The land area of Edwards, MS was 2 in 2014.
Land Area
Water Area
Land area is a measurement providing the size, in square miles, of the land portions of geographic entities for which the Census Bureau tabulates and disseminates data. Area is calculated from the specific boundary recorded for each entity in the Census Bureau's geographic database. Land area is based on current information in the TIGER® data base, calculated for use with Census 2010.
Water Area figures include inland, coastal, Great Lakes, and territorial sea water. Inland water consists of any lake, reservoir, pond, or similar body of water that is recorded in the Census Bureau's geographic database. It also includes any river, creek, canal, stream, or similar feature that is recorded in that database as a two- dimensional feature (rather than as a single line). The portions of the oceans and related large embayments (such as Chesapeake Bay and Puget Sound), the Gulf of Mexico, and the Caribbean Sea that belong to the United States and its territories are classified as coastal and territorial waters; the Great Lakes are treated as a separate water entity. Rivers and bays that empty into these bodies of water are treated as inland water from the point beyond which they are narrower than 1 nautical mile across. Identification of land and inland, coastal, territorial, and Great Lakes waters is for data presentation purposes only and does not necessarily reflect their legal definitions.
Above charts are based on data from the U.S. Census American Community Survey | ODN Dataset | API -
Geographic and Area Datasets Involving Edwards, MS
- API
DWR Dam Safety Jurisdictional Dam
data.colorado.gov | Last Updated 2024-10-28T06:04:24.000ZA Jurisdictional Dam is a dam creating a reservoir with a capacity of more than 100 acre-feet, or creates a reservoir with a surface area in excess of 20 acres at the high-water line, or exceeds 10 feet in height measured vertically from the elevation of the lowest point of the natural surface of the ground where that point occurs along the longitudinal centerline of the dam up to the crest of the emergency spillway of the dam. For reservoirs created by excavation, or where the invert of the outlet conduit is placed below the surface of the natural ground at its lowest point beneath the dam, the jurisdictional height shall be measured from the invert of the outlet at the longitudinal centerline of the embankment or from the bottom of the excavation at the longitudinal centerline of the dam, whichever is greatest. Jurisdictional height is defined in Rule 4.2.19. The State Engineer shall have final authority over determination of the jurisdictional height of the dam.
- API
Oil and Gas Annual Production: Beginning 2001
data.ny.gov | Last Updated 2024-04-30T19:06:49.000ZThis dataset contains annual production information of oil and gas wells in New York State from 2001 to present.
- API
Surface Drinking Water Importance - Forests on the Edge_data
opendata.utah.gov | Last Updated 2024-04-10T19:40:35.000ZAmerica’s private forests provide a vast array of public goods and services, including abundant, clean surface water. Forest loss and development can affect water quality and quantity when forests are removed and impervious surfaces, such as paved roads, spread across the landscape. We rank watersheds across the conterminous United States according to the contributions of private forest land to surface drinking water and by threats to surface water from increased housing density. Private forest land contributions to drinking water are greatest in the East but are also important in Western watersheds. Development pressures on these contributions are concentrated in the Eastern United States but are also found in the North-Central region, parts of the West and Southwest, and the Pacific Northwest; nationwide, more than 55 million acres of rural private forest land are projected to experience a substantial increase in housing density from 2000 to 2030. Planners, communities, and private landowners can use a range of strategies to maintain freshwater ecosystems, including designing housing and roads to minimize impacts on water quality, managing home sites to protect water resources, and using payment schemes and management partnerships to invest in forest stewardship on public and private lands.This data is based on the digital hydrologic unit boundary layer to the Subwatershed (12-digit) 6th level for the continental United States. To focus this analysis on watersheds with private forests, only watersheds with at least 10% forested land and more than 50 acres of private forest were analyzed. All other watersheds were labeled “Insufficient private forest for this analysis"and coded -99999 in the data table. This dataset updates forest and development statistics reported in the the 2011 Forests to Faucet analysis using 2006 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, Grid Values=41,42,43,95. and Theobald, Dr. David M. 10 March 2008. bhc2000 and bhc2030 (Housing density for the coterminous US in 2000 and 2030, respectively.) Field Descriptions:HUC_12: Twelve Digit Hydrologic Unit Code: This field provides a unique 12-digit code for each subwatershed.HU_12_DS: Sixth Level Downstream Hydrologic Unit Code: This field was populated with the 12-digit code of the 6th level hydrologic unit that is receiving the majority of the flow from the subwatershed.IMP1: Index of surface drinking water importance (Appendix Map). This field is from the 2011 Forests to Faucet analysis and has not been updated for this analysis.HDCHG_AC: Acres of housing density change on private forest in the subwatershed. HDCHG_PER: Percent of the watershed to experience housing density change on private forest. IMP_HD_PFOR: Index Private Forest importance to Surface Drinking Water with Development Pressure - identifies private forested areas important for surface drinking water that are likely to be affected by future increases in housing density, Ptle_IMP_HD: Private Forest importance to Surface Drinking Water with Development Pressure (Figure 7), percentile. Ptle_HDCHG: Percentage of each subwatershed to Experience an increase in House Density in Private Forest (Figure 6), percentile. FOR_AC: Acres forest (2006) in the subwatershed. PFOR_AC: Acres private forest (2006) in the subwatershed. PFOR_PER: Percent of the subwatershed that is private forest. HU12_AC: Acreage of the subwatershedFOR_PER: Percent of the subwatershed that is forest. PFOR_IMP: Index of Private Forest Importance to Surface Drinking Water. .Ptle_PFIMP: Private forest importance to surface drinking water(Figure 4), percentile. TOP100: Top 100 subwatersheds. 50 from the East, 50 from the west (using the Mississippi River as the divide.) (Figure 8)TOP50EW: 1 = EAST; 2=WESTPoint of Contact: Rebecca Lilja GIS SpecialistForest ServiceNortheastern Area State and Private Forestryp: 603-868-7627 c: 603-953-4307 rlilja@fs.fed.us271 Mast Rd Durham, NH 03824
- API
Land Use_data
opendata.utah.gov | Last Updated 2024-04-10T19:40:16.000ZThis dataset combines the work of several different projects to create a seamless data set for the contiguous United States. Data from four regional Gap Analysis Projects and the LANDFIRE project were combined to make this dataset. In the Northwestern United States (Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Washington and Wyoming) data in this map came from the Northwest Gap Analysis Project. In the Southwestern United States (Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah) data used in this map came from the Southwest Gap Analysis Project. The data for Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Virginia came from the Southeast Gap Analysis Project and the California data was generated by the updated California Gap land cover project. The Hawaii Gap Analysis project provided the data for Hawaii. In areas of the county (central U.S., Northeast, Alaska) that have not yet been covered by a regional Gap Analysis Project, data from the Landfire project was used. Similarities in the methods used by these projects made possible the combining of the data they derived into one seamless coverage. They all used multi-season satellite imagery (Landsat ETM+) from 1999-2001 in conjunction with digital elevation model (DEM) derived datasets (e.g. elevation, landform) to model natural and semi-natural vegetation. Vegetation classes were drawn from NatureServe’s Ecological System Classification (Comer et al. 2003) or classes developed by the Hawaii Gap project. Additionally, all of the projects included land use classes that were employed to describe areas where natural vegetation has been altered. In many areas of the country these classes were derived from the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD). For the majority of classes and, in most areas of the country, a decision tree classifier was used to discriminate ecological system types. In some areas of the country, more manual techniques were used to discriminate small patch systems and systems not distinguishable through topography. The data contains multiple levels of thematic detail. At the most detailed level natural vegetation is represented by NatureServe’s Ecological System classification (or in Hawaii the Hawaii GAP classification). These most detailed classifications have been crosswalked to the five highest levels of the National Vegetation Classification (NVC), Class, Subclass, Formation, Division and Macrogroup. This crosswalk allows users to display and analyze the data at different levels of thematic resolution. Developed areas, or areas dominated by introduced species, timber harvest, or water are represented by other classes, collectively refered to as land use classes; these land use classes occur at each of the thematic levels. Six layer files are included in the download packages to assist the user in displaying the data at each of the Thematic levels in ArcGIS.
- API
Oil, Gas, & Other Regulated Wells: Beginning 1860
data.ny.gov | Last Updated 2024-10-28T09:10:16.000ZInformation on oil, gas, storage, solution salt, stratigraphic, and geothermal wells in New York State
- API
Liquefaction zones (HESS)
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2023-06-09T23:59:16.000ZLiquefaction zones for development of the Parcel Inventory dataset for the Housing Element Site Selection (HESS) Pre-Screening Tool. This feature set is a subset of the complete feature set for the San Francisco Bay Region. It only provides features for areas at either High or Very High susceptibility to liquefaction. The features delineate different types and ages of Quaternary deposits for the region and their susceptibility to liquefaction. The data provides a framework for the architecture and history of the Quaternary sedimentary basins, which is used in estimating earthquake shaking. **This data set represents the entire San Francisco Bay Region by combining both Open-File Report 00-444 and Open-File Report 2006-1037 data. The area covered by Open-File Report 2006-1037 was erased from Open-File Report 00-444 and the two data sets were merged. A column has been added to the attribute table to label which report each polygon was originally from. Other than this supplemental information paragraph, all the metadata is from Open-File Report 2006-1037.** This report presents a map and database of Quaternary deposits and liquefaction susceptibility for the urban core of the San Francisco Bay region. It supercedes the equivalent area of U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-444 (Knudsen and others, 2000), which covers the larger nine-county San Francisco Bay region. The report consists of (1) a spatial database, (2) two small-scale colored maps (Quaternary deposits and liquefaction susceptibility), (3) a text describing the Quaternary map and liquefaction interpretation (part 3), and (4) a text introducing the report and describing the database (part 1). All parts of the report are digital; part 1 describes the database and digital files and how to obtain them by downloading across the internet. The nine counties surrounding San Francisco Bay straddle the San Andreas fault system, which exposes the region to serious earthquake hazard (Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 1999). Much of the land adjacent to the Bay and the major rivers and streams is underlain by unconsolidated deposits that are particularly vulnerable to earthquake shaking and liquefaction of water-saturated granular sediment. This new map provides a consistent detailed treatment of the central part of the 9-county region in which much of the mapping of Open-File Report 00-444 was either at smaller (less detailed) scale or represented only preliminary revision of earlier work. Like Open-File Report 00-444, the current mapping uses geomorphic expression, pedogenic soils, inferred depositional environments, and geologic age to define and distinguish the map units. Further scrutiny of the factors controlling liquefaction susceptibility has led to some changes relative to Open-File Report 00-444: particularly the reclassification of San Francisco Bay mud (Qhbm) to have only MODERATE susceptibility and the rating of artificial fills according to the Quaternary map units inferred to underlie them (other than dams ? adf). The two colored maps provide a regional summary of the new mapping at a scale of 1:200,000, a scale that is sufficient to show the general distribution and relationships of the map units but not to distinguish the more detailed elements that are present in the database. The report is the product of cooperative work by the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) and National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program of the U.S. Geological Survey, William Lettis & Associates, Inc. (WLA), and the California Geological Survey. An earlier version was submitted to the U.S. Geological Survey by WLA as a final report for a NEHRP grant (Witter and others, 2005). The mapping has been carried out by WLA geologists under contract to the NEHRP Earthquake Program (Grant 99-HQ-GR-0095) and by the California Geological Survey. The original reports and data are available at Open-File Report 2006-1037 (https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/