Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Data”

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 703 records · Page 39Linked to original sources
USGS2018

U.S. Geological Survey Community for Data Integration 2017 Workshop Proceedings

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Community for Data Integration (CDI) Workshop was held May 16–19, 2017 at the Denver Federal Center. There were 183 in-person attendees and 35 virtual attendees over four days. The theme of the workshop was “Enabling Integrated Science,” with the purpose of bringing together the community to discuss current topics, shared challenges, and steps forward to advance integrated science at the USGS. The CDI welcomed several keynote speakers, including Bill Werkheiser, USGS Acting Director; Kevin T. Gallagher, USGS Associate Director of the Core Science Systems Mission Area; Bruce Caron, Earth Science Information Partners Community Architect; and Tim Quinn, Chief of the USGS Office of Enterprise Information. Their presentations focused on the importance of collaborative, cross-disciplinary, and open science and the role of the CDI in identifying and supporting new opportunities in these areas for the USGS and its partners. In addition to the stated theme, the workshop agenda was driven by the needs of the CDI, with topics highlighting current resources and technologies that could help attendees in their daily work. Topical sessions were proposed by CDI members and included subjects such as data citation, information technology architecture, legacy data, real-time data, and many more. Plenary speakers from the community talked about USGS activities in data science, elevation and hydrography data integration, advanced scientific computing solutions, cloud computing, data-management training, and data-sharing agreements. Two panels addressed the role of the CDI in enabling integrated science and examples of CDI-supported projects in action. Breakout discussions focused on the workshop theme of “Enabling Integrated Science” and covered five topics: Data and Data Integration, Modeling, Computing Capacity, Science Data Integration, and User Needs and Experience. Sessions on each topic identified actions that could bring the USGS and the broader Earth science community closer to the goal of making integrated science commonplace. The breakouts produced recommendations with the broad themes of improving communication and connections across the USGS, reducing duplication and increasing knowledge transfer, increasing training and testbed opportunities to learn and experiment, and creating community-supported standards to enable better integration and interoperability. The DataBlast poster and live demonstration session showcased 36 projects from around the CDI and included recent CDI-funded projects as well as other USGS and partner initiatives that were related to data and software integration and discovery. Importantly, the CDI workshop provided a forum for scientists, technologists, data and resource managers, program managers, and others to convene face to face to discuss common methods, interests, challenges, and solutions related to scientific data and technologies. As a result of this rare convergence, new connections were made across disciplines, backgrounds, and geographical locations, seeding future activities and collaborations. Sharing of ideas from all attendees was encouraged through the use of a mobile application to collect real-time questions and feedback from the audience The primary outcomes of the workshop are the recommendations from the breakout sessions titled “Roadmap Discussions on Enabling Integrated Science” and from the topical sessions detailed in these proceedings. These sessions, as well as the plenary discussions, identified new areas of collaboration and learning that the CDI will facilitate, such as data science, software development, scientific modeling practices, and user needs and experience. The CDI will build on the results of the workshop to guide its future topics, events, and funding opportunities to support an integrated science capacity for the USGS.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2021

Oyster model inventory: Identifying critical data and modeling approaches to support restoration of oyster reefs in coastal U.S. Gulf of Mexico waters

Executive Summary Along the coast of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, the eastern oyster ( Crassostrea virginica ) plays important ecological and economic roles. Commercial landings from this region account for more than 50 percent of all U.S. landings; these oyster reefs also provide varied ecosystem services, including nursery habitat for many fish and macroinvertebrate species, shoreline protection, and water-quality maintenance. Declining trends in both total oyster production and functional reef area across this region have spurred investment in restoration of oyster resources, with specific calls for restoration projects to develop a network of reefs and identify broodstock and sanctuary reef restoration sites. Decision making related to restoration and establishment of a network of oyster reefs in the Gulf of Mexico requires information on both the environment and the effects of the environment on the oyster life cycle (including larval movement, survival, oyster recruitment, reproduction, growth, and mortality). Here, we examined the current state of data and model development in this region with the goal of providing an overview of oyster modeling approaches and an inventory of available data and existing oyster models. This report is meant to provide an overview to managers for understanding existing efforts and identify a path forward to most efficiently inform oyster resource management and restoration planning in moving from a single reef management approach to a reef network management approach. Numerous models related to some aspect of the oyster life cycle have been built, calibrated, and validated for various Gulf of Mexico estuaries over the last few decades (over 30 models identified). These models, which could inform site restoration, can be classified into four approaches: (1) oyster Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) models; (2) larval transport models; (3) on-reef oyster models that may include oyster growth, mortality and reproduction, and substrate persistence; and (4) coupled larval transport on-reef metapopulation models that simulate the entire oyster life cycle. The data requirements, model complexity and assumptions, and transferability vary by approach. Specifically, some approaches may offer greater accessibility, flexibility, and transferability spatially or temporally, with minimal data input, but only provide broad information to support site selection. In contrast, other approaches may require significant site-specific data for their construction and validation but may provide more accurate and location-specific data to support site selection for broodstock reefs. Regardless of modeling approach used, data on environmental drivers, such as salinity, water temperature, or water flow impacting oyster metabolism and movement, are required at appropriate spatial and temporal scales. While numerous data collection platforms, environmental models, and research products exist within Gulf of Mexico estuaries to provide important environmental data to use as drivers in the oyster models, significant variability in temporal and spatial coverage of the data, and variation in the availability of future condition models, exists across estuaries. This variation influences the spatial and temporal scales at which oyster models may be developed and impacts the calibration and validation of the oyster models within a given estuary, affecting its potential ability to address specific management or restoration questions. While multiple modeling approaches exist for informing site selection of broodstock or sanctuary oyster reefs, the development, calibration, and validation of a single modeling platform presents the most efficient, transferable, and useful tool for managers across the Gulf of Mexico. The development of a single modeling platform would involve using standardized input variables, governing equations, and assumptions for the modeled oyster processes and outputs, and for standardized calibration and validation procedures that could be applied within each estuary. The differences among estuary applications would require substituting only estuary-specific environmental data, and calibrating and validating the modeling approach with local oyster data. Two modeling approaches likely to be useful include (1) development of a general geospatial HSI modeling framework that could be applied consistently across estuaries and (2) a mechanistic coupled larval transport on-reef metapopulation model requiring only estuarine specific calibration and hydrodynamic models. Both approaches benefit from existing work across multiple Gulf of Mexico estuaries and could provide valuable support for oyster restoration, but may differ in their ability to address specific questions related to oyster restoration. HSI models specifically guide restoration practitioners in determining suitable habitat based on available data. The HSI approach, while currently more widely used and accessible, requires more development of larval suitability and larval input and output components in order to inform reef connectivity. A metapopulation approach considering the full oyster life cycle that simulates both on-reef oyster growth, mortality, reproduction, substrate persistence, and larval transport (ideally with larval growth and mortality) would provide the greatest detail and level of understanding but requires significant up-front investment. The larval oyster model and on-reef oyster model are usually developed independently for systems, although the two approaches can be coupled to represent the entire oyster life cycle in order to characterize and assess a reef metapopulation. This approach may be less accessible and much more data-intensive, however, and it requires some expertise to run and apply to inform oyster resource management. Ultimately, the development of single modeling platforms for each of these approaches would provide flexible tools applicable across all Gulf of Mexico oyster supporting estuaries. By using a single platform for model development, testing, calibrating and validating, and evaluation of modeled future scenarios, oyster restoration scientists and managers would not only be able to examine different scenario outcomes within a single estuary, but could also have comparable modeled results to evaluate potential outcomes, across estuaries and regions, that are not confounded by varying modeled data inputs, governing equations, assumptions, or user judgement.

Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas↗
USGS2022

Compilation and evaluation of data used to identify groundwater sources under the direct influence of surface water in Pennsylvania

A study was conducted to compile and evaluate data used to identify groundwater sources that are under the direct influence of surface water (GUDI) in Pennsylvania. In the early 1990s, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) implemented the Surface Water Identification Protocol (SWIP) for the identification of GUDI sources. Since the establishment of the SWIP, PADEP has classified more than 500 individual sources across Pennsylvania as GUDI, but Pennsylvania’s complex geology and physiography provide a challenge for a uniform method of GUDI determination. Components used in this study to compile and evaluate data associated with GUDI determination include: (1) a preliminary review of file information for 43 public water-supply wells, (2) quality control and addition of data to PADEP’s database for public water-supply systems to prepare data for analysis, and (3) exploratory evaluation of existing GUDI sources in the database with respect to hydrogeologic and source-construction characteristics that are currently utilized in the assessment methodology. Case files for 43 wells from PADEP’s Northcentral and Southcentral regions were reviewed to: (1) provide a better understanding of how the SWIP was applied in practice, (2) verify and compile missing data, and (3) find additional attributes not previously available that might explain a well’s categorization as GUDI. Review of file information showed that the SWIP outlined in PADEP technical guidance was usually followed, but for some sources, the GUDI determination was more complex and could not be easily summarized. Data compiled for study analyses provided by PADEP include source data derived from public water-supply system case files, a source-information database for public water-supply systems, and Microscopic Particulate Analysis (MPA) results and associated water-quality data for public water-supply system groundwater sources. Data from the Pennsylvania Drinking Water Information System (PADWIS) , which is PADEP’s database for public water-supply systems, were also used for this study. The PADWIS database originally included data for 12,147 groundwater sources (11,812 groundwater sources not under the direct influence of surface water (non-GUDI) wells and 335 GUDI wells). A subset (4,018 wells consisting of 3,842 non-GUDI wells and 175 GUDI wells) of the PADWIS database was created for an analysis and includes only community wells evaluated in accordance with the SWIP. MPA results for 631 community and noncommunity wells were compiled, along with associated water-quality data (alkalinity, chloride, Escherichia coli , fecal coliform, nitrate, pH, sodium, specific conductance, sulfate, total coliform, total dissolved solids, total residue, and turbidity) populated from the PADEP Bureau of Laboratories Sample Information System. Data compiled from sources other than PADEP include spatial data, both naturogenic (for example, average precipitation or distance to closest hydrologic feature) and anthropogenic (for example, percentage of developed or agricultural land cover within a specific vicinity of a public water-supply system well) data representing spatially derived variables. Comparison among wells in the PADWIS dataset subset using the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test showed that GUDI wells had significantly older median construction years, shallower depths, and static water levels closer to the land surface than non-GUDI wells and that carbonate aquifers had the highest percentages of wells designated as GUDI (12 percent; 57 wells). Further comparison of wells in the PADWIS database subset using the Spearman’s rho monotonic correlation test illustrated that public water-supply wells designated as GUDI largely occur in unconfined aquifers and have high average yield and shallow static water levels. Assessment of the MPA database subset using the Kruskal-Wallis test showed wells with MPA total risk-factor scores that exceeded zero had older median construction years and shallower casing depths than wells with MPA total risk-factor scores of zero and that carbonate aquifers had the highest percentages of wells with MPA total risk-factor scores exceeding zero (30 percent; 63 wells). Spearman’s rho correlations showed that wells completed in aquifers with depths to major water-bearing zones closer to the land-surface had higher total risk-factor scores resulting from MPA samples. Based on the results of the analyses described in this report, broad conclusions can be drawn regarding site-specific well characteristics as well as anthropogenic and naturogenic factors that could be responsible for a well being designated as GUDI, but the accuracy of these results is dependent on the quality of the data being analyzed. Ultimately, study results serve as an added resource for initial desktop screening of wells to determine if additional site-specific investigation is warranted and underscore the need for field evaluation.

Pennsylvania↗
USGS1982

Data management system for USGS/USEPA urban hydrology studies program

A data management system was developed to store, update, and retrieve data collected in urban stormwater studies jointly conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 11 cities in the United States. The data management system is used to retrieve and combine data from USGS data files for use in rainfall, runoff, and water-quality models and for data computations such as storm loads. The system is based on the data management aspect of the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) and was used to create all the data files in the data base. SAS is used for storage and retrieval of basin physiography, land-use, and environmental practices inventory data. Also, storm-event water-quality characteristics are stored in the data base. The advantages of using SAS to create and manage a data base are many with a few being that it is simple, easy to use, contains a comprehensive statistical package, and can be used to modify files very easily. Data base system development has progressed rapidly during the last two decades and the data managment system concepts used in this study reflect the advancement made in computer technology during this era. Urban stormwater data is, however, just one application for which the system can be used. (USGS)

Open-File Report↗
USGS2007

Summary of selected U.S. Geological survey data on domestic well water quality for the Centers for Disease Control's National Environmental Public Health Tracking Program

About 10 to 30 percent of the population in most States uses domestic (private) water supply. In many States, the total number of people served by domestic supplies can be in the millions. The water quality of domestic supplies is inconsistently regulated and generally not well characterized. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has two water-quality data sets in the National Water Information System (NWIS) database that can be used to help define the water quality of domestic-water supplies: (1) data from the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program, and (2) USGS State data. Data from domestic wells from the NAWQA Program were collected to meet one of the Program's objectives, which was to define the water quality of major aquifers in the United States. These domestic wells were located primarily in rural areas. Water-quality conditions in these major aquifers as defined by the NAWQA data can be compared because of the consistency of the NAWQA sampling design, sampling protocols, and water-quality analyses. The NWIS database is a repository of USGS water data collected for a variety of projects; consequently, project objectives and analytical methods vary. This variability can bias statistical summaries of contaminant occurrence and concentrations; nevertheless, these data can be used to define the geographic distribution of contaminants. Maps created using NAWQA and USGS State data in NWIS can show geographic areas where contaminant concentrations may be of potential human-health concern by showing concentrations relative to human-health water-quality benchmarks. On the basis of national summaries of detection frequencies and concentrations relative to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) human-health benchmarks for trace elements, pesticides, and volatile organic compounds, 28 water-quality constituents were identified as contaminants of potential human-health concern. From this list, 11 contaminants were selected for summarization of water-quality data in 16 States (grantee States) that were funded by the Environmental Public Health Tracking (EPHT) Program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Only data from domestic-water supplies were used in this summary because samples from these wells are most relevant to human exposure for the targeted population. Using NAWQA data, the concentrations of the 11 contaminants were compared to USEPA human-health benchmarks. Using NAWQA and USGS State data in NWIS, the geographic distribution of the contaminants were mapped for the 16 grantee States. Radon, arsenic, manganese, nitrate, strontium, and uranium had the largest percentages of samples with concentrations greater than their human-health benchmarks. In contrast, organic compounds (pesticides and volatile organic compounds) had the lowest percentages of samples with concentrations greater than human-health benchmarks. Results of data retrievals and spatial analysis were compiled for each of the 16 States and are presented in State summaries for each State. Example summary tables, graphs, and maps based on USGS data for New Jersey are presented to illustrate how USGS water-quality and associated ancillary geospatial data can be used by the CDC to address goals and objectives of the EPHT Program.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2019

Determination of study reporting limits for pesticide constituent data for the California Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program Priority Basin Project, 2004–2018—Part 1: National Water Quality Schedules 2003, 2032, or 2033, and 2060

The California Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program Priority Basin Project (GAMA-PBP) is a long-term cooperative project designed to assess the quality of groundwater resources used for public and domestic drinking water supplies in the State of California, to monitor and evaluate changes to that quality, to investigate the human and natural factors controlling water quality, and to improve the availability of comprehensive groundwater quality data and information. Between May 18, 2004, and May 3, 2018, the GAMA-PBP collected 3001 groundwater samples for analysis of pesticide constituents by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL)(note that ‘pesticide constituents’ includes parent compounds and degradates). Of these samples, 2994 were analyzed for pesticide constituents on schedules 2003, 2032, or 2033 (65 to 84 constituents), and 840 were analyzed for pesticide constituents on schedule 2060 (58 constituents). The original dataset reported by the NWQL to the USGS National Water Information System (NWIS) database contained a total of 2,688 detections of 78 pesticide constituents and 253,825 non-detections. In this original dataset, 33 percent of the 3,001 samples analyzed had reported detections of one or more pesticide constituents. This report describes the GAMA-PBP data-quality objectives for pesticide data, the procedures used to establish study reporting limits, and use of those reporting limits to censor the data from the NWQL so that the final data published by the GAMA-PBP meet these data-quality objectives. The final GAMA-PBP dataset for samples collected from May 2004 to May 2018, after censoring, had a total of 1,632 detections of 37 pesticide constituents. In the final GAMA-PBP dataset, 25 percent of the 3,001 samples analyzed had detections of one or more pesticide constituents. The presence of pesticides in groundwater is commonly evaluated by calculating detection frequencies. Detection frequencies for pesticides are sensitive to detection limits and method performance for concentrations near those limits; therefore, the two primary data quality issues addressed in the GAMA-PBP data-quality objectives for pesticides are (1) establishing criteria for classifying data from the laboratory as detections or non-detections for the purpose of data reporting by the project and (2) accounting for changes in analytical methods or method performance over time. The GAMA-PBP addresses these issues by developing study reporting limits that are used as the boundary between detections and non-detections for the reporting of GAMA-PBP results. These reporting limits are defined from method detection limits (MDLs) provided by the NWQL, unless examination of results from laboratory set blanks (LSBs) and GAMA-PBP field blanks indicates that a higher concentration censoring limit is warranted. The GAMA-PBP selected the MDL as the primary choice for defining study reporting limits for consistency with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines for reporting detections of pesticides and other organic constituents. A five-step procedure is used to develop study reporting limits and censor the GAMA-PBP dataset accordingly. The effect of the censoring at each step is described to provide information about the relative effect of each step on the overall censoring of the dataset. Steps 1 and 2 can be implemented at the time the data are received, whereas steps 3−5 require information accumulated over an extended period. Step 1: Reject results that were most likely the result of specific contamination instances attributable to unusual field or laboratory conditions during sample collection or processing. Two such instances were identified, leading to rejection of 25 detections, which were assigned a data-quality indicator code of “Q” for “reviewed and rejected” in the NWIS database. Step 2: Use the NWQL MDLs in effect at the time each sample was analyzed as the reporting limit. A total of 506 detections were censored on this basis. Step 3: Use the maximum MDL established by the NWQL during July 2004–August 2018 (MDLmax) as the reporting limit. The rationale for using the MDLmax as the reporting limit is based primarily on the observation that the concentrations of MDLs generally increased over time. A total of 438 detections were censored on this basis. Step 4: Use the LSBs to identify periods of greater potential laboratory contamination bias and define raised reporting limits to be used during those periods. These periods were defined by using a moving average detection frequency approach. For consistency with the NWQL procedures for defining raised reporting limits on the basis of detections in LSBs, the raised reporting limits were defined as equal to three times the highest concentration measured in an LSB during the period. A total of 25 detections in groundwater samples analyzed during periods of increased laboratory contamination bias were censored. Step 5: Use the LSBs and field blanks to identify potential contamination bias from field or laboratory processes outside of the time periods identified in step 4. The NWQL protocols were used to define the MDLs from blanks analyzed outside of the periods identified in step 4. If an MDL defined from blanks was greater than the MDLmax, the MDL defined from blanks was used to censor the data. One constituent had a study reporting limit defined on this basis, and a total of 62 detections in groundwater samples were censored. As of 2019, the USGS NWIS database does not have the capability to store both the original value reported by the NWQL and the final value published by the GAMA-PBP that reflects application of the quality-control censoring described in this report. In the interim, while this capability is developed, the 1,031 results censored in steps 2−5 are blocked from public release in NWIS, and the GAMA-PBP has published the original and final values in a USGS data release accompanying this report. The entire GAMA-PBP final dataset for pesticide constituents on schedules 2003, 2032, or 2033, or on schedule 2060 is publicly available in that USGS data release, through the USGS GAMA-PBP public web portal, and through the California State Water Resources Control Board GAMA public groundwater information system.

California↗
USGS2025

Evaluating hydrologic data products for scientific and management applications related to potential future streamflow conditions in the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers

The hydrology of the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers is a fundamental driver of ecosystem patterns and processes across a large portion of the United States. Quantitative hydrologic data for the main stems of these rivers underlie numerous scientific investigations, statistical models, and decision-making processes for local, State, and Federal agencies involved in the Upper Mississippi River Restoration program. Although historical hydrologic data exist, data representing potential future conditions of the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers lack the resolution necessary to anticipate biotic and abiotic responses to altered hydrology and to determine resilient management actions. A source of future hydrologic scenarios is the readily available LOCA–VIC–mizuRoute hydrologic data products (named for the chain of models the data are produced from—localized constructed analogs, Variable Infiltration Capacity macroscale hydrological model, and the mizuRoute hydrologic routing model—that we shorten further to LVM in this report) that include simulated discharges for historic and future timeframes. The objective of this study is to assess the reliability of the hydrologic data products for their use in Upper Mississippi River Restoration program applications. Key study questions are (1) do the hydrologic data products reproduce characteristics of hydrology necessary to support ecological modeling and restoration decision-making applications within the Upper Mississippi River Restoration program? and (2) are there geographic differences in the reliability of the hydrologic data products? Seven characteristics of river hydrology were selected related to flow magnitude, seasonality, and regime for evaluation. The seven characteristics were calculated using observed and historical simulated hydrologic data at 19 U.S. Geological Survey streamgages throughout the basins of the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers; two streamgages are located on the main stem of the Mississippi River and two streamgages are located on the main stem of the Illinois River. Statistical comparisons between observed and historical simulated characteristics indicated that the hydrologic data products did not reliably represent historical hydrologic conditions in the basin or main stem. The hydrologic data products we evaluated could not reliably capture the overall hydrologic regime or flow magnitudes; the latter is evidenced by substantial underestimates of discharge at most streamgages. Seasonal hydrologic characteristics were captured more reliably than flow magnitude, but overall correspondence was low for most streamgages. A weak latitudinal pattern in seasonal characteristics indicated the hydrologic data products poorly represent streamflow timing in snow-affected regions of the basin. Discrepancies in magnitude, seasonality, and regime indicate the potential for multiple sources of error. Because poor correspondence was present across all 19 streamgages, it was not possible to identify specific drivers of poor performance (that is, drainage area or geography). The modeling chain should be evaluated for biases associated with meteorologic forcing data, as well as hydrologic model formulation and calibration. We conclude that the hydrologic data products we evaluated appear unsuitable for applications tied to habitat and ecosystem restoration and management in the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers. Plans to develop a future hydrology dataset for the Upper Mississippi River Restoration program would benefit from ongoing work to improve global climate model output downscaling methods, to improve hydrologic models, to make use of innovations in machine-learning approaches for projecting hydrology, and other efforts. The framework developed herein to evaluate hydrometeorological outputs generated using global climate models for a specific water resources application is a transferrable approach that could be applied to other data products and river systems.

Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Sout↗
USGS2026

Effect of mineral deposit data on predictions from the three-part approach to quantitative mineral resource assessment—A study of 16 previous U.S. Geological Survey assessments

The three-part approach to quantitative mineral resource assessment requires information about the properties of undiscovered mineral deposits in an assessment area. These properties are unknown, so the properties of discovered mineral deposits of the same mineral deposit type are used instead. In the three-part approach, these discovered mineral deposits come from around the world, and their properties constitute the pooled data for that mineral deposit type. Alternatively, these discovered mineral deposits could come from the assessment area, and their properties constitute the tract data for that mineral deposit type. Tract data may be more representative of the undiscovered mineral deposits in the assessment area than the pooled data. The goal of this study was to determine whether resource predictions using pooled data are equivalent to resource predictions using tract data. To this end, 16 previous U.S Geological Survey assessments were studied. For each assessment, resources were predicted for one undiscovered mineral deposit in the assessment area. One set of predictions used pooled data, and another used tract data. The two sets of predictions were compared with an equivalence test, using the six assessment statistics that are commonly reported for mineral resource assessments. Practical equivalence is the condition that two corresponding assessment statistics are within a factor of 1.5 of one another. For each of 2 assessments, all 6 assessment statistics were practically equivalent. For both assessments, the assessment statistics from the pooled data, relative to the corresponding assessment statistics from the tract data, ranged from 1.30 times smaller to 1.03 times larger. For each of 14 assessments, 1 or more of the 6 assessment statistics were not practically equivalent. The assessment statistics from the pooled data, relative to the corresponding assessment statistics from the tract data, ranged from 26.6 times smaller to 5.53 times larger. The use of pooled data has been a standard procedure in the three-part approach since at least 1986. The 16 assessments in this study are not a representative sample of those prior assessments that used pooled data. So, it is inappropriate to use the study results to infer whether pooled data affected the resource predictions for those prior assessments.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2016

Geometric quality assessment of lidar data based on swath overlap

This paper provides guidelines on quantifying the relative horizontal and vertical errors observed between conjugate features in the overlapping regions of lidar data. The quantification of these errors is important because their presence quantifies the geometric quality of the data. A data set can be said to have good geometric quality if measurements of identical features, regardless of their position or orientation, yield identical results. Good geometric quality indicates that the data are produced using sensor models that are working as they are mathematically designed, and data acquisition processes are not introducing any unforeseen distortion in the data. High geometric quality also leads to high geolocation accuracy of the data when the data acquisition process includes coupling the sensor with geopositioning systems. Current specifications (e.g. Heidemann 2014) do not provide adequate means to quantitatively measure these errors, even though they are required to be reported. Current accuracy measurement and reporting practices followed in the industry and as recommended by data specification documents also potentially underestimate the inter-swath errors, including the presence of systematic errors in lidar data. Hence they pose a risk to the user in terms of data acceptance (i.e. a higher potential for Type II error indicating risk of accepting potentially unsuitable data). For example, if the overlap area is too small or if the sampled locations are close to the center of overlap, or if the errors are sampled in flat regions when there are residual pitch errors in the data, the resultant Root Mean Square Differences (RMSD) can still be small. To avoid this, the following are suggested to be used as criteria for defining the inter-swath quality of data: a) Median Discrepancy Angle b) Mean and RMSD of Horizontal Errors using DQM measured on sloping surfaces c) RMSD for sampled locations from flat areas (defined as areas with less than 5 degrees of slope) It is suggested that 4000-5000 points are uniformly sampled in the overlapping regions of the point cloud, and depending on the surface roughness, to measure the discrepancy between swaths. Care must be taken to sample only areas of single return points only. Point-to-Plane distance based data quality measures are determined for each sample point. These measurements are used to determine the above mentioned parameters. This paper details the measurements and analysis of measurements required to determine these metrics, i.e. Discrepancy Angle, Mean and RMSD of errors in flat regions and horizontal errors obtained using measurements extracted from sloping regions (slope greater than 10 degrees). The research is a result of an ad-hoc joint working group of the US Geological Survey and the American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ASPRS) Airborne Lidar Committee.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2002

Narrowing historical uncertainty: probabilistic classification of ambiguously identified tree species in historical forest survey data

Historical data have increasingly become appreciated for insight into the past conditions of ecosystems. Uses of such data include assessing the extent of ecosystem change; deriving ecological baselines for management, restoration, and modeling; and assessing the importance of past conditions on the composition and function of current systems. One historical data set of this type is the Public Land Survey (PLS) of the United States General Land Office, which contains data on multiple tree species, sizes, and distances recorded at each survey point, located at half-mile (0.8 km) intervals on a 1-mi (1.6 km) grid. This survey method was begun in the 1790s on US federal lands extending westward from Ohio. Thus, the data have the potential of providing a view of much of the US landscape from the mid-1800s, and they have been used extensively for this purpose. However, historical data sources, such as those describing the species composition of forests, can often be limited in the detail recorded and the reliability of the data, since the information was often not originally recorded for ecological purposes. Forest trees are sometimes recorded ambiguously, using generic or obscure common names. For the PLS data of northern Wisconsin, USA, we developed a method to classify ambiguously identified tree species using logistic regression analysis, using data on trees that were clearly identified to species and a set of independent predictor variables to build the models. The models were first created on partial data sets for each species and then tested for fit against the remaining data. Validations were conducted using repeated, random subsets of the data. Model prediction accuracy ranged from 81% to 96% in differentiating congeneric species among oak, pine, ash, maple, birch, and elm. Major predictor variables were tree size, associated species, landscape classes indicative of soil type, and spatial location within the study region. Results help to clarify ambiguities formerly present in maps of historic ecosystems for the region and can be applied to PLS datasets elsewhere, as well as other sources of ambiguous historical data. Mapping the newly classified data with ecological land units provides additional information on the distribution, abundance, and associations of tree species, as well as their relationships to environmental gradients before the industrial period, and clarifies the identities of species formerly mapped only to genus. We offer some caveats on the appropriate use of data derived in this way, as well as describing their potential.

Ecosystems↗
USGS2017

Archive of bathymetry data collected in South Florida from 1995 to 2015

Description Land development and alterations of the ecosystem in south Florida over the past 100 years have decreased freshwater and increased nutrient flows into many of Florida's estuaries, bays, and coastal regions. As a result, there has been a decrease in the water quality in many of these critical habitats, often prompting seagrass die-offs and reduced fish and aquatic life populations. Restoration of water quality in many of these habitats will depend partly upon using numerical-circulation and sediment-transport models to establish water-quality targets and to assess progress toward reaching restoration targets. Application of these models is often complicated because of complex sea floor topography and tidal flow regimes. Consequently, accurate and modern sea-floor or bathymetry maps are critical for numerical modeling research. Modern bathymetry data sets will also permit a comparison to historical data in order to help assess sea-floor changes within these critical habitats. New and detailed data sets also support marine biology studies to help understand migratory and feeding habitats of marine life. This data series is a compilation of 13 mapping projects conducted in south Florida between 1995 and 2015 and archives more than 45 million bathymetric soundings. Data were collected primarily with a single beam sound navigation and ranging (sonar) system called SANDS developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in 1993. Bathymetry data for the Estero Bay project were supplemented with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Experimental Advanced Airborne Research Lidar (EAARL) system. Data from eight rivers in southwest Florida were collected with an interferometric swath bathymetry system. The projects represented in this data series were funded by the USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program (CMGP), the USGS South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Project- formally named Placed Based Studies, and other non-Federal agencies. The purpose of the data collection for all these projects was to support one or more of the following scientific aspects: numerical model applications, sea floor change analysis, or marine habitat investigations. This report serves as an archive of processed bathymetry sounding data, digital bathymetric contours, digital bathymetric maps, sea floor surface grids, and formal Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) metadata. Refer to the Abbreviations page for explanations of acronyms and abbreviations used in this report. Since 2006, the USGS St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center (SPCMSC) assigns a unique identifier or Field Activity Number (FAN) for each field data collection. Projects described in this report conducted prior to 2006 do not have a FAN. Data from the 13 projects presented in this report provided critical hydrographic information to support multiple science projects in south Florida. The projects and the types of sounding data collected are: Florida Bay (1995-1999) - single-beam Lake Okeechobee (2001) - single-beam Tampa Bay (2001-2004) - single-beam Caloosahatchee River (2002)- single-beam Estero Bay to Matlacha Pass and offshore to Wiggins Pass (2003) - single-beam and airborne lidar North and Northwest Forks of the Loxahatchee and Lower St. Lucie Rivers (2003) - single-beam South Charlotte Harbor and offshore Sanibel Island (2003-2004) - single-beam Shark River and Trout Creek (2004) - single-beam and interferometric swath Southwest Florida Rivers (2004) - interferometric swath Offshore from Wiggins Pass to Cape Romano (2005) - single-beam Ten Thousand Islands (2009) - single-beam Lemon Bay (2011) - single-beam Southwest Florida Rivers (2015) - interferometric swath

Florida↗
USGS2016

Post-disaster supply chain interdependent critical infrastructure system restoration: A review of data necessary and available for modeling

The majority of restoration strategies in the wake of large-scale disasters have focused on short-term emergency response solutions. Few consider medium- to long-term restoration strategies to reconnect urban areas to national supply chain interdependent critical infrastructure systems (SCICI). These SCICI promote the effective flow of goods, services, and information vital to the economic vitality of an urban environment. To re-establish the connectivity that has been broken during a disaster between the different SCICI, relationships between these systems must be identified, formulated, and added to a common framework to form a system-level restoration plan. To accomplish this goal, a considerable collection of SCICI data is necessary. The aim of this paper is to review what data are required for model construction, the accessibility of these data, and their integration with each other. While a review of publicly available data reveals a dearth of real-time data to assist modeling long-term recovery following an extreme event, a significant amount of static data does exist and these data can be used to model the complex interdependencies needed. For the sake of illustration, a particular SCICI (transportation) is used to highlight the challenges of determining the interdependencies and creating models capable of describing the complexity of an urban environment with the data publicly available. Integration of such data as is derived from public domain sources is readily achieved in a geospatial environment, after all geospatial infrastructure data are the most abundant data source and while significant quantities of data can be acquired through public sources, a significant effort is still required to gather, develop, and integrate these data from multiple sources to build a complete model. Therefore, while continued availability of high quality, public information is essential for modeling efforts in academic as well as government communities, a more streamlined approach to a real-time acquisition and integration of these data is essential.

Data Science Journal↗
USGS2000

Water-quality and lake-stage data for Wisconsin lakes, water year 1999

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with local and other agencies, collects data at selected lakes throughout Wisconsin. These data, accumulated over many years, provide a data base for developing an improved understanding of the water quality of lakes. To make these data available to interested parties outside the USGS, the data are published annually in this report series. The location of water-quality and lake-stage stations in Wisconsin for water year 1999 are shown in figure 1. A water year is the 12-month period from October 1 through September 30. It is designated by the calendar year in which it ends. Thus, the period October 1, 1998 through September 30, 1999 is called "water year 1999." The purpose of this report is to provide information about the chemical and physical characteristics of Wisconsin lakes. Data that have been collected at specific lakes, and information to aid in the interpretation of those data, are included in this report. Data collected include measurements of in-lake water quality and lake stage. Time series of Secchi depths, surface total phosphorus and chlorophyll a concentrations collected during non-frozen periods are usually included for lakes with two or more years of data. Graphs of vertical profiles of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and specific conductance are included for sites where these parameters were measured. Descriptive information for each lake includes: location of the lake, area of the lake's watershed, period for which data are available, revisions to previously published records, and pertinent remarks. Additional data, such as streamflow and water quality in tributary and outlet streams of some of the lakes, are published in another volume: "Water Resources Data- Wisconsin, 1999." Water-resources data, including stage and discharge data at most streamflow-gaging stations, are available throught the World Wide Web on the Internet. The Wisconsin District's home page is at http://wi.water.usgs.gov/. Information on the Wisconsin District's Lakes Program is found at wi.water.usgs.gov/lake/index.html.

Wisconsin↗
USGS2001

Water-quality and lake stage data for Wisconsin lakes, water year 2000

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with local and other agencies, collects data at selected lakes throughout Wisconsin. These data, accumulated over many years, provide a data base for developing an improved understanding of the water quality of lakes. To make these data available to interested parties outside the USGS, the data are published annually in this report series. The locations of water-quality and lake-stage stations in Wisconsin for water year 2000 are shown in figure 1. A water year is the 12-month period from October 1 through September 30. It is designated by the calendar year in which it ends. Thus, the period October 1, 1999 through September 30, 2000 is called "water year 2000." The purpose of this report is to provide information about the chemical and physical characteristics "of Wisconsin lakes. Data that have been collected at specific lakes, and information to aid in the interpretation of those data, are included in this report. Data collected include measurements of in-lake water quality and lake stage. Time series of Secchi depths, surface total phosphorus and chlorophyll a concentrations collected during non-frozen periods are usually included for lakes with two or more years of data. Graphs of vertical profiles of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and specific conductance are included for sites where these parameters were measured. Descriptive information for each lake includes: location of the lake, area of the lake's watershed, period for which data are available, revisions to previously published records, and pertinent remarks. Additional data, such as streamflow and water quality in tributary and outlet streams of some of the lakes, are published in another volume: "Water Resources Data- Wisconsin, 2000." Water-resources data, including stage and discharge data at most streamflow-gaging stations, are available throught the World Wide Web on the Internet. The Wisconsin District's home page is at http://wi.water.usgs.gov/. Information on the Wisconsin District's Lakes Program is found atwi.water.usgs.gov/lake/index.html.

Wisconsin↗
USGS2000

Statistical Approaches to Interpretation of Local, Regional, and National Highway-Runoff and Urban-Stormwater Data

Decision makers need viable methods for the interpretation of local, regional, and national-highway runoff and urban-stormwater data including flows, concentrations and loads of chemical constituents and sediment, potential effects on receiving waters, and the potential effectiveness of various best management practices (BMPs). Valid (useful for intended purposes), current, and technically defensible stormwater-runoff models are needed to interpret data collected in field studies, to support existing highway and urban-runoffplanning processes, to meet National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements, and to provide methods for computation of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) systematically and economically. Historically, conceptual, simulation, empirical, and statistical models of varying levels of detail, complexity, and uncertainty have been used to meet various data-quality objectives in the decision-making processes necessary for the planning, design, construction, and maintenance of highways and for other land-use applications. Water-quality simulation models attempt a detailed representation of the physical processes and mechanisms at a given site. Empirical and statistical regional water-quality assessment models provide a more general picture of water quality or changes in water quality over a region. All these modeling techniques share one common aspect-their predictive ability is poor without suitable site-specific data for calibration. To properly apply the correct model, one must understand the classification of variables, the unique characteristics of water-resources data, and the concept of population structure and analysis. Classifying variables being used to analyze data may determine which statistical methods are appropriate for data analysis. An understanding of the characteristics of water-resources data is necessary to evaluate the applicability of different statistical methods, to interpret the results of these techniques, and to use tools and techniques that account for the unique nature of water-resources data sets. Populations of data on stormwater-runoff quantity and quality are often best modeled as logarithmic transformations. Therefore, these factors need to be considered to form valid, current, and technically defensible stormwater-runoff models. Regression analysis is an accepted method for interpretation of water-resources data and for prediction of current or future conditions at sites that fit the input data model. Regression analysis is designed to provide an estimate of the average response of a system as it relates to variation in one or more known variables. To produce valid models, however, regression analysis should include visual analysis of scatterplots, an examination of the regression equation, evaluation of the method design assumptions, and regression diagnostics. A number of statistical techniques are described in the text and in the appendixes to provide information necessary to interpret data by use of appropriate methods. Uncertainty is an important part of any decisionmaking process. In order to deal with uncertainty problems, the analyst needs to know the severity of the statistical uncertainty of the methods used to predict water quality. Statistical models need to be based on information that is meaningful, representative, complete, precise, accurate, and comparable to be deemed valid, up to date, and technically supportable. To assess uncertainty in the analytical tools, the modeling methods, and the underlying data set, all of these components need be documented and communicated in an accessible format within project publications.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2005

Quality-assurance data for routine water analyses by the U.S. Geological Survey Laboratory in Troy, New York—July 1995 through June 1997

The laboratory for analysis of low-ionic-strength water at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) office in Troy, N.Y. analyzes samples collected by USGS projects in the Northeast. The laboratory’s quality-assurance program is based on internal and interlaboratory quality-assurance samples and quality-control procedures developed to ensure proper sample collection, processing, and analysis. For the time period addressed in this report, the quality-assurance/quality-control data were stored in the laboratory’s SAS data-management system, which provides efficient review, compilation, and plotting of quality-assurance/quality-control data. This report presents and discusses samples analyzed from July 1995 through June 1997. Quality-control results for 19 analytical procedures were evaluated for bias and precision. Control charts show that data from ten of the analytical procedures were biased throughout the analysis period for either high-concentration or low-concentration samples but were within control limits; these procedures were: acid-neutralizing capacity, total monomeric aluminum, ammonium, calcium, chloride, dissolved organic carbon, magnesium, nitrate (ion chromatography), nitrate (colorimetric method), and sulfate. Four of the analytical procedures were occasionally biased but were within control limits; they were: fluoride, pH, silicon, and sodium. Results from the filter-blank and analytical-blank analyses indicate that all analytical procedures in which blanks were run were within control limits, although values for a few blanks were outside the control limits. Sampling and analysis precision are evaluated herein in terms of the coefficient of variation obtained for triplicate samples in 14 of the 19 procedures. Data-quality objectives (DQO’s) were met by at least 92 percent of the samples analyzed in all procedures except acid neutralizing capacity (80 percent of samples met objectives), total monomeric aluminum (87 percent of samples met objectives), organic monomeric aluminum (89 percent of samples met objectives), and chloride (89 percent of samples met objectives). The data are insufficient to evaluate the DQO’s for total aluminum. Results of the USGS interlaboratory Standard Reference Sample Program indicated acceptable data quality for most constituents over the time period. The results of the P-sample (low-ionic strength constituent) analysis indicated high data quality with good ratings in all studies. The T-sample (trace constituent) had unacceptable ratings in two studies, but received satisfactory ratings in the others. The N-sample (nutrient constituent) studies had an unacceptable rating in one and an excellent rating in the other. Environment Canada’s NWRI program results indicated that at least 90 percent of the samples met data-quality objectives in 9 of the 12 analyses; exceptions were calcium, chloride, and silicon. Data-quality objectives were not met for calcium samples in two NWRI studies, but all of the samples analyzed were within control limits for the remaining studies. Data-quality objectives were not met for 32 percent of samples analyzed for chloride and 27 percent of samples analyzed for silicon. Results from blind reference-sample analyses indicated that data-quality objectives were met by at least 90 percent of the calcium, pH, potassium, and sodium samples. Data-quality objectives were met by 77 percent of the chloride samples, 83 percent of the magnesium samples, and 80 percent of the sulfate samples. There is insufficient data to evaluate the specific conductance samples.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1987

Water-quality data-collection activities in Colorado and Ohio; Phase II, Evaluation of 1984 field and laboratory quality-assurance practices

Serious questions have been raised by Congress about the usefulness of water-quality data for addressing issues of regional and national scope and, especially, for characterizing the current quality of the Nation's streams and ground water. In response, the U.S. Geological Survey has undertaken a pilot study in Colorado and Ohio to (1) determine the characteristics of current (1984) water-quality data-collection activities of Federal, regional, State, and local agencies, and academic institutions; and (2) determine how well the data from these activities, collected for various purposes and using different procedures, can be used to improve our ability to answer major broad-scope questions, such as: A. What are (or were) natural or near-natural water-quality conditions? B. What are existing water-quality conditions? C. How has water quality changed, and how do the changes relate to human activities? Colorado and Ohio were chosen for the pilot study largely because they represent regions with different types of waterquality concerns and programs. The study has been divided into three phases, the objectives of which are: Phase I--Inventory water-quality data-collection programs, including costs, and identify those programs that met a set of broad criteria for producing data that are potentially appropriate for water-quality assessments of regional and national scope. Phase II--Evaluate the quality assurance of field and laboratory procedures used in producing the data from programs that met the broad criteria of Phase I. Phase III--Compile the qualifying data and evaluate the adequacy of this data base for addressing selected water-quality questions of regional and national scope. Water-quality data are collected by a large number of organizations for diverse purposes ranging from meeting statutory requirements to research on water chemistry. Combining these individual data bases is an appealing and potentially cost-effective way to attempt to develop a data base adequate for regional or national water-quality assessments. However, to combine data from diverse sources, field and laboratory procedures used to produce the data need to be equivalent and need to meet specific qualityassurance standards. It is these factors that are the focus of Phase II, which is described in this report. In the first phase of this study, an inventory was made of all public organizations and academic institutions that undertook water-quality data-collection activities in Colorado and Ohio in 1984. Water-quality programs identified in Phase I were tested against a set of broad screening criteria. A total of 44 waterquality programs in Colorado and 29 programs in Ohio passed the Phase-I screen and were examined in Phase II. These programs accounted for an estimated 165,000 analyses in Colorado and 76,300 analyses in Ohio for 20 selected constituents and properties. Although qualifying programs included both surface- and ground-water sampling, they emphasized surface waters and produced few groundwater analyses (3,660 for Colorado and 470 for Ohio). For Phase II, information about field and laboratory qualityassurance practices was provided by each organization and its supporting laboratories through questionnaires. This information was evaluated against a set of specific criteria for field and laboratory practices. The criteria were developed from guidelines published by public agencies and professional organizations such as the American Public Health Association, the U.Sc, Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. Geological Survey. Each of the eight criteria that comprise the Phase-II screen fall into one of two major categories--field practices or laboratory practices.

Colorado, Ohio↗
USGS1989

Description of data files compiled for the Central Midwest Regional Aquifer-System Analysis

Several types of geologic and hydrologic data were collected and compiled as part of the Central Midwest Regional Aquifer-System Analysis. The study described the hydrology of Cambrian-age through Cretaceous-age rocks in all of Kansas and Nebraska and parts of eight other states. Information from both water wells and petroleum wells was obtained from numerous State, Federal, and private sources. The completeness, quality, and distribution of the data varies considerably. Most data files contain data selected to represent the regional scope of the study. The log data file contains about 850 lithologic logs and about 750 geophysical logs. The hydraulic-head data file contains about 1 ,400 measured water levels and about 2,600 values of equivalent freshwater head derived from drill-stem-test analyses. The hydrochemical data file contains about 2,900 water quality analyses. The aquifer-property data file contains about 1,050 values. In addition to site-specific data, areal information in the form of model-data arrays is available for initial hydraulic head, transmissivity, and vertical leakance. These data describe the major geohydrologic units studied in terms of a three-dimensional grid, 28 rows x 33 columns x 5 layers. Parts of the hydraulic-head, hydrochemical, and aquifer-property data files are proprietary. The fluid-withdrawal data file was developed for study use only. Most other data described herein are available on magnetic tape from the U.S. Geological Survey in Lawrence, Kansas. (USGS)

Open-File Report↗