This data layer is an element of the Oregon GIS Framework. 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.

Census tracts are small, relatively permanent statistical subdivisions of a county or equivalent entity, and were defined by local participants as part of the 2020 Census Participant Statistical Areas Program. The Census Bureau delineated the census tracts in situations where no local participant existed or where all the potential participants declined to participate. The primary purpose of census tracts is to provide a stable set of geographic units for the presentation of census data and comparison back to previous decennial censuses. Census tracts generally have a population size between 1,200 and 8,000 people, with an optimum size of 4,000 people. When first delineated, census tracts were designed to be homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. The spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the density of settlement. Physical changes in street patterns caused by highway construction, new development, and so forth, may require boundary revisions. In addition, census tracts occasionally are split due to population growth, or combined as a result of substantial population decline. Census tract boundaries generally follow visible and identifiable features. They may follow legal boundaries such as minor civil division (MCD) or incorporated place boundaries in some States and situations to allow for census tract-to-governmental unit relationships where the governmental boundaries tend to remain unchanged between censuses. State and county boundaries always are census tract boundaries in the standard census geographic hierarchy. In a few rare instances, a census tract may consist of noncontiguous areas. These noncontiguous areas may occur where the census tracts are coextensive with all or parts of legal entities that are themselves noncontiguous. For the 2010 Census and beyond, the census tract code range of 9400 through 9499 was enforced for census tracts that include a majority American Indian population according to Census 2000 data and/or their area was primarily covered by federally recognized American Indian reservations and/or off-reservation trust lands; the code range 9800 through 9899 was enforced for those census tracts that contained little or no population and represented a relatively large special land use area such as a National Park, military installation, or a business/industrial park; and the code range 9900 through 9998 was enforced for those census tracts that contained only water area, no land area.

Vector polygon map data of city limits from cities across the State of Oregon containing 241 features.

City limits GIS (Geographic Information System) data provides valuable information about the boundaries of a city, which is crucial for various planning and decision-making processes. Urban planners and government officials use this data to understand the extent of their jurisdiction and to make informed decisions regarding zoning, land use, and infrastructure development within the city limits.

By overlaying city limits GIS data with other layers such as population density, land parcels, and environmental features, planners can analyze spatial patterns and identify areas for growth, conservation, or redevelopment. This data also aids in emergency management by defining the areas of responsibility for different emergency services, helping to streamline response efforts during crises..

This city limits data is available for viewing and sharing as a map in a Koordinates map viewer. This data is also available for export to DWG for CAD, PDF, KML, CSV, and GIS data formats, including Shapefile, MapInfo, and Geodatabase.

The purpose of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW or the Department) sage-grouse core area approach to conservation (OAR 635-140-0015) is ‘to address greater sage-grouse management from a conservation biology perspective that identifies the most productive populations and habitat that meets all life history needs.’ Under this overarching goal, ODFW identified and mapped sage-grouse habitats necessary to conserve 90% of Oregon’s greater sage-grouse population, defined as ‘Core Areas’, or 'core habitat'. Similarly, ODFW identified low-density habitats, which provide additional breeding, summer, and migratory habitats for Oregon’s greater sage-grouse populations. The ODFW sage-grouse core and low-density habitat map was originally delineated in 2011 as one component of the Oregon Sage-Grouse Conservation Assessment and Strategy (CAAS). Sage-grouse core areas were named in 2011, and these named core areas were adopted as Sage-Grouse Priority Areas for Conservation (PACs), a range-wide designation, by the Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Objectives Team (COT) and published in the Team’s 2013 Report. ODFW sage-grouse core habitat and sage-grouse PACs are analogous.The Goal 5 sage-grouse rule (OAR 660-023-0115) was adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) in 2015. This rule defines core and low-density sage-grouse habitat and makes specific reference to the sage-grouse map delineated by ODFW and outlined in the CAAS. The LCDC adopted the 2011 ODFW sage-grouse core and low-density habitat map into OAR 660-023-0115 as the controlling document identifying significant sage-grouse habitat. The Goal 5 sage-grouse rule (OAR 660-023-0115) defines significant sage-grouse habitat and identifies types of land use that could conflict with the conservation of Oregon's sage-grouse populations. The Rule directs counties to review applications for development permits using the mitigation hierarchy (avoidance, minimization, and mitigation; defined in OAR 635-140-0000 through 0025) and sets development thresholds that limit the amount of significant sage-grouse habitat impacted due to new large-scale development.The core and low-density habitat map was updated by ODFW in 2023 with the Department's most recent sage-grouse data and the best available science, following the methodology outlined in the CAAS (see 'Sage-Grouse Core Area Habitat Categorization and Conservation Recommendations using ODFW Fish and Wildlife Habitat Mitigation Policy'). During the final phases of the update process, the draft map was reviewed by ODFW District Biologists, cooperating agency biologists, elected county officials or their representatives in counties with sage-grouse habitat, Oregon's Sage-Grouse Local Implementation Teams (LITs), conservation partners, and the public to ground-truth and refine the boundaries at a 1:10,000 scale. The updated core and low-density map adopted by the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission on 15 December 2023. Updated sage-grouse PAC boundaries were delineated within the final approved core habitat and appropriately named. The Department expects the LCDC to adopt the updated (2023) sage-grouse core and low-density habitat map as part of the Goal 5 sage-grouse rule (OAR 660-023-0115), thereby replacing the deprecated 2011 map. Until the updated (2023) sage-grouse habitat map is adopted by the LCDC to replace the 2011 map, the 2011 map will continue to apply for OAR 660-023-0115.Spatial ReferenceProjected Coordinate System: NAD 1983 Oregon Statewide Lambert (Intl Feet)Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicWKID: 2992Authority: EPSGLinear Unit: Feet (0.3048)Geographic Coordinate System: NAD 1983WKID: 4269Authority: EPSGAngular Unit: Degree (0.0174532925199433)Datum: D North American 1983

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.

This is a dataset download, not a document. The Open button will start the download.This data layer is an element of the Oregon GIS Framework. Oregon Fish Habitat Distribution. These data describe areas of suitable habitat believed to be used currently or historically by native or non-native fish populations. The term "currently" is defined as within the past five reproductive cycles. Historical habitat includes suitable habitat that fish no longer access and will not access in the foreseeable future without human intervention. This information is based on sampling, the best professional opinion of Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife or other natural resources agency staff biologists or modeling (see the fhdBasis field). Due to natural variations in run size, water conditions, or other environmental factors, some habitats identified may not be used annually. These data now comply with the Oregon Fish Habitat Distribution Data Standard that was adopted by the Oregon Geographic Information Council in April 2020. The Standard document can be found at: https://www.oregon.gov/geo/standards/OregonFishHabitatDistributionDataStandard_v4.pdf. Historical habitat distribution data are within the scope of the standard and are identified via the habitat use (fhdUseType) attribute. Historical habitats are only identified outside of currently accessible habitat and are not comprehensive. Data representing current habitat for anadromous and resident salmonid species are generally more comprehensive than data for non-game and non-native fish species. All datasets are subject to update as new information becomes available. Key features of the Oregon Fish Habitat Distribution Data include: species, run, life history, habitat use, origin, production, the basis for each record, originator name, originator entity and reference. Habitat distribution data are mapped at a 1:24,000 scale statewide and are based on the National Hydrography dataset. The data are made available as GIS files in both shapefile and ESRI geodatabase format. The data were developed over an extensive time period ranging from 1996 to 2022. The data are now managed on the National Hydrography Dataset and have been synchronized to December 2021 NHD geometry.Procedures_Used: These data were originally created through a process where 1:100,000 scale fish habitat distribution data (current as of 2001) were plotted on 1:24,000 scale USGS quadrangle maps and then provided to ODFW and other natural resources agency field staff. Based on survey data, supporting documentation, and the best professional judgment of the field biologists, different types (spawning, rearing, migration, etc.) of species specific habitat distribution (see the fhdUseTy field) were marked on the maps with colored pens. Additional attributes such as source contributors, agencies and the basis of the data were also collected. These hardcopy data were then digitized by ODFW GIS staff and stored as event tables based on the PNW River Reach files at 1:100,000 scale. Habitat locations identified outside of the 1:100,000 scale stream network were captured as upstream points associated with 1:24,000 scale streams. Beginning in 2007 and ending in 2008, the data were migrated to events associated with the Pacific Northwest Framework Hydrography 1:24,000 scale stream network. All habitat distribution records are now in a single, consistent linear event format. Revisions: The first 1:100,000 scale version of the data was completed in 1996. Significant revisions at that scale were also made in 1999. The 1:24K Mapping Project occurred between 2001 - 2003 and data were published in 2004. Data were migrated to events mapped on the 1:24,000 PNW Framework hydrography in 2007 and 2008. Significant revisions since 2004 include additions of anadromous habitat in the upper Deschutes and upper North

The 2019 cartographic boundary KMLs 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 generalized boundaries for counties and equivalent entities are as of January 1, 2010.

Quantitative assessment of spatial patterns of all human uses of the oceans and their cumulative effects is needed for implementing ecosystem-based management, marine protected areas, and ocean zoning. Researchers applied methods developed to map cumulative impacts globally to the California Current using more comprehensive and higher-quality data for 25 human activities and 19 marine ecosystems. They first surveyed experts in six sub-regions of the California Current to explore geographic variation in the effects of threats. A workshop was held to use decision theory to evaluate the tradeoffs of using expert opinion to assess threats and associated impacts. Data on ecosystems and threats were gathered at resolutions of approximately one square kilometer. By synthesizing information and inferences regarding anticipated impacts of threats, project participants developed a spatially-explicit understanding of the distribution and magnitude of human threats in the California Current. The analysis indicates where protection and threat mitigation are most needed in the California Current and reveals that coastal ecosystems near high human population density and the continental shelves off Oregon and Washington are the most heavily impacted. Climate change is the top threat, and impacts from multiple threats are ubiquitous. Remarkably, these results were highly spatially correlated with the global results for this region (R2=.92), suggesting that the global model provides guidance to areas without local data or resources to conduct similar regional-scale analyses. This dataset contains raster layers for the 25 human activities and 19 ecosystems used to build the cumulative impact model in the California Current marine ecosystems. A zip file for all impacts, a zip file for all ecosystems, and a raster of the final model are included along with the individual impacts and ecosystems raster layers. For more information on methods, see Halpern et al, Mapping cumulative human impacts to California Current marine ecosystems. Conservation Letters, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2009.00058.x