SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Map”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 271 records · Page 15Linked to original sources

USGS2001

Digital geologic map of the Fawnskin 7.5' quadrangle, San Bernardino County, California

Version 1.1 of this Open-File Report contains a digital geologic map and map database of the Fawnskin 7.5' quadrangle, San Bernardino County, California, that includes: 1. ARC/INFO (Environmental Systems Research Institute) version 7.2.1 double-precision coverages of the various elements of the geologic map 2. A PostScript (.ps) file to plot the geologic map on a topographic base, containing a Correlation of Map Units diagram and a Description of Map Units 3. Portable Document Format (.pdf) files of: a. This Readme; includes in Appendix I, data contained in fskn_met.txt b. The same graphic as plotted in 2 above. (Test plots from this .pdf do not produce 1:24,000-scale maps. Adobe Acrobat page-size settings control map scale.) This release includes features not found in most other digital geologic maps, in that all polygons, lines, and points in the coverage are encoded with detailed, comprehensive geologic data contained in six INFO data tables (.rel). (See Matti and others, 1998a, 1998b, and 1998c, for information on how the encoding may be accessed and utilized.) No paper map is included in the Open-File Report, but a PostScript plot file containing an image of the geologic map sheet, topographic base, Correlation of Map Units (CMU), and detailed Description of Map Units (DMU) is. The Correlation of Map Units and Description of Map Units are in the editorial format of USGS Miscellaneous Investigations Series maps (I-maps) but have not been edited to comply with I-map standards. Within the geologic map data package, map units are identified by such standard geologic-map criteria as formation name, age, and lithology. Even though this is an author-prepared report, every attempt has been made to closely adhere to the stratigraphic nomenclature of the U.S. Geological Survey. Descriptions of units can be obtained by viewing or plotting the .pdf file (3b above) or plotting the PostScript file (2 above). If roads in some areas, especially roads that parallel topographic contours, do not show well on plots of the geologic map, we recommend use of the USGS Fawnskin 7.5' topographic quadrangle in conjunction with the geologic map.

California↗

USGS1994

Quaternary Geologic Map of the Lake Nipigon 4 Degrees x 6 Degrees Quadrangle, United States and Canada

The Quaternary Geologic Map of the Lake Nipigon 4 degree x 6 degree Quadrangle was mapped as part of the Quaternary Geologic Atlas of the United States. The atlas was begun as an effort to depict the areal distribution of surficial geologic deposits and other materials that accumulated or formed during the past 2+ million years, the period that includes all activities of the human species. These materials are at the surface of the earth. They make up the 'ground' on which we walk, the 'dirt' in which we dig foundations, and the 'soil' in which we grow crops. Most of our human activity is related in one way or another to these surface materials that are referred to collectively by many geologists as regolith, the mantle of fragmental and generally unconsolidated material that overlies the bedrock foundation of the continent. The maps were compiled at 1:1,000,000 scale. This map is a product of collaboration of the Ontario Geological Survey, the University of Michigan, and the U.S. Geological Survey, and is designed for both scientific and practical purposes. It was prepared in two stages. First, separate maps and map explanations were prepared by the compilers. Second, the maps were combined, integrated, and supplemented by the editor. Map unit symbols were revised to a uniform system of classification and the map unit descriptions were prepared by the editor from information received from the compilers and from additional sources listed under Sources of Information. Diagrams accompanying the map were prepared by the editor. For scientific purposes, the map differentiates Quaternary surficial deposits on the basis of lithology or composition, texture or particle size, structure, genesis, stratigraphic relationships, engineering geologic properties, and relative age, as shown on the correlation diagram and indicated in the map unit descriptions. Deposits of some constructional landforms, such as kame moraine deposits, are distinguished as map units. Deposits of erosional landforms, such as outwash terraces, are not distinguished, although glaciofluvial, ice-contact, and lacustrine deposits that are mapped may be terraced. As a Quaternary geologic map it serves as a base from which a variety of maps relating Quaternary geologic history can be derived. For practical purposes, the map is a surficial materials map. Materials are distinguished on the basis of lithology or composition, texture or particle size, and other physical, chemical, and engineering characteristics. It is not a map of soils that are recognized and classified in pedology or agronomy. Rather, it is a generalized map of soils as recognized in engineering geology, or of substrata or parent materials in which pedologic or agronomic soils are formed. As a materials map it serves as a base from which a variety of maps for use in planning engineering, land use, or land management projects can be derived.

IMAP↗

USGS2003

Geologic map of the La Mesita Negra SE Quadrangle, Bernalillo County, New Mexico

Geologic mapping, in support of the USGS Middle Rio Grande Basin Geologic Mapping Project, shows the spatial distribution of artificial-fill, alluvial, colluvial, and eolian deposits, lava flows and related sediments of the Albuquerque volcanoes, and upper Santa Fe Group sediments. These deposits are on, beneath, and along the West Mesa (Llano de Albuquerque) just west of Albuquerque, New Mexico. Artificial fill deposits are mapped chiefly beneath and near segments of Interstate 40, in an inactive landfill (or dump) north of Interstate 40 near the eastern boundary of the map area, and in the active Cerro Colorado landfill near the southwestern corner of the map area. Alluvial deposits are mapped in stream channels, beneath treads of terraces, and on hill slopes. They include alluvium in stream channels and beneath treads of low terraces, terrace alluvium, sheetwash deposits, gravelly alluvium, and old alluvium and calcic soils of the Llano de Albuquerque. Alluvial and colluvial deposits are mapped on hill slopes. They include young alluvial-slope deposits, alluvium and colluvium, undivided, and old alluvial-slope deposits. Colluvial deposits are also mapped on hill slopes. They include colluvial deposits, undivided, as well as alluvial deposits, eolian sand, and calcic soils associated with fault scarps. Eolian deposits as well as eolian and alluvial deposits mantle gently slopping surfaces on the Llano de Albuquerque. They include active eolian sand, active and inactive eolian sand and sheetwash deposits, undivided, and inactive eolian sand and sheetwash deposits, undivided. Lava flows and related sediments of the Albuquerque volcanoes were mapped near the southeast corner of the map area. They include five young lava flows, two young cinder deposits, and old lava flows. Upper Santa Fe Group sediments are well exposed and mapped in the western part of the map area. They include a gravel unit, a pebbly sand unit, and a mud and sand unit. Undivided upper Santa Fe Group sediments were mapped in the eastern part of the map area. Sediments and lava flows in the map area record alluvial, eolian, colluvial, and volcanic processes of the past several million years. The surficial deposits (post-Santa Fe Group sediments) on the map are known or estimated to be at least 1 m thick; most deposits are poorly exposed. Thin (< 50 cm), discontinuous deposits of eolian sand and sheetwash (Qea, Qes, and Qsw) locally are present on gently sloping map units older than the alluvium in stream channels and low terraces (Qa). These thin eolian and sheetwash deposits are not mapped, but they are widespread on the gravel unit of the upper Santa Fe Group sediments (Tg) on the eastern flank of the Llano de Albuquerque, near the eastern boundary of the map area (quadrangle). Small deposits of artificial fill (af) less than about 25 m wide are not mapped. Fractional map symbols (for example, Qsw/Qby1) are used where sheetwash deposits mantle lava flows. These fractional units are not described here; instead refer to descriptions of individual units.

Miscellaneous Field Studies Map↗

USGS2015

California State Waters Map Series: Offshore of Refugio Beach, California

In 2007, the California Ocean Protection Council initiated the California Seafloor Mapping Program (CSMP), designed to create a comprehensive seafloor map of high-resolution bathymetry, marine benthic habitats, and geology within California’s State Waters. The CSMP approach is to create highly detailed seafloor maps through collection, integration, interpretation, and visualization of swath sonar data, acoustic backscatter, seafloor video, seafloor photography, high-resolution seismic-reflection profiles, and bottom-sediment sampling data. The map products display seafloor morphology and character, identify potential marine benthic habitats, and illustrate both the surficial seafloor geology and shallow (to about 100 m) subsurface geology. The Offshore of Refugio Beach map lies within the western Santa Barbara Channel region of the Southern California Bight. This geologically complex region forms a major biogeographic transition zone, separating the cold-temperate Oregonian province north of Point Conception from the warm-temperate California province to the south. The map area is in the southern part of the Western Transverse Ranges geologic province, which is north of the California Continental Borderland. Significant clockwise rotation—at least 90°—since the early Miocene has been proposed for the Western Transverse Ranges province, and geodetic studies indicate that the region is presently undergoing north-south shortening. Uplift rates (as much as 0.5 mm/yr) that are based on studies of onland marine terraces provide further evidence of significant shortening. The coastal zone of this map area lies at the steep flank of the Santa Ynez Mountains. The crest of the range, which lies about 8 km from the shoreline (north of the map area), has a maximum elevation of about 780 m. This area is largely open space, partly used for livestock grazing, with no significant towns or population centers. Highway 101 crosses the map area, adjacent to and within a few hundred meters of the shoreline. The most significant developments are the recreational state beaches at El Capitan Beach and Refugio Beach. The beaches are subject to erosion each winter during storm-wave attack, and then they undergo gradual recovery or accretion during the more gentle wave climate of the late spring, summer, and fall months. The Offshore of Refugio Beach map area lies in the west-central part of the Santa Barbara littoral cell, which is characterized by west-to-east transport of sediment from Point Arguello on the northwest to Hueneme and Mugu Canyons on the southeast. Longshore drift rates have been reported to range from about 160,000 to 800,000 tons/yr, averaging 400,000 tons/yr. Sediment supply to the western and central part of the littoral cell, including the map area, is mainly from relatively small coastal watersheds. Within the map area, these coastal watersheds include (from east to west) Cañada del Capitan, Tajiquas Creek, Arroyo Hondo, Cañada del Molino, and several unnamed canyons and creeks. The Santa Ynez and Santa Maria Rivers, the mouths of which are 80 to 120 km northwest of the map area, are not considered significant sediment sources because Point Conception and Point Arguello provide obstacles to downcoast sediment transport and also because much of their sediment load is trapped in dams. The Ventura and Santa Clara Rivers, the mouths of which are about 70 km to the southeast of the map area, are not sediment sources for the map area. The offshore part of the map area consists of relatively flat and shallow continental shelf, which dips gently seaward (about 0.8° to 1.0°) so that water depths at the shelf break, roughly coincident with the California’s State Waters limit, are about 80 to 100 m. This part of the Santa Barbara Channel is relatively well protected from large Pacific swells from the north and northwest by Point Conception and from the south and southwest by offshore islands and banks. The shelf is underlain by variable amounts of upper Quaternary marine and fluvial sediments deposited as sea level fluctuated in the late Pleistocene. In the map area, the shelf break is at depths of about 90 m and lies about 5.6 to 6.4 km offshore. Beyond the shelf break, the slope is steep (as much as about 7°) and unstable. Several submarine landslides, including the large (130 km 2 ) Goleta landslide complex, have been documented offshore of Goleta, a few kilometers east of the map area. This compound slump complex may have been initiated more than 200,000 year ago, but it also includes three recent failures that may have been generated 8,000 to 10,000 years ago. A local, 10-m-high tsunami may have been generated from these failure events. Small folds related to local faulting are superimposed on the homocline that makes up the south flank of the Santa Ynez Mountains. One of these superimposed anticlines hosts the Molino gas field, which was discovered in 1962 and subsequently developed through directional drilling from onshore wells. The Oligocene Sespe and Vaqueros Formations are the reservoirs in the Molino gas field, and the map area includes numerous seafloor hydrocarbon seeps. Seafloor habitats in the broad Santa Barbara Channel region consist of significant amounts of soft, unconsolidated sediment interspersed with isolated areas of rocky habitat that support kelp-forest communities nearshore and rocky-reef communities in deep water. The potential marine benthic habitat types mapped in the Offshore of Refugio Beach map area are directly related to its Quaternary geologic history, geomorphology, and active sedimentary processes. These potential habitats, which lie primarily within the Shelf (continental shelf) but also partly within the Flank (basin flank or continental slope) megahabitats, primarily are composed of soft sediment interrupted by a few carbonate mounds. This homogeneous seafloor of sediment and low-relief bedrock provides promising habitat for groundfish, crabs, shrimp, and other marine benthic organisms.

California↗

USGS2004

Preliminary integrated geologic map databases for the United States: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, and Indiana

The growth in the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) has highlighted the need for regional and national digital geologic maps attributed with age and lithology information. Such maps can be conveniently used to generate derivative maps for purposes including mineral-resource assessment, metallogenic studies, tectonic studies, and environmental research. This Open-File Report is a preliminary version of part of a series of integrated state geologic map databases that cover the entire United States. The only national-scale digital geologic maps that portray most or all of the United States for the conterminous U.S. are the digital version of the King and Beikman (1974a, b) map at a scale of 1:2,500,000, as digitized by Schruben and others (1994) and the generalized digital version (Reed and Bush, 2004) of the Geologic Map of North America (Reed and others, 2005a, b) compiled at a scale of 1:5,000,000. The present series of maps is intended to provide the next step in increased detail. State geologic maps that range in scale from 1:100,000 to 1:1,000,000 are available for most of the country, and digital versions of these state maps are the basis for this product. In a few cases, new digital compilations were prepared (e.g. Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota) or existing paper maps were digitized (e.g. Kentucky, Texas). Also as part of this series, new regional maps for Alaska and Hawaii are being compiled and ultimately new state maps will be produced. The digital geologic maps are presented in standardized formats as ARC/INFO export (.e00) files and as ArcView shape (.shp) files. Accompanying these spatial databases are a set of five supplemental attribute tables that relate the map units to detailed lithologic and age information. The maps for the CONUS have been fitted to a common set of state boundaries based on the 1:100,000 topographic map series of the United States Geological Survey (USGS). When the individual state maps are merged, the combined attribute tables can be used directly with the merged maps to make derivative maps. No attempt has been made to reconcile differences in mapped geology across state lines.

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin↗

USGS2005

Preliminary integrated geologic map databases for the United States: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South Carolina

The growth in the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) has highlighted the need for regional and national digital geologic maps attributed with age and lithology information. Such maps can be conveniently used to generate derivative maps for purposes including mineral-resource assessment, metallogenic studies, tectonic studies, and environmental research. This Open-File Report is a preliminary version of part of a series of integrated state geologic map databases that cover the entire United States. The only national-scale digital geologic maps that portray most or all of the United States for the conterminous U.S. are the digital version of the King and Beikman (1974a, b) map at a scale of 1:2,500,000, as digitized by Schruben and others (1994) and the digital version of the Geologic Map of North America (Reed and others, 2005a, b) compiled at a scale of 1:5,000,000 which is currently being prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey. The present series of maps is intended to provide the next step in increased detail. State geologic maps that range in scale from 1:100,000 to 1:1,000,000 are available for most of the country, and digital versions of these state maps are the basis of this product. In a few cases, new digital compilations were prepared (e.g. OH, SC, SD) or existing paper maps were digitized (e.g. KY, TX). For Alaska and Hawaii, new regional maps are being compiled and ultimately new state maps will be produced. The digital geologic maps are presented in standardized formats as ARC/INFO (.e00) export files and as ArcView shape (.shp) files. Accompanying these spatial databases are a set of five supplemental data tables that relate the map units to detailed lithologic and age information. The maps for the CONUS have been fitted to a common set of state boundaries based on the 1:100,000 topographic map series of the United States Geological Survey (USGS). When the individual state maps are merged, the combined attribute tables can be used directly with the merged maps to make derivative maps. No attempt has been made to reconcile differences in mapped geology across state lines.

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Caro↗

USGS2005

Preliminary integrated geologic map databases for the United States: Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, and West Virginia

The growth in the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) has highlighted the need for regional and national digital geologic maps attributed with age and lithology information. Such maps can be conveniently used to generate derivative maps for purposes including mineral-resource assessment, metallogenic studies, tectonic studies, and environmental research. This Open-File Report is a preliminary version of part of a series of integrated state geologic map databases that cover the entire United States. The only national-scale digital geologic maps that portray most or all of the United States for the conterminous U.S. are the digital version of the King and Beikman (1974a, b) map at a scale of 1:2,500,000, as digitized by Schruben and others (1994) and the generalized digital version (Reed and Bush, 2004) of the Geologic Map of North America (Reed and others, 2005a, b) compiled at a scale of 1:5,000,000. The present series of maps is intended to provide the next step in increased detail. State geologic maps that range in scale from 1:100,000 to 1:1,000,000 are available for most of the country, and digital versions of these state maps are the basis for this product. In a few cases, new digital compilations were prepared (e.g. Ohio, South Carloina, South Dakota) or existing paper maps were digitized (e.g. Kentucky, Texas). Also as part of this series, new regional maps for Alaska and Hawaii are being compiled and ultimately new state maps will be produced. The digital geologic maps are presented in standardized formats as ARC/INFO export (.e00) files and as ArcView shape (.shp) files. Accompanying these spatial databases are a set of five supplemental attribute tables that relate the map units to detailed lithologic and age information. The maps for the CONUS have been fitted to a common set of state boundaries based on the 1:100,000 topographic map series of the United States Geological Survey (USGS). When the individual state maps are merged, the combined attribute tables can be used directly with the merged maps to make derivative maps. No attempt has been made to reconcile differences in mapped geology across state lines.

Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, West Virginia↗

USGS2005

Preliminary integrated geologic map databases for the United States: Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia

The growth in the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) has highlighted the need for regional and national digital geologic maps attributed with age and lithology information. Such maps can be conveniently used to generate derivative maps for purposes including mineral-resource assessment, metallogenic studies, tectonic studies, and environmental research. This Open-File Report is a preliminary version of part of a series of integrated state geologic map databases that cover the entire United States. The only national-scale digital geologic maps that portray most or all of the United States for the conterminous U.S. are the digital version of the King and Beikman (1974a, b) map at a scale of 1:2,500,000, as digitized by Schruben and others (1994) and the generalized digital version (Reed and Bush, 2004) of the Geologic Map of North America (Reed and others, 2005a, b) compiled at a scale of 1:5,000,000. The present series of maps is intended to provide the next step in increased detail. State geologic maps that range in scale from 1:100,000 to 1:1,000,000 are available for most of the country, and digital versions of these state maps are the basis for this product. In a few cases, new digital compilations were prepared (e.g. Ohio, South Carloina, South Dakota) or existing paper maps were digitized (e.g. Kentucky, Texas). Also as part of this series, new regional maps for Alaska and Hawaii are being compiled and ultimately new state maps will be produced. The digital geologic maps are presented in standardized formats as ARC/INFO export (.e00) files and as ArcView shape (.shp) files. Accompanying these spatial databases are a set of five supplemental attribute tables that relate the map units to detailed lithologic and age information. The maps for the CONUS have been fitted to a common set of state boundaries based on the 1:100,000 topographic map series of the United States Geological Survey (USGS). When the individual state maps are merged, the combined attribute tables can be used directly with the merged maps to make derivative maps. No attempt has been made to reconcile differences in mapped geology across state lines.

Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virgin↗

USGS2005

Preliminary integrated geologic map databases for the United States: Central states: Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, and Louisiana

The growth in the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) has highlighted the need for regional and national digital geologic maps attributed with age and lithology information. Such maps can be conveniently used to generate derivative maps for purposes including mineral-resource assessment, metallogenic studies, tectonic studies, and environmental research. This Open-File Report is a preliminary version of part of a series of integrated state geologic map databases that cover the entire United States. The only national-scale digital geologic maps that portray most or all of the United States for the conterminous U.S. are the digital version of the King and Beikman (1974a, b) map at a scale of 1:2,500,000, as digitized by Schruben and others (1994) and the digital version of the Geologic Map of North America (Reed and others, 2005a, b) compiled at a scale of 1:5,000,000 which is currently being prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey. The present series of maps is intended to provide the next step in increased detail. State geologic maps that range in scale from 1:100,000 to 1:1,000,000 are available for most of the country, and digital versions of these state maps are the basis of this product. In a few cases, new digital compilations were prepared (e.g. OH, SC, SD) or existing paper maps were digitized (e.g. KY, TX). For Alaska and Hawaii, new regional maps are being compiled and ultimately new state maps will be produced. The digital geologic maps are presented in standardized formats as ARC/INFO (.e00) export files and as ArcView shape (.shp) files. Accompanying these spatial databases are a set of five supplemental data tables that relate the map units to detailed lithologic and age information. The maps for the CONUS have been fitted to a common set of state boundaries based on the 1:100,000 topographic map series of the United States Geological Survey (USGS). When the individual state maps are merged, the combined attribute tables can be used directly with the merged maps to make derivative maps. No attempt has been made to reconcile differences in mapped geology across state lines. This is the first version of this product and it will be subsequently updated to include four additional states (North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Iowa)

Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Misso↗

USGS2006

Scoping of flood hazard mapping needs for Cumberland County, Maine

This report was prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Maine Water Science Center as the deliverable for scoping of flood hazard mapping needs for Cumberland County, Maine, under Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Inter-Agency Agreement Number HSFE01-05-X-0018. This section of the report explains the objective of the task and the purpose of the report. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) developed a plan in 1997 to modernize the FEMA flood mapping program. FEMA flood maps delineate flood hazard areas in support of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). FEMA's plan outlined the steps necessary to update FEMA's flood maps for the nation to a seamless digital format and streamline FEMA's operations in raising public awareness of the importance of the maps and responding to requests to revise them. The modernization of flood maps involves conversion of existing information to digital format and integration of improved flood hazard data as needed. To determine flood mapping modernization needs, FEMA has established specific scoping activities to be done on a county-by-county basis for identifying and prioritizing requisite flood-mapping activities for map modernization. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with FEMA and the Maine State Planning Office Floodplain Management Program, began scoping work in 2005 for Cumberland County. Scoping activities included assembling existing data and map needs information for communities in Cumberland County, documentation of data, contacts, community meetings, and prioritized mapping needs in a final scoping report (this document), and updating the Mapping Needs Update Support System (MNUSS) Database or its successor with information gathered during the scoping process. The average age of the FEMA floodplain maps in Cumberland County, Maine is 21 years. Most of these studies were in the early to mid 1980s. However, in the ensuing 20-25 years, development has occurred in many of the watersheds, and the characteristics of the watersheds have changed with time. Therefore, many of the older studies may not depict current conditions nor accurately estimate risk in terms of flood heights. The following is the scope of work as defined in the FEMA/USGS Statement of Work: Task 1: Collect data from a variety of sources including community surveys, other Federal and State Agencies, National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) State Coordinators, Community Assistance Visits (CAVs) and FEMA archives. Lists of mapping needs will be obtained from the MNUSS database, community surveys, and CAVs, if available. FEMA archives will be inventoried for effective FIRM panels, FIS reports, and other flood-hazard data or existing study data. Best available base map information, topographic data, flood-hazard data, and hydrologic and hydraulic data will be identified. Data from the Maine Floodplain Management Program database also will be utilized. Task 2: Contact communities in Cumberland County to notify them that FEMA and the State have selected them for a map update, and that a project scope will be developed with their input. Topics to be reviewed with the communities include (1) Purpose of the Flood Map Project (for example, the update needs that have prompted the map update); (2) The community's mapping needs; (3) The community's available mapping, hydrologic, hydraulic, and flooding information; (4) target schedule for completing the project; and (5) The community's engineering, planning, and geographic information system (GIS) capabilities. On the basis of the collected information from Task 1 and community contacts/meetings in Task 2, the USGS will develop a Draft Project Scope for the identified mapping needs of the communities in Cumberland County. The following items will be addressed in the Draft Project Scope: review of available information, determine if and how effective FIS data can be used in new project, and identify other data needed to

Open-File Report↗

USGS2006

Scoping of flood hazard mapping needs for Kennebec County, Maine

This report was prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Maine Water Science Center as the deliverable for scoping of flood hazard mapping needs for Kennebec County, Maine, under Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Inter-Agency Agreement Number HSFE01-05-X-0018. This section of the report explains the objective of the task and the purpose of the report. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) developed a plan in 1997 to modernize the FEMA flood mapping program. FEMA flood maps delineate flood hazard areas in support of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). FEMA's plan outlined the steps necessary to update FEMA's flood maps for the nation to a seamless digital format and streamline FEMA's operations in raising public awareness of the importance of the maps and responding to requests to revise them. The modernization of flood maps involves conversion of existing information to digital format and integration of improved flood hazard data as needed. To determine flood mapping modernization needs, FEMA has established specific scoping activities to be done on a county-by-county basis for identifying and prioritizing requisite flood-mapping activities for map modernization. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with FEMA and the Maine State Planning Office Floodplain Management Program, began scoping work in 2005 for Kennebec County. Scoping activities included assembling existing data and map needs information for communities in Kennebec County (efforts were made to not duplicate those of pre-scoping completed in March 2005), documentation of data, contacts, community meetings, and prioritized mapping needs in a final scoping report (this document), and updating the Mapping Needs Update Support System (MNUSS) Database or its successor with information gathered during the scoping process. The average age of the FEMA floodplain maps in Kennebec County, Maine is 16 years. Most of these studies were in the late 1970's to the mid 1980s. However, in the ensuing 20-30 years, development has occurred in many of the watersheds, and the characteristics of the watersheds have changed with time. Therefore, many of the older studies may not depict current conditions nor accurately estimate risk in terms of flood heights. The following is the scope of work as defined in the FEMA/USGS Statement of Work: Task 1: Collect data from a variety of sources including community surveys, other Federal and State Agencies, National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) State Coordinators, Community Assistance Visits (CAVs) and FEMA archives. Lists of mapping needs will be obtained from the MNUSS database, community surveys, and CAVs, if available. FEMA archives will be inventoried for effective FIRM panels, FIS reports, and other flood-hazard data or existing study data. Best available base map information, topographic data, flood-hazard data, and hydrologic and hydraulic data will be identified. Data from the Maine Floodplain Management Program database also will be utilized. Task 2: Contact communities in Kennebec County to notify them that FEMA and the State have selected them for a map update, and that a project scope will be developed with their input. Topics to be reviewed with the communities include (1) Purpose of the Flood Map Project (for example, the update needs that have prompted the map update); (2) The community's mapping needs; (3) The community's available mapping, hydrologic, hydraulic, and flooding information; (4) target schedule for completing the project; and (5) The community's engineering, planning, and geographic information system (GIS) capabilities. On the basis of the collected information from Task 1 and community contacts/meetings in Task 2, the USGS will develop a Draft Project Scope for the identified mapping needs of the communities in Kennebec County. The following items will be addressed in the Draft Project Scope: review of available information, determine if and how e

Open-File Report↗

USGS2006

Scoping of flood hazard mapping needs for Somerset County, Maine

This report was prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Maine Water Science Center as the deliverable for scoping of flood hazard mapping needs for Somerset County, Maine, under Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Inter-Agency Agreement Number HSFE01-05-X-0018. This section of the report explains the objective of the task and the purpose of the report. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) developed a plan in 1997 to modernize the FEMA flood mapping program. FEMA flood maps delineate flood hazard areas in support of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). FEMA's plan outlined the steps necessary to update FEMA's flood maps for the nation to a seamless digital format and streamline FEMA's operations in raising public awareness of the importance of the maps and responding to requests to revise them. The modernization of flood maps involves conversion of existing information to digital format and integration of improved flood hazard data as needed. To determine flood mapping modernization needs, FEMA has established specific scoping activities to be done on a county-by-county basis for identifying and prioritizing requisite flood-mapping activities for map modernization. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with FEMA and the Maine State Planning Office Floodplain Management Program, began scoping work in 2005 for Somerset County. Scoping activities included assembling existing data and map needs information for communities in Somerset County (efforts were made to not duplicate those of pre-scoping completed in March 2005), documentation of data, contacts, community meetings, and prioritized mapping needs in a final scoping report (this document), and updating the Mapping Needs Update Support System (MNUSS) Database or its successor with information gathered during the scoping process. The average age of the FEMA floodplain maps in Somerset County, Maine is 18.1 years. Most of these studies were in the late 1970's to the mid 1980s. However, in the ensuing 20-30 years, development has occurred in many of the watersheds, and the characteristics of the watersheds have changed with time. Therefore, many of the older studies may not depict current conditions nor accurately estimate risk in terms of flood heights. The following is the scope of work as defined in the FEMA/USGS Statement of Work: Task 1: Collect data from a variety of sources including community surveys, other Federal and State Agencies, National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) State Coordinators, Community Assistance Visits (CAVs) and FEMA archives. Lists of mapping needs will be obtained from the MNUSS database, community surveys, and CAVs, if available. FEMA archives will be inventoried for effective FIRM panels, FIS reports, and other flood-hazard data or existing study data. Best available base map information, topographic data, flood-hazard data, and hydrologic and hydraulic data will be identified. Data from the Maine Floodplain Management Program database also will be utilized. Task 2: Contact communities in Somerset County to notify them that FEMA and the State have selected them for a map update, and that a project scope will be developed with their input. Topics to be reviewed with the communities include (1) Purpose of the Flood Map Project (for example, the update needs that have prompted the map update); (2) The community's mapping needs; (3) The community's available mapping, hydrologic, hydraulic, and flooding information; (4) target schedule for completing the project; and (5) The community's engineering, planning, and geographic information system (GIS) capabilities. On the basis of the collected information from Task 1 and community contacts/meetings in Task 2, the USGS will develop a Draft Project Scope for the identified mapping needs of the communities in Somerset County. The following items will be addressed in the Draft Project Scope: review of available information, determine if and ho

Open-File Report↗

USGS2008

Mapping of Florida's coastal and marine resources: Setting priorities workshop

The importance of mapping habitats and bioregions as a means to improve resource management has become increasingly clear. Large areas of the waters surrounding Florida are unmapped or incompletely mapped, possibly hindering proper management and good decisionmaking. Mapping of these ecosystems is among the top priorities identified by the Florida Oceans and Coastal Council in their Annual Science Research Plan. However, lack of prioritization among the coastal and marine areas and lack of coordination of agency efforts impede efficient, cost–effective mapping. A workshop on Mapping of Florida’s Coastal and Marine Resources was sponsored by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), and Southeastern Regional Partnership for Planning and Sustainability (SERPPAS). The workshop was held at the USGS Florida Integrated Science Center (FISC) in St. Petersburg, FL, on February 7-8, 2007. The workshop was designed to provide State, Federal, university, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) the opportunity to discuss their existing data coverage and create a prioritization of areas for new mapping data in Florida. Specific goals of the workshop were multifold, including to: provide information to agencies on state-of-the-art technology for collecting data; inform participants of the ongoing mapping programs in waters off Florida; present the mapping needs and priorities of the State and Federal agencies and entities operating in Florida; work with State of Florida agencies to establish an overall priority for areas needing mapping; initiate discussion of a unified classification of habitat and bioregions; discuss and examine the need to standardize terminology and data collection/storage so that data, in particular habitat data, can be shared; identify opportunities for partnering and leveraging mapping efforts among agencies and entities; identify impediments and organizational gaps that hinder collection of data for mapping; seek innovative solutions to the primary obstacles identified; identify the steps needed to move mapping of Florida’s oceans and coasts forward, in preparation for a better coordinated, more cost-effective mapping program to allow State and Federal agencies to make better decisions on coastal-resource issues. Over 90 invited participants representing more than 30 State and Federal agencies, universities, NGOs, and private industries played a large role in the success of this two-day workshop. State of Florida agency participants created a ranked priority order for mapping 13 different regions around Florida. The data needed for each of the 13 priority regions were outlined. A matrix considering State and Federal priorities was created, utilizing input from all agencies. The matrix showed overlapping interests of the entities and will allow for partnering and leveraging of resources. The five most basic mapping needs were determined to be bathymetry, high-vertical resolution coastline for sea-level rise scenarios, shoreline change, subsurface geology, and benthic habitats at sufficient scale. There was a clear convergence on the need to coordinate mapping activities around the state. Suggestions for coordination included: creating a glossary of terms: a standard for specifying agency data-mapping needs; creating a geographic information officer (GIO) position or permanent organizing group to maintain communications established at this workshop and to maintain progress on the issues identified during the workshop. The person or group could develop a website, maintain a project-status matrix, develop a list of contacts, create links to legislative updates and links to funding sources; developing a web portal and one-stop/clearinghouse of data. There was general consensus on the need to adopt a single habitat classification system and a strategy to accommodate existing systems smoothly. Unresolved aspects of the systems warrant that a separate workshop would be needed to work out details. Participants recognized that the State priority list would necessarily be updated periodically. An annual review of priorities would facilitate information exchange, mapping activities updates, and re-allocation of funding among changing priorities. It was recognized that mapping of State waters would take billions of dollars and in light of tightening budgets there was need for processes that could be used to appropriate or leverage monies for mapping and reduce data-collection costs. Fourteen different avenues were explored. There was a clear consensus that the linking of public to private partnerships to support mapping was imperative, and ways to achieve this were discussed.

Florida↗

USGS2016

Quaternary geologic map of the Wolf Point 1° × 2° quadrangle, Montana and North Dakota

The Wolf Point quadrangle encompasses approximately 16,084 km 2 (6,210 mi 2 ). The northern boundary is the Montana/Saskatchewan (U.S.-Canada) boundary. The quadrangle is in the Northern Plains physiographic province and it includes the Peerless Plateau and Flaxville Plain. The primary river is the Missouri River. The map units are surficial deposits and materials, not landforms. Deposits that comprise some constructional landforms (for example, ground-moraine deposits, end-moraine deposits, and stagnation-moraine deposits, all composed of till) are distinguished for purposes of reconstruction of glacial history. Surficial deposits and materials are assigned to 23 map units on the basis of genesis, age, lithology or composition, texture or particle size, and other physical, chemical, and engineering characteristics. It is not a map of soils that are recognized in pedology or agronomy. Rather, it is a generalized map of soils recognized in engineering geology, or of substrata or parent materials in which pedologic or agronomic soils are formed. Glaciotectonic (ice-thrust) structures and deposits are mapped separately, represented by a symbol. The surficial deposits are glacial, ice-contact, glaciofluvial, alluvial, lacustrine, eolian, colluvial, and mass-movement deposits. Till of late Wisconsin age is represented by three map units. Till of Illinoian age also is mapped. Till deposited during pre-Illinoian glaciations is not mapped, but is widespread in the subsurface. Linear ice-molded landforms (primarily drumlins), shown by symbol, indicate directions of ice flow during late Wisconsin and Illinoian glaciations. The Quaternary geologic map of the Wolf Point quadrangle, northeastern Montana and North Dakota, was prepared to provide a database for compilation of a Quaternary geologic map of the Regina 4° × 6° quadrangle, United States and Canada, at scale 1:1,000,000, for the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Geologic Atlas of the United States map series. This map was compiled from data from many sources, at several different map scales. That information was generalized and simplified, and then transferred to a base map at 1:250,000 scale to serve as the base for final reduction to 1:1,000,000, the nominal reading scale of maps in the Quaternary Geologic Atlas of the United States map series. This map is the generalized and simplified 1:250,000 scale compilation. Letter symbols for the map units are those used for the same units in the Quaternary Geologic Atlas of the United States map series. The map summarizes new, and selected published and unpublished, geologic information for public use and for use by Federal, State, and local governmental agencies for land use planning, including assessment of natural resources, natural hazards, recreation potential, and land use management. It also is a base from which a variety of maps relating to earth surface processes and Quaternary geologic history can be derived.

Montana, North Dakota↗

USGS2026

High-resolution transboundary vegetation community maps of the Sonoran and Mojave Desert ecoregion to support critical landscape conservation planning and habitat management needs

We produced a 30-m resolution binational land cover map of Bird Conservation Region 33 (BCR 33) for the U.S. North American Bird Conservation Initiative. The region covers large portions of the Sonoran and Mojave Deserts. The map can support the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Migratory Bird Program’s recovery planning efforts and constitutes the first known binational land cover dataset spanning sections of the United States–Mexico border and using a consistent classification system for both countries. The mapped region includes 152 distinct land cover classes, covering a total area of 38,421,453 ha (148,345 mi 2 ), of which 13,148,345 ha (52,706 mi 2 ) are located in Mexico and 24,770,640 ha (95,639 mi 2 ) in the United States. We primarily used Landsat 8 (OLI) imagery, supplemented by limited ground surveys from two field campaigns, drone-based aerial data, and existing vegetation classification frameworks from both countries. The classification applied a data-fusion approach integrating 30-m Landsat 8 imagery, decadal phenology metrics from vegetation indices, and a random forest model trained mainly with datasets from a comprehensive national mapping project from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) GAP Analysis Project (GAP) and federal wildland fire agencies’ Landscape Fire and Resource Management Planning Tools (LANDFIRE) (GAP/LANDFIRE) [United States side] and the National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI) [Mexico side] as well as land cover maps and opportunistic open-access and field observations. Mapping of the full BCR 33 region was carried out in two phases: 1) Phase I, the prototype map, covered a smaller portion of the transboundary area and identified 31 land cover classes, and 2) Phase II, the full BCR 33 map (refer to Figure 1), which resulted in 152 land cover classes. Using a Random Forest classifier, we achieved an overall prediction accuracy of 92% for the Phase I map and 87% for the Phase II full region map. This slight decrease can be attributed to working on a larger, more complex area with a greater number of land cover classes. No formal validation was conducted, aside from using a subset of the collected field observations and training data to assess model performance during and after training. The training sites were further verified using Google Earth (Google, 2026) imagery. Two undergraduate students who worked for over a year visually inspected imagery and open access public images to confirm each training site during model training using in-house developed, online, visual tools. A portion of this field training data was reserved for model validation, and the corresponding results are to be presented in later sections. The project developed an end-to-end, medium- and fine-resolution remote sensing–based data fusion mapping approach. This effort produced a map (Nagler et al., 2025) and the online tools to support a dynamic, live, online map for visualizing the transboundary vegetation communities in BCR 33. The toolset is currently hosted by the University of Arizona (UofA) Vegetation Index and Phenology (VIP) Lab to support FWS partners (https://vip.arizona.edu/viplab_data_explorer?LCM_BCR33). The online map is designed to allow rapid updates using new training, validation, or correction data, making it dynamic and maintainable. The approach we took established a framework for rapid updating and correction of land cover maps, as the model can be quickly retrained with new field observations, updated training data, or other sources. This enables dynamic mapping and change detection of the region’s vegetation. This framework is an advance in data fusion and crowdsourced mapping of complex, vulnerable regions, providing support to regional stakeholders and the wider user community. This transboundary map can inform the protection, conservation, and restoration of vegetation, habitat, and ecosystems, particularly for threatened and endangered species across the two nations using consistent and harmonized binational mapping systems. Beyond supporting land management decisions and stakeholders in the transboundary desert ecoregions, this BCR 33 mapping effort establishes a foundation for future rapid, low-cost, cross-border land cover mapping that can benefit and advance ecosystem management.

Arizona, Baja California, California, Nevada, Sina↗

USGS2015

Southern Salish Sea Habitat Map Series: Admiralty Inlet

In 2010 the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 initiated the Puget Sound Scientific Studies and Technical Investigations Assistance Program, designed to support research in support of implementing the Puget Sound Action Agenda. The Action Agenda was created in response to Puget Sound having been designated as one of 28 estuaries of national significance under section 320 of the U.S. Clean Water Act, and its overall goal is to restore the Puget Sound Estuary's environment by 2020. The Southern Salish Sea Mapping Project was funded by the Assistance Program request for proposals process, which also supports a large number of coastal-zone- and ocean-management issues. The issues include the recommendations of the Marine Protected Areas Work Group to the Washington State Legislature (Van Cleve and others, 2009), which endorses a Puget Sound and coast-wide marine conservation needs assessment, gap analysis of existing Marine Protected Areas (MPA) and recommendations for action. This publication is the first of four U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigation Maps that make up the Southern Salish Sea Mapping Project. The remaining three map blocks to be published in the future, located south of Admiralty Inlet, are shown in figure 1. Puget Sound is a deep, fjord-type estuary covering an area of 2,330 km 2 in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States (fig. 1). It is connected to the ocean by the Strait of Juan de Fuca, a turbulent passage approximately 160 km in length and 22 km wide at its west end, expanding to over 40 km wide at its east end (Thomson, 1994). During the Pleistocene, the area was occupied several times by lobes of continental ice, resulting in a complex basin-fill of glacial and interglacial deposits that are locally as thick as 1100 m (Johnson and others, 2001). The last glaciation, called the Fraser glaciation, began after 28,800±740 14 C yr B.P. when ice started a slow expansion (Clague, 1981). At peak advance the westward Juan de Fuca lobe reached the edge of the continental shelf through the Juan de Fuca Strait shortly before 14,460±200 14 C yr B.P. (Herzer and Bornhold, 1982). The southward Puget lobe advanced to its terminal position in Puget Sound by around 14,150 14 C yr B.P. (Porter and Swanson, 1998). Ice retreated from its maximum to northern Whidbey Island by 13,650±350 14 C yr B.P. (Dethier and others, 1995). Retreating glaciers resulted in a thick sequence of ice-contact, glacial-marine sediment, and early post-glacial sediments (Linden and Schurrer, 1988). These deposits have experienced the effects of a marine transgression followed by regression, resulting in a sea-level several tens of meters lower than the present day (Linden and Schurrer, 1988). A second transgression brought sea level to about the present level by around 5,470±120 14 C yr B.P. (Clague and others, 1982) establishing the present oceanographic and geologic environment Puget Sound is separated into four interconnected basins; Whidbey, Central (Main), Hood Canal, and South (Thomson, 1994). The Whidbey, Central, and Hood Canal basins are the three main branches of the Puget Sound estuary and are separated from the Strait of Juan de Fuca by a double sill at Admiralty Inlet. The Admiralty Inlet map area includes the Inlet and a portion of the Whidbey Basin (fig. 1). The shallower South Basin is separated by a sill at Tacoma Narrows and is highly branched with numerous finger inlets. Flow within Puget Sound is dominated by tidal currents of as much as 1 m/s at Admiralty Inlet, reducing to approximately 0.5 m/s in the Central Basin (Lavelle and others, 1988). The lack of silt and clay-sized sediments in the Admiralty Inlet map area is likely a result of the strong currents (see Ground-Truth Studies for the Admiralty Inlet Map Area, sheet 3). The subtidal component of flow reaches approximately 0.1 m/s and is driven by density gradients arising from the contrast in salty ocean water at the entrance and freshwater inputs from stream flow (Lavelle and others, 1988). The total freshwater input to Puget Sound is approximately 3.4 x 10 6 m 3 /day, primarily from the Skagit River (Cannon, 1983). The subtidal circulation mostly consists of a two-layered flow in the basins with fresher water exiting at the surface and saltier water entering at depth (Ebbesmeyer and Cannon, 2001). In general, surface waters flow north and deeper waters flow south; variations arise from wind effects that can drive a surface current in the same direction as the wind, and a baroclinic response in the lower layer to about 100-m depth (Matsuura and Cannon, 1997). Oceanographic properties are influenced by temporal forcing parameters such as reduced stream flow during the 2000-01 drought that increased surface salinity and decreased differences between surface and bottom waters (Newton and others, 2003). On offshore seismic-reflection profiles, Pleistocene strata (excluding latest Pleistocene glacial and post-glacial deposits) form a distinct seismic unit, bounded below by pre-Tertiary or Tertiary basement and above by typically flat-lying latest Pleistocene to Holocene deposits that fill in erosional or depositional relief (Johnson and others, 2001). Cores from central Puget Sound have accumulation rates that range from 85 to 1200 mg/cm 2 /yr, or 0.12 to 2.4 cm/yr; the highest accumulation rates are near the southern end of central Puget Sound (Carpenter and others, 1985). Carpenter and others (1985) un-weighted arithmetic mean of accumulation rates for central Puget Sound deeper stations is 480±340 (± one standard deviation) mg/cm 2 /yr. Lavelle and others (1985) also found rates as high as 1200 mg/cm 2 /yr over the past approximately 70 years in cores in the Central Basin off of and north and south of Elliott Bay. Puget Sound basin rates are comparable to rates in midshelf silt deposits on the Washington coast north of the Columbia River (Nittrouer and others, 1979). The deep subtidal (in other words, below SCUBA depths) habitats of Puget Sound are relatively poorly known. A few subtidal surveys exist for several habitat types from the 1960s and 1970s (reviewed in Dethier, 1990), using grab and box core data. The Dethier (1990) review divides habitat up into Coast and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (CMECS) substrate, water column energy, and depth zones but does not attempt to map these habitats, rather it is an inventory of habitats found in the area and the flora and fauna associated with each habitat. The approach of the Southern Salish Sea Mapping project is to create highly detailed seafloor maps through collection, integration, interpretation, and visualization of swath sonar data (the undersea equivalent of satellite remote-sensing data in terrestrial mapping), acoustic backscatter, seafloor video, seafloor photography, and bottom-sediment sampling data. This approach is based in part on methods presented and data collection and product needs identified at the Washington State Seafloor Mapping Workshop (Washington State Seafloor Mapping Workshop Steering Committee, 2008), attended by coastal and marine managers and scientists. The map products display seafloor geomorphology and substrate, and identify potential marine benthic habitats. It is emphasized that the more interpretive habitat and geology maps rely on the integration of multiple, new high-resolution datasets and that mapping at small scales would not be possible without such data. Oceanographic current and wave data is not included in this analysis, however, the accompanying geographic information system (GIS) data set is designed and intended to be combined with oceanographic and biologic data sets assembled by others in the future and some of the GIS data has already been incorporated in the unpublished Nature Conservancy Benthic Habitats of Puget Sound database. This publication includes four map sheets, explanatory text, and a descriptive pamphlet. Each map sheet is published as a portable document format (PDF) file. ESRI ArcGIS compatible geotiffs (for example, bathymetry) and shapefiles (for example video observation points) will be available for download in the data catalog associated with this publication (Cochrane, 2015). An ArcGIS Project File with the symbology used to generate the map sheets is also provided. For those who do not own the full suite of ESRI GIS and mapping software, the data can be read using ESRI ArcReader, a free viewer that is available at http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arcreader/index.html .

Washington↗

USGS2018

California State Waters Map Series — Offshore of Point Conception, California

Introduction In 2007, the California Ocean Protection Council initiated the California Seafloor Mapping Program (CSMP), designed to create a comprehensive seafloor map of high-resolution bathymetry, marine benthic habitats, and geology within the 3-nautical-mile limit of California’s State Waters. The CSMP approach is to create highly detailed seafloor maps through collection, integration, interpretation, and visualization of swath sonar data, acoustic backscatter, seafloor video, seafloor photography, high-resolution seismic-reflection profiles, and bottom-sediment sampling data. The map products display seafloor morphology and character, identify potential marine benthic habitats, and illustrate both the surficial seafloor geology and shallow subsurface geology. The Offshore of Point Conception map area is in the westernmost part of the Western Transverse Ranges geologic province, which is north of the California Continental Borderland. Significant clockwise rotation—at least 90°—since the early Miocene has been proposed for the Western Transverse Ranges province, and this region is presently undergoing north-south shortening. The offshore part of the map area lies south of the stee p south and west flanks of t he Santa Ynez Mountains . The crest of the range , which has a maximum elevation of about 340 m in the map area, lies about 5 km north and east of the arcuate shoreline. The onland part of the coastal zone is remote and sparsely populated. The road to Jalama Beach County Park provides the only public coastal access in the entire map area. North of this county park, the coastal zone is part of Vandenberg Air Force Base. South of Jalama Beach County Park, most of the coastal zone is part of the Cojo-Jalama Ranch, purchased by the Nature Conservancy in December 2017. A relatively small part of the coastal zone in the eastern part of the map area lies within the privately owned Hollister Ranch. The nearest significant commercial centers are Lompoc (population, about 42,000), about 10 km north of the map area, and Goleta (population, about 30,000), about 50 km east of the map area. The Union Pacific railroad tracks run west and northwest along the coast through the entire map area, within a few hundred meters of the shoreline. The map area has a long history of petroleum exploration, and the seafloor notably includes large asphalt mounds and pockmarks that result from petroleum seepage. Several offshore gas and oil fields were discovered, and some were developed, in and on the margin of California’s State Waters. Much of the shoreline in the Offshore of Point Conception map area is characterized by narrow beaches that have thin sediment cover above bedrock platforms, backed by low (10- to 20-m-high) cliffs that are capped by a coastal terrace. Beaches are subject to wave erosion during winter storms, followed by gradual sediment recovery or accretion in the late spring, summer, and fall months during the gentler wave climate. The map area lies in the west-central part of the Santa Barbara littoral cell, which is characterized by west-to-east transport of sediment from Point Arguello on the northwest to Hueneme and Mugu Canyons on the southeast. Sediment supply to the map area is mainly from relatively small coastal watersheds, including the Jalama Creek–Espada Creek drainage basin (about 63 km 2 ), as well as Cañada del Jolloru, Black Canyon, Wood Canyon, Cañada del Cojo, and Barranca Honda. Coastal-watershed discharge and sediment load are highly variable, characterized by brief large events during major winter storms and long periods of low (or no) flow and minimal sediment load between storms. In recent (recorded) history, the majority of high-discharge, high-sediment-flux events have been associated with El Niño phases of the El Niño–Southern Oscillation climatic pattern. Following the coastline, the shelf bends to the north and northwest around Point Conception, and the trend of the shelf break changes from about 298° to 241° azimuth. Shelf width ranges from about 5 km south of Point Conception to about 11 km northwest of it; the slope ranges from about 1.0° to 1.2° to about 0.7° south and northwest of Point Conception, respectively. Southwest of Point Conception, the shelf break and upper slope are incised by a 600-m-wide, 20- to 30-m-deep, south-facing trough, one of five heads of the informally named Arguello submarine canyon. The map area is located at a major biogeographic transition zone between the east-west-trending Santa Barbara Channel region of the Southern California Bight and the northwest-trending central California coast. North of Point Conception, the coast is subjected to high wave exposure from the north, west, and south, as well as consistently strong upwelling that brings cold, nutrient-rich waters to the surface. Southeast of Point Conception, the Santa Barbara Channel is largely protected from strong north swells by Point Conception and from south swells by the Channel Islands; surface waters are warmer, and upwelling is weak and seasonal. Seafloor habitats in the broad Santa Barbara Channel region consist of significant amounts of soft, unconsolidated sediment interspersed with isolated areas of rocky habitat that support kelp-forest communities in the nearshore and rocky-reef communities in deeper water. The potential marine benthic habitat types mapped in the Offshore of Point Conception map area are directly related to its Quaternary geologic history, geomorphology, and active sedimentary processes. These potential habitats lie primarily within the Shelf (continental shelf) but also partly within the Flank (basin flank or continental slope) megahabitats. The fairly homogeneous seafloor of sediment and low-relief bedrock provides characteristic habitat for rockfish, groundfish, crabs, shrimp, and other marine benthic organisms. Several areas of smooth sediment form nearshore terraces that have relatively steep, smooth fronts, which are attractive to groundfish. Below the steep shelf break, soft, unconsolidated sediment is interrupted by the heads of several submarine canyons, gullies, and rills, also good potential habitat for rockfish. The map area includes the large (58.3 km 2 ) Point Conception State Marine Reserve.

California↗

USGS2006

FGDC Digital Cartographic Standard for Geologic Map Symbolization (PostScript Implementation)

PLEASE NOTE: This now-approved 'FGDC Digital Cartographic Standard for Geologic Map Symbolization (PostScript Implementation)' officially supercedes its earlier (2000) Public Review Draft version (see 'Earlier Versions of the Standard' below). In August 2006, the Digital Cartographic Standard for Geologic Map Symbolization was officially endorsed by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) as the national standard for the digital cartographic representation of geologic map features (FGDC Document Number FGDC-STD-013-2006). Presented herein is the PostScript Implementation of the standard, which will enable users to directly apply the symbols in the standard to geologic maps and illustrations prepared in desktop illustration and (or) publishing software. The FGDC Digital Cartographic Standard for Geologic Map Symbolization contains descriptions, examples, cartographic specifications, and notes on usage for a wide variety of symbols that may be used on typical, general-purpose geologic maps and related products such as cross sections. The standard also can be used for different kinds of special-purpose or derivative map products and databases that may be focused on a specific geoscience topic (for example, slope stability) or class of features (for example, a fault map). The standard is scale-independent, meaning that the symbols are appropriate for use with geologic mapping compiled or published at any scale. It will be useful to anyone who either produces or uses geologic map information, whether in analog or digital form. Please be aware that this standard is not intended to be used inflexibly or in a manner that will limit one's ability to communicate the observations and interpretations gained from geologic mapping. In certain situations, a symbol or its usage might need to be modified in order to better represent a particular feature on a geologic map or cross section. This standard allows the use of any symbol that doesn't conflict with others in the standard, provided that it is clearly explained on the map and in the database. In addition, modifying the size, color, and (or) lineweight of an existing symbol to suit the needs of a particular map or output device also is permitted, provided that the modified symbol's appearance is not too similar to another symbol on the map. Be aware, however, that reducing lineweights below .125 mm (.005 inch) may cause symbols to plot incorrectly if output at higher resolutions (1800 dpi or higher). For guidelines on symbol usage, as well as on color design and map labeling, please refer to the standard's introductory text. Also found there are informational sections covering concepts of geologic mapping and some definitions of geologic map features, as well as sections on the newly defined concepts and terminology for the scientific confidence and locational accuracy of geologic map features. More information on both the past development and the future maintenance of the FGDC Digital Cartographic Standard for Geologic Map Symbolization can be found at the FGDC Geologic Data Subcommittee website (http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/fgdc_gds/). Earlier Versions of the Standard

Techniques and Methods↗