<<< This dataset is not released yet. Release date: 1st September, 2025. >>>

The Cartographic Sign Detection Dataset (CaSiDD) comprises 796 manually annotated historical map samples, corresponding to 18,750 cartographic signs, like icons and symbols. Moreover, the signs are categorized into 24 distinct classes, like tree, mill, hill, religious edifice, or grave. The original images are part of the Semap dataset [1].

The dataset is published in the context of R. Petitpierre's PhD thesis: Studying Maps at Scale: A Digital Investigation of Cartography and the Evolution of Figuration [2]. Details on annotation, and statistics on annotated cartographic signs are provided in the manuscript.

Organization of the data

To come soon.

Descriptive statistics

Number of distinct classes: 24 + hapaxes
Number of image samples: 796
Number of annotations: 18,750
Study period: 1492–1948.

Use and Citation

For any mention of this dataset, please cite :

@misc{casidd_petitpierre_2025,
author = {Petitpierre, R{\'{e}}mi and Jiang, Jiaming},
title = {{Cartographic Sign Detection Dataset (CaSiDD)}},
year = {2025},
publisher = {EPFL},
url = {https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16278381}}

@phdthesis{studying_maps_petitpierre_2025,
author = {Petitpierre, R{\'{e}}mi},
title = {{Studying Maps at Scale: A Digital Investigation of Cartography and the Evolution of Figuration}},
year = {2025},
school = {EPFL}}

Corresponding author

Rémi PETITPIERRE - remi.petitpierre@epfl.ch - ORCID - Github - Scholar - ResearchGate

Work ethics

85% of the data were annotated by RP. The remainder was annotated by JJ, a master's student from EPFL, Switzerland.

License

This project is licensed under the CC BY 4.0 License.

Liability

We do not assume any liability for the use of this dataset.

References

1. Petitpierre R, Gomez Donoso D, Krisel B (2025) Semantic Segmentation Map Dataset (Semap). EPFL. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16164782
2. Petitpierre R (2025) Studying Maps at Scale: A Digital Investigation of Cartography and the Evolution of Figuration. PhD thesis. École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne.

This dataset is a series of digital map-posters accompanying the AdaptNRM Guide: Helping Biodiversity Adapt: supporting climate adaptation planning using a community-level modelling approach.

These represent supporting materials and information about the community-level biodiversity models applied to climate change. Map posters are organised by four biological groups (vascular plants, mammals, reptiles and amphibians), two climate change scenario (1990-2050 MIROC5 and CanESM2 for RCP8.5), and five measures of change in biodiversity.

The map-posters present the nationally consistent data at locally relevant resolutions in eight parts – representing broad groupings of NRM regions based on the cluster boundaries used for climate adaptation planning (http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/adaptation) and also Nationally.

Map-posters are provided in PNG image format at moderate resolution (300dpi) to suit A0 printing. The posters were designed to meet A0 print size and digital viewing resolution of map detail. An additional set in PDF image format has been created for ease of download for initial exploration and printing on A3 paper. Some text elements and map features may be fuzzy at this resolution.

Each map-poster contains four dataset images coloured using standard legends encompassing the potential range of the measure, even if that range is not represented in the dataset itself or across the map extent.

Most map series are provided in two parts: part 1 shows the two climate scenarios for vascular plants and mammals and part 2 shows reptiles and amphibians. Eight cluster maps for each series have a different colour theme and map extent. A national series is also provided. Annotation briefly outlines the topics presented in the Guide so that each poster stands alone for quick reference.

An additional 77 National maps presenting the probability distributions of each of 77 vegetation types – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroups (NVIS subgroups) - are currently in preparation.

Example citations:

Williams KJ, Raisbeck-Brown N, Prober S, Harwood T (2015) Generalised projected distribution of vegetation types – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroups (1990 and 2050), A0 map-poster 8.1 - East Coast NRM regions. CSIRO Land and Water Flagship, Canberra. Available online at www.AdaptNRM.org and https://data.csiro.au/dap/.

Williams KJ, Raisbeck-Brown N, Harwood T, Prober S (2015) Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050), A0 map-poster 9.1 - East Coast NRM regions. CSIRO Land and Water Flagship, Canberra. Available online at www.AdaptNRM.org and https://data.csiro.au/dap/.

This dataset has been delivered incrementally. Please check that you are accessing the latest version of the dataset. Lineage: The map posters show case the scientific data. The data layers have been developed at approximately 250m resolution (9 second) across the Australian continent to incorporate the interaction between climate and topography, and are best viewed using a geographic information system (GIS). Each data layers is 1Gb, and inaccessible to non-GIS users. The map posters provide easy access to the scientific data, enabling the outputs to be viewed at high resolution with geographical context information provided.

Maps were generated using layout and drawing tools in ArcGIS 10.2.2

A check list of map posters and datasets is provided with the collection.

Map Series: 7.(1-77) National probability distribution of vegetation type – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroup pre-1750 #0x

8.1 Generalised projected distribution of vegetation types (NVIS subgroups) (1990 and 2050)

9.1 Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for plants and mammals (1990-2050)

9.2 Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

10.1 Need for assisted dispersal for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

10.2 Need for assisted dispersal for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

11.1 Refugial potential for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

11.1 Refugial potential for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

12.1 Climate-driven future revegetation benefit for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

12.2 Climate-driven future revegetation benefit for vascular reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

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://data.geodata.state.gov/guidance/index.html 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. ATTRIBUTE NAME | | VALUE | RANK | 1 | 2 | 3 STATUS | International Boundary | Other Line of International Separation | Special 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

Jurisdictional Unit, 2022-05-21. For use with WFDSS, IFTDSS, IRWIN, and InFORM.This is a feature service which provides Identify and Copy Feature capabilities. If fast-drawing at coarse zoom levels is a requirement, consider using the tile (map) service layer located at https://nifc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=3b2c5daad00742cd9f9b676c09d03d13.OverviewThe Jurisdictional Agencies dataset is developed as a national land management geospatial layer, focused on representing wildland fire jurisdictional responsibility, for interagency wildland fire applications, including WFDSS (Wildland Fire Decision Support System), IFTDSS (Interagency Fuels Treatment Decision Support System), IRWIN (Interagency Reporting of Wildland Fire Information), and InFORM (Interagency Fire Occurrence Reporting Modules). It is intended to provide federal wildland fire jurisdictional boundaries on a national scale. The agency and unit names are an indication of the primary manager name and unit name, respectively, recognizing that:There may be multiple owner names.Jurisdiction may be held jointly by agencies at different levels of government (ie State and Local), especially on private lands, Some owner names may be blocked for security reasons.Some jurisdictions may not allow the distribution of owner names. Private ownerships are shown in this layer with JurisdictionalUnitIdentifier=null,JurisdictionalUnitAgency=null, JurisdictionalUnitKind=null, and LandownerKind="Private", LandownerCategory="Private". All land inside the US country boundary is covered by a polygon.Jurisdiction for privately owned land varies widely depending on state, county, or local laws and ordinances, fire workload, and other factors, and is not available in a national dataset in most cases.For publicly held lands the agency name is the surface managing agency, such as Bureau of Land Management, United States Forest Service, etc. The unit name refers to the descriptive name of the polygon (i.e. Northern California District, Boise National Forest, etc.).These data are used to automatically populate fields on the WFDSS Incident Information page.This data layer implements the NWCG Jurisdictional Unit Polygon Geospatial Data Layer Standard.Relevant NWCG Definitions and StandardsUnit2. A generic term that represents an organizational entity that only has meaning when it is contextualized by a descriptor, e.g. jurisdictional.Definition Extension: When referring to an organizational entity, a unit refers to the smallest area or lowest level. Higher levels of an organization (region, agency, department, etc) can be derived from a unit based on organization hierarchy.Unit, JurisdictionalThe governmental entity having overall land and resource management responsibility for a specific geographical area as provided by law.Definition Extension: 1) Ultimately responsible for the fire report to account for statistical fire occurrence; 2) Responsible for setting fire management objectives; 3) Jurisdiction cannot be re-assigned by agreement; 4) The nature and extent of the incident determines jurisdiction (for example, Wildfire vs. All Hazard); 5) Responsible for signing a Delegation of Authority to the Incident Commander.See also: Unit, Protecting; LandownerUnit IdentifierThis data standard specifies the standard format and rules for Unit Identifier, a code used within the wildland fire community to uniquely identify a particular government organizational unit.Landowner Kind & CategoryThis data standard provides a two-tier classification (kind and category) of landownership. Attribute Fields JurisdictionalAgencyKind Describes the type of unit Jurisdiction using the NWCG Landowner Kind data standard. There are two valid values: Federal, and Other. A value may not be populated for all polygons.JurisdictionalAgencyCategoryDescribes the type of unit Jurisdiction using the NWCG Landowner Category data standard. Valid values include: ANCSA, BIA, BLM, BOR, DOD, DOE, NPS, USFS, USFWS, Foreign, Tribal, City, County, OtherLoc (other local, not in the standard), State. A value may not be populated for all polygons.JurisdictionalUnitNameThe name of the Jurisdictional Unit. Where an NWCG Unit ID exists for a polygon, this is the name used in the Name field from the NWCG Unit ID database. Where no NWCG Unit ID exists, this is the “Unit Name” or other specific, descriptive unit name field from the source dataset. A value is populated for all polygons.JurisdictionalUnitIDWhere it could be determined, this is the NWCG Standard Unit Identifier (Unit ID). Where it is unknown, the value is ‘Null’. Null Unit IDs can occur because a unit may not have a Unit ID, or because one could not be reliably determined from the source data. Not every land ownership has an NWCG Unit ID. Unit ID assignment rules are available from the Unit ID standard, linked above.LandownerKindThe landowner category value associated with the polygon. May be inferred from jurisdictional agency, or by lack of a jurisdictional agency. A value is populated for all polygons. There are three valid values: Federal, Private, or Other.LandownerCategoryThe landowner kind value associated with the polygon. May be inferred from jurisdictional agency, or by lack of a jurisdictional agency. A value is populated for all polygons. Valid values include: ANCSA, BIA, BLM, BOR, DOD, DOE, NPS, USFS, USFWS, Foreign, Tribal, City, County, OtherLoc (other local, not in the standard), State, Private.DataSourceThe database from which the polygon originated. Be as specific as possible, identify the geodatabase name and feature class in which the polygon originated.SecondaryDataSourceIf the Data Source is an aggregation from other sources, use this field to specify the source that supplied data to the aggregation. For example, if Data Source is "PAD-US 2.1", then for a USDA Forest Service polygon, the Secondary Data Source would be "USDA FS Automated Lands Program (ALP)". For a BLM polygon in the same dataset, Secondary Source would be "Surface Management Agency (SMA)."SourceUniqueIDIdentifier (GUID or ObjectID) in the data source. Used to trace the polygon back to its authoritative source.MapMethod:Controlled vocabulary to define how the geospatial feature was derived. Map method may help define data quality. MapMethod will be Mixed Method by default for this layer as the data are from mixed sources. Valid Values include: GPS-Driven; GPS-Flight; GPS-Walked; GPS-Walked/Driven; GPS-Unknown Travel Method; Hand Sketch; Digitized-Image; DigitizedTopo; Digitized-Other; Image Interpretation; Infrared Image; Modeled; Mixed Methods; Remote Sensing Derived; Survey/GCDB/Cadastral; Vector; Phone/Tablet; OtherDateCurrentThe last edit, update, of this GIS record. Date should follow the assigned NWCG Date Time data standard, using 24 hour clock, YYYY-MM-DDhh.mm.ssZ, ISO8601 Standard.CommentsAdditional information describing the feature. GeometryIDPrimary key for linking geospatial objects with other database systems. Required for every feature. This field may be renamed for each standard to fit the feature.JurisdictionalUnitID_sansUSNWCG Unit ID with the "US" characters removed from the beginning. Provided for backwards compatibility.JoinMethodAdditional information on how the polygon was matched information in the NWCG Unit ID database.LocalNameLocalName for the polygon provided from PADUS or other source.LegendJurisdictionalAgencyJurisdictional Agency but smaller landholding agencies, or agencies of indeterminate status are grouped for more intuitive use in a map legend or summary table.LegendLandownerAgencyLandowner Agency but smaller landholding agencies, or agencies of indeterminate status are grouped for more intuitive use in a map legend or summary table.DataSourceYearYear that the source data for the polygon were acquired.Data InputThis dataset is based on an aggregation of 4 spatial data sources: Protected Areas Database US (PAD-US 2.1), data from Bureau of Indian Affairs regional offices, the BLM Alaska Fire Service/State of Alaska, and Census Block-Group Geometry. NWCG Unit ID and Agency Kind/Category data are tabular and sourced from UnitIDActive.txt, in the WFMI Unit ID application (https://wfmi.nifc.gov/unit_id/Publish.html). Areas of with unknown Landowner Kind/Category and Jurisdictional Agency Kind/Category are assigned LandownerKind and LandownerCategory values of "Private" by use of the non-water polygons from the Census Block-Group geometry.PAD-US 2.1:This dataset is based in large part on the USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States - PAD-US 2.`. PAD-US is a compilation of authoritative protected areas data between agencies and organizations that ultimately results in a comprehensive and accurate inventory of protected areas for the United States to meet a variety of needs (e.g. conservation, recreation, public health, transportation, energy siting, ecological, or watershed assessments and planning). Extensive documentation on PAD-US processes and data sources is available.How these data were aggregated:Boundaries, and their descriptors, available in spatial databases (i.e. shapefiles or geodatabase feature classes) from land management agencies are the desired and primary data sources in PAD-US. If these authoritative sources are unavailable, or the agency recommends another source, data may be incorporated by other aggregators such as non-governmental organizations. Data sources are tracked for each record in the PAD-US geodatabase (see below).BIA and Tribal Data:BIA and Tribal land management data are not available in PAD-US. As such, data were aggregated from BIA regional offices. These data date from 2012 and were substantially updated in 2022. Indian Trust Land affiliated with Tribes, Reservations, or BIA Agencies: These data are not considered the system of record and are not intended to be used as such. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Branch of Wildland Fire Management (BWFM) is not the originator of these data. The

A digital dataset of the geomorphology of the Lower Mississippi River Valley in Missouri, Kentucky, Arkansas, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Mississippi was developed from Roger T. Saucier’s “Geomorphology and Quaternary Geologic History of the Lower Mississippi Valley, Volumes I and II” (1994) as part of the Mississippi Alluvial Plain (MAP) Regional Water Availability Study. The maps included in the 1994 reports provide a comprehensive overview of the previously misunderstood alluvial valley geology and characterize twenty-nine Pleistocene and Holocene alluvial deposits, such as point bars, abandoned channels, backswamps, and natural levees. Each map was georeferenced to North American Datum 1983 and projected to USA Contiguous Albers Equal Conic (U.S. Geological Survey version) projection (standard parallels 29.5 and 45.5 degrees, central meridian -96 degrees, and latitude of origin 23 degrees). Once georeferenced (using ArcMap v 10.4.1), individual geomorphological features were digitized manually. Each polygon was validated using a geodatabase topology and the Topology Editor tools in ArcMap; this step was completed to create individual polygons without gaps or overlap. Efforts were made to match colors in the original map legend to the digital product, with the exception of a few features listed in the original key (for example, feature “Pve” does not match the exact color in the plates). Updated colors were selected to ease the distinction between similarly colored features. Saucier envisioned his work to be utilized by engineering geologists conducting studies that were focused at both the local and regional scale in the Lower Mississippi River Valley (Saucier, 1994). Creating a digital dataset of Saucier’s seminal geomorphological work increases the usability of the map layers for current and future scientific investigations focused on regional groundwater availability in the Mississippi Alluvial Plain. References Saucier, R.T., 1994, Geomorphology and Quaternary Geologic History of the Lower Mississippi Valley: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, Vols. I and II, 398 p. and 28 plates

This dataset comprises land use maps of Maputo city, with exception of the KaTembe urban district, for the years 1964, 1973, 1982, 1991 and 2001. It is the digital version of the land use maps published by Henriques [1] and revised under the LUCO research project.

The land use of Maputo city was identified from: i) aerial photographs (1964, 1982, 1991), orthophoto maps (1973) and IKONOS images (2001); ii) documentary sources, such as the Urbanization Master Plan (1969) and the Maputo City Addressing (1997); iii) the recognition made during several field survey campaigns. The methodology is described in Henriques [1].

Land use was classified into three levels, resulting from a hierarchical classification system, including descriptive and parametric classes. Levels I and II are available in this repository.

Level I, composed by 10 classes, contains the main forms of occupation: built-up areas (residential, economic activity, equipment, and infrastructure) and non-built-up areas (vacant or "natural"). It is geared towards analyses that serve policymaking and resource management at the regional or national scale [1].

Level II, composed by 31 classes, discriminates the higher hierarchical level according to its functional land use to become useful for municipal planning and management in municipal master plans, for example [1].

Maps are available in shapefile format and include predefined symbology-legend files, for QGIS and ArcGIS (v.10.7 or higher). The urban land use classes are described in Portuguese and English, and their meaning is provided as an accompanying document (ULU_Maputo_Nomenclatura_PT.pdf / ULU_Maputo_Nomenclature_EN.pdf).

Data format: vector (shapefile, polygon)

Reference system: WGS84, UTM 36S (EPSG:32736)

Original minimum mapping unit: 25 m2

Urban Land Use dataset attributes:

[N_I_C] – code of level I

[N_I_D_PT] – name of level I, in Portuguese

[N_I_D_EN] - name of level I, in English

[N_II_C] – code of level II

[N_II_D_PT] - name of level II, in Portuguese

[N_II_D_EN] - name of level II, in English

Funding: this research was supported by national funds through FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, I.P. Project number: FCT AGA-KHAN/ 541731809 / 2019

[1] Henriques, C.D. (2008). Maputo. Cinco décadas de mudança territorial. O uso do solo observado por tecnologias de informação geográfica [Maputo. Five decades of territorial transformation. Land use assessed by geographical information technologies]. Lisboa, Instituto Português de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento (ISBN: 978-972-8975-22-7).

Soil map units are the basic geographic unit of the Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO). The SSURGO dataset is a compilation of soils information collected over the last century by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Map units delineate the extent of different soils. Data for each map unit contains descriptions of the soil’s components, productivity, unique properties, and suitability interpretations. Each soil type has a unique combination of physical, chemical, nutrient and moisture properties. Soil type has ramifications for engineering and construction activities, natural hazards such as landslides, agricultural productivity, the distribution of native plant and animal life and hydrologic and other physical processes. Soil types in the context of climate and terrain can be used as a general indicator of engineering constraints, agriculture suitability, biological productivity and the natural distribution of plants and animals. Data from thegSSURGO databasewas used to create this layer. To download ready-to-use project packages of useful soil data derived from the SSURGO dataset, please visit the USA SSURGO Downloader app. Dataset Summary Phenomenon Mapped:Soils of the United States and associated territoriesGeographic Extent:The 50 United States, Puerto Rico, Guam, US Virgin Islands, Marshall Islands, Northern Marianas Islands, Palau, Federated States of Micronesia, and American SamoaCoordinate System:Web Mercator Auxiliary SphereVisible Scale:1:144,000 to 1:1,000Source:USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Update Frequency:AnnualPublication Date:December 2024 What can you do with this 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 Online Add this layer to a map in the map viewer. The layer is limited to scales of approximately 1:144,000 or larger but avector tile layercreated from the same data can be used at smaller scales to produce awebmapthat displays across the full scale range. 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 forFarmland Class= "All areas are prime farmland" to create a map of only prime farmland.Add labels and set their propertiesCustomize the pop-upArcGIS Pro Add 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.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 theLiving Atlas of the Worldthat provides an easy way to explore the landscape layers and many other beautiful and authoritative maps on hundreds of topics. Data DictionaryAttributesKey fields from nine commonly used SSURGO tables were compiled to create the 173 attribute fields in this layer. Some fields were joined directly to the SSURGO Map Unit polygon feature class while others required summarization and other processing to create a 1:1 relationship between the attributes and polygons prior to joining the tables. Attributes of this layer are listed below in their order of occurrence in the attribute table and are organized by the SSURGO table they originated from and the processing methods used on them. Map Unit Polygon Feature Class Attribute TableThe fields in this table are from the attribute table of the Map Unit polygon feature class which provides the geographic extent of the map units. Area SymbolSpatial VersionMap Unit Symbol Map Unit TableThe fields in this table have a 1:1 relationship with the map unit polygons and were joined to the table using the Map Unit Key field. Map Unit NameMap Unit KindFarmland ClassInterpretive FocusIntensity of MappingIowa Corn Suitability Rating Legend TableThis table has 1:1 relationship with the Map Unit table and was joined using the Legend Key field. Project Scale Survey Area Catalog TableThe fields in this table have a 1:1 relationship with the polygons and were joined to the Map Unit table using the Survey Area Catalog Key and Legend Key fields. Survey Area VersionTabular Version Map Unit Aggregated Attribute TableThe fields in this table have a 1:1 relationship with the map unit polygons and were joined to the Map Unit attribute table using the Map Unit Key field. Slope Gradient - Dominant ComponentSlope Gradient - Weighted AverageBedrock Depth - MinimumWater Table Depth - Annual MinimumWater Table Depth - April to June MinimumFlooding Frequency - Dominant ConditionFlooding Frequency - MaximumPonding Frequency - PresenceAvailable Water Storage 0-25 cm - Weighted AverageAvailable Water Storage 0-50 cm - Weighted AverageAvailable Water Storage 0-100 cm - Weighted AverageAvailable Water Storage 0-150 cm - Weighted AverageDrainage Class - Dominant ConditionDrainage Class - WettestHydrologic Group - Dominant ConditionIrrigated Capability Class - Dominant ConditionIrrigated Capability Class - Proportion of Mapunit with Dominant ConditionNon-Irrigated Capability Class - Dominant ConditionNon-Irrigated Capability Class - Proportion of Mapunit with Dominant ConditionRating for Buildings without Basements - Dominant ConditionRating for Buildings with Basements - Dominant ConditionRating for Buildings with Basements - Least LimitingRating for Buildings with Basements - Most LimitingRating for Septic Tank Absorption Fields - Dominant ConditionRating for Septic Tank Absorption Fields - Least LimitingRating for Septic Tank Absorption Fields - Most LimitingRating for Sewage Lagoons - Dominant ConditionRating for Sewage Lagoons - Dominant ComponentRating for Roads and Streets - Dominant ConditionRating for Sand Source - Dominant ConditionRating for Sand Source - Most ProbableRating for Paths and Trails - Dominant ConditionRating for Paths and Trails - Weighted AverageErosion Hazard of Forest Roads and Trails - Dominant ComponentHydric Classification - Presence Rating for Manure and Food Processing Waste - Weighted Average Component Table – Dominant ComponentMap units have one or more components. To create a 1:1 join component data must be summarized by map unit. For these fields a custom script was used to select the component with the highest value for the Component Percentage Representative Value field (comppct_r). Ties were broken with the Slope Representative Value field (slope_r). Components with lower average slope were selected as dominant. If both soil order and slope were tied, the first value in the table was selected. Component Percentage - Low ValueComponent Percentage - Representative ValueComponent Percentage - High ValueComponent NameComponent KindOther Criteria Used to Identify ComponentsCriteria Used to Identify Components at the Local LevelRunoff ClassSoil loss tolerance factorWind Erodibility IndexWind Erodibility GroupErosion ClassEarth Cover 1Earth Cover 2Hydric ConditionHydric RatingAspect Range - Counter Clockwise LimitAspect - Representative ValueAspect Range - Clockwise LimitGeomorphic DescriptionNon-Irrigated Capability SubclassNon-Irrigated Unit Capability ClassIrrigated Capability SubclassIrrigated Unit Capability ClassConservation Tree Shrub GroupGrain Wildlife HabitatGrass Wildlife HabitatHerbaceous Wildlife HabitatShrub Wildlife HabitatConifer Wildlife HabitatHardwood Wildlife HabitatWetland Wildlife HabitatShallow Water Wildlife HabitatRangeland Wildlife HabitatOpenland Wildlife HabitatWoodland Wildlife HabitatWetland Wildlife HabitatSoil Slip PotentialSusceptibility to Frost HeavingConcrete CorrosionSteel CorrosionTaxonomic ClassTaxonomic OrderTaxonomic SuborderGreat GroupSubgroupParticle SizeParticle Size ModCation Exchange Activity ClassCarbonate ReactionTemperature ClassMoist SubclassSoil Temperature RegimeEdition of Keys to Soil Taxonomy Used to Classify SoilCalifornia Storie IndexComponent Key Component Table – Weighted AverageMap units may have one or more soil components. To create a 1:1 join, data from the Component table must be summarized by map unit. For these fields a custom script was used to calculate an average value for each map unit weighted by the Component Percentage Representative Value field (comppct_r). Slope Gradient - Low ValueSlope Gradient - Representative ValueSlope Gradient - High ValueSlope Length USLE - Low ValueSlope Length USLE - Representative ValueSlope Length USLE - High ValueElevation - Low ValueElevation - Representative ValueElevation - High ValueAlbedo - Low ValueAlbedo - Representative ValueAlbedo - High ValueMean Annual Air Temperature - Low ValueMean Annual Air Temperature - Representative ValueMean Annual Air Temperature - High ValueMean Annual Precipitation - Low ValueMean Annual Precipitation - Representative ValueMean Annual Precipitation - High ValueRelative Effective Annual Precipitation - Low ValueRelative Effective Annual Precipitation - Representative ValueRelative Effective Annual Precipitation - High ValueDays between Last and First Frost - Low ValueDays between Last and First Frost - Representative ValueDays between Last and First Frost - High ValueRange Forage Annual Potential Production - Low ValueRange Forage Annual Potential Production - Representative ValueRange Forage Annual Potential Production - High ValueInitial Subsidence - Low ValueInitial Subsidence - Representative ValueInitial Subsidence -

This dataset has results and the model associated with the publication Ciulla et al., (2024). It contains a U-Net semantic segmentation model (unet_model.h5) and associated code implemented in tensorflow 2.0 for the model training and identification of oil and gas well symbols in USGS historical topographic maps (HTMC). Given a quadrangle map (7.5 minutes), downloadable at this url: https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/, and a list of coordinates of the documented wells present in the area, the model returns the coordinates of oil and gas symbols in the HTMC maps. For reproducibility of our workflow, we provide a sample map in California and the documented well locations for the entire State of California (CalGEM_AllWells_20231128.csv) downloaded from https://www.conservation.ca.gov/calgem/maps/Pages/GISMapping2.aspx. Additionally, the locations of 1,301 potential undocumented orphaned wells identified using our deep learning framework or the counties of Los Angeles and Kern in California, and Osage and Oklahoma in Oklahoma are provided in the file found_potential_UOWs.zip. The results of the visual inspection of satellite imagery in Osage County is in the file visible_potential_UOWs.zip. The dataset also includes a custom tool to validate the detected symbols in the HTMC maps (vetting_tool.py). More details about the methodology can be found in the associated paper: Ciulla, F., Santos, A., Jordan, P., Kneafsey, T., Biraud, S.C., and Varadharajan, C. (2024) A Deep Learning Based Framework to Identify Undocumented Orphaned Oil and Gas Wells from Historical Maps: a Case Study for California and Oklahoma. Accepted for publication in Environmental Science and Technology. The geographical coordinates provided correspond to the locations of potential undocumented orphaned oil and gas wells (UOWs) extracted from historical maps. The actual presence of wells need to be confirmed with on-the-ground investigations. For your safety, do not attempt to visit or investigate these sites without appropriate safety training, proper equipment, and authorization from local authorities. Approaching these well sites without proper personal protective equipment (PPE) may pose significant health and safety risks. Oil and gas wells can emit hazardous gasses including methane, which is flammable, odorless and colorless, as well as hydrogen sulfide, which can be fatal even at low concentrations. Additionally, there may be unstable ground near the wellhead that may collapse around the wellbore. This dataset was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. While this document is believed to contain correct information, neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor the Regents of the University of California, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by its trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or the Regents of the University of California. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof or the Regents of the University of California.

A collection of geospatial files, map images, publication documentation, and informational resources in support of the Geologic Map of North America.

Analysis of ‘Vegetation - San Felipe Valley Wildlife Area [ds172]’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/45cefa2f-6d87-4325-80ea-68914a3484ea on 27 January 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

This Vegetation Map of the San Felipe Valley Wildlife Area in San Diego County, California is based on vegetation samples collected in the field in 2002 and 2005 and on photo interpretation of a 2000 Color Infrared (CIR) Image. The map legend is based on classification of the plots and follows the hierarchical National Vegetation Classification System (USGS-NPS 2005) and Manual of California (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995). Types are cross-walked to California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) and Holland types. No report was produced; this metadata serves to document the entire project. WHAT EACH RECORD REPRESENTS: Each record represents the attributes of the individual polygon in the map layer, including vegetation type, structural information, and disturbance information. The map represents vegetation as it existing prior to the 2002 Pines Fire. Polygons are attributed to the lowest level of the classification hierarchy allowed by the image resolution and comfort level of the photo interpreter. Thus, individual polygons are mapped to the Formation, Alliance or Association level. Several "mapping units" not in the vegetation classification were also used in the mapping classification (=map legend). The hierarchical classification and crosswalk allow mapping at coarser levels or in different systems (e.g., CWHR). If mapping at the Formation level (the "1000s" in the spreadsheet), please consider including the California juniper types 2106, 2171, 2172 and 2173 in the 4000s (Evergreen Shrubland). This juniper is considered a tree in the national classification, but is more shrub-like and its desert affinities make California juniper types fit more logically into the Evergreen Shrubland Formation.

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

Dataset Abstract:

Field-level monitoring of crop types in the United States via the Cropland Data Layer (CDL) has played an important role in improving production forecasts and enabling large-scale study of agricultural inputs and outcomes. Although CDL offers crop type maps across the conterminous US from 2008 onward, such maps are missing in many Midwestern states or are uneven in quality before 2008. To fill these data gaps, we used the now-public Landsat archive and cloud computing services to map corn and soybean at 30m resolution across the US Midwest from 1999-2018. Our training data were CDL from 2008-2018, and we validated the predictions on CDL 1999-2007 where available, county-level crop acreage statistics, and state-level crop rotation statistics. The corn-soybean maps, which we call the Corn-Soy Data Layer (CSDL), are publicly hosted on Google Earth Engine and also available for download on Zenodo.

Summary of Methods:

Using Google Earth Engine, we trained a random forest classifier to classify each pixel of the study area into corn, soybean, and an aggregated "other crops" class. CDL 2008-2018 data were used as labels. The features input to the model were harmonic regression coefficients fit to the NIR, SWIR1, SWIR2, and GCVI bands/indices of time series from Landsat 5, 7, and 8 Surface Reflectance observations. Cloudy pixels were masked out using the pixel_qa band provided with Landsat Surface Reflectance products.

Map Legend:

• 0 = outside study area
• 1 = corn
• 5 = soy
• 9 = other crop
• 255 = non-crop (masked by NLCD)

Values were chosen to be consistent with CDL values when possible.

Usage Notes:

We recommend that users consider metrics such as (1) user's and producer's accuracy with CDL and (2) R² with NASS statistics across space and time to determine in which states/counties and years CSDL is of high quality. This can be done with the CSV file of user's and producer's accuracies included in this Zenodo, and annual county-level statistics and example code we have included in our repo at https://github.com/LobellLab/csdl.

We present the dataset of mills from 1880 and 1920s-1930s in the area of the former Galicia (78,500 km2), now in Ukraine and Poland. We found 4,022 mill locations for 1880 and 3,588 for the 1920s-1930s. We present them as shapefile, GML, GeoJSON, KML formats with attributes for seven types of mills for 1880 and ten types of mills for 1920s-1930s, and mills counted in a 10 km grid.

Our data contains two point layers and six grid layers (10 km side squares). All data is available in an open shapefile, GML, GeoJSON, KML formats, commonly used in Geographic Information Systems. Point layers contain the following attributes for each of the mills: auto-numbered numeric identifier (ID), type (Type), map sheet date (Map_year), longitude (Long), and latitude (Lat). According to the legend of these maps and explanations, the following types of mills can be distinguished for 1880:

1 – Gristmill (ger. Fruchtmühle), 2 – Sawmill (ger. Sägemühle), 3 – Paper mill (ger. Papiermühle), 4 – Powder mill (ger. Pulvermühle), 5 – Fulling mill (ger. Walkmühle), 6 – Windmill (ger. Windmühle), 7 – Ship mill, (ger. Schiffmühle).

For the 1920s-1930s, the following types of mills were distinguished according to the legend of these maps and explanations.

1 – Watermill, 2 – Steam mill, 3 – Sawmill, 4 – Sawmill with water wheel, 5 – Motor sawmill, 6 – Steam sawmill, 7 – Steam mill, 8 – Windmill, 9 – Wind turbine, 10 – Ship mill.

A reference grid designed by the European Environment Agency (EEA) in the ETRS 1989 LAEA projection (EPSG 9820) was used to create the grid layers, consisting of cells with sides of 10 km. In the set we provide, it contains the following attributes: auto-numbered numeric identifier of the cell (FID), cell code (CellCode), east (EofOrigin) and north (NofOrigin) cell start coordinates and an attribute (Count) in which aggregated mill types are counted for each cell: gristmills, sawmills, windmills

The data can be used in economic, demographic and environmental reconstructions, e.g. to estimate historical anthropopressure related to settlement, agriculture and forestry. Mills are often associated with river structures such as floodgates, dams, and millraces and therefore they are a good example of human interference in river ecosystems. They can also be one criteria for identifying areas where the local population used traditional environmental knowledge. It can be useful for a contemporary assessment of the environment’s suitability for devices using renewable energy sources. Finally, the data on the remains of former mills is suitable for the protection of cultural heritage sites that are technical monuments related to traditional food processing and industry.

This research was funded by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, Republic of Poland under the frame of “National Programme for the Development of Humanities” 2015–2021, as a part of the GASID project (Galicia and Austrian Silesia Interactive Database 1857–1910, 1aH 15 0324 83)

The Soil Geographical Data Base of France at Scale 1:1,000,000 is part of the European Soil Geographical Data Base of Europe. It is the resulting product of a collaborative project involving all the European Union and neighbouring countries. It is a simplified representation of the diversity and spatial variability of the soil coverage for France. The methodology used to differentiate and name the main soil types is based on the terminology of the F.A.O. legend for the Soil Map of the World at Scale 1:5,000,000. This terminology has been refined and adapted to take account of the specificities of the landscapes in Europe. It is itself founded on the distinction of the main pedogenetic processes leading to soil differentiation. The database contains a list of Soil Typological Units (STU). Besides the soil names they represent, these units are described by variables (attributes) specifying the nature and properties of the soils: for example the texture, the water regime, etc. The geographical representation was chosen at a scale corresponding to the 1:1,000,000. At this scale, it is not feasible to delineate the STUs. Therefore they are grouped into Soil Mapping Units (SMU) to form soil associations and to illustrate the functioning of pedological systems within the landscapes. Harmonisation of the soil data from the member countries is based on a dictionary giving the definition for each occurrence of the variables. Considering the scale, the precision of the variables is weak. Furthermore these variables were estimated over large areas by expert judgement rather than measured on local soil samples. This expertise results from synthesis and generalisation tasks of national or regional maps published at more detailed scales, for example 1:50,000 or 1:25,000 scales. Delineation of the Soil Mapping Units is also the result of expertise and experience. The spatial variability of soils is very important and is difficult to express at global levels of precision. Quality indices of the information (purity and confidence level) are included with the data in order to guide usage.

To create this app:

2021 STATEWIDE CROP MAPPING - PROVISIONALLand use data is critically important to the work of the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and other California agencies. Understanding the impacts of land use, crop location, acreage, and management practices on environmental attributes and resource management is an integral step in the ability of Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to produce Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) and implement projects to attain sustainability. Land IQ was contracted by DWR to develop a comprehensive and accurate spatial land use database for the 2021 water year (WY 2021). The primary objective of this effort was to produce a spatial land use database with accuracies exceeding 95% using remote sensing, statistical, and temporal analysis methods. This project is an extension of the 2014, 2016, 2018, 2019, and 2020 land use mapping, which classified over 14 million acres of land into irrigated agriculture and urban area. Unlike the 2014 and 2016 datasets, the WY 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 datasets include multi-cropping and incorporates DWR ground-truth data from Siskiyou, Modoc, Lassen and Shasta counties. Land IQ integrated crop production knowledge with detailed ground truth information and multiple satellite and aerial image resources to conduct remote sensing land use analysis at the field scale. Individual fields (boundaries of homogeneous crop types representing cropped area, rather than legal parcel boundaries) were classified using a crop category legend and a more specific crop type legend. A supervised classification method using a random forest approach was used to classify delineated fields and was carried out county by county where training samples were available. Random forest approaches are currently some of the highest performing methods for data classification and regression. To determine frequency and seasonality of multiple-cropped fields, peak growth dates were determined for annual crops. Fields were attributed with DWR crop categories and included citrus/subtropical, deciduous fruits and nuts, field crops, grain and hay, idle, pasture, rice, truck crops, urban, vineyards, and young perennials. These categories represent aggregated groups of specific crop types in the Land IQ dataset. Accuracy was calculated for the crop mapping using both DWR and Land IQ crop legends. The overall accuracy result for the crop mapping statewide was XX.X% (UPDATE) using the Land IQ legend and XX% (UPDATE) using the DWR legend. Accuracy and error results varied among crop types. In particular, some less extensive crops that have very few validation samples may have a skewed accuracy result depending on the number and nature of validation sample points. DWR revised crops and conditions from the Land IQ classification were encoded using standard DWR land use codes added to feature attributes, and each modified classification is indicated by the value 'r' in the ‘DWR_REVISE' data field. Polygons drawn by DWR, not included in Land IQ dataset receive the 'n' code for new. Boundary change (i.e. DWR changed the boundary that LIQ delivered could be split boundary) indicated by 'b'. Each polygon classification is consistent with DWR attribute standards, however some of DWR's traditional attribute definitions are modified and extended to accommodate unavoidable constraints within remote-sensing classifications, or to make data more specific for DWR's water balance computation needs. The original Land IQ classifications reported for each polygon are preserved for comparison, and are also expressed as DWR standard attributes. Comments, problems, improvements, updates, or suggestions about local conditions or revisions in the final data set should be forwarded to the appropriate Regional Office Senior Land Use Supervisor. Revisions were made if: - DWR corrected the original crop classification based on local knowledge and analysis, -PARTIALLY IRRIGATED CROPS Crops irrigated for only part of their normal irrigation season were given the special condition of ‘X’, -In certain areas, DWR changed the irrigation status to irrigated or non-irrigated. Among those areas the special condition may have been changed to 'Partially Irrigated' based on image analysis and local knowledge, - young versus mature stages of perennial orchards and vineyards were identified (DWR added ‘Young’ to Special Condition attributes), - DWR determined that a field originally classified ‘Idle’ was actually cropped one or more times during the year, - the percent of cropped area was changed from the original acres reported by Land IQ (values indicated in DWR ‘Percent’ column), - DWR determined that the field boundary should have been split to better reflect separate crops within the same polygon and identified by a 'b' in the DWR_REVISED column, - The ‘Mixed’ was added to the MULTIUSE column refers to no boundary change, but percent of field is changed where more than one crop is found, - DWR identified a distinct early or late crop on the field before the main season crop (‘Double’ was added to the MULTIUSE column); if the 1st and 2nd sequential crops occupied different portions of the total field acreage, the area percentages were indicated for each crop). This dataset includes multicropped fields. If the field was determined to have more than one crop during the course of the water year, the order of the crops is sequential, beginning with Class 1. All single cropped fields will be placed in Class 2, so every polygon will have a crop in the Class 2 and CropType2 columns. In the case that a permanent crop was removed during the water year, the Class 2 crop will be the permanent crop followed by ‘X’ – Unclassified fallow in the Class 3 column. In the case of Intercropping, the main crop will be placed in the Class 2 column with the partial crop in the Class 3 column. The column 'MAIN_CROP' was added in 2019 and has been continued through the 2021 dataset. This column indicates which field Land IQ identified as the main season crop for the water year representing the crop grown during the dominant growing season for each county. The column ‘MAIN_CROP_DATE’, another addition to the 2019 dataset, indicates the NDVI peak date for this main season crop. Asterisks (* or **) in attribute table indicates no data have been collected for that specific attribute.

This report provides a guide to the development and presentation of 2016-2018 NSDUH substate estimates. A summary of the estimation methodology is included as well as sample sizes, response rates, and population estimates. This shapefile includes geographic boundaries of the 2016-2018 NSDUH substate regions along with prevalence rates, map group values, and the upper and lower bounds found in the map legends. It can be used for analysis and data display with Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software.

The Surface Geology of Australia (2010 edition) is a seamless national coverage of outcrop and surficial geology, compiled for us e at or around 1:1 000 000 scale. The data maps outcropping bedrock geology and unconsolidated or poorly consolidated regolith m aterial covering bedrock. Geological units are represented as polygon and line geometries, and are attributed with information r egarding stratigraphic nomenclature and parentage, age, lithology, and primary data source. The dataset also contains geological contacts, structural features such as faults and shears, and miscellaneous supporting lines like the boundaries of water and ice bodies.

The dataset has been compiled from merging the seven State and Territory 1:1 000 000 scale surface geology datasets released by G eoscience Australia between 2006 and 2008, correcting errors and omissions identified in those datasets, addition of some offshor e island territories, and updating stratigraphic attribute information to the best available in 2010 from the Australian Stratigr aphic Units Database (http://www.ga.gov.au/oracle/stratnames/index.jsp). The map data were compiled largely from simplifying and edgematching existing 1:250 000 scale geological maps. Where these maps were not current, more recent source maps, ranging in s cale from 1:50 000 to 1:1 000 000 were used. In some areas where the only available geological maps were quite old and poorly lo cated, some repositioning of mapping using recent satellite imagery or geophysics was employed.

This data is freely available from Geoscience Australia under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Australia Licence.

It is recommended that these data be referred to as:

Raymond, O.L., Retter, A.J., (editors), 2010. Surface geology of Australia 1:1,000,000 scale, 2010 edition [Digital Dataset] Geoscience Australia, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. http://www.ga.gov.au

Specialised Geographic Information System (GIS) software is required to view this data.

Descriptions of MAP_SYMB attribute field:
MAP_SYMB format = Drxy

1. D = unit age. Two letters may be used for units spanning for than one age periods.
   
   

Cenozoic Cz
Quaternary Q
Mesozoic Mz
Cretaceous K
Jurassic J
Triassic -R
Paleozoic Pz
Permian P
Carboniferous C
Devonian D
Silurian S
Ordovician O
Cambrian -C
Proterozoic -P
Neoproterozoic N
Mesoproterozoic M
Paleoproterozoic L
Archean A

2. r = gross rock descriptor. A one letter code to reflect the broad lithological composition of the unit

IGNEOUS EXAMPLES
g felsic to intermediate intrusive granite, granodiorite, tonalite, monzonite, diorite, syenite
d mafic intrusive gabbro, dolerite, norite
f felsic extrusive / high level intrusive rhyolite, dacite, ignimbrite, pyroclastic rocks
a intermediate extrusive / high level intrusive andesite, trachyte, latite, pyroclastic rocks
b mafic extrusive / high level intrusive basalt, scoria, shoshonite, pyroclastic rocks
u ultramafic undivided (intrusive & extrusive) komatiite, high Mg basalt, pyroxenite, dunite, wehrlite
k alkaline ultramafic kimberlite, lamprophyre, carbonatite

SEDIMENTARY
s siliciclastic/undifferentiated sediment shale, siltstone, sandstone, conglomerate, mudstone
j volcanogenic sediment epiclastic sediments and breccias, greywacke, arkose
l carbonate sediment limestone, marl, dolomite
c non-carbonate chemical sediment chert, evaporite, phosphorite, BIF
o organic-rich rock coal, amber, oil shale

MIXED SEDIMENTARY & IGNEOUS
v felsic & mafic volcanics
i felsic & mafic intrusives
w volcanics & sediments

METAMORPHIC
y low-medium grade meta clastic sediment slate, phyllite, schist, quartzite
t low-medium grade metabasite mafic schist, greenstone, amphibolite
r low-medium grade metafelsite rhyolitic schist, meta-andesite
m calc-silicate and marble meta carbonates and calcareous sediments
n high grade metamorphic rock gneiss, granulite, migmatite
p high-P metamorphic rock eclogite, blueschist
h contact metamorphic rock hornfels, spotted slate
e metamorphosed ultramafic rocks serpentinite, talc schist, chlorite schist (no feldspars), tremolite schist, ultr amafic amphibolite

OTHER
z fault / shear rock mylonite, fault breccia, cataclasite, gouge
q vein quartz vein, carbonate vein
x complex, melange, undivided, unknown

1. xy = One or two letters to reflect the stratigraphic name of a unit. Where practical, these letters reflect stratigraphic g rouping or hierarchy. For instance, formations within a named group should have letter symbols reflecting their parent group.
   
   

eg: Tomkinson Creek Group - Lsk
Bootu Formation - Lskb

This report provides a guide to the development and presentation of 2012-2014 NSDUH substate estimates. A summary of the estimation methodology is included as well as sample sizes, response rates, and population estimates.This shapefile includes geographic boundaries of the 2012-2014 NSDUH substate regions along with prevalence rates, map group values, and the upper and lower bounds found in the map legends. It can be used for analysis and data display with Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software.

The surficial material dataset was developed as part of the Western Economic Partnership Agreement (WEPA) project covering all of NTS 73M, the southern three-quarters of 74D and southeast part of 84A. Part of the dataset was compiled by airphoto interpretations and followed by random ground-truthing by AGS geologists (NTS 73M). The dataset was later merged with other existing surficial geology maps (74D and 84A). The mapping scheme chosen for the 1:50 000 scale terrain classification is a variant of the scheme used in Alberta Geological Survey Bulletin 57 to map the surficial geology of the Sand River area (Map 178), NTS 73L, directly south of the study area. In this terrain classification scheme, each map unit includes a component of genesis, morphology and relief. Where available, additional information regarding the properties of the genetic unit was included as a genetic modifier. For example, the map unit 'sMh1' denotes hummocky (h), low relief (1), sandy (s) moraine (M). Genesis of geological material is considered to be the primary component of the map unit thus colours on the map depict differences in genesis. In the above example, the map unit colour would correspond to the legend colour chosen for moraine (M). An attempt has been made to reclassify the surficial geological units depicted in the surficial geology map of area NTS 74D (Map 148) using this mapping scheme, without significantly changing the polygon shapes of that previous work.