Geology topics

Gerard McMahon

Publications and source records attributed to Gerard McMahon.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2017

Five-year external reviews of the eight Department of Interior Climate Science Centers: Alaska Climate Science Center

This report primarily addresses the first two purposes of the review while providing comments on the third as identified by the science review team (SRT). A separate report of recommendations for the recompetition, based upon compiled observation from all three reviews conducted in 2016, was submitted to NCCWSC on April 15, 2016 to assist with the development of recompetition documents. To further address host-university administrative competencies and efficiencies, separate interviews of host-university faculty and administrators were conducted by NCCWSC staff in conjunction with the on-site component of the reviews.

Alaska↗

USGS2016

The Department of the Interior Southeast Climate Science Center synthesis report 2011–15—Projects, products, and science priorities

Introduction In 2009, the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) Secretary Ken Salazar established a network of eight regional Climate Science Centers (CSCs) that, along with the Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs), would help define and implement the Department's climate adaptation response. The Southeast Climate Science Center (SE CSC) was established at North Carolina State University (NCSU) in Raleigh, North Carolina, in 2010, under a 5-year cooperative agreement with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), to identify and address the regional challenges presented by climate change and variability in the Southeastern United States. All eight regional CSC hosts, including NCSU, were selected through a competitive process. Since its opening, the focus of the SE CSC has been on working with partners in the identification and development of research-based information that can assist managers, including cultural and natural resource managers, in adapting to global change processes, such as climate and land use change, that operate at local to global scales and affect resources important to the DOI mission. The SE CSC was organized to accomplish three goals: Provide co-produced, researched based, actionable science that supports transparent global change adaptation decisions . Convene conversations among decision makers, scientists, and managers to identify key ecosystem adaptation decisions driven by climate and land use change, the values and objectives that will be used to make decisions, and the research-based information needed to assess adaptation options . Build the capacity of natural resource professionals, university faculty, and students to understand and frame natural resource adaptation decisions and develop and use research-based information to make adaptation decisions . This report provides an overview of the SE CSC and the projects developed by the SE CSC since its inception. An important goal of this report is to provide a framework for understanding the evolution of the SE CSC science agenda, which has evolved over the first 5 years of the Center’s operation.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2015

Global change and conservation triage on National Wildlife Refuges

National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs) in the United States play an important role in the adaptation of social-ecological systems to climate change, land-use change, and other global-change processes. Coastal refuges are already experiencing threats from sea-level rise and other change processes that are largely beyond their ability to influence, while at the same time facing tighter budgets and reduced staff. We engaged in workshops with NWR managers along the U.S. Atlantic coast to understand the problems they face from global-change processes and began a multidisciplinary collaboration to use decision science to help address them. We are applying a values-focused approach to base management decisions on the resource objectives of land managers, as well as those of stakeholders who may benefit from the goods and services produced by a refuge. Two insights that emerged from our workshops were a conspicuous mismatch between the scale at which management can influence outcomes and the scale of environmental processes, and the need to consider objectives related to ecosystem goods and services that traditionally have not been explicitly considered by refuges (e.g., protection from storm surge). The broadening of objectives complicates the decision-making process, but also provides opportunities for collaboration with stakeholders who may have agendas different from those of the refuge, as well as an opportunity for addressing problems across scales. From a practical perspective, we recognized the need to (1) efficiently allocate limited staff time and budgets for short-term management of existing programs and resources under the current refuge design and (2) develop long-term priorities for acquiring or protecting new land/habitat to supplement or replace the existing refuge footprint and thus sustain refuge values as the system evolves over time. Structuring the decision-making problem in this manner facilitated a better understanding of the issues of scale and suggested that a long-term solution will require a significant reassessment of objectives to better reflect the comprehensive values of refuges to society. We discuss some future considerations to integrate these two problems into a single framework by developing novel optimization approaches for dynamic problems that account for uncertainty in future conditions.

Ecology and Society↗

USGS2014

Maximizing the social and ecological value of Cape Romain National Wildlife Refuge, South Carolina as the effects of global change processes increase.

Coastal ecosystems in the eastern U.S. have been severely altered by processes associated with human development, including drainage of coastal wetlands, changes in hydrology that alter sediment and freshwater delivery to the coast, land clearing, agricultural and forestry activity, and the construction of seawalls and other structures that “harden” the coast. Sea-level rise and the changing frequency of extreme events associated with climate change are now further degrading the capacity of those ecological and social systems to remain resilient in the face of disturbance, largely through the degradation and loss of land and habitat. The goal was to develop a problem framing that would broadly reflect the type, scale and scope of SLR-adaptation decisions faced by refuges in general, and that could be used by individual refuges to help understand how their specific problems fit into a larger context of SLR planning and implementation. We worked with refuge managers in developing a common frame of reference for some shared SLR-related management problems, while also facilitating communication about these problems with other refuges and with surrounding jurisdictions.

South Carolina↗

USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey climate and land use change science strategy—A framework for understanding and responding to global change

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), a nonregulatory Federal science agency with national scope and responsibilities, is uniquely positioned to serve the Nation’s needs in understanding and responding to global change, including changes in climate, water availability, sea level, land use and land cover, ecosystems, and global biogeochemical cycles. Global change is among the most challenging and formidable issues confronting our Nation and society. Scientists agree that global environmental changes during this century will have far-reaching societal implications (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007; U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2009). In the face of these challenges, the Nation can benefit greatly by using natural science information in decisionmaking. Since the passage of the U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990, the USGS has made substantial scientific contributions to understanding the interactive living and nonliving components of the Earth system. USGS natural science activities have led to fundamental advances in observing and understanding climate and land-cover change and the effects these changes have on ecosystems, natural-resource availability, and societal sustainability. Most of these major advances were pursued in partnership with other organizations within and outside the Department of the Interior. The inherent value of partnerships with other U.S. Global Change Research Program agencies and natural-resource managers is emphasized in all aspects of the planning and implementation of this Science Strategy for the coming decade. Over the next 10 years, the USGS will make substantial contributions to understanding how Earth systems interact, respond to, and cause global change. The USGS will work with science partners, decisionmakers, and resource managers at local to international levels (including Native American tribes) to improve understanding of past and present change; develop relevant forecasts; and identify those lands, resources, and communities most vulnerable to global change processes. Science will play an essential role in helping communities and land and resource managers understand local to global implications, anticipate effects, prepare for changes, and reduce the risks associated with decisionmaking in a changing environment. USGS partners and stakeholders will benefit from the data, predictive models, and decision-support products and services resulting from the implementation of this strategy. This Science Strategy recognizes core USGS strengths that are applied to key societal problems. It establishes seven goals for USGS global change science and strategic actions that may be implemented in the short term (1–5 years) and the longer term (5–10 years) to improve our understanding of the following areas of inquiry: Rates, causes, and impacts of past global changes; The global carbon cycle; Biogeochemical cycles and their coupled interactions; Land-use and land-cover change rates, causes, and consequences; Droughts, floods, and water availability under changing land-use and climatic conditions; Coastal response to sea-level rise, climatic change, and human development; and Biological responses to global change. In addition to the seven thematic goals, we address the central role of monitoring in accordance with the USGS Science Strategy recommendation that global change research should rely on existing “…decades of observational data and long-term records to interpret consequences of climate variability and change to the Nation’s biological populations, ecosystems, and land and water resources” (U.S. Geological Survey, 2007, p. 19). We also briefly describe specific needs and opportunities for coordinating USGS global change science among USGS Mission Areas and address the need for a comprehensive and sustained communications strategy.

Circular↗

USGS2012

Effects of urban development on stream ecosystems in nine metropolitan study areas across the United States

Urban development is an important agent of environmental change in the United States. The urban footprint on the American landscape has expanded during a century and a half of almost continuous development. Eighty percent of Americans now live in metropolitan areas, and the advantages and challenges of living in these developed areas—convenience, congestion, employment, pollution—are part of the day-to-day realities of most Americans. Nowhere are the environmental changes associated with urban development more evident than in urban streams. Contaminants, habitat destruction, and increasing streamflow flashiness resulting from urban development have been associated with the disruption of biological communities, particularly the loss of sensitive aquatic species. Every stream is connected downstream to larger water bodies, including rivers, reservoirs, and ultimately coastal waters. Inputs of chemical contaminants or sediments at any point along the stream can cause degradation downstream with adverse effects on biological communities and on economically valuable resources, such as fisheries and tourism. In response to general concerns about the degradation of urban streams, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted a national-scale, scientific investigation of the effects of urban development on stream ecosystems. Nine metropolitan study areas of the United States were selected—Portland, Oregon; Salt Lake City, Utah; Birmingham, Alabama; Atlanta, Georgia; Raleigh, North Carolina; Boston, Massachusetts; Denver, Colorado; Dallas, Texas; and Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The studies were conducted in Salt Lake City, Birmingham, and Boston in 1999–2000; in Atlanta, Raleigh, and Denver in 2002–2003; and in Portland, Dallas, and Milwaukee in 2003–2004. The comprehensive investigation of all nine studies focused on three broad questions of interest to decision makers: What are the primary effects of urban development on stream ecosystems? How do the effects of urban development on stream ecosystems vary regionally across the country? Which urban-related stressors are most closely linked to biological community degradation, and how can multiple stressors be managed to protect stream health as a watershed becomes increasingly urbanized?

Alabama;Colorado;Georgia;Massachusetts;North Carol↗

USGS2012

Strategies for managing the effects of urban development on streams

Urban development remains an important agent of environmental change in the United States. The U.S. population grew by 17 percent from 1982 to 1997, while urbanized land area grew by 47 percent, suggesting that urban land consumption far outpaced population growth (Fulton and others, 2001; Sierra Club, 2003; American Farmland Trust, 2009). Eighty percent of Americans now live in metropolitan areas. Each American effectively occupies about 20 percent more developed land (for housing, schools, shopping, roads, and other related services) than 20 years ago (Markham and Steinzor, 2006). Passel and Cohn (2008) predict a dramatic 48 percent increase in the population of the United States from 2005 to 2050. The advantages and challenges of living in these developed areas—convenience, congestion, employment, pollution—are part of the day-to-day realities of most Americans. Nowhere are the environmental changes associated with urban development more evident than in urban streams. The U.S. Geological Survey's National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program investigation of the effects of urban development on stream ecosystems (EUSE) during 1999–2004 provides the most spatially comprehensive analysis of stream impacts of urban development that has been completed in the United States. A nationally consistent study design was used in nine metropolitan areas of the United States—Portland, Oregon; Salt Lake City, Utah; Birmingham, Alabama; Atlanta, Georgia; Raleigh, North Carolina; Boston, Massachusetts; Denver, Colorado; Dallas, Texas; and Milwaukee, Wisconsin. A summary report published as part of the EUSE study describes several of these impacts on urban streams ( Coles and others, 2012 ).

Alabama;Colorado;Georgia;Massachusetts;North Carol↗

USGS2012

Urban development results in stressors that degrade stream ecosystems

In 2003, eighty-three percent of Americans lived in metropolitan areas, and considerable population increases are predicted within the next 50 years. Nowhere are the environmental changes associated with urban development more evident than in urban streams. Contaminants, habitat destruction, and increasing streamflow flashiness resulting from urban development have been associated with the disruption of biological communities, particularly the loss of sensitive aquatic biota. Every stream is connected downstream to other water bodies, and inputs of contaminants and (or) sediments to streams can cause degradation downstream with adverse effects on biological communities and on economically valuable resources, such as fisheries and tourism. Understanding how algal, invertebrate, and fish communities respond to physical and chemical stressors associated with urban development can provide important clues on how multiple stressors may be managed to protect stream health as a watershed becomes increasingly urbanized. This fact sheet highlights selected findings of a comprehensive assessment by the National Water-Quality Assessment Program of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) of the effects of urban development on stream ecosystems in nine metropolitan study areas.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2012

Stream ecosystems change with urban development

The healthy condition of the physical living space in a natural stream—defined by unaltered hydrology (streamflow), high diversity of habitat features, and natural water chemistry—supports diverse biological communities with aquatic species that are sensitive to disturbances. In a highly degraded urban stream, the poor condition of the physical living space—streambank and tree root damage from altered hydrology, low diversity of habitat, and inputs of chemical contaminants—contributes to biological communities with low diversity and high tolerance to disturbance.

General Information Product↗

USGS2012

Linking urbanization to the Biological Condition Gradient (BCG) for stream ecosystems in the Northeastern United States using a Bayesian network approach

Urban development alters important physical, chemical, and biological processes that define urban stream ecosystems. An approach was developed for quantifying the effects of these processes on aquatic biota, and then linking those effects to endpoints that can be used for environmental management. These complex, interacting systems are challenging to model from a scientific standpoint. A desirable model clearly shows the system, simulates the interactions, and ultimately predicts results of management actions. Traditional regression techniques that calculate empirical relations between pairs of environmental factors do not capture the interconnected web of multiple stressors, but urban development effects are not yet understood at the detailed scales required to make mechanistic modeling approaches feasible. Therefore, in contrast to a fully deterministic or fully statistical modeling approach, a Bayesian network model provides a hybrid approach that can be used to represent known general associations between variables while acknowledging uncertainty in predicted outcomes. It does so by quantifying an expert-elicited network of probabilistic relations between variables. Advantages of this modeling approach include (1) flexibility in accommodating many model specifications and information types; (2) efficiency in storing and manipulating complex information, and to parameterize; and (3) transparency in describing the relations using nodes and arrows and in describing uncertainties with discrete probability distributions for each variable. In realization of the aforementioned advantages, a Bayesian network model was constructed to characterize the effect of urban development on aquatic macroinvertebrate stream communities through three simultaneous, interacting ecological pathways affecting stream hydrology, habitat, and water quality across watersheds in the Northeastern United States. This model incorporates both empirical data and expert knowledge to calculate the probabilities of attaining desired aquatic ecosystem conditions under different urban stress levels, environmental conditions, and management options. Ecosystem conditions are characterized in terms of standardized Biological Condition Gradient (BCG) management endpoints. This approach to evaluating urban development-induced perturbations in watersheds integrates statistical and mechanistic perspectives, different information sources, and several ecological processes into a comprehensive description of the system that can be used to support decision making. The completed model can be used to infer which management actions would lead to the highest likelihood of desired BCG tier achievement. For example, if best management practices (BMP) were implemented in a highly urbanized watershed to reduce flashiness to medium levels and specific conductance to low levels, the stream would have a 70-percent chance of achieving BCG Tier 3 or better, relative to a 24-percent achievement likelihood for unmanaged high urban land cover. Results are reported probabilistically to account for modeling uncertainty that is inherent in sources such as natural variability and model simplification error.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2012

Representation of regional urban development conditions using a watershed-based gradient study design

As part of the U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality Assessment Program, the effects of urbanization on stream ecosystems (EUSE) have been intensively investigated in nine metropolitan areas in the United States, including Boston, Massachusetts; Atlanta, Georgia; Birmingham, Alabama; Raleigh, North Carolina; Salt Lake City, Utah; Denver, Colorado; Dallas–Fort Worth, Texas; Portland, Oregon; and Milwaukee–Green Bay, Wisconsin. Each of the EUSE study area watersheds was associated with one ecological region of the United States. This report evaluates whether each metropolitan area can be generalized across the ecological regions (ecoregions) within which the EUSE study watersheds are located. Seven characteristics of the EUSE watersheds that affect stream ecosystems were examined to determine the similarities in the same seven characteristics of the watersheds in the entire ecoregion. Land cover (percentage developed, forest and shrubland, and herbaceous and cultivated classes), average annual temperature, average annual precipitation, average surface elevation, and average percentage slope were selected as human-influenced, climate, and topography characteristics. Three findings emerged from this comparison that have implications for the use of EUSE data in models used to predict stream ecosystem condition. One is that the predominant or "background" land-cover type (either forested or agricultural land) in each ecoregion also is the predominant land-cover type within the associated EUSE study watersheds. The second finding is that in all EUSE study areas, the watersheds account for the range of developed land conditions that exist in the corresponding ecoregion watersheds. However, six of the nine EUSE study area watersheds have significantly different distributions of developed land from the ecoregion watersheds. Finally, in seven of the nine EUSE/ecoregion comparisons, the distributions of the values of climate variables in the EUSE watersheds are different from the distributions for watersheds in the corresponding ecoregions.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2012

Improving scientific communication through the use of U.S. Geological Survey Video Podcasts

It is crucial that scientist find innovative ways of effectively communicating research to resource managers, public officials, and the general public. New technologies, such as video podcasts, are being used as an outreach tool to communicate results from the U.S Geological Survey (USGS) National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program. The purpose of these podcasts is to summarize scientific research and methods from the NAWQA program. Video podcasts are audio podcasts that incorporate video clips to illustrate ideas presented in simple, concise language with brief 3 to 5-minute films. The process of creating concise podcast messages expands the potential audience for communicating research findings, but the production of video podcasts requires adequate allocation of time and resources. Audience responses to NAWQA podcasts thus far indicate that video is an effective means of sharing scientific information with a broader audience.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2009

Spatial analysis of instream nitrogen loads and factors controlling nitrogen delivery to streams in the southeastern United States using spatially referenced regression on watershed attributes (SPARROW) and regional classification frameworks

Understanding how nitrogen transport across the landscape varies with landscape characteristics is important for developing sound nitrogen management policies. We used a spatially referenced regression analysis (SPARROW) to examine landscape characteristics influencing delivery of nitrogen from sources in a watershed to stream channels. Modelled landscape delivery ratio varies widely (by a factor of 4) among watersheds in the southeastern United States—higher in the western part (Tennessee, Alabama, and Mississippi) than in the eastern part, and the average value for the region is lower compared to other parts of the nation. When we model landscape delivery ratio as a continuous function of local-scale landscape characteristics, we estimate a spatial pattern that varies as a function of soil and climate characteristics but exhibits spatial structure in residuals (observed load minus predicted load). The spatial pattern of modelled landscape delivery ratio and the spatial pattern of residuals coincide spatially with Level III ecoregions and also with hydrologic landscape regions. Subsequent incorporation into the model of these frameworks as regional scale variables improves estimation of landscape delivery ratio, evidenced by reduced spatial bias in residuals, and suggests that cross-scale processes affect nitrogen attenuation on the landscape. The model-fitted coefficient values are logically consistent with the hypothesis that broad-scale classifications of hydrologic response help to explain differential rates of nitrogen attenuation, controlling for local-scale landscape characteristics. Negative model coefficients for hydrologic landscape regions where the primary flow path is shallow ground water suggest that a lower fraction of nitrogen mass will be delivered to streams; this relation is reversed for regions where the primary flow path is overland flow.

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Caro↗

USGS2009

Urban streams across the USA: Lessons learned from studies in 9 metropolitan areas

Studies of the effects of urbanization on stream ecosystems have usually focused on single metropolitan areas. Synthesis of the results of such studies have been useful in developing general conceptual models of the effects of urbanization, but the strength of such generalizations is enhanced by applying consistent study designs and methods to multiple metropolitan areas across large geographic scales. We summarized the results from studies of the effects of urbanization on stream ecosystems in 9 metropolitan areas across the US (Boston, Massachusetts; Raleigh, North Carolina; Atlanta, Georgia; Birmingham, Alabama; Milwaukee-Green Bay, Wisconsin; Denver, Colorado; Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas; Salt Lake City, Utah; and Portland, Oregon). These studies were conducted as part of the US Geological Survey’s National Water-Quality Assessment Program and were based on a common study design and used standard sample-collection and processing methods to facilitate comparisons among study areas. All studies included evaluations of hydrology, physical habitat, water quality, and biota (algae, macroinvertebrates, fish). Four major conclusions emerged from the studies. First, responses of hydrologic, physical-habitat, water-quality, and biotic variables to urbanization varied among metropolitan areas, except that insecticide inputs consistently increased with urbanization. Second, prior land use, primarily forest and agriculture, appeared to be the most important determinant of the response of biota to urbanization in the areas we studied. Third, little evidence was found for resistance to the effects of urbanization by macroinvertebrate assemblages, even at low levels of urbanization. Fourth, benthic macroinvertebrates have important advantages for assessing the effects of urbanization on stream ecosystems relative to algae and fishes. Overall, our results demonstrate regional differences in the effects of urbanization on stream biota and suggest additional studies to elucidate the causes of these underlying differences.

Alabama, Colorado, Georgia, Massachusetts, North C↗

USGS2009

Selected Physical, Chemical, and Biological Data Used to Study Urbanizing Streams in Nine Metropolitan Areas of the United States, 1999-2004

This report documents and summarizes physical, chemical, and biological data collected during 1999-2004 in a study titled Effects of Urbanization on Stream Ecosystems, undertaken as part of the U.S. Geological Survey's National Water-Quality Assessment Program. Data-collection methods and data processing are described in this report for streamflow; stream temperature; instream chemistry; instream aquatic habitat; and algal, macroinvertebrate, and fish communities. Data summaries prepared for analytical use are presented in downloadable data tables.

Data Series↗

USGS2008

Data to support statistical modeling of instream nutrient load based on watershed attributes, southeastern United States, 2002

This report presents and describes the digital datasets that characterize nutrient source inputs, environmental characteristics, and instream nutrient loads for the purpose of calibrating and applying a nutrient water-quality model for the southeastern United States for 2002. The model area includes all of the river basins draining to the south Atlantic and the eastern Gulf of Mexico, as well as the Tennessee River basin (referred to collectively as the SAGT area). The water-quality model SPARROW (SPAtially-Referenced Regression On Watershed attributes), developed by the U.S. Geological Survey, uses a regression equation to describe the relation between watershed attributes (predictors) and measured instream loads (response). Watershed attributes that are considered to describe nutrient input conditions and are tested in the SPARROW model for the SAGT area as source variables include atmospheric deposition, fertilizer application to farmland, manure from livestock production, permitted wastewater discharge, and land cover. Watershed and channel attributes that are considered to affect rates of nutrient transport from land to water and are tested in the SAGT SPARROW model as nutrient-transport variables include characteristics of soil, landform, climate, reach time of travel, and reservoir hydraulic loading. Datasets with estimates of each of these attributes for each individual reach or catchment in the reach-catchment network are presented in this report, along with descriptions of methods used to produce them. Measurements of nutrient water quality at stream monitoring sites from a combination of monitoring programs were used to develop observations of the response variable - mean annual nitrogen or phosphorus load - in the SPARROW regression equation. Instream load of nitrogen and phosphorus was estimated using bias-corrected log-linear regression models using the program Fluxmaster, which provides temporally detrended estimates of long-term mean load well-suited for spatial comparisons. The detrended, or normalized, estimates of load are useful for regional-scale assessments but should be used with caution for local-scale interpretations, for which use of loads estimated for actual time periods and employing more detailed regression analysis is suggested. The mean value of the nitrogen yield estimates, normalized to 2002, for 637 stations in the SAGT area is 4.7 kilograms per hectare; the mean value of nitrogen flow-weighted mean concentration is 1.2 milligrams per liter. The mean value of the phosphorus yield estimates, normalized to 2002, for the 747 stations in the SAGT area is 0.66 kilogram per hectare; the mean value of phosphorus flow-weighted mean concentration is 0.17 milligram per liter. Nutrient conditions measured in streams affected by substantial influx or outflux of water and nutrient mass across surface-water basin divides do not reflect nutrient source and transport conditions in the topographic watershed; therefore, inclusion of such streams in the SPARROW modeling approach is considered inappropriate. River basins identified with this concern include south Florida (where surface-water flow paths have been extensively altered) and the Oklawaha, Crystal, Lower Sante Fe, Lower Suwanee, St. Marks, and Chipola River basins in central and northern Florida (where flow exchange with the underlying regional aquifer may represent substantial nitrogen influx to and outflux from the surface-water basins).

Open-File Report↗

USGS2007

Consequences of land-cover misclassification in models of impervious surface

Model estimates of impervious area as a function of landcover area may be biased and imprecise because of errors in the land-cover classification. This investigation of the effects of land-cover misclassification on impervious surface models that use National Land Cover Data (NLCD) evaluates the consequences of adjusting land-cover within a watershed to reflect uncertainty assessment information. Model validation results indicate that using error-matrix information to adjust land-cover values used in impervious surface models does not substantially improve impervious surface predictions. Validation results indicate that the resolution of the landcover data (Level I and Level II) is more important in predicting impervious surface accurately than whether the land-cover data have been adjusted using information in the error matrix. Level I NLCD, adjusted for land-cover misclassification, is preferable to the other land-cover options for use in models of impervious surface. This result is tied to the lower classification error rates for the Level I NLCD. ?? 2007 American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing.

Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing↗

USGS2007

Selected Physical, Chemical, and Biological Data for 30 Urbanizing Streams in the North Carolina Piedmont Ecoregion, 2002-2003

This report provides summarized physical, chemical, and biological data collected during a study of the effects of urbanization on stream ecosystems as part of the U.S. Geological Survey's National Water-Quality Assessment study. The purpose of this study was to examine differences in biological, chemical, and physical characteristics of streams across a gradient of urban intensity. Thirty sites were selected along an urbanization gradient that represents conditions in the North Carolina Piedmont ecoregion, including the cities of Raleigh, Durham, Cary, Greensboro, Winston-Salem, High Point, Asheboro, and Oxford. Data collected included streamflow variability, stream temperature, instream chemistry, instream aquatic habitat, and collections of the algal, macroinvertebrate, and fish communities. In addition, ancillary data describing land use, socioeconomic conditions, and urban infrastructure were compiled for each basin using a geographic information system analysis. All data were processed and summarized for analytical use and are presented in downloadable data tables, along with the methods of data collection and processing.

North Carolina↗