AndreaBozzo/ceres-open-data-index huggingface dataset:
marine observations by program

This layer mirrors that found at: [National Data Buoy Center (noaa.gov)] For further information on this layer, refer to: [NDBC Web Data Guide (noaa.gov)] Mariners rely on real-time marine weather and oceanographic observations to provide current conditions for waters they are navigating or plan to navigate. These observations are also used by weather forecasters in preparation of marine weather forecasts and warnings. They help generate surface-weather analysis and are often assimilated into numerical weather and oceanographic forecast models, providing greater accuracy in predictions to forecasters and mariners. The conditions that are relevant to mariners include winds, waves and swell, visibility, water levels, water currents, ice coverage and thickness, and air gap – the distance between the water surface and lowest point of a bridge. These conditions can vary based on season, geographic area, and ship position along the intended route. Observations for coastal waters, offshore waters, and high seas are available to mariners from a variety of observing networks operated by NOAA’s National Ocean Service (NOS), National Weather Service (NWS), Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services (CO-OPS), Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS), and other federal agencies. Information on where to find real-time observations for each of the primary marine weather and oceanographic variables is given below, along with detailed descriptions of the various observing networks and programs.
FWS MB Maui 100 Feet Elevation Contours

The layer depicts 100 feet elevation contours for Maui, Hawai'i. Data is originally from the Hawaii Statewide GIS Project. Additional information and metadata can be obtained by contacting Hawaii Statewide GIS Program, Office of Planning, State of Hawaii; PO Box 2359, Honolulu, HI 96804; (808) 587-2846; email: gis@hawaii.gov; Website: https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis.
FWS HQ National Wild Fish Health Survey Data from Laboratory Information Systems Database view

The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wild Fish Health Survey Database (NWFHSDb) has been available to the public since September 2001. The database contains data on pathogen occurrence in free-ranging (wild) populations of fish. This data is collected via the National Wild Fish Health Survey, initiated in 1996 as a collaborative effort among natural resource agencies. The survey is maintained and managed by the nine USFWS National Fish Health Centers. The database is part of an effort to create an information system that will be a valuable tool for the management, protection, and recovery of aquatic ecosystems. The NWFHSDb consists of two distinct components: an internal database maintained and utilized by the Fish Health Centers for entering, tracking, and reporting data, and this publicly accessible website. Data from each Fish Health Center is available on this site for display and download. The NWFHSDb displays pathogen distribution information and is based on the spatial data generated by the Fish Health Centers. The NWFHSDb itself is a geographic information system (GIS) designed to be accessed via a web browser. It offers users the ability to obtain maps of NWFHS data based on user-defined queries. Individual case reports are available for each record and search results may be downloaded in several formats for further analysis. The feature layer and related tables contain data from 2021-present. Depending on data integration issues, data may not be complete. Please reach out to the identified Fish Health Center for questions or more information.
Climate Informed Corridors

Dreiss et al. (2022) extracted raw data values on connectivity and climate flow for areas that were IDed as climate-informed corridors based on categorical connectivity and climate flow dataset (TNC 2020). The remaining values were rescaled to fall between 0 and 1. A second climate corridor dataset (Carroll et al. 2018) was similarly rescaled. These two datasets were combined and locations in the 80th percentile of the distribution of combined values were analyzed. Higher values in the dataset indicate more optimal climate corridors. From Dreiss et al.2022, here we took the upper 66% of values from the climate-informed wildlife corridors, as the top 33% and 50% were both insufficient to show data in the region given the dataset's national scale. The layer was clipped to the analysis area and converted into a polygon. 3. These two layers were combined using the Count Overlap tool. Final output = Dreiss_Belote_CO
Midwest Mussel Hotspots (HUC8)

More Details Spatial patterns in mussel richness and endemism (i.e., weighted and corrected weighted endemism) at HUC4, HUC6, and HUC8 spatial scales were characterized. Stream SR was estimated by summing the total number of mussel species predicted within each stream. Stream-level weighted endemism was calculated by weighting each species’ presence in the stream by the inverse of the total number of streams it was predicted to occupy, then summing across all species predicted present within the stream. This biodiversity metric therefore provides context about the range extent of the species predicted within the stream (e.g., higher values indicate either high richness or the presence of several range-restricted species). Stream-level corrected weighted endemism was calculated by dividing weighted endemism by the total number of species predicted present within the stream. This metric therefore corrects for an abundance of species predicted present within a stream (meaning, larger corrected weighted endemism values indicate the presence of more range-restricted species). Endemism metrics were rescaled to fall between zero and one to increase metric interpretability. These rescaled values were used in ensuing analyses. Stream-level SR and endemism metrics within each HUC region were strongly right-skewed (many smaller values and few large values). This necessitated calculating the median value of these richness and endemism metrics across all streams within each HUC region. Next, local neighborhoods for each HUC4, HUC6 and HUC8 region were generated to account for the degree of spatial connectivity among HUC regions (i.e. the number of neighboring regions for each HUC). These neighborhoods, as well as HUC median richness and endemism values, were then used to estimate 1) a global Moran's I across the entire study region and 2) a local Getis–Ord Gi statistic for each HUC region. The global Moran's I analysis evaluates directionality in, and magnitude of, spatial autocorrelation (i.e., whether high or low values cluster together, are randomly distributed or are overdispersed) throughout an entire region. Alternatively, the local Getis–Ord Gi statistic identifies clusters of zones within the entire region that contain statistically greater or lesser values of interest. HUC regions associated with statistically significant (α = 0.05, P < 0.025 and P > 0.975) values from the Getis-Ord analysis were classified as hot or cold spots of mussel richness or endemism. Fields of Note HUC - HUC region ID States - State(s) containing each HUC region Name - HUC region name SS_SR - Estimated species richness ssSR_HtSp - HUC region hotspot status based on species richness Additional Resources This data, as well as data layers depicting hot/cold spots of species richness and other biodiversity metrics at HUC4 and HUC6 spatial scales, are available for download here: [https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/65d762ced34ec3e1801d7e30].
FWS MB Kahoolawe 100 Feet Elevation Contours

The layer depicts 100 feet elevation contours for Kahoolawe, Hawai'i. Data is originally from the Hawaii Statewide GIS Project. Additional information and metadata can be obtained by contacting Hawaii Statewide GIS Program, Office of Planning, State of Hawaii; PO Box 2359, Honolulu, HI 96804; (808) 587-2846; email: gis@hawaii.gov; Website: https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis.
Resilient and Connected Network

This layer is clipped from the Nature Conservancy’s Resilient and Connected Network database, which assembled information on places recognized for their biodiversity value, as well as from state wildlife action plans and the Natural Heritage Network. The Nature Conservancy describes this data on this site https://www.maps.tnc.org/resilientland as: "The Resilient and Connected Network is a proposed conservation network of representative climate-resilient sites designed to sustain biodiversity and ecological functions into the future under a changing climate. The network was identified and mapped over a 10-year period by Nature Conservancy scientists using public data available at the state and national scale, and an inclusive process that involved 289 scientists from agencies, academia, and NGOs across the US. The Network is a starting point for conversations with local communities, indigenous tribes, land trusts, agencies, corporations, and funders on how to coordinate conservation efforts to increase our collective impact and sustain nature. Resilient lands and waters may be conserved by a wide range of measures from good land stewardship, to other forms of private land conservation, to outright fee or easement acquisition by various levels of government. "
Net Pond Change, 2009-2019

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory Program produces decadal Wetlands Status and Trends reports to Congress. These reports provide scientific estimates of wetland area in the conterminous United States as well as change in wetland area. This specific report spans the years between 2009 and 2019. This layer is in a web map that is a component in a[ story map ]that presents a summary of the results of the report as well as providing examples of the types of wetland change observed, the implications of wetland change, and the studies' recommendations for policies and strategies going forward. This map shows interpolated net pond change in the conterminous United States between 2009 and 2019. To learn more and access Wetlands Status and Trends reports, visit [https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/status-and-trends], and you can find more broad information about wetlands at [https://www.fws.gov/wetlands].
Forested Wetland Density

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory Program produces decadal Wetlands Status and Trends reports to Congress. These reports provide scientific estimates of wetland area in the conterminous United States as well as change in wetland area. This specific report spans the years between 2009 and 2019. This layer is in a web map that is a component in a[ story map ]that presents a summary of the results of the report as well as providing examples of the types of wetland change observed, the implications of wetland change, and the studies' recommendations for policies and strategies going forward. This map shows interpolated forested wetland density in the conterminous United States between 2009 and 2019. To learn more and access Wetlands Status and Trends reports, visit [https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/status-and-trends], and you can find more broad information about wetlands at [https://www.fws.gov/wetlands].
Wetland Density

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory Program produces decadal Wetlands Status and Trends reports to Congress. These reports provide scientific estimates of wetland area in the conterminous United States as well as change in wetland area. This specific report spans the years between 2009 and 2019. This layer is in a web map that is a component in a[ story map ]that presents a summary of the results of the report as well as providing examples of the types of wetland change observed, the implications of wetland change, and the studies' recommendations for policies and strategies going forward. This map shows interpolated wetland density in the conterminous United States between 2009 and 2019. To learn more and access Wetlands Status and Trends reports, visit [https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/status-and-trends], and you can find more broad information about wetlands at [https://www.fws.gov/wetlands].
Saltwater Wetland Density

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory Program produces decadal Wetlands Status and Trends reports to Congress. These reports provide scientific estimates of wetland area in the conterminous United States as well as change in wetland area. This specific report spans the years between 2009 and 2019. This layer is in a web map that is a component in a[ story map ]that presents a summary of the results of the report as well as providing examples of the types of wetland change observed, the implications of wetland change, and the studies' recommendations for policies and strategies going forward. This map shows interpolated saltwater wetland density in the conterminous United States between 2009 and 2019. To learn more and access Wetlands Status and Trends reports, visit [https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/status-and-trends], and you can find more broad information about wetlands at [https://www.fws.gov/wetlands].
FWS Pacific Region - Non-native and Invasive Plant Species of Oahu, Hawaii, USA

Primary data sources: EDDMapS ([https://eddmaps.org/]) - all vascular plant data for Oahu downloaded via web browser using the advanced query tool. GBIF ([https://www.gbif.org/]) - all vascular plant data for Oahu from 1950 to present downloaded using the GBIF API using R package rgbif NAS ([https://nas.er.usgs.gov/]) - all vascular plants for Oahu downloaded using the NAS API via web browser NWRSpecies ([https://ecos.fws.gov/FWSpecies/]) - all vascular plants for Pearl Harbor NWR, Oahu Forest NWR, James Campbell NWR downloaded using the Advanced Query tool via web browser Contact: Rob Taylor (robert_taylor@fws.gov)
The Fish Barrier Hunter_form

This is a survey to be used in-house to discover barriers blocking upstream and downstream passage of fish in Alaska. The survey collects data of crossings over a waterway that is fish baring. Alaska is a state that has seen significant increase in population in the past 30 years and will continue to see an increase in its population. This leads to a greater system and network of roads. Some of these crossings could cause adverse effects on fish passage, blocking or impeding fish movements through out the system. Through data collection of crossing location, type, size, material, etc. , we can begin to highlight potential threats. This will help further understand our current barriers to fish in the state, and provide us with data on unknown barriers worthy of our conservation efforts. This format of data collection will help streamline our culvert database and associated site photos.
Fish Passage Construction Daily Report_form

This layer displays point data generated from the publicly available [Survey123 form], that goes by the same name. The goal of this is to display data collected on active US Fish and Wildlife Fish Passage construction sites across Alaska, through use of a survey and [ArcGIS Dashboard] to display and manage construction photos, while providing a tool to track progress in the construction process. Both the form and the dashboard associated with this layer are publicly available and hyperlinked above. For further questions contact timothy_a_ericson@fws.gov or jessica_straub@fws.gov.
FWS_ACJV_SHARP_DEMO_sitesallyears_2024

This dataset shows the approximate location of demographic data collection sites that are part of the Saltmarsh Habitat and Avian Research Program (SHARP; 2010 - present for all states except CT; 2001-present for CT). Demographic data collection includes one or more of the following types of data collection throughout a season: 1) bird capture and banding, and/or 2) nest searching and monitoring. Locations shown have been visited 1 or more years, but were not visited every year within the stated time frames. https://www.tidalmarshbirds.org/ This dataset shows the approximate location of demographic data collection sites that are part of the Saltmarsh Habitat and Avian Research Program (SHARP; 2010 - present for all states except CT; 2001-present for CT). Demographic data collection includes one or more of the following types of data collection throughout a season: 1) bird capture and banding, and/or 2) nest searching and monitoring. Locations shown have been visited 1 or more years, but were not visited every year within the stated time frames.
SARP TIDAL Road Crossing Survey Protocol Form

This is the feature service linked to the survey123 survey used by SARP and partners to assess road stream crossings for aquatic organism passage within TIDAL waters. This survey protocol and the associated fields of this service was developed by the North Atlantic Aquatic Connectivity Collaborative (NAACC) and adapted for use in the Southeastern United States by SARP. The data collected within this form is used in SARP's Aquatic Barrier Prioritization Tool (https://connectivity.sarpdata.com). Partners across political boundaries have trained others and used this protocol since 2015. Manual and paper form available at [this link]. This data layer can be used to better understand the specific information associated with fish passage including photos for points surveyed.
Pacific Lamprey Known Observations And Distribution

Date: December 2022 Summary: The Pacific lamprey has inhabited the rivers, streams and coastal waters of the west for 350 million years (BPA, 2005). These data describe areas of known distribution (this dataset is limited to Oregon, Washington and Idaho) currently and historically used by Pacific Lamprey. Pacific Lamprey, Entosphenus tridentata are native to the Pacific coast from Baja California to the Bering Sea. They are anadromous, migrating from their natal stream to the ocean and back, but unlike salmon, Pacific Lamprey spend well over half of their total life cycle in freshwater. Distribution data is mapped at a 1:24,000 scale and are based on the StreamNet Hydrography dataset. Type: ArcGIS Feature Layer View for most up to date observation and distribution data Reason: Public outreach Scale: Web Source: Columbia River Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office curated the data from multiple sources (see metadata).
FWS ACJV SHARP SALS detections 2021_2022

These data display data collection locations for point count surveys completed by the Saltmarsh Habitat and Avian Research Program (SHARP) in 2021 and 2022. Each point was visited 2 times during the breeding season in one or both years by an observer who conducted a point count survey following the SHARP survey protocol (see [https://www.tidalmarshbirds.org/index.php/publicly-availablr-products/products/vegatation-sampling-protocols/marsh-survey-protocols/204-sharp-callbacksurvey-protocol/file).] The data include coordinates for point count locations, whether or not a Saltmarsh Sparrow was detected 0-100m from the observer at that point in 2021/2022, the maximum count for Saltmarsh Sparrows recorded during 2021/2022 surveys, and whether or not the point location is part of a regional sampling framework to estimate population size across the region (see Wiest et al. 2016 for details).
Golden_winged Warbler Focal Areas

Focal Areas from the Golden-winged Warbler Conservation Plan Longer description: Geographic focal areas, as defined by the Golden-winged Warbler Working Group, are places where the maintenance of core populations will be important for sustaining and growing the current distribution (Figure 3–3 in the Conservation Plan). [https://gwwa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/GWWA_Conservation-Plan_191007_low-res.pdf] Citation: Roth, A.M., R.W. Rohrbaugh, T. Will, S. Barker Swarthout, and D.A. Buehler, editors. 2019. Golden-winged Warbler Status Review and Conservation Plan. 2nd Edition. www.gwwa.org Key Words: Golden-winged Warbler, conservation, Focal Areas, working group Terms of Use: Note that these focal areas were established in 2011 and are being revised to reflect updated data on current GWWA distribution
Rangeland Areas

Rangeland was extracted from the NLCD 2021 imagery database (all lands designated as cropland) to ensure working lands are represented in the High Divide. The NLCD 2021 database can be found at: Dewitz, J., 2023, National Land Cover Database (NLCD) 2021 Products: U.S. Geological Survey data release, [https://doi.org/10.5066/P9JZ7AO3.] The NLCD provides the following description of their data: "The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in partnership with several federal agencies, has developed and released six National Land Cover Database (NLCD) products over the past two decades: NLCD 1992, 2001, 2006, 2011, 2016, and 2019 ([National Land Cover Database (NLCD) - ScienceBase-Catalog]). These products provide spatially explicit and reliable information on the Nation’s land cover and land cover change. To continue the legacy of NLCD and further establish a long-term monitoring capability for the Nation’s land resources, the USGS designed a new generation of NLCD products released in 2016. This innovation continues with design and processing improvements through 2021 and aims to provide consistent, and robust methodologies for production of a multi-temporal land cover and land cover change database from 2001 to 2021 at 2–3-year intervals. Comprehensive research was conducted and resulted in streamlined processes for integrating specialized MRLC partner data along with numerous new datasets, assembling and preprocessing Landsat imagery and geospatial ancillary datasets; a multi-source integrated training data development and machine learning based land cover classifications; a temporally, spectrally, and spatially integrated land cover change analysis strategy; a hierarchical theme-based post-classification and integration protocol for generating land cover and change products; a continuous fields biophysical parameters modeling method; and an automated operational system incorporating AI/ML technologies for NLCD 2021 production. These processes resulted in a five percent increase in accuracy from the 2011 product for an overall Level II & I Overall accuracy (OA) 86.4% & 90.6% in the NLCD 2016 release. (Wickham et. al, “Thematic Accuracy assessment of the NLCD 2016 land cover for the conterminous United States”, Remote Sensing of Environment, volume 257, May 2021, 112357 [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2021.112357] ) This accuracy continues at the same high level with the 2019 accuracy assessment. (Wickham, J., Stehman, S.V., Sorenson, D.G., Gass, L., Dewitz, Jon A., Thematic accuracy assessment of the NLCD 2019 land cover for the conterminous United States, v. 60, no. 1, at [https://doi.org/10.1080/15481603.2023.2181143] )"
blueprint_feedback

Getting feedback about the Midwest Conservation Blueprint helps us better reflect the experiences, perspectives, and priorities of all those who live, work, and recreate in the Midwest. By getting public input, we can “ground truth” our data by comparing the results of our analysis to the real experiences of people in these places. Each piece of feedback is reviewed and will be considered when making annual updates to the Midwest Conservation Blueprint. During each update cycle, we will share a summary of all comments received and changes made. All comments will remain anonymous as we do not collect any personal identifiable information. Overall, this feedback process will help improve our data sources, methodology, and the usefulness of the Midwest Conservation Blueprint in an open and transparent manner. For more information about the Blueprint and contact information for staff, please see the [Midwest Conservation Action Portal].