This map shows the population density in the United States in 2012. Population density is calculated by dividing the total population count of geographic feature by the area of the feature, in square miles. The area is calculated from the geometry of the geographic feature in projected coordinates. The best use of this map is at the larger scales (tracts and block groups).The data shown is from Esri's 2012 Updated Demographics. The map adds increasing level of detail as you zoom in, from state, to county, to ZIP Code, to tract, to block group data. This map shows Esri's 2012 estimates using Census 2010 geographies.The map is designed to be displayed in conjunction with the Canvas basemap with a transparency of 25%. To use it on other basemaps, try a transparency of 25-50%.Information about the USA Population Density map service used in this map is here.

Map made for VIDA storymap, http://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Cascade/index.html?appid=a55bb730dbea4a5da9c706b748b72e44, for question/section 1: "Who lives there?" showing population information in remote census tracts in New Mexico. For more information on remote tracts in this context, please see story map at above link or see details at the source feature layer:Containing Rural areas as defined by US Census 2013 urban/rural defined areas, http://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=fbd1e91ec0a54c58b6fcca8a5138c1fc. Remote is filtered to include: 'RURAL' in 2 category designation, Population of LESS THAN 5001 persons, AND % Low access low-income at 20 miles to AT LEAST 5%. Map displaying by Esri 2019 Age Dependency Ratios.

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

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

Created using ArcGIS Pro Geoprocessing tools (Create Space Time Cube, Emerging Hot Spot Analysis, and Enrich Layer) and the ArcGIS R Bridge. The EBest function, part of the spdep package was used to calculate an Empirical Bayes smoothed crime rate with 2016 population estimates. This procedure is presented as part of the R-ArcGIS Workflow Demo on GeoNet.Relative Burglary Risk is the natural log (Ln) of the kernel density of burglaries g(x) divided by the kernel density of households g(y) calculated using CrimeStat. Note: Ten months of burglary data (the minimum required) were used for this initial analysis. Also Note: These locations are one-half kilometer square polygons. It will be updated in the future as more data from the Albuquerque Police Department is obtained (see ABQ Data).Please see the web map for another similar way to present these results.More information at (http://www.unm.edu/~lspear/other_nm.html).

See alsoAFRICAN AMERICAN POPULATIONS IN NEW MEXICO, 2017https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=ac955fbb33a84e2db20f0a08279ccf9b

Habitat selection models frequently use data collected from a small geographic area over a short window of time to extrapolate patterns of relative abundance to unobserved areas or periods of time. However, these types of models often poorly predict how animals will use habitat beyond the place and time of data collection because space-use behaviors vary between individuals and are context-dependent. Here, we present a modelling workflow to advance predictive distribution performance by explicitly accounting for individual variability in habitat selection behavior and dependence on environmental context. Using global positioning system (GPS) data collected from 238 individual pronghorn, (Antilocapra americana), across 3 years in Utah, we combine individual-year-season-specific exponential habitat-selection models with weighted mixed-effects regressions to both draw inference about the drivers of habitat selection and predict space-use in areas/times where/when pronghorn were not monitored. We found a tremendous amount of variation in both the magnitude and direction of habitat selection behavior across seasons, but also across individuals, geographic regions, and years. We were able to attribute portions of this variation to season, movement strategy, sex, and regional variability in resources, conditions, and risks. We were also able to partition residual variation into inter- and intra-individual components. We then used the results to predict population-level, spatially and temporally dynamic, habitat-selection coefficients across Utah, resulting in a temporally dynamic map of pronghorn distribution at a 30x30m resolution but an extent of 220,000km2. We believe our transferable workflow can provide managers and researchers alike a way to turn limitations of traditional habitat selection models - variability in habitat selection - into a tool to understand and predict species-habitat associations across space and time.