Seismic Line Location Map Hot Pot Project, Humboldt County, Nevada 2010. Detailed map (pdf) showing topographic base map, Township and Range layer, Oski BLM and private leases at time of survey, and locations, with selected shot points, of the five seismic lines.

This raster dataset contains a 10-meter resolution digital elevation model (DEM) of the Elk River watershed in Humboldt County, California. This dataset was generated from 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle maps originally produced by the US Geological Survey. This dataset is the product of the Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey’s (CGS) investigation of landslides in the Elk River watershed. The 52 square mile study area is located in Humboldt County in northwestern California. The investigation was based on interpretation of 1940, 1941, 1948, 1954, 1962, 1965, 1984, 1988, 1996 and 2000 aerial photos, findings from CGS’s landslide mapping conducted in the early 1980s (Kilbourne, R.T. 1982-84, Manson, M. W. 1984), as well as other sources. Mapping was conducted at 1:24,000 scale. The resulting maps are titled “Geologic and Geomorphic Features Related to Landsliding, Elk River Watershed” (Plate 1) and “Relative Landslide Potential with Geologic and Geomorphic Features, Elk River Watershed” map (Plate 2). This study was conducted at a regional scale of mapping using ten sets of aerial photos combined with a compilation of earlier published and unpublished work. Other photo sets may reveal additional landslides. The regional nature of the study makes the data and maps, including the relative landslide potential zones, inappropriate as a substitute for site-specific analysis.

This raster dataset contains topographic hillshade for the Elk River watershed in Humboldt County, California. This dataset is the product of the Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey’s (CGS) investigation of landslides in the Elk River watershed. The 52 square mile study area is located in Humboldt County in northwestern California. The investigation was based on interpretation of 1940, 1941, 1948, 1954, 1962, 1965, 1984, 1988, 1996 and 2000 aerial photos, findings from CGS’s landslide mapping conducted in the early 1980s (Kilbourne, R.T. 1982-84, Manson, M. W. 1984), as well as other sources. Mapping was conducted at 1:24,000 scale. The resulting maps are titled “Geologic and Geomorphic Features Related to Landsliding, Elk River Watershed” (Plate 1) and “Relative Landslide Potential with Geologic and Geomorphic Features, Elk River Watershed” map (Plate 2). This study was conducted at a regional scale of mapping using ten sets of aerial photos combined with a compilation of earlier published and unpublished work. Other photo sets may reveal additional landslides. The regional nature of the study makes the data and maps, including the relative landslide potential zones, inappropriate as a substitute for site-specific analysis.

This data release contains a geospatial database related to a digital 3D hydrogeologic framework model (3D HFM) of the Eel River Valley groundwater basin, California. The geospatial database contains two main data elements: (1) input data to the 3D HFM; (2) interpolated elevations and thicknesses of hydrogeologic units as a cellular array, which are a spatial representation of the 3D HFM results. Three hydrogeologic framework models of the same extent and similar conceptualization but successively increasing complexity were developed to characterize the structure, thickness, and extent of the materials within the basin; data from each phase of model-building are contained in this data release. The Phase 1 3D HFM has three hydrogeologic units (HGUs) and is based on a state-scale geologic map and generalized geologic cross sections, with no faults. The Phase 2 3D HFM has four HGUs and refines the elevation and thickness of the HGUs using data from detailed geologic maps and on structure contour and isopach maps that were based on formation tops picked from oil and gas well logs; the model includes faults. The Phase 3 3D HFM has seven HGUs and further refines the elevation and thickness of the HGUs using additional detailed geologic map data and stratigraphic interpretation of lithology data from water wells; the model includes faults. Each 3D HFM is a digital representation of the subsurface configuration of the HGUs that can be visualized in three dimensions and directly incorporated into numerical flow models. Input data to the 3D HFMs included in this data release include surface map data polygons of the hydrogeologic units, fault traces, and structure contour and isopach data that were used in the Phase 2 and 3 HFMs to define the extent and thickness of the deepest basin-filling hydrogeologic unit. Textural (grain size) data were compiled from driller’s lithologic logs from water wells. Well locations are included as point data within the geospatial database; the lithologic data from downhole intervals in each borehole are tabulated in spreadsheet form. The interpolated elevations and thickness of stratigraphic units are presented as a cellular array: essentially a “flattened”, two-dimensional representation of the digital 3D geologic framework, which defines the elevation and thickness of the HGUs within the 3D HFMs from each phase of model construction. The elevation and thickness of the geologic units are contained within a single polygon feature class ModelCells, which contains a mesh of polygons that represent model cells that have multiple attributes including XY location, elevation and thickness of each hydrogeologic unit. The spatial data are accompanied by non-spatial tables that describe the sources of geologic information, a glossary of terms, a description of model units, and a Data Dictionary that duplicates the Entity and Attribute information contained in the metadata file. Spatial data are also presented as shapefiles.

description: This dataset was developed in an effort to compile Western Pond Turtle (Clemmys marmorata) observations in CDFG Region 1. Steve Burton (CDFG Staff Environmental Scientist) took the lead on the project by sending out an email request for Region 1 Staff to send him any anecdotal information they may have regarding pond turtles. He received approximately 65 anecdotal observations which were subsequently added to this GIS Layer. These anecdotal observations typically did not include observation dates, counts of individuals, or presence of juveniles. During the Summer of 2006, CDFG hired Cheryl Bondi through a contract with Humboldt State University to seek additional observations from other sources, to re-visit the anecdotal sites, and to visit likely sites to make additional observations. Cheryl compiled/reported an additional 277 observations in the database. To facilitate the reporting of Western Pond Turtle observations into a centralized database, the Region 1 Information Services Branch established an online Turtle Mapping tool which allows users to add observations via an ArcIMS Mapping tool. Region 1 Staff were directed to this application to report Pond Turtle Observations. This tool will continue to be available and the database is expected to continue growing. The basic reference data provided by the tool are the scanned 1:24k USGS Topographical Maps. As such, the expected accuracy of the observation locations are +/- 40 ft. Staff were additionally instructed to report sightings of Red-Eared Sliders (Trachemys scripta elegans) as well. These observations were only incidental to the collection of Western Pond Turtle observations. As of 4/10/2007, only 3 Red-Eared Slider observations were reported in the database. Note that this layer was compiled before Mendocino County became part of Region 1. As such, no efforts were made to compile Western Pond Turtle Observations for Mendocino County.; abstract: This dataset was developed in an effort to compile Western Pond Turtle (Clemmys marmorata) observations in CDFG Region 1. Steve Burton (CDFG Staff Environmental Scientist) took the lead on the project by sending out an email request for Region 1 Staff to send him any anecdotal information they may have regarding pond turtles. He received approximately 65 anecdotal observations which were subsequently added to this GIS Layer. These anecdotal observations typically did not include observation dates, counts of individuals, or presence of juveniles. During the Summer of 2006, CDFG hired Cheryl Bondi through a contract with Humboldt State University to seek additional observations from other sources, to re-visit the anecdotal sites, and to visit likely sites to make additional observations. Cheryl compiled/reported an additional 277 observations in the database. To facilitate the reporting of Western Pond Turtle observations into a centralized database, the Region 1 Information Services Branch established an online Turtle Mapping tool which allows users to add observations via an ArcIMS Mapping tool. Region 1 Staff were directed to this application to report Pond Turtle Observations. This tool will continue to be available and the database is expected to continue growing. The basic reference data provided by the tool are the scanned 1:24k USGS Topographical Maps. As such, the expected accuracy of the observation locations are +/- 40 ft. Staff were additionally instructed to report sightings of Red-Eared Sliders (Trachemys scripta elegans) as well. These observations were only incidental to the collection of Western Pond Turtle observations. As of 4/10/2007, only 3 Red-Eared Slider observations were reported in the database. Note that this layer was compiled before Mendocino County became part of Region 1. As such, no efforts were made to compile Western Pond Turtle Observations for Mendocino County.