Amazon Geoglyphs Spatial Analysis Dataset

DATA & Tools

Data Overview and Sources

This dataset was constructed for the Phase 2 research described in the write-up document, analyzing the spatial relationships between geoglyphs (ancient earthwork structures) in the Amazon basin and hydrological environments to identify potential geoglyph locations.

Data sources

• HydroBASINS: www.hydrosheds.org - Global watershed boundaries
• GloRiC: www.hydrosheds.org - Global River Classification
• jqjacobs.net: Archaeogeodesy Placemarks (Amazon geoglyph category extracted from Google Earth KML)

File Structure

2_1_plan_research_area/
├── scripts/
│  └── kmz_point_extractor.py   # Data extraction script (Archaeogeodesy KMZ → geoglyph coordinates)
├── data/
│  ├── amazon_basin.gpkg     # Watershed boundaries (HydroBASINS Level 3 Amazon basin)
│  ├── amazon_gloric.gpkg     # River data (GloRiC clipped to basin extent)
│  ├── amazon_grid_gloric.gpkg  # Grid statistics (0.5° grid-based river environment statistics)
│  ├── sites_geoglyphs.gpkg    # Site locations (extracted geoglyph points)
│  ├── survey_area.gpkg      # Administrative areas (Brazil/Peru/Bolivia states of interest)
│  └── focus_area.gpkg      # Analysis area (potential geoglyph survey target region)
└── plan_research_area.qgz     # QGIS project (integrated layer management)

QGIS Processing Workflow

1. Watershed Boundary Extraction (amazon_basin.gpkg)

• (1) Vector → Research Tools → Select by Attribute: Select Amazon basin by attributes
• (2) Export → Save Selected Features As: Save selected features as new layer

2. River Data Clipping (amazon_gloric.gpkg)

• (1) Vector → Research Tools → Select by Location: Select GloRiC features intersecting with amazon_basin
• (2) Export → Save Selected Features As: Save selected river data
• (3) Vector → Data Management Tools → Add Geometry Attributes: Calculate river length

3. Grid-based Statistics Generation (amazon_grid_gloric.gpkg)

• (1) Vector → Research Tools → Create Grid: Create 0.5° interval grid
• (2) Vector → Research Tools → Select by Location: Select grids contained within amazon_basin
• (3) Vector → Analysis Tools → Join Attributes by Location (Summary): Calculate river characteristics statistics by grid
  • Aggregation functions: Mean, Standard Deviation
  • Target variables: Temp_min (minimum temperature), CMI_indx (climate moisture index), Log_elev (elevation)

4. Research Area Definition (survey_area.gpkg)

• (1) Vector → Research Tools → Select by Attribute: Select Amazon areas of interest from country-level state shapefiles
• (2) Export → Save Selected Features As: Save selected states as GPKG

5. Focus Research Area (focus_area.gpkg)

• (1) Layer → Create Layer → New Shapefile Layer: Create new polygon layer
• (2) Toggle Editing: Manually create rectangular polygon for potential geoglyph survey

This dataset serves as the foundation for Phase 2 research utilizing environmental filtering and Sentinel-2 multispectral analysis to identify potential geoglyph locations.

Urban Tree Canopy Assessment. This was created using the Urban Tree Canopy Syracuse 2010 (All Layers) file HERE.The data for this map was created using LIDAR and other spatial analysis tools to identify and measure tree canopy in the landscape. This was a collaboration between the US Forest Service Northern Research Station (USFS), the University of Vermont Spatial Laboratory, and SUNY ESF. Because the full map is too large to be viewed in ArcGIS Online, this has been reduced to a vector tile layer to allow it to be viewed online. To download and view the shapefiles and all of the layers, you can download the data HERE and view this in either ArcGIS Pro or QGIS.Data DictionaryDescription source  USDA Forest ServiceList of values  Value 1 Description Tree CanopyValue 2 Description Grass/ShrubValue 3 Description Bare SoilValue 4 Description WaterValue 5 Description BuildingsValue 6 Description Roads/RailroadsValue 7 Description Other PavedField Class Alias Class Data type String Width 20Geometric objects  Feature class name landcover_2010_syracusecity Object type  complex Object count 7ArcGIS Feature Class Properties Feature class name landcover_2010_syracusecity Feature type  Simple Geometry type Polygon Has topology FALSE Feature count 7 Spatial index TRUE Linear referencing  FALSEDistributionAvailable format  Name ShapefileTransfer options  Transfer size 163.805Description Downloadable DataFieldsDetails for object landcover_2010_syracusecityType Feature Class Row count  7 Definition  UTCField FIDAlias FID Data type OID Width  4 Precision 0 Scale 0Field descriptionInternal feature number.Description source ESRIDescription of valueSequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated.Field ShapeAlias Shape Data type Geometry Width 0 Precision 0 Scale 0Field description Feature geometry.Description source  ESRIDescription of values Coordinates defining the features.Field CodeAlias Code Data type Number Width 4Overview Description  Metadata DetailsMetadata language  English Metadata character set utf8 - 8 bit UCS Transfer FormatScope of the data described by the metadata  dataset Scope name  datasetLast update 2011-06-02ArcGIS metadata properties Metadata format ArcGIS 1.0 Metadata style North American Profile of ISO19115 2003Created in ArcGIS for the item 2011-06-02 16:48:35 Last modified in ArcGIS for the item 2011-06-02 16:44:43Automatic updates Have been performed Yes Last update 2011-06-02 16:44:43Item location history  Item copied or moved 2011-06-02 16:48:35 From T:\TestSites\NY\Syracuse\Temp\landcover_2010_syracusecity To \T7500\F$\Export\LandCover_2010_SyracuseCity\landcover_2010_syracusecity

This dataset maps the location of anti-social graffiti around the University of Edinburgh's central campus. The data was collected over a 2 week period between the 19th May and the 2nd June 2014. The data was collected using a smartphone through an app called Fieldtrip GB (http://fieldtripgb.blogs.edina.ac.uk/). Multiple asset collectors were deployed to use a pre-defined data collection form which allowed users to log the following attributes: Date / Name of asset collector / Type of graffiti (image/tag/words/advert/.....) / What the graffiti was on (building/wall/lamppost/....) / What medium was used (paint/paper/chalk/....) / Density of graffiti / Photograph / Location. The data is by no means complete and realistically captured only around 50% of the graffiti in the study area. It is hoped that this dataset will be updated every 3 months to chart the distribution of graffiti over time. data was collected using the app Fieldtrip GB Once collected, data from multiple asset collectors was merged in FtGB's authoring tool and exported as a CSV file. This was then imported into QGIS and saved as a vector dataset in ESRI Shapefile format. GIS vector data. This dataset was first accessioned in the EDINA ShareGeo Open repository on 2014-06-06 and migrated to Edinburgh DataShare on 2017-02-22.

The data found in this repository contain the basis for the historical, architectural, and geo-spatial analyses discussed in the dissertation entitled: CITADEL – Computation Investigation of the Topographical and Architectural Designs in an Evolving Landscape. These data include the following categories. 1. Photogrammetric Data: all photos, calibration information, and Agisoft Metashape projects for the four sites. All post-processed 3D models of the photogrammetric process and their associated perspectives from which orthophotos were generated for the construction research. 2. Laserscan Data: all raw data and calibration information pertaining the four sites as recorded by the Riegl VZ-400 laser scanner, and all post-processed 3D models of the sites. 3. GIS Data: all historical maps that were geo-referenced in the project, the entire QGIS project file with all associated layers, all raster and vector data saved as individual files, and all shapefiles saved as individual files. 4. Graph Database: all spreadsheets containing the base information drawn from the charters provided by online and analog sources. The entire Cypher Script as well as instruction for importing the data into Neo4j. The rubric outlining how the status and administration positions of the individuals in the charters were ranked relative to one another. The cognitive development of the database’s structure represented by graph schemas over time. 5. Architectural Plans: the roombook outlining every wall, architectural element, and building phase of the four sites. All 76 architectural plans of the construction research using orthophotos of the photogrammetric models.

IMPORTANT INFORMATION: This version (V3) of the dataset is based on aerial imagery from 2024 (month depends on department) and cadastral data from January 2025. It features: updates for 27 departments: 01, 02, 04, 11, 17, 23, 24, 29, 30, 33, 34, 38, 40, 47, 56, 60, 62, 64, 66, 67, 68, 73, 80, 84, 87, 2A, 2B 7 new departments: 77, 78, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 Data for other departments is not reuploaded in this version of the dataset. Please use the version selector and goes to V2 to access older data for these departments. This dataset contains images of the rooftops of French buildings, with a large portion of the images from metropolitan France available. Ultimately, it will include around 40,000,000 images, organized by department. This dataset is related to the scientific publication "Thebault, Nerot, Govehovitch, Ménézo - A comprehensive building-wise Residential Photovoltaic system detection in heterogeneous urban and rural areas: application to French territories" Applied Energy, 2025, doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2025.125630 Aerial Land Imagery The aerial imagery used in this study comes from the Institut National de l'Information Géographique et Forestière (IGN), the French national geographic institute. These images are provided in 25 km² RGB tiles with a resolution of 20 cm. The tiles are organized by French department and are freely accessible as JP2 raster files BD Ortho - Institut National Géographique. All the imagery utilized in this project is less than four years old. The availability of department-level imagery is fundamental to our methodology, as both cadastral data processing and the analysis of CNN model predictions are performed at this geographic scale. Building Registry The location and geometry of each building were extracted from a national building registry distributed by the French Etalab project. For each French department, a single SHP file is provided, containing building geometries stored as polygon features. Data Post-Processing Both raster (aerial imagery) and vector (building registry) data were processed using PyQGIS via QGIS. The preprocessing of vector data follows several steps. First, polygons with an area smaller than 10 m² were discarded, as they typically represent small, likely non-residential buildings, which are unlikely to host PV panels. Next, a 4-meter buffer was applied to each polygon to account for the frequent spatial discrepancies between the building registry and the actual building locations. To include additional contextual information in each final image and accommodate these shifts, each polygon was replaced with its oriented rectangular bounding box, minimizing the area of the box. Finally, the X and Y coordinates and a department-based unique identifier were added to each polygon feature. Creation of Building Images Each building polygon was intersected with the corresponding aerial imagery raster to generate a cropped image. These images were saved to individual files. For example, the Herault department (34), one of the more populated regions of France, contains approximately 700,000 images, with an average image size of 120x120 pixels. Notably, 97.9% of these images are smaller than 250x250 pixels. Approximately 1.5% of buildings span multiple raster tiles, resulting in final images that do not fully capture the entire rooftop. Ce jeu de donnée contient les images des toitures des batiments Française, une grande partie des images du territoire métropolitain Français sont disponible. A terme il contiendra environ 40 000 000 images, organisées par départements. Imagerie aérienne L’imagerie aérienne utilisée dans cette étude provient de l’Institut National de l’Information Géographique et Forestière (IGN), l’institut géographique national français. Ces images sont fournies sous forme de tuiles RGB de 25 km² avec une résolution de 20 cm. Les tuiles sont organisées par département français et sont accessibles gratuitement en tant que fichiers raster JP2 (BD Ortho - Institut National Géographique). Toutes les images utilisées dans ce projet ont moins de quatre ans. La disponibilité d’images aériennes à l’échelle départementale est fondamentale pour notre méthodologie, car à la fois le traitement des données cadastrales et l’analyse des prédictions du modèle CNN sont effectués à cette échelle géographique. Registre des bâtiments La localisation et la géométrie de chaque bâtiment ont été extraites d’un registre national des bâtiments distribué par le projet Etalab en France. Pour chaque département français, un fichier SHP unique est fourni, contenant les géométries des bâtiments sous forme de polygones. Post-traitement des données Les fichiers raster (imagerie aérienne) et vectoriels (registre des bâtiments) ont été traités avec PyQGIS via QGIS. Le prétraitement des données vectorielles suit plusieurs étapes. Tout d’abord, les polygones ayant une surface inférieure à 10 m² ont été exclus, car ils représentent généralement des petits bâtiments,...

Reason for Selection Protected natural areas in urban environments provide urban residents a nearby place to connect with nature and offer refugia for some species. They help foster a conservation ethic by providing opportunities for people to connect with nature, and also support ecosystem services like offsetting heat island effects (Greene and Millward 2017, Simpson 1998), water filtration, stormwater retention, and more (Hoover and Hopton 2019). In addition, parks, greenspace, and greenways can help improve physical and psychological health in communities (Gies 2006). Urban park size complements the equitable access to potential parks indicator by capturing the value of existing parks.Input DataSoutheast Blueprint 2024 extentFWS National Realty Tracts, accessed 12-13-2023Protected Areas Database of the United States(PAD-US):PAD-US 3.0 national geodatabase -Combined Proclamation Marine Fee Designation Easement, accessed 12-6-20232020 Census Urban Areas from the Census Bureau’s urban-rural classification; download the data, read more about how urban areas were redefined following the 2020 censusOpenStreetMap data “multipolygons” layer, accessed 12-5-2023A polygon from this dataset is considered a beach if the value in the “natural” tag attribute is “beach”. Data for coastal states (VA, NC, SC, GA, FL, AL, MS, LA, TX) were downloaded in .pbf format and translated to an ESRI shapefile using R code. OpenStreetMap® is open data, licensed under theOpen Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL) by theOpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF). Additional credit to OSM contributors. Read more onthe OSM copyright page.2021 National Land Cover Database (NLCD): Percentdevelopedimperviousness2023NOAA coastal relief model: volumes 2 (Southeast Atlantic), 3 (Florida and East Gulf of America), 4 (Central Gulf of America), and 5 (Western Gulf of America), accessed 3-27-2024Mapping StepsCreate a seamless vector layer to constrain the extent of the urban park size indicator to inland and nearshore marine areas <10 m in depth. The deep offshore areas of marine parks do not meet the intent of this indicator to capture nearby opportunities for urban residents to connect with nature. Shallow areas are more accessible for recreational activities like snorkeling, which typically has a maximum recommended depth of 12-15 meters. This step mirrors the approach taken in the Caribbean version of this indicator.Merge all coastal relief model rasters (.nc format) together using QGIS “create virtual raster”.Save merged raster to .tif and import into ArcPro.Reclassify the NOAA coastal relief model data to assign areas with an elevation of land to -10 m a value of 1. Assign all other areas (deep marine) a value of 0.Convert the raster produced above to vector using the “RasterToPolygon” tool.Clip to 2024 subregions using “Pairwise Clip” tool.Break apart multipart polygons using “Multipart to single parts” tool.Hand-edit to remove deep marine polygon.Dissolve the resulting data layer.This produces a seamless polygon defining land and shallow marine areas.Clip the Census urban area layer to the bounding box of NoData surrounding the extent of Southeast Blueprint 2024.Clip PAD-US 3.0 to the bounding box of NoData surrounding the extent of Southeast Blueprint 2024.Remove the following areas from PAD-US 3.0, which are outside the scope of this indicator to represent parks:All School Trust Lands in Oklahoma and Mississippi (Loc Des = “School Lands” or “School Trust Lands”). These extensive lands are leased out and are not open to the public.All tribal and military lands (“Des_Tp” = "TRIBL" or “Des_Tp” = "MIL"). Generally, these lands are not intended for public recreational use.All BOEM marine lease blocks (“Own_Name” = "BOEM"). These Outer Continental Shelf lease blocks do not represent actively protected marine parks, but serve as the “legal definition for BOEM offshore boundary coordinates...for leasing and administrative purposes” (BOEM).All lands designated as “proclamation” (“Des_Tp” = "PROC"). These typically represent the approved boundary of public lands, within which land protection is authorized to occur, but not all lands within the proclamation boundary are necessarily currently in a conserved status.Retain only selected attribute fields from PAD-US to get rid of irrelevant attributes.Merged the filtered PAD-US layer produced above with the OSM beaches and FWS National Realty Tracts to produce a combined protected areas dataset.The resulting merged data layer contains overlapping polygons. To remove overlapping polygons, use the Dissolve function.Clip the resulting data layer to the inland and nearshore extent.Process all multipart polygons (e.g., separate parcels within a National Wildlife Refuge) to single parts (referred to in Arc software as an “explode”).Select all polygons that intersect the Census urban extent within 0.5 miles. We chose 0.5 miles to represent a reasonable walking distance based on input and feedback from park access experts. Assuming a moderate intensity walking pace of 3 miles per hour, as defined by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service’s physical activity guidelines, the 0.5 mi distance also corresponds to the 10-minute walk threshold used in the equitable access to potential parks indicator.Dissolve all the park polygons that were selected in the previous step.Process all multipart polygons to single parts (“explode”) again.Add a unique ID to the selected parks. This value will be used in a later step to join the parks to their buffers.Create a 0.5 mi (805 m) buffer ring around each park using the multiring plugin in QGIS. Ensure that “dissolve buffers” is disabled so that a single 0.5 mi buffer is created for each park.Assess the amount of overlap between the buffered park and the Census urban area using “overlap analysis”. This step is necessary to identify parks that do not intersect the urban area, but which lie within an urban matrix (e.g., Umstead Park in Raleigh, NC and Davidson-Arabia Mountain Nature Preserve in Atlanta, GA). This step creates a table that is joined back to the park polygons using the UniqueID.Remove parks that had ≤10% overlap with the urban areas when buffered. This excludes mostly non-urban parks that do not meet the intent of this indicator to capture parks that provide nearby access for urban residents. Note: The 10% threshold is a judgement call based on testing which known urban parks and urban National Wildlife Refuges are captured at different overlap cutoffs and is intended to be as inclusive as possible.Calculate the GIS acres of each remaining park unit using the Add Geometry Attributes function.Buffer the selected parks by 15 m. Buffering prevents very small and narrow parks from being left out of the indicator when the polygons are converted to raster.Reclassify the parks based on their area into the 7 classes seen in the final indicator values below. These thresholds were informed by park classification guidelines from the National Recreation and Park Association, which classify neighborhood parks as 5-10 acres, community parks as 30-50 acres, and large urban parks as optimally 75+ acres (Mertes and Hall 1995).Assess the impervious surface composition of each park using the NLCD 2021 impervious layer and the Zonal Statistics “MEAN” function. Retain only the mean percent impervious value for each park.Extract only parks with a mean impervious pixel value <80%. This step excludes parks that do not meet the intent of the indicator to capture opportunities to connect with nature and offer refugia for species (e.g., the Superdome in New Orleans, LA, the Astrodome in Houston, TX, and City Plaza in Raleigh, NC).Extract again to the inland and nearshore extent.Export the final vector file to a shapefile and import to ArcGIS Pro.Convert the resulting polygons to raster using the ArcPy Feature to Raster function and the area class field.Assign a value of 0 to all other pixels in the Southeast Blueprint 2024 extent not already identified as an urban park in the mapping steps above. Zero values are intended to help users better understand the extent of this indicator and make it perform better in online tools.Use the land and shallow marine layer and “extract by mask” tool to save the final version of this indicator.Add color and legend to raster attribute table.As a final step, clip to the spatial extent of Southeast Blueprint 2024.Note: For more details on the mapping steps, code used to create this layer is available in theSoutheast Blueprint Data Downloadunder > 6_Code. Final indicator valuesIndicator values are assigned as follows:6= 75+ acre urban park5= 50 to <75 acre urban park4= 30 to <50 acre urban park3= 10 to <30 acre urban park2=5 to <10acreurbanpark1 = <5 acre urban park0 = Not identified as an urban parkKnown IssuesThis indicator does not include park amenities that influence how well the park serves people and should not be the only tool used for parks and recreation planning. Park standards should be determined at a local level to account for various community issues, values, needs, and available resources.This indicator includes some protected areas that are not open to the public and not typically thought of as “parks”, like mitigation lands, private easements, and private golf courses. While we experimented with excluding them using the public access attribute in PAD, due to numerous inaccuracies, this inadvertently removed protected lands that are known to be publicly accessible. As a result, we erred on the side of including the non-publicly accessible lands.The NLCD percent impervious layer contains classification inaccuracies. As a result, this indicator may exclude parks that are mostly natural because they are misclassified as mostly impervious. Conversely, this indicator may include parks that are mostly impervious because they are misclassified as mostly

Dataset Summary

This dataset is developed for pixel-level classification of urban informal settlements using satellite imagery. The input data consists of Sentinel-2 imagery (2015–2016), and the ground truth is derived from a government-conducted survey available as a KML vector file, rasterized to align with the imagery.Formats include NumPy arrays and HDF5 files for easy ML integration. Intended for land‑use/land‑cover classification tasks.

🛰️ Data Source

Satellite Imagery: Sentinel‑2 L2A (Surface Reflectance) images from 2015–16, accessed via Google Earth Engine (GEE)

Ground Truth: Official government KML vector file, manually rasterized to match imagery resolution and alignment

📦 Data Format

Ground Truth Source: Government survey KML converted to raster via QGIS

Satellite Data: Sentinel‑2 L2A (Surface Reflectance) images from 2015–16

CRS & Extent: EPSG:4326

Bounding Box: Longitude: 72.7827462580 to 72.9718317340

Latitude: 18.9086328640 to 19.2638524900

Spatial Accuracy: ~±2 m (WGS84)

Raster Size: 2105 × 3954 pixels (Float64 GeoTIFF)

Formats: NumPy (.npy) and HDF5 (.h5) for image bands and per-pixel labels

Pixel size: ~10m (based on Sentinel-2 native resolution)

Label Values:

        1 → Informal/Slum

        0 → Formal/Non-slum

Data Type: float64 (image), uint8 (labels)

📜 Coordinate System Details

CRS Name: EPSG:4326 - WGS 84

Datum: World Geodetic System 1984 (EPSG:6326)

Units: Geographic (degrees)

Accuracy: ≤ 2 meters (approximate)

Type: Geographic 2D

Celestial Body: Earth

Reference: Dynamic (not plate-fixed)

Additional Details

1.Processing Pipeline KML to Raster: Ground truth polygons from KML rasterized using GDAL to match Sentinel-2 extent and resolution. Image Preprocessing: Cloud masking and band selection (R, G, B, NIR) through Google Earth Engine. Export Format: .tif downloaded, converted to .npy and .h5 using rasterio, numpy, and h5py. Alignment: Verified pixel-wise correspondence between image and label arrays.

2.Authorship & Provenance Creators: M Rupesh Kumar Yadav, Mtech, Dept of Centre of Studies in Resources Engineering, IIT Bombay. You can contact through mail rupesh32003@gmail.com, 24m0319@iitb.ac.in, or checkout github for further resources/assistance. orcid id, github, LinkedIn

3.Content & Structure Bands per sample: RGB (3 bands) + NIR (1 band) Ground truth: Per-pixel labels aligned with imagery Data splits: (e.g.) train/val/test percentages or file lists File naming conventions: Explain if files correspond to tiles, dates, etc. Example sample: Show dimensions, dtype, label values, and their mapping to classes.

4.Collection & Processing Satellite imagery: Retrieved via Google Earth Engine over 2015–16; filtered by cloud cover threshold Ground truth conversion: KML survey data rasterized using same spatial resolution and CRS Alignment: Resampled and aligned bands using GEE reprojection Preprocessing steps: Cloud masking, atmospheric correction (L2A), normalization, dtype cast to Float64 Label handling: Ensured spatial overlap and clipping; labeled invalid/missing areas as class 0 or mask

5.Usage & Intended Applications Tasks: Semantic segmentation or pixel-level land-cover mapping Ideal for: Land use change detection, agricultural mapping, validation of remote sensing models Not suitable for: Tasks needing multispectral beyond NIR, very high-res (<10 m) labeling, temporal sequence modeling

6.Limitations & Bias Temporal span: Only covers 2015–2016; may not reflect current conditions Spatial scope bias: Limited geographic area (Mumbai region) Labeling bias: Dependent on government survey accuracy and rasterization fidelity Cloud coverage: Some tiles may still contain residual cloud pixels

This dataset corresponds to land area polygons of Australian coastline and surrounding islands. It was generated from 10 m Sentinel 2 imagery from 2022 - 2024 using the Normalized Difference Water Index (NDWI) to distinguish land from water. It was estimated from composite imagery made up from images where the tide is above the mean sea level. The coastline approximately corresponds to the mean high water level. This dataset was created as part of the NESP MaC 3.17 northern Australian Reef mapping project. It was developed to allow the inshore edge of digitised fringing reef features to be neatly clipped to the land areas without requiring manual digitisation of the neighbouring coastline. This required a coastline polygon with an edge positional error of below 50 m so as to not distort the shape of small fringing reefs. We found that existing coastline datasets such as the Geodata Coast 100K 2004 and the Australian Hydrographic Office (AHO) Australian land and coastline dataset did not meet our needs. The scale of the Geodata Coast 100K 2004 was too coarse to represent small islands and the the positional error of the Australian Hydrographic Office (AHO) Australian land and coastline dataset was too high (typically 80 m) for our application as the errors would have introduced significant errors in the shape of small fringing reefs. The Digital Earth Australia Coastline (GA) dataset was sufficiently accurate and detailed however the format of the data was unsuitable for our application as the coast was expressed as disconnected line features between rivers, rather than a closed polygon of the land areas. We did however base our approach on the process developed for the DEA coastline described in Bishop-Taylor et al., 2021 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2021.112734). Adapting it to our existing Sentinel 2 Google Earth processing pipeline. The difference between the approach used for the DEA coastline and this dataset was the DEA coastline performed the tidal calculations and filtering at the pixel level, where as in this dataset we only estimated a single tidal level for each whole Sentinel image scene. This was done for computational simplicity and to align with our existing Google Earth Engine image processing code. The images in the stack were sorted by this tidal estimate and those with a tidal high greater than the mean seal level were combined into the composite. The Sentinel 2 satellite follows a sun synchronous orbit and so does not observe the full range of tidal levels. This observed tidal range varies spatially due to the relative timing of peak tides with satellite image timing. We made no accommodation for variation in the tidal levels of the images used to calculate the coastline, other than selecting images that were above the mean tide level. This means tidal height that the dataset coastline corresponds to will vary spatially. While this approach is less precise than that used in the DEA Coastline the resulting errors were sufficiently low to meet the project goals.
This simplified approach was chosen because it integrated well with our existing Sentinel 2 processing pipeline for generating composite imagery. To verify the accuracy of this dataset we manually checked the generated coastline with high resolution imagery (ArcGIS World Imagery). We found that 90% of the coastline polygons in this dataset have a horizontal position error of less than 20 m when compared to high-resolution imagery, except for isolated failure cases. During our manual checks we identified some areas where our algorithm can lead to falsely identifying land or not identifying land. We identified specific scenarios, or 'failure modes,' where our algorithm struggled to distinguish between land and water. These are shown in the image "Potential failure modes": a) The coastline is pushed out due to breaking waves (example: western coast, S2 tile ID 49KPG). b) False land polygons are created because of very turbid water due to suspended sediment. In clear water areas the near infrared channel is almost black, starkly different to the bright land areas. In very highly turbid waters the suspended sediment appears in the near infrared channel, raising its brightness to a level where it starts to overlap with the brightness of the dimmest land features. (example: Joseph Bonaparte Gulf, S2 tile ID 52LEJ). This results in turbid rivers not being correctly mapped. In version 1-1 of the dataset the rivers across northern Australia were manually corrected for these failures. c) Very shallow, gentle sloping areas are not recognised as water and the coastline is pushed out (example: Mornington Island, S2 tile ID 54KUG). Update: A second review of this area indicated that the mapped coastline is likely to be very close to the try coastline. d) The coastline is lower than the mean high water level (example: Great Keppel (Wop-pa) Island, S2 tile ID 55KHQ). Some of these potential failure modes could probably be addressed in the future by using a higher resolution tide calculation and using adjusted NDWI thresholds per region to accommodate for regional differences. Some of these failure modes are likely due to the near infrared channel (B8) being able to penetrate the water approximately 0.5 m leading to errors in very shallow areas. Some additional failures include: - Interpreting jetties as land - Interpreting oil rigs as land - Bridges being interpreted as land, cutting off rivers Methods: The coastline polygons were created in four separate steps: 1. Create above mean sea level (AMSL) composite images. 2. Calculate the Normalized Difference Water Index (NDWI) and visualise as a grey scale image. 3. Generate vector polygons from the grey scale image using a NDWI threshold. 4. Clean up and merge polygons. To create the AMSL composite images, multiple Sentinel 2 images were combined using the Google Earth Engine. The core algorithm was: 1. For each Sentinel 2 tile filter the "COPERNICUS/S2_HARMONIZED" image collection by - tile ID - maximum cloud cover 20% - date between '2022-01-01' and '2024-06-30' - asset_size > 100000000 (remove small fragments of tiles) 2. Remove high sun-glint images (see "High sun-glint image detection" for more information). 3. Split images by "SENSING_ORBIT_NUMBER" (see "Using SENSING_ORBIT_NUMBER for a more balanced composite" for more information). 4. Iterate over all images in the split collections to predict the tide elevation for each image from the image timestamp (see "Tide prediction" for more information). 5. Remove images where tide elevation is below mean sea level. 6. Select maximum of 200 images with AMSL tide elevation. 7. Combine SENSING_ORBIT_NUMBER collections into one image collection. 8. Remove sun-glint and apply atmospheric correction on each image (see "Sun-glint removal and atmospheric correction" for more information). 9. Duplicate image collection to first create a composite image without cloud masking and using the 15th percentile of the images in the collection (i.e. for each pixel the 15th percentile value of all images is used). 10. Apply cloud masking to all images in the original image collection (see "Cloud Masking" for more information) and create a composite by using the 15th percentile of the images in the collection (i.e. for each pixel the 15th percentile value of all images is used). 11. Combine the two composite images (no cloud mask composite and cloud mask composite). This solves the problem of some coral cays and islands being misinterpreted as clouds and therefore creating holes in the composite image. These holes are "plugged" with the underlying composite without cloud masking. (Lawrey et al. 2022) Next, for each image the NDWI was calculated: 1. Calculate the normalised difference using the B3 (green) and B8 (near infrared). 2. Shift the value range from between -1 and +1 to values between 1 and 255 (0 reserved as no-data value). 3. Export image as 8 bit unsigned Integer grey scale image. During the next step, we generated vector polygons from the grey scale image using a NDWI threshold: 1. Upscale image to 5 m resolution using bilinear interpolation. This was to help smooth the coastline and reduce the error introduced by the jagged pixel edges. 2. Apply a threshold to create a binary image (see "NDWI Threshold" for more information) with the value 1 for land and 2 for water (0: no data). 3. Create polygons for land values (1) in the binary image. 4. Export as shapefile. Finally, we created a single layer from the vectorised images: 1. Merge and dissolve all vector layers in QGIS. 2. Perform smoothing (QGIS toolbox, Iterations 1, Offset 0.25, Maximum node angle to smooth 180). 3. Perform simplification (QGIS toolbox, tolerance 0.00003). 4. Remove polygon vertices on the inner circle to fill out the continental Australia. 5. Perform manual QA/QC. In this step we removed false polygons created due to sun glint and breaking waves. We also removed very small features (1 – 1.5 pixel sized features, e.g. single mangrove trees) by calculating the area of each feature (in m2) and removing features smaller than 200 m2. 15th percentile composite: The composite image was created using the 15th percentile of the pixels values in the image stack. The 15th percentile was chosen, in preference to the median, to select darker pixels in the stack as these tend to correspond to images with clearer water conditions and higher tides. High sun-glint image detection: Images with high sun-glint can lead to lower quality composite images. To determine high sun-glint images, a land mask was first applied to the image to only retain water pixels. This land mask was estimated using NDWI. The proportion of the water pixels in the near-infrared and short-wave infrared bands above a sun-glint threshold was calculated. Images with a high proportion were then filtered out of the image collection.
Sun-glint removal and atmospheric correction: The Top of Atmosphere L1

CanVec contains more than 60 topographic features classes organized into 8 themes: Transport Features, Administrative Features, Hydro Features, Land Features, Manmade Features, Elevation Features, Resource Management Features and Toponymic Features. This multiscale product originates from the best available geospatial data sources covering Canadian territory. It offers quality topographic information in vector format complying with international geomatics standards. CanVec can be used in Web Map Services (WMS) and geographic information systems (GIS) applications and used to produce thematic maps. Because of its many attributes, CanVec allows for extensive spatial analysis. Related Products: Constructions and Land Use in Canada - CanVec Series - Manmade Features Lakes, Rivers and Glaciers in Canada - CanVec Series - Hydrographic Features Administrative Boundaries in Canada - CanVec Series - Administrative Features Mines, Energy and Communication Networks in Canada - CanVec Series - Resources Management Features Wooded Areas, Saturated Soils and Landscape in Canada - CanVec Series - Land Features Transport Networks in Canada - CanVec Series - Transport Features Elevation in Canada - CanVec Series - Elevation Features Map Labels - CanVec Series - Toponymic Features

Reason for SelectionProtected natural areas in urban environments provide urban residents a nearby place to connect with nature and offer refugia for some species. Because beaches in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands are open to the public, beaches also provide important outdoor recreation opportunities for urban residents, so we include beaches as parks in this indicator.Input DataSoutheast Blueprint 2023 subregions: CaribbeanSoutheast Blueprint 2023 extentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) Coastal Relief Model, accessed 11-22-2022Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) 3.0: VI, PR, and Marine Combined Fee EasementPuerto Rico Protected Natural Areas 2018 (December 2018 update): Terrestrial and marine protected areas (PACAT2018_areas_protegidasPR_TERRESTRES_07052019.shp, PACAT2018_areas_protegidasPR_MARINAS_07052019.shp) 2020 Census Urban Areas from the Census Bureau’s urban-rural classification; download the data, read more about how urban areas were redefined following the 2020 censusOpenStreetMap data “multipolygons” layer, accessed 3-14-2023A polygon from this dataset is considered a park if the “leisure” tag attribute is either “park” or “nature_reserve”, and considered a beach if the value in the “natural” tag attribute is “beach”. OpenStreetMap describes leisure areas as “places people go in their spare time” and natural areas as “a wide variety of physical geography, geological and landcover features”. Data were downloaded in .pbf format and translated ton an ESRI shapefile using R code. OpenStreetMap® is open data, licensed under the Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL) by the OpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF). Additional credit to OSM contributors. Read more on the OSM copyright page. TNC Lands - Public Layer, accessed 3-8-2023U.S. Virgin Islands beaches layer (separate vector layers for St. Croix, St. Thomas, and St. John) provided by Joe Dwyer with Lynker/the NOAA Caribbean Climate Adaptation Program on 3-3-2023 (contact jdwyer@lynker.com for more information)Mapping StepsMost mapping steps were completed using QGIS (v 3.22) Graphical Modeler.Fix geometry errors in the PAD-US PR data using Fix Geometry. This must be done before any analysis is possible.Merge the terrestrial PR and VI PAD-US layers.Use the NOAA coastal relief model to restrict marine parks (marine polygons from PAD-US and Puerto Rico Protected Natural Areas) to areas shallower than 10 m in depth. The deep offshore areas of marine parks do not meet the intent of this indicator to capture nearby opportunities for urban residents to connect with nature.Merge into one layer the resulting shallow marine parks from marine PAD-US and the Puerto Rico Protected Natural Areas along with the combined terrestrial PAD-US parks, OpenStreetMap, TNC Lands, and USVI beaches. Omit from the Puerto Rico Protected Areas layer the “Zona de Conservación del Carso”, which has some policy protections and conservation incentives but is not formally protected.Fix geometry errors in the resulting merged layer using Fix Geometry.Intersect the resulting fixed file with the Caribbean Blueprint subregion.Process all multipart polygons to single parts (referred to in Arc software as an “explode”). This helps the indicator capture, as much as possible, the discrete units of a protected area that serve urban residents.Clip the Census urban area to the Caribbean Blueprint subregion.Select all polygons that intersect the Census urban extent within 1.2 miles (1,931 m). The 1.2 mi threshold is consistent with the average walking trip on a summer day (U.S. DOT 2002) used to define the walking distance threshold used in the greenways and trails indicator. Note: this is further than the 0.5 mi distance used in the continental version of the indicator. We extended it to capture East Bay and Point Udall based on feedback from the local conservation community about the importance of the park for outdoor recreation.Dissolve all the park polygons that were selected in the previous step.Process all multipart polygons to single parts (“explode”) again.Add a unique ID to the selected parks. This value will be used to join the parks to their buffers.Create a 1.2 mi (1,931 m) buffer ring around each park using the multiring buffer plugin in QGIS. Ensure that “dissolve buffers” is disabled so that a single 1.2 mi buffer is created for each park.Assess the amount of overlap between the buffered park and the Census urban area using overlap analysis. This step is necessary to identify parks that do not intersect the urban area, but which lie within an urban matrix. This step creates a table that is joined back to the park polygons using the UniqueID.Remove parks that had ≤2% overlap with the urban areas when buffered. This excludes mostly non-urban parks that do not meet the intent of this indicator to capture parks that provide nearby access for urban residents. Note: In the continental version of this indicator, we used a threshold of 10%. In the Caribbean version, we lowered this to 2% in order to capture small parks that dropped out of the indicator when we extended the buffer distance to 1.2 miles.Calculate the GIS acres of each remaining park unit using the Add Geometry Attributes function.Join the buffer attribute table to the previously selected parks, retaining only the parks that exceeded the 2% urban area overlap threshold while buffered. Buffer the selected parks by 15 m. Buffering prevents very small parks and narrow beaches from being left out of the indicator when the polygons are converted to raster.Reclassify the polygons into 7 classes, seen in the final indicator values below. These thresholds were informed by park classification guidelines from the National Recreation and Park Association, which classify neighborhood parks as 5-10 acres, community parks as 30-50 acres, and large urban parks as optimally 75+ acres (Mertes and Hall 1995).Export the final vector file to a shapefile and import to ArcGIS Pro.Convert the resulting polygons to raster using the ArcPy Polygon to Raster function. Assign values to the pixels in the resulting raster based on the polygon class sizes of the contiguous park areas.Clip to the Caribbean Blueprint 2023 subregion.As a final step, clip to the spatial extent of Southeast Blueprint 2023. Note: For more details on the mapping steps, code used to create this layer is available in the Southeast Blueprint Data Download under > 6_Code. Final indicator valuesIndicator values are assigned as follows:6 = 75+ acre urban park5 = >50 to <75 acre urban park4 = 30 to <50 acre urban park3 = 10 to <30 acre urban park2 = 5 to <10 acre urban park1 = <5 acre urban park0 = Not identified as an urban parkKnown IssuesThis indicator does not include park amenities that influence how well the park serves people and should not be the only tool used for parks and recreation planning. Park standards should be determined at a local level to account for various community issues, values, needs, and available resources. This indicator includes some protected areas that are not open to the public and not typically thought of as “parks”, like mitigation lands, private easements, and private golf courses. While we experimented with excluding them using the public access attribute in PAD, due to numerous inaccuracies, this inadvertently removed protected lands that are known to be publicly accessible. As a result, we erred on the side of including the non-publicly accessible lands.This indicator includes parks and beaches from OpenStreetMap, which is a crowdsourced dataset. While members of the OpenStreetMap community often verify map features to check for accuracy and completeness, there is the potential for spatial errors (e.g., misrepresenting the boundary of a park) or incorrect tags (e.g., labelling an area as a park that is not actually a park). However, using a crowdsourced dataset gives on-the-ground experts, Blueprint users, and community members the power to fix errors and add new parks to improve the accuracy and coverage of this indicator in the future.Other Things to Keep in MindThis indicator calculates the area of each park using the park polygons from the source data. However, simply converting those park polygons to raster results in some small parks and narrow beaches being left out of the indicator. To capture those areas, we buffered parks and beaches by 15 m and applied the original area calculation to the larger buffered polygon, so as not to inflate the area by including the buffer. As a result, when the buffered polygons are rasterized, the final indicator has some areas of adjacent pixels that receive different scores. While these pixels may appear to be part of one contiguous park or suite of parks, they are scored differently because the park polygons themselves are not actually contiguous. The Caribbean version of this indicator uses a slightly different methodology than the continental Southeast version. It includes parks within a 1.2 mi distance from the Census urban area, compared to 0.5 mi in the continental Southeast. We extended it to capture East Bay and Point Udall based on feedback from the local conservation community about the importance of the park for outdoor recreation. Similarly, this indicator uses a 2% threshold of overlap between buffered parks and the Census urban areas, compared to a 10% threshold in the continental Southeast. This helped capture small parks that dropped out of the indicator when we extended the buffer distance to 1.2 miles. Finally, the Caribbean version does not use the impervious surface cutoff applied in the continental Southeast because the landcover data available in the Caribbean does not assess percent impervious in a comparable way.Disclaimer: Comparing with Older Indicator VersionsThere are numerous problems with using Southeast Blueprint

Reason for SelectionHardbottom provides an anchor for important seafloor habitats such as deep-sea corals, plants, and sponges. Hardbottom is also sometimes associated with chemosynthetic communities that form around cold seeps or hydrothermal vents. In these unique ecosystems, micro-organisms that convert chemicals into energy form the base of complex food webs (Love et al. 2013). Hardbottom and associated species provide important habitat structure for many fish and invertebrates (NOAA 2018). Hardbottom areas serve as fish nursery, spawning, and foraging grounds, supporting commercially valuable fisheries like snapper and grouper (NCDEQ 2016).According to Dunn and Halpin (2009), “hardbottom habitats support high levels of biodiversity and are frequently used as a surrogate for it in marine spatial planning.” Artificial reefs arealso known to provide additional habitat that is quickly colonized to provide a suite of ecosystem services commonly associated with naturally occurring hardbottom (Wu et al. 2019). We did not include active oil and gas structures as human-created hardbottom. Although they provide habitat, because of their temporary nature, risk of contamination, and contributions to climate change, they do not have the same level of conservation value as other artificial structures.Input DataSoutheast Blueprint 2024 extentSoutheast Blueprint 2024 subregionsCoral & hardbottomusSEABED Gulf of America sediments, accessed 12-14-2023; download the data; view and read more about the data on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Gulf Data Atlas (select Physical --> Marine geology --> 1. Dominant bottom types and habitats)Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Gulf of America, seismic water bottom anomalies, accessed 12-20-2023The Nature Conservancy’s (TNC)South Atlantic Bight Marine Assessment(SABMA); chapter 3 of the final report provides more detail on the seafloor habitats analysisNOAA deep-sea coral and sponge locations, accessed 12-20-2023 on the NOAA Deep-Sea Coral & Sponge Map PortalFlorida coral and hardbottom habitats, accessed 12-19-2023Shipwrecks & artificial reefsNOAA wrecks and obstructions layer, accessed 12-12-2023 on the Marine CadastreLouisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF) Artificial Reefs: Inshore Artificial Reefs, Nearshore Artificial Reefs, Offshore and Deepwater Artificial Reefs (Google Earth/KML files), accessed 12-19-2023Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) Artificial Reefs, accessed 12-19-2023; download the data fromThe Artificial Reefs Interactive Mapping Application(direct download from interactive mapping application)Mississippi Department of Marine Resources (MDMR) Artificial Reef Bureau: Inshore Reefs, Offshore Reefs, Rigs to Reef (lat/long coordinates), accessed 12-19-2023Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (ADCNR) Artificial Reefs: Master Alabama Public Reefs v2023 (.xls), accessed 12-19-2023Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC):Artificial Reefs in Florida(.xlsx), accessed 12-19-2023Defining inland extent & split with AtlanticMarine Ecoregions Level III from the Commission for Environmental Cooperation North American Environmental Atlas, accessed 12-8-20212023 NOAA coastal relief model: volumes 2 (Southeast Atlantic), 3 (Florida and East Gulf of America), 4 (Central Gulf of America), and 5 (Western Gulf of America), accessed 3-27-2024National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)Characterizing Spatial Distributions of Deep-sea Corals and Hardbottom Habitats in the U.S. Southeast Atlantic;read the final report; data shared prior to official release on 2-4-2022 by Matt Poti with the NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) (matthew.poti@noaa.gov)Predictive Modeling and Mapping of Hardbottom Seafloor Habitats off the Southeast U.S: unpublished NOAA data anddraft final report entitled Assessment of Benthic Habitats for Fisheries Managementprovided on 1-28-2021 by Matt Poti with NOAA NCCOS (matthew.poti@noaa.gov)Mapping StepsNote: Most of the mapping steps were accomplished using the graphical modeler in QGIS 3.34. Individual models were created to combine data sources and assign ranked values. These models were combined in a single model to assemble all the data sources and create a summary raster. Create a seamless vector layer to constrain the extent of the Atlantic coral and hardbottom indicator to marine and estuarine areas <1 m in elevation. This defines how far inland it extends.Merge together all coastal relief model rasters (.nc format) using the create virtual raster tool in QGIS.Save the merged raster to .tif format and import it into ArcPro.Reclassify the NOAA coastal relief model data to assign a value of 1 to areas from deep marine to 1 m elevation. Assign all other areas (land) a value of 0.Convert the raster produced above to vector using the raster to polygon tool.Clip to the 2024 Blueprint subregions using the pairwise clip tool.Hand-edit to remove terrestrial polygons (one large terrestrial polygon and the Delmarva peninsula).Dissolve the resulting data layer to produce a seamless polygon defining marine and estuarine areas <1 m in elevation.Hand-edit to select all but the main marine polygon and delete.Define the extent of the Gulf version of this indicator to separate it from the Atlantic. This split reflects the extent of the different datasets available to represent coral and hardbottom habitat in the Atlantic and Gulf, rather than a meaningful ecological transition.Use the select tool to select the Florida Keys class from the Level III marine ecoregions (“NAME_L3 = "Florida Keys"“).Buffer the “Florida Keys” Level III marine ecoregion by 2 km to extend it far enough inland to intersect the inland edge of the <1 m elevation layer.Reclassify the two NOAA Atlantic hardbottom suitability datasets to give all non-NoData pixels a value of 0. Combine the reclassified hardbottom suitability datasets to define the total extent of these data. Convert the raster extent to vector and dissolve to create a polygon representing the extent of both NOAA hardbottom datasets.Union the buffered ecoregion with the combined NOAA extent polygon created above. Add a field and use it to dissolve the unioned polygons into one polygon. This leaves some holes inside the polygon, so use the eliminate polygon part tool to fill in those holes, then convert the polygon to a line.Hand-edit to extract the resulting line between the Gulf and Atlantic.Hand-edit to use this line to split the <1 m elevation layer created earlier in the mapping steps to create the separation between the Gulf and Atlantic extent.From the BOEM seismic water bottom anomaly data, extract the following shapefiles: anomaly_confirmed_relic_patchreefs.shp, anomaly_Cretaceous.shp, anomaly_relic_patchreefs.shp, seep_anomaly_confirmed_buried_carbonate.shp, seep_anomaly_confirmed_carbonate.shp, seep_anomaly_confirmed_organisms.shp, seep_anomaly_positives.shp, seep_anomaly_positives_confirmed_gas.shp, seep_anomaly_positives_confirmed_oil.shp, seep_anomaly_positives_possible_oil.shp, seep_anomaly_confirmed_corals.shp, seep_anomaly_confirmed_hydrate.shp.To create a class of confirmed BOEM features, merge anomaly_confirmed_relic_patchreefs.shp, seep_anomaly_confirmed_organisms.shp, seep_anomaly_confirmed_corals.shp, and seep_anomaly_confirmed_hydrate.shp and assign a value of 6.To create a class of predicted BOEM features, merge the remaining extracted shapefiles and assign a value of 3.From usSEABED sediments data, use the field “gom_domnc” to extract polygons: rock (dominant and subdominant) receives a value of 2 and gravel (dominant and subdominant) receives a value of 1.From the wrecks database, extract locations having “high” and “medium” confidence (positionQuality = “high” and positionQuality = “medium”). Buffer these locations by 150 m and assign a value of 4. The buffer distance used here, and later for coral locations, follows guidance from the Army Corps of Engineers for setbacks around artificial reefs and fish havens (Riley et al. 2021).Merge artificial reef point locations from FL, AL, MS and TX. Buffer these locations by 150 m. Merge this file with the three LA artificial reef polygons and assign a value of 5.From the NOAA deep-sea coral and sponge point locations, select all points. Buffer the point locations by 150 m and assign a value of 7.From the FWC coral and hardbottom dataset polygon locations, fix geometries, reproject to EPSG=5070, then assign coral reefs a value of 7, hardbottom a value of 6, hardbottom with seagrass a value of 6, and probable hardbottom a value of 3. Hand-edit to remove an erroneous hardbottom polygon off of Matagorda Island, TX, resulting from a mistake by Sheridan and Caldwell (2002) when they digitized a DOI sediment map. This error is documented on page 6 of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council’s5-Year Review of the Final Generic Amendment Number 3.From the TNC SABMA data, fix geometries and reproject to EPSG=5070, then select all polygons with TEXT_DESC = "01. mapped hard bottom area" and assign a value of 6.Union all of the above vector datasets together—except the vector for class 6 that combines the SABMA and FL data—and assign final indicator values. Class 6 had to be handled separately due to some unexpected GIS processing issues. For overlapping polygons, this value will represent the maximum value at a given location.Clip the unioned polygon dataset to the buffered marine subregions.Convert both the unioned polygon dataset and the separate vector layer for class 6 using GDAL “rasterize”.Fill NoData cells in both rasters with zeroes and, using Extract by Mask, mask the resulting raster with the Gulf indicator extent. Adding zero values helps users better understand the extent of this indicator and to make this indicator layer perform better in online tools.Use the raster calculator to evaluate the maximum value among