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).

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.

This dataset is about books. It has 1 row and is filtered where the book is Learning GIS using open source software : an applied guide for geo-spatial analysis. It features 7 columns including author, publication date, language, and book publisher.

DescriptionThis dataset is available for download from: Parcelization (File Geodatabase)Parcelization, a measure of size and density of parcels in a localized area, is a development feasibility factor that is used in evaluating substations’ ability to support new utility-scale resources in long-term energy planning. A statewide dataset of parcel boundaries are used to develop this index. The parcels are converted into a 90-meter raster, containing values of a unique identifier reflective of Parcel APN. A focal statistics tool is used to count the number of unique parcels within a 0.5 mile radius of each parcel. This output is provided here and is an intermediate output to the final parcelization map. Users who wish to use this information to produce the final map should overlay parcel boundary data and extract the mean raster value within each parcel. The map is limited to the area considered with solar technical resource potential after a minimum set of land-use screens (referred to as the Base Exclusions) has been applied. More information on the methods developing this dataset as well as the main use of this dataset in state electric system planning processes can be found in a recent CEC staff report and workshops supporting the resource-to-busbar mapping methodology for the 2024-2025 Transmission Planning Process.

The dataset, GeoGPT-Data, is the experimental data used in the paper "GeoGPT: An Assistant for Understanding and Processing Geospatial Tasks", which has been accepted by the International Journal of Applied Earth Observations and Geoinformation (JAG). If you need to use this dataset, please cite our paper.

This dataset represents a water shortage vulnerability analysis performed by DWR using modified PLSS sections pulled from the Well Completion Report PLSS Section Summaries. The attribute table includes water shortage vulnerability indicators and scores from an analysis done by CA Department of Water Resources, joined to modified PLSS sections. Several relevant summary statistics from the Well Completion Reports are included in this table as well. This data is from the 2024 analysis.

Water Code Division 6 Part 2.55 Section 8 Chapter 10 (Assembly Bill 1668) effectively requires California Department of Water Resources (DWR), in consultation with other agencies and an advisory group, to identify small water suppliers and “rural communities” that are at risk of drought and water shortage. Following legislation passed in 2021 and signed by Governor Gavin Newsom, the Water Code Division 6, Section 10609.50 through 10609.80 (Senate Bill 552 of 2021) effectively requires the California Department of Water Resources to update the scoring and tool periodically in partnership with the State Water Board and other state agencies. This document describes the indicators, datasets, and methods used to construct this deliverable.  This is a statewide effort to systematically and holistically consider water shortage vulnerability statewide of rural communities, focusing on domestic wells and state small water systems serving between 4 and 14 connections. The indicators and scoring methodology will be revised as better data become available and stake-holders evaluate the performance of the indicators, datasets used, and aggregation and ranking method used to aggregate and rank vulnerability scores. Additionally, the scoring system should be adaptive, meaning that our understanding of what contributes to risk and vulnerability of drought and water shortage may evolve. This understanding may especially be informed by experiences gained while navigating responses to future droughts.”

A spatial analysis was performed on the 2020 Census Block Groups, modified PLSS sections, and small water system service areas using a variety of input datasets related to drought vulnerability and water shortage risk and vulnerability. These indicator values were subsequently rescaled and summed for a final vulnerability score for the sections and small water system service areas. The 2020 Census Block Groups were joined with ACS data to represent the social vulnerability of communities, which is relevant to drought risk tolerance and resources. These three feature datasets contain the units of analysis (modified PLSS sections, block groups, small water systems service areas) with the model indicators for vulnerability in the attribute table. Model indicators are calculated for each unit of analysis according to the Vulnerability Scoring documents provided by Julia Ekstrom (Division of Regional Assistance).

All three feature classes are DWR analysis zones that are based off existing GIS datasets. The spatial data for the sections feature class is extracted from the Well Completion Reports PLSS sections to be aligned with the work and analysis that SGMA is doing. These are not true PLSS sections, but a version of the projected section lines in areas where there are gaps in PLSS. The spatial data for the Census block group feature class is downloaded from the Census. ACS (American Communities Survey) data is joined by block group, and statistics calculated by DWR have been added to the attribute table. The spatial data for the small water systems feature class was extracted from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) SABL dataset, using a definition query to filter for active water systems with 3000 connections or less. None of these datasets are intended to be the authoritative datasets for representing PLSS sections, Census block groups, or water service areas. The spatial data of these feature classes is used as units of analysis for the spatial analysis performed by DWR.

These datasets are intended to be authoritative datasets of the scoring tools required from DWR according to Senate Bill 552. Please refer to the Drought and Water Shortage Vulnerability Scoring: California's Domestic Wells and State Smalls Systems documentation for more information on indicators and scoring. These estimated indicator scores may sometimes be calculated in several different ways, or may have been calculated from data that has since be updated. Counts of domestic wells may be calculated in different ways. In order to align with DWR SGMO's (State Groundwater Management Office) California Groundwater Live dashboards, domestic wells were calculated using the same query. This includes all domestic wells in the Well Completion Reports dataset that are completed after 12/31/1976, and have a 'RecordType' of 'WellCompletion/New/Production or Monitoring/NA'.

Please refer to the Well Completion Reports metadata for more information. The associated data are considered DWR enterprise GIS data, which meet all appropriate requirements of the DWR Spatial Data Standards, specifically the DWR Spatial Data Standard version 3.4, dated September 14, 2022. DWR makes no warranties or guarantees — either expressed or implied— as to the completeness, accuracy, or correctness of the data.

DWR neither accepts nor assumes liability arising from or for any incorrect, incomplete, or misleading subject data. Comments, problems, improvements, updates, or suggestions should be forwarded to GIS@water.ca.gov.

OVERVIEWThis site is dedicated to raising the level of spatial and data literacy used in public policy. We invite you to explore curated content, training, best practices, and datasets that can provide a baseline for your research, analysis, and policy recommendations. Learn about emerging policy questions and how GIS can be used to help come up with solutions to those questions.EXPLOREGo to your area of interest and explore hundreds of maps about various topics such as social equity, economic opportunity, public safety, and more. Browse and view the maps, or collect them and share via a simple URL. Sharing a collection of maps is an easy way to use maps as a tool for understanding. Help policymakers and stakeholders use data as a driving factor for policy decisions in your area.ISSUESBrowse different categories to find data layers, maps, and tools. Use this set of content as a driving force for your GIS workflows related to policy. RESOURCESTo maximize your experience with the Policy Maps, we’ve assembled education, training, best practices, and industry perspectives that help raise your data literacy, provide you with models, and connect you with the work of your peers.

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.

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

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.

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.

On October 30, 2015 Governor Brown issued an emergency declaration requiring public agencies to identify areas of tree mortality that hold the greatest potential to result in wildfire and/or falling trees and threaten people and property in these areas. Once identified, these areas will be prioritized for removal of dead and dying trees that present a threat to public safety. Tier One High Hazard Zones are areas where assets to be protected and tree mortality directly coincide. These are the areas designated by state and local governments as being in greatest need of dead tree removal, pursuant to the California Governor's Emergency proclamation on October 30, 2015. These areas are considered as having the highest potential of being a safety issue to people, buildings and infrastructure. Dead trees heighten wildfire risk and can be hazardous if they fall.This service represents the latest official release of HHZ. It will be updated annually when a new version is released. As of June 2019, it represents HighHazardZones19_1.

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.

This product is part of the Landscape Change Monitoring System (LCMS) data suite. It shows LCMS change attribution classes for each year. See additional information about change in the Entity_and_Attribute_Information or Fields section below.LCMS is a remote sensing-based system for mapping and monitoring landscape change across the United States. Its objective is to develop a consistent approach using the latest technology and advancements in change detection to produce a "best available" map of landscape change. Because no algorithm performs best in all situations, LCMS uses an ensemble of models as predictors, which improves map accuracy across a range of ecosystems and change processes (Healey et al., 2018). The resulting suite of LCMS change, land cover, and land use maps offer a holistic depiction of landscape change across the United States over the past four decades.Predictor layers for the LCMS model include outputs from the LandTrendr and CCDC change detection algorithms and terrain information. These components are all accessed and processed using Google Earth Engine (Gorelick et al., 2017). To produce annual composites, the cFmask (Zhu and Woodcock, 2012), cloudScore, and TDOM (Chastain et al., 2019) cloud and cloud shadow masking methods are applied to Landsat Tier 1 and Sentinel 2a and 2b Level-1C top of atmosphere reflectance data. The annual medoid is then computed to summarize each year into a single composite. The composite time series is temporally segmented using LandTrendr (Kennedy et al., 2010; Kennedy et al., 2018; Cohen et al., 2018). All cloud and cloud shadow free values are also temporally segmented using the CCDC algorithm (Zhu and Woodcock, 2014). LandTrendr, CCDC and terrain predictors can be used as independent predictor variables in a Random Forest (Breiman, 2001) model. LandTrendr predictor variables include fitted values, pair-wise differences, segment duration, change magnitude, and slope. CCDC predictor variables include CCDC sine and cosine coefficients (first 3 harmonics), fitted values, and pairwise differences from the Julian Day of each pixel used in the annual composites and LandTrendr. Terrain predictor variables include elevation, slope, sine of aspect, cosine of aspect, and topographic position indices (Weiss, 2001) from the USGS 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) (U.S. Geological Survey, 2019). Reference data are collected using TimeSync, a web-based tool that helps analysts visualize and interpret the Landsat data record from 1984-present (Cohen et al., 2010).Outputs fall into three categories: change, land cover, and land use. Change relates specifically to vegetation cover and includes slow loss (not included for PRUSVI), fast loss (which also includes hydrologic changes such as inundation or desiccation), and gain. These values are predicted for each year of the time series and serve as the foundational products for LCMS. References: Breiman, L. (2001). Random Forests. In Machine Learning (Vol. 45, pp. 5-32). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324Chastain, R., Housman, I., Goldstein, J., Finco, M., and Tenneson, K. (2019). Empirical cross sensor comparison of Sentinel-2A and 2B MSI, Landsat-8 OLI, and Landsat-7 ETM top of atmosphere spectral characteristics over the conterminous United States. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 221, pp. 274-285). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2018.11.012Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., and Kennedy, R. (2010). Detecting trends in forest disturbance and recovery using yearly Landsat time series: 2. TimeSync - Tools for calibration and validation. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 114, Issue 12, pp. 2911-2924). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.07.010Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., Healey, S. P., Kennedy, R. E., and Gorelick, N. (2018). A LandTrendr multispectral ensemble for forest disturbance detection. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 205, pp. 131-140). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.11.015Foga, S., Scaramuzza, P.L., Guo, S., Zhu, Z., Dilley, R.D., Beckmann, T., Schmidt, G.L., Dwyer, J.L., Hughes, M.J., Laue, B. (2017). Cloud detection algorithm comparison and validation for operational Landsat data products. Remote Sensing of Environment, 194, 379-390. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.03.026Gorelick, N., Hancher, M., Dixon, M., Ilyushchenko, S., Thau, D., and Moore, R. (2017). Google Earth Engine: Planetary-scale geospatial analysis for everyone. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 202, pp. 18-27). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.06.031Healey, S. P., Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., Kenneth Brewer, C., Brooks, E. B., Gorelick, N., Hernandez, A. J., Huang, C., Joseph Hughes, M., Kennedy, R. E., Loveland, T. R., Moisen, G. G., Schroeder, T. A., Stehman, S. V., Vogelmann, J. E., Woodcock, C. E., Yang, L., and Zhu, Z. (2018). Mapping forest change using stacked generalization: An ensemble approach. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 204, pp. 717-728). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.09.029Kennedy, R. E., Yang, Z., and Cohen, W. B. (2010). Detecting trends in forest disturbance and recovery using yearly Landsat time series: 1. LandTrendr - Temporal segmentation algorithms. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 114, Issue 12, pp. 2897-2910). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.07.008Kennedy, R., Yang, Z., Gorelick, N., Braaten, J., Cavalcante, L., Cohen, W., and Healey, S. (2018). Implementation of the LandTrendr Algorithm on Google Earth Engine. In Remote Sensing (Vol. 10, Issue 5, p. 691). https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10050691Olofsson, P., Foody, G. M., Herold, M., Stehman, S. V., Woodcock, C. E., and Wulder, M. A. (2014). Good practices for estimating area and assessing accuracy of land change. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 148, pp. 42-57). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2014.02.015Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J., Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M. and Duchesnay, E. (2011). Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. In Journal of Machine Learning Research (Vol. 12, pp. 2825-2830).Pengra, B. W., Stehman, S. V., Horton, J. A., Dockter, D. J., Schroeder, T. A., Yang, Z., Cohen, W. B., Healey, S. P., and Loveland, T. R. (2020). Quality control and assessment of interpreter consistency of annual land cover reference data in an operational national monitoring program. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 238, p. 111261). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2019.111261U.S. Geological Survey. (2019). USGS 3D Elevation Program Digital Elevation Model, accessed August 2022 at https://developers.google.com/earth-engine/datasets/catalog/USGS_3DEP_10mWeiss, A.D. (2001). Topographic position and landforms analysis Poster Presentation, ESRI Users Conference, San Diego, CAZhu, Z., and Woodcock, C. E. (2012). Object-based cloud and cloud shadow detection in Landsat imagery. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 118, pp. 83-94). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.10.028Zhu, Z., and Woodcock, C. E. (2014). Continuous change detection and classification of land cover using all available Landsat data. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 144, pp. 152-171). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2014.01.011This record was taken from the USDA Enterprise Data Inventory that feeds into the https://data.gov catalog. Data for this record includes the following resources: ISO-19139 metadata ArcGIS Hub Dataset ArcGIS GeoService For complete information, please visit https://data.gov.

All of the ERS mapping applications, such as the Food Environment Atlas and the Food Access Research Atlas, use map services developed and hosted by ERS as the source for their map content. These map services are open and freely available for use outside of the ERS map applications. Developers can include ERS maps in applications through the use of the map service REST API, and desktop GIS users can use the maps by connecting to the map server directly.

The 2020 Generalized Land Use Inventory dataset encompasses the seven county Twin Cities (Minneapolis and St. Paul) Metropolitan Area in Minnesota. The dataset was developed by the Metropolitan Council, a regional governmental organization that deals, in part, with regional issues and long range planning for the Twin Cities area. The data were interpreted from April 2020 air photos, with additional assistance from county parcel data and assessor's information, Internet information, field checks , and community review.

The following generalized land use classes are used (some of which have subclasses):

Single Family Residential
Multifamily Residential
Office
Retail and Other Commercial
Mixed Use
Industrial and Utility
Extractive
Institutional
Park, Recreational, or Preserve
Golf Course
Major Highway
Railway
Airport
Agriculture
Undeveloped
Water

See Section 5 of the metadata for a detailed description of each of these land use categories and available subcategories.

Note: Although this dataset does contain an 'Undeveloped' land category, this dataset does not attempt to delineate what lands might be considered developable. The definition of that category can be found in Section 5 of this metadata.

More information about the Metropolitan Council's generalized land use data can be found here Landuse Notes

Overview

The Office of the Geographer and Global Issues at the U.S. Department of State produces the Large Scale International Boundaries (LSIB) dataset. The current edition is version 11.4 (published 24 February 2025). The 11.4 release contains updated boundary lines and data refinements designed to extend the functionality of the dataset. These data and generalized derivatives are the only international boundary lines approved for U.S. Government use. The contents of this dataset reflect U.S. Government policy on international boundary alignment, political recognition, and dispute status. They do not necessarily reflect de facto limits of control.

National Geospatial Data Asset

This dataset is a National Geospatial Data Asset (NGDAID 194) managed by the Department of State. It is a part of the International Boundaries Theme created by the Federal Geographic Data Committee.

Dataset Source Details

Sources for these data include treaties, relevant maps, and data from boundary commissions, as well as national mapping agencies. Where available and applicable, the dataset incorporates information from courts, tribunals, and international arbitrations. The research and recovery process includes analysis of satellite imagery and elevation data. Due to the limitations of source materials and processing techniques, most lines are within 100 meters of their true position on the ground.

Cartographic Visualization

The LSIB is a geospatial dataset that, when used for cartographic purposes, requires additional styling. The LSIB download package contains example style files for commonly used software applications. The attribute table also contains embedded information to guide the cartographic representation. Additional discussion of these considerations can be found in the Use of Core Attributes in Cartographic Visualization section below.

Additional cartographic information pertaining to the depiction and description of international boundaries or areas of special sovereignty can be found in Guidance Bulletins published by the Office of the Geographer and Global Issues: https://data.geodata.state.gov/guidance/index.html

Contact

Direct inquiries to internationalboundaries@state.gov. Direct download: https://data.geodata.state.gov/LSIB.zip

Attribute Structure

The dataset uses the following attributes divided into two categories: ATTRIBUTE NAME | ATTRIBUTE STATUS CC1 | Core CC1_GENC3 | Extension CC1_WPID | Extension COUNTRY1 | Core CC2 | Core CC2_GENC3 | Extension CC2_WPID | Extension COUNTRY2 | Core RANK | Core LABEL | Core STATUS | Core NOTES | Core LSIB_ID | Extension ANTECIDS | Extension PREVIDS | Extension PARENTID | Extension PARENTSEG | Extension

These attributes have external data sources that update separately from the LSIB: ATTRIBUTE NAME | ATTRIBUTE STATUS CC1 | GENC CC1_GENC3 | GENC CC1_WPID | World Polygons COUNTRY1 | DoS Lists CC2 | GENC CC2_GENC3 | GENC CC2_WPID | World Polygons COUNTRY2 | DoS Lists LSIB_ID | BASE ANTECIDS | BASE PREVIDS | BASE PARENTID | BASE PARENTSEG | BASE

The core attributes listed above describe the boundary lines contained within the LSIB dataset. Removal of core attributes from the dataset will change the meaning of the lines. An attribute status of “Extension” represents a field containing data interoperability information. Other attributes not listed above include “FID”, “Shape_length” and “Shape.” These are components of the shapefile format and do not form an intrinsic part of the LSIB.

Core Attributes

The eight core attributes listed above contain unique information which, when combined with the line geometry, comprise the LSIB dataset. These Core Attributes are further divided into Country Code and Name Fields and Descriptive Fields.

County Code and Country Name Fields

“CC1” and “CC2” fields are machine readable fields that contain political entity codes. These are two-character codes derived from the Geopolitical Entities, Names, and Codes Standard (GENC), Edition 3 Update 18. “CC1_GENC3” and “CC2_GENC3” fields contain the corresponding three-character GENC codes and are extension attributes discussed below. The codes “Q2” or “QX2” denote a line in the LSIB representing a boundary associated with areas not contained within the GENC standard.

The “COUNTRY1” and “COUNTRY2” fields contain the names of corresponding political entities. These fields contain names approved by the U.S. Board on Geographic Names (BGN) as incorporated in the ‘"Independent States in the World" and "Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty" lists maintained by the Department of State. To ensure maximum compatibility, names are presented without diacritics and certain names are rendered using common cartographic abbreviations. Names for lines associated with the code "Q2" are descriptive and not necessarily BGN-approved. Names rendered in all CAPITAL LETTERS denote independent states. Names rendered in normal text represent dependencies, areas of special sovereignty, or are otherwise presented for the convenience of the user.

Descriptive Fields

The following text fields are a part of the core attributes of the LSIB dataset and do not update from external sources. They provide additional information about each of the lines and are as follows: ATTRIBUTE NAME | CONTAINS NULLS RANK | No STATUS | No LABEL | Yes NOTES | Yes

Neither the "RANK" nor "STATUS" fields contain null values; the "LABEL" and "NOTES" fields do. The "RANK" field is a numeric expression of the "STATUS" field. Combined with the line geometry, these fields encode the views of the United States Government on the political status of the boundary line.

ATTRIBUTE NAME | | VALUE | RANK | 1 | 2 | 3 STATUS | International Boundary | Other Line of International Separation | Special Line

A value of “1” in the “RANK” field corresponds to an "International Boundary" value in the “STATUS” field. Values of ”2” and “3” correspond to “Other Line of International Separation” and “Special Line,” respectively.

The “LABEL” field contains required text to describe the line segment on all finished cartographic products, including but not limited to print and interactive maps.

The “NOTES” field contains an explanation of special circumstances modifying the lines. This information can pertain to the origins of the boundary lines, limitations regarding the purpose of the lines, or the original source of the line.

Use of Core Attributes in Cartographic Visualization

Several of the Core Attributes provide information required for the proper cartographic representation of the LSIB dataset. The cartographic usage of the LSIB requires a visual differentiation between the three categories of boundary lines. Specifically, this differentiation must be between:

• International Boundaries (Rank 1);
• Other Lines of International Separation (Rank 2); and
• Special Lines (Rank 3).

Rank 1 lines must be the most visually prominent. Rank 2 lines must be less visually prominent than Rank 1 lines. Rank 3 lines must be shown in a manner visually subordinate to Ranks 1 and 2. Where scale permits, Rank 2 and 3 lines must be labeled in accordance with the “Label” field. Data marked with a Rank 2 or 3 designation does not necessarily correspond to a disputed boundary. Please consult the style files in the download package for examples of this depiction.

The requirement to incorporate the contents of the "LABEL" field on cartographic products is scale dependent. If a label is legible at the scale of a given static product, a proper use of this dataset would encourage the application of that label. Using the contents of the "COUNTRY1" and "COUNTRY2" fields in the generation of a line segment label is not required. The "STATUS" field contains the preferred description for the three LSIB line types when they are incorporated into a map legend but is otherwise not to be used for labeling.

Use of

This dataset is a compilation of tax parcel polygon and point layers from the seven Twin Cities, Minnesota metropolitan area counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott and Washington. The seven counties were assembled into a common coordinate system. No attempt has been made to edgematch or rubbersheet between counties. A standard set of attribute fields is included for each county. (See section 5 of the metadata). The attributes are the same for the polygon and points layers. Not all attributes are populated for all counties.

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. The 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.

Polygon and point counts for each county are as follows (Updated annually, current as of 1/15/2014):

polygons / points
Anoka - 130052 / 130052
Carver - 39639 / 39639
Dakota - 138356 / 151873
Hennepin - 425977 / 425977
Ramsey - 148841 / 166648
Scott - 55732 / 55732
Washington - 105525 / 105525

This is a MetroGIS Regionally Endorsed dataset.

Each of the seven Metro Area counties has entered into a multiparty agreement with the Metropolitan Council to assemble and distribute the parcel data for each county as a regional (seven county) parcel dataset.

A standard set of attribute fields is included for each county. The attributes are identical for the point and polygon datasets. Not all attributes fields are populated by each county. Detailed information about the attributes can be found in the MetroGIS Regional Parcels Attributes 2013 document.

Additional information may be available in the individual metadata for 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 listed in the individual county metadata.

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: http://www.hennepin.us/gisopendata

Ramsey = https://www.ramseycounty.us/your-government/open-government/research-data

Scott = http://www.scottcountymn.gov/1183/GIS-Data-and-Maps

Washington = http://www.co.washington.mn.us/index.aspx?NID=1606

The DNR Hydrography Dataset is the centralized SDE data storage for master versions of DNR hydrographic spatial features (effective 2012). It includes the authoritative versions of the following statewide feature classes:

• DNR Hydrography - DNR Watersheds - Level 08 - All Catchments (polygons) https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/geos-dnr-watersheds


• DNR Hydrography - All Water Features (polygons)


• DNR Hydrography - Public Waters Basins (polygons) https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/water-mn-public-waters


• DNR Hydrography - Stream Routes with Kittle Numbers and Mile Measures (measured polyline routes) https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/water-measured-kittle-routes


• DNR Hydrography - Hydrologic Points of Interest (HPOI) (points) - in development

The DNR Hydrography Dataset is a collection of the "best available" DNR spatial features representing MN surficial hydrology. These features originate from multiple sources representing a range of scales and accuracies. All feature classes are (will eventually be) topologically related and will function as an integrated set of statewide features. Most DNR hydro-related layers are (will eventually be) derived from this central data storage so that master features may be edited once and then remain synchronized among all derived layers.

NOTE: The DNR Hydrography dataset replaces the older DNR 24K and DNR 100K data layers, including those derived layers listed below. Users should discontinue use of these older layers.

100K: dnr_100k_hydro_area_features, dnr_100k_hydro_stream_centerlines, lake_dnrpy2, wetl_dnrpy2, strm_usgsln2
24K: dnr_24k_lakes_and_open_water, dnr_24k_rivers_and_streams, dnr_24k_perennial_stream, lake_openwpy3, strm_baseln3, strm_pwiln3

Developed by SOLARGIS and provided by the Global Solar Atlas (GSA), this data resource contains global horizontal irradiation (GHI) 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 characteristics: GHI LTAy_AvgDailyTotals (GeoTIFF) Data format: GEOTIFF File size : 268.11 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).