The WV_Parcel data is a composite dataset of individual county parcel data. Each county provides a unique dataset, with different temporal currencies, attributes and geographies.Website Link: https://www.mapwv.gov/

Vector polygon map data of property parcels from Kanawha County, West Virginia containing 117689 features.

​

Property parcel GIS map data consists of detailed information about individual land parcels, including their boundaries, ownership details, and geographic coordinates.

​

Property parcel data can be used to analyze and visualize land-related information for purposes such as real estate assessment, urban planning, or environmental management.

​

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

Tax District Boundaries: Official tax district boundary lines adopted by the WV Legislature in 1978 as a general reference to delineate rural tax district boundaries. The boundaries were drawn from 1:24,000-scale USGS topographic maps in 1978 and coincide with county magisterial districts as of July 1, 1973. Unlike magisterial districts that are realigned every ten years following the census, the tax district boundary does not follow equal representation requirements. In 1978 the West Virginia Geologic and Economical Survey published six 1:500,000-scale maps delineating official county and tax district boundary lines for the State. In 1996 the West Virginia Department of Tax and Revenue, Property Tax Division, converted the 1978 source maps into a digital format and added descriptive attributes for each tax district. In October of 2003, the WV GIS Technical Center appended 24K DLG boundary files and lines drawn from 24K DRGs into a statewide 24K Tax District Boundary dataset. In 2017, WVGISTC has appended this file with parcel data or Census Populated Places boundaries for missing tax districts.

Vector polygon map data of property parcels from Berkeley County, West Virginia containing 54,024 features.

​

Property parcel GIS map data consists of detailed information about individual land parcels, including their boundaries, ownership details, and geographic coordinates.

​

Property parcel data can be used to analyze and visualize land-related information for purposes such as real estate assessment, urban planning, or environmental management.

​

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

This map shows high-resolution (1 meter) land cover in the EPA Region 3, covering the parts of West Virginia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania outside of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. It contains the following classes: Water, Tree Canopy, Scrub\Shrub, Low Vegetation, Barren, Impervious Structures, Other Impervious, Impervious Roads, Tree Canopy Over Impervious Structures, Tree Canopy Over Other Impervious, and Tree Canopy Over Impervious Roads. Using object-based image analysis mapping techniques, it was mapped from a combination of remote-sensing imagery and GIS datasets, including LiDAR, multispectral imagery, and thematic layers (e.g., roads, building footprints). Draft output was then manually reviewed and edited to eliminate obvious errors of omission and commission. The classification scheme closely follows a similar mapping effort for the Chesapeake Bay Watershed; together, maps from the two projects cover the entirety of the EPA Region 3 states. One difference between the projects, however, is that tidal wetlands were mapped in the Chesapeake Bay effort, included as the class Emergent Wetlands, but not in the EPA Region 3 zones outside of the watershed. The map is considered current as of 2020 for West Virginia, 2021 for Virginia, and 2022 for Pennsylvania.

A General Land and building inventory of West Virginia University owned or controlled real estate. This application shows WVU owned property along with the WV Sheriff's Tax Parcel information, Clery Geography, and WVU Facilities Building inventory information. This map is for planning purposes only and is provided with no warranty. For the most recent and up to date information please contact the author.

Will vary by map. In each map, each pixel will have a value representing the index of interest. For example, the ForDen_66ha dataset is a grid map for West Virginia at 30 meter resolution. Each pixel value represents an index of forest area density for the surrounding 65.61 ha.(27x27 pixel) analysis window.

This TNC Lands spatial dataset represents the lands and waters in which The Nature Conservancy (TNC) currently has, or historically had, an interest, legal or otherwise in West Virginia. The system of record for TNC Lands is the Legal Records Management (LRM) system, which is TNC’s database for all TNC land transactions.TNC properties should not be considered open to the public unless specifically designated as being so. TNC may change the access status at any time at its sole discretion. It's recommended to visit preserve-specific websites or contact the organization operating the preserve before any planned visit for the latest conditions, notices, and closures. TNC prohibits redistribution or display of the data in maps or online in any way that misleadingly implies such lands are universally open to the public.The types of current land interests represented in the TNC Lands data include: Fields and Attributes included in the public dataset:Field NameField DefinitionAttributesAttribute Definitions Public NameThe name of the tract that The Nature Conservancy (TNC) Business Unit (BU) uses for public audiences.Public name of tract if applicableN/A TNC Primary InterestThe primary interest held by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) on the tractFee OwnershipProperties where TNC currently holds fee-title or exclusive rights and control over real estate. Fee Ownership can include TNC Nature Preserves, managed areas, and properties that are held for future transfer. Conservation EasementProperties on which TNC holds a conservation easement, which is a legally binding agreement restricting the use of real property for conservation purposes (e.g., no development). The easement may additionally provide the holder (TNC) with affirmative rights, such as the rights to monitor species or to manage the land. It may run forever or for an expressed term of years. Deed RestrictionProperties where TNC holds a deed restriction, which is a provision placed in a deed restricting or limiting the use of the property in some manner (e.g., if a property goes up for sale, TNC gets the first option). TransferProperties where TNC historically had a legal interest (fee or easement), then subsequently transferred the interest to a conservation partner. AssistProperties where TNC assisted another agency/entity in protecting. Management Lease or AgreementAn agreement between two parties whereby one party allows the other to use their property for a certain period of time in exchange for a periodic fee. Grazing Lease or PermitA grazing lease or permit held by The Nature Conservancy Right of WayAn access easement or agreement held by The Nature Conservancy. OtherAnother real estate interest or legal agreement held by The Nature Conservancy Fee OwnerThe name of the organization serving as fee owner of the tract, or "Private Land Owner" if the owner is a private party. If The Nature Conservancy (TNC) primary interest is a "Transfer" or "Assist", then this is the fee owner at the time of the transaction.Fee Owner NameN/A Fee Org TypeThe type of organization(s) that hold(s) fee ownership. Chosen from a list of accepted values.Organization Types for Fee OwnershipFED:Federal, TRIB:American Indian Lands, STAT:State,DIST:Regional Agency Special District, LOC:Local Government, NGO:Non-Governmental Organization, PVT:Private, JNT:Joint, UNK:Unknown, TERR:Territorial, DESG:Designation Other Interest HolderThe name of the organization(s) that hold(s) a different interest in the tract, besides fee ownership or TNC Primary Interest. This may include TNC if the Other Interest is held or co-held by TNC. Multiple interest holders should be separated by a semicolon (;).Other Interest Holder NameN/A Other Interest Org TypeThe type of organization(s) that hold(s) a different interest in the tract, besides fee ownership. This may include TNC if the Other Interest is held or co-held by TNC. Chosen from a list of accepted values.Organization Types for interest holders:FED:Federal, TRIB:American Indian Lands, STAT:State,DIST:Regional Agency Special District, LOC:Local Government, NGO:Non-Governmental Organization, PVT:Private, JNT:Joint, UNK:Unknown, TERR:Territorial, DESG:Designation Other Interest TypeThe other interest type held on the tract. Chosen from a list of accepted values.​Access Right of Way; Conservation Easement; Co-held Conservation Easement; Deed Restriction; Co-held Deed Restriction; Fee Ownership; Co-held Fee Ownership; Grazing Lease or Permit; Life Estate; Management Lease or Agreement; Timber Lease or Agreement; OtherN/A Preserve NameThe name of The Nature Conservancy (TNC) preserve that the tract is a part of, this may be the same name as the as the "Public Name" for the tract.Preserve Name if applicableN/APublic AccessThe level of public access allowed on the tract.Open AccessAccess is encouraged on the tract, trails are maintained, signage is abundant, and parking is available. The tract may include regular hours of availability.Open with Limited AccessThere are no special requirements for public access to the tract, the tract may include regular hours of availability with limited amenities.Restricted AccessThe tract requires a special permit from the owner for access, a registration permit on public land, or has highly variable times or conditions to use.Closed AccessNo public access is allowed on the tract.UnknownAccess information for the tract is not currently available.Gap CategoryThe Gap Analysis Project (GAP) code for the tract. Gap Analysis is the science of determining how well we are protecting common plants and animals. Developing the data and tools to support that science is the mission of the Gap Analysis Project (GAP) at the US Geological Survey. See their website for more information, linked in the field name.1 - Permanent Protection for BiodiversityPermanent Protection for Biodiversity2 - Permanent Protection to Maintain a Primarily Natural StatePermanent Protection to Maintain a Primarily Natural State3 - Permanently Secured for Multiple Uses and in natural coverPermanently Secured for Multiple Uses and in natural cover39 - Permanently Secured and in agriculture or maintained grass coverPermanently Secured and in agriculture or maintained grass cover4 - UnsecuredUnsecured (temporary easements lands and/or municipal lands that are already developed (schools, golf course, soccer fields, ball fields)9 - UnknownUnknownProtected AcresThe planar area of the tract polygon in acres, calculated by the TNC Lands geographic information system (GIS).Total geodesic area of polygon in acresProjection: WGS 1984 Web Mercator Auxiliary SphereOriginal Protection DateThe original protection date for the tract, from the Land Resource Management (LRM) system record.Original protection dateN/AStateThe state within the United States of America or the Canadian province where the tract is located.Chosen from a list of state names.N/ACountryThe name of the country where the tract is located.Chosen from a list of countries.N/ADivisionThe name of the TNC North America Region Division where the tract is located. Chosen from a list of TNC North America DivisionsN/A

The mapped area boundary, flood inundation extents, and depth rasters were created to provide an estimated extent of flood inundation along the Cherry River within the communities of Richwood and Fenwick, West Virginia. These geospatial data include the following items: 1. cherry_bnd; shapefile containing the polygon showing the mapped area boundary for the Cherry River flood maps, 2. cherry_hwm; shapefile containing high-water mark points, 3. polygon_cherry_hwm; shapefile containing mapped extent of flood inundation, derived from the water-surface elevation surveyed at high-water marks, 4. depth_hwm; raster file for the flood depths derived from the water-surface elevation surveyed at high-water marks, 5. polygon_cherry_dem; shapefile containing mapped extent of flood inundation, derived from the height above ground recorded at high-water marks and the digital elevation model (DEM) raster, 6. depth_dem; raster file for the flood depths derived from the height above ground recorded at high-water marks and the digital elevation model raster. The upstream and downstream mapped area extent is limited to the upstream-most and downstream-most high-water mark locations. In areas of uncertainty of flood extent, the mapped area boundary is lined up with the flood inundation polygon extent. The mapped area boundary polygon was used to extract the final flood inundation polygon and depth raster from the water-surface elevation raster file. Depth raster files were created using the "Topo to Raster" tool in ArcMap (ESRI, 2012). For this study two sets of inundation layers were generated for each reach. One raster file showing flood depths, "depth_hwm", was created by using high-water mark water-surface elevation values on the land surface and a digital elevation model. However, differences in elevation between the surveyed water-surface elevation values at HWM’s and the land-surface elevation from the digital elevation model data provided uncertainty in the inundation extent of the generated layers. Often times elevation differences of +/- 20 feet were noticed between the surveyed elevation from a HWM on the land surface and the digital elevation model land-surface elevation. Due to these elevation differences, we incorporated a second method of interpolating the water-surface layer. The recorded height above ground value from the surveyed HWM was added to the digital elevation model land-surface elevation at that point. This created a new water-surface elevation value to be used with the “Topo to Raster” interpolation method to create a second depth raster, "depth_dem". Both sets of inundation layers are provided.

no abstract provided

description: The mapped area boundary, flood inundation extents, and depth rasters were created to provide an estimated extent of flood inundation along the New River within the community of Hinton, West Virginia. These geospatial data include the following items: 1. newriver_bnd; shapefile containing the polygon showing the mapped area boundary for the New River flood maps, 2. newriver_hwm; shapefile containing high-water mark points, 3. polygon_newriver_hwm; shapefile containing mapped extent of flood inundation, derived from the water-surface elevation surveyed at high-water marks, 4. depth_hwm; raster file for the flood depths derived from the water-surface elevation surveyed at high-water marks, 5. polygon_newriver_dem; shapefile containing mapped extent of flood inundation, derived from the height above ground recorded at high-water marks and the digital elevation model (DEM) raster, 6. depth_dem; raster file for the flood depths derived from the height above ground recorded at high-water marks and the digital elevation model raster. The upstream and downstream mapped area extent is limited to the upstream-most and downstream-most high-water mark locations. In areas of uncertainty of flood extent, the mapped area boundary is lined up with the flood inundation polygon extent. The mapped area boundary polygon was used to extract the final flood inundation polygon and depth raster from the water-surface elevation raster file. Depth raster files were created using the "Topo to Raster" tool in ArcMap (ESRI, 2012). For this study two sets of inundation layers were generated for each reach. One raster file showing flood depths, "depth_hwm", was created by using high-water mark water-surface elevation values on the land surface and a digital elevation model. However, differences in elevation between the surveyed water-surface elevation values at HWMs and the land-surface elevation from the digital elevation model data provided uncertainty in the inundation extent of the generated layers. Often times elevation differences of +/- 20 feet were noticed between the surveyed elevation from a HWM on the land surface and the digital elevation model land-surface elevation. Due to these elevation differences, we incorporated a second method of interpolating the water-surface layer. The recorded height above ground value from the surveyed HWM was added to the digital elevation model land-surface elevation at that point. This created a new water-surface elevation value to be used with the Topo to Raster interpolation method to create a second depth raster, "depth_dem". Both sets of inundation layers are provided.; abstract: The mapped area boundary, flood inundation extents, and depth rasters were created to provide an estimated extent of flood inundation along the New River within the community of Hinton, West Virginia. These geospatial data include the following items: 1. newriver_bnd; shapefile containing the polygon showing the mapped area boundary for the New River flood maps, 2. newriver_hwm; shapefile containing high-water mark points, 3. polygon_newriver_hwm; shapefile containing mapped extent of flood inundation, derived from the water-surface elevation surveyed at high-water marks, 4. depth_hwm; raster file for the flood depths derived from the water-surface elevation surveyed at high-water marks, 5. polygon_newriver_dem; shapefile containing mapped extent of flood inundation, derived from the height above ground recorded at high-water marks and the digital elevation model (DEM) raster, 6. depth_dem; raster file for the flood depths derived from the height above ground recorded at high-water marks and the digital elevation model raster. The upstream and downstream mapped area extent is limited to the upstream-most and downstream-most high-water mark locations. In areas of uncertainty of flood extent, the mapped area boundary is lined up with the flood inundation polygon extent. The mapped area boundary polygon was used to extract the final flood inundation polygon and depth raster from the water-surface elevation raster file. Depth raster files were created using the "Topo to Raster" tool in ArcMap (ESRI, 2012). For this study two sets of inundation layers were generated for each reach. One raster file showing flood depths, "depth_hwm", was created by using high-water mark water-surface elevation values on the land surface and a digital elevation model. However, differences in elevation between the surveyed water-surface elevation values at HWMs and the land-surface elevation from the digital elevation model data provided uncertainty in the inundation extent of the generated layers. Often times elevation differences of +/- 20 feet were noticed between the surveyed elevation from a HWM on the land surface and the digital elevation model land-surface elevation. Due to these elevation differences, we incorporated a second method of interpolating the water-surface layer. The recorded height above ground value from the surveyed HWM was added to the digital elevation model land-surface elevation at that point. This created a new water-surface elevation value to be used with the Topo to Raster interpolation method to create a second depth raster, "depth_dem". Both sets of inundation layers are provided.

The USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) is the nation's inventory of protected areas, including public open space and voluntarily provided, private protected areas, identified as an A-16 National Geospatial Data Asset in the Cadastral Theme (http://www.fgdc.gov/ngda-reports/NGDA_Datasets.html). PAD-US is an ongoing project with several published versions of a spatial database of areas dedicated to the preservation of biological diversity, and other natural, recreational or cultural uses, managed for these purposes through legal or other effective means. The geodatabase maps and describes public open space and other protected areas. Most areas are public lands owned in fee; however, long-term easements, leases, and agreements or administrative designations documented in agency management plans may be included. The PAD-US database strives to be a complete “best available” inventory of protected areas (lands and waters) including data provided by managing agencies and organizations. The dataset is built in collaboration with several partners and data providers (http://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/padus/stewards/). See Supplemental Information Section of this metadata record for more information on partnerships and links to major partner organizations. As this dataset is a compilation of many data sets; data completeness, accuracy, and scale may vary. Federal and state data are generally complete, while local government and private protected area coverage is about 50% complete, and depends on data management capacity in the state. For completeness estimates by state: http://www.protectedlands.net/partners. As the federal and state data are reasonably complete; focus is shifting to completing the inventory of local gov and voluntarily provided, private protected areas. The PAD-US geodatabase contains over twenty-five attributes and four feature classes to support data management, queries, web mapping services and analyses: Marine Protected Areas (MPA), Fee, Easements and Combined. The data contained in the MPA Feature class are provided directly by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Marine Protected Areas Center (MPA, http://marineprotectedareas.noaa.gov ) tracking the National Marine Protected Areas System. The Easements feature class contains data provided directly from the National Conservation Easement Database (NCED, http://conservationeasement.us ) The MPA and Easement feature classes contain some attributes unique to the sole source databases tracking them (e.g. Easement Holder Name from NCED, Protection Level from NOAA MPA Inventory). The "Combined" feature class integrates all fee, easement and MPA features as the best available national inventory of protected areas in the standard PAD-US framework. In addition to geographic boundaries, PAD-US describes the protection mechanism category (e.g. fee, easement, designation, other), owner and managing agency, designation type, unit name, area, public access and state name in a suite of standardized fields. An informative set of references (i.e. Aggregator Source, GIS Source, GIS Source Date) and "local" or source data fields provide a transparent link between standardized PAD-US fields and information from authoritative data sources. The areas in PAD-US are also assigned conservation measures that assess management intent to permanently protect biological diversity: the nationally relevant "GAP Status Code" and global "IUCN Category" standard. A wealth of attributes facilitates a wide variety of data analyses and creates a context for data to be used at local, regional, state, national and international scales. More information about specific updates and changes to this PAD-US version can be found in the Data Quality Information section of this metadata record as well as on the PAD-US website, http://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/padus/data/history/.) Due to the completeness and complexity of these data, it is highly recommended to review the Supplemental Information Section of the metadata record as well as the Data Use Constraints, to better understand data partnerships as well as see tips and ideas of appropriate uses of the data and how to parse out the data that you are looking for. For more information regarding the PAD-US dataset please visit, http://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/padus/. To find more data resources as well as view example analysis performed using PAD-US data visit, http://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/padus/resources/. The PAD-US dataset and data standard are compiled and maintained by the USGS Gap Analysis Program, http://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/ . For more information about data standards and how the data are aggregated please review the “Standards and Methods Manual for PAD-US,” http://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/padus/data/standards/ .

description: The mapped area boundary, flood inundation extents, and depth rasters were created to provide an estimated extent of flood inundation along the Elk River within communities in Kanawha and Clay Counties, West Virginia. These geospatial data include the following items: 1. elk_bnd; shapefile containing the polygon showing the mapped area boundary for the Elk River flood maps, 2. elk_hwm; shapefile containing high-water mark points, 3. polygon_elk_hwm; shapefile containing mapped extent of flood inundation, derived from the water-surface elevation surveyed at high-water marks, 4. depth_hwm; raster file for the flood depths derived from the water-surface elevation surveyed at high-water marks, 5. polygon_elk_dem; shapefile containing mapped extent of flood inundation, derived from the height above ground recorded at high-water marks and the digital elevation model (DEM) raster, 6. depth_dem; raster file for the flood depths derived from the height above ground recorded at high-water marks and the digital elevation model raster. The upstream and downstream mapped area extent is limited to the upstream-most and downstream-most high-water mark locations. In areas of uncertainty of flood extent, the mapped area boundary is lined up with the flood inundation polygon extent. The mapped area boundary polygon was used to extract the final flood inundation polygon and depth raster from the water-surface elevation raster file. Depth raster files were created using the "Topo to Raster" tool in ArcMap (ESRI, 2012). For this study two sets of inundation layers were generated for each reach. One raster file showing flood depths, "depth_hwm", was created by using high-water mark water-surface elevation values on the land surface and a digital elevation model. However, differences in elevation between the surveyed water-surface elevation values at HWMs and the land-surface elevation from the digital elevation model data provided uncertainty in the inundation extent of the generated layers. Often times elevation differences of +/- 20 feet were noticed between the surveyed elevation from a HWM on the land surface and the digital elevation model land-surface elevation. Due to these elevation differences, we incorporated a second method of interpolating the water-surface layer. The recorded height above ground value from the surveyed HWM was added to the digital elevation model land-surface elevation at that point. This created a new water-surface elevation value to be used with the Topo to Raster interpolation method to create a second depth raster, "depth_dem". Both sets of inundation layers are provided.; abstract: The mapped area boundary, flood inundation extents, and depth rasters were created to provide an estimated extent of flood inundation along the Elk River within communities in Kanawha and Clay Counties, West Virginia. These geospatial data include the following items: 1. elk_bnd; shapefile containing the polygon showing the mapped area boundary for the Elk River flood maps, 2. elk_hwm; shapefile containing high-water mark points, 3. polygon_elk_hwm; shapefile containing mapped extent of flood inundation, derived from the water-surface elevation surveyed at high-water marks, 4. depth_hwm; raster file for the flood depths derived from the water-surface elevation surveyed at high-water marks, 5. polygon_elk_dem; shapefile containing mapped extent of flood inundation, derived from the height above ground recorded at high-water marks and the digital elevation model (DEM) raster, 6. depth_dem; raster file for the flood depths derived from the height above ground recorded at high-water marks and the digital elevation model raster. The upstream and downstream mapped area extent is limited to the upstream-most and downstream-most high-water mark locations. In areas of uncertainty of flood extent, the mapped area boundary is lined up with the flood inundation polygon extent. The mapped area boundary polygon was used to extract the final flood inundation polygon and depth raster from the water-surface elevation raster file. Depth raster files were created using the "Topo to Raster" tool in ArcMap (ESRI, 2012). For this study two sets of inundation layers were generated for each reach. One raster file showing flood depths, "depth_hwm", was created by using high-water mark water-surface elevation values on the land surface and a digital elevation model. However, differences in elevation between the surveyed water-surface elevation values at HWMs and the land-surface elevation from the digital elevation model data provided uncertainty in the inundation extent of the generated layers. Often times elevation differences of +/- 20 feet were noticed between the surveyed elevation from a HWM on the land surface and the digital elevation model land-surface elevation. Due to these elevation differences, we incorporated a second method of interpolating the water-surface layer. The recorded height above ground value from the surveyed HWM was added to the digital elevation model land-surface elevation at that point. This created a new water-surface elevation value to be used with the Topo to Raster interpolation method to create a second depth raster, "depth_dem". Both sets of inundation layers are provided.

The mapped area boundary, flood inundation extents, and depth rasters were created to provide an estimated extent of flood inundation along the Greenbrier River within the community of Ronceverte, West Virginia. These geospatial data include the following items: 1. greenbrier_ron_bnd; shapefile containing the polygon showing the mapped area boundary for the Greenbrier River flood maps, 2. greenbrier_ron_hwm; shapefile containing high-water mark points, 3. polygon_greenbrier_ron_hwm; shapefile containing mapped extent of flood inundation, derived from the water-surface elevation surveyed at high-water marks, 4. depth_hwm; raster file for the flood depths derived from the water-surface elevation surveyed at high-water marks, 5. polygon_greenbrier_ron_dem; shapefile containing mapped extent of flood inundation, derived from the height above ground recorded at high-water marks and the digital elevation model (DEM) raster, 6. depth_dem; raster file for the flood depths derived from the height above ground recorded at high-water marks and the digital elevation model raster. The upstream and downstream mapped area extent is limited to the upstream-most and downstream-most high-water mark locations. In areas of uncertainty of flood extent, the mapped area boundary is lined up with the flood inundation polygon extent. The mapped area boundary polygon was used to extract the final flood inundation polygon and depth raster from the water-surface elevation raster file. Depth raster files were created using the "Topo to Raster" tool in ArcMap (ESRI, 2012). For this study two sets of inundation layers were generated for each reach. One raster file showing flood depths, "depth_hwm", was created by using high-water mark water-surface elevation values on the land surface and a digital elevation model. However, differences in elevation between the surveyed water-surface elevation values at HWM’s and the land-surface elevation from the digital elevation model data provided uncertainty in the inundation extent of the generated layers. Often times elevation differences of +/- 20 feet were noticed between the surveyed elevation from a HWM on the land surface and the digital elevation model land-surface elevation. Due to these elevation differences, we incorporated a second method of interpolating the water-surface layer. The recorded height above ground value from the surveyed HWM was added to the digital elevation model land-surface elevation at that point. This created a new water-surface elevation value to be used with the “Topo to Raster” interpolation method to create a second depth raster, "depth_dem". Both sets of inundation layers are provided.

Geospatial Services Land management within the US Forest Service and on the 900,000+ acre Monongahela National Forest (NF) is driven by a wide mix of resource and societal demands that prove a challenge in fulfilling the Forest Service’s mission of “Caring for the Land and Serving the People.” Programmatically, the 2006 Land and Resource Management Plan guide natural resource management activities on lands administered by the Monongahela National Forest. The Forest Plan describes management direction and practices, resource protection methods and monitoring, desired resource conditions, and the availability and suitability of lands for resource management. Technology enables staff to address these land management issues and Forest Plan direction by using a science-based approach to facilitate effective decisions. Monongahela NF geospatial services, using enabling-technologies, incorporate key tools such as Environmental Systems Research Institute’s ArcGIS desktop suite and Trimble’s global positioning system (GPS) units to meet program and Forest needs. Geospatial Datasets The Forest has a broad set of geospatial datasets that capture geographic features across the eastern West Virginia landscape. Many of these datasets are available to the public through our download site. Selected geospatial data that encompass the Monongahela National Forest are available for download from this page. A link to the FGDC-compliant metadata is provided for each dataset. All data are in zipped format (or available from the specified source), in one of two spatial data formats, and in the following coordinate system: Coordinate System: Universal Transverse Mercator Zone: 17 Units: Meters Datum: NAD 1983 Spheroid: GRS 1980 Map files – All map files are in pdf format. These maps illustrate the correlated geospatial data. All maps are under 1 MB unless otherwise noted. Metadata file – This FGDC-compliant metadata file contains information pertaining to the specific geospatial dataset. Shapefile – This downloadable zipped file is in ESRI’s shapefile format. KML file – This downloadable zipped file is in Google Earth’s KML format. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Monongahela National Forest Geospatial Data. File Name: Web Page, url: https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/mnf/landmanagement/gis/?cid=stelprdb5108081 Selected geospatial data that encompass the Monongahela National Forest are available for download from this page.

This layer, Blackwater Falls State Park, shows the boundary of Blackwater Falls State Park in Tucker County, West Virginia. The data associated with this layer were received from Friends of Blackwater. Source and date:The Blackwater Falls State Park boundary was received as a shapefile from Friends of Blackwater on September 29th, 2022. It reflects the boundary shown on the official Blackwater Falls State Park trail map, and was confirmed with tax parcel maps by Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. of Bridgeport, WV.Purpose:The Blackwater Falls State Park boundary was created to show the extent of the park and its proximity to the proposed Corridor H. Processing:ABRA imported the downloaded shapefile polygon layer into ArcGIS and symbolized it as shown to create this feature layer.Symbolization:The following symbolization is how it appears in the Parsons to Davis online map provided by ABRA.Blackwater Falls State Park: green polygon with a black dashed outline

Geology was researched and compiled for use in studies of ecosystem health, environmental impact, soils, groundwater, land use, tectonics, crustal genesis, sedimentary provenance, and any others that could benefit from geographically referenced geological data.

The Washington DC Area geologic map database (DCDB) provides geologic map information of areas to the NW, W, and SW of Washington, DC to various professionals and private citizens who have uses for geologic data. Digital, geographically referenced, geologic data is more versatile than traditional hard copy maps, and facilitates the examination of relationships between numerous aspects of the geology and other types of data such as: land-use data, vegetation characteristics, surface water flow and chemistry, and various types of remotely sensed images. The DCDB was created by combining Arc/Info coverages, designing a Microsoft (MS) Access database, and populating this database. Proposed improvements to the DCDB include the addition of more geochemical, structural, and hydrologic data.

Data are provided in several common GIS formats and MS Access database files. The geologic data themes included are bedrock, surficial, faults and fold axes, neat line, structural data, and sinkholes; the base themes are political boundaries, roads, elevation contours, and hydrography.

Data were originally collected in UTM coordinates, zone 18, NAD 1927, and projected to geographic coordinates (Lat/Long), NAD 1983. The data base is accompanied by large format color maps, a readme.txt file, and a explanatory PDF pamphlet.

This dataset combines the work of several different projects to create a seamless data set for the contiguous United States. Data from four regional Gap Analysis Projects and the LANDFIRE project were combined to make this dataset. In the northwestern United States (Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Washington and Wyoming) data in this map came from the Northwest Gap Analysis Project. In the southwestern United States (Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah) data used in this map came from the Southwest Gap Analysis Project. The data for Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Virginia came from the Southeast Gap Analysis Project and the California data was generated by the updated California Gap land cover project. The Hawaii Gap Analysis project provided the data for Hawaii. In areas of the county (central U.S., Northeast, Alaska) that have not yet been covered by a regional Gap Analysis Project, data from the Landfire project was used. Similarities in the methods used by these projects made possible the combining of the data they derived into one seamless coverage. They all used multi-season satellite imagery (Landsat ETM+) from 1999-2001 in conjunction with digital elevation model (DEM) derived datasets (e.g. elevation, landform) to model natural and semi-natural vegetation. Vegetation classes were drawn from NatureServe's Ecological System Classification (Comer et al. 2003) or classes developed by the Hawaii Gap project. Additionally, all of the projects included land use classes that were employed to describe areas where natural vegetation has been altered. In many areas of the country these classes were derived from the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD). For the majority of classes and, in most areas of the country, a decision tree classifier was used to discriminate ecological system types. In some areas of the country, more manual techniques were used to discriminate small patch systems and systems not distinguishable through topography. The data contains multiple levels of thematic detail. At the most detailed level natural vegetation is represented by NatureServe's Ecological System classification (or in Hawaii the Hawaii GAP classification). These most detailed classifications have been crosswalked to the five highest levels of the National Vegetation Classification (NVC), Class, Subclass, Formation, Division and Macrogroup. This crosswalk allows users to display and analyze the data at different levels of thematic resolution. Developed areas, or areas dominated by introduced species, timber harvest, or water are represented by other classes, collectively refered to as land use classes; these land use classes occur at each of the thematic levels. Raster data in both ArcGIS Grid and ERDAS Imagine format is available for download at http://gis1.usgs.gov/csas/gap/viewer/land_cover/Map.aspx Six layer files are included in the download packages to assist the user in displaying the data at each of the Thematic levels in ArcGIS. In adition to the raster datasets the data is available in Web Mapping Services (WMS) format for each of the six NVC classification levels (Class, Subclass, Formation, Division, Macrogroup, Ecological System) at the following links. http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Class_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Subclass_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Formation_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Division_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_NVC_Macrogroup_Landuse/MapServer http://gis1.usgs.gov/arcgis/rest/services/gap/GAP_Land_Cover_Ecological_Systems_Landuse/MapServer

Geospatial data about West Point, Virginia Parcels. Export to CAD, GIS, PDF, CSV and access via API.

Mineral resource occurrence data covering the world, most thoroughly within the U.S. This database contains the records previously provided in the Mineral Resource Data System (MRDS) of USGS and the Mineral Availability System/Mineral Industry Locator System (MAS/MILS) originated in the U.S. Bureau of Mines, which is now part of USGS. The MRDS is a large and complex relational database developed over several decades by hundreds of researchers and reporters. While database records describe mineral resources worldwide, the compilation of information was intended to cover the United States completely, and its coverage of resources in other countries is incomplete. The content of MRDS records was drawn from reports previously published or made available to USGS researchers. Some of those original source materials are no longer available. The information contained in MRDS was intended to reflect the reports used as sources and is current only as of the date of those source reports. Consequently MRDS does not reflect up-to-date changes to the operating status of mines, ownership, land status, production figures and estimates of reserves and resources, or the nature, size, and extent of workings. Information on the geological characteristics of the mineral resource are likely to remain correct, but aspects involving human activity are likely to be out of date.