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

This data represents flowlines in the Roaring Fork watershed to be used in a web map showing connected wetland and deepwater habitat features from the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) dataset and various hydrographic features from the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD). A connectivity model was used to determine isolation/connectivity using a 0, 5, & 10 meter buffer of features. The general model process steps include: NWI was used as input data (other data can be added as input e.g. NHD) to determine "seed" jurisdictional waters. Currently, “seed” jurisdictional waters was defined as all Estuarine, Lacustrine, Tidal Riverine, Lower Perennial Riverine, and Upper Perennial Riverine NWI features. Select all NWI features in the study area that are "potential connectors". Currently, “potential connectors” were defined by excluding NWI features that had drier water regimes (temporarily flooded [A], continuously saturated [B], Continuously Saturated [D] and Seasonally Flooded/Saturated [E] and all Palustrine Farmed [Pf] features). Select all the "potential connectors" that intersect the "seed" data with the customized buffer distance. Continue iterations of step 3 by using the output (“seed” + intersecting “potential connectors”) as the “seed”. Iterations repeat until the count of selected NWI features does not increase. Select all NWI features (including non-connector wetlands) that intersect the final output of step 4. All selected features are exported as "Connected NWI Features...". Invert the selection and export remaining features as "Isolated NWI Features..."
SHARP_patches_100m_USFWSsals_SALSvSLR

Modelling the potential for alternative management strategies to improve the conservation status of saltmarsh sparrow and other tidal marsh specialist birds. Christopher Field, Department of Natural Resources Science, University of Rhode Island Chris Elphick, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut June 25, 2020 Please direct any questions to: Christopher Field christopher.field@uconn.edu Data sources Saltmarsh sparrow abundance estimates are from Wiest et al. (2018). Marsh patch boundaries follow Wiest et al. (2016), who used a 50-m buffering approach to group marshes into biologically-relevant units using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Wetlands Inventory (https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/nwi/). Forest loss is the area within 100 m of tidal marsh that experienced loss between 2000-2018 (as a proportion of the patch), from Hansen et al. (2018). Area of marsh (ha) that is behind a tidal restriction is from University of Massachusetts Landscape Ecology Lab’s Designing Sustainable Landscapes: https://jamba.provost.ads.umass.edu/web/lcc/dsl/metrics/DSL_documentation_tidal_restrictio ns.pdf. Sea-level rise rate (mm/year) is from the NOAA tide gauge that is closest to the marsh patch.
ne_ae2080_polygon

inundation at 2080 from - Lentz, E.E., Thieler, E.R., Plant, N.G., Stippa, S.R., Horton, R., and Gesch, D., 2016, Evaluation of dynamic coastal response to sea-level rise modifies inundation likelihood: Nature Climate Change doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE2957 and Lentz, E.E., Stippa, S.R., Thieler, E.R., Plant, N.G., Gesch, D.B., and Horton, R.M., 2015, Evaluating coastal landscape response to sea-level rise in the northeastern United States—Approach and methods (ver. 2.0, December 2015): U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2014–1252, 26 p., https://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20141252. inundation at 2080 from - Lentz, E.E., Thieler, E.R., Plant, N.G., Stippa, S.R., Horton, R., and Gesch, D., 2016, Evaluation of dynamic coastal response to sea-level rise modifies inundation likelihood: Nature Climate Change doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE2957 and Lentz, E.E., Stippa, S.R., Thieler, E.R., Plant, N.G., Gesch, D.B., and Horton, R.M., 2015, Evaluating coastal landscape response to sea-level rise in the northeastern United States—Approach and methods (ver. 2.0, December 2015): U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2014–1252, 26 p., https://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20141252.
SHARP_patches_100m_USFWSsals_SALSvLOSS

Modelling the potential for alternative management strategies to improve the conservation status of saltmarsh sparrow and other tidal marsh specialist birds. Christopher Field, Department of Natural Resources Science, University of Rhode Island Chris Elphick, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut June 25, 2020 Please direct any questions to: Christopher Field christopher.field@uconn.edu Data sources Saltmarsh sparrow abundance estimates are from Wiest et al. (2018). Marsh patch boundaries follow Wiest et al. (2016), who used a 50-m buffering approach to group marshes into biologically-relevant units using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Wetlands Inventory (https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/nwi/). Forest loss is the area within 100 m of tidal marsh that experienced loss between 2000-2018 (as a proportion of the patch), from Hansen et al. (2018). Area of marsh (ha) that is behind a tidal restriction is from University of Massachusetts Landscape Ecology Lab’s Designing Sustainable Landscapes: https://jamba.provost.ads.umass.edu/web/lcc/dsl/metrics/DSL_documentation_tidal_restrictio ns.pdf. Sea-level rise rate (mm/year) is from the NOAA tide gauge that is closest to the marsh patch.
mu_elev_Merge_2020

Aboout the Estuarine Processes, Hazards, and Ecosystems Team At the U.S. Geological Survey's Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center we undertake interdisciplinary projects that aim to quantify and understand estuarine processes through observations and numerical modeling. Both the spatial and temporal scales of these mechanisms are important, and therefore require modern instrumentation and state-of-the-art hydrodynamic models. These are mostly collaborative projects that include participation from other U.S. Geological Survey offices, other federal and state agencies, and academic institutions. Estuaries are dynamic environments where complex interactions between the atmosphere, ocean, watershed, ecosystems, and human infrastructure take place. They serve as valuable ecological habitat and provide numerous ecosystem services and recreational opportunities. However, they are modified by physical processes such as storms and sea-level rise, while anthropogenic impacts such as nutrient loading threaten ecosystem function within estuaries. This project collects basic observational data on these processes, develops numerical models of the processes, and applies the models to understand the past, present, and future states of estuaries. Measuring parameters such as water velocity, salinity, sediment concentration, dissolved oxygen and other constituents in watersheds, tidal wetlands, estuaries, and coasts is critical for evaluating the socioeconomic and ecological function of those regions. Technological advances have made it possible to autonomously measure these parameters over timescales of weeks to months. These measurements are necessary to evaluate three-dimensional numerical models that can represent the spatial and temporal complexity of these parameters. Once the models adequately represent relevant aspects of the physical system, they can be used to evaluate possible future scenarios including sea-level rise, streamflow changes, land-use modifications, and geomorphic evolution.
FWS ACJV SHARP hexagons_surveys_states

https://www.tidalmarshbirds.org/ SHARP - With partners in governmental agencies, conservation non-profits, academic organizations, and private citizens, we support the science behind tidal marsh bird conservation. We answer the questions needed to prevent tidal marsh birds and their wetland habitats from vanishing. We ask that you please acknowledge SHARP in all uses of these data, and if your use represents a substantial portion of a particular publication, please consider reaching out to the [SHARP Principal Investigators] for our greater involvement and potential authorship. 1994 – 2012 Tidal marsh bird survey database (max counts) [SHARP Bird Surveys (1994-2012) - Public Release: 22Oct2015 (417 downloads)] (data, metadata, and database contact information) This database contains compiled data from 11 contributing organizations (see metadata) that conducted avian point counts between 1994 – 2012 within wetlands designated as E2EM (Estuarine Emergent Wetland – i.e., tidal salt marsh) by the National Wetland Inventory. Each row indicates the maximum count of individuals of each species detected at a point for a particular year. Detections for our five focal species (Saltmarsh Sparrow, Seaside Sparrow, Nelson’s Sparrow, Willet, and Clapper Rail) are included in this database. Requested citation for field and analytical methods: Correll, MD, WA Wiest, TP Hodgman, WG Shriver, CS Elphick, BJ McGill, KM O’Brien, BJ Olsen. 2017. Predictors of specialist avifaunal decline in coastal marshes. Conservation Biology 31(1):172-182. [https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12797]. Requested citation for full database: SHARP 2015. “Specialist-bird survey database: 1994-2012”. Saltmarsh Habitat and Avian Research Program. https://www.tidalmarshbirds.org.
NHD_Sinks_RoaringFork

This data represents sinks in the Roaring Fork watershed to be used in a web map showing connected wetland and deepwater habitat features from the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) dataset and various hydrographic features from the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD). A connectivity model was used to determine isolation/connectivity using a 0, 5, & 10 meter buffer of features. The general model process steps include: NWI was used as input data (other data can be added as input e.g. NHD) to determine "seed" jurisdictional waters. Currently, “seed” jurisdictional waters was defined as all Estuarine, Lacustrine, Tidal Riverine, Lower Perennial Riverine, and Upper Perennial Riverine NWI features. Select all NWI features in the study area that are "potential connectors". Currently, “potential connectors” were defined by excluding NWI features that had drier water regimes (temporarily flooded [A], continuously saturated [B], Continuously Saturated [D] and Seasonally Flooded/Saturated [E] and all Palustrine Farmed [Pf] features). Select all the "potential connectors" that intersect the "seed" data with the customized buffer distance. Continue iterations of step 3 by using the output (“seed” + intersecting “potential connectors”) as the “seed”. Iterations repeat until the count of selected NWI features does not increase. Select all NWI features (including non-connector wetlands) that intersect the final output of step 4. All selected features are exported as "Connected NWI Features...". Invert the selection and export remaining features as "Isolated NWI Features..."
PSWCD_potentailXings_Yukon

Created by the Palmer Soil and Water Conservation District, this original GIS exercise was to map all points where a streamline crosses a road, trail, etc creating a dataset of potential water infrastructure crossings. This data is part of an exercise and is not to be taken as comprehensive or representative of what is truly on the ground. While some validation of points have occurred this is not represented in this original clip of the dataset. This layer contains points of water, road/trail crossings that fall within the Yukon River watershed.
RoaringForkWatershed

The Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) is a comprehensive aggregated collection of hydrologic unit data consistent with the national criteria for delineation and resolution. It defines the areal extent of surface water drainage to a point except in coastal or lake front areas where there could be multiple outlets as stated by the "Federal Standards and Procedures for the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD)" “Standard” (http://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/11/a3/). Watershed boundaries are determined solely upon science-based hydrologic principles, not favoring any administrative boundaries or special projects, nor particular program or agency. This dataset represents the hydrologic unit boundaries to the 12-digit (6th level) for the entire United States. Some areas may also include additional subdivisions representing the 14- and 16-digit hydrologic unit (HU). At a minimum, the HUs are delineated at 1:24,000-scale in the conterminous United States, 1:25,000-scale in Hawaii, Pacific basin and the Caribbean, and 1:63,360-scale in Alaska, meeting the National Map Accuracy Standards (NMAS). Higher resolution boundaries are being developed where partners and data exist and will be incorporated back into the WBD. WBD data are delivered as a dataset of polygons and corresponding lines that define the boundary of the polygon. WBD polygon attributes include hydrologic unit codes (HUC), size (in the form of acres and square kilometers), name, downstream hydrologic unit code, type of watershed, non-contributing areas, and flow modifications. The HUC describes where the unit is in the country and the level of the unit. WBD line attributes contain the highest level of hydrologic unit for each boundary, line source information and flow modifications.
NHD Flowlines

This data represents flowlines in the Roaring Fork watershed to be used in a web map showing connected wetland and deepwater habitat features from the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) dataset and various hydrographic features from the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD). A connectivity model was used to determine isolation/connectivity using a 0, 5, & 10 meter buffer of features. The general model process steps include: 1. NWI was used as input data (other data can be added as input e.g. NHD) to determine "seed" jurisdictional waters. Currently, “seed” jurisdictional waters was defined as all Estuarine, Lacustrine, Tidal Riverine, Lower Perennial Riverine, and Upper Perennial Riverine NWI features. 2. Select all NWI features in the study area that are "potential connectors". Currently, “potential connectors” were defined by excluding NWI features that had drier water regimes (temporarily flooded [A], continuously saturated [B], Continuously Saturated [D] and Seasonally Flooded/Saturated [E] and all Palustrine Farmed [Pf] features). 3. Select all the "potential connectors" that intersect the "seed" data with the customized buffer distance. 4. Continue iterations of step 3 by using the output (“seed” + intersecting “potential connectors”) as the “seed”. Iterations repeat until the count of selected NWI features does not increase. 5. Select all NWI features (including non-connector wetlands) that intersect the final output of step 4. All selected features are exported as "Connected NWI Features...". 6. Invert the selection and export remaining features as "Isolated NWI Features..."
NHD Plus - Sinks

This data represents sinks in the Roaring Fork watershed to be used in a web map showing connected wetland and deepwater habitat features from the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) dataset and various hydrographic features from the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD). A connectivity model was used to determine isolation/connectivity using a 0, 5, & 10 meter buffer of features. The general model process steps include: 1. NWI was used as input data (other data can be added as input e.g. NHD) to determine "seed" jurisdictional waters. Currently, “seed” jurisdictional waters was defined as all Estuarine, Lacustrine, Tidal Riverine, Lower Perennial Riverine, and Upper Perennial Riverine NWI features. 2. Select all NWI features in the study area that are "potential connectors". Currently, “potential connectors” were defined by excluding NWI features that had drier water regimes (temporarily flooded [A], continuously saturated [B], Continuously Saturated [D] and Seasonally Flooded/Saturated [E] and all Palustrine Farmed [Pf] features). 3. Select all the "potential connectors" that intersect the "seed" data with the customized buffer distance. 4. Continue iterations of step 3 by using the output (“seed” + intersecting “potential connectors”) as the “seed”. Iterations repeat until the count of selected NWI features does not increase. 5. Select all NWI features (including non-connector wetlands) that intersect the final output of step 4. All selected features are exported as "Connected NWI Features...". 6. Invert the selection and export remaining features as "Isolated NWI Features..."
NHD Isolated Flowlines

This data represents flowlines in the Roaring Fork watershed to be used in a web map showing connected wetland and deepwater habitat features from the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) dataset and various hydrographic features from the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD). A connectivity model was used to determine isolation/connectivity using a 0, 5, & 10 meter buffer of features. The general model process steps include: 1. NWI was used as input data (other data can be added as input e.g. NHD) to determine "seed" jurisdictional waters. Currently, “seed” jurisdictional waters was defined as all Estuarine, Lacustrine, Tidal Riverine, Lower Perennial Riverine, and Upper Perennial Riverine NWI features. 2. Select all NWI features in the study area that are "potential connectors". Currently, “potential connectors” were defined by excluding NWI features that had drier water regimes (temporarily flooded [A], continuously saturated [B], Continuously Saturated [D] and Seasonally Flooded/Saturated [E] and all Palustrine Farmed [Pf] features). 3. Select all the "potential connectors" that intersect the "seed" data with the customized buffer distance. 4. Continue iterations of step 3 by using the output (“seed” + intersecting “potential connectors”) as the “seed”. Iterations repeat until the count of selected NWI features does not increase. 5. Select all NWI features (including non-connector wetlands) that intersect the final output of step 4. All selected features are exported as "Connected NWI Features...". 6. Invert the selection and export remaining features as "Isolated NWI Features..."
Watershed Boundary - Roaring Fork

This data represents the boundary of the Roaring Fork watershed, to be used in a web map showing connected wetland and deepwater habitat features from the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) dataset and various hydrographic features from the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD). A connectivity model was used to determine isolation/connectivity using a 0, 5, & 10 meter buffer of features. The general model process steps include: 1. NWI was used as input data (other data can be added as input e.g. NHD) to determine "seed" jurisdictional waters. Currently, “seed” jurisdictional waters was defined as all Estuarine, Lacustrine, Tidal Riverine, Lower Perennial Riverine, and Upper Perennial Riverine NWI features. 2. Select all NWI features in the study area that are "potential connectors". Currently, “potential connectors” were defined by excluding NWI features that had drier water regimes (temporarily flooded [A], continuously saturated [B], Continuously Saturated [D] and Seasonally Flooded/Saturated [E] and all Palustrine Farmed [Pf] features). 3. Select all the "potential connectors" that intersect the "seed" data with the customized buffer distance. 4. Continue iterations of step 3 by using the output (“seed” + intersecting “potential connectors”) as the “seed”. Iterations repeat until the count of selected NWI features does not increase. 5. Select all NWI features (including non-connector wetlands) that intersect the final output of step 4. All selected features are exported as "Connected NWI Features...". 6. Invert the selection and export remaining features as "Isolated NWI Features..."
NAWCA Bird Priority Areas

This map is for querying the location of a proposed NAWCA grant project in relation to the shorebird areas of continental importance. How: Type your coordinates (decimal degrees) into the search bar, negative longitude first (eg: -75.8, 35.7) or pan and zoom to your project area. This dataset was developed by the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Partnership to aid the ranking of wetland habitat project by NAWCA. This map is intended to recommend -- at the national scale -- areas of the U.S. where NAWCA projects should be developed and favored based on benefits to wetland-associated shorebirds. This map is for querying the location of a proposed NAWCA grant project in relation to the shorebird areas of continental importance. How: Type your coordinates (decimal degrees) into the search bar, negative longitude first (eg: -75.8, 35.7) or pan and zoom to your project area. This dataset was developed by the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Partnership to aid the ranking of wetland habitat project by NAWCA. This map is intended to recommend -- at the national scale -- areas of the U.S. where NAWCA projects should be developed and favored based on benefits to wetland-associated shorebirds.
Little Tennessee Conservation Priority Areas by HUC12

LittleT_watershed_boundary - dissolved HUC8 boundaries for the Little Tennessee Watershed LittleT_HUC8 - Extracted HUC8 watersheds for the Little Tennessee Watershed, from NHD WBD. LittleT_HUC12 - Extracted HUC12 watersheds for the Little Tennessee Watershed, from NHD WBD. Existing Conservation Priorities - merged HUC12 scale conservation priorities from multiple entities: TNC, NCWAP, TNSWAP. TNC data from: Priority Areas for Freshwater Conservation Action: A Biodiversity Assessment of the Southeastern United States. NCWAP data: [http://www.ncwildlife.org/Plan#6718619-2015-downloads.] TNSWAP data: [https://databasin.org/datasets/d892d1b9ef7e408189db6eee4743e210] and [https://databasin.org/datasets/a174f129b8044a73b1ad16556c2863a7]
Wetland Connectivity Roaring Fork Watershed

This data represents connected wetland and deepwater habitat features from the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) dataset. A connectivity model was used to determine isolation/connectivity using a 0, 5, & 10 meter buffer of features. The general model process steps include: 1. NWI was used as input data (other data can be added as input e.g. NHD) to determine "seed" jurisdictional waters. Currently, “seed” jurisdictional waters was defined as all Estuarine, Lacustrine, Tidal Riverine, Lower Perennial Riverine, and Upper Perennial Riverine NWI features. 2. Select all NWI features in the study area that are "potential connectors". Currently, “potential connectors” were defined by excluding NWI features that had drier water regimes (temporarily flooded [A], continuously saturated [B], Continuously Saturated [D] and Seasonally Flooded/Saturated [E] and all Palustrine Farmed [Pf] features). 3. Select all the "potential connectors" that intersect the "seed" data with the customized buffer distance. 4. Continue iterations of step 3 by using the output (“seed” + intersecting “potential connectors”) as the “seed”. Iterations repeat until the count of selected NWI features does not increase. 5. Select all NWI features (including non-connector wetlands) that intersect the final output of step 4. All selected features are exported as "Connected NWI Features...". 6. Invert the selection and export remaining features as "Isolated NWI Features..."
NHD_H_19010211_HU8_GDB

This layer was created using the geodatabase from the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) downloader for the Huc 8 area 19010211. To download this area or others, it can be done at [https://apps.nationalmap.gov/downloader/#/]. Within this geodatabase you will find streamline information, NHD Points, and WBD data.
PCC Population Patches

This layer represents a 1/4 mile buffer of locations where Panama City crayfish samples were taken in support of a genetics study by James D Austin (University of Florida) which was funded by USFWS. Ten to 15 samples (each at least 50 meters apart) were supposed to be taken from various sites. Patty Kelly was the Panama City Field Office lead on this effort. After the genetic study showed relationships among the buffer polygons, the 19 buffer polygons were modified to 13 "population patches". For the Deer Point, Star Ave, and 231 (north and south) populations, both natural features (shorelines, creeks, etc) and man-made features (roads) were used to determine the boundaries. Please refer to the Species Status Assessment for further discussion: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017. Species status assessment report for the Panama City crayfish, Version 1.0, June, 2017, Atlanta, GA.