AndreaBozzo/ceres-open-data-index huggingface dataset:
CED_TROUT_frontpage_map_R_A

This Wild Troute CED spatial web service (ESRI ArcGIS Online Hosted Feature Layer) provides spatial representations and attribute information of conservation efforts entered into the Conservation Efforts Database (https://conservationefforts.org) by various data providers. This spatial web service is made of point, line, and polygon layers and non-spatial tables. Feature records are group with their respective spatial feature type layers (point, line, polygon). The three spatial layers have identical attribute fields. Read only access to this data is ONLY available via an interactive web map on the Conservation Efforts Database website or authorized websites. Users who are interested in more access can directly contact the data providers by using the contact information available through the CED interactive map's pop-up/identify feature. The spatially explicit, web-based Conservation Efforts Database is capable of (1) allowing multiple-users to enter data from different locations, (2) uploading and storing documents, (3) linking conservation actions to one or more threats (one-to-many relationships), (4) reporting functions that would allow summaries of the conservation actions at multiple scales (e.g., management zones, populations, or priority areas for conservation), and (5) accounting for actions at multiple scales from small easements to statewide planning efforts. In recognition of the need to conserve healthy wild trout habitat to provide for the long-term conservation of its inhabitants, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and United States Geological Survey (USGS) developed the Conservation Efforts Database version 2.0.0 (CED). The purpose of the CED is to efficiently capture the unprecedented level of conservation plans and actions being implemented throughout wild trout habitat and designed to capture actions. Understanding the distribution and type of conservation actions happening across the landscape will allow visualization and quantification of the extent to which threats are being addressed. The purpose of this CED spatial web service (ESRI ArcGIS Online Hosted Feature Layer) is to provide CED data for authorized web sites or authorized users.
CED_GUSG_frontpage_map_R_A

This CED spatial web service (ESRI ArcGIS Online Hosted Feature Layer) provides Gunnison Sage Grouse spatial representations and attribute information of conservation efforts entered into the Conservation Efforts Database (https://conservationefforts.org) by various data providers. This spatial web service is made of point and polygon layers and non-spatial tables. Feature records are group with their respective spatial feature type layers (point, polygon). The two spatial layers have identical attribute fields. Read only access to this data is ONLY available via an interactive web map on the Conservation Efforts Database website or authorized websites. Users who are interested in more access can directly contact the data providers by using the contact information available through the CED interactive map's pop-up/identify feature. The spatially explicit, web-based Conservation Efforts Database is capable of (1) allowing multiple-users to enter data from different locations, (2) uploading and storing documents, (3) linking conservation actions to one or more threats (one-to-many relationships), (4) reporting functions that would allow summaries of the conservation actions at multiple scales (e.g., management zones, populations, or priority areas for conservation), and (5) accounting for actions at multiple scales from small easements to statewide planning efforts.The sagebrush ecosystem is the largest ecosystem type in the continental U.S., providing habitat for more than 350 associated fish and wildlife species. In recognition of the need to conserve a healthy sagebrush ecosystem to provide for the long-term conservation of its inhabitants, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and United States Geological Survey (USGS) developed the Conservation Efforts Database version 2.0.0 (CED). The purpose of the CED is to efficiently capture the unprecedented level of conservation plans and actions being implemented throughout the sagebrush ecosystem and designed to capture actions not only for its most famous resident, the greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; hereafter, sage-grouse) but for the other species that rely on sagebrush habitats. Understanding the distribution and type of conservation actions happening across the landscape will allow visualization and quantification of the extent to which threats are being addressed. The purpose of this CED spatial web service (ESRI ArcGIS Online Hosted Feature Layer) is to provide CED data for authorized web sites or authorized users.
CEDfrontpage_map_v9_R_A

This CED spatial web service (ESRI ArcGIS Online Hosted Feature Layer) provides spatial representations and attribute information of conservation efforts entered into the Conservation Efforts Database (https://conservationefforts.org) by various data providers. This spatial web service is made of point, line, and polygon layers and non-spatial tables. Feature records are group with their respective spatial feature type layers (point, line, polygon). The three spatial layers have identical attribute fields. Read only access to this data is ONLY available via an interactive web map on the Conservation Efforts Database website or authorized websites. Users who are interested in more access can directly contact the data providers by using the contact information available through the CED interactive map's pop-up/identify feature. The spatially explicit, web-based Conservation Efforts Database is capable of (1) allowing multiple-users to enter data from different locations, (2) uploading and storing documents, (3) linking conservation actions to one or more threats (one-to-many relationships), (4) reporting functions that would allow summaries of the conservation actions at multiple scales (e.g., management zones, populations, or priority areas for conservation), and (5) accounting for actions at multiple scales from small easements to statewide planning efforts.The sagebrush ecosystem is the largest ecosystem type in the continental U.S., providing habitat for more than 350 associated fish and wildlife species. In recognition of the need to conserve a healthy sagebrush ecosystem to provide for the long-term conservation of its inhabitants, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and United States Geological Survey (USGS) developed the Conservation Efforts Database version 2.0.0 (CED). The purpose of the CED is to efficiently capture the unprecedented level of conservation plans and actions being implemented throughout the sagebrush ecosystem and designed to capture actions not only for its most famous resident, the greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; hereafter, sage-grouse) but for the other species that rely on sagebrush habitats. Understanding the distribution and type of conservation actions happening across the landscape will allow visualization and quantification of the extent to which threats are being addressed. The purpose of this CED spatial web service (ESRI ArcGIS Online Hosted Feature Layer) is to provide CED data for authorized web sites or authorized users.
Black Bear Lake Road Culvert Recommendations

Overview This Feature Service provides detailed geospatial data focused on the evaluation of road crossings and culvert structures, with an emphasis on their impact on anadromous fish habitats in the Black Bear region. The data supports assessments related to fish passage, habitat quality, and crossing infrastructure conditions. Feature Layers * BlackBearFBH_ViewJoin_CopyFeatures1: This layer contains comprehensive information about culvert structures including their dimensions, condition, and recommendations for road construction or remediation. It highlights the priority of crossings for anadromous fish, identifies crossing issues, and provides measurements and modeled data on channel bankfull widths and fish habitat quality upstream of crossings. The data is valuable for environmental planning, fish passage restoration, and infrastructure management. Geographic Coverage The data covers the Black Bear area within a northern region of the United States, with spatial context suggesting a focus on areas critical for fish habitats and culvert infrastructure. Use Cases * Environmental and fish habitat conservation planning. * Infrastructure assessment for culvert replacements or upgrades to improve fish passage. * Supporting regulatory compliance related to aquatic habitat protection. * GIS analysis for transportation and ecological resource management.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Visitor Survey Points Feature Service

** THIS ITEM IS PUBIC AND READ ONLY ** The goal of the National Visitor Survey is to provide managers, planners, visitor services specialists, and others, including the public, with reliable baseline data about refuge visitors and their experiences at national wildlife refuges. Results of this work reflect recreation activities, trip characteristics, contributions to local economies, and beliefs about the importance and satisfaction of vital aspects ofthe National Wildlife Refuge System. More than 6,000 visitors have told us about their experiences at refuges nationwide. This layer provides centroid points where the National Visitor Survey was conducted. Links to the National Visitor Survey Reports are available in the attribute data for each point. Dataset Contact: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Natural Resource Program Center, GIS Team Lead, Richard Easterbrook: [richard_easterbrook@fws.gov]
BlackBearFBH_ViewJoin

This layer presents a survey of culverts that the Klawock Indigenous Stewards Forest Partnership (KISFP), Southeast Alaska Watershed Coalition (SAWC), and US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) have surveyed on the road towards Black Bear Lake near Klawock, AK. This effort is aimed at identifying barriers that impede fish passage, degrade water quality, or reduce infrastructure resilience across Alaska's streams and roads. The data collected hopes to provide critical insights into the potential impacts of infrastructure on aquatic ecosystems.
Imperiled Species - Critical Habitat (Midwest Conservation Blueprint 2026 Indicator)

Definition This indicator identifies the prevalence of species listed as threatened or endangered within the Midwest Landscape. It prioritizes areas based on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s final and proposed Critical Habitat designations. Pixels can take the following values: * 1 – Final or proposed critical habitat, not a natural asset * 2 – Natural assets within final or proposed critical habitat Selection This indicator was chosen as a targetable, important feature of the MLI goals that will be used to track conditions over time and prioritize areas for conservation. Indicators were defined through elicitation and prioritization exercises with federal and state participants. Criteria for the indicators includes 1) actionable, 2) measurable, 3) relevant to multiple groups across the region, and/or 4) representative of other social and/or environmental values. Input Data & Mapping Steps This indicator originates from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service HQ Critical Habitat layer. To create this layer, MLI partners, members, and staff completed the following mapping steps: projected all input data to NAD83 (2011) UTM Zone 15N, converted the data to a 30m raster, and emphasized natural assets within critical habitat, leading to the following categories: 0 – Not final or proposed critical habitat, 1 – Final or proposed critical habitat, not a natural asset, 2 – Natural assets within final or proposed critical habitat. Finally, we removed highly altered areas using our Highly Altered Areas mask. For full mapping details, please refer to the [Midwest Conservation Blueprint Development Process]. For a complete download of all Blueprint input and output data, visit the [Midwest Conservation Blueprint 2026 Data Download.]
Imperiled Species - T&E (Midwest Conservation Blueprint 2026 Indicator)

Definition This indicator identifies the prevalence of species listed as threatened or endangered within the Midwest Landscape. It prioritizes areas based on the rarity-weighted richness of threatened or endangered species found within a 300m pixel. Pixels can take the following values: * 1 – Low rarity-weighted richness, not a natural asset * 2 – Low rarity-weighted richness, natural asset * 3 – Medium rarity-weighted richness, not a natural asset * 4 – Medium rarity-weighted richness, natural asset * 5 – High rarity-weighted richness, not a natural asset * 6 – High rarity-weighted richness, natural asset Selection This indicator was chosen as a targetable, important feature of the MLI goals that will be used to track conditions over time and prioritize areas for conservation. Indicators were defined through elicitation and prioritization exercises with federal and state participants. Criteria for the indicators includes 1) actionable, 2) measurable, 3) relevant to multiple groups across the region, and/or 4) representative of other social and/or environmental values. Input Data & Mapping Steps This indicator originates from the NatureServe Imperiled Species Range-size Rarity layer. To create this layer, MLI partners, members, and staff completed the following mapping steps: projected all input data to NAD83 (2011) UTM Zone 15N, resampled the raster to 30m pixels, reclassified the raster into three classes, and emphasized natural assets leading to the following categories: 1 – Low rarity-weighted richness, not a natural asset, 2 – Low rarity-weighted richness, natural asset, 3 – Medium rarity-weighted richness, not a natural asset, 4 – Medium rarity-weighted richness, natural asset, 5 – High rarity-weighted richness, not a natural asset, and 6 – High rarity-weighted richness, natural asset. Finally, we removed highly altered areas using our Highly Altered Areas mask. For full mapping details, please refer to the [Midwest Conservation Blueprint Development Process]. For a complete download of all Blueprint input and output data, visit the [Midwest Conservation Blueprint 2026 Data Download.]
At-Risk Species - RSGCN (Midwest Conservation Blueprint 2026 Indicator)

Definition This indicator identifies the prevalence and population trend of species at risk of being threatened with extinction, with an emphasis on at-risk species that are of a regional conservation need. It prioritizes areas based on the rarity-weighted richness of those Regional Species of Greatest Conservation Need (RSGCN) which are not listed as Threatened or Endangered by the ESA or G1 or G2 imperiled species. Pixels can take the following values: * 1 – Lowest rarity-weighted richness values * 2 – Low rarity-weighted richness values * 3 – Slightly low rarity-weighted richness values * 4 – Slightly high rarity-weighted richness values * 5 – High rarity-weighted richness values * 6 – Highest rarity-weighted richness values Selection This indicator was chosen as a targetable, important feature of the MLI goals that will be used to track conditions over time and prioritize areas for conservation. Indicators were defined through elicitation and prioritization exercises with federal and state participants. Criteria for the indicators includes 1) actionable, 2) measurable, 3) relevant to multiple groups across the region, and/or 4) representative of other social and/or environmental values. Input Data & Mapping Steps This indicator originates from the Midwest Regional Species of Greatest Conservation Need (RSGCN) database and the USGS Gap Analysis Project (GAP). To create this layer, MLI partners, members, and staff completed the following mapping steps: projected all input data to NAD83 (2011) UTM Zone 15N, calculated the range-weighted rarity of each RSGCN GAP model by dividing the raster value by the percent of blueprint extent covered by the species, mosaicked all input rasters into a single rarity-weighted richness layer, and reclassified the layer into the following values: 1 – Lowest rarity-weighted richness values, 2 – Low rarity-weighted richness values, 3 – Slightly low rarity-weighted richness values, 4 – Slightly high rarity-weighted richness values, 5 – High rarity-weighted richness values, and 6 – Highest rarity-weighted richness values. Finally, we removed highly altered areas using our Highly Altered Areas mask. For full mapping details, please refer to the [Midwest Conservation Blueprint Development Process]. For a complete download of all Blueprint input and output data, visit the [Midwest Conservation Blueprint 2026 Data Download.]
At-Risk Species - COAs (Midwest Conservation Blueprint 2026 Indicator)

Definition This indicator identifies the prevalence of species at risk of being threatened with extinction within the Midwest Landscape. It prioritizes areas based on locations of State Conservation Opportunity Areas. Pixels can take the following values: * 1 – State Conservation Opportunity Areas, not a natural asset * 2 – Natural Assets within State Conservation Opportunity Areas Selection This indicator was chosen as a targetable, important feature of the MLI goals that will be used to track conditions over time and prioritize areas for conservation. Indicators were defined through elicitation and prioritization exercises with federal and state participants. Criteria for the indicators includes 1) actionable, 2) measurable, 3) relevant to multiple groups across the region, and/or 4) representative of other social and/or environmental values. Input Data & Mapping Steps This indicator originates from the State Wildlife Action Plans of the 13 Midwest Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (MAFWA) states. To create this layer, MLI partners, members, and staff completed the following mapping steps: projected all input data to NAD83 (2011) UTM Zone 15N, converted all input data to 30m rasters, mosaicked all input rasters into a single regional layer, reclassified the regional raster into a binary, and targeted natural assets within Conservation Opportunity Areas to create a layer with the following values: NoData – Not part of any state Conservation Opportunity Areas, 1 – State Conservation Opportunity Areas, not a natural asset, 2 – Natural Assets within State Conservation Opportunity Areas. Finally, we removed highly altered areas using our Highly Altered Areas mask. For full mapping details, please refer to the [Midwest Conservation Blueprint Development Process]. For a complete download of all Blueprint input and output data, visit the [Midwest Conservation Blueprint 2026 Data Download.]
Wetlands (Midwest Conservation Blueprint 2026 Indicator)

Definition This indicator identifies the availability of wetland habitat within the Midwest Landscape. It prioritizes areas based on whether a pixel can be classified as a wetland. Pixels can take the following values: * NoData – Not a wetland * 1 - Wetland Selection This indicator was chosen as a targetable, important feature of the MLI goals that will be used to track conditions over time and prioritize areas for conservation. Indicators were defined through elicitation and prioritization exercises with federal and state participants. Criteria for the indicators includes 1) actionable, 2) measurable, 3) relevant to multiple groups across the region, and/or 4) representative of other social and/or environmental values. Input Data & Mapping Steps This indicator originates from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). To create this layer, MLI partners, members, and staff completed the following mapping steps: projected all input data to NAD83 (2011) UTM Zone 15N, selected all wetland types other than "riverine" and "lakes," converted the selected polygons into a 30m raster, and reclassified the raster into two classes: 0 – Not a wetland, 1 - Wetland. Highly altered areas were removed using the Highly Altered Areas mask. For full mapping details, please refer to the [Midwest Conservation Blueprint Development Process]. For a complete download of all Blueprint input and output data, visit the [Midwest Conservation Blueprint 2026 Data Download.]
Climate Resiliency (Midwest Conservation Blueprint 2026 Indicator)

Definition This indicator identifies the ability of lands and waters to function under changing climate conditions within the Midwest Landscape. It prioritizes areas based on landscape diversity and connectedness. Pixels can take the following values: * 1 – Least resilient * 2 – Less resilient * 3 – Slightly less resilient * 4 – Average resilience * 5 – Slightly more resilient * 6 – More resilient * 7 – Most resilient Selection This indicator was chosen as a targetable, important feature of the MLI goals that will be used to track conditions over time and prioritize areas for conservation. Indicators were defined through elicitation and prioritization exercises with federal and state participants. Criteria for the indicators includes 1) actionable, 2) measurable, 3) relevant to multiple groups across the region, and/or 4) representative of other social and/or environmental values. Input Data & Mapping Steps This indicator originates from the Nature Conservancy's Resilient Land Mapping tool. To create this layer, MLI partners, members, and staff completed the following mapping steps: projected all input data to NAD83 (2011) UTM Zone 15N, and reclassified the raster into the following classes: 1 – Least resilient, 2 – Less resilient, 3 – Slightly less resilient, 4 – Average resilience, 5 – Slightly more resilient, 6 – More resilient, 7 – Most resilient. "Developed" pixels were reclassified as "Least resilient" to avoid removal of urban areas. "Sea level rise area” pixels were reclassified as “Least resilient” to avoid removal of coastal areas. Finally, highly altered areas were removed using our Highly Altered Areas Mask. For full mapping details, please refer to the [Midwest Conservation Blueprint Development Process]. For a complete download of all Blueprint input and output data, visit the [Midwest Conservation Blueprint 2026 Data Download.]
Terrestrial Habitat Connectivity (Midwest Conservation Blueprint 2026 Indicator)

Definition This indicator identifies the ability of terrestrial species to move across the landscape within the Midwest. It prioritizes areas based on relative ease of movement for terrestrial species, factoring in NLCD landcover classes, slope, proximity to water, and habitat core score. Pixels can take the following values: * 1 – Most costly (1,755-11,199) * 2 – More costly (443-1,754) * 3 – Average cost (237-442) * 4 – Less costly (112-236) * 5 – Least costly (0-111) Selection This indicator was chosen as a targetable, important feature of the MLI goals that will be used to track conditions over time and prioritize areas for conservation. Indicators were defined through elicitation and prioritization exercises with federal and state participants. Criteria for the indicators includes 1) actionable, 2) measurable, 3) relevant to multiple groups across the region, and/or 4) representative of other social and/or environmental values. Input Data & Mapping Steps This indicator originates from the Esri Green Infrastructure Habitat Cost Surface layer. To create this layer, MLI partners, members, and staff completed the following mapping steps: projected all input data to NAD83 (2011) UTM Zone 15N, mosaicked all state-level rasters into a single regional raster, and reclassified the raster into the following values: 1 – Most costly (1,755-11,199), 2 – More costly (443-1,754), 3 – Average cost (237-442), 4 – Less costly (112-236), 5 – Least costly (0-111). Finally, highly altered areas were removed using our Highly Altered Areas mask. For full mapping details, please refer to the [Midwest Conservation Blueprint Development Process]. For a complete download of all Blueprint input and output data, visit the [Midwest Conservation Blueprint 2026 Data Download.]