This city boundary shapefile was extracted from Esri Data and Maps for ArcGIS 2014 - U.S. Populated Place Areas. This shapefile can be joined to 500 Cities city-level Data (GIS Friendly Format) in a geographic information system (GIS) to make city-level maps.

This is a district-level shape file of Indian districts sourced from the survey of India. It has been updated till 2022 and contains a total of 742 districts.

This mapping completed the Larsemann Hills photogrammetric mapping project. The project was commenced on 14 December 2001 and completed in April 2003. It includes the integration of newly mapped data with dataset gis136. (Larsemann Hills - Mapping from Landsat 7 imagery captured January 2000)

A report on the project is available at the url given below.

Satellite image map of Fisher Massif, Mac. Robertson Land, Antarctica. This map was produced for the Australian Antarctic Division by AUSLIG (now Geoscience Australia) Commercial, in Australia, in 1992. The map is at a scale of 1:100000, and was produced from Landsat TM scenes (WRS 128-111, 129-110). It is projected on a Transverse Mercator projection, and shows glaciers/ice shelves and gives some historical text information. The map has both geographical and UTM co-ordinates.

https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F7337879%2Fd85902b733a4fecd570ecb10d911b253%2FFigure1.jpg?generation=1712017346000901&alt=media" alt="">

MatSeg Dataset for Zero-Shot Material States Segmentation The dataset contains large-scale synthetic images for training data and highly diverse real-world image benchmarks for testing. Focusing on zero-shot class-agnostic segmentation of materials and their states. This means finding the region of materials states without pre-training on the specific material classes or states. The benchmark contains a wide range of real-world materials and states. For example: wet regions of the surface, scattered dust, minerals of rocks, the sediment of soils, rotten parts of fruits, degraded and corrosive surface regions, food and liquid states, and many others. The focus is on scattered and fragmented materials, as well as soft boundaries partial transition, and partial similarity between regions. It contains both hard segmentation maps and soft and partial similarity annotations for similar but not identical materials. See Readme Files In zips for readers and Technical details.

Synthethic Training Dataset Structure Each folder contains one image and its segmentation map. RGB_RGB.jpg: The image rgb Mask**.png: where ** a number of the mask of a given material, note materials can overlap and values can be between 0-255 (soft). ObjectMaskOcluded.png: Basically the ROI mask means the region that is annotated, anything not marked in this mask is background and is not annotated.

Real-world image Benchmark A benchmark for zero-shot material state segmentation. The benchmark contains 820 real-world images with a wide range of material states and settings. For example: food states (cooked/burned..), plants (infected/dry.) to rocks/soil (minerals/sediment), construction/metals (rusted, worn), liquids (foam/sediment), and many other states in a class-agnostic manner. The goal is to evaluate the segmentation of material materials without knowledge or pretraining on the material or setting. The focus is on materials with complex scattered boundaries, and gradual transition (like the level of wetness of the surface). The annotation of the benchmark is point-based and similarity-based. Hence, for each image, we select several points and regions (Figure 2). We group the points of the same materials into the same label, we also define a group of points that have partial similarity. For example points in group A are more similar to points in group B than to points in group C (In case materials A and B are similar to each other but not identical). This approach allows us to capture the complexity of gradual transition and partial similarities in the world. While also enabling dealing with complex scattered and blurry shapes without needing to annotate the full shape which in many cases is unclear or very hard For more details see : https://arxiv.org/pdf/2403.03309.pdf https://github.com/sagieppel/MatSeg-Dataset For more training data see: https://icedrive.net/s/SBb3g9WzQ5wZuxX9892Z3R4bW8jw

For more information on this dataset please go to https://gis.epa.ie/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/5f1999f0-37e4-4c14-acf8-3b42bfdae894The Teagasc Subsoils map classifies the subsoils of Ireland into 16 themes, using digital stereo photogrammetry supported by field work. Produced by Teagasc (Kinsealy), EPA and GSI.The dataset was created using a compilation of existing data, photogrammetric mapping, field studies. Soil survey maps, Quaternary maps and published and unpublished reports were complied and boundaries between sediment types are interpreted and mapped using photo-interpretation in a soft copy photogrammetric workstation with digital stereo-pairs of black and white photography acquired at a scale of 1:40,000. Fieldwork was carried out, around the flanks of large bogs delineate the exact boundary between peat and mineral soils but predominantly within the boundary zones of differencing subsoils. Areas mapped during the photogrammetric analysis were also checked during the fieldwork. Methods adopted during field mapping include reconnaissance mapping, auger sampling, trenching, digital photography and GPS data recording. Aerial photography datasets involved in mapping were acquired in 1995 while field data collected was collected during 1998-2005.The classification of subsoils is based on the classification used by the Geological Survey of Ireland Quaternary Section in mapping Quaternary sediment types.This classification has been altered only to ensure utility specific to the requirements of the EPA Soil and Subsoil Mapping Project. (Please refer to "Teagasc-EPA Soils and Subsoils Mapping Project - Final Report" for more information. Available for download at https://gis.epa.ie)

Satellite image map of Edward VIII Gulf, Kemp Land, Antarctica. This map was produced for the Australian Antarctic Division by AUSLIG (now Geoscience Australia) Commercial, in Australia, in 1993. The map is at a scale of 1:100000, and was produced from a Landsat TM (WRS 139-107) scene (bands 2,3 and 4). It is projected on a Transverse Mercator projection, and shows glaciers/ice shelves and penguin colonies, and gives some historical text information. The map has both geographical and UTM co-ordinates.

It has long been established that earthquake ground motions may be amplified by weak deposits such as soils and other unconsolidated sediments. Seismic microzonation aims to identify these amplification effects through the classification of subsoil classes or local ground shaking properties and appropriate engineering design.In New Zealand, the current building code NZ1170.5 (Standards New Zealand 2004) specifies discrete subsoil classes ranging from A (hard rock) to E (very soft sediment). This project has developed new subsoil class maps for the Wellington City Territorial Authority area managed by the Wellington City Council.The maps were generated from new geological mapping available for the area, an updated borehole database, a database of site period measurements and a 3D geological model constructed for this study.The updated maps use the 2004 NZS1170.5 standard subsoil classification.The area mapped in this study extends from Tawa southwards, encapsulating Johnsonville, Newlands, Khandallah, Wilton, Karori, Ngauranga, Horokiwi, Thorndon, Te Aro, Newtown, Island Bay, Kilbirnie, Miramar and Seatoun. These areas all have accumulations of looseto dense Quaternary sediment deposited on indurated and variably weathered Rakaiaterrane basement rock. The sediment in these areas varies in thickness from a few metres to several hundred metres.The soft sediments are prone to amplification of ground motion during earthquakes, particularly where significant thicknesses are preserved.The subsoil classifications mapped in Wellington City are NZS1170.5: B, C, D and E.To create the boundaries and subsoil class maps, a 3D geological model has been constructed,drawing on databases of site period measurements and borehole data. In total, 931 site period measurements from previous studies are compiled in the database, with some reprocessed for this study. Records from 2422 boreholes are also compiled into another database from sources such as the New Zealand Geotechnical Database (NZGD), GNS Science and private records available to GNS Science for research purposes. A 3D geological model was created from these data and from existing geological mapping to model the sub-surface geometry of11 geological units and create depth to basement and thickness maps. All of these data were utilised to create a map of the subsoil classification in Wellington City and improve on previous studies through the integration of new data compiled and advanced modelling techniques.Several areas around Wellington are data-poor and lack borehole information or geophysical measurements to constrain the subsoil classes and their boundaries. We recommend that additional data is collected in important zones, such as those in Kilbirnie and Miramar where subsoil classes D and E are modelled, allowing their extent to be better determined.

This dataset represents the consolidated submissions of GRSG habitat management areas from each individual BLM ARMP & ARMPA/Records of Decision (ROD) and for subsequent updates as of February 2025. Please contact the BLM Montana State Office for details on how sage-grouse management is applied in these areas. This dataset represents the consolidated submissions of GRSG habitat management areas from each individual BLM ARMP & ARMPA/Records of Decision (ROD) and for subsequent updates. These data were submitted to the BLM’s Wildlife Habitat Spatial Analysis Lab in March 2016 and were updated for UT in April of 2017, WY in October of 2017 (Lander and Bighorn EIS) and May 2022 (Buffalo and NinePlan EIS); CO in February of 2020, NVCA in July 2022, and Oregon in August 2022.

February 2025: Colorado and Oregon submitted signed ROD data for GRSG habitat in Feb 2025 - these feature classes replaced previous CO and OR data in the Aug 2022 version.

August 2022 Update: OR - New habitat data was submitted by Oregon EIS as part of the Allocation Decision Analysis data call in 2022. Data that was submitted earlier was updated to reflect SFA designations in Aug 2022.

July 2022 Update: NVCA - New habitat data was submitted by NVCA as part of the Allocation Decision Analysis data call in 2022.

May 2022 Update: WY - New habitat data was submitted by Wyoming EISs Buffalo and Nine Plan as part of the Allocation Decision Analysis data call in 2022.

February 2020 Update: CO - In February 2016, the Associated Governments of Northwest Colorado (AGNC) hired a consultant (Olsson) to help further refine CPW’s greater sage-grouse habitat maps in Northwest Colorado. The Olsson consultation team, have utilized CPW’s contemporary and rigorous habitat models and developed their own to produce revised PHMA and GHMA habitat data. These spatial datasets (i.e., habitat maps) are specifically designed to meet the management intent of the ARMPA and have been produced for formal submittal to the BLM for incorporation into Northwest Colorado Land and Resource Management Plans. The updated habitat delineations for NWCO include Undesignated Habitat (UDH) to address concerns surrounding the management of privately held irrigated agricultural lands. The BLM's NWCO Sage-Grouse Plan has no management decisions associated with this habitat designation.

October 2017 Update: WY - On October 27, 2017 the WY state director signed maintenance actions for the Wyoming Sage-Grouse ARMPA, Buffalo RMP, Cody RMP, and Worland RMP that changed WY PHMA boundaries, bringing them into consistency with the Wyoming Core Areas (version 4) from the current Governor's executive order 2015-4. The updated PHMA boundaries were also adopted by the Lander RMP.

April 2017 Update: UT - The interagency team reconvened in late 2016 to review State of Utah GRSG populations and the BLM’s 2015 and 2016 wildfire data. Of the ten soft triggers and seven hard triggers evaluated, only one population soft trigger and one population hard trigger have been met, both within the Sheeprocks population area of Fillmore and Salt Lake Field Offices. Appendix I of the ARMPA includes “hard-wired” changes in management that were finalized in the 2015 Record of Decision, listed in Appendix I Table I.1 (Specific Management Responses). The PHMA in the Sheeprocks population has changed as a result of this, and the change is reflected in this data.

The following habitat management areas were used in the creation of this feature class:

PHMA: Areas identified as having the highest habitat value for maintaining sustainable GRSG populations and include breeding, late brood-rearing, and winter concentration areas.

GHMA: Areas that are occupied seasonally or year-round and are outside of PHMAs.

IHMA: Areas in Idaho that provide a management buffer for and that connect patches of PHMAs. IHMAs encompass areas of generally moderate to high habitat value habitat or populations but that are not as important as PHMAs.

OHMA: Areas in Nevada and Northeastern California, identified as unmapped habitat in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS, that are within the Planning Area and contain seasonal or connectivity habitat areas.

RHMA: Areas in Montana EISs with ongoing or imminent impacts containing substantial and high-quality GRSG habitat that historically supported sustainable GRSG populations. Management actions would emphasize restoration for the purpose of establishing or restoring sustainable GRSG populations. Areas are delineated using key, core, and connectivity data or maps and other resource information.

LCHMA: Areas in CO EIS that have been identified as broader regions of connectivity important to facilitate the movement of GRSG and maintain ecological processes.

UDH: In CO EIS, An Undesignated Habitat management prescription was developed to address concerns surrounding the management of privately held irrigated agricultural lands.

Anthro Mountain: An additional 41,200 acres of National Forest System lands in the Anthro Mountain portion of the Carbon Population Area in Utah EIS that are managed as neither PHMA nor GHMA. These areas are identified as “Anthro Mountain.” In the BLM’s ARMPA, these areas are considered split-estate, where the BLM merely administers the mineral estate.

Taken from sections of the report:

Introduction

In broad terms the Surveying Program aimed to verify new or existing mapping or lead to better quality mapping through higher quality and more extensive survey control in the Prince Charles Mountains. The various tasks will be dealt with in the following paragraphs in terms of the techniques used and results achieved. I have also included some comments regarding the performance of equipment and clothing in the Antarctic.

Time Frame

The NPCM summer field party departed Hobart at 5 Pm on Friday the 21st. of November 1990 aboard the Aurora Australis. The fast ice edge, some 50kn off Mawson (It is assumed that this measurement is incorrect, as "kn" likely means "km", but the distance of 50 is excessive - AADC data officer), was made by approximately 6am on Thursday the 7th of December 1990. Due to bad weather and logistic considerations it was not until Friday the 21st of December that I departed Mawson for the NPCMs. I returned to Mawson on the 25th of January 1991 and did not depart until the 13th of February 1991. The Ice Bird docked in Hobart on the 24th of February 1991.

Satellite image map of Charybdis Glacier, Mac. Robertson Land, Antarctica. This map is part (c) in a series of four north Prince Charles Mountains maps. This map was produced for the Australian Antarctic Division by AUSLIG (now Geoscience Australia) Commercial, in Australia, in 1991. The map is at a scale of 1:500000, and was produced from Landsat TM and Landsat MSS scenes. It is projected on a Lambert Conformal Conic projection, and shows traverses/routes/foot/tracks, stations/bases, and glaciers/ice shelves. The map has only geographical co-ordinates.

This map shows the seabed data which has been collected in Irish waters. The seabed is mapped using boats and airplanes. The boats use special equipment called a multibeam echosounder. A multibeam echosounder is a type of sonar that is used to map the seabed. Sound waves are emitted in a fan shape beneath the boat. The amount of time it takes for the sound waves to bounce off the bottom of the sea and return to a receiver is used to determine water depth. LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) is another way to map the seabed, using airplanes. Two laser light beams are emitted from a sensor on-board an airplane. The red beam reaches the water surface and bounces back; while the green beam penetrates the water hits the seabed and bounces back. The difference in time between the two beams returning allows the water depth to be calculated. LiDAR is only suitable for shallow waters (up to 30m depth).The data are collected as points in XYZ format. X and Y coordinates and Z (depth). The boat travels up and down the water in a series of lines (trackline). An XYZ file is created for each line and contains thousands of points. The line files are merged together and converted into gridded data to create a Digital Terrain Model of the seabed. We use different sized boats and equipment depending on the depth of the water. Some datasets are vector datasets. Vector data portray the world using points, lines, and polygons (areas). Point datasets include the shipwreck locations and seabed sediment sample locations.Line datasets include the sub-bottom profile (rock and sediment below the seabed) tracklines, maritime boundaries and seabed survey tracklines. Polygon datasets include the sub-bottom profile coverage data, INFOMAR/INSS survey zones, priority areas, seabed survey coverage and seabed sediment classification.Some datasets are in raster format. Raster data stores information in a cell-based manner and consists of a matrix of cells (or pixels) organised into rows and columns. The format of the raster is a grid for bathymetry and an image (geotiff) for backscatter. The resolution varies. An example is 10m by 10m cell size for a bathymetry grid. This means that each cell (pixel) represents an area on the seabed of 10 metres squared. Each cell has a depth value which is the average depth of all the points located within that cell. For the backscatter image 10m, it is coloured using grey shades. The darker shading represents a hard seabed (e.g. rock) and lighter shading represents a soft seabed (e.g. sand, silt or mud).This data shows areas that have been surveyed to date. There are plans to fill in the missing areas between 2020 and 2026. The deeper offshore waters were mapped as part of the Irish National Seabed Survey (INSS) between 1999 and 2005. INtegrated Mapping FOr the Sustainable Development of Ireland's MArine Resource (INFOMAR) is mapping the inshore areas. (2006 - 2026).

United States Geological Survey (USGS) Existing Landslide Areas for development of the Parcel Inventory dataset for the Housing Element Site Selection (HESS) Pre-Screening Tool.

The best available predictor of where movement of slides and earth flows might occur is the distribution of past movements. These landslides can be recognized from their distinctive topographic shapes, which can persist in the landscape for thousands of years. Most of the landslides recognizable in this fashion range in size from a few acres to several square miles. Most show no evidence of recent movement and are not currently active. Some small proportion of them may become active in any one year, with movements concentrated within all or part of the landslide masses or around their edges.

This data provides a summary of the distribution of landslides evident in the landscape of the San Francisco Bay Region. Original identification and delineation of these landslides required detailed analysis of the topography by skilled geologists, a task generally accomplished through the study of aerial photographs. In general, landslide maps are now available for most of the region at scales of 1:24,000 - 1:62,500. The data modifies and improves the earlier compilations of landslide data, which was prepared from sources available in the mid-1970's. The generalized landslide distribution shown then has here been improved in areas where the 1970's sources were notably deficient and includes the distribution of surficial deposits that define landscape not generally vulnerable to these kinds of landslides. The method of compilation and resolution of 1:125,000 (1 inch = 2 miles) limits use of this data to regional considerations. For more detailed information, reference the original 1:24,000 - 1:62,500 maps, if available in local libraries, or consult local officials or private consultants.

A shapefile of the Existing Landslide Areas can be downloaded from here (https://mtc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=6f8057505e844378813532969e43b826). A link to the ArcInfo (e00) source data is provided below.

FLATLANDS Slides and earth flows do not occur on nearly flat ground -- they require slopes that are steep and long enough to permit failure. Thus this data excludes gently sloping ground from principal consideration. A slope boundary of 15 percent for this purpose. A similar criterion is the boundary between hillsides and areas of recent alluvial deposition. This boundary typically occurs at a slope of about 15 percent. This criterion has the advantage over slope alone of being limited to the lowland areas and excluding such other areas of low slope as hilltops and sidehill benches.

LANDSLIDE CATEGORY The principal source of information used to define the distribution of slides and earth flows in the region is category 5 (landslides) of a 1979 regional slope stability map. The category 5 areas are a generalization of the distribution of mapped landslide deposits recognizable in the terrain, consisting principally of slumps, translational slides, and earth flows.

An important limitation of the earlier map is the varied character of the landslide mapping used in its compilation. For many areas, landslide inventory maps of various kinds, and even some detailed engineering geologic maps, were available, whereas elsewhere only general geologic maps were available. Some of the landslide inventory maps delineated only the most obvious landslides in the landscape, whereas others represented a thorough effort to identify all recognizable landslides.

From these varied sources, a generalization of the distribution of the landslides was determined by drawing envelopes around areas containing any type or size of mapped landslide that was within 1,000-1,500 feet of another landslide. Envelopes were also drawn around groups of landslides in such topographic settings as the same hillslope or creek bank, under the logic that such groups of landslides have a common local cause. Isolated landslides were represented directly where large enough, and inversely, inlying areas larger than 1,000-1,500 feet in diameter that lacked landslides were similarly delineated.

The result was subdivision of the hillside terrain of the region into two categories, one that contained scattered landslides together with intervening ground typically as wide as 1,000-1,500 feet, and a second that contained no mapped landslides. (These two categories are described as 'Mostly Landslide' and Few Landslides', respectively in the data.) Although generally consistent, in detail the content of each category depends on the type of landslide mapping represented by each compilation source. Where the landslide mapping was thorough, for example, the non-landslide category contains few if any mappable landslides, whereas in the areas for which geologic maps were used as sources, the non-landslide category may contain numerous landslides not deemed important in depicting the areal geology.

ADDITION OF OTHER LANDSLIDE INFORMATION Additions to the earlier compilations focused on those areas lacking any information and those which used general geologic maps as their source.

In northern Sonoma County, landslide mapping was done at a scale of 1:62,500. Rather than drawing envelopes around these landslides -- a task for which time was not available -- envelopes were drawn around areas lacking mapped landslides. The result is similar to category 5 of earlier compilations, but includes more areas of non-landslide. This category is combined with the 'Few Landslides' category in the data.

In southeastern Sonoma County, more tractable information was provided. Envelopes were drawn around these landslides and groups of landslides. Other, local additions were made in southern Sonoma County. In the northeastern part of the Bay region, 1:24,000 landslide maps were similarly used to draw envelopes around landslides and groups of landslides, although numerous small landslides and questionably identified larger landslides were excluded on a case-by-case basis.

A large patch of northwestern Marin County is not addressed by any available landslide mapping. In this area, a map of terrain types was used in concert with a digital slope map (30-meter resolution) to interpret landslide distribution. Areas mapped as old erosion surface or 'Hard terrain' together with other areas with slopes less than about 30 percent were categorized as having Few Landslides. Those areas mapped as 'Soft terrain' where slopes are greater than 30 percent were categorized as being Mostly Landslide, and intervening areas of 'Intermediate terrain' steeper than 30 percent were categorized as having Many Landslides.

The original USGS report and data are from Open-File Report 97-745 C (https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/of97-745/of97-745c.html).

The Inventory of New Jersey’s The Inventory of New Jersey’s Estuarine Shellfish Resources is conducted on a rotating basis throughout the major Atlantic coastal estuaries of New Jersey. The primary purpose of the work is to estimate the standing stock of hard clams (Mercenaria mercenaria) and describe their relative distribution. Additionally, the survey describes the relative distribution of other commercially important bivalve species and vascular submerged aquatic vegetation (“SAV”), also known as seagrasses. Hard Clam: The substrate is sampled with a hydraulic hard clam dredge designed to retain clams sized 30mm and larger. All live clams collected are counted and measured to the nearest millimeter. The density of clams at each station is reported in clams per square foot. The resulting geospatial data represents the relative distribution of hard clams at either “none” (no clams collected), “low” (0.01 to 2), “moderate” (>0.20 - 2), or “high” (>0.50 clams/ft2) densities. Where no category designation is given, the area is considered a “no data” area relative to this survey. This means that the survey did not sample within this area for reasons including shallow water, obstructions, or the presence of shellfish aquaculture leases. The area may or may not be marked formally as such. However, a “no data” area may contain shellfish resources unknown to the Marine Resources Administration (MRA) or the MRA may have data for the area from other investigations. It does not automatically mean that the area is devoid of shellfish resources. This data represents a one point in time documentation of relative abundance of hard clams, and hard clams may be found presently in areas not previously sampled or at stations where they were not historically collected. Complete reports for each surveyed estuary provide methodology, analysis, charts, and additional pertinent information, and can be found on the NJ Fish and Wildlife’s website. The NJ Coastal Zone Management rules at N.J.A.C. 7:7 define shellfish densities of 0.2 clams per square foot or greater as productive shellfish habitat. The Leasing of Atlantic Coast Bottom for Aquaculture regulations discourages establishing leases in productive shellfish habitat (NJAC 7:25-24.6(d)). Note that this layer does not include delineation of shellfish leases or aquaculture development zones. Those data are provided separately. Data from 1980s were digitized based primarily on the georeferenced images of the 1980s’ map series, in combination with usage of the 1986 NJDEP Landuse/Landcover geospatial dataset to more accurately depict shoreline boundaries. Digitizing was completed using freehand and/or copying/pasting/editing waterbody features from the 1986 NJDEP Landuse/Landcover geospatial dataset. Digitizing was completed at a scale between 1:4,000 to 1:12,000. This data represents a digital interpretation of the original hard copy charts. Therefore, some anomalies may exist in the line features along the present-day coastline. Users should interpret the mapping to extend to the present-day coastline. Data from 2000s to present were created based upon survey station tabular data which was then mapped as a point feature class. Several GIS tools were then used to generate polygon features surrounding the stations to represent hard clam distribution (see Process Steps for more detail). Associated Species: When other commercially or recreationally important bivalve species are retained in the sample, they are documented, along with common invertebrate species. Data from the 1980s documents the presence of all other commercially and recreationally important bivalve species that are regulated by the State of New Jersey as well as common (but not all) shellfish predators that were retrained in the dredge while targeting hard clams. Presence indicates the area is productive for the species. The regulated bivalve species are soft clams (Mya arenaria), bay scallops (Argopecten irradians), surf clam (Spisula solidissima), Eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica), and blue mussel (Mytilus edulis). This data is a point in time observation of production areas and regulated bivalve species may be found presently in areas not previously sampled or at stations where they were not historically collected. This data represents a digital interpretation of the original hard copy charts. Therefore, some anomalies may exist in the line features along the present-day coastline. Users should interpret the mapping to extend to the present-day coastline. It is important to note that this data is not a comprehensive evaluation of Eastern oyster populations in the Mullica River, Great Egg Harbor River, or Delaware Bay, which are surveyed separately and specifically for that species. Similarly, although surf clams are occasionally found in estuarine environments, the species primarily dwells in the Atlantic Ocean and separate comprehensive population surveys of state and federal waters are available. For additional species collected (for example sponges, non-commercial shellfish, etc.) please contact the Bureau of Shellfisheries. Historical reports for each surveyed estuary provide methodology, analysis, charts, and additional pertinent information, and can be requested by contacting the Marine Resources Administration. The features were digitized based primarily on the georeferenced images of the 1980s’ map series, in combination with usage of the 1986 NJDEP Land use/Landcover geospatial dataset in order to more accurately depict shoreline boundaries. Digitizing was completed using freehand and/or copying/pasting/editing waterbody features from the 1986 NJDEP Landuse/Landcover geospatial dataset. Digitizing was completed at a scale between 1:4,000 to 1:12,000. This data represents a digital interpretation of the original hard copy charts. Therefore, some anomalies may exist in the line features along the present-day coastline. Users should interpret the mapping to extend to the present-day coastline. Data from 2000 to present also documents the presence of all other commercially and recreationally important bivalve species that are regulated by the State of New Jersey as well as common invertebrates, including common bivalve predators. Presence indicates that area is productive for the species listed. The regulated bivalve species are soft clams (Mya arenaria), bay scallops (Argopecten irradians), surf clam (Spisula solidissima), Eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica), and blue mussel (Mytilus edulis). This data is a one point in time observation of production areas and regulated bivalve species may be found presently in areas not previously sampled or at stations where they were not historically collected. It is important to note that this data is not a comprehensive evaluation of Eastern oyster populations in the Mullica River, Great Egg Harbor River, or Delaware Bay, which are surveyed separately and specifically for that species. Similarly, although surf clams are occasionally found in estuarine environments, the species primarily dwells in the Atlantic Ocean and separate comprehensive population surveys of state and federal waters are available. Further, data on channeled whelk (Busycotypus canaliculatus), knobbed whelk (Busycon carica), Atlantic horseshoe crab (Limulus polyphemus) and blue crab (Callinectes sapidus) are not intended for use in fishery management plans at this time. For additional species collected (for example sponges, non-commercial shellfish, etc.) please contact the Marine Resources Administration. This feature class was created based upon survey station tabular data which was then mapped as a point feature class. Several GIS tools were then used to generate polygon features surrounding the stations to represent each species’ distribution (see Process Steps for more detail). Submerged Aquatic Vegetation: When submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV; seagrass) is retained in the sample, or observed visually from the research vessel, the presence of the vegetation and species is noted. Only presence of the vegetation is provided, without inference regarding coverage, shoot density, or any other characteristic. Only regulated species (per N.J.A.C. 7:7-9.6) of vascular vegetation is presented here. This is primarily eelgrass (Zostera marina) and widgeon grass (Ruppia maritima. However, other regulated species are found in New Jersey. Data from 1980s is a “snapshot in time” of relative distribution of SAV, and SAV may be found presently in areas not previously sampled or at stations where they were not historically collected. Species composition may change over time. This data represents a digital interpretation of the original hard copy charts. Therefore, some anomalies may exist in the line features along the present-day coastline. Users should interpret the mapping to extend to the present-day coastline. Where hard copy charts were not previously created (Shrewsbury, Manasquan, and Metedeconk Rivers), a 1,000ft buffer was placed around the survey station where SAV was found. Historical reports for each surveyed estuary provide methodology, analysis, charts, and additional pertinent information, and can be requested by contacting the Marine Resources Administration. The SAV data from the 1980s can confirm the history of SAV in a given area, corroborating other survey years. However, further investigation is necessary if it is the only dataset available for a project. In such cases, please contact the Marine Resources Administration (MRA) as they may have information on the area that was collected during different surveys or is not yet published. Data from 2000s to present is also a “one point in time” documentation of relative distribution of SAV, and SAV may be found presently in areas not previously sampled or at stations where they were not historically collected. Species composition may change over time. Where SAV was found, a 1,000ft

Taken from sections of the report:

Introduction

The 2000/2001 Antarctic Geodesy Summer Program consisted of a number of distinct components. They included:

• ARGN reference mark surveys at Mawson and Davis.

• Orthometric height connections between the Mawson ARGN site (AUS064) and the Mawson TGBM (AUS258).

• Orthometric height connections between the Davis ARGN site (AUS099) and the Davis TGBM (AUS186).

• Connection by GPS to the Tide Gauge Benchmarks at Mawson, Davis and Larsemann Hills.

• Strengthen the Australian Antarctic Geodetic Network with GPS observations where possible.

• Establish a permanent Australian monument and connection to existing Chinese monuments in the Grove Mountains.

• Connect to Russian and Chinese Geodetic control points in the Larsemann Hills vicinity for datum unification.

• Derive ellipsoidal heights for lake benchmarks in the Vestfold Hills for the purpose of developing a geometric geoid model for that area.

The following report details the work completed in the 2000/2001 summer season, bu AUSLIG (Now Geoscience Australia) geodetic surveyors, Gary Johnston and Paul Digney between November 2000 and March 2001.

Taken from sections of the Report:

The 2002-03 Mapping and Geographic Information Program (MAGIP) field season was undertaken from Davis Station. Nigel Peters from Sinclair Knight Merz undertook this season's fieldwork, the results of which are described in the following report.

The main objective for this season was to provide photo control mapping in the Rauer Group, with photo control also required at Davis Station and Marine Plains. A number of other tasks were undertaken in support of various scientific and engineering programs.

The tasks outlined in the surveyors brief are varied and numerous and have been included to provide the surveyor with a full and appropriate work program. The tasks are prioritised, usually with one or two major tasks with a number of minor tasks listed to be undertaken if the opportunity arises. This season's Survey Brief has been included in Appendix A with a summary of achievements listed in Appendix B.

The following report covers the fieldwork undertaken by myself during the 2002/2003 ANARE Summer Field Season. Data collected in support of other scientific programs has been included in this report primarily as a record of work undertaken by the mapping program. These data have been supplied to the various scientists for inclusion in their studies.

Sequence of Events

4th November - 12th November 2002 - Pre-Departure Training

• Field training for expeditioners at Bronte Park prior to the departure of V2.
• Survey briefing at Antarctic Division by Mapping Officer, Mr Henk Brolsma

20th November -5th December 2002 - Voyage 2

• Final preparation and checking and replacement of damaged equipment
• The Aurora Australis departed Hobart on the evening of 22nd November en route for Zhongshan, Davis and Mawson
• The Aurora Australis arrived of Zhongshan on the 3rd December where Chinese personal were deployed
• The Aurora Australis stopped approximately 1km off shore from Davis on the evening of the 4th December and arrived at Davis Station 5th December

6th December - 10th December 2002 - Davis Station

• Davis Resupply involving unloading and storage of food and equipment

11th December - 31st December 2002 - Davis Station

• Down loading Tide Gauge at Davis Station
• GPS measurements AUS303
• Coordination and levelling building Heights
• Coordination of control points Rauer Group
• Coordination of control points Davis

1st January - 20th January 2003 - Davis Station

• Coordination of control points Rauer Group
• Antenna Farm levelling
• Surveys at Brooks, Bandits and Watts huts

21st January - 26th January 2003 - Law Base

• Law Base Tide gauge downloading
• GPS connections to Davis

27th January - 9th February 2003 - Davis Station

• Tarbuck Crag repeater survey
• Skyline Survey Antenna Farm
• Establish new Tide Pole at Deep Lake
• Station duties loading equipment on to Ice Bird

10th February - 22nd February 2003 - Voyage 5

• Depart Davis
• Arrive Hobart 22nd February

Scope of Work

The Antarctic Mapping Officer Mr Henk Brolsma provided the scope of works within the Surveyors Brief for the 2002- 2003 field survey program (Appendix A). The following is a summation of the survey requirements for this season.

Rauer Group

• Photo control are required throughout the Rauer Group at specified locations

Davis

• Down Load Tide gauge
• Timed water level measurements
• Levelling between tide gauge benchmarks, including GPS observation
• Update station map and determine levels for all building floors, roof levels and the ground at the corner of every building
• Photo control for orthophoto at Davis and at Heideman Bay

Zhongshan

• Download tide gauge
• Timed water level measurements
• Height connection from Law Base to tide gauge bench mark
• Level between tide gauge benchmarks
• Check existing marks established for tide gauge location

Vestfold Hills

• Deep Lake depth pole
• Take pole readings
• Repair depth pole
• Lake levelling
• Location of bench marks

Taken from sections of the Report:

Introduction and Project Outline

The 2000/01 MAGIP field program for the Antarctic survey season has been scoped to continue and extend the objectives of the Mapping and GIS section of the Antarctic Division in support of the ANARE mapping program (ANAREMAGIP) as well as providing survey support for other ongoing ANARE science programs.

The field component of the program in the Davis/ Mawson area for this season was to primarily establish ground control for existing 1:30000 photography in the Larsemann Hills. Additional tasks included updating of station summaries and the retrieval of data from the tide gauges at Law Base, Mawson and Davis Stations.

The original Antarctic Division's Brief to Surveyors is included as Appendix A of this report.

David Hurd from the Survey and Geographic Information Services Group of Hydro Tasmania and Arthur Moerke, a volunteer assistant, have been the field operatives throughout the season.

The survey program consisted of the following major areas: * Photo control - Larsemann Hills * Completion of various tasks relating to the Davis tide gauge - Installation of second tide gauge at Davis - Downloading the existing tide gauge at Davis. - Timed water-level measurements. - Precise levelling connection of the tide gauge bench marks with the ARGN GPS site at Davis. * Completion of similar tasks described for the tide gauge at Davis Base with the gauge located at Law Base. * Lake levels within the Vestfold Hills. * Inspection and analysis of the reader board and pole at Deep Lake. * Providing GPS coordinates for all uncoordinated survey marks in the Vestfold Hills

Additionally other unscoped inclusions in the program included * Update of station summary for Mawson station * Engineering surveys at Davis, Zhongshan, Progress 2 and Law Base. * Completion of similar tasks described for the tide gauge at Davis Base with the gauge located at Mawson station.

Discussions with Mapping Officer Henk Brolsma prior to departure (26/9/00) agreed that the Auslig Surveyors working in the area this season would utilise their equipment to complete the height connections between the tide gauge benchmarks at Davis Station and AUS99 and to complete the level run as detailed in priority 2

Similarly with the height connection to the Law Base GPS station NMS278 and AUS99 at Davis.

The scope specified that GPS locations were to be processed relevant to the base station at Casey. It was assumed that this was an error and was intended to specify AUS99 at Davis.

Later discussions with the Auslig surveyors also lead to the extension of their involvement to include the tide gauge benchmark at Law Base and the benchmark located on the peak overlooking Law Base, C1.

Recommendations

Several recommendations can be made from the experiences over the summer.

It is understood that there is a differential GPS transmitter system at Davis, which is either not functioning or is turned off. During the stay at Davis we were advised that the expeditioners last winter spent days digging to locate a series of junction boxes that required repair. A GPS unit could be provided with accuracies capable of locating the assets in a very short time. The ability to locate these buried assets could have a significant effect on station life when considering the importance of quick repairs before anything freezes. A system for all station may be worthwhile as a safety measure.

Alternatively, the establishment of a more visible control network possibly in combination with cane line locations and the basic training of one or two expeditioners in the use of a theodolite and tape, which could stay on station, may enable relatively rapid relocation of junction boxes etc.

The tide gauge location was not possible at Mawson station because of the amount of algae/vegetation that accumulated beneath the ice. Also there was significant difficulty in accessing the gauge at Law Base because the ice had broken up but not out. It was fortunate that the weather conditions provided a pond which allowed for access. Assuming that a similar level of growth was present below the ice at Law Base prior to the break up then accessing the gauges in the future should possibly be based on a balance of growth conditions and the condition of the ice.

It is recommended that all poles related to the tide gauge at Davis be repainted annually to ensure that they are readily available when boating allows.

Considering the anticipated shutting down of the old tide gauge at Davis, the establishment of the new gauge may justify a higher priority listing. The installed mounting block for the new gauge has not been painted with anti-fouling paint and because of this will continually be subjected to weed growth. Perhaps it could be arranged so that the barge at Davis could be used to install the new gauge and a replacement mounting block in a single operation. Possibly it could be deployed adjacent to the unused, installed block.

Some form of shore mounted interface with the tide gauges would save significant amounts of time and avoid many logistical issues in regard to boat time and organisation of drivers. Law Base does not have boats or drivers so any future access to the Law Base gauge will need to either arrange for the transportation of these resources or ensure that they are in the area before the ice breaks up.

The timed water level measurements could be made more efficiently and over a longer period with the summer deployment and retrieval of some form of GPS buoy similar to what the university has been using. Alternatively the timed water level measurements using a video camera with timed exposures may be an option.

A handheld GPS with some form of computer interface would be a great asset in the location of benchmarks in the ice-free areas. Having a list of coordinates that could be loaded into a lightweight unit would allow for rapid location of marks prior to deployment of heavy equipment or confirmation of mark identification for levelling. This should be seen as highly desirable.

As mentioned in the 98/99 report the use of a digital camera for documentation purposes should be seen as essential in the antarctic environment.

Logistically, it would seem that registration in the ASAC system ensures that expeditioners are not left off lists and that equipment and resources are more easily available. While this did not represent any immoveable barriers, some form of registration may make things easier.

It seems that the levelling in the Vestfolds is given a low priority but is an ongoing project. The number of lakes levelled varies from season to season from around seventy to three or four. While the lakes are currently levelled on an opportunistic basis a suggestion may be to either place a higher priority on completing the extensive lake list or reduce the number of lakes to be levelled so that a continuous data set may be generated. I am under the impression that there has been a thesis written on the lake levels and maybe this could be used as a guide to which lakes should be levelled annually. Possible continuously levelling lakes throughout a season may also provide indications of movement throughout the season in addition to the annual snapshot. This could be particularly relevant in regard to accessing the deep lake reader board.

The rock drill battery is incapable of holding enough charge to complete more than three drill holes. It may be worthwhile to either recondition the battery or replace it.

Satellite image map of Stibbs Bay, Mac. Robertson Land, Antarctica. This map was produced for the Australian Antarctic Division by AUSLIG (now Geoscience Australia) Commercial, in Australia, in 1992. The map is at a scale of 1:100000, and was produced from Landsat TM scene WRS 137-107. It is projected on a Transverse Mercator projection, and shows glaciers/ice shelves, penguin colonies, refuge/depots, Specially Protected Areas (SPA), and gives some historical text information. The map has both geographical and UTM co-ordinates.

A series of maps were produced for the publication "Flight paths for helicopter operations in the Australian Antarctic Territory", originally published in hard copy in September 2000. These superseded a series published in 1999.

A new edition of the maps was produced in 2011.

The maps are digitally available from the SCAR Map Catalogue. See the Related URL below.

Taken from sections of the report:

Introduction This report details the survey work carried out on Voyage 4 during November and December 1998 by LANDINFO on behalf of the Australian Antarctic Division's MAGIP Field Program. The principle aim of this work was to acquire aerial photography of penguin rookeries near Australia's three Antarctic Stations and to carry out survey work associated with the Antarctic Tide Gauge Network. A number of other tasks were also carried out. This report details each task carried out and the results achieved. The following people carried out the survey work:

Richard Lemon LANDINFO Pty Ltd Roger Handsworth Antarctic Division Instrument Engineer

This report covers the fieldwork associated with the MAGIP Field Program. Some non survey aspects of the tide gauge work will be the subject of a separate report to be submitted by Roger Handsworth.

Time Frame The survey party departed Hobart at 5:15pm on Thursday 29th October 1998 aboard the Aurora Australis on Voyage 4 of the 1998-99 summer season. The survey party arrived at Casey Station via helicopter from the Aurora Australis just before 12pm (UTC+8) on Saturday 7th November. After spending a period of about 25 hours at Casey the survey team returned to the Aurora Australis at about 1pm on Sunday 8th November 1998.

The Aurora Australis arrived off Davis Station on the morning of Wednesday 18th November 1998. The survey party had access to the station from about 2.30pm (UTC+7) the same day. The survey team had four full days in which to carry out its tasks at Davis. The Aurora Australis left Davis on the morning of Sunday 22nd November on route to Sansom Island. The survey party returned to the Aurora Australis by helicopter at about 7:30pm on Sunday 22nd November.

The survey party was flown to Sansom Island at about 9:30am on Monday 23rd November and returned to the Aurora Australis at about 3:30pm the same day.

Due to problems with Aurora Australis' propeller pitch control, the survey party was flown to Mawson Station by long range helicopter on Wednesday 2nd December and arrived at about 8:30am (UTC+6). The survey team had eight full days at Mawson station before departing for the Ship on Thursday 10th December at about 11am.

The Aurora Australis returned to Fremantle at about 11am Western Standard Time (UTC+8) on Monday 28th December 1998.

Project Outline The Antarctic Division's Brief, which outlines the details of the program, is included in Appendix A. The program of work was divided into four specific sites, Casey, Davis, Mawson and Sansom Island. The work at each of the Antarctic stations was divided into two main areas of interest. These being the aerial photography of the penguin rookeries using the Linhof camera and survey work associated with the tide gauges and tide gauge bench marks. The work at Sansom Island involved the coordination of photo control points.

A list of the individual tasks and a summary of the achievements can be found at Appendix B.