Imagine you are sailing down a wide river and observing the changing landscape on either side. Fields give way to forests, tributaries and streams flow into the river, bridges cross over, and you know that one side of the river is managed by a government agency, while the other is subdivided into land ownership parcels of different sizes. The connectedness, adjacency, and proximity between these features can be summed up in one word: topology.Geodatabase topology allows you to define the spatial relationships you want protected in your GIS data. By doing so, no matter how much you edit, twist, bend, or squash your feature data, things stay connected, adjacent, or within the areas they belong. This course is designed to get you started with geodatabase topology.After completing this course, you will be able to:Use visual inspection and topology to identify and correct errors.Build a geodatabase topology.Choose and apply topology rules.

The establishment of a BES Multi-User Geodatabase (BES-MUG) allows for the storage, management, and distribution of geospatial data associated with the Baltimore Ecosystem Study. At present, BES data is distributed over the internet via the BES website. While having geospatial data available for download is a vast improvement over having the data housed at individual research institutions, it still suffers from some limitations. BES-MUG overcomes these limitations; improving the quality of the geospatial data available to BES researches, thereby leading to more informed decision-making. BES-MUG builds on Environmental Systems Research Institute's (ESRI) ArcGIS and ArcSDE technology. ESRI was selected because its geospatial software offers robust capabilities. ArcGIS is implemented agency-wide within the USDA and is the predominant geospatial software package used by collaborating institutions. Commercially available enterprise database packages (DB2, Oracle, SQL) provide an efficient means to store, manage, and share large datasets. However, standard database capabilities are limited with respect to geographic datasets because they lack the ability to deal with complex spatial relationships. By using ESRI's ArcSDE (Spatial Database Engine) in conjunction with database software, geospatial data can be handled much more effectively through the implementation of the Geodatabase model. Through ArcSDE and the Geodatabase model the database's capabilities are expanded, allowing for multiuser editing, intelligent feature types, and the establishment of rules and relationships. ArcSDE also allows users to connect to the database using ArcGIS software without being burdened by the intricacies of the database itself. For an example of how BES-MUG will help improve the quality and timeless of BES geospatial data consider a census block group layer that is in need of updating. Rather than the researcher downloading the dataset, editing it, and resubmitting to through ORS, access rules will allow the authorized user to edit the dataset over the network. Established rules will ensure that the attribute and topological integrity is maintained, so that key fields are not left blank and that the block group boundaries stay within tract boundaries. Metadata will automatically be updated showing who edited the dataset and when they did in the event any questions arise. Currently, a functioning prototype Multi-User Database has been developed for BES at the University of Vermont Spatial Analysis Lab, using Arc SDE and IBM's DB2 Enterprise Database as a back end architecture. This database, which is currently only accessible to those on the UVM campus network, will shortly be migrated to a Linux server where it will be accessible for database connections over the Internet. Passwords can then be handed out to all interested researchers on the project, who will be able to make a database connection through the Geographic Information Systems software interface on their desktop computer. This database will include a very large number of thematic layers. Those layers are currently divided into biophysical, socio-economic and imagery categories. Biophysical includes data on topography, soils, forest cover, habitat areas, hydrology and toxics. Socio-economics includes political and administrative boundaries, transportation and infrastructure networks, property data, census data, household survey data, parks, protected areas, land use/land cover, zoning, public health and historic land use change. Imagery includes a variety of aerial and satellite imagery. See the readme: http://96.56.36.108/geodatabase_SAL/readme.txt See the file listing: http://96.56.36.108/geodatabase_SAL/diroutput.txt

The Digital Geologic Units of Great Smoky Mountains National Park and Vicinity, Tennessee and North Carolina consists of geologic units mapped as area (polygon) features. The data were completed as a component of the Geologic Resources Evaluation (GRE) program, a National Park Service (NPS) Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) funded program that is administered by the NPS Geologic Resources Division (GRD). The data were captured, grouped and attributed as per the NPS GRE Geology-GIS Geodatabase Data Model v. 1.3.1. (available at: https://science.nature.nps.gov/im/inventory/geology/GeologyGISDataModel.cfm). The data layer is available as a feature class in a 9.1 personal geodatabase (grsm_geology.mdb). Attributed geologic contact lines that define the geologic unit polygons are present within the Geologic Contacts (GRSMGLGA) data layer. The Geologic Units (GRSMGLG) GIS data layer is also available as a coverage export (.E00) file (GRSMGLG.E00), and as a shapefile (.SHP) file (GRSMGLG.SHP). Each GIS data format has an ArcGIS 9.1 layer (.LYR) file (GRSMGLG_GDB.LYR (geodatabase feature class), GRSMGLG_COV.LYR (coverage), GRSMGLG_SHP.LYR (shapefile) with map symbology that is included with the GIS data. See the Distribution Information section for additional information on data acquisition. The GIS data projection is NAD83, UTM Zone 17N. That data is within the area of interest of Great Smoky Mountains National Park. This dataset is just one component of the Digital Geologic Map of Great Smoky Mountains National Park and Vicinity, Tennessee and North Carolina. The data layers (feature classes) that comprise the Digital Geologic Map of Great Smoky Mountains National Park and Vicinity, Tennessee and North Carolina include: GRSMAML (Alteration and Metamorphic Lines), GRSMATD (Geologic Attitude and Observation Points), GRSMFLD (Folds), GRSMFLT (Faults), GRSMGLG (Geologic Units), GRSMGLGA (Geologic Contacts), GRSMGPT (Point Geologic Features), GRSMGSL (Geologic Sample Localities), GRSMMIN (Mine Point Features), GRSMSEC (Cross Section Lines), GRSMSUR (Surficial Geologic Units), GRSMSURA (Surficial Contacts) and GRSMSYM (Fault Symbology). There are three additional ancillary map components, the Geologic Unit Information (GRSMGLG1) Table, the Source Map Information (GRSMMAP) Table and the Map Help File (GRSM_GEOLOGY.HLP). Refer to the NPS GRE Geology-GIS Geodatabase Data Model v. 1.3.1 (available at: https://science.nature.nps.gov/im/inventory/geology/GeologyGISDataModel.cfm) for detailed data layer (feature class) and table specifications including attribute field parameters, definitions and domains, and implemented topology rules and relationship classes.The corresponding Integration of Resource Management Applications (IRMA) NPS Data Store reference is Great Smoky Mountains National Park Geology.

(Link to Metadata) The BNDHASH dataset depicts Vermont villages, towns, counties, Regional Planning Commissions (RPC), and LEPC (Local Emergency Planning Committee) boundaries. It is a composite of generally 'best available' boundaries from various data sources (refer to ARC_SRC and SRC_NOTES attributes). However, this dataset DOES NOT attempt to provide a legally definitive boundary. The layer was originally developed from TBHASH, which was the master VGIS town boundary layer prior to the development and release of BNDHASH. By integrating village, town, county, RPC, and state boundaries into a single layer, VCGI has assured vertical integration of these boundaries and simplified maintenance. BNDHASH also includes annotation text for town, county, and RPC names. BNDHASH includes the following feature classes: 1) VILLAGES = Vermont villages 2) TOWNS = Vermont towns 3) COUNTIES = Vermont counties 4) RPCS = Vermont's Regional Planning Commissions 5) LEPC = Local Emergency Planning Committee boundaries 6) VTBND = Vermont's state boundary The master BNDHASH layer is managed as ESRI geodatabase feature dataset by VCGI. The dataset stores villages, towns, counties, and RPC boundaries as seperate feature classes with a set of topology rules which binds the features. This arrangement assures vertical integration of the various boundaries. VCGI will update this layer on an annual basis by reviewing records housed in the VT State Archives - Secretary of State's Office. VCGI also welcomes documented information from VGIS users which identify boundary errors. NOTE - VCGI has NOT attempted to create a legally definitive boundary layer. Instead the idea is to maintain an integrated village/town/county/rpc boundary layer which provides for a reasonably accurate representation of these boundaries (refer to ARC_SRC and SRC_NOTES). BNDHASH includes all counties, towns, and villages listed in "Population and Local Government - State of Vermont - 2000" published by the Secretary of State. BNDHASH may include changes endorsed by the Legislature since the publication of this document in 2000 (eg: villages merged with towns). Utlimately the Vermont Secratary of State's Office and the VT Legislature are responsible for maintaining information which accurately describes the location of these boundaries. BNDHASH should be used for general mapping purposes only. * Users who wish to determine which boundaries are different from the original TBHASH boundaries should refer to the ORIG_ARC field in the BOUNDARY_BNDHASH_LINE (line featue with attributes). Also, updates to BNDHASH are tracked by version number (ex: 2003A). The UPDACT field is used to track changes between versions. The UPDACT field is flushed between versions.

description: This dataset contains point features representing the approximate location of tax parcels contained in County Assessor tax rolls. Individual county data was integrated into this statewide publication by the Arkansas Geographic Information Office (AGIO). The Computer Aided Mass Appraisal (CAMA) systems maintained in each county are used to populate the database attributes for each centroid feature. The entity attribute structure conforms to the Arkansas Cadastral Mapping Standard. The digital cadastral data is provided as a publication version that only represents a snapshot of the production data at the time it was received from the county. Published updates may be made to counties throughout the year. These will occur after new data is digitized or updates to existing data are finished. Production versions of the data exist in the various counties where daily and weekly updates occur. Users should consult the BEGIN_DATE attribute column to determine the age of the data for a given county. This column reflects the date when AGIO received the data from the county. Only parcels with an associated Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal (CAMA) record are provided. This means a CAMA record may exist, but no point geometry or vice-versa. Cadastral data is dynamic by its nature; therefore it is impossible for any county to ever be considered complete. The data is NOT topologically enforced. As a statewide integrator, AGIO publishes the data but does not make judgment calls about where points or polygon lines are meant to be located. Therefore each county data set is published without topology rules being enforced. GIS Technicians use best practices such as polygon closure and vertex snapping, however, topology is not built for each county. Users should be aware, by Arkansas Law (15-21-504 2 B) digital cadastral data does not represent legal property boundary descriptions, nor is it suitable for boundary determination of the individual parcels included in the cadastre. Users requiring a boundary determination should consult an Arkansas Registered Land Surveyor (http://www.arkansas.gov/pels/search/search.php) on boundary questions. The digital cadastral data is intended to be a graphical representation of the tax parcel only. Just because a county is listed does NOT imply the data represents county wide coverage. AGIO worked with each county to determine a level of production that warranted the data was ready to be published. For example, in some counties only the north part of the county was covered or in other cases only rural parcels are covered and yet in others only urban parcels. The approach is to begin incremental publishing as production blocks are ready, even though a county may not have county wide coverage. Each case represents a significant amount of data that will be useful immediately. Users should consult the BEGIN_DATE attribute column to determine the age of the data for a given county. This date reflects when the data was received from the county. Digital cadastral data users should be aware the County Assessor Mapping Program adopted a phased approach for developing cadastral data. Phase One includes the production of a parcel centroid for each parcel that bears the attributes prescribed by the state cadastral mapping standard. Phase Two includes the production of parcel polygon geometry and bears the standard attributes. The Arkansas standard closely mirrors the federal Cadastral Core Data Standard established by the Federal Geographic Data Committee, Subcommittee for Cadastral Data. Counties within this file include: Arkansas, Ashley, Baxter, Boone, Carroll, Chicot, Clark, Clay, Columbia, Conway, Craighead, Crawford, Cross, Desha, Faulkner, Franklin, Hot Spring, Howard, Izard, Jackson, Jefferson, Lafayette, Lincoln, Little River, Logan, Lonoke, Madison, Mississippi, Montgomery, Nevada, Newton, Perry, Pike, Poinsett, Polk, Pope, Pulaski, Randolph, Saline, Sebastian, Stone, Van Buren, Washington and White.; abstract: This dataset contains point features representing the approximate location of tax parcels contained in County Assessor tax rolls. Individual county data was integrated into this statewide publication by the Arkansas Geographic Information Office (AGIO). The Computer Aided Mass Appraisal (CAMA) systems maintained in each county are used to populate the database attributes for each centroid feature. The entity attribute structure conforms to the Arkansas Cadastral Mapping Standard. The digital cadastral data is provided as a publication version that only represents a snapshot of the production data at the time it was received from the county. Published updates may be made to counties throughout the year. These will occur after new data is digitized or updates to existing data are finished. Production versions of the data exist in the various counties where daily and weekly updates occur. Users should consult the BEGIN_DATE attribute column to determine the age of the data for a given county. This column reflects the date when AGIO received the data from the county. Only parcels with an associated Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal (CAMA) record are provided. This means a CAMA record may exist, but no point geometry or vice-versa. Cadastral data is dynamic by its nature; therefore it is impossible for any county to ever be considered complete. The data is NOT topologically enforced. As a statewide integrator, AGIO publishes the data but does not make judgment calls about where points or polygon lines are meant to be located. Therefore each county data set is published without topology rules being enforced. GIS Technicians use best practices such as polygon closure and vertex snapping, however, topology is not built for each county. Users should be aware, by Arkansas Law (15-21-504 2 B) digital cadastral data does not represent legal property boundary descriptions, nor is it suitable for boundary determination of the individual parcels included in the cadastre. Users requiring a boundary determination should consult an Arkansas Registered Land Surveyor (http://www.arkansas.gov/pels/search/search.php) on boundary questions. The digital cadastral data is intended to be a graphical representation of the tax parcel only. Just because a county is listed does NOT imply the data represents county wide coverage. AGIO worked with each county to determine a level of production that warranted the data was ready to be published. For example, in some counties only the north part of the county was covered or in other cases only rural parcels are covered and yet in others only urban parcels. The approach is to begin incremental publishing as production blocks are ready, even though a county may not have county wide coverage. Each case represents a significant amount of data that will be useful immediately. Users should consult the BEGIN_DATE attribute column to determine the age of the data for a given county. This date reflects when the data was received from the county. Digital cadastral data users should be aware the County Assessor Mapping Program adopted a phased approach for developing cadastral data. Phase One includes the production of a parcel centroid for each parcel that bears the attributes prescribed by the state cadastral mapping standard. Phase Two includes the production of parcel polygon geometry and bears the standard attributes. The Arkansas standard closely mirrors the federal Cadastral Core Data Standard established by the Federal Geographic Data Committee, Subcommittee for Cadastral Data. Counties within this file include: Arkansas, Ashley, Baxter, Boone, Carroll, Chicot, Clark, Clay, Columbia, Conway, Craighead, Crawford, Cross, Desha, Faulkner, Franklin, Hot Spring, Howard, Izard, Jackson, Jefferson, Lafayette, Lincoln, Little River, Logan, Lonoke, Madison, Mississippi, Montgomery, Nevada, Newton, Perry, Pike, Poinsett, Polk, Pope, Pulaski, Randolph, Saline, Sebastian, Stone, Van Buren, Washington and White.

Every published digital survey is designated as either ‘Final’, or ‘Provisional’, depending upon its status in a peer review process. Final surveys are peer reviewed with extensive quality control methods to confirm that field attributes reflect the most detailed and specific land-use classification available, following the standard DWR Land Use Legendspecific to the survey year. Data sets are considered ‘final’ following the reconciliation of peer review comments and confirmation by the originating Regional Office. During final review, individual polygons are evaluated using a combination of aerial photointerpretation, satellite image multi-spectral data and time series analysis, comparison with other sources of land use data, and general knowledge of land use patterns at the local level.Provisional data sets have been reviewed for conformance with DWR’s published data record format, and for general agreement with other sources of land use trends. Comments based on peer review findings may not be reconciled, and no significant edits or changes are made to the original survey data.The 2013 Alpine County land use survey data was developed by the State of California, Department of Water Resources (DWR) through its Division of Integrated Regional Water Management (DIRWM) and Division of Statewide Integrated Water Management (DSIWM). Land use boundaries were digitized and land use data were gathered by staff of DWR’s North Central Region using extensive field visits and aerial photography. The land uses that were mapped were detailed agricultural land uses, and lesser detailed urban and native vegetation land uses. The land use data went through standard quality control procedures before final processing. Quality control procedures were performed jointly by staff at DWR’s DSIWM headquarters, under the leadership of Jean Woods, and North Central Region, under the supervision of Kim Rosmaier. This data was developed to aid DWR’s ongoing efforts to monitor land use for the main purpose of determining current and projected water uses. The associated data are considered DWR enterprise GIS data, which meet all appropriate requirements of the DWR Spatial Data Standards, specifically the DWR Spatial Data Standards version 2.1, dated March 9, 2016. DWR makes no warranties or guarantees - either expressed or implied - as to the completeness, accuracy, or correctness of the data. DWR neither accepts nor assumes liability arising from or for any incorrect, incomplete, or misleading subject data. Comments, problems, improvements, updates, or suggestions should be forwarded to gis@water.ca.gov. This data represents a land use survey of Alpine County conducted by the California Department of Water Resources, North Central Regional Office staff. Land use field boundaries were digitized with ArcGIS 10.0 and 10.2 using 2012 U.S.D.A National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) one-meter imagery as the base. Agricultural fields were delineated by following actual field boundaries instead of using the centerlines of roads to represent the field borders. Field boundaries were reviewed and updated using 2013 Landsat 8 imagery. Field boundaries were not drawn to represent legal parcel (ownership) boundaries, and are not meant to be used as parcel boundaries. The field work for this survey was conducted during September 2013. Images, land use boundaries and ESRI ArcMap software were loaded onto laptop computers that were used as the field data collection tools. Staff took these laptops into the field and virtually all agricultural fields were visited to identify the land use. Global positioning System (GPS) units connected to the laptops were used to confirm the surveyor's location with respect to the fields. Land use codes were digitized in the field using dropdown selections from defined domains. Upon completion of the survey, a Python script was used to convert the data table into the standard land use format. ArcGIS geoprocessing tools and topology rules were used to locate errors for quality control. The primary focus of this land use survey is mapping agricultural fields. Urban residences and other urban areas were delineated using aerial photo interpretation. Some urban areas may have been missed, especially in forested areas. Rural residential land use was delineated by drawing polygons to surround houses and other buildings along with some of the surrounding land. These footprint areas do not represent the entire footprint of urban land. Sources of irrigation water were identified for general areas and occasionally supplemented by information obtained from landowners. Water source information was not collected for each field in the survey, so the water source listed for a specific agricultural field may not be accurate. After quality control procedures were completed, the data was finalized. The positional accuracy of the digital line work, which is based upon the orthorectified NAIP imagery, is approximately 6 meters. The land use attribute accuracy for agricultural fields is high, because almost every delineated field was visited by a surveyor. The accuracy is 95 percent because some errors may have occurred. Possible sources of attribute errors are: a) Human error in the identification of crop types, b) Data entry errors.

Every published digital survey is designated as either ‘Final’, or ‘Provisional’, depending upon its status in a peer review process. Final surveys are peer reviewed with extensive quality control methods to confirm that field attributes reflect the most detailed and specific land-use classification available, following the standard DWR Land Use Legendspecific to the survey year. Data sets are considered ‘final’ following the reconciliation of peer review comments and confirmation by the originating Regional Office. During final review, individual polygons are evaluated using a combination of aerial photointerpretation, satellite image multi-spectral data and time series analysis, comparison with other sources of land use data, and general knowledge of land use patterns at the local level.Provisional data sets have been reviewed for conformance with DWR’s published data record format, and for general agreement with other sources of land use trends. Comments based on peer review findings may not be reconciled, and no significant edits or changes are made to the original survey data.The 2013 Tuolumne County land use survey data was developed by the State of California, Department of Water Resources (DWR) through its Division of Integrated Regional Water Management (DIRWM) and Division of Statewide Integrated Water Management (DSIWM). Land use boundaries were digitized and land use data were gathered by staff of DWR’s North Central Region using extensive field visits and aerial photography. Land use polygons in agricultural areas were mapped in greater detail than areas of urban or native vegetation. Quality control procedures were performed jointly by staff at DWR’s DSIWM headquarters, under the leadership of Jean Woods, and North Central Region, under the supervision of Kim Rosmaier. This data was developed to aid DWR’s ongoing efforts to monitor land use for the main purpose of determining current and projected water uses. The associated data are considered DWR enterprise GIS data, which meet all appropriate requirements of the DWR Spatial Data Standards, specifically the DWR Spatial Data Standards version 2.1, dated March 9, 2016. DWR makes no warranties or guarantees - either expressed or implied - as to the completeness, accuracy, or correctness of the data. DWR neither accepts nor assumes liability arising from or for any incorrect, incomplete, or misleading subject data. Comments, problems, improvements, updates, or suggestions should be forwarded to gis@water.ca.gov. This data represents a land use survey of Tuolumne County conducted by the California Department of Water Resources, North Central Regional Office staff. Land use field boundaries were digitized with ArcGIS 10.0 and 10.2 using 2012 U.S.D.A National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) one-meter imagery as the base. Agricultural fields were delineated by following actual field boundaries instead of using the centerlines of roads to represent the field borders. Field boundaries were reviewed and updated using 2013 Landsat 8 imagery. Field boundaries were not drawn to represent legal parcel (ownership) boundaries, and are not meant to be used as parcel boundaries. The field work for this survey was conducted during June 2013. Images, land use boundaries and ESRI ArcMap software were loaded onto laptop computers that were used as the field data collection tools. Staff took these laptops into the field and virtually all agricultural fields were visited to identify the land use. Global positioning System (GPS) units connected to the laptops were used to confirm the surveyor's location with respect to the fields. Land use codes were digitized in the field using dropdown selections from defined domains. Upon completion of the survey, a Python script was used to convert the data table into the standard land use format. ArcGIS geoprocessing tools and topology rules were used to locate errors for quality control. The primary focus of this land use survey is mapping agricultural fields. Urban residences and other urban areas were delineated using aerial photo interpretation. Some urban areas may have been missed, especially in forested areas. Rural residential land use was delineated by drawing polygons to surround houses and other buildings along with some of the surrounding land. These footprint areas do not represent the entire footprint of urban land. Sources of irrigation water were identified for general areas and occasionally supplemented by information obtained from landowners. Water source information was not collected for each field in the survey, so the water source listed for a specific agricultural field may not be accurate. Before final processing, standard quality control procedures were performed jointly by staff at DWR’s North Central Region, and at DSIWM headquarters under the leadership of Jean Woods. Senior Land and Water Use Supervisor. After quality control procedures were completed, the data was finalized. The positional accuracy of the digital line work, which is based upon the orthorectified NAIP imagery, is approximately 6 meters. The land use attribute accuracy for agricultural fields is high, because almost every delineated field was visited by a surveyor. The accuracy is 95 percent because some errors may have occurred. Possible sources of attribute errors are: a) Human error in the identification of crop types, b) Data entry errors.

This map is designated as Final.Land-Use Data Quality ControlEvery published digital survey is designated as either ‘Final’, or ‘Provisional’, depending upon its status in a peer review process. Final surveys are peer reviewed with extensive quality control methods to confirm that field attributes reflect the most detailed and specific land-use classification available, following the standard DWR Land Use Legendspecific to the survey year. Data sets are considered ‘final’ following the reconciliation of peer review comments and confirmation by the originating Regional Office. During final review, individual polygons are evaluated using a combination of aerial photointerpretation, satellite image multi-spectral data and time series analysis, comparison with other sources of land use data, and general knowledge of land use patterns at the local level.Provisional data sets have been reviewed for conformance with DWR’s published data record format, and for general agreement with other sources of land use trends. Comments based on peer review findings may not be reconciled, and no significant edits or changes are made to the original survey data.The 2012 Sonoma County land use survey data was developed by the State of California, Department of Water Resources (DWR) through its Division of Integrated Regional Water Management (DIRWM) and Division of Statewide Integrated Water Management (DSIWM). Land use boundaries were digitized and land use data was gathered by staff of DWR’s North Central Region using extensive field visits and aerial photography. Land use polygons in agricultural areas were mapped in greater detail than areas of urban or native vegetation. Quality control procedures were performed jointly by staff at DWR’s DSIWM headquarters, under the leadership of Jean Woods, and North Central Region, under the supervision of Kim Rosmaier. This data was developed to aid DWR’s ongoing efforts to monitor land use for the main purpose of determining current and projected water uses. The associated data are considered DWR enterprise GIS data, which meet all appropriate requirements of the DWR Spatial Data Standards, specifically the DWR Spatial Data Standards version 2.1, dated March 9, 2016. DWR makes no warranties or guarantees - either expressed or implied - as to the completeness, accuracy, or correctness of the data. DWR neither accepts nor assumes liability arising from or for any incorrect, incomplete, or misleading subject data. Comments, problems, improvements, updates, or suggestions should be forwarded to gis@water.ca.gov. This data represents a land use survey of Sonoma County conducted by the California Department of Water Resources, North Central Regional Office staff. The field work for this survey was conducted during July - September 2012 by staff visiting each field and noting what was grown. The county was divided into five survey areas using major road as centerlines and other geographic features for boundaries. The county was surveyed with two teams. The linework was heads up digitized in ArcGIS 10.0 with 2010 National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) one-meter imagery as the base. Field Boundaries were reviewed with ArcGIS 10.2 and NAIP 2012 imagery when it became available. The data was recombined after it was finished. The Virtual Basic Landuse Attributor was used for the survey and to start the post survey process; after converting to ArcGIS 10.2, the domain file geodatabase structure was used to attribute and help finish facilitating the post survey process. Tables were run through a Python script to put the data in the standard landuse format. ArcGIS geoprocessing tools and topology rules were used to locate errors and for quality control and assurance. Horse pastures were designated either S2 or S6. The special condition 'G' was used to denote vineyards that had sprinklers for frost protection rather than representing a cover crop as stated in the February 2009 Standard Land Use Legend used for this survey. Field Boundaries were not drawn to represent legal parcel (ownership) boundaries, or meant to be used as parcel boundaries. Images and land use boundaries were loaded onto laptop computers that were used as the field data collection tools. GPS units connected to the laptops were used to confirm surveyor's location with respect to the fields. Staff took these laptops into the field and virtually all the areas were visited to positively identify the land use. Land use codes were digitized in the field on laptop computers using ESRI ArcMAP software, version 10.0. Before final processing, standard quality control procedures were performed jointly by staff at DWR’s North Central Region, and at DSIWM headquarters under the leadership of Jean Woods. Senior Land and Water Use Supervisor. After quality control procedures were completed, the data was finalized. The positional accuracy of the digital line work, which is based upon the orthorectified NAIP imagery, is approximately 6 meters. The land use attribute accuracy for agricultural fields is high, because almost every delineated field was visited by a surveyor. The accuracy is 95 percent because some errors may have occurred. Possible sources of attribute errors are: a) Human error in the identification of crop types, b) Data entry errors.

Every published digital survey is designated as either ‘Final’, or ‘Provisional’, depending upon its status in a peer review process. Final surveys are peer reviewed with extensive quality control methods to confirm that field attributes reflect the most detailed and specific land-use classification available, following the standard DWR Land Use Legendspecific to the survey year. Data sets are considered ‘final’ following the reconciliation of peer review comments and confirmation by the originating Regional Office. During final review, individual polygons are evaluated using a combination of aerial photointerpretation, satellite image multi-spectral data and time series analysis, comparison with other sources of land use data, and general knowledge of land use patterns at the local level.Provisional data sets have been reviewed for conformance with DWR’s published data record format, and for general agreement with other sources of land use trends. Comments based on peer review findings may not be reconciled, and no significant edits or changes are made to the original survey data.The 2014 Santa Clara County land use survey data was developed by the State of California, Department of Water Resources (DWR) through its Division of Integrated Regional Water Management (DIRWM) and Division of Statewide Integrated Water Management (DSIWM). Land use boundaries were digitized and land use data were gathered by staff of DWR’s North Central Region using extensive field visits and aerial photography. Land use polygons in agricultural areas were mapped in greater detail than areas of urban or native vegetation. Quality control procedures were performed jointly by staff at DWR’s DSIWM headquarters, under the leadership of Jean Woods, and North Central Region, under the supervision of Kim Rosmaier. This data was developed to aid DWR’s ongoing efforts to monitor land use for the main purpose of determining current and projected water uses. The associated data are considered DWR enterprise GIS data, which meet all appropriate requirements of the DWR Spatial Data Standards, specifically the DWR Spatial Data Standards version 2.1, dated March 9, 2016. DWR makes no warranties or guarantees - either expressed or implied - as to the completeness, accuracy, or correctness of the data. DWR neither accepts nor assumes liability arising from or for any incorrect, incomplete, or misleading subject data. Comments, problems, improvements, updates, or suggestions should be forwarded to gis@water.ca.gov. This data represents a land use survey of Santa Clara County conducted by the California Department of Water Resources, North Central Regional Office staff. Land use field boundaries were digitized with ArcGIS 10.3 using 2012 U.S.D.A National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) one-meter imagery as the base. Agricultural fields were delineated by following actual field boundaries instead of using the centerlines of roads to represent the field borders. Field boundaries were reviewed and updated using 2014 Landsat 8 imagery and 2014 U.S.D.A National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) one-meter imagery after it became available in late 2014. The county boundary is based on the CalFire updated State and County boundary layer dated 2009. Field boundaries were not drawn to represent legal parcel (ownership) boundaries, and are not meant to be used as parcel boundaries. The field work for this survey was conducted from June 16, 2014 through July 24, 2014. Images, land use boundaries and ESRI ArcMap software were loaded onto laptop computers that were used as the field data collection tools. Staff took these laptops into the field and virtually all agricultural fields were visited to identify the land use. Global positioning System (GPS) units connected to the laptops were used to confirm the surveyor's location with respect to the fields. Land use codes were digitized in the field using dropdown selections from defined domains. Upon completion of the survey, a Python script was used to convert the data table into the standard land use format. ArcGIS geoprocessing tools and topology rules were used to locate errors for quality control. The primary focus of this land use survey is mapping agricultural fields. Urban residences and other urban areas were delineated using aerial photo interpretation. Some urban areas may have been missed. Rural residential land use was delineated by drawing polygons to surround houses and other buildings along with some of the surrounding land. These footprint areas do not represent the entire footprint of urban land. Sources of irrigation water were not identified for most areas. The exception is the area of the Corde Valle Golf Course near San Martin and a few nearby fields where recycled water is used as a water source in addition to groundwater. Before final processing, standard quality control procedures were performed jointly by staff at DWR’s North Central Region, and at DSIWM headquarters under the leadership of Jean Woods. Senior Land and Water Use Supervisor. After quality control procedures were completed, the data was finalized. The positional accuracy of the digital line work, which is based upon the orthorectified NAIP imagery, is approximately 6 meters. The land use attribute accuracy for agricultural fields is high, because almost every delineated field was visited by a surveyor. The accuracy is 95 percent because some errors may have occurred. Possible sources of attribute errors are: a) Human error in the identification of crop types, b) Data entry errors.

Analysis of ‘Southwest Mendocino County Land Use Survey 2010’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/d0b5d175-8ece-4232-a620-db6a3706b6f1 on 28 January 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

Analysis of ‘Calaveras County Land Use Survey 2015’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/09618f89-b1d4-4bde-bccf-7e46afb6dee8 on 28 January 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

The H-GAC ZIP code coverage includes polygons and their attributes for Harris County. It was primarily created from the census 2002 ZIP code boundary data with secondary source data coming from Centerpoint ZIP code, Esri 2009 ZIP code, address point data from centerpoint and counties, CRIS ( Carrier Route Information System) data, US Postal Services Online site ( Look up a ZIP code) and parcels. Must Not Overlap and Must Not have Gaps topology rules have been used in order to create an accurate ZIP code layer. The layer represents physical ZIP codes and a few PO BOX ZIP codes are included rural areas . PO BOX ZIP codes can be identifying by "zip_type" field in the attribute table.

Analysis of ‘San Joaquin County Land Use Survey 2017’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/34320867-1a92-4422-98e2-4f68d26cff40 on 28 January 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

Access National Hydrography ProductsThe National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) is a feature-based database that interconnects and uniquely identifies the stream segments or reaches that make up the nation's surface water drainage system. NHD data was originally developed at 1:100,000-scale and exists at that scale for the whole country. This high-resolution NHD, generally developed at 1:24,000/1:12,000 scale, adds detail to the original 1:100,000-scale NHD. (Data for Alaska, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands was developed at high-resolution, not 1:100,000 scale.) Local resolution NHD is being developed where partners and data exist. The NHD contains reach codes for networked features, flow direction, names, and centerline representations for areal water bodies. Reaches are also defined on waterbodies and the approximate shorelines of the Great Lakes, the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and the Gulf of Mexico. The NHD also incorporates the National Spatial Data Infrastructure framework criteria established by the Federal Geographic Data Committee.The NHD is a national framework for assigning reach addresses to water-related entities, such as industrial discharges, drinking water supplies, fish habitat areas, wild and scenic rivers. Reach addresses establish the locations of these entities relative to one another within the NHD surface water drainage network, much like addresses on streets. Once linked to the NHD by their reach addresses, the upstream/downstream relationships of these water-related entities--and any associated information about them--can be analyzed using software tools ranging from spreadsheets to geographic information systems (GIS). GIS can also be used to combine NHD-based network analysis with other data layers, such as soils, land use and population, to help understand and display their respective effects upon one another. Furthermore, because the NHD provides a nationally consistent framework for addressing and analysis, water-related information linked to reach addresses by one organization (national, state, local) can be shared with other organizations and easily integrated into many different types of applications to the benefit of all.Statements of attribute accuracy are based on accuracy statements made for U.S. Geological Survey Digital Line Graph (DLG) data, which is estimated to be 98.5 percent. One or more of the following methods were used to test attribute accuracy: manual comparison of the source with hardcopy plots; symbolized display of the DLG on an interactive computer graphic system; selected attributes that could not be visually verified on plots or on screen were interactively queried and verified on screen. In addition, software validated feature types and characteristics against a master set of types and characteristics, checked that combinations of types and characteristics were valid, and that types and characteristics were valid for the delineation of the feature. Feature types, characteristics, and other attributes conform to the Standards for National Hydrography Dataset (USGS, 1999) as of the date they were loaded into the database. All names were validated against a current extract from the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS). The entry and identifier for the names match those in the GNIS. The association of each name to reaches has been interactively checked, however, operator error could in some cases apply a name to a wrong reach.Points, nodes, lines, and areas conform to topological rules. Lines intersect only at nodes, and all nodes anchor the ends of lines. Lines do not overshoot or undershoot other lines where they are supposed to meet. There are no duplicate lines. Lines bound areas and lines identify the areas to the left and right of the lines. Gaps and overlaps among areas do not exist. All areas close.The completeness of the data reflects the content of the sources, which most often are the published USGS topographic quadrangle and/or the USDA Forest Service Primary Base Series (PBS) map. The USGS topographic quadrangle is usually supplemented by Digital Orthophoto Quadrangles (DOQs). Features found on the ground may have been eliminated or generalized on the source map because of scale and legibility constraints. In general, streams longer than one mile (approximately 1.6 kilometers) were collected. Most streams that flow from a lake were collected regardless of their length. Only definite channels were collected so not all swamp/marsh features have stream/rivers delineated through them. Lake/ponds having an area greater than 6 acres were collected. Note, however, that these general rules were applied unevenly among maps during compilation. Reach codes are defined on all features of type stream/river, canal/ditch, artificial path, coastline, and connector. Waterbody reach codes are defined on all lake/pond and most reservoir features. Names were applied from the GNIS database. Detailed capture conditions are provided for every feature type in the Standards for National Hydrography Dataset available online through https://prd-wret.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets/palladium/production/atoms/files/NHD%201999%20Draft%20Standards%20-%20Capture%20conditions.PDF.Statements of horizontal positional accuracy are based on accuracy statements made for U.S. Geological Survey topographic quadrangle maps. These maps were compiled to meet National Map Accuracy Standards. For horizontal accuracy, this standard is met if at least 90 percent of points tested are within 0.02 inch (at map scale) of the true position. Additional offsets to positions may have been introduced where feature density is high to improve the legibility of map symbols. In addition, the digitizing of maps is estimated to contain a horizontal positional error of less than or equal to 0.003 inch standard error (at map scale) in the two component directions relative to the source maps. Visual comparison between the map graphic (including digital scans of the graphic) and plots or digital displays of points, lines, and areas, is used as control to assess the positional accuracy of digital data. Digital map elements along the adjoining edges of data sets are aligned if they are within a 0.02 inch tolerance (at map scale). Features with like dimensionality (for example, features that all are delineated with lines), with or without like characteristics, that are within the tolerance are aligned by moving the features equally to a common point. Features outside the tolerance are not moved; instead, a feature of type connector is added to join the features.Statements of vertical positional accuracy for elevation of water surfaces are based on accuracy statements made for U.S. Geological Survey topographic quadrangle maps. These maps were compiled to meet National Map Accuracy Standards. For vertical accuracy, this standard is met if at least 90 percent of well-defined points tested are within one-half contour interval of the correct value. Elevations of water surface printed on the published map meet this standard; the contour intervals of the maps vary. These elevations were transcribed into the digital data; the accuracy of this transcription was checked by visual comparison between the data and the map.

This data represents a land use survey of 2017 San Joaquin County conducted by the California Department of Water Resources, North Central Region Office staff. Land use field boundaries were digitized with ArcGIS 10.5.1 using 2016 NAIP as the base, and Google Earth and Sentinel-2 imagery website were used as reference as well. Agricultural fields were delineated by following actual field boundaries instead of using the centerlines of roads to represent the field borders. Field boundaries were not drawn to represent legal parcel (ownership) boundaries and are not meant to be used as parcel boundaries. The field work for this survey was conducted from July 2017 through August 2017. Images, land use boundaries and ESRI ArcMap software were loaded onto Surface Pro tablet PCs that were used as the field data collection tools. Staff took these Surface Pro tablet into the field and virtually all agricultural fields were visited to identify the land use. Global positioning System (GPS) units connected to the laptops were used to confirm the surveyor's location with respect to the fields. Land use codes were digitized in the field using dropdown selections from defined domains. Agricultural fields the staff were unable to access were designated 'E' in the Class field for Entry Denied in accordance with the 2016 Land Use Legend. The areas designated with 'E' were also interpreted using a combination of Google Earth, Sentinel-2 Imagery website, Land IQ (LIQ) 2017 Delta Survey, and the county of San Joaquin 2017 Agriculture GIS feature class. Upon completion of the survey, a Python script was used to convert the data table into the standard land use format. ArcGIS geoprocessing tools and topology rules were used to locate errors for quality control. The primary focus of this land use survey is mapping agricultural fields. Urban residences and other urban areas were delineated using aerial photo interpretation. Some urban areas may have been missed. Rural residential land use was delineated by drawing polygons to surround houses and other buildings along with some of the surrounding land. These footprint areas do not represent the entire footprint of urban land. Water source information was not collected for this land use survey. Therefore, the water source has been designated as Unknown. Before final processing, standard quality control procedures were performed jointly by staff at DWR’s North Central Region,Office and at DRA's headquarters office under the leadership of Muffet Wilkerson, Senior Land and Water Use Supervisor. After quality control procedures were completed, the data was finalized. The positional accuracy of the digital line work, which is based upon the orthorectified NAIP imagery, is approximately 6 meters. The land use attribute accuracy for agricultural fields is high, because almost every delineated field was visited by a surveyor. The accuracy is 95 percent because some errors may have occurred. Possible sources of attribute errors are: a) Human error in the identification of crop types, b) Data entry errors.

This feature dataset includes feature classes for Surface Management Status and Federal Mineral Estate for Wyoming. This dataset is intended to represent the ownership & management information on BLM Master Title Plats(MTPs). Surface management will be identified by the Agency of Jurisdiction, when the surface is Federal. All other lands will be identified as either Private, Local Government, Wind River Indian Reservation (for tribal lands), State, State Parks & Historic Sites, University of Wyoming, or Wyoming Game & Fish Department. Private parcels do not identify the name of the individual owner. Mineral estate identifies only the Federal mineral interest. The feature dataset also includes topology rules established by the BLM Surface Management Agency National Data Standard. Updates for the June 2016 version includes multiple correction surface and mineral status, as well as conformance with the most recent version of CadNSDI PLSS data (current to June 6, 2016).

This data represents a land use survey of Alpine County conducted by the California Department of Water Resources, North Central Regional Office staff. Land use field boundaries were digitized with ArcGIS 10.0 and 10.2 using 2012 U.S.D.A National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) one-meter imagery as the base. Agricultural fields were delineated by following actual field boundaries instead of using the centerlines of roads to represent the field borders. Field boundaries were reviewed and updated using 2013 Landsat 8 imagery. Field boundaries were not drawn to represent legal parcel (ownership) boundaries, and are not meant to be used as parcel boundaries. The field work for this survey was conducted during September 2013. Images, land use boundaries and ESRI ArcMap software were loaded onto laptop computers that were used as the field data collection tools. Staff took these laptops into the field and virtually all agricultural fields were visited to identify the land use. Global positioning System (GPS) units connected to the laptops were used to confirm the surveyor's location with respect to the fields. Land use codes were digitized in the field using dropdown selections from defined domains. Upon completion of the survey, a Python script was used to convert the data table into the standard land use format. ArcGIS geoprocessing tools and topology rules were used to locate errors for quality control. The primary focus of this land use survey is mapping agricultural fields. Urban residences and other urban areas were delineated using aerial photo interpretation. Some urban areas may have been missed, especially in forested areas. Rural residential land use was delineated by drawing polygons to surround houses and other buildings along with some of the surrounding land. These footprint areas do not represent the entire footprint of urban land. Sources of irrigation water were identified for general areas and occasionally supplemented by information obtained from landowners. Water source information was not collected for each field in the survey, so the water source listed for a specific agricultural field may not be accurate. After quality control procedures were completed, the data was finalized. The positional accuracy of the digital line work, which is based upon the orthorectified NAIP imagery, is approximately 6 meters. The land use attribute accuracy for agricultural fields is high, because almost every delineated field was visited by a surveyor. The accuracy is 95 percent because some errors may have occurred. Possible sources of attribute errors are: a) Human error in the identification of crop types, b) Data entry errors.