SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Nature Conservation”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 253 records · Page 14Linked to original sources

USGS2013

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Texas

Texas↗

USGS2014

Characterization of salinity loads and selenium loads in the Smith Fork Creek region of the Lower Gunnison River Basin, western Colorado, 2008-2009

The lower Gunnison River Basin of the Colorado River Basin has elevated salinity and selenium levels. The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act of June 24, 1974 (Public Law 93–320, amended by Public Law 98–569), authorized investigation of the Lower Gunnison Basin Unit Salinity Control Project by the U.S. Department of the Interior. The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and the Natural Resources Conservation Service are responsible for assessing and implementing measures to reduce salinity and selenium loading in the Colorado River Basin. Cost-sharing programs help farmers, ranchers, and canal companies improve the efficiency of water delivery systems and irrigation practices. The delivery systems (irrigation canals) have been identified as potential sources of seepage, which can contribute to salinity loading. Reclamation wants to identify seepage from irrigation systems in order to maximize the effectiveness of the various salinity-control methods, such as polyacrylamide lining and piping of irrigation canals programs. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Reclamation, developed a study to characterize the salinity and selenium loading of seven subbasins in the Smith Fork Creek region and identify where control efforts can be maximized to reduce salinity and selenium loading. Total salinity loads ranged from 27.9±19.1 tons per year (t/yr) to 87,500±80,500 t/yr. The four natural subbasins—BkKm, RCG1, RCG2, and SF1—had total salinity loads of 27.9±19.1 t/yr, 371±248 t/yr, 2,180±1,590 t/yr, and 4,200±2,720 t/yr, respectively. The agriculturally influenced sites had salinity loads that ranged from 7,580±6,900 t/yr to 87,500±80,500 t/yr. Salinity loads for the subbasins AL1, B1, CK1, SF2, and SF3 were 7,580±6,900 t/yr; 28,300±26,700 t/yr; 48,700±36,100 t/yr; 87,500±80,900 t/yr; and 52,200±31,800 t/yr, respectively. The agricultural salinity load was separated into three components: tail water, deep percolation, and canal seepage. Annual tail-water salinity loads ranged from 48.0 to 2,750 tons in the Smith Fork Creek region. The largest tail-water salinity load was in subbasin SF3, and the lowest salinity load from tail water was in subbasin R1. The remaining four agricultural subbasins—AL1, B1, CK1, and SF2—had tail-water loads of 285 t/yr, 180 t/yr, 333 t/yr, and 1,700 t/yr, respectively. The deep percolation component of the agricultural salinity load ranged from 3,300 t/yr in subbasin AL1 to 51,800 t/yr in subbasin SF2. Subbasins R1, B1, CK1, and SF3 had deep percolation salinity loads of 4,940 t/yr, 15,200 t/yr, 21,200 t/yr, and 23,600 t/yr, respectively. The canal seepage component of the agricultural salinity load ranged from 1,100 t/yr in subbasin AL1 to 15,300 t/yr in subbasin CK1. Subbasins B1, R1, SF2, and SF3 had canal seepage salinity loads of 6,610 t/yr, 3,890 t/yr, 9,430 t/yr, and 12,100 t/yr, respectively. Four natural subbasins—RCG1, RCG2, SF1, and BkKm—were used to calculate natural salinity yields for the remaining subbasins. The appropriate salinity yield was applied to the corresponding number of acres and resulted in a natural salinity load for each subbasin. The annual salinity yields for the Dakota Sandstone and Burro Canyon Formation, Mancos Shale, and crystalline geologies are 0.217 tons per acre (t/acre), 0.113 t/acre, and 0.151 t/acre, respectively. Three of the four natural subbasins had little to no selenium load based on the measured data and calculated selenium loads. Subbasins RCG1 and RCG2 had surface-water selenium loads of 0.106±0.024 pounds (lb) and 0.00 lb, respectively. Subbasin BkKm did not have an estimated surface-water selenium load because of the lack of any water-quality samples during the study period. The subbasin designated by site CK1 had the highest selenium load with 135±38.7 lb, and the next highest subbasins in decreasing order are B1, SF3, AL1, SF1, and R1 with selenium loads of 69.6±28.4 lb, 56.5±23.8 lb, 30.5±16.6 lb, 26.8±6.95 lb, and 15.6±27.7 lb, respectively.

Colorado↗

USGS2023

New indicators of ecological resilience and invasion resistance to support prioritization and management in the sagebrush biome, United States

Ecosystem transformations to altered or novel ecological states are accelerating across the globe. Indicators of ecological resilience to disturbance and resistance to invasion can aid in assessing risks and prioritizing areas for conservation and restoration. The sagebrush biome encompasses parts of 11 western states and is experiencing rapid transformations due to human population growth, invasive species, altered disturbance regimes, and climate change. We built on prior use of static soil moisture and temperature regimes to develop new, ecologically relevant and climate responsive indicators of both resilience and resistance. Our new indicators were based on climate and soil water availability variables derived from process-based ecohydrological models that allow predictions of future conditions. We asked: (1) Which variables best indicate resilience and resistance? (2) What are the relationships among the indicator variables and resilience and resistance categories? (3) How do patterns of resilience and resistance vary across the area? We assembled a large database ( n = 24,045) of vegetation sample plots from regional monitoring programs and derived multiple climate and soil water availability variables for each plot from ecohydrological simulations. We used USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service National Soils Survey Information, Ecological Site Descriptions, and expert knowledge to develop and assign ecological types and resilience and resistance categories to each plot. We used random forest models to derive a set of 19 climate and water availability variables that best predicted resilience and resistance categories. Our models had relatively high multiclass accuracy (80% for resilience; 75% for resistance). Top indicator variables for both resilience and resistance included mean temperature, coldest month temperature, climatic water deficit, and summer and driest month precipitation. Variable relationships and patterns differed among ecoregions but reflected environmental gradients; low resilience and resistance were indicated by warm and dry conditions with high climatic water deficits, and moderately high to high resilience and resistance were characterized by cooler and moister conditions with low climatic water deficits. The new, ecologically-relevant indicators provide information on the vulnerability of resources and likely success of management actions, and can be used to develop new approaches and tools for prioritizing areas for conservation and restoration actions.

Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution↗

USGS2007

Strategic Plan for the North American Breeding Bird Survey: 2006-2010

Executive Summary The mission of the North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) is to provide scientifically credible measures of the status and trends of North American bird populations at continental and regional scales to inform biologically sound conservation and management actions. Determining population trends, relative abundance, and distributions of North American avifauna is critical for identifying conservation priorities, determining appropriate conservation actions, and evaluating those actions. The BBS program, jointly coordinated by the U.S. Geological Survey and Environment Canada’s Canadian Wildlife Service, provides the U.S. and Canadian Federal governments, state and provincial agencies, other conservation practitioners, and the general public with science-based avian population trend estimates and other information for regional and national species’ population assessments. Despite the demonstrated value of the BBS for furthering avian conservation across North America, its importance is often underappreciated, and it is underfunded compared with many other government-supported programs that report on status of the environment. Today, BBS resources, adjusted for inflation, are below the amount allocated in the 1970s and are still only sufficient to support two biologists. Yet the number of routes, participants, data, and data requests has quadrupled. Data and information management and delivery requirements and security concerns, non-existent in 1966, impose further demands on BBS resources. In addition, the Mexican expansion of the BBS offers new hope for a truly continental approach to avian conservation, but also brings additional challenges. Meeting the goals of this plan will take cooperation among myriad stakeholders; yet, even with collaboration, most objectives of this plan will be unattainable if BBS program support is not increased. The BBS developed this strategic plan to help set priorities and identify resources required for the program to continue to meet the evolving needs of the conservation community for information on bird population change. By setting clear goals, strategies, and measures of success, this plan provides a cohesive framework and vision for maintenance and development of the BBS. The plan identifies two major goals for the BBS, with a number of strategies and objectives to achieve these goals. Over the next 5 years, progress made in addressing each long-term goal and its associated 5-year strategies and objectives will gage the plan’s success. Specific actions, projected outcomes, and measures of success related to accomplishing these are outlined in Table 1, with a timeline in Table 2. The two main goals for the program, with a summary of the strategies to achieve them, are: Goal 1: Collect scientifically credible measures of the status and trends of North American bird populations at continental and regional scales. The North American Breeding Bird Survey will continue to support North American natural resource conservation through the collection of scientifically credible measures of the status and trends of continental bird populations. While doing this, the BBS will work to improve the science behind the program to better meet its mission and the changing needs of the avian conservation community. In partnership with collaborators, the BBS will address detection probability bias and habitat bias, improve analytical methods, and more fully assess and account for observer quality. Moreover, the BBS will improve the quality and breadth of avian population data through strategic increases in route density and the establishment of a Mexican BBS program. Goal 2: Ensure BBS data and analytical results are widely available and easily accessible for use by the avian conservation and management communities. At the heart of the BBS lies a four-million-record database containing more than 40 years of data on more than 600 bird species. These data are of no value if not well maintained, appropriately analyzed, and widely and easily accessible. The USGS has greatly improved data management and accessibility in recent years. Trend estimates were first made available via the Internet in the mid-1990s, followed closely by the raw data with baseline metadata and standard operating procedures. Nevertheless, numerous enhancements to data management and the usability of BBS results will greatly improve the ability of the BBS to serve avian conservation goals. The BBS needs to ensure that BBS data and results presented on the web site use the best data-management practices and statistical methods, with adequate documentation for users to understand them and any differences between different trend estimates. Moreover, the BBS needs to increase communication with BBS partners and stakeholders to ensure that it continues to meet the avian population status and trends needs of the conservation community and to encourage the development of new products. Working with collaborators, the BBS will develop tools for integrating environmental parameters like habitat change into the analyses, and for integrating BBS data with other avian survey results. In addition, the BBS will continue to improve data and database management through the incorporation of additional data and data fields, such as georeferenced stop locations and more complete metadata for the raw data and results, thus enhancing the uses that can be made of the data.

Circular↗

USGS2017

At a global scale, do climate change threatened species also face a greater number of non-climatic threats?

For many species the threats of climate change occur in a context of multiple existing threats. Given the current focus of global change ecology in identifying and understanding species vulnerable to climate change, we performed a global analysis to characterize the multi-threat context for species threatened by climate change. Utilizing 30,053 species from the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species, we sought to evaluate if species threatened by climate change are more likely threatened by a greater number of non-climatic threats than species not threatened by climate change. Our results show that species threatened by climate change are generally impacted by 21% more non-climatic threats than species not threatened by climate change. Across all species, this pattern is related to IUCN risk status, where endangered species threatened by climate change face 33% more non-climatic threats than endangered species not threatened by climate change. With the clear challenges of assessing current and projected impacts of climate change on species and ecosystems, research often requires reductionist approaches that result in downplaying this multi-threat context. This cautionary note bears relevance beyond climate change threatened species as we also found other (but not all) anthropogenic threats are also similarly associated with more threats. Our findings serve as a reminder that ecological research should seriously consider these potential threat interactions, especially for species under elevated conservation concern.

Global Ecology and Conservation↗

USGS2013

Equations for estimating bankfull channel geometry and discharge for streams in Massachusetts

Regression equations were developed for estimating bankfull geometry—width, mean depth, cross-sectional area—and discharge for streams in Massachusetts. The equations provide water-resource and conservation managers with methods for estimating bankfull characteristics at specific stream sites in Massachusetts. This information can be used for the adminstration of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Rivers Protection Act of 1996, which establishes a protected riverfront area extending from the mean annual high-water line corresponding to the elevation of bankfull discharge along each side of a perennial stream. Additionally, information on bankfull channel geometry and discharge are important to Federal, State, and local government agencies and private organizations involved in stream assessment and restoration projects. Regression equations are based on data from stream surveys at 33 sites (32 streamgages and 1 crest-stage gage operated by the U.S. Geological Survey) in and near Massachusetts. Drainage areas of the 33 sites ranged from 0.60 to 329 square miles (mi2). At 27 of the 33 sites, field data were collected and analyses were done to determine bankfull channel geometry and discharge as part of the present study. For 6 of the 33 sites, data on bankfull channel geometry and discharge were compiled from other studies done by the U.S. Geological Survey, Natural Resources Conservation Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. Similar techniques were used for field data collection and analysis for bankfull channel geometry and discharge at all 33 sites. Recurrence intervals of the bankfull discharge, which represent the frequency with which a stream fills its channel, averaged 1.53 years (median value 1.34 years) at the 33 sites. Simple regression equations were developed for bankfull width, mean depth, cross-sectional area, and discharge using drainage area, which is the most significant explanatory variable in estimating these bankfull characteristics. The use of drainage area as an explanatory variable is also the most commonly published method for estimating these bankfull characteristics. Regional curves (graphic plots) of bankfull channel geometry and discharge by drainage area are presented. The regional curves are based on the simple regression equations and can be used to estimate bankfull characteristics from drainage area. Multiple regression analysis, which includes basin characteristics in addition to drainage area, also was used to develop equations. Variability in bankfull width, mean depth, cross-sectional area, and discharge was more fully explained by the multiple regression equations that include mean-basin slope and drainage area than was explained by equations based on drainage area alone. The Massachusetts regional curves and equations developed in this study are similar, in terms of values of slopes and intercepts, to those developed for other parts of the northeastern United States. Limitations associated with site selection and development of the equations resulted in some constraints for the application of equations and regional curves presented in this report. The curves and equations are applicable to stream sites that have (1) less than about 25 percent of their drainage basin area occupied by urban land use (commercial, industrial, transportation, and high-density residential), (2) little to no streamflow regulation, especially from flood-control structures, (3) drainage basin areas greater than 0.60 mi2 and less than 329 mi2, and (4) a mean basin slope greater than 2.2 percent and less than 23.9 percent. The equations may not be applicable where streams flow through extensive wetlands. The equations also may not apply in areas of Cape Cod and the Islands and the area of southeastern Massachusetts close to Cape Cod with extensive areas of coarse-grained glacial deposits where none of the study sites are located. Regardless of the setting, the regression equations are not intended for use as the sole method of estimating bankfull characteristics; however, they may supplement field identification of the bankfull channel when used in conjunction with field verified bankfull indicators, flood-frequency analysis, or other supporting evidence.

Massachusetts↗

USGS2020

Habitat use by tiger prey in Thailand’s Western Forest Complex: What will it take to fill a half-full tiger landscape?

Tiger populations are declining globally, and depletion of major ungulate prey is an important contributing factor. To better understand factors affecting prey distribution in Thailand’s Western Forest Complex (WEFCOM), we conducted sign surveys for gaur (Bos gaurus ), banteng ( Bos javanicus ), and sambar ( Rusa unicolor ) along 3517 1-km transects and used occupancy models to identify important covariates associated with habitat use by each species. Habitat use by both gaur and sambar was lowest in areas closest to human settlements, although sambar preferred lower slopes near streams whereas gaur preferred steeper slopes at higher elevations. Banteng were found in only one of 17 protected areas (Huai Kha Khaeng [HKK] Wildlife Sanctuary), where they used low elevations and low slopes. We used these modeled relationships to predict occurrence of gaur, sambar, and banteng across each square km of the 19,000 km 2 WEFCOM landscape, using > 60 % occupancy probability to define suitable habitat use for each species. Based on this criterion, gaur and sambar occupied 28 and 50 % of suitable habitat in WEFCOM, and banteng occupied 57 % of suitable habitat in HKK. We used our models to assess the effectiveness of two hypothetical conservation initiatives. First, we modeled the impact of decreasing human activities around nine villages in the core of WEFCOM, which increased predicted suitable habitat in WEFCOM to 68 and 75 % for guar and sambar. We also modeled the extent of potential banteng habitat that still remains in the other 16 protected areas. This could result in a 4-fold increase in banteng suitable habitat in WEFCOM. This is the first study to use occupancy surveys to determine where large prey species can be restored to support management to increase the distribution of tigers, and potentially fill a half-full tiger landscape.

Journal for Nature Conservation↗

USGS2017

Conservation genetics of American crocodile, Crocodylus acutus , populations in Pacific Costa Rica

Maintaining genetic diversity is crucial for the survival and management of threatened and endangered species. In this study, we analyzed genetic diversity and population genetic structure at neutral loci in American crocodiles, Crocodylus acutus, from several areas (Parque Nacional Marino Las Baulas, Parque Nacional Santa Rosa, Parque Nacional Palo Verde, Rio Tarcoles, and Osa Conservation Area) in Pacific Costa Rica. We genotyped 184 individuals at nine microsatellite loci to describe the genetic diversity and conservation genetics between and among populations. No population was at Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium (HWE) over all loci tested and a small to moderate amount of inbreeding was present. Populations along the Pacific coast had an average heterozygosity of 0.572 across all loci. All populations were significantly differentiated from each other with both FST and RST measures of population differentiation with a greater degree of molecular variance (81%) found within populations. Our results suggest C. acutus populations in Pacific Costa Rica were not panmictic with moderate levels of genetic diversity. An effective management plan that maintains the connectivity between clusters is critical to the success of C. acutus in Pacific Costa Rica.

Nature Conservation↗

USGS2018

Genetic diversity and structure from Antillean manatee (Trichechus manatus manatus) in the southern Gulf of Mexico: Comparison between connected and isolated populations

Antillean manatees ( Trichechus manatus manatus ), a subspecies of the West Indian manatee, is listed as endangered species in the Red List of Threatened Species of the International Union for Conservation of Nature. The aims of this research were to survey on the possible regional genetic structure in the southern Gulf of Mexico and to compare genetic status of a landlocked population in Laguna de las Ilusiones (IL) with individuals from localities with no barriers to displacement and breed (open population [OP]). We analyzed 45 manatee skin samples collected from different locations in Tabasco ( n = 38, including 19 from IL), Veracruz ( n = 3), Campeche ( n = 2), and Chiapas ( n = 2). The genomic DNA was isolated and PCR amplifications were performed for each sample using 28 microsatellite loci, previously designed for West Indian manatees and described as polymorphic for this species. Two clusters ( k = 2) were identified by STRUCTURE. The analysis of both a priori populations (IL and OP) indicate that the global values of F ST and R ST ( F ST =0.049, R ST =0.077) were significant. The H E for IL was 0.38 ± 0.03 and for OP was 0.49 ± 0.01. The average number of alleles N A for IL was 2.21 ± 0.09 and for OP was 2.32 ± 0.09. The overall inbreeding coefficient was F IS =−0.013 for analyzed populations. Genetic diversity was low. The IL population had slightly lower genetic diversity compared with OP, which could be explained by isolation of that small group, so conservation plans for IL should be considered as priority.

Tropical Conservation Science↗

USGS2014

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Montana

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of Montana, elevation data are critical for flood risk management, infrastructure and construction management, agriculture and precision farming, geologic resource assessment and hazard mitigation, natural resources conservation, and other business uses. Today, high-density light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the primary sources for deriving elevation models and other datasets. Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data that are older and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The National Enhanced Elevation Assessment evaluated multiple elevation data acquisition options to determine the optimal data quality and data replacement cycle relative to cost to meet the identified requirements of the user community. The evaluation demonstrated that lidar acquisition at quality level 2 for the conterminous United States and quality level 5 ifsar data for Alaska with a 6- to 10-year acquisition cycle provided the highest benefit/cost ratios. The new 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative selected an 8-year acquisition cycle for the respective quality levels. 3DEP, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Office of Management and Budget Circular A–16 lead agency for terrestrial elevation data, responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other 3D representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

Montana↗

USGS2013

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Alabama

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of Alabama, elevation data are critical for flood risk management; infrastructure and construction management; wildfire management, planning, and response; natural resources conservation; geologic resource assessment and hazards mitigation; and other business uses. Today, high-density light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the primary sources for deriving elevation models and other datasets. Federal, State, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data that are older and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The National Enhanced Elevation Assessment evaluated multiple elevation data acquisition options to determine the optimal data quality and data replacement cycle relative to cost to meet the identified requirements of the user community. The evaluation demonstrated that lidar acquisition at quality level 2 for the conterminous United States and quality level 5 ifsar data for Alaska with a 6- to 10-year acquisition cycle provided the highest benefit/cost ratios. The new 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative selected an 8-year acquisition cycle for the respective quality levels. 3DEP, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-16 lead agency for terrestrial elevation data, responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other 3D representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

Alabama↗

USGS2015

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Wyoming

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of Wyoming, elevation data are critical for geologic resource assessment and hazard mitigation, flood risk management, water supply an quality, natural resources conservation, agriculture and precision farming, and other business uses. Today, high-density light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the primary sources for deriving elevation models and other datasets. Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data that are older and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The National Enhanced Elevation Assessment evaluated multiple elevation data acquisition options to determine the optimal data quality and data replacement cycle relative to cost to meet the identified requirements of the user community. The evaluation demonstrated that lidar acquisition at quality level 2 for the conterminous United States and quality level 5 interferometric synthetic aperture radar (ifsar) data for Alaska with a 6- to 10-year acquisition cycle provided the highest benefit/cost ratios.The 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative selected an 8-year acquisition cycle for the respective quality levels. 3DEP, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey, the Office of Management and Budget Circular A–16 lead agency for terrestrial elevation data, responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other 3D representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

Wyoming↗

USGS2014

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Mississippi

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of Mississippi, elevation data are critical for infrastructure and construction management, flood risk management, agriculture and precision farming, natural resources conservation, forest resources management, water supply and quality, and other business uses. Today, high-density light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the primary sources for deriving elevation models and other datasets. Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data that are older and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The National Enhanced Elevation Assessment evaluated multiple elevation data acquisition options to determine the optimal data quality and data replacement cycle relative to cost to meet the identified requirements of the user community. The evaluation demonstrated that lidar acquisition at quality level 2 for the conterminous United States and quality level 5 interferometric synthetic aperture radar (ifsar) data for Alaska with a 6- to 10-year acquisition cycle provided the highest benefit/cost ratios.The 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative selected an 8-year acquisition cycle for the respective quality levels. 3DEP, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey, the Office of Management and Budget Circular A–16 lead agency for terrestrial elevation data, responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other 3D representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

Mississippi↗

USGS2014

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Oregon

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of business uses, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. In the State of Oregon, elevation data are critical for river and stream resource management; forest resources management; water supply and quality; infrastructure and construction management; wildfire management, planning and response; natural resources conservation; and other business uses. Today, high-density light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the primary source for deriving elevation models and other datasets. The Oregon Lidar Consortium (OLC), led by the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI), has developed partnerships with Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies to acquire quality level 1 data in areas of shared interest. The goal of OLC partners is to acquire consistent, high-resolution and high-quality statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The National Enhanced Elevation Assessment evaluated multiple elevation data acquisition options to determine the optimal data quality and data replacement cycle relative to cost to meet the identified requirements of the user community. The evaluation demonstrated that lidar acquisition at quality level 2 for the conterminous United States and quality level 5 ifsar data for Alaska with a 6- to 10-year acquisition cycle provided the highest benefit/cost ratios. The 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative selected an 8-year acquisition cycle for the respective quality levels. 3DEP, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Office of Management and Budget Circular A–16 lead agency for terrestrial elevation data, responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other 3D representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

Oregon↗

USGS2015

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Iowa

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of Iowa, elevation data are critical for agriculture and precision farming, infrastructure and construction management, natural resources conservation, flood risk management, water supply and quality, and other business uses. Today, high-density light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the primary sources for deriving elevation models and other datasets. Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data that are older and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The National Enhanced Elevation Assessment evaluated multiple elevation data acquisition options to determine the optimal data quality and data replacement cycle relative to cost to meet the identified requirements of the user community. The evaluation demonstrated that lidar acquisition at quality level 2 for the conterminous United States and quality level 5 interferometric synthetic aperture radar (ifsar) data for Alaska with a 6- to 10-year acquisition cycle provided the highest benefit/cost ratios. The 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative selected an 8-year acquisition cycle for the respective quality levels. 3DEP, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey, the Office of Management and Budget Circular A–16 lead agency for terrestrial elevation data, responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other 3D representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

Iowa↗

USGS2014

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Tennessee

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of Tennessee, elevation data are critical for agriculture and precision farming, flood risk management, natural resources conservation, infrastructure and construction management, forest resources management, aviation navigation and safety, and other business uses. Today, high-density light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the primary sources for deriving elevation models and other datasets. Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data that are older and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The National Enhanced Elevation Assessment evaluated multiple elevation data acquisition options to determine the optimal data quality and data replacement cycle relative to cost to meet the identified requirements of the user community. The evaluation demonstrated that lidar acquisition at quality level 2 for the conterminous United States and quality level 5 ifsar data for Alaska with a 6- to 10-year acquisition cycle provided the highest benefit/cost ratios. The 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative selected an 8-year acquisition cycle for the respective quality levels. 3DEP, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Office of Management and Budget Circular A–16 lead agency for terrestrial elevation data, responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other 3D representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

Tennessee↗

USGS2014

The 3D Elevation Program: Summary for New Jersey

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of New Jersey, elevation data are critical for water supply and quality, flood risk management, natural resources conservation, agriculture and precision farming, infrastructure and construction management, and other business uses. Today, high-density light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the primary sources for deriving elevation models and other datasets. Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data that are older and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The National Enhanced Elevation Assessment evaluated multiple elevation data acquisition options to determine the optimal data quality and data replacement cycle relative to cost to meet the identified requirements of the user community. The evaluation demonstrated that lidar acquisition at quality level 2 for the conterminous United States and quality level 5 interferometric synthetic aperture radar (ifsar) data for Alaska with a 6- to 10-year acquisition cycle provided the highest benefit/cost ratios. The 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative selected an 8-year acquisition cycle for the respective quality levels. 3DEP, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey, the Office of Management and Budget Circular A–16 lead agency for terrestrial elevation data, responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other 3D representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

New Jersey↗

USGS2014

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Indiana

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of Indiana, elevation data are critical for flood risk management, agriculture and precision farming, natural resources conservation, infrastructure and construction management, aviation navigation and safety, and other business uses. Today, high-density light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the primary sources for deriving elevation models and other datasets. Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data that are older and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The National Enhanced Elevation Assessment evaluated multiple elevation data acquisition options to determine the optimal data quality and data replacement cycle relative to cost to meet the identified requirements of the user community. The evaluation demonstrated that lidar acquisition at quality level 2 for the conterminous United States and quality level 5 interferometric synthetic aperture radar (ifsar) data for Alaska with a 6- to 10-year acquisition cycle provided the highest benefit/cost ratios. The 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative selected an 8-year acquisition cycle for the respective quality levels. 3DEP, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey, the Office of Management and Budget Circular A–16 lead agency for terrestrial elevation data, responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other 3D representations of the Nation's natural and constructed features.

Indiana↗