This dataset may be a mix of two years and is updated as the data is released for each county. For example, one county may have data from 2014 while a neighboring county may have had a more recent release of 2016 data. For specific years, please check the service that specifies the year, i.e. California Important Farmland: 2016.Established in 1982, Government Code Section 65570 mandates FMMP to biennially report on the conversion of farmland and grazing land, and to provide maps and data to local government and the public.The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) provides data to decision makers for use in planning for the present and future use of California's agricultural land resources. The data is a current inventory of agricultural resources. This data is for general planning purposes and has a minimum mapping unit of ten acres.

Statistical analyses and maps representing mean, high, and low water-level conditions in the surface water and groundwater of Miami-Dade County were made by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Miami-Dade County Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources, to help inform decisions necessary for urban planning and development. Sixteen maps were created that show contours of (1) the mean of daily water levels at each site during October and May for the 2000-2009 water years; (2) the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles of the daily water levels at each site during October and May and for all months during 2000-2009; and (3) the differences between mean October and May water levels, as well as the differences in the percentiles of water levels for all months, between 1990-1999 and 2000-2009. The 80th, 90th, and 96th percentiles of the annual maximums of daily groundwater levels during 1974-2009 (a 35-year period) were computed to provide an indication of unusually high groundwater-level conditions. These maps and statistics provide a generalized understanding of the variations of water levels in the aquifer, rather than a survey of concurrent water levels. Water-level measurements from 473 sites in Miami-Dade County and surrounding counties were analyzed to generate statistical analyses. The monitored water levels included surface-water levels in canals and wetland areas and groundwater levels in the Biscayne aquifer. Maps were created by importing site coordinates, summary water-level statistics, and completeness of record statistics into a geographic information system, and by interpolating between water levels at monitoring sites in the canals and water levels along the coastline. Raster surfaces were created from these data by using the triangular irregular network interpolation method. The raster surfaces were contoured by using geographic information system software. These contours were imprecise in some areas because the software could not fully evaluate the hydrology given available information; therefore, contours were manually modified where necessary. The ability to evaluate differences in water levels between 1990-1999 and 2000-2009 is limited in some areas because most of the monitoring sites did not have 80 percent complete records for one or both of these periods. The quality of the analyses was limited by (1) deficiencies in spatial coverage; (2) the combination of pre- and post-construction water levels in areas where canals, levees, retention basins, detention basins, or water-control structures were installed or removed; (3) an inability to address the potential effects of the vertical hydraulic head gradient on water levels in wells of different depths; and (4) an inability to correct for the differences between daily water-level statistics. Contours are dashed in areas where the locations of contours have been approximated because of the uncertainty caused by these limitations. Although the ability of the maps to depict differences in water levels between 1990-1999 and 2000-2009 was limited by missing data, results indicate that near the coast water levels were generally higher in May during 2000-2009 than during 1990-1999; and that inland water levels were generally lower during 2000-2009 than during 1990-1999. Generally, the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles of water levels from all months were also higher near the coast and lower inland during 2000–2009 than during 1990-1999. Mean October water levels during 2000-2009 were generally higher than during 1990-1999 in much of western Miami-Dade County, but were lower in a large part of eastern Miami-Dade County.

Note: This is a large dataset. To download, go to ArcGIS Open Data Set and click the download button, and under additional resources select the shapefile or geodatabase option. America's private forests provide a vast array of public goods and services, including abundant, clean surface water. Forest loss and development can affect water quality and quantity when forests are removed and impervious surfaces, such as paved roads, spread across the landscape. We rank watersheds across the conterminous United States according to the contributions of private forest land to surface drinking water and by threats to surface water from increased housing density. Private forest land contributions to drinking water are greatest in the East but are also important in Western watersheds. Development pressures on these contributions are concentrated in the Eastern United States but are also found in the North-Central region, parts of the West and Southwest, and the Pacific Northwest; nationwide, more than 55 million acres of rural private forest land are projected to experience a substantial increase in housing density from 2000 to 2030. Planners, communities, and private landowners can use a range of strategies to maintain freshwater ecosystems, including designing housing and roads to minimize impacts on water quality, managing home sites to protect water resources, and using payment schemes and management partnerships to invest in forest stewardship on public and private lands.This data is based on the digital hydrologic unit boundary layer to the Subwatershed (12-digit) 6th level for the continental United States. To focus this analysis on watersheds with private forests, only watersheds with at least 10% forested land and more than 50 acres of private forest were analyzed. All other watersheds were labeled ?Insufficient private forest for this analysis"and coded -99999 in the data table. This dataset updates forest and development statistics reported in the the 2011 Forests to Faucet analysis using 2006 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, Grid Values=41,42,43,95. and Theobald, Dr. David M. 10 March 2008. bhc2000 and bhc2030 (Housing density for the coterminous US in 2000 and 2030, respectively.) Field Descriptions:HUC_12: Twelve Digit Hydrologic Unit Code: This field provides a unique 12-digit code for each subwatershed.HU_12_DS: Sixth Level Downstream Hydrologic Unit Code: This field was populated with the 12-digit code of the 6th level hydrologic unit that is receiving the majority of the flow from the subwatershed.IMP1: Index of surface drinking water importance (Appendix Map). This field is from the 2011 Forests to Faucet analysis and has not been updated for this analysis.HDCHG_AC: Acres of housing density change on private forest in the subwatershed. HDCHG_PER: Percent of the watershed to experience housing density change on private forest. IMP_HD_PFOR: Index Private Forest importance to Surface Drinking Water with Development Pressure - identifies private forested areas important for surface drinking water that are likely to be affected by future increases in housing density, Ptle_IMP_HD: Private Forest importance to Surface Drinking Water with Development Pressure (Figure 7), percentile. Ptle_HDCHG: Percentage of each subwatershed to Experience an increase in House Density in Private Forest (Figure 6), percentile. FOR_AC: Acres forest (2006) in the subwatershed. PFOR_AC: Acres private forest (2006) in the subwatershed. PFOR_PER: Percent of the subwatershed that is private forest. HU12_AC: Acreage of the subwatershedFOR_PER: Percent of the subwatershed that is forest. PFOR_IMP: Index of Private Forest Importance to Surface Drinking Water. .Ptle_PFIMP: Private forest importance to surface drinking water(Figure 4), percentile. TOP100: Top 100 subwatersheds. 50 from the East, 50 from the west (using the Mississippi River as the divide.) Metadata

In the United States, areas that are protected from development and managed for biodiversity conservation include Wilderness Areas, National Parks, National Wildlife Refuges, and Wild & Scenic Rivers. Understanding the geographic distribution of these protected areas and their level of protection is an important part of landscape-scale planning. The Protected Areas Database of the United States classifies lands into four GAP Status classes. This layer displays the two highest levels of protection GAP Status 1 and 2. These two classes are commonly referred to as protected areas.Dataset SummaryPhenomenon Mapped: Areas protected from development and managed to maintain biodiversity (GAP Status 1 and 2)Units: MetersCell Size: 30.92208102 metersSource Type: DiscretePixel Type: 8-bit unsigned integerData Coordinate System: WGS 1984Mosaic Projection: Web Mercator Auxiliary SphereExtent: 50 United States plus Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands and other Pacific Ocean Islands.Source: USGS National Gap Analysis Program PAD-US version 2.1Publication Date: September 2020ArcGIS Server URL: https://landscape10.arcgis.com/arcgis/This layer displays protected areas from the Protected Areas Database of the United States version 2.1 created by the USGS National Gap Analysis Program. This layer displays GAP Status 1, areas managed for biodiversity where natural disturbances are allowed to proceed or are mimicked by management, and GAP Status 2, areas managed for biodiversity where natural disturbance is suppressed. The source data for this layer are available here. A feature layer published from this dataset is also available. The polygon vector layer was converted to raster layers using the Polygon to Raster Tool using the National Elevation Dataset 1 arc second product as a snap raster.The service behind this layer was published with 8 functions allowing the user to select different views of the service. Other layers created from this service using functions include:USA Protected from Land Cover ConversionUSA Unprotected AreasUSA Protected Areas - Gap Status 1-4USA Protected Areas - Gap Status 1USA Protected Areas - Gap Status 2USA Protected Areas - Gap Status 3USA Protected Areas - Gap Status 4What can you do with this Layer? This layer is suitable for both visualization and analysis across the ArcGIS system. This layer can be combined with your data and other layers from the ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World in ArcGIS Online and ArcGIS Pro to create powerful web maps that can be used alone or in a story map or other application.Because this layer is part of the ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World it is easy to add to your map:In ArcGIS Online, you can add this layer to a map by selecting Add then Browse Living Atlas Layers. A window will open. Type "Protected Areas" in the search box and browse to the layer. Select the layer then click Add to Map.In ArcGIS Pro, open a map and select Add Data from the Map Tab. Select Data at the top of the drop down menu. The Add Data dialog box will open on the left side of the box, expand Portal if necessary, then select Living Atlas. Type "Protected Areas" in the search box, browse to the layer then click OK.In ArcGIS Pro you can use the built-in raster functions to create custom extracts of the data. Imagery layers provide fast, powerful inputs to geoprocessing tools, models, or Python scripts in Pro.The ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World provides an easy way to explore many other beautiful and authoritative maps on hundreds of topics like this one.

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.

ArcGIS Map Packages and GIS Data for Gillreath-Brown, Nagaoka, and Wolverton (2019)

**When using the GIS data included in these map packages, please cite all of the following:

Gillreath-Brown, Andrew, Lisa Nagaoka, and Steve Wolverton. A Geospatial Method for Estimating Soil Moisture Variability in Prehistoric Agricultural Landscapes, 2019. PLoSONE 14(8):e0220457. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220457

Gillreath-Brown, Andrew, Lisa Nagaoka, and Steve Wolverton. ArcGIS Map Packages for: A Geospatial Method for Estimating Soil Moisture Variability in Prehistoric Agricultural Landscapes, Gillreath-Brown et al., 2019. Version 1. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2572018

OVERVIEW OF CONTENTS

This repository contains map packages for Gillreath-Brown, Nagaoka, and Wolverton (2019), as well as the raw digital elevation model (DEM) and soils data, of which the analyses was based on. The map packages contain all GIS data associated with the analyses described and presented in the publication. The map packages were created in ArcGIS 10.2.2; however, the packages will work in recent versions of ArcGIS. (Note: I was able to open the packages in ArcGIS 10.6.1, when tested on February 17, 2019). The primary files contained in this repository are:

Raw DEM and Soils data

Digital Elevation Model Data (Map services and data available from U.S. Geological Survey, National Geospatial Program, and can be downloaded from the National Elevation Dataset)

DEM_Individual_Tiles: Individual DEM tiles prior to being merged (1/3 arc second) from USGS National Elevation Dataset.

DEMs_Merged: DEMs were combined into one layer. Individual watersheds (i.e., Goodman, Coffey, and Crow Canyon) were clipped from this combined DEM.

Soils Data (Map services and data available from Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture)

Animas-Dolores_Area_Soils: Small portion of the soil mapunits cover the northeastern corner of the Coffey Watershed (CW).

Cortez_Area_Soils: Soils for Montezuma County, encompasses all of Goodman (GW) and Crow Canyon (CCW) watersheds, and a large portion of the Coffey watershed (CW).

ArcGIS Map Packages

Goodman_Watershed_Full_SMPM_Analysis: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the full Goodman Watershed (GW).

Goodman_Watershed_Mesa-Only_SMPM_Analysis: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the mesa-only Goodman Watershed.

Crow_Canyon_Watershed_SMPM_Analysis: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the Crow Canyon Watershed (CCW).

Coffey_Watershed_SMPM_Analysis: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the Coffey Watershed (CW).

For additional information on contents of the map packages, please see see "Map Packages Descriptions" or open a map package in ArcGIS and go to "properties" or "map document properties."

LICENSES

Code: MIT year: 2019 Copyright holders: Andrew Gillreath-Brown, Lisa Nagaoka, and Steve Wolverton

CONTACT

Andrew Gillreath-Brown, PhD Candidate, RPA Department of Anthropology, Washington State University andrew.brown1234@gmail.com – Email andrewgillreathbrown.wordpress.com – Web

Geographic Information System (GIS) analyses are an essential part of natural resource management and research. Calculating and summarizing data within intersecting GIS layers is common practice for analysts and researchers. However, the various tools and steps required to complete this process are slow and tedious, requiring many tools iterating over hundreds, or even thousands of datasets. USGS scientists will combine a series of ArcGIS geoprocessing capabilities with custom scripts to create tools that will calculate, summarize, and organize large amounts of data that can span many temporal and spatial scales with minimal user input. The tools work with polygons, lines, points, and rasters to calculate relevant summary data and combine them into a single output table that can be easily incorporated into statistical analyses. These tools are useful for anyone interested in using an automated script to quickly compile summary information within all areas of interest in a GIS dataset

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

The State Lands Commission has prepared the Significant Lands Inventory (report) for the California Legislature as a general identification and classification of those unconveyed State school lands and tide and submerged lands which possess significant environmental values. The publication incorporates evaluated and pertinent comments received on the initial draft report which was circulated statewide in February 1975.The absence of a particular digitized waterway in the dataset does not mean that the State does not claim ownership of that parcel or waterway, or that such specific parcel or waterway has no significant environmental values. This dataset is not intended to establish ownership, only to identify those parcels which possess significant environmental values. Staff was unable to physically inventory all of the considered lands; instead, the advice and participation of those with known environmental expertise was utilized as additional to staff survey.Tide and submerged lands are digitized in the WaterBody and WaterLine feature classes; WaterLines for coastal areas, WaterBody for inland areas. Tide and submerged lands under the jurisdiction of the State Lands Commission are those sovereign lands received from the Federal Government by virtue of California's admission to the Union on an equal footing with the original States. Such lands, and State interest therein, are generally the lands waterward of the ordinary high water mark of the Pacific Ocean (seaward to a three-mile limit); tidal bays, sloughs, estuaries; and, navigable lakes and streams within the State.School Lands are digitized in the SchoolLand feature class. State school lands under the jurisdiction of the Commission are largely composed of the 16th and 36th sections of each township. The Federal Government transferred these lands to the State in 1853, in order to establish a financial foundation for a public school system. In cases where the 16th and 36th sections were mineral in character, incomplete as to acreage total, or already claimed or granted by the Federal Government, the State was permitted to select other lands "in lieu" of the specific sections.The public trust of commerce, navigation and fisheries which the State retains on patented sovereign lands should also be considered included in this inventory. Wherever a waterway, or body of water, is listed or mapped, the common trust state interest in patented sovereign lands, if any, is also included.The State Lands Commission emphasized when it adopted this report at its December 1, 1975 meeting that all tide and submerged lands are significant by the nature of their public ownership. Only because of the methodology used for this report are all of these waterways not specifically listed in this inventory.It is the intent of the State Lands Commission that the Significant Lands Inventory be periodically updated. This dataset should be considered informational, to assist the Legislature, the Commission, and the public in considering the environmental aspects of a proposed project and the significant values to be protected therein.

The Residential Schools Locations Dataset in Geodatabase format (IRS_Locations.gbd) contains a feature layer "IRS_Locations" that contains the locations (latitude and longitude) of Residential Schools and student hostels operated by the federal government in Canada. All the residential schools and hostels that are listed in the Residential Schools Settlement Agreement are included in this dataset, as well as several Industrial schools and residential schools that were not part of the IRRSA. This version of the dataset doesn’t include the five schools under the Newfoundland and Labrador Residential Schools Settlement Agreement. The original school location data was created by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and was provided to the researcher (Rosa Orlandini) by the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation in April 2017. The dataset was created by Rosa Orlandini, and builds upon and enhances the previous work of the Truth and Reconcilation Commission, Morgan Hite (creator of the Atlas of Indian Residential Schools in Canada that was produced for the Tk'emlups First Nation and Justice for Day Scholar's Initiative, and Stephanie Pyne (project lead for the Residential Schools Interactive Map). Each individual school location in this dataset is attributed either to RSIM, Morgan Hite, NCTR or Rosa Orlandini. Many schools/hostels had several locations throughout the history of the institution. If the school/hostel moved from its’ original location to another property, then the school is considered to have two unique locations in this dataset,the original location and the new location. For example, Lejac Indian Residential School had two locations while it was operating, Stuart Lake and Fraser Lake. If a new school building was constructed on the same property as the original school building, it isn't considered to be a new location, as is the case of Girouard Indian Residential School.When the precise location is known, the coordinates of the main building are provided, and when the precise location of the building isn’t known, an approximate location is provided. For each residential school institution location, the following information is provided: official names, alternative name, dates of operation, religious affiliation, latitude and longitude coordinates, community location, Indigenous community name, contributor (of the location coordinates), school/institution photo (when available), location point precision, type of school (hostel or residential school) and list of references used to determine the location of the main buildings or sites. Access Instructions: there are 47 files in this data package. Please download the entire data package by selecting all the 47 files and click on download. Two files will be downloaded, IRS_Locations.gbd.zip and IRS_LocFields.csv. Uncompress the IRS_Locations.gbd.zip. Use QGIS, ArcGIS Pro, and ArcMap to open the feature layer IRS_Locations that is contained within the IRS_Locations.gbd data package. The feature layer is in WGS 1984 coordinate system. There is also detailed file level metadata included in this feature layer file. The IRS_locations.csv provides the full description of the fields and codes used in this dataset.

Established in 1982, Government Code Section 65570 mandates FMMP to biennially report on the conversion of farmland and grazing land, and to provide maps and data to local government and the public.The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) provides data to decision makers for use in planning for the present and future use of California's agricultural land resources. The data is a current inventory of agricultural resources. This data is for general planning purposes and has a minimum mapping unit of ten acres.

Established in 1982, Government Code Section 65570 mandates FMMP to biennially report on the conversion of farmland and grazing land, and to provide maps and data to local government and the public.The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) provides data to decision makers for use in planning for the present and future use of California's agricultural land resources. The data is a current inventory of agricultural resources. This data is for general planning purposes and has a minimum mapping unit of ten acres.

This data was downloaded from OpenStreetMap (OSM) roads data for Wisconsin from the OpenStreetMap's GeoFabrik website: http://www.geofabrik.de/data/download.html and reprojected to WTM 83/91. Several attributes were added to facilitate use of the OSM data in DNR basemaps. DNR has made edits to this data to correct errors where known and to hide road features within DNR Managed Lands that are not public roadways.This dataset contains only Interstate Highway, US Highways, and State Highways.To report errors in this dataset, contact Bill Ceelen at William.Ceelen@wisconsin.gov. Additional information about OSM is available on the GeoFabrik site: http://www.geofabrik.de/geofabrik/openstreetmap.html

INFP, CRMD and UCL have developed a framework capable of analyzing the implications of natural hazards on transportation networks, also in a time-dependent manner. This is currently embedded into an ArcGIS toolbox entitled Network-risk, which has been successfully tested for Bucharest, contributing to an insightful evaluation of emergency intervention times for ambulances and firefighters, in the case of an earthquake. The files and the user manual allow a replication of our recent analysis in Toma-Danila et al. (2022) and a download of results (such as affected roads and unaccesible areas in Bucharest), in various formats. Some of the results are also presented in an ArcGIS Online app, called "Riscul seismic al Bucurestiului" (The seismic risk of Bucharest), available at https://tinyurl.com/yt32aeyx. In the files you can find: - the Bucharest road network used in the article; - facilities for Bucharest and Ilfov, such as hospitals, firestations, buildings with seismic risk or tramway lines accesible by emergency vehicles - results of the analysis: unaccesible roads and areas, service areas around facilities, closest facilities for representative points - Excel calculator for Z elevation from OpenStreetMap data - the user manual and a ArcGIS toolbox.

Main citation: - Toma-Danila D., Tiganescu A., D'Ayala D., Armas I., Sun L. (2022) Time-Dependent Framework for Analyzing Emergency Intervention Travel Times and Risk Implications due to Earthquakes. Bucharest Case Study. Frontiers in Earth Science, https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2022.834052

Previous references: - Toma-Danila D., Armas I., Tiganescu A. (2020) Network-risk: an open GIS toolbox for estimating the implications of transportation network damage due to natural hazards, tested for Bucharest, Romania. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 20(5): 1421-1439, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-1421-2020 - Toma-Danila D. (2018) A GIS framework for evaluating the implications of urban road network failure due to earthquakes: Bucharest (Romania) case study. Natural Hazards, 93, 97-111, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11069-017-3069-y

This dataset contains locations of major rivers that flow through Allegheny County. These shapes have been taken from the Hydrology dataset. The Ohio River, Monongahela River and Allegheny River are coded as Major Rivers.

Link to the ScienceBase Item Summary page for the item described by this metadata record. Service Protocol: Link to the ScienceBase Item Summary page for the item described by this metadata record. Application Profile: Web Browser. Link Function: information

The Important Bird Area Program in the US is administered by the National Audubon Society in partnership with Birdlife International. This data set contains available boundaries and associated attributes for Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in the United States, identified as of September 2017. The data is intended to support ocean planning activities pursuant to the Executive Order Regarding the Ocean Policy to Advance the Economic, Security, and Environmental Interests of the United States, the Energy Policy Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Rivers and Harbors Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act.View Dataset on the Gateway

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

travel_time_to_ports_x (x ranges from 1 to 5)

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

Format Raster Dataset, GeoTIFF, LZW compressed Unit Minutes

Data type Byte (16 bit Unsigned Integer)

No data value 65535

Flags None

Spatial resolution 30 arc seconds

Spatial extent

Upper left -180, 85

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

Temporal resolution 2015

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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