Steeves, Peter and Douglas Nebert1994Hydrologic Unit Map of New Mexico (1:250,000)1vector digital dataReston, VirginiaU.S. Geological Surveywithheldnhnm.NHNM.water_nm_huc250
The Geographic Information Retrieval and Analysis System (GIRAS)
was developed in the mid 70s to put into digital form a number
of data layers which were of interest to the USGS. One of these
data layers was the Hydrologic Units. The map is based on the
Hydrologic Unit Maps published by the U.S. Geological Survey
Office of Water Data Coordination, together with the list
descriptions and name of region, subregion, accounting units, and
cataloging unit. The hydrologic units are encoded with an eight-
digit number that indicates the hydrologic region (first two digits),
hydrologic subregion (second two digits), accounting unit (third two
digits), and cataloging unit (fourth two digits).
The data produced by GIRAS was originally collected at a scale of
1:250K. Some areas, notably major cities in the west, were
recompiled at a scale of 1:100K. In order to join the data together
and use the data in a geographic information system (GIS) the data
were processed in the ARC/INFO GUS software package. Within the
GIS, the data were edgematched and the neatline boundaries between
maps were removed to create a single data set for the conterminous
United States.
Keywords
HUC, GIRAS, Hydrologic Units, 1:250
This data set was compiled originally to provide the National Water
Quality Assessment (NAWQA) study units with an intermediate-
scale river basin boundary for extracting other GIS data layers. The
data can also be used for illustration purposes at intermediate or
small scales (1:250,000 to 1:2 million).
Procedures_Used:
The data was recieved as compressed giras tar files representing
either a 1:250,000-scale (1:250K) quadrangle or a 1:100,000-scale (1:100K)
quadrangle. Each file was named after its respective quadrangle. A
coverage of 1:250k quadrangles was used to divide the country up into
four sections and get a list of names for each section. Using GIRASARC2,
an aml designed to create an ARC/INFO data set (coverage) from a GIRAS file
and a corresponding neat line coverage, it was quickly discovered that many
of the quad names were to long for the program (i.e. sault_saint_marie)
and a generic naming system for files and coverages was incorporated. In
1 of 10 cases, the name of the quadrangle did not correspond with the name
of the file. These problems were traced down and corrected (after all four
sections were converted there were many files left over...these wound up be
all the 1:100k quads which did not have similar names to the 1:250k
files).
After the files for a given section were all converted into ARC/INFO
format, a loop aml was run which copied a coverage and its neatline
cover into temporary storage (there was not enough room in info to
deal with a large number of files in one directory), attached to
that directory, built line topology, and went into the editor, ARCEDIT.
In ARCEDIT, the outer edge (original neatline) was selected and deleted an
the mathematically-calculated neatline coverage from the GIRASNEAT AML
program was copied in using the ARCEDIT GET command. The original
neatline was replaced with a calculated neatline because in all cases, the
outline of the coverage quad never quite conformed to a "true" neatline
causing overlaps and gapes between adjacent maps. The new neatline was
connected to the internal arcs where they intersected. Lines which did
not quite join the new neatline were extended to the edge with a maximum
tolerance of 500 meters. All extensions were made within this tolerance.
All arcs which extended beyond the new neatline were clipped off within
a 500 meter tolerance as arguments to the CLEAN command into a separate
directory. Both the neatline and huc coverages were deleted from the
temporary space, and the program looped to the next coverage.
Another program was then run which added an item to the .aat called OUTER,
went into INFO, and populated the attribute for all arcs composing the
new neatline. This was done by reselecting for the identity of the polygon
to the left or right of each arc whose value was "1", the identity of the
outer "universe" polygon (reselect lpoly# = 1 or rpoly# = 1 in the .aat and
calculated outer to = 1). All coverages were checked for additional
dangles and then a MAPJOIN was run using NET as the feature option.
Finally, most map edge lines were removed from the MAPJOINed coverage
using the DISSOLVE to create a seamless basin coverage with polygons
(basins) and arcs (boundaries) with attributes.
Quality control methods were applied to the resulting coverage by detecting
and fixing node and label errors and remaining neat line arc problems
(i.e. long neat lines still in the coverage). Many more problems arose
in the western part of the country than in the east. Bordering HUC code
disagreements between quads caused a number of cases in which neatlines
did not dissolve. These were provisionally corrected for the most part,
however there were several cases that required external review and editing
to fix, and are now incorporated in the final data set. After all 1:250K
sections were completed, the same procedure was run for the handful of
1:100k quads. These were mapjoined with the 1:250k quads to provide more
detailed coverage where it was available.
Revisions:
Process_Step
Process_Description
Revision #1. See above for all the details
Process_Date 10/92
Process_Step
Process_Description
Revision #2. Seattle and Bakersfield quadrangles were missing
from the composite supplied by Pete Steeves. These were manually
pasted in using Arcedit with small tolerances. Labelerrors were
remedied and most dangles were removed using the Eliminate command.
Process_Date 1/93
Process_Step
Process_Description
Revision #3. The following changes were made to a
1:250,000-scale version derived from National Mapping Divisions
Geographic Information Retrieval and Analysis System (GIRAS) data.
The discrepancies in the hydrologic unit codes (HUCs) in California
were changed because the California State Hydrologic Unit Map (HUM)
was revised in 1978 but the 1:250,000-scale digital dataset was not.
This has been reviewed by Bill Battaglin, Doug Nebert, and Paul
Kapinos and is noted under Reviews (#6 below).
The areas in which the HUC labels were incorrect in California were
180701, 180702, 180703, 180600, 180300, and 180400. Boundaries were
added in 180702 and 180600 from the 1:2 million source. Along the
Oregon/California border, a boundary was added in 180102. In Wyoming,
a boundary was added in 100902 from the 1:2 million source. Labels
were corrected in these HUCs to reflect state updates, and where
necessary, to add new labels to the newly-drawn boundaries. Map edges
were manually removed in Arkansas, California, and along the
Oregon/California border.
After the changes were made and saved in Arcedit, the build and clean
commands were executed, followed by labelerrors. Three polygons had
duplicate labels and were corrected. The labels were centered in the
polygons by the centroidlabels command. Verification of the coverage
was done by the describe command.
Process_Date 12/93.
Process_Step
Process_Description
Revision #4. The NAMES file was added to the data set and its
attributes were defined in the ATT file of the documentaton. This
table is a lookup table to correlate the 8-digit numbers with verbose
names officially assigned to the basins.
Process_Date 3/94.
Process_Step
Process_Description
Revision #5. The following corrections were made to the 1:250,000-scale
coverage of Hydrologic Unit Codes (HUC250):
Valid HUC code, 7140103, added to HUC250.NAM. Bourbeuse, Missouri.
HUC250.NAM was sorted on HUC.
HUC frequency >1, tiny polygons were deleted that were erroneous:
17010212 deleted small poly to NW of main poly
10130305 deleted small poly to S of main poly
10230005 deleted small poly to S of main poly
14020001 deleted small poly to N of main poly
15050201 deleted small poly to W of main poly
04080203 deleted small poly to N of main poly
03120001 deleted small poly to S of main poly
Invalid HUC codes, not in names file, were corrected:
18020023 HUC should be 18020111 (in N-central California)
18070010 HUC should be 18070303 (in so. California)
15010017 HUC should be 15010007, delete arc separating it
(in nw Arizona)
1870201 HUC should be 18070201 (in so. California, missing an 0)
1870204 HUC should be 18070204 (in so. California, missing an 0)
18060012 HUC should be 18060011 (in so. California,
improper polygon closure)
18060011 HUC label added after polygon closure of 18060011
HUC frequency >1, larger polys were checked and corrected:
18020126 western poly is 18020108 in HUC2M (CA)
18050005 southern poly is 18050006 in HUC2M (CA)
18060006 split into 2 polys, no apparent reason, delete arc
splitting polys (CA)
04110001 and 04100001 together are 04100001 in HUC2M (MI)
(MAPEDGE was deleted)
02080108 northwestern poly is 02080208 in HUC2M (VA)
The invalid HUC codes, and 7140103 were found by relating to the
HUC250.NAM file, and identifying polygons with no match in the names
file. The rest were found by looking at the 96 polygons which had
HUC codes with frequencies >1 in the PAT. Most of these seemed to
be correct, and were along the US-Canada boundary, or were islands
along the coasts.
These errors were found in the HUC250 coverage published as OFR 94-0326.
Process_Date 12/94 & 1/95
Reviews_Applied_to_Data:
Peer review, 10/18/93, Bill Battaglin, USGS-WRD, Lakewood, Co, memo to
Doug Nebert:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I have completed a review of the 1:250,000 scale hydrologic units coverage
(HUC) and found the digital data and metadata to be of high quality. I
have a few suggested improvements to the digital data and to the
documentation. Below is a summary of the methods I used to check feature
accuracy in the digital data base and the problems I found.
Digital Features:
The line work for the HUC coverage was checked against the line work from:
(1) the 1:2,000,000 HUC coverage by plotting both data sets out on one large
graphic (about 1:3,000,000). No major discrepancies were found except in
coastal areas where the 1:2,000,000 scale coverage had more detail than the
1:250,000 scale coverage.
(2) line work from 1:24,000 scale digitized drainage basins in Colorado,
Illinois, and New Jersey. The match was generally good with departures
generally less than 2500 meters. The biggest departures were in Colorado
and were as large as 4000 meters.
(3) line work from the 1:2,000,000 scale rivers coverage for the USA by
plotting both data sets out on one large graphic (about 1:3,000,000). In
general the nesting of streams in HUCs was good and HUC boundaries inter-
sected steams at stream intersections. In some places (SE New Mexico,
SE California and NW Utah), the streams coverage does not match the HUC
coverage that well, but this could easily be because of the unusual nature
of streams in these areas or because of inaccuracies in the streams coverage.
(4) line work from 1:100,000 scale streams from Colorado, Illinois, and
Kansas. The nesting of streams in HUCs was very good. Stream arcs for
the most part did not cross HUC arcs except at stream intersections. The
error (distance from intersection to HUC line) between HUC lines and stream
intersection was less than 500 meters at all intersections checked
(about 25).
Problems with Line work:
(1) There was a very large number of very short arcs in the coverage (3211
Lt 1000 meters long and 1729 Lt. 100 meters long). Most of these arcs were
internal (did not border on outside polygon) and coded as 250k edges(3)
(almost 3000) but some were 250k (2) lines and one was a 2m dlg (4). Arcs
with lengths of less than 100 meters (maybe even less than 1000 meters) are
difficult to deal with when editing subsets of the coverage, and they also
add to the overall size of the database. I know many of these lines were
created in the process of edgematching the quads, but I think the informa-
tion content of these very short arcs is less valuable than the hassle and
overhead involved in keeping them in the coverage.
(2) The edit distance for the coverage was set to a very small value.
This may have been required for earlier processing, however, it makes
the finished coverage difficult to work with. I had to reset the edit
distance to a larger value when I wanted to select arcs in ARCEDIT
interactively. This, of course, will be one of the things users will
want to do with the new HUC coverage.
Polygon labels/attributes:
(1) Label point accuracy was checked by making a point cover of polygon
labels from the 1:2,000,000 HUC coverage and then doing an identify of
those points in the 1:250,000 scale HUC polygon. This procedure looked
for both new or missing polygons, and was also used to check attribute
values. I also dissolved both coverages by accounting unit and compared
the number and location of remaining polygons.
Problems with labels/attributes:
(1) I discovered a total of 649 places where the HUC codes from the label
point of the 1:2,000,000 coverage did not match the HUC code for the
1:250,000 HUC polygon that it fell within. As you had indicated in the
documentation, there were a lot of differences in California. The 2m HUC had
lots of label points resulting from islands, bays, and estuaries that are
not included in the 1:250,000 scale HUC coverages. In other places the
polygons seemed to be the same but the HUC codes were different. For example
HUC 18020111 in the 1:2,000,000 coverage is coded as HUC 18020023 in the
1:250,000 coverage. There were also many differences in the Great Lakes.
It seems odd that the 1:2,000,000 coverage should have more detail with
regard to coastal features than the 1:250,000 scale coverage has. There
were also internal polygon label differences in Minnesota (7100001 in 250k,
70200001 in 2m), Colorado (10090204 in 250k, 10180007 in 2m), Illinois
(mistake in the 2m HUC I think), and Louisiana (11140203 in 250k, 11140202
in 2m). Texas and Florida also have a few that look like they should be
checked.
(2) The dissolved 1:2,000,000 coverage contained 350 accounting unit
polygons while the dissolved 1:250,000 HUC coverage only contained 177.
There were large differences in the way the Accounting unit polygons
looked in the Great Lakes Region, and in parts of California, Wyoming,
and Florida. Again, many of the differences result from the use of a
cruder coastline in the 1:250,000 scale HUC coverage.
Coverage Documentation:
The coverage documentation was reviewed both editorially and for overall
completeness. The documentation was editorially sound and did not need any
corrections.
Problems with the Documentation:
(1) The redefined items in the pat file were not defined in the data
dictionary portion of the documentation file.
(2) The complete reference to the source material for the data is not in the
documentation file."
Response to Peer review by Bill Battaglin, 1/5/93, Doug Nebert,USGS-WRD
Reston
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Data were reviewed for attribute accuracy against a 1:2million base through
random audit of polygon features. Line attributes were verified by symbol-
ization on the screen. Regions were shaded in to verify correct polygon
values for HUC at the Hydrologic Region level. Documentation was updated.
The short arcs along the quadrangle boundaries were kept in the data set
due to the importance of maintaining as much original information as
possible. Basin codes were updated and additional erroneous neatlines
removed.
Peer review, 11/10/93, Doug Nebert, USGS-WRD, Reston, memo to Paul Kapinos:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"As you are aware, we have several digital versions of the hydrologic unit
maps for the United States and I am in the process of verifying and publishi
a 1:250,000-scale version derived from National Mapping Division Geographic
Information Retrieval and Analysis System (GIRAS) data as part of their land
use mapping program of the 1970s and early 1980s.
In comparing the 1:250,000-scale data reviewers noticed differences in both
basin definition and hydrologic unit codes in Southern California and in the
San Joaquin valley. The 1974 state map, at 1:500,000-scale agrees with the
1:250,000-scale GIRAS data in boundaries and numbers, whereas the 1:2.5 mill
"wall map" of the U.S. agrees with the 1:2,000,000 digital data set. Both p
maps are authoritative sources of information, but apparently something chan
between the two maps.
On a related note, it is worthwhile to mention that the 1:2.5 million-scale
wall map for the western U.S. is being revised to include new Alaska hydrolo
unit codes before reprinting. It would be wise to be sure that the boundari
depicted there are also the authoritative ones.
I would appreciate your review and adjudication of the California hydrologic
unit definitions in order for us to publish this digital data set. Please
provide a written response (e-mail and paper copy) and marked-up maps as to
which basins and boundaries are current."
Peer review, 11/29/93, Paul Kapinos, USGS-WRD, memo to Doug Nebert:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"The discrepancies in the hydrologic unit codes (and some boundaries)
in the State of California are due to the fact that the California
State Hydrologic Unit Map (HUM) was revised in 1978 but the 1:250,000-scale
digital data set was not. The events that most likely occurred can be
summarized as follows:
o The 1:500,000-scale HUMs were published by OWDC over a period of about
four years between 1974 and 1978.
o The National Mapping Division (NMD) overlaid the hydrologic unit
boundaries on their 1:250,000-scale land-use and land-cover map
series after each State HUM was completed, and later digitized these
boundaries and their respective codes.
o In 1978, the State of California asked OWDC to revise the hydrologic
unit boundaries and codes in the central valley.
o The 1:500,000-scale California HUM was revised and reprinted but NMD
was either not informed of the revisions or chose not to revise or
redigitize their 1:250,000-scale overlays.
o Once all the HUMs were printed (including the 1978 revisions of
California and South Dakota), the 1980 1:2.5 million-scale United
States wall map was published using the up-to-date (1978) boundaries
and codes.
Based on the above summary, I would recommend using the boundaries
and codes from the 1:2.5 million-scale map and the 1:2,000,000 digital
data set. Please be aware that other hydrologic unit boundaries and/or
codes may have been revised when individual State HUMs were reprinted
by OWDC. I doubt if there has been any attempt to update any of the
digital data sets with these changes."
Response to Peer Review by Paul Kapinos, Doug Nebert 2/14/94:
-------------------------------------------------------------
The areas in question in California were updated to reflect the more
current information as contained in the 1:2 million data set. Polygon
hydrologic unit codes were updated in the Central Valley and in coastal
Southern California. Where necessary, 1:2 million-scale linework was
substituted to define the correct basin boundaries where no corresponding
information was available at a different scale.
Related_Spatial_and_Tabular_Data_Sets:
Any data set which has hydrologic unit codes as part of their data may
be able to use this data.
Other_References_Cited:
U.S. Geological Survey, 1990. Land Use and Land Cover Digital Data from
1:250,000- and 1:100,000-Scale Maps. Data Users Guide 4, 33 pp, Reston
Virginia.
Notes:
en1994publication dateAs needed-109.331569-102.94086937.06925831.307024114432.675975683105.4004793470532.2178674102352.071275Nonehydrologic unitwatershedsNoneConterminous United StatesNoneNoneNoneNone
(describe any restrictions or legal prerequisites for accessing
the data set. Put "None" if there are no restrictions)
These data were digitized at a scale of 1:250,000 with some portions
of coverage at 1:100,000- and 1:2 million scale. Limitations of
the data strictly revolve around this scale input. Use of these
boundaries with larger scale data (i.e. 1:24k hydrography) is not
recommended as it would be beyond the resolution capabilities of
the data set.
Mark NegriU.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Div. (WRD)Computer Specialist, Spatial Data Support Unitmailing address
12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, MS-445
RestonVA20191USA703-648-5613703-648-5295mnegri@usgs.gov6:30am-3:30pm ESTMay contact thru email or telephone
(Here you acknowledge the agencies and organizations that gave
you money, resources, and encouragement to digitize the data and
to enter all this wonderful metadata.)
NoneUnclassifiedNoneESRI ArcCatalog 9.0.0.535Feature ClassSee Entity_Attribute_InformationSee Explanation
Attribute accuracy is described, where present, with each
attribute defined in the Entity and Attribute Section.
Polygon and chain-node topology present.
(Information in wordy narrative form describing omissions,
selection criteria, generalization, definitions used, and other
rules applied to derive the data set)
(An explanation of the accuracy of the horizontal coordinate
measurements and a description of tests used, if any, to
determine horizontal positional accuracy. This is different
from horizontal resolution as reported in the DOC file.
Positional accuracy defines how correctly the digital features
match real-world features and woiuld be related to the concept
of the National Map Accuracy Standard -- xx% of well-defined
point features fall within xx units of their true position.
The resolution is the smallest unit of measure the GIS can
reliably manage without truncation or rounding.)
variableResolution as reported
(The same as above, but for vertical information that may
be encoded with the 2-D features such as cell or contour
estimates of a vertical dimension. A description of the
contour interval of input data and its basis could be described
here.)
250,000 and 100,000ELIMINATE HUC250E HUC250F KEEPEDGE POLY. NMNHP uses a subset of the attributes originally developed in the 1994 data.withheld199301070959withheldBUILD HUC250F LINEwithheld199301071000withheldRENAME HUC250F HUC250withheld199301071156withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE DDNEBERTwithheld199301071158withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE DDNEBERTwithheld199301071237withheldCOPY /HOME2A/RESDGS1/DDNEBERT/HUC250/HUC250 HUC250withheld199301071245withheldCOPY HUC250 /DSDL1/CUSA/TILES/CUSA/HUC250withheld199301110917withheldEXPORT COVER /DSDL1/CUSA/TILES/CUSA/HUC250 HUC250.E00withheld199301131030withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE DDNEBERTwithheld199307131210withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE DDNEBERTwithheld199307131211withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE DDNEBERTwithheld199307131213withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE DDNEBERTwithheld199307131219withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE DDNEBERTwithheld199307131225withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE DDNEBERTwithheld199307131228withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE DDNEBERTwithheld199307131238withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE DDNEBERTwithheld199307131240withheldCOPY /DSDL1/CUSA/TILES/CUSA/HUC250 HUC250withheld199311021403withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199311291441withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199311301444withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199311301458withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199312010848withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199312010908withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199312011317withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199312060826withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199312061111withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199312061436withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199312061503withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199312070749withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199312070825withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199312070840withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199312081119withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199312081123withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250withheld199312081138withheldTOLERANCE HUC250withheld199312081427withheldCLEAN HUC250 HUC250C 50 10withheld199312081509withheldLABELERRORS HUC250Cwithheld199312140753withheldARCEDIT /DSDL2/JPORTER/HUC250Cwithheld199312140836withheldBUILD HUC250Cwithheld199312140843withheldLABELERRORS HUC250Cwithheld199312140843withheldCENTROIDLABELS HUC250C INSIDEwithheld199312140850withheldRENAME HUC250C HUC250withheld199312201410withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199312210934withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199312211007withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199312211105withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199312211153withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199312211222withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199312211235withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199312211324withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199312211341withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199312211401withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199312211416withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199312211422withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199312211426withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199312211430withheldIMPORT COVER HUC250 HUC250withheld199401171651withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE DDNEBERTwithheld199401171716withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE DDNEBERTwithheld199401171744withheldDOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE DDNEBERTwithheld199403071259withheldEXPORT COVER HUC250 /DSDL1/CUSA/DATABASE/WAIS/HUC250.E00withheld199404111056withheldEXPORT COVER /DSDL1/CUSA/TILES/CUSA/HUC250 HUC250withheld199404111546withheldEXPORT COVER HUC250 HUC250_CUSA.E00withheld199410171112withheldJPORTER COPY /DSDL1/CUSA/TILES/CUSA/HUC250 /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199412201045withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199412201242withheldJPORTER BUILD HUC250 POLYwithheld199412201246withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199412201300withheldJPORTER BUILD HUC250 POLYwithheld199412201303withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199412201308withheldJPORTER BUILD HUC250 POLYwithheld199412201311withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199412201408withheldJPORTER BUILD HUC250 POLYwithheld199412201411withheldJPORTER DOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199412211043withheldJPORTER DOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199412211107withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199412211245withheldJPORTER BUILD HUC250 POLYwithheld199412211248withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199412211441withheldJPORTER BUILD HUC250 POLYwithheld199412211444withheldJPORTER EXPORT COVER /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250 HUC250.DECwithheld199412221203withheldJPORTER EXPORT COVER /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250 HUC250withheld199501200821withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199501270910withheldJPORTER CLEAN HUC250withheld199501270930withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199501271010withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199501271012withheldJPORTER BUILD HUC250withheld199501271015withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199501271033withheldJPORTER BUILD HUC250withheld199501271036withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199501271050withheldJPORTER BUILD HUC250withheld199501271053withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199501271115withheldJPORTER BUILD HUC250withheld199501271118withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199501271356withheldJPORTER BUILD HUC250 POLYwithheld199501271400withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199501271408withheldJPORTER BUILD HUC250 POLYwithheld199501271411withheldJPORTER IDEDIT HUC250 POLYwithheld199501271544withheldJPORTER BUILD HUC250 POLYwithheld199501301022withheldJPORTER EXPORT COVER /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250 HUC250withheld199501311013withheldJPORTER ARCEDIT /HOME/GIS/JPORTER/HUC/HUC250withheld199504101033withheldJPORTER BUILD HUC250 POLYwithheld199504101038withheldJPORTER DOCUMENT HUC250 UPDATE JPORTERwithheld199504101048withheldJPORTER DOCUMENT HUC250 DELETE JPORTERwithheld199504101049withheldJPORTER DOCUMENT HUC250 COPY /DSDL1/CUSA/TILES/CUSA/HUC250 JPORTERwithheld199504101051withheldMNEGRI COPY ~JPORTER/HUC/HUC250 HUC250withheld199504111310withheldMNEGRI ARCSDTS HUC250 HUC250SDTS.TGZ PREFwithheld199504111424withheldMNEGRI ARCSDTS HUC250 HUC250.SDTS.TGZ PREFwithheld199504120920withheldMNEGRI EXPORT COVER HUC250 HUC250.E00withheld199504120932withheldMNEGRI EXPORT COVER HUC250 HUC250.E00withheld199504280832withheldMNEGRI ARCSDTS HUC250 HUC250.SDTS.TGZ PREFwithheld199504280951withheldMNEGRI EXPORT COVER HUC250 /SCRATCH_AREA1/MNEGRI/HUC250.E00 NONEwithheld199509191725withheldMetadata imported.withheld20030325Dataset copied.withheld20030624VectorSimpleFALSE0TRUEFALSEcoordinate pair0.0004140.000414metersNorth American Datum of 1927Clarke 18666378206.400000294.978698GCS_North_American_1927NAD_1927_UTM_Zone_13NExplicit elevation coordinate included with horizontal coordinates1.000000water_nm_huc8HUC POLYGONSGIRAS DATAFeature Class0OBJECTIDInternal feature number.ESRIPositive real numbersSequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated.OBJECTIDOID400PERIMETERPerimeter in metersESRISequential unique positive integerPERIMETERDouble800nhnm_NHNM_water_nm_huc250_AREAAREADouble800HYDCODEHYDROLOGIC UNIT IDGIRASIntegerHYDCODEInteger400REGGIRAS No restrictionsREGSmallInteger200Hydrologic region - 2 digitsSUBREGSUBREGSmallInteger200GIRASHydrologic subregion - 2 digitsACT_UNITACT_UNITSmallInteger200GIRASAccounting unit - 2 digitsCAT_UNITCAT_UNITSmallInteger200GIRASCataloging unit 2 digitsSHAPEShapeGeometry000Feature geometry.ESRICoordinates defining the features.NAMENameString5000SHAPE_LengthShape_LengthDouble800Length of feature in internal units.EsriPositive real numbers that are automatically generated.SHAPE_AreaShape_AreaDouble800Area of feature in internal units squared.EsriPositive real numbers that are automatically generated.HUC250.AATHYDROLOGIC UNIT LINEWORKGIRAS DATA' FNODE#'Internal number of from-nodeComputedSequential unique positive integer' TNODE#'Internal number of to-nodeComputedSequential unique positive integer' LPOLY#'Internal number of polygon to left of arcComputedSequential unique positive integerRPOLY#Internal number of polygon to right of arcComputedSequential unique positive integerLENGTHLength of arc in coverage unitsComputedPositive real numbersHUC250#Internal feature numberComputedSequential unique positive integerHUC250-IDUser-assigned feature numberUser-definedIntegerSOURCELINE CODING FOR UNIQUE CASESGIRAS AND 1:2M DLG DATA1=100K 2=250K 3=250K EDGE 4=2MILLION DLGHUC250.LEFTRIGHTNames of Hydrologic Cataloging Units (HUC)U.S. Geological Survey, Office of Water Data CoordinationHUCHydrologic Unit CodeU.S. Geological Survey as FIPS standardInteger 8-digit codes defined uniquely for each basinNAMEHydrologic Unit NameU.S. Geological Survey as FIPS standardInteger 8-digit codes defined uniquely for each basin
For definition of drainage basins, there are two principal tabular
data elements of interest. The first, "HUC", stands for the Hydrologic
Unit Code and includes the 8-digit cataloging unit as assigned to
the basin polygon by the U.S. Geological Survey. The second item,
"SOURCE", is an attribute of each bounding line segment (arc) and
incorporates a code to define the source and scale of the source
linework. Because this data set includes linework from different
scale sources, it is important to recognize the presence and use
of this item in quality evaluation.
The SOURCE item has four special codes to describe the source linework.
Code 1 stands for all arcs that were from 1:100,000 scale GIRAS files
and were internal to the quadrangle (no neatlines). Code 2 stands for
all arcs from the 1:250,000-scale GIRAS files which were internal to
the quadrangle. Code 3 is for lines from either GIRAS source scale but
were part of the neatline which may be used to connect arcs that
dont join cleanly between quads. Code 4 is for linework in the southern
Central Valley and southern Coastal California where the GIRAS data
were replaced with 1:2 million scale basin boundaries.
A companion NAMES file (HUC250.NAMES) is provided with this data set
to allow a user to perform a temporary join between the basin polygons
and display or query basins based on their assigned text names rather
than just the basin number (HUC).
Not AvailableMark NegriU.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Div. (WRD)Computer Specialist, Spatial Data Support Unitmailing address
12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, MS-445
RestonVA20191USA703-648-5613703-648-5295mnegri@usgs.gov6:30am-3:30pm ESTMay contact thru email or telephoneDownloadable Data20041026Mark NegriU.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Div. (WRD)Computer Specialist, Spatial Data Support Unitmailing address
12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, MS-445
RestonVA20191USA703-648-5613703-648-5295mnegri@usgs.gov6:30am-3:30pm ESTMay contact thru email or telephoneFGDC Content Standards for Digital Geospatial MetadataFGDC-STD-001-1998local timeNoneUnclassifiedNoneen2025041511224500FALSE20250415112207002025041511220700water_nm_huc8002ProjectedGCS_North_American_1983Linear Unit: Meter (1.000000)NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_13N<ProjectedCoordinateSystem xsi:type='typens:ProjectedCoordinateSystem' xmlns:xsi='http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance' xmlns:xs='http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema' xmlns:typens='http://www.esri.com/schemas/ArcGIS/3.3.0'><WKT>PROJCS["NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_13N",GEOGCS["GCS_North_American_1983",DATUM["D_North_American_1983",SPHEROID["GRS_1980",6378137.0,298.257222101]],PRIMEM["Greenwich",0.0],UNIT["Degree",0.0174532925199433]],PROJECTION["Transverse_Mercator"],PARAMETER["False_Easting",500000.0],PARAMETER["False_Northing",0.0],PARAMETER["Central_Meridian",-105.0],PARAMETER["Scale_Factor",0.9996],PARAMETER["Latitude_Of_Origin",0.0],UNIT["Meter",1.0],AUTHORITY["EPSG",26913]]</WKT><XOrigin>-5120900</XOrigin><YOrigin>-9998100</YOrigin><XYScale>10000</XYScale><ZOrigin>-100000</ZOrigin><ZScale>10000</ZScale><MOrigin>-100000</MOrigin><MScale>10000</MScale><XYTolerance>0.001</XYTolerance><ZTolerance>0.001</ZTolerance><MTolerance>0.001</MTolerance><HighPrecision>true</HighPrecision><WKID>26913</WKID><LatestWKID>26913</LatestWKID></ProjectedCoordinateSystem>1.0Esri ArcGIS 13.3.2.52636water_nm_huc8-109.331569-102.94086937.06925831.3070241114432.675975683105.4004794102352.0712753470532.2178671ISO 19115 Geographic Information - MetadataDIS_ESRI1.0dataset002withheldFeature ClassFile Geodatabase Feature ClassNAD_1927_UTM_Zone_13NEPSG6.11(3.0.1)020250415