(Link to Metadata) The BNDHASH dataset depicts Vermont village, town, county, and Regional Planning Commission (RPC) 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) BNDHASH_POLY_VILLAGES = Vermont villages 2) BNDHASH_POLY_TOWNS = Vermont towns 3) BNDHASH_POLY_COUNTIES = Vermont counties 4) BNDHASH_POLY_RPCS = Vermont's Regional Planning Commissions 5) BNDHASH_POLY_VTBND = Vermont's state boundary 6) BNDHASH_LINE = Lines on which all POLY feature classes are built The master BNDHASH data is managed as an ESRI geodatabase feature dataset by VCGI. The dataset stores village, town, county, RPC, and state 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/state 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 locations 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 feature 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.

(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.

Northeastern United States County Boundary data are intended for geographic display of state and county boundaries at statewide and regional levels. Use it to map and label counties on a map. These data are derived from Northeastern United States Political Boundary Master layer. This information should be displayed and analyzed at scales appropriate for 1:24,000-scale data. The State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection (CTDEP) assembled this regional data layer using data from other states in order to create a single, seamless representation of political boundaries within the vicinity of Connecticut that could be easily incorporated into mapping applications as background information. More accurate and up-to-date information may be available from individual State government Geographic Information System (GIS) offices. Not intended for maps printed at map scales greater or more detailed than 1:24,000 scale (1 inch = 2,000 feet.)

County Foresters provide forest management and forest stewardship information, technical assistance, and outreach to landowners in Vermont. County Forester offices are conveniently located around the state. This layer displays their coverage area and contact information. If a problem exists in the coverage map, please check first with the Private Land Forestry Program.

(Link to Metadata) CNTY2010 contains a subset of attributes from Summary File 1 of the 2010 Decennial Census. The TIGER/Line Files are shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) that are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line File is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. States and equivalent entities are the primary governmental divisions of the United States. In addition to the fifty States, the Census Bureau treats the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and each of the Island Areas (American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands) as the statistical equivalents of States for the purpose of data presentation.

This resource is a member of a series. The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) System (MTS). The MTS represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The TIGER/Line shapefiles include both incorporated places (legal entities) and census designated places or CDPs (statistical entities). An incorporated place is established to provide governmental functions for a concentration of people as opposed to a minor civil division (MCD), which generally is created to provide services or administer an area without regard, necessarily, to population. Places always nest within a state but may extend across county and county subdivision boundaries. An incorporated place is usually a city, town, village, or borough, but can have other legal descriptions. CDPs are delineated for the decennial census as the statistical counterparts of incorporated places. CDPs are delineated to provide data for settled concentrations of population that are identifiable by name but are not legally incorporated under the laws of the state in which they are located. The boundaries for CDPs are often defined in partnership with state, local, and/or tribal officials and usually coincide with visible features or the boundary of an adjacent incorporated place or another legal entity. CDP boundaries often change from one decennial census to the next with changes in the settlement pattern and development; a CDP with the same name as in an earlier census does not necessarily have the same boundary. The only population/housing size requirement for CDPs is that they must contain some housing and population. The boundaries of most incorporated places in this shapefile are as of January 1, 2024, as reported through the Census Bureau's Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS). The boundaries of all CDPs were delineated as part of the Census Bureau's Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP) for the 2020 Census, but some CDPs were added or updated through the 2024 BAS as well.

(Link to Metadata) DemoCensus_CNTY2000 includes Census 2000 County boundaries and SF1 attributes. The data was downloaded (URL defunct) by VCGI from ESRI's Data website. The downloaded shapefiles were combined into a single shapefile and reprojected to VCS NAD83. A set of Census 2000 SF1 (URL defunct) attributes were joined to the shapefile. For more information go to (URL defunct)

(Link to Metadata) COUSUB2010 contains a subset of attributes from Summary File 1 of the 2010 Decennial Census.The TIGER/Line Files are shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) that are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line File is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. County subdivisions are the primary divisions of counties and their equivalent entities for the reporting of Census Bureau data, and they include legally minor civil divisions (MCDs) and statistical census county divisions (CCDs), and unorganized territories. For the 2010 Census, the legal MCDs are the primary governmental and/or administrative divisions of counties in 29 States and Puerto Rico; Tennessee changed from having CCDs for Census 2000 to having MCDs for the 2010 Census. In MCD States where no MCD exists or is not defined, the Census Bureau creates statistical unorganized territories to complete coverage. The entire area of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas is covered by county subdivisions. The boundaries of all 2010 Census legal MCDs are as of January 1, 2010 as reported through the Census Bureau's Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS). For the 2010 Census, CCDs or their equivalents are delineated in 21 States. The boundaries of all 2010 Census statistical CCDs were delineated as part of the Census Bureau's Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP).

Digital data from VG2015-3 Springston, G, Thomas, E, and Kim, J, 2015,�Surficial Geologic Map of the Southern Two-Thirds of the Woodbury Quadrangle, Vermont, Washington County, Vermont: Vermont Geological Survey Open File Report VG2015-3. Data may include surficial geologic contacts, isopach contours lines, bedrock outcrop polygons, bedrock geologic contacts, hydrogeologic units and more. The surficial geologic materials data at a scale of 1:24,000 depict types of unconsolidated surficial and glacial materials overlying bedrock in Vermont. Data is created by mapping on the ground using standard geologic pace and compass techniques and/or GPS on a USGS 1:24000 topographic base map. The materials data is selected from the Vermont Geological Survey Open File Report (OFR) publication (https://dec.vermont.gov/geological-survey/publication-gis/ofr). The OFR contains more complete descriptions of map units, cross-sections, isopach maps and other information that may not be included in this digital data set.

(Link to Metadata) DemoCensus_CNTY1990 is derived from BoundaryCounty_CNTY250. BoundaryCounty_CNTY250 was derived from BoundaryTown_TB250 (TB250 was archived 6/2003 and has been replaced by BNDHASH. However, CNTY1990 has not been regenerated). Associated table documentation maps.vcgi.vermont.gov/gisdata/metadata/census1990_suppdoc.txt

(Link to Metadata) This datalayer contains Vermont forestry estimate data, by county, primarily obtained from the Vermont Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA), conducted in the years; 1966, 1973, 1983, and 1997 by the USDA Forest Service. Inventory items for Grand Isle and Franklin Counties have been combined. See the 'Attribute Accuracy Report' for reasons. Also included within this database are land-use change figures, reflective of the time periods; 1970s-1980s, 1980s-1990s, and the 1970s-1990s. This data has been made available by the Orton Family Foundation and the UVM School of Natural Resources, Spatial Analysis Lab. One may download Excel spreadsheets or comma-delimited ASCII textfiles of this data from the VGIS indicators webpage - http://vcgi.vermont.gov/indicators/

The 2015 cartographic boundary shapefiles are simplified representations of selected geographic areas from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). These boundary files are specifically designed for small-scale thematic mapping. When possible, generalization is performed with the intent to maintain the hierarchical relationships among geographies and to maintain the alignment of geographies within a file set for a given year. Geographic areas may not align with the same areas from another year. Some geographies are available as nation-based files while others are available only as state-based files. The records in this file allow users to map the parts of Urban Areas that overlap a particular county. After each decennial census, the Census Bureau delineates urban areas that represent densely developed territory, encompassing residential, commercial, and other nonresidential urban land uses. In general, this territory consists of areas of high population density and urban land use resulting in a representation of the "urban footprint." There are two types of urban areas: urbanized areas (UAs) that contain 50,000 or more people and urban clusters (UCs) that contain at least 2,500 people, but fewer than 50,000 people (except in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Guam which each contain urban clusters with populations greater than 50,000). Each urban area is identified by a 5-character numeric census code that may contain leading zeroes. The primary legal divisions of most states are termed counties. In Louisiana, these divisions are known as parishes. In Alaska, which has no counties, the equivalent entities are the organized boroughs, city and boroughs, municipalities, and for the unorganized area, census areas. The latter are delineated cooperatively for statistical purposes by the State of Alaska and the Census Bureau. In four states (Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, and Virginia), there are one or more incorporated places that are independent of any county organization and thus constitute primary divisions of their states. These incorporated places are known as independent cities and are treated as equivalent entities for purposes of data presentation. The District of Columbia and Guam have no primary divisions, and each area is considered an equivalent entity for purposes of data presentation. The Census Bureau treats the following entities as equivalents of counties for purposes of data presentation: Municipios in Puerto Rico, Districts and Islands in American Samoa, Municipalities in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Islands in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The entire area of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas is covered by counties or equivalent entities. The boundaries for counties and equivalent entities are as of January 1, 2010.

Digital Data from VG98-123A Walsh, G. J., 1998,�Digital and preliminary bedrock geologic map of the Vermont part of the Hartland quadrangle, Windsor County, Vermont: USGS Open-File Report 98-123A, 1 color plate and�text,�scale 1:24000. The bedrock geologic map data at a scale of 1:24,000 depicts types of bedrock underlying unconsolidated materials in Vermont. Data is created by mapping on the ground using standard geologic pace and compass techniques and/or GPS on a USGS 1:24000 topographic base map. Data may be organized by town, quadrangle or watershed. Each data bundle may includes point, line and polygon data and some or all of the following: 1) contacts (lithogic contacts), 2) fault_brittle, 3) fault_ductile, 4) fault_thrust, 5) fault_bed_plane (bedding plane thrust), 6) bedding, 7) bedding_graded (graded bedding) 8) bedding_overturn (overturned bedding), 9) bedding_select (selected points for published map), 10) foliation_n1, n2, n3 etc (foliation data), 11) outcrop (exposed outcrops), 12) field_station (outcrop and data collection point), 13) fold_axis, 14) axial_plane, 15) lamprophyre, 16) water_well_log (water well driller information), 16) linear_int (intersection lineation), 17) linear_str (stretching lineation) 18) x_section_line (line of cross-section), and photolinear (lineaments identified from air photos). Other feature classes may be included with each data bundle. (https://dec.vermont.gov/geological-survey/publication-gis/ofr).

Pickaway County ESN Map 3-2025

Digital bedrock Geologic Map of The Mount Snow and Readsboro quadrangles, Bennington and Windham counties Vermont. Abstract was not provided, for more information on this resource and accessibility options please see the links provided.

Working Lands FloodplainThis area includes land located outside of Center Areas and within the FEMA mapped 100 year floodplain. Much of this area is used for agriculture due to favorable, alluvial soils and large flat fields which are absent in the more mountainous terrain in other areas of Lamoille County. Provided State Accepted Agricultural Practices (AAPs) are followed, agriculture is an appropriate use of these floodplain areas. Best Management Practices, such as establishing vegetated buffers along streambanks, are strongly encouraged. Some areas have reverted to wetlands or floodplain forests. This vegetation can greatly improve floodwater attenuation and may capture sediment and debris during large flood events, helping to mitigate downstream flood damage and debris jams. Center Areas No Water InfrastructureThis area consists of Lamoille County’s traditional village and downtown centers as well as areas identified as nodes for compact and/or mixed use development in local plans. This area includes, but is not limited to, State “Designated Downtowns and Village Centers”. In general, these areas contain the highest densities and greatest diversity of uses found in the County. While local plans may designate zoning districts with varying permitted uses (residential, commercial, etc.), the overall pattern of development within Center Areas is one of mixed uses. All areas within the Center Area shall be considered an “existing settlement” for the purpose of Act 250 review. In recognition of the significant difference in density and diversity of uses enabled by municipal sewage and water infrastructure, this area is divided into the following four distinct Planning Areas on the Future Land Use Map:- Centers with Water but without Wastewater Infrastructure- Centers with Wastewater but without Water Infrastructure (as of 2015, there are no such Centers in Region)- Centers without Wastewater or Water InfrastructureNote: The Centers with Wastewater and Water and Centers with Water may include some areas in proximity to municipal sewage and water service that are not currently connected to the system. Center Areas InfrastructureThis area consists of Lamoille County’s traditional village and downtown centersas well as areas identified as nodes for compact and/or mixed use development in loca lplans. This area includes, but is not limited to, State “Designated Downtowns and Village Centers”. In general, these areas contain the highest densities and greatest diversity of uses found in the County. While local plans may designate zoning districts with varying permitted uses (residential, commercial, etc.), the overall pattern of development within Center Areas is one of mixed uses. All areas within the Center Area shall be considered an “existing settlement” for the purpose of Act 250 review. In recognition of the significant difference in density and diversity of uses enabled by municipal sewage and water infrastructure, this area is divided into the following four distinct Planning Areas on the Future Land Use Map:- Centers with Wastewater and Water InfrastructureNote: The Centers with Wastewater and Water and Centers with Water may include some areas in proximity to municipal sewage and water service that are not currently connected to the system. Center No InfrastructureThis area consists of Lamoille County’s traditional village and downtown centersas well as areas identified as nodes for compact and/or mixed use development in loca lplans. This area includes, but is not limited to, State “Designated Downtowns and Village Centers”. In general, these areas contain the highest densities and greatest diversity of uses found in the County. While local plans may designate zoning districts with varying permitted uses (residential, commercial, etc.), the overall pattern of development within Center Areas is one of mixed uses. All areas within the Center Area shall be considered an “existing settlement” for the purpose of Act 250 review. In recognition of the significant difference in density and diversity of uses enabled by municipal sewage and water infrastructure, this area is divided into the following four distinct Planning Areas on the Future Land Use Map:- Centers with Wastewater and Water Infrastructure- Centers with Water but without Wastewater Infrastructure- Centers with Wastewater but without Water Infrastructure (as of 2015, there are no such Centers in Region)Note: The Centers with Wastewater and Water and Centers with Water may include some areas in proximity to municipal sewage and water service that are not currently connected to the system.EnterpriseThe Enterprise Area contains areas designated for special uses that generate significant amounts of activity, such as industrial parks, airport facilities, ski resorts, etc. in municipal plans. While not directly connected to a Center or “existing settlement,” these areas provide much of the Region’s current and potential employment opportunities and are vital to the economic development of the County.Other Conserved LandsThe overlays on the Future Land Use Map are for State Forest Land and other Conserved Land. This overlay represents other conserved lands (municipal/private etc..). Conserved lands often have limited uses because of the characteristics being conserved. Development is usually limited or restricted. Since these areas have already been conserved, they are not targeted for future agricultural soils mitigation. However, future conservation easements are encouraged to connect to existing conserved lands to: reduce forest and agricultural fragmentation; provide large blocks of land that better support wildlife connectivity; protect rare, important, and irreplaceable natural and fragile areas; and protect scenic and historic features and resources. Use of recreation on some conserved lands is appropriate and should be encouraged when possible. RuralThe BNDHASH data layer depicts Vermont villages, towns, counties, Regional Planning Commissions (RPC), State administrative, and LEPC (Local Emergency Planning Committee) boundaries.It is a mosaic of generally 'best available' boundaries from various data sources (refer to ARC_SRC and SRC_NOTES attributes). The layer was originally developed from TBHASH, which was the master VGIS town boundary layer prior to the development and release of BNDHASH. BNDHASH replaces TBHASH as well as TB250, TB24, CNTY250, VT250, and RPC250. 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 villages2) TOWNS = Vermont towns3) COUNTIES = Vermont counties4) RPCS = Vermont's Regional Planning Commissions5) ADMIN = State Administrative Boundaries created by Executive Order #7-95 (Oct 1995)6) LEPC = Local Emergency Planning Committee boundaries7) VTBND = Vermont's state boundaryThe master BNDHASH layer is managed as ESRI geodatabase feature dataset by VCGI. The dataset stores villages, towns, counties, and RPC boundaries as separate 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 perfect boundary layer (refer to Completeness_Report). 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). Ultimately the Vermont Secretary 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. Shoreland Regional The overlay on the Future Land Use Map for the Shoreland Area follows the jurisdiction of the Vermont Shoreland Protection Act (Chapter 49 A of Title 10 §1441etseq.) administered by the Agency of Natural Resources Department of Environmental Conservation. The Act establishes a state regulation for guiding development within the protected shoreland area 250 feet from the mean water level of all lakes greater than 10 acres in size.The intent of the Act is to prevent degradation of water quality inlakes, preserve habitat and natural stability of shorelines, and maintain the economic benefits of lakes and their shorelands. Municipalities may be delegated to administer this Act locally. State ForestThis area contains state forest land in Lamoille County, representing some of the County's largest blocks of unfragmented forests. As noted in the Working Lands Chapter of this Plan, there are numerous, diverse uses of Lamoille County’s forests, including but not limited to active forest management, conservation, wildlife management, recreation, and/or aesthetic preservation. The specific use of any forest should be left to the property owner and/or land manager. However, what

(Link to Metadata) NRCS mapped historical and current-day built-up lands for Grand Isle County, VT using several vintages of aerial photography: 1941, 1962, 1974, 1977, 1980, 1986, 1995, and 2003. The mapping was done using definitions and protocols established by NRCS in its conduct of the National Resources Inventory (NRI), a statistically based survey, designed and implemented to assess the conditions and trends of soil, water, and related resources on non-federal lands. Two land cover/use categories from the NRI ("urban and small built-up" and "farmsteads") were combined and mapped as 'Built-up'. NRI minimum built-up densities were not adhered to. In addition, total 'developed' lands for 2003 were mapped by integrating the mapped built-up data with roads, both public and private. An approximate 15-page report on definitions, mapping tools and ancillary materials, mapping methodology, and results is included with the data distributed by VCGI. Prepared results include tabular information on built-up change for the County and each of its five towns, 2003 road data, and a graphic depicting built-up acreage changes from 1941-2003. See Builtup_Documentation.doc & Builtup_Prepared_Results.xls included with the data zip file. VCGI converted the orginial NRCS shapefiles to Arc/Info coverage region subclasses. The region naming convention for built-up data is: region.b, for the developed 2003 data the naming convention is: region.dev2003. This "feature dataset" approach allows multiple data sources to be treated as one data set.

description: (Link to Metadata) This metadata applies to the following collection area(s): Windham County 2015 0.7m and related "HILLSHADE" raster data. HILLSHADE data is for cartographic use only and was created using ArcGIS "HILLSHADE" command that models illumination of a surface from a light source with an azimuth of 315 and an altitude of 45 . This metadata complies with the VT Geodata Portal format and applies to thematic layers with the same resolution (RESCLASS), e.g., 0p7m, 1m etc., and may include multiple data "collection" efforts. For the original vendor metadata containing specific details on each collections "point cloud" such as flight dates, nominal pulse spacing and RMSEz etc., see the "All Available Lidar" Product page: (http://vcgi.vermont.gov/data/products/ALL-LDR_MIX_LIDAR_STATE_ALL). For an overview of the "Vermont Lidar Initiative" please see "http://vcgi.vermont.gov/lidar".; abstract: (Link to Metadata) This metadata applies to the following collection area(s): Windham County 2015 0.7m and related "HILLSHADE" raster data. HILLSHADE data is for cartographic use only and was created using ArcGIS "HILLSHADE" command that models illumination of a surface from a light source with an azimuth of 315 and an altitude of 45 . This metadata complies with the VT Geodata Portal format and applies to thematic layers with the same resolution (RESCLASS), e.g., 0p7m, 1m etc., and may include multiple data "collection" efforts. For the original vendor metadata containing specific details on each collections "point cloud" such as flight dates, nominal pulse spacing and RMSEz etc., see the "All Available Lidar" Product page: (http://vcgi.vermont.gov/data/products/ALL-LDR_MIX_LIDAR_STATE_ALL). For an overview of the "Vermont Lidar Initiative" please see "http://vcgi.vermont.gov/lidar".

The bedrock geology of the Bellows Falls 7.5 x 15 minute quadrangle, Vermont and New Hampshire, consists of polydeformed Ordovician to Devonian metasedimentary, metavolcanic, and metaplutonic rocks of the Connecticut Valley trough, Bronson Hill anticlinorium (or Bronson Hill terrane), and the Central Maine terrane. Previous work in this area includes a 1:62,500-scale published map and text by Kruger (1946), state geologic maps of New Hampshire (Lyons and others, 1997) and Vermont (Ratcliffe and others, 2011), and various maps and reports presented largely as parts of field trip guidebooks (e.g., Thompson and Rosenfeld, 1979; Chamberlain and others, 1988; Spear, 1992; Thompson and others, 1993). Armstrong (1997) completed a provisional open-file map of the geology of the Vermont part of the Bellows Falls 7.5 x 15 minute quadrangle, which is incorporated and revised on this map based on additional field work. This study recognizes three major structural levels from west to east, lo ...