Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Surveying and Mapping”

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

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

At least 1,621 records · Page 90Linked to original sources
USGS2013

Geologic map of the east half of the Lime Hills 1:250,000-scale quadrangle, Alaska

This map is compiled from geologic mapping conducted between 1985 and 1992 by the U.S. Geological Survey as part of the Alaska Mineral Resource Assessment Program. That mapping built upon previous USGS work (1963–1988) unraveling the magmatic history of the Alaska–Aleutian Range batholith. Quaternary unit contacts depicted on this map are derived largely from aerial-photograph interpretation. K-Ar ages made prior to this study have been recalculated using 1977 decay constants. The east half of the Lime Hills 1:250,000-scale quadrangle includes part of the Alaska–Aleutian Range batholith and several sequences of sedimentary rocks or mixed sedimentary and volcanic rocks. The Alaska–Aleutian Range batholith contains rocks that represent three major igneous episodes, (1) Early and Middle Jurassic, (2) Late Cretaceous and early Tertiary, and (3) middle Tertiary; only rocks from the latter two episodes are found in this map area. The map area is one of very steep and rugged terrain; elevations range from a little under 1,000 ft (305 m) to 9,828 ft (2,996 m). Foot traverses are generally restricted to lowermost elevations. Areas suitable for helicopter landings can be scarce at higher elevations. Most of the area was mapped from the air, supplemented by direct examination of rocks where possible. This restricted access greatly complicates understanding some of the more complex geologic units. For example, we know there are plutons whose compositions vary from gabbro to granodiorite, but we have little insight as to how these phases are distributed and what their relations might be to each other. It is also possible that some of what we have described as compositionally complex plutons might actually be several distinct intrusions.

Alaska↗
USGS1987

Seismicity map of the state of Florida

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of Florida, even though earthquakes in nearby states or countries may have been felt or may have caused damage in Florida.

Florida↗
USGS1979

Seismicity map of the State of Louisiana

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of Louisiana, even though earthquakes in nearby states or countries may have been felt or may have caused damage in Louisiana. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1983) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted. These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the arabic number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the 1eft of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of all earthquakes at that geographic location. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

Louisiana↗
USGS1987

Seismicity map of the state of Pennsylvania

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of Pennsylvania, even though earthquakes in nearby states may have been felt or may have caused damage in Pennsylvania. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1983) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted. These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the arabic number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the left of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of a11 earthquakes at that geographic location. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

Pennsylvania↗
USGS1985

Seismicity map of the State of Montana

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of Montana, even though earthquakes in bordering states or countries may have been felt or may have caused damage in Montana. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1981) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. No earthquakes with magnitudes greater than 2.5 were located in Montana during 1981. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. Special criteria used in compiling the list of earthquake in the State of Montana include the following: (1) All earthquakes with epicenters along the Montana-Wyoming border with a latitude of 45° N are listed in Montana. (2) Aftershocks of the 1925 and 1935 earthquakes were assigned the same geographic locations as the main shocks. (3) Instrumental epicenters for the 1959 Hebgen Lake earthquake and its aftershocks were 1ocated in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming; only the ones located in Montana are included on this map. All non-instrumental locations were given the location of the main shock with an accuracy code that includes the community reporting the maximum intensity. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted. These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the left of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of all earthquakes at that geographic location. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

Montana↗
USGS1986

Seismicity map of the state of Arizona

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of Arizona, even though earthquakes in nearby states or countries may have been felt or may have caused damage in Arizona. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1982) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. Table 1 includes earthquakes reported felt in Yuma, Arizona that had no corroborating reports from other areas. These events are listed with coordinates (32.7°N., 114.6° W.) near Yuma even though it is suspected that they may have actually occurred in the Imperial Valley, California or Baja California, Mexico. Very few earthquakes have been instrumentally located near Yuma and it is believed that most historical felt reports correspond to earthquakes that occurred in the seismic zone extending from the Gulf of California northward into California. It is known that some earthquakes located graphically from phase data prior to epicenter determinations by electronic computer were erroneously located in southern Arizona and actually had locations in the Gulf of California or northern Mexico. For detailed descriptions of the effects of earthquakes in Arizona see Bulletin 193, Arizona earthquakes, 1776-1980 (reference 343) which lists the localities where the earthquakes were felt and the effects at each place. This publication also includes isoseismal maps for 41 events. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted. These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the arabic number to the right of the triangle. The Roman numeral to the left of the triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of al 1 earthquakes with epicenters at that geographic location. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

Arizona↗
USGS1987

Seismicity map of the state of Indiana

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of Indiana, even though earthquakes in nearby states may have been felt or may have caused damage in Indiana. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1983) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted. These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the arabic number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the left of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of all earthquakes at that geographic location. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

Indiana↗
USGS1987

Seismicity map of the state of Ohio

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of Ohio, even though earthquakes in nearby states or countries may have been felt or may have caused damage in Ohio. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1983) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted . These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the arabic number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the left of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of all earthquakes at that geographic location. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

Ohio↗
USGS1987

Seismicity map of the state of North Carolina

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of North Carolina, even though earthquakes in nearby states may have been felt or may have caused damage in North Carolina. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1983) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted. These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the arabic number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the left of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of a11 earthquakes at that geographic location. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

North Carolina↗
USGS1988

Seismicity map of the state of New Mexico

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of New Mexico, even though earthquakes in nearby states or countries may have been felt or may have caused damage in New Mexico. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1983) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used.

New Mexico↗
USGS1963

Niobium and tantalum in the United States, exclusive of Alaska and Hawaii

The accompanying map shows the location of the principal known deposits of niobium and tantalum minerals in the United States, exclusive of Alaska and Hawaii. Symbols of different shapes are used to depict deposits of different geologic types, and large symbols denote deposits with a record of production. Small symbols denote known occurrences of the minerals. Individual symbols may represent districts or groups of deposits too closely spaced to permit them to be distinguished separately because of scale limitations. Some districts or areas of widespread occurrences are shown by a shaded pattern. The deposits are numbered by states on the map and identified by number in the index, which also gives the geographic coordinates of the deposits, brief geologic descriptions, and references to the principal published reports if such exist. Both published information and unpublished data gathered by the U. S. Geological Survey were used in preparing the map and text.

Mineral Investigations Resource Map↗
USGS2024

2023-2024 Coastal sage scrub and chaparral community monitoring for western San Diego County

Western San Diego County is dominated by shrublands supporting biologically diverse native plant and animal communities. Widespread urbanization has led to regional habitat loss and fragmentation, and many species in these shrubland communities are rare, threatened, or endangered. Large-scale, multiple-species conservation planning has resulted in a regional preserve system that focuses on these shrubland communities. Several large-scale threats are leading to type conversion from shrub-dominated to non-native invasive annual grass-dominated vegetation. To understand the changes that are occurring to native shrublands, we have developed a vegetation monitoring program with several components at multiple spatial scales, focused on quantifying coastal sage scrub (CSS) and chaparral vegetation community characteristics. Several drivers of change associated with type conversion of native shrubland to non-native annual grassland have been identified by previous research including increasing fire frequency, nitrogen deposition from air pollution, and prolonged and intense drought associated with changing climate. Loss of ecological integrity indices have been proposed as useful measures of the threat of degradation and type conversion of shrublands in San Diego County. For this study, ecological integrity is defined as a system’s ability to maintain species’ relationships and functions comparable to natural habitat in the region. Previous studies have identified the percent cover of invasive non-native annual grasses as a proxy for overall ecological degradation (loss of integrity) that is consistent across native taxonomic groups. Increased cover of non-native grass is associated with lower integrity of the shrubland vegetation community as shrub-associated plant and animal species are replaced by species preferring grassy and disturbed habitats. The objectives of this CSS and chaparral vegetation community monitoring plan are to: 1) Determine the distribution, composition, structure, and integrity of CSS and chaparral vegetation communities on conserved lands in western San Diego County, 2) Identify whether these attributes of the vegetation communities are changing over time, and 3) Evaluate relationships of known drivers of change (threats) and environmental factors in association with changes in vegetation community attributes. The CSS and chaparral vegetation community monitoring program is divided into four components: 1) vegetation mapping, 2) GIS/remote sensing office analysis of landscape-scale data, 3) permanent field plots using Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) and field data collections, and 4) animal and target species surveys and rapid assessment protocols. The first component, which is not detailed in this vegetation monitoring plan, aims to map vegetation communities every 10-15 years based on a classification developed for western San Diego County. High resolution aerial imagery will be used to update the 2012 vegetation map and expand it across the entire study area. The second component uses remote sensing models to annually track ecological integrity of shrublands across the study area and will include a map of areas of change and areas of stability over several decades. These landscape-scale integrity classifications will be used to analyze ecological processes, threats, and abiotic factors relative to changes to shrubland ecological integrity over time and space. The third component includes field surveys of 100 permanent plots across areas historically mapped as shrublands. Surveys in the 1930s mapped vegetation types using plot data. By using this historical classification map, we included areas that have already type-converted from shrubland to non-native annual grassland. The plots were split between CSS (55 plots) and chaparral (45 plots) and stratified into four geographical eco-subregions to guarantee coverage over small patches of habitat along the heavily developed coast. Surveys will include the collection of UAS imagery at a very high resolution. Species-level identifications will be made from the imagery based on a plant list compiled of all species detected in the plot during a thorough field survey by botanists, combined with geo-referenced samples of plant species locations. In addition, herbaceous cover will be estimated in the field using nine 1-m diameter circles (one per subplot) to obtain ocular estimates of cover for each plant species within the circle frame. Soil samples will be collected and analyzed for important element compositions. These data will be analyzed to evaluate plot-level ecological integrity based on species composition and cover. Repeated monitoring will allow evaluation of changes in vegetation attributes over time with known drivers or threats and other environmental factors. In addition, analyses will focus on indicator species and various measures of biological diversity for the vegetation communities. Finally, animal species and rare plants will be assessed using either taxa-based rapid assessment protocols or specialized species-specific protocols for rarer species. The purpose of these assessments is to document the status, habitat, and threat covariates of specific species and confirm the species composition and diversity of animal taxonomic groups (e.g., pollinators). Diversity and abundance of animal species at vegetation plots will be used to refine measures and thresholds of ecological integrity. Rapid assessment protocols for animal taxonomic groups can include multiple detection methods such as, camera traps, cover boards, and bird point counts. Pollinators will be monitored at plots using a protocol currently being developed in conjunction with but separately from this plan. Target rare plant species will be monitored using the regional Inspect and Manage (IMG) protocol that measures the status of rare plant occurrences and habitat and threat covariates over time. Species-specific animal survey methods will be refined as these species are prioritized for future monitoring. The goal of this monitoring program is to classify CSS and chaparral vegetation community integrity, identify areas of degradation across western San Diego County, and characterize drivers, and environmental factors associated with loss of ecological integrity. A combination of vegetation mapping, landscape-scale remote sensing, and field plots will be used to address all the aspects of our research questions. Data compiled and collected will be available to conservation partners to help inform future management decisions.

California↗
USGS2008

An Integrated Hydrogeologic and Geophysical Investigation to Characterize the Hydrostratigraphy of the Edwards Aquifer in an Area of Northeastern Bexar County, Texas

In August 2007, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the San Antonio Water System, did a hydrogeologic and geophysical investigation to characterize the hydrostratigraphy (hydrostratigraphic zones) and also the hydrogeologic features (karst features such as sinkholes and caves) of the Edwards aquifer in a 16-square-kilometer area of northeastern Bexar County, Texas, undergoing urban development. Existing hydrostratigraphic information, enhanced by local-scale geologic mapping in the area, and surface geophysics were used to associate ranges of electrical resistivities obtained from capacitively coupled (CC) resistivity surveys, frequency-domain electromagnetic (FDEM) surveys, time-domain electromagnetic (TDEM) soundings, and two-dimensional direct-current (2D-DC) resistivity surveys with each of seven hydrostratigraphic zones (equivalent to members of the Kainer and Person Formations) of the Edwards aquifer. The principal finding of this investigation is the relation between electrical resistivity and the contacts between the hydrostratigraphic zones of the Edwards aquifer and the underlying Trinity aquifer in the area. In general, the TDEM data indicate a two-layer model in which an electrical conductor underlies an electrical resistor, which is consistent with the Trinity aquifer (conductor) underlying the Edwards aquifer (resistor). TDEM data also show the plane of Bat Cave fault, a well-known fault in the area, to be associated with a local, nearly vertical zone of low resistivity that provides evidence, although not definitive, for Bat Cave fault functioning as a flow barrier, at least locally. In general, the CC resistivity, FDEM survey, and 2D-DC resistivity survey data show a sharp electrical contrast from north to south, changing from high resistivity to low resistivity across Bat Cave fault as well as possible karst features in the study area. Interpreted karst features that show relatively low resistivity within a relatively high-resistivity area likely are attributable to clay or soil filling a sinkhole. In general, faults are inferred where lithologic incongruity indicates possible displacement. Along most inferred faults, displacement was not sufficient to place different members of the Kainer or Person Formations (hydrostratigraphic zones) adjacent across the inferred fault plane. In general, the Kainer Formation (hydrostratigraphic zones V through VIII) has a higher resistivity than the Person Formation (hydrostratigraphic zones II through IV). Although resistivity variations from the CC resistivity, FDEM, and 2D-DC resistivity surveys, with mapping information, were sufficient to allow surface mapping of the lateral extent of hydrostratigraphic zones in places, resistivity variations from TDEM data were not sufficient to allow vertical delineation of hydrostratigraphic zones; however, the Edwards aquifer-Trinity aquifer contact could be identified from the TDEM data.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS1981

New maps of Federal coal

Compilation and analysis of publicly available data on Federal coal are resulting in voluminous map sets showing coal isopachs, structure contours, and overburden isopachs on each known minable coal bed. As of the spring of 1981, there are available from the U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Services Section in Denver map sets at 1:24,000 scale or microfiche sets covering approximately 470 of the ultimately 1,400 quadrangles in the program. Because Congress in 1976 mandated the prompt “inventorying” of all unleased Federal coal for Government land-use planning, and because dollars but not employee positions were provided for the work, the U.S. Geological Survey was obliged to contract for the compilations. A typical map set has a short text and about 20 plates, including a data sheet; a Federal mineral ownership map; and correlation charts. For each coal bed, there are isopachs, structure contours, stripping limits, and mining ratios extending as far as the data will permit, regardless of coal ownership. Reserve base tonnages and relative development potentials are calculated, but only for unleased Federal coal areas. Termed “minable” are coal beds at least 1.524 m (5 ft) thick and less than 914.4 m (3,000 ft) deep. For conventional underground mining methods, beds dipping more than 15° are excluded; also excluded are all but 3.66 m (12 ft) of thick beds. For in situ conversion methods, the minimum dip is 15° except for the deep thick beds in the Powder River Basin. Arbitrary parameters classify the development potential of each unleased 16.19-hectare (40-acre) tract as high, moderate, low, unknown, or negative. The former Secretary of the Interior announced his intention to restrict leasing in general to tracts classified as having high to moderate potential for development. Many geologists will find these systematic map compilations to be useful bases for adding new data points and making their own interpretations, correlations, extrapolations, and reserve estimates.

Geological Society of America Bulletin↗
USGS1990

U.S. Geological Survey DLG-3 and Bureau of the Census TIGER data. Development and GIS applications

The U.S. Geological Survey has been actively developing digital cartographic and geographic data and standards since the early 1970's. One product is Digital Line Graph data, which offer a consistently accurate source of base category geographic information. The Bureau of the Census has combined their Dual Independent Map Encoding data with the Geological Survey's 1:100,000-scale Digital Line Graph data to prepare for the 1990 decennial census. The resulting Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing data offer a wealth of information. A major area of research using these data is in transportation analysis. The attributes associated with Digital Line Graphs can be used to determine the average travel times along each segment. Geographic information system functions can then be used to optimize routes through the network and to generate street name lists. Additional aspects of the subject are discussed.

Conference Paper↗
USGS1985

US GeoData: Digital cartographic and geographic data

The increasing use of computers for storing and analyzing earth science information has sparked a growth in the demand for various types of cartographic data in digital form. The production of map data in computerized form is called digital cartography, and it involves the collection, storage, processing, analysis, and display of map data with the aid of computers. The U.S. Geological Survey, the Nation's largest earth science research agency, has expanded its national mapping program to incorporate operations associated with digital cartography, including the collection of planimetric, elevation, and geographic names information in digital form. This digital information is available for use in meeting the multipurpose needs and applications of the map user community.

General Information Product↗