Geographical data provides relevant insight for a wide scope of applications, providing a robust picture of multiple geographical layers to enhance geospatial analysis, segmentation, personalization and audience engagement.

Acxiom combines data from multiple reliable private and public sources, summarizing individual and household data attributes for a given geographic level to create robust unique estimates for each area. The use of proven granular data and multivariate procedures ensure the projections accurately reflect the area. Once aggregated, it is no longer possible to identify individuals and the data can be considered anonymous, protecting consumers’ privacy in accordance with local and EU privacy laws.
An extensive range of demographic and lifestyle attributes are available, including:  Lifestage Demographics  Household Composition  Daytime Population  Home and Property  Income and Employment  Affordability and expenditure  Lifestyles, Interest and Charity  Automotive  Finance and Credit  Media, Channel and Technology  Personicx Segmentation Attributes are a combination of proportions, mean values and scores for a range of demographic, income and lifestyle data at a postcode level.

Use cases & Benefits: Elevate your analysis and marketing with an improved understanding of local areas and market potential to:  Optimize strategic planning for site location and sales territories  Define the right mix of products and services to offer based on market characteristics.  Target individuals geographically with online and offline communications

This digital dataset was created as part of a U.S. Geological Survey study, done in cooperation with the Monterey County Water Resource Agency, to conduct a hydrologic resource assessment and develop an integrated numerical hydrologic model of the hydrologic system of Salinas Valley, CA. As part of this larger study, the USGS developed this digital dataset of geologic data and three-dimensional hydrogeologic framework models, referred to here as the Salinas Valley Geological Framework (SVGF), that define the elevation, thickness, extent, and lithology-based texture variations of nine hydrogeologic units in Salinas Valley, CA. The digital dataset includes a geospatial database that contains two main elements as GIS feature datasets: (1) input data to the 3D framework and textural models, within a feature dataset called “ModelInput”; and (2) interpolated elevation, thicknesses, and textural variability of the hydrogeologic units stored as arrays of polygonal cells, within a feature dataset called “ModelGrids”. The model input data in this data release include stratigraphic and lithologic information from water, monitoring, and oil and gas wells, as well as data from selected published cross sections, point data derived from geologic maps and geophysical data, and data sampled from parts of previous framework models. Input surface and subsurface data have been reduced to points that define the elevation of the top of each hydrogeologic units at x,y locations; these point data, stored in a GIS feature class named “ModelInputData”, serve as digital input to the framework models. The location of wells used a sources of subsurface stratigraphic and lithologic information are stored within the GIS feature class “ModelInputData”, but are also provided as separate point feature classes in the geospatial database. Faults that offset hydrogeologic units are provided as a separate line feature class. Borehole data are also released as a set of tables, each of which may be joined or related to well location through a unique well identifier present in each table. Tables are in Excel and ascii comma-separated value (CSV) format and include separate but related tables for well location, stratigraphic information of the depths to top and base of hydrogeologic units intercepted downhole, downhole lithologic information reported at 10-foot intervals, and information on how lithologic descriptors were classed as sediment texture. Two types of geologic frameworks were constructed and released within a GIS feature dataset called “ModelGrids”: a hydrostratigraphic framework where the elevation, thickness, and spatial extent of the nine hydrogeologic units were defined based on interpolation of the input data, and (2) a textural model for each hydrogeologic unit based on interpolation of classed downhole lithologic data. Each framework is stored as an array of polygonal cells: essentially a “flattened”, two-dimensional representation of a digital 3D geologic framework. The elevation and thickness of the hydrogeologic units are contained within a single polygon feature class SVGF_3DHFM, which contains a mesh of polygons that represent model cells that have multiple attributes including XY location, elevation and thickness of each hydrogeologic unit. Textural information for each hydrogeologic unit are stored in a second array of polygonal cells called SVGF_TextureModel. The spatial data are accompanied by non-spatial tables that describe the sources of geologic information, a glossary of terms, a description of model units that describes the nine hydrogeologic units modeled in this study. A data dictionary defines the structure of the dataset, defines all fields in all spatial data attributer tables and all columns in all nonspatial tables, and duplicates the Entity and Attribute information contained in the metadata file. Spatial data are also presented as shapefiles. Downhole data from boreholes are released as a set of tables related by a unique well identifier, tables are in Excel and ascii comma-separated value (CSV) format.

Spatial analysis and statistical summaries of the Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) provide land managers and decision makers with a general assessment of management intent for biodiversity protection, natural resource management, and recreation access across the nation. This data release presents results from statistical summaries of the PAD-US 2.1 protection status for various land unit boundaries (Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) Summary Statistics by GAP Status Code) as well as summaries of public access status (Public Access Statistics), provided in Microsoft Excel readable workbooks, the vector GIS analysis files and scripts used to complete the summaries, and raster GIS analysis files for combination with other raster data. The PAD-US 2.1 Combined Fee, Designation, Easement feature class in the full inventory (with Military Lands and Tribal Areas from the Proclamation and Other Planning Boundaries feature class) was modified to prioritize and remove overlapping management designations, limiting overestimation in protection status or public access statistics and to support user needs for vector and raster analysis data. Analysis files were clipped to the Census State boundary file to define the extent and fill in areas (largely private land) outside the PAD-US, providing a common denominator for statistical summaries.

These datasets represent management units within in-force water sharing plans across NSW, including regulated, unregulated and groundwater plans (or a combination of these). The data includes both water sources and management zones (where applicable) derived from plans gazetted under the NSW Water Management Act 2000. The boundaries of these water sources and management zones are used to define areas in which specific management rules apply. As such, this data may be used to understand which water sharing plan rules apply to a specific location. The plans are in place for 10 years but may be amended within this time. Any updates to water source or management zone boundaries as a result of a plan being amended during, or replaced following its 10 year term will be made available at that time.

PLEASE NOTE: In the case of any discrepancy between this digital dataset and the published Water Sharing Plan (accessible on the www.legislation.nsw.gov.au site) the instrument as made by the Minister remains the authoritative source and should be used to both interpret the intent of the Plan and in subsequent decision making. Best endeavours have been made in collating relevant Water Sharing Plan boundary and attribution contained in this dataset. However, no warranty is provided as to the accuracy or currency of this representation. The department does not warrant and is not liable for the use of this material as per the licenced sharing conditions CC-BY 4.0.

From the site: "The Assessment Unit is the fundamental unit used in the National Assessment Project for the assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources. The Assessment Unit is defined within the context of the higher-level Total Petroleum System. The Assessment Unit is shown here as a geographic boundary interpreted, defined, and mapped by the geologist responsible for the province and incorporates a set of known or postulated oil and (or) gas accumulations sharing similar geologic, geographic, and temporal properties within the Total Petroleum System, such as source rock, timing, migration pathways, trapping mechanism, and hydrocarbon type. The Assessment Unit boundary is defined geologically as the limits of the geologic elements that define the Assessment Unit, such as limits of reservoir rock, geologic structures, source rock, and seal lithologies. The only exceptions to this are Assessment Units that border the Federal-State water boundary. In these cases, the Federal-State water boundary forms part of the Assessment Unit boundary."

Spatial analysis and statistical summaries of the Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) provide land managers and decision makers with a general assessment of management intent for biodiversity protection, natural resource management, and recreation access across the nation. The PAD-US 3.0 Combined Fee, Designation, Easement feature class (with Military Lands and Tribal Areas from the Proclamation and Other Planning Boundaries feature class) was modified to remove overlaps, avoiding overestimation in protected area statistics and to support user needs. A Python scripted process ("PADUS3_0_CreateVectorAnalysisFileScript.zip") associated with this data release prioritized overlapping designations (e.g. Wilderness within a National Forest) based upon their relative biodiversity conservation status (e.g. GAP Status Code 1 over 2), public access values (in the order of Closed, Restricted, Open, Unknown), and geodatabase load order (records are deliberately organized in the PAD-US full inventory with fee owned lands loaded before overlapping management designations, and easements). The Vector Analysis File ("PADUS3_0VectorAnalysisFile_ClipCensus.zip") associated item of PAD-US 3.0 Spatial Analysis and Statistics ( https://doi.org/10.5066/P9KLBB5D ) was clipped to the Census state boundary file to define the extent and serve as a common denominator for statistical summaries. Boundaries of interest to stakeholders (State, Department of the Interior Region, Congressional District, County, EcoRegions I-IV, Urban Areas, Landscape Conservation Cooperative) were incorporated into separate geodatabase feature classes to support various data summaries ("PADUS3_0VectorAnalysisFileOtherExtents_Clip_Census.zip") and Comma-separated Value (CSV) tables ("PADUS3_0SummaryStatistics_TabularData_CSV.zip") summarizing "PADUS3_0VectorAnalysisFileOtherExtents_Clip_Census.zip" are provided as an alternative format and enable users to explore and download summary statistics of interest (Comma-separated Table [CSV], Microsoft Excel Workbook [.XLSX], Portable Document Format [.PDF] Report) from the PAD-US Lands and Inland Water Statistics Dashboard ( https://www.usgs.gov/programs/gap-analysis-project/science/pad-us-statistics ). In addition, a "flattened" version of the PAD-US 3.0 combined file without other extent boundaries ("PADUS3_0VectorAnalysisFile_ClipCensus.zip") allow for other applications that require a representation of overall protection status without overlapping designation boundaries. The "PADUS3_0VectorAnalysis_State_Clip_CENSUS2020" feature class ("PADUS3_0VectorAnalysisFileOtherExtents_Clip_Census.gdb") is the source of the PAD-US 3.0 raster files (associated item of PAD-US 3.0 Spatial Analysis and Statistics, https://doi.org/10.5066/P9KLBB5D ). Note, the PAD-US inventory is now considered functionally complete with the vast majority of land protection types represented in some manner, while work continues to maintain updates and improve data quality (see inventory completeness estimates at: http://www.protectedlands.net/data-stewards/ ). In addition, changes in protected area status between versions of the PAD-US may be attributed to improving the completeness and accuracy of the spatial data more than actual management actions or new acquisitions. USGS provides no legal warranty for the use of this data. While PAD-US is the official aggregation of protected areas ( https://www.fgdc.gov/ngda-reports/NGDA_Datasets.html ), agencies are the best source of their lands data.

Learn state-of-the-art skills to build compelling, useful, and fun Web GIS apps easily, with no programming experience required.Building on the foundation of the previous three editions, Getting to Know Web GIS, fourth edition,features the latest advances in Esri’s entire Web GIS platform, from the cloud server side to the client side.Discover and apply what’s new in ArcGIS Online, ArcGIS Enterprise, Map Viewer, Esri StoryMaps, Web AppBuilder, ArcGIS Survey123, and more.Learn about recent Web GIS products such as ArcGIS Experience Builder, ArcGIS Indoors, and ArcGIS QuickCapture. Understand updates in mobile GIS such as ArcGIS Collector and AuGeo, and then build your own web apps.Further your knowledge and skills with detailed sections and chapters on ArcGIS Dashboards, ArcGIS Analytics for the Internet of Things, online spatial analysis, image services, 3D web scenes, ArcGIS API for JavaScript, and best practices in Web GIS.Each chapter is written for immediate productivity with a good balance of principles and hands-on exercises and includes:A conceptual discussion section to give you the big picture and principles,A detailed tutorial section with step-by-step instructions,A Q/A section to answer common questions,An assignment section to reinforce your comprehension, andA list of resources with more information.Ideal for classroom lab work and on-the-job training for GIS students, instructors, GIS analysts, managers, web developers, and other professionals, Getting to Know Web GIS, fourth edition, uses a holistic approach to systematically teach the breadth of the Esri Geospatial Cloud.AUDIENCEProfessional and scholarly. College/higher education. General/trade.AUTHOR BIOPinde Fu leads the ArcGIS Platform Engineering team at Esri Professional Services and teaches at universities including Harvard University Extension School. His specialties include web and mobile GIS technologies and applications in various industries. Several of his projects have won specialachievement awards. Fu is the lead author of Web GIS: Principles and Applications (Esri Press, 2010).Pub Date: Print: 7/21/2020 Digital: 6/16/2020 Format: Trade paperISBN: Print: 9781589485921 Digital: 9781589485938 Trim: 7.5 x 9 in.Price: Print: $94.99 USD Digital: $94.99 USD Pages: 490TABLE OF CONTENTSPrefaceForeword1 Get started with Web GIS2 Hosted feature layers and storytelling with GIS3 Web AppBuilder for ArcGIS and ArcGIS Experience Builder4 Mobile GIS5 Tile layers and on-premises Web GIS6 Spatial temporal data and real-time GIS7 3D web scenes8 Spatial analysis and geoprocessing9 Image service and online raster analysis10 Web GIS programming with ArcGIS API for JavaScriptPinde Fu | Interview with Esri Press | 2020-07-10 | 15:56 | Link.

This digital dataset was created as part of a U.S. Geological Survey study in cooperation with the Santa Barbara County Water Agency to conduct a hydrologic resource assessment and develop an integrated numerical hydrologic model of the hydrologic system of Cuyama Valley, CA. As part of this larger study, the USGS developed this digital dataset of geologic data and three-dimensional hydrogeologic framework models, referred to here as the Cuyama Valley 3-D hydrogeologic framework models (3DHFM), that define the elevation, thickness, extent, and lithology-based texture variations of three hydrogeologic units in the Cuyama Valley, CA, groundwater basin. A USGS report that described the construction of 3-D geologic framework and textural models for Cuyama Valley groundwater basin was published in 2013 (Sweetkind and others, 2013). This data release formalizes the input geologic data and model outputs as a digital dataset. The Cuyama Valley 3DHFM incorporates as input data stratigraphic and lithologic information derived from water, monitoring, and oil and gas wells, as well as data from geologic maps and interpreted structure contour maps. Input surface and subsurface data have been reduced to points that define the top elevation and textural or grain-size characteristics of each hydrogeologic units at x,y locations; these point data sets serve as digital input to the framework models. The location of wells used sources of subsurface stratigraphic and lithologic information are provided as separate point feature classes in a geospatial database. Faults that offset hydrogeologic units are provided as a separate line feature class. Borehole data are also provided in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet that includes separate TABs for well location, stratigraphic information of the depths to top and base of hydrogeologic units intercepted downhole. Two types of geologic frameworks were constructed: (1) a hydrostratigraphic framework where the elevation, thickness, and spatial extent of the three basin-fill hydrogeologic units were defined based on interpolation of the input data, and (2) a textural model for each hydrogeologic unit based on kriging-based interpolation of classed downhole lithologic data. Each of the frameworks is stored within a second geospatial database as an array of polygonal cells or cell centroids: essentially a “flattened”, two-dimensional representation of a digital 3D geologic framework. The elevation and thickness of the hydrogeologic units are contained within a point feature class which contains a mesh of cell centroids that represent model cells that have multiple attributes including x,y location, elevation, and thickness of each hydrogeologic unit. Computed textural information for each of the three basin-fill hydrogeologic units are stored in separate feature classes of polygonal cells where a single textural variable “percent coarse grained” is an attribute at each x,y location. The spatial data are accompanied by non-spatial tables that describe the sources of geologic information, a glossary of terms, a description of model units, and a Data Dictionary that duplicates the Entity and Attribute information contained in the metadata file. Spatial data are also presented as shapefiles and borehole data are provided in Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. The elevation, thickness, and textural model of each hydrogeologic unit are also released as raster files.

This data release provides shapefiles that represent storage assessment units (SAUs) and drilling-density cells in the Anadarko and Southern Oklahoma Basins of Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas in the United States. The SAU is the fundamental unit used in the National Assessment of Geologic Carbon Dioxide Storage Resources project for the assessment of geologic CO2 storage resources. The SAU is a geographic polygon interpreted, defined, and mapped by the geologist responsible for the assessment interval. Individual SAUs are defined on the basis of common geologic and hydrologic characteristics. The resource that is assessed is the mass of CO2 that can be stored in the technically accessible pore volume of a storage formation. The technically accessible storage resource is one that may be available using present-day geological and engineering knowledge and technology for CO2 injection into geologic formations and therefore is not a total in-place resource estimate. The SAU polygon is defined geologically as the limits of the geologic elements that define the SAU, such as limits of reservoir rock, geologic structures, depth, and seal lithologies. The only exceptions to this are SAUs that border the international, or Federal-State water boundary. In these cases, the international or Federal-State water boundary forms part of the SAU boundary. Drilling-density cell maps show the number of wells that have been drilled into the SAU. Each 1-square-mile cell has a count for the number of unique well boreholes drilled into the SAU. For a given sedimentary basin, the National Assessment of Geologic Carbon Dioxide Storage Resources project identifies SAUs containing the potential for storage and sequestration of carbon dioxide. Proprietary well header data from IHS ENERDEQ through 2010 were queried to determine which wells were drilled into specific SAUs. The coordinates of wells are proprietary and cannot be released; however, counts of the number of wells per square mile are presented in the well drilling density data layer.

OpenStreetMap (OSM) is a collaborative project to create a free editable map of the world. Created in 2004, it was inspired by the success of Wikipedia and more than two million registered users who can add data by manual survey, GPS devices, aerial photography, and other free sources.

OSM is produced as a public good by volunteers, and there are no guarantees about data quality. OpenStreetMap® is open data, licensed under the Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL) by the OpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF).

OSM represents physical features on the ground (e.g. roads or buildings) using tabs attached to its basic data structure (its nodes, ways, and relations). Each tag describes a geographic attribute of the feature being shown by the specific node, way or relation.

Nodes are one of the core elements in the OSM data model. It consists of a single point in space defined by its latitude, longitude and node id. Nodes can be used to define standalone point features.

Spatial analysis and statistical summaries of the Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) provide land managers and decision makers with a general assessment of management intent for biodiversity protection, natural resource management, and outdoor recreation access across the nation. This data release presents results from statistical summaries of the PAD-US 4.0 protection status (by GAP Status Code) and public access status for various land unit boundaries (PAD-US 4.0 Vector Analysis and Summary Statistics). Summary statistics are also available to explore and download from the PAD-US Statistics Dashboard ( https://www.usgs.gov/programs/gap-analysis-project/science/pad-us-statistics ). The vector GIS analysis file, source data used to summarize statistics for areas of interest to stakeholders (National, State, Department of the Interior Region, Congressional District, County, EcoRegions I-IV, Urban Areas, Landscape Conservation Cooperative), and complete Summary Statistics Tabular Data (CSV) are included in this data release. Raster analysis files are also available for combination with other raster data (PAD-US 4.0 Raster Analysis). The PAD-US Combined Fee, Designation, Easement feature class in the Full Inventory Database, with Military Lands and Tribal Areas from the Proclamation and Other Planning Boundaries feature class, was modified to prioritize and remove overlapping management designations, limiting overestimation in protection status or public access statistics and to support user needs for vector and raster analysis data. Analysis files in this data release were clipped to the Census State boundary file to define the extent and fill in areas (largely private land) outside the PAD-US, providing a common denominator for statistical summaries.

Buildings_BACI

   File Geodatabase Feature Class


   Thumbnail Not Available

   Tags

   Buildings, structures, ruins, storage tanks, silos, water towers, Baltimore City Planimetric, Biophysical Resources, Land, Socio-Economic Resources, Capital




   Summary


   This data was created as a landbase feature as part of the planimetric data.


   Description


   This dataset represents photogrammetrically captured Building footprints => 100sq. ft. including storage tanks, silos, water towers, power plants, substations, and structures under construction and ruins. Feature capture rules:


   Buildings - Outline edge of roofline. All buildings shall be captured as polygons. In commercial areas especially, it is important that the plotted building represent the face of the building where it meets the sidewalk. Polygons shall be created for the outer boundary of the building when a partywall exists. Does not include sheds and small temporary structures. Attached garages shall be represented as part of the building structure. Large structures such as stadiums shall also be represented.

   Structures under construction or demolition - Delineate the rooflines of all buildings under construction as interpreted from aerial photography. If roofline is not visible compile visible foundation or walls

   Ruins - Delineate old overgrown areas of old structures that have been demolished or are in disrepair. Original data will be reclassified to define as separate subtype.

   Storage tanks, silos, and water towers - Outlines of all storage tanks, silos and water towers. . Original data will be reclassified to define as separate subtype.

   Power plants and substations - Outline of power plant and substation structure. . Original data will be reclassified to define as separate subtype.


   Credits

   There are no credits for this item.


   Use limitations


   Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of these data. The City of Baltimore, Maryland makes no representations nor warranties, either express or implied, regarding the accuracy of this information or its suitability for any particular purpose whatsoever. The data is licensed "as is" and the City of Baltimore will not be liable for its use or misuse by any party. Reliance of these data is at the risk of the user.


   Extent



   West -76.714715  East -76.525355 

   North 39.375162  South 39.193953 




   Scale Range

   There is no scale range for this item.

The Referrals Spatial Database records locations of referrals submitted to the Department under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC Act) 1999. A proponent (those who are proposing a development) must supply the maximum extent (location) of any proposed activities that need to be assessed under the EPBC Act through an application process. Referral boundaries should not be misinterpreted as development footprints but where referrals have been received by the Department. It should be noted that not all referrals captured within the Referrals Spatial Database, are assessed and approved by the Minister for the Environment, as some are withdrawn before assessment can take place. For more detailed information on a referral a URL is provided to the EPBC Act Public notices pages. Status and detailed planning documentation is available on the EPBC Act Public notices (http://epbcnotices.environment.gov.au/referralslist/). This includes some summary statistics and public notifications. In the first instance where a proponent provides GIS data through a referral application, this is loaded as the polygons for a referral. Where this doesn't exist other means to digitise boundaries are employed to provide a relatively accurate reflection of the maximum extent for which the referral may impact. This sometimes takes the form of heads up digitising planning documents, sourcing from other state databases (such as PSMA Australia) features and coordinates supplied through the application forms.This data has been licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence. More information can be found at http://www.ausgoal.gov.au/creative-commons. Referral spatial boundaries are indicative only and should not be used to define the totality of onground works including being used as a substitute for an onground development footprint. Through the assessment and approval process, boundaries may be updated by a proponent to reflect improved understanding of the extent of a development. Where advised ERIN update the EPBC Act Referrals Spatial Database to reflect these changes however no guarantee is given to this. (c) Commonwealth of Australia (Department of the Environment and Energy) 2018 CC - Attribution (CC BY)

State Legislative Districts (SLDs) are the areas from which members are elected to state legislatures. The SLDs embody the upper (senate) and lower (house) chambers of the state legislature. Nebraska has a unicameral legislature and the District of Columbia has a single council, both of which the Census Bureau treats as upper-chamber legislative areas for the purpose of data presentation; there are no data by lower-chamber legislative area for either Nebraska or the District of Columbia. A unique three-character census code, identified by state participants, is assigned to each SLD within a state. In Connecticut, Illinois, Louisiana, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, and Puerto Rico, the Redistricting Data Program (RDP) participant did not define the SLDs to cover all of the state or state equivalent area. In these areas with no SLDs defined, the code "ZZZ" has been assigned, which is treated as a single SLD for purposes of data presentation.The most recent SLD boundaries collected by the Census Bureau are for the 2022 election year and were provided by state-level participants through the RDP.Download: https://www2.census.gov/geo/tiger/TGRGDB24/tlgdb_2024_a_us_legislative.gdb.zip Layer: State_Legislative_Districts_UpperMetadata: https://meta.geo.census.gov/data/existing/decennial/GEO/GPMB/TIGERline/Current_19115/series_tl_2023_sldu.shp.iso.xml

Congressional districts are the 444 areas from which people are elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. After the apportionment of congressional seats among the states based on census population counts, each state is responsible for establishing congressional districts for the purpose of electing representatives. Each congressional district is to be as equal in population to all other congressional districts in a state as practicable.The 119th Congress is seated from January 2023 through December 2024. In Connecticut, Illinois, and New Hampshire, the Redistricting Data Program (RDP) participant did not define the congressional districts to cover all of the state or state equivalent area. In these areas with no congressional districts defined, the code "ZZ" has been assigned, which is treated as a single congressional district for purposes of data presentation. The TIGER/Line data for the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas (American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands) each contain a single record for the non-voting delegate district in these areas. The boundaries of all other congressional districts reflect information provided to the Census Bureau by the states by August 31, 2022.Download: https://www2.census.gov/geo/tiger/TGRGDB24/tlgdb_2024_a_us_legislative.gdb.zip Layer: Congressional_DistrictsMetadata: https://meta.geo.census.gov/data/existing/decennial/GEO/GPMB/TIGERline/Current_19115/series_tl_2023_cd118.shp.iso.xml

ABSTRACT: The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center (UMESC) has produced the Vegetation Spatial Database Coverage (vegetation map) for the Acadia National Park Vegetation Mapping Project, USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program (VMP). The vegetation map is of Acadia National Park (NP) and extended environs, providing 99,693 hectares (246,347 acres) of map data. Of this coverage, 52,872 hectares (130,650 acres) is non-vegetated ocean, bay, and estuary (53% of coverage). Acadia NP comprises 19,276 hectares (47,633 acres) of the total data coverage area (19%, 40% not counting ocean and estuary data). Over 7,120 polygons make up the coverage, each with map class description and, for vegetation classes, physiognomic feature information. The spatial database provides crosswalk information to all National Vegetation Classification System (NVCS) floristic and physiognomic levels, and to other established classification systems (NatureServe's U.S. Terrestrial Ecological System Classification, Maine Natural Community Classification, and the USGS Land Use and Land Cover Classification). This mapping project has identified 53 NVCS associations (vegetation communities) at Acadia National Park through analyses of vegetation sample data. These associations are represented in the map coverage with 33 map classes. With all vegetation types, land use classes, and park specific categories combined, 57 map classes define the ground features within the project area (58 classes including the class for no map data). Each polygon within the spatial database map is identified with one of these map classes. In addition, physiognomic modifiers are added to map classes representing vegetation to describe the vegetation structure within a polygon (density, pattern, and height). The spatial database was produced from the interpretation of spring 1997 1:15,840-scale color infrared aerial photographs. The standard minimum mapping unit (MMU) applied is 0.5 hectares (1.25 acres). The interpreted data were transferred and automated using base maps produced from USGS digital orthophoto quadrangles. The finished spatial database is a single seamless coverage, projected in Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 19, with datum in North American Datum of 1983. The estimated overall thematic accuracy for vegetation map classes is 80%.

From the site: "The Assessment Unit is the fundamental unit used in the National Assessment Project for the assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources. The Assessment Unit is defined within the context of the higher-level Total Petroleum System. The Assessment Unit is shown here as a geographic boundary interpreted, defined, and mapped by the geologist responsible for the province and incorporates a set of known or postulated oil and (or) gas accumulations sharing similar geologic, geographic, and temporal properties within the Total Petroleum System, such as source rock, timing, migration pathways, trapping mechanism, and hydrocarbon type. The Assessment Unit boundary is defined geologically as the limits of the geologic elements that define the Assessment Unit, such as limits of reservoir rock, geologic structures, source rock, and seal lithologies. The only exceptions to this are Assessment Units that border the Federal-State water boundary. In these cases, the Federal-State water boundary forms part of the Assessment Unit boundary."

Geoscience Australia has been deriving raster sediment datasets for the continental Australian Exclusive Economic Zone (AEEZ) using existing marine samples collected by Geoscience Australia and external organisations. Since seabed sediment data are collected at sparsely and unevenly distributed locations, spatial interpolation methods become essential tools for generating spatially continuous information. Previous studies have examined a number of factors that affect the performance of spatial interpolation methods. These factors include sample density, data variation, sampling design, spatial distribution of samples, data quality, correlation of primary and secondary variables, and interaction among some of these factors. Apart from these factors, a spatial reference system used to define sample locations is potentially another factor and is worth investigating. In this study, we aim to examine the degree to which spatial reference systems can affect the predictive accuracy of spatial interpolation methods in predicting marine environmental variables in the continental AEEZ. Firstly, we reviewed spatial reference systems including geographic coordinate systems and projected coordinate systems/map projections, with particular attention paid to map projection classification, distortion and selection schemes; secondly, we selected eight systems that are suitable for the spatial prediction of marine environmental data in the continental AEEZ. These systems include two geographic coordinate systems (WGS84 and GDA94) and six map projections (Lambert Equal-area Azimuthal, Equidistant Azimuthal, Stereographic Conformal Azimuthal, Albers Equal-Area Conic, Equidistant Conic and Lambert Conformal Conic); thirdly, we applied two most commonly used spatial interpolation methods, i.e. inverse distance squared (IDS) and ordinary kriging (OK) to a marine dataset projected using the eight systems. The accuracy of the methods was assessed using leave-one-out cross validation in terms of their predictive errors and, visualization of prediction maps. The difference in the predictive errors between WGS84 and the map projections were compared using paired Mann-Whitney test for both IDW and OK. The data manipulation and modelling work were implemented in ArcGIS and R. The result from this study confirms that the little shift caused by the tectonic movement between WGS84 and GDA94 does not affect the accuracy of the spatial interpolation methods examined (IDS and OK). With respect to whether the unit difference in geographical coordinates or distortions introduced by map projections has more effect on the performance of the spatial interpolation methods, the result shows that the accuracies of the spatial interpolation methods in predicting seabed sediment data in the SW region of AEEZ are similar and the differences are considered negligible, both in terms of predictive errors and prediction map visualisations. Among the six map projections, the slightly better prediction performance from Lambert Equal-Area Azimuthal and Equidistant Azimuthal projections for both IDS and OK indicates that Equal-Area and Equidistant projections with Azimuthal surfaces are more suitable than other projections for spatial predictions of seabed sediment data in the SW region of AEEZ. The outcomes of this study have significant implications for spatial predictions in environmental science. Future spatial prediction work using a data density greater than that in this study may use data based on WGS84 directly and may not have to project the data using certain spatial reference systems. The findings are applicable to spatial predictions of both marine and terrestrial environmental variables.

You can also purchase hard copies of Geoscience Australia data and other products at http://www.ga.gov.au/products-services/how-to-order-products/sales-centre.html

Under the direction and funding of the National Cooperative Mapping Program with guidance and encouragement from the United States Geological Survey (USGS), a digital database of three-dimensional (3D) vector data, displayed as two-dimensional (2D) data-extent bounding polygons. This geodatabase is to act as a virtual and digital inventory of 3D structure contour and isopach vector data for the USGS National Geologic Synthesis (NGS) team. This data will be available visually through a USGS web application and can be queried using complimentary nonspatial tables associated with each data harboring polygon. This initial publication contains 60 datasets collected directly from USGS specific publications and federal repositories. Further publications of dataset collections in versioned releases will be annotated in additional appendices, respectfully. These datasets can be identified from their specific version through their nonspatial tables. This digital dataset contains spatial extents of the 2D geologic vector data as polygon features that are attributed with unique identifiers that link the spatial data to nonspatial tables that define the data sources used and describe various aspects of each published model. The nonspatial DataSources table includes full citation and URL address for both published model reports, any digital model data released as a separate publication, and input type of vector data, using several classification schemes. A tabular glossary defines terms used in the dataset. A tabular data dictionary describes the entity and attribute information for all attributes of the geospatial data and the accompanying nonspatial tables.

This digital GIS dataset and accompanying nonspatial files synthesize model outputs from a regional-scale volumetric 3-D geologic model that portrays the generalized subsurface geology of the Powder River Basin and Williston Basin regions from a wide variety of input data sources. The study area includes the Hartville Uplift, Laramie Range, Bighorn Mountains, Powder River Basin, and Williston Basin. The model data released here consist of the stratigraphic contact elevation of major Phanerozoic sedimentary units that broadly define the geometry of the subsurface, the elevation of Tertiary intrusive and Precambrian basement rocks, and point data that illustrate an estimation of the three-dimensional geometry of fault surfaces. The presence of folds and unconformities are implied by the 3D geometry of the stratigraphic units, but these are not included as discrete features in this data release. The 3D geologic model was constructed from a wide variety of publicly available surface and subsurface geologic data; none of these input data are part of this Data Release, but data sources are thoroughly documented such that a user could obtain these data from other sources if desired. The PowderRiverWilliston3D geodatabase contains 40 subsurface horizons in raster format that represent the tops of modeled subsurface units, and a feature dataset “GeologicModel”. The GeologicModel feature dataset contains a feature class of 30 estimated faults served in elevation grid format (FaultPoints), a feature class illustrating the spatial extent of 22 fault blocks (FaultBlockFootprints), and a feature class containing a polygon delineating the study areas (ModelBoundary). Nonspatial tables define the data sources used (DataSources), define terms used in the dataset (Glossary), and provide a description of the modeled surfaces (DescriptionOfModelUnits). Separate file folders contain the vector data in shapefile format, the raster data in ASCII format, and the tables as comma-separated values. In addition, a tabular data dictionary describes the entity and attribute information for all attributes of the geospatial data and the accompanying nonspatial tables (EntityAndAttributes). An included READ_ME file documents the process of manipulating and interpreting publicly available surface and subsurface geologic data to create the model. It additionally contains critical information about model units, and uncertainty regarding their ability to predict true ground conditions. Accompanying this data release is the “PowderRiverWillistonInputSummaryTable.csv”, which tabulates the global settings for each fault block, the stratigraphic horizons modeled in each fault block, the types and quantity of data inputs for each stratigraphic horizon, and then the settings associated with each data input.