General point locations of federal (US Army Corps of Engineers) dredge projects along the Massachusetts marine coastline; historical to 16 December 1998; includes navigational channels, anchorages, harbors, beaches and dikes. Feature attributes include hyperlinks to respective USACE project descriptions, histories, and maps.

Initializing forest landscape models (FLMs) to simulate changes in tree species composition requires accurate fine-scale forest attribute information mapped contiguously over large areas. Nearest-neighbor imputation maps have high potential for use as the initial condition within FLMs, but the tendency for field plots to be imputed over large geographical distances results in species frequently mapped outside of their home ranges, which is problematic. We developed an approach for evaluating and selecting field plots for imputation based on their similarity in feature-space, their species composition, and their geographical distance between source and imputation to produce a map that is appropriate for initializing an FLM. We applied this approach to map 13m ha of forest throughout the six New England states (Rhode Island, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Maine). The map itself is a .img raster file of FIA plot CN numbers. To access FIA data from this map, one has to link the mapcodes in this map to FIA data supplied by USDA FIA database (https://apps.fs.usda.gov/fia/datamart/datamart.html). Due to plot confidentiality and integrity concerns, pixels containing FIA plots were always assigned to some other plot than the actual one found there.

The U.S. Geological Survey has conducted geologic mapping to characterize the sea floor offshore of Massachusetts. The mapping was carried out using a Simrad Subsea EM 1000 Multibeam Echo Sounder on the Frederick G. Creed on four cruises conducted between 1994 and 1998. The mapping was conducted in cooperation with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and with support from the Canadian Hydrographic Service and the University of New Brunswick.

The long-term goal of this mapping effort is to produce high-resolution geologic maps and a Geographic Information System (GIS) project that presents images and grids of bathymetry, shaded relief bathymetry, and backscatter intensity data from these surveys that will serve the needs of research, management and the public.

These data were automated to provide an accurate high-resolution historical shoreline of Biddeford Pool, Maine, to Cape Ann, Mass. suitable as a geographic information system (GIS) data layer. These data are derived from shoreline maps that were produced by the NOAA National Ocean Service including its predecessor agencies which were based on an office interpretation of imagery and/or field...

The U.S. Geological Survey has conducted geologic mapping to characterize the sea floor offshore of Massachusetts. The mapping was carried out using a Simrad Subsea EM 1000 Multibeam Echo Sounder on the Frederick G. Creed on four cruises conducted between 1994 and 1998. The mapping was conducted in cooperation with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and with support from the Canadian Hydrographic Service and the University of New Brunswick.

The long-term goal of this mapping effort is to produce high-resolution geologic maps and a Geographic Information System (GIS) project that presents images and grids of bathymetry, shaded relief bathymetry, and backscatter intensity data from these surveys that will serve the needs of research, management and the public.

The data presented here have been published on paper maps of Quadrangle 2 in western Massachusetts Bay at a scale of 1:25,000 (USGS Map I-2732A, B and C).

This map is designed for use in ArcGIS Navigator and contains data for the U.S. Northeast Region supporting map display, geocoding and routing. The U.S. Northeast Region includes Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
The data is from ArcGIS StreetMap Premium North America 2025 Release 1 (based on TomTom 2024.12 vintage).

Note: Only the latest version of the map is available for download. See the 
Navigator map coverage 
and click on the map to access details (including file size, updated date, and data source).

These data were collected from May 2005 to June 2006 for the use in the CZM "Coastal Public Access Sites" data viewer. The points create a hyperlink for field photos taken from South of Boston to the Rhode Island border. Sites include all those in the MassGIS Protected and Recreational Open Space GIS data layer as well as all other publicly assessable land that leads to the shore including public rights-of-way and landings. These data were used for ground truthing rights-of-way and landings that not present in the MassGIS Protected and Recreational Open Space GIS datalayer. The GPS unit used was Trimble GeoExplorer III and the software to used to process the data was Pathfinder Office 3.00.

Geologic-Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data related to Appalachian National Scenic Trail is delivered in a data package Zip (.zip) file. These data are a product of the NPS Geologic Resources Inventory (GRI) program, which is funded by the Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Division and administered by the NPS Geologic Resources Division (GRD).Geologic-GIS data for Appalachian National Scenic Trail consists of geologic map footprints of available maps that intersect the 7.5’ quadrangles of interest (QOI) for the park. Each footprint depicts the respective map’s extent and contains information conveying map name, scale, publication year and type. The footprints are joined using a footprint ID as a key to a standalone table that contains a formal map reference, a Boolean showing if GIS data is available, additional map notes, and a URL link t o where the map can be downloaded, if available. Geologic-GIS map footprints are provided in ESRI file geodatabase format supported by a Pro 3.X map (.mapx) file. The Pro 3.x map displays the footprint data in thematic layers categorizing and symbolizing the footprints by publication year, map type, and scale.

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.

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.

Connectivity describes how well a landscape facilitates or impedes the movement of animals. Maximizing connectivity is a common management goal, especially for large mammals like moose (Alces americanus americanus) that occupy large home ranges and have the capacity to move long distances. Moose in the northeastern US (encompassing the states of Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Maine, Connecticut, and Rhode Island) represent a management priority and are expected to decline due to the near-term impacts of climate change and landscape development that will alter the distribution of habitats across the region. Large-scale maps of moose connectivity are unavailable but would provide an important resource for management planning to improve moose persistence in the landscape. We used an omnidirectional circuit-theory approach to model and map moose connectivity across the six states in the northeastern US. The approach involved integrating a distribution map developed from an occurrence model and a resistance map developed from expert opinion data, along with home range information and current landcover maps to depict expected movement flow. The data release includes 1 CSV file that contains expert-elicited responses regarding moose occurrence and resistence to movement. The release also includes 6 rasters (1 and 2) the Omniscape inputs files named "source.tif" and "resistance.tif"; (3) the connectivity raster using a 0-threshold "source" input named "cumulative_current_map_raw0.tif"; (4) the Omniscape connectivity raster using a 0.2-threshold "source" input named "cumulative_current_map_raw02.tif"; (5) and (6) the respective normalized connectivity rasters, named "normalized_map_crop0.tif" and "normalized_map_crop02.tif". The latter two rasters can be categorized into flow categories if desired: impeded (areas with less current than in a resistance-free landscape), diffuse (areas with as much current as a resistance-free landscape), intensified (areas with more current than a resistance-free landscape), and channelized (areas with much more current than a resistance-free landscape).

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.

CSO attributes and _location information are from a variety of datasets for each state: Connecticut: Beginning with GIS data compiled by the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (“CT DEEP”) and displayed on their CSO Right-to-Know site (https://portal.ct.gov/DEEP/Municipal-Wastewater/Combined-Sewer-Overflows-Right-to-Know), EPA filtered the data for the purposes of this map and made corrections based upon updated information available in EPA’s files. EPA’s map only displays municipalities with CSO outfalls, whereas CT DEEP’s map includes municipalities with CSO-related bypasses at their Wastewater Treatment Facilities (but no Combined Sewer Collection System CSO outfalls). EPA’s map only displays CSO outfalls – the point at which CSOs are discharged to the receiving water - whereas CT DEEP’s map includes CSO regulators (the structure through which wastewater and stormwater exits the conveyance pipe towards the Wastewater Treatment Facility). Maine: Service containing both facility and outfall locations permitted under the Maine Pollution Elimination System (MEPDES) and administered by the Maine Department of Environmental Protection (MEDEP). The data has been collected using multiple methods over 2 decades under the direction of the Maine DEP GIS Unit. All _location data was quality checked by MEDEP MEPDES Inspectors and GIS Unit staff in 2018. Massachusetts: Attribute and location information from a combination of MassDEP CSOs(https://mass-eoeea.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=08c0019270254f0095a0806b155abcde) (metadata - https://mass-eoeea.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=0262b339c2c74213bdaaa15adccc0e96) and NPDES permits(https://www.epa.gov/npdes-permits/massachusetts-final-individual-npdes-permits). New Hampshire: Active CSO outfalls collected from NH NPDES permits(https://www.epa.gov/npdes-permits/new-hampshire-final-individual-npdes-permits). EPA made corrections based upon updated information available in EPA’s files. Rhode Island: RI CSO Outfall Point Features. The outfalls managed by the Narragansett Bay Commission are downloadable from a GIS file through RIGIS (Rhode Island Geographic Information System https://www.rigis.org/datasets/nbc-sewer-overflows/explore?location=41.841121%2C-71.414224%2C13.57&showTable=true). Data was intended for use in utility facility engineering structure inventory. Last updated: 2019. Downloaded: 11/19/2021. Metadata (https://www.arcgis.com/sharing/rest/content/items/2108bab269df47f988e59c18a556f37d/info/metadata/metadata.xml?format=default&output=html) Vermont: Attribute and location information from Vermont Open Geodata Poral (https://geodata.vermont.gov/datasets/VTANR::stormwater-infrastructure-point-features/explore?location=43.912839%2C-72.414150%2C9.29). Point, line, and polygon data was collected and compiled through field observations, municipal member knowledge, ortho-photo interpretation, digitization of georeferenced town plans and record drawings, and state stormwater permit plans. Accuracy of all data is for planning purposes and field verification is at the user’s discretion. VT Layer: Stormwater Infrastructure (Point Features) Metadata (https://www.arcgis.com/sharing/rest/content/items/5c9875ee609c4586bd569dbacb2d92f1/info/metadata/metadata.xml?format=default&output=html).

This ArcGIS Map Package contains information on brook trout occupancy in the southern portion of the brook trout range (PA and south). Fish sample data from a number of state and federal agencies/organizations were used to define patches for brook trout as groups of occupied contiguous catchment polygons from the National Hydrography Dataset Plus Version 1 (NHDPlusV1) catchment GIS layer. After defining patches, NHDPlusV1 catchments were assigned occupancy codes. Then state and federal agencies reviewed patches and codes to verify data accuracy. A similar effort is currently being conducted by the Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture to develop occupancy data for the remainder of the brook trout range including states of New York, Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Ohio. This ArcGIS Map Package contains data for the entire southern portion of the brook trout range with preset symbology that displays brook trout occupancy. The Map Package also includes the same information clipped into seperate layers for each state. State information is provided for the convenience of users that are interested in data for only a particular state. Additional layers displaying state boundaries, quadrangle maps, and the brook trout range are also included as spatial references.

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

Abstract:

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management (CZM) and Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) have developed a mapping methodology utilizing high-resolution coastal elevation data (LIDAR) and aerial photography to map the top of coastal banks along predominantly ocean-facing shorelines of Massachusetts. These data present the occurrence and distribution of the top of coastal banks circa 2005-2006 that lie within the same geographic extent covered by the CZM-USGS Massachusetts Shoreline Change Mapping and Analysis Project, 2013 Update.

Purpose:

These data were created to provide a historical position benchmark from which change in the position of the top of coastal banks can be monitored. The data were developed for research and general planning to provide advisory information on the location of coastal banks, and in combination with other data sets, highlight those areas in Massachusetts that are potentially at risk from coastal erosion, and have the potential to affect existing and future land use. The features shown have been determined by remote sensing, and thus should not be used for project planning or permitting. They do not necessarily represent nor should they be used as boundary delineation under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act.

Attribute Accuracy Report:

The attribute data were checked for valid values and logical consistency.

Logical Consistency Report:

All vector data are presumed to be topologically clean based on a validation of relevant topology rule(s) and visual inspection. No duplicate features exist. The data were visually inspected for missing and misplaced features.

Completeness Report:

This dataset contains all coastal banks that fall within the footprint of the Massachusetts Shoreline Change Mapping and Analysis Project, 2013 Update (i.e., ocean-facing shoreline of Massachusetts). Within that defined spatial extent, presence/absence of coastal banks using 2005-2006 LIDAR was guided by the Top of Current Coastal Bank (2013-2014) dataset for Massachusetts. This dataset represents one temporal delineation of coastal bank and is part of the larger Massachusetts Coastal Bank Erosion Hazard Mapping project.

These data differ from Top of Current Coastal Bank (2013-2014) in that coastal bank type representing rocky ledges (e.g., mapped coastal bank comprised of elevated rocky cliffs, headlands, or ledges) were omitted. These rocky ledge areas were not found to be eroding based on visual inspection and are not well captured by the delineation methodology utilized in the Massachusetts Coastal Bank Erosion Hazard Mapping project. These data have not been ground truthed.

Horizontal Positional Accuracy:

A positional accuracy report was not conducted for these data. The 2005-2007 US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Topo/Bathy Lidar: Maine, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island dataset, from which the top of coastal bank features were largely derived (2005), reports a horizontal positional accuracy of 3 meters. The 2006 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Topographic Lidar: Bristol and Plymouth Counties, Massachusetts dataset, from which the top of coastal bank features are partially derived, reports horizontal accuracy of 1 meter.

This map layer contains the shallowest principal aquifers of the conterminous United States, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, portrayed as polygons. The map layer was developed as part of the effort to produce the maps published at 1:2,500,000 in the printed series "Ground Water Atlas of the United States". The published maps contain base and cultural features not included in these data. This is a replacement for the July 1998 map layer called Principal Aquifers of the 48 Conterminous United States.

Census Designated Places are the statistical counterparts of incorporated places. CDPs are settled concentrations of population that are identifiable by name but not legally incorporated under the laws of the state in which the CDPs are located. The Census Bureau defines CDP boundaries in cooperation with local partners as part of the PSAP. CDP boundaries usually coincide with visible features or the boundary of an adjacent Incorporated Place or another legal entity boundary. CDPs have no legal status and do not have officials elected to serve traditional municipal functions. CDP boundaries may change from one decennial census to the next with changes in the settlement pattern; a CDP with the same name as in an earlier census does not necessarily have the same boundary. There are no population size requirements for CDPs. In the nine states of the Northeast (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont) as well as Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin, a CDP may represent a densely settled concentration of population within a town or township; in other instances, a CDP represents an entire town or township.Additional resources to obtain Place geography is listed below.Consolidated City Shapefile – https://www2.census.gov/geo/tiger/TIGER2020/CONCITY/Place Shapefile (Includes Incorporated Place and Census Designated Place) – https://www2.census.gov/geo/tiger/TIGER2020/PLACE/

This dataset consists of cartographic data in digital line graph (DLG) form for the northeastern states (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont). Information is presented on two planimetric base categories, political boundaries and administrative boundaries, each available in two formats: the topologically structured format and a simpler format optimized for graphic display. These DGL data can be used to plot base maps and for various kinds of spatial analysis. They may also be combined with other geographically referenced data to facilitate analysis, for example the Geographic Names Information System.

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

County Subdivisions are the primary divisions of counties and equivalent entities. They include census county divisions, census subareas, minor civil divisions, and unorganized territories, and can be classified as either legal or statistical. Legal entities are termed minor civil divisions and statistical entities can be either census county divisions, census subareas, or unorganized territories.

Minor Civil Divisions (MCDs) are the primary governmental or administrative divisions of a county in many states (parishes in Louisiana) and of the county equivalents in Puerto Rico and the Island Areas. MCDs in the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas represent many different kinds of legal entities with a wide variety of governmental and/or administrative functions. MCDs include areas variously designated as barrios, barrios-pueblo, boroughs, charter townships, commissioner districts, election districts, election precincts, gores, grants, locations, magisterial districts, parish governing authority districts, plantations, purchases, reservations, supervisor's districts, towns, and townships. The Census Bureau recognizes MCDs in 29 states, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas. The District of Columbia has no primary divisions, and is considered equivalent to an MCD for statistical purposes.

In some states, all or some incorporated places are not part of any MCD; these places are termed independent places. In nine states-Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, and Wisconsin-all incorporated places are independent places. In other states, incorporated places are part of, or dependent within, the MCDs in which they are located, or the pattern is mixed-some incorporated places are independent of MCDs and others are included within one or more MCDs.

In New York and Maine, American Indian reservations (AIRs) generally exist outside the jurisdiction of any town (MCD) and thus also serve as the equivalent of MCDs for purposes of data presentation.

In states with legal MCDs, the Census Bureau assigns a default FIPS county subdivision code of 00000 and ANSI code of eight zeroes in some coastal, territorial sea, and Great Lakes water where county subdivisions do not extend into the Great Lakes or out to the three-mile limit.

Census County Divisions (CCDs) are areas delineated by the Census Bureau in cooperation with state, tribal, and local officials for statistical purposes. CCDs have no legal function and are not governmental units. CCD boundaries usually follow visible features and usually coincide with census tract boundaries. The name of each CCD is based on a place, county, or well-known local name that identifies its location.

Census Subareas are statistical subdivisions of boroughs, city and boroughs, municipalities, and census areas, the statistical equivalent entities for counties in Alaska. The state of Alaska and the Census Bureau cooperatively delineate the census subareas to serve as the statistical equivalents of MCDs.

Unorganized Territories (UTs) are defined by the Census Bureau in nine MCD states where portions of counties or equivalent entities are not included in any legally established MCD or incorporated place. The Census Bureau recognizes such separate pieces of territory as one or more separate county subdivisions for census purposes. It assigns each unorganized territory a descriptive name, followed by the designation "UT".