This dataset represents point locations of cities and towns in Arizona. The data contains point locations for incorporated cities, Census Designated Places and populated places. Several data sets were used as inputs to construct this data set. A subset of the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) national dataset for the state of Arizona was used for the base location of most of the points. Polygon files of the Census Designated Places (CDP), from the U.S. Census Bureau and an incorporated city boundary database developed and maintained by the Arizona State Land Department were also used for reference during development. Every incorporated city is represented by a point, originally derived from GNIS. Some of these points were moved based on local knowledge of the GIS Analyst constructing the data set. Some of the CDP points were also moved and while most CDP's of the Census Bureau have one point location in this data set, some inconsistencies were allowed in order to facilitate the use of the data for mapping purposes. Population estimates were derived from data collected during the 2010 Census. During development, an additional attribute field was added to provide additional functionality to the users of this data. This field, named 'DEF_CAT', implies definition category, and will allow users to easily view, and create custom layers or datasets from this file. For example, new layers may created to include only incorporated cities (DEF_CAT = Incorporated), Census designated places (DEF_CAT = Incorporated OR DEF_CAT = CDP), or all cities that are neither CDP's or incorporated (DEF_CAT= Other). This data is current as of February 2012. At this time, there is no planned maintenance or update process for this dataset.This data is created to serve as base information for use in GIS systems for a variety of planning, reference, and analysis purposes. This data does not represent a legal record.

Tempe is among Arizona's most educated cities, lending to a creative, smart atmosphere. With more than a dozen colleges, trade schools, and universities, about 40 percent of our residents over the age of 25 have Bachelor's degrees or higher. Having such an educated and accessible workforce is a driving factor in attracting and growing jobs for residents in the region.The City of Tempe is a member of the Greater Phoenix Economic Council (GPEC), and with the membership, staff tracks collaborative efforts to recruit business prospects and locations. The Greater Phoenix Economic Council (GPEC) is a performance-driven, public-private partnership. GPEC partners with the City of Tempe, Maricopa County, 22 other communities, and more than 170 private-sector investors to promote the region’s competitive position and attract quality jobs that enable strategic economic growth and provide increased tax revenue for Tempe. This dataset provides the target and actual job creation numbers for the City of Tempe and the Greater Phoenix Economic Council (GPEC). The job creation target for Tempe is calculated by multiplying GPEC's target by twice Tempe's proportion of the population. This page provides data for the New Jobs Created performance measure.The performance measure dashboard is available at 5.02 New Jobs Created. Additional Information Source: Extracted from GPEC monthly and annual reports and proprietary excel filesContact: Madalaine McConvilleContact Phone: 480-350-2927Data Source Type: Excel filesPreparation Method: Extracted from GPEC monthly and annual reports and proprietary Excel filesPublish Frequency: AnnuallyPublish Method: ManualData Dictionary

This dataset contains 50-ft contours for the Hot Springs shallowest unit of the Ouachita Mountains aquifer system potentiometric-surface map. The potentiometric-surface shows altitude at which the water level would have risen in tightly-cased wells and represents synoptic conditions during the summer of 2017. Contours were constructed from 59 water-level measurements measured in selected wells (locations in the well point dataset). Major streams and creeks were selected in the study area from the USGS National Hydrography Dataset (U.S. Geological Survey, 2017), and the spring point dataset with 18 spring altitudes calculated from 10-meter digital elevation model (DEM) data (U.S. Geological Survey, 2015; U.S. Geological Survey, 2016). After collecting, processing, and plotting the data, a potentiometric surface was generated using the interpolation method Topo to Raster in ArcMap 10.5 (Esri, 2017a). This tool is specifically designed for the creation of digital elevation models and imposes constraints that ensure a connected drainage structure and a correct representation of the surface from the provided contour data (Esri, 2017a). Once the raster surface was created, 50-ft contour interval were generated using Contour (Spatial Analyst), a spatial analyst tool (available through ArcGIS 3D Analyst toolbox) that creates a line-feature class of contours (isolines) from the raster surface (Esri, 2017b). The Topo to Raster and contouring done by ArcMap 10.5 is a rapid way to interpolate data, but computer programs do not account for hydrologic connections between groundwater and surface water. For this reason, some contours were manually adjusted based on topographical influence, a comparison with the potentiometric surface of Kresse and Hays (2009), and data-point water-level altitudes to more accurately represent the potentiometric surface. Select References: Esri, 2017a, How Topo to Raster works—Help | ArcGIS Desktop, accessed December 5, 2017, at ArcGIS Pro at http://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/tool-reference/3d-analyst/how-topo-to-raster-works.htm. Esri, 2017b, Contour—Help | ArcGIS Desktop, accessed December 5, 2017, at ArcGIS Pro Raster Surface toolset at http://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/tool-reference/3d-analyst/contour.htm. Kresse, T.M., and Hays, P.D., 2009, Geochemistry, Comparative Analysis, and Physical and Chemical Characteristics of the Thermal Waters East of Hot Springs National Park, Arkansas, 2006-09: U.S. Geological Survey 2009–5263, 48 p., accessed November 28, 2017, at https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5263/. U.S. Geological Survey, 2015, USGS NED 1 arc-second n35w094 1 x 1 degree ArcGrid 2015, accessed December 5, 2017, at The National Map: Elevation at https://nationalmap.gov/elevation.html. U.S. Geological Survey, 2016, USGS NED 1 arc-second n35w093 1 x 1 degree ArcGrid 2016, accessed December 5, 2017, at The National Map: Elevation at https://nationalmap.gov/elevation.html.

Analysis of ‘AE/VCE Confirmed Vernal Pools’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/86c3c30c-b5f3-4a22-841b-6f685fbf0fa5 on 20 November 2021.

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

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

These products were developed to provide scientific and correspondingly spatially explicit information regarding the distribution and abundance of conifers (namely, singleleaf pinyon (Pinus monophylla), Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma), and western juniper (Juniperus occidentalis)) in Nevada and portions of northeastern California. Encroachment of these trees into sagebrush ecosystems of the Great Basin can present a threat to populations of greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus). These data provide land managers and other interested parties with a high-resolution representation of conifers across the range of sage-grouse habitat in Nevada and northeastern California that can be used for a variety of management and research applications. We mapped conifer trees at 1 x 1 meter resolution across the extent of all Nevada Department of Wildlife Sage-grouse Population Management Units plus a 10 km buffer. Using 2010 and 2013 National Agriculture Imagery Program digital orthophoto quads (DOQQs) as our reference imagery, we applied object-based image analysis with Feature Analyst software (Overwatch, 2013) to classify conifer features across our study extent. This method relies on machine learning algorithms that extract features from imagery based on their spectral and spatial signatures. Conifers in 6230 DOQQs were classified and outputs were then tested for errors of omission and commission using stratified random sampling. Results of the random sampling were used to populate a confusion matrix and calculate the overall map accuracy of 84.3 percent. We provide 5 sets of products for this mapping process across the entire mapping extent: (1) a shapefile representing accuracy results linked to our mapping subunits; (2) binary rasters representing conifer presence or absence at a 1 x 1 meter resolution; (3) a 30 x 30 meter resolution raster representing percentage of conifer canopy cover within each cell from 0 to 100; (4) 1 x 1 meter resolution canopy cover classification rasters derived from a 50 meter radius moving window analysis; and (5) a raster prioritizing pinyon-juniper management for sage-grouse habitat restoration efforts. The latter three products can be reclassified into user-specified bins to meet different management or study objectives, which include approximations for phases of encroachment. These products complement, and in some cases improve upon, existing conifer maps in the western United States, and will help facilitate sage-grouse habitat management and sagebrush ecosystem restoration. These data support the following publication: Coates, P.S., Gustafson, K.B., Roth, C.L., Chenaille, M.P., Ricca, M.A., Mauch, Kimberly, Sanchez-Chopitea, Erika, Kroger, T.J., Perry, W.M., and Casazza, M.L., 2017, Using object-based image analysis to conduct high-resolution conifer extraction at regional spatial scales: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2017-1093, 40 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20171093. References: ESRI, 2013, ArcGIS Desktop: Release 10.2: Environmental Systems Research Institute. Overwatch, 2013, Feature Analyst Version 5.1.2.0 for ArcGIS: Overwatch Systems Ltd.

The World Terrestrial Ecosystems map classifies the world into areas of similar climate, landform, and land cover, which form the basic components of any terrestrial ecosystem structure. This map is important because it uses objectively derived and globally consistent data to characterize the ecosystems at a much finer spatial resolution (250-m) than existing ecoregionalizations, and a much finer thematic resolution (431 classes) than existing global land cover products. This item was updated on Apr 14, 2023 to distinguish between Boreal and Polar climate regions in the terrestrial ecosystems. Cell Size: 250-meter Source Type: ThematicPixel Type: 16 Bit UnsignedData Projection: GCS WGS84Extent: GlobalSource: USGS, The Nature Conservancy, EsriUpdate Cycle: NoneAnalysis: Optimized for analysis What can you do with this layer?This map allows you to query the land surface pixels and returns the values of all the input parameters (landform type, landcover/vegetation type, climate region) and the name of the terrestrial ecosystem at that location. This layer can be used in analysis at global and local regions. However, for large scale spatial analysis, we have also provided an ArcGIS Pro Package that contains the original raster data with multiple table attributes. For simple mapping applications, there is also a raster tile layer. This layer can be combined with the World Protected Areas Database to assess the types of ecosystems that are protected, and progress towards meeting conservation goals. The WDPA layer updates monthly from the United Nations Environment Programme. Optimized for analysis means this layer does not have size constraints for analysis and it is recommended for multisource analysis with other layers optimized for analysis. See the Living Atlas Imagery Layers Optimized for Analysis Group for a complete list of imagery layers optimized for analysis. Developing the World Terrestrial EcosystemsWorld Terrestrial Ecosystems map was produced by adopting and modifying the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) approach on the definition of Terrestrial Ecosystems and development of standardized global climate regions using the values of environmental moisture regime and temperature regime. We then combined the values of Global Climate Regions, Landforms and matrix-forming vegetation assemblage or land use, using the ArcGIS Combine tool (Spatial Analyst) to produce World Ecosystems Dataset. This combination resulted of 431 World Ecosystems classes. Each combination was assigned a color using an algorithm that blended traditional color schemes for each of the three components. Every pixel in this map is symbolized by a combination of values for each of these fields. The work from this collaboration is documented in the publication:Sayre et al. 2020. An assessment of the representation of ecosystems in global protected areas using new maps of World Climate Regions and World Ecosystems - Global Ecology and Conservation More information about World Terrestrial Ecosystems can be found in this Story Map.

Mapping of Visible Surface Water (VSW), or water features not concealed by other objects (i.e., tree canopy, bridges, etc.), is an important component of landcover models. VSW is not intended to represent a full hydrography or show connectivity, like other available water datasets – like NHD – whose boundaries may include other landcover types (i.e., shrubs, trees, etc.). Each feature has been visually verified and given attributes by an analyst. This dataset is also unique in that it reflects surface water for a single year - 2017. A variety of funding sources acquired between 2019 and 2023 aided the completion of the dataset for the entire state of Washington. More information on the dataset, current data coverage, and applications can be found on our website: https://hrcd-wdfw.hub.arcgis.com/.

Tip: Try using the filter options on the data tab to limit your download to a single County or WRIA. The filtered download can take a substantial amount of time to initiate, so it may be necessary to download the full dataset if the filter option does not work.

Dataset featuring the full-time, part-time and seasonal jobs, as well as internships posted on the City's job portal @ https://www.raleighnc.gov/jobs This dataset is updated weekdays by 9am and does not contain past (non-active) postings.

This data set represents a 5-meter resolution LiDAR-derived percent slope layer for New Hampshire. It was generated from a statewide Esri Mosaic Dataset which comprised 8 separate LiDAR collections that covered the state as of January, 2020. The Mosaic Dataset was used as input to the ArcGIS Spatial Analyst "Slope" geoprocessing tool which calculates the percent slope for each cell of the input raster, in this case, the statewide mosaic dataset.

RTB Maps is a cloud-based electronic Atlas. We used ArGIS 10 for Desktop with Spatial Analysis Extension, ArcGIS 10 for Server on-premise, ArcGIS API for Javascript, IIS web services based on .NET, and ArcGIS Online combining data on the cloud with data and applications on our local server to develop an Atlas that brings together many of the map themes related to development of roots, tubers and banana crops. The Atlas is structured to allow our participating scientists to understand the distribution of the crops and observe the spatial distribution of many of the obstacles to production of these crops. The Atlas also includes an application to allow our partners to evaluate the importance of different factors when setting priorities for research and development. The application uses weighted overlay analysis within a multi-criteria decision analysis framework to rate the importance of factors when establishing geographic priorities for research and development.Datasets of crop distribution maps, agroecology maps, biotic and abiotic constraints to crop production, poverty maps and other demographic indicators are used as a key inputs to multi-objective criteria analysis.Further metadata/references can be found here: http://gisweb.ciat.cgiar.org/RTBmaps/DataAvailability_RTBMaps.htmlDISCLAIMER, ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND PERMISSIONS:This service is provided by Roots, Tubers and Bananas CGIAR Research Program as a public service. Use of this service to retrieve information constitutes your awareness and agreement to the following conditions of use.This online resource displays GIS data and query tools subject to continuous updates and adjustments. The GIS data has been taken from various, mostly public, sources and is supplied in good faith.RTBMaps GIS Data Disclaimer• The data used to show the Base Maps is supplied by ESRI.• The data used to show the photos over the map is supplied by Flickr.• The data used to show the videos over the map is supplied by Youtube.• The population map is supplied to us by CIESIN, Columbia University and CIAT.• The Accessibility map is provided by Global Environment Monitoring Unit - Joint Research Centre of the European Commission. Accessibility maps are made for a specific purpose and they cannot be used as a generic dataset to represent "the accessibility" for a given study area.• Harvested area and yield for banana, cassava, potato, sweet potato and yam for the year 200, is provided by EarthSat (University of Minnesota’s Institute on the Environment-Global Landscapes initiative and McGill University’s Land Use and the Global Environment lab). Dataset from Monfreda C., Ramankutty N., and Foley J.A. 2008.• Agroecology dataset: global edapho-climatic zones for cassava based on mean growing season, temperature, number of dry season months, daily temperature range and seasonality. Dataset from CIAT (Carter et al. 1992)• Demography indicators: Total and Rural Population from Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) and CIAT 2004.• The FGGD prevalence of stunting map is a global raster datalayer with a resolution of 5 arc-minutes. The percentage of stunted children under five years old is reported according to the lowest available sub-national administrative units: all pixels within the unit boundaries will have the same value. Data have been compiled by FAO from different sources: Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), UNICEF MICS, WHO Global Database on Child Growth and Malnutrition, and national surveys. Data provided by FAO – GIS Unit 2007.• Poverty dataset: Global poverty headcount and absolute number of poor. Number of people living on less than $1.25 or $2.00 per day. Dataset from IFPRI and CIATTHE RTBMAPS GROUP MAKES NO WARRANTIES OR GUARANTEES, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED AS TO THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY, OR CORRECTNESS OF THE DATA PORTRAYED IN THIS PRODUCT NOR ACCEPTS ANY LIABILITY, ARISING FROM ANY INCORRECT, INCOMPLETE OR MISLEADING INFORMATION CONTAINED THEREIN. ALL INFORMATION, DATA AND DATABASES ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITH NO WARRANTY, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. By accessing this website and/or data contained within the databases, you hereby release the RTB group and CGCenters, its employees, agents, contractors, sponsors and suppliers from any and all responsibility and liability associated with its use. In no event shall the RTB Group or its officers or employees be liable for any damages arising in any way out of the use of the website, or use of the information contained in the databases herein including, but not limited to the RTBMaps online Atlas product.APPLICATION DEVELOPMENT:• Desktop and web development - Ernesto Giron E. (GeoSpatial Consultant) e.giron.e@gmail.com• GIS Analyst - Elizabeth Barona. (Independent Consultant) barona.elizabeth@gmail.comCollaborators:Glenn Hyman, Bernardo Creamer, Jesus David Hoyos, Diana Carolina Giraldo Soroush Parsa, Jagath Shanthalal, Herlin Rodolfo Espinosa, Carlos Navarro, Jorge Cardona and Beatriz Vanessa Herrera at CIAT, Tunrayo Alabi and Joseph Rusike from IITA, Guy Hareau, Reinhard Simon, Henry Juarez, Ulrich Kleinwechter, Greg Forbes, Adam Sparks from CIP, and David Brown and Charles Staver from Bioversity International.Please note these services may be unavailable at times due to maintenance work.Please feel free to contact us with any questions or problems you may be having with RTBMaps.

Yearly effective energy and mass transfer (EEMT) (MJ m−2 yr−1) was calculated for the Catalina Mountains by summing the 12 monthly values. Effective energy and mass flux varies seasonally, especially in the desert southwestern United States where contemporary climate includes a bimodal precipitation distribution that concentrates in winter (rain or snow depending on elevation) and summer monsoon periods. This seasonality of EEMT flux into the upper soil surface can be estimated by calculating EEMT on a monthly basis as constrained by solar radiation (Rs), temperature (T), precipitation (PPT), and the vapor pressure deficit (VPD): EEMT = f(Rs,T,PPT,VPD). Here we used a multiple linear regression model to calculate the monthly EEMT that accounts for VPD, PPT, and locally modified T across the terrain surface. These EEMT calculations were made using data from the PRISM Climate Group at Oregon State University (www.prismclimate.org). Climate data are provided at an 800-m spatial resolution for input precipitation and minimum and maximum temperature normals and at a 4000-m spatial resolution for dew-point temperature (Daly et al., 2002). The PRISM climate data, however, do not account for localized variation in EEMT that results from smaller spatial scale changes in slope and aspect as occurs within catchments. To address this issue, these data were then combined with 10-m digital elevation maps to compute the effects of local slope and aspect on incoming solar radiation and hence locally modified temperature (Yang et al., 2007). Monthly average dew-point temperatures were computed using 10 yr of monthly data (2000–2009) and converted to vapor pressure. Precipitation, temperature, and dew-point data were resampled on a 10-m grid using spline interpolation. Monthly solar radiation data (direct and diffuse) were computed using ArcGIS Solar Analyst extension (ESRI, Redlands, CA) and 10-m elevation data (USGS National Elevation Dataset [NED] 1/3 Arc-Second downloaded from the National Map Seamless Server at seamless.usgs.gov). Locally modified temperature was used to compute the saturated vapor pressure, and the local VPD was estimated as the difference between the saturated and actual vapor pressures. The regression model was derived using the ISOHYS climate data set comprised of approximately 30-yr average monthly means for more than 300 weather stations spanning all latitudes and longitudes (IAEA).

Levee stations, usually in feet but in some cases miles, snapped to 2017 Delta levee centerlines (derived from the 2017 Delta LiDAR). Base source for station locations are surveyed field markers on the levees or distance-derived CAD files, in either case as supplied by local maintaining agency's engineers. DWR collected station location data and snapped the stations into the levee centerline file from 2012. After updated levee centerlines were created, the existing points were snapped to the new lines. So there is some small difference between the supplied station locations, previous station locations and these station locations. In some cases, multiple series of stations exist for a district, generally associated with distinct waterways. Also, district levees may be demarked in feet or in miles. The label fields are simply cartographic support, the label data are identical in all cases, but are provided to support fast labeling at more infrequent intervals as needed. Stationing is not as simple as it may seem. In some cases, multiple sets of stationing exist for a district's levees (see Sherman Island for example). What this dataset intends to represent is the current stationing used by District engineers for that District on levee maintenance and improvement projects. As changes are made to the stationing, and the new stationing data become available to the Levee Program, they will be added to this database. Some islands also have separate groups of stations for various parts of the district. This version is current as of 03/24/2020. Source of the original levee stationing is DWR Delta Levees Program, compiled from data provided by internal files, from CSU Chico State, MBK Engineers, KSN Engineers, Siegfried Engineers, Malani & Associates, Green Mountain Engineers, and DCC Engineers. Processing work done by CA DWR, Division of Engineering, Geodetic Branch, Geospatial Data Support Section, specifically by Arina Ushakova (Research Data Analyst I), and initial QC by Joel Dudas (Senior Engineer, Water Resources).

The Sheeprocks (UT) was revised to resync with the UT habitat change as reflected in the Oct 2017 habitat data, creating the most up-to-date version of this dataset. Data submitted by Wyoming in February 2018 and by Montana and Oregon in May 2016 were used to update earlier versions of this feature class. The biologically significant unit (BSU) is a geographical/spatial area within Greater Sage-Grouse habitat that contains relevant and important habitats which is used as the basis for comparative calculations to support evaluation of changes to habitat. This BSU unit, or subset of this unit is used in the calculation of the anthropogenic disturbance threshold and in the adaptive management habitat trigger. BSU feature classes were submitted by individual states/EISs and consolidated by the Wildlife Spatial Analysis Lab. They are sometimes referred to as core areas/core habitat areas in the explanations below, which were consolidated from metadata submitted with BSU feature classes. These data provide a biological tool for planning in the event of human development in sage-grouse habitats. The intended use of all data in the BLM's GIS library is to support diverse activities including planning, management, maintenance, research, and interpretation. While the BSU defines the geographic extent and scale of these two measures, how they are calculated differs based on the specific measures to reflect appropriate assessment and evaluation as supported by scientific literature.There are 10 BSUs for the Idaho and Southwestern Montana GRSG EIS sub-region. For the Idaho and Southwestern Montana Greater Sage-Grouse Plan Amendment FEIS the biologically significant unit is defined as: a geographical/spatial area within greater sage-grouse habitat that contains relevant and important habitats which is used as the basis for comparative calculations to support evaluation of changes to habitat. Idaho: BSUs include all of the Idaho Fish and Game modeled nesting and delineated winter habitat, based on 2011 inventories within Priority and/or Important Habitat Management Area (Alternative G) within a Conservation Area. There are eight BSUs for Idaho identified by Conservation Area and Habitat Management Area: Idaho Desert Conservation Area - Priority, Idaho Desert Conservation Area - Important, Idaho Mountain Valleys Conservation Area - Priority, Idaho Mountain Valleys Conservation Area - Important, Idaho Southern Conservation Area - Priority, Idaho Southern Conservation Area - Important, Idaho West Owyhee Conservation Area - Priority, and Idaho West Owyhee Conservation Area - Important. Raft River : Utah portion of the Sawtooth National Forest, 1 BSU. All of this areas was defined as Priority habitat in Alternative G. Raft River - Priority. Montana: All of the Priority Habitat Management Area. 1 BSU. SW Montana Conservation Area - Priority. Montana BSUs were revised in May 2016 by the MT State Office. They are grouped together and named by the Population in which they are located: Northern Montana, Powder River Basin, Wyoming Basin, and Yellowstone Watershed. North and South Dakota BSUs have been grouped together also. California and Nevada's BSUs were developed by Nevada Department of Wildlife's Greater Sage-Grouse Wildlife Staff Specialist and Sagebrush Ecosystem Technical Team Representative in January 2015. Nevada's Biologically Significant Units (BSUs) were delineated by merging associated PMUs to provide a broader scale management option that reflects sage grouse populations at a higher scale. PMU boundarys were then modified to incorporate Core Management Areas (August 2014; Coates et al. 2014) for management purposes. (Does not include Bi-State DPS.) Within Colorado, a Greater Sage-Grouse GIS data set identifying Preliminary Priority Habitat (PPH) and Preliminary General Habitat (PGH) was developed by Colorado Parks and Wildlife. This data is a combination of mapped grouse occupied range, production areas, and modeled habitat (summer, winter, and breeding). PPH is defined as areas of high probability of use (summer or winter, or breeding models) within a 4 mile buffer around leks that have been active within the last 10 years. Isolated areas with low activity were designated as general habitat. PGH is defined as Greater sage-grouse Occupied Range outside of PPH. Datasets used to create PPH and PGH: Summer, winter, and breeding habitat models. Rice, M. B., T. D. Apa, B. L. Walker, M. L. Phillips, J. H. Gammonly, B. Petch, and K. Eichhoff. 2012. Analysis of regional species distribution models based on combined radio-telemetry datasets from multiple small-scale studies. Journal of Applied Ecology in review. Production Areas are defined as 4 mile buffers around leks which have been active within the last 10 years (leks active between 2002-2011). Occupied range was created by mapping efforts of the Colorado Division of Wildlife (now Colorado Parks and Wildlife –CPW) biologists and district officers during the spring of 2004, and further refined in early 2012. Occupied Habitat is defined as areas of suitable habitat known to be used by sage-grouse within the last 10 years from the date of mapping. Areas of suitable habitat contiguous with areas of known use, which do not have effective barriers to sage-grouse movement from known use areas, are mapped as occupied habitat unless specific information exists that documents the lack of sage-grouse use. Mapped from any combination of telemetry locations, sightings of sage grouse or sage grouse sign, local biological expertise, GIS analysis, or other data sources. This information was derived from field personnel. A variety of data capture techniques were used including the SmartBoard Interactive Whiteboard using stand-up, real-time digitizing atvarious scales (Cowardin, M., M. Flenner. March 2003. Maximizing Mapping Resources. GeoWorld 16(3):32-35). Update August 2012: This dataset was modified by the Bureau of Land Management as requested by CPW GIS Specialist, Karin Eichhoff. Eichhoff requested that this dataset, along with the GrSG managment zones (population range zones) dataset, be snapped to county boundaries along the UT-CO border and WY-CO border. The county boundaries dataset was provided by Karin Eichhoff. In addition, a few minor topology errors were corrected where PPH and PGH were overlapping. Update October 10, 2012: NHD water bodies greater than 100 acres were removed from GrSG habitat, as requested by Jim Cagney, BLM CO Northwest District Manager. 6 water bodies in total were removed (Hog Lake, South Delaney, Williams Fork Reservoir, North Delaney, Wolford Mountain Reservoir (2 polygons)). There were two “SwampMarsh” polygons that resulted when selecting polygons greater than 100 acres; these polygons were not included. Only polygons with the attribute “LakePond” were removed from GrSG habitat. Colorado Greater Sage Grouse managment zones based on CDOW GrSG_PopRangeZones20120609.shp. Modified and renumbered by BLM 06/09/2012. The zones were modified again by the BLM in August 2012. The BLM discovered areas where PPH and PGH were not included within the zones. Several discrepancies between the zones and PPH and PGH dataset were discovered, and were corrected by the BLM. Zones 18-21 are linkages added as zones by the BLM. In addition to these changes, the zones were adjusted along the UT-CO boundary and WY-CO boundary to be coincident with the county boundaries dataset. This was requested by Karin Eichhoff, GIS Specialist at the CPW. She provided the county boundaries dataset to the BLM. Greater sage grouse GIS data set identifying occupied, potential and vacant/unknown habitats in Colorado. The data set was created by mapping efforts of the Colorado Division of Wildlife biologist and district officers during the spring of 2004, and further refined in the winter of 2005. Occupied Habitat: Areas of suitable habitat known to be used by sage-grouse within the last 10 years from the date of mapping. Areas of suitable habitat contiguous with areas of known use, which do not have effective barriers to sage-grouse movement from known use areas, are mapped as occupied habitat unless specific information exists that documents the lack of sage-grouse use. Mapped from any combination of telemetry locations, sightings of sage grouse or sage grouse sign, local biological expertise, GIS analysis, or other data sources. Vacant or Unknown Habitat: Suitable habitat for sage-grouse that is separated (not contiguous) from occupied habitats that either: 1) Has not been adequately inventoried, or 2) Has not had documentation of grouse presence in the past 10 years Potentially Suitable Habitat: Unoccupied habitats that could be suitable for occupation of sage-grouse if practical restoration were applied. Soils or other historic information (photos, maps, reports, etc.) indicate sagebrush communities occupied these areas. As examples, these sites could include areas overtaken by pinyon-juniper invasions or converted rangelandsUpdate October 10, 2012: NHD water bodies greater than 100 acres were removed from GrSG habitat and management zones, as requested by Jim Cagney, BLM CO Northwest District Manager. 6 water bodies in total were removed (Hog Lake, South Delaney, Williams Fork Reservoir, North Delaney, Wolford Mountain Reservoir (2 polygons)). There were two “SwampMarsh” polygons that resulted when selecting polygons greater than 100 acres; these polygons were not included. Only polygons with the attribute “LakePond” were removed from GrSG habitat. Oregon submitted updated BSU boundaries in May 2016 and again in October 2016, which were incorporated into this latest version. In Oregon, the Core Area maps and data were developed as one component of the Conservation Strategy for sage-grouse. Specifically, these data provide a tool in planning and identifying appropriate mitigation in the event of human development in sage-grouse habitats. These maps will assist in making

The Solar Radiation Potential Model (SRPM) was derived from the Lake County 2007 Digital Surface Model (DSM). The DSM is a 3-foot pixel resolution raster in GeoTIFF format, created using all points (excluding NOISE) from our 2007 LiDAR data without incorporating the breaklines. The SRPM was created using the ArcGIS 'Area Solar Radiation' geoprocessing tool. Due to the number of variables and parameters, the default values of the geoprocessing tool were used.The solar radiation analysis tools in the ArcGIS Spatial Analyst extension enables one to map and analyze the effects of the sun over a geographic area for specific time periods. It accounts for atmospheric effects, site latitude and elevation, steepness (slope) and compass direction (aspect), daily and seasonal shifts of the sun angle, and effects of shadows cast by surrounding topography. The resultant outputs can be easily integrated with other GIS data and can help model physical and biological processes as they are affected by the sun.These data are derived from other data sources, no accuracy measurements or tests were conducted. Primary use and intent for these data are for visualizations and topographic analysis. This dataset does not take the place of an on-site survey for design, construction or regulatory purposes.

This dataset contains 10,000 synthetic records simulating the migratory behavior of various bird species across global regions. Each entry represents a single bird tagged with a tracking device and includes detailed information such as flight distance, speed, altitude, weather conditions, tagging information, and migration outcomes.

The data was entirely synthetically generated using randomized yet realistic values based on known ranges from ornithological studies. It is ideal for practicing data analysis and visualization techniques without privacy concerns or real-world data access restrictions. Because it’s artificial, the dataset can be freely used in education, portfolio projects, demo dashboards, machine learning pipelines, or business intelligence training.

With over 40 columns, this dataset supports a wide array of analysis types. Analysts can explore questions like “Do certain species migrate in larger flocks?”, “How does weather impact nesting success?”, or “What conditions lead to migration interruptions?”. Users can also perform geospatial mapping of start and end locations, cluster birds by behavior, or build time series models based on migration months and environmental factors.

For data visualization, tools like Power BI, Python (Matplotlib/Seaborn/Plotly), or Excel can be used to create insightful dashboards and interactive charts.

Join the Fabric Community DataViz Contest | May 2025: https://community.fabric.microsoft.com/t5/Power-BI-Community-Blog/%EF%B8%8F-Fabric-Community-DataViz-Contest-May-2025/ba-p/4668560

The Solar Radiation Potential Model (SRPM) was derived from the Lake County 2007 Digital Surface Model (DSM). The DSM is a 3-foot pixel resolution raster in GeoTIFF format, created using all points (excluding NOISE) from our 2007 LiDAR data without incorporating the breaklines. The SRPM was created using the ArcGIS 'Area Solar Radiation' geoprocessing tool. Due to the number of variables and parameters, the default values of the geoprocessing tool were used.

The solar radiation analysis tools in the ArcGIS Spatial Analyst extension enables one to map and analyze the effects of the sun over a geographic area for specific time periods. It accounts for atmospheric effects, site latitude and elevation, steepness (slope) and compass direction (aspect), daily and seasonal shifts of the sun angle, and effects of shadows cast by surrounding topography. The resultant outputs can be easily integrated with other GIS data and can help model physical and biological processes as they are affected by the sun.

These data are derived from other data sources, no accuracy measurements or tests were conducted. Primary use and intent for these data are for visualizations and topographic analysis. This dataset does not take the place of an on-site survey for design, construction or regulatory purposes.

PurposeThis map is designed to be loaded into ArcGIS Pro projects to give users easy access to sanitary sewer utility data.BackgroundPrior to the creation of this map, non-GIS users would only be able to access static copies of utility data in the ArcGIS Online utility web maps/apps. This basemap allows power users to access a live feed of the data, which is updated on a nightly basis. This map can be opened in ArcGIS Pro to give users more flexibility to analyze and explore the data. The map and the data within are for internal use only.ProcessThe GIS Analyst updates this dataset on a continuous basis using As-Builts and CAD files submitted during the development review process, as well as field staff verification

This map presents the full data available on the MLTSD GeoHub, and maps several of the key variables reflected by the Employment Services Program of ETD.Employment Services are a suite of services delivered to the public to help Ontarians find sustainable employment. The services are delivered by third-party service providers at service delivery sites (SDS) across Ontario on behalf of the Ministry of Labour, Training and Skills Development (MLTSD). The services are tailored to meet the individual needs of each client and can be provided one-on-one or in a group format. Employment Services fall into two broad categories: unassisted and assisted services.

Unassisted services include the following components:resources and information on all aspects of employment including detailed facts on the local labour marketresources on how to conduct a job search.assistance in registering for additional schoolinghelp with career planningreference to other Employment and government programs.

Unassisted services are available to all Ontarians without reference to eligibility criteria. These unassisted services can be delivered through structured orientation or information sessions (on or off site), e-learning sessions, or one-to-one sessions up to two days in duration. Employers can also use unassisted services to access information on post-employment opportunities and supports available for recruitment and workplace training.

The second category is assisted services, and it includes the following components:assistance with the job search (including individualized assistance in career goal setting, skills assessment, and interview preparation) job matching, placement and incentives (which match client skills and interested with employment opportunities, and include placement into employment, on-the-job training opportunities, and incentives to employers to hire ES clients), and job training/retention (which supports longer-term attachment to or advancement in the labour market or completion of training)For every assisted services client a service plan is maintained by the service provider, which gives details on the types of assisted services the client has accessed. To be eligible for assisted services, clients must be unemployed (defined as working less than twenty hours a week) and not participating in full-time education or training. Clients are also assessed on a number of suitability indicators covering economic, social and other barriers to employment, and service providers are to prioritize serving those clients with multiple suitability indicators.

About This Dataset

This dataset contains data on ES clients for each of the twenty-six Local Board (LB) areas in Ontario for the 2015/16 fiscal year, based on data provided to Local Boards and Local Employment Planning Councils (LEPC) in June 2016 (see below for details on Local Boards). This includes all assisted services clients whose service plan was closed in the 2015/16 fiscal year and all unassisted services clients who accessed unassisted services in the 2015/16 fiscal year. These clients have been distributed across Local Board areas based on the address of each client’s service delivery site, not the client’s home address. Note that clients who had multiple service plans close in the 2015/16 fiscal year (i.e. more than one distinct period during which the client was accessing assisted services) will be counted multiple times in this dataset (once for each closed service plan). Assisted services clients who also accessed unassisted services either before or after accessing assisted services would also be included in the count of unassisted clients (in addition to their assisted services data).

Demographic data on ES assisted services clients, including a client’s suitability indicators and barriers to employment, are collected by the service provider when a client registers for ES (i.e. at intake). Outcomes data on ES assisted services clients is collected through surveys at exit (i.e. when the client has completed accessing ES services and the client’s service plan is closed) and at three, six, and twelve months after exit. As demographic and outcomes data is only collected for assisted services clients, all fields in this dataset contain data only on assisted services clients except for the ‘Number of Clients – Unassisted R&I Clients’ field.

Note that ES is the gateway for other Employment Ontario programs and services; the majority of Second Career (SC) clients, some apprentices, and some Literacy and Basic Skills (LBS) clients have also accessed ES. It is standard procedure for SC, LBS and apprenticeship client and outcome data to be entered as ES data if the program is part of ES service plan. However, for this dataset, SC client and outcomes data has been separated from ES, which as a result lowers the client and outcome counts for ES.

About Local Boards

Local Boards are independent not-for-profit corporations sponsored by the Ministry of Labour, Training and Skills Development to improve the condition of the labour market in their specified region. These organizations are led by business and labour representatives, and include representation from constituencies including educators, trainers, women, Francophones, persons with disabilities, visible minorities, youth, Indigenous community members, and others. For the 2015/16 fiscal year there were twenty-six Local Boards, which collectively covered all of the province of Ontario.

The primary role of Local Boards is to help improve the conditions of their local labour market by:engaging communities in a locally-driven process to identify and respond to the key trends, opportunities and priorities that prevail in their local labour markets;facilitating a local planning process where community organizations and institutions agree to initiate and/or implement joint actions to address local labour market issues of common interest; creating opportunities for partnership development activities and projects that respond to more complex and/or pressing local labour market challenges; and organizing events and undertaking activities that promote the importance of education, training and skills upgrading to youth, parents, employers, employed and unemployed workers, and the public in general.

In December 2015, the government of Ontario launched an eighteen-month Local Employment Planning Council pilot program, which established LEPCs in eight regions in the province formerly covered by Local Boards. LEPCs expand on the activities of existing Local Boards, leveraging additional resources and a stronger, more integrated approach to local planning and workforce development to fund community-based projects that support innovative approaches to local labour market issues, provide more accurate and detailed labour market information, and develop detailed knowledge of local service delivery beyond Employment Ontario (EO).

Eight existing Local Boards were awarded LEPC contracts that were effective as of January 1st, 2016. As such, from January 1st, 2016 to March 31st, 2016, these eight Local Boards were simultaneously Local Employment Planning Councils. The eight Local Boards awarded contracts were:Durham Workforce Authority Peel-Halton Workforce Development GroupWorkforce Development Board - Peterborough, Kawartha Lakes, Northumberland, HaliburtonOttawa Integrated Local Labour Market PlanningFar Northeast Training BoardNorth Superior Workforce Planning Board Elgin Middlesex Oxford Workforce Planning & Development BoardWorkforce Windsor-Essex

MLTSD has provided Local Boards and LEPCs with demographic and outcome data for clients of Employment Ontario (EO) programs delivered by service providers across the province on an annual basis since June 2013. This was done to assist Local Boards in understanding local labour market conditions. These datasets may be used to facilitate and inform evidence-based discussions about local service issues – gaps, overlaps and under-served populations - with EO service providers and other organizations as appropriate to the local context.

Data on the following EO programs for the 2015/16 fiscal year was made available to Local Boards and LEPCs in June 2016:Employment Services (ES)Literacy and Basic Skills (LBS) Second Career (SC) Apprenticeship

This dataset contains the 2015/16 ES data that was sent to Local Boards and LEPCs. Datasets covering past fiscal years will be released in the future.

Notes and Definitions

NAICS – The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) is an industry classification system developed by the statistical agencies of Canada, the United States, and Mexico against the backdrop of the North American Free Trade Agreement. It is a comprehensive system that encompasses all economic activities in a hierarchical structure. At the highest level, it divides economic activity into twenty sectors, each of which has a unique two-digit identifier. These sectors are further divided into subsectors (three-digit codes), industry groups (four-digit codes), and industries (five-digit codes). This dataset uses two-digit NAICS codes from the 2007 edition to identify the sector of the economy an Employment Services client is employed in prior to and after participation in ES.

NOC – The National Organizational Classification (NOC) is an occupational classification system developed by Statistics Canada and Human Resources and Skills Development Canada to provide a standard lexicon to describe and group occupations in Canada primarily on the basis of the work being performed in the occupation. It is a comprehensive system that encompasses all occupations in Canada in a hierarchical structure. At the highest level are ten broad occupational categories, each of which has a unique one-digit identifier. These broad occupational categories are further divided into forty major groups (two-digit codes), 140 minor groups

This map layer shows the base zoning districts in the City of Columbus. Zoning disrticts and associated regulations govern the use, placement, spacing, and size of land and buildings. Zoning provides guidelines for setbacks, height of structures, lot sizes, lot coverage, parking and other requirements. Zoning also regulates the types of land uses permitted on a property.Once legislation is passed to rezone an area, this layer is updated based on the legal description provided in the application. All property within the City of Columbus will contain zoning information applicable to that individual area. Data is maintained by the GIS Analyst at the Department of Building and Zoning Services.