The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Quality, in cooperation with the NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, developed the GIS data set, Surface Water Intakes to enhance planning, siting and impact analysis in areas directly affecting water supply intakes in North Carolina. The file enables users to identify point locations where communities draw raw water from a lake, river, or stream; treat it; and distribute treated water to residences and businesses in North Carolina. The original locations were developed by the DEHNR-Division of Environmental Health, Public Water Supply Branch in April of 1990. Locations have been altered, added and deleted by the Division of Water Quality who updates this file in accordance with the Water Supply Watersheds file. This file is updated as changes occur.

High resolution (10 meter) land surface temperature (LST) from September 1, 2022 is mapped for the seven-county metropolitan region of the Twin Cities. The goal of the map is to show the heat differences across the region and is not intended to show the maximum temperature that any specific area can reach. The raster dataset was computed at 30 meters using satellite imagery from Landsat 9 and downscaled to 10 meters using Copernicus Sentinel-2. These datasets were integrated using techniques modified from Ermida et al. 2020 and Onačillová et al. 2022). Open water was removed using ancillary data from OpenStreetMap and 2020 Generalized Land Use for the Twin Cities (Metropolitan Council).

First, Landsat 9 imagery taken at 11:59 am CDT on September 01, 2022 was processed into 30-meter resolution LST (based on Ermida et al. 2020). At this time, the air temperature was 88° F at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (NOAA). A model predicting LST based on spectral indices of Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), Normalized Difference Water Index (NDWI), and Normalized Difference Built-up Index (NDBI) was created and applied to 10-meter Sentenel-2 imagery. Sentinel-2 imagery was also taken on September 1, 2022, and this resulted in a 10-meter downscaled LST image (based on Onačillová et al. 2022). To account for anomalies in NDVI on the primary image date of September 1 (e.g., recently harvested agricultural fields), maximum NDVI occurring between July 1, 2022 and September 1, 2022 was used for both Landsat and Sentinel image processing. Water bodies were removed for all processing steps (OpenStreetMap 2023, Metropolitan Council 2021).

This dataset is an update to the 2016 LST data for the Twin Cities Region (Metropolitan Council).

The code to create and processes this dataset is available at: https://github.com/Metropolitan-Council/extreme.heat

Sources:
Ermida, S.L., Soares, P., Mantas, V., Göttsche, F.-M., Trigo, I.F., 2020. Google Earth Engine open-source code for Land Surface Temperature estimation from the Landsat series. Remote Sensing, 12 (9), 1471; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12091471.

Metropolitan Council. 2021. Generalized Land Use 2020. Minnesota Geospatial Commons. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/us-mn-state-metc-plan-generl-lnduse2020

Metropolitan Council. 2017. Land Surface Temperature for Climate Vulnerability Analysis. Minnesota Geospatial Commons. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/us-mn-state-metc-env-cva-lst2016

NOAA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Centers for Environmental Information, station USW00014922. September 1, 2022.

Onačillová, K., Gallay, M., Paluba, D., Péliová, A., Tokarčík, O., Laubertová, D. 2022. Combining Landsat 8 and Sentinel 2 data in Google Earth Engine to derive higher resolution land surface temperature maps in urban environment. Remote Sensing, 14 (16), 4076. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14164076.

OpenStreetMap contributors. 2023. Retrieved from https://planet.openstreetmap.org on April 12, 2023.

The National Hydrography Dataset Plus (NHDplus) maps the lakes, ponds, streams, rivers and other surface waters of the United States. Created by the US EPA Office of Water and the US Geological Survey, the NHDPlus provides mean annual and monthly flow estimates for rivers and streams. Additional attributes provide connections between features facilitating complicated analyses. For more information on the NHDPlus dataset see the NHDPlus v2 User Guide.Dataset SummaryPhenomenon Mapped: Surface waters and related features of the United States and associated territories not including Alaska.Geographic Extent: The United States not including Alaska, Puerto Rico, Guam, US Virgin Islands, Marshall Islands, Northern Marianas Islands, Palau, Federated States of Micronesia, and American SamoaProjection: Web Mercator Auxiliary Sphere Visible Scale: Visible at all scales but layer draws best at scales larger than 1:1,000,000Source: EPA and USGSUpdate Frequency: There is new new data since this 2019 version, so no updates planned in the futurePublication Date: March 13, 2019Prior to publication, the NHDPlus network and non-network flowline feature classes were combined into a single flowline layer. Similarly, the NHDPlus Area and Waterbody feature classes were merged under a single schema.Attribute fields were added to the flowline and waterbody layers to simplify symbology and enhance the layer's pop-ups. Fields added include Pop-up Title, Pop-up Subtitle, On or Off Network (flowlines only), Esri Symbology (waterbodies only), and Feature Code Description. All other attributes are from the original NHDPlus dataset. No data values -9999 and -9998 were converted to Null values for many of the flowline fields.What can you do with this layer?Feature layers work throughout the ArcGIS system. Generally your work flow with feature layers will begin in ArcGIS Online or ArcGIS Pro. Below are just a few of the things you can do with a feature service in Online and Pro.ArcGIS OnlineAdd this layer to a map in the map viewer. The layer is limited to scales of approximately 1:1,000,000 or larger but a vector tile layer created from the same data can be used at smaller scales to produce a webmap that displays across the full range of scales. The layer or a map containing it can be used in an application. Change the layer’s transparency and set its visibility rangeOpen the layer’s attribute table and make selections. Selections made in the map or table are reflected in the other. Center on selection allows you to zoom to features selected in the map or table and show selected records allows you to view the selected records in the table.Apply filters. For example you can set a filter to show larger streams and rivers using the mean annual flow attribute or the stream order attribute. Change the layer’s style and symbologyAdd labels and set their propertiesCustomize the pop-upUse as an input to the ArcGIS Online analysis tools. This layer works well as a reference layer with the trace downstream and watershed tools. The buffer tool can be used to draw protective boundaries around streams and the extract data tool can be used to create copies of portions of the data.ArcGIS ProAdd this layer to a 2d or 3d map. Use as an input to geoprocessing. For example, copy features allows you to select then export portions of the data to a new feature class. Change the symbology and the attribute field used to symbolize the dataOpen table and make interactive selections with the mapModify the pop-upsApply Definition Queries to create sub-sets of the layerThis layer is part of the ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World that provides an easy way to explore the landscape layers and many other beautiful and authoritative maps on hundreds of topics.Questions?Please leave a comment below if you have a question about this layer, and we will get back to you as soon as possible.

This dataset captures in digital form the results of previously published U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water Mission Area studies related to water resource assessment of Cenozoic strata and unconsolidated deposits within the Mississippi Embayment and the Gulf Coastal Plain of the south-central United States. The data are from reports published from the late 1980s to the mid-1990s by the Gulf Coast Regional Aquifer-System Analysis (RASA) studies and in 2008 by the Mississippi Embayment Regional Aquifer Study (MERAS). These studies, and the data presented here, describe the geologic and hydrogeologic units of the Mississippi embayment, Texas coastal uplands, and the coastal lowlands aquifer systems, south-central United States. This dataset supercedes a previously released dataset on USGS ScienceBase (https://doi.org/10.5066/P9JOHHO6) that was found to contain errors. Following initial release of data, several types of errors were recognized in the well downhole stratigraphic data. Most of these errors were the result of unrecognized improper results in the optical character recognition conversion from the original source report. All downhole data have been thoroughly checked and corrected, data tables were revised, and new point feature classes were created for well location and WellHydrogeologicUnit. GIS data related to the geologic map and subsurface contours were correct in original release and are retained here in original form; only the well data have been revised from the initial data release. The Mississippi embayment, Texas coastal uplands, and coastal lowlands aquifer systems underlie about 487,000 km2 in parts of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Tennessee, and Texas from the Rio Grande on the west to the western part of Florida on the east. The previously published investigations divided the Cenozoic strata and unconsolidated deposits within the Mississippi Embayment and the Gulf Coastal Plain into 11 major geologic units, typically mapped at the group level, with several additional units at the formational level, which were aggregated into six hydrogeologic units within the Mississippi embayment and Texas coastal uplands and into five hydrogeologic units within the Coastal Lowlands aquifer system. These units include the Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer, Vicksburg-Jackson confining unit (contained within the Jackson Group), the upper Claiborne aquifer (contained within the Claiborne Group), the middle Claiborne confining unit (contained within the Claiborne Group), the middle Claiborne aquifer (contained within the Claiborne Group), the lower Claiborne confining unit (contained within the Claiborne Group), the lower Claiborne aquifer (contained within the Claiborne Group), the middle Wilcox aquifer (contained within the Wilcox Group), the lower Wilcox aquifer (contained within the Wilcox Group), and the Midway confining unit (contained within the Midway Group). This dataset includes structure contour and thickness data digitized from plates in two reports, borehole data compiled from two reports, and a geologic map digitized from a report plate. Structure contour and thickness maps of hydrogeologic units in the Mississippi Embayment and Texas coastal uplands had been previously digitized by a USGS study from georeferenced images of altitude and thickness contours in USGS Professional Paper 1416-B (Hosman and Weiss, 1991). These data, which were stored on the USGS Water Mission Area’s NSDI node, were downloaded, reformatted, and attributed for present dataset. Structure contour maps of geologic units in the Mississippi Embayment and Texas coastal uplands were digitized and attributed from georeferenced images of altitude and thickness contours in USGS Professional Paper 1416-G (Hosman, 1996) for this data release. Borehole data in this data release include data compiled for USGS Gulf Coast RASA studies in which a scanned version of a USGS report (Wilson and Hosman, 1987) was converted through optical character recognition and then manipulated to form a data table, and from borehole data compiled for the subsequent MERAS study (Hart and Clark, 2008) where an Excel workbook was downloaded and manipulated for use in a GIS and as part of this dataset. The digital geologic map was digitized from Plate 4 of USGS Professional Paper 1416-G (Hosman, 1996) and then attributed according to the USGS National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program’s GeMS digital geologic map schema. The digital dataset a digital geologic map with contacts and faults and geologic map polygons distributed as separate feature classes within a geographic information system geodatabase. The geologic map database is a digital representation of the geologic compilation of the Guld Coast region originally published as Plate 4 of USGS Professional Paper 1416-G (Hosman, 1996). The dataset includes a second geographic information system geodatabase that contain digital structure contour and thickness data as polyline feature classes for all of the hydrogeologic units contoured in USGS Professional Paper 1416-B (Hosman and Weiss, 1991) and all of the geologic units contoured in USGS Professional Paper 1416-G (Hosman, 1996). The geodatabase also contains separate point feature classes that portray borehole location and the depth to hydrogeologic units penetrated downhole for all boreholes compiled for the USGS RASA sturdies by Wilson and Hosman (1987) and for the subsequent USGS MERAS study (Hart and Clark, 2008). Borehole data are provided in Microsoft Excel spreadsheet that includes separate TABs for well location and tabulation of the depths to top and base of hydrogeologic units intercepted downhole, in a format suitable for import into a relational database. Each of the geographic information system geodatabases include non-spatial tables that describe the sources of geologic or hydrogeologic information, a glossary of terms, and a description of units. Also included is a Data Dictionary that duplicates the Entity and Attribute information contained in the metadata file. To maximize usability, spatial data are also distributed as shapefiles and tabular data are distributed as ascii text files in comma separated values (CSV) format. The landing page to for this data release contains a url to an external web resource where the downhole well data and a single contoured surface from the data release are rendered in 3D and can be interactively viewed by the user.

This dataset provides detailed information on road surfaces from OpenStreetMap (OSM) data, distinguishing between paved and unpaved surfaces across the region. This information is based on road surface prediction derived from hybrid deep learning approach. For more information on Methods, refer to the paper

Roughly 0.0497 million km of roads are mapped in OSM in this region. Based on AI-mapped estimates the share of paved and unpaved roads is approximately 0.0117 and 0.0111 (in million kms), corressponding to 23.4856% and 22.3095% respectively of the total road length in the dataset region. 0.0269 million km or 54.2049% of road surface information is missing in OSM. In order to fill this gap, Mapillary derived road surface dataset provides an additional 0.0008 million km of information (corressponding to 3.0011% of total missing information on road surface)

It is intended for use in transportation planning, infrastructure analysis, climate emissions and geographic information system (GIS) applications.

This dataset provides comprehensive information on road and urban area features, including location, surface quality, and classification metadata. This dataset includes attributes from OpenStreetMap (OSM) data, AI predictions for road surface, and urban classifications.

AI features:

• pred_class: Model-predicted class for the road surface, with values "paved" or "unpaved."

• pred_label: Binary label associated with pred_class (0 = paved, 1 = unpaved).

• osm_surface_class: Classification of the surface type from OSM, categorized as "paved" or "unpaved."

• combined_surface_osm_priority: Surface classification combining pred_label and surface(OSM) while prioritizing the OSM surface tag, classified as "paved" or "unpaved."

• combined_surface_DL_priority: Surface classification combining pred_label and surface(OSM) while prioritizing DL prediction pred_label, classified as "paved" or "unpaved."

• n_of_predictions_used: Number of predictions used for the feature length estimation.

• predicted_length: Predicted length based on the DL model’s estimations, in meters.

• DL_mean_timestamp: Mean timestamp of the predictions used, for comparison.

OSM features may have these attributes(Learn what tags mean here):

• name: Name of the feature, if available in OSM.

• name:en: Name of the feature in English, if available in OSM.

• name:* (in local language): Name of the feature in the local official language, where available.

• highway: Road classification based on OSM tags (e.g., residential, motorway, footway).

• surface: Description of the surface material of the road (e.g., asphalt, gravel, dirt).

• smoothness: Assessment of surface smoothness (e.g., excellent, good, intermediate, bad).

• width: Width of the road, where available.

• lanes: Number of lanes on the road.

• oneway: Indicates if the road is one-way (yes or no).

• bridge: Specifies if the feature is a bridge (yes or no).

• layer: Indicates the layer of the feature in cases where multiple features are stacked (e.g., bridges, tunnels).

• source: Source of the data, indicating the origin or authority of specific attributes.

Urban classification features may have these attributes:

• continent: The continent where the data point is located (e.g., Europe, Asia).

• country_iso_a2: The ISO Alpha-2 code representing the country (e.g., "US" for the United States).

• urban: Binary indicator for urban areas based on the GHSU Urban Layer 2019. (0 = rural, 1 = urban)

• urban_area: Name of the urban area or city where the data point is located.

• osm_id: Unique identifier assigned by OpenStreetMap (OSM) to each feature.

• osm_type: Type of OSM element (e.g., node, way, relation).

The data originates from OpenStreetMap (OSM) and is augmented with model predictions using images downloaded from Mapillary in combination with the GHSU Global Human Settlement Urban Layer 2019 and AFRICAPOLIS2020 urban layer.

This dataset is one of many HeiGIT exports on HDX. See the HeiGIT website for more information.

We are looking forward to hearing about your use-case! Feel free to reach out to us and tell us about your research at communications@heigit.org – we would be happy to amplify your work.

This data set was developed to provide geologic map GIS of the Coeur d'Alene 1:100,000 quadrangle for use in future spatial analysis by a variety of users. These data can be printed in a variety of ways to display various geologic features or used for digital analysis and modeling. This database is not meant to be used or displayed at any scale larger than 1:100,000 (e.g. 1:62,500 or 1:24,000).

The digital geologic map of the Coeur d'Alene 1:100,000 quadrangle was compiled from preliminary digital datasets [Athol, Coeur d'Alene, Kellogg, Kingston, Lakeview, Lane, and Spirit Lake 15-minute quadrangles] prepared by the Idaho Geological Survey from A. B. Griggs (unpublished field maps), supplemented by Griggs (1973) and by digital data from Bookstrom and others (1999) and Derkey and others (1996). The digital geologic map database can be queried in many ways to produce a variety of derivative geologic maps.

This GIS consists of two major Arc/Info data sets: one line and polygon file (cda100k) containing geologic contacts and structures (lines) and geologic map rock units (polygons), and one point file (cda100kp) containing structural data.

Abstract

The dataset was derived by the Bioregional Assessment Programme from multiple source datasets. The source datasets are identified in the Lineage field in this metadata statement. The processes undertaken to produce this derived dataset are described in the History field in this metadata statement.

This resource contains raster datasets created using ArcGIS to analyse groundwater levels in the Namoi subregion.

This is an update to some of the data that is registered here: http://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/dataset/7604087e-859c-4a92-8548-0aa274e8a226

Purpose

These data layers were created in ArcGIS as part of the analysis to investigate surface water - groundwater connectivity in the Namoi subregion. The data layers provide several of the figures presented in the Namoi 2.1.5 Surface water - groundwater interactions report.

Dataset History

Extracted points inside Namoi subregion boundary. Converted bore and pipe values to Hydrocode format, changed heading of 'Value' column to 'Waterlevel' and removed unnecessary columns then joined to Updated_NSW_GroundWaterLevel_data_analysis_v01\NGIS_NSW_Bore_Join_Hydmeas_unique_bores.shp clipped to only include those bores within the Namoi subregion.

Selected only those bores with sample dates between >=26/4/2012 and <31/7/2012. Then removed 4 gauges due to anomalous ref_pt_height values or WaterElev values higher than Land_Elev values.

Then added new columns of calculations:

WaterElev = TsRefElev - Water_Leve

DepthWater = WaterElev - Ref_pt_height

Ref_pt_height = TsRefElev - LandElev

Alternatively - Selected only those bores with sample dates between >=1/5/2006 and <1/7/2006

2012_Wat_Elev - This raster was created by interpolating Water_Elev field points from HydmeasJune2012_only.shp, using Spatial Analyst - Topo to Raster tool. And using the alluvium boundary (NAM_113_Aquifer1_NamoiAlluviums.shp) as a boundary input source.

12_dw_olp_enf - Select out only those bores that are in both source files.

Then using depthwater in Topo to Raster, with alluvium as the boundary, ENFORCE field chosen, and using only those bores present in 2012 and 2006 dataset.

2012dw1km_alu - Clipped the 'watercourselines' layer to the Namoi Subregion, then selected 'Major' water courses only. Then used the Geoprocessing 'Buffer' tool to create a polygon delineating an area 1km around all the major streams in the Namoi subregion.

selected points from HydmeasJune2012_only.shp that were within 1km of features the WatercourseLines then used the selected points and the 1km buffer around the major water courses and the Topo to Raster tool in Spatial analyst to create the raster.

Then used the alluvium boundary to truncate the raster, to limit to the area of interest.

12_minus_06 - Select out bores from the 2006 dataset that are also in the 2012 dataset. Then create a raster using depth_water in topo to raster, with ENFORCE field chosen to remove sinks, and alluvium as boundary. Then, using Map Algebra - Raster Calculator, subtract the raster just created from 12_dw_olp_enf

Dataset Citation

Bioregional Assessment Programme (2017) Namoi bore analysis rasters - updated. Bioregional Assessment Derived Dataset. Viewed 10 December 2018, http://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/dataset/effa0039-ba15-459e-9211-232640609d44.

Dataset Ancestors

• Derived From Bioregional Assessment areas v02

• Derived From Gippsland Project boundary

• Derived From Bioregional Assessment areas v04

• Derived From Upper Namoi groundwater management zones

• Derived From Natural Resource Management (NRM) Regions 2010

• Derived From Bioregional Assessment areas v03

• Derived From Victoria - Seamless Geology 2014

• Derived From GIS analysis of HYDMEAS - Hydstra Groundwater Measurement Update: NSW Office of Water - Nov2013

• Derived From Bioregional Assessment areas v01

• Derived From GEODATA TOPO 250K Series 3, File Geodatabase format (.gdb)

• Derived From GEODATA TOPO 250K Series 3

• Derived From NSW Catchment Management Authority Boundaries 20130917

• Derived From Geological Provinces - Full Extent

• Derived From Hydstra Groundwater Measurement Update - NSW Office of Water, Nov2013

This layer is a high-resolution tree canopy change-detection layer for Baltimore City, MD. It contains three tree-canopy classes for the period 2007-2015: (1) No Change; (2) Gain; and (3) Loss. It was created by extracting tree canopy from existing high-resolution land-cover maps for 2007 and 2015 and then comparing the mapped trees directly. Tree canopy that existed during both time periods was assigned to the No Change category while trees removed by development, storms, or disease were assigned to the Loss class. Trees planted during the interval were assigned to the Gain category, as were the edges of existing trees that expanded noticeably. Direct comparison was possible because both the 2007 and 2015 maps were created using object-based image analysis (OBIA) and included similar source datasets (LiDAR-derived surface models, multispectral imagery, and thematic GIS inputs). OBIA systems work by grouping pixels into meaningful objects based on their spectral and spatial properties, while taking into account boundaries imposed by existing vector datasets. Within the OBIA environment a rule-based expert system was designed to effectively mimic the process of manual image analysis by incorporating the elements of image interpretation (color/tone, texture, pattern, location, size, and shape) into the classification process. A series of morphological procedures were employed to insure that the end product is both accurate and cartographically pleasing. No accuracy assessment was conducted, but the dataset will be subjected to manual review and correction. 2006 LiDAR and 2014 LiDAR data was also used to assist in tree canopy change.

A potentiometric-surface map represents the altitude at which water would stand in tightly cased wells completed at any location within the study area aquifer. Using the altitude of water levels measured in the study area, the potentiometric-surface map depicts points of equal altitude with contours denoting a given water-level altitude calculated by subtracting the water level measured from the land-surface elevation (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929). The contour lines were created using computer-based program ArcGIS with an interval of 10 feet. The direction of water flow from areas of high elevation to low elevation can be interpreted using potentiometric-surface maps and areas of decreased groundwater levels can be identified. The 2014 potentiometric-surface map shows ten total cones of depressions: two large depressions, five small depressions, and three areas of decreased water levels. As with the 2010 potentiometric-surface map, one large depression begins in southeastern Arkansas County, near the Arkansas and Desha County line, and extends north into Prairie County, west into Lonoke County, and east into the western-most part of Monroe County. Even though the center of the depression had deepened in 2010, the area of the cone in Arkansas County within the southeastern half of the depression had not expanded horizontally. The analysis of the 2014 potentiometric-surface map suggests no horizontal expansion in this area. The additional GIS shapefiles were used to depicts the western extent of the Mississippi River alluvial aquifer in eastern Arkansas on plates 1, 2, and 3 in Rodgers and Whaling (2020).

This dataset provides detailed information on road surfaces from OpenStreetMap (OSM) data, distinguishing between paved and unpaved surfaces across the region. This information is based on road surface prediction derived from hybrid deep learning approach. For more information on Methods, refer to the paper

Roughly 4.8023 million km of roads are mapped in OSM in this region. Based on AI-mapped estimates the share of paved and unpaved roads is approximately 0.5281 and 0.2874 (in million kms), corressponding to 10.9979% and 5.9838% respectively of the total road length in the dataset region. 3.9868 million km or 83.0183% of road surface information is missing in OSM. In order to fill this gap, Mapillary derived road surface dataset provides an additional 0.0218 million km of information (corressponding to 0.5461% of total missing information on road surface)

It is intended for use in transportation planning, infrastructure analysis, climate emissions and geographic information system (GIS) applications.

This dataset provides comprehensive information on road and urban area features, including location, surface quality, and classification metadata. This dataset includes attributes from OpenStreetMap (OSM) data, AI predictions for road surface, and urban classifications.

AI features:

• pred_class: Model-predicted class for the road surface, with values "paved" or "unpaved."

• pred_label: Binary label associated with pred_class (0 = paved, 1 = unpaved).

• osm_surface_class: Classification of the surface type from OSM, categorized as "paved" or "unpaved."

• combined_surface_osm_priority: Surface classification combining pred_label and surface(OSM) while prioritizing the OSM surface tag, classified as "paved" or "unpaved."

• combined_surface_DL_priority: Surface classification combining pred_label and surface(OSM) while prioritizing DL prediction pred_label, classified as "paved" or "unpaved."

• n_of_predictions_used: Number of predictions used for the feature length estimation.

• predicted_length: Predicted length based on the DL model’s estimations, in meters.

• DL_mean_timestamp: Mean timestamp of the predictions used, for comparison.

OSM features may have these attributes(Learn what tags mean here):

• name: Name of the feature, if available in OSM.

• name:en: Name of the feature in English, if available in OSM.

• name:* (in local language): Name of the feature in the local official language, where available.

• highway: Road classification based on OSM tags (e.g., residential, motorway, footway).

• surface: Description of the surface material of the road (e.g., asphalt, gravel, dirt).

• smoothness: Assessment of surface smoothness (e.g., excellent, good, intermediate, bad).

• width: Width of the road, where available.

• lanes: Number of lanes on the road.

• oneway: Indicates if the road is one-way (yes or no).

• bridge: Specifies if the feature is a bridge (yes or no).

• layer: Indicates the layer of the feature in cases where multiple features are stacked (e.g., bridges, tunnels).

• source: Source of the data, indicating the origin or authority of specific attributes.

Urban classification features may have these attributes:

• continent: The continent where the data point is located (e.g., Europe, Asia).

• country_iso_a2: The ISO Alpha-2 code representing the country (e.g., "US" for the United States).

• urban: Binary indicator for urban areas based on the GHSU Urban Layer 2019. (0 = rural, 1 = urban)

• urban_area: Name of the urban area or city where the data point is located.

• osm_id: Unique identifier assigned by OpenStreetMap (OSM) to each feature.

• osm_type: Type of OSM element (e.g., node, way, relation).

The data originates from OpenStreetMap (OSM) and is augmented with model predictions using images downloaded from Mapillary in combination with the GHSU Global Human Settlement Urban Layer 2019 and AFRICAPOLIS2020 urban layer.

This dataset is one of many HeiGIT exports on HDX. See the HeiGIT website for more information.

We are looking forward to hearing about your use-case! Feel free to reach out to us and tell us about your research at communications@heigit.org – we would be happy to amplify your work.

This dataset is a modified version of the FWS developed data depicting “Highly Important Landscapes”, as outlined in Memorandum FWS/AES/058711 and provided to the Wildlife Habitat Spatial analysis Lab on October 29th 2014. Other names and acronyms used to refer to this dataset have included: Areas of Significance (AoSs - name of GIS data set provided by FWS), Strongholds (FWS), and Sagebrush Focal Areas (SFAs - BLM). The BLM will refer to these data as Sagebrush Focal Areas (SFAs). Data were provided as a series of ArcGIS map packages which, when extracted, contained several datasets each. Based on the recommendation of the FWS Geographer/Ecologist (email communication, see data originator for contact information) the dataset called “Outiline_AreasofSignificance” was utilized as the source for subsequent analysis and refinement. Metadata was not provided by the FWS for this dataset. For detailed information regarding the dataset’s creation refer to Memorandum FWS/AES/058711 or contact the FWS directly. Several operations and modifications were made to this source data, as outlined in the “Description” and “Process Step” sections of this metadata file. Generally: The source data was named by the Wildlife Habitat Spatial Analysis Lab to identify polygons as described (but not identified in the GIS) in the FWS memorandum. The Nevada/California EIS modified portions within their decision space in concert with local FWS personnel and provided the modified data back to the Wildlife Habitat Spatial Analysis Lab. Gaps around Nevada State borders, introduced by the NVCA edits, were then closed as was a large gap between the southern Idaho & southeast Oregon present in the original dataset. Features with an area below 40 acres were then identified and, based on FWS guidance, either removed or retained. Finally, guidance from BLM WO resulted in the removal of additional areas, primarily non-habitat with BLM surface or subsurface management authority. Data were then provided to each EIS for use in FEIS development. Based on guidance from WO, SFAs were to be limited to BLM decision space (surface/sub-surface management areas) within PHMA. Each EIS was asked to provide the limited SFA dataset back to the National Operations Center to ensure consistent representation and analysis. Returned SFA data, modified by each individual EIS, was then consolidated at the BLM’s National Operations Center retaining the three standardized fields contained in this dataset.Several Modifications from the original FWS dataset have been made. Below is a summary of each modification.1. The data as received from FWS: 16,514,163 acres & 1 record.2. Edited to name SFAs by Wildlife Habitat Spatial Analysis Lab:Upon receipt of the “Outiline_AreasofSignificance” dataset from the FWS, a copy was made and the one existing & unnamed record was exploded in an edit session within ArcMap. A text field, “AoS_Name”, was added. Using the maps provided with Memorandum FWS/AES/058711, polygons were manually selected and the “AoS_Name” field was calculated to match the names as illustrated. Once all polygons in the exploded dataset were appropriately named, the dataset was dissolved, resulting in one record representing each of the seven SFAs identified in the memorandum.3. The NVCA EIS made modifications in concert with local FWS staff. Metadata and detailed change descriptions were not returned with the modified data. Contact Leisa Wesch, GIS Specialist, BLM Nevada State Office, 775-861-6421, lwesch@blm.gov, for details.4. Once the data was returned to the Wildlife Habitat Spatial Analysis Lab from the NVCA EIS, gaps surrounding the State of NV were closed. These gaps were introduced by the NVCA edits, exacerbated by them, or existed in the data as provided by the FWS. The gap closing was performed in an edit session by either extending each polygon towards each other or by creating a new polygon, which covered the gap, and merging it with the existing features. In addition to the gaps around state boundaries, a large area between the S. Idaho and S.E. Oregon SFAs was filled in. To accomplish this, ADPP habitat (current as of January 2015) and BLM GSSP SMA data were used to create a new polygon representing PHMA and BLM management that connected the two existing SFAs.5. In an effort to simplify the FWS dataset, features whose areas were less than 40 acres were identified and FWS was consulted for guidance on possible removal. To do so, features from #4 above were exploded once again in an ArcMap edit session. Features whose areas were less than forty acres were selected and exported (770 total features). This dataset was provided to the FWS and then returned with specific guidance on inclusion/exclusion via email by Lara Juliusson (lara_juliusson@fws.gov). The specific guidance was:a. Remove all features whose area is less than 10 acresb. Remove features identified as slivers (the thinness ratio was calculated and slivers identified by Lara Juliusson according to https://tereshenkov.wordpress.com/2014/04/08/fighting-sliver-polygons-in-arcgis-thinness-ratio/) and whose area was less than 20 acres.c. Remove features with areas less than 20 acres NOT identified as slivers and NOT adjacent to other features.d. Keep the remainder of features identified as less than 40 acres.To accomplish “a” and “b”, above, a simple selection was applied to the dataset representing features less than 40 acres. The select by location tool was used, set to select identical, to select these features from the dataset created in step 4 above. The records count was confirmed as matching between the two data sets and then these features were deleted. To accomplish “c” above, a field (“AdjacentSH”, added by FWS but not calculated) was calculated to identify features touching or intersecting other features. A series of selections was used: first to select records 6. Based on direction from the BLM Washington Office, the portion of the Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument (UMRBNM) that was included in the FWS SFA dataset was removed. The BLM NOC GSSP NLCS dataset was used to erase these areas from #5 above. Resulting sliver polygons were also removed and geometry was repaired.7. In addition to removing UMRBNM, the BLM Washington Office also directed the removal of Non-ADPP habitat within the SFAs, on BLM managed lands, falling outside of Designated Wilderness’ & Wilderness Study Areas. An exception was the retention of the Donkey Hills ACEC and adjacent BLM lands. The BLM NOC GSSP NLCS datasets were used in conjunction with a dataset containing all ADPP habitat, BLM SMA and BLM sub-surface management unioned into one file to identify and delete these areas.8. The resulting dataset, after steps 2 – 8 above were completed, was dissolved to the SFA name field yielding this feature class with one record per SFA area.9. Data were provided to each EIS for use in FEIS allocation decision data development.10. Data were subset to BLM decision space (surface/sub-surface) within PHMA by each EIS and returned to the NOC.11. Due to variations in field names and values, three standardized fields were created and calculated by the NOC:a. SFA Name – The name of the SFA.b. Subsurface – Binary “Yes” or “No” to indicated federal subsurface estate.c. SMA – Represents BLM, USFS, other federal and non-federal surface management 12. The consolidated data (with standardized field names and values) were dissolved on the three fields illustrated above and geometry was repaired, resulting in this dataset.

{{description}}

The friction (cost allocation/effort) surface was assembled using three primary input datasets on land surface characteristics that help or hinder travel speeds: land cover, roads and topography. Landcover data were from the ESA CCI Landcover map for Africa 2016, roads data were merged from Open-Street Map (OSM) and the MapwithAi project and topography was taken from the SRTM Digital Elevation Model. The costs for travel consider walking/pedestrian travel in this data, but the software is supplied with an easy to change set of travel speeds so they can be adapted easily to consider travel speeds reflecting motorised transportation use. We have reduced the walking speeds to reflect the fact that adults walking with children move approximately 22% slower. There are two friction surfaces provided, the first defines open water as a barrier to travel and so the speed allocated to this landcover is NA. The second defines open water with an associated speed (1 km/hr). To create a walking speed array, first the road walking speeds were used and then missing values were filled with landcover walking speed values. This walking speed array was multiplied by the slope impact grid. The speed for each cell was converted from kilometers per hour to meters per second. Finally, the time (in seconds) to walk across each cell was calculated. The outputs are 20-m spatial resolution geotiffs indicating the time to walk across each cell. They are subsequently used in the least cost path analysis to estimate travel time to the nearest health facilities. However,these friction surfaces can be used by others to estimate travel speed to other destinations in a GIS.

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.

High resolution land cover dataset for Virginia Beach, VA. Seven land cover classes were mapped: (1) tree canopy, (2) grass/shrub, (3) bare earth, (4) water, (5) buildings, (6) roads, and (7) other paved surfaces. The minimum mapping unit for the delineation of features was set at 3x3 square feet.

The primary sources used to derive this land cover layer were (1) NAIP 2008 imagery derived from the compressed county mosaic, (2) Normalized digital surface model (nDSM) for Virginia Beach, VA, generated from 2004 light detection and ranging (LiDAR) data representing a 2ft surface. Ancillary data sources used were GIS vector planimetrics layers containing buildings, roads, utility lines, and surface water, provided by the City of Virginia Beach to aid in classification. This land cover dataset is considered current as of November, 2009.

Object-based image analysis techniques (OBIA) were employed to extract land cover information using the best available remotely sensed and vector GIS datasets. OBIA systems work by grouping pixels into meaningful objects based on their spectral and spatial properties, while taking into account boundaries imposed by existing vector datasets. Within the OBIA environment a rule-based expert system was designed to effectively mimic the process of manual image analysis by incorporating the elements of image interpretation (color/tone, texture, pattern, location, size, and shape) into the classification process. A series of morphological procedures were employed to insure that the end product is both accurate and cartographically pleasing.

No accuracy assessment was conducted, but the dataset was subject to a thorough manual quality control. 18194 corrections were made to the classification.

Land Use dataset for New Castle, Kent, and Sussex Counties in the State of Delaware. This Land Use dataset represents land use classification for the State of Delaware for two time periods: 2017 and 2022. This dataset originates from Aerial Information Systems, Inc who were tasked with updating the state of Delaware's existing 2012 GIS Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) and Impervious Surface datasets to 2017 conditions. The UVM Spatial Analysis Lab received the updated 2017 layer, and using a detailed manual review system, corrected and edited this dataset to 2017 orthorectified imagery of the State of Delaware as necessary. Additionally, the dataset was edited to accommodate an update that includes 2022 land use classification, using a detailed manual review system and 2022 orthorectified imagery of the State of Delaware. The manual review was carried out at a scale of 1:5000, and all observable errors were corrected. The land use codes used for this dataset are derived from the metadata of Delaware's existing 2012 GIS Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) and Impervious Surface datasets

This data layer references data from a high-resolution tree canopy change-detection layer for Seattle, Washington. Tree canopy change was mapped by using remotely sensed data from two time periods (2016 and 2021). Tree canopy was assigned to three classes: 1) no change, 2) gain, and 3) loss. No change represents tree canopy that remained the same from one time period to the next. Gain represents tree canopy that increased or was newly added, from one time period to the next. Loss represents the tree canopy that was removed from one time period to the next. Mapping was carried out using an approach that integrated automated feature extraction with manual edits. Care was taken to ensure that changes to the tree canopy were due to actual change in the land cover as opposed to differences in the remotely sensed data stemming from lighting conditions or image parallax. Direct comparison was possible because land-cover maps from both time periods were created using object-based image analysis (OBIA) and included similar source datasets (LiDAR-derived surface models, multispectral imagery, and thematic GIS inputs). OBIA systems work by grouping pixels into meaningful objects based on their spectral and spatial properties, while taking into account boundaries imposed by existing vector datasets. Within the OBIA environment a rule-based expert system was designed to effectively mimic the process of manual image analysis by incorporating the elements of image interpretation (color/tone, texture, pattern, _location, size, and shape) into the classification process. A series of morphological procedures were employed to ensure that the end product is both accurate and cartographically pleasing. No accuracy assessment was conducted, but the dataset was subjected to manual review and correction.University of Vermont Spatial Analysis Laboratory in collaboration with City of Seattle.This dataset consists of City of Seattle SDOT Urban Forestry Management Units which cover the following tree canopy categories: Existing tree canopy percent Possible tree canopy - vegetation percent Relative percent change Absolute percent changeFor more information, please see the 2021 Tree Canopy Assessment.

Abstract: The National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) is a feature-based database that interconnects and uniquely identifies the stream segments or reaches that make up the nation's surface water drainage system. NHD data was originally developed at 1:100,000-scale and exists at that scale for the whole country. This high-resolution NHD, generally developed at 1:24,000/1:12,000 scale, adds detail to the original 1:100,000-scale NHD. (Data for Alaska, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands was developed at high-resolution, not 1:100,000 scale.) Local resolution NHD is being developed where partners and data exist. The NHD contains reach codes for networked features, flow direction, names, and centerline representations for areal water bodies. Reaches are also defined on waterbodies and the approximate shorelines of the Great Lakes, the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and the Gulf of Mexico. The NHD also incorporates the National Spatial Data Infrastructure framework criteria established by the Federal Geographic Data Committee.
Purpose: The NHD is a national framework for assigning reach addresses to water-related entities, such as industrial discharges, drinking water supplies, fish habitat areas, wild and scenic rivers. Reach addresses establish the locations of these entities relative to one another within the NHD surface water drainage network, much like addresses on streets. Once linked to the NHD by their reach addresses, the upstream/downstream relationships of these water-related entities--and any associated information about them--can be analyzed using software tools ranging from spreadsheets to geographic information systems (GIS). GIS can also be used to combine NHD-based network analysis with other data layers, such as soils, land use and population, to help understand and display their respective effects upon one another. Furthermore, because the NHD provides a nationally consistent framework for addressing and analysis, water-related information linked to reach addresses by one organization (national, state, local) can be shared with other organizations and easily integrated into many different types of applications to the benefit of all.

This is a collection of Digital Surface Models and Highest Hit rasters covering selected U.S. Forest Service and adjoining lands in the Southwest Region, encompassing Arizona and New Mexico. The data are presented in a time-enabled format, allowing the end-user to view available data year-by-year, or all available years at once, within a GIS system. The data encompass varying years, varying resolutions, and varying geographic extents, dependent upon available data as provided by the region. DSM and Highest Hit rasters represent elevation of Earth's surface, including its natural and human-made features, such as vegetation and buildings.The data contains an attribute table. Notable attributes that may be of interest to an end-user are:lowps: the pixel size of the source raster, given in meters.highps: the pixel size of the top-most pyramid for the raster, given in meters.beginyear: the first year of data acquisition for an individual dataset.endyear: the final year of data acquisition for an individual dataset.dataset_name: the name of the individual dataset within the collection.metadata: A URL link to a file on IIPP's Portal containing metadata pertaining to an individual dataset within the image service.resolution: The pixel size of the source raster, given in meters.Terrain-related imagery are primarily derived from Lidar, stereoscopic aerial imagery, or Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar datasets. Consequently, these derivatives inherit the limitations and uncertainties of the parent sensor and platform and the processing techniques used to produce the imagery. The terrain images are orthographic; they have been georeferenced and displacement due to sensor orientation and topography have been removed, producing data that combines the characteristics of an image with the geometric qualities of a map. The orthographic images show ground features in their proper positions, without the distortion characteristic of unrectified aerial or satellite imagery. Digital orthoimages produced and used within the Forest Service are developed from imagery acquired through various national and regional image acquisition programs. The resulting orthoimages can be directly applied in remote sensing, GIS and mapping applications. They serve a variety of purposes, from interim maps to references for Earth science investigations and analysis. Because of the orthographic property, an orthoimage can be used like a map for measurement of distances, angles, and areas with scale being constant everywhere. Also, they can be used as map layers in GIS or other computer-based manipulation, overlaying, and analysis. An orthoimage differs from a map in a manner of depiction of detail; on a map only selected detail is shown by conventional symbols whereas on an orthoimage all details appear just as in original aerial or satellite imagery.Tribal lands have been masked from this public service in accordance with Tribal agreements.This 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.