9-40e8-987c-520d5fa366dd.

Dataset Ancestors

• Derived From QLD Dept of Natural Resources and Mines, Groundwater Entitlements 20131204

• Derived From Queensland QLD - Regional - NRM - Water Asset Information Tool - WAIT - databases

• Derived From Matters of State environmental significance (version 4.1), Queensland

• Derived From Communities of National Environmental Significance Database - RESTRICTED - Metadata only

• Derived From South Australia SA - Regional - NRM Board - Water Asset Information Tool - WAIT - databases

• Derived From National Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) Atlas

• Derived From National Groundwater Information System (NGIS) v1.1

• Derived From Birds Australia - Important Bird Areas (IBA) 2009

• Derived From Queensland QLD Regional CMA Water Asset Information WAIT tool databases RESTRICTED Includes ALL Reports

• Derived From [Environmental Asset Database

Abstract The dataset was derived by the Bioregional Assessment Programme from multiple source datasets. The source datasets are identified in the Lineage field in this metadata statement. The …Show full descriptionAbstract The dataset was derived by the Bioregional Assessment Programme from multiple source datasets. The source datasets are identified in the Lineage field in this metadata statement. The processes undertaken to produce this derived dataset are described in the History field in this metadata statement. Hunter Asset Database v2.4 supersedes previous versions of the Hunter Asset database. In this V2.4 database: (1) Updated M2 test results for 86 assets from the external review (2) Updated asset names for two assets (AID: 8642 and 8643) required from the external review (3) Created Draft Water Dependent Asset Register file using the template V5 This dataset contains the Asset database (.mdb), a Geodatabase version for GIS mapping purposes (.gdb), the draft Water Dependent Asset Register spreadsheet, a data dictionary document, and a folder (NRM_DOC) containing documentation associated with the Water Asset Information Tool (WAIT) process as outlined below. The Asset database is registered to the BA repository as an ESRI personal goedatabase (.mdb - doubling as a MS Access database) that can store, query, and manage non-spatial data while the spatial data is in a separate file geodatabase joined by AID/ElementID. Under the BA program, a spatial assets database is developed for each defined bioregional assessment project. The spatial elements that underpin the identification of water dependent assets are identified in the first instance by regional NRM organisations (via the WAIT tool) and supplemented with additional elements from national and state/territory government datasets. A report on the WAIT process for the Hunter is included in the zip file as part of this dataset. Elements are initially included in the preliminary assets database if they are partly or wholly within the subregion's preliminary assessment extent (Materiality Test 1, M1). Elements are then grouped into assets which are evaluated by project teams to determine whether they meet the second Materiality Test (M2). Assets meeting both Materiality Tests comprise the water dependent asset list. Descriptions of the assets identified in the Hunter subregion are found in the "AssetList" table of the database. Assets are the spatial features used by project teams to model scenarios under the BA program. Detailed attribution does not exist at the asset level. Asset attribution includes only the core set of BA-derived attributes reflecting the BA classification hierarchy, as described in Appendix A of " HUN_asset_database_doc_20151120.doc", located in this filet. The "Element_to_Asset" table contains the relationships and identifies the elements that were grouped to create each asset. Detailed information describing the database structure and content can be found in the document " HUN_asset_database_doc_20151120.doc" located in this file. Some of the source data used in the compilation of this dataset is restricted. Dataset History OBJECTID VersionID Notes Date_ 1 1 Initial database. 29/08/2014 3 1.1 Update the classification for seven identical assets from Gloucester subregion 16/09/2014 4 1.2 Added in NSW GDEs from Hunter - Central Rivers GDE mapping from NSW DPI (50 635 polygons). 28/01/2015 5 1.3 New AIDs assiged to NSW GDE assets (Existing AID + 20000) to avoid duplication of AIDs assigned in other databases. 12/02/2015 6 1.4 "(1) Add 20 additional datasets required by HUN assessment project team after HUN community workshop (2) Turn off previous GW point assets (AIDs from 7717-7810 inclusive) (3) Turn off new GW point asset (AID: 0) (4) Assets (AIDs: 8023-8026) are duplicated to 4 assets (AID: 4747,4745,4744,4743 respectively) in NAM subregion . Their AID, Asset Name, Group, SubGroup, Depth, Source, ListDate and Geometry are using values from that NAM assets. (5) Asset (AID 8595) is duplicated to 1 asset ( AID 57) in GLO subregion . Its AID, Asset Name, Group, SubGroup, Depth, Source, ListDate and Geometry are using values from that GLO assets. (6) 39 assets (AID from 2969 to 5040) are from NAM Asset database and their attributes were updated to use the latest attributes from NAM asset database (7)The databases, especially spatial database, were changed such as duplicated attributes fields in spatial data were removed and only ID field is kept. The user needs to join the Table Assetlist or Elementlist to the spatial data" 16/06/2015 7 2 "(1) Updated 131 new GW point assets with previous AID and some of them may include different element number due to the change of 77 FTypes requested by Hunter assessment project team (2) Added 104 EPBC assets, which were assessed and excluded by ERIN (3) Merged 30 Darling Hardyhead assets to one (asset AID 60140) and deleted another 29 (4) Turned off 5 assets from community workshop (60358 - 60362) as they are duplicated to 5 assets from 104 EPBC excluded assets (5) Updated M2 test results (6) Asset Names (AID: 4743 and 4747) were changed as requested by Hunter assessment project team (4 lower cases to 4 upper case only). Those two assets are from Namoi asset database and their asset names may not match with original names in Namoi asset database. (7)One NSW WSP asset (AID: 60814) was added in as requested by Hunter assessment project team. The process method (without considering 1:M relation) for this asset is not robust and is different to other NSW WSP assets. It should NOT use for other subregions. (8) Queries of Find_All_Used_Assets and Find_All_WD_Assets in the asset database can be used to extract all used assts and all water dependant assts" 20/07/2015 8 2.1 "(1) There are following six assets (in Hun subregion), which is same as 6 assets in GIP subregion. Their AID, Asset Name, Group, SubGroup, Depth, Source and ListDate are using values from GIP assets. You will not see AIDs from AID_from_HUN in whole HUN asset datable and spreadsheet anymore and you only can see AIDs from AID_from_GIP ( Actually (a) AID 11636 is GIP got from MBC (B) only AID, Asset Name and ListDate are different and changed) (2) For BA-NSB-HUN-130-WaterDependentAssetRegister-AssetList-V20150827.xlsx, (a) Extracted long ( >255 characters) WD rationale for 19 assets (AIDs: 8682,9065,9073,9087,9088,9100,9102,9103,60000,60001,60792,60793,60801,60713,60739,60751,60764,60774,60812 ) in tab "Water-dependent asset register" and 37 assets (AIDs: 5040,8651,8677,8682,8650,8686,8687,8718,8762,9094,9065,9067,9073,9077,9081,9086,9087,9088,9100,9102,9103,60000,60001,60739,60742,60751,60713,60764,60771, 60774,60792,60793,60798,60801,60809,60811,60812) in tab "Asset list" in 1.30 Excel file (b) recreated draft BA-NSB-HUN-130-WaterDependentAssetRegister-AssetList-V20150827.xlsx (3) Modified queries (Find_All_Asset_List and Find_Waterdependent_asset_register) for (2)(a)" 27/08/2015 9 2.2 "(1) Updated M2 results from the internal review for 386 Sociocultural assets (2)Updated the class to Ecological/Vegetation/Habitat (potential species distribution) for assets/elements from sources of WAIT_ALA_ERIN, NSW_TSEC, NSW_DPI_Fisheries_DarlingHardyhead" 8/09/2015 10 2.3 "(1) Updated M2 results from the internal review * Changed "Assessment team do not say No" to "All economic assets are by definition water dependent" * Changed "Assessment team say No" : to "These are water dependent, but excluded by the project team based on intersection with the PAE is negligible" * Changed "Rivertyles" to "RiverStyles"" 22/09/2015 11 2.4 "(1) Updated M2 test results for 86 assets from the external review (2) Updated asset names for two assets (AID: 8642 and 8643) required from the external review (3) Created Draft Water Dependent Asset Register file using the template V5" 20/11/2015 Dataset Citation Bioregional Assessment Programme (2015) Asset database for the Hunter subregion on 20 November 2015. Bioregional Assessment Derived Dataset. Viewed 07 June 2018, http://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/dataset/0bbcd7f6-2d09-418c-9549-8cbd9520ce18. Dataset Ancestors Derived From NSW Office of Water Surface Water Entitlements Locations v1_Oct2013 Derived From Travelling Stock Route Conservation Values Derived From Spatial Threatened Species and Communities (TESC) NSW 20131129 Derived From NSW Wetlands Derived From Climate Change Corridors Coastal North East NSW Derived From Communities of National Environmental Significance Database - RESTRICTED - Metadata only Derived From Climate Change Corridors for Nandewar and New England Tablelands Derived From National Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) Atlas Derived From Asset database for the Hunter subregion on 27 August 2015 Derived From Birds Australia - Important Bird Areas (IBA) 2009 Derived From Estuarine Macrophytes of Hunter Subregion NSW DPI Hunter 2004 Derived From Hunter CMA GDEs (DRAFT DPI pre-release) Derived From Camerons Gorge Grassy White Box Endangered Ecological Community (EEC) 2008 Derived From NSW Office of Water Surface Water Licences Processed for Hunter v1 20140516 Derived From Threatened migratory shorebird habitat mapping DECCW May 2006 Derived From Asset database for the Hunter subregion on 12 February 2015 Derived From NSW Office of Water Surface Water Offtakes - Hunter v1 24102013 Derived From National Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) Atlas (including WA) Derived From Asset list for Hunter - CURRENT Derived From Species Profile and Threats Database (SPRAT) - Australia - Species of National Environmental Significance Database (BA subset - RESTRICTED - Metadata only) Derived From Ramsar Wetlands of Australia Derived From Native Vegetation Management (NVM) - Manage Benefits Derived From Commonwealth Heritage List Spatial Database (CHL) Derived From GW Element Bores with Unknown FTYPE Hunter NSW Office of Water 20150514

Layer was originally created using best available paper documentation for Bedford Regional Water Authority (BRWA) GIS use. The Bedford County iGIS site (ParcelViewer replacement), which is shared publicly, is a dependency of this layer. BRWA is responsible for maintaining the data, which is updated on as-needed basis. This layer is expected to be maintained indefinitely.

This layer represents the risk for each waterbody of failing to meet their Water Framework Directive (WFD) objectives by 2027. The risk of not meeting WFD objectives was determined by assessment of monitoring data, data on the pressures and data on the measures that have been implemented. Waterbodies that are At Risk are prioritised for implementation of measures. This assessment was completed in 2020 by the EPA Catchments Unit in conjunction with other public bodies and was primarily based on monitoring data up the end of 2018.The three risk categories are: Waterbodies that are At Risk of not meeting their Water Framework Directive objectives. For these waterbodies an evidence-based process was undertaken to identify the significant pressures; once a pressure is designated as ‘significant’, measures and accompanying resources are needed to mitigate the impact(s) from this pressure. These At Risk waterbodies require not only implementation of the existing measures described in the various regulations, e.g. the Good Agricultural Practices Regulations, but also in many instances more targeted supplementary measures. Waterbodies that are categorised as Review either because additional information is needed to determine their status before resources and more targeted measures are initiated or the measures have been undertaken, e.g. a wastewater treatment plant upgrade, but the outcome hasn’t yet been measured/monitored. * Waterbodies that are Not at Risk and therefore are meeting their Water Framework Directive objectives. These require maintenance of existing measures to protect the satisfactory status of the water bodies.For more information on this dataset please go to https://gis.epa.ie/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/1df2cfd8-293d-41b1-a369-ba92c6ac14ef

Abstract

The dataset was derived by the Bioregional Assessment Programme. This dataset was derived from multiple datasets. You can find a link to the parent datasets in the Lineage Field in this metadata statement. The History Field in this metadata statement describes how this dataset was derived.

The asset database for Cooper subregion (v4) supersedes previous version (v3) of the Cooper Asset database (Asset database for the Cooper subregion on 27 August 2015, GUID: 0b122b2b-e5fe-4166-93d1-3b94fc440c82). It contains the Asset database (COO_asset_database_20160512.mdb), a Geodatabase version for GIS mapping purposes (COO_asset_database_GISOnly_20160512.gdb), the draft Water Dependent Asset Register spreadsheet (BA-LEB-COO-130-WaterDependentAssetRegister-AssetList-v20160512.xlsx), a data dictionary (COO_asset_database_doc_20160512.doc), a folder (Indigenous_doc) containing documentation associated with Indigenous water asset project and a folder (NRM_DOC) containing documentation associated with the Water Asset Information Tool (WAIT) process as outlined

The Asset database is registered to the BA repository as an ESRI personal goedatabase (.mdb - doubling as a MS Access database) that can store, query, and manage non-spatial data while the spatial data is in a separate file geodatabase joined by AID/ElementID.

Under the BA program, a spatial assets database is developed for each defined bioregional assessment project. The spatial elements that underpin the identification of water dependent assets are identified in the first instance by regional NRM organisations (via the WAIT tool) and supplemented with additional elements from national and state/territory government datasets. A report on the WAIT process for the Cooper is included in the zip file as part of this dataset.

Elements are initially included in the preliminary assets database if they are partly or wholly within the subregion's preliminary assessment extent (Materiality Test 1, M1). Elements are then grouped into assets which are evaluated by project teams to determine whether they meet the second Materiality Test (M2). Assets meeting both Materiality Tests comprise the water dependent asset list. Descriptions of the assets identified in the Cooper subregion are found in the "AssetList" table of the database.

Assets are the spatial features used by project teams to model scenarios under the BA program. Detailed attribution does not exist at the asset level. Asset attribution includes only the core set of BA-derived attributes reflecting the BA classification hierarchy, as described in Appendix A of " COO_asset_database_doc_20160512.doc ", located in this file.

Some of the source data used in the compilation of this dataset is restricted.

The public version of this asset database can be accessed via the following dataset: Asset database for the Cooper subregion on 12 May 2016 Public (https://data.gov.au/data/dataset/bffa0c44-c86f-4f81-8070-2f0b13e0b774)

Dataset History

Version ID\tDate\tNotes

1.0\t27/03/2015\tInitial database

2.0\t14/08/2015\t"(1) Updated the database for M2 test results provided from COO assessment team and created the draft BA-LEB-COO-130-WaterDependentAssetRegister-AssetList-V20150814.xlsx

(2) updated the group, subgroup, class and depth for (up to) 2 NRM WAIT assets to cooperate the feedback to OWS from relevant SA NRM regional office (whose staff missed the asset workshop). The AIDs and names of those assets are listed in table LUT_changed_asset_class_20150814 in COO_asset_database_20150814.mdb

(3) As a result of (2), added one new asset separated from one existing asset. This asset and its parent are listed in table LUT_ADD_1_asste_20150814 in COO_asset_database_20150814.mdb. The M2 test result for this asset is inherited from its parent in this version

(5) Added Appendix C in COO_asset_database_doc_201500814.doc is about total elements/assets in current Group and subgroup

(6)Added Four SQL queries (Find_All_Used_Assets, Find_All_WD_Assets, Find_Amount_Asset_in_Class and Find_Amount_Elements_in_Class) in COO_asset_database_20150814.mdb.mdb for total assets and total numbers

(7)The databases, especially spatial database (COO_asset_database_20150814Only.gdb), were changed such as duplicated attribute fields in spatial data were removed and only ID field is kept. The user needs to join the Table Assetlist or Elementlist to the relevant spatial data"

3.0 27/08/2015 M2_Reason in the Assetlist table and DecisionBrief in the AssetDecisions table have been updated with short descriptions (<255 characters) provided by project team 21/8, and the draft "water-dependent asset register and asset list" (BA-LEB-COO-130-WaterDependentAssetRegister-AssetList-V20150827) also updated accordingly. No changes to asset numbers.

4.0 12/05/2016 "Total number of registered water assets was increased by 26(1+25) due to:

(a) The one asset changed M2 test to "Yes" from the review done by Ecologist group. The original data is included the database as the table tbl_COO _Species_TEC_decisions_reveiw_23112015

(b) 53 indigenous water assets from OWS were added ( but only 25 assets meet the criteria of the registration and are registered) . The data and documents from OWS are included in subdirectory Indigenous_doc

(c)The draft new Water Dependent Asset Register file (BA-LEB-COO-130-WaterDependentAssetRegister-AssetList-v20160512.xlsx) was created.

"

Dataset Citation

Bioregional Assessment Programme (2014) Asset database for the Cooper subregion on 12 May 2016. Bioregional Assessment Derived Dataset. Viewed 07 February 2017, http://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/dataset/90230311-b2e7-4d4d-a69a-03daab0d03cc.

Dataset Ancestors

• Derived From QLD Dept of Natural Resources and Mines, Groundwater Entitlements 20131204

• Derived From Queensland QLD - Regional - NRM - Water Asset Information Tool - WAIT - databases

• Derived From Matters of State environmental significance (version 4.1), Queensland

• Derived From Geofabric Surface Network - V2.1

• Derived From Communities of National Environmental Significance Database - RESTRICTED - Metadata only

• Derived From South Australia SA - Regional - NRM Board - Water Asset Information Tool - WAIT - databases

• Derived From National Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) Atlas

• Derived From National Groundwater Information System (NGIS) v1.1

• Derived From Birds Australia - Important Bird Areas (IBA) 2009

• Derived From Queensland QLD Regional CMA Water Asset Information WAIT tool databases RESTRICTED Includes ALL Reports

• Derived From Queensland wetland data version 3 - wetland areas.

• Derived From SA Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR) Water Management Areas 141007

• Derived From South Australian Wetlands - Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) Classification

• Derived From National Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) Atlas (including WA)

• Derived From Asset database for the Cooper subregion on 14 August 2015

• Derived From QLD Dept of Natural Resources and Mines, Groundwater Entitlements linked to bores v3 03122014

• Derived From Species Profile and Threats Database (SPRAT) - Australia - Species of National Environmental Significance Database (BA subset - RESTRICTED - Metadata only)

• Derived From Ramsar Wetlands of Australia

• Derived From Permanent and Semi-Permanent Waterbodies of the Lake Eyre Basin (Queensland and South Australia) (DRAFT)

• Derived From SA EconomicElements v1 20141201

• Derived From QLD Dept of Natural Resources and Mines, Groundwater Entitlements linked to bores and NGIS v4 28072014

• Derived From National Heritage List Spatial Database (NHL) (v2.1)

• Derived From Great Artesian Basin and Laura Basin groundwater recharge areas

• Derived From SA Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR) Groundwater Licences 141007

• Derived From Lake Eyre Basin (LEB) Aquatic Ecosystems Mapping and Classification

• Derived From

This is a point data set representing river miles of the main channel of the Lower Boise River created by the City of Boise Public Works Department. The points are approximately 1/10th of a mile apart from each other for flexibility in landmark identification and model node selection (used in analysis). A river mile is a relative measure of the navigable distances in the deepest part of the channel. It is the distance in miles along a river from its mouth. River mile numbers begin at zero and increase further upstream. The data set was created by digitizing 1/10th of a mile measurements along the river channel using 2015 Idaho NAIP Imagery (1-meter resolution) at a 1:3000 scale or finer. As newer high-quality aerial imagery becomes available, a new version of the dataset will be created to reflect changes in the main channel over time and made available here. We are currently working on a 2017 version.For more information about this dataset, please contact Darcy Sharp, City of Boise Public Works Environmental Data Analyst, dsharp@cityofboise.org.Data Usage:If you download this dataset, it is highly recommended that you keep track of the year of imagery the dataset is correlated to, in this case it is 2015. As newer NAIP imagery becomes available, we will release a newer version of this dataset. It is especially important to cite the year if this dataset will be used in published documents so readers are clear on which vintage of the dataset was used in cartographic products, for analyses, etc.Data and Attribute Creation Information:The National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) is not used for this river mile layer. The NHD layer includes alternative side channels, ephemeral tributaries, and other river features that result in a high river mileage tally. NHD often uses contours to predict where the stream should be but does not connect that to actual flowing water.Features in this data set were created via heads-up digitizing. This data set is subject to errors in source data accuracy and errors introduced in the digitizing process. Source data includes: River Mile locations - 2015 Natural Color and IR 1-meter NAIP Idaho aerial imageryRiver Reach (local landmark) values - USGS (https://waterdata.usgs.gov/id/nwis/ for HUC 17050114) Site Identification numbers, IDWR Site Identification Numbers(https://research.idwr.idaho.gov/apps/Hydrologic/Accounting/ for the Boise River System), Idaho Department of Environmental Quality water quality assessments (https://cloud.insideidaho.org), and Idaho Department of Fish and Game fishing and boating access sites (https://data-idfggis.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/idfg-fishing-and-boating-access-sites)DEQ Assessment Units - assigned by referencing the DEQ Integrated Report found at https://mapcase.deq.idaho.gov/wq2014/Elevation values - grdn44w117_13 raster downloaded from the US Geological Survey digital elevation model available on The National Map at https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/Latitude and Longitude values - calculated using GIS