The Digital Geologic-GIS Map of Everglades National Park and Vicinity, Florida is composed of GIS data layers and GIS tables, and is available in the following GRI-supported GIS data formats: 1.) a 10.1 file geodatabase (ever_geology.gdb), a 2.) Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) geopackage, and 3.) 2.2 KMZ/KML file for use in Google Earth, however, this format version of the map is limited in data layers presented and in access to GRI ancillary table information. The file geodatabase format is supported with a 1.) ArcGIS Pro map file (.mapx) file (ever_geology.mapx) and individual Pro layer (.lyrx) files (for each GIS data layer), as well as with a 2.) 10.1 ArcMap (.mxd) map document (ever_geology.mxd) and individual 10.1 layer (.lyr) files (for each GIS data layer). The OGC geopackage is supported with a QGIS project (.qgz) file. Upon request, the GIS data is also available in ESRI 10.1 shapefile format. Contact Stephanie O'Meara (see contact information below) to acquire the GIS data in these GIS data formats. In addition to the GIS data and supporting GIS files, three additional files comprise a GRI digital geologic-GIS dataset or map: 1.) A GIS readme file (ever_geology_gis_readme.pdf), 2.) the GRI ancillary map information document (.pdf) file (ever_geology.pdf) which contains geologic unit descriptions, as well as other ancillary map information and graphics from the source map(s) used by the GRI in the production of the GRI digital geologic-GIS data for the park, and 3.) a user-friendly FAQ PDF version of the metadata (ever_geology_metadata_faq.pdf). Please read the ever_geology_gis_readme.pdf for information pertaining to the proper extraction of the GIS data and other map files. Google Earth software is available for free at: https://www.google.com/earth/versions/. QGIS software is available for free at: https://www.qgis.org/en/site/. Users are encouraged to only use the Google Earth data for basic visualization, and to use the GIS data for any type of data analysis or investigation. The data were completed as a component of the Geologic Resources Inventory (GRI) program, a National Park Service (NPS) Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Division funded program that is administered by the NPS Geologic Resources Division (GRD). For a complete listing of GRI products visit the GRI publications webpage: For a complete listing of GRI products visit the GRI publications webpage: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/geologic-resources-inventory-products.htm. For more information about the Geologic Resources Inventory Program visit the GRI webpage: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/gri,htm. At the bottom of that webpage is a "Contact Us" link if you need additional information. You may also directly contact the program coordinator, Jason Kenworthy (jason_kenworthy@nps.gov). Source geologic maps and data used to complete this GRI digital dataset were provided by the following: Florida Geological Survey and U.S. Geological Survey. Detailed information concerning the sources used and their contribution the GRI product are listed in the Source Citation section(s) of this metadata record (ever_geology_metadata.txt or ever_geology_metadata_faq.pdf). Users of this data are cautioned about the locational accuracy of features within this dataset. Based on the source map scale of 1:675,000 and United States National Map Accuracy Standards features are within (horizontally) 342.9 meters or 1125 feet of their actual location as presented by this dataset. Users of this data should thus not assume the location of features is exactly where they are portrayed in Google Earth, ArcGIS, QGIS or other software used to display this dataset. All GIS and ancillary tables were produced as per the NPS GRI Geology-GIS Geodatabase Data Model v. 2.3. (available at: https://www.nps.gov/articles/gri-geodatabase-model.htm).
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
This dataset contains both large (A0) printable maps of the Torres Strait broken into six overlapping regions, based on a clear sky, clear water composite Sentinel 2 composite imagery and the imagery used to create these maps. These maps show satellite imagery of the region, overlaid with reef and island boundaries and names. Not all features are named, just the more prominent features. This also includes a vector map of Ashmore Reef and Boot Reef in Coral Sea as these were used in the same discussions that these maps were developed for. The map of Ashmore Reef includes the atoll platform, reef boundaries and depth polygons for 5 m and 10 m.
This dataset contains all working files used in the development of these maps. This includes all a copy of all the source datasets and all derived satellite image tiles and QGIS files used to create the maps. This includes cloud free Sentinel 2 composite imagery of the Torres Strait region with alpha blended edges to allow the creation of a smooth high resolution basemap of the region.
The base imagery is similar to the older base imagery dataset: Torres Strait clear sky, clear water Landsat 5 satellite composite (NERP TE 13.1 eAtlas, AIMS, source: NASA).
Most of the imagery in the composite imagery from 2017 - 2021.
Method:
The Sentinel 2 basemap was produced by processing imagery from the World_AIMS_Marine-satellite-imagery dataset (01-data/World_AIMS_Marine-satellite-imagery in the data download) for the Torres Strait region. The TrueColour imagery for the scenes covering the mapped area were downloaded. Both the reference 1 imagery (R1) and reference 2 imagery (R2) was copied for processing. R1 imagery contains the lowest noise, most cloud free imagery, while R2 contains the next best set of imagery. Both R1 and R2 are typically composite images from multiple dates.
The R2 images were selectively blended using manually created masks with the R1 images. This was done to get the best combination of both images and typically resulted in a reduction in some of the cloud artefacts in the R1 images. The mask creation and previewing of the blending was performed in Photoshop. The created masks were saved in 01-data/R2-R1-masks. To help with the blending of neighbouring images a feathered alpha channel was added to the imagery. The processing of the merging (using the masks) and the creation of the feathered borders on the images was performed using a Python script (src/local/03-merge-R2-R1-images.py) using the Pillow library and GDAL. The neighbouring image blending mask was created by applying a blurring of the original hard image mask. This allowed neighbouring image tiles to merge together.
The imagery and reference datasets (reef boundaries, EEZ) were loaded into QGIS for the creation of the printable maps.
To optimise the matching of the resulting map slight brightness adjustments were applied to each scene tile to match its neighbours. This was done in the setup of each image in QGIS. This adjustment was imperfect as each tile was made from a different combinations of days (to remove clouds) resulting in each scene having a different tonal gradients across the scene then its neighbours. Additionally Sentinel 2 has slight stripes (at 13 degrees off the vertical) due to the swath of each sensor having a slight sensitivity difference. This effect was uncorrected in this imagery.
Single merged composite GeoTiff:
The image tiles with alpha blended edges work well in QGIS, but not in ArcGIS Pro. To allow this imagery to be used across tools that don't support the alpha blending we merged and flattened the tiles into a single large GeoTiff with no alpha channel. This was done by rendering the map created in QGIS into a single large image. This was done in multiple steps to make the process manageable.
The rendered map was cut into twenty 1 x 1 degree georeferenced PNG images using the Atlas feature of QGIS. This process baked in the alpha blending across neighbouring Sentinel 2 scenes. The PNG images were then merged back into a large GeoTiff image using GDAL (via QGIS), removing the alpha channel. The brightness of the image was adjusted so that the darkest pixels in the image were 1, saving the value 0 for nodata masking and the boundary was clipped, using a polygon boundary, to trim off the outer feathering. The image was then optimised for performance by using internal tiling and adding overviews. A full breakdown of these steps is provided in the README.md in the 'Browse and download all data files' link.
The merged final image is available in export\TS_AIMS_Torres Strait-Sentinel-2_Composite.tif
.
Source datasets:
Complete Great Barrier Reef (GBR) Island and Reef Feature boundaries including Torres Strait Version 1b (NESP TWQ 3.13, AIMS, TSRA, GBRMPA), https://eatlas.org.au/data/uuid/d2396b2c-68d4-4f4b-aab0-52f7bc4a81f5
Geoscience Australia (2014b), Seas and Submerged Lands Act 1973 - Australian Maritime Boundaries 2014a - Geodatabase [Dataset]. Canberra, Australia: Author. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ [license]. Sourced on 12 July 2017, https://dx.doi.org/10.4225/25/5539DFE87D895
Basemap/AU_GA_AMB_2014a/Exclusive_Economic_Zone_AMB2014a_Limit.shp
The original data was obtained from GA (Geoscience Australia, 2014a). The Geodatabase was loaded in ArcMap. The Exclusive_Economic_Zone_AMB2014a_Limit layer was loaded and exported as a shapefile. Since this file was small no clipping was applied to the data.
Geoscience Australia (2014a), Treaties - Australian Maritime Boundaries (AMB) 2014a [Dataset]. Canberra, Australia: Author. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ [license]. Sourced on 12 July 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.4225/25/5539E01878302
Basemap/AU_GA_Treaties-AMB_2014a/Papua_New_Guinea_TSPZ_AMB2014a_Limit.shp
The original data was obtained from GA (Geoscience Australia, 2014b). The Geodatabase was loaded in ArcMap. The Papua_New_Guinea_TSPZ_AMB2014a_Limit layer was loaded and exported as a shapefile. Since this file was small no clipping was applied to the data.
AIMS Coral Sea Features (2022) - DRAFT
This is a draft version of this dataset. The region for Ashmore and Boot reef was checked. The attributes in these datasets haven't been cleaned up. Note these files should not be considered finalised and are only suitable for maps around Ashmore Reef. Please source an updated version of this dataset for any other purpose.
CS_AIMS_Coral-Sea-Features/CS_Names/Names.shp
CS_AIMS_Coral-Sea-Features/CS_Platform_adj/CS_Platform.shp
CS_AIMS_Coral-Sea-Features/CS_Reef_Boundaries_adj/CS_Reef_Boundaries.shp
CS_AIMS_Coral-Sea-Features/CS_Depth/CS_AIMS_Coral-Sea-Features_Img_S2_R1_Depth5m_Coral-Sea.shp
CS_AIMS_Coral-Sea-Features/CS_Depth/CS_AIMS_Coral-Sea-Features_Img_S2_R1_Depth10m_Coral-Sea.shp
Murray Island 20 Sept 2011 15cm SISP aerial imagery, Queensland Spatial Imagery Services Program, Department of Resources, Queensland
This is the high resolution imagery used to create the map of Mer.
World_AIMS_Marine-satellite-imagery
The base image composites used in this dataset were based on an early version of Lawrey, E., Hammerton, M. (2024). Marine satellite imagery test collections (AIMS) [Data set]. eAtlas. https://doi.org/10.26274/zq26-a956. A snapshot of the code at the time this dataset was developed is made available in the 01-data/World_AIMS_Marine-satellite-imagery folder of the download of this dataset.
Data Location:
This dataset is filed in the eAtlas enduring data repository at: data\custodian\2020-2029-AIMS\TS_AIMS_Torres-Strait-Sentinel-2-regional-maps. On the eAtlas server it is stored at eAtlas GeoServer\data\2020-2029-AIMS.
Change Log:
2025-05-12: Eric Lawrey
Added Torres-Strait-Region-Map-Masig-Ugar-Erub-45k-A0 and Torres-Strait-Eastern-Region-Map-Landscape-A0. These maps have a brighten satellite imagery to allow easier reading of writing on the maps. They also include markers for geo-referencing the maps for digitisation.
2025-02-04: Eric Lawrey
Fixed up the reference to the World_AIMS_Marine-satellite-imagery dataset, clarifying where the source that was used in this dataset. Added ORCID and RORs to the record.
2023-11-22: Eric Lawrey
Added the data and maps for close up of Mer.
- 01-data/TS_DNRM_Mer-aerial-imagery/
- preview/Torres-Strait-Mer-Map-Landscape-A0.jpeg
- exports/Torres-Strait-Mer-Map-Landscape-A0.pdf
Updated 02-Torres-Strait-regional-maps.qgz to include the layout for the new map.
2023-03-02: Eric Lawrey
Created a merged version of the satellite imagery, with no alpha blending so that it can be used in ArcGIS Pro. It is now a single large GeoTiff image. The Google Earth Engine source code for the World_AIMS_Marine-satellite-imagery was included to improve the reproducibility and provenance of the dataset, along with a calculation of the distribution of image dates that went into the final composite image. A WMS service for the imagery was also setup and linked to from the metadata. A cross reference to the older Torres Strait clear sky clear water Landsat composite imagery was also added to the record.
https://spdx.org/licenses/CC0-1.0.htmlhttps://spdx.org/licenses/CC0-1.0.html
Understanding historic patterns of land use and land cover change across large temporal and spatial scales is critical for developing effective biodiversity conservation management and policy. We quantify the extent and fragmentation of suitable habitat across the continental range of Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) based on present-day occurrence data and land-use variables between 850 and 2015 A.D. We found that following centuries of relative stability, over 64% (3.36 million km2) of suitable elephant habitat across Asia was lost since the year 1700, coincident with colonial-era land-use practices in South Asia and subsequent agricultural intensification in Southeast Asia. Average patch size dropped 83% from approximately 99,000–16,000 km2 and the area occupied by the largest patch decreased 83% from ~ 4 million km2 (45% of area) to 54,000 km2 (~ 7.5% of area). Whereas 100% of the area within 100 km of the current elephant range could have been considered suitable habitat in the year 1700, over half was unsuitable by 2015, driving potential conflict with people. These losses reflect long-term decline of non-forested ecosystems, exceeding estimates of deforestation within this century. Societies must consider ecological histories in addition to proximate threats to develop more just and sustainable land-use and conservation strategies. Methods Elephant occurrence data Elephant occurrence locations were initially compiled from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (https://www.gbif.org/), Movebank (https://www.movebank.org/) and published literature as well as data contributed by the authors based on direct sightings, data logged via tracking devices, and camera traps (n>5000 locations). Records were first checked visually for irrelevant points (e.g., occurrences outside natural continental range, from GBIF) and then refined to include locations representing ecosystems where the species could conceivably flourish, including but not exclusively limited to protected areas. To minimize sampling bias that could result in model overfitting, we further subsampled data to cover the full distribution as widely as possible while eliminating redundant points located within any particular landscape. For instance, thousands of potential redundancies from collar-based tracking datasets were removed by using only one randomly selected data point per individual, per population or landscape. Outliers from the remaining points were removed using Cooks’ distance to eliminate locations that could represent potential errors. The final dataset consisted of 91 occurrence points spanning the years 1996-2015 which served as training data, where all data other than from GBIF and cited literature were contributed by the authors or individuals listed in acknowledgments. QGIS and Google Earth Pro were used to initially visualize and process the data. Predictor variables We used the Land-Use Harmonization 2 (LUH2) data products 25 as our environmental variables. The LUH2 datasets provide historical reconstructions of land use and land management from 850 to 2015 CE, at annual increments. The LUH2 data products were downloaded from the University of Maryland at http://luh.umd.edu/data.shtml (LUHv2h “baseline” scenario released October 14th 2016). They contain three types of variables gridded at 0.25° x 0.25° (approximately 30 km2 at the equator): state variables describing the land-use of a grid cell for a given year, transition variables describing the changes in a grid cell from one year to the next, and management variables that describe agricultural applications such as irrigation and fertilizer use, totaling 46 variables. Of these, we selected 20 variables corresponding to all 3 types which were expected to be relevant to elephant habitat use based on knowledge of the species’ ecology 21,22,32,81. Using ArcGIS 10 (ESRI 2017) we extracted each variable between 850–1700 CE at 25-year increments, and annually between 1700–2015. We separately obtained elevation from the SRTM Digital Elevation Model. Data analysis We limited the geographic extent of all analyses to the 13 range countries in which elephants are currently found. We used MAXENT, a maximum entropy algorithm 82, to model habitat suitability using the ‘dismo’ package in R (R Core Team 2017). Resulting raster files were binarized in ArcGIS into suitable and unsuitable habitat with a pixel size of approximately 20 km2 as a cutoff threshold. As there is no commonly accepted threshold type 84, to ensure that the specific choice of threshold did not affect the observed trends, we initially used three possible thresholds: 0.237, representing ‘maximum test sensitivity plus specificity,’ 0.284 corresponding to ‘maximum training sensitivity plus specificity,’ and 0.331 representing ‘10th percentile training presence’. Unless otherwise stated, for subsequent analyses we show only results using the threshold of 0.284, where everything below this threshold was classified as ‘unsuitable’ and everything above it was classified as ‘suitable’. The resulting binary maps were re-projected using the WGS84 datum and an Albers Equal Area Conic projection. Polygons representing the known elephant range were digitized from Hedges et al. 2008 from the category labelled as “active confirmed”. We refer to the areas within these polygons as “current range,” and refer to areas outside them as “potential range”. We compared the total extent of suitable habitat within and outside the current elephant range, quantifying changes over time. Country-level analyses were conducted for all countries except Indonesia and Malaysia where the Bornean and Sumatran ranges were treated separately in recognition of the distinct subspecies in these two regions. We ranked each region based on the percentage of the current range within that region as well as the proportion of the estimated elephant population found within it, and calculated the ratio of these ranks. We calculated the total change in extent of suitable habitat by subtracting the area of suitable habitat available in 2015 from the area available in 1700, as major changes were observed within this period. We also specifically quantified the percentage of suitable habitat found within a 100 km buffer of the current range polygons in both years. We then calculated fragmentation statistics using the program FRAGSTATS v.4.2 88. These metrics characterize changes to the spatial configuration of habitat in addition to their absolute extent. We used a ‘no sampling’ strategy with the search radius and threshold distance set to 61 km (approximately three-pixel lengths) based on the movement and dispersal capacity of elephants. See associated paper for references, tables and figures.
Not seeing a result you expected?
Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.
The Digital Geologic-GIS Map of Everglades National Park and Vicinity, Florida is composed of GIS data layers and GIS tables, and is available in the following GRI-supported GIS data formats: 1.) a 10.1 file geodatabase (ever_geology.gdb), a 2.) Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) geopackage, and 3.) 2.2 KMZ/KML file for use in Google Earth, however, this format version of the map is limited in data layers presented and in access to GRI ancillary table information. The file geodatabase format is supported with a 1.) ArcGIS Pro map file (.mapx) file (ever_geology.mapx) and individual Pro layer (.lyrx) files (for each GIS data layer), as well as with a 2.) 10.1 ArcMap (.mxd) map document (ever_geology.mxd) and individual 10.1 layer (.lyr) files (for each GIS data layer). The OGC geopackage is supported with a QGIS project (.qgz) file. Upon request, the GIS data is also available in ESRI 10.1 shapefile format. Contact Stephanie O'Meara (see contact information below) to acquire the GIS data in these GIS data formats. In addition to the GIS data and supporting GIS files, three additional files comprise a GRI digital geologic-GIS dataset or map: 1.) A GIS readme file (ever_geology_gis_readme.pdf), 2.) the GRI ancillary map information document (.pdf) file (ever_geology.pdf) which contains geologic unit descriptions, as well as other ancillary map information and graphics from the source map(s) used by the GRI in the production of the GRI digital geologic-GIS data for the park, and 3.) a user-friendly FAQ PDF version of the metadata (ever_geology_metadata_faq.pdf). Please read the ever_geology_gis_readme.pdf for information pertaining to the proper extraction of the GIS data and other map files. Google Earth software is available for free at: https://www.google.com/earth/versions/. QGIS software is available for free at: https://www.qgis.org/en/site/. Users are encouraged to only use the Google Earth data for basic visualization, and to use the GIS data for any type of data analysis or investigation. The data were completed as a component of the Geologic Resources Inventory (GRI) program, a National Park Service (NPS) Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Division funded program that is administered by the NPS Geologic Resources Division (GRD). For a complete listing of GRI products visit the GRI publications webpage: For a complete listing of GRI products visit the GRI publications webpage: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/geologic-resources-inventory-products.htm. For more information about the Geologic Resources Inventory Program visit the GRI webpage: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/gri,htm. At the bottom of that webpage is a "Contact Us" link if you need additional information. You may also directly contact the program coordinator, Jason Kenworthy (jason_kenworthy@nps.gov). Source geologic maps and data used to complete this GRI digital dataset were provided by the following: Florida Geological Survey and U.S. Geological Survey. Detailed information concerning the sources used and their contribution the GRI product are listed in the Source Citation section(s) of this metadata record (ever_geology_metadata.txt or ever_geology_metadata_faq.pdf). Users of this data are cautioned about the locational accuracy of features within this dataset. Based on the source map scale of 1:675,000 and United States National Map Accuracy Standards features are within (horizontally) 342.9 meters or 1125 feet of their actual location as presented by this dataset. Users of this data should thus not assume the location of features is exactly where they are portrayed in Google Earth, ArcGIS, QGIS or other software used to display this dataset. All GIS and ancillary tables were produced as per the NPS GRI Geology-GIS Geodatabase Data Model v. 2.3. (available at: https://www.nps.gov/articles/gri-geodatabase-model.htm).