USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · ofr20081308

Description of Existing Data for Integrated Landscape Monitoring in the Puget Sound Basin, Washington

Abstract

This report summarizes existing geospatial data and monitoring programs for the Puget Sound Basin in northwestern Washington. This information was assembled as a preliminary data-development task for the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Puget Sound Integrated Landscape Monitoring (PSILM) pilot project. The PSILM project seeks to support natural resource decision-making by developing a 'whole system' approach that links ecological processes at the landscape level to the local level (Benjamin and others, 2008). Part of this effort will include building the capacity to provide cumulative information about impacts that cross jurisdictional and regulatory boundaries, such as cumulative effects of land-cover change and shoreline modification, or region-wide responses to climate change. The PSILM project study area is defined as the 23 HUC-8 (hydrologic unit code) catchments that comprise the watersheds that drain into Puget Sound and their near-shore environments. The study area includes 13 counties and more than four million people. One goal of the PSILM geospatial database is to integrate spatial data collected at multiple scales across the Puget Sound Basin marine and terrestrial landscape. The PSILM work plan specifies an iterative process that alternates between tasks associated with data development and tasks associated with research or strategy development. For example, an initial work-plan goal was to delineate the study area boundary. Geospatial data required to address this task included data from ecological regions, watersheds, jurisdictions, and other boundaries. This assemblage of data provided the basis for identifying larger research issues and delineating the study-area boundary based on these research needs. Once the study-area boundary was agreed upon, the next iteration between data development and research activities was guided by questions about data availability, data extent, data abundance, and data types. This report is not intended as an exhaustive compilation of all available geospatial data, rather, it is a collection of information about geospatial data that can be used to help answer the suite of questions posed after the study-area boundary was defined. This information will also be useful to the PSILM team for future project tasks, such as assessing monitoring gaps, exploring monitoring-design strategies, identifying and deriving landscape indicators and metrics, and visual geographic communication. The two main geospatial data types referenced in this report - base-reference layers and monitoring data - originated from numerous and varied sources. In addition to collecting information and metadata about the base-reference layers, the data also were collected for project needs, such as developing maps for visual communication among team members and with outside groups. In contrast, only information about the data was typically required for the monitoring data. The information on base-reference layers and monitoring data included in this report is only as detailed as what was readily available from the sources themselves. Although this report may appear to lack consistency between data records, the varying degree of details contained in this report are merely a reflection of varying source detail. This compilation is just a beginning. All data listed also are being catalogued in spreadsheets and knowledge-management systems. Our efforts are continual as we develop a geospatial catalog for the PSILM pilot project.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 44° to 49° latitude; -124.5° to -119° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Danielle P. Aiello, Alicia A. Torregrosa, Allyson L. Jason, Tracy L. Fuentes, Edward G. Josberger. 2008. Description of Existing Data for Integrated Landscape Monitoring in the Puget Sound Basin, Washington. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20081308

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona