The National Hydrography Dataset Plus High Resolution (NHDplus High Resolution) maps the lakes, ponds, streams, rivers and other surface waters of the United States. Created by the US Geological Survey, NHDPlus High Resolution provides mean annual flow and velocity estimates for rivers and streams. Additional attributes provide connections between features facilitating complicated analyses.For more information on the NHDPlus High Resolution dataset see the User’s Guide for the National Hydrography Dataset Plus (NHDPlus) High Resolution.Dataset SummaryPhenomenon Mapped: Surface waters and related features of the United States and associated territoriesGeographic Extent: The Contiguous United States, Hawaii, portions of Alaska, Puerto Rico, Guam, US Virgin Islands, Northern Marianas Islands, and American SamoaProjection: Web Mercator Auxiliary Sphere Visible Scale: Visible at all scales but layer draws best at scales larger than 1:1,000,000Source: USGSUpdate Frequency: AnnualPublication Date: July 2022This layer was symbolized in the ArcGIS Map Viewer and while the features will draw in the Classic Map Viewer the advanced symbology will not. Prior to publication, the network and non-network flowline feature classes were combined into a single flowline layer. Similarly, the Area and Waterbody feature classes were merged under a single schema.Attribute fields were added to the flowline and waterbody layers to simplify symbology and enhance the layer's pop-ups. Fields added include Pop-up Title, Pop-up Subtitle, Esri Symbology (waterbodies only), and Feature Code Description. All other attributes are from the original dataset. No data values -9999 and -9998 were converted to Null values.What can you do with this layer?Feature layers work throughout the ArcGIS system. Generally your work flow with feature layers will begin in ArcGIS Online or ArcGIS Pro. Below are just a few of the things you can do with a feature service in Online and Pro.ArcGIS OnlineAdd this layer to a map in the map viewer. The layer or a map containing it can be used in an application. Change the layer’s transparency and set its visibility rangeOpen the layer’s attribute table and make selections. Selections made in the map or table are reflected in the other. Center on selection allows you to zoom to features selected in the map or table and show selected records allows you to view the selected records in the table.Apply filters. For example you can set a filter to show larger streams and rivers using the mean annual flow attribute or the stream order attribute.Change the layer’s style and symbologyAdd labels and set their propertiesCustomize the pop-upUse as an input to the ArcGIS Online analysis tools. This layer works well as a reference layer with the trace downstream and watershed tools. The buffer tool can be used to draw protective boundaries around streams and the extract data tool can be used to create copies of portions of the data.ArcGIS ProAdd this layer to a 2d or 3d map.Use as an input to geoprocessing. For example, copy features allows you to select then export portions of the data to a new feature class.Change the symbology and the attribute field used to symbolize the dataOpen table and make interactive selections with the mapModify the pop-upsApply Definition Queries to create sub-sets of the layerThis layer is part of the ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World that provides an easy way to explore the landscape layers and many other beautiful and authoritative maps on hundreds of topics.Questions?Please leave a comment below if you have a question about this layer, and we will get back to you as soon as possible.

This dataset includes all 7 metro counties that have made their parcel data freely available without a license or fees.

This dataset is a compilation of tax parcel polygon and point layers assembled into a common coordinate system from Twin Cities, Minnesota metropolitan area counties. No attempt has been made to edgematch or rubbersheet between counties. A standard set of attribute fields is included for each county. The attributes are the same for the polygon and points layers. Not all attributes are populated for all counties.

NOTICE: The standard set of attributes changed to the MN Parcel Data Transfer Standard on 1/1/2019.
https://www.mngeo.state.mn.us/committee/standards/parcel_attrib/parcel_attrib.html

See section 5 of the metadata for an attribute summary.

Detailed information about the attributes can be found in the Metro Regional Parcel Attributes document.

The polygon layer contains one record for each real estate/tax parcel polygon within each county's parcel dataset. Some counties have polygons for each individual condominium, and others do not. (See Completeness in Section 2 of the metadata for more information.) The points layer includes the same attribute fields as the polygon dataset. The points are intended to provide information in situations where multiple tax parcels are represented by a single polygon. One primary example of this is the condominium, though some counties stacked polygons for condos. Condominiums, by definition, are legally owned as individual, taxed real estate units. Records for condominiums may not show up in the polygon dataset. The points for the point dataset often will be randomly placed or stacked within the parcel polygon with which they are associated.

The polygon layer is broken into individual county shape files. The points layer is provided as both individual county files and as one file for the entire metro area.

In many places a one-to-one relationship does not exist between these parcel polygons or points and the actual buildings or occupancy units that lie within them. There may be many buildings on one parcel and there may be many occupancy units (e.g. apartments, stores or offices) within each building. Additionally, no information exists within this dataset about residents of parcels. Parcel owner and taxpayer information exists for many, but not all counties.

This is a MetroGIS Regionally Endorsed dataset.

Additional information may be available from each county at the links listed below. Also, any questions or comments about suspected errors or omissions in this dataset can be addressed to the contact person at each individual county.

Anoka = http://www.anokacounty.us/315/GIS
Caver = http://www.co.carver.mn.us/GIS
Dakota = http://www.co.dakota.mn.us/homeproperty/propertymaps/pages/default.aspx
Hennepin = https://gis-hennepin.hub.arcgis.com/pages/open-data
Ramsey = https://www.ramseycounty.us/your-government/open-government/research-data
Scott = http://opendata.gis.co.scott.mn.us/
Washington: http://www.co.washington.mn.us/index.aspx?NID=1606

WARNING: This is a pre-release dataset and its fields names and data structures are subject to change. It should be considered pre-release until the end of 2024. Expected changes:Metadata is missing or incomplete for some layers at this time and will be continuously improved.We expect to update this layer roughly in line with CDTFA at some point, but will increase the update cadence over time as we are able to automate the final pieces of the process.This dataset is continuously updated as the source data from CDTFA is updated, as often as many times a month. If you require unchanging point-in-time data, export a copy for your own use rather than using the service directly in your applications.PurposeCounty and incorporated place (city) boundaries along with third party identifiers used to join in external data. Boundaries are from the authoritative source the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), altered to show the counties as one polygon. This layer displays the city polygons on top of the County polygons so the area isn"t interrupted. The GEOID attribute information is added from the US Census. GEOID is based on merged State and County FIPS codes for the Counties. Abbreviations for Counties and Cities were added from Caltrans Division of Local Assistance (DLA) data. Place Type was populated with information extracted from the Census. Names and IDs from the US Board on Geographic Names (BGN), the authoritative source of place names as published in the Geographic Name Information System (GNIS), are attached as well. Finally, coastal buffers are removed, leaving the land-based portions of jurisdictions. This feature layer is for public use.Related LayersThis dataset is part of a grouping of many datasets:Cities: Only the city boundaries and attributes, without any unincorporated areasWith Coastal BuffersWithout Coastal BuffersCounties: Full county boundaries and attributes, including all cities within as a single polygonWith Coastal BuffersWithout Coastal BuffersCities and Full Counties: A merge of the other two layers, so polygons overlap within city boundaries. Some customers require this behavior, so we provide it as a separate service.With Coastal BuffersWithout Coastal Buffers (this dataset)Place AbbreviationsUnincorporated Areas (Coming Soon)Census Designated Places (Coming Soon)Cartographic CoastlinePolygonLine source (Coming Soon)Working with Coastal BuffersThe dataset you are currently viewing includes the coastal buffers for cities and counties that have them in the authoritative source data from CDTFA. In the versions where they are included, they remain as a second polygon on cities or counties that have them, with all the same identifiers, and a value in the COASTAL field indicating if it"s an ocean or a bay buffer. If you wish to have a single polygon per jurisdiction that includes the coastal buffers, you can run a Dissolve on the version that has the coastal buffers on all the fields except COASTAL, Area_SqMi, Shape_Area, and Shape_Length to get a version with the correct identifiers.Point of ContactCalifornia Department of Technology, Office of Digital Services, odsdataservices@state.ca.govField and Abbreviation DefinitionsCOPRI: county number followed by the 3-digit city primary number used in the Board of Equalization"s 6-digit tax rate area numbering systemPlace Name: CDTFA incorporated (city) or county nameCounty: CDTFA county name. For counties, this will be the name of the polygon itself. For cities, it is the name of the county the city polygon is within.Legal Place Name: Board on Geographic Names authorized nomenclature for area names published in the Geographic Name Information SystemGNIS_ID: The numeric identifier from the Board on Geographic Names that can be used to join these boundaries to other datasets utilizing this identifier.GEOID: numeric geographic identifiers from the US Census Bureau Place Type: Board on Geographic Names authorized nomenclature for boundary type published in the Geographic Name Information SystemPlace Abbr: CalTrans Division of Local Assistance abbreviations of incorporated area namesCNTY Abbr: CalTrans Division of Local Assistance abbreviations of county namesArea_SqMi: The area of the administrative unit (city or county) in square miles, calculated in EPSG 3310 California Teale Albers.COASTAL: Indicates if the polygon is a coastal buffer. Null for land polygons. Additional values include "ocean" and "bay".GlobalID: While all of the layers we provide in this dataset include a GlobalID field with unique values, we do not recommend you make any use of it. The GlobalID field exists to support offline sync, but is not persistent, so data keyed to it will be orphaned at our next update. Use one of the other persistent identifiers, such as GNIS_ID or GEOID instead.AccuracyCDTFA"s source data notes the following about accuracy:City boundary changes and county boundary line adjustments filed with the Board of Equalization per Government Code 54900. This GIS layer contains the boundaries of the unincorporated county and incorporated cities within the state of California. The initial dataset was created in March of 2015 and was based on the State Board of Equalization tax rate area boundaries. As of April 1, 2024, the maintenance of this dataset is provided by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration for the purpose of determining sales and use tax rates. The boundaries are continuously being revised to align with aerial imagery when areas of conflict are discovered between the original boundary provided by the California State Board of Equalization and the boundary made publicly available by local, state, and federal government. Some differences may occur between actual recorded boundaries and the boundaries used for sales and use tax purposes. The boundaries in this map are representations of taxing jurisdictions for the purpose of determining sales and use tax rates and should not be used to determine precise city or county boundary line locations. COUNTY = county name; CITY = city name or unincorporated territory; COPRI = county number followed by the 3-digit city primary number used in the California State Board of Equalization"s 6-digit tax rate area numbering system (for the purpose of this map, unincorporated areas are assigned 000 to indicate that the area is not within a city).Boundary ProcessingThese data make a structural change from the source data. While the full boundaries provided by CDTFA include coastal buffers of varying sizes, many users need boundaries to end at the shoreline of the ocean or a bay. As a result, after examining existing city and county boundary layers, these datasets provide a coastline cut generally along the ocean facing coastline. For county boundaries in northern California, the cut runs near the Golden Gate Bridge, while for cities, we cut along the bay shoreline and into the edge of the Delta at the boundaries of Solano, Contra Costa, and Sacramento counties.In the services linked above, the versions that include the coastal buffers contain them as a second (or third) polygon for the city or county, with the value in the COASTAL field set to whether it"s a bay or ocean polygon. These can be processed back into a single polygon by dissolving on all the fields you wish to keep, since the attributes, other than the COASTAL field and geometry attributes (like areas) remain the same between the polygons for this purpose.SliversIn cases where a city or county"s boundary ends near a coastline, our coastline data may cross back and forth many times while roughly paralleling the jurisdiction"s boundary, resulting in many polygon slivers. We post-process the data to remove these slivers using a city/county boundary priority algorithm. That is, when the data run parallel to each other, we discard the coastline cut and keep the CDTFA-provided boundary, even if it extends into the ocean a small amount. This processing supports consistent boundaries for Fort Bragg, Point Arena, San Francisco, Pacifica, Half Moon Bay, and Capitola, in addition to others. More information on this algorithm will be provided soon.Coastline CaveatsSome cities have buffers extending into water bodies that we do not cut at the shoreline. These include South Lake Tahoe and Folsom, which extend into neighboring lakes, and San Diego and surrounding cities that extend into San Diego Bay, which our shoreline encloses. If you have feedback on the exclusion of these items, or others, from the shoreline cuts, please reach out using the contact information above.Offline UseThis service is fully enabled for sync and export using Esri Field Maps or other similar tools. Importantly, the GlobalID field exists only to support that use case and should not be used for any other purpose (see note in field descriptions).Updates and Date of ProcessingConcurrent with CDTFA updates, approximately every two weeks, Last Processed: 12/17/2024 by Nick Santos using code path at https://github.com/CDT-ODS-DevSecOps/cdt-ods-gis-city-county/ at commit 0bf269d24464c14c9cf4f7dea876aa562984db63. It incorporates updates from CDTFA as of 12/12/2024. Future updates will include improvements to metadata and update frequency.

Analysis of ‘2018 CT Data Catalog (GIS)’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/5a93e011-4ea8-40b1-a888-0f573e6b785d on 26 January 2022.

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

Catalog of high value data inventories produced by Connecticut executive branch agencies and compiled by the Office of Policy and Management. This catalog contains information on high value GIS data only. A catalog of high value non-GIS data may be found at the following link: https://data.ct.gov/Government/CT-Data-Catalog-Non-GIS-/ghmx-93jn

As required by Public Act 18-175, executive branch agencies must annually conduct a high value data inventory to capture information about the high value data that they collect.

High value data is defined as any data that the department head determines (A) is critical to the operation of an executive branch agency; (B) can increase executive branch agency accountability and responsiveness; (C) can improve public knowledge of the executive branch agency and its operations; (D) can further the core mission of the executive branch agency; (E) can create economic opportunity; (F) is frequently requested by the public; (G) responds to a need and demand as identified by the agency through public consultation; or (H) is used to satisfy any legislative or other reporting requirements.

This dataset was last updated 1/2/2019 and will continue to be updated as high value data inventories are submitted to OPM.

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

The research focus in the field of remotely sensed imagery has shifted from collection and warehousing of data ' tasks for which a mature technology already exists, to auto-extraction of information and knowledge discovery from this valuable resource ' tasks for which technology is still under active development. In particular, intelligent algorithms for analysis of very large rasters, either high resolutions images or medium resolution global datasets, that are becoming more and more prevalent, are lacking. We propose to develop the Geospatial Pattern Analysis Toolbox (GeoPAT) a computationally efficient, scalable, and robust suite of algorithms that supports GIS processes such as segmentation, unsupervised/supervised classification of segments, query and retrieval, and change detection in giga-pixel and larger rasters. At the core of the technology that underpins GeoPAT is the novel concept of pattern-based image analysis. Unlike pixel-based or object-based (OBIA) image analysis, GeoPAT partitions an image into overlapping square scenes containing 1,000'100,000 pixels and performs further processing on those scenes using pattern signature and pattern similarity ' concepts first developed in the field of Content-Based Image Retrieval. This fusion of methods from two different areas of research results in orders of magnitude performance boost in application to very large images without sacrificing quality of the output.

GeoPAT v.1.0 already exists as the GRASS GIS add-on that has been developed and tested on medium resolution continental-scale datasets including the National Land Cover Dataset and the National Elevation Dataset. Proposed project will develop GeoPAT v.2.0 ' much improved and extended version of the present software. We estimate an overall entry TRL for GeoPAT v.1.0 to be 3-4 and the planned exit TRL for GeoPAT v.2.0 to be 5-6. Moreover, several new important functionalities will be added. Proposed improvements includes conversion of GeoPAT from being the GRASS add-on to stand-alone software capable of being integrated with other systems, full implementation of web-based interface, writing new modules to extent it applicability to high resolution images/rasters and medium resolution climate data, extension to spatio-temporal domain, enabling hierarchical search and segmentation, development of improved pattern signature and their similarity measures, parallelization of the code, implementation of divide and conquer strategy to speed up selected modules.

The proposed technology will contribute to a wide range of Earth Science investigations and missions through enabling extraction of information from diverse types of very large datasets. Analyzing the entire dataset without the need of sub-dividing it due to software limitations offers important advantage of uniformity and consistency. We propose to demonstrate the utilization of GeoPAT technology on two specific applications. The first application is a web-based, real time, visual search engine for local physiography utilizing query-by-example on the entire, global-extent SRTM 90 m resolution dataset. User selects region where process of interest is known to occur and the search engine identifies other areas around the world with similar physiographic character and thus potential for similar process. The second application is monitoring urban areas in their entirety at the high resolution including mapping of impervious surface and identifying settlements for improved disaggregation of census data.

Last Update: 02/04/2025The statewide roads dataset is a multi-purpose statewide roads dataset for cartography and range based-address location. This dataset is also used as the base geometry for deriving the GIS-representation of UDOT's highway linear referencing system (LRS). A network analysis dataset for route-finding can also be derived from this dataset. This dataset utilizes a data model based on Next-Generation 911 standards and the Federal Highway Administration's All Roads Network Of Linear-referenced Data (ARNOLD) reporting requirements for state DOTs. UGRC adopted this data model on September 13th, 2017.The statewide roads dataset is maintained by UGRC in partnership with local governments, the Utah 911 Committee, and UDOT. This dataset is updated monthly with Davis, Salt Lake, Utah, Washington and Weber represented every month, along with additional counties based on an annual update schedule. UGRC obtains the data from the authoritative data source (typically county agencies), projects the data and attributes into the current data model, spatially assigns polygon-based fields based on the appropriate SGID boundary, and then standardizes the attribute values to ensure statewide consistency. UGRC also generates a UNIQUE_ID field based on the segment's location in the US National Grid, with the street name then tacked on. The UNIQUE_ID field is static and is UGRC's current, ad hoc solution to a persistent global id. More information about the data model can be found here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jQ_JuRIEtzxj60F0FAGmdu5JrFpfYBbSt3YzzCjxpfI/edit#gid=811360546 More information about the data model transition can be found here: https://gis.utah.gov/major-updates-coming-to-roads-data-model/We are currently working with US Forest Service to improve the Forest Service roads in this dataset, however, for the most up-to-date and complete set of USFS roads, please visit their data portal where you can download the "National Forest System Roads" dataset.More information can be found on the UGRC data page for this layer:https://gis.utah.gov/data/transportation/roads-system/

Today, deep neural networks are widely used in many computer vision problems, also for geographic information systems (GIS) data. This type of data is commonly used for urban analyzes and spatial planning. We used orthophotographic images of two residential districts from Kielce, Poland for research including urban sprawl automatic analysis with Transformer-based neural network application.Orthophotomaps were obtained from Kielce GIS portal. Then, the map was manually masked into building and building surroundings classes. Finally, the ortophotomap and corresponding classification mask were simultaneously divided into small tiles. This approach is common in image data preprocessing for machine learning algorithms learning phase. Data contains two original orthophotomaps from Wietrznia and Pod Telegrafem residential districts with corresponding masks and also their tiled version, ready to provide as a training data for machine learning models.Transformed-based neural network has undergone a training process on the Wietrznia dataset, targeted for semantic segmentation of the tiles into buildings and surroundings classes. After that, inference of the models was used to test model's generalization ability on the Pod Telegrafem dataset. The efficiency of the model was satisfying, so it can be used in automatic semantic building segmentation. Then, the process of dividing the images can be reversed and complete classification mask retrieved. This mask can be used for area of the buildings calculations and urban sprawl monitoring, if the research would be repeated for GIS data from wider time horizon.Since the dataset was collected from Kielce GIS portal, as the part of the Polish Main Office of Geodesy and Cartography data resource, it may be used only for non-profit and non-commertial purposes, in private or scientific applications, under the law "Ustawa z dnia 4 lutego 1994 r. o prawie autorskim i prawach pokrewnych (Dz.U. z 2006 r. nr 90 poz 631 z późn. zm.)". There are no other legal or ethical considerations in reuse potential.Data information is presented below.wietrznia_2019.jpg - orthophotomap of Wietrznia districtmodel's - used for training, as an explanatory imagewietrznia_2019.png - classification mask of Wietrznia district - used for model's training, as a target imagewietrznia_2019_validation.jpg - one image from Wietrznia district - used for model's validation during training phasepod_telegrafem_2019.jpg - orthophotomap of Pod Telegrafem district - used for model's evaluation after training phasewietrznia_2019 - folder with wietrznia_2019.jpg (image) and wietrznia_2019.png (annotation) images, divided into 810 tiles (512 x 512 pixels each), tiles with no information were manually removed, so the training data would contain only informative tilestiles presented - used for the model during training (images and annotations for fitting the model to the data)wietrznia_2019_vaidation - folder with wietrznia_2019_validation.jpg image divided into 16 tiles (256 x 256 pixels each) - tiles were presented to the model during training (images for validation model's efficiency); it was not the part of the training datapod_telegrafem_2019 - folder with pod_telegrafem.jpg image divided into 196 tiles (256 x 265 pixels each) - tiles were presented to the model during inference (images for evaluation model's robustness)Dataset was created as described below.Firstly, the orthophotomaps were collected from Kielce Geoportal (https://gis.kielce.eu). Kielce Geoportal offers a .pst recent map from April 2019. It is an orthophotomap with a resolution of 5 x 5 pixels, constructed from a plane flight at 700 meters over ground height, taken with a camera for vertical photos. Downloading was done by WMS in open-source QGIS software (https://www.qgis.org), as a 1:500 scale map, then converted to a 1200 dpi PNG image.Secondly, the map from Wietrznia residential district was manually labelled, also in QGIS, in the same scope, as the orthophotomap. Annotation based on land cover map information was also obtained from Kielce Geoportal. There are two classes - residential building and surrounding. Second map, from Pod Telegrafem district was not annotated, since it was used in the testing phase and imitates situation, where there is no annotation for the new data presented to the model.Next, the images was converted to an RGB JPG images, and the annotation map was converted to 8-bit GRAY PNG image.Finally, Wietrznia data files were tiled to 512 x 512 pixels tiles, in Python PIL library. Tiles with no information or a relatively small amount of information (only white background or mostly white background) were manually removed. So, from the 29113 x 15938 pixels orthophotomap, only 810 tiles with corresponding annotations were left, ready to train the machine learning model for the semantic segmentation task. Pod Telegrafem orthophotomap was tiled with no manual removing, so from the 7168 x 7168 pixels ortophotomap were created 197 tiles with 256 x 256 pixels resolution. There was also image of one residential building, used for model's validation during training phase, it was not the part of the training data, but was a part of Wietrznia residential area. It was 2048 x 2048 pixel ortophotomap, tiled to 16 tiles 256 x 265 pixels each.

The Digital Geomorphic-GIS Map of Gulf Islands National Seashore (5-meter accuracy and 1-foot resolution 2006-2007 mapping), Mississippi and Florida is composed of GIS data layers and GIS tables, and is available in the following GRI-supported GIS data formats: 1.) a 10.1 file geodatabase (guis_geomorphology.gdb), a 2.) Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) geopackage, and 3.) 2.2 KMZ/KML file for use in Google Earth, however, this format version of the map is limited in data layers presented and in access to GRI ancillary table information. The file geodatabase format is supported with a 1.) ArcGIS Pro map file (.mapx) file (guis_geomorphology.mapx) and individual Pro layer (.lyrx) files (for each GIS data layer), as well as with a 2.) 10.1 ArcMap (.mxd) map document (guis_geomorphology.mxd) and individual 10.1 layer (.lyr) files (for each GIS data layer). The OGC geopackage is supported with a QGIS project (.qgz) file. Upon request, the GIS data is also available in ESRI 10.1 shapefile format. Contact Stephanie O'Meara (see contact information below) to acquire the GIS data in these GIS data formats. In addition to the GIS data and supporting GIS files, three additional files comprise a GRI digital geologic-GIS dataset or map: 1.) A GIS readme file (guis_geology_gis_readme.pdf), 2.) the GRI ancillary map information document (.pdf) file (guis_geomorphology.pdf) which contains geologic unit descriptions, as well as other ancillary map information and graphics from the source map(s) used by the GRI in the production of the GRI digital geologic-GIS data for the park, and 3.) a user-friendly FAQ PDF version of the metadata (guis_geomorphology_metadata_faq.pdf). Please read the guis_geology_gis_readme.pdf for information pertaining to the proper extraction of the GIS data and other map files. Google Earth software is available for free at: https://www.google.com/earth/versions/. QGIS software is available for free at: https://www.qgis.org/en/site/. Users are encouraged to only use the Google Earth data for basic visualization, and to use the GIS data for any type of data analysis or investigation. The data were completed as a component of the Geologic Resources Inventory (GRI) program, a National Park Service (NPS) Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Division funded program that is administered by the NPS Geologic Resources Division (GRD). For a complete listing of GRI products visit the GRI publications webpage: For a complete listing of GRI products visit the GRI publications webpage: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/geologic-resources-inventory-products.htm. For more information about the Geologic Resources Inventory Program visit the GRI webpage: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/gri,htm. At the bottom of that webpage is a "Contact Us" link if you need additional information. You may also directly contact the program coordinator, Jason Kenworthy (jason_kenworthy@nps.gov). Source geologic maps and data used to complete this GRI digital dataset were provided by the following: U.S. Geological Survey. Detailed information concerning the sources used and their contribution the GRI product are listed in the Source Citation section(s) of this metadata record (guis_geomorphology_metadata.txt or guis_geomorphology_metadata_faq.pdf). Users of this data are cautioned about the locational accuracy of features within this dataset. Based on the source map scale of 1:26,000 and United States National Map Accuracy Standards features are within (horizontally) 13.2 meters or 43.3 feet of their actual location as presented by this dataset. Users of this data should thus not assume the location of features is exactly where they are portrayed in Google Earth, ArcGIS, QGIS or other software used to display this dataset. All GIS and ancillary tables were produced as per the NPS GRI Geology-GIS Geodatabase Data Model v. 2.3. (available at: https://www.nps.gov/articles/gri-geodatabase-model.htm).

This dataset is a compilation of county parcel data from Minnesota counties that have opted-in for their parcel data to be included in this dataset.

It includes the following 55 counties that have opted-in as of the publication date of this dataset: Aitkin, Anoka, Becker, Benton, Big Stone, Carlton, Carver, Cass, Chippewa, Chisago, Clay, Clearwater, Cook, Crow Wing, Dakota, Douglas, Fillmore, Grant, Hennepin, Houston, Isanti, Itasca, Jackson, Koochiching, Lac qui Parle, Lake, Lyon, Marshall, McLeod, Mille Lacs, Morrison, Mower, Murray, Norman, Olmsted, Otter Tail, Pennington, Pipestone, Polk, Pope, Ramsey, Renville, Rice, Saint Louis, Scott, Sherburne, Stearns, Stevens, Traverse, Waseca, Washington, Wilkin, Winona, Wright, and Yellow Medicine.

If you represent a county not included in this dataset and would like to opt-in, please contact Heather Albrecht (Heather.Albrecht@hennepin.us), co-chair of the Minnesota Geospatial Advisory Council (GAC)’s Parcels and Land Records Committee's Open Data Subcommittee. County parcel data does not need to be in the GAC parcel data standard to be included. MnGeo will map the county fields to the GAC standard.

County parcel data records have been assembled into a single dataset with a common coordinate system (UTM Zone 15) and common attribute schema. The county parcel data attributes have been mapped to the GAC parcel data standard for Minnesota: https://www.mngeo.state.mn.us/committee/standards/parcel_attrib/parcel_attrib.html

This compiled parcel dataset was created using Python code developed by Minnesota state agency GIS professionals, and represents a best effort to map individual county source file attributes into the common attribute schema of the GAC parcel data standard. The attributes from counties are mapped to the most appropriate destination column. In some cases, the county source files included attributes that were not mapped to the GAC standard. Additionally, some county attribute fields were parsed and mapped to multiple GAC standard fields, such as a single line address. Each quarter, MnGeo provides a text file to counties that shows how county fields are mapped to the GAC standard. Additionally, this text file shows the fields that are not mapped to the standard and those that are parsed. If a county shares changes to how their data should be mapped, MnGeo updates the compilation. If you represent a county and would like to update how MnGeo is mapping your county attribute fields to this compiled dataset, please contact us.

This dataset is a snapshot of parcel data, and the source date of the county data may vary. Users should consult County websites to see the most up-to-date and complete parcel data.

There have been recent changes in date/time fields, and their processing, introduced by our software vendor. In some cases, this has resulted in date fields being empty. We are aware of the issue and are working to correct it for future parcel data releases.

The State of Minnesota makes no representation or warranties, express or implied, with respect to the use or reuse of data provided herewith, regardless of its format or the means of its transmission. THE DATA IS PROVIDED “AS IS” WITH NO GUARANTEE OR REPRESENTATION ABOUT THE ACCURACY, CURRENCY, SUITABILITY, PERFORMANCE, MECHANTABILITY, RELIABILITY OR FITINESS OF THIS DATA FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE. This dataset is NOT suitable for accurate boundary determination. Contact a licensed land surveyor if you have questions about boundary determinations.

DOWNLOAD NOTES: This dataset is only provided in Esri File Geodatabase and OGC GeoPackage formats. A shapefile is not available because the size of the dataset exceeds the limit for that format. The distribution version of the fgdb is compressed to help reduce the data footprint. QGIS users should consider using the Geopackage format for better results.

The USGS National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) downloadable data collection from The National Map (TNM) is a comprehensive set of digital spatial data that encodes information about naturally occurring and constructed bodies of surface water (lakes, ponds, and reservoirs), paths through which water flows (canals, ditches, streams, and rivers), and related entities such as point features (springs, wells, stream gages, and dams). The information encoded about these features includes classification and other characteristics, delineation, geographic name, position and related measures, a "reach code" through which other information can be related to the NHD, and the direction of water flow. The network of reach codes delineating water and transported material flow allows users to trace movement in upstream and downstream directions. In addition to this geographic information, the dataset contains metadata that supports the exchange of future updates and improvements to the data. The NHD supports many applications, such as making maps, geocoding observations, flow modeling, data maintenance, and stewardship. For additional information on NHD, go to https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/national-hydrography.

DWR was the steward for NHD and Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) in California. We worked with other organizations to edit and improve NHD and WBD, using the business rules for California. California's NHD improvements were sent to USGS for incorporation into the national database. The most up-to-date products are accessible from the USGS website. Please note that the California portion of the National Hydrography Dataset is appropriate for use at the 1:24,000 scale.

For additional derivative products and resources, including the major features in geopackage format, please go to this page: https://data.cnra.ca.gov/dataset/nhd-major-features Archives of previous statewide extracts of the NHD going back to 2018 may be found at https://data.cnra.ca.gov/dataset/nhd-archive.

In September 2022, USGS officially notified DWR that the NHD would become static as USGS resources will be devoted to the transition to the new 3D Hydrography Program (3DHP). 3DHP will consist of LiDAR-derived hydrography at a higher resolution than NHD. Upon completion, 3DHP data will be easier to maintain, based on a modern data model and architecture, and better meet the requirements of users that were documented in the Hydrography Requirements and Benefits Study (2016). The initial releases of 3DHP include NHD data cross-walked into the 3DHP data model. It will take several years for the 3DHP to be built out for California. Please refer to the resources on this page for more information.

The FINAL,STATIC version of the National Hydrography Dataset for California was published for download by USGS on December 27, 2023. This dataset can no longer be edited by the state stewards. The next generation of national hydrography data is the USGS 3D Hydrography Program (3DHP).

Questions about the California stewardship of these datasets may be directed to nhd_stewardship@water.ca.gov.

Data set that contains information on archaeological remains of the pre historic settlement of the Letolo valley on Savaii on Samoa. It is built in ArcMap from ESRI and is based on previously unpublished surveys made by the Peace Corps Volonteer Gregory Jackmond in 1976-78, and in a lesser degree on excavations made by Helene Martinsson Wallin and Paul Wallin. The settlement was in use from at least 1000 AD to about 1700- 1800. Since abandonment it has been covered by thick jungle. However by the time of the survey by Jackmond (1976-78) it was grazed by cattle and the remains was visible. The survey is at file at Auckland War Memorial Museum and has hitherto been unpublished. A copy of the survey has been accessed by Olof Håkansson through Martinsson Wallin and Wallin and as part of a Masters Thesis in Archeology at Uppsala University it has been digitised.

Olof Håkansson has built the data base structure in the software from ESRI, and digitised the data in 2015 to 2017. One of the aims of the Masters Thesis was to discuss hierarchies. To do this, subsets of the data have been displayed in various ways on maps. Another aim was to discuss archaeological methodology when working with spatial data, but the data in itself can be used without regard to the questions asked in the Masters Thesis. All data that was unclear has been removed in an effort to avoid errors being introduced. Even so, if there is mistakes in the data set it is to be blamed on the researcher, Olof Håkansson. A more comprehensive account of the aim, questions, purpose, method, as well the results of the research, is to be found in the Masters Thesis itself. Direkt link http://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1149265&dswid=9472

Purpose:

The purpose is to examine hierarchies in prehistoric Samoa. The purpose is further to make the produced data sets available for study.

Prehistoric remains of the settlement of Letolo on the Island of Savaii in Samoa in Polynesia

Developed by SOLARGIS and provided by the Global Solar Atlas (GSA), this data resource contains diffuse horizontal irradiation (DIF) in kWh/m² covering the globe. Data is provided in a geographic spatial reference (EPSG:4326). The resolution (pixel size) of solar resource data (GHI, DIF, GTI, DNI) is 9 arcsec (nominally 250 m), PVOUT and TEMP 30 arcsec (nominally 1 km) and OPTA 2 arcmin (nominally 4 km). The data is hyperlinked under 'resources' with the following characeristics: DIF LTAy_AvgDailyTotals (GeoTIFF) Data format: GEOTIFF File size : 198.94 MB There are two temporal representation of solar resource and PVOUT data available: • Longterm yearly/monthly average of daily totals (LTAym_AvgDailyTotals) • Longterm average of yearly/monthly totals (LTAym_YearlyMonthlyTotals) Both type of data are equivalent, you can select the summarization of your preference. The relation between datasets is described by simple equations: • LTAy_YearlyTotals = LTAy_DailyTotals * 365.25 • LTAy_MonthlyTotals = LTAy_DailyTotals * Number_of_Days_In_The_Month For individual country or regional data downloads please see: https://globalsolaratlas.info/download (use the drop-down menu to select country or region of interest) For data provided in AAIGrid please see: https://globalsolaratlas.info/download/world. For more information and terms of use, please, read metadata, provided in PDF and XML format for each data layer in a download file. For other data formats, resolution or time aggregation, please, visit Solargis website. Data can be used for visualization, further processing, and geo-analysis in all mainstream GIS software with raster data processing capabilities (such as open source QGIS, commercial ESRI ArcGIS products and others).

The dataset and the validation are fully described in a Nature Scientific Data Descriptor https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-019-0265-5

If you want to use this dataset in an interactive environment, then use this link https://mybinder.org/v2/gh/GeographerAtLarge/TravelTime/HEAD

The following text is a summary of the information in the above Data Descriptor.

The dataset is a suite of global travel-time accessibility indicators for the year 2015, at approximately one-kilometre spatial resolution for the entire globe. The indicators show an estimated (and validated), land-based travel time to the nearest city and nearest port for a range of city and port sizes.

The datasets are in GeoTIFF format and are suitable for use in Geographic Information Systems and statistical packages for mapping access to cities and ports and for spatial and statistical analysis of the inequalities in access by different segments of the population.

These maps represent a unique global representation of physical access to essential services offered by cities and ports.

The datasets travel_time_to_cities_x.tif (where x has values from 1 to 12) The value of each pixel is the estimated travel time in minutes to the nearest urban area in 2015. There are 12 data layers based on different sets of urban areas, defined by their population in year 2015 (see PDF report).

travel_time_to_ports_x (x ranges from 1 to 5)

The value of each pixel is the estimated travel time to the nearest port in 2015. There are 5 data layers based on different port sizes.

Format Raster Dataset, GeoTIFF, LZW compressed Unit Minutes

Data type Byte (16 bit Unsigned Integer)

No data value 65535

Flags None

Spatial resolution 30 arc seconds

Spatial extent

Upper left -180, 85

Lower left -180, -60 Upper right 180, 85 Lower right 180, -60 Spatial Reference System (SRS) EPSG:4326 - WGS84 - Geographic Coordinate System (lat/long)

Temporal resolution 2015

Temporal extent Updates may follow for future years, but these are dependent on the availability of updated inputs on travel times and city locations and populations.

Methodology Travel time to the nearest city or port was estimated using an accumulated cost function (accCost) in the gdistance R package (van Etten, 2018). This function requires two input datasets: (i) a set of locations to estimate travel time to and (ii) a transition matrix that represents the cost or time to travel across a surface.

The set of locations were based on populated urban areas in the 2016 version of the Joint Research Centre’s Global Human Settlement Layers (GHSL) datasets (Pesaresi and Freire, 2016) that represent low density (LDC) urban clusters and high density (HDC) urban areas (https://ghsl.jrc.ec.europa.eu/datasets.php). These urban areas were represented by points, spaced at 1km distance around the perimeter of each urban area.

Marine ports were extracted from the 26th edition of the World Port Index (NGA, 2017) which contains the location and physical characteristics of approximately 3,700 major ports and terminals. Ports are represented as single points

The transition matrix was based on the friction surface (https://map.ox.ac.uk/research-project/accessibility_to_cities) from the 2015 global accessibility map (Weiss et al, 2018).

Code The R code used to generate the 12 travel time maps is included in the zip file that can be downloaded with these data layers. The processing zones are also available.

Validation The underlying friction surface was validated by comparing travel times between 47,893 pairs of locations against journey times from a Google API. Our estimated journey times were generally shorter than those from the Google API. Across the tiles, the median journey time from our estimates was 88 minutes within an interquartile range of 48 to 143 minutes while the median journey time estimated by the Google API was 106 minutes within an interquartile range of 61 to 167 minutes. Across all tiles, the differences were skewed to the left and our travel time estimates were shorter than those reported by the Google API in 72% of the tiles. The median difference was −13.7 minutes within an interquartile range of −35.5 to 2.0 minutes while the absolute difference was 30 minutes or less for 60% of the tiles and 60 minutes or less for 80% of the tiles. The median percentage difference was −16.9% within an interquartile range of −30.6% to 2.7% while the absolute percentage difference was 20% or less in 43% of the tiles and 40% or less in 80% of the tiles.

This process and results are included in the validation zip file.

Usage Notes The accessibility layers can be visualised and analysed in many Geographic Information Systems or remote sensing software such as QGIS, GRASS, ENVI, ERDAS or ArcMap, and also by statistical and modelling packages such as R or MATLAB. They can also be used in cloud-based tools for geospatial analysis such as Google Earth Engine.

The nine layers represent travel times to human settlements of different population ranges. Two or more layers can be combined into one layer by recording the minimum pixel value across the layers. For example, a map of travel time to the nearest settlement of 5,000 to 50,000 people could be generated by taking the minimum of the three layers that represent the travel time to settlements with populations between 5,000 and 10,000, 10,000 and 20,000 and, 20,000 and 50,000 people.

The accessibility layers also permit user-defined hierarchies that go beyond computing the minimum pixel value across layers. A user-defined complete hierarchy can be generated when the union of all categories adds up to the global population, and the intersection of any two categories is empty. Everything else is up to the user in terms of logical consistency with the problem at hand.

The accessibility layers are relative measures of the ease of access from a given location to the nearest target. While the validation demonstrates that they do correspond to typical journey times, they cannot be taken to represent actual travel times. Errors in the friction surface will be accumulated as part of the accumulative cost function and it is likely that locations that are further away from targets will have greater a divergence from a plausible travel time than those that are closer to the targets. Care should be taken when referring to travel time to the larger cities when the locations of interest are extremely remote, although they will still be plausible representations of relative accessibility. Furthermore, a key assumption of the model is that all journeys will use the fastest mode of transport and take the shortest path.

WARNING: This is a pre-release dataset and its fields names and data structures are subject to change. It should be considered pre-release until the end of March 2025. The schema changed in February 2025 - please see below. We will post a roadmap of upcoming changes, but service URLs and schema are now stable. For deployment status of new services in February 2025, see https://gis.data.ca.gov/pages/city-and-county-boundary-data-status. Additional roadmap and status links at the bottom of this metadata.

Purpose

City boundaries along with third party identifiers used to join in external data. Boundaries are from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA). These boundaries are the best available statewide data source in that CDTFA receives changes in incorporation and boundary lines from the Board of Equalization, who receives them from local jurisdictions for tax purposes. Boundary accuracy is not guaranteed, and though CDTFA works to align boundaries based on historical records and local changes, errors will exist. If you require a legal assessment of boundary location, contact a licensed surveyor.

This dataset joins in multiple attributes and identifiers from the US Census Bureau and Board on Geographic Names to facilitate adding additional third party data sources. In addition, we attach attributes of our own to ease and reduce common processing needs and questions. Finally, coastal buffers are separated into separate polygons, leaving the land-based portions of jurisdictions and coastal buffers in adjacent polygons. This feature layer is for public use.

Related Layers

This dataset is part of a grouping of many datasets:

1. Cities: Only the city boundaries and attributes, without any unincorporated areas
   • With Coastal Buffers
   • Without Coastal Buffers (this dataset)
2. Counties: Full county boundaries and attributes, including all cities within as a single polygon
   • With Coastal Buffers
   • Without Coastal Buffers
3. Cities and Full Counties: A merge of the other two layers, so polygons overlap within city boundaries. Some customers require this behavior, so we provide it as a separate service.
   • With Coastal Buffers
   • Without Coastal Buffers
4. City and County Abbreviations
5. Unincorporated Areas (Coming Soon)
6. Census Designated Places
7. Cartographic Coastline
   • Polygon
   • Line source (Coming Soon)

Point of Contact

California Department of Technology, Office of Digital Services, odsdataservices@state.ca.gov

Field and Abbreviation Definitions

• CDTFA_CITY: CDTFA incorporated city name
• CDTFA_COUNTY: CDTFA county name. For counties, this will be the name of the polygon itself. For cities, it is the name of the county the city polygon is within.
• CDTFA_COPRI: county number followed by the 3-digit city primary number used in the Board of Equalization"s 6-digit tax rate area numbering system. The boundary data originate with CDTFA's teams managing tax rate information, so this field is preserved and flows into this dataset.
• CENSUS_GEOID: numeric geographic identifiers from the US Census Bureau
• CENSUS_PLACE_TYPE: City, County, or Town, stripped off the census name for identification purpose.
• GNIS_PLACE_NAME: Board on Geographic Names authorized nomenclature for area names published in the Geographic Name Information System
• GNIS_ID: The numeric identifier from the Board on Geographic Names that can be used to join these boundaries to other datasets utilizing this identifier.
• CDT_CITY_ABBR: Abbreviations of incorporated area names - originally derived from CalTrans Division of Local Assistance and now managed by CDT. Abbreviations are 4 characters. Not present in the county-specific layers.
• CDT_COUNTY_ABBR: Abbreviations of county names - originally derived from CalTrans Division of Local Assistance and now managed by CDT. Abbreviations are 3 characters.
• CDT_NAME_SHORT: The name of the jurisdiction (city or county) with the word "City" or "County" stripped off the end. Some changes may come to how we process this value to make it more consistent.
• AREA_SQMI: The area of the administrative unit (city or county) in square miles, calculated in EPSG 3310 California Teale Albers.
• OFFSHORE: Indicates if the polygon is a coastal buffer. Null for land polygons. Additional values include "ocean" and "bay".
• PRIMARY_DOMAIN: Currently empty/null for all records. Placeholder field for official URL of the city or county
• CENSUS_POPULATION: Currently null for all records. In the future, it will include the most recent US Census population estimate for the jurisdiction.
• GlobalID: While all of the layers we provide in this dataset include a GlobalID field with unique values, we do not recommend you make any use of it. The GlobalID field exists to

This dataset represents a unique compiled environmental data set for the circumpolar Arctic ocean region 45N to 90N region. It consists of 170 layers (mostly marine, some terrestrial) in ArcGIS 10 format to be used with a Geographic Information System (GIS) and which are listed below in detail. Most layers are long-term average raster GRIDs for the summer season, often by ocean depth, and represent value-added products easy to use. The sources of the data are manifold such as the World Ocean Atlas 2009 (WOA09), International Bathimetric Chart of the Arctic Ocean (IBCAO), Canadian Earth System Model 2 (CanESM2) data (the newest generation of models available) and data sources such as plankton databases and OBIS. Ocean layers were modeled and predicted into the future and zooplankton species were modeled based on future data: Calanus hyperboreus (AphiaID104467), Metridia longa (AphiaID 104632), M. pacifica (AphiaID 196784) and Thysanoessa raschii (AphiaID 110711). Some layers are derived within ArcGIS. Layers have pixel sizes between 1215.819573 meters and 25257.72929 meters for the best pooled model, and between 224881.2644 and 672240.4095 meters for future climate data. Data was then reprojected into North Pole Stereographic projection in meters (WGS84 as the geographic datum). Also, future layers are included as a selected subset of proposed future climate layers from the Canadian CanESM2 for the next 100 years (scenario runs rcp26 and rcp85). The following layer groups are available: bathymetry (depth, derived slope and aspect); proximity layers (to,glaciers,sea ice, protected areas, wetlands, shelf edge); dissolved oxygen, apparent oxygen, percent oxygen, nitrogen, phosphate, salinity, silicate (all for August and for 9 depth classes); runoff (proximity, annual and August); sea surface temperature; waterbody temperature (12 depth classes); modeled ocean boundary layers (H1, H2, H3 and Wx).This dataset is used for a M.Sc. thesis by the author, and freely available upon request. For questions and details we suggest contacting the authors. Process_Description: Please contact Moritz Schmid for the thesis and detailed explanations. Short version: We model predicted here for the first time ocean layers in the Arctic Ocean based on a unique dataset of physical oceanography. Moreover, we developed presence/random absence models that indicate where the studied zooplankton species are most likely to be present in the Arctic Ocean. Apart from that, we develop the first spatially explicit models known to science that describe the depth in which the studied zooplankton species are most likely to be at, as well as their distribution of life stages. We do not only do this for one present day scenario. We modeled five different scenarios and for future climate data. First, we model predicted ocean layers using the most up to date data from various open access sources, referred here as best-pooled model data. We decided to model this set of stratification layers after discussions and input of expert knowledge by Professor Igor Polyakov from the International Arctic Research Center at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. We predicted those stratification layers because those are the boundaries and layers that the plankton has to cross for diel vertical migration and a change in those would most likely affect the migration. I assigned 4 variables to the stratification layers. H1, H2, H3 and Wx. H1 is the lower boundary of the mixed layer depth. Above this layer a lot of atmospheric disturbance is causing mixing of the water, giving the mixed layer its name. H2, the middle of the halocline is important because in this part of the ocean a strong gradient in salinity and temperature separates water layers. H3, the isotherm is important, because beneath it flows denser and colder Atlantic water. Wx summarizes the overall width of the described water column. Ocean layers were predicted using machine learning algorithms (TreeNet, Salford Systems). Second, ocean layers were included as predictors and used to predict the presence/random absence, most likely depth and life stage layers for the zooplankton species: Calanus hyperboreus, Metridia longa, Metridia pacifica and Thysanoessa raschii, This process was repeated for future predictions based on the CanESM2 data (see in the data section). For zooplankton species the following layers were developed and for the future. C. hyperboreus: Best-pooled model as well as future predictions (rcp26 including ocean layer(also excluding), rcp85 including oocean layers (also excluding) for 2010 and 2100.For parameters: Presence/random absence, most likely depth and life stage layers M. longa: Best-pooled model as well as future predictions (rcp26 including ocean layer(also excluding), rcp85 including oocean layers (also excluding) for 2010 and 2100. For parameters: Presence/rand... Visit https://dataone.org/datasets/f63d0f6c-7d53-46ce-b755-42a368007601 for complete metadata about this dataset.

This dataset contains model-based census tract level estimates for the PLACES 2021 release in GIS-friendly format. PLACES is the expansion of the original 500 Cities project and covers the entire United States—50 states and the District of Columbia (DC)—at county, place, census tract, and ZIP Code Tabulation Area (ZCTA) levels. It represents a first-of-its kind effort to release information uniformly on this large scale for local areas at 4 geographic levels. Estimates were provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. PLACES was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) in conjunction with the CDC Foundation. Data sources used to generate these model-based estimates include Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2019 or 2018 data, Census Bureau 2010 population estimates, and American Community Survey (ACS) 2015–2019 or 2014–2018 estimates. The 2021 release uses 2019 BRFSS data for 22 measures and 2018 BRFSS data for 7 measures (all teeth lost, dental visits, mammograms, cervical cancer screening, colorectal cancer screening, core preventive services among older adults, and sleeping less than 7 hours a night). Seven measures are based on the 2018 BRFSS data because the relevant questions are only asked every other year in the BRFSS. These data can be joined with the census tract 2015 boundary file in a GIS system to produce maps for 29 measures at the census tract level. An ArcGIS Online feature service is also available for users to make maps online or to add data to desktop GIS software. https://cdcarcgis.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=024cf3f6f59e49fe8c70e0e5410fe3cf

Crowther_Nature_Files.zip This description pertains to the original download. Details on revised (newer) versions of the datasets are listed below. When more than one version of a file exists in Figshare, the original DOI will take users to the latest version, though each version technically has its own DOI. -- Two global maps (raster files) of tree density. These maps highlight how the number of trees varies across the world. One map was generated using biome-level models of tree density, and applied at the biome scale. The other map was generated using ecoregion-level models of tree density, and applied at the ecoregion scale. For this reason, transitions between biomes or between ecoregions may be unrealistically harsh, but large-scale estimates are robust (see Crowther et al 2015 and Glick et al 2016). At the outset, this study was intended to generate reliable estimates at broad spatial scales, which inherently comes at the cost of fine-scale precision. For this reason, country-scale (or larger) estimates are generally more robust than individual pixel-level estimates. Additionally, due to data limitations, estimates for Mangroves and Tropical coniferous forest (as identified by WWF and TNC) were generated using models constructed from Topical moist broadleaf forest data and Temperate coniferous forest data, respectively. Because we used ecological analogy, the estimates for these two biomes should be considered less reliable than those of other biomes . These two maps initially appeared in Crowther et al (2015), with the biome map being featured more prominently. Explicit publication of the data is associated with Glick et al (2016). As they are produced, updated versions of these datasets, as well as alternative formats, will be made available under Additional Versions (see below).

Methods: We collected over 420,000 ground-sources estimates of tree density from around the world. We then constructed linear regression models using vegetative, climatic, topographic, and anthropogenic variables to produce forest tree density estimates for all locations globally. All modeling was done in R. Mapping was done using R and ArcGIS 10.1.

Viewing Instructions: Load the files into an appropriate geographic information system (GIS). For the original download (ArcGIS geodatabase files), load the files into ArcGIS to view or export the data to other formats. Because these datasets are large and have a unique coordinate system that is not read by many GIS, we suggest loading them into an ArcGIS dataframe whose coordinate system matches that of the data (see File Format). For GeoTiff files (see Additional Versions), load them into any compatible GIS or image management program.

Comments: The original download provides a zipped folder that contains (1) an ArcGIS File Geodatabase (.gdb) containing one raster file for each of the two global models of tree density – one based on biomes and one based on ecoregions; (2) a layer file (.lyr) for each of the global models with the symbology used for each respective model in Crowther et al (2015); and an ArcGIS Map Document (.mxd) that contains the layers and symbology for each map in the paper. The data is delivered in the Goode homolosine interrupted projected coordinate system that was used to compute biome, ecoregion, and global estimates of the number and density of trees presented in Crowther et al (2015). To obtain maps like those presented in the official publication, raster files will need to be reprojected to the Eckert III projected coordinate system. Details on subsequent revisions and alternative file formats are list below under Additional Versions.----------

Additional Versions: Crowther_Nature_Files_Revision_01.zip contains tree density predictions for small islands that are not included in the data available in the original dataset. These predictions were not taken into consideration in production of maps and figures presented in Crowther et al (2015), with the exception of the values presented in Supplemental Table 2. The file structure follows that of the original data and includes both biome- and ecoregion-level models.

Crowther_Nature_Files_Revision_01_WGS84_GeoTiff.zip contains Revision_01 of the biome-level model, but stored in WGS84 and GeoTiff format. This file was produced by reprojecting the original Goode homolosine files to WGS84 using nearest neighbor resampling in ArcMap. All areal computations presented in the manuscript were computed using the Goode homolosine projection. This means that comparable computations made with projected versions of this WGS84 data are likely to differ (substantially at greater latitudes) as a product of the resampling. Included in this .zip file are the primary .tif and its visualization support files.

References:

Crowther, T. W., Glick, H. B., Covey, K. R., Bettigole, C., Maynard, D. S., Thomas, S. M., Smith, J. R., Hintler, G., Duguid, M. C., Amatulli, G., Tuanmu, M. N., Jetz, W., Salas, C., Stam, C., Piotto, D., Tavani, R., Green, S., Bruce, G., Williams, S. J., Wiser, S. K., Huber, M. O., Hengeveld, G. M., Nabuurs, G. J., Tikhonova, E., Borchardt, P., Li, C. F., Powrie, L. W., Fischer, M., Hemp, A., Homeier, J., Cho, P., Vibrans, A. C., Umunay, P. M., Piao, S. L., Rowe, C. W., Ashton, M. S., Crane, P. R., and Bradford, M. A. 2015. Mapping tree density at a global scale. Nature, 525(7568): 201-205. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1038/nature14967Glick, H. B., Bettigole, C. B., Maynard, D. S., Covey, K. R., Smith, J. R., and Crowther, T. W. 2016. Spatially explicit models of global tree density. Scientific Data, 3(160069), doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.69.

The Minnesota DNR Toolbox and Hydro Tools provide a number of convenience geoprocessing tools used regularly by MNDNR staff. Many of these may be useful to the wider public. However, some tools may rely on data that is not available outside of the DNR. All tools require at least ArcGIS 10+.

If you create a GDRS using GDRS Manager and include this toolbox resource and MNDNR Quick Layers, the DNR toolboxes will automatically be added to the ArcToolbox window whenever Quick Layers GDRS Location is set to the GDRS location that has the toolboxes.

Toolsets included in MNDNR Tools V10:
- Analysis Tools
- Conversion Tools
- Division Tools
- General Tools
- Hydrology Tools
- LiDAR and DEM Tools
- Raster Tools
- Sampling Tools

These toolboxes are provided free of charge and are not warrantied for any specific use. We do not provide support or assistance in downloading or using these tools. We do, however, strive to produce high-quality tools and appreciate comments you have about them.

This data set delineates the boundaries of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service geographic Regions. The dataset was created as a geographic representation of the Regional administrative boundaries of the US Fish and Wildlife Service at a very coarse scale. The boundaries were created using the ArcGIS shoreline dataset from approximately 1995. This dataset should not be used for legal purposes or at small scales and does not accurately denote the shorelines of the united states. The Regional Boundaries data set is managed by the FWS Headquarters Information Resources and Technology Management, Branch of Geospatial Data Management. The complete data and metadata can be accessed here: https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/us-fish-and-wildlife-service-regional-boundaries. This data set is a graphical representation and has limitations of accuracy as determined by, among others, the source, scale and resolution of the data. DOI Interior Regions / Regional Boundaries (https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=309aa728d6c041ceaefc1526a409b5d1).

This parcels dataset is a spatial representation of tax lots for Gloucester County, New Jersey that have been extracted from the NJ statewide parcels composite by the NJ Office of Information Technology, Office of GIS (NJOGIS). Parcels at county boundaries have been modified to correspond with the NJ county boundaries and the parcels in adjacent counties.Each parcel contains a field named PAMS_PIN based on a concatenation of the county/municipality code, block number, lot number and qualification code. Using the PAMS_PIN, the dataset can be joined to the MOD-IV database table that contains supplementary attribute information regarding lot ownership and characteristics. Due to irregularities in the data development process, duplicate PAMS_PIN values exist in the parcel records. Users should avoid joining MOD-IV database table records to all parcel records with duplicate PAMS_PINs because of uncertainty regarding whether the MOD-IV records will join to the correct parcel records. There are also parcel records with unique PAMS_PIN values for which there are no corresponding records in the MOD-IV database tables. This is mostly due to the way data are organized in the MOD-IV database.The polygons delineated in the dataset do not represent legal boundaries and should not be used to provide a legal determination of land ownership. Parcels are not survey data and should not be used as such.The MOD-IV system provides for uniform preparation, maintenance, presentation and storage of property tax information required by the Constitution of the State of New Jersey, New Jersey Statutes and rules promulgated by the Director of the Division of Taxation. MOD-IV maintains and updates all assessment records and produces all statutorily required tax lists for property tax bills. This list accounts for all parcels of real property as delineated and identified on each municipality's official tax map, as well as taxable values and descriptive data for each parcel. Tax List records were received as raw data from the Taxation Team of NJOIT which collected source information from municipal tax assessors and created the statewide table. This table was subsequently processed for ease of use with NJ tax parcel spatial data and split into an individual table for each county.***NOTE*** For users who incorporate NJOGIS services into web maps and/or web applications, please sign up for the NJ Geospatial Forum discussion listserv for early notification of service changes. Visit https://nj.gov/njgf/about/listserv/ for more information.