Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>The purpose of this dataset is to provide a cartographic representation of the facility locations stored in the ADEQ Facility and Permit Summary Permit Data System (PDS).</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><P><SPAN>The National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) is a feature-based database that interconnects and uniquely identifies the stream segments or reaches that make up the nation's surface water drainage system. NHD data was originally developed at 1:100,000-scale and exists at that scale for the whole country. This high-resolution NHD, generally developed at 1:24,000/1:12,000 scale, adds detail to the original 1:100,000-scale NHD. (Data for Alaska, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands was developed at high-resolution, not 1:100,000 scale.) Local resolution NHD is being developed where partners and data exist. The NHD contains reach codes for networked features, flow direction, names, and centerline representations for areal water bodies. Reaches are also defined on waterbodies and the approximate shorelines of the Great Lakes, the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and the Gulf of Mexico. The NHD also incorporates the National Spatial Data Infrastructure framework criteria established by the Federal Geographic Data Committee.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><P STYLE="font-size:16ptmargin:7 0 7 0;"><SPAN>This data includes streams of Arkansas that have been designated as Ecologically Sensitive Waterbodies, as indicated by Regulation No. 2 adopted by the Arkansas Pollution Control And Ecology Commission. It consists of a subset of the stream segments from the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) Medium Resolution (1:100,000) Flowline. This dataset originated from the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission (ANHC).</SPAN></P><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN /></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><P><SPAN>The National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) is a feature-based database that interconnects and uniquely identifies the stream segments or reaches that make up the nation's surface water drainage system. NHD data was originally developed at 1:100,000-scale and exists at that scale for the whole country. This high-resolution NHD, generally developed at 1:24,000/1:12,000 scale, adds detail to the original 1:100,000-scale NHD. (Data for Alaska, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands was developed at high-resolution, not 1:100,000 scale.) Local resolution NHD is being developed where partners and data exist. The NHD contains reach codes for networked features, flow direction, names, and centerline representations for areal water bodies. Reaches are also defined on waterbodies and the approximate shorelines of the Great Lakes, the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and the Gulf of Mexico. The NHD also incorporates the National Spatial Data Infrastructure framework criteria established by the Federal Geographic Data Committee.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
Description: This data includes segments of Arkansas streams that have been designated as Trout Waters, as indicated by Regulation No. 2 of the Arkansas Pollution Control And Ecology Commission. It consists of a subset of the stream segments from the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) Medium Resolution (1:100,000) Flowline.
Copyright Text: Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality
Description: This data includes segments of Arkansas streams that have been designated for Use Attainability Analysis, as indicated by Regulation No. 2 of the Arkansas Pollution Control And Ecology Commission. It consists of a subset of the stream segments from the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) Medium Resolution (1:100,000) Flowline.
Copyright Text: Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality
Description: The Nature Conservancy’s vision is to conserve portfolios of functional conservation areas within and across ecoregions. Through this portfolio approach, we will work with partners to conserve a full array of ecosystems and viable native species . An ecoregional portfolio, the end product of ecoregional planning, is a selected set of places that represents the full distribution and diversity of native species, natural communities and ecosystems in an ecoregion. Designing ecoregion-based portfolios is a complex, iterative process based on five steps: * Identifying the species, communities and ecosystems in an ecoregion; * Setting specific goals for the number and distribution of these conservation targets to be captured in the portfolio; * Assembling information and relevant data on the location and quality of conservation targets; * Designing a network of conservation areas that most effectively meets the goals; and * Identifying the highest priority conservation areas, wide-ranging targets and pervasive threats for conservation action.
Description: Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and quantity of environmental resources. They are designed to serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, management, and monitoring of ecosystems and ecosystem components. By recognizing the spatial differences in the capacities and potentials of ecosystems, ecoregions stratify the environment by its probable response to disturbance (Bryce, Omernik, and Larsen, 1999). Ecoregions are general purpose regions that are critical for structuring and implementing ecosystem management strategies across federal agencies, state agencies, and nongovernment organizations that are responsible for different types of resources in the same geographical areas (Omernik and others, 2000). A Roman numeral hierarchical scheme has been adopted for different levels of ecological regions. Level I is the coarsest level, dividing North America into 15 ecological regions. Level II divides the continent into 52 regions (Commission for Environmental Cooperation Working Group, 1997). At level III, the continental United States contains 104 ecoregions and the conterminous United States has 84 ecoregions (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [USEPA], 2003). Level IV ecoregions are further subdivisions of level III ecoregions. Methods used to define the USEPA's ecoregions are explained in Omernik (1995), Omernik and others (2000), and Gallant and others (1989). The approach used to compile the ecoregions of Arkansas is based on the premise that ecological regions can be identified through the analysis of the spatial patterns and the composition of biotic and abiotic characteristics that affect or reflect differences in ecosystem quality and integrity (Wiken, 1986; Omernik, 1987, 1995). These characteristics include geology, physiography, climate, soils, land use, wildlife, fish, hydrology, and vegetation (including "potential natural vegetation" defined by Küchler (p. 2, 1964) as "vegetation that would exist today" if human influence ended and "the resulting plant succession" was "telescoped into a single moment"). The relative importance of each characteristic varies from one ecological region to another regardless of ecoregion hierarchical level. In Arkansas, there are 7 level III ecoregions and 32 level IV ecoregions; all but four of these level IV ecoregions are also found in ecologically similar parts of adjacent states (Chapman and others, 2002, 2004a, 2004b; Griffith, Omernik, and Azevedo, 1998). Arkansas' ecological diversity is strongly related to regional physiography, geology, soil, climate, and land use. Elevated karst plateaus, folded mountains, agricultural valleys, forested uplands, and bottomland forests occur. Fire-maintained prairie was once extensive in several parts of the state. The ecoregion were compiled at a scale of 1:250,000, and depict revisions and subdivisions of earlier level III ecoregions that were originally compiled at a smaller scale (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003; Omernik, 1987). It is part of a collaborative project primarily between USEPA Region 6, USEPA-National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory (Corvallis, Oregon), and the Multi-Agency Wetland Planning Team (MAWPT), which comprises representatives of six Arkansas state agencies (Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission, Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation Commission, Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality, Arkansas Forestry Commission, and University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service). Collaboration and consultation also occurred with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), U.S. Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, USGS-Earth Resources Observation Systems Data Center, and University of Arkansas-Center for Advanced Spatial Technologies. This project is associated with an interagency effort to develop a common framework of ecological regions (McMahon and others, 2001). Reaching that objective requires recognition of the differences in the conceptual approaches and mapping methodologies applied to develop the most common ecoregion-type frameworks, including those developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture-Forest Service (Bailey and others, 1994), the USEPA (Omernik 1987, 1995), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture-Soil Conservation Service (1981). As each of these frameworks is further refined, their differences are becoming less discernible. Each collaborative ecoregion project, such as this one in Arkansas, is a step toward attaining consensus and consistency in ecoregion frameworks for the entire nation. Comments and questions regarding the Level III and IV Ecoregions of Arkansas should be addressed to Alan Woods, Oregon State University, c/o US EPA., 200 SW 35th Street, Corvallis, OR 97333, (541) 754-4469, email: woods.alan@epa.gov, or to James Omernik, USGS, c/o US EPA, 200 SW 35th Street, Corvallis, OR 97333, (541) 754-4458, email: omernik.james@epa.gov
Description: Approximate bounding areas pertaining to the engineering and institutional controls of properties regulated by the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality.
Copyright Text: Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality
Description: Bounding polygons representing the scope of individual inspection districts for Air Division within the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality. Updated 5 March 2013.
Copyright Text: Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality
Description: Bounding polygons representing the scope of individual inspection districts for RST (Regulated Storage Tanks) Division within the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality.
Copyright Text: Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality
Description: Bounding polygons representing the scope of individual inspection districts for Solid Waste Division within the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality. Updated 5 March 2013.
Copyright Text: Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Data available online through GeoStor at http://www.geostor.arkansas.gov. AHTD County Boundaries for year end 2000 information. This file contains location information for County Boundaries in the state of Arkansas. These locations were extracted from the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department county mapping files for the year 2000.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department
Description: Data available online through GeoStor at http://www.geostor.arkansas.gov. This layer illustrates Major Land Resource Area (MLRA) boundaries for the State of Arkansas.
Copyright Text: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Description: Nutrient Surplus Areas as defined by the Arkansas 84th General Assembly and modified by the 85th General Assembly. These were delineated by using the12 digit HUCs as described by the Arkansas Natural Resources Conservation Service State Office (NRCS) as the South and East borders, with the state line being the North and West border. These were then classified using the 8 digit numbers for management purposes.
Description: This layer is the Ozark-St. Francis National Forest Special Interest Area polygons. The Ozark - St. Francis National Forests have 21 Special Interest Areas (SIA) totaling approximately 23,243 acres. SIAs are managed for their unique goelogical, botanical, biological, zoological, scenic, or cultural features. These features are unique enough that they ae not found in loarge areas anywhere on the Forests, or they provide the best representation of similar areas on the Forests. These areas are designated as SIAs because of their unique features, complexity, and degree of interest. They are managed for their unique recreational and educational values, and are intended for public use and interpretation.
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><P><SPAN>This data includes springs and seeps of Arkansas that have been designated as Ecologically Sensitive Waterbodies, as indicated by Regulation No. 2 adopted by the Arkansas Pollution Control And Ecology Commission. It consists of a subset of the stream segments from the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) Medium Resolution (1:100,000) Flowline. This dataset originated from the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission (ANHC).</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
Description: This data includes lakes of Arkansas that have been designated as Trout Waters, as indicated by Regulation No. 2 of the Arkansas Pollution Control And Ecology Commission. It consists of a subset of the stream segments from the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) Medium Resolution (1:100,000) Flowline.
Copyright Text: Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality
Description: The data describes the Wildlife Management features of Wildlife Management Areas. These areas are managed specifically with a management principle in mind.
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><P><SPAN>A set of Points that displays AGFC Pysical Points on a state wide basis. For example: gates, pipes, cables, POIs or other features that were best represented by a point.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: Mike Jezierski, Scott Lane, Tracy Moy, AGFC Field staff.
Description: This dataset contains information utilized by the Arkansas Department of Parks & Tourism and the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission. The completeness and accuracy of data is based on resources available at the time of production. All data is subject to updates, revisions and modifications without notice.
Copyright Text: Darin Mitchell, GISP Senior GIS Analyst - Arkansas State Parks Michael Conway GIS/Database Analyst Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission
Description: Potential Natural Vegetation (PNV) mapping: PROVIDES DETAILED MAPS TO GUIDE RESTORATION OF A HIGHLY ALTERED LANDSCAPE, THE MAPS REFLECT THE EXISTING HYDROLOGIC ENVIRONMENT, PARTICULARLY THE EFFECTS OF THE WORLD’S LARGEST AND MOST COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD CONTROL EFFORT, THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES PROJECT, THESE RESTORATION TEMPLATES CAN BE USED IN A GIS ENVIRONMENT TO INVESTIGATE A WIDE RANGE OF SCENARIOS, INCLUDING LANDSCAPE-SCALE PLANNING AS WELL AS HIGHLY SITE-SPECIFIC RESTORATION DESIGN, THE HYDROGEOMORPHIC (HGM) CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM IS INCORPORATED IN THE PROCESS SO THAT THE MAPS REFLECT ECOSYSTEM FUNCTION AS WELL AS TRADITIONAL COMMUNITY COMPOSITION AND STRUCTURE. The HGM approach was used in the creation of this data.Section 404 of the Clean Water Act directs the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to administer a regulatory program for permitting the discharge of dredged or fill material in “waters of the United States.” As part of the permit review process, the impact of discharging dredged or fill material on wetland functions must be assessed. In 1996, a National Action Plan to implement the Hydrogeomorphic Approach for developing Regional Guidebooks to assess wetland functions was published. The Hydrogeomorphic Approach is a collection of concepts and methods for developing functional indices and subsequently using them to assess the capacity of a wetland to perform functions relative to similar wetlands in a region. This report, one of a series of Regional Guidebooks that will be published in accordance with the National Action Plan, applies the Hydrogeomorphic Approach to wetland and riparian forests in the Arkansas Valley Region of Arkansas in a planning and ecosystem restoration context.
Copyright Text: Tom Foti ANHC, ANHC, AGFC, Arkansas State Multi-Agency Wetlands Planning Team (MAWPT), USACE, Archeological Assessments, Inc. (AAI), Nashville, Arkansas, Center for Advanced Spatial Technology (CAST) at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Jennifer Sheehan (AGFC) and Malcom Williamson (CAST). William Isenberger and W. J. Bennett, Jr., both of AAI, Charles Klimas, acting as an independent consultant, and Mark Phillips, i-Maps, located in Springfield, Missouri.