The data release for the geologic terranes of the Hailey 1 x 2 degrees quadrangle and the western part of the Idaho Falls 1 x 2 degrees quadrangle, south-central Idaho is a Geologic Map Schema (GeMS)-compliant version that updates the GIS files for the geologic map published in U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Bulletin 2064-A (Worl and Johnson, 1995). The updated digital data present the attribute tables and geospatial features (lines and polygons) in the format that meets GeMS requirements. This data release presents the geologic map as shown on the plate and captured in geospatial data for the published map. Minor errors, such as mistakes in line decoration or differences between the digital data and the map image, are corrected in this version. The database represents the geology for the 6.1 million-acre, geologically complex Hailey quadrangle and the western part of the Idaho Falls quadrangle, at a publication scale of 1:250,000. The map covers primarily Blaine, Camas, Custer and Elmore Counties, but also includes minor parts of Ada, Butte, Gooding, Lincoln, and Minidoka Counties. These GIS data supersede those in the interpretive report: Worl, R.G. and Johnson, K.M., 1995, Geology and mineral deposits of the Hailey 1 degree x 2 degrees quadrangle and the western part of the Idaho Falls 1 degree x 2 degrees quadrangle, south-central Idaho - an overview: U.S. Geological Survey, Bulletin 2064-A, scale 1:250,000, https://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b2064-a/.

description: The paper version of Map Showing Geologic Terranes of the Hailey 1 x2 Quadrangle and the western part of the Idaho Falls 1 x2 Quadrangle, south-central Idaho was compiled by Ron Worl and Kate Johnson in 1995. The plate was compiled on a 1:250,000 scale topographic base map. TechniGraphic System, Inc. of Fort Collins Colorado digitized this map under contract for N.Shock. G.Green edited and prepared the digital version for publication as a geographic information system database. The digital geologic map database can be queried in many ways to produce a variety of geologic maps.; abstract: The paper version of Map Showing Geologic Terranes of the Hailey 1 x2 Quadrangle and the western part of the Idaho Falls 1 x2 Quadrangle, south-central Idaho was compiled by Ron Worl and Kate Johnson in 1995. The plate was compiled on a 1:250,000 scale topographic base map. TechniGraphic System, Inc. of Fort Collins Colorado digitized this map under contract for N.Shock. G.Green edited and prepared the digital version for publication as a geographic information system database. The digital geologic map database can be queried in many ways to produce a variety of geologic maps.

The Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) Database depicts flood risk information and supporting data used to develop the risk data. The primary risk classifications used are the 1-percent-annual-chance flood event, the 0.2-percent-annual-chance flood event, and areas of minimal flood risk. The DFIRM Database is derived from Flood Insurance Studies (FISs), previously published Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), flood hazard analyses performed in support of the FISs and FIRMs, and new mapping data, where available. The FISs and FIRMs are published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The file is georeferenced to earth's surface using the UTM projection and coordinate system. The specifications for the horizontal control of DFIRM data files are consistent with those required for mapping at a scale of 1:24,000.

This is a Vector Tile package of basic Map background data for Idaho State- Included areas are a 10 mile buffer of Idaho Dispatch Centers & Field Office Boundaries: Idaho Dispatch Centers= Bitterroot Dispatch Center, Boise Dispatch Center, Central Idaho Interagency Fire Center, Coeur d'Alene Dispatch Center, Eastern Idaho Interagency Fire Center, Grangeville Dispatch Center, Payette National Forest Dispatch, South Central Idaho Interagency Dispatch Center; BLM Field Offices= Boise District, Coeur d''Alene District, Idaho Falls District, Twin Falls District; USFS Forests= Bitterroot Natl Forest, Boise Natl Forest, Caribou-Targhee Natl Forest, ID Panhandle Natl Forest, Nez Perce-Clearwater Natl Forest, Payette Natl Forest, Salmon-Challis Natl Forest, Sawtooth Natl Forest. Simple map background layers: Land Surface Mgt. Agency, roads, rivers cities, elevation and other points of interest.

Does not include Fire Assests or Dispatch Boundaries - This is a Vector Tile package of basic Map background data for Idaho State- Included areas are a 10 mile buffer of Idaho Dispatch Centers & Field Office Boundaries: Idaho Dispatch Centers= Bitterroot Dispatch Center, Boise Dispatch Center, Central Idaho Interagency Fire Center, Coeur d'Alene Dispatch Center, Eastern Idaho Interagency Fire Center, Grangeville Dispatch Center, Payette National Forest Dispatch, South Central Idaho Interagency Dispatch Center; BLM Field Offices= Boise District, Coeur d''Alene District, Idaho Falls District, Twin Falls District; USFS Forests= Bitterroot Natl Forest, Boise Natl Forest, Caribou-Targhee Natl Forest, ID Panhandle Natl Forest, Nez Perce-Clearwater Natl Forest, Payette Natl Forest, Salmon-Challis Natl Forest, Sawtooth Natl Forest. Simple map background layers: Land Surface Mgt. Agency, roads, rivers cities, elevation and other points of interest.

This data shows wild horse and burro herd areas in Idaho. Wild horses are managed in accordance with the Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act of 1971, which gives the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) responsibility to protect wild horses while ensuring their populations are in balance with the ecological capacity of public lands. This data set contains nine herd areas (HA). Five herd areas are located in the Boise District, one HA is located in the Twin Falls District and three HAs are located in the the Idaho Falls District. All of Idaho's herd areas are managed for wild horses; there are no burros. A campaign started in the 1950's to protect wild horses and burros led to aerial flight surveys in 1971 to determine where wild horses and burros occurred. On Dec. 18, 1971, Congress passed the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act. At that time, wild horses and burros were found roaming across 53.8 million acres of Herd Areas, of which 42.4 million acres were under the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) jurisdiction. Herd Areas were carried forward in land use plans and determinations were made as to whether or not to manage animals on these federal lands. Today the BLM manages wild horses and burros in 179 subsets of these Herd Areas (known as Herd Management Areas) that comprise 31.6 million acres, of which 26.9 million acres are under BLM management. No specific amount of acreage was “set aside” for the exclusive use of wild horses and burros under the 1971 Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act. The Act directed the BLM to determine the areas where horses and burros were found roaming and to manage them "in a manner that is designed to achieve and maintain a thriving natural ecological balance on the public lands." The law also stipulated in Section 1339 that "Nothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize the [Interior] Secretary to relocate wild free-roaming horses or burros to areas of the public lands where they do not presently exist." Of the 22.2 million acres no longer managed for wild horse and burro use 6.7 million acres were never under BLM management. Of the 15.5 million other acres of land under BLM management (numbers current as of July 25, 2011): 48.6 percent (7,522,100 acres) were intermingled ("checkerboard") land ownerships or areas where water was not owned or controlled by the BLM, which made management infeasible; 13.5 percent (2,091,709 acres) were lands transferred out of the BLM's ownership to other agencies, both Federal and state through legislation or exchange; 10.6 percent (1,645,758 acres) were lands where there were substantial conflicts with other resource values (such as the need to protect habitat for desert tortoise); 9.7 percent (1,512,179 acres) were lands removed from wild horse and burro use through court decisions; urban expansion; highway fencing (causing habitat fragmentation); and land withdrawals; 9.6 percent (1,485,068 acres) were lands where no BLM animals were present at the time of the passage of the 1971 Act or places where all animals were claimed as private property. These lands in future land-use plans will be subtracted from the BLM totals as they should never have been designated as lands where herds were found roaming; and 8.0 percent (1,240,894 acres) were lands where a critical habitat component (such as winter range) was missing, making the land unsuitable for wild horse and burro use, or areas that had too few animals to allow for effective management. Since Herd Area boundaries were set by Congress they will not be updated. For more information contact us at blm_id_stateoffice@blm.gov.

A dataset listing Idaho cities by population for 2024.

This data represents the Trust area of Swan Falls Agreement. Under Policy 5C of the Swan Falls Agreement of 1984 between the Idaho Power Company and the State of Idaho, certain hydropower water users are subordinated to other upstream beneficial water users. The flows at Swan Falls that are between the minimum flow of the Swan Falls Agreement and the appropriated amount are held in trust by the state and may be subject to depletion by future beneficial upstream users. This 'trust" water includes only those waters, including groundwater, from areas which are tributary to the Snake River above Milner and Swan Falls Dam. Rights to use water tributary to the Snake River above Milner Dam are not to be administered with rights to use water downstream from Milner Dam. Internal polygons represent perched aquifer areas that are not tributary to the Snake River (Milner to Swan Falls), yet the underlying regional aquifer is tributary to the Milner to Swan Falls reach of the Snake.

Web mapping application containing parcel, address, and zoning information for Sioux Falls, South Dakota.The City of Sioux Falls Parcel Finder provides access to interactive parcel and address information such as parcel id, owner name, legal description, land use, easements, building photos, zoning, preliminary information, and more. In addition, Parcel Finder has the following features:Search by address, intersection, county parcel id, city parcel id, and owner name.Ability to select features.Selected features can be exported to a csv, or other file types.Layers in the layer list can be turned on and off, and reordered.The layer list, by default, contains the address layer that can be turned on to label the house/building number.Add data from the City of Sioux Falls data repository.Add data featuring Demographic and Lifestyle topics.Measuring tools are back!Drawing tools, allowing you to customize your map, suitable for printing.Expanding printing options.

Hydrological Information Products for the Off-Project Water Program of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2012-1199 U.S. Department of the Interior By Daniel T. Snyder, John C. Risley, and Jonathan V. Haynes Prepared in cooperation with The Klamath Tribes Access complete report at: https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2012/1199 Suggested citation: Snyder, D.T., Risley, J.C., and Haynes, J.V., 2012, Hydrological information products for the Off-Project Water Program of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2012–1199, 17 p., https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2012/1199 Summary The Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) was developed by a diverse group of stakeholders, Federal and State resource management agencies, Tribal representatives, and interest groups to provide a comprehensive solution to ecological and water-supply issues in the Klamath Basin. The Off-Project Water Program (OPWP), one component of the KBRA, has as one of its purposes to permanently provide an additional 30,000 acre-feet of water per year on an average annual basis to Upper Klamath Lake through “voluntary retirement of water rights or water uses or other means as agreed to by the Klamath Tribes, to improve fisheries habitat and also provide for stability of irrigation water deliveries.” The geographic area where the water rights could be retired encompasses approximately 1,900 square miles. The OPWP area is defined as including the Sprague River drainage, the Sycan River drainage downstream of Sycan Marsh, the Wood River drainage, and the Williamson River drainage from Kirk Reef at the southern end of Klamath Marsh downstream to the confluence with the Sprague River. Extensive, broad, flat, poorly drained uplands, valleys, and wetlands characterize much of the study area. Irrigation is almost entirely used for pasture. To assist parties involved with decisionmaking and implementation of the OPWP, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Klamath Tribes and other stakeholders, created five hydrological i nformation products. These products include GIS digital maps and datasets containing spatial information on evapotranspiration, subirrigation indicators, water rights, subbasin streamflow statistics, and return-flow indicators. The evapotranspiration (ET) datasets were created under contract for this study by Evapotranspiration, Plus, LLC, of Twin Falls, Idaho. A high-resolution remote sensing technique known as Mapping Evapotranspiration at High Resolution and Internalized Calibration (METRIC) was used to create estimates of the spatial distribution of ET. The METRIC technique uses thermal infrared Landsat imagery to quantify actual evapotranspiration at a 30-meter resolution that can be related to individual irrigated fields. Because evaporation uses heat energy, ground surfaces with large ET rates are left cooler as a result of ET than ground surfaces that have less ET. As a consequence, irrigated fields appear in the Landsat images as cooler than nonirrigated fields. Products produced from this study include total seasonal and total monthly (April–October) actual evapotranspiration maps for 2004 (a dry year) and 2006 (a wet year). Maps showing indicators of natural subirrigation were also provided by this study. “Subirrigation” as used here is the evapotranspiration of shallow groundwater by plants with roots that penetrate to or near the water table. Subirrigation often occurs at locations where the water table is at or above the plant rooting depth. Natural consumptive use by plants diminishes the benefit of retiring water rights in subirrigated areas. Some agricultural production may be possible, however, on subirrigated lands for which water rights are retired. Because of the difficulty in precisely mapping and quantifying subirrigation, this study presents several sources of spatially mapped data that can be used as indicators of higher subirrigation probability. These include the floodplain boundaries defined by stream geomorphology, water-table depth defined in Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil surveys, and soil rooting depth defined in NRCS soil surveys. The two water-rights mapping products created in the study were “points of diversion” (POD) and “place of use” (POU) for surface-water irrigation rights. To create these maps, all surface-water rights data, decrees, certificates, permits, and unadjudicated claims within the entire 1,900 square mile study area were aggregated into a common GIS geodatabase. Surface-water irrigation rights within a 5-mile buffer of the study area were then selected and identified. The POU area was then totaled by water right for primary and supplemental water rights. The maximum annual volume (acre-feet) allowed under each water right also was calculated using the POU area and duty (allowable annual irrigation application in feet). In cases where a water right has more than one designated POD, the total volume for the water right was equally distributed to each POD listed for the water right. Because of this, mapped distribution of diversion rates for some rights may differ from actual practice. Water-right information in the map products was from digital datasets obtained from the Oregon Water Resources Department and was, at the time acquired, the best available compilation of water-right information available. Because the completeness and accuracy of the water-right data could not be verified, users are encouraged to check directly with the Oregon Water Resources Department where specific information on individual rights or locations is essential. A dataset containing streamflow statistics for 72 subbasins in the study area was created for the study area. The statistics include annual flow durations (5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 95-percent exceedances) and 7-day, 10-year (7Q10) and 7-day, 2-year (7Q2) low flows, and were computed using regional regression equations based on measured streamflow records in the region. Daily streamflow records used were adjusted as needed for crop consumptive use; therefore the statistics represent streamflow under more natural conditions as though irrigation diversions did not exist. Statistics are provided for flow rates resulting from streamflow originating from within the entire drainage area upstream of the subbasin pour point (referring to the outlet of the contributing drainage basin). The statistics were computed for the purpose of providing decision makers with the ability to estimate streamflow that would be expected after water conservation techniques have been implemented or a water right has been retired. A final product from the study are datasets of indicators of the potential for subsurface return flow of irrigation water from agricultural areas to nearby streams. The datasets contain information on factors such as proximity to surface-water features, geomorphic floodplain characteristics, and depth to water. The digital data, metadata, and example illustrations for the datasets described in this report are available on-line from the USGS Water Resources National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) Node Website http://water.usgs.gov/lookup/getgislist or from the U.S. Government website DATA.gov at http://www.data.gov with links provided in a Microsoft® Excel® workbook in appendix A. Introduction Program Background The Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) was developed by a diverse group of stakeholders, Federal and State resource management agencies, Tribal representatives, and interest groups to provide a comprehensive solution to ecological and water-supply issues in the basin. The KBRA covers the entire Klamath Basin, from headwater areas in southern Oregon and northern California to the Pacific Ocean, and addresses a wide range of issues that include hydropower, fisheries, and water resources. The Water Resources Program (Part IV of the KBRA) includes a section (16) known as the Off-Project Water Program (OPWP) (Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, 2010, p. 105). Program Goals The primary goals of the OPWP include developing an Off-Project Water Settlement to resolve upper basin water issues, improve fish habitat, and provide for stability in irrigation deliveries (Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, 2010, p. 105). One of the approaches to achieving these objectives is a water-use retirement program. The water-use retirement program is an effort to permanently provide an additional 30,000 acre-ft of water per year on an average annual basis to Upper Klamath Lake through “voluntary retirement of water rights or water uses, or other means as agreed to by the Klamath Tribes, to improve fisheries habitat and also provide for stability of irrigation water deliveries” (Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, 2010, p. 105–111). The KBRA sets a 24-month window after the “effective date” for development of a proposal for the Off-Project Water Settlement. There is interest on the part of the Klamath Watershed Partnership (and others) in having a decisionmaking process in place before this time line. To assist parties in the OPWP involved with decisionmaking and implementation, the USGS proposed a two-phase approach. The first phase, which is described in this report, includes compilation and evaluation of relevant existing work and data in the upper basin, and synthesizing that information into a set of five hydrological information products. These products include GIS digital maps and datasets containing spatial information on evapotranspiration, subirrigation indicators, water rights, subbasin streamflow statistics, and return-flow indicators. Should efforts continue, a second phase could be developed to implement a monitoring program to evaluate the level of success of the first phase and to address additional information needs. Understanding the response of streams and groundwater to various land-use changes (such as