The UAS Facility Maps are designed to identify permissible altitudes (above ground level) at which UAS, operating under the Small UAS Rule (14 CFR 107), can be authorized to fly within the surface areas of controlled airspace. These altitude parameters, provided by the respective air traffic control facilities, are criteria used to evaluate airspace authorization requests (14 CFR 107.41), submitted via FAA.GOV/UAS. Airspace authorization requests for altitudes in excess of the predetermined map parameters will require a lengthy coordination process. This dataset will be continually updated and expanded to include UAS Facility Maps for all controlled airspace by Fall 2017. This map is not updated in real time. Neither the map nor the information provided herein is guaranteed to be current or accurate. Reliance on this map constitutes neither FAA authorization to operate nor evidence of compliance with applicable aviation regulations in or during enforcement proceedings before the National Transportation Safety Board or any other forum. Disclaimer of Liability. The United States government will not be liable to you in respect of any claim, demand, or action—irrespective of the nature or cause of the claim, demand, or action—alleging any loss, injury, or damages, direct or indirect, that may result from the use or possession of any of the information in this draft map or any loss of profit, revenue, contracts, or savings or any other direct, indirect, incidental, special, or consequential damages arising out of any use of or reliance upon any of the information in this draft map, whether in an action in contract or tort or based on a warranty, even if the FAA has been advised of the possibility of such damages. The FAA’s total aggregate liability with respect to its obligations under this agreement or otherwise with respect to the use of this draft map or any information herein will not exceed $0. Some States, Territories, and Countries do not allow certain liability exclusions or damages limitations; to the extent of such disallowance and only to that extent, the paragraph above may not apply to you. In the event that you reside in a State, Territory, or Country that does not allow certain liability exclusions or damages limitations, you assume all risks attendant to the use of any of the information in this draft map in consideration for the provision of such information. Export Control. You agree not to export from anywhere any of the information in this draft map except in compliance with, and with all licenses and approvals required under, applicable export laws, rules, and regulations. Indemnity. You agree to indemnify, defend, and hold free and harmless the United States government from and against any liability, loss, injury (including injuries resulting in death), demand, action, cost, expense, or claim of any kind or character, including but not limited to attorney’s fees, arising out of or in connection with any use or possession by you of this draft map or the information herein. Governing Law. The above terms and conditions will be governed by the laws of each and every state within the United States, without giving effect to that state’s conflict-of-laws provisions. You agree to submit to the jurisdiction of the state or territory in which the relevant use of any of the information in this draft map occurred for any and all disputes, claims, and actions arising from or in connection with this draft map or the information herein.

On May 25, 2014, a rain-on-snow induced rock avalanche occurred in the West Salt Creek Valley on the northern flank of Grand Mesa in western Colorado. The avalanche mobilized from a preexisting rock slide and traveled 4.6 km down the confined valley, killing 3 people. The avalanche was rare for the contiguous U.S. because of its large size (54.5 Mm3) and long travel distance. To understand the avalanche failure sequence, mechanisms, and mobility, we mapped landslide structures, geology, and ponds at 1:1000-scale. We used high-resolution, Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) imagery from July 2014 as a base for our field mapping. Herein, we present the map data and UAS imagery. The data accompany an interpretive paper published in the journal Geosphere. The full citation for this interpretive journal paper is: Coe, J.A., Baum, R.L., Allstadt, K.E., Kochevar, B.F., Schmitt, R.G., Morgan, M.L., White, J.L., Stratton, B. Hayashi, T.A., and Kean, J.W., 2016, Rock avalanche dynamics revealed by large-scale field mapping and seismic signals at a highly mobile avalanche in the West Salt Creek Valley, western Colorado: Geosphere, v. 12, no. 2, p. 607-631, doi:10.1130/GES01265.1

Important Note: This item is in mature support as of June 2021 and is no longer updated.

This map presents land cover and detailed topographic maps for the United States. It uses the USA Topographic Map service. The map includes the National Park Service (NPS) Natural Earth physical map at 1.24km per pixel for the world at small scales, i-cubed eTOPO 1:250,000-scale maps for the contiguous United States at medium scales, and National Geographic TOPO! 1:100,000 and 1:24,000-scale maps (1:250,000 and 1:63,000 in Alaska) for the United States at large scales. The TOPO! maps are seamless, scanned images of United States Geological Survey (USGS) paper topographic maps.

The maps provide a very useful basemap for a variety of applications, particularly in rural areas where the topographic maps provide unique detail and features from other basemaps.

To add this map service into a desktop application directly, go to the entry for the USA Topo Maps map service.

Tip: Here are some famous locations as they appear in this web map, accessed by including their location in the URL that launches the map:

Grand Canyon, Arizona

Golden Gate, California

The Statue of Liberty, New York

Washington DC

Canyon De Chelly, Arizona

Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming

Area 51, Nevada

The data are designed for strategic analyses at a national or regional scale which require spatially explicit information regarding the extent, distribution, and prevalence of the ownership types represented. The data are not recommended for tactical analyses on a sub-regional scale, or for informing local management decisions. Furthermore, map accuracies vary considerably and thus the utility of these data can vary geographically under different ownership patterns.

This snow depth map was generated 14 January 2015, close to peak of winter accumulation, applying Unmanned Aerial System digital surface models with a spatial resolution of 10 cm. The covered area is 285'000 m2 at the top of Brämabüel, 2490 m a.s.l. covering all expositions. Coordinate system: CH1903LV03.

A detailed description is given here:

Bühler, Y., Adams, M. S., Bösch, R., and Stoffel, A.: Mapping snow depth in alpine terrain with unmanned aerial systems (UASs): potential and limitations, The Cryosphere, 10, 1075-1088, 10.5194/tc-10-1075-2016, 2016.

Abstract: Detailed information on the spatial and temporal distribution, and variability of snow depth (HS) is a crucial input for numerous applications in hydrology, climatology, ecology and avalanche research. Nowadays, snow depth distribution is usually estimated by combining point measurements from weather stations or observers in the field with spatial interpolation algorithms. However, even a dense measurement network is not able to capture the large spatial variability of snow depth in alpine terrain. Remote sensing methods, such as laser scanning or digital photogrammetry, have recently been successfully applied to map snow depth variability at local and regional scales. However, such data acquisition is costly, if manned airplanes are involved. The effectiveness of ground-based measurements on the other hand, is often hindered by occlusions, due to the complex terrain or acute viewing angles. In this paper, we investigate the application of unmanned aerial systems (UAS), in combination with structure-from-motion photogrammetry, to map snow depth distribution. Such systems have the advantage that they are comparatively cost-effective and can be applied very flexibly to cover also otherwise inaccessible terrain. In this study we map snow depth at two different locations: a) a sheltered location at the bottom of the Flüela valley (1900 m a.s.l.) and b) an exposed location (2500 m a.s.l.) on a peak in the ski resort Jakobshorn, both in the vicinity of Davos, Switzerland. At the first test site, we monitor the ablation on three different dates. We validate the photogrammetric snow depth maps using simultaneously acquired manual snow depth measurements. The resulting snow depth values have a root mean square error (RMSE) better than 0.07 to 0.15 m on meadows and rocks and a RMSE better than 0.30 m on sections covered by bushes or tall grass. This new measurement technology opens the door for efficient, flexible, repeatable and cost effective snow depth monitoring for various applications, investigating the worlds cryosphere.

FEMA Framework Basemap datasets comprise six of the seven FGDC themes of geospatial data that are used by most GIS applications (Note: the seventh framework theme, orthographic imagery, is packaged in a separate NFIP Metadata Profile): cadastral, geodetic control, governmental unit, transportation, general structures, hydrography (water areas & lines. These data include an encoding of the geographic extent of the features and a minimal number of attributes needed to identify and describe the features. (Source: Circular A16, p. 13)

The Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) Database depicts flood risk Information And supporting data used to develop the risk data. The primary risk; classificatons 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 1:12,000.

This layer is sourced from maps.coast.noaa.gov.

This map service presents spatial information developed as part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Office for Coastal Management’s Coastal Flood Exposure Mapper. The purpose of the online mapping tool is to provide coastal managers, planners, and stakeholders a preliminary look at exposures to coastal flooding hazards. The Mapper is a screening-level tool that uses nationally consistent data sets and analyses. Data and maps provided can be used at several scales to help communities initiate resilience planning efforts. Currently the extent of the Coastal Flood Exposure Mapper covers U.S. coastal areas along the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean. NOAA provides the information “as-is” and shall incur no responsibility or liability as to the completeness or accuracy of this information. NOAA assumes no responsibility arising from the use of this information. For additional information, please contact the NOAA Office for Coastal Management (coastal.info@noaa.gov).

© NOAA Office for Coastal Management

This map contains live feed sources for US current wildfire locations and perimeters, VIIRS and MODIS hot spots, wildfire conditions / red flag warnings, and wildfire potential. Each of these layers provides insight into where a fire is located, its intensity and the surrounding areas susceptibility to wildfire. Find out more about the Esri Disaster Response Program: www.esri.com/disaster About the Data: Click on the links in the LAYERS section for details about each layer Wildfire: This displays large active fire incidents and situation reports that have been entered into the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) database by local emergency response teams. The final official perimeter should be obtained from the host unit, which can be determined by looking at the Unit Id for any specific fire. The host unit is responsible for producing official and final perimeters for all incidents in their jurisdiction.Hot Spot: The MODIS and VIIRS thermal layers are created from the MODIS satellite detection system and represents hot spots that could be potential fire locations in the last 24 hour period at a horizontal resolution of 1 km and temporal resolution of 1 to 2 days. Wind Data (NOAA METAR): Typical METAR contains data for the temperature, dew point, wind speed and direction, precipitation, cloud cover and heights, visibility, and barometric pressure. A METAR may also contain information on precipitation amounts, lightning, and other information. Red Flag Warnings: Filtered from the Weather Watches and Warnings layer.

Important Note: This item is in mature support as of June 2023 and will retire in December 2025. A new version of this item is available for your use.The layers going from 1:1 to 1:1.5M present the 2010 Census Urbanized Areas (UA) and Urban Clusters (UC). A UA consists of contiguous, densely settled census block groups (BGs) and census blocks that meet minimum population density requirements (1000 people per square mile (ppsm) / 500 ppsm), along with adjacent densely settled census blocks that together encompass a population of at least 50,000 people. A UC consists of contiguous, densely settled census BGs and census blocks that meet minimum population density requirements, along with adjacent densely settled census blocks that together encompass a population of at least 2,500 people, but fewer than 50,000 people. The dataset covers the 50 States plus the District of Columbia within United States. The layer going over 1:1.5M presents the urban areas in the United States derived from the urban areas layer of the Digital Chart of the World (DCW). It provides information about the locations, names, and populations of urbanized areas for conducting geographic analysis on national and large regional scales. To download the data for this layer as a layer package for use in ArcGIS desktop applications, refer to USA Census Urban Areas.

In 2023, Google Maps was the most downloaded map and navigation app in the United States, despite being a standard pre-installed app on Android smartphones. Waze followed, with 9.89 million downloads in the examined period. The app, which comes with maps and the possibility to access information on traffic via users reports, was developed in 2006 by the homonymous Waze company, acquired by Google in 2013.

Usage of navigation apps in the U.S. As of 2021, less than two in 10 U.S. adults were using a voice assistant in their cars, in order to place voice calls or follow voice directions to a destination. Navigation apps generally offer the possibility for users to download maps to access when offline. Native iOS app Apple Maps, which does not offer this possibility, was by far the navigation app with the highest data consumption, while Google-owned Waze used only 0.23 MB per 20 minutes.

Usage of navigation apps worldwide In July 2022, Google Maps was the second most popular Google-owned mobile app, with 13.35 million downloads from global users during the examined month. In China, the Gaode Map app, which is operated along with other navigation services by the Alibaba owned AutoNavi, had approximately 730 million monthly active users as of September 2022.

Layered GeoPDF 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Map. Layers of geospatial data include orthoimagery, roads, grids, geographic names, elevation contours, hydrography, and other selected map features. This map depicts geographic features on the surface of the earth. One intended purpose is to support emergency response at all levels of government. The geospatial data in this map are from selected National Map data holdings and other government sources.

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 State Plane coordinate system. The specifications for the horizontal control of DFIRM data files are consistent with those required for mapping at a scale of 1:12,000.

This dataset consists of point intercept data, sampled with a point frame, from three 1 ha sites along an elevation and precipitation gradient within Reynolds Creek Experimental Watershed collected between late May and mid July, 2019. The lowest elevation site ('wbs1', 1,425 m) was vegetated by shrub steppe dominated Wyoming big sage (Artemisia tridentata ssp. wyomingensis). Vegetation at the middle elevation site ('los1', 1,680 m) was shrub steppe dominated by low sage (Artemisia arbuscula). Shrub steppe at the highest elevation site ('mbs1', 2,110 m) was dominated by mountain big sage (Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana) and Utah snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus utahensis). At each site 30 randomly located square 1 m^2 plots were sampled. The plots were oriented with one axis randomly chosen from 45, 90, 135, 180, 225, 270, 315 and 360 degrees north azimuth. A point frame of 20 pins was orientated perpendicular to the azimuth and each pin was lowered through the canopy and each contact was recorded to species or other plant material category. Whether the contacted material was photosynthetic (coded as a '+') or non-photosynthetic (coded as '-') was also recorded. Last seasons senesced plant material that is alive but not photosynthetic is coded as '.'. There may be 0, 1, 2 or more canopy hits for each pin (numbered 1 through n with 1 being the top-most canopy hit). A final basal hit is recorded for each pin and coded as hit 0. The point frame was moved so that a total of 5 rows were recorded for a total of 100 pins for each plot. The plant species codes used follow the USDA Plants Database. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Data from: UAS imagery protocols to map vegetation are transferable between dryland sites across an elevational gradient . File Name: point_frame_2019_reynoldscreek.xlsxResource Description: This dataset consists of point frame data from three 1 ha sites along an elevation and precipitation gradient within Reynolds Creek Experimental Watershed collected between late May and mid July, 2019. The lowest site's ('wbs1', 1,425 m) characteristic dominant shrub is Wyoming big sage (Artemisia tridentata ssp. wyomingensis). The middle elevation site's ('los1', 1,680 m) dominant shrub is low sage (Artemisia arbuscula). The highest elevation site's ('mbs1', 2,110 m) dominant shrubs are mountain big sage (Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana) and Utah snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus utahensis). At each site 30 randomly located square 1 m^2 plots were sampled. The plots were oriented with one axis randomly chosen from 45, 90, 135, 180, 225, 270, 315 and 360 degrees north azimuth. A point frame of 20 pins was orientated perpendicular to the azimuth and each pin was lowered through the canopy and each contact was recorded to species or other plant material category. Whether the contacted material was photosynthetic (coded as a '+') or non-photosynthetic (coded as '-') was also recorded. Last seasons senesced plant material that is alive but not photosynthetic is coded as '.'. There may be 0, 1, 2 or more canopy hits for each pin (numbered 1 through n with 1 being the top-most canopy hit). A final basal hit is recorded for each pin and coded as hit 0. The point frame was moved so that a total of rows rows were recorded for a total of 100 pins for each plot. The plant species codes used follow the USDA Plants Database.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/excel Resource Title: GeoJSON. File Name: ReynoldsCrkExpWtrshdGeoJSON.json

The Digital Geologic Map of the U.S. Geological Survey Mapping in the Western Portion of Amistad National Recreation Area, Texas is composed of GIS data layers complete with ArcMap 9.3 layer (.LYR) files, two ancillary GIS tables, a Map PDF document with ancillary map text, figures and tables, a FGDC metadata record and a 9.3 ArcMap (.MXD) Document that displays the digital map in 9.3 ArcGIS. The data were completed as a component of the Geologic Resources Inventory (GRI) program, a National Park Service (NPS) Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) funded program that is administered by the NPS Geologic Resources Division (GRD). Source geologic maps and data used to complete this GRI digital dataset were provided by the following: Eddie Collins, Amanda Masterson and Tom Tremblay (Texas Bureau of Economic Geology); Rick Page (U.S. Geological Survey); Gilbert Anaya (International Boundary and Water Commission). Detailed information concerning the sources used and their contribution the GRI product are listed in the Source Citation sections(s) of this metadata record (wpam_metadata.txt; available at http://nrdata.nps.gov/amis/nrdata/geology/gis/wpam_metadata.xml). All GIS and ancillary tables were produced as per the NPS GRI Geology-GIS Geodatabase Data Model v. 2.1. (available at: http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/inventory/geology/GeologyGISDataModel.cfm). The GIS data is available as a 9.3 personal geodatabase (wpam_geology.mdb), and as shapefile (.SHP) and DBASEIV (.DBF) table files. The GIS data projection is NAD83, UTM Zone 14N. The data is within the area of interest of Amistad National Recreation Area.

A digital version of the Geologic Map of the United States, originally published at a scale of 1:2,500,000 (King and Beikman, 1974b). It excludes Alaska and Hawaii.

Source: http://tin.er.usgs.gov/geology/us/

ArcGIS Online web map that is used in the U.S. Quaternary Faults Web Application This web map is not intended to be viewed or used alone

This map uses the USA Generalized Federal Lands layer which presents the federal and tribal land areas of the United States. The lands are symbolized by the managing agency. A vector tile layer showing federal land boundaries and place names is included in this map.

Map quadrangle boundaries for the 1:63,360-scale maps of Alaska, with unique identification codes conforming to the scheme used in the related data set quad24, which contains 1:24,000-scale quadrangle names and codes for the conterminous US and Hawaii.