Link to landing page referenced by identifier. Service Protocol: Link to landing page referenced by identifier. Link Function: information-- dc:identifier.

In 2023, Washington, D.C. had the highest population density in the United States, with 11,130.69 people per square mile. As a whole, there were about 94.83 residents per square mile in the U.S., and Alaska was the state with the lowest population density, with 1.29 residents per square mile. The problem of population density Simply put, population density is the population of a country divided by the area of the country. While this can be an interesting measure of how many people live in a country and how large the country is, it does not account for the degree of urbanization, or the share of people who live in urban centers. For example, Russia is the largest country in the world and has a comparatively low population, so its population density is very low. However, much of the country is uninhabited, so cities in Russia are much more densely populated than the rest of the country. Urbanization in the United States While the United States is not very densely populated compared to other countries, its population density has increased significantly over the past few decades. The degree of urbanization has also increased, and well over half of the population lives in urban centers.

Human population density in 2000, by terrestrial ecoregion.

We summarized human population density by ecoregion using the Gridded Population of the World database and projections for 2015 (CIESIN et al. 2005). The mean for each ecoregion was extracted using a zonal statistics algorithm.

These data were derived by The Nature Conservancy, and were displayed in a map published in The Atlas of Global Conservation (Hoekstra et al., University of California Press, 2010). More information at http://nature.org/atlas.

Data derived from:

Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), Columbia University; and Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT). 2005. Gridded Population of the World Version 3 (GPWv3). Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC), Columbia University Palisades, New York. Available at http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/gpw. Digital media.

United Nations Population Division (UNPD). 2007. Global population, largest urban agglomerations and cities of largest change. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2007 Revision Population Database. Available at http://esa.un.org/unup/index.asp.

For more about The Atlas of Global Conservation check out the web map (which includes links to download spatial data and view metadata) at http://maps.tnc.org/globalmaps.html. You can also read more detail about the Atlas at http://www.nature.org/science-in-action/leading-with-science/conservation-atlas.xml, or buy the book at http://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520262560

The 2020 cartographic boundary KMLs are simplified representations of selected geographic areas from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). These boundary files are specifically designed for small-scale thematic mapping. When possible, generalization is performed with the intent to maintain the hierarchical relationships among geographies and to maintain the alignment of geographies within a file set for a given year. Geographic areas may not align with the same areas from another year. Some geographies are available as nation-based files while others are available only as state-based files. Census tracts are small, relatively permanent statistical subdivisions of a county or equivalent entity, and were defined by local participants as part of the 2020 Census Participant Statistical Areas Program. The Census Bureau delineated the census tracts in situations where no local participant existed or where all the potential participants declined to participate. The primary purpose of census tracts is to provide a stable set of geographic units for the presentation of census data and comparison back to previous decennial censuses. Census tracts generally have a population size between 1,200 and 8,000 people, with an optimum size of 4,000 people. When first delineated, census tracts were designed to be homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. The spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the density of settlement. Physical changes in street patterns caused by highway construction, new development, and so forth, may require boundary revisions. In addition, census tracts occasionally are split due to population growth, or combined as a result of substantial population decline. Census tract boundaries generally follow visible and identifiable features. They may follow legal boundaries such as minor civil division (MCD) or incorporated place boundaries in some states and situations to allow for census tract-to-governmental unit relationships where the governmental boundaries tend to remain unchanged between censuses. State and county boundaries always are census tract boundaries in the standard census geographic hierarchy. In a few rare instances, a census tract may consist of noncontiguous areas. These noncontiguous areas may occur where the census tracts are coextensive with all or parts of legal entities that are themselves noncontiguous. For the 2010 Census and beyond, the census tract code range of 9400 through 9499 was enforced for census tracts that include a majority American Indian population according to Census 2000 data and/or their area was primarily covered by federally recognized American Indian reservations and/or off-reservation trust lands; the code range 9800 through 9899 was enforced for those census tracts that contained little or no population and represented a relatively large special land use area such as a National Park, military installation, or a business/industrial park; and the code range 9900 through 9998 was enforced for those census tracts that contained only water area, no land area.

US Census American Community Survey (ACS) 2021, 5-year estimates of the key demographic characteristics of Census Tracts geographic level in Orange County, California. The data contains 105 fields for the variable groups D01: Sex and age (universe: total population, table X1, 49 fields); D02: Median age by sex and race (universe: total population, table X1, 12 fields); D03: Race (universe: total population, table X2, 8 fields); D04: Race alone or in combination with one or more other races (universe: total population, table X2, 7 fields); D05: Hispanic or Latino and race (universe: total population, table X3, 21 fields), and; D06: Citizen voting age population (universe: citizen, 18 and over, table X5, 8 fields). The US Census geodemographic data are based on the 2021 TigerLines across multiple geographies. The spatial geographies were merged with ACS data tables. See full documentation at the OCACS project GitHub page (https://github.com/ktalexan/OCACS-Geodemographics).

Updated 10/6/2022: In the Time/Distance analysis process, points that were found to have been included initially, but with no significant or year-round population were removed. The layer of removed points is also available for viewing. MCNA - Removed Population PointsThe Network Adequacy Standards Representative Population Points feature layer contains 97,694 points spread across California that were created from USPS postal delivery route data and US Census data. Each population point also contains the variables for Time and Distance Standards for the County that the point is within. These standards differ by County due to the County "type" which is based on the population density of the county. There are 5 county categories within California: Rural (<50 people/sq mile), Small (51-200 people/sq mile), Medium (201-599 people/sq mile), and Dense (>600 people/sq mile). The Time and Distance data is divided out by Provider Type, Adult and Pediatric separately, so that the Time or Distance analysis can be performed with greater detail. HospitalsOB/GYN SpecialtyAdult Cardiology/Interventional CardiologyAdult DermatologyAdult EndocrinologyAdult ENT/OtolaryngologyAdult GastroenterologyAdult General SurgeryAdult HematologyAdult HIV/AIDS/Infectious DiseaseAdult Mental Health Outpatient ServicesAdult NephrologyAdult NeurologyAdult OncologyAdult OphthalmologyAdult Orthopedic SurgeryAdult PCPAdult Physical Medicine and RehabilitationAdult PsychiatryAdult PulmonologyPediatric Cardiology/Interventional CardiologyPediatric DermatologyPediatric EndocrinologyPediatric ENT/OtolaryngologyPediatric GastroenterologyPediatric General SurgeryPediatric HematologyPediatric HIV/AIDS/Infectious DiseasePediatric Mental Health Outpatient ServicesPediatric NephrologyPediatric NeurologyPediatric OncologyPediatric OphthalmologyPediatric Orthopedic SurgeryPediatric PCPPediatric Physical Medicine and RehabilitationPediatric PsychiatryPediatric Pulmonology

This polygon shapefile contains the urbanized areas of California. These data were derived from the TIGER/2000 Urbanized Areas (UA) dataset of the 1990 Census. The Census Bureau defines UAs as an area consisting of a central place(s) and adjacent urban fringe that together have a minimum residential population of at least 50,000 people and generally an overall population density of at least 1,000 people per square mile of land area. The Census Bureau uses published criteria to determine the qualification and boundaries of UAs.The U.S. Census Bureau classifies as urban all territory, population, and housing units located within urbanized areas (UAs). It delineates UA boundaries to encompass densely settled territory, which generally consists of: A cluster of one or more block groups or census blocks each of which has a population density of at least 1,000 people per square mile at the time and, Surrounding block groups and census blocks each of which has a population density of at least 500 people per square mile at the time and, Less densely settled blocks that form enclaves or indentations, or are used to connect discontiguous areas with qualifying densities. This layer is part of the Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) GIS Maps and Data collection.

In 2023, the resident population of California was ***** million. This is a slight decrease from the previous year, with ***** million people in 2022. This makes it the most populous state in the U.S. Californian demographics Along with an increase in population, California’s gross domestic product (GDP) has also been increasing, from *** trillion U.S. dollars in 2000 to **** trillion U.S. dollars in 2023. In the same time period, the per-capita personal income has almost doubled, from ****** U.S. dollars in 2000 to ****** U.S. dollars in 2022. In 2023, the majority of California’s resident population was Hispanic or Latino, although the number of white residents followed as a close second, with Asian residents making up the third-largest demographic in the state. The dark side of the Golden State While California is one of the most well-known states in the U.S., is home to Silicon Valley, and one of the states where personal income has been increasing over the past 20 years, not everyone in California is so lucky: In 2023, the poverty rate in California was about ** percent, and the state had the fifth-highest rate of homelessness in the country during that same year, with an estimated ** homeless people per 10,000 of the population.

This is a map of populated areas with population density greater than or equal to 1 individual/ ha (i.e., rural/exurban but including suburban and urban as defined by Marzluff et al. 2001) as determined from U.S. Census data corrected for public lands.

50 year Projected Urban Growth scenarios. Base year is 2000. Projected year in this dataset is 2050.

By 2020, most forecasters agree, California will be home to between 43 and 46 million residents-up from 35 million today. Beyond 2020 the size of California's population is less certain. Depending on the composition of the population, and future fertility and migration rates, California's 2050 population could be as little as 50 million or as much as 70 million. One hundred years from now, if present trends continue, California could conceivably have as many as 90 million residents. Where these future residents will live and work is unclear. For most of the 20th Century, two-thirds of Californians have lived south of the Tehachapi Mountains and west of the San Jacinto Mountains-in that part of the state commonly referred to as Southern California. Yet most of coastal Southern California is already highly urbanized, and there is relatively little vacant land available for new development. More recently, slow-growth policies in Northern California and declining developable land supplies in Southern California are squeezing ever more of the state's population growth into the San Joaquin Valley. How future Californians will occupy the landscape is also unclear. Over the last fifty years, the state's population has grown increasingly urban. Today, nearly 95 percent of Californians live in metropolitan areas, mostly at densities less than ten persons per acre. Recent growth patterns have strongly favored locations near freeways, most of which where built in the 1950s and 1960s. With few new freeways on the planning horizon, how will California's future growth organize itself in space? By national standards, California's large urban areas are already reasonably dense, and economic theory suggests that densities should increase further as California's urban regions continue to grow. In practice, densities have been rising in some urban counties, but falling in others.

These are important issues as California plans its long-term future. Will California have enough land of the appropriate types and in the right locations to accommodate its projected population growth? Will future population growth consume ever-greater amounts of irreplaceable resource lands and habitat? Will jobs continue decentralizing, pushing out the boundaries of metropolitan areas? Will development densities be sufficient to support mass transit, or will future Californians be stuck in perpetual gridlock? Will urban and resort and recreational growth in the Sierra Nevada and Trinity Mountain regions lead to the over-fragmentation of precious natural habitat? How much water will be needed by California's future industries, farms, and residents, and where will that water be stored? Where should future highway, transit, and high-speed rail facilities and rights-of-way be located? Most of all, how much will all this growth cost, both economically, and in terms of changes in California's quality of life? Clearly, the more precise our current understanding of how and where California is likely to grow, the sooner and more inexpensively appropriate lands can be acquired for purposes of conservation, recreation, and future facility siting. Similarly, the more clearly future urbanization patterns can be anticipated, the greater our collective ability to undertake sound city, metropolitan, rural, and bioregional planning.

Consider two scenarios for the year 2100. In the first, California's population would grow to 80 million persons and would occupy the landscape at an average density of eight persons per acre, the current statewide urban average. Under this scenario, and assuming that 10% percent of California's future population growth would occur through infill-that is, on existing urban land-California's expanding urban population would consume an additional 5.06 million acres of currently undeveloped land. As an alternative, assume the share of infill development were increased to 30%, and that new population were accommodated at a density of about 12 persons per acre-which is the current average density of the City of Los Angeles. Under this second scenario, California's urban population would consume an additional 2.6 million acres of currently undeveloped land. While both scenarios accommodate the same amount of population growth and generate large increments of additional urban development-indeed, some might say even the second scenario allows far too much growth and development-the second scenario is far kinder to California's unique natural landscape.

This report presents the results of a series of baseline population and urban growth projections for California's 38 urban counties through the year 2100. Presented in map and table form, these projections are based on extrapolations of current population trends and recent urban development trends. The next section, titled Approach, outlines the methodology and data used to develop the various projections. The following section, Baseline Scenario, reviews the projections themselves. A final section, entitled Baseline Impacts, quantitatively assesses the impacts of the baseline projections on wetland, hillside, farmland and habitat loss.

Link to the ScienceBase Item Summary page for the item described by this metadata record. Service Protocol: Link to the ScienceBase Item Summary page for the item described by this metadata record. Application Profile: Web Browser. Link Function: information

Medical Service Study Areas - Census Detail, 2010California Health & Human Services Agency Open Data Portal DescriptionMedical Service Study Areas (MSSAs) are sub-city and sub-county geographical units used to organize and display population, demographic and physician data. MSSAs were developed in 1976 by the California Healthcare Workforce Policy Commission (formerly California Health Manpower Policy Commission) to respond to legislative mandates requiring it to determine "areas of unmet priority need for primary care family physicians" (Song-Brown Act of 1973) and "geographical rural areas where unmet priority need for medical services exist" (Garamendi Rural Health Services Act of 1976).MSSAs are recognized by the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration, Bureau of Health Professions' Office of Shortage Designation as rational service areas for purposes of designating Health Professional Shortage Areas (HPSAs), and Medically Underserved Areas and Medically Underserved Populations (MUAs/MUPs).The MSSAs incorporate the U.S. Census total population, socioeconomic and demographic data and are updated with each decadal census. Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development provides updated data for each County's MSSAs to the County and Communities, and will schedule meetings for areas of significant population change. Community meetings will be scheduled throughout the State as needed.Adopted by the California Healthcare Workforce Policy Commission on May 15, 2002.Each MSSA is composed of one or more complete census tracts. MSSAs will not cross county lines. All population centers within the MSSA are within 30 minutes travel time to the largest population center.Urban MSSA - Population range 75,000 to 125,000. Reflect recognized community and neighborhood boundaries. Similar demographic and socio-economic characteristics.Rural MSSA - Population density of less than 250 persons per square mile. No population center exceeds 50,000.Frontier MSSA - Population density of less than 11 persons per square mile.

A dataset listing California counties by population for 2024.

description: In this dataset we present two maps that estimate the location and population served by domestic wells in the contiguous United States. The first methodology, called the Block Group Method or BGM, builds upon the original block-group data from the 1990 census (the last time the U.S. Census queried the population regarding their source of water) by incorporating higher resolution census block data. The second methodology, called the Road-Enhanced Method or REM, refines the locations by using a buffer expansion and shrinkage technique along roadways to define areas where domestic wells exist. The fundamental assumption with this method is that houses (and therefore domestic wells) are located near a named road. The results are presented as two nationally consistent domestic-well population datasets. While both methods can be considered valid, the REM map is more precise in locating domestic wells; the REM map had a smaller amount of spatial bias (nearly equal vs biased in type 1 error), total error (10.9% vs 23.7%,), and distance error (2.0 km vs 2.7 km), when comparing the REM and BGM maps to a California calibration map. However, the BGM map is more inclusive of all potential locations for domestic wells. The primary difference in the BGM and the REM is the mapping of low density areas. The REM has a 57% reduction in areas mapped as low density (populations greater than 0 but less than 1 person per km), concentrating populations into denser regions. Therefore, if one is trying to capture all of the potential areas of domestic-well usage, then the BGM map may be more applicable. If location is more imperative, then the REM map is better at identifying areas of the landscape with the highest probability of finding a domestic well. Depending on the purpose of a study, a combination of both maps can be used. For space concerns, the datasets have been divided into two separate geodatabases. The BGM map geodatabase and the REM map database.; abstract: In this dataset we present two maps that estimate the location and population served by domestic wells in the contiguous United States. The first methodology, called the Block Group Method or BGM, builds upon the original block-group data from the 1990 census (the last time the U.S. Census queried the population regarding their source of water) by incorporating higher resolution census block data. The second methodology, called the Road-Enhanced Method or REM, refines the locations by using a buffer expansion and shrinkage technique along roadways to define areas where domestic wells exist. The fundamental assumption with this method is that houses (and therefore domestic wells) are located near a named road. The results are presented as two nationally consistent domestic-well population datasets. While both methods can be considered valid, the REM map is more precise in locating domestic wells; the REM map had a smaller amount of spatial bias (nearly equal vs biased in type 1 error), total error (10.9% vs 23.7%,), and distance error (2.0 km vs 2.7 km), when comparing the REM and BGM maps to a California calibration map. However, the BGM map is more inclusive of all potential locations for domestic wells. The primary difference in the BGM and the REM is the mapping of low density areas. The REM has a 57% reduction in areas mapped as low density (populations greater than 0 but less than 1 person per km), concentrating populations into denser regions. Therefore, if one is trying to capture all of the potential areas of domestic-well usage, then the BGM map may be more applicable. If location is more imperative, then the REM map is better at identifying areas of the landscape with the highest probability of finding a domestic well. Depending on the purpose of a study, a combination of both maps can be used. For space concerns, the datasets have been divided into two separate geodatabases. The BGM map geodatabase and the REM map database.

The 2015 cartographic boundary shapefiles are simplified representations of selected geographic areas from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). These boundary files are specifically designed for small-scale thematic mapping. When possible, generalization is performed with the intent to maintain the hierarchical relationships among geographies and to maintain the alignment of geographies within a file set for a given year. Geographic areas may not align with the same areas from another year. Some geographies are available as nation-based files while others are available only as state-based files. The records in this file allow users to map the parts of Urban Areas that overlap a particular county. After each decennial census, the Census Bureau delineates urban areas that represent densely developed territory, encompassing residential, commercial, and other nonresidential urban land uses. In general, this territory consists of areas of high population density and urban land use resulting in a representation of the "urban footprint." There are two types of urban areas: urbanized areas (UAs) that contain 50,000 or more people and urban clusters (UCs) that contain at least 2,500 people, but fewer than 50,000 people (except in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Guam which each contain urban clusters with populations greater than 50,000). Each urban area is identified by a 5-character numeric census code that may contain leading zeroes. The primary legal divisions of most states are termed counties. In Louisiana, these divisions are known as parishes. In Alaska, which has no counties, the equivalent entities are the organized boroughs, city and boroughs, municipalities, and for the unorganized area, census areas. The latter are delineated cooperatively for statistical purposes by the State of Alaska and the Census Bureau. In four states (Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, and Virginia), there are one or more incorporated places that are independent of any county organization and thus constitute primary divisions of their states. These incorporated places are known as independent cities and are treated as equivalent entities for purposes of data presentation. The District of Columbia and Guam have no primary divisions, and each area is considered an equivalent entity for purposes of data presentation. The Census Bureau treats the following entities as equivalents of counties for purposes of data presentation: Municipios in Puerto Rico, Districts and Islands in American Samoa, Municipalities in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Islands in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The entire area of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas is covered by counties or equivalent entities. The boundaries for counties and equivalent entities are as of January 1, 2010.

This dataset (SRA13_1) represents our initial determination of SRA status as of 7/1/13. After comparing SRA parcels to assessor roll files, a final determination of SRA status as of 7/1/13 will be reflected in SRA13_2. SRA13_1 includes numerous annexations affecting SRA status that have occurred since 7/1/2012. CAL FIRE has a legal responsibility to provide fire protection on all State Responsibility Area (SRA) lands, which are defined based on land ownership, population density and land use. For example, CAL FIRE does not have responsibility for densely populated areas, incorporated cities, agricultural lands, or lands administered by the federal government. The SRA dataset provides areas of legal responsibility for fire protection, including State Responsibility Areas (SRA), Federal Responsibility Areas (FRA), and Local Responsibility Areas (LRA). SRA designations undergo a thorough 5 year review cycle, as well as annual updates for incorporations/annexations, error fixes, and ownership changes (automatic changes that do not require Board of Forestry approval). In addition, CAL FIRE is now responsible for determining parcels subject to the SRA Fire Prevention Fee under AB X1 29. As part of the SRA Fee process, CAL FIRE performs an annual comparison of SRA data to assessor roll files, to identify SRA parcels that are actually federally owned (FRA) or part of an incorporated city (LRA).

© Numerous federal agencies have provided data that help us to identify FRA lands (BLM, U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs). This layer is a component of Fire Hazard Severity Zones.

This map shows the Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) mapped by the California of Forestry and Fire Potection (CAL FIRE). More information at CalFire (http://frap.cdf.ca.gov/projects/hazard/fhz.php)

DISCLAIMER

The State of California and the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy of data or maps. The user will not seek to hold the State or the Department liable under any circumstances for any damages with respect to any claim by the user or any third party on account of or arising from the use of data or maps.

OTHER LIMITATIONS

There are no restrictions on distribution of the data by users. However, users are encouraged to refer others to the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to acquire the data, in case updated data become available. The user will cite the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection as the original source of the data, but will clearly denote cases where the original data have been altered, updated, or in any way changed from the original condition.

© CalFire (http://frap.cdf.ca.gov/)

The 2019 cartographic boundary KMLs are simplified representations of selected geographic areas from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). These boundary files are specifically designed for small-scale thematic mapping. When possible, generalization is performed with the intent to maintain the hierarchical relationships among geographies and to maintain the alignment of geographies within a file set for a given year. Geographic areas may not align with the same areas from another year. Some geographies are available as nation-based files while others are available only as state-based files. The records in this file allow users to map the parts of Urban Areas that overlap a particular county. After each decennial census, the Census Bureau delineates urban areas that represent densely developed territory, encompassing residential, commercial, and other nonresidential urban land uses. In general, this territory consists of areas of high population density and urban land use resulting in a representation of the ""urban footprint."" There are two types of urban areas: urbanized areas (UAs) that contain 50,000 or more people and urban clusters (UCs) that contain at least 2,500 people, but fewer than 50,000 people (except in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Guam which each contain urban clusters with populations greater than 50,000). Each urban area is identified by a 5-character numeric census code that may contain leading zeroes. The primary legal divisions of most states are termed counties. In Louisiana, these divisions are known as parishes. In Alaska, which has no counties, the equivalent entities are the organized boroughs, city and boroughs, municipalities, and for the unorganized area, census areas. The latter are delineated cooperatively for statistical purposes by the State of Alaska and the Census Bureau. In four states (Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, and Virginia), there are one or more incorporated places that are independent of any county organization and thus constitute primary divisions of their states. These incorporated places are known as independent cities and are treated as equivalent entities for purposes of data presentation. The District of Columbia and Guam have no primary divisions, and each area is considered an equivalent entity for purposes of data presentation. The Census Bureau treats the following entities as equivalents of counties for purposes of data presentation: Municipios in Puerto Rico, Districts and Islands in American Samoa, Municipalities in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Islands in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The entire area of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas is covered by counties or equivalent entities. The generalized boundaries for counties and equivalent entities are as of January 1, 2010.