County boundaries for the state of Oklahoma.

The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. County subdivisions are the primary divisions of counties and their equivalent entities for the reporting of Census Bureau data. They include legally-recognized minor civil divisions (MCDs) and statistical census county divisions (CCDs), and unorganized territories. For the 2010 Census, the MCDs are the primary governmental and/or administrative divisions of counties in 29 States and Puerto Rico; Tennessee changed from having CCDs for Census 2000 to having MCDs for the 2010 Census. In MCD States where no MCD exists or is not defined, the Census Bureau creates statistical unorganized territories to complete coverage. The entire area of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas are covered by county subdivisions. The boundaries of most legal MCDs are as of January 1, 2020, as reported through the Census Bureau's Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS). The boundaries of all CCDs, delineated in 21 states, are those as reported as part of the Census Bureau's Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP) for the 2020 Census.

County Boundaries-Oklahoma

Layers in this dataset represent Public Land Survey System subdivisions for Canadian County. Included are Townships, Sections, Quarter Sections and Government Lots. This data was created from 2019 to 2021 as part of a project to update county parcel data in partnership with ProWest & Associates (https://www.prowestgis.com/) and CEC Corporation (https://www.connectcec.com/). Corners were located to the quarter section level and additional corners were determined for the South Canadian River meanders based on the original government surveys. Quarter section corners were located using Certified Corner Records ( filed by Oklahoma licensed professional surveyors with the Oklahoma Department of Libraries where those records included coordinates. When a corner record could not be found or did not include coordinates, other interpolation methods were employed. These included connecting known corner record locations to unknown corners using data from filed subdivisions or from highway plans on record with the Oklahoma Department of Transportation. Where no corner records with coordinates were available and no interpolation methods could be used, aerial inspection was used to locate corners as the last option.Corner location accuracy varies as the method of locating the corner varies. For corners located using Certified Corner Records, accuracy is high depending on the age of the corner record and can possibly be less than 1 U.S. Foot. For corners located using interpolation methods, accuracy depends on the additional material used to interpolate the corner. In general, newer subdivisions and highway plans yield higher accuracy. For meander corners located using original government surveys, accuracy will be low due to the age of those surveys which date to the 1870's at the earliest. Additionally, corners that were located with aerials as the last available option cannot be assumed to be accurate.The data was built at the quarter section level first by connecting located corners and larger subdivisions were created from the quarter sections. For townships that extend into Grady County, township lines were only roughly located outside sections not in Canadian County.

The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. Edge refers to the linear topological primitives that make up MTDB. The All Lines Shapefile contains linear features such as roads, railroads, and hydrography. Additional attribute data associated with the linear features found in the All Lines Shapefile are available in relationship (.dbf) files that users must download separately. The All Lines Shapefile contains the geometry and attributes of each topological primitive edge. Each edge has a unique TIGER/Line identifier (TLID) value.

Current and historic population figures for counties in Oklahoma. Obtained from the Oklahoma Department of Commerce.

NFIP participation status of Oklahoma counties.

Geospatial data about Oklahoma Township/Range. Export to CAD, GIS, PDF, CSV and access via API.

County commissioner districts for the state of Oklahoma.

This dataset combines the work of several different projects to create a seamless data set for the contiguous United States. Data from four regional Gap Analysis Projects and the LANDFIRE project were combined to make this dataset. In the northwestern United States (Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Washington and Wyoming) data in this map came from the Northwest Gap Analysis Project. In the southwestern United States (Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah) data used in this map came from the Southwest Gap Analysis Project. The data for Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Virginia came from the Southeast Gap Analysis Project and the California data was generated by the updated California Gap land cover project. The Hawaii Gap Analysis project provided the data for Hawaii. In areas of the county (central U.S., Northeast, Alaska) that have not yet been covered by a regional Gap Analysis Project, data from the Landfire project was used. Similarities in the methods used by these projects made possible the combining of the data they derived into one seamless coverage. They all used multi-season satellite imagery (Landsat ETM+) from 1999-2001 in conjunction with digital elevation model (DEM) derived datasets (e.g. elevation, landform) to model natural and semi-natural vegetation. Vegetation classes were drawn from NatureServe's Ecological System Classification (Comer et al. 2003) or classes developed by the Hawaii Gap project. Additionally, all of the projects included land use classes that were employed to describe areas where natural vegetation has been altered. In many areas of the country these classes were derived from the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD). For the majority of classes and, in most areas of the country, a decision tree classifier was used to discriminate ecological system types. In some areas of the country, more manual techniques were used to discriminate small patch systems and systems not distinguishable through topography. The data contains multiple levels of thematic detail. At the most detailed level natural vegetation is represented by NatureServe's Ecological System classification (or in Hawaii the Hawaii GAP classification). These most detailed classifications have been crosswalked to the five highest levels of the National Vegetation Classification (NVC), Class, Subclass, Formation, Division and Macrogroup. This crosswalk allows users to display and analyze the data at different levels of thematic resolution. Developed areas, or areas dominated by introduced species, timber harvest, or water are represented by other classes, collectively refered to as land use classes; these land use classes occur at each of the thematic levels. Raster data in both ArcGIS Grid and ERDAS Imagine format is available for download at http://gis1.usgs.gov/csas/gap/viewer/land_cover/Map.aspx Six layer files are included in the download packages to assist the user in displaying the data at each of the Thematic levels in ArcGIS. In adition to the raster datasets the data is available in Web Mapping Services (WMS) format for each of the six NVC classification levels (Class, Subclass, Formation, Division, Macrogroup, Ecological System) at the following links. http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Class_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Subclass_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Formation_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Division_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Macrogroup_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_Ecological_Systems_Landuse/MapServer

Oklahoma Tribal Statistical Areas (OTSA) labels; January 1, 2022 vintage

Transportation, legislative, municipal, and hydrology geospatial data for Atoka County.

Oklahoma Tribal Statistical Areas (OTSA); January 1, 2022 vintage

County Level Transit Systems

Oklahoma state, county, PLSS and municipal layers.

The Canadian County Parcel Data Public View is a set of geospatial features representing the surface ownership of property in fee simple for property tax purposes as required by 68 O.S. § 2821 and other related data used to produce the parcels such as subdivision boundaries and subdivision lots. The data is created from source documentation filed with the Canadian County Clerk's Office including deeds, easements, and plats. Other data sources such as filed Certified Corner Records filed with the State of Oklahoma or highway plans produced by the Department of Transportation may be used to adjust parcel boundaries. Single legal descriptions may be split up into two or more parcels if the description crosses the boundaries of multiple taxing jurisdictions or crosses quarter section boundaries. Accuracy of parcel data can vary considerably due to a combination of factors. Most parcels and subdivision legal descriptions reference a quarter section or quarter section corner. The accuracy of the quarter section corners is discussed with Canadian County's Public Land Survey System Data. Accuracy is further enhanced or degraded by the quality of the legal description used to create the feature. Generally, legal descriptions created from surveys will have higher accuracy the newer they were created due to improvements in the field of surveying. However, it can be difficult to determine the age of a legal description as descriptions are generally reused on subsequent deeds after the description was first created. Legal descriptions can occasionally contain updated bearings and distances and may denote the updates. The Assessor's Office uses the latest available legal description for creating parcels. Legal descriptions may lack specificity such as the use of "North" instead of a measured bearing or have missing parameters such as missing bearings for curved boundaries. In these cases, parcel data accuracy can be degraded. Further, if a legal description contains a specific landmark or boundary, sometimes called a "bound", the boundary is drawn to that point or landmark regardless of whether the bearing and/or distance accurately arrive at that point. For instance, if a legal description reads "...to the south line of the southeast quarter", the boundary is drawn to the south line of the quarter section even if the bearing and distance are short of or extend beyond that point. Because parcel data must be created for the entire county regardless of the accuracy of the descriptions used to create those parcels, parcels may need to be "stretched" or "squeezed" to make them fit together. When possible, the Assessor's Office relies on the most accurate legal descriptions to set the boundaries and then fits older boundaries to them. Due to the large number of variables, parcel data accuracy cannot be guaranteed nor can the level of accuracy be described for the entire dataset. While Canadian County makes every reasonable effort to make sure parcel data is accurate, this data cannot be used in place of a survey performed by an Oklahoma Licensed Professional Land Surveyor.ParcelDataExternal - Polygons representing surface fee simple title. This parcel data formatted and prepared for public use. Some fields may be blank to comply with 22 O.S. § 60.14 & 68 O.S. § 2899.1Attributes:Account (account): The unique identifier for parcel data generated by the appraisal software used by the Assessor's Office"A" Number (a_number): An integer assigned in approximate chronological order to represent each parcel divided per quarter sectionParcel ID (parcel_id): Number used to identify parcels geographically, see Parcel Data Export Appendix A for an in-depth explanation. This identifier is not unique for all parcelsParcel Size (parcel_size): Size of the parcels, must be used in conjunction with following units fieldParcel Size Units (parcel_size_units): Units for the size of the parcel. Can be "Acres" or "Lots" for parcels within subdivisions that are valued per lotOwner's Name (owners_name): Name of the surface owner of the property in fee simple on recordMailing Information (mail_info): Extra space for the owners name if needed or trustee namesMailing Information 2 (mail_info2): Forwarded mail or "In care of" mailing informationMailing Address (mail_address): Mailing address for the owner or forwarding mailing addressMailing City (mail_city): Mailing or postal cityMailing State (mail_state): Mailing state abbreviated to standard United States Postal Service codesMailing ZIP Code (mail_zip): Mailing ZIP code as determined by the United States Postal ServiceTax Area Code (tax_area): Integer numeric code representing an area in which all the taxing jurisdictions are the same. See Parcel Data Appendix B for a more detailed description of each tax areaTax Area Description (tax_area_desc): Character string code representing the tax area. See Parcel Data Appendix B for a more detailed description of each tax areaProperty Class (prop_class): The Assessor's Office classification of each parcel by rural (no city taxes) or urban (subject to city taxes) and exempt, residential, commercial, or agriculture. This classification system is for property appraisal purposes and does not reflect zoning classifications in use by municipalities. See Parcel Data Appendix B for a more detailed description of each property classificationLegal Description (legal): A highly abbreviated version of the legal description for each parcel. This legal description may not match the most recent legal description for any given property due to administrative divisions as described above, or changes made to the property by way of recorded instruments dividing smaller parcels from the original description. This description may NOT be used in place of a true legal descriptionSubdivision Code (subdiv_code): A numeric code representing a recorded subdivision plat which contains the parcel. This value will be "0" for any parcel not part of a recorded subdivision plat.Subdivision Name (subdiv_name): The name of the recorded subdivision plat abbreviated as needed to adapt to appraisal software field limitationsSubdivision Block Number (subdiv_block): Numeric field representing the block number of a parcel. This value will be "0" if the parcel is not in a recorded subdivision plat or if the plat did not contain block numbersSubdivision Lot Number (subdiv_lot): Numeric field representing the lot number of a parcel. This value will be "0" if the parcel is not in a recorded subdivision platTownship Number (township): Numeric field representing the Public Land Survey System tier or township the parcel is located in. All townships or tiers in Canadian County are north of the base line of the Indian Meridian.Range Number (range): Numeric field representing the Public Land Survey System range the parcel is located in. All Ranges in Canadian County are west of the Indian MeridianSection Number (section): Numeric field representing the Public Land Survey System section number the parcel is located inQuarter Section Code (quarter_sec): Numeric field with a code representing the quarter section a majority of the parcel is located in, 1 = Northeast Quarter, 2 = Northwest Quarter, 3 = Southwest Quarter, 4 = Southeast QuarterSitus Address (situs): Address of the property itself if it is knownSitus City (situs_city): Name of the city the parcel is actually located in (regardless of the postal city) or "Unincorporated" if the parcel is outside any incorporated city limitsSitus ZIP Code (situs_zip): ZIP Code as determined by the United States Postal Service for the property itself if it is knownLand Value (land_val): Appraised value of the land encompassed by the parcel as determined by the Assessor's OfficeImprovement Value (impr_val): Appraised value of the improvements (house, commercial building, etc.) on the property as determined by the Assessor's OfficeManufactured Home Value (mh_val): Appraised value of any manufactured homes on the property and owned by the same owner of the land as determined by the Assessor's OfficeTotal Value (total_val): Total appraised value for the property as determined by the Assessor's OfficeTotal Capped Value (cap_val): The capped value as required by Article X, Section 8B of the Oklahoma ConstitutionTotal Assessed Value (total_assess): The capped value multiplied by the assessment ratio of Canadian County, which is 12% of the capped valueHomestead Exempt Amount (hs_ex_amount): The amount exempt from the assessed value if a homestead exemption is in placeOther Exempt Value (other_ex_amount): The amount exempt from the assessed value if other exemptions are in placeTaxable Value (taxable_val): The amount taxes are calculated on which is the total assessed value minus all exemptionsSubdivisions - Polygons representing a plat or subdivision filed with the County Clerk of Canadian County. Subdivision boundaries may be revised by vacations of the plat or subdivision or by replatting a portion or all of a subdivision. Therefore, subdivision boundaries may not match the boundaries as shown on the originally filed plat.Attributes:Subdivision Name (subdivision_name): The name of the plat or subdivisionSubdivision Number (subdivision_number): An ID for each subdivision created as a portion of the parcel ID discussed in Parcel Data Export Appendix APlat Book Number (book): The book number for the recorded documentPlat Book Page Number (page): The page number for the recorded documentRecorded Acres (acres): The number of acres within the subdivision if knownRecorded Date (recorded_date): The date the document creating the subdivision was recordedDocument URL (clerk_url): URL to download a copy of the document recorded by the Canadian County Clerk's OfficeBlocks - Polygons derived from subdivision lots representing the blocks

County bridges using beams repurposed from the Crosstown Expressway project.

This map was prepared by the Center for Spatial Analysis, University of Oklahoma. School District Boundaries are based on information provided by the Oklahoma Department of Education. All boundary questions and changes should be directed to this agency. Map scale is 1:450,000.Last Updated: 06/016/2023

The Colorado Lesser Prairie Chicken EOR isan area which encompasses all known seasonal activities within the observed range of the lesser prairie chicken. The range was mapped and edited by the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) Bird Conservation Coordinator, CPW Area 12 Wildlife Biologist (where the bird range is located) and the CPW GIS Unit. The purpose of this layer is to indicate suitable range within Colorado for the Lesser Prairie Chicken based on suitable habitat present. Data used to help map the range include area soil data, CRP property and location of known Lesser Prairie Chicken leks.The range was separated into two Ecoregions Sandsage and Shortgrass to indicate the habitat type the range falls in.As a component of the 5-Year Review of the Range-wide Conservation Plan (Van Pelt et al. 2013), the Interstate Working Group (IWG) evaluated and re-mapped (as necessary) the Estimated Occupied Range (EOR) along with the Focal Areas (CHAT 1) and Connectivity Zones (CHAT 2) across lesser prairie-chicken (LPC) range in Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, and New Mexico. The IWG used the criteria below to adjust the EOR and Focal Area and Connectivity Zone delineations. The proposed mapping revisions are based on best available science and local knowledge. The IWG presented the initial proposed mapping changes to the LPC State Implementation Teams for review in late 2019 and early 2020. Recommended changes to the range-wide EOR boundary will be included in the 10-year review of the RWP. The current 5-year Review will only recommend changes to Focal Areas (CHAT 1) and Connectivity Areas (CHAT 2) such that there is no change to the EOR+10 in the RWP (Van Pelt et. al 2013) and associated area of coverage for the LPC Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances (CCAA) (USFWS 2014). However, individual states may decide to use the updated EOR mapping for land-use recommendations and targeting habitat conservation and restoration. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) will use current biologically-based mapping for LPC conservation in Colorado. Colorado Parks and Wildlife revised LPC mapping was completed by Liza Rossi (Bird Conservation Coordinator), Jonathan Reitz (Lamar Terrestrial Biologist), and Michelle Flenner (GIS Specialist) in July 2019. CPW made adjustments to the EOR as well as Focal Areas (CHAT 1) and Connectivity Zones (CHAT 2). Mapping adjustments were based on the information below.The EOR was expanded to include the majority of documented leks, including areas in Cheyenne County not included in 2013. The northern portion of the proposed EOR would connect to Kansas and be included in the Shortgrass/CRP Mosaic Ecoregion rather than the Sand Sagebrush Ecoregion. Jonathan Reitz increased CPW lek searching effort in spring 2019 in order to help inform CHAT (Focal Area and Connectivity Zones) mapping and EOR review and revisions. He increased efforts in anticipation that the IWG would be reviewing and proposing changes to the CHAT layers and potentially EOR as part of the 5-year RWP review. During 2019 intensified lek searches, Jonathan identified multiple new leks in Cheyenne County. However, a lek in eastern and northern Cheyenne County near the Kansas state line, but outside mapped EOR, has been documented since 2015. For proposed changes in Cheyenne County, we used lek data to include areas outside of the current EOR, but which now clearly have lesser prairie-chickens. LPC leks (many of which are mixed LPC and greater prairie-chicken leks) in this area have also been located by consultants surveying for wind companies. For the proposed changes in Baca County, it is important to note that we used locations from translocated LPC, which have changed our understanding of LPC habitat use in southeastern Colorado. The translocated LPC are using CRP grasslands and portions of shortgrass and mid-grass prairie that were not originally included in the sand sagebrush prairie CHAT mapping. 2013 CHAT mapping focused largely on sandy soils and excluded many of the soils associated with shortgrass and mid-grass areas. We are proposing to reduce the EOR in Prowers County based on local knowledge of LPC use in the area. Although there is a single historic lek identified in this area, this lek was only documented during a single year and had only three birds on it.The proposed changes were presented at the Colorado LPC State Implementation Team Meeting in Lamar on November 14, 2019. The group there was supportive of the changes and thought we should reflect our biological understanding of LPC distribution rather than being confined by the 2013 RWP covered area. CPW is proposing these changes to reflect current distribution of LPC in Colorado. CPW updates Species Activity Mapping (SAM) every four years across Colorado. SAM mapping will be updated for the CPW SE Region in 2020 and the updated Colorado EOR as well as proposed CHAT 1 and CHAT 2 will be incorporated in CPW mapping. The proposed changes were reviewed and agreed to by CPW Area 12 personnel at an Area Meeting on February 5, 2020. Although CPW will move forward with this mapping for Colorado conservation efforts, formal changes to the covered area of the RWP (2013 EOR +10, Van Pelt et al. 2013) or the Range-wide Oil and Gas Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances for the Lesser Prairie-Chicken (CCAA, USFWS 2014) will be evaluated through the 10-Year Review of the RWP or an update to the CCAA). Changes to the CHAT mapping will be presented as part of the 5-year Review to the Lesser Prairie-Chicken Initiative Council. USFWS. 2014. Range-Wide Oil and Gas Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances for the Lesser Prairie-Chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus) in Colorado Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. 78 FR 76639.Van Pelt, W.E., S. Kyle, J. Pitman, D. Klute, G. Beauprez, D. Schoeling, A. Janus, J. Haufler. 2013. The Lesser Prairie-Chicken Range-wide Conservation Plan. Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. Cheyenne, Wyoming. Pp.367.Interstate Working Group Members include: Kent Fricke, chair (Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism), Liza Rossi (Colorado Parks and Wildlife), Brett Cooper (Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation), Grant Beauprez (New Mexico Department of Game and Fish), and Russell Martin (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department).