Northeastern United States County Boundary data are intended for geographic display of state and county boundaries at statewide and regional levels. Use it to map and label counties on a map. These data are derived from Northeastern United States Political Boundary Master layer. This information should be displayed and analyzed at scales appropriate for 1:24,000-scale data. The State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection (CTDEP) assembled this regional data layer using data from other states in order to create a single, seamless representation of political boundaries within the vicinity of Connecticut that could be easily incorporated into mapping applications as background information. More accurate and up-to-date information may be available from individual State government Geographic Information System (GIS) offices. Not intended for maps printed at map scales greater or more detailed than 1:24,000 scale (1 inch = 2,000 feet.)

This web map is built for the purpose of viewing data and information collected and processed by the U.S. Geological survey (USGS) for the January 4 and March 2-4, 2018 nor'easter winter storm flooding event in coastal New England. Under an interagency agreement with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the USGS New England Water Science Center collected high-water marks and continuous water-level sensor data using the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). More information about these data and the nor'easter storm events are in the USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2020-5048 and the USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2021–5109. This map is used in the January and March 2018 Nor’easters in Coastal New England Dashboard. A counterpart Geo-narrative web application has been published with this dashboard and can been viewed at the following link The January and March 2018 Nor'easters Geonarrative.

Northeastern United States Town Boundary data are intended for geographic display of state, county and town (municipal) boundaries at statewide and regional levels. Use it to map and label towns on a map. These data are derived from Northeastern United States Political Boundary Master layer. This information should be displayed and analyzed at scales appropriate for 1:24,000-scale data. The State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection (CTDEP) assembled this regional data layer using data from other states in order to create a single, seamless representation of political boundaries within the vicinity of Connecticut that could be easily incorporated into mapping applications as background information. More accurate and up-to-date information may be available from individual State government Geographic Information System (GIS) offices. Not intended for maps printed at map scales greater or more detailed than 1:24,000 scale (1 inch = 2,000 feet.)

This data set contains the 1995-era or early-date classifications of US coastal zone 65 and can be used to analyze change. This imagery was collected as part of the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics program in a multi-agency effort to provide baseline multi-scale environmental characteristics and to monitor environmental change. This data set utilized 10 full or partial Landsat scenes which were analyzed according to the Coastal Change Analysis Program (C-CAP) protocol to determine land cover. Note: These data were reprojected from their native projection into North American Datum 1983 (NAD83) / Massachusetts State Plane coordinate system, Mainland Zone (Fipszone 2001) meters by the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management on Oct. 12, 2006.

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: This Classification and change analysis is based on Landsat TM scenes: p11r30 (08/14/1995), p11r31 (09/12/1994), p12r30 (07/04/1995), p12r31 (08/21/1995), p12r32 (06/15/1994), p13r30 (07/29/1996), p13r31 (08/09/1994), p13r32 (08/09/1994), p14r29 (05/31/1995)

These data represent a digital form of the geologic map of Cape Cod and the islands.

Data layers in this child item include high-water mark and storm-sensor data collected by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) New England Water Science Center following the January 4, 2018, and March 2-4, 2018, winter-storm events in New England. High-water marks and continuous water-level sensor data range from Portland, Maine, to Provincetown, Massachusetts, and reference the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88). For more information about these storm events and the data collection, please see Bent, G.C., and Taylor, N.J., 2020, Total water level data from the January and March 2018 nor’easters for coastal areas of New England: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2020–5048, 47 p., accessed June 3, 2021, at https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20205048 Flood-inundation map layers and interim products used to create them also are included in this child item. The USGS polygon of the stillwater-inundation map reflects a statistical storm with a 1-percent annual exceedance probability from Portland, Maine, to Provincetown, Massachusetts, based on coastal tide-gage data. The January and March 2018 inundation maps are polygon shapefiles of estimated flood extent derived from the high-water mark and storm-sensor data following the storm events. The flood extents and water-surface elevations were derived from simplified estimations of high-water mark and storm-sensor data and delineated using 2-meter-resolution lidar digital-elevation models. Interim data layers that were used to create the flood-inundation polygons include a coastal flood-profile line and coastal watershed boundaries. The compressed zip files contain ESRI shapefiles that include xml metadata files. Detailed processing steps are documented in the metadata for each layer. See the Scientific Investigation Report associated with this data release for more information.

Surficial geologic maps play and important role in understanding the present sea floor and the processes that shape it. Between 1984 and 1991, over 1,700 bottom sample stations were occupied in the northwestern Gulf of Maine. Although the data were originally collected for a variety of research projects, contracts, and graduate student theses, they were eventually compiled as part of a Maine Geological Survey and University of Maine program to map the inner continental shelf of this region.

This data release provides a generalized lithology look-up table for the lithogeochemical classification of Vermont's bedrock geologic map units. The table is defined from the mapped bedrock geologic units published by Ratcliffe and others (2011) and the generalized lithology of rock group A and rock group B for lithogeochemical classification as defined by Robinson and Kapo (2003). The 2003 classification was created fro all six New England states and Vermont's geologic units were based on an older, less detailed, bedrock map of Vermont by Doll and others (1961). The new data table in this data release is designed to be joined with the published attribute table from the 2011 map database, as part of the bedrock geologic map unit polygons. The join attribute is the item called "Lith" in the 2011 map database. The data table is non-interpretive and the 2011 map data were not modified. The data release contains two files, including one metadata file and one comma-delimited (CSV) file: VTcontax_attrib_lithology.csv. References: Doll, C.G., Cady, W.M., Thompson, J.B., and Billings, M.P., 1961, Centennial geologic map of Vermont: Vermont Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Map MISCMAP-01, scale 1:250,000. Ratcliffe, N.M., Stanley, R.S., Gale, M.H., Thompson, P.J., and Walsh, G.J., 2011, Bedrock geologic map of Vermont: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3184, 3 sheets, scale 1:100,000, https://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3184/ Robinson, G.R., Jr., and Kapo, K.E., 2003, Generalized lithology and lithogeochemical character of near-surface bedrock in the New England region: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 03-225, https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2003/of03-225/

This geographic information system (GIS) data layer shows the dominant lithology and geochemical, termed lithogeochemical, character of near-surface bedrock in the New England region covering the states of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. The bedrock units in the map are generalized into groups based on their lithological composition and, for granites, geochemistry. Geologic provinces are defined as time-stratigraphic groups that share common features of age of formation, geologic setting, tectonic history, and lithology. This data set incorporates data from digital maps of two NAWQA study areas, the New England Coastal Basin (NECB) and the Connecticut, Housatonic, and Thames River Basins (CONN) areas and extends data to cover the states of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. The result is a regional dataset for the lithogeochemical characterization of New England (the layer named NE_LITH). Polygons in the final coverage are attributed according to state, drainage area, geologic province, general rock type, lithogeochemical characteristics, and specific bedrock map unit.

First edition was 1875. The maps here are identical to our 1878 Gray's Atlas of the United States, except that this copy has 17 large scale maps of Virginia Cities in the rear with a "Professional Directory of Patrons. Virginia." The 1878 U.S. Atlas has a large map of New England in the rear and a directory of patrons for Rhode Island and Massachusetts. It is a mystery why Gray used two different titles for essentially the same atlas. The source of the Virginia city maps is interesting - about half state under the title that they are from "Special Surveys" by Jacob and George Chace, Topographical Engineers. The other half do not list the Chaces. There is no record of these maps in Phillips, either as an atlas or separates. Perhaps they were sold as separates or pocket maps. Several sheets intentionally left missing; not listed in Table of Contents. Maps are in full color typically differentiating counties or states.

Census Current (2022) Legal and Statistical Entities Web Map Service; January 1, 2022 vintage.

Incorporated Places are those reported to the Census Bureau as legally in existence as of the latest Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS), under the laws of their respective states. An incorporated place is established to provide governmental functions for a concentration of people as opposed to a minor civil division, which generally is created to provide services or administer an area without regard, necessarily, to population. Places always are within a single state or equivalent entity, but may extend across county and county subdivision boundaries. An incorporated place usually is a city, town, village, or borough but can have other legal descriptions. For Census Bureau data tabulation and presentation purposes, incorporated places exclude:

1) The boroughs in Alaska (treated as statistical equivalents of counties).

2) Towns in the New England states, New York, and Wisconsin (treated as MCDs).

3) The boroughs in New York (treated as MCDs).

Background and Data Limitations The Massachusetts 1830 map series represents a unique data source that depicts land cover and cultural features during the historical period of widespread land clearing for agricultural. To our knowledge, Massachusetts is the only state in the US where detailed land cover information was comprehensively mapped at such an early date. As a result, these maps provide unusual insight into land cover and cultural patterns in 19th century New England. However, as with any historical data, the limitations and appropriate uses of these data must be recognized: (1) These maps were originally developed by many different surveyors across the state, with varying levels of effort and accuracy. (2) It is apparent that original mapping did not follow consistent surveying or drafting protocols; for instance, no consistent minimum mapping unit was identified or used by different surveyors; as a result, whereas some maps depict only large forest blocks, others also depict small wooded areas, suggesting that numerous smaller woodlands may have gone unmapped in many towns. Surveyors also were apparently not consistent in what they mapped as ‘woodlands’: comparison with independently collected tax valuation data from the same time period indicates substantial lack of consistency among towns in the relative amounts of ‘woodlands’, ‘unimproved’ lands, and ‘unimproveable’ lands that were mapped as ‘woodlands’ on the 1830 maps. In some instances, the lack of consistent mapping protocols resulted in substantially different patterns of forest cover being depicted on maps from adjoining towns that may in fact have had relatively similar forest patterns or in woodlands that ‘end’ at a town boundary. (3) The degree to which these maps represent approximations of ‘primary’ woodlands (i.e., areas that were never cleared for agriculture during the historical period, but were generally logged for wood products) varies considerably from town to town, depending on whether agricultural land clearing peaked prior to, during, or substantially after 1830. (4) Despite our efforts to accurately geo-reference and digitize these maps, a variety of additional sources of error were introduced in converting the mapped information to electronic data files (see detailed methods below). Thus, we urge considerable caution in interpreting these maps. Despite these limitations, the 1830 maps present an incredible wealth of information about land cover patterns and cultural features during the early 19th century, a period that continues to exert strong influence on the natural and cultural landscapes of the region.

    Acknowledgements
    Financial support for this project was provided by the BioMap Project of the Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, the National Science Foundation, and the Andrew Mellon Foundation. This project is a contribution of the Harvard Forest Long Term Ecological Research Program.

A regression model that estimates monthly temperature and precipitation as a function of latitude, longitude, and elevation for the New England area was used to estimate annual growing degree days and precipitation for the state of Massachusetts. For details of the regression model please see the published paper (Ollinger, S.V., Aber, J.D., Federer, C.A., Lovett, G.M., Ellis, J.M., 1995. Modeling Physical and Chemical Climate of the Northeastern United States for a Geographic Information System. US Dept of Agriculture, Forest Service, Radnor, PA, USA).

The following permits are administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). A Section 10 permit is required for all work, including structures, seaward of the mean high water line in navigable waters of the United States, defined as waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, as well as a few of the major rivers used to transport interstate or foreign commerce. A Section 404 permit is required for activities which involve the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including not only navigable waters, but also coastal waters, inland rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands. A Section 103 permit is required to transport dredged material for the purpose of disposal in the ocean. Please note: These permits are considered together as they are administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under a single permit application. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District has issued a Programmatic General Permit (PGP) for work in Massachusetts. The PGP provides for three levels of regulatory review: * Category I: Activities of minimal environmental impact that do not require Corps regulatory review and are classified as non-reporting. While no written notification to the Corps is required for these "minor" projects, they must comply with the conditions contained in the PGP. * Category II: Activities likely to be of minimal environmental impact but that have the potential to have adverse effects. A project-specific review and authorization from the Corps in writing are required. Copies of the Massachusetts Chapter 91 application and plans, or the Water Quality Certification application and plans, are usually sufficient for Category II review. * Category III: Activities that have potential to cause adverse environmental impacts. These projects must get an Individual Corps license, and therefore require project-specific review, are available for public review and comment, and may require preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement. Review Process: PGP, applications for projects meeting the PGP criteria must include a brief project description, vicinity map, site plan, and a plan view of the proposed structure. Federal and state resource agencies meet every three weeks to review PGP applications. A PGP is usually issued, with or without special conditions, ten days after the review closes. Individual Permits: Applications for Individual Permits must include site location, a description of the project and its purpose, and related maps and plans. Within 15 days of receiving the required application material, the Corps issues a Public Notice seeking comments from abutters, regulatory agencies and the public. Comments are accepted for up to 30 days. The Corps evaluates comments received, compliance with section 404(b)(1) of the federal Clean Water Act, public interest criteria and issues a permit. If denied, the applicant is informed of the reason(s). Neither a PGP nor an Individual Permit is valid until the applicant has obtained a 401 Water Quality Certification from DEP. Individual permits are not valid until CZM concurs that the project is consistent with state coastal policies. Applicability to Aquaculture: Shellfish culture projects smaller than one acre are generally found to be eligible for a PGP. Larger projects, such as hatcheries, may exceed the thresholds of PGP eligibility, and therefore may be required to obtain an Individual Permit. Any project in or affecting the waters of the United States must comply with the conditions of the PGP or, in the case of larger projects, the conditions of an Individual Permit. Forms: PGP - None; Individual - ENG Form 4345: www.nae.usace.army.mil/ Fees PGP - None; Individual - Commercial Activity $100.00 Contact: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, Regulatory Branch, (978) 318-8338 and (800) 362-4367.

This datalayer is part of a group of layers used for research in the Ipswich River Watershed. This layer includes the area within each town in the Ipswich River Watershed in vector form. This map contains complete information and was derived from the ip30_noinfo_towns layer. To show area within the towns the make up the Ipswich River Watershed study area.

(3 - 1 - Long-Term Change - Western FI Map: Part of the Coastal Change at Fire Island geo-narrative)Fire Island is a 31 mile long barrier island that is centrally located on the southern shore of Long Island, New York. The island is comprised of Fire Island National Seashore (including several federal wilderness tracts), NY state and county parks, and developed communities. The U.S. Geological Survey has been conducting research in the offshore, nearshore, and barrier island systems at Fire Island for more than two decades to better understand drivers of coastal change and evolution. This Story Map features research that is being used to predict how beaches change in response to storms and how they may subsequently recover in the year following a storm event. Himmelstoss, E.A., Kratzmann, M., Hapke, C., Thieler, E.R., and List, J., 2010, The National Assessment of Shoreline Change: A GIS Compilation of Vector Shorelines and Associated Shoreline Change Data for the New England and Mid-Atlantic Coasts: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2010-1119, available at https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1119/

The 2020 TIGER/Line Shapefiles contain current geographic extent and boundaries of both legal and statistical entities (which have no governmental standing) for the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Island areas. This vintage includes boundaries of governmental units that match the data from the surveys that use 2020 geography (e.g., 2020 Population Estimates and the 2020 American Community Survey). In addition to geographic boundaries, the 2020 TIGER/Line Shapefiles also include geographic feature shapefiles and relationship files. Feature shapefiles represent the point, line and polygon features in the MTDB (e.g., roads and rivers). Relationship files contain additional attribute information users can join to the shapefiles. Both the feature shapefiles and relationship files reflect updates made in the database through September 2020. To see how the geographic entities, relate to one another, please see our geographic hierarchy diagrams here.Census Urbanized Areashttps://www2.census.gov/geo/tiger/TIGER2020/UACCensus Urban/Rural Census Block Shapefileshttps://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/geo/shapefiles/index.php2020 TIGER/Line and Redistricting shapefiles:https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files/time-series/geo/tiger-line-file.2020.htmlTechnical documentation:https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/maps-data/data/tiger/tgrshp2020/TGRSHP2020_TechDoc.pdfTIGERweb REST Services:https://tigerweb.geo.census.gov/tigerwebmain/TIGERweb_restmapservice.htmlTIGERweb WMS Services:https://tigerweb.geo.census.gov/tigerwebmain/TIGERweb_wms.htmlThe legal entities included in these shapefiles are:American Indian Off-Reservation Trust LandsAmerican Indian Reservations – FederalAmerican Indian Reservations – StateAmerican Indian Tribal Subdivisions (within legal American Indian areas)Alaska Native Regional CorporationsCongressional Districts – 116th CongressConsolidated CitiesCounties and Equivalent Entities (except census areas in Alaska)Estates (US Virgin Islands only)Hawaiian Home LandsIncorporated PlacesMinor Civil DivisionsSchool Districts – ElementarySchool Districts – SecondarySchool Districts – UnifiedStates and Equivalent EntitiesState Legislative Districts – UpperState Legislative Districts – LowerSubminor Civil Divisions (Subbarrios in Puerto Rico)The statistical entities included in these shapefiles are:Alaska Native Village Statistical AreasAmerican Indian/Alaska Native Statistical AreasAmerican Indian Tribal Subdivisions (within Oklahoma Tribal Statistical Areas)Block Groups3-5Census AreasCensus BlocksCensus County Divisions (Census Subareas in Alaska)Unorganized Territories (statistical county subdivisions)Census Designated Places (CDPs)Census TractsCombined New England City and Town AreasCombined Statistical AreasMetropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas and related statistical areasMetropolitan DivisionsNew England City and Town AreasNew England City and Town Area DivisionsOklahoma Tribal Statistical AreasPublic Use Microdata Areas (PUMAs)State Designated Tribal Statistical AreasTribal Designated Statistical AreasUrban AreasZIP Code Tabulation Areas (ZCTAs)Shapefiles - Features:Address Range-FeatureAll Lines (called Edges)All RoadsArea HydrographyArea LandmarkCoastlineLinear HydrographyMilitary InstallationPoint LandmarkPrimary RoadsPrimary and Secondary RoadsTopological Faces (polygons with all geocodes)Relationship Files:Address Range-Feature NameAddress RangesFeature NamesTopological Faces – Area LandmarkTopological Faces – Area HydrographyTopological Faces – Military Installations

This polygon layer was used in an educational StoryMap created by US Fish and Wildlife Service and Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Program in collaboration with students at William and Mary. Layer created by Mary Lawrence Young, William & Mary collaborator to USFWS. Polygon layer showing state boundary polygon for Connecticut mapped at the 1:24,000-scale. Layer created by Mary Lawrence Young, College of William and Mary in collaboration with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Region 5 (R5), New England Field Office (NEFO). This layer was extracted from the original dataset: Connecticut Towns courtesy of Professor Jill Kelly from Yale University.For more information contact Anne Condon, anne_condon@fws.gov

The surficial geologic map of the Eastern and Central United States depicts the areal distribution of surficial geologic deposits and other materials that accumulated or formed during the past 2+ million years, the period that includes all activities of the human species. These materials are at the surface of the earth. They make up the "ground" on which we walk, the "dirt" in which we dig foundations, and the “soil” in which we grow crops. Most of our human activity is related in one way or another to these surface materials that are referred to collectively by many geologists as regolith, the mantle of fragmental and generally unconsolidated material that overlies the bedrock foundation of the continent. The map is based on 31 published maps in the U.S. Geological Survey's Quaternary Geologic Atlas of the United States map series (U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series I-1420). It was compiled at 1:1,000,000 scale, to be viewed as a digital map at 1:2,000,000 nominal scale and to be printed as a conventional paper map at 1:2,500,000 scale. This map is not a map of soils as recognized and classified in agriculture. Rather, it is a generalized map of soils as recognized in engineering geology, or of substrata or parent materials in which agricultural, agronomic, or pedologic soils are formed. Where surficial deposits or materials are thick, agricultural soils are developed only in the upper part of the engineering soils. Where they are very thin, agricultural soils are developed through the entire thickness of a surficial deposit or material. The surficial geologic map provides a broad overview of the areal distribution of surficial deposits and materials. It identifies and depicts more than 150 types of deposits and materials. In general, the map units are divided into two major categories, surface deposits and residual materials. Surface deposits are materials that accumulated or were emplaced after component particles were transported by ice, water, wind, or gravity. The glacial sediments that cover the surface in much of the northern United States east of the Rocky Mountains are in this category, as are the gravel, sand, silt, and clay that were deposited in past and present streams, lakes, and oceans. In contrast, residual materials formed in place, without significant transport of component particles by ice, water, wind, or gravity. They are products of modification or alteration of pre-existing surficial deposits, surficial materials, or bedrock. For example, intense weathering of solid rock, or even stream deposits, by chemical processes may produce a residual surficial material that is greatly transformed from its original physical and chemical state. In recent years, surficial deposits and materials have become the focus of much interest by scientists, environmentalists, governmental agencies, and the general public. They are the foundations of ecosystems, the materials that support plant growth and animal habitat, and the materials through which travels much of the water required for our agriculture, our industry, and our general well being. They also are materials that easily can become contaminated by pesticides, fertilizers, and toxic wastes. In this context, the value of the surficial geologic map is evident The map and its digital database provide information about four major aspects of the surficial materials, through description of more than 150 types of materials and depiction of their areal distribution. The map unit descriptions provide information about (1) genesis (processes of origin) or environments of deposition (for example, deposits related to glaciation (glacial deposits), flowing water (alluvial deposits), lakes (lacustrine deposits), wind (eolian deposits), or gravity (mass-movement deposits)), (2) age (for example, how long ago the deposits accumulated or were emplaced or how long specific processes have been acting on the materials), (3) properties (the chemical, physical, and mechanical or engineering characteristics of the materials), and (4) thickness or depth to underlying deposits or materials or to bedrock. This approach provides information appropriate for a broad user base. The map is useful to national, state, and other governmental agencies, to engineering and construction companies, to environmental organizations and consultants, to academic scientists and institutions, and to the layman who merely wishes to learn more about the materials that conceal the bedrock. The map can facilitate regional and national overviews of (1) geologic hazards, including areas of swelling clay and areas of landslide deposits and landslide-prone materials, (2) natural resources, including aggregate for concrete and road building, peat, clay, and shallow sources for groundwater, and (3) areas of special environmental concern, i... Visit https://dataone.org/datasets/d863e647-d00d-4994-89bc-be4be9d4adf0 for complete metadata about this dataset.

As of February 1, 2025, California was the state with the most Target stores in the United States, with 318 stores. The company had a total of 1,978 stores open throughout the United States that year.